IllustrationTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WATER WAS LEAKING FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE WINDOW ONTO THE FLOORMAT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 96,000.
2006 Ford Taurus
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Ford Taurus do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 318.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Taurus years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
80–25K
2225–50K
6650–75K
7075–100K
86100–150K
20150K+
272 reports with mileage · 46 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 176 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 25 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports4 fire reports8 injury reports
Visibility complaints
6 reportsSINCE I BOUGHT THIS CAR THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM IN VERY HARD RAINS OR HEAVY SNOWSTORMS. THEY DRIVERS SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER WOULD CATCH ONTO THE OTHER ONE AND GET SNAGGED. I WOULD HAVE TO PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND UNTANGLE THEM AND SOMETIMES DRIVE REAL SLOW BENDING OVER TO LOOK OUT OF THE PASSENGERS S…
Read full complaint
SINCE I BOUGHT THIS CAR THE WINDSHIELD WIPERS HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM IN VERY HARD RAINS OR HEAVY SNOWSTORMS. THEY DRIVERS SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER WOULD CATCH ONTO THE OTHER ONE AND GET SNAGGED. I WOULD HAVE TO PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND UNTANGLE THEM AND SOMETIMES DRIVE REAL SLOW BENDING OVER TO LOOK OUT OF THE PASSENGERS SIDE WINDOW. THIS WOULD HAPPEN OFF AND ON DURING HARD RAINS OR HEAVY SNOWSTORMS. THIS YEAR WAS THE WORST. IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY WHEN WE HAD A HEAVY SNOWSTORM THE DRIVER SIDE WINDSHIELD WIPER WOULD STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CYCLE AND SIT RIGHT IN THE CENTER OF THE WINDSHIELD. I ONCE AGAIN HAD TO DRIVE IN PERIL. THIS APRIL (29TH), WE HAD ANOTHER HEAVY SNOWSTORM AND THE DRIVERS SIDE WIPER FROZE AGAIN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CYCLE, THEN IT WOULD SLAM ALL THE WAY OVER ONTO THE DRIVERS SIDE VIEW MIRROR AND GET STUCK THERE. I DROVE TO THE FORD DEALER AND THEY TIGHTENED SOME SCREW ON MY WIPER AND SAID IT WAS FIXED. THE SAME THING HAPPENED THE NEXT WEEK (MARCH 4TH), IN A HEAVY RAIN. I HAD TO PULL OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AGAIN AND UN-SNAG THE WIPER FROM THE SIDE-VIEW MIRROR. EVERY TIME THIS HAPPENED I WAS IN REAL PERIL OF HAVING AN ACCIDENT. I COULDN'T SEE THE ROAD AND WAS JUST LUCKY THAT I DID NOT HAVE AN ACCIDENT EACH TIME THE WIPERS STOPPED WORKING PROPERLY. I ONCE AGAIN WENT DIRECTLY TO MY FORD DEALER AND THEY DIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM AS A STRIPPED WINDOW WIPER TRANSMISSION. THEY SAID THE PROBLEM WAS NOT COVERED IN MY EXTENDED WARRANTY. I WAS SHOCKED SINCE I WAS TOLD THAT MY EXTENDED WARRANTY COVERED EVERYTHING ON THE CAR. I HAD TO PAY $89.50 FOR A DIAGNOSTIC THEN $241.98 FOR PARTS AND LABOR. I RESEARCHED PROBLEMS WITH 2006 FORD TAURUS SEDANS AND FOUND THAT THE WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR HAD A RECALL. I LET MY FORD DEALER KNOW THIS AND TOLD ME THAT IT WAS NOT THE TRANSMISSION THAT WAS BAD NOT THE MOTOR. IT SEEMS THAT WINDOW WIPER DESIGN IS FAULTY WHETHER ITS THE MOTOR OR TRANSMISSION.
