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 258 of 325 1 ... 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 ... 325 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#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
#2570 of 3244 hmmmm by johnclineii Jul 03, 2005 (3:02 am)
Although primarily about Fusion, there are some interesting hints about the future of Five Hundred here (and perhaps even more so about Crown Vic/Grand Marquis):   http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0507/03/A01-235800.htm Replies to this message: turbo301 (Jul 05, 2005 8:16 am) basils (Jul 05, 2005 10:52 am)
#2571 of 3244 Re: hmmmm [johnclineii] by turbo301 Jul 05, 2005 (8:16 am)
Replying to: johnclineii (Jul 03, 2005 3:02 am) Well, the CV/GM are fairly "urban" already: they're not "tough" looking like the Fusion, but you get a GM with one of those fuzzy coach roofs, chrome wheels, whitewalls and that extra fender opening chrome, and you have yourself a fairly pimpin' ride. It's amazing how small the line is between a "geezer-mobile", which is often how CVs/GMs are termed, and a hip hop-esque pimpmobile!   Besides that, the CV has built-in urban toughness by virtue of it being THE quintessential cop car. How much more urban does it get than that (wrong side of the law, I guess .   I imagine that Ford will restyle the CV/GM into something much squarer come 2008 or whenever, to be more in line with the Fusion/500. The excitement around the Focus' "new edge" styling died off pretty quickly, so I'm sure that Ford is desperate to find a winning formula that will not date itself in 5 years. Replies to this message: basils (Jul 05, 2005 10:52 am)
#2572 of 3244 Re: hmmmm [turbo301] by basils Jul 05, 2005 (10:52 am)
Replying to: turbo301 (Jul 05, 2005 8:16 am) The easiest way to "toughen up" a car is the following....in no particular order.   1. Front end more angular and aggressive. 2. Same with rear. 3. Beefier looking tires and more utilitarian/hotrod/sinister wheels. 4. Add horsepower. 5. Advertise the heck out of it.
#2573 of 3244 Re: About the R&H Package: [justiceisdead] by bruneau1 Jul 05, 2005 (2:30 pm)
Replying to: justiceisdead (Mar 11, 2000 9:55 pm) The handling package may be a little too firm for tradtionalists, and it produces some jiggles. A no-no is a car like the Marquis. Too bad all the other good stuff in the package doesn't come with the standard suspension which is more liveable. Of course, the solid rear axle needs to be replaced