Howdy, Stranger!

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

Welcome to the Edmunds forums! We are changing the way you sign into our forums. Click here to learn more.

Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego



  • Didn't notice I designed an AWD model of the 500, that's where the price jump occured!

    My bad!

  • I know this is a 500/ Montego forum, but I saw this in the corner of the edmunds page. I thought its interesting! tml?tid=edmunds.h..wkedmunds.headlines.1.*
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    I asked to have the Milan forum, grouped into the Ford Fusion forum since it's virtually the same vehicle.
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Link: Ford Fusion

  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Unless something has changed, I don't think Ford is going to sell the Taurus alongside the 500. The Taurus was to be relegated to fleet sales only.
  • since some 2005 Taurus models are already at dealers, along with some 2005 Five Hundreds (not many of each) I don't think there will be any question of selling along side each other. Locally a dealer has two Five Hundreds (1) Limited with CVT and (1) 6speed SEL.. This dealer also has (7) 2005 Taurus models listed in his inventory.
  • And it was posted above that the Mercury warranty is longer than the Ford's. That is NOT true. They are identical.

    The brochure for the Montego says the outside temperature display comes only on the Premium, not the Luxury (which, weirdly, is the base).

    Is that true? Does anyone know? odd, if so, as it is on the Five Hundred!
  • An online inventory check of (5) local Mercury dealers (within 25 miles) shows a total of (8) Montegos - five Premier models (1)CVT (4)6speed - three Luxury models (1)CVT (2)6speed
  • John I just looked at window stickers for the Luxury and the Premier it shows the item as standard on the Premier which also includes a compass, no mention of either on the Luxury
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687

     The Taurus will stick around for awhile after the introduction of the Fusion...How long ? All depends on a few factors. My personal guess is 2 years, till new vehicle line is introduced in ATL. What exactly will occur with the ATL plant, is still being worked on.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    My dealership just got word that the cars are released. Mine should be in in 2 weeks.

    None are physically on dealership lots at the moment.

    Not many Tauruses on my lot at the moment, but there are a few 2005.

  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    Did anyone catch the ford 500 road test by C&D? the reviewer stated the car has only so so performance despite the six speed transmissions and the interior materials are a disappointment.

    i guess ford needs to advertise more in that magazine.
  • That was quite an over generalization. C&D said they thought the engine wasnt ultra-fast like the V6 Accord, but its more than enough for everyday driving and for people in that segment.

    Secondly they also didnt just say the interior materials were a dissapointment. It was "hit or miss". They liked the easy access to the buttons and controls on the Five Hundred and loved the interior space. They though the seat was great, but also thought that it still incorporated some plastics on the dashboard. Thats hardly saying they hated it. One other thing I'd like to point out is that this is the BASE stripper model SE. They didnt give them the Limited of SEL.
  • venus537venus537 Posts: 1,443
    i would hope 200 hp is still more than enough power for everyday driving but no where did i read that in the article though. i doubt that C&D would disagree with that assessment however, but they did use the phrase "so-so performance".

    and no where did i read "hit and miss" about their appraisal of interior materials ("interior materials are a disappointment", "plastic looks bargain-basement"). they did say the interior was well laid out but that's something entirely different.

    no, the article was not overly negative but it wasn't a ringing endorsement either. and there are times when a follow up more detailed road test contradicts what the preview road test said.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Thanks, ANT. Happy to stand corrected. I'm excited about all the new product coming from Ford - but I mourn the condition of the current Taurus. I remember how excited I was when my niece brought her brand new 86 Taurus LX up from Bakersfield, and left it with me for a week, while she flew out of town. After driving that car only one mile, I knew I would have one for my next car. I ended up buying an 87 Sable for me, and an 87 Taurus LX for the company, followed by an 87 Sable, an 88 Taurus LX, two 89 Taurus LXs, and a 90 Taurus LX all for the company. I converted half the fleet to
    Tauri. Also convinced my sister to buy an 87 Sable, followed by a 92 Sable. A drive in my Sable, convinced my cousing to buy two 89 Tauri, followed by a 00 Taurus that he still has. It was the most awesome, and revolutionary car I had ever seen, and had absolutely everything right. Now, when I rent a Taurus, which I do pretty often, I can't believe how far apart they are from the 86, particularly in seats, ergonomics, style, and even ride. Seems like it all got decontented away over the years and unnecessarily IMO. I'm hoping to have a similar reaction to the new 500 that I had to the original Taurus.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    Heh, the Taurus. I blame Jac on that one. Mainly because he concentrated more on buying car companies, than concentrating on the issues at hand and continue the updates. But that's another topic...
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    ANT14 & nvbanker: Ford management is finally making lemonade out of Nasser's lemons by using the Volvo 80/90 platform for the Five Hundred / Montego / Freestyle, building the Volvo 40 and Mazda 3 on the same platform, and building the Mazda 6, Fusion, Milan, and Zephyr on the same platform.

    To me, the Five Hundred and Montego really are the long-overdue updates of the Taurus and Sable. The three side windows design has been improved, the seating position is nicely elevated, the back seat and trunk are big enough to really use and to differentiate the cars from competitors, the structure is much stronger and safer, the interiors are nice and full of useful storage places, and the drivetrains are modern (even though it sure would be nice to have a V8). It all should have been done five or six years ago, but better late than never.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    As I mentioned long time ago when this forum opened up, as you stated, this was Jac's bastardized project. Get an expensive platform and bring it down to Taurus like price levels. It wasn't feasable so hence, we have the 500.

    Spawning the new Fusion off the Mazda6 platform was just a last minute revelation when Ford noticed how well performing that platform was, and how the media was receiving it.
  • One feature I haven't seen mentioned is a stainless steel exhaust. Is this a "given" these days? I hope the 500 has one. (My 92 Taurus has one and I have yet to invest a dime in repairs)
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    The last car I had a muffler go out on was an 89 Cherokee, so I sure hope they're all
    Stainless now...
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    Yes, you'll be ok, no need to worry.
  • A no-nonsense, simple car with good performance, especially with the CVT:
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    I disagree with you on the current generation Taurus. I owned and drove a 90 Taurus LX with the Vulcan for ten years and now have owned a 2000 SES with the Duratec for four years and 41k miles. The 90 was a very good car but the 2000 is much better. Everything about the 2000 Taurus is much much better than the 1990 version, including NVH, transmission smoothness, more features, more comfortable seats, etc. I could go on and on but will not bore you with all the details. And, I bought it for a bargain price of $18K, not a huge amount more than my 1990 Taurus cost new even after ten years of inflation, and a lot less than I would have paid for a V-6 Accord or Camry.

    While Taurus may have slipped some to the ever increasing number of competitors, it is still a very good car, especially when you factor in the price, and is much underappreciated by those who do not drive it on a daily basis and write it off as a "rental car".

    In any case, the 500, and coming in 2006 Fusion will bring Ford back to parity or perhaps surpass a lot of the competition.

    With the increasing fragmentation of the marketplace with crossovers and more models from all manufacturers, it is doubtful any single model car will ever sell in the volumes that occured in the past, however.
  • I hope all that is applicable to the 2005 model, I havn't seen a 2004! :-)
  • xmf314xmf314 Posts: 154
    I've seen 500s being tested here in Los Angeles for some time now. The styling although derivative is pleasing, and I like the high seating position. From what I've read, It might be an ideal family vehicle for someone who considers practicality over sportiness.

    However, I'm wondering if, like the Taurus, it will become a darling of the rental fleets. Most Chrysler 300s I see here are rentals, and the 500 may also become a rental workhorse. I would certainly rent a 500, but if I owned one I would be dismayed to see fleets of them at airports.
  • Just a bit surprised that the CVT appears to get worse mileage even though it "selects the optimal gear ratio" and that the range of ratios on the CVT extends beyond the 6 speed on the high end..

       21/29 (3.0L FWD 6-speed)
       19/26 (3.0L AWD CVT)
       20/27 (3.0L FWD CVT)

    Gear Ratios
          Ratio Range 2.41:1 - 0.41:1
       6-Speed Automatic
          Gears 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
          4.15:1 2.37:1 1.56:1 1.16:1 0.86:1 0.69:1
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    Eder, the number's are taken from the EPA testing, which needs a major overhaul and many are aware of it. Real world number's will show the CVT does better in how we drive day to day.
  • dbc123dbc123 Posts: 105
    In tech papers on CVT's it has been reported that the actual effeciency of the CVT is higher than a conventional transmission in the lower gears and prior to converter lockup. However a conventional automatic in top gear and with the converter locked can approach 99% effeciency while the CVT is several points less. Friction of the belt or chain drive clamped against the pulleys appeared to cause this. Note that a Honda Civic HX CVT has 1 Mpg better city rating than the manual trans model but 4 Mpg LESS highway mpg than the manual.
This discussion has been closed.