COWL LEAK ON 2006 FORD TAURUS WHICH ALLOWS WATER LEAK IN ON PASSENGER SIDE TO CONTACT ELECTRICAL PARTS INCLUDING HVAC BLOWER MOTOR AND RESISTOR. BLOWER CAN STOP WORKING AND IF WINDOWS ARE FOGGED OR NEED TO BE DEFROSTED IT CREATES A VERY HAZARDOUS CONDITION IMPOSSIBLE TO CORRECT. I AM TOLD BY DEALERSHIPS THIS IS VERY COMMON WI…
Read full complaint
COWL LEAK ON 2006 FORD TAURUS WHICH ALLOWS WATER LEAK IN ON PASSENGER SIDE TO CONTACT ELECTRICAL PARTS INCLUDING HVAC BLOWER MOTOR AND RESISTOR. BLOWER CAN STOP WORKING AND IF WINDOWS ARE FOGGED OR NEED TO BE DEFROSTED IT CREATES A VERY HAZARDOUS CONDITION IMPOSSIBLE TO CORRECT. I AM TOLD BY DEALERSHIPS THIS IS VERY COMMON WITH THE TAURUS'. IF IT IS SO COMMON WHY DON'T THEY (FORD) PUBLICIZE THIS OR TELL YOU THIS BEFORE YOU BUY A TAURUS? *TR
I HAVE A 03 TAURUS WHICH LEAKED WATER ONTO THE PASSENGER FLOOR BOARD ALSO CAUSING MY AC BLOWER MOTOR TO SHORT OUT. I COULD NOT GET FORD TO ACT EVEN THOUGH A RELATED RECALL EXISTED UNDER 03V087000. I HAVE FOUND MANY OTHERS WITH THIS PROBLEM. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE AIR BAG INDICATOR LIGHT ILLUMINATED INTERMITTENTLY AND THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED ILLUMINATED. THE MECHANIC PERFORMED A TUNE-UP; HOWEVER, THE LIGHTS REMAINED ILLUMINATED. IN ADDITION, THE DRIVER'S SIDE POWER WINDOW WOULD GO DOWN BUT WOULD NOT RISE UP. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD TAURUS. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE AIR BAG INDICATOR LIGHT ILLUMINATED INTERMITTENTLY AND THE SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED ILLUMINATED. THE MECHANIC PERFORMED A TUNE-UP; HOWEVER, THE LIGHTS REMAINED ILLUMINATED. IN ADDITION, THE DRIVER'S SIDE POWER WINDOW WOULD GO DOWN BUT WOULD NOT RISE UP. AS OF DECEMBER 27, 2007, THE DEALER HAD NOT REPAIRED THE VEHICLE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 25,000 AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 77,000.
TL* - THE CONTACT STATED THAT PASSENGER'S SIDE MIRROR APPEARED TO SHOW OBJECTS FURTHER THAN IT SHOULD. THE CONTACT TOOK VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP, AND THEY TOLD HIM THAT THE MIRROR WAS THE STANDARD REGULATION MIRROR FOR ALL VEHICLES, AND THAT THEY COULD NOT REMOVE IT AND REPLACE WITH A REGULAR MIRROR. THE CONTACT STATE…
Read full complaint
TL* - THE CONTACT STATED THAT PASSENGER'S SIDE MIRROR APPEARED TO SHOW OBJECTS FURTHER THAN IT SHOULD. THE CONTACT TOOK VEHICLE BACK TO THE DEALERSHIP, AND THEY TOLD HIM THAT THE MIRROR WAS THE STANDARD REGULATION MIRROR FOR ALL VEHICLES, AND THAT THEY COULD NOT REMOVE IT AND REPLACE WITH A REGULAR MIRROR. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE MIRROR SHOULD BE THE SAME AS THE DRIVER'S SIDE MIRROR. *AK UPDATED 1/26/2007 - *NM
Official recalls
206V119000 · Electrical System: Instrument Cluster/panel
Apr 10, 2006
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES BUILT FOR ONE SPECIFIC FLEET CUSTOMER WERE MODIFIED FOR OPTIONAL HANDS-FREE CELLULAR PHONE OPERATING CAPABILITY. TO PROVIDE THIS FUNCTIONALITY, A SPECIAL OVERLAY WIRE HARNESS WAS INSTALLED THAT INADVERTENTLY DID NOT INCLUDE THE CIRCUITS FOR PASSENGER AIR BAG DEACTIVATION INDICATOR (PADI) LAMP FUNCTION. AS A RESULT, THESE VEHICLES DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 208, 'OCCUPANT CRASH PROTECTION.'
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE PADI LAMP WILL FAIL TO ILLUMINATE AND THE AIR BAG WARNING LAMP IN THE CLUSTER WILL STAY ILLUMINATED.
Remedy: THE FLEET CUSTOMER WAS NOTIFIED AND ALL VEHICLES HAVE BEEN REPAIRED. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 28, 2006.
05V520000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:motor
Nov 9, 2005
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS, PASSENGER CARS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR MAY HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT GREASE BEING APPLIED TO THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AFTER A PERIOD OF CONTINUOUS USE ON THE HIGH SPEED SETTING, LACK OF GREASE ON THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR MAY CAUSE THE GEAR TO DISTORT OR FRACTURE DURING OPERATION RESULTING IN A LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION. INOPERATIVE WIPERS UNDER INCLEMENT WEATHER CONDITIONS COULD CAUSE A CRASH DUE TO IMPAIRED VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE WIPER MOTOR FOR THE PRESENCE OF GREASE AND GREASE THE WIPER MOTOR GEARS IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673 OR LINCOLN/MERCURY AT 1-800-521-4140.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1PE12005 · Stuck Throttle
Opened Mar 7, 2012 · Closed Oct 22, 2012
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:cables
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do
Vehicle Speed Control
Preliminary Evaluation (PE)12-005 was opened to investigate allegations of speed control cables detaching from the throttle body and subsequently interfering with the throttle closing fully to the idle position in model year (MY) 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus vehicles.The speed control cable, throttle body attachment arm (?nail head?) for the speed control cable, cable mounting bracket and cable routing for the MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Taurus are common to all MY 2004 through 2006 Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable vehicles equipped with either the 155 HP 3.0L 2-valve Vulcan engine or the 200 HP 3.0L 4-valve Duratec engine (the ?subject vehicles?). Figures 1 and 2 show the throttle body cam and speed control cable installed and a cable interference condition caused by contact between a detached cable and the ?nail head.?Ford?s assessment of the condition in incident vehicles noted that the interference conditions produced tended to be short in duration as the cable end tended to dislodge itself from the throttle body due to vibration, road loads or engine roll in addition to tapping the acceleration pedal.Ford inspected three incident vehicles and measured maximum throttle openings of 5.8% to 14.9%, resulting in engine speeds ranging from 1600 to 2200 rpm with the transmission selector in Drive.A Ford stack-up analysis of the speed control cable length from the attachment bracket to the throttle body indicated a maximum theoretical throttle opening of 16.4% that could result from the alleged defect. Engineers at the NHTSA Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) inspected an incident vehicle to evaluate throttle positions and engine speeds that could result from the alleged defect and performed brake testing of a vehicle with the throttle stuck at the worst case throttle opening that could result from the condition.The VRTC vehicle inspection noted that, depending on the orientation of the detached cable end, the amount of throttle opening that could result from interference by a detached speed control cable end varied from 4.8% to 11.3%.VRTC brake testing of a MY 2006 Taurus with a Vulcan engine and the throttle held open at 16% found that, even with multiple brake applications, sufficient vacuum was available for the brake booster assist and the brake pedal efforts required to stop the vehicle did not increase significantly from normal operating conditions. ODI?s analysis of 100 complaints related to the alleged defect found that drivers were generally able to free the interference condition or safely brake to a stop without incident.Approximately one-third (32) reported that the stuck throttle condition was corrected with no action or by tapping the accelerator pedal while the vehicle was still moving, another third (34) reported braking to a stop with the vehicle in Drive prior to correcting the condition, and the remaining third (34) reported that the driver responded to the incident by shifting to Neutral before stopping the vehicle.One complaint alleged that stuck-throttle type symptoms caused the vehicle to pass partially through a traffic light and into an intersection before stopping, however,ODI was unable to contact the owner to verify the cause or relationship to the alleged defect condition.ODI has not identified any crashes related to the alleged defect. Tables 1 and 2 provide a breakdown of complaints and warranty claims related to the alleged defect by engine and model year.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation do