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
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
IIHS reported that the Ford Fusion was a death trap, so I wouldn't recommend that car to anyone! So I suppose I'd rather be in a Honda Civic, which IIHS rated Gold, rather than a Fusion! Jetter can keep that piece of %^&*!:lemon:
I find it funny that when I am on a Ford forum, people say VW= :lemon: , then when I am on a VW forum they say Ford= :lemon: . I guess I should buy a Toyota...oh wait they have transmission problems now.
Civic was rated gold, but is in small car category because it is a much lighter car. It is about 500 pounds less than the Jetta...so its frontal crash test is certainly not comparable to the 500s and also not even comparable to Jetta's. Side crash test results of Civic were not as good as Jettas, but were pretty comparable to the 500.
Here is a driver death rate report from IIHS. As you say, on average, larger cars are safer...but as you can see some smaller cars were quite safe. The old version of the Jetta had lower death rate than a Taurus as did the Civic.
The new version of Jetta is more like the size of the Passat, which had one of the lowest death rates. This was some of the other data that led me to believe that VW was doing a good job on safety.
The most disappointing thing is, it seems like there is a general trend that american makes are less safe than foreign based on these death rate stats.
http://www.iihs.org/news/2005/iihs_sr_031505.pdf
They've had them before, too. Can you say Camry? Sure ya can. :P
Standardized crash tests may be important, but it is also important not to dwell on slight differences between vehicles as the test is just one data point, and even then it is only one test of one sample as well.
I always get a chuckle out of those who post in one sentence that they want the safest vehicle available, then they also want that vehicle to go 0-60 in 6.5 or 7.0 seconds as 8.0 or 8.5 seconds is just to slow. Seems the priorities are a bit inconsistant to me.
I will definitely consider a VW Passat based on the info from the Status Report, though it could be very pricey. The Value Edition would be my choice. The passenger volume equals only 96 cubic feet is its only setback for my taste.
I also like the int/ext design on both Ford Five Hundred and the Passat. With a VW designer and Volvo underpinnings, gives me good feelings about the Five Hundred would be an excellent family car. Bigger and cheaper than the Passat might make it the better deal. :surprise:
Where the 500 really shines over the Passat is in trunk room. However, a lot of people find 13 to 16 cubic feet more than adequate...it depends on your needs. With the 500, you will be driving a vehicle that is a foot longer, so that may be a consideration too.
Cheaper is also relative. Passats hold their value very well. However, if you are going to keep the car 10 years, who cares?
For example, no matter how safely designed a car is, if it attracts mostly "street racer buyers" or younger drivers, no matter how safely the car is designed, it will not look good in this study simply because the majority of drivers of that particular vehicle are risky drivers and will push up the death rates.
Still the most critical safety variable of any vehicle is the human behind the wheel.
Between 1998 and 2003 I owned a Passat, a Golf and an Audi TT. Not one problem with any of them, and I still have the diesel Golf. Was very pleased with all of them. The 1999 Passat wagon was a real gem. Nothing at that time at that price could touch it for features and quality of the interior.
BTW, I've had good luck with Fords too.
They did adjust for this to some extent. The text of that report idicated the figures were adjusted based on the percentage of female drivers.
The old Jetta certainly attracted a younger set of drivers than the taurus, yet death rates were about the same...slightly lower for the much smaller Jetta actually. Ford hired a VW designer...perhaps they should recruit some of their safety folks as well .
I checked out a new Passat last week, and although I'm not nuts about the new styling, the interior makes the one in the 500 look like rental city.
Has anyone else shared a similar experience with this car?
Have any of you tried to hook up some sort of Aux Input Jack to your factory radio to plug an MP3 player into? On
http://www.fordaccessoriesstore.com/fas/b2c/featured_accessories.asp?id=25
they have something called TripTunes but that supposedly won't fit the 500's radio. Or will it?
Thanks...
http://logjamelectronics.com/piefrd04aux.html
With that, your AUX button on the radio will activate the AUX-In you just created.
NOTE: This assumes you have one of the radios that has an AUX button on it. It also assumes that you do NOT have a Rear Seat Entertainment System installed.
This device is a great way to hook up your Ipod and CONTROL it:
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Harman-Kardon-Drive-Play-DP1US-/sem/rpsm/oid/1336- 14/catOid/-12927/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do
But you still need the PIE adapter shown above.
I recommend having the door replaced. I did. And it's fine.
Are there any differences between the 2005 vs. 2006 model years?
Thanks!
Navigation systems became an option (not available before).
And one other thing, which I can't remember at the moment.
The big changes are to come in a bit less than a year now, for model year 08 (new Six Speed transmission, new 3.5 engine (optional or standard?) and probably dropping of the CVT, new front grille resembling the Fusion, new rear styling and satellite radio becomes a factory option).
I hope the gas mileage can come close to the 2007 Camry MPG (city 40/highway 38). Anything lower than an averaged MPG than 30 I would go with the Camry. The 2006 Honda Accord Hybrid MPGs 25 city/34 highway is a joke! Why did Honda even bother? :lemon:
Anyone know when the Five Hundred Hybrid is expected to be out? :shades:
Second generation Hybrid will include Fusion/Milan/Escape/Tribute/Mariner, while Third generation will include Edge/500/Montego. Edge to receive the 3rd generation first.
Of course, this is "NOW"... I wouldn't be surprised if along the way one of the vehicles Hybrid option is dropped if it doesn't have enough taker (example: 500 Keeps it, Montego loses it..or Escape keeps it, Mariner kills it).
Or if things coincide, they could possibly skip 2nd generation and run into the 3rd provided that suppliers are able to ramp up production.
Hopefully the battery won't diminish the room inside TOO much.
I understand that the handling is better, but is AWD necessarily safer than FWD? I live in Alabama, where there is little ice, but a lot of rain. Is there an appreciable difference?
Any feedback/weblinks with more info would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Navigation systems became an option (not available before).
And one other thing, which I can't remember at the moment.
The big changes are to come in a bit less than a year now, for model year 08 (new Six Speed transmission, new 3.5 engine (optional or standard?) and probably dropping of the CVT, new front grille resembling the Fusion, new rear styling and satellite radio becomes a factory option).
I understand the the 2007 model will be hitting the dealer lots very soon.
Are there any differences between the 2006 and 2007 Ford 500? I am not interested in the 2008 model which will have a new engine along with cosmetic changes.
Thanks!
In Alabama, you hardly know what winter is. You probably haven't honed your driving skills on ice, but most people down there stay home at the hint of icy roads right?
AWD will not help you stop any better, and that is the feature you usually rely on to avoid accidents.
I have the AWD on my Five Hundred. I mainly got it to ensure that I got a CVT. But I also got it on my Freestyle (bought before my Five Hundred). Whether it's worth the extra 2 grand, 200 lbs, and reduced gas mileage is somewhat debatable. For me, it was. But I can certainly understand why others would say it's not.
So, it sounds like I would have little need for the AWD (and can thereby save some $$).
I've had AWD on my Honda CRV, but I doubt I've had much need for it with that vehicle either.
Ford has a great dealer search feature on their web site for specific configurations you are looking for.
CVT doesn't matter that much to me... I kind of lean toward the Mercury Montego stying vs the Ford Five Hundred, and with the Montego it looks like you can only get CVT with AWD.
7o,ooo happy miles so far....
And waiting patiently for the o8's...and no repairs at all to date!