I've owned one for quite a while now, a 2002 "triple black" hardtop,exterior & interior all black. It wasn't designed to be a sports car, never was. It was meant to be more of a boulevard cruiser which it does very well. Mine just turned 19,000 miles. I belong to a local Thunderbird club and attend the events when I can. We were recently invited to the Le May car museum in Tacoma, WA. I like seeing just about any one else's car and appreciate that their car is just as important to them as mine is to me. Not every vehicle is every guy's "cup of tea", but that's what this whole car-enthusiasm- thing is all about,isn't it? What I own isn't for everyone and what they own may not be of much interest to me,but we should just enjoy them having a good time with what they own and appreciate the time and effort it takes to have a vehicle they're proud of. Just like me.
+John Hiram When I bought mine two Ford dealers tried to add a 10k premium over the stick price. I found mine at Pasadena Ford sitting in the showroom and drove it off the lot for $39,000.00 plus tax and license. I don't think some Ford dealers knew how to sell a $40,000.00 2-seater when a fully optioned Mustang GT cost $10,000.00 less. The 2002-2005 TBird like the TBirds of the 1960s was more of a Lincoln Continental than a Ford and priced in Lincoln territory.
I agree, there were uglier cars from this era (Chevy HHR, Pontiac Aztek, even Honda Element come quickly to mind) but I also think this T-bird was trying too hard to be retro. Trying to be cool and actually being cool are two different things. The retro styling on this car was disjointed and out of place, instead of sleek it came across as old or trying to look old. The dash was too similar to the LS, so it wasn't unique or special enough and clearly being a two-seater only limited its appeal even further. Of all the different T-birds over the decades, even including the square ones from the late 1970s and early 1980s, this 2000s model is the one most T-bird purists dismiss as being a 'real Thunderbird.' Not sure if it was the gap in production between the prior T-bird and this one, or the underwhelming performance and design, but this T-bird is like the red-headed stepchild in a long line of fine Thunderbirds. Given almost two decades since this car came and went quickly from showrooms, perhaps that is unfair but what is clear is that this car never sold in anywhere near the numbers Ford expected at the time
Ford has always blown it by being too conservative with HP and performance. There's no way this car should have had less than the 310 HP 32 valve 4.6 in it. This was slow for a small V8 car even in 2002
The 4.6 was and always will be trash. Any non OHV V8 made by Ford is trash because they should be made with the proper OHV configuration. Sorry. Not tryin to hate. I've always believed simpler is better.
Even the 427 SOHC? Although, I do agree. 4.6 was a mistake. Small block displacement in a big block footprint. Ford should have modernized the Windsor like GM did with their 350.
@@extremedrivr The 4.6 was a great motor. For the era, it was a good performer that was reliable and efficient. Just ask cops which drove the Crown Vics. Ford managed to get as much as 320 hp out of it in 16 valve configuration with the Mustang. The InTech version maxed out at 290 in 1998 which was great for the time. Remember this 'Bird and the LS had the Jag 3.9 V8 which was, well, bad.
You notice the only people saying the car doesn't perform well and has tons of problems are people who don't own the car. Every owner loves it, and except for the ignition coil in the 2002, reports no problems. The 280-hp engine is plenty of power. The car's looks are classically beautiful. It's true sales dropped off by 2005, but only because the American car buyer is fickle and demand for the car dwindled--not because of any performance issues. As a luxury boulevard cruiser, the T-Bird kicks ass. My 2004 Bird is the best car buy I've ever made. And these things hold their value very well. The low-mileage ones will set you back $25,000+. That's for a 15-year-old car. If the thing was a piece of junk, everyone would know it. So how could it possibly hold its value the way it has?
I just purchased a 2004 Pacific coast edition #214/1000 built. Monterey mist green. Car has original 31k miles, with one lady owner from new, including tons of original paperwork. Thanks for your positive review !
coperna714 ; Sales dropped as soon as the Blunderbird hit the showroom floors. The T-Bird cost more than a Corvette. Sales dropped because of the retro 2005 Mustang. The 2002-2005 T-Bird, you could switch the headlights with the taillights. But it was definitely a far cry than its predecessor, the 1989-2000 Thunderturd. I was so disappointed with the ugly Cougar. Then Ford introduced the GT at $150,000. You could buy 3 Vipers at that price. I was ready to buy the Corvette. And this is coming from a Ford Blue Blood American. But patience is a virtue. Low and behold I bought a new 2009 GT500 11-08. Cost? Just under $44k. Still own it today. I will keep my $25,000+ to find and rescue 1957-1969 Fairlanes.
Great Review!!! To me, this is one of the BEST built and designed cars from Ford. One of the best cars that reminisces the good old days of the 50's and 60's into a modern day driving machine. Even 15 years later, these cars are one of the most recognizable and distinctive cars without having to look at the emblem to know what type of car it is! I've been around and driven many of these retrobirds and never have I meet an unhappy customer or owner anywhere that I've been. And now that I'm a proud owner of an 03 myself, I get lots of great compliments and people of all ages love everything about the car.
Definitely one of the best looking car's Ford ever produced. I see these quite often here on GA roads. There always extremely clean and kept up. I've never seen one that wasn't just completely spotless and beautiful. The owner's of these Thunderbirds really take good care of them.
I have a 2004. By then, most of the kinks were worked out but the word on the street was wayyy too much money for so little. 2002/3 sunk the ship and too little too late to survive. Complaints about a standard blah dashboard for that kind of money. However, I like mine, for sure. Great handling and unlike the early Vettes, you have pure comfort. "Fast" too. As one said, not a sport car but it will get up and go. I put Flowmaster's on it and it growls. I added 25hp to it. I can say that I rarely NOT get a compliment when I'm out. Merlot in color.
I've owned an '02 since new and even though it has had it share of problems I plan on keeping it. The TBird was not geared toward Mustang buyers or buyers of any other Ford car. Like TBirds of the 1960s, the 2002-2005 TBird was more Lincoln than Ford (built alongside Lincolns at the Ford Wixson plant) and priced in Lincoln/Cadillac territory. The TBird is a unique and fun car to drive and gets looks that few 14-year old cars would ever get. My wife took it to the market the other week and a kid said 'Nice ride' to her as she was putting groceries in the trunk. That comment from a kid in West LA where there are SLs, 6-Series, Bentleys etc everywhere. You can't compare it to a Mustang GT or Corvette as those are designed and marketed to a different buyer.
+lasuvidaboy its a nice car im surprised it was a sales flop..i would hold on to it. i think in a few years it will be retro..making it even more cooler..not that it already isnt a cool looking car..
they are great little cars and finally something great in the thunderbird arena after so many dismal years from the late 60s to current. This should have been a sales hit but sometimes people just dont catch on and appreciate something good when its available.
The official car of country club lady, you know, 50+, kids are gone, bad plastic surgery, very fashion conscious, always sharply dressed, married husband at age 25 and never worked a day in her life. Secretly hates and resents her philandering husband but knows no other way of life so she stays bitter and pops pills/drinks white wine to deal. At least this was her car until about 2005 when it went out of style and she convinced hubby to buy her a new Mercedes SL.
@@expsterm1 What 2002 models DPO we now see regularly? Individually not collectively...plus they did not sell well so there never was an abundance like some more economical cars ...collector cars now forsure
Waykers 13 Not even one in 13 years. My second ‘02 I just purchased a few weeks ago because it has 70k miles less. I figure it will last me another 10 years!
Linda Kriegel nice glad you love it, I have a black 02 so sexy ) I love it I drove it alot it has a little over 100K on it, I hardly see them on the road nowadays.
A perfect example of beauty is skin deep. T bird had mediocre performance, and that awful Lincoln engine. Each coil on plug would fail causing an expensive repair. Never going to be an investment grade car like say a 64 t bird.
The design has No Soul to it.. Reminds me of those Cartoon Cars in the old Shell Gasoline Commercials.. They washed down the Original T-Bird and made it an "AnyCar".. Yuck!!
This was actually a very cool looking car. I still turn my head whenever I see one on the road. It has so much character. It was a shame that it became a flop....
This was FINALLY a real thunderbird after so many dreary, dismal, cheap made and boring looking tbirds from previous years. This car should have been more popular than any year before. I have been in two of these cars and its everything you could want in a thunderbird. And very much like how the original 55 tbirds came about and using other existing Ford/Lincoln parts and driveline.
I was impressed when I drove one for 6 weeks as a dealer. The only issue with the car was the excessive cowl shake going over rough roads, or railroad tracks. Very shaky indeed. My 63 valiant convertible bondo bucket had much less cowl shake than the 02 tbird.
Average owner would be 55-70 years old. I remember this Thunderbird model as a pre-teen with old-school styling, compared to the 1990s Thunderbird, when I was in my childhood years. Too bad it was discontinued after the 2005 model year.
They never sold that many to begin with. Good luck getting parts 19 years later on a low production Ford car. You were probably SOL starting around 2010 except for maybe core mechanical parts.
I would have a set of 57 bird fins installed. on the front that cheep looking grill would have to go. I would replace it with the elegant 2000 Chrysler Concord grill, that looks like it came from a Ferrari. I would replace the ugly headlights and bezels with either 52 Mercury
7.7 sec. 0-60? Now that is blistering. With performance like that, how did this thing manage to become a sales flop? I was certain that the 25-45 crowd would be all over these things. If there's one image that the name Thunderbird conjures up, its the modern youth of America.
joh n This is why manufacturers shouldn't try retro styling. The only company that's ever made a decent retro-styled car is Mini, and that's only because they've been making the same car for 56 years.
For something so good looking, I can hardly find any examples of this T-Bird here in NorCal. All I see here are the ugly and sad-looking Chrysler PT Cruisers.
+TEDdotcom You hardly see them anywhere but check any of the used car sites (ebay, cars dot com, etc.) and you'll find a flock (pun intended) of them with odometer readings in the low four digits and even one or two with less than a thousand on them. It seems a lot of people bought these as investments, not cars and just left them in garages which may explain the lack of them on the road. But from what I'm seeing on the asking prices, they're still losing money.
This thing was a flop because the performance lacked. The 3.9 Liter was unreliable and very expensive to fix along wit the LS and the Jag. I work at a Ford dealer and see them come in.
ZL1Gimpelson I would also think that the car was a bit too expensive. 35 grand in 2002 was a lot of money. Adjusted for inflation, it would be 46 grand today.
@@BuzzLOLOL the success of the New Beetle definitely started the 90's retro movement (Plymouth Prowler was a year earlier but it was not a mass market car). Of course it was not the same as the original, but neither was the Mini, which came 2 years later.
@@lukerinderknecht2982 - New 'Mini' twice as big as old Mini if you see them side by side !!! But, at least, both front engine FWD... Old Beetle air cooled, rear engine, RWD... New 'Beetle' front engine, water cooled, FWD... totally different cars... And new Beetle has junk dual clutch automatic tranny that costs a fortune to repair...
Angelina Cortalano YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT. This has nothing in common with the DOHC Modular V8 other than the fact that it's DOHC. Quit being a fucking know it all if you have no idea what you're talking about.
They should have just put the Terminator Mustang supercharged V8 in this car and offered a 6 speed manual. Program the electronics a bit more aggressive than the Cobra and run higher stock boost. It would have sold for $50K if younger buyers wanted it instead of mostly age 50+.
5 років тому
Should have offered the 2003 Cobra 4.6 32 valve supercharged engine in this car with uprated suspension and big tires. It would have been a classic.
***** What's crazy is that we're nearing being a decade from the 2000s and the Bush administration... I mean 1990-1991 cars are considered Classic Cars at this point >_>
Is it just me, or does anyone else find this video painful to watch (or listen to) with the terrible background music blaring over the narration?? When did Motorweek start doing this?
These cars and lic ls were junk! The 3.9L are junk and had all kinds of problems. Lots of cooling issues and coil issues. And hard top noise issues and gas tank issues. It's like ford forgot about the gas tanks and had to figure that after the car was done with design process!
Yeah that was a consistent problem with that engine, as were leaks. The also had all of the front suspension noises and issues common to that platform. 02-03s also had shift tuning issues with the trans. constantly hunting for the right gear. I've read the last yr was a much better, more refined car, but it seemed that everybody who wanted a Bird, already had 1. Plus the mark ups, which were insane, kept them on the lots. I remember seeing new 1's on the lots in 07!
Funny, I've had one since 03 with 70k miles now, with the only problem being the coils got wet at a car show and went out about 3 years ago! Never heard of anyone having major mechanical problems.
This car had the same engine they later put into the Lincoln LS. Surprisingly quick for it's small displacement(for it's time). However, the designer of the car wanted to offer a special package with a supercharger option. This would have vaulted the performance easily into Mustang Cobra territory, possibly beyond and was shot down. Rumor is designer took the supercharged test car with him for his retirement. I have been wanting to get one of these(in black) and do a Coyote swap in it. IMO that would make this into a real beast, and would then be both sides- a real looker and a fast car.
The design has more elements of the first Corvettes than the first T-birds. Performance was nonexistent. It was destined for failure. The 58-60, foxbody, and this retro have to be the worst cars to abuse the Thunderbird name.
Ernest Somogy ; That explains why Ford sold 52,176 1955-1957 T-Birds. Chevrolet sold 14,146 1954-1957 Corvettes. But the 54-57 Corvette is far better looking than the 2002-2005 Blunderbird. I mean you could take the frontlights and switch them with the taillights. The front curves are the same as the rear curves. Almost like a half moon. It was a lot better looking than its predecessor. 1989-2000? Thunderturd. UGGH ! ZERO style.
I being from the Motor City knew right away the Ford got it wrong. They messed up Lincoln/Wixom plant and just kept going down. Thanks Jack the Knife. If anybody knows who that is ! Jag/Volvo, aka the Ford family . Motorweak !
Great looking car, but I hated the LS underpinnings. I know because I had a '05 LS V8 and it was very troublesome. Combine this T-Bird's styling with the Coyote 5.0 V8 and try to adapt current Mustang suspension and we have a winner.
A matter of taste re looks. To me - and many - hood-deck proportions are just plain wrong. Headlights were compared to pulling back a kitten's eyelids. 'Meh' overall. All this hype and hope -- too bad it didn't fly high in the end.
I still don't understand why Ford didn't use the 4.6 V8 instead?? I think that's one of the big mistakes they made with this car because that engine literally had no problems but this 3.9 was plaqued with them..
Why U.S. auto manufacturers don't build more retro type cars is beyond me... look how well the Chrysler PT Cruiser did when it was first offered! Who wouldn't want an automobile with cool 1950's-60's styling with 21st century technology? They are also allowed to build 10,000 automobiles without the useless, (IMO) emission controls; my father bought a slightly revamped Ford Model-T in the mid-70's who's production was also limited to ten-grand. WAKE-UP and smell the desires of the American driver Ford and GM!
Yeah, the "cool" styling of EVERY other pee-pee cruiser on the street. That is the true meaning of having a "street rod", so your ride will look EXACTLY like everyone else's ride, LMFAO!
@@TheOzthewiz I believe you have missed the point of my comment. I find it difficult to believe that you were unable to comprehend such a simple statement. (Let me clear this up first: I never mentioned "street rod" or even "cool" for that matter, so why you quoted me as such is quite odd) In-any-case, It is obvious that you have missed the point of my comment. I'll try again. The benefit of the 10-K unit build-limit legal-loophole eliminates non-viable govt. regulated features/components. Further, this 10-K unit legal-loophole opens an agency through which U.S. auto manufacturers are allowed to build 10-K of any type/model or any variations of previously mass-produced automobiles of any year of manufacture, WITHOUT the burden of having to load the units down with sundry government-regulated items; e.g.: outdated features, pollution-control devices and other such related items and other non-essential redundant systems. Be they Model T's or '57 T-Birds; What the customer does to modify the vehicle after the purchase of one of those limited production units is their decision. In other words, you may create any type of modified automobile, or 'street rod', (as you call it), which the owner desires. Therefore, "the 'cool' styling of EVERY other pee-pee cruiser on the street", as you worded it, exists exclusively within your meagre imagination. - Spero ti sia piaciuta la tua risatina, ragazzina.
I have one with just over 60k NICE as turquoise as pictured with two tone interior upgrade and of course hard top ...southern California car with zero rust routine maintenance kept as investment but right now I need to sell off a few things
Too bad Ford killed off the Mercury Cougar with it's Porsche designed engine for this piece of crap. Funnier still, Ford has turned to VW to now save them !!!!!
I think this t-bird is one of those cars whose appeal depends a lot on color. Turquoise, white, black, and silver are beautiful; but yellow and red... are not
I think what people had majorly against this T-Bird is that unfortunately it didn't continue the power of the previous generations. Remember the last 2 had introduced the Turbo Coupe option which was a perfect throwback to when the T-Bird was the speed demon of the Ford Family. It gave not only the luxury of a Lincoln but the power of a Mustang. The newer T-Bird have you the 50's styling but sadly none of it's raw power. For it's price people wanted something Mustang fast but Lincoln equipped. Not just the latter with a 50's aesthetic.
I feel like they should have come lowered, with the rear raised a bit for a more aggressive stance. As is, it looks like an old man with a golf hat car.
I feel like Ford could try the thunderbird again if they wanted to Hell IMO the 2015 mustang convertible kinda looks like a thunderbird with 4 seats It probably wouldn’t be the biggest success but I think it would probably be decent Also I once assumed this generation of thunderbird was made by Chrysler Cuz it kinda looked like something they’d do in this time period lol
That backlight on that top though 😂 that’s a ridiculously bad fit even if it was a prototype. Over heating engine, stumbling engine.... I’ve heard nothing but terrible things about these cars. SMH
I still don't understand why Ford didn't give this car more power and handling. It did't have to be a Corvette killer but the platform deserved much, much, much more in performance and the Ford Store owners that price gouged the shit out of them sure didn't help sales. It just seems that FoMoCo half assed this car from the get-go.
they were daft to parts bin it from the S type when they could stare straight at an XK in the range it was meant for ..Daft.. why it only lasted 3 years such a tragedy .. weve owned 2 T-Birds ..and when we saw the cheap cheap plastic centre console we left its spot on the show rooms wanting to upchuck and go straight for the shelby mustang gt near her. having also owned a real 98 Lincoln MK 8 SC we also detest the ls its a glorified mitsubushi something horrid.
I've owned one for quite a while now, a 2002 "triple black" hardtop,exterior & interior all black. It wasn't designed to be a sports car, never was. It was meant to be more of a boulevard cruiser which it does very well. Mine just turned 19,000 miles. I belong to a local Thunderbird club and attend the events when I can. We were recently invited to the Le May car museum in Tacoma, WA.
I like seeing just about any one else's car and appreciate that their car is just as important to them as mine is to me. Not every vehicle is every guy's "cup of tea", but that's what this whole car-enthusiasm- thing is all about,isn't it? What I own isn't for everyone and what they own may not be of much interest to me,but we should just enjoy them having a good time with what they own and appreciate the time and effort it takes to have a vehicle they're proud of. Just like me.
Not my cup of tea!! But still like comments!!
Never understood why this car didn't make it. I loved it.
too slow.
overpriced too.
+John Hiram When I bought mine two Ford dealers tried to add a 10k premium over the stick price. I found mine at Pasadena Ford sitting in the showroom and drove it off the lot for $39,000.00 plus tax and license. I don't think some Ford dealers knew how to sell a $40,000.00 2-seater when a fully optioned Mustang GT cost $10,000.00 less. The 2002-2005 TBird like the TBirds of the 1960s was more of a Lincoln Continental than a Ford and priced in Lincoln territory.
lasuvidaboy do you still have yours
Yeah, we were all waiting for a 2 door sports car that weighs nearly 4,000 whopping pounds! Is it all cast iron?
I look forward to these retro uploads!
I dont know why people say this car is ugly
There are a lot uglier cars from the early 2000s
I agree, there were uglier cars from this era (Chevy HHR, Pontiac Aztek, even Honda Element come quickly to mind) but I also think this T-bird was trying too hard to be retro. Trying to be cool and actually being cool are two different things. The retro styling on this car was disjointed and out of place, instead of sleek it came across as old or trying to look old. The dash was too similar to the LS, so it wasn't unique or special enough and clearly being a two-seater only limited its appeal even further.
Of all the different T-birds over the decades, even including the square ones from the late 1970s and early 1980s, this 2000s model is the one most T-bird purists dismiss as being a 'real Thunderbird.' Not sure if it was the gap in production between the prior T-bird and this one, or the underwhelming performance and design, but this T-bird is like the red-headed stepchild in a long line of fine Thunderbirds. Given almost two decades since this car came and went quickly from showrooms, perhaps that is unfair but what is clear is that this car never sold in anywhere near the numbers Ford expected at the time
Pt cruiser. Eclipse Saturn's, chevy sub compact cars.
That doesn’t mean it’s not ugly.
Ford has always blown it by being too conservative with HP and performance. There's no way this car should have had less than the 310 HP 32 valve 4.6 in it.
This was slow for a small V8 car even in 2002
The 4.6 was and always will be trash. Any non OHV V8 made by Ford is trash because they should be made with the proper OHV configuration.
Sorry. Not tryin to hate. I've always believed simpler is better.
Even the 427 SOHC? Although, I do agree. 4.6 was a mistake. Small block displacement in a big block footprint. Ford should have modernized the Windsor like GM did with their 350.
@@extremedrivr you're a moron. The 4.6 modular is one of the most reliable engines ever built.
@@danielphilcox4658 Right? Wtf... I mean 4.6s aren't the fastest but they're damn reliable. I think he has his engines mixed up
@@extremedrivr The 4.6 was a great motor. For the era, it was a good performer that was reliable and efficient. Just ask cops which drove the Crown Vics. Ford managed to get as much as 320 hp out of it in 16 valve configuration with the Mustang. The InTech version maxed out at 290 in 1998 which was great for the time. Remember this 'Bird and the LS had the Jag 3.9 V8 which was, well, bad.
This car suddenly looks better to me now than it ever has.
This car had so much potential. Ford didn’t try hard enough to keep it alive. I think it looks awesome.
I saw a teal one a few weeks ago. I was thinking how much fun it would be with a Coyote swap.
U don't need one these cars hauled ass stock
So much more expensive than an LS
Who tf does Coyote swaps. LS is way more tunable, cheaper, and there is way more parts available
@@mattbanco4406 People who like Fords. Expensive or not, it's a Ford, it needs a Ford engine.
The Coyote turned out to be a bomb just like the Ecoboost 6 unfortunately.
*I think its one of the coolest cars made in the last 25years. I Absolutely LOVE THE REMOVEABLE HARDTOP!*
You notice the only people saying the car doesn't perform well and has tons of problems are people who don't own the car. Every owner loves it, and except for the ignition coil in the 2002, reports no problems. The 280-hp engine is plenty of power. The car's looks are classically beautiful. It's true sales dropped off by 2005, but only because the American car buyer is fickle and demand for the car dwindled--not because of any performance issues. As a luxury boulevard cruiser, the T-Bird kicks ass. My 2004 Bird is the best car buy I've ever made. And these things hold their value very well. The low-mileage ones will set you back $25,000+. That's for a 15-year-old car. If the thing was a piece of junk, everyone would know it. So how could it possibly hold its value the way it has?
I just purchased a 2004 Pacific coast edition #214/1000 built. Monterey mist green. Car has original 31k miles, with one lady owner from new, including tons of original paperwork. Thanks for your positive review !
coperna714 ; Sales dropped as soon as the Blunderbird hit the showroom floors. The T-Bird cost more than a Corvette. Sales dropped because of the retro 2005 Mustang. The 2002-2005 T-Bird, you could switch the headlights with the taillights. But it was definitely a far cry than its predecessor, the 1989-2000 Thunderturd. I was so disappointed with the ugly Cougar. Then Ford introduced the GT at $150,000. You could buy 3 Vipers at that price. I was ready to buy the Corvette. And this is coming from a Ford Blue Blood American. But patience is a virtue. Low and behold I bought a new 2009 GT500 11-08. Cost? Just under $44k. Still own it today. I will keep my $25,000+ to find and rescue 1957-1969 Fairlanes.
Great Review!!! To me, this is one of the BEST built and designed cars from Ford. One of the best cars that reminisces the good old days of the 50's and 60's into a modern day driving machine. Even 15 years later, these cars are one of the most recognizable and distinctive cars without having to look at the emblem to know what type of car it is! I've been around and driven many of these retrobirds and never have I meet an unhappy customer or owner anywhere that I've been. And now that I'm a proud owner of an 03 myself, I get lots of great compliments and people of all ages love everything about the car.
Definitely one of the best looking car's Ford ever produced. I see these quite often here on GA roads. There always extremely clean and kept up. I've never seen one that wasn't just completely spotless and beautiful. The owner's of these Thunderbirds really take good care of them.
I’m from Cordele ga
The inner boomer in me loves these so much.
I have a 2004. By then, most of the kinks were worked out but the word on the street was wayyy too much money for so little. 2002/3 sunk the ship and too little too late to survive. Complaints about a standard blah dashboard for that kind of money. However, I like mine, for sure. Great handling and unlike the early Vettes, you have pure comfort. "Fast" too. As one said, not a sport car but it will get up and go. I put Flowmaster's on it and it growls. I added 25hp to it. I can say that I rarely NOT get a compliment when I'm out. Merlot in color.
I've owned an '02 since new and even though it has had it share of problems I plan on keeping it. The TBird was not geared toward Mustang buyers or buyers of any other Ford car. Like TBirds of the 1960s, the 2002-2005 TBird was more Lincoln than Ford (built alongside Lincolns at the Ford Wixson plant) and priced in Lincoln/Cadillac territory. The TBird is a unique and fun car to drive and gets looks that few 14-year old cars would ever get. My wife took it to the market the other week and a kid said 'Nice ride' to her as she was putting groceries in the trunk. That comment from a kid in West LA where there are SLs, 6-Series, Bentleys etc everywhere. You can't compare it to a Mustang GT or Corvette as those are designed and marketed to a different buyer.
+lasuvidaboy its a nice car im surprised it was a sales flop..i would hold on to it. i think in a few years it will be retro..making it even more cooler..not that it already isnt a cool looking car..
they are great little cars and finally something great in the thunderbird arena after so many dismal years from the late 60s to current. This should have been a sales hit but sometimes people just dont catch on and appreciate something good when its available.
lasuvidaboy hi do you have or did you have a problem with your coils going bad
Was he referring to the CAR OR your wife?
The official car of country club lady, you know, 50+, kids are gone, bad plastic surgery, very fashion conscious, always sharply dressed, married husband at age 25 and never worked a day in her life. Secretly hates and resents her philandering husband but knows no other way of life so she stays bitter and pops pills/drinks white wine to deal. At least this was her car until about 2005 when it went out of style and she convinced hubby to buy her a new Mercedes SL.
This is definitely a cool car. I remember when they first came out I saw them on a fairly regular basis. In the last 5 years or so, not so much.
I probably see as many classic T-Birds as i do these :P
Because they broke down.
@@expsterm1 What 2002 models DPO we now see regularly? Individually not collectively...plus they did not sell well so there never was an abundance like some more economical cars ...collector cars now forsure
I've only seen one and it was in a college parking lot
@@expsterm1 no you're just ignorant 🤦🏽♂️it was because they didn't sell well.
In a way it kind of looks like the first-ever Corvettes The Styling
Nathan Lopez ; That explains why Ford sold 52,176 1955-1957 T-Birds. Chevrolet sold 14,146 1954-1957 Corvettes.
I have an '02 in this same color...gets a TON of compliments and alot of people don't know what it is or never saw one before.
Sonnywitdamoney do you still have your t bird
I have 2!!!
Linda Kriegel do you have a problem with your starter coils going bad one after the other?
Waykers 13 Not even one in 13 years. My second ‘02 I just purchased a few weeks ago because it has 70k miles less. I figure it will last me another 10 years!
Linda Kriegel nice glad you love it, I have a black 02 so sexy ) I love it I drove it alot it has a little over 100K on it, I hardly see them on the road nowadays.
A perfect example of beauty is skin deep. T bird had mediocre performance, and that awful Lincoln engine. Each coil on plug would fail causing an expensive repair. Never going to be an investment grade car like say a 64 t bird.
OR a, '55-'57 BIRD..
The design has No Soul to it.. Reminds me of those Cartoon Cars in the old Shell Gasoline Commercials.. They washed down the Original T-Bird and made it an "AnyCar".. Yuck!!
I love these retro reviews. Bring back lots of memories. I remember when Ford came out with this Thunderbird. One of a kind.
Hope you have that Sedona review!
This was actually a very cool looking car. I still turn my head whenever I see one on the road. It has so much character. It was a shame that it became a flop....
This was FINALLY a real thunderbird after so many dreary, dismal, cheap made and boring
looking tbirds from previous years. This car should have been more popular than any year before. I have been in two of these cars and its everything you could want in a thunderbird. And very much like how the original 55 tbirds came about and using other existing Ford/Lincoln parts and driveline.
1,000 lbs. overweight...
That's SOP for most car manufacturers. The Mustang is one example, the Pontiac Fiero is another!
I really wish this car came in a manual because its a damn beautiful car.
My only real complaint.
I see a disproportionate amount of these on the road around me here in Arizona. Must be because of all the retirees that move here.
hahahahaha I live in Phx and have seen a few
StewartLucrative was
I live in Phoneix and i drive one and im old us oldies love them
I was impressed when I drove one for 6 weeks as a dealer. The only issue with the car was the excessive cowl shake going over rough roads, or railroad tracks. Very shaky indeed. My 63 valiant convertible bondo bucket had much less cowl shake than the 02 tbird.
Average owner would be 55-70 years old. I remember this Thunderbird model as a pre-teen with old-school styling, compared to the 1990s Thunderbird, when I was in my childhood years. Too bad it was discontinued after the 2005 model year.
Ford should bring this car back and take out the ugly flex.
Kitty Fister lol
If Ford would've made it 4-seater as previous generation it would sell much better!
I never see these cars on the road anymore... its probably been 6 years since i've seen the last one
They never sold that many to begin with. Good luck getting parts 19 years later on a low production Ford car. You were probably SOL starting around 2010 except for maybe core mechanical parts.
I would have a set of 57 bird fins installed. on the front that cheep looking grill would have to go. I would replace it with the elegant 2000 Chrysler Concord grill, that looks like it came from a Ferrari. I would replace the ugly headlights and bezels with either 52 Mercury
MotorWeek getting it wrong - again. :P
7.7 sec. 0-60? Now that is blistering. With performance like that, how did this thing manage to become a sales flop? I was certain that the 25-45 crowd would be all over these things. If there's one image that the name Thunderbird conjures up, its the modern youth of America.
joh n Meh, my truck can go that fast. This is more like a Thunderturd.
You missed my sarcasm, didn't you? It's hard to get that across through a comment on a UA-cam video.
Oh. My fault.
Have a +1 then.
joh n This is why manufacturers shouldn't try retro styling. The only company that's ever made a decent retro-styled car is Mini, and that's only because they've been making the same car for 56 years.
For something so good looking, I can hardly find any examples of this T-Bird here in NorCal.
All I see here are the ugly and sad-looking Chrysler PT Cruisers.
+TEDdotcom You hardly see them anywhere but check any of the used car sites (ebay, cars dot com, etc.) and you'll find a flock (pun intended) of them with odometer readings in the low four digits and even one or two with less than a thousand on them. It seems a lot of people bought these as investments, not cars and just left them in garages which may explain the lack of them on the road. But from what I'm seeing on the asking prices, they're still losing money.
Seems like it really needed the 4.6
Kurt Definitely should’ve been an option.
It really needed the old pushrod 1994 5.0 / 302 with the factory forged bottom end (that they should have never quit making).
This thing was a flop because the performance lacked. The 3.9 Liter was unreliable and very expensive to fix along wit the LS and the Jag. I work at a Ford dealer and see them come in.
ZL1Gimpelson I would also think that the car was a bit too expensive. 35 grand in 2002 was a lot of money. Adjusted for inflation, it would be 46 grand today.
+Henry Rieken
The Lincoln LS for 2002 was priced between $38k and $40k+ for the higher end model.
+ZL1Gimpelson
This is the fastest Thunderbird built.
And, name me a car that ISN'T expensive to fix, these days.
It was expensive to fix for being a 2002.
Performance also lacked because a 1,000 lbs. overweight...
Please do the 98' New Beetle! It started all these retro themed cars to come out! Please
New Beetle was just a look alike... nothing like the first ones... New Mini started the retro...
@@BuzzLOLOL the success of the New Beetle definitely started the 90's retro movement (Plymouth Prowler was a year earlier but it was not a mass market car). Of course it was not the same as the original, but neither was the Mini, which came 2 years later.
@@lukerinderknecht2982 - New 'Mini' twice as big as old Mini if you see them side by side !!! But, at least, both front engine FWD... Old Beetle air cooled, rear engine, RWD... New 'Beetle' front engine, water cooled, FWD... totally different cars... And new Beetle has junk dual clutch automatic tranny that costs a fortune to repair...
@@BuzzLOLOL LOL
For Real.... LOLLOL
beautiful car, it would be nicer with supercharged cobra engine;)
Originally built exclusively for Lincoln and then went on to the Mustang line. And this is a cobra 3.9L 32 valve v8!
Angelina Cortalano YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT. This has nothing in common with the DOHC Modular V8 other than the fact that it's DOHC. Quit being a fucking know it all if you have no idea what you're talking about.
