Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis

a_l_hubcaps

This came up as a digression in the 2006 Fusion thread the other day, and I thought it warranted its own thread. There are a lot of rumors swirling about the future of the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis, but very little solid info. To recap some of the rumors:

 

-They will be redesigned on the D3 (Five Hundred) platform

-They will be redesigned on the Australian Falcon platform

-They will be redesigned on the Explorer platform

-They will be restyled, but stay with the current Panther platform indefinitely

 

I ran across something interesting today:

http://www.pfmmag.com/NovDec04/Julyaugust2005policevehices.htm

This is from something called "Police Fleet Manager", and it claims that the Grand Marquis will be redesigned for 2006 and the Crown Vic will be redone for 2009. I would think that these people know what they are talking about, but who knows.

 

So, what would people like to see done with these cars? Any more information or rumors? Personally, I'd like to see them stay RWD body-on-frame, but I'm not too confident that's going to happen.

 

-Andrew L

steve2575

I've heard the rumor about a 2008 redesign based on the Aus Falcon, but not the Explorer... I'd like to think that given the popularity of Dodge/Chrysler RWD vehicles of late, ford would be smarter than to switch the CV/GM to a FWD D3 platform. This is especially true when you consider that there would be overlap between a Five Hundred and a D3 based Crown Victoria.

 

I'd hate to see the Panther platform retired; it's a proven design, and with an updated body/interior for the CV/GM, could last at least another decade. If they do decide to retire the platform, I could see them using the Explorer platform since it most closely matches the Panther.

flasvt

What would take to update the Panther platform from up to date standards?

What would take to stretch the Lincoln LS platform to work as the foundation for the next CV/GM/TC?

Could Ford use one of its European platforms? Maybe a reworked version of the XJ architecture?

steve2575

I’m not sure if it’s a question of bringing the Panther platform up to date; this is the last RWD, body-on-frame, rigid rear suspension platform available on a sedan. Almost all sedans (and even most SUV’s) are unit-body constructed with independent suspensions and FWD. The technology may be several decades old, but the Panther platform has been highly refined over the years (specifically with the 2003 MY), and has been proven to be extremely durable (which is why you see so many Panther police cars and taxis).

 

I have a ’92 Grand Marquis with 130K+ miles that I bought a couple of years ago as a stopgap until I could afford a new vehicle. After having the car checked out, I found that everything is in good working order after 13 years of continuous use, and in fact, I could even expect another 70K or so miles out of it. My girlfriends 2000 Neon by contrast, needs $3500 in engine, suspension, and transmission work over the next few months, and it only has 73K miles on it… Sometimes newer isn’t better.

 

Granted, it’s not the car for everyone, but there are lots of us who would like to be able to buy a large, comfortable RWD car that we could squeeze 15 years out of it if we had to… I think for Ford to retire the platform just because it’s old would be a disservice. As long as it can still turn a profit, why mess with what works?

 

The Lincoln LS platform was borrowed from Europe I believe; I’m not sure it could be stretched & widened to make a good replacement for the Panther… Does anyone else know about the LS, and how hard it would be to modify?

marsha7

for probably 15-20 years ago (I had an 83 Grand Marquis) they could continue this platform even with low to medium volume...since it is stereotypically an "older person's car" (except to those of us young folks smart enough to know a good car when we see one), there will be for some years enough old folks to keep buying these cars...I would like to see some upgrades (I know, they have upgraded many suspension and safety features already) that I have mentioned on the regular CV/GM site...firmer seats with better leather...put side marker lights on the CV like the GM, as it is a safety feature for night vision not just a style feature...bring back the rear amber signal lights that they had a few years ago on the CV and took away in 2004 (safety, again)...maybe upgrade the sound system for something like Explorer Limited or Mustang has, something a little more modern that what is in there now, or at least a sound system UPGRADE, for those of us who want more than most old folks want...add door and truck ajar lights, as even the Taurus has this...since many Fords are going to 5 speed auto trannies, throw one in the CV/GM...UPGRADE the engine to 275-300 HP, like the Mustang engine or the Marauder engine...right now only the GM has a roof console with Homelink, add it to CV, as my current one has extra lights and a compass...it seems a lot of platic with an on-off button just to turn on a compass...they should look at what Dodge offers, a trip computer, Homelink and a compass and outside temp all in the roof console...get the outisde temp out of the heater control where it is so annoying to push the button just for outside temp, place it above like Dodge where you can see compass direction and outisde temp on one screen that you leave on all the time...maybe put a digital trip odometer like in Taurus, but keep the dials and gauges analog...even tho it has an auto trans, add a tachometer, since they have one in Taurus and it has an auto trans...that's my "short list" for now, more to be added later...

a_l_hubcaps

Take a look at this article. It has 2 major points about the future of the CV/GM:

 

"In 2006, a $100-million US investment will see changes to the cars' grilles, bumpers and front ends."

 

"In 2008, another $200 million US will be spent on a more extensive redesign."

 

Given that rumors have long claimed the GM would get a facelift for MY2006, I suspect these are both MYs rather than CYs. $200 million is not enough to launch an all-new model, or even a substantially new model on an existing platform. So I take this article to mean that the cars will stay on Panther through at least MY2009 (since they wouldn't redesign the car and only make it for one year).

 

-Andrew L

jsylvester

It appears Ford is going to stick with the Panther for a few more years, which for anyone who has actually owned one, knows is good news.

I'd like to see the 3 valve 4.6 liter make it's way into the car very soon, and another gear or two in the tranny (though the 5 speed auto doesn't nearly have the reputation as the 4 speed being currently used).

I think Ford has decided not to keep their full size sedan in the $20k-$30k out the door price range. The platform has been heavily modified structurally and mechanically, now they just need to update the exterior and interior.

chris65amg

I'll admit that I have a special place in my heart (as well as garage, as I age) for Crown Vics. My grandmother had an early 80's one (they were called LTD Crown Victoria's or something) and she refused to sell it because "new cars are all tin cans! If one of those big buses came along and hit me in a Hondai or whatever you call them, I'd die!" Ah, bless her.

Well, the Panther works, and I really hope that Ford keeps it. It's a proven design, and tons of people have bought one (or more) of them. Ford could easily keep Panther around for another 7-10 years if they kept refining it. For their sake, because a lot of customers would switch to an Avalon or 300 (Lucerne???) if something happened to the Crown Vic. And, considering Ford's less than stellar redesign work, (IMO) I don't think that it would work out. When I first heard of the 500, I thought that Ford meant to erase the Crown Vic! But they don't, so i'm all good. No FWD, though. Crown Vic's have been RWD since they were LTD's, and that shouldn't change. BTW, I also liked the Marauder, and a super-refined Marauder engine would be perfect for the CV/GM. Venerable cars. Not in the sense of a Mustang or Corvette, but both have their spot in automotive history.

OK, I'm done.
---Chris

ehaase

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Articles/articleId=104825

euphonium

Delete the side bulge which makes it look like a pregnant weasel and replace the "Ford" engine with the 300 hp 4.6. After all, you don't see a Chevy powered Caddie. Giving the TC more running ability may just prevent it from being caught by an oversexed Weasel.

johnclineii

I am tempted to ask when and why you have observed pregnant weasels, but some things it is just best not to know....

euphonium

were part of our college lab experiments as were frogs, rabbits, cats, mice, rats, & other rodents. Now you know and don't you feel better for it? Non science majors usually just take Chem 101 or Bact 210 and get by with a BA.

johnclineii

Thanks. I do feel better now. And I feel better knowing the Panther cars are going to be around a bit longer, even though I do love my Ford Five Hundred with AWD. Wonder if the Panther will ever get AWD?

cgn49

the 500 looks to be a nice car; the only rap on it is that they say it's underpowered. do you feel that thats an accurate statement?

mystique

Does anybody have any pics of the redone 06' Crown Vic or Grand Marquis. I am particularly interested in the LX Sport.

lexusrocks

Ford should seriously consider building an SVT Crown Victoria with at least 300hp. If they don't Ford will lose the large performance sedan market to the new Cadillac STS, Dodge Charger, Chrylser 300C and the new Chevrolet Impala. If the Australians can get the really cool Ford Falcon, why can't we get a Ford sport sedan? Ford should also incorporate more technology, such as a nav system in the new model. If they can do this, the Crown Victoria could become Ford's most desirbale model. At the same time all this happening, I also feel the Ford Five Hundred needs a new engine, preferably one with at least 250hp.

johnclineii

Been on a 2000 mile trip + with the Five Hundred.

Anyway, the car could definitely use a bit more power. Then again, I averaged over 30 mpg on the trip, with AWD nonetheless....

So, even I am conflicted! I love the CVT. Feel free to join us over at the Five Hundred forum here...

samnoe

"I also feel the Ford Five Hundred needs a new engine, preferably one with at least 250 hp..."

Yeah, Ford also fells the same. And that's why the new Duratec 3.5L engine will be added to the 500 next year.

I also think that the CV needs a boost to compete with the others on the market. The need to improve the powertrain, the interior, and a few other minor stuff.

bigunit67

In the regular CV/GM chat room, one of the posters makes a point about Dodge introducing a Charger Police Car model for MY 2006, and that this little fact will force Ford to upgrade the CV, especially in the area of engine power.

I did a little digging, and does indeed appear the Charger will be offered with an option of the 3.5 or 5.7 V-8 for 2006 - to police fleets. I don't endorse anyone's website, but you can follow the following link to get the data I did: link title

Personal rant/opinion/burning question section:

1. I would think Ford could offer the 3-valve 4.6 as an option while retaining the existing 2-valve for who don't want/crave extra power w/o burning up too many development dollars.

2. Also, if anyone out there knows, could Ford put a version of the cylinder-deactiviation technology that Diamler is using on the 300c to work in their V-8 cars? Don't take away from what is there, but add something useful and relevant to the package to make people take another look at it.

3. And to go full-blown crazy, how possible would it be to incorporate an electric motor with the CV/GM and have a hybrid version available? It just makes sense to me to take your oldest car platform, one whose costs have long since be recouped, and make changes that would likely be well received in today's marketplace. With Buick going through a total makeover, and the Bonneville being axed, and a whole new 280 HP Avalon to contend with, do something that makes the public take another look at your cars. You can't just "build it and have them come".

Comments, questions? Threats?

euphonium

Ford should continue with the 220 hp 4.6, Mercury should continue with the 239 engine, but only Lincoln Town Car should have the 300 hp engine available for why should the price of a Lincoln only get you a Ford powerplant? Jaguar's six speed tranny should be with only the Town Car, leaving the Ford/Mercury with the common 4 speed AOD. When you pay much more, you should receive much more. Mercury buyers are not interested in performance as the demise of the Marauder proves. Also, bring back the Towing Package enabling the sedans to drag 3,000 lb trailers. One shouldn't have to buy a pickup or SUV for the infrequent towing of boats.

marsha7

like this...I thought the only thing proven by the demise of the Marauder was that no one would actually pay an additional $5-7,000 for 60 extra HP and a cheap trio of 3 gauges sitting in front of the floor shifter...while we all seem to want the extra HP, since it probably cost Ford less than $100 in parts to do so, no one got suckered into paying mega thousands more for it...add an add'l grand, you have takers...add an add'l five to seven grand and it will rust on the dealers lot until the arrival of forever...

bigunit67

The TC, GM, and CV have been around a while and dont have a lot of development costs to recoup. An article I saw last year in the USA today stated that the ave profit, as of the end of 2003, on each car was approximately 10,000 dollars. Knowing that, what ford attempted to do with the sticker of a Marauder was nothing but an attempt to milk more profit out of one product line to cover holes in the rest of it's lineup...NOT offer a competitive car at a realistic price.

Adding that to what Marsha7 says, taking an already high profit-margin car and attempting to milk several thousand more $$$ out of it is what turned the public off, not the concept of "more power". If you look around at the new 280 HP Avalon, the 265 HP Maxima, and many others, the public is addicted to ponies again, despite high gas prices.

When you see the sticker for a Chrysler 300c and then compare it (last model year) to the Marauder, Ford has a hard time justifying what they offered vs what others produced from scratch. I do agree with you that they should raise the content value of the TC. It should not be the price it is with a 240 HP engine powering it. However, I would wager most TC owners wouldn't be swayed by what a Ford or Mercury can offer since there is more to a town car than just what's under the hood (extra size, status, amenities, etc).

Whether we're 100% right or not, maybe SOMEONE at Ford is reading this and realizes what they're throwing out there is behind the times and they'll catch up soon.

jsylvester

As long as the redesign doesn't mess with the basics, which in the case of my 94 Grand Marquis, a car that feels solid even after 11 years and 115,000 miles.

I'd settle for the same power, but I would like a 6 speed auto for better fuel efficiency. If they could add a couple of MPG to both the city and highway EPA rating, I'd be happy.

I'd even settle for the same exterior if they would update the interior, especially the horrible cup holders in the newer ones. The one in my 94 falls short, but it feels Swiss-made compared to the one I saw in a 2005 at the auto show. Also, go back the the better leather, thicker carpeting, and some interior chrome they had before the decontenting began.

ragdollgirl

I agree with jsylvester, the basic car is great. I, too, have a 94 GM. Mine has almost 200,000 miles. It still looks and runs great, albeit with a few electrical issues that don't affect the performance. I'm about ready to scope out a new car and although I haven't yet looked closely at new GMs, I think I will get one, unless they have been seriously "decontented". I like mine so well I hate to have to go and reinvent the wheel, so to speak. I hope I am not disappointed when I do go look at new ones. If they have cheapened the leather, carpets, etc., maybe I will be. It doesn't appear as though Ford will be improving those items soon. Too bad.

fsmmcsi

The only problems I have with the Crown Victoria / Grand Marquis / Town Car are the completely outdated interior (sliding around on the flat seats is no fun), and the solid rear axle. You just can not have a smooth ride with a solid rear axle. Ford apparently did not have a competitive push before the 300 & Charger came along.

As for the engine, the 2006 Explorer has upgraded to the 292 HP / 300 Ft.-Lbs. three valve 4.6 V8 and the six speed automatic, and all of the other vehicles which used the two valve 4.6 apparently will also upgrade to that engine and transmission for improved power and better mileage.

jsylvester

You are correct, there are some compromises with the solid rear axle, but there are advantages. It is simple and durable, and usually requires only simple shock absorbers as any future maintenance.

On the interior, I'm guessing part of the update will be to make better form-fitting seats for the bucket seat option. Myself personally, I prefer the bench seat, but you do slide around on the leather.

xkss

They should drop the Crown Victoria name and replace it with the Falcon when the Australian Ford Falcon comes here in 2008.

check it out here.

Australian Fords

xkss

Here is the Australian Ford FPV GT-P (FPV stands for Ford Performance Vehicles).

You can get it without the stripes.

basils

Sorry, but the Falcon just looks way too dull for me. Reminds me of a cross between a '95 Mustang and a new Pontiac GTO. No real eye catching lines or distinct qualities about it. As for the Crown Vic....why change it so drastically? It's an original! Great ride...one of the best, very clean and simple lines, very reliable, smooth power delivery, rear wheel drive BENEFITS (yes, benefits), classy yet slightly retro in design, and not every "joe" on the block owns one. True, cops and taxis have them, but they aren't the same in appearance. The only thing that I would want them to do in 2006-2008, is maybe use a 3v 4.6, slightly upgrade the interior, offer all versions the same wide color choices, and maybe modernize the front fascia....but not too much, and leave the rear alone.
Whatever they do I hope it looks great because I plan on getting a 2006 model....unless they butcher the design or turn it into a Falcon!

xkss

The Falcon has way more performance than the Crown Vic.

jsylvester

I prefer the Panther over the Austrailian Falcon, but I'm more into comfort and durability than blazing performance.

