Howdy, Stranger!

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





Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis

1356

Comments

  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,876
    Hi jcbahr,
    I'm not really clear what it is you're looking for. Wiring diagrams for all model years of the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis?

    This discussion is about future models, but we can try to point you toward better discussions for your questions. However, if you want detailed wiring information you're likely to have to purchase a repair manual like Chiltons, or purchase a subscription at alldataDIY.com if you need it ASAP.

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Could Ford make an AWD option available with the current panther platform, or would it require enough rework that it'd not be worth it (and better to start over)??
  • ehaaseehaase Posts: 328
    Ford will show a concept car based on the Mustang called the Interceptor that may preview a CV/GM replacement. The concept (to me) looks like a downsized early 1960's full size Ford sedan with a Super Chief front end.
  • This excerpt comes from the 1-10-07 USA Today, Business Section, and the article title is Automakers Roll out Hopes For Recovery. The part I'm tying to the CV is at the bottom.

    Here is the link, working for now anyway...

    http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-01-10-detroit-show-wed-usat_x.htm

    The challenges

    The Detroit automakers are banking on the sheet metal shown here to help change the red ink to black. What needs fixing to get there:

    •Product. "Now comes the real challenge. You can't keep shrinking. Now you have to be about product," says Kevin Tynan of Argus Research. "General Motors is probably a step ahead," having the most models in the pipeline, he says.

    "We've got to do, first and foremost, exciting cars and trucks," Wagoner says.

    Fields says Ford is hardly idling. He says that 70% of the vehicles sold by Ford, Mercury and Lincoln will be new by the end of next year, and by 2010, all vehicles sold by those Ford Motor brands will be new designs.

    Ford also hopes that unexpected features such as its Sync communication and entertainment system will draw buyers. So far, there's a huge buzz about Sync, developed with Microsoft and exclusively Ford's to offer until late 2008.
  • Last weekend I was able to go to the St Louis Auto Dealers show. While there, I asked a guy from an area Ford dealer (who acted like a level headed company guy) if he knew anything about the CV/GM. His words were, to the effect, that it will likely be around through 09-10 and be replaced about that time.

    He said that fleet contracts and dickering over replacements have delayed any cancellations prior to then.

    Better start the letter writing & car-buying campaign now folks...
  • hwyhobohwyhobo Posts: 263
    I can't believe Ford would be insane enough to cancel CV/GM altogether instead of update it (add a wagon, fer crying out loud!).
  • It seems like a no-brainer to make a somewhat updated CV on the Explorer platform. Explorer sales are down so there's probably extra capacity. Its got body on frame but also IRS. That will allow more back seat room right there. Keep everything else the same: 6 speed auto, 3 valve engine. Instant competition for the Chryslers! Someone earlier on this thread suggested the same thing in 2005. Seems like a good idea to me.
  • Ford is committed to shoving the Five Hundred down the throats of it's retail customers due to office politics. All the guys behind the Panther platform are either retired or dead, and there are too many careers there tied to the Five Hundred.

    Sales of the Five Hundred are pretty sad, considering how much time, effort, and money has been poured into it. They will waste more effort on updating it, and creating new models off the platform, but it is not going to do much.

    Meanwhile, the Panther sits completely neglected. When the Panther is gone, I'm done with Ford - and I'm a loyal Grand Marquis owner.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,673
    Good idea to use the Explorer platform with IRS, but throw in the 292 HP engine, not the 239 that it has now...my CV 2004 has 239, does get out of its own way, but 292 HP with firmer seats could make this a sleeper dream car...oh, and without the inflated price of the Marauder, as what we want ain't worth an extra 5 grand...

    Read in today's paper...the Five Hundred is about to be discontinued...and renamed...TAURUS...no kidding, in the business section of today's AJC...
  • hwyhobohwyhobo Posts: 263
    Yep, it's in today's Autoweek as well: http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070206/FREE/70206001/1024/L- - ATESTNEWS

    What really disturbs me, though, is that the %*&^-ugly Ford Tempo-style front will now adorn the newly renamed Taurus. Yes, that will set it on fire.

    Well, at least the interior looks more upscale from the decidedly low-rent 2007 model.
  • samnoesamnoe Posts: 731
    What's up with Ford? With the name game? Whenever a vehicle is not selling well, they change names, and they hope for the best! It's rediciolus!!

