1992 Ford Thunderbird Reviews, Pricing & Specs

































































































What owners say
"Overall, drivers generally enjoy the 1992 Ford Thunderbird for its power, reliability, and fun driving experience. Many appreciate its solid build and handling. However, a few drivers expressed concerns about the engine's power and gas mileage. While some love its unique design and comfort, others noted minor issues like the lack of cupholders and potential cold start worries. Most would recommend it as a good car."
Performance is a bit sub-par for this car, but it's to be expected with a underpowered base model. From experience, acceleration is slow at slower speeds but it does pick up faster in the higher gears. It can hit 180 kph, and I've seen it last for a few hours on extended runs between 140-160 kph. Braking feels good for its size, and the handling is fairly responsive. One thing to note (as I live in a cold climate) is that this car seems to start no matter how cold it is. I've never had it not plugged in when colder than -30C, but at this temperature it turns over without a problem. Build quality is great. No problems so far, but the lower mileage may be the reason for this. The interior is nice, with the only drawback being no cupholders. The car feels solid no matter the speed you drive at, and nothing in the car feels flimsy. The appearance is drop-dead sexy. I've looked at earlier and later T-birds (80's up) and this one seems to have the right amount of flair. The front end styling on the 90-92s seems more proper for this car compared to the 93s and later. This car is just class, all around. Cost of Ownership is good. My maintenance on the car is lower than it should be due to a busy life, but there have been no problems. It's a domestic so parts aren't a concern. Gas mileage isn't bad for a V-6 of its age either. Fun Factor: For what this car was built to be, it's great. Handling is fantastic, interior noise is low, the ride is great even on gravel roads. As someone else put it, it's hard not to keep from speeding in it. I've talked with a few other T-bird owners after they see my car, and I have yet to hear anything bad about their overall experiences with these birds.
November 14, 2010the engine is the only thing that made me love this car everything else was jus too poorly designed. It was fun too drive from time too time but the weight ratio became a problem so thats pretty much it
January 2, 2010Quick car for its age, and even tho its pretty bad on gas it's still better then most vehicles that can keep up to it. It's ride is kinda rough but usually people that buy this car wouldn't care (at least they shouldn't), seeing as how it helps to corner a lot better that way.
June 11, 2008What owners say
Performance is a bit sub-par for this car, but it's to be expected with a underpowered base model. From experience, acceleration is slow at slower speeds but it does pick up faster in the higher gears. It can hit 180 kph, and I've seen it last for a few hours on extended runs between 140-160 kph. Braking feels good for its size, and the handling is fairly responsive. One thing to note (as I live in a cold climate) is that this car seems to start no matter how cold it is. I've never had it not plugged in when colder than -30C, but at this temperature it turns over without a problem. Build quality is great. No problems so far, but the lower mileage may be the reason for this. The interior is nice, with the only drawback being no cupholders. The car feels solid no matter the speed you drive at, and nothing in the car feels flimsy. The appearance is drop-dead sexy. I've looked at earlier and later T-birds (80's up) and this one seems to have the right amount of flair. The front end styling on the 90-92s seems more proper for this car compared to the 93s and later. This car is just class, all around. Cost of Ownership is good. My maintenance on the car is lower than it should be due to a busy life, but there have been no problems. It's a domestic so parts aren't a concern. Gas mileage isn't bad for a V-6 of its age either. Fun Factor: For what this car was built to be, it's great. Handling is fantastic, interior noise is low, the ride is great even on gravel roads. As someone else put it, it's hard not to keep from speeding in it. I've talked with a few other T-bird owners after they see my car, and I have yet to hear anything bad about their overall experiences with these birds.
November 14, 2010the engine is the only thing that made me love this car everything else was jus too poorly designed. It was fun too drive from time too time but the weight ratio became a problem so thats pretty much it
January 2, 2010Quick car for its age, and even tho its pretty bad on gas it's still better then most vehicles that can keep up to it. It's ride is kinda rough but usually people that buy this car wouldn't care (at least they shouldn't), seeing as how it helps to corner a lot better that way.
June 11, 2008I really think this is a good car and I would recommend this car to anyone. This is my first car and I don't think that I would get rid of this car for a long time. This is really a nice car.
February 26, 2013I love this car. it has power and reliability. easy and fun to drive.
August 3, 2007The only cool thing about this car is the automatic seat belts
January 7, 2008This is the most fun I have ever had with a car. The mustang is great in all but this car has my heart.
December 23, 2007not a ford person. good acel nice burnouts one wheel peel the cars 0-60 is nice, hauls ass in second gear. well worth the 600 i paid. fun car. transmission break fast. engines dont last long. not good winter cars
November 24, 2009Damn. I'd have to say this is one of the best designed cars from the 80s or the 90s. Hell, mine was hit by a Semi square in the back. I was stopped, the Semi was estimated to be doing 50mph when he hit me because of the skid marks and when he finally stopped. I still drove that car around for another couple weeks until their insurance company offered nearly four times the kelly blue book value of the car. My only real problem was the 3.8L V6 engine. I always wanted more power. But as for speed, both me and my parents have had it in the 140s. It is also quite surprising acceleration-wise. Not too many turboed hondas or toyotas could keep up with my rear wheel drive, 140hp, 3500lb, automatic transmition, american luxury car with an independent rear suspension.
July 25, 2008i loved it up until my battery started dying for no apparent reason
July 5, 2007Trims & specs
Base MSRP $16,840 | Seating 5 |
Engine N/A | Cargo Capacity N/A |
Combined MPG N/A | Drivetrain N/A |
Base MSRP $22,541 | Seating 5 |
Engine N/A | Cargo Capacity N/A |
Combined MPG N/A | Drivetrain N/A |
Base MSRP $19,278 | Seating 5 |
Engine N/A | Cargo Capacity N/A |
Combined MPG N/A | Drivetrain N/A |
Base MSRP $19,106 | Seating 5 |
Engine N/A | Cargo Capacity N/A |
Combined MPG N/A | Drivetrain N/A |


