You are here: Forums Sedans Ford Crown Victoria/Mercury Grand Marquis Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis

Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis

3244 messages,  Last post on Aug 25, 2009 at 8:13 PM

You are in the Ford Crown Victoria/Mercury Grand Marquis Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Exterior, Sedan

Messages Page 241 of 326 1 ... 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 ... 326 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#2392 of 3244 2006 redesign by fsv Jan 06, 2005 (10:27 am)
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? Replies to this message: nvbanker (Jan 06, 2005 8:52 pm)
#2393 of 3244 Manifold/Head gasket problems? by dhski04 Jan 06, 2005 (5:28 pm)
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? Replies to this message: nvbanker (Jan 06, 2005 8:54 pm) fx4 (Apr 07, 2005 8:19 am)
#2394 of 3244 Re: 2006 redesign [fsv] by nvbanker Jan 06, 2005 (8:52 pm)
Replying to: fsv (Jan 06, 2005 10:27 am) "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.
#2395 of 3244 Re: Manifold/Head gasket problems? [dhski04] by nvbanker Jan 06, 2005 (8:54 pm)
Replying to: dhski04 (Jan 06, 2005 5:28 pm) 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? Replies to this message: fx4 (Apr 07, 2005 8:19 am)
#2396 of 3244 by johnclineii Jan 07, 2005 (3:09 am)
Hmmm, nvbanker....my Five Hundred has infinitely variable speeds! With an abundantly (instead of just sufficiently) powerful engine, I think this would be ideal!
#2397 of 3244 6-speed by fsv Jan 07, 2005 (6:35 am)
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. Replies to this message: nvbanker (Jan 07, 2005 4:16 pm)
#2398 of 3244 by dhski04 Jan 07, 2005 (3:40 pm)
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.
#2399 of 3244 Re: 6-speed [fsv] by nvbanker Jan 07, 2005 (4:16 pm)
Replying to: fsv (Jan 07, 2005 6:35 am) "ideal is infinitely variable speeds"   Exactly! I agree with you folks! If you need to go beyond 5 individual gears, just go CVT and get it over with, that way, it makes much more sense to me. It's the endless shifting that gets annoying to me. I'd invest in the CVT today if it were available. How's it working so far, John?
#2400 of 3244 by johnclineii Jan 07, 2005 (4:33 pm)
I am VERY pleased with it. Reliability remains to be proven. I put 173,000 trouble free miles on my Impala LS. We shall see what the Ford Five Hundred does. We know the Panthers (CV/GM) are very reliable vehicles...
#2401 of 3244 Re: Crown Vic vs. Impala [dhski04] by crankshaft Jan 09, 2005 (8:28 am)
Replying to: dhski04 (Jan 02, 2005 7:07 pm) I have always been a ford RWD person with some weight in the trunk.However,I recently bought a FWD and in the snow there is no comparison.If you have a lot of snow,go for a dependable front wheel drive.We have had more deep snow this season,I have been thru snow that would have stopped my GM.

Messages Page 241 of 326 1 ... 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 ... 326 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Ford Crown Victoria/Mercury Grand Marquis Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis