Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego

1404143454671

Comments

  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    The CVT is NOT the main issue delaying the 3.5. The ENGINE itself is. It ain't available yet. And I am sure many would be more than happy to accept a 3.5 with a six speed.

     

    Thing is, most people who look at larger engines end up buying the base. But the larger engine gets them into the showroom to start with. Think Chrysler 300C. The surprise there has been even Chrysler has been shocked at how many actually ARE springing for the larger engine.

     

    None of us knows what the price or availability of oil will be two years from now. If gasoline is unbelievably expensive, the CVT and 3.0 may continue to be the largest seller by far...you may even see the CVT show up in more than the base on the FWD side. If oil remains relatively cheap (ask our Canadians what they are paying for gasoline, then ask a Brit the same thing about petrol), the larger engine may sell well indeed.

     

    All that being said, the power in my car is acceptable (AWD and CVT). Not thrilling, but acceptable. I would prefer the 3.5, and MAY buy one when they come out.

     

    Then again, knowing me, I may have a Fusion by then. Or an HHR. HA HA HA HA! (yeah, right. I really want to drive a Cobalt with that body on it...yep....just a silly thought that won't last two minutes after I drive one!)
  • mgp2mgp2 Member Posts: 10
    The main advantage I see of the 500/Montego over Taurus/Sable is safety and AWD. The taurus has never had good side impact protection (3 stars) wheras the competition (Accord/Camry) which was originally behind when it came to safety, has since surpassed Taurus in that department too.

     

    After having drove both the Montego 6-speed and the AWD CVT and soon after borrowed someone's 2004 Sable for a day (same 200 HP engine), I was surprised that the Sable engine was considerably quieter even under hard acceleration. I do not understand why, unless the Sable has better sound insulation from the engine compartment. Even though the noise difference is only experienced during acceleration, I found it annoying, especially considering the less expensive Sable sounded as good in my opinion as an Accord, whereas the Montegeo should have been quieter, considering the extra cost and the fact that it is touted as a more premium automobile (which it is in everything expect engine noise)
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    One thing hurting the CVT is the cost of the tranny. The "chain" comes from LUK in Europe and the rising euro is making this transmission more expensive than it was suppose to be. This is why the FWD SE is getting the 6 speed AISEN unit.

     

    Personally I would like to see a sleeper version of the 500 ala' the SHO Taurus. Something to give the showroom some draw.

     

    This is a great time in history for auto enthusiasts. With the Auto Industry so fragmented and showing signs of becoming more so and the costs of building lots of unique models coming down compared to the past by using modern flexible factories and flexible chassis, we have more models then ever to choose from or at least since before the depression.

     

    I just had a customer in the showroom yesterday who totally gushed over the 500. But then he was in the target demographic, an empty nester in late fifties. Unfortunately he was there with his son and it was his son who needed a car.

     

    The 500 is a good product overall and so far so good. Imagine if this car got launched with the boondoggle of the Focus or the Tribscape?

     

    I think we all have a good future to look forward too.

     

    Mark
  • ehaaseehaase Member Posts: 328
    I hope that the Duratec35 replaces the Vulcan, Duratec 30, 3.8L and 4.2L OHV, and German 4.0L SOHC in all applications. Except for Honda, most of the competition (I think) is moving away from 3 liters.
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    The Duratec35 will replace the Essex V6's (3.8L 4.2L). The Vulcan will die when the current Ranger is replaced. The Duratec30 will take that spot, and other spots where the 2.3L peaks at, and the Duratec35 starts at (power wise).

     

    The Duratec35 can ALSO grow, as is with minimal modifications. Whereas the Duratec30 was somewhat limited since it was spawned from the Duratec25, and reached it's pinnacle.
  • samnoesamnoe Member Posts: 731
    Somebody questioned above but you didn't give an adequate answer: Will the new 3.5L Duratec be quieter than the current noisy 3.0L? and I mean A LOT quieter? because I think it's (and so all Ford engines) one of the most noisy engines found today, even compared to old tech pushrods from GM.