    Windstar to Freestar, 500 to Taurus, Zypher to MKZ, and then MKR, MKX, MK I don't know what....
  • fordenvyfordenvy Posts: 72
    These concepts will be built if the company lasts long enough, it's kind of obvious the attempt for these are not just for publicity. These are hot sisters, they should build both of them, I have a feeling they will cut off the CV and the GM names because of the years of neglect. They need something new and exciting, for young and old. You have to say the interceptor will make a great looking police car. If they don't get watered down by the bean-counters these will be hot products. I'd even consider them.
  • fordenvyfordenvy Posts: 72
    If the Interceptor and MKR are built, they still won't be available to us for another 3.5 years(2011 model year). Disapointing, thats too late.
  • bigunit67bigunit67 Posts: 62
    Was in the B&N the other day checking out the auto mags for June/July. Memory is failing a wee bit but I believe it was in the most recent Car and Driver that they had a long article about Ford's future, with the Interceptor being on the cover and the focus of an inside article.

    It went on to talk about how much $$$ the company makes from F-150, Mustang, and "Panther-Platform" sales and if it weren't for those, woe be to Ford. It also said that for 2010 the Company has announced it will close the plants that make the Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, and Lincoln Town Car.

    Fait Accompli? Kinda sounds like it. After all, as the article stated, at that point the platform will be 31 years old and who'd want it - words to the effect. So we've come to the point that age, success, and profitability are being used as pretexts to cancel something...niiiiice.

    I'm one to argue the cars needed serious updating, but do you really have to throw out a rock-solid platform in order to accomplish it? Guess so, as any and all execs that pushed the Panther platform are likely long gone and it's "nobody's baby", so why keep it and it's accompanying bathwater?
  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    I just wonder what all the executive transports and police will use as a good portion of the police and executive transport fleets are Crown Vics and Lincoln Towncars.

    -mike
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,327
    "Car & Driver" is frequently more alarming than authoritative. :sick:

    ARM is no dummy so it would not be surprising to see a continuation of the CV, GM, & TC all with IRS and a DOHC engine for just the TC. All contained in a sleek new body design. ;)
  • bigunit67bigunit67 Posts: 62
    Good point Paisan. I'm just reporting what I read (but not what I'd do if I were in charge of Ford) :)

    I'm all for the platform continuing, trust me. To let a warhorse like that go without so much as even a passing upgrade is a crime.

    One of my best friends is a highway patrolman in Missouri. They have been testing out the Dodge Charger police car and found it to be wanting as compared to the CV (v-6 version). He wasn't personally involved, but just said reports the field force was given was that it didn't have the durability/structural integrity of the CV. I assume Dodge is working on that.

    The reason they tested it was about a year ago Ford informed them that they might be closing down production of the CV in 08/09. Since the state buys a massive amount of vehicles (cars replaced at the 50,000 mi mark) they began testing alternatives. All he's been told since is that they don't think that will happen in 08/09...not a ringing endorsement.
  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    Well comparing the V6 version of the charger to the V8 CV is not a fair comparo IMHO. The new chargers seem to be hitting the road pretty well in terms of police vehicles. We'll see how they do now that DC has been sold. Who knows what the next version will have or have not.

    -mike
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,327
    Yet, the state trooper driving the Charger "6" has been known to declare, "Oh, I could have had a V8!" ;)
  • I wholeheartedly agree. Ford's making a mistake killing off the Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, and Town Car. I also agree that they're still really nice cars; let's just say that they're behind the PAZAAZ curve. Ford owns the police cruiser market, the limo/livery market, the full size GSA/fleet/rental market, and the 65+ geriatric/55+ near-geriatric (of which I'm a member) market. Who in their right minds would abandon all that? The Panther platform is rock-solid, and these cars provide the most car value available in the USA today, even Consumer Reports Magazine loves the Town Car. Yes, they are in need of a significant updating and a real face-lift (similar in magnitude to the Town Car's '03 over '02 model face-lift: nothing major, but easily noticeable). A nice bump in power (eg: 5.4L/300hp instead of the 4.6L/239hp engine) would also help. Give us buyers a reason to trade out of their 03's, 04's & 05's, and we probably will.

    Ford has made so many blunders and false-starts, and then re-starts ('The Way Forward', then 'The New Way Forward' and even 'The New, New Way Forward'). Then there's the name changes, casting strong 'Brand Equity' names to the wind for new names, in an attempt to spice up warmed-over oatmeal. Why throw veneralble names and products like Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, and Town Car away. They immediately say "Ford", "Mercury", and "Lincoln". It costs a lot of money to grow name recognition like that, and the public's expectation of the products tied to those names can not be some pint-sized FWD/AWD replacement. Ford needs to stop cutting corners, do it right and stay in business. Or keep trying to cut corners and find themselves takeover targets. Or worse yet, find themselves joining American Motors and Studebaker in the automotive history museums.

    I know Ford has to be very careful how it spends it's last $12-15 billion or so. And I know that Ford needs to bring some dramaticly different products to market, so they can catch the eye of those well heeled hi-tech kids who're in the Honda, Toyota, BMW and Audi showrooms. The Lincoln MK-S and Ford Flex are a nice start, but the Ford Interceptor, Tonka Truck, and Lincoln MK-R are sorely needed soon. But it can take a couple billion dollars to bring a new line of serious contenders to market, and even then WILL IT WIN or WILL IT LOOSE? Who knows. Why not drop a couple hundred million dollars to dress-up the OLE' PANTHER. Let her soldier on another 5 or 6 years, she's guaranteed to pay dividends. She'll fill a spot (RWD Sedan) that everyone is running back to, and nothing else Ford currently has will fill. I guarantee if Ford gives me and folks like me a reason to trade-in my 2005 Town Car, we'll do it. The Limo/Livery folks (fashion concious as they are) will want the new chariot, the police will want the new better pursuit unit, and even the fleets will want the updated look. Then Ford will have to hire Brinks to haul all their profits to the bank; heck, a Panther redo might even fund one of those big ticket new products.
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,327
    I recently read where the CV will be religated to Livery, GM will be marketed in GS & LS, while the TC continues.

    I confess I haven't noticed much change between the 02 & 03 TC appearance. From 1998 on - same style to me.

    My Rx for buying a new TC includes a major style change with the Mustang 300 hp engine, but we can dream can't we? ;)
  • I've read the same things. I've also read and heard, from a few lower level internal sources, that the CV/GM/TC as we know them, are to be killed after 2009. Ford has very few resources and is running scared. They know they've made a lot of mistakes, and now they're in crisis/survival mode. As a result they're betting the house on a few new new products, platforms and engines (ie: twinforce), selling off assets (except Ford Credit, hopefully) to help fund it, and hoping for success. They know they need to do things differently than before (at least they've come to that painfull recognition); but in my opinion, that doesn't mean amputate your left arm because a couple fingers are dead: just cut off those fingers and move on. This will be another move that they will live to regret. Make the Flex, make the MK-S, replace the Ranger (way over due), build a lot of the hot new concepts (Lord knows we need em). But at least put a few dollars into something that has a proven track record and a reasonable chance of success.

    You're right the difference between the '02 to '03 TC was not as visually dramatic as between the '97 to '98. The '03 was a significant mid-model facelift. Look at the two side by side, the differences are subtle but easily noticeable. Also significant interior changes. Ford will never spend the $$$ for a complete re-do of these cars; heck, they're choosing to be 'penny wise and pound foolish' by not investing in the decent facelift I'm proposing. I just hope that Mr. Mullaly (Ford's CEO) will happen to read comments like the ones in this chat, and do something sensible about it. A major re-styling/re-engineering would be great, but I don't expect it. If they did, then these cars could live on for at least one more styling generation 7-10 years. With a decent facelift and interior messaging, these cars would see a spike in interest and sales, and could soldier on for at least 4-5 more years.

    Regarding the Mustang's 300hp engine; that would be great in a Crown Vic XL 500 (remember the old Galaxie XL 500), or another Marauder. But for the Town Car, I think low-end torque and the horse power numbers are achieved. Also you don't pollute the Mustang's performance image by putting it's engine in grandpa's Town Car, maybe dad's Marauder is okay though. Besides the older dads and grand-dads would be more appreciative of engine size and the slower-roller, grunt force of the 5.4L, 300hp engine from the Navigator.

