Howdy, Stranger!

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

Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego



  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    I agree, used is even more of a bargain. I prefer to buy new as I keep my cars a long time and prefer to control all the maintenance. A certified used with an extended warranty is a very valid and cost savings approach, no doubt about it and I would definitely consider that route next time.

    That could apply to just about any car you buy, but with Taurus/Sable's (undeserved in my opinion) "rental car" image, high depreciation makes it even a better deal purchasing a year or two old used car.

    Somebody better buy new though, or the used car supply would dry up.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    All the gear heads here seem to be upset over the 30 Duratec.

    I sell Fords and I can tell you that as long as the car FEELS like it can safely accelerate into traffic, no one will care what the published horsepower ratings are.

    People only ask "is this a 4 cylinder or a 6 cylinder" these people don't even understand that a thoroughly modern 4 cylinder like the Ford/Mazda 2.3L offers the same type of performance as an old tech 6 cylinder like the 3.0L Vulcan in the Taurus.

    People just think 6 cylinders are better then 4 cylinders.

    GM is well aware of this perception and sticks to old tech low output OHV engines instead of moving to DOHC engines and saves about $800.00 per unit..

    When a customer tests drive a car, they care about how it feels. If the 500 has a tight feel. Feels well put together and creates an overall impression of value it will sell.

    Ford's target demographic for this vehicle is the 40's something empty nester who is moving out of a mini-van or suv. (SUV customers will go for the AWD version). These people didn't buy the SUV or Mini-Van for str8 line performance and they aren't going to decide whether or not to buy a 500 over str8 line performance.

    Initial quality will be way more important to the success of this vehicle than horsepower figures. Hence the 30 Durotec is a good choice, its' been around almost 10 years, its proven reliable and Mazda has put plenty of refinement into it over the years.

    Obviously, if you try to evaluate the 500 as a Porsche or a Lexus, its going to loose. The questions actual customers will be asking are "will this carry my family comfortably," "will this be reliable," "will my friends and co-workers laugh at me," "is this vehicle safe."

    I for one know I'll be say to my customers "this is built on the same platform as the Volvo S60" "this AWD system is the same one used by Volvo" "the safety systems in this vehicle were designed by Volvo" "this care uses VOLVO technology."

    Remember its more fun to drive a slow car fast then a fast car slow

  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    In GM's case, those ohv V-6s may not bother the GM faithful, but I do think those engines are a stumbling block in the effort to win over import buyers. Just as customers think that six cylinders are better than four, most import buyers think ohc is better than ohv.

    "Gear heads" have more influence over other car buyers than their numbers would suggest. If several sources aimed at gear heads note (relatively) slow acceleration figures, that is a hurdle the sales force will have to overcome for prospective customers. Most family sedan buyers don't expect a rocket sled with four doors, but they will be reluctant to buy a vehicle that is branded "slow."
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    Ironically GM is fully aware that it's OHV engines deter some of it's buyer's... If not, they wouldn't have made an engine deal with Honda, for them to supply their 3.5L SOHC V6 into the Saturn.

    And which is why they have placed their new 3.6L DOHC V6 (high feature) into their Rendevouz, Larcross, etc. Or even the Caddy XLR, which they could have placed the 5.7L OHV V8, but they chose the sophisticated Northstar instead.

    But obviously they don't see it as a priority, and are concentrating on interiors instead which is desperately needed as well.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 8,862
    "Just as customers think that six cylinders are better than four, most import buyers think ohc is better than ohv."

    I have to respectfully disagree with this. IMHO, most buyers could care less regarding OHC vs OHV. Gearheads OTOH...
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    You mean, uneducated buyer's that is. Thanks to the internet many consumer's are using it to research vehicles before test drives. And even on some of these forums, I've seen people who obviously have no knowledge of a certain vehicle, bring it up.

    One of them stated, "One review stated it had a OHV engine, is that bad??" SO I went on to mention the difference (and the ticking problem GM has with their OHV V8's)...So consumer's are slowly learning.

    But yes, they'll be many that won't notice the difference or know what to look for. And for them, there's GM, Kia and VW.....
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 8,862
    "You mean, uneducated buyer's that is." Uneducated and blissfully happy about it. I think your anecdote is in the minority. I can count on one hand the number of my co-workers and neighbors who know nothing more about their vehicles other than the make, model, color, number of doors, and where to fill the tank.

    The vast majority of car buyers shop based on style, price, and reputation as opposed to the nuances of engine design.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    How it drives matters a lot to the "uneducated" well as to the gearhead. For example, when FWD first came out, and was touted as the best innovation in modern car design since the electric starter, I bought a Sable, and though I loved the design, feel and quality of the car - I would say to myself, (and others), what's with the torque steer? How is this better??? Other than traction, obviously......
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    With OHV and it's inherent designs, your confronted with typical issues that are common to them. Such as being noisy and crude sounding when pushed hard. A customer will notice such things.

    I was asked by someone why the Freestar sounded rough at higher RPM, over the Sienna when they were shopping for a minivan.

    And that's obviously a factor consumer's will take into account even if they aren't aware of the engine designs.
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Posts: 518
    In case anyone's interested in option information, the Five Hundred ordering guide is out. Run a Google search for:

    ford 2005 "ordering guides"

    and it's the first hit. Just FYI.

    -Andrew L
  • samnoesamnoe Posts: 731
    Interesting pdf file! Thanks Andrew.

    So the power output will be as follows:

    203 hp @ 5750 rpm
    207 lb.-ft. @ 4500 rpm

    Same goes for Freestyle.

    a little better than expected!
  • tomcat630tomcat630 Posts: 854
    There are quite a few pseudo car enthusiasts who mainly look at stat sheets in car magazines. They may not necessarily know auto engineering, but basically want "the lastest and greatest" as the magazines say so. So, OHC has been labeled "better", and they demand that.
  • andy71andy71 Posts: 96
    I personally like OHC or to be more specific DOHC engine over old fashioned pushrod engine. I realize pushrod engines have good low rpm torque although it comes at the expense of high rpm horsepower. But my biggest complaint about OHV engine is the rough sounding exhaust note at higher rpm. It just doesn't have the smoothness of an OHC engine. That's the reason the Duratec Taurus is a much better car than the Vulcan Taurus.
  • frizz2112frizz2112 Posts: 84
    I was hoping that Ford would pull a fast one on us and release the 500 with the 232 HP version of the Duratec that they use in the Lincoln LS. I'm sure cost considerations and potential conflict with Lincoln are to blame for this, but it sure would have gone a long way to keeping the 500 competitive engine wise until the 3.5 comes out. With Chrysler putting Hemis in their big cars and Toyota planning a 270 HP Avalon in the fall, the 500 is going to look and feel pretty weak in comparison. I agree that to many buyers this won't matter, and I also feel that the conservative styling will actually help sales (look at the Camry and Accord.) The magazines might not like it, but people will buy it. Here's to hoping that the quality is where it needs to be...
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I'm old enough to remember the original Hemis, the 330 in the DeSoto Firedome, and the 426 in the Hemi-Cuda. From the designs I've seen, this new Hemi is not nearly as much a Hemi as the originals, but it's probably enough to technically qualify. Anyway, drove one of the new ones. Very disappointing. I sure couldn't find all 340hp. It was brand new, and may get better after it calibrates fully, but it was kind of a dog, compared with my Navigator anyway. So, the marketing hype is working great - but I'm not sure the Hemi is all that and a bag of chips too.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Yet I am quite sure it was much more than an approximately 203 hp, 207 ft lb torque engine in a 3800 pound car...
  • fdcapt2fdcapt2 Posts: 122
    I've posted here a few times asking for any updates on the 500/Montego, and have gotten some pretty good information from some of you. I know I've bitched about the 30 Duratec they will use in the cars this year, but IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE !! No matter how I try to get it in my head, I still can't understand how Ford could drop the ball as bad as they did by powering these cars with an engine pushing out 203HP. I understand with the new 6 speed and the CVT, it will be a much different feel. I drove cars with these engines for a long time and even though they were OK, they still lacked power. As far as the new Hemi someone mentioned here, every article, in every magazine or website that I've read, has had nothing but good things to say about the cars that will be powered by this motor, especially the Chrysler 300C. Who knows, I haven't had a Mopar vehicle since my 340 Duster days. Maybe I might have to cross the road to the Land of Mopar.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Getting a new car out with all the components brand new and ready to go isn't as easy as cooking dinner and getting everything done at the same time, (a feat I cannot master, BTW). Clearly it would have been great to get the 3.5 ready in time, or would you rather they hold up the 500 until the engine is thoroughly tested?
    I know what I DON'T want - I don't want the damn head gaskets to breech because they hurried it up.
    I would just wait an extra year until the new engine is available if it were me. I made that mistake once - I bought a 97 Mountaineer in 96 when they first came out, because I wanted an SUV. The next year, the Navigator was out - and I should have waited, because I really needed, and wanted the bigger truck. But I was stuck with the Mountaineer for a 2 year lease.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    When you have a five year old car with 154,000 miles on the clock, waiting another year is NOT a reasonable option.
  • andy71andy71 Posts: 96
    Maybe Ford should have kept the trusty Taurus for another model year. I actually like the Taurus and the newer ones are far superior to the ones from the early and mid 90's. Ford should have introduced the 500 in MY' 06 when the 3.5L engine was ready for production. An all new car with an all new engine.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    I'll keep it simple again... The Duratec35, was NOT, and there's NO possible way, of bringing that engine sooner. Between the part maker's, supplier's, factory allocation, etc. It was simply NOT possible.

