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



  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Uh...that's OLD news...Ford itself is building the CVT's, without ZF as a partner, in Batavia, Ohio. And there are other companies that build/engineer CVT's, not just ZF.

    Don't read too much into that article...your conclusion that Ford won't be using CVTs after 2007 may or may not be the case, but nothing in that article requires that conclusion.
  • gteegtee Posts: 179
    I don't have a crystal ball, so I cannot see into the future. I can only make an educated guess. And my guess is that CVT will be discontinued in NA market at end of 2007.

    There are several reasons for this:

    1. It cost too much money to build a CVT. New GM-Ford 6-speed will be cheaper to build.

    2. Current CVT cannot handle torque of 3.5l engine. So its limited to 3.0l Duratech. I believe that Duratech will be discontinued down the road as well.

    3. The original plan was to produce 1M CVT per year; it was reduced to 250K per year. New Ford products such as Fusion do not use CVT. They use 6-speed. If Ford were serious about CVT they would certainly introduce it on new products besides 500 and Freestyle.

    4. According to ANT14, Ford is working on a new version of CVT using TOROTACK technology. This version of CVT will eliminate the Torque Converter ,which will improve the fuel economy. This means that the current CVT as used on 500 is an intermediate development of CVT technology at best.

    My personal opinion about the whole CVT issue is this. The CVT development was stared by Jacques Nasser. This guy had no idea what he was doing, and really had no business running Ford. Remember Ford started to go down hill with him at the helm. The best move Bill Ford made was to fire him before he run Ford into the ground.

    So he stared this whole CVT development thing because the original projections were that CVT would cost x% less to produce and would provide 10% better fuel economy, and it was new and exciting. The development stared and then people stared to realize that this CVT transmission was not as easy as every body thought. The project was two years behind schedule. Then ZF pulled out because they did not want to invest any more money into it. Companies don’t just pull out from a project because of nothing. There must have been good reason why Ford and ZF split apart on this project. I don’t know why because I don’t work for Ford, but you can be sure it was something serious. I know Germans. They are very stubborn and they can usually finish a project. So it must have been a money issue, like ZF could not deliver CVT for a negotiated price.

    Ford took over the whole project and continued to pour millions of dollars into it. The internal data showed that CVT was not giving the fuel economy everybody expected and it cost more to build then a conventional transmission. But now they faced a problem. They invested millions of dollars into it. They had to produce something, or heads in top management would roll.

    In the mean time the 500 and Freestyle are being developed and it’s committed that 500 and Freestyle will use the newly developed CVT. I am not sure who decided to do this, but it was on a high level. They had to use CVT because millions upon millions of dollars were spent on this technology. The factory was already built. It was too late to cancel this project.

    Luckily cooled heads at Ford prevailed and they started to develop a 6-speed with GM. Think about it. Why would Ford start to develop a 6-speed transmission with a competitor when they had the CVT. If CVT were truly a world-class technology there would be not need for a conventional 6-speed. NO, in 2000 when the development of CVT was running behind schedule and it was apparent that CVT would not deliver on its promise, Ford stared to develop the 6-speed with GM. Lets see which transmission will be used in the future? The GM-Ford 6-speed automatic is the FUTURE.

    Like I said, I don’t work for Ford. This is just a likely scenario of what happened based on available information. Remember in 1990’s the 2 stroke engines were supposed to be the future (another well proven technology). In 2000’s the CVT is the future. 2010’s the hydrogen will be the future.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 11,861
    not sure why i should know about when airbags should deploy or not, but i'll give it a try.

    what was the other vehicle involved in the the collision?

    my expedition got the front left wheel knocked off it, but the airbags did not deploy. i drove right through the other vehicle. i should point out that i tried to avoid it and they were traveling the wrong way.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 11,861
    thanks for putting so much thought into your post.
    i basically agree, except about the performance. it does seem to work. it is just an expensive way to get there.
    don't know if currency values play into it.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757

  • gteegtee Posts: 179
    When you have to explain to the public that there is "no bad blood" between you and the supplier, you know there is bad blood between you and the supplier.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    The "Bad Blood" supplier is now providing more transmissions for Ford, and other Ford family vehicles, than they did previous to the Batavia venture.

    The ZF supplied 6 speed automatic used in RWD vehicles like the XJ, Navigator, etc.

    So are we going to spin it and say Ford is doing this because they felt sorry for what they did to ZF years ago?
  • gteegtee Posts: 179
    I am not a politician so I don't have to spin anything. I just thought that it was funny that they used the title "No Bad Blood". I mean which PR company came up with that title for the article? I happen to like ZF transmissions, my 740 used a ZF 5-speed which I thought was just great.
  • lateralglateralg Posts: 929
    Are you sure about the 6 speed for RWD vehicles? How about the '06 Explorer/Mountaineer?
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    That would be the 6R, built in Livonia. Van [non-permissible content removed] gets the 6F (GM JV).
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    So even the Mazda CX9 gets the 3.5L engine well before the Five Hundred/Montego?

    What's up with THAT? Isn't it more important to get that engine available as an option in the Five Hundred/Montego, which the media has had a field day calling underpowered?
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    Yes John, it is amazing that Ford is putting the bigger engine in the lighter Fusion/Milan/Zephyr before they put it into the heavier Five Hundred / Montego / Freestyle.
  • gene_vgene_v Posts: 235
    John, I'll say it. FORD is stuck on stupid.
    Just unbelievable that the Five hundred has to wait its turn behind Mazda and others.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Posts: 2,697
    It doesn't say the Fusion gets the new engine or when.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687
    "What's up with THAT? Isn't it more important to get that engine available as an option in the Five Hundred/Montego, which the media has had a field day calling underpowered?"

    True, I see your point, but the first vehicle to debut the engine will be the Lincoln Aviator, so being it's on the same assembly line, it's not much of an issue to dump it into the Edge or any other CD3 derived equivilant.

    As for the F/M/Z, they get it next mainly because of the AWD option, and new JV FMC/GM 6 speed automatic. It's easier to just combine those three components, and just dump them into those vehicles.

    If the 500 were to receive the 3.5L first, then A) the transmission isn't ready for Ford just yet B) the existing AWD would require beefing up C )Not many would know that such items have been introduced unless they see a new face. New face when? Next remodel period which is 2007, as a 2008 vehicle. In other words, your looking at 14-18 months from now.

    After those vehicles, then you'll see the engine surplanting various other engines families, as newly redesigned vehicles are being introduced... As is, when the Freestar/Monterey minivans are replaced, the engines in it will also be killed 3.9L/4.2L. Next "people mover" will use the new V6's and V8's.

    Let's not forget, these factories manufacturing these components require time to tool up, build, and slowly phase them into vehicles as they ramp up. And the same will occur when certain engines are killed. Can't yank all 3.9L/4.2L in a months time, rather slowly kill them off as new vehicles are redesigned to accept the newer ones.
  • fsmmcsifsmmcsi Posts: 792
    ANT14, did you just tell us that new V8s on on the way? Maybe based on the new V6 design (probably meaning a 60 degree angle between banks)? Is Ford going to have new V6, V8 (and maybe even 4 cylinder engines) which really are the same design?

    Unfortunately, I see your point that if the car does not look different, many dealers and buyers will never be able to focus on the improvements.
  • gteegtee Posts: 179
    Every thing you say about the engines is correct, the only thing this whole change over should have occurred about 5 years ago. 3.8L/3.9L/4.2L Essex engines should have been killed about 10 years ago. This way we could all enjoy driving cars with powerful engines instead of waiting for another 18 months.
  • ANT14ANT14 Posts: 2,687

    New V8 meaning, the Volvo's Yamaha 4.4L, which will first be used in a few Lincolns. And the Triton 4.6L, doesn't necessarily need to stay at 4.6L either...


    Originally yes, the plan was the phase in the 3.5L a few years ago. Even the Lincoln LS was to receive the new 3.5L as well, but because other fires needed to be put out, that got pushed back. The positive thing is that in the process of being introduced a bit later, it gained VVT, and various other components.
  • cv2cv2 Posts: 3

    I'm looking at buying a new '05 SE FWD as I was able to get a pretty good deal on it. I have not road tested it yet, but for those of you who own one, how is the ride comfort? Firm, soft, in the middle?

  • "Firm, soft, in the middle? "

    Somewhere between soft and in the middle.

    Smoother than a Taurus, not as soft as a Town Car.
  • jaxs1jaxs1 Posts: 2,697
    Strange. Are you not planning on driving it yourself before you buy it?
    You're buying it based soley on the price?
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    Check to see if it is a CVT or 6 speed car.

    Also, this is one of the Safety cars you can buy according to IIHS.

  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    Has anyone had the fuel strap recall done yet? Should we feel safe until then?
  • I haven't had it done yet (though I got the recall notice last week).

    As I recall, the possible failure of the straps was something that isn't supposed to happen for quite a few miles?
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    How does one program some features of the body computer, such as headlight blink when using the key fob, when doors lock and unlock automatically, etc?

  • cv2cv2 Posts: 3
    Hi all,

    I just traded-in my vehicle for a 500 SEL and I'm very happy so far! When driving back on the freeway, and applying the brakes, I noticed an unusual noise coming from the front of the car. (I assume the brakes, but maybe the engine?)

    Whenever I apply the brakes when going faster than about 20mph, I hear a fairly loud noise similar to jake-brakes on 18-wheelers. I wonder if it's normal since it's a new car, and maybe the pads need to adjust.

    Has anyone else experienced this?

  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    That certainly isn't normal...I'd get it back in and have it looked at. I've over 51,000 miles on mine now, and never had any odd braking noises at all...
  • bruneau1bruneau1 Posts: 468
    See your dealer at once- not normal.
  • mschmalmschmal Posts: 1,757
    One of the main goals for Ford during the design of the Five Hundred was to build a car that outperformed the competition in IIHS tests.

    Mission acomplished.

    Now you can tell your children that the reason they don't ride in the safest full size sedan available is because you think the looks are too conservative or because you feel that the 0-60 times in the 8 second range are inadequate...

This discussion has been closed.