Comparing Aerostar & Windstar

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Fred - 07 Nov 2005 19:06 GMT

I'm looking for a 93-98 Ford van and wonder if the Aerostar
and Windstar are the same mechanically?

Any trouble spots for 93-98 Windstar?

Does the Windstar back seats fold down or come out?

Thanks!

Fred

Reply to this Message

nospam.clare.nce@sny.der.on.ca - 08 Nov 2005 00:38 GMT

>I'm looking for a 93-98 Ford van and wonder if the Aerostar
>and Windstar are the same mechanically?
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>Fred

The Aerostar is basically based on the Ranger - it is a TRUCK.
The windstar is based on a Taurus. It is a fat station wagon and
suffers all of the problems the Taurus was known for.
Absolutely NO comparison.

Reply to this Message

Tom Adkins - 08 Nov 2005 02:47 GMT

> The Aerostar is basically based on the Ranger - it is a TRUCK.
> The windstar is based on a Taurus. It is a fat station wagon and
> suffers all of the problems the Taurus was known for.
> Absolutely NO comparison.

Pretty close. No comparison between the two. Aerstar is a rear drive minivan loosely
based on the Ranger chassis, Windbag, er..Windstar is a front drive minivan based
loosely on the Taurus chassis. If looking for a Aero, look for an 96-97, they were the
best and great performers. If looking at the FWD Windstar, look at 2001-2005 models.
The 95-2000 were terrible.

Reply to this Message

Fred - 08 Nov 2005 05:21 GMT

Thanks! I just got back from the library, looking thru the
consumer books. After looking thru several, I came to the
conclusion that the Aerostar looks like the best all round
for me for the money. Chrysler products get both good and
bad reviews. Toyotas are almost always thumbs up but cost a
lot more and repairs are expensive.

> > The Aerostar is basically based on the Ranger - it is a TRUCK.
> > The windstar is based on a Taurus. It is a fat station wagon and
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> best and great performers. If looking at the FWD Windstar, look at 2001-2005 models.
> The 95-2000 were terrible.

Reply to this Message

C. E. White - 09 Nov 2005 12:56 GMT

> The Aerostar is basically based on the Ranger - it is a TRUCK.

I think it is a stretch to say that the Aerostar is based on a Ranger. I
know Ford included them in the same workshop manual set, but I think this
was because of the engineering group responsible for the design.

Aerostars were designed by Ford Truck Engineering, while Windstars were done
by Ford Car Engineering. Aerostars don't share anything more than engines,
transmissions, rear axles and corporate switch gear with Rangers. The basic
chassis is different. The front suspension is completely different. The rear
suspension (except for the actual rear gear) is different. None of the major
interior bits are shared (seats, instrument cluster, dash, etc). So while,
Aerostars may share design team members with the Ranger, very little else is
shared and certainly no more than might be shared between other Ford
platforms.

Whether this makes the rear wheel drive (or in some cases AWD) Aerostars
trucks or not I can't say. For truck like applications (hauling loads,
towing), I believe RWD is preferable, which makes the Aerostar closer to a
truck than the front wheel drive Windstar.

Ed

Reply to this Message

Fred - 11 Nov 2005 01:09 GMT

Thanks, CE! Great information.

Fred

> > The Aerostar is basically based on the Ranger - it is a TRUCK.
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Ed

Reply to this Message