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 257 of 325 1 ... 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 ... 325 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#2560 of 3244 Re: negative rant... [basils] by turbo301 Jun 29, 2005 (11:36 am)
Replying to: basils (Jun 29, 2005 11:13 am) Thanks for your reply. I think that Canada's self-righteousness comes from our politicians, who try too hard to distance themselves from their American counterparts. Our current Liberal government can do no wrong (at least, in its mind, and somehow it keeps getting re-elected!), which has lead the whole government to have a very swelled opinion of itself. The media also perpetrates this "gotta be anything but American" attitude; it's our version of national pride, for some reason. However, most, or at least many, Canadians are normal people who have the same values as you guys.   Our roads are salted to death, and even though my '85 is pretty darn rusty (even with only 107,000 km on it!), the bumpers are like new. Ford's chrome is 100x better than General Motors' in this regard, since the latter's bumpers seem to rust and peel a lot worse and in shorter time. I'm sure that modern chrome is not as good a quality as that old Ford stuff, unfortunately.   My take on your points:   a.) You said it! b.) I think we need more interesting colours - too much tan out there these days. How about some nice greens? c.) Sure d.) The current dash IS retro - but what's the fine line between retro and outdated LOL?! Some sort of '60s luxury car homage might be nice, though... Certainly more chrome would be nice, since chrome has come back "in" lately. e.) Amen! Replies to this message: basils (Jun 29, 2005 12:17 pm) basils (Jun 29, 2005 3:18 pm) and 1 more...
#2561 of 3244 Re: negative rant... [turbo301] by basils Jun 29, 2005 (12:17 pm)
Replying to: turbo301 (Jun 29, 2005 11:36 am) Most Americans, me included, tend to be more interested in just being able to do what we want to do....you know, freedom. We want the government to butt out and shut up so that we can enjoy our cowboy spirit in peace. In the media that I hear, and on various message boards I frequent, many Canadians really have this peculiar need to distance themselves from anything American (just as you noted). I can understand that to a certain extent, but sometimes it really comes off as arrogant and snobish. (Just like our liberals here). From the war in Iraq, to the gay marriage issue, religion, politics, history, government assistance, healthcare etc, I'm getting a rather strong impression that Canadians despise the U.S. I really don't see how this will be beneficial to a nation so dependant upon another, do you? Glad you agree about the CV/GM points I made. Yes, the current dash is sort of retro....but more like early eightees retro, not the '60's or '70's that I was trying to convey. A bit more chrome (like you said), maybe some added colored lighting (like that slight green hue from the late sixties), perhaps even a touch of REAL wood? (That may be going too far). I didn't know that Ford bumpers would last in all that salt...I'm surprised. When I was a little kid I used to like to rub the palm of my hand on the rust bumps of chrome bumpers. I can even remember trying to clean off those bumpers with rust remover. Always left pits in the chrome. The colors? Yeah, tan and silver is everywhere! Even white is over represented these days. Same with a common red...ala Dodge...yeck! Yeah, I love green. Some interesting greens would be cool, just not the blue-green crap from the early nineties.....reminds me of a swimming pool bottom. Replies to this message: basils (Jun 29, 2005 3:18 pm) turbo301 (Jun 29, 2005 5:07 pm)
#2562 of 3244 Good conversation by pat HOST Jun 29, 2005 (1:54 pm)
and I'm glad to see you folks working things out.   However, we need to back off the political characterizations and the flat generalizations about any given ethnic group - neither subject belongs here.   So carry on about the cars - and again, I'm glad to see a good conversation going on here.
#2565 of 3244 Re: negative rant... [turbo301] by basils Jun 29, 2005 (3:18 pm)
I can understand why Canadians buy fewer large cars with the higher fuel prices and all. I'm kind of lucky in my situation. My job is only 10 miles away so it really doesn't matter about gas mileage. I could drive a CV, Civic, Echo, or Expedition. But for a V-8, the Vic does outstanding. Somebody on another board has now said they saw a 2006 GM. I just don't understand how this can be if Ford has posted, in company letterhead, that the build on these cars doesn't even start until August sometime. I just wish I could see a photo or other proof that an '06 is already out there. Like I've said before, the facelifted GM is something I really want to see. It may be a preview look at what the CV will look like next year......and if it's really nice, I'll get the GM instead of the CV. No way though that I'll wait all the way to 2008 for a 3v engine or MAYBE better styling. I like it the way it is well enough to not gripe if they vastly improve anything. Although if they pop in that Mustang V-8 in '07 - '08....I'll be ticked!! 300 horses in a CV would be really nice! P.S. I thought the CV was cleared of any flaws in regard to the fuel tank? Replies to this message: turbo301 (Jun 29, 2005 5:07 pm)
#2566 of 3244 Re: negative rant... [basils] by turbo301 Jun 29, 2005 (5:07 pm)
Replying to: basils (Jun 29, 2005 3:18 pm) The situation with the CV/GM reminds me of the 1981 Firebird. Sales lagged because it was the last of the 2nd generation, and everyone knew that the 3rd generation was coming in '82 - lighter, more "European", etc. Those few who did buy (and keep) '81s are laughing now, though, as 2nd generation cars are worth far more than 3rd gen cars. Who knows? Maybe if you get one of the last CVs/GMs it will end up appreciating if it is replaced with a smaller, more European car in 2008.   300 horses in a CV is called a Marauder; given that sales disaster, Ford is probably disillusioned with the notion of a powerful full-size sedan. Just think, if they could have done a 300 hp CV in 1994, it might have gone somewhere. The big problem with the Marauder was its price and positioning. Everyone thinks that, because a car is V8 powered, it has to be ultra-fast. Instead, if people just saw the Marauder as an over-achieving cruiser (and if it was priced only a few grand more than a GM), which is what it really is, it would seem like a much better car.   As for the CV Pinto-ing out, it might have been cleared - or Ford burried the cases. Regardless, I still think that they're plenty safe cars. The gas tank has been in the same basic place since 1979, as far as I know, so why did the complaints just start in the last few years? No matter how your gas tank is arranged, if you get rear ended hard enough, there will be the possibility of fire. Lawsuits like those against Ford tend to be more "get rich quick" than justice-oriented.   I commute 120 km every day, so I am pleased to see my car getting 26 mpg . Paying for gas is one luxury (actually, a necessity) that I will gladly pay, 'cause I love driving so much.
#2567 of 3244 Reply to Turbo by basils Jun 30, 2005 (8:22 am)
I see what you are saying about the Camaro/Firebird. It would be real funny to end up with a situation like that. In reality I've already considered it. I just don't trust that Ford will make the right move on the remake. I hope I'm wrong. The Marauder was a nice car with poor marketing and a high dollars-to-horsepower price tag. If they just slip the Mustang engine into the Vic as an option for the younger or performance crowd, and give the whole car a minor facelift inside and out, then start a superb, yet simple advertising blitz about the reliability, toughness (cop car and taxi angle), comfort, power, and a "last of it's kind American icon" kind of campaign, I really believe they could easily revive the sales and add ten years to this car. Look how long the Yamaha V-max motorcycle stayed in production even though it's widely regarded as dated. Make the people what they don't know they want, and they will buy it like sheep. How far, in miles, is 120km? Please excuse my ignorance. Do you use synthetic or dino oil? Yeah, the gas tank thing was cleared a while back. Ford was found not at fault from what I recall. With Ford being so large, every "pro-consumer" and "Ralph Nader wanna be" is looking for anything to bring them down. They tried it with the Firestone tire thing too. And right now a recall has started about some switch or something that caused a fire in something like one car out of a million....but I wouldn't want to have been the one that owned that ONE car! Replies to this message: turbo301 (Jun 30, 2005 8:41 am)
#2568 of 3244 Re: Reply to Turbo [basils] by turbo301 Jun 30, 2005 (8:41 am)
Replying to: basils (Jun 30, 2005 8:22 am) Actually, I wouldn't mind being the owner of that one car - just think of the settlement you'd get LOL!   Although Ford may have been cleared in the courts, the damage done in the court of public opinion will take a while to undo. One of the big selling points of the Panther cars is its safety, and even calling that into question, let alone there being something actually wrong with it, will probably hurt.   I was talking to one of London's (Ontario, that is) police officers the other day about whether they were thinking of using Chargers or not (we currently exclusively use CVs). He said no because Chargers do not have enough room for rear seat passengers when the cage is installed (there's precious little there even in a CV!). Also, most of the aftermarket equipment is built specifically for the CV. While Dodge will do its darndest to change this, at least Ford has a bit of an advantage for the time being. This seems fair, since they're the only company that did not abandon the traditional police formula so many years ago.   120 km is about 75 miles. I will just be using standard oil in my CV, at least for the time being. My turbo T/A gets $7 per liter synthetic, but I don't think I need to resort to this in the old 4.6 . I've heard that there isn't much benefit to using synthetic in a "regular" motor, as long as you change the oil at the required intervals and the car is not used in severe-duty driving. My highway stints are about as light duty as you can get.
#2569 of 3244 iusecad by marsha7 Jun 30, 2005 (7:38 pm)
Can't argue your point except to say that there are folks who do not use seatbelts, even tho it is prudent to do so, yet some have wrecks and do not suffer injury...you go below 1/4 tank without bad effect...still, I believe it is prudent to not go below the 1/4 mark, simply because I have much better odds of preventing the condensation problem...will it be perfect???...no, but I do feel it is risky to take the chance of water condensation when a simple behavior has a great chance of prevention...and, you are still going to refuel anyway, so what the heck...YMMV

Messages Page 257 of 325 1 ... 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 ... 325 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