As stated above, the Panther performs it's role very well; all it needs is some updating, especially in the interior and the drivetrain. My only concern is if Ford monkey's with the drivetrain, it will lose it's bulletproof reliability.

basils

True, the Falcon out performs the CV in quickness and cornering, but Ford has the new Mustang GT for that. Why do we need to change the CV into some kind of teenager car? Leave it as is with just some improvements like a bit added horsepower and slight styling changes. For the money this car can't be touched. It's like a Lincoln for the budget minded. The level of comfort is superb and yes, the durablity is top notch......so why mess with it? I fear that once the Crown Vic gets changed into another platform, we'll never see it's kind again. No more retro styling, no more superb comfort (unless you pay 40k or more), no more large size ( a great alternative to a clunky SUV), and the end of an era of the big American rear wheel drive car.
Let's keep it alive!

johnclineii

I too love the Panther series, but know that large size, comfort and very conservative styling can also be found in the Montego/Five Hundred. No RWD or V-8 or body on frame though. Thank goodness Mr. Ford tossed Mr. Nasser out the door, or the Panther would be gone already, and those who CHOOSE a Vic/GM would no longer be able to.

I own and drive a Five Hundred, but I want Panthers to be around for a very long time....

chris65amg

""As stated above, the Panther performs it's role very well; all it needs is some updating, especially in the interior and the drivetrain. My only concern is if Ford monkey's with the drivetrain, it will lose it's bulletproof reliability.""

One of my dad's friends has a Crown Vic from '93 or thereabouts. The car has 150k miles on it, and since he takes it in for regular oil changes and maitenance, the car is still running very well. Ford doesn't need great performance from this car. It is also as durable as any fom the Japanese, which is hard to say of a Ford. I do agree that they should tweak the drivetrain a bit.

marsha7

firm up the bucket seats, which would add $10 for firmer foam and better side hugging (if you want cushy, get the bench seat...bucket seats should have firmer support like an LS Lincoln...I sat in my buddy's new Yukon SLT and the seats were supportive)...besides, the old folks do not get buckets and floor shifters, so totally different seats can appeal to a totally different market...and modernize the sound system, it looks like a Lafayette system from the 70s...

This car is the only one I have seen that does not have the option of heat or air going to dash vents and floor at same time...why???

johnclineii

Although primarily about Fusion, there are some interesting hints about the future of Five Hundred here (and perhaps even more so about Crown Vic/Grand Marquis):

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0507/03/A01-235800.htm

marsha7

on my 2004 CV LX Sport...I see so many CVs on the road, with the badge "Crown Victoria LX" on the trunk, and they have those combination taillights where the upper 80% is red, but there is a 1" x 4" band at the bottom which is the amber signal light...mine is all red...what years and exact models had the combo light (red/amber) and why did Ford change it after they created the red/amber, where the amber signal light is so much more visible in the dark, fog, mist, rain, and just off in the distance on a clear night???...so stupid to make it and then limit it to certain years or specific models... :confuse: :confuse:

surrfurtom

I believe that all the P71 police versions of the CV had the red tailights. The civilian versions up until 2004 had the red/amber lens. In 2004 Ford put the solid red in all CVs. Can't give you a good reason for the change other than consolidation of the tailight lens design. I agree the red/amber are more noticeable for civilian vehicles as they do not have auxiliary emergency strobe lights.

chuck1959

Why does Ford or any other car company for that matter seem to put to small an engine in cars the first year they are introduce? Don't they drive these cars first. Yeah I know the are trying to get good MPG. Don't the know we (consumers) would like a good mix of power and MPG.

chuck1959

Dropping the CV would really be the death of the CV. Olds did it to all their cars and look where they are now! Buick is next after getting rid of the Park Avenue/LeSabre, Regal, Century names. All of this is IMO, of course. Besides most folks associate the Falcon name with a compact. Look how everyone got so upset about a 4-door Charger!

matchbox

How about a 5.4 in a LX sport and then call it interceptor? I'll take mine black on black please.

euphonium

Question: You didn't buy a Marauder, so why would you buy a 5.4 LX Sport?

matchbox

A couple years ago I was much more sensible about where my money went. Bought an LX sport. Need more power. Taking way to long to blow through a tank of gas at only 3 miles to work. I'm ready to get that collectable.

jefferyg

Many of you on this thread have mentioned the use of the CV in police and taxi service. But another common use for the panther platform is Town Car Conversions for limousines and hearses. For his 63rd birthday my dad went out and bought an 05 Grand Marquis before the family plan ended. My dad works for a funeral home and he bought a white GM to replace his white 96 GM - BECAUSE IT MATCHES THE HEARSE! Their hearse is a Lincoln Town Car Conversion, but the GM does look very similar and so they use it for a lead car in funeral processions.

I think that the Panther cars do need a boost of power without sacrificing mpg. My dad as well as most of my friends who drive them report getting 25 or better on the highway. If ford could somehow squeeze 30 out of the 4.6 they wouldn't be able to build enough of them.

IMO a major issue they need to work on is rear-seat legroom. My wife and I recently bought an 06 VW Passat and it has more rear-seat legroom than my dad's new GM. The seats in our car are also more comfortable.

I think building on the Explorer Platform would be a good move. They need to upgrade, but not totally get away from the current exterior styling. A slightly shorter hood and longer wheelbase could get a little extra room in the interior while keeping the big trunk. Rear seats that recline slightly such as in the Explorer/Mountaineer would also be a nice touch for a full-size family sedan.

The problem I see with my concept is that it would decimate the 500 and Montego. But then again I wonder why anyone would buy a 500 when they can have a CV for the same money? :confuse:

ehaase

Just how heavy do you think that a CV/GM on an Explorer platform would weigh? How would putting them on this platform help increase fuel efficiency?

jefferyg

I didn't say it would help fuel economy. However, it could help Ford trim costs if they were only producing one frame for Explorers, Mountaineers, Grand Marquis, and Crown Vics. Besides with the V8 the 2006 Explorer XLT weighs only 400 pounds more than a Crown Vic. Take out the third row seat and the auxillary air conditioner and you're probably getting pretty close to the same tonnage.

joe3716

For future GM, like to see (1)the rear rigid axle replaced with an independent suspension system in the rear to eliminate that "jittery feel" when the vehicle goes over bumpy or uneven road surface. (2)Remove or put that flat, black "emission" box and hoses under the gas tank somewhere else that's not vulnerable of being ripped off by road debris or getting wet? (3) tweak or replace the transmission to give higher MPG?

johnclineii

There may not be a future Crown Vic/Grand Marquis:

http://winnipegsun.com/Business/2006/08/19/1764588-sun.html

navigator89

That really is bad news to me. I'm a real fan of the Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis, because of their smooth ride, American looks, and their interior space. However I want to see them modernized a bit with the addition of premium features and a 300hp engine.

If there is no more Crown Vic/Grand Marquis, Ford will really lose a lot of business from the police, taxi companies and all the people in Kuwait/Saudi Arabia who drive them. (In these two countries, these cars are ridiculously popular.)

Lol, that's two bad pieces of news about Ford in the same hour. First they wont be putting a V8 in the MKS and now this.

euphonium

have you personally invested a lot in their stock? It is the shareholders who are most affected and their concern is primary. If a car of ten year old design has to be sacfificed for the future of Ford, so be it.

You and I have been wanting the Mustang engine in the CV,GM, and TC for years, but face it, we are in the minority as most of the purchasers like the gas mileage of the status quo.

pantherapardus

Demise of the RWD Ford's may be exaggerated. Sales of the CV and the GM are down is true and St. Thomas may not have a future. But my guess is that Ford will do something similar to GM with its Zeta body, making a new family of "modular" cars for the Mustang, CV, GM, Town Car and a host of other derivatives. The market is fragmenting and the chances of Ford hitting a new product to the bleachers don't look good. But hitting lots of singles does. My guess is this car, along with 280hp 3.5L V-6 and new versions of the 4.6 that musters up to 350hp will be out in 2011 as a 2012 model. In the mean time, I speculate only the CV and the GM to gravitate to a 117.4" wheelbase (from 116" as St Thomas I am told is unable to deal with 2 wheelbases its so inflexible) along with the town car which starts building along side them in 2008 and the addition of the 5.4L in at least the Police application as an option.