Ford Tempo
Full disclosure here--I don't like the Ford Tempo, or its Mercury Topaz twin. Based on some of the other awful cars I like, including its Fairmont predecessor, I really should like the Tempo. I keep moaning on about how depressing it is that Detroit can't make a simple, inexpensive, reliable small car, but yet I don't give the Tempo--a car that filled that niche from 1984 to 1994--any of the respect it deserves. Mea culpa, Tempo lovers. Mea maxima culpa.
The Ford Tempo was a first-car staple in my generation--Tempos were ubiquitous in high-school parking lots back in my day, and two of my friends had Tempos as their first cars. Cookie the Dog's Owner already wrote two excellent posts on the phenomenon of first cars (Challenge, Results), and one of the most agreed-upon points was the fact that kids will love their first car regardless of what it is. I was one of the commenters agreeing fervently with that point, and yet the Tempo makes me question that assertion.
Can there be a more conflicted feeling than having a Tempo as your first car? On the one hand, you're excited that you own your first car; you want to race around in it, customize it, show it off to your friends, and take advantage of your new mobility. On the other hand, well, it's a Tempo. Small, ugly, and relentlessly slow, the Tempo married an agricultural driving experience with a lack of pretension and luxury that bordered on the Amish.
The Tempo looked bland, cranked out less than 100 horsepower for most of its life, had absolutely no willingness to handle, and had no style. In fact, Tempos had negative style; they actively destroyed style upon contact in a matter reminiscent of matter and anti-matter. You know how nervous public speakers are counseled to imagine that the audience is naked? Well, if you're ever intimidated by meeting somebody rich and famous, just imagine them behind the wheel of a Tempo. Boom--intimidation gone.
Even today, in an age where pedestrian small cars like older Neons, Civics, and Corollas are the new hot rods of the young, Tempos have furiously resisted becoming cool. That happens when an uninspiring design is married to a dullard chassis and coarse, low-performance engines. The early diesel four put out a shockingly low 52 horsepower; the 2.3-liter four put in the vast majority of Tempos generated between 86 and 100 horsepower depending on year and trim. A few late Tempos received the 150-horsepower 3.0-liter Vulcan V-6 from the Taurus; those might have been interesting, I suppose.
In late 1985 Autoweek previewed a Ford Tempo GT--a violently surreal combination of terms justified with some special wheels, the Chevy Celebrity Eurosport blackout trim treatment, and "high swirl output" version of the 2.3-liter four putting out a street-pounding 100 horsepower. I'm no an engineer, but "high swirl output" doesn't sound particularly meaningful to me. In fact, it sounds laughably obtuse. We certainly don't hear Ferrari boasting about the high swirl combustion in its engines. I never heard about the Tempo GT again, but the "high swirl combustion" and "high swirl output" engines persisted throughout the model run.
No, the Tempo wasn't a sports car, but that didn't stop a buddy of mine from treating his poor, cringing Tempo like one. He got air over hills, abused the narrow tires, and had the throttle pinned to the floor for roughly 90 percent of that car's life--frequently out of necessity to keep up with traffic. He eventually put that Tempo--and his insurance coverage--out of its misery by wrecking it in spectacular fashion.
As I pointed out at the beginning, none of this is particularly fair. When the Tempo debuted in 1984, its domestic small-car competition--the Chrysler K-car and Chevrolet Citation--weren't exactly world-beaters either. Yet Japan and Germany were producing some pretty compelling competitors, and by the time the Tempo was mercifully retired in 1994 it was hopelessly, overwhelmingly outclassed.
There are Tempo and Topaz fanatics out there; the best site for those looking for more information is TempoTopaz.com. This is my chance to make the usual distinction in these cases--I don't care for the car, but I have nothing but respect for a car lover who is passionate enough to make sites like this possible. In about 20 years, when there are only a few Tempos left, I'll probably come over to your immaculate Tempo GL in a car show and look at it appreciatively. I'm just not ready yet.
The first commercial shows Formula 1 legend and 1980s Ford spokesman Jackie Stewart talking up the Tempo. I'm a huge Stewart fan; he was a great driver, a fantastic advocate for driver safety, and a thoroughly admirable man. But hearing him lauding the Tempo hits all of my irony buttons. Great lines: "It's been designed from the wheels up ... It handles well, it goes around corners well ... the Ford Tempo is a real driver's car." Oh, dear. The part where he shills the Ford warranty is particularly painful. Well, at least his close relationship with Ford helped Stewart to start his own Formula 1 team in 1997.
