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

Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis

1…4445474950…61

Comments

  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    stretched? They need to widen them, not stretch them. The back seat and trunk of the Five Hundred/Montego is far longer lengthwise than the Panther cars...
  • jsylvesterjsylvester Member Posts: 572
    Sales were down November to November, but GM sales are down 3.8% for the year. Hard to say why November sales changed so much - maybe fleet purchases in 2003 or something.

    2004 YTD, the Grand Marquis still makes up 25% of the sales for the Lincoln-Mercury division, with little advertising.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    ...and probably at least 25 percent of Mercury profits. These vehicles were amortized years ago and are both very profitable for Ford Motor Company and a very good buy for the consumer who intends to own the vehicle for a very long time.

    Depreciation is terrible, but repair costs are low. V8, body on frame, reasonably priced. There simply is NO competition.

    I own a Five Hundred myself, and for lots of reasons. But there is MUCH to like about the Panther cars! Don't forget to add in the Town Car, which is mechanically very similar...
  • jrc346jrc346 Member Posts: 337
    I think this time next year there will be a refreshened Crown Vic and GM for 2006. They will most likely be getting the 3V 4.6 and the new 6-speed auto transmission. There have also been a few rumors about a larger engine. However, with higher horsepower ratings form the 3V motor, and with the 6-speed auto transmission, I don't think power will be coming up short.

    The CV is not going anywhere for a while. If Ford decides to stop selling it to the general public (highly unlikely) then it will become a fleet only vehicle.
  • corsicachevycorsicachevy Member Posts: 316
    What would even be better than the 3V 4.6 would be the 3V 5.4 from the F150. Ford, with an eye toward fuel economy, could de-tune the engine to about 280hp, but maintain the +350 lb-ft of torque. The added twist would make everyone happy - especially the police.
  • ehaaseehaase Member Posts: 328
    The reliable insiders at the other message boards I read say that plans for restyling the CV/GM have been cancelled. I wish that Ford would have utilized the DEW98 platform much more. I would think that costs would drop if the platform had been more fully leveraged.
  • harmar2harmar2 Member Posts: 36
    The Detroit News reported very recently that FoMoCo does not like the fact that a very high percentage of its CV/GM buyers are 60+ years-old. And that it has made the decision NOT to increase fleet sales (which are being held at 15% now), but no explanation for that was given.

    I haven't seen figures on how often various age groups replace a car, but it would seem to make sense that older drivers put on fewer miles per year and would keep them longer. FoMoCo probably wants to appeal to a younger age bracket that drives more and replaces more often. Why, then, you ask, don't ads for these models target a younger crowd? I dunno! My profession is psychology, not marketing!

    A buddy, retired from FoMoCo, tells me that profit is still there for these models, because costs have been depreciated out and only cosmetic changes are being made.

    The same Detroit News issue (I believe) carried a story that FoMoCo is thinking seriously of stopping sales of these models to law enforcement agencies. Those rear end collision fires and suits by some states have spooked company lawyers.

    A large mix is at work here, not just one factor. I've got another 50,000 - 75,000 to put on mine before looking for a new one. If the CV/GM die, the Kia Amanti looks mighty tempting.

    Maybe with the fattening US population trend, CV/GM models will again become necessary? ;]
  • danielj6danielj6 Member Posts: 285
    Fords' large cars continue to be a great value but car manufacturers, and FOMOCO is no exception,
    are forced to build what sells. Despite the sharp rise in gasoline prices people are still buying large SUV's.

    At least two issues become evident here: The perception of fashion and superiority in being seen driving a trendy gas guzzling SUV and the issue of safety (partly true due to their sheer size). A fashion statement and a somewhat skewed sense of safety vis a vis high insurance bills and gas consumption.

    Instead, CV/GM offer safety, comfort, power in one package at a reasonable price. In general, people go for instant gratification instead of sensible choices. Being seen driving an SUV, and a high end European sedan provides certain gratification to the ego that Ford's large sedans do not. To some, their cars are extensions of the self.