    YES, Ford could have delayed the 500/Montego/Freestyle till '-06, but when ONCE the vehicle would debut, it would have been critisized for having (2003 techonology). Plus, Ford would be losing time (which is money) on THAT specific program, if it's not introduced THIS YEAR.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    OHCs are labeled "better" because they are.

    the magazines are just stating the obvious. i guess it's just not obvious to GM diehards who can't afford to drive cadillacs. why in the heck would GM positioned the upcoming 3.6l for their higher echelon cars?

    true, many consumers probably don't have the slightest clue that their engine is an OHC design but they notice the smoothness and refinement of that engine. this is what would sells the car.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    OHC is to OHV like OHV was to FLATHEAD engine technology in the 50's. It's just more refined and smoother, allows for higher reving and probably runs more efficiently too. Doesn't mean pushrods are totally out of date, but - all the great cars use OHC, I believe. That says something to me. I was very surprised and somewhat disappointed that the much ballyhooed Hemi - is a pushrod engine.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    i guess their's something to a large pushrod V8 engine. the corvette V8 is highly regarded too.

    but i'm far from impressed by GM's pushrod V6 engines.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    Taurus/Sable is not going away for several more model years. They are consolidating production in Atlanta, so likely Taurus/Sable production will be at half or less the previous rate. You can buy one if you want. Dated or not they are a good car and a great bargain.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,935
    "When you have a five year old car with 154,000 miles on the clock, waiting another year is NOT a reasonable option. "

    Wow - I am very impressed.
    That's probably 8 or 9 years on my typical annual driving.
    Hope it continues faithful service until you can purchase what you want . . .
    - Ray
    Not at all proud to have purchased 4 cars in the past 8 years
    2016 BMW 340i
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    It looks like nvbanker was fooled by the noise and roughgness of the Navigator. I have driven them, and they are SLOW. The test results show 10 second range zero to sixty results, and the weight, engine power, and gearing all indicate that is what to expect. The new HEMI, especially in the 300C, is very smooth, quiet and fast. How that I have driven one, I have dropped any interest in the 500 - I was just checking the forum one last time before erasing my 500 information.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Well, enjoy the Chrysler. As for me, I'd rather not sit in the bottom of a fish bowl with high windows, and I have experienced what passes for Chrysler quality before...

    Not to mention the prices on those beasts.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I understand the published numbers, believe me, and I don't dispute them. I'm just talking about the feel of the Hemi, which was an abject disappointment to me, and some others, evidently.

    As for your insults of my Navigator - what did I ever do to you?
This discussion has been closed.