Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego

dave2222 · August 2004

oh and if youre wondering what styling direction Mercury is going in look at the Mercury Messenger Concept.

mrmoose000 · August 2004

Who designed the 1999 Five-Hundred?

Who will be designing the exterior of the car?

Was it J. Mays? I have always like his work...is there any place that lists who designed what cars in the Ford line-up? Just so we can get some idea of design direction...

frasierdog · August 2004

ANT14 said:"I have yet to own/or know, the perfect vehicle...No matter how expensive"

Oh no you don't.

You have writen how Honda can get away with unlighted swithes because they are Honda.

There should be no wiggle room for Ford getting rid of a SAFETY feature on the basis of a picky owners argument. For $25k, put the $15 saftey lights back in.

I will give Ford all the credit for the design. But I am not all hyped up on new car fever to overlook a missing safety feature.

mrmoose000 · August 2004

Who designed the 1999 Five-Hundred?

Who will be designing the exterior of the car?

Was it J. Mays? I have always like his work...is there any place that lists who designed what cars in the Ford line-up? Just so we can get some idea of design direction...

What do we know about the car that fits in between the Fusion and F-H? (The real Taurus*RIP* replacement...)

ANT14 · August 2004

You mean Cougar ? Heh....

I agree, there's some items here and there that WOULD be appreciated, but in this time of cost cutting by ALL manufacturer's, there's certain things you will lose, not know you missed, etc.

And I do mean ALL...I've seen some recent example of Toyota headliner's, which are subpar to even anything GM might have. Corolla's carpeting is simply felt. Honda has yet to light all their window switches/accessory switched and relocate their power window switched to the overhead console, (their current location behind the steering wheel dashboard, is the cheap method).

Some of the door panels and such some are critisizing, are using materials that are above the Accord/Camry standards, just wanted to share that. But that will be overlooked since some prefer a bit more flair on them and will simply focus on what's missing.

Steering wheel buttons, lighted. Ask Honda and Toyota why don't they light up more of their switched. Rear parking assist, most do not have that on sedans. Mercury will have heated/cooled seats, something rare under in sedans in this price class.

Trunk, 21Cu.ft. enough to stuff a few dead bodies, ask Toy/Honda why they can only fit one/2 (if you brake/bend some limbs). Again, no vehicle is perfect, all will depend what your needs are. Are you willing to give up a lighted glovebox for cooled seats, or Navi system for a huge trunk? It's the whole package that needs to be considered.

badgerfan · August 2004

The 500 is a 2005 model, not a 1999. I believe the guy who came over to Ford from VW/Audi (Jay Mays?) had a lot of influence. You can certainly see VW/Audi influence in the car's styling.

I may be wrong, but there really isn't enough room to squeeze a car between Fusion and 500. That was the problem with Contour, it was too close in size and room to the Focus and had too little price differential from Taurus. My bet is that when the Fusion arrives, it will be near in interior space and trunk space to the current Taurus, though will be a bit shorter, similar to Camry and Accord in overall length.

Three model sizes of sedan style automobile generally covers the market, unless you want to throw in a minicompact, which historically is hard to make money on and does not command a big market share in the US. Just look at the miniscule sales Toyota is having with the Echo.

buckwheat · August 2004

If your a J. Mays fan read the following it will answer some of your questions, I posted much of this many months back;

http://waw.wardsauto.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazinearticleid=19- - 3567&magazineid=50&siteID=26&releaseid=12046&mode- - =print

ANT14 · August 2004

Yes the 500 idea came during the Jac Nasser era, I believe I covered this quite a bit back. Originally under Jac's supervision he wanted to use the P2 platform, to stem a vehicle to replace the Taurus. Problem was, that during development, the realization that Ford would be losing money on it, if it surplanted the Taurus. Hence, it was pushed upmarket. And eloquently billed as a large Mid-size sedan, not to overthrow the Crown Vic for the title of Large sedan.

The Fusion will certainly replace the Taurus, it's interior dimensions are large where it counts...Same as with the Focus and 500. While the exterior length will be kept minimal (under 195in.) The Taurus' architecture doesn't make the best use of interior porportion, contrary to it's exterior dimensions. The Fusion will certainly adopt an interior architecture that will make the most of it's dimensions, just as the Focus did, and the 500 will.

nvbanker · August 2004

" have yet to own/or know, the perfect vehicle..."