     

    Especially the imports engines are extremely quiet - not just inside the car (protected with quiet steel or other gimmicks) but the engine itself is very quiet and refined, which adds a quality feel to the vehicle.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I can name a few Ford engines that are stone quiet, and I will. The 3.9L Lincoln LS/Thunderbird V-8 is "quiet as a Rolls Royce" to re-coin a phrase from 1966. You can't tell they're running at idle. The old Cologne 4.0L V-6 is also amazingly quiet at warm idle and very well balanced for a 60 degree engine. The 4.6L modular V-8 is quiet enough for the Town Car and the geezers who drive them with the radio off all day or on AM, and you can't hear them idle, or feel them either. The Essex engines are cornbinders, I'll grant you that, but they're the oldest in the stable and gone soon anyway. Nothing is noisier than a Chevy Cavalier though, IMO, which sounds like a Cement Mixer at a crosswalk. I'm afraid to walk in front of one, never know if I'm going to lose a leg in the teeth or something.....
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Yes the 3.5L will be very quiet, at least... all the ingredients are in there to make it quiet. Place the vehicle in a Mustang, and obviously it'll be tailored to make a bit of noise.

     

    The VCT versions of the Duratec30 are quieter than the non VCT versions. (X-type, S-type, LS V6, Mazda6).

     

    Ford's 3.9L/4.2L/4.4L (LS, Jag, LR) are one of the quietest Ford has. I've been able to stand a nickel on it's side on top of the engine, without it falling off of how smooth they are.

     

    Ford's Essex 3.8/9 and 4.2L... Can qualify for farm machinery noise level.

     

    Some GM engines might be a bit quieter, but I can point a few variants that have major fan noise eminating from under the hood. (specially the one's coupled with the 4.3L V6)

     

    Saturns 3.0L, has a clickity whisp, caused by air rushing between 2 accessories mounted onto the engine.

     

    Saturns 1.9L, far from being quiet.

     

    GM's Ecotec's (as were the Quad-Cams) far from being quiet.

     

    GM's Vortec, class action suit being organized for the piston-slap issue. Tick Tick Tick Tick.

     

    GM's 3.8L is one of the quieter one's, then again the engine is older than myself, so you figure after so many years, they narrowed the NVH down.

     

    Many of Toyota's 2.2L, clatters after a few years of usage, as Accord 2.2L.

     

    Honda's Vtec derived 1.6L also have a running clatter when warmed up.

     

    Nissans 3.5L a very quiet overall, although the new 4.0L seems to be noiser.

     

    VW (like they don't have enough issues) the 1.8L clatters after a few years.

     

    Chrysler's 3.8L, I cursed after I closed the hood. The 2.4L I think cursed back at me.

     

    These are just some that popped into my head at 3am.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    One of us should get some sleep.....instead, we're evaluating engine NVH in the still of the night... How ironic.

     

    I rented an 05 Town Car last week in Jacksonville and drove it between there, Gainesville and Tallahasse. Since it was an 05, I lifted the hood to see "what's new for 05" under there. Was wondering....I know it doesn't matter really, since no self-respecting Town Car owner even knows the where the engine is located, but would it kill you to put Lincoln on the engine somewhere under there, instead of just, V-8? My Navigator has it. Or, is that because my Navigator is a 4V unique to Lincoln, and the Town Car has the Crown Vic engine shared with Ford, and they can't really call it a Lincoln specific engine without getting sued like the General did in 1977 over the Chevy engines in Oldsmobiles thing (that was SOOOOo stupid, if you ask me... I mean, what's the difference???) Just wondering.
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Actually that's one of the cost cutting methods. Not to overly dress up the engine bay in plastic panels/coverings. Except for the luxury brands that is.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    "Except for the luxury brands that is."

     

    You didn't let something slip there, did ya? I was talking about Lincoln.....
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Depends if it shares engines with a Ford variant. Notice the LS is nicely decorated, as oppose to a Town Car.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I guess.... Like I said, No self-respecting Town Car owner has ever lifted the hood anyway, or knows where the engine is in the damn thing anyway.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Town Car owners do not refer to "engines."

     

    They refer to the motors in their motor cars.

     

    :)
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    My friend who has owned 3 of them says, "There's an engine in there somewhere, right?" That's how I know...
  • pegasus17pegasus17 Member Posts: 536
    Interesting info from LUK on CVT:

     

    http://www.luk.de/content/en/products/productinformation/gearing-- systems/cvt/luk_kurbelcvt_sv/LuK_KurbelCVT_lv.jsp

     

    For ANT14: Pls confirm that the Ford 500 CVT was developed by Luk with Ford and is produced here in Ohio...
  • samnoesamnoe Member Posts: 731
    Well, I will also disagree somewhat. While you are correct for most, the Town Car I rented was definitely noisy when revved. And I don't talk about "flooring" just regular passing or merging into the thruway.

     

    You and ANT are correct on the smaller chevy's which I never drove before. I'm speaking about many Buicks, Pontiacs, and Chevy's I've rented many times. I compared it to the other cars I rented as well, Crown Vic, Town Car, and (of course) Taurus.

     

    While talking about that, I must agree that the Taurus drove much better than Buick Century, but then again, the noisy engine drove me crazy...

     

    Back to the subject, so many people complained here that the 500 engine sounds noisy, so I really hope that the new "state-of-the-art" 3.5L Duratec which Ford will soon release to compete with other hi-tech engine, will be quiet, even without isolating the engine. The Freestar is also well isolated, but try opening a window while revving the Essex, or somebody stand outside, and you feel like standing next to a 747... OK, at least a tractor-trailer...
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Coppamc,

     

    I believe there's more detailed information over the CVT posted in earlier posts. It has been, and will be a very busy week for me because of NAIAS, so my brain is working on overtime here.

     

    Very good link....

    http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=18348

     

    And

    http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=17407

     

    Let me know if this answers your question. About Luk ? Hmmm, I'll need to research if maybe they helped, or supplied a specific part.

     

    Ford also is also interested in Torotrak (Torotrak.com), it's a IVT. I prefer the IVT design over CVT since it has less limitations, such as weight limitations.
  • contracoffincontracoffin Member Posts: 2
    Is anyone else out there tall and as outraged as I by all the hype about interior space in this vehicle has ONLY 37.5 inches of head room?? Most of these designers seem to be under the impression that looking straight ahead at the visor will add untold joy to our driving experience. Do they think people are getting shorter? (in fact statistics show the opposite) Do they think there is a glass shortage and they can't spare a few more additional inches of glass on the top side of the windshield. UNREAL!!! Why this flagrant disregard for the customer?
  • nedc2nedc2 Member Posts: 192
    What????

     

    Try 39.4" front headroom and 38.7"" rear, which is class leading rear headromm by the way.
  • pegasus17pegasus17 Member Posts: 536
    I looked at a few 500's last night and noticed that Germany was the source for the CVT transmission per the vehicle contents label on the side of the car opposite the MSRP sticker. Not sure how that jives with the Batavia, OH plant? Also, what is the deal with the wipers? No metal frames; all one piece; seems chintzy...
  • jmingjming Member Posts: 9
    I'll add that I am really disappointed in the legroom available in the Montego. I am 6'5" and so am always interested in larger cars. I too had heard all the hype about the "gigantic" interior and on a recent dealer visit I sat in the Montego. Despite rolling the seat ALL the way back, the legroom was totally inadequate - similar to the Toyota Corolla which is our other car. I drive a 2003 Mountaineer and can be much more comfortable even without the seat all the way back. I think if FoMoCo had allowed about 2 more inches of seat travel, it would be fine. I would be very worried about leg / knee injuries if I had a collision driving a Montego. No sale.
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    They use similar wipers on the Land Rover LR3. This is new technology that has the additional benefit of not requiring changing to winter wiper blades in areas that get snow.
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Coppamc,

     

    While it's assembled in Batavia, the majority of the contents are from Germany. Originally the first CVT producing plant for Ford was over in europe and has been in place in a number of vehicles to date.
  • rfdixonrfdixon Member Posts: 1
    I've owned a Five Hundred SEL since November 12th and your decision to wait for more power is a good one.

    RFDx
  • gussguss Member Posts: 1,167
    I agree, I am 6'6 and thought this would be the perfect vehicle for me with the large cabin and Suv type seating. Wrong , the legroom was the killer . Headroom seamed pretty good though.

       

     Funny thing was , I then sat in the '05 Focus while I was there. I think it had more head and legroom. Go figure.
  • felixc1976felixc1976 Member Posts: 31
    Does anybody know what kind of updates will be available for 2006 500/Montego?
  • frasierdogfrasierdog Member Posts: 128
    Since we are on the topic of engines ...

     

    Would you please compare the upcoming Ford 3.5 VVT with the new Chevy 3.5 & 3.9 VVT engines.

     

    Any differences in technology?
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    You mean the 3.5L (LX9) found in the Malibu, Impala, Minivan trio, G6, etc ? Along with it's older brother 3.9L, that used to be 3.8L last year?

     

    Of the 3.5L I-5 Vortec (L52) that's found in the Colorado ?
  • frasierdogfrasierdog Member Posts: 128
    Forget the 3.5 it will not be VVT.

     

    The NEW 3.9L to be used in the 2006 Impala and 2006 Monte will have VVT.

     

    Do you know how the 3.9L will compare to the Ford 3.5L with VVT in terms of technology?
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    As different as night and day, mainly because the 3.9L (previous 3.8L) is an OHV design. In fact, I believe the original design of that engine dates back a few decades and older than I am In current form, it first debuted in 1980 as a 2.8L, then later grew in time.

     

    It's smaller brother (which I mentioned previously) is the 3.5L LX9, which was originally a 3.4L which has now been increased, which itself stems from the 3.1L from long ago.

     

    OHV and OHC are quite different in how they make use of their power. While every other manufacturer switched to OHC designed engines, GM stubbornly stuck to OHV and has been blasted for doing so. Personally, if they would have switched to OHC design over a decade ago, they wouldn't require constant tweaking through-out the year. To it's benefit, GM has been able to cut costs since OHV engines are cheaper to produce, and the engineering behind it has been amortisized.

     

    The argument previously was that OHV engines were able to produce the majority of their torque at lower RPM's than OHC counterparts... Only for a few years though. Ford showed that with OHC engines, it was able to do the same. Ford's 5.4L OHC V8 was able to produce more torque, and at lower RPM's than Gm's Vortec 5.3L OHV V8.

     

    Plus with such technologies as VVT, OHC engines have started to excel is producing more torque at lower RPM's. OHC design engines allow the engine to rev higher, and much quicker, over OHV engines...and sound much better as well. Which is why many of GM's 3.4L, 3.8L can run out of breathe at higher RPM's. Of course, GM tailors the transmission to downshift a gear to attain power, tradeoff- you lose acceleration time/momentum between shifts. Having a reserve of power without the transmission needed to downshift, is always helpful. (Which is where CVT's tend to excel in, but we won't go there).

     

    In it's defense, since the engines have been around so long, it's one of GM's more reliable units. Because of EPA issues, many manufacturer's ditched OHV design engines even (Ford own 5.0L OHV V8 regarded as one of the best produced) because it would cost more to tweak them through-out the years, rather than starting with a fresh OHC design, which was GM's roll.

     

    Unfortunately for GM, they do not even have a name for this family of engines. This evident in their website where they have "Vortec, Ecotec, Duramax, Global V6"...and this family of engines has been listed as "OTHER". Considering it's in the majority of their products you would think they would have named it...

     

    The 3.9L gains Variable Length intake manifold. Which is another method of VVT as we all know it. Considering it's OHV design, it's harder for that design to accept a variation of VVT, over a OHC engine. Just as it's more difficult to intergrate a cylinder deactivation (DOD) technology on an OHC engine because of the size constraints above the engine. Therefore you have trade-offs all along.

     

    Now between GM's 3.9L, and Ford 3.5L as I mentioned, it's totally a world of difference between them both. In fact a bit too easy since the Duratec35 will be quieter, smoother, produce less emissions, lighter, better NVH, breathe better at higher RPM's, rev quicker.

     

    It will be interesting when the GM/Ford Transmission joint venture takes place since both engines will use the same transmission. Granted, the transmission can be programmed to snap shifts quicker, softer, etc. depending upon each vehicle application.

     

    I think the GM engine we should compare the Duratec35 with, is the new global 3.6L V6 found in the CTS and new Buicks. In terms of design, efficiency, NVH, they are both similar in many ways.
  • frasierdogfrasierdog Member Posts: 128
    Thank you for the info.

     

    " I think the GM engine we should compare the Duratec35 with, is the new global 3.6L V6 .."

     

    Please do ...
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Their objective is the same, each has their own way of being constructed, and tuned according to the applications.

     

    The Duratec35 block is built from Aluminum high-pressure diecast, deep-shirt cylinder block, while the GM is sand-casted aluminum with cast-in iron bore liners.

     

    Duratec's heads are aluminum alloy with aluminum cam covers, while GM uses cast aluminum.

     

    Duratecs valves are direct bucket which is mechanical, with continuously variable cam timing. Gm's is a roller follower with hydraulic lash adjusters.

     

    Duratec will feature sequential "multiport" fuel injection, while GM makes due with sequential fuel injection.

     

    Both have forged steel crankshafts.

     

    Most importantly, the Duratec35 isn't just an increased version of the Duratec30, it shared very little with it. Also the fact that the Lima engine plant has received major investment to allow for flexible manufacturing to produce this engine.
  • garandmangarandman Member Posts: 524
    The main advantage I see of the 500/Montego over Taurus/Sable is safety and AWD. The taurus has never had good side impact protection (3 stars) wheras the competition (Accord/Camry) which was originally behind when it came to safety, has since surpassed Taurus in that department too.

     

    The Taurus was rated as a "Large" car against other mid-size cars. The Accord and Camry are rated as "Mid-Size" cars. The Scion tC, for example, is not a safer car than a big car with fewer stars - it's just safer compared to other roller skates.

    http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl_4dr.htm
  • frasierdogfrasierdog Member Posts: 128
    Please explain this ...

     

    "Duratec will feature sequential "multiport" fuel injection, while GM makes due with sequential fuel injection. "

     

    Please compare the torque curves and the efficiencies?
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    I don't have torque curves available for GM's to make that comparison, and too early for the Duratec35 to give you an idea. But I'm expecting about 80% of torque available at 1500RPM.

     

    The Duratec35 will also have various states of tune, it'll also be used in the Fusion ST with around 270HP as one example. While in the Aviator, you might see it tuned to produce more torque since it's a heavier vehicle. The Aviator will receive the engine first-unless things change at the last minute.
  • avenger1avenger1 Member Posts: 90
    The new Saturn aura which has just been announced a few days ago is basically a rebadged Opel Astra/Vectra. Part of the package is the new 6 speed transmission (GM/Ford) and a V6 (250-horsepower 3.6L DOHC V-6 engine with variable valve timing). Ant, I have a few questions...

     

    How does the new 6 speed differ from the current 6sp in the 500, and why switch when one was just made before the other?

     

    Is there any reliability info on Opels for those of us on this side of the pond that may not have heard of this make?

     

    Which engine is this? Is it the Honda V6 used in the Vue? Is this the unit you described above (old school design)?

     

    I think it is interesting that many domestics are importing or re-engineering euro brands to compete (Holden Monaco = Pontiac GTO, S80 platform = 500, Opel Astra = Saturn Aura).
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    The Saturn Aura is styled like the Opel Astra, but the platform also underpins the Malibu, G6, and Saab 9-3.

     

    The 3.6L in the Aura is a version of GM's best V6, the same on in the Cadillac SRX, CTS, STS, and now the Buick LaCrosse. It is an excellent engine, far better than the 3.5L in the Malibu. Interesting the wide variation of engines that are used in that platform.

     

    Back to the Five Hundred. What are thoughts on the competing Avalon? An XL no options is $26,800. Standard dual zone auto climate, 280 hp, ABS, side curtains and chest airbag, power windows mirrors locks drivers seat, tilt telescope wheel, electroluminescent gauges, active head restraints, reclining rear seat. BUT. Only 14.5 cubic foot trunk, and 16 inch wheels on the XL.

     

    ~alpha
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,255
    last opel to be imported = catera. i think it just depends where the manufacturer wants to put their development money.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • fdcapt2fdcapt2 Member Posts: 122
    I'd rather have the Avalon with less trunk, but better in every other aspect. Trunks don't make a car handle better.
  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    I am more than certain that 500 handles better than Avalon. So trunk does make a car handle better :)
  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    LuK is suppling the chain used in the CVT. They also supply the chain used by Audi in their CVT.

     

    Appearently this is the piece that is rising in price with the Euro and causing the CVT to be more expensive than was anticipated.

     

    Mark
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    And as the CVT is more expensive than anticipated, will we see it disappear quietly into the good night?
  • samnoesamnoe Member Posts: 731
    Alpha? If I read good on the new Avalon board, the XL will NOT offer side curtain airbags? Am I right or not?

     

    And no heated mirrors, no command seating, AWD, and larger trunk. Fuel economy also remains to be seen.
  • samnoesamnoe Member Posts: 731
    Interesting... As someone stated above, it's beyond our knowledge why Ford is doing that in the time they can not supply the demand for real consumers.
  • ANT14ANT14 Member Posts: 2,687
    Avenger,

     

    GM's 3.6L DOHC is a new designed, of an improved/enlargened 3.2L which was in the CTS. It's modern, in comparison to the OHV engines designed decades ago.

     

    TO answer your question as to...

     

    "How does the new 6 speed differ from the current 6sp in the 500, and why switch when one was just made before the other?"

     

    The current 6 Speed unit is supplied by Aisin, which is a Toyota owned subsidiary supplier. Last I remember, Toyota owns somewhere around 46%, although they keep increasing the stakes everytime I check.

     

    The 6 speed automatic transmission is an improved version of their 5 speed auto supplied to other manufacturer's.

     

    Even if Ford and GM have the joint transmission program taking place, Ford wanted bragging rights of using the first 6 speed automatic in the segment, and helps acceleration over a 5 speed unit.

     

    By Ford/GM designing their own, they cut costs. And improve quality/reliability moreso.

     

    John,

     

    They have invested quite a bit in CVT's, they won't be abandoning, but you might see they build their own chains, over the European supplied ones.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Samnoe, I think you may be confused a bit. ALL Avalons have side chest and side curtain airbags STANDARD. What is in debate, as it is unclear from the prelim literature... is whether the XL will offer VSC as an option (Ford's approach to stability control availability seems to have rubbed off on Toyota, perhaps).

     

    "Command Seating"? What does that mean? Thats a marketing fabrication for a rear seat thats elevated slightly. So what? Do the Five Hundred/Montego rear seats adjust for rake? Prelim fuel economy on the Avalon is rated 22/31. Thats darn good given the power specifications.

     

    And someone mentioned the Five Hundred would outhandle the Avalon? That remains to be seen, and the Touring edition of the Avalon offers enough suspension upgrades to make me believe that model, at least, would be the equal of the Fords. More balanced handling was one of the first comments out of the presenter's mouth at the intro of the Avalon- it clearly left room for improvement on the last gen, so Id expect to see it.

     

    ~alpha
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Command seating is NOT about the rear seat. You are thinking theater seating. Command seating has to do with ALL the seats setting up higher, so that the H point is higher, and the driver (and passengers) feel in command of the road.
    (besides, back seat passengers seldom get to issue commands, rather--they follow them!)

     

    It is NOT just a marketing concept. Drive the car for quite some time. You will see it for yourself.
  • spartanmannspartanmann Member Posts: 197
    The new Ford Passat seems to be a very good vehicle based on all of the discussions here. But after waiting 19 years to replace the Taurus, shouldn't head turning styling and class leading power and performance be provided? This car will impress Taurus/Sable owners, but how many Accord or Camry buyers will consider switching. Ford just doesn't seem to want to make the extra effort be a class leader - except for the crown jewel F-150. Very strange approach.
This discussion has been closed.