Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
2005 Mercury Montego
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I for one like my big and bulky Grand Marquis.
I will stop on the way home tonight and pick up 3 - 40 lbs bags of fertilizer, 6 bags of rocks, 50 lbs each. With the air suspension in the rear, ride height is perfect.
I have used my cars to haul more than most trucks. For the record, you can put 14 bags of pine bark chips in the trunk!
For what I can't haul in the back, I put in the my trailer hauled by the Grand Marquis. I have hauled 2000 lbs. in stone with this car. Try that with a Accord.
Despite what the safety ratings say, my Grand Marquis and an Accord are not equal. If I hit an Accord head on at 60 mph, the Accord will not fair nearly as well.
The error of the testing you see on TV is that the momentum of each car is in proportion to is frame and body strength.
One item I love on the Grand Marquis is that to turn on all the interior lights, just push the light switch in. Every car should be this way. I hate reaching for 3 seperate switches in imports and then still not as much light.
Currently, the only question being asked about their safety, is about the fuel tank. There's been 12 cases since 1984, where a Crown Vic has been hit by the back while parked, and it catching on fire. So far, Ford conducts rear impact tests that surpass the federal standard, and this vehicle did surpass it.
Common sense dictates, if your parked on the side of a highway (as cops do), and an SUV hits the rear of your vehicle at 70MPH, chances are it'll obviously burst into flames. My point of rebuttle is, Try doing the same with an Accord and Camry, and let's see how worse off the condition would be. Hence, it's NOT the vehicle itself that's a safety issue, it's the senario it's placed upon.
NHTSA conducted it's own tests, and stated the CrownVic, Grand Marquis ARE safe on rear impact tests. Yet, for the sake of a lawsuit, some will obviously argue against that.
I would agree that the Grand Marq would sustain less damage than the Accord, but I'd be interested to see how well the Accord could protect a 50% male in a frontal offset against a Grand Marq, in terms of injury measures. Does the GM offer a collapsible steering column, multistage airbags, and seatbelt pretensioners with force limiters- ANT, can you tell me?
I think this would be an outsanding crash test.
~alpha
New for this year I believe is lamited side glass, which helps prevent smash and grab robberies, as well as quiet the cabin a bit, and prevents flying glass incase of an accident.
A few months ago I saw one hit off-set a new Altima. Ouch. The Crown Vic's mental crunches upto the upper part of the wheel well, where as the Altima had everything crushed back and even the A-Pillar bent. The driver of the Altima had to be rushed off in the ambulance, whereas the Crown Vic's driver was walking around and waiting for a toq truck.
That's one vehicle I wouldn't like to get involved with. At least some SUV's are unibody are usually cause less damage because they absorb much more of the impact (over traditional Body On Frame)... But a body on frame passenger car can be just as bad as the truck versions.
Aggresive Driving Tip 101: The CrownVic's/Grand Marquis are favored by police dept's for being able to push vehicles off the road in case of a chase. But you can also make the vehicle in front of you flip as well. If the vehicle is a FWD , usually the left rear corner is the best place to "hold" the vehicle. (OR opposite to your closest curb- which can help it roll over).
Take your CV, pass the left side corner, jerk your steering wheel to the right and keep control as you accelerate and push into it's corner, then watch it flip. Corolla's, Camry's, Cavalier's, Neon's are some of the few one's that are easiest to flip from experience.
Being the CV/GM are RWD, you can also BUMP the rear of a vehicle any other vehicle, where they'll momentarily lose a bit of control for a few seconds if they are accelerating. They can counteract this by not accelerating as they get bumped, but they would need to keep their eye on the rear and ahead.
And if you want try to dissable the vehicle totally (using your CV/GM) and it's ok to cause damage to your own vehicle, always hit at the passenger side engine compartment. Most of the belts/electronics, and important hoses are found on that side on FWD vehicles. If it's RWD, it's a bit harder but usually the driver side of the engine compartment, has the location of the items that can dissable a vehicle quickly
Don't try this at home... BUT if you must
yeah, yeah I know what u mean
In a front end crash, the impact on a Crown Vic is distributed by more than just the front motor mounts as in a front wheel drive car. Energy is transferred to the engine mounts, transmission mounts, through the drive shaft to the rear axle mounts and also adsorbed into the full frame ... with out ever affecting the driver compartment.
To crunch the driver compartment, you have to rip out the whole drive train and destroy a major portion of the frame.
Forget the collapsing steering column, give me a full frame and twice the mass.
Mass of the vehicle also helps with the ride characteristics.
If you add a 200 lb. man to a 5000 lb. vehicle, only a 4% change in total weight. Add a 200 lb. man to a 2000 lb vehicle, 10% change.
This new Montego has a lot to live up to.
Thanks for your continued info on this board.
~alpha
As well as NOT saying:
" ... and you know"
" ... and um ... and um ..."
" ... it's like, you know .."
Detroit News has an article discussing it.
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosinsider/0307/15/c01-218065.htm
This is the engine I mentioned months back would be offered on the 500/Montego/Fresstyle a year after it's introduction. Notice the time line as to when they will begin the engine production.
A correction on the article, the current 3.0L that will debut on these vehicles, will NOT have 200HP, it'll be a bit more than that.
geez, get the facts straight, DET News.
~alpha
Sincerely,
Nurse_luna
Sincerely,
Nurse_Luna
The vehicle will be larger than the Sable, it's interior volume will measure under the EPA's Full-size classification. The seating will be much more upright, and at butt level when you enter the vehicle. Meaning, you will sit up a bit higher than most other sedans. And as you read, it'll be offered in FWD and AWD versions, etc.
It's still a year away so you have time to save up for it.
You said $25-30K pricing on the Montego...will the Ford 500 be cheaper, or are they going to price them side-by-side and rely on a different "image" to differentiate the two cars?
-Andrew L
Again, thank you for the info you have provided to me. I use to drive a Grand Marquis and I really loved all the room I had in it. Will the Montego be more like that in size? Also, was this at an auto show?...or will it be and when? Thank you so much for all the info you have given me. Hope you have a great weekend.
Sincerely,
Nurse_Luna
Nurse Luna, a prototype has not yet hit the autoshow circuit, but look for it to possible be displayed at the next round of auto showers at the end of this year/beginning of next year. Yes the interior will be sized as a Full-size, just like the Grand Marquis, but the exterior will not be as huge and bulky as the Grand Marquis.
The Grand Marquis is quite a bit long because of it's platform, the type of platform, etc. and the packaging is rather unefficient. Whereas the 500/Montego's packaging is much more trim... like the Focus, the interior dimensions are maximized, while keeping trim exterior dimensions.
Thank you so much for all the info you have provided to me, I really appreciate it. Do you work for Ford? As I said before, my brother-in-law works for ford, and so did my father-in-law before he retired. Next time I see my brother-in-law I will ask him if he knows anything about the Montego. I just don't know when that will be. Have you ever gone to ebay motors? They have alot of older model cars that are for sale. By the way my Husband had a Montego , He said, about 30(thirty) years ago and just love it. I am going to have a hard time waiting for this car to become available. Anyways, thanks again so much for all the info you have posted and since you Created this thread, for introducing me to the 2005 Montego.
Sincerely,
Nurse_Luna
I remember that this car had a hard time starting every morning everyday when my mom backed her car out from the garage to take me to elementary school. It often leaked some oil. This car actually had power windows, air-conditioning, rear power window lock switch, defroster, and etc... Not sure if it had power door locks. This 1975 Montego sure was pretty well innovated with latest technology. Very few 1975 cars have rear power window lock-switch and air-conditioning unlike today. There were few repairs required in the 1975 Mercury Montego. Some rust did occur but not too noticable.
My mom replaced her car to a 1990 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser station wagon. Besides my mom's previous car, can anybody tell me what is special about Mercury Montego? Mercury claimed that the Montego was a powerful name in the past. Would love to hear what is special about Montego? Thanks for your help.
Walter Chan
Ford Torino, and came with some more options usually, and better seats, but it wasn't a champion performer. I'm glad yours was dependable into the later years. They did have great air conditioners that lasted forever, that's true. The motors were strong and durable. Weak spots were the air pumps and emission controls would fail. Carburators and chokes were problematic in later years of life. Mileage wasn't great. But generally, they ran for a long time with minimal problems.
Walter Chan
"freon" (He hasn't switched, nor plans to, to R134) and also adds a bit of compressor oil as well to lubricate.
I have read some positive feedback over the A/C installed in those generations Cougar/Tbird/Mustang fitted with the 5.0.
My conclusion therefore is that, generally, Fords had very competent A/C. Frankly, I think they still have the best A/C in the business, except in the Town Car.
Mercury is going to have a tough time convincing buyers that buying the Monterey minivan this Fall is any different than buying a Ford Freestar. There gonna have the same problems with the Mariner SUV and the Monterey. Is it worth it?
As for Monterey and Mariner, it's not hurting any to offer dressed up Ford's for them. Mercury's best sales were in years where such a product range existed. If other manufacturer's can pull it off, it will not hurt Mercury/Lincoln dealerships any.
upsetter, I feel that you don't like GM vehicles, but I do. I don't really like Ford vehicles but like to keep up to date with the new vehicles they are making. Ford should be a good example for GM at this time. It is a good idea what you think GM should do with Oldsmobile, but I personally think that General Motors has too much upscale vehicles (olds, buick, cadillac) They need to revise some of there models like how they are right now. Now that GM is phasing out Oldsmobile to do this to GM rooms:
1)Saturn- Entry Level Vehicles
2)Chevrolet- Value Priced Vehicles
3)Buick- Middle Upscale Vehicles
4)Cadillac- Expensive upscale vehicles
This will do a lot good to GM, upsetter. The Olds idea is great, but I don't think GM is going to follow Ford. Ford needs to make Lincoln more upscale (in my opinion) and let Merc fill in the other gap that Lincoln left.