Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
This gets us to 2003, where you now find SUV's becoming more car-like, crossovers like Pacifica, Matrix and Vibe. Suddenly, the US car companies are realizing that in the past ten to fifteen years they had basically ceded the car business to the Japanese and Europeans, especially so at GM.
The days are getting interesting...and the Crown Vic and GM continue to soldier on, years after their predicted demise. We should salute Ford Motor Company for continuing the CV/GM after General Motors dropped the Caprice/Impala in order to use the plant where they had been made to make more SUV's, which brought GM much more profit per unit! On the other hand, if it weren't for the huge fleet sales to police, cab companies and commercial fleets, and the very high profit on the Town Cars, the CV/GM/LTC sedans would have been gone long ago. Too bad Ford didn't also save the large station wagon. I bet a lot of potential sales are out there, especially to those who would rather have a car than a minivan.
Sidenote- GM still offered a 350 through '81 in the Z-28, automatic only in U.S models.
Canadian models still could be equipped with a 4 speed!!
Good point. Sufficient demand for full size/RWD/V-8 still exists. Ford has even expanded its full size offerings by bringing back the Maruader.
I think the Ford did 0-60 in around 13 seconds, while the Chevy was more like low 15's and the Dodge was pushing 16!
As for rear-ends, I don't know what this particular Ford had, but I think a 2.73:1 was pretty common. 2.56:1 was a popular Chevy rear-end back then, and Mopar was sticking mainly 2.45:1 rears behind most of their V-8's. I know in the case of Chrysler, they changed first and second gear in the trannies to compensate for the taller rear-end, but I don't know if Ford and Chevy did the same thing.
Ford did offer a few other rear ends, such as a 3.08:1 and for higher performance they'd switch up between a 3.27:1 or a 3.55:1. Sometimes the quicker rear-end would actually help mileage, in mixed driving. I have an 1985 Consumer Guide new car reference, and they tested an '85 Crown Vic with the handling package (3.55:1 rear, dual exhaust, limited slip) and an '85 Grand Marquis with just a 3.08:1. They got an average of 17.1 mpg out of the Ford, and only 13.9 out of the Merc!
Just for comparison, in that timeframe, the big Chevy/Pontiacs were using 2.56:1 and Buick/Olds, 2.73:1. The only thing Chrysler had left by that time was the Diplomat/Gran Fury/Fifth Ave, essentially a Volare trying to pass for a full-size. They weighed almost as much as the truly big cars, and were stuck with 2.24:1 rears! How they got out of their own way, I'll never know!
Today's Crown Vics and Grand Marquis are at least as sturdy and safe as an 85 Marquis. Or Grand Marquis for that matter.
Many have pointed out here that the mid size LTD and Marquis were fox-based Fords. If you have one, crawl under that sucker. Follow the "frame" from the back end of the car all the way to the front bumper. Guess what? You can't. It doesn't have a full frame. It's "uni-body" (read cheap) construction.
Apples and oranges here folks...
More like apples to office furniture....
FWIW, my 1995 Thunderbird (which I named Patsy) has heavy duty steel bumpers. I learned that the hard way bouncing her off a guardrail, and she lived to tell about it. You can't see the bumpers, because they are hidden behind a plastic fascia, but they are there, and when you need them, you'll kneel down and thank God (or whatever supreme being you beleive in) that they were there. And they work just as well as the old, chrome covered bumpers of the old days. You get more cosmetic damage on the plastic fascia, but the car itself holds up just as well. You know what else? Patsy's also got dual air bags. Driver and passenger. Old fashioned steel bumpers and airbags both. And when you really think about it, airbags and bumpers do different things. Bumpers are the car's suit of armor. The protect the functional parts of the car by posing a hard, impenetrable barrier to delicate stuff such as radiators and gas tanks. (Why do you think you have to be running 70 or 80 when you rear end a Crown Vic to make the gas tank explode. 20 or 30 would be more than enough without bumpers!) Air bags, on the other hand, keep the driver from impaling him- or her- self on the steering column. Bumpers are to protect the car, air bags the driver.
One more thing...Not all cars have metal bumpers. My grandmother's '92 Bonneville has a similar setup to my T-Bird- a plastic fascia with the real bumper behind it. Except where the real bumper is cold, hard steel on my T-Bird, it's fiberglass on my Grandma's Bonneville. I think GM is secretly a division of Rubbermaid or Tupperware, the amount of plastic in their cars! Seeing how that Bonneville was built has forever turned me off to GM cars, despite the 100,000 relatively trouble-free miles the car has given. Fords are built much tougher, and I feel much safer in a full-sized Ford than I do in a comperable GM product.
I think it was 1994 or so that dual air bags were finally required. Interestingly, the GM air bags that they offered on a few Olds, Buick, and Caddy models in the '70's was a dual system, and only cost about $300 as an option. For comparison, fuel injection on a Cadillac was something like $500 back then!
As for comparing a modern Grand Marquis to an '85 Grand Marquis, I'm sure the new one is even safer, thanks mainly to the air bags and the "softer" bumpers. In 1985 I believe they still had a 5 mph standard for bumpers, so at very low impacts, an '85 might sustain less damage than a new one, but at higher speeds, the newer one will protect the occupants better.
They always were fairly safe cars, though. I believe big Fords from '79 on up were rated better for safety than the big GM and Mopar products.
I have seen ABS and traction control listed separately on cars from other manufacturers, though. I believe it usually went for $600 for the ABS, and then if you got traction control it was another $150 over that.
John, I think you summarized the SUV era as well as I've seen. (# 1774) And it appears to be heading full circle - back to the form of the family station wagon.
I can name a few PROs of the WAGON:
- the wagon seats 6 AND has a large cargo area without reconfiguation or jumping over seat rows.
- less of the SUV bounce/jiggle
- safer on the hwy, (lower center of gravity)
- I would guess better MPG than SUVs (less wind resistence)
Sure, many will always see the family wagon as "uncool" or not having enough "style, just as many say the same thing about the CV/GM.
But my guess is that SUVs will have peaked out in 2003, and that the American car makers better face the foreign competition better in the CAR market to prevent further overall market share loss. (I know GM had a small fractional gain last year).
http://www.cars.com/news/stories/012103_storya_ap.jhtml?aff=natio- nal
That's OK, I still like it and knew it wasn't going to make it in the next Emimem video when I bought it.
It sounds like yours has many good years on it.
there's many knowledgeable folks that should be able to help you out.
Well, alright then. Its hard,even by European standards,but don't be put off by that.Do try one for yourself,for an extended period,and if you can live with the ride,the other fine qualities of the re-design are very rewarding.Kind regards.
Excellent living-room sized seats with 8-way power plus lumbar on the front, adjustable pedals, very good road noise isolation, hugs the road nicely, soft on the bumps.
However, there are other things that left me scratching my head. The engine which has more torque and power felt rather weak. My 4x4 passport which is heavier can jump off the line with ease and with no sign of srain. The steering becomes numb and rubbery at about 80 mph and I had a hard time keeping the car inside my lane. In contrast, I can point and shot with pinpoint accuracy in my passport at 80 mph. And I thought their biggest improvement was the steering.
That LS Premium might have been stuck with fairly tall gearing, which would have kept it from taking off very fast off from a standstill. One one hand, you have peak torque coming on fairly high, which means the engine has to rev to get there, but then you have tall gearing keeping the engine revs down.
I dunno about the steering though. Maybe they still take out the road feel on purpose, because they think that's what the typical big Ford/Merc buyer wants?
I can also easily nudge the car a couple of inches left or right at high speed to avoid a pothole or other wandering sleepy drivers. I can't do it in the GM.
Because of these, i have a second thought about the GM.
Drmp, have you checked out the Marauder ?
The closest reference I can think of is the Michigan State Police test of a police-spec Crown Vic. I think it did 0-60 in about 9.3 seconds, which was in range with the police spec Impala and Intrepid. Keep in mind though, police cars tend to be built more for top speed, and the heavier-duty components add weight and offset power increases. They also test them with two officers on board.
One thing though, a car like a Grand Marquis probably isn't going to feel all that quick off the line, especially with standard tall gearing. I've just noticed that big cars in general don't feel like they're going all that fast, until you look down at the speedo and say "DAY-UMM!!" With smaller cars with engines that rev more, they feel like they're going fast, even when they're not!
About the only personal experience I have with GM acceleration is this...a buddy of mine has a '95 GS with the 195 hp V-8 and 2.73:1 gearing. I raced him one night in my '89 Gran Fury ex-police car, and he couldn't keep up. 20 less horsepower, 1 less tranny gear, but 2.94:1 rear gearing and about 400-500 lb less weight.
I'm sure with an extra 30 hp on tap though, the newest ones should be noticeably quicker.
Thx
I am the original owner of a 97 GM and still love it after 5 1/2 years.
Last April, the intake manifold failed. I became aware of the extended warranty for some but not all of the Fords that have the 4.6 and grouched to Ford, but to no avail. To the retired attorney who planned on pursuing Ford over this: how are you coming along? any luck? Thanks again to all.
Good Luck.
The SUV advantages were - it rode high for a good view and everyone in the neighborhood owns at least 1 SUV and for those 5 days a year there is more snow than salt on the road, you get better traction.
The GM advantages were - it has an easy to read electronic instramentaion panel, rides with less hwy bounce, and I wouldn't have to succumb to the neighborhood/national SUV craze.
Now none of the above were strong enough to make a final vote.
The final vote that carried the decision was SAFETY. Early in my Edmunds research, I eliminated the 3rd row seat if I DID get the SUV. There's nothing safe about that seat located inches in front of the back glass and rear bumper. The kids loved it, it was like a little hidden club back there for them. But I wasn't going to stress out at every stopped light when I had someone sitting back there.
Of course, the other big SAFETY fear I had was ROLLOVER. Dr. Jeffrey Runge, the NHTSA administrator, said rollovers account for more than half of SUV fatalities.
So why am I posting this ? Well I just got done reading some posts and SUV links to TIME, James R. Heale, USA Today, and so-on about how unsafe SUVs are and I would bet there will be more data to come that will back this up even more. And as I get commments about driving a grandpa mobile, I'll just smile and enjoy as the great marketing of SUVs takes a few shots.
I still like the SUV I almost bought, but ... IMO, I am driving one of the safest vehicles on the road with as many creature features as I've seen on ANY vehicle !
http://www.mercola.com/2002/mar/13/car_seats.htm
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030224-42346- - - 4,00.html
justreading "I don't like SUVs, why do you?" Feb 16, 2003 1:24pm
The side impact was only 4 STARS, but if eqquiped with side airbags, I don't see how there is a safer VEHICLE on the road right now ?
And please, no need to include the 60 MPH crash into the back-end on the hwy issue. (If I was pulling over 3-5 drivers a day on the hwy, that would concern me, but most people don't)
As far as a redesign?
Don't expect one anytime soon. The same basic platform goes back to '79, although with significant improvements over the years, especially the 2003's. Personal speculation, but I think the Mercury Montego and Ford 500 will end up replacing the Grand Marquis and Crown Victoria. I think the Grand Marquis and Crown Victoria nameplates have become too associated with "old people" cars to be viable in the marketplace, and the Taurus will probably never recover from the radioactive catfish design of '96, so Ford is hoping that one car, splitting the difference between the Taurus and the Crown Vic, will correct two of their marketing mistakes, make them more competitive in the family sedan market, and reduce the number of car models they have to make. Much as they hoped to replace both the Contour and Escort with the Focus on the small car end of the market. If Ford has ceased production on the Contour and Escort, I missed that notice, but replacing them with the Focus was the original plan. I wouldn't be surprised if Ford is doing the same thing with the 500.
As an aside, such a tactic worked for Jaguar in the '60's, when they replaced a small, medium, and large sized sedan with a single midsize car, the XJ6. Now, ironically, they're going the opposite way, having come out with a midsize S-Type, a small X-Type, and moving the XJ up to the big end of the spectrum with the 2004's.
version of the LS and may not fit our standard-sized garage. Have to check that and other differences to the LS model.
Will appreciate any input on these two cars from you.
Is this "ticking" accompanied by any sort of bucking sensation. My 94 GM started some mild bucking on hard acceleration when warm at around 60,000 miles. If I remember right, there was a ticking sound, too. Problem was found to be ignition wires. Replacing them solved the problem. At 110,000 miles, I had a similar problem, although it was more prevalent when cold. It was found to be the ignition wires again. Hope this helps.
For what ever reason, I never shopped the CV-LX, so I can't offer comparisons of the 2.
I believe all 3 are reliable, safe, and a great value now as they are all being discounted because they're not cool and not AWD.
But since I'm looking at the interior of the car 95% of the time, I was sold on the Ultimate as I like the interior a lot ! Especially the instramentation panel, steering wheel, and roomy leather seats.
Let me know what you thought of the CV after you drive it. Also, what are the rebates on the 2 ?
Your ticking under load is just pinging from pre-ignition of the fuel in the cylinders. I had the exact same problem in my 95 CV with the engine check lamp ultimately coming on after many months of pinging. Well, it turned out that a Mass Air Sensor located on the air filter housing needed changing. After changing it, the car runs quiet and smooth with all fuel types. I hope this helps.
Ron
BTW, for what-it's-worth for anyone interested, read the Feburary 2003 Consumers Report issue "Cruising For Comfort" on the Toyota Avalon, Buick Park Avenue, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis. The Grand Marquis was rated by CR at the BOTTIM of thisgroup and CR's comments on the GM has given us some second thoughts on buying this car after our initial impressions of the car.
CR's comments and rating on the Lincoln Town Car has also influenced our thoughts on this car. The Executive model of the Town Car line was the one I drove, also in a limited course near the dealership.
The wife doesn't want us to buy the Toyota Avalon, which was rated at the top by CR, and sitting behind the wheel during a short test drive, I found its comfort level not up to par with the TC Executive nor the Mercury GM Ultimate Edition. Comfort is a major feature that both of us want , as well as reliability and some other major features.
Today we're looking-at / test-driving the Buick Park Avenue base model and Park Avenue Ultra. This would be something like a $10,000 step-up in price, but with mfg. incentives and the wife's Honeywell General Motors or Ford discount offered at her job, we might be able to live with the bottom line. The Park Avenue is longer than the GM LS Ultimate Edition, so we'll be measuring our standard-sized garage to see if it'll fit.
Will get back to the Town Hall soon. Would like to hear from others about the Grand Marquis and other big-'an-comfy easy-riding new cars they've driven or bought .