Last post on Nov 26, 2013 at 8:41 AM
You are in the Ford Crown Victoria/Mercury Grand Marquis
What is this discussion about?
Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Exterior, Sedan
#2005 of 3300 Should I buy this car?
Aug 23, 2003 (1:20 pm)
Hello, I need some advice...I'm considering purchasing a used car (1992 Ford Crown Victoria 4D LX) from a friend of the family. The good news: its only $1000 plus $550 for painting and repair which is great for my budget. The bad news: its a former cab so has 240,000 miles on it.
I know it sounds crazy to buy a car with so many miles but it has been well maintained, new tires, and the engine and transmission were replaced fairly recently. It runs smoothly and I may only need a car for 1 year so I'm tempted...any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
#2006 of 3300 2003 GM Wheels
Aug 25, 2003 (4:12 pm)
I'm having trouble finding aftermarket rims for my 2003 GM. I can find rims for 1998-2002 GM or 2003 Maurauder but not for 2003 GM. I find that the difference between these is the offset, the 2002 GM has ~20 mm offsets and the Maurauder has ~40mm offsets. On ebay, there had been 2003 GM OEM wheels which lists the offset as 50mm. Which is it? Thanks for your help.
#2007 of 3300 1998 Mercury Grand Marquis Window Switch
Aug 27, 2003 (12:09 pm)
I just traded in my baby bimmer on a 1998 Merc GM LS and I love it. However, only a week after I bought it, I discovered that the front passenger window doesn't open and close consistently. Specifically, sometimes the driver's side switch opens the window, and then ceases to work for no apparent reason whether the window is open or shut. At other times, the passenger door switch does the same thing. I can't figure out what is causing the problem.
Have any of you had this problem before? Any idea how to repair it or what it would cost to repair?
Any info is greatly appreciated.
Have a great day!
Aug 27, 2003 (3:23 pm)
I had a '90 Crown Vic that did that (driver's window) and the right rear window on my '98 quit working all together. I haven't had it checked but my gut tells me its the motor. If it is, I'm gonna guess $150-$200 at an independent shop...
#2009 of 3300 Power Windows
Aug 28, 2003 (5:09 am)
The motor on these assemblys rarely fails: much more common is regulator failure. This is usually, but not always, accompanied by "crunching" sounds as the nylon gears, nylon drum and braided steel cables come apart while the motor runs. If the window works intermittently but smoothly, most likely electrical gremlin (short, open or switch) problem.
Aug 29, 2003 (12:46 am)
I am pretty frustrated right now. I own a 97 CVic and was having loud/embarrassing squeaking noises from my front end/hood. A couple cintributors to this board suggested silicon spray lubricant, and it worked wonders.
Then, tonight happened.
As I was coming out after dropping off a FedEx package at the FedEx office, with my 7 year old daughter and wife in the car, I was slowing to a stop before turning onto the street, and my front end literally gave way. When I got out (I was only doing about 5-10 mph at the time the collapse occurred), my driver's side front wheel was bent in/toed in and that side/end of the car was resting on the ground. Considering the fact I was about 90 seconds from getting on the Interstate, I thank my lucky stars that it happened where it did.
There are 140,000 miles on the car, but this in inexcusable, in my opinion. The towing service guy said right away that it looked like my bottom ball joint gave way, and it shouldn't be too much to repair...he'd be surprised if its over about $200. Nonetheless, it scared the HELL out of me.and my family.
I'm going to the Goodyear Tire Center (where I know one of the mechanics that I used to work with) that I had it towed to tonite and will arrive a few minutes before they open at 7a.m.
Any guesses on what this will cost? Anyone else had this problem or heard of it? Is it likely I did a lot of collateral damage? There doesn't seem to be any body damage and there was no fluids leaking afterwards, and the tire remained inflated, just toed in and looking like it was supporting the cars weight on that end by way of the wheel well resting on top of the tire (my uneducated eyes maybe).
Four months ago, the resin intake manifold blew while we were on a road trip, and I had to spend about $400 for the replacement part and another hundo to have my guy install it. It seems there's been talk on this board about Ford paying for the part AFTER the fact. Is this true? Should I approach Ford about this. ? If so, what is the procedure?
#2011 of 3300 Unfortunate but "Inexcusable"?
Aug 29, 2003 (5:56 am)
I'm not sure I could agree with you that lower ball joint separation on a 7 year old car with 140K that had been making loud squeaking noises is inexcusable. The warning signs were there. I've seen these front ends badly worn but only once or twice heard of ball joint separation. It can and does happen to any car if the joint is sufficiently worn. Repair expense is reasonable assuming no other damage. I'd sure check the other lower also.
Ford has reimbursed some for manifold replacment but usually not with the time and milage on your car. Still, it's worth a try.
Sep 02, 2003 (2:36 pm)
As far as the inatke minifold, Ford offered an extended warranty on 96-97 T-Birds & cougars with the V-8 option, and 96 & up Mustangs with the V-8. However, the only 96 & up Crown Vics that are covered by the extended warranty are the police & fleet cars. The logic behind it, at least according to Ford, is that the Mustang & T-Bird are sportscars (I use that term loosly. Don't have a fit, Mr. Shiftright), and are likely to see harder driving conditions than a Crown Vic, whose most grueling task is probably going to be carrying a pot of beans to the Church potluck. The exception, of course, are police cars and cabs, which get the snot beat out of them by cops and taxi drivers, so they were covered as well.
At least, that's the official Ford line. Personally, I think it's just an excuse on Ford's part to exempt the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis and save the company a little bit of money. That being said, Ford knows about the problem, and if you call customer service and raise a big enough stink, you're likely to get some or all of your money back out of repairs.
Finally, this isn't just a Ford problem. GM's 3.8 V-6 has a reputation for being a tough, dependable powerplant, like Ford's 4.6, but about the same time Ford adopted resin intakes for the 4.6, GM did the same for the 3.8, and has been having the same issues with intake manifolds failing. Appearantly, plastics technology just hasn't advanced to the point where it can replace metal in conditions like you find in an internal combustion engine.
Sep 02, 2003 (2:41 pm)
True, but GM has done two things. The newer engines returned to metal. And the plastic ones have been recalled for a fix. ALL of them. Not just cop cars and taxis and sports cars.
Sep 02, 2003 (3:36 pm)
I was unaware GM went so far in fixing the problem, but it's good they're doing it. Ford has tried at least twice to redesign the plastic manifold, this last time by replacing the section that failed 99.9% of the time with an aluminum tube. It remains to be seen whether this will make the new manifolds as reliable as the '95 and earlier, or if some section of the manifold only marginally stronger will start rupturing. All I know is when manifolds were made of metal, it was almost unheard of for one to fail of its own volition. That one should expect an imminent intake failure on post-'95 model year cars says Ford needs to follow GM's example. It's time for the plastic manifold designers to admit defeat, draw up plans for a metal manifold, and move on.