Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis

johnclineii · January 2003

Meanwhile, the big old engines went into things like Chevy Suburbans, where big engine freaks found them, the car companies realized that the truck fleet and the car fleet were treated separately under the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) legislation, they gussied up the trucks to make them more non-farmer, white collar as opposed to blue collar friendly, jacked up the prices, and the high priced non-offroad SUV concept was born, the car companies made lots of money, then at least some people began to figure out they were paying way too much money for just an engine, but the ONLY remaining CARS that have body on frame, V-8's and RWD are the Crown Vic, Grand Marquis (and now Marauder) and the Lincoln Town Cars. SUV's are also beginning to be seen by some as unsafe (having a much hihger center of gravity and needing to be driven like, well, a truck), threatening to others on the highway, and gas guzzlers.

This gets us to 2003, where you now find SUV's becoming more car-like, crossovers like Pacifica, Matrix and Vibe. Suddenly, the US car companies are realizing that in the past ten to fifteen years they had basically ceded the car business to the Japanese and Europeans, especially so at GM.

The days are getting interesting...and the Crown Vic and GM continue to soldier on, years after their predicted demise. We should salute Ford Motor Company for continuing the CV/GM after General Motors dropped the Caprice/Impala in order to use the plant where they had been made to make more SUV's, which brought GM much more profit per unit! On the other hand, if it weren't for the huge fleet sales to police, cab companies and commercial fleets, and the very high profit on the Town Cars, the CV/GM/LTC sedans would have been gone long ago. Too bad Ford didn't also save the large station wagon. I bet a lot of potential sales are out there, especially to those who would rather have a car than a minivan.

blh7068 · January 2003

Were the majority of the Ford V-8's 302's in the early 80's? I remember a friends parents had a 79 Crown Vic w/a 302....meager HP...but the car still got out of its own way. Did Ford still offer choices of rear axles on their full size cars in that time period? Or was the "economy axle" the only choice?

Sidenote- GM still offered a 350 through '81 in the Z-28, automatic only in U.S models.
Canadian models still could be equipped with a 4 speed!!

blh7068 · January 2003

"The days are getting interesting...and the Crown Vic and GM continue to soldier on, years after their predicted demise."

Good point. Sufficient demand for full size/RWD/V-8 still exists. Ford has even expanded its full size offerings by bringing back the Maruader.

andre1969 · January 2003

...I vaguely remember and old Consumer Reports test from 1979 where they pitted a Crown Vic 302 up against a Chevy Caprice (or Impala, I forget now) with a 305, and a Dodge St. Regis with a 318. In this test at least, the Ford blew the other two away.

I think the Ford did 0-60 in around 13 seconds, while the Chevy was more like low 15's and the Dodge was pushing 16!

As for rear-ends, I don't know what this particular Ford had, but I think a 2.73:1 was pretty common. 2.56:1 was a popular Chevy rear-end back then, and Mopar was sticking mainly 2.45:1 rears behind most of their V-8's. I know in the case of Chrysler, they changed first and second gear in the trannies to compensate for the taller rear-end, but I don't know if Ford and Chevy did the same thing.

Ford did offer a few other rear ends, such as a 3.08:1 and for higher performance they'd switch up between a 3.27:1 or a 3.55:1. Sometimes the quicker rear-end would actually help mileage, in mixed driving. I have an 1985 Consumer Guide new car reference, and they tested an '85 Crown Vic with the handling package (3.55:1 rear, dual exhaust, limited slip) and an '85 Grand Marquis with just a 3.08:1. They got an average of 17.1 mpg out of the Ford, and only 13.9 out of the Merc!

Just for comparison, in that timeframe, the big Chevy/Pontiacs were using 2.56:1 and Buick/Olds, 2.73:1. The only thing Chrysler had left by that time was the Diplomat/Gran Fury/Fifth Ave, essentially a Volare trying to pass for a full-size. They weighed almost as much as the truly big cars, and were stuck with 2.24:1 rears! How they got out of their own way, I'll never know!

