Will Mercury soon be joining Plymouth and Oldsmobile?



  • ppborcebppborceb Wallingford,CTMember Posts: 61
    Everyone knows that Mercury is nothing but a copycat Ford for the Geezers with money that wouldn't be caught dead in a Ford. The Grand Marquis is nothing more than a Crown Victoria, but priced higher.
    Dump the Mercury and go back to the original company that Henry put America on wheels!
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    ...has been around since 1939 and has at times been a clear step up from a Ford.
    The first Mercuries were almost indistinguishable from a Ford. You'd think every panel from a Mercury would interchange with a Ford, but it doesn't. The 1946-48 Mercuries were clearly Fords with extremely busy front-end styling.

    I'd say from 1949 through 1960, Mercury clearly was a step-up from a Ford. They cheapened the brand from 1961-64 and went back to being a super-deluxe Ford. It went back upscale again in 1965 in the "Lincoln Tradition" and stayed there through 1978. Remember those awesome Park Lanes and Marquises Jack Lord drove on Hawaii Five-O? It went back to being a super-deluxe Ford in 1979 and stayed there since.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    "Super deluxe" is a stretch. A Mercury is a Ford with a slightly different trim package. As you pointed out, it wasn't always that way.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Remember those awesome Park Lanes and Marquises Jack Lord drove on Hawaii Five-O?

    Yes. Awesome, huge and grotesque. Would rather remember Magnum PI's ride.

    Perhaps you got some lyrics for Five-O theme? What did Lord say to Dano at end of case?

    As said before, the only memorable car from Mercury was 49-50 model, which can still be seen in many custom/hot rod shows. Still looks good chopped and channeled.

    With all of Ford's problems in recent years, cannot understand why they still prop up the Mercury brand.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    There were many memorable Mercurys, though not all successful in sales. The 49-51 didn't share a thing with Fords...it was a Lincoln body to start. The Turnpike Cruiser was the wrong car at the wrong time, but definitely memorable. The original Cougar was one of the prettiest cars of the 1960s. Many of the Park Lanes were more tasteful than the generally huge and grotesque competition. The German built Mercury Capri was a winner. The 1986 Sable was well distinguished from the Taurus. The 1999-2002 Cougar was well-styled and very competitive on launch (it outsold the Mitsubishi perennial champ), but the 2 door coupe market is a tough one, and Ford didn't commit to the fast-paced change it requires. The Cyclones and Marauders (not the more recent fiasco) were always contenders and beautifully styled as well. The 68 through 72 (prior to the 5 mph battering ram bumpers)Montegos were beautiful as well. But granted, that's not a lot in the entire marque's history. One thing that often used to distinquish a Mercury from a Ford was the unique rooflines on some models. With the coming of the Contour/Mystique twins and the Crown Vic adopting the Grand Marquis roofline, that long tradition was seemingly abandoned for good. I lost interest in Mercury models after that. Sales show that most people did. Could you imagine Mercury selling 500,000 cars today with their pathetic badge engineered lineup? I say get rid of the embarrassment.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    Book 'em, Dano!
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Member Posts: 228
    according to news from Ford Motor Co. today.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    And I for one am very happy to hear I was wrong about this. Always liked Mercurys..up until the last few years.
  • bruce6bruce6 Member Posts: 29
    Let us hope the decision to keep Mercury comes with an intent to make it's products at least somewhat unique. Platform-sharing is fine. Identical cars with different grilles and taillights is not.
  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    According to Kuzak:

    "Mercury and Lincoln will complement each other. Lincoln will start with midsized sedans and move up from there...Mercury brings a younger, more female customer than the Ford brand.We're focusing (Mercury) very much on small, fuel-efficient products."

    Ford hopes that Mercury will continue to attract these younger premium car buyers who will then move up to Lincolns as they get older and their families get larger.

    Going forward, he said, Mercury will continue to offer improved versions of its Mariner crossover, Milan mid-sized sedan and a new as yet unnamed compact. That car will go into production in 2010 and will share a common platform with the new Ford Focus that will also enter production that year. In addition, Mercury will offer hybrid versions of the Mariner and -- starting at the end of this year -- the Milan.

    Kuzak made no mention of the full-sized Mercury Sable, which no longer appears to be part of the brands future lineup. Instead, he said, Lincoln will pick up where Mercury leaves off, giving Lincoln-Mercury dealers a full product lineup.

  • georgecavaliergeorgecavalier Member Posts: 54
    I have heard basically the same thing. Here on Inside Line, they said that Mercury will be adding a new small car. I think that is a great idea. With the way gas prices are, people from all walks of life are looking at smaller cars. Not everyone is going to want bare-bones econoboxes so a premium small car is a good thing. I wish GM would get that through their heads and bring over the small Buicks that are selling very well in China. Anyway, for Mercury to pull this off, they will need to make a vehicle that is unique from a Ford. What they don't need is a Tracer that is very much the same as a Focus with a different grille and tail lights.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Yeah, and what they dont need is to eliminate 50% of their market right out of the box by aiming Mercury at females. Just how stupid is that?
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Pretty stupid. That focus the last few years has done nothing but cost them sales.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Yeah, and what they dont need is to eliminate 50% of their market right out of the box by aiming Mercury at females. Just how stupid is that?

    They used to run the commercial of a woman driving her male office colleague to a business meeting and meeting their female boss.

    They also need some commercials showing a tall guy late 20's/30's with about 5-day beard stubble, in jeans and getting into Mercury with his actress-like female companion and he driving to "in" place.
  • wtd44wtd44 Member Posts: 1,211
    Having a local Mercury dealer keeps me happy with Ford products. I can use the Mercury place for any and all warranty work and other repairs and service I may not want to do myself. Otherwise, I'd have to use the local Ford dealer, and that is very unappealing to me. The broader point is that Lincoln Mercury dealers provide the benefits of "competition" with Ford dealers, thus favoring the customer.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Excellent summary on the history of Mercury's brand differentiation. I agree with everything you said.

    I imagine that Ford is quietly studying whether to invest more in Mercury to reinvigorate it, or to close the brand. So, in the future, you'll either see more aspirational and youthful Mercurys, in the spirit of the '49-mid '50s, and the Cougar, or no Mercurys. I don't know which it will be. Does Ford really need a middle brand? Arguably, it doesn't, if Ford models top out at entry luxury, and Lincoln begins there. On the other hand, it wouldn't be difficult to make a case for a middle brand, so long as it's differentiated from Ford and Lincoln. I have confidence that Alan Mulally will make the right call on Mercury. He's obviously acting deliberately, rather than hastily.

    I think there's room for expansion of the Mustang line, plus a market for a RWD Lincoln 3-Series competitor, once Ford's financial condition improves.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    One of the keys for Mercury is to move Lincoln further up market. If it stays "near luxury" it clouds the case for having Mercury. This is what GM is trying to do with Buick and Cadillac.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    I agree with you, especially if Ford keeps Mercury. Even if it does, though, Lincoln could continue to offer its MKZ, since Mercedes, BMW and Lexus offer their respective near-luxury C-Class, 3-Series and ES350. To your point, Lincoln could then add one or more upscale models to its lineup.
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHMember Posts: 22,170
    I've just returned from the winter car auctions in Scottsdale. General Motors, Ford and Lincoln were all present, exhibiting their current wares and offering test rides. Conspicuous by their absence were Chrysler Corporation and Mercury Division.
    I did not see a single new Mercury, not even the Milan which sells pretty well in Arid-zona.

    As I was looking at the new Taurus it occurred to me that there doesn't seem to be a
    new Sable version even though it's big enough to serve as a replacement for the Grand Marquis.

    It looks like Ford Motor Co. is going to let Merc die for lack of new product.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • bigo08bigo08 Member Posts: 102
    I started this thing like over 3 years ago... :shades:
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHMember Posts: 22,170
    I started this thing like over 3 years ago...

    talk about a slow death. :sick:

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaMember Posts: 64,482
    And so Mercury will join the other casualties of the new century:


    Will anybody on the highway notice?

    Good idea or not?
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Ford can be like Honda and Toyota. Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus. Not sure why Toyota plugs along with Scion brand.

    The article mentions an old movie having James Dean driving a Mercury and Five-0 tv series using big Mercury. Recall that Clint Eastwood movie "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" had bad guys driving a Mercury.

    Except for James Dean customized Mercury, which copies can still be seen at hot rod, old car shows in the summer, there has never been a notable Mercury car.