    One thing I will say about Ford is, their interiors have improved far more over the last dozen years than any other manufacturers. They are closer to Audi quality (the industry standard for interiors) than to that of General Motors. And their quality has been improving by leaps and bounds. It's unfortunate that customers need to see significant styling changes outside before they'll look at the inside of a car, but that's the way it is. Witness the Windstar to Freestar mistake. The new car's interior was nicely done (except they missed the boat by dropping only the rear seat into the floor, Chrysler and Honda killed them on that one), and it was well engineered. But instead of spending the money to significantly change the look, they thought they could fool the customers into looking past the near identical exterior, by changing the NAME. I am a Ford/Lincoln/Mercury guy, always have been, and my family was a FORD family. Even when I lampoon them, it's my way of telling them where they're going wrong, because I really want to see them survive and thrive. If Ford goes away, a big piece of AMERICANA gets flushed down the toilet. WAKE UP FORD, THERE ARE A LOT OF US OUT HERE WHO WILL BUY YOUR PRODUCTS, YOU JUST GOTTA MAKE WHAT WE WANT!
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,673
    if they put a 300 HP engine in the CV, don't add $5000 to the sticker like with the Marauder...then engine just isnt't worth $5K additional over the cost of the standard 239 HP V8...pull that trick and they could easily lose me forever...
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,327
    Would you pay $500 more to have the 300 hp engine? I would because I don't trade every three or four years. ;)
  • Marsha: There was a lot more to the Marauder than just a 300 HP engine, but I'll agree with you that $5000 was too much of a premium for what you got. They should've put the 5.4L engine out of the SVT F150 Lightning pick-up in that car, along with more performance tuning, sporty interior upgrades (seats, gauges, etc.) and a few more performance oriented sheet metal tweaks (to give it more of a visual difference); then they could have commanded $10,000 more, and gotten it gladly from all the folks like me who could remember the original Marauder. Ford needs to stop doing a half-baked job, or else they're gonna loose a lot of folks forever. Either go all the way and do it right, or else start fading slowly into bankruptcy and out of business. Let's hope for better.
  • A 300 HP engine would probably cost more than $500 to bring to market, but I think it could easily be done for $1000. The Mustang 4.6L is a high performance engine and might even cost more than the 5.4L engine from the Navigator. That 5.4L is not only 300 HP, but is a torque monster and a slower spinning engine, which makes it ideal for the Town Car. And with the Town Car's taller axle ratio, the gas mileage probably won't suffer much if anything at all. With the 5.4L's 365 lbs-ft. of torque, it won't have to work as hard to get that 4500 lbs. of iron moving. Also, I think the engine life expectancy will be longer. So, for those of you who want to keep your cars for 8, 10, or even 12 years or more, that should represent a good value.
  • You're right! CV: relegated to Livery/GSA pool/Law Enforcement. GM: marketed as LS & LS Premium to Rental & Commercial Fleets, & Public mostly on an order basis. TC: Executive Series, Limo/Livery only; Signature/Designer Series, Rental/Commercial Fleets & Public mostly on an order basis. 2008 models, late arrivals (Dec/Jan), as production moved to Canada plant. Virtually no visual or technical difference from 2007 models, maybe a new color or two and more streamlined packaging for simplicity. As I hear it, ditto for 2009, after which these models will probably be terminated. BIG MISTAKE!!! I guess maybe I'll keep my '05 TC and maybe replace it in a few years with an '07/'08/'09, late model, low mileage used one. No need to buy an '08/'09 new, just not enough difference from my current car. I hear Chrysler is looking to do a 6" stretch version of the 300; I may look at one of those when it comes out, or the rear drive Cady I hear may be on the drawing board. But who knows, Ford may get smart and re-do the TC. Then again maybe they have a real surprise for us, a totally new full size, rear drive (Aussie) platformed car. Now that could be a good thing, as long as they do it right. I guess we can dream.
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,673
    and what it would cost are two very different things...I would suppose that the actual cost to Ford is barely over $100 per car (what is the actual cost difference for a different valve or piston shapr???...almost nothing), but what they want to charge for it is something else...

    They could easily do it for $500 and I would certainly pay $500 for the better engine...but $5000???...no way, I will wave goodbye to Ford and buy a competitor product...now, no $500 for Ford or $5000, I am gone...

    But they could upgrade the CV with the better engine, put in real sport seats for another $100 (their economies of scale are immense, and the actual difference is cost is hardly anything, yet the comfort to the driver is a world of difference), upgrade the dash and radio for almost nothing (it has to have a dash and radio, anyway) so it is a little more modern, like something in say, the 1990s (...:):):)...), and just make it into a 21st century family sedan...with all the tooling almost paid for...
  • I used to work for Ford; am still peripherally associated with the car business. I know a little something about the manufacturing and marketing ends, albeit not a tremendous amount about the bean-counting, but am converstionally acquainted with that as well.

    Don't want to get into a [non-permissible content removed]-for-tat about it, so suffice it to say, there are many of other considerations besides just dropping a different engine into a car. I agree, the 4 valves in the 4.6L as opposed to the 3 valves in the 5.4L are not really a big issue. Sometimes extra power, torque, and or weight requires stronger tranny seals, suspension tweaks, cooling upgrades, and more. Even at Ford's economies of scale, it is not possible to make the changes we're talking about for a 'C-Note'. Putting more padding in the seats, maybe. But putting in structurally superior, ergonomically improved seating (good idea) would cost a lot more than $100. Changing the dash (another good idea) requires re-engineering; everything has to be re-designed into the new dash and tolerances have to be tight (Ford is improving there). Sometimes changing one thing throws all else out of alignment.

    Bottom line, $250-$350 million or so invested into the CV/GM/TC trio for a significant facelift, interior upgrade and power boost would probably trigger a nice sales spike. It may cost Ford $400, $500 or even $600 a copy to do it right; and I wouldn't begrudge them charging $1000 more. After all, everyone is entitled to a reasonable profit, and a few hundred dollars extra profit x a bunch more cars may entice them to do it; and that would be a good thing. Besides, the difference between $50k and $51k aint much of nothin, if it means the difference in getting a car that's improved, as opposed to getting warmed over oatmeal.

    Oh, by the way, yes the tooling is paid for, and yes they've been cash cows for Ford. But with the recent cut in margins to narrow the sticker price-to-transaction price difference, and the continuing high cost of incentives (rebates/subvented financing), a lot of that profit is now gone. That's the real reason why Ford would consider killing their (used to be) Cash Cow. Make it look different, feel better, act stronger and I think many folks (like me) will come buy another one; after all why buy the same thing with a higher year designation, when the old thing is working just fine. I want my new car to look like a new car, I even want my neighbors to know that I have a new car (vain as that might sound), and most consumers (even commercial consumers) are like that, so there's a lot of sales that Ford's loosing. Hell, we might even get a few of those Cadillac, Buick and Chrysler customers to jump ship.

    One more thing, I really like the upcoming MK-S, I really do. I just believe that that car is going to draw a very different type of customer. Heck, I might even buy one of those myself after I take a good look at it. But the Town Car customer is really more of a Cadillac, Buick, and maybe even a S-Class Benz, Lexus LS-Series type of buyer. Big car luxury and/or definately RWD oriented. They definately are not BMW 5-Series, Audi A6, or Cadillac Catera buyers. The MK-S will appeal more to them. And that's a good thing, Ford needs to capture that type of buyer. But in addition to maybe buying an MK-S, I would DEFINATELY buy a new Town Car, if it were done right, and I know lots and lots of people who would. Besides, you aint gonna find Limo/Livery buyers driving an MK-S. Or cops driving a Ford Fusion or even a Taurus (500) as a Police Cruiser. No sense in Ford driving their customers over to the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger showrooms. That's like handing Chrysler a gift. WAKE-UP Ford! This market is your birthright. Fight to keep it, or piss a lot of folks off.

    Anyway, there you have it.
  • In WWII, after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed many of our battleships, the Navy brass became very anti-battleship. Tactics of the war and the determination of those in charge hastened the advent of the aircraft carrier as the "capital ship" of choice.

    Now, even though you can get chapter and verse from the Marines how it is wise to reactivate the Missouri, Iowa, New Jersey and Wisconsin for duty in shore bombardment and fleet defense, there is as much chance of that happening as there is of Ford keeping these platforms.

    What's the tie in? Well, just as much as one can make the case for continuing these cars in an era of renewed interest in RWD platforms, nobody at FMC is going to open their ears and listen, the logic be d**ned.

    Right or wrong, I would guess the Congressional mutterings about raising CAFE standards are being used as an extra nail in the coffin of the Panther cars. And, talking points I can also guess will highlight the interior space of the new Taurus/old 500 as being superior to the CV/GM and dealers will be told to tell people "whatcha griping about?"...in so many words.

    A few years ago when the Marauder was announced I was excited, thinking we'd get to keep these cars for a good many years. So much for that notion :cry:
This discussion has been closed.