It would be BETTER with ECO-BOOST, like in the Ford GT!
@@angelinacortalano3741 99 + cobra had a 4.6l dohc v8
In the 18 years I've been working on automobiles I've only seen one of these cars, they really weren't all that but they're really rare
My uncle has one of these... would love to inherit it one day :)
I wish they kept building them. Curious to see what one would look like for 2016.
2023
This is quite a sweet looking car.
Poor sales could've been a result of the $4,000 premium mark-up. Just think of it, for 4 grand, one gets.....nothing.
Poor sales from 1,000 lbs. overweight...
Depreciating "asset"..
They should have just put the Terminator Mustang supercharged V8 in this car and offered a 6 speed manual. Program the electronics a bit more aggressive than the Cobra and run higher stock boost. It would have sold for $50K if younger buyers wanted it instead of mostly age 50+.
Should have offered the 2003 Cobra 4.6 32 valve supercharged engine in this car with uprated suspension and big tires. It would have been a classic.
I saw a black one yesterday, the first time in years that I have seen one.
A million "2002 is NOT retro/Keep Retro Reviews to the '80s & 90's!!!!!!" complaints/posts in 3.........2............1
Calling this a retro review makes me feel old.😩 I remember seeing these on the lot brand new just a few years ago.
***** What's crazy is that we're nearing being a decade from the 2000s and the Bush administration... I mean 1990-1991 cars are considered Classic Cars at this point >_>
One of the ugliest cars ever.
If I wanted a Lincoln LS that bad, I would go buy one......
I'm impressed at how they changed an american icon to a Barbie-mobile for the likes of Paris Hilton
DolleHengst the"likes of paris hilton" lmao
Is it just me, or does anyone else find this video painful to watch (or listen to) with the terrible background music blaring over the narration?? When did Motorweek start doing this?
hahahhaaa, I hear ya, thats really distracting for me
These cars and lic ls were junk! The 3.9L are junk and had all kinds of problems. Lots of cooling issues and coil issues. And hard top noise issues and gas tank issues. It's like ford forgot about the gas tanks and had to figure that after the car was done with design process!
Yeah that was a consistent problem with that engine, as were leaks. The also had all of the front suspension noises and issues common to that platform. 02-03s also had shift tuning issues with the trans. constantly hunting for the right gear. I've read the last yr was a much better, more refined car, but it seemed that everybody who wanted a Bird, already had 1. Plus the mark ups, which were insane, kept them on the lots. I remember seeing new 1's on the lots in 07!
Funny, I've had one since 03 with 70k miles now, with the only problem being the coils got wet at a car show and went out about 3 years ago! Never heard of anyone having major mechanical problems.
Oh my god man- I feel sooooooooooo old watching this
This car had the same engine they later put into the Lincoln LS. Surprisingly quick for it's small displacement(for it's time). However, the designer of the car wanted to offer a special package with a supercharger option. This would have vaulted the performance easily into Mustang Cobra territory, possibly beyond and was shot down. Rumor is designer took the supercharged test car with him for his retirement. I have been wanting to get one of these(in black) and do a Coyote swap in it. IMO that would make this into a real beast, and would then be both sides- a real looker and a fast car.
Know a guy in Tampa who will put a supercharger in for 10K
weirdest car ever. almost.
Don't think they sold too well....should have been sportier!
A beautiful and rare car. The 2002 TBird was a fine effort.
the blue trim on the inside is good looking asf
The design has more elements of the first Corvettes than the first T-birds. Performance was nonexistent. It was destined for failure. The 58-60, foxbody, and this retro have to be the worst cars to abuse the Thunderbird name.
Ernest Somogy ; That explains why Ford sold 52,176 1955-1957 T-Birds. Chevrolet sold 14,146 1954-1957 Corvettes. But the 54-57 Corvette is far better looking than the 2002-2005 Blunderbird. I mean you could take the frontlights and switch them with the taillights. The front curves are the same as the rear curves. Almost like a half moon. It was a lot better looking than its predecessor. 1989-2000? Thunderturd. UGGH ! ZERO style.
First the Cougar and then this. They looked promising but oddly enough went nowhere.
Destined to become a classic you’ll wish you had never sold!
Just crying out for a Coyote V-8 transplant......
This is a Coyote 3.9l 32 valve v8.
@@angelinacortalano3741 no it's a jaguar based v8
@@sutherlandA1 you're sort of correct the 3.9 liter V8 is actually a Jaguar V8
@@sutherlandA1 Yeah, because Ford, sort of OWNED Jaguar during that period....
@@TheOzthewiz well when ford sold JLR to Tata they kept the V8 and still use it in updated form
This Thunderbird is now slower than the 1989 model as far as 0-60 does that make any sense .
Victor Victor No, nor does your awkward syntax and lack of correct punctuation that even a third-grader knows how to use.
I being from the Motor City knew right away the Ford got it wrong. They messed up Lincoln/Wixom plant and just kept going down. Thanks Jack the Knife. If anybody knows who that is ! Jag/Volvo, aka the Ford family . Motorweak !
They flew of the lot alright! And they never came back!
Great looking car, but I hated the LS underpinnings. I know because I had a '05 LS V8 and it was very troublesome. Combine this T-Bird's styling with the Coyote 5.0 V8 and try to adapt current Mustang suspension and we have a winner.
A matter of taste re looks. To me - and many - hood-deck proportions are just plain wrong. Headlights were compared to pulling back a kitten's eyelids. 'Meh' overall. All this hype and hope -- too bad it didn't fly high in the end.
I still don't understand why Ford didn't use the 4.6 V8 instead?? I think that's one of the big mistakes they made with this car because that engine literally had no problems but this 3.9 was plaqued with them..
Why U.S. auto manufacturers don't build more retro type cars is beyond me... look how well the Chrysler PT Cruiser did when it was first offered! Who wouldn't want an automobile with cool 1950's-60's styling with 21st century technology? They are also allowed to build 10,000 automobiles without the useless, (IMO) emission controls; my father bought a slightly revamped Ford Model-T in the mid-70's who's production was also limited to ten-grand. WAKE-UP and smell the desires of the American driver Ford and GM!
Yeah, the "cool" styling of EVERY other pee-pee cruiser on the street. That is the true meaning of having a "street rod", so your ride will look EXACTLY like everyone else's ride, LMFAO!
@@TheOzthewiz I believe you have missed the point of my comment. I find it difficult to believe that you were unable to comprehend such a simple statement. (Let me clear this up first: I never mentioned "street rod" or even "cool" for that matter, so why you quoted me as such is quite odd) In-any-case, It is obvious that you have missed the point of my comment. I'll try again. The benefit of the 10-K unit build-limit legal-loophole eliminates non-viable govt. regulated features/components. Further, this 10-K unit legal-loophole opens an agency through which U.S. auto manufacturers are allowed to build 10-K of any type/model or any variations of previously mass-produced automobiles of any year of manufacture, WITHOUT the burden of having to load the units down with sundry government-regulated items; e.g.: outdated features, pollution-control devices and other such related items and other non-essential redundant systems. Be they Model T's or '57 T-Birds; What the customer does to modify the vehicle after the purchase of one of those limited production units is their decision. In other words, you may create any type of modified automobile, or 'street rod', (as you call it), which the owner desires. Therefore, "the 'cool' styling of EVERY other pee-pee cruiser on the street", as you worded it, exists exclusively within your meagre imagination. - Spero ti sia piaciuta la tua risatina, ragazzina.
I have one with just over 60k NICE as turquoise as pictured with two tone interior upgrade and of course hard top ...southern California car with zero rust routine maintenance kept as investment but right now I need to sell off a few things
Too bad Ford killed off the Mercury Cougar with it's Porsche designed engine for this piece of crap. Funnier still, Ford has turned to VW to now save them !!!!!
I'd like to drive one and see what it's like.
I think this t-bird is one of those cars whose appeal depends a lot on color. Turquoise, white, black, and silver are beautiful; but yellow and red... are not
I think what people had majorly against this T-Bird is that unfortunately it didn't continue the power of the previous generations. Remember the last 2 had introduced the Turbo Coupe option which was a perfect throwback to when the T-Bird was the speed demon of the Ford Family. It gave not only the luxury of a Lincoln but the power of a Mustang. The newer T-Bird have you the 50's styling but sadly none of it's raw power. For it's price people wanted something Mustang fast but Lincoln equipped. Not just the latter with a 50's aesthetic.
I feel like they should have come lowered, with the rear raised a bit for a more aggressive stance. As is, it looks like an old man with a golf hat car.
That WAS Ford's target market. Should have come with a set of golf clubs..
COOL MotorWeek | Retro Review: 2002 Ford Thunderbird
IT WAS 'GROOVY', daddy-O
I feel like Ford could try the thunderbird again if they wanted to
Hell IMO the 2015 mustang convertible kinda looks like a thunderbird with 4 seats
It probably wouldn’t be the biggest success but I think it would probably be decent
Also I once assumed this generation of thunderbird was made by Chrysler
Cuz it kinda looked like something they’d do in this time period lol
it's sad how this car was so damn awful but motorweek wouldn't tell you, lol.
This car would have been great if they offered it in a manual. Idk why Ford has been shafting manual drivers
Love this car still a head turner!
this car was the bigges heap of trash during that time absolutely no reliability or performance just using the name to sell to nostalgic old people
That backlight on that top though 😂 that’s a ridiculously bad fit even if it was a prototype. Over heating engine, stumbling engine.... I’ve heard nothing but terrible things about these cars. SMH
I still don't understand why Ford didn't give this car more power and handling. It did't have to be a Corvette killer but the platform deserved much, much, much more in performance and the Ford Store owners that price gouged the shit out of them sure didn't help sales. It just seems that FoMoCo half assed this car from the get-go.
they were daft to parts bin it from the S type when they could stare straight at an XK in the range it was meant for ..Daft.. why it only lasted 3 years such a tragedy .. weve owned 2 T-Birds ..and when we saw the cheap cheap plastic centre console we left its spot on the show rooms wanting to upchuck and go straight for the shelby mustang gt near her.
having also owned a real 98 Lincoln MK 8 SC we also detest the ls its a glorified mitsubushi something horrid.
This is an infomercial!
Horrible editing , loud soundtrack and cheesy graphics. Unacceptable for an early 2000s production.
I really like John Davis' '62 Sport Roadster. BTW, I own a '05 50th Anniversary in red like the one in this Motor Week review...
Lástima que no lo isieron en México por si dios nos daba la oportunidad de comprar uno asta de sesta mano
A 4.6 and t45 would have made this car much better.
Didn't this car and the Lincoln la v8 start in second gear? And with a tune you could make it start in first gear?
This car was a total pos,it looked good but thats all.
The guys buying this car almost 20 years ago are probably not able to drive anymore.
I want one o f these cars soooooooo bad!!!
When you try to americanize a Jaguar...nope
When this car was on the cover of Motor Trend, I did not like it, I said what r they going retro for? Years later, I kind of like the car !
O why didnt they do a e bird with the terminator? It would have been so easy ford, easy and epic
We werent a Ford driving family but i really appreciated the retro styling
That thing was a terd!
It was a PILE of STEAMING turds!
02 T-Bird: Somewhat cool idea, really badly executed.