Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis



  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,849
    ...but I think on the GM/CV, if you have ABS then you have traction control. At least it's that way on the '03 models, from what I've read. It may have been different in '00, but I doubt it.

    I have seen ABS and traction control listed separately on cars from other manufacturers, though. I believe it usually went for $600 for the ABS, and then if you got traction control it was another $150 over that.
  • cfocfocfocfo Posts: 147
    That GS model with leather is one of the best values out there ! What a great car, enjoy !

    John, I think you summarized the SUV era as well as I've seen. (# 1774) And it appears to be heading full circle - back to the form of the family station wagon.

    I can name a few PROs of the WAGON:
    - the wagon seats 6 AND has a large cargo area without reconfiguation or jumping over seat rows.
    - less of the SUV bounce/jiggle
    - safer on the hwy, (lower center of gravity)
    - I would guess better MPG than SUVs (less wind resistence)

    Sure, many will always see the family wagon as "uncool" or not having enough "style, just as many say the same thing about the CV/GM.
    But my guess is that SUVs will have peaked out in 2003, and that the American car makers better face the foreign competition better in the CAR market to prevent further overall market share loss. (I know GM had a small fractional gain last year).
  • soboysoboy Posts: 1
    Hello all - I am a car enthusiast, used to work for Ford, cars are my hobby and my passion. Last year, I inherited a 1998 Mercury Grand Marquis, LS with antilock brakes and traction control. 37,000 miles and in almost perfect condition. I never thought I'd be writing this, but I love this car! It is smooth and quiet, reasonably quick, gets great gas mileage for a large car with a V-8, it has excellent brakes and much better handling than I expected. It doesn't feel like a boat, as I remember my father's American cars did from the 1970's. I also feel very safe driving it with the wife and kids aboard. Before getting the GM, I was seriously thinking about buying a new BMW, but now I am going to stick with the Grand Marquis.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,849
    ...on how the '03 models compare to the '02 and earlier models? Does the hydroformed frame and rack-and-pinion steering make much of a difference in ride and handling?
  • cfocfocfocfo Posts: 147
    I am loving my Grand Marquis also, unlike a lot of GM owners, I had to buy mine. Apparently, the GM is a car that is commonly left by the dearly deceased. LOL

    That's OK, I still like it and knew it wasn't going to make it in the next Emimem video when I bought it.

    It sounds like yours has many good years on it.
  • Was a long time user of Explorer forum but I've come into something new. 02 Sport LX, definitely not your father's crown vic. P-74 luxury package, leather buckets, console shift, 17 inch 5 spoke wheels, true dual exhaust, 235hp police interceptor motor,Handling and Performance Package. What can I do to add more punch? Has a 3.27 rear but was told I could go to a 3.73 ( also told not to be used if traction control activated) Any opinions on the JET POWER module from Jet performance products? they say up to 17 more hp. I'd like to deflate some import ego's with old fashioned US hp. Too old for a mustang....
  • iusecadiusecad Posts: 287
    if you haven't already, try

    there's many knowledgeable folks that should be able to help you out.
  • andre1969 re:your request for comments on the above.I have had a new 03 GM for 6 months and approx 6600 miles now.Redesigned frame and new rack and pinion steering superb.Car feels,stucturely,very stong.No twisting or bending evident. Steering nicely weighted,and precise.Holds its course very well.Handling excellent.(you can almost see the guys in the BMWs trying to keep up on the long fast curves saying to themselves "I did'nt think American cars could go round corners like that").Lets not discuss the ride!!
    Well, alright then. Its hard,even by European standards,but don't be put off by that.Do try one for yourself,for an extended period,and if you can live with the ride,the other fine qualities of the re-design are very rewarding.Kind regards.
  • drmpdrmp Posts: 187
    and have mixed feelings about it. Originally thought this is my next car (currently driving a '99 Passport).

    Excellent living-room sized seats with 8-way power plus lumbar on the front, adjustable pedals, very good road noise isolation, hugs the road nicely, soft on the bumps.

    However, there are other things that left me scratching my head. The engine which has more torque and power felt rather weak. My 4x4 passport which is heavier can jump off the line with ease and with no sign of srain. The steering becomes numb and rubbery at about 80 mph and I had a hard time keeping the car inside my lane. In contrast, I can point and shot with pinpoint accuracy in my passport at 80 mph. And I thought their biggest improvement was the steering.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,849
    As for the acceleration, at least, well the LS Premium, according to Edmund's at least, has 224 hp @4800 rpm and 272 ft-lb of torque @ 4000 rpm. Well, Crown Vics and Grand Marquises have had around that much torque for probably as long as they've been putting 302's in them. In 1990, for example, the old 302 put out 270 ft-lb of torque, but it did it at 2000 rpm.

    That LS Premium might have been stuck with fairly tall gearing, which would have kept it from taking off very fast off from a standstill. One one hand, you have peak torque coming on fairly high, which means the engine has to rev to get there, but then you have tall gearing keeping the engine revs down.