The second ad hits some of the Tempo's high points, but never verbally mentions the most fascinating thing--the Tempo is evidently capable of driving upside-down. I wonder what Ford ever did with that four-story-high Tempo script structure. Check out some of these features--the world's most advanced automotive computer, and an interior with more rear room than a Mercedes-Benz 300D! Because that's why the only thing the Mercedes has going for it, after all. I'd be willing to bet that it even has reclining seats and a digital clock!
The top photo is from Flickr user F.r.e.d.d.y.; his photo description explains that this Tempo is his, and broke down six times in three weeks. The other photos are from dave_7, whose photos we've featured here from time to time. You may know him from such Car Lusts as the Ford Courier, Jaguar XJ, and the Rover P6. Dave_7 bought his Tempo for $50; at that price, it makes a pretty good beater.
--Chris H.
hawver on September 18, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Well, the first car I was ever intimate with a lady in was a turquoise 1987 Tempo , so I have a little love for these cars. As the commercial says, the back seats were rather spacious :)
bwbandy on September 18, 2008 at 12:18 PM
My first car was a '82 Chevette and I hated it. So I don't fit your theory of first car love. The brakes were truly frightening (and this was a new car) and I got rid of it because it was so terrible to drive. How about a post on people's worst car experience.
David Colborne on September 18, 2008 at 12:19 PM
The Tempo is definitely a "let's just be friends" car for me. It's not interesting, it's not exciting, but it's reliable and stable enough where you know that, when your other, more exciting car breaks down, you can climb into it and abuse it for a while without feeling bad and without it breaking your heart, too.
Shawn on September 18, 2008 at 01:15 PM
The only Tempo that could be considered a lukewarm level of interesting is the rare AWD model.
Big Chris on September 18, 2008 at 01:51 PM
I have a hatred for the Tempo that few other vehicles can approach - see my hatred for the Vanagon as a reference point.
My first car as a professional out of college was a Tempo. It was a lemon of all lemons. The Tempos were garbage to begin with, and this particular car was the top of the turd heap. F.r.e.d.d.y mentions his Tempo broke down 6 times in 3 week. If I were to make that statement, it would read "ONLY broke down 6 times in 3 weeks". To have it die that infrequently would've been progress. The sheer lack of steering response was multiplied by the lack of power. The car could've been made entirely out of sponge and had better response. As for power - the kids driving Yugos all wanted to drag race me. It was that bad. And Turquoise in color. This vehicle brought me closer than any other point in my life to pushing a car down a hill and into a lake - except I didn't want to inflict the blue bomb on the local fish. I HATE Tempos. I'll stop now, because anything I say after this I might regret.
Rob the SVX Guy on September 18, 2008 at 03:15 PM
C'mon Chris, at least hyperlink the neon quote to my article about them. :P
But yeah. I would say the Tempo does nothing except steer young adults towards import vehicles. If you get a tempo as your first car, I'd say with a lot of certainty that your next car will be a Honda or Toyota, or something remotely fun. The tempo defines "transportation appliance".
Cookie the Dog's Owner on September 18, 2008 at 03:28 PM
Chris and Chris, I read your complaints about the Tempo and I think to myself, "They don't know how good they had it! At least it was a Tempo, and not a '78 Monza!"
Mochi Mochi on September 18, 2008 at 03:47 PM
"Yet Japan and Germany were producing some pretty compelling competitors, and by the time the Tempo was mercifully retired in 1994 it was hopelessly, overwhelmingly outclassed." EXACTLY !!
Why such incompetence?! Why such a lack of imagination? Ford Retard Execs - dumb and dumber - let's put all our energy into building marginal larger cars and forget about these small cars... is that it?
Look at the messed up camber on that car as it waddles through the corners. Ugh!
I want a Ford Ka!
Chris Hafner on September 18, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Mochi Mochi: "Look at the messed up camber on that car as it waddles through the corners."
But Jackie Stewart said it's a real driver's car!
Sorry about the messed up links, Rob - should be fixed now.
Big Chris: "The car could've been made entirely out of sponge and had better response."
This is a great line.
Shawn: "The only Tempo that could be considered a lukewarm level of interesting is the rare AWD model."
Ooh, goood memory. I'd forgotten about that one.
Cookie the Dog's Owner: "At least it was a Tempo, and not a '78 Monza!"
The Monza might have been worse, but at least it was *interesting!*
Jim in KC on September 18, 2008 at 05:46 PM
Take a good look at that interior photo. See the angle on that dashboard? My then ten-year-old son discovered, on the way to drum lessons, that the dashboard is perfectly slanted for use as a practice pad.
That's about all the car was good for.
GaryThePowers on September 18, 2008 at 07:20 PM
The Tempo was the first car I remember having a strong disdain for. Ugh. I had a boss that drove one back in the early 90s it was that stinking baby blue color.
Now I hate Camrys!
http://www.caroftheday.org/2008/09/17/anticamry/
Peter the Not-so-Great on September 18, 2008 at 08:53 PM
Let's hear it for Jackie Stewart. He's a living legend of motor sport, both as a driver and as a team owner, but at one point in time he was giving Krusty the Klown a run for his money in the Sell-Out Sweepstakes. Unfortunately for him, that point in time coincided with the point in time that Ford was cranking out tin cans like the Tempo and the US-market Escort. Although to be fair to Sir Jackie, ISTR a rumor that the Escort he test-drove (and was so enthusiastic about in the ads) was a prototype, and one which had very little in common with the piece of crap that made it into the showrooms.
Big Chris on September 18, 2008 at 10:15 PM
And on the Monza - at least you can turn them into a cool drag car if you strip them and stuff something big in them. The Tempo would just become a high speed death trap if you did that to it - so still no redeeming value.
Anthony Cagle on September 19, 2008 at 09:44 AM
This is one of those cars I just can't get worked up over for good or ill. Plain vanilla transportation; a utility car if there ever was one. It sort of reminds me of my old Hornet, which I shall be composing an ode to one of these days. That was another 'first car' that I at least have fond memories of.
John Bono on September 19, 2008 at 12:49 PM
When I hear High Swirl Output, I think of something made of porcelain that the dog drinks out of.
That Other Guy on September 19, 2008 at 06:31 PM
Seems a little fitting that my first post here should also be about my first car...
My folks landed me a 92 Mercury Topaz 2-door the summer before my senior year of high school, in 1998. I'd had a small Nissan extended-cab truck before that, inherited from my parents and then totaled just shy of a year later, but the Topaz was the first car I could truly call my own. A few highlights from the 6 years I owned it:
-Was passed by a Geo Metro while ascending a reasonably steep grade. This was a great object lesson that no matter how hard you try, sometimes there is just no overcoming the weakness of a 96hp engine tasked with hauling 4 reasonable-sized adults uphill, even with a manual transmission.
-Speed Racer: the speedometer topped out at about 84mph, out of morbid curiosity (plus a distinct lack of self-preservation instinct, or concern for that poor car) I decided to test its top speed and floored it. 20+ seconds later, with the speedometer needle pegged, the RPMs at somewhere around 6000+, and the entire car shaking (not just rattling, but the entire frame and everything bolted on to it was literally shaking), I decided that this car really wasn't meant to go anywhere NEAR whatever speed it was doing (90? 95? 86?).
-4 of those 6 years were spent at Washington State University in Pullman, WA: lots of hills and at times a LOT of snow on the roads. Which led to the joy of coasting down a hill at about 5mph, and each time I'd so much as rub the brake pedal with my foot the topaz would start fishtailing. And then the reverse fun: taking a running start at a hill (got up to 30MPH in ~5 seconds!), and clawing up to the top at about 3mph, in 1st gear, with the engine redlining at about 6000RPM. How the devil that engine survived doing that once, let alone several times, is beyond me.
-Actually, that probably was at least a little responsible for the cooling pump popping a leak that resulted in steamed coolant spewing out from under the hood like it was a lobster broiling pot. A few years prior to that it had blown a coolant hose to the same effect while pulling into a mcdonald's parking lot off the highway; only two major repairs it ever needed in 6 years of brutal treatment.
-More maintenance fun! One winter in Pullman the temperatures dropped to consistently single digits during the day, and for awhile the car's headlights wouldn't turn on, even after a good 20+ minutes of warmup time. This got me pulled over one night by the local police, who were going to write me up a warning and have me check in with a mechanic or else be ticketed. Conveniently the headlights turned on while he was writing it up (it had been a solid hour or so since I'd first started the car), so no ticket, no warning, no problem! No mechanic visit either, because I had no money for one anyways.
-The End: the automatic seatbelts started to constantly jam up in their tracks, and no amount of lubricant or repair work could make them unjam. Since the cost for new seatbelt motors was about $300 each (couldn't find any at a junkyard anywhere), I traded the car in towards the purchase of a new 2003 Suzuki Forenza (itself a little bastard of a car that I could rant about with much disgust). Got $330 trade in value for the Topaz, amazing given that KBB value for a "Good" condition Topaz of those miles was $300, and this Topaz was most certainly not in good condition. Probably the most shocked I've ever seen anyone at a car dealership was when the lady writing up the final papers saw the payoff for that Topaz.
Ahh, good times.
Rob the SVX guy on September 20, 2008 at 10:03 AM
@ Other Guy: I thought I'd share some car knowledge with you, in response to each of your points.
1. Downshift. I have a 98hp 89 Accord, and I drive faster than 95% of all the traffic on the road. You have to learn how to use every last horse.
2. Shaking at speeds isn't the sign of a bad car, it's a sign that your wheels are not balanced. My 68 Charger, my 97 Neon, and my old Mercury Marquis all did this until I had the wheels rebalanced. Even if that had been done recently, it's possible for a weight to fly off.
3. It sounds like your rear brakes were not adjusted properly. No car should immediately fishtail when hitting the brakes. Also, when going up snowy hills, slamming on the gas and redlining it is the opposite of what you should do. Spinning the tires only reduces the amount of already small traction you get on snowy surfaces.
Cheers,
- Rob
davefla on September 21, 2008 at 11:02 AM
In January 1989, I drove off to grad school in my navy blue 2-door 1984. The three weeks it spent in the parking lot in March were the best times I had with it. In roughly 35k miles (less than 80k on the odo at the end) it'd had a carb rebuild, a new clutch, a CV joint and suspension work. Weirdest of all, the seatback frame broke on the right side, apparently from my habit of pressing against it while pulling my wallet from my back left pocket at drive-through windows. I went about 5-10 and 190 pounds, but that was just too much for the spot welds.
As soon as I found a full-time position two and a half years later, I bought a loaded '89 Mercury Sable at the used lot I'd been passing on my way to work for six months. I sold the Tempo to a pal for $300; three weeks later he came to me bitching about a $400 exhaust leak under the hood, and demanding to know if I'd known about it prior to the sale. I pointed out that I'd spent $500 on tires, suspension and a battery within six months of selling it to him, and made damn certain he'd known about that before accepting PAYMENTS. He shut up and traded it away after letting someone at a small repair shop complete a patch job. Unfortunately, he traded it on a first-gen Escort...
Looking back now, it's a wonder that Tempo ownership didn't lead me to become a bicyclist or a mass transit user - in MICHIGAN winters!
PS: While there was an AWD version, I seem to recall that it involved a vacuum-operated system which caused a concentric-shaft system to mate up in order to temporarily (VERY temporarily) spin the rear wheels. In other words, not only didn't it have a center differential, but it wasn't even as useful or robust as 4WD. The reason it's forgotten is that it was completely forgettable.
Steaming Pile on September 22, 2008 at 02:16 PM
@Shawn on September 18, 2008 at 01:15 PM
The only Tempo that could be considered a lukewarm level of interesting is the rare AWD model.
--------------------------------------
I had it's gay brother, the Mercury Topaz. Don't know why I thought it was a good idea to spend eight thousand Bush41-era dollars on a two year old Topaz with the extra complication of four wheel drive, except for the fact that it only had 21,000 miles on it. The best thing about the car was that the warranty was transferable for a reasonable fee, which I gladly paid.
The first thing to go were the rear CV joints made necessary by the four wheel drive system. Under warranty, sure, but I had to pay the sales tax out of my pocket, which meant maxing out my craptastic 80s-era VISA Classic card.
Next, the A/C unit. Same deal. Good thing it kept running long enough for me to pay down enough of the VISA balance to pay the damn sales tax.
Finally, after some other annoyances, like the faces of the climate control buttons falling off (they went back on with super glue as soon as I could find the damn things) and such, the oil pump ceased functioning without warning. By the time the oil pressure light came on, it was already too late, and the engine was completely hosed.
Now, do you think the people at the Ford dealer would just uncrate a new engine and get me back on the road in a couple of days? No. They completely rebuilt the engine from the smallest bolt, the cost of which was something like $3500, if memory serves. I guess the reasoning behind this was that they could maximize the amount they would charge Ford under my warranty, which was rapidly running out by this time.
Three weeks later, I had my car back, running reasonably well, but no way was I going to hang on to this piece of crap once the clock reached 60,000 miles and the car turned into a pumpkin or something. I was shipping off to Korea a couple of weeks later, so I signed a power of attorney and had my wife sell the damn thing for me. Somebody at Fort Jackson got what amounted to a new car for $4200.
Now, the positives. The stereo was nice and loud, and it sounded good. The ride was as plush as an 80s Ford product could be. It had enough room for five people. The handling was fairly decent. The mileage was, uh, adequate. I usually got around 25-27 MPG, depending on whether I was running the air conditioner, which in South Carolina was nearly all the time.