    My two cents.
  • jsylvesterjsylvester Member Posts: 572
    People aged 60+ have more wealth than any other age group, and the Ford Panther platform buyers are some of the most loyal in the market - many trade every 2-4 years, regardless of miles.

    My opinion is Ford is run by those who do not understand the customer for this car. They seem to think that the demand for this car is dying off, not that people's tastes change as they age. I guess Nasser promoted self-concious yuppie-types into management that they are too blind to see they could continue their monopoly on this segment of the market by only spending some money to update the vehicle.

    They also act like they are embarrassed by the car, as they are doing their best to kill it off. They have preferred to decontent it, and decided to put off needed updates (why does it still have a 4 speed auto, even the Explorer has a 5 speed auto) to it's interior. Also, a 2005 Grand Marquis looks very much alike a 1992 Grand Marquis.

    If the car dies, it is not because the buyers have abandoned it, rather Ford has abandoned the customers that buy it.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Hmmmmm, not sure the "costs" would drop on the DEW98 if volume went up enough to make them profitable ehaase. It's such a complex platform, which is why it's so darn good, you just have to get at least $45,000 minimum for the car to break even, which takes it out of Ford's and even Lincoln's price point at that size. Sell more, lose more money.....

    They are using DEWlite for Mustang, if it makes you feel better though, and maybe that one, which is darn good, if not damn good may find its way into some other good RWD Fords soon at a cost that we can afford to pay.......
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Your point here is excellent, and it's the same paradigm ( a $10 word I like to dig up once in a while ) that Cadillac and Lincoln use to say they must reinvent themselves because their average customer is 62 years of age! Oh dear! They;re all dying off!

    Well, yes, they will die. Someday. Meanwhile, they have money to spend, they like big Cadillacs and Lincolns, and they are YOUR customers, ya might wanna keep making a nice car for them, and update it for the ENDLESS supply of 62 year olds! There is a new crop of them EVERY YEAR. HELLO!!!!! It's like they're dying, and there will never be anymore of them!
  • iusecadiusecad Member Posts: 287
    what I said about driving in the snow with my Vic. My last snow experience was with the Goodyear RS-A's (?) that the Sheriff's Dept had on it. They still had a 1/4" of tread but they might as well have been bald. Today with my 2 month old Firestone Affinity LH30's I went through the 2"-3" slush/snow like nothin'. Even as well as my Focus did, which I was very impressed by. (Although it has Goodyear RS-A's [?].)
  • harmar2harmar2 Member Posts: 36
    My retired Ford buddy tells me there are big battles in the design departments, with younger designers agitating for changes (they call it an 'update') in the CV/GM line. He says, also, that new/younger managerial level employees don't know what has been tried in the past (and didn't work), so FoMOCo is (in)famous for trying to reinvent wheels. (As he describes it, these new people are very knowledgeable, but their knowledge is a "mile wide and an inch deep.")

    The Detroit News recently ran a piece saying to watch the upcoming auto shows for a new Lincoln design that is heavily influenced by a "European flavor." FoMoCo seems enamored by its Volvo designers' ideas. These 'news' pieces often are wrong, so we'll see.

    Whatever happens to Lincoln will eventually rub off on the CV/GM line.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Whatever happens to Lincoln......indeed......
    I'm certainly wondering what that may be!!
  • heart2heart2 Member Posts: 38
    Anyone have ideas what is causing problems with driver's window which goes up and down slowly(much more slowly than ever before). This is a '98 GM. I know the door will need to be disassembled...??difficult?
  • iusecadiusecad Member Posts: 287
    my '98 Vic just started doing that. I think mine is caused by the cold and would probably benefit from some sort of lube in the tracks...
  • bdeyes333bdeyes333 Member Posts: 12
    iusecad,You are right on with the lube idea, I use a good quality Silicone Spray Lubricant twice per year in each window channel.It streaks the glass for a little while but it's no big deal. Never have a problem with my Chevy's power windows.Stuff is also good to use on all the rubber bits as it keeps them from sticking in cold temperatures.

     

     Hope this helps, BD EYES
  • jsylvesterjsylvester Member Posts: 572
    Crown Vics and Grand Marquis have had slower than normal power windows since the 92 redesign - my 94 is the same way. The simple answer is the motor just runs slower than what most other vehicles do.

     

    If it is slower than before, than I would suggest lubing the tracks, but don't expect a miracle.
  • panda1panda1 Member Posts: 2
    Does any one out there know any thing about the 2000 Grand Marquis LS? This one has 111,000 miles on it. The price is $6,559,looks new and is emmaculant inside and out. The dealer said it did not have traction control on it, but over the glove box it reads PrecisionTrac. Does any one know what this means? I am use to luxery cars and this one rode quite well. I was pleased with my test drive. I drove it in town and on the highway. Thanks for any input.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    If its just been casually maintainned, Panda, it should be good for another 40,000 miles easy. If it's been as well cared for as it looks, she may go for 500,000. Some of the limos do. These are an old design, but tough as neutronium which is why police love to mount curbs with them-they are almost indestructable. They get good mileage, ride great and are roomy. Should be good price too.
  • panda1panda1 Member Posts: 2
    Thank you nvbanker. I MADE A MISTAKE, THIS IS A GS, NOT A LS. I assuned the difference was the GS did not have as many bells and whistles as the LS. Exterior and interior look the same, but no leather and not as many buttons. And this car does not have a door remote which is important to me, so I would have to have one installed. No matter if it is a used car lot, or a dealership, the salesmen always give me the creeps, which makes me feel uncertain about them and the vehical. HAS ANY ONE OUT THERE OWNED A GS?
  • harmar2harmar2 Member Posts: 36
    Check the suspension. My GS Sable had no rear sway bar and lacked a few other options not obvious to the naked eye. It may lack interior creature comforts, too, such as power seats, etc. If you have a bad back or hip, for example, those power adjustments are a godsend on trips. Some online site should be available to give you a list of options found only on an LS.

     

    As for mileage, a buddy routinely got 150,000 on GMs, then sold them to friends with no fear of anything going sour. None did.

     

    Good luck.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The GS is pretty much the rental line, and it's pretty plain. It wouldn't work for me. The main feature I ñotice the difference in is the seats. Check out the seats carefully for lumbar support & lateral comfort. Mechanically, it should be about the same.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Not really. The LS has what amounts to the performance and handling package for the CV on most models. There are a LOT more GS models out there used than there are LS's. It's hard to find an LS or a Crown Vic Sport or even a Crown Vic LX in the used market. The buyers of those models are far more likely to keep them for a long time, as opposed to the fleet buyers, who often trade frequently but rack up high miles.
  • road46road46 Member Posts: 18
    John, read many of your posts under Impala and I am a 04 owner. I hope you are enjoying your 500. I have been thinking of recommending the 500 to my mom, but I am continuing to research this car. Appreciated all of your Impala postings. I know have 8500 trouble free miles on this car. Except for a loose rear defroster connector at -10 degrees, I have not had any mechanical problems w this car
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Yep. I've got 8300 miles on my Five Hundred so far. Got the AWD. You can read all about it over on the Five Hundred forum here at Edmunds...
  • ron35ron35 Member Posts: 134
    panda 1 - The Kelly Blue Book value for that vehicle with 111K is $5930 so I think you can do a lot better on the price. I have a 2K GM LS generally the LS has a few more bells and whistles; most in my area have leather seats but I managed to find cloth the side panel on the LS is also a little larger. Mine has power passenger seat, upgraded stereo and a digital dash. Mechanically they are the same (I do not have HPP). The precision trak refers to front end suspension components and is not traction lock or LSD.

     

    Ron
  • dhski04dhski04 Member Posts: 10
    I am looking to buy a used (2000-2002?) sedan that will be used primarily for highway trips. I have narrowed it down to a CV or an Impala and would go with the CV for sure if it weren't for the RWD. I live in Illinois and we can get some nasty snow storms. Also, I have a very steep driveway. I haven't had much fun driving my RWD F-150 (even with lots of sand in the back) in the winter and therefore I'm apprehensive about getting another RWD...thoughts?
  • fsvfsv Member Posts: 196
    Does anybody know what will be done to CV/GM in 2006?
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I'd try to get the CV or GM or even Town Car with traction control, and you should be ok-even on your driveway. May take some looking.
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Member Posts: 518
    fsv-

     

    There seem to be two main rumors about the future of the CV/GM.

     

    Rumor #1: Restyle for MY2006, total redesign on the AUS Falcon (EA169) platform for MY2010.

     

    Rumor #2: No major changes for MY2006, total redesign on the Five Hundred (D3) platform for MY2008.

     

    It's not clear which of these is accurate at this point. I've heard both from credible sources.

     

    -Andrew L
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I thought the Falcon platform was old and not suitable for NADOT standards any longer. I would put more stock in the D3 rumor.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    My guess? The Panther will soldier on with modest changes. FoMoCo makes too much money off this body on frame, RWD, V-8 vehicle to pass up. The tooling was paid for long ago, the customers are happy, sales continue. What's not to like?

     

    Those who want a Five Hundred (like me) will buy one. Those who don't MIGHT buy a CV/GM, but would never buy a Five Hundred. Why give up those sales?
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Member Posts: 518
    johncline-

     

    I'd like to think you're right -- I would certainly be more interested in a RWD CV/GM than a D3 vehicle -- but the Panther sales are slipping. I think the Chrysler 300 might have something to do with that. For the record, I like the 300, but I'm not sure I would want one. Incredible durability is very important to me, and the CV/GM has that while the 300 is unproven.

     

    The D3 rumor seems to be gaining traction lately. I've seen that one around in several places including Blue Oval News. The Falcon rumor is older, but it was bolstered by a supplier document dated 10/04 that leaked recently...actually, I found it inadvertantly while running a Google search, and posted it on BON (it has since been removed) :-P So who knows what we're going to see. Ford seems to be obsessed with optimizing platform sharing right now -- not a bad strategy, in general -- so the D3 possibility would not surprise me. It leaves me wondering, though, how a D3 CV/GM would be differentiated from the Five Hundred and Montego. I mean, which direction would they stretch it? The two platforms already have about the same trunk and interior space. It almost seems like the best option, if Ford wants to go the D3 route, would be to put a vinyl interior and black steel wheels on a Five Hundred and just sell that to the commercial/govt fleets. Not that D3 would necessarily be a good idea. I'm just sayin'.

     

    -Andrew L
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Member Posts: 518
    ...right now, D3 is running the old 3.0 Taurus engine, which is not exactly a powerhouse. The 3.0 has a 21-horse deficit against the CV/GM V8 (203 vs. 224) and is down in torque by 65 lb-ft (207 vs. 272). I believe the Duratec 3.5 V6 is expected to be ready for MY2008, which would coincide with the rumored debut of a CV/GM replacement, if you believe the D3 rumor. So the upshot is, it's highly unlikely that the Panther will be replaced before MY2008, because if Ford tried to offer a police vehicle with a 3.0 V6 and an unproven CVT, they would never hear the end of it.

     

    And then there's the issue of the St. Thomas assembly plant, which currently builds the CV/GM. I don't think Ford has any substantial spare capacity at the current D3 plant (that's Chicago, I think). So most likely STAP would have to be completely gutted and retooled for D3. If that's going to happen in time for MY2008, I would think we'd have to hear about it by the start of CY2007.

     

    By the way, I'm not any kind of insider, I'm just putting pieces together. So who knows if any of this is actually correct.

     

    -Andrew L
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Atlanta will not be building the Taurus after next year. And...the 3.5 is supposed to be available for the Five Hundred/Montego sometime in 2007. Probably before the 2008 MY, but who knows?
  • jrc346jrc346 Member Posts: 337
    If you really want one, then get one. Only suggestion I would make is snow tires and some weight in the trunk. I have a friend with a 94 CV which runs wonderfully at 126,000mi I might add, and he puts on snows and loads about 300-400lbs of sand in the trunk, although he has the rear air suspension so there is no rear end sag. I think I remember him telling me that gas mileage teeters anywhere between 20 and 22MPG with the extra weight. About a 2MPG loss on average. Anyway, the car lives in Michigan and gets just about anywhere my Expedition can. My son also has snow tires on his RWD T-bird and I can't stress how nice they are to drive on in bad weather. They track straight through snow and stick like glue when you take off from a stop light or sign.

     

    My point is, don't let worries of snow stop you from buying the car of your choice. If you equip your car for the winter, in most cases you will be doing much better in the snow than most FWD vehicles.
  • ehaaseehaase Member Posts: 328
    The rumors I have read is that the D3 replacements for the Town Car, LS, and possibly CV/GM will be built in Atlanta. I get most of my information from Automotive News and from people at other message boards who have consistently proven to be accurate insiders.

     

    Sales of the Crown Vic were down 37 percent 12/04 from 12/03 and sales were down 9.8 percent for 2004 from 2003. Sales of the Grand Marquis were down 32.1 percent in 12/40 from 12/03, and sales were down 8.8 percent for the year. Ford has ridden the Panther gravy train about as far as it can. The cars need either a restyling or the 5.4L or probably both.
  • jsylvesterjsylvester Member Posts: 572
    All Grand Marquis come with traction control; it is an option on the base Crown Vic. Ditto with the cd player, I believe.

     

    The problem with the Panther is it interior has been unchanged since the 1995 model year, and the exterior since 1998. Actually, on the Grand Marquis, other than a mildly restyled nose and tail, the exterior has been the exact same since the 1992 model year.

     

    I have a 94 Grand Marquis, which I love, but there is really not enough differences between it and a 2005 to make it worth it to me to spend the money. That being said, it is also nowhere near to being worn out, with only 114,000 miles. It runs perfectly, uses no oil, shifts great, and has been very cheap to own. the leather is starting to wear, and the frame has some surface rust, but at least it has a real frame.

     

    Ford has let the car lapse; I'd be happy with the same interior if they could restyle the exterior, put the Mustang 3 valve engine in it, and a 5 speed auto.

     

    Either way, I'm getting another one before the go away, regardless of when that may be. Ford sells no other automobile that is near the durability and longevity of the Panther. I'm saving my pennies for a 2007 (worst case scenario), though I'm sure my 94 will still be alive and kicking then as well.
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Member Posts: 518
    ehaase-

     

    I thought Atlanta would be getting the CD3 crossovers...Lincoln Aviator replacement and something else for Ford. I could've sworn I read that somewhere. Taurus production is scheduled to end 3/31/06 (see http://www.donlen.com/buildstart_ford.asp). Will the D3 Lincolns be ready for production that soon?

     

    -Andrew L
  • ehaaseehaase Member Posts: 328
    From what I read in Automotive News, the first D3 Lincoln would be out in the summer of 2007 and the second one would be out in early 2008. I believe I read that Ford would make a final decision sometime later this year.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    I have had my 2004 Crown Vic LX Sport (gotta have that floor shifter) since Aug 1, 2004 (car built Aug 2003 and sat on dealer lot for a full year)...it rides so smooth on the highway, could get better mpg (I am not hard on it), but would be nice with more HP...doesn't the Mustang have the same 4.6L but put out 300 HP???...is the 5.4L really necessary, or are we just splitting hairs between the 2 engines...300 HP and the CV would fly, never need more power than that...they could update some of the interior, since the car's engineering was paid for back in the 1980s...I would like to see some firmer sport seats (but keep the 8-way power and adj lumbar supports on driver and passenger), 5 speed auto OD trans, some simple amenities like Homelink (available in the GM but not CV), "door ajar" and "trunk open" dash lights (how can it not have those?), maybe a more modern 250-300 watt CD/Audio system, mine looks like it is from the 80s...separate headlights for upper and lower beams, side by side for a low profile hood, maybe offer HID Xenon, side marker lights like on the GM (when those marker lights come on at nights, it illuminate the countryside so you can play night baseball), bring back the taillights from last year which had amber signal lights at the bottom of the red taillight...headlight switch on a steering column stalk like on imports, just to name a few...if they added some or all of these ideas, especially the 300HP engine (they did it in the Marauder), I would buy another one in a few years, and, if I knew they were going to terminate the CV/GM, I would certainly buy one and store it so I would have another one when this one wears out...many folks call it a "old person's car" but what is wrong with great safety, large car, great ride, good road car, maybe it is just the old folks who figured it out and Ford is smart enough to provide it...
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Ford is definitely smart enough to figure out they should keep making it after GM & Chrysler quit making them because some pointed head MBA from Michigan State U said 'Nobody wants big RWD cars anymore, let's drop them and force our customers into Luminas, and call them Impalas, they won't know the difference!'
  • fsvfsv Member Posts: 196
    Opened Motortrend yesterday "redesign on existing platform". I wonder what it would be. Me personally - I would like to have more legroom for rear passengers. Extended (like BMW) driver and passenger seats. And deeper trunk. May be air suspension on all four corners. Slightly updated exterior - a little edgier - but just a little. Xenon headlights. Detailing of more expensive car, like LED taillight, or at least, as in post 2930 "the taillights from last year which had amber signal lights at the bottom of the red taillight". Keep shifter on the steering column - I personally don't see any point in wasting floor space. What's name of it - rear parking signal? That's too. Tranny could be 5 or 6 speed (like the one on Montego) - will it add to fuel economy. Something like Chrysler's Variable Displacement engine would be nice. Ford should think heavily about putting some hybrid powerplants in it's heavier vehicles - CV is mostly fleet/cab/cop car - it will be fuel economy of scale.

     

    Did I forget something?
  • dhski04dhski04 Member Posts: 10
    I am thinking about purchasing a 1999 Grand Marquis GS. Were there problems with the 1999 intake manifolds (I know 1997 especially had problems because they were plastic)? Any problems with head gaskets?
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    "Tranny could be 5 or 6 speed"

     

    I have to ask, why? I remember back far enough, to the advent of automatics, when there were 1 and 2 speed automatics in the early 60's. They were ok, not efficient but ok. 3 speeds were revolutionary in 62 & 63. That's all we had until the 80's then Automatic Overdrives came out and Wow! The effort to squeeze an extra MPG out of a Lincoln Town Car spawned a 4 speed automatic! Unfortunately, the damn thing had a short life span since they self destructed from a constant shifting in and out of OD, so everybody locked them out of OD unless they hit the freeway. There went the economy. Now, we're getting 5 speed trannys. I have one. I gotta tell you, I think it's overkill. That first gear lasts about a second, and it's into second. What was the point? Did that really get me anything? I'm not sure it did. Now we need 6 speeds? Frankly, I don't think so. I think 4 was probably enough, and I'm damn sure 5 is. YMMV, that's just my opinion. I can't imaging how 6 speeds is going to do much more for me that 5 does.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I'm not aware of any head or manifold gasket problems with the 4.6L modular V-8 engines. The Cologne engines had some, perhaps you are confusing them?
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Member Posts: 2,287
    Hmmm, nvbanker....my Five Hundred has infinitely variable speeds! :) With an abundantly (instead of just sufficiently) powerful engine, I think this would be ideal!
  • fsvfsv Member Posts: 196
    Agree with johnclineii - ideal is infinitely variable speeds. MB's will be getting now 7-speed autos. CVT is ideal. Reality is - cvt is still not strong to handle bigger engines. But we should try to get to ideal solution. And major reason is fuel economy. Doesn't it hurt to fill up the Mountaineer once a week? Gas here in NY is very expensive, I don't know about state where you are... Ford also better gets a hybrid for it's bigger trucks and cars - and soon.
  • dhski04dhski04 Member Posts: 10
    Does anyone have a CV/GM WITHOUT traction control/abs and live in a snowy area? I'm still hesitant about buying a RWD car without traction control/abs.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles