Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis
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
Borrow from the research and development on the Escape hybrid and introduce a V-6 + Hybrid option for the CV....keep the 4.6 currently in usage...allow for a Marauder-style performance package with a 3-valve 4.6 engine that is already in the Explorer. Update the transmission with ones in the development pipeline. Change the styling from 'go-along' to more 'get out of my way'.
My point is, Do Something Bill Ford. Yes, I will argue it has many benefits to offer being just what it is. However, if you want the new, younger buyers to take note, a dash of 21st century appeal must be added to what is a solid 20th century-designed car if you want to save it...and the company that makes it, imho.
Agreed. Everyone wants better fuel efficiency these days.
Change the styling from 'go-along' to more 'get out of my way' [...] if you want the new, younger buyers to take note, a dash of 21st century appeal must be added
Please, Bill Ford, don't do it. Younger buyers will not buy CV, and you will lose your base. Have we forgotten the "This is not your father's Oldsmobile" and the roaring success of that campaign? Always take care of your core buyers first. I love the styling of the CV and the GM (even more the one before the last GM "refresh"), I just want 3 things:
1a. Passthrough between the trunk and the interior for longer items
- or even better -
1b. Wagon option
- and of course -
2. Better fuel efficiency (how about a diesel compliant with all 50 states?)
DaimlerChrysler reported CYTD sales in Nov 2006 of @127K 300s. Ford reported @110K CVs/GMs. Doesn't sound like much of a disparity, particularly considering the amount of advertising DC put into selling that vehicle compared to practically zero advertising from Ford. Crown Vic sells itself because it has established itself with its audience. If you undermine that target market in any way, you better be prepared to plonk a huge amount of money to gain new markets, and it is an iffy proposition.
Like I said, with such a following, it would be better to improve where it counts, and to expand its appeal, not change the base offer.
Also, how many of the total of CV/GM sales include the (CV)number sold to govt, police, and taxi fleets? There is a Dodge Charger proposal out there for police depts, but it is just getting launched whereas we all know and fear the black-grilled CV in our rear-view mirrors
I respect the older drivers that own CV's and GM's (going by known demographics alone there) and like the notion of them continuing in the style and manner they currently are. That is their/your right. However, I have lived long enough to see my dad's historically favorite car, the Buick LeSabre, go from RWD to FWD to no drive. The scene changes no matter how much you love something.
I know the mods don't want us to get into repetitive discussions, and I don't want to get into [non-permissible content removed] for tat comebacks with you. I respect your position, but consider this: All I would like to do is to see Ford set out some goals whereby they creatively enhance the CV/GM and assure its continued survival (and renewal for that matter). I fear that if it is left totally alone, with what 5+ years in the car market means as far as tastes go, we could be on life support with it come 2011/2012. We'd be talking about a car that would have been updated once in 20 years at that point...a risk in today's auto world to say the least.
Oh, but I agree completely. This is precisely my way of thinking as to how Ford should go. Expand the existing offer by adding a wagon and a sporty two-door (but please, no Marauder). I see then we are of one mind.
Here's my idea. First, pull the engine/transmission combo out of the Explorer and drop it in the Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis. The only modification would be slightly less aggressive cams which would drop the power down to about 280hp but pay dividens in terms of idle quality and drivablity. For the Town Car - an aluminum 5.4 3V Triton with 325hp. Its about time the Lincoln line was distinguishable (mechanically) from a run of the mill Ford.
Finally (and most importantly) make a serious commitment to improving the interiors. The F150/Montego interiors would be a nice starting point.
I think the platform allows for a lot of variety while keeping it true to its roots. A potential hybrid option, or two, a version basically like it is, and one with a higher performance option ala the Marauder (but not having a totally separate car line)....they all could be worked out along with a freshening and updating of the chassis that would maintain what traditional clients like and not have everyone under the age of 60 turn a blind eye towards it. Or so I hope/think.
We can ONLY hope Ford reads these threads and keeps up with what people are wanting. We may all disagree on the specifics, but change will be needed or we'll be waving good-bye to it one day soon I fear.
I will be re-wiring their vehicles and proposing a bid to do so. Any information or direction is greatly appreciated.
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 /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
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.
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...
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.
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...
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.
Windstar to Freestar, 500 to Taurus, Zypher to MKZ, and then MKR, MKX, MK I don't know what....
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?
-mike
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.
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.
-mike
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.
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?
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!
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...
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.
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
And again you're right, Ford probably won't continue the Panther trio. The difference though is that Ford, even after re-pricing these cars closer to actual transaction prices, is still making money on them. And Ford still pretty much owns the police cruiser and livery markets unto themselves, and shares ownership of the geriatric and near-geriatric crowd with Buick. Currently there is nothing out there that those markets would strongly prefer over the current stalwarts. Granted, the 60-80 year old generation is dieing away, but there are still enough of us old fogies left with enough disposable income to buy another round of these old behemoths.
Ford is currently looking at an Australian rwd platform as a replacement for it's large rwd cars, and I agree that's a much better long term solution, after all, there's not much more messaging that can be done on the Panther platform. But there is currently nothing in the Ford stable that can fill the void that would be left if Ford kills those cars. Sure, given no other choice, the market place will find it's own replacements. But will they be Ford products? And after the defections, will Ford be able to win back those defectors? Maybe, maybe not. But even if they do, they'll have to fight for what was heretofore theirs, and that could be quite expensive. I subscribe to the theory that you keep what's yours, while trying to take a little of the enemy's turf. You don't hand the enemy your turf on a silver platter and then hope to win it back later. My suggestion to Ford is, invest enough in a significant facelift to buy yourself enough time (3-4 yrs.) to get that new Aussie platform developed into world-class replacements for these cars. Something that'll be competitive for the next 15-20 years.
Ford doesn't have very deep pockets, so they've gotta make some smart moves, but they've also gotta take some chances. I think investing $250-$350 mil, maybe even $500 million in the CV/GM/TC trio could produce a change similar in magnitude as that of the '07 Expedition/Navigator, or the '08 Escape/Mariner. That would be enough of a change to drive most of their current market back into their showrooms for another dose. It'd be enough of a change to drive sales without the $10k rebate programs. Like I said before, people want their new car to look like a new car, and all of the name-changing (eg: MK-TC) aint gonna do it. Remember the Windstar/Freestar debacle? By giving us a substantially spiffed up new chariot, police departments, limo companies, semi-old fogies (like me), as well as the old fogies would all be happy to stay in the fold while Ford gets it's act together.
Oh, by the way, gas mileage numbers aren't all that bad on these cars, given what they compete with; besides, they're not being hit with gas-guzzler surcharges as many cars are. And as far as the new Taurus/Sable being superior to CV/GM, you're right, but tell that to all the major law enforcement agencies that test the hell out of virtually every concievable police cruiser, and still virtually all of them keep tapping the Crown Vic as the cruiser of choice, despite a few glaring soft spots. And while you're at it, try telling BMW, M/Bnz, Lexus, etc., that front wheel drive is the better drive system choice for a large luxury car. Heck, even Cadillac has seen the error of their ways and is making the switch back to rwd. Consumer demand has always been the stronger driver of product developement, despite CAFE. The answer for CAFE standards is hybrids (better yet diesel/electric hybrids) in short-term, hydrogen fuel cell technology in the mid-term, and vastly improved mass-transit infrastructure and consumer transit appetites in the long-term.
It would be great if Ford would do exactly as you've said. New exciting styling, new platform, new powerplant/drive-train (possibly a clean-diesel/electric hybrid), better build quality & reliability, and a new marketing attitude. Then they would have a winning hand. Forget about chasing market share or pure numbers. Build 'Must Have' vehicles, the numbers will automaticly happen, but the best part is they will be PROFITABLE. Because of my past relationship with the Ford Motor Company product marketing, I spend a lot of time looking at and studying their new models. I believe they're on the right track. Quality is much better than just 10 yrs. ago, engineering is vastly improved, interiors are near European in quality (Ford has been taking a few pages out of Audi's book), and safety is top shelf. The tepidity and missteps of management, executive in-fighting and turf battles, along with stale products are what lies at the root of Ford's problems. Now that the insiders have been suppressed or pushed out, and under the new leadership of Alan Mullaly, Ford stands a good chance of putting the shine back on the blue oval. A lot of good product has been launched lately. Quality is high, warranty claims are way down (strong contributor to Ford's most recent quarter showing a profit), and subvention & incentive costs (on the new products) is very low (compared to products they replaced). So things are looking up.
Still, Ford is hampered by a very small monetary war-chest. They have to be careful how and when they spend their meager resources. I do understand they can't re-do all their stale product all at once. I know new vehicles like the Flex, the MKS, a new F-Series P/U, a new Ranger, and the new TwinForce engine family and PowerShift dual clutch family of gearboxes all have to take precedence over many other worthy needs. So until Ford can get some of those new products on the ground and start to fill up their coffers, which can fund the new CV/GM/TC replacements, as well as other new product further down the pipeline. I'd be content with a major facelift and powertrain stroking. It's probably all we even stand a remote chance of getting. Besides, it's better than letting the CV/GM/TC just languish in the gutter; totally untouched and unloved. So when sales continue to drop, some bean counter will use that as justification for the axe. History will bear witness to that being another one of Ford's major missteps; and the point when FoMoCo handed GM and Chrysler the limo/livery, police, and large rwd market on a silver platter. Doesn't it make sense to plug that 3-5 year gap, between the current Panther platform and the future stretched-Aussie platform repacements, with something that might defend your dominant market position until worthy replacements are available? Especially since you can probably make a profit doing it. Maybe the problem with my rationale is that it makes sense. Ford's recent history has been to continually do things that don't make sense, like shooting themselves in the foot.
I'm with you, I too hope Ford doesn't abandon this type of car. But it doesn't look good for the Crown Victoria/Grand Marquis/Town Car. Ford has decided to let them soldier on unchanged at least through 2009, but beyond that is not real clear. It seems most likely that they will be discontinued after that. There is a high probability that Ford will return to the large U. S. rwd market later with a version of their Australian rwd platform, which will probably (hopefully) be a world-class competitor. That's good and well, but it appears that Ford may abandon that market for 2 or 3 years while they prepare their replacements. That, I think is where they would be making a big mistake. A significant face-lift, a mild re-engineering, and a nice powertrain massaging for the 2009 model would allow this trio to soldier on for another 3 or 4 years. Ford could get a nice up-tic in sales and defend their dominance of this market segment for a relatively small price, while buying the time needed to prepare the world-class competitive replacements they will ultimately need for long term viability. Hopefully someone at Ford is listening to people like us and doesn't abandon this type of car.
So unfortunately, you may have to plan on keeping your '08 Grand Marquis LS for a pretty long time. I know you're gonna love it, so that's not gonna be a bad thing. I wish you lots of luck with your new geezer's car: sorry, I mean youngster's car.
My question is have any of the lovers of these cars driven a new Taurus or Sable? I can't speak to the durability but I think you would find the Taurus/Sable to have a more comfortable and quieter ride, more rear seat room, better driving dynamics, better visability, stronger performance and better fuel economy, while taking up about a foot less garage space.