It was actually a decent car when it ran, but it just loved maintenance, and that made it unacceptable for an enlisted man's family sedan.
Sillypickle on September 23, 2008 at 10:38 PM
My best friend had a hand-me-down Tempo for several years. I remember him trying his best to justify his sad excuse for a car while we were driving from Orange County to San Diego to visit his school. He said "well, at least it gets better gas mileage than your Camry!" I admitted that he did get a few MPG better than my V6-equipped 89 Camry on the freeway, but I also noted that he was afraid to push the car much past 70 MPH. My freeway driving habits involved a steady diet of 85-90, which would have made the trip to San Diego go by significantly quicker. At 70 I doubt the Tempo would have any advantage at all in gas mileage, and it was behind in every other regard. I'm still trying to figure out which fact about the car is more amazing: that it kept running so much longer than its interior parts would function, or that anyone was willing to put up with it long enough to drive it into the ground.
Steaming Pile on September 24, 2008 at 05:26 AM
@Sillypickle - I bet at 70 the Tempo sounds like the Starship Enterprise (the original one) at warp 9.
Frank Lee on October 18, 2008 at 12:33 AM
Oh you poor souls. Maybe the middle year Tempos had problems the '84s and early '90s didn't? Because I've had imports and I've had Tempos; IMHO the Tempos have more going for them!
The five Tempos I have have all been very comfortable, durable, and reliable. I find Tempo seats more comfortable over long drives than those of much more costly and "luxurious" vehicles. When I ask them to start at -40F, they do, without even being plugged in. One of them has 300,000 miles on it and it's still going. One of them averages close to 40 mpg. None of them have cost much for repairs/maintenance/service- mostly tires, mufflers, and ordinary stuff that any 25 year old vehicle would need; the few parts I've needed outside of that were readily available and dirt cheap. My biggest complaint would have to be the poor quality paint. And those awful early headliners that ALL separated and fell down when they got old. :(
It's true, there's only 100hp; but it's not the same as, say, 100 Honda horsepower because the 2.3 has such good low rpm torque. No need to wind 'em out. All of mine, whether 5-speed or a/t will hit around 100 mph... (can't tell for sure with those stupid 85 mph speedos)... well, isn't that quite enough?
I remember when they came out in '84- at that time, I really hated the styling. But it has really grown on me since. I don't mind being seen in them, but then again I don't live to try to impress strangers out on the road either.
Well, I know I'm probably not going to change anybody's mind- that's OK, I don't really care. Actually it's a good thing Tempos get no love- I've been able to amass my fleet of them for not much dough! More for me woo hoo!
Ken on October 21, 2008 at 09:55 AM
The Ford Tempo is far more reliable than any import I have owned. We have owned three, and all have been capable of very high mileage.
My current 1993 2.3l gets 30 mpg and is able to cruise at 70 mph with no problems.
When you consider the cost of these cars new and now used, they are, and were, a great bargain. Compared to a Mustang, they are actually more sporty (Tempos have fully independent rear suspension, and only weigh 2500 lbs). Compared to most Porsches I have experienced, the Tempo is more reliable, and offers more fun per mile as the Porsches are always in the shop.
Anyone who badmouths Tempos does not work on cars. They are fantastic workhorses, easy to fix, reliable. I like them because they are "underdogs" and are terrific commuter cars.
That Car Guy on October 22, 2008 at 07:56 PM
Our family had a Tempo, circa-1991 4-door, 5-speed. Bought it used, in 1996, for a song! The first thing I did was replace the slightly-worn front struts with stiffer ones, and handling became acceptable.
Just the normal stuff broke... hood release cable, paint cracked, and I tried to like the thing for the bargain it was. One shop wanted $400 for a tune-up, I did it for $80. The intake manifold got dirty, and a can or two of spray cleaner took care of that.
Just one major curiosity of the car... it had PB, PS, AC, CC (With the manual!), tilt, a tach, PDL... but no power windows. I never understood that.
Frank Lee on October 22, 2008 at 09:55 PM
Car Guy: Yours was strangely optioned. Seems to me 99% of the 4-doors had automatics, and 99% of the 2-doors had 5-speeds. May not be true but that's all I've ever seen. And, I've seen quite a few 4-doors with power windows.
I lowered one of mine about 1.75" by cutting the springs. Put in new struts at the same time. The ride is a little less plush and a lot more "planted" and stabile in cornering. Did you know there are 4 different front sway bar sizes that fit, stock? I've played with them with good results too. But I'm very satisfied with my completely stock '94's ride and handling.