    Unless there are still Mercury "only" dealerships, there is absolutely no reason for Ford to offer Mercury. It is only diverting vital resources at Ford Corp that could otherwise be used to improve and refine the gold-plated brand of Ford, and rebuild the past fine image of Lincoln.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    but I think it's probably the best decision, from a business standpoint. The brand has been languishing for years now, and it's time to put it out of its misery. I think Mercury made sense at one time when it was a step-up car between a Ford and a Lincoln. But for several decades now, there has been very little to distinguish a Mercury from the Ford it was badge-engineered from.

    I wonder though, if the Lincoln dealers are going to make it on reduced volume. I read elsewhere that Ford wants them to either merge with local Ford dealers, or close down entirely.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    edited May 2010
    Mercury was Ford's Buick.

    Interesting to see Buick get new legs, while Mercury goes into a death spiral. It's probably a sign that there's only room in the marketplace for one American brand that those 60 and over can relate to—and they will miss it dearly.

    Wonder if this will hurt Mulally's (walk-on-water-do-no-wrong) image, or Ford's (Rise like a Phoenix) image when the deed is finally done?

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    Interesting to see Buick get new legs, while Mercury goes into a death spiral. It's probably a sign that there's only room in the marketplace for one American brand that those 60 and over can relate to—and they will miss it dearly.

    I think one advantage that Buick has is that it, at least, is a step up from Chevy. Mercury really hasn't been a step up from Ford in a long time...maybe the early 1990's?

    Ford never really knew what, exactly, to do with Mercury division. It came out in 1939, as a mid-priced brand. IIRC, it was situated, price-wise, a bit above the likes of Dodge and Pontiac, but below DeSoto and Oldsmobile. In some years, it was a glammed-up Ford, while in others, it was a cheapened Lincoln. In 1957-60, Mercury got its own, dedicated body (although the bigger 1958 Edsels did share it) and tried to move a bit upscale. However, that move was a failure, and from 1961 onward the car went back to being a gussied-up Ford. And, over the years, as the Fords got nicer, they started encroaching into Mercury territory. And once downsizing hit Detroit, and the Lincolns got shrunken, that put a further squeeze on Mercury.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,457
    Another blurb:

    Report: Wings to Fall Off Ford's Mercury Division (AutoObserver)

    "According to data from Edmunds.com, Mercury is most-often cross-shopped with Ford. In April, 46 percent of Mercury buyers cross-shopped with Ford, 23 percent cross-shopped General Motors Co.'s Chevrolet, 22 percent cross-shopped Honda and 21 percent cross-shopped Toyota."
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTMember Posts: 16,382
    but i think Ford/Lincoln can divide up some of that.
    just like Ford after selling Jaguar and Volvo is in the process of moving Lincoln up market.
    Ford can also use some Mercury trims on future top of the line Fords.
    2020 Ford Explorer XLT
  • craigmricraigmri Member Posts: 243
    I agree the brand engineering thing is lame. The Current Mercury offerings are all re-badged Fords so why compete with yourself? They spent the last 10 or 15 years letting the brand get stale. Who brags that they just bought a sweet Mercury anymore? It'll cost millions(hundreds of millions) to resurrect the product and lots of time(a decade) for people to come around. Letting it go is probably the most cost effective approach and apply the corporate assets on the Ford and Lincoln brands.

    On an emotional side note, how cool would it be to take a Fusion, let Chip Foose work his magic and call it a Mercury Comet.....put 400hp in anything and its cool!
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    edited May 2010
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    Oh, that thing's going to last you until the next ice age! How many miles do you have on it now? My friend with the 2004 Crown Vic has something like 180,000 miles on it and it's still running well. He had a 1995 Grand Marquis before that, which had around 175,000 on it when he traded for the Crown Vic. Admittedly, it was getting a little tired. Running rough, smoking a bit, and the check engine light was on. He got a whopping $600 in trade on it. I would've been tempted to buy it from him for that price, except that it was too new and would've needed to be inspected.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    There was a lot of overlapping between GM's mid range brands and, to a slightly lesser extent, between Dodge and DeSoto. However - and I know we're splitting hairs here - I saw Mercury as more of a direct competitor to Pontiac and Dodge than to Olds, Buick and DeSoto.
  • cannon3cannon3 Member Posts: 296
    I am a Ford fan, I have blue blood ;) Sorry Merc fans, the brand was dying. Now Ford can take this extra cash/capacity and give it to Lincoln. Lincoln is rising and with the open capacity/cash it can now make models to compete and beat BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Acura. Cadillac is now in the same room as these top luxo brands and continues to put out great vehicles. Lincoln has the chance now to do the same.
  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Member Posts: 3,425
    Did you ever find the secret location of the switch that lowers the top down? ;)
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    I think it has about 86,561 on it as of this morning. I will be taking it to the Ford Carlisle show this weekend for the heck of it. I cleaned it up really nice this past weekend.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    That top wasn't my choice but that of my wife's Aunt Sylvie who is 85 years-old! :P
  • tomcatt630tomcatt630 Member Posts: 124
    Some people claim 'I'll go elsewhere since I don't want to be seen in a Ford!'. But they forget that 90% of buyers don't care. :P The crosshop records show this.

    Also, for every older buyer turned off by not getting the 'better' brand, there are much more buyers under 35 willing to buy new Fords. To them, Merc is 'my grandparent's old car'.

    Here in Chicagoland, L-M dealers competed with Ford pushing Tracers, Topazes, and Sables claiming 'they are better than a Ford', even though made in same plant!! Now dealers are combining.

    Anyone who thinks Ford "needs" Mercury is living in 1971. :confuse:
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    Same goes for Lincoln really. They seem to just be gussied up Ford's as well with all too often over done styling that comes off somewhat unattractive. If there are any cost savings from dumping Mercury, Ford should put all that money into improving Lincoln. I don't understand why people pay another 10 grand for essentially the same car and drive train as a Ford?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    Same goes for Lincoln really. They seem to just be gussied up Ford's as well with all too often over done styling that comes off somewhat unattractive. If there are any cost savings from dumping Mercury, Ford should put all that money into improving Lincoln. I don't understand why people pay another 10 grand for essentially the same car and drive train as a Ford?

    I think that's going to be a serious problem, especially with the Fords going upscale. For instance, that MK-whatever thing...the one that Volvo essentially tought them how to build...seemed like a nice car last year. When we still had that older 500/Montego-based Taurus and Sable. But the new Taurus is pretty impressive inside and out. It ain't just a generic, mass-market fleet car anymore. And, it's not particularly cheap.

    Then, there's that other MK-whatever thing, the one that used to be called "Zephyr". Y'know, it would be an impressive car if there was no Fusion or Milan to compare it to. I think the interior is really sharp looking. It evokes memories of the classic early/mid-60's Continentals, while still being modern. And I even think the car looks good, with the exception of the taillights, which seem too over-sized for the car, and positioned poorly. But, for all the pleasantry, it's still just a tarted up Fusion. It's a 2010 Versailles!

    Cadillac, at least, seems a bit more insulated than Lincoln, since GM has other divisions to spread the cheaper models across and that helps Cadillac to retain a bit of exlusivity. For instance, there is no other divisional equivalent to the CTS or STS (although the STS is a moot point, I guess). And while Buick does still carry the Lucerne, GM does, IMO at least, a pretty good job of differentiating it from the DTS.

    Now, the pickup truck/SUV-based stuff, that's a different story. But truth be told, you can option up a Silverado or Sierra to obscene amounts of money, anyway. I think I heard somewhere that Chevrolet sells more $50K+ vehicles than any other brand in America!

    However, it seems things are changing. The new SRX, IMO, is a step in the wrong direction. Sure, it's a hot seller right now, but at what ultimate cost? I mean hey, the Vega and Citation were hot sellers once upon a time. And the Cadillac Cimarron sold tolerably enough to last for most of the 80's.

    And I think that new LaCrosse-based Cadillac thing is a step in the wrong direction, too. If it would be, say, a replacement for the STS and the older Seville, then yeah, go for it. But as a DTS replacement, I don't think it's worthy. To me, the DTS should compete with the likes of the Lexus LS, BMW 7-series, Audi A-8, Benz S-class, etc. Basing it on the LaCrosse, IMO, takes it down to the level of the ES350.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,457
    But it's still a no-hitter.

    It's Official: Mercury Is an Ex-Brand (Edmunds Daily)

  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    I dunno. I'd say from about 1969-1978 a Mercury could be practically a Lincoln. I had a 1989 Mercury Grand Marquis LS which seemed to be a really nice car. I called it "the poor man's Town Car." I liked it a lot better than the 2005 model I now have which seems more like a Crown Victoria with a different grille and an extra piece of red plastic between the taillights.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    Mercury did have a pretty cool graphic-designy logo in it's last two decades. It looks better without the ". MERCURY . " above it.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Member Posts: 2,437
    Ford can be like Honda and Toyota. Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus. Not sure why Toyota plugs along with Scion brand.

    That would be true of course if Ford was more like Toyota and Honda. The Ford brand is still transforming itself and is now making inroads, but Lincoln is neither a Lexus or an Acura competitor. Lincoln sales suck. The MKS and MKT (newest Lincolns) have failed to energize the brand. As bad as Mercury sales were (and they were bad), they still outsold Lincoln.

    Other companies have several divisions and do well. VW is on its way to being #1 in a few short years, and it has VW, Audi, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Bentley, SEAT, Skoda, and now Porsche. They are buying Suzuki and will probably purchase Proton (Malaysia). Not all their brands are going full guns, but it is a business model that is presently working for the parent company. GM is another example with four divisions that are able to increase sales--no mean feat after going bankrupt. GM already outsells Ford again, and has more new models coming than Ford does. Chrysler owners also market a plethora of brands.

    So two brands work, and multiple brands under one umbrella can work. The key is to provide a good core brand, and differentiation and enough flair with near luxury and luxury models that they truly are aspirational. Lincoln isn't there yet. The MKS is not superior to the Taurus in power, amenities and certainly not in styling.

    Meanwhile, Ford needs to step it up with Subaru, Kia and Hyundai barking at its heels. Efforts like the Transit Connect, Fiesta and 2012 Focus are terrific. The 2011 Mustang really has the motors now. The F150 will remain competitive, especially with Ecoboost, but the 2004 body shell with 2009 mods looks less cohesive than Ram or Silverado. The 2011 Fusion still uses the same body shell introduced in 2005. The 2011 Superduty still uses the same body shell introduced in 1999. The Expedition and Navigator still use the 1997 body shell with embellishments. The 2011 Mustang body shell is from 2005. The Ranger has not been significantly restyled since the fall of 1992. Ford still seems to think it is OK to change the front clip, tail lights and interior furnishings every 3-5 years and call the model "all new." I always do hope it works, but I also hope that when Ford returns to reasonable profitability, that it will routinely restyle its new models on the outside when it modifies them underneath and within.

    RIP Mercury. You could have lived if anyone at Ford had cared to do more than cynical brand engineering when Ford was flush in the early 2000s. Thank goodness for Mulally. Now, let's see that Freestyle/Flex/MKT/2012 Explorer architecture-efforts turned into something that will burn up the sales charts.
  • propwash49propwash49 Member Posts: 38
    I find it interesting that Ford chose to give Mercury (their middle-range brand) the axe, while Chrysler dumped Plymouth (their low-end marque.) If you compare FoMoCo brands to Mopar, you have Plymouth competing directly with Ford, Mercury against Dodge, and Chrysler against Lincoln. OK, maybe Chrysler vs. Lincoln is a little bit of a stretch, but you get my point. The only reason I can think that Chrysler dumped their bottom end brand is that the difference between Plymouth's sales and Dodge's was much smaller than the difference between Ford and Mercury. It seems to me that Dodge and Plymouth sales might have been pretty much even, where Ford outsells Mercury by a vast margin. With GM, I think that they dumped Pontiac, Olds and Saab purely due to low sales volume, plus they had such a huge overlap with seven passenger car lines and GMC, Chevy and Hummer trucks. Who knows, they might eventually decide to get rid of either GMC or Chevy trucks as well.
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Member Posts: 228
    edited June 2010
    I have a 2008 Mercury Sable bought new in 2008. My previous vehicle was a 2000 Oldsmobile Silhouette bought new in 1999. I sure know how to pick them!
    With the announcement of their discontinuing the Oldsmobile line, they sent me a coupon that gave me $1500 credit toward a new Olds vehicle, or $1000 toward other GM vehicles.
    Does anyone know if Ford has a similar program for recent new Mercury owners?
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    Wonder if I should run out and get a new Grand Marquis while I can still get one. I imagine these cars are going to be in great demand in the used market as there are still plenty of people who want a full-frame RWD V-8 powered car?
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    I find it interesting that Ford chose to give Mercury (their middle-range brand) the axe, while Chrysler dumped Plymouth (their low-end marque.)

    That's due partly to Chrysler's dealer structure. Up through 1959, there were few, if any, stand-alone Plymouth dealers. They were almost always sold through Dodge, DeSoto, or Chrysler-Imperial dealers. Heck, one store local to me sold all 5 brands at one time!

    However, in 1960, Chrysler changed their divisional structure. Dodge became a stand-alone division, while Plymouth and DeSoto were merged in with Chrysler-Imperial. Since Dodge dealers would no longer have Plymouths to sell, the Dart was introduced to fill that gap. This was not the compact Dart that most people think of, but a full-sized car that competed directly with Plymouth, Ford, and Chevy. Even the advertising for the Dart mentioned the Plymouth as a competitor!

    Another problem with this divisional structure was that Dodge got to get almost any new model it wanted, while at Chrysler-Plymouth, if it was a cheap model, it came out as a Plymouth, while if it was a nicer model, it came out as a Chrysler. This actually worked out pretty well through the 1960's, as there was still a pretty big gap between the cheapest Chryslers and the biggest Plymouths. Competitors like Buick, Olds, and Mercury fielded compact and intermediate cars, but Mopar left those for Plymouth. Chrysler division built nothing but full-sized cars through the 1960's, and its models were larger and roomier than Plymouth's full-sized models.

    However, in the 1970's, Plymouth started missing out. For example, as personal luxury coupes became all the rage, Mopar responded with the Dodge Charger S/E and the Chrysler Cordoba. No Plymouth version was offered. When more upscale compacts hit the market, again, it was the Dodge Diplomat and Chrysler LeBaron, with no Plymouth version. Now, these cars were just gussied up Volares and Aspens, and Plymouth did have a nice model called the Volare Premier. But, those LeBarons and Diplomats were definitely a step up at the time...or at least, presented the illusion of it!

    For 1979, Chrysler half-heartedly downsized its full-sized cars. Dodge got the St. Regis, while Chrysler got the Newport and New Yorker, but Plymouth got nothing. Actually, for 1979, Plymouth division was essentially down to just two models, the Horizon and the Volare! And this was supposed to be Mopar's "volume" line, to compete with Ford and Chevy! The lineup was fleshed out with a few captive imports like the Plymouth Colt and Champ, and the larger Sapporo. And there were even a few Plymouth-badged trucks and vans during that timeframe. Still, Plymouth was missing out on the more profitable midsize, fullsize, and personal luxury coupe market.

    Plymouth did finally get a full-sized car for 1980, the Gran Fury, but it was sold mainly to police, taxi, and other fleet buyers. And in 1980, with the second fuel crisis coming on strong, full sized cars suddenly weren't so profitable anymore.

    In the 1980's, with the introduction of the K-car, we got some pretty small Chryslers, and some pretty cheap ones too, which really cut into Plymouth territory. Dodge was still usually getting a version of everything, cheap AND nice, while at C-P, Plymouth was increasingly relegated to the cheap models, while the nice and even not-so-nice models were badged as Chryslers. And this kept going on right up until the end, when the final Plymouth, a 2001 base Neon, rolled out the door and into history.

    Dodge was supposed to be a "step up" division, along the lines of Pontiac or Mercury, but over the years, it increasingly became Chrysler's volume Ford/Chevy fighter. Dodge was also around long before Chrysler Corporation was even founded. In fact, the first Fords used engines manufactured by none other than the Dodge Brothers! So that might be one reason why Chrysler stuck it out with Dodge...more heritage. Plymouth was thought up after the merger of Chrysler and Dodge, a car to compete with Ford and Chevy.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAMember Posts: 15,306
    A pictorial:

    Farewell, Mercury
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 24,703
    Oh wow, I never knew they did a convertible concept of the 2004 Marauder! Truthfully, I don't think that body style lends itself all that well to being a coupe or convertible, but it's still kinda cool! Wish they had made it available to the public!
This discussion has been closed.