rea98d · January 2003

For clarification, after 1983, Ford's LTD and Mercury's Marquis/Marquis Brogham were built on the midsize Fox platform shared with the T-Bird and the Mustang. That is the car that came with the 3.8, and they were midsized cars. The full sized cars were called the LTD Crown Victoria, and the Grand Marquis. The full size cars NEVER EVER EVER came with a V-6, so if you have a Marquis with a 3.8, it is not the same car as the Grand Marquis with the 5.0. The 1979 Grand Marquis is built on the same platform as the 2003 Grand Marquis, and except for the short-lived, unloved 255 V-8, engine sizes have been getting smaller over the years. A 3.8 was never offered in a full sized Ford car. The fact that Ford had a mid-size LTD and a full size LTD Crown Victoria (and Mercury, a mid-size Marquis and a full size Grand Marquis) is confusing. Made even more so because the lower trim levels of the full sized cars in '82 used the same names as the mid sized cars in '83. So, a 1985 Marquis Brogham is a totally, completely different car than a 1985 Grand Marquis, while a 1982 Marquis Brogham is the same as a 1982 Grand Marquis, except it has cheaper seat upholstry and less fancy gadgets. Are we confused yet? Engines have been getting smaller over the years. In 1978, the last year for the big cars, you could get a 460, a 400 or a 351. In 1979, you could get a 351 (which was totally different from '78's 351. Go figure), a 302 or a 255. The 255 was dropped from the lineup a couple of years later because it proved to be about as popular as ski-jackets in the Outback, leaving the 351 and the 302. Then the 351 was dropped, fisrt for civilian cars and then for police packages, leaving only the 302. Finally the 302 was dropped in favor of a 280 cubic inch (4.6L to use modern terminology) V-8, which, with some improvements, is still in use today.

frankss · January 2003

Just bought a new 2003 Grand Marquis. It is a GS model, got leather seats,full size spare,CD,and keyless entry along with some other gizmos. Runs great, peppy motor,very comfortable.

99windstar · January 2003

Weren't air bags mandated by the Feds? I don't think any car maker would have swapped an inexpensive steel bumper for a very expensive air bag systems just for grins.

Today's Crown Vics and Grand Marquis are at least as sturdy and safe as an 85 Marquis. Or Grand Marquis for that matter.

Many have pointed out here that the mid size LTD and Marquis were fox-based Fords. If you have one, crawl under that sucker. Follow the "frame" from the back end of the car all the way to the front bumper. Guess what? You can't. It doesn't have a full frame. It's "uni-body" (read cheap) construction.

Apples and oranges here folks...

rea98d · January 2003

"Apples and oranges here folks..."

More like apples to office furniture....

FWIW, my 1995 Thunderbird (which I named Patsy) has heavy duty steel bumpers. I learned that the hard way bouncing her off a guardrail, and she lived to tell about it. You can't see the bumpers, because they are hidden behind a plastic fascia, but they are there, and when you need them, you'll kneel down and thank God (or whatever supreme being you beleive in) that they were there. And they work just as well as the old, chrome covered bumpers of the old days. You get more cosmetic damage on the plastic fascia, but the car itself holds up just as well. You know what else? Patsy's also got dual air bags. Driver and passenger. Old fashioned steel bumpers and airbags both. And when you really think about it, airbags and bumpers do different things. Bumpers are the car's suit of armor. The protect the functional parts of the car by posing a hard, impenetrable barrier to delicate stuff such as radiators and gas tanks. (Why do you think you have to be running 70 or 80 when you rear end a Crown Vic to make the gas tank explode. 20 or 30 would be more than enough without bumpers!) Air bags, on the other hand, keep the driver from impaling him- or her- self on the steering column. Bumpers are to protect the car, air bags the driver.

One more thing...Not all cars have metal bumpers. My grandmother's '92 Bonneville has a similar setup to my T-Bird- a plastic fascia with the real bumper behind it. Except where the real bumper is cold, hard steel on my T-Bird, it's fiberglass on my Grandma's Bonneville. I think GM is secretly a division of Rubbermaid or Tupperware, the amount of plastic in their cars! Seeing how that Bonneville was built has forever turned me off to GM cars, despite the 100,000 relatively trouble-free miles the car has given. Fords are built much tougher, and I feel much safer in a full-sized Ford than I do in a comperable GM product.

andre1969 · January 2003

...I think ultimately they were mandated, but the auto makers had so many years to get ready for them. They had to come up with some kind of passive restraint, either in mid-year 1988 or the beginning of '89. Ford went for motorized shoulder straps, while GM had those dumb seatbelts that were anchored in the door. You could fasten it, and when you opened the door you could still get out. Unfortunately, if your door flew open in an accident, or got ripped off and back, you were screwed. Chrysler started putting air bags in their big RWD sedans in mid-'88, but other cars had a regular lap belt, and then a shoulder strap anchored to the door. I had an '88 LeBaron coupe like that, but then an '89 Gran Fury with a driver's side air bag.

I think it was 1994 or so that dual air bags were finally required. Interestingly, the GM air bags that they offered on a few Olds, Buick, and Caddy models in the '70's was a dual system, and only cost about $300 as an option. For comparison, fuel injection on a Cadillac was something like $500 back then!

As for comparing a modern Grand Marquis to an '85 Grand Marquis, I'm sure the new one is even safer, thanks mainly to the air bags and the "softer" bumpers. In 1985 I believe they still had a 5 mph standard for bumpers, so at very low impacts, an '85 might sustain less damage than a new one, but at higher speeds, the newer one will protect the occupants better.

They always were fairly safe cars, though. I believe big Fords from '79 on up were rated better for safety than the big GM and Mopar products.

usaf52 · January 2003

Reading the Edmund's review of the 2000 CV, the text says that the 4 wheel ABS includes the traction control. Is this part of one integrated system? If the CV has ABS does this mean it automatically has traction control??

andre1969 · January 2003

...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.

cfocfo · January 2003

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).

cfocfo · January 2003

Wagon or SUV ?

http://www.cars.com/news/stories/012103_storya_ap.jhtml?aff=natio- nal

soboy · January 2003

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.

andre1969 · January 2003

...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?

cfocfo · January 2003

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.

marlin77 · January 2003

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....

iusecad · January 2003

if you haven't already, try http://www.crownvic.net

there's many knowledgeable folks that should be able to help you out.

james130 · January 2003

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.

drmp · February 2003

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.

andre1969 · February 2003

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?

drmp · February 2003

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.

cfocfo · February 2003

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 ?

andre1969 · February 2003

...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.

drmp · February 2003

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.

cfocfo · February 2003

Anyone have any info on installing mud guards on a 2003 GM ? Also, isn't there an CV or GM.net type site for info like that ?

Thx

jjacob9105 · February 2003

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.

kinley · February 2003

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.

cfocfo · February 2003

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 !

http://www.mercola.com/2002/mar/13/car_seats.htm

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030224-42346- - - 4,00.html

justreading "I don't like SUVs, why do you?" Feb 16, 2003 1:24pm

hughiem · February 2003

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.

drs120 · February 2003

I presently own a 1999 Grand Marquis with 40,000 miles. The car runs terrific except for an occasional hiccup. When driving in stop and go traffic (aka Cross Bronx Expressway), the O/D OFF light on the dashboard flashes. It takes turning off the car and restarting it to reset it. Can anyone lend some advise here? It only happens when the car is warmed up and you encounter stop and go conditons.

wgr · February 2003

Does anyone know when/if any siginificant redesign is planned for the Crown Vic/Marquis ?

kinley · February 2003

cfocfo · February 2003

It looked like it was the highest ranked (5 stars) full size vehicle on the market, according to the STAR ranking system at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/.

The side impact was only 4 STARS, but if eqquiped with side airbags, I don't see how there is a safer VEHICLE on the road right now ?

And please, no need to include the 60 MPH crash into the back-end on the hwy issue. (If I was pulling over 3-5 drivers a day on the hwy, that would concern me, but most people don't)

iusecad · February 2003

Question - is it possible to add a factory keyless entry system to an Interceptor? Would it just be plugging in some controller/receiver? Second question is how much do you suppose all this would run me?

rea98d · February 2003

You can usually find those keyless entry kits at Target or K-mart for something like $30. Installation will be DIY, and I'm not sure what that entails, although I almost did this to my '95 Thunderchicken once.

As far as a redesign?
Don't expect one anytime soon. The same basic platform goes back to '79, although with significant improvements over the years, especially the 2003's. Personal speculation, but I think the Mercury Montego and Ford 500 will end up replacing the Grand Marquis and Crown Victoria. I think the Grand Marquis and Crown Victoria nameplates have become too associated with "old people" cars to be viable in the marketplace, and the Taurus will probably never recover from the radioactive catfish design of '96, so Ford is hoping that one car, splitting the difference between the Taurus and the Crown Vic, will correct two of their marketing mistakes, make them more competitive in the family sedan market, and reduce the number of car models they have to make. Much as they hoped to replace both the Contour and Escort with the Focus on the small car end of the market. If Ford has ceased production on the Contour and Escort, I missed that notice, but replacing them with the Focus was the original plan. I wouldn't be surprised if Ford is doing the same thing with the 500.

As an aside, such a tactic worked for Jaguar in the '60's, when they replaced a small, medium, and large sized sedan with a single midsize car, the XJ6. Now, ironically, they're going the opposite way, having come out with a midsize S-Type, a small X-Type, and moving the XJ up to the big end of the spectrum with the 2004's.

dinu · March 2003

Am presently shopping for a 2003 GM-LS and a 2003 CV-LX . Will buy one of the two and would like to hear from owners of either one of these cars. The wife and I have checked out the GM-LS but not the CV-LX as yet. ...we'll do that next weekend. We like the GM-LS "Ultimate Edition" model a lot , especially pocket-book wise as compared to the 2003 Lincoln Town Car Executive we've also driven....which is very nice. We haven't driven the GM-LSE as yet but I believe this is a longer
version of the LS and may not fit our standard-sized garage. Have to check that and other differences to the LS model.

Will appreciate any input on these two cars from you.

kinley · March 2003

How much for the LS Ultimate?

creativecomput · March 2003

I have a '93 Grand Marquie that runs great, the only problem I have with it is that after it warms up the motor will start ticking if the car is under a heavy load. When the car is still cold you can put it under the same load and it runs fine. Has anyone had this problem, or can give me any advice. Thanks

zslick · March 2003

Creativecomput,

Is this "ticking" accompanied by any sort of bucking sensation. My 94 GM started some mild bucking on hard acceleration when warm at around 60,000 miles. If I remember right, there was a ticking sound, too. Problem was found to be ignition wires. Replacing them solved the problem. At 110,000 miles, I had a similar problem, although it was more prevalent when cold. It was found to be the ignition wires again. Hope this helps.

cfocfo · March 2003

I bought a GM-LS Ultimate 2 months ago after taking a similar route to yours. I was interested in the GM-LSE, but never found one. Also checked out the Lincoln Town Car Executive, but I was looking at used 2001 models with low miles for the same $$ as a New GM-Ultimate.
For what ever reason, I never shopped the CV-LX, so I can't offer comparisons of the 2.

I believe all 3 are reliable, safe, and a great value now as they are all being discounted because they're not cool and not AWD.
But since I'm looking at the interior of the car 95% of the time, I was sold on the Ultimate as I like the interior a lot ! Especially the instramentation panel, steering wheel, and roomy leather seats.

Let me know what you thought of the CV after you drive it. Also, what are the rebates on the 2 ?

R92688 · March 2003

Creativecomput,
Your ticking under load is just pinging from pre-ignition of the fuel in the cylinders. I had the exact same problem in my 95 CV with the engine check lamp ultimately coming on after many months of pinging. Well, it turned out that a Mass Air Sensor located on the air filter housing needed changing. After changing it, the car runs quiet and smooth with all fuel types. I hope this helps.

ronslakie · March 2003

Creativecomput - As noted above the likely candidate is the Mass Airflow Sensor. I have read on other forums that there is a simple method to fix this without replacing the sensor. This sensor can be sprayed with electric contact cleaner and will work like new.

Ron

jcooney3 · March 2003

Head rests on 2003 GM too tall block view when backing up. Anyone hear of this?

kinley · March 2003

rea98d · March 2003

18 Wheelers use a primitive form of sonar when they back up. They keep coming back til they hear something crunch ;-)

randal5 · March 2003

I totalled my Seville and I am shopping to replace it with either a GM or a Continental. 98 model year is in my price range. What are some key advantages of the GM over the Continental? I'm leaning toward the Continental but I'd like a reason to spend less money.

kinley · March 2003

It will keep you out of the ditch. Rather than a discontinued Conti, check out the 2000 Lincoln LS.

cfocfo · March 2003

At 6'7", I find the headrests just right ! : )

dinu · March 2003

Sorry about not responding sooner. We haven't bought the GM LS Ultimate Edition yet as we're still looking at other brands & models. The sticker price on this particular model was about $27,000, which is not the invoice price. We liked its interior, general looks, and features but I gave it a limited test drive at that time. This Edmunds website has good advice on how to test drive a car and I'll follow what it says for my next time behind the wheel of the GM LS Ultimate Edition.

BTW, for what-it's-worth for anyone interested, read the Feburary 2003 Consumers Report issue "Cruising For Comfort" on the Toyota Avalon, Buick Park Avenue, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis. The Grand Marquis was rated by CR at the BOTTIM of thisgroup and CR's comments on the GM has given us some second thoughts on buying this car after our initial impressions of the car.

CR's comments and rating on the Lincoln Town Car has also influenced our thoughts on this car. The Executive model of the Town Car line was the one I drove, also in a limited course near the dealership.

The wife doesn't want us to buy the Toyota Avalon, which was rated at the top by CR, and sitting behind the wheel during a short test drive, I found its comfort level not up to par with the TC Executive nor the Mercury GM Ultimate Edition. Comfort is a major feature that both of us want , as well as reliability and some other major features.

Today we're looking-at / test-driving the Buick Park Avenue base model and Park Avenue Ultra. This would be something like a $10,000 step-up in price, but with mfg. incentives and the wife's Honeywell General Motors or Ford discount offered at her job, we might be able to live with the bottom line. The Park Avenue is longer than the GM LS Ultimate Edition, so we'll be measuring our standard-sized garage to see if it'll fit.

Will get back to the Town Hall soon. Would like to hear from others about the Grand Marquis and other big-'an-comfy easy-riding new cars they've driven or bought .

Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles