What is a good year for Aerostar? - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
ยป Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > alt.autos.ford
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto Escrow

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-04-2005, 00:01   #1 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
What is a good year for Aerostar?

I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?

Thanks in advance.

Fred


  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-04-2005, 03:01   #2 (permalink)
dmtaurus
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.

Fred wrote:

> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Fred


  Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2005, 11:01   #3 (permalink)
nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus <dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
wrote:

>For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
>transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
>set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
>
>Fred wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
>> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Fred


The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production, and they
finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are virtually gone,
5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because the last one
built was 8 years ago.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2005, 11:01   #4 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

Thankye gents!

<nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
news:mf4nm11u88sf6mib3ckqfom4m9j27skl8i@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus

<dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless

their
> >transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive

planetary gear
> >set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
> >
> >Fred wrote:
> >
> >> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years

old.
> >> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away

from?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Fred

>
> The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production,

and they
> finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are

virtually gone,
> 5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
> You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because

the last one
> built was 8 years ago.



  Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2005, 22:01   #5 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

Thanks, DM!

"dmtaurus" <dmtaurus@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:436B336A.D1A33E3F@surfbest.net...
> For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless

their
> transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive

planetary gear
> set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
>
> Fred wrote:
>
> > I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years

old.
> > Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away

from?
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Fred

>



  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2005, 09:01   #6 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

One more question - I have gotten conflicting info. I know that the
transmission was upgraded sometime since 1993. Anyone know for sure what
year it was? I have heard 94, 96 and 97.

<nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
news:mf4nm11u88sf6mib3ckqfom4m9j27skl8i@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus <dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
> >transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
> >set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
> >
> >Fred wrote:
> >
> >> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
> >> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Fred

>
> The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production, and they
> finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are virtually gone,
> 5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
> You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because the last one
> built was 8 years ago.



  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2005, 18:01   #7 (permalink)
nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: What is a good year for Aerostar?

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:41:49 GMT, "Fred"
<testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote:

>One more question - I have gotten conflicting info. I know that the
>transmission was upgraded sometime since 1993. Anyone know for sure what
>year it was? I have heard 94, 96 and 97.
>
><nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
>news:mf4nm11u88sf6mib3ckqfom4m9j27skl8i@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus <dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
>> >transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
>> >set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
>> >
>> >Fred wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
>> >> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks in advance.
>> >>
>> >> Fred

>>
>> The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production, and they
>> finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are virtually gone,
>> 5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
>> You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because the last one
>> built was 8 years ago.

>

1997 got the "all new" transmission.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2005, 00:01   #8 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
MANY THANKS TO ALL!! (was: What is a good year for Aerostar?)

Thanks, nospam, and to all those fine and very helpful folks who have
answered my infinitely basic questions. I just got back home from buying a
'97. Between all your help and a few phone calls to helpful dealers'
service managers, everything worked out fine.

Now here's some hints to pass on to future car buyers....

I found that the dealer service managers in this area (S. Calif) answered my
questions on the phone, but were for the most part impatient and not all
that helpful. What I ended up doing was going to www.bigyellow.com, and
finding the Ford dealers in small Southern towns. Without exception, they
all spent lots of time with me on the phone and offered many friendly tips
of what to look for.

I will try to remember to take some photos of my 97 in the morning and show
you all what this one looks like.

Fred

<nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
news:fd3dn1d8aj9e3fk38fvb40khigahtr3t4m@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:41:49 GMT, "Fred"
> <testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote:
>
> >One more question - I have gotten conflicting info. I know that the
> >transmission was upgraded sometime since 1993. Anyone know for sure what
> >year it was? I have heard 94, 96 and 97.
> >
> ><nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
> >news:mf4nm11u88sf6mib3ckqfom4m9j27skl8i@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus <dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
> >> >transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
> >> >set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
> >> >
> >> >Fred wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
> >> >> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks in advance.
> >> >>
> >> >> Fred
> >>
> >> The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production, and they
> >> finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are virtually gone,
> >> 5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
> >> You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because the last one
> >> built was 8 years ago.

> >

> 1997 got the "all new" transmission.



  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2005, 07:01   #9 (permalink)
BuckerooBanzai
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: MANY THANKS TO ALL!! (was: What is a good year for Aerostar?)

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 06:49:12 GMT, "Fred" <testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote:

>Thanks, nospam, and to all those fine and very helpful folks who have
>answered my infinitely basic questions. I just got back home from buying a
>'97. Between all your help and a few phone calls to helpful dealers'
>service managers, everything worked out fine.
>
>Now here's some hints to pass on to future car buyers....
>
>I found that the dealer service managers in this area (S. Calif) answered my
>questions on the phone, but were for the most part impatient and not all
>that helpful. What I ended up doing was going to www.bigyellow.com, and
>finding the Ford dealers in small Southern towns. Without exception, they
>all spent lots of time with me on the phone and offered many friendly tips
>of what to look for.
>
>I will try to remember to take some photos of my 97 in the morning and show
>you all what this one looks like.
>
>Fred
>
><nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
>news:fd3dn1d8aj9e3fk38fvb40khigahtr3t4m@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:41:49 GMT, "Fred"
>> <testing@testing1212mouse.com> wrote:
>>
>> >One more question - I have gotten conflicting info. I know that the
>> >transmission was upgraded sometime since 1993. Anyone know for sure what
>> >year it was? I have heard 94, 96 and 97.
>> >
>> ><nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca> wrote in message
>> >news:mf4nm11u88sf6mib3ckqfom4m9j27skl8i@4ax.com...
>> >> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 05:09:47 -0500, dmtaurus <dmtaurus@surfbest.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >For transmission issues stay away from 86 to 93's unless their
>> >> >transmissions have been rebuilt using the new, drive planetary gear
>> >> >set. The 94 and newer units incorporated the change.
>> >> >
>> >> >Fred wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I'm looking for a late model used Aerostar, 4-7 years old.
>> >> >> Is there a good model year? or a bad year to stay away from?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks in advance.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Fred
>> >>
>> >> The BEST aerostar is the 1997 - last year of production, and they
>> >> finally got everything right. The corrosion issues are virtually gone,
>> >> 5 speed automatic, great van, all the way round.
>> >> You can't get a 4 year old, or even a 7 year old, because the last one
>> >> built was 8 years ago.
>> >

>> 1997 got the "all new" transmission.

Please do not post binary attachments to our text newsgroups.
1. No one is asking to see it/them. If you think there's interest there's
better ways to get it front of interested eyes;
a. Get their email address and attach it to a letter.
b. Avail yourself of some free web page service (check with your ISP) and
post it up there, come back to the text newsgroups and tell us where to point
our browsers.
c. Post it in a binary usenet group and come back here and tell us where to
find it. This isn't very desirable as most ISP's 'free' news servers often
cap the size of a newsgroup post, oftentimes don't retain a complete set of
large binary posts very long, and also might split up the post and leave a
chunk or two of it out.
2. Offline newsreaders are often setup to grab all the unread messages on a
news server by group. That means that folks that have no interest in looking
at pictures of your Aerostar, end up with large chunks of data stuffing up
their hard drives when they download your pictures.
3. Some folks still "pay the freight" so to speak, for downloading data.
Dialup users, for instance, limiting themselves to a few minutes a day
downloading the newsgroups to read at their leisure, suddenly find themselves
taking an inordinate amount of time as your large attachment makes downloading
one message take awhile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2005, 10:01   #10 (permalink)
Fred
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: MANY THANKS TO ALL!! (was: What is a good year for Aerostar?)

"BuckerooBanzai" <nospam5934@hellsouth.org> wrote

> Please do not post binary attachments to our text newsgroups.


Thanks for the good info, Brother Bonzai. Yes, it's a pain when people post
files to non-binary newsgroups. Although I had not planned to post it here,
your fine advice is welcome.

Fred


  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > alt.autos.ford



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 22:25.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.