    I dunno about the steering though. Maybe they still take out the road feel on purpose, because they think that's what the typical big Ford/Merc buyer wants?
  • drmpdrmp Posts: 187
    My passport has only 205 hp@5400 and 215lb-ft@3200 but it is quicker off the line and quicker at any speeds despite the heavy 4x4 body.

    I can also easily nudge the car a couple of inches left or right at high speed to avoid a pothole or other wandering sleepy drivers. I can't do it in the GM.

    Because of these, i have a second thought about the GM.
  • cfocfocfocfo Posts: 147
    I guess it doesn't matter what the car is, even a Grand Marquis, there will always seem to be a "quicker off the line discussion", LOL.

    Drmp, have you checked out the Marauder ?
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,849
    ...about what 0-60 is for the current Grand Marquis? Say, the base model with the 224 hp engine?

    The closest reference I can think of is the Michigan State Police test of a police-spec Crown Vic. I think it did 0-60 in about 9.3 seconds, which was in range with the police spec Impala and Intrepid. Keep in mind though, police cars tend to be built more for top speed, and the heavier-duty components add weight and offset power increases. They also test them with two officers on board.

    One thing though, a car like a Grand Marquis probably isn't going to feel all that quick off the line, especially with standard tall gearing. I've just noticed that big cars in general don't feel like they're going all that fast, until you look down at the speedo and say "DAY-UMM!!" With smaller cars with engines that rev more, they feel like they're going fast, even when they're not!

    About the only personal experience I have with GM acceleration is this...a buddy of mine has a '95 GS with the 195 hp V-8 and 2.73:1 gearing. I raced him one night in my '89 Gran Fury ex-police car, and he couldn't keep up. 20 less horsepower, 1 less tranny gear, but 2.94:1 rear gearing and about 400-500 lb less weight.

    I'm sure with an extra 30 hp on tap though, the newest ones should be noticeably quicker.
  • drmpdrmp Posts: 187
    My Passport may have been geared for quick launch. Two independent sources (one of which is motortrend) clocked the passport at 8.3 sec 0-60 mph. I've also driven my SUV to 100 mph however, as expect it has a poor fuel economy due to the boxy shape of my SUV. The GM is quiter at speed and you can easily go over 80 mph without noticing.
  • cfocfocfocfo Posts: 147
    Anyone have any info on installing mud guards on a 2003 GM ? Also, isn't there an CV or type site for info like that ?

  • I just finished reading all of the active posts, and learned a lot. Thanks to all who took the time to post.

    I am the original owner of a 97 GM and still love it after 5 1/2 years.

    Last April, the intake manifold failed. I became aware of the extended warranty for some but not all of the Fords that have the 4.6 and grouched to Ford, but to no avail. To the retired attorney who planned on pursuing Ford over this: how are you coming along? any luck? Thanks again to all.
  • kinleykinley Posts: 854
    If their district service office is reasonably close, go in person with all of your paperwork. To make a deal, they need to document your individual case. IMO they should pay the entire bill and they have in the past to many people.
    Good Luck.
  • cfocfocfocfo Posts: 147
    Last month I was deciding between a roomy SUV or a roomy GM for our family vehicle. Both met my needs and wants lists and I could have gone either way. Better gas MPG would have been nice, as the writing was on the wall for higher gas prices, but the size of the other beasts out on the road eliminated a gas efficient vehicle, too bad.
    The SUV advantages were - it rode high for a good view and everyone in the neighborhood owns at least 1 SUV and for those 5 days a year there is more snow than salt on the road, you get better traction.
    The GM advantages were - it has an easy to read electronic instramentaion panel, rides with less hwy bounce, and I wouldn't have to succumb to the neighborhood/national SUV craze.

    Now none of the above were strong enough to make a final vote.

    The final vote that carried the decision was SAFETY. Early in my Edmunds research, I eliminated the 3rd row seat if I DID get the SUV. There's nothing safe about that seat located inches in front of the back glass and rear bumper. The kids loved it, it was like a little hidden club back there for them. But I wasn't going to stress out at every stopped light when I had someone sitting back there.
    Of course, the other big SAFETY fear I had was ROLLOVER. Dr. Jeffrey Runge, the NHTSA administrator, said rollovers account for more than half of SUV fatalities.

    So why am I posting this ? Well I just got done reading some posts and SUV links to TIME, James R. Heale, USA Today, and so-on about how unsafe SUVs are and I would bet there will be more data to come that will back this up even more. And as I get commments about driving a grandpa mobile, I'll just smile and enjoy as the great marketing of SUVs takes a few shots.

    I still like the SUV I almost bought, but ... IMO, I am driving one of the safest vehicles on the road with as many creature features as I've seen on ANY vehicle !,9171,1101030224-42346- - - 4,00.html

    justreading "I don't like SUVs, why do you?" Feb 16, 2003 1:24pm
  • I have a CV with only 7000 miles on it and the rear end has a whining noise, most noticable when you let off the gas at 65mph, the whining gets loudest at about 62 down to about 52. Then it comes in again about 40 down to 30mph. The noise is only under deceleration, if you give gas it goes away. Service manager drove it and can't seem to hear the noise, but everyone else can, especially rear seat passenger. Anyone else run into this problem.
Sign In or Register to comment.