Actually, and for argument's sake, I have owned the 'perfect' car several times. Cars I would label as 'perfect' for my needs, and 'perfect'
at the time were:

74 Mustang II (I know, I know, but it was new).
84 Thunderbird
86 Taurus LX
88 Oldsmobile Delta 88
92 Lincoln Continental (ended up not so perfect)
99 Lincoln Navigator

And frankly, I'd consider my 03 Navigator perfect also. Perfection in a machine of transportation, is pretty subjective, IMO. This truck meets or exceeds every expectation and need I have of it. That's perfection to me.

Go ahead, flame me, I dare ya!!

johnclineii · August 2004

I wouldn't think of flaming you! And my perfect cars, for me, were:

1992 Nissan Maxima SE 5 speed
1995 Olds LSS
1998 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
2000 Chevrolet Impala LS (now with 166,000 miles, and counting...)

ANT14 · August 2004

Nvbanker, Heh I wouldn't flame ya. But I ment in the lines of ... every crease, every detail, every possible toy, every possible high tech system, etc. Even on my current vehicles, there's always something I would rather have had them done in a different way. Maybe the stitching could be better (not that it's broken). Maybe have the sunvisor be 2 inches longer, etc. Really just rediculous anal retentive sort of details that no other person will care about, yet being a perfectionist, I try to maximize.

Sort of how I added much more insulation on a Mustang GT (way back when) because the road noise was something I disliked... Or removing ALL these rediculous sun visors, that have safety labels on them I find annoying. (Had someone sew up new one's for me). Again...just anal retentive items no one else would care about heh...

Oh and before I get the off-topic police on me, let me throw something to tie this all together...

The 500 will feature a warning chime, that will remind you that you have left your turn signal on, after you have traveled a certain distance. A quick little "bling" that will sound.

Now, if they can just invent one that will signal the CORRECT one on lane changes... unlike the number of people here in Miami that have the left turn signal on, to turn to the right..Ahhh...

johnclineii · August 2004

I don't think this has been posted yet:

http://www.myford500.com/documents/2005_fleet_preview_guide.pdf

fsmmcsi · August 2004

Pricing will be the key factor in the success or failure of the new Ford products, since they lack anything like a nice V8 and rear wheel drive, or a reputation for quality to attract buyers. The size, seating position, and good looks (my opinion) will be positives for some buyers, but with so many other choices, it takes more.

johnclineii · August 2004

I doubt that. AWD is a major factor.

Nice V-8? With gas prices the way they are and going higher? I guess my observation is that you are not in the target market for this car...

alpha01 · August 2004

But how 'bout just introducing the car with a strong V6, instead of promising 250+ hp, but only in 3 model years....

This is a mis-step the next Avalon will not be making, and the way it seems, these two cars are going to go head-to-head.

~alpha

samnoe · August 2004

"The 500 will feature a warning chime, that will remind you that you have left your turn signal on, after you have traveled a certain distance. A quick little "bling" that will sound."

That feature is already used in so many cars and vans today. In my 2002 Windstar I have it, but rarely use it. I usually never travel a 3/4 mile with the signals on and not noticing. The only possible way is if the radio is turned up very loud and don't hear that signal noise, but then I won't hear that reminder sound either...

I agree with you that all manufacturers are cutting costs (features) on newer models recently. One example, my father in-law drives a 2001 Chrysler Town & Country. Until 2003, there was so many features on all their vans, from lower-end to higher-end. in 2003, they dropped them all, Here is a short list:

- illuminated controls for power window/door locks;
- illuminated ignition key ring;
- windshield wiper de-icer (which de-iced the snow/ice in winter);
- sun visor extender;
- dual sun visor mirror with variable brightness. Now there is just a single lamp with no adjustable brightness;
- dual liftgate lamps. Now there is only one.
and so on.

Ford eliminated on the Freestar some good points from the Windstar. Examples: Light in the glove box, illuminated power control for the audio system; good sun visor (which eliminates the need for an extender. the Freestars is not the same size as Windstar's); power lumbar support, and many more. They even offered the 2002 Windstar Limited with dual sun visors, and stopped making'em on the 2003's.

OK, so you see I agree. What bothers me is, that if you already developed this feature, and won't cost the manufacturer a dime to figure out how to install that feature, why shouldn't they offer it as an OPTION? I'm sure there will be 1000' of people willing to pay for them!

That's something I'll never understand. It seems to me that those people building cars are not smart enough to understand simple stuff as that. They have something in stock, people want to buy them, they beg you please sell it we'll pay you top dollar, but the company has deaf ears!

Isn't that crazy? Being an insider, can you explain me that? What's Ford thinking? When a Taurus owner will be excited to upgrade to the new 500 and will find out there is no light in glove box, no dual sun visor, or tiny buttons on the radio, how will he respond?

ANT14 · August 2004

I wish such options were available such as the...

Example...

"Extended sun visors" - $79 Order Code: A123
"Glovebox light" - $24 Order Code B267
"Door reflectors" - $18 Order Code B778
"Double seam stitching - $89 Order Code C324

The issue... Complexity. If these items were left as options each, it would increase the complexity of the build, the ordering, the manufacturing. Hence, maybe it's just $4 for that lightbulb in the glovebox, but $24 by the time you get it produced. Then the negative press... "YOU NEED to pay for a glovebox light in this vehicle".

Granted, I'm not defending the notion. I too want a glovebox light, and some other toys that I believe should be standard. But consumer groups (I dislike them) researched, come to these conclusions. When items,toys,options, are not offered, it's usually THEM.

I sometimes question the participants of these research groups... Can you imagine "what if" the Mustangs research group, was composed of 50% retired, nursing home inhabitants, where they main concern would be "Are the seats cushy enough?, I dont need speed"... It's a MUSTANG ! But that's a far out example (there's more to it than just that).

Another senario... A supplier could have a "set design" for a certain item. More inexpensive if it's shared with other vehicles/manufacturer's, than creating a totally new one, for that specific vehicle. Helps as well.

Some manufacturer's are cutting cost by removing items, but Ford has publically stated it has tripled it's investment in it's interiors. And sometimes the "resources" are spread around...Surely, you might not get a glovebox light, but your getting better materials through-out, thicker carpeting, thick headliner, more comfortable seats, etc. Which means, you might lose the glovebox light, but gain items that are much more pleasing to touch and feel, which gives a lasting impression.

The thinking is, will the glovebox light always be on, and how many times do you really reach into it... Whereas, your constantly feeling the steering wheel, the seats, touch the doors, quality of the buttons clicking, etc.

dave2222 · August 2004

The fusion will not directly replace the Taurus. The taurus in itself would be too hard to directly replace as its sales are far to great. So we've been spreading the risk with the Freestyle, Five Hundred, and Fusion. The Freestyle will compete more with subaru and other sports wagons and for those people who arent looking for something as sporty as a Nissan Mazda or Subaru. The Five Hundred is to compete with the Avalon for the mid-large sedan market. They both have comparable engines, sizes, and specs. They found though that people who are buying Avalons want a more comfortable car. The target age range will be around 40. The Fusion is targeted at the Camry and Accords while the Fusion 3.5L will be targeted at the Altima which is a little bit more sporty with aggressive sloped back headlights, tri-bar steel bar grille, nice interiors, and american styled exteriors. Fords trying to differentiate itself from the Japanesse and Europeans in design style so people actually buy american for american design not copied Euro or Japanesse styling.

As for the person who said that the Five hundred was a 2005 car you're wrong. It first started in 1999. Nasser has always been obsessed with euro everything so when it came to design a new flagship he of course wanted it euro based. Then came Bill Ford and Fords future took a 180 to the north. Bill Ford layed out his goals to make more enviormentally friendly cars, focus on sigma six quality, increase profit per car to Japanesse levels, and add a more american flavor to fords car designs. For example did you know that the Focus's sound deadening panels are actually made out of old jeans, and that the lights at the dearborn and atlanta plants are powered by paint fumes? Just some of the innovations Bills been pioneering to make Ford a more cleaner company.

The fusion and Milan will both come in hybrid forms as well.

dave2222 · August 2004

Fords cost cutting isnt to use cheaper materials. Actually its the opposite by streamlining designs and reducing the number of different parts used you considerably reduce transport costs, retooling costs, supplier costs, taxs, etc... Quality also rises as supply chains arent interrupted nearly as much. Fords now able to reinvest those saved costs into higher quality material. So while you may get a wider variety in interiors from other brands you'll get better quality interiors and exteriors from ford motor company. Another way Ford is cost cutting is to stream line platforms. By doing this you reduce platform expenditures by up to 10% and save 20% on retooling costs. This allows for flexible manufacturing and on time manufacturing. By doing this you further improve quality and are better able to meet demands by the market. Fords now able to produce a couple of platforms that work for multiple vehicles. Point in case in the rouge plant theyre now able to produce the fusion, freestyle, montego, five hundred, milan , and a number of other cars since theyre all based on the 6 platform. A huge part of retooling costs comes from Platform making which can cost millions of dollars. Simply put Fords trying to streamline production as much as possible while still improving quality. What youll begin to see starting next year is a huge jump in quality. Weve already seen this with the new F-150 as well as the new Ford focus both of which are using shared interior systems. These and the new cars for 2004 + 2005 should bring them far above the Industry Avg. in quality standards. With the new investments in interior plus fit and finish you'll see a higher rating as well in the Consumer reports which many people use in helping to decide their cars.

fsmmcsi · August 2004

The Mazda 6 platform is not what is under the Five Hundred, Montego, and Freestyle - it started as the Volvo 80.

As for gas prices, I do not see how anyone who performs the calculations would place fuel mileage high on their list of priorities. I drive roughly 27,000 miles per year, far more than average. With gas at $2 per gallon, a 17MPG car costs $3,176 per year, and a 25 MPG car costs $2,160, a savings of just $19.54 per week, less than $0.04 per mile.

Also, as Chrysler has shown, a powerful V8 with cylinder deactivation produces the fuel mileage of a much smaller engine.

johnclineii · August 2004

And it's the Chicago plant that produces Five Hundred/Montego/Freestyle, not Rouge. In fact, the suppliers have aligned themselves in many cases right outside the plant.

dave2222 · August 2004

I apoligize for the type about what platform is being used the 6 and volvo platform are being used.

badgerfan · August 2004

Though I agree that the Fusion is likely targeted at a more "sporty" consumer, that does not mean that it will not grab a healthy part of the Taurus customer base. If Fusion is capable of carrying 5 passengers in relative comfort and has a 15-17 cubic foot trunk, it will certainly replace the Taurus in many customer's minds. Even though I am in the demographic getting "too old" for Fusion, it will probably more closely fit my needs than the 500, which is quite a bit longer and heavier than the current Taurus. I may even consider a Focus next time around.

One thing the automakers soon find out is that no matter how much they try to target cars to the youth market, the fact is the vast majority of people under 30 are not buying new cars, they are buying used, as that is what they can afford. Or they are buying Korean, at the bottom of the new car price range.

dave2222 · August 2004

The midsize- to large sedan market have fragmented significantly since the last major redesign of the Taurus. There will be a more econo Fusion that youre proably looking for as well as an ST version just like the Focus ST that appeals to people looking for a more sporty car. The styling wont be as aggressive as Nissans or Mazdas ,but wont lack the dullness found in Toyotas. Most people will generally buy the 3.0L duratec since it better fits their needs and gets great gas mileage. Itll also have a 6-speed transmission as well a CVT. Youll just have to wait to see what it looks like. I was impressed when I saw it, but I like more sporty styles so thats proably why. Its looks almost exactly like the drawing, but was in black with black and white dots on side for camo.

ANT14 · August 2004

The artist that sketched the "Futura" and 500 years ago, did quite well. Whereas the one who sketched the Montego got it ALLLLLL wrong... Made the Montego look lowered/slammed.

spidermonkey · August 2004

As far as gas prices...

To me, ~$1000 a year is a lot of money. I plan on keeping a car for at least 6 years, so that extra money spent on gas adds up. And when you consider that that $1000 is after tax, then you are talking about $1300+ extra that I can put into my 401K vs. driving a less fuel efficient vehicle. I don't drive as much as you do, but even if you cut your numbers in half, my answer is still the same.

It's all about trade-offs. For a 3600 pound vehicle, the value I place on horsepower begins to drop exponentially after 180hp. ...so I don't want to pay for it.

That's just where I'm coming from, and I admit that I'm cheap.

rayainsw · August 2004

I agree that $1,000 / year is not a trivial amount to most people.

drive roughly 27,000 miles per year, far more than average. With gas at $2 per gallon, a 17MPG car costs $3,176 per year, and a 25 MPG car costs $2,160, a savings of just $19.54 per week, less than $0.04 per mile.

Well  a more likely comparison, meaning something closer to what a typical consumer might see / use when buying a new vehicle, it seems to me would be more like 15,000 miles per year (closer to typical / average) and overall 22 MPG vs 25 MPG. Here the difference calculates as:

15,000 / 22 MPG = 682 gal x $2.00 = $1363 / year

15,000 / 25 MPG = 600 gal x $2.00 = $1200 / year

diff = $163 / year = $3.13 / week = $0.44 / day

- Ray
Apologies for some rounding errors . . .

ANT14 · August 2004

Nothing wrong with being cheap... Cheap is buying something that must be replaced without the first few months, HENCE, might as well buy something good to avoid that.

Better you place your money on a house, or 401K, something that appreciates, moreso than on a car that depreciates. It's amazing how many people I see buy expensive cars, add $6K of pointless toys (DVD's on the headrests, lowered suspensions, ghetto-fied wheels) YET, they live in the worst run down houses in town.

fsmmcsi · August 2004

Let's say 15 MPG (pickup / SUV) vs 30MPG (small car) at 12,000 miles per year and $2 per gallon is a better comparison for average drivers. The small car would only save $800 per year, and the large vehicle with cylinder deactivation would narrow that to $400.

Yes, it is funny to see those who spend what they don't have buying what they don't need. That is, funny as long as they then don't demand that government take money from others to give to them.

Ford may have guessed correctly when they decided to build the Five Hundred family with the 3.0 driving the front wheels, but I think that a Five Hundred with a 4.6 V8 and rear wheel drive would sell far better, and be much more of a real alternative to the Avalon, 300, and other large cars.

I don't know when Ford will figure out how to offer cylinder deactivation, since it is probably much more complex with an OHC engine than with a pushrod design. It would really help them compete, especially with the large vehicles which people prefer. Superchargers and turbo chargers also allow a small engine to provide better power when needed, and would be a simple solution to improving the Five Hundred line.

nvbanker · August 2004

"The thinking is, will the glovebox light always be on, and how many times do you really reach into it... Whereas, your constantly feeling the steering wheel, the seats"

ANT, the focus groups are actually right! As much as I think the details of a glovebox light and other trifeling things should be in a nice car - and as pissed as I was when I picked up my special order 98 Mountaineer with ALL the options on it, I mean every possible option package was included, and I discovered that it didn't have a glovebox light or a power passenger seat, and my 97 did have those things - it didn't make me quit buying Mercurys.... They're not deal breakers, but they should be included anyway because they are people pleasers and they make you feel good about your car.

woodsmml · August 2004

Hi,
I happened to see the new ford 500 and freestyle today in Boston. Very nice looking vehicles. Both were black w/grey leather interior. Fit and finish looked top shelf. Paint jobs on both showed no blotches. Interiors looked nicer than what you associate with Ford. Since both had Mich. manufacturers plates, I'm guessing they are early production vehicles being tested or maybe brought in for local dealers to try out. Both vehicles were badged for AWD and were top of the line models.

ANT14 · August 2004

FSM,

Yes cylinder de-activation might be a bit more costlier on OHC engine designs, BUT not by much... There's various different ways (some simply done by computers), that can allow/disallow cylinder...

NVBanker,

Yes there's certain items that won't break a deal. It's ironic how many look at the negatives and bypass all the positives. Example, Ford uses manual backrest adjustment.... I find it much easier to use, quicker, less issues if it breaks down, over the power units... That to me isn't an issue, but for some in the media, they quickly note it.

Wood,

Yes they were production versions.

johnclineii · August 2004

On the Five Hundred, all but the SE model will have power backrest adjustment, or did you mean lumbar adjustment?

ANT14 · August 2004

No just in general, not taking these new vehicles into account. Although in the new vehicles coming out, you will be seeing it powered.

johnclineii · August 2004

On the Five Hundred, the BASE model has it manual, the others powered. Will be interesting to see if this vehicle is decontented as time goes by. I sure hope not.

nvbanker · August 2004

I HATE decontenting!!!!

ANT14 · August 2004

All automaker's usually decontent as time passes... When they offer a certain feature, and see it's not selling, or most do not care for it...chances are it gets removed. Amazingly Volvo has a few items that most people do not really care for, and they keep it around rather than bothering to remove it.

Or another common trait, group it into a package group where the person will pay additional for, and upsell them into other items they wouldn't have bothered buying anyways.

nvbanker · August 2004

I struggled mightily to get this last Mountaineer just right because of that very problem. My 02 was one of the first ever made and it had everything on it you could get except the running boards, which the dealer ordered and installed after. When we wanted the 04, my wife wanted a rare color (True Blue) this time, and we ordered it. We didn't want to lose anything the 02 had, so we tried to get the max option package in that color, which is the Luxury model now. The first one that came in, had deleted the 3rd row seat out and had no CD changer. That wouldn't do, so we rejected it. The dealer ordered it again, this time it came in Red, but with the right equipment. We rejected that. The third one we ordered came in as a Convenience model, which is a stripper, cloth seats and a 6 cylinder engine, but the right color, so we rejected that one too. At this point, we just took a Black Premier that was on the way already, and despite the color, which was the same as the 02, it's perfect otherwise. Now, I don't know for sure, the dealer tells us it wasn't their fault, that Ford keeps changing the option packages, color availability and combinations on them, making it impossible to get just what we wanted, and the Premier, which has the right equipment on it, only comes in 4 colors, and blue isn't one of them. But it was a nightmare. And you know how the girls are - it's all about the color!

I'm not jazzed with the Convenience, Luxury & etc., option packages Ford is going to now. If you have a color issue, you can really struggle to get the right car.

ANT14 · August 2004

Yes many times it's not the dealer's fault, although they can be on top of the situation. Example, they might place an order today with the correct order codes and such (tailored to your needs) and it gets process... If Ford tomorrow changes their packages, or makes an item unavailable (sometimes there's outside reasons like supplier delays), then your order is still pending... If you do NOT receive build date yet, chances are that your order (and your options) might default since it hasn't gone through yet.

Naturally the dealer's are adviced when such changes take place... If a particular color is no longer being offered effective, last build date for it, etc. Again, all depends how on top of it they are.

A dealer can easily place 200 order's, but being on top of those 200 are quite difficult at that.

nvbanker · August 2004

That sounds pretty much like what happened. The gal that orders the cars at my dealer was pulling her hair out. Fortunately, I'm a patient guy

I mean, what the hell, eventually I'll get what I want, what's the rush..... And they treat me like gold, so I knew they were trying. Plus, the 04 has really been a satisfier. It's an awesome car.

ehaase · August 2004

If the Five Hundred and Freestyle don't sell, I expect a lot of decontenting to get them price competitive with the Impala.

nvbanker · August 2004

Saw the spread on them in the new Automobile mag today. I was pretty impressed from the exterior view. They have potential, if they run as good as they should, and the interior doesn't disappoint, they'll do fine.

fsmmcsi · August 2004

Nvbanker - my early '02 Mountaineer V8 rwd built in July of 2001 with all options except sunroof, running boards, and 4WD rides rough. After owing a 1994 Thunderbird V8 which was smooth and quiet, and driving a rental '02 Explorer V6, my Mountaineer has been a big disapointment. How do the two you have owned ride? I am on the message boards because I am shopping to find some 2005 model vehicle to replace the Mountaineer. From an economic standpoint I would love to keep it for 200,000 miles, but I drive too much to tolerate it much longer.

ANT14 · August 2004

FSM,

How has your vehicle been a dissapointment ? Are you looking for a car-based alternative ute, something maybe like a Freestyle ?

mschmal · August 2004

Hey Ant, is anyone working on using electric solenoids instead of cam shafts to open and close valves? this would make cylinder shut off easy....

ANT14 · August 2004

Various methods are currently being tested throughout the industry. 2 of which you have mentioned...retarding spark ignition/fuel delivery to the cylinder. I prefer electric selenoid method since so far it's the easiest and known way. I'm awaiting to see Honda's method for their OHC V6 they wish to implement a cylinder de-activation senario in.

And there's various other things being tested to improve fuel economy in the industry like electric steering, electric starter's, etc. More items that are removed from the engine load and onto the electric system can improve fuel economy. Only other issue is, you can't add to much because our current 12V batteries can only hold so much. So next up, 42V electrical systems... which will obviously add weight to the vehicle. The techonology is still being tested to somehow improve the added weight, and reach a fine line where you can add heft, but without having a penalty on fuel usage for doing so.

grega · August 2004

I had the chance to drive the 500 today at Ford's innovation test drive and overall impression is very good. The car looks good, not bland at all, very solid and conservative so it should last a long time (vs. Taurus egg-shape).

Interior is quite roomy and quality (dash) looks good and the wood, although plastic, looks and feels solid, not cheap. The high seating position was a popular comment by most people and everyone liked it. For a mid-size it is very roomy, almost more than a crown vic.

Performance on the track was acceptable, not a hot rod 0-to-60, but satisfying, just don't cross shop it with a 300C. I thought the steering could have been tighter, seemed a little slow in the s-turns with not enough feedback.

Overall, the car is impressive and should do well with its solid appearance and very roomy interior and high seating, a very satisfying package.

nvbanker · August 2004

I think I know what you mean, fsm.... My life changed with the acquisition of a ranch out of town in 1995. My main driver at the time was a Lincoln Continental - a veritable land yacht for smooth driving. After beating up the Lincoln on some dirt roads for about a year, I decided I needed to switch to an SUV as a pickup wouldn't be appropriate for work. When the Mountaineer made its first debut, I went and tried one out - they only came with V-8s initially, and I tried an AWD model. I thought the ride was just awful, unacceptable, Jeep like and miserable, so I waited. I tried the Chevy Blazer, which rode much softer, but was ugly and felt very cheap to me. The Expedition had just came out, but the only models available were strippers, and I was used to some luxury, so I waited a while, and finally bought the Mountaineer. I had it for 2 years, and although it was a flawless truck, I hated it except when I went to the ranch on weekends - then I loved it. But as a daily driver, I never liked the car. Funny thing though, my wife loved it! So, I bought her a 98 Mountaineer, and when my lease was up on my 97, I moved up to a Navigator, which satisfied my two needs, and itches. I still drive Navigators, and my wife still drives Mountaineers. She traded the 98 on an 02 which was a huge improvement in ride quality, due to the independent rear suspension. Now, we have an 04, which we like best of them all. I guess my conclusion is, I got used to the ride partially over the years, and the ride improved with the 02 significantly, while the utility is still there. I personally think the truck is the perfect utility vehicle. I am a little surprised that the 02 offends you so much. If you don't like the 02, you'd have HATED the 97 & 98!! Anyway, the Expedition/Navigator ride much smoother and only cost you about 1 MPG over the Mountaineer. If something that large isn't an option - I don't know much else you can do. TrailBlazers ride and drive a little softer still, if you can stand the cheesy interiors. Perhaps some of the imports may ride easier too, but I doubt it. Every import I tried was even truckier. IMO, the Explorer/Mountaineer is the best handling and riding SUV on the planet.....

Now, there are crossovers that are less trucky, like the new Freestyle, the MDX, the Pilot, and the Rendezvous. More like a minivan. Perhaps they would do better for you? Maybe go try a Freestyle out? See what you think.

fsmmcsi · August 2004

Ant14 - the '02 Mountineer disappointment is the very rough ride, noisy ride, and wobbly front suspension - all kinds of play, bumps, and noise through the steering column. I have briefly driven an Aviator and it feels somewhat better, but for the huge price increase, it should. I do live in California, and the freeways here are quite rough, but our '94 T-bird with an IRS was smooth and quiet.

Nvbanker - I am on this forum just because the Five Hundred family seems like a potential alternative to an SUV. I need a work vehicle with capacity to haul my 55" x 22" Wing ladder and various other equipment. If I can find a car with a big enough trunk, I would prefer it over another wagon body style, as it would allow me to keep all of my things in a separate compartment so that I am also not bothered with rattles from that stuff, and it would be safer than hauling items which might fly about in a wreck in the same compartment. Ford definitely has the right idea with the Five Hundred family bodies and interiors - the looks, the high seating, the plentiful storage compartments, the big back seat, and the big trunk are all very well done. The solid axle Panther cars are just too primitave. I am also looking at the upcoming Honda four door car-truck, which will share the next generation Pilot / Odyessey / MDX platform.

nvbanker · August 2004

Well, the rack & pinion steering these trucks have does purposefully transmit road feel very well to the steering wheel & driver, by design. The downside to that, is that you get more feedback than you want sometimes. But play and wobbly are not normal. I've not driven a Mountaineer over 40,000 miles, as I trade cars too often. I have an old Explorer with 140,000 miles on it, but it's different up front, so it doesn't help. Sounds like this truck is just not for you, sadly. Perhaps you could go test drive a new one and see if it's just yours, or if they are too rough for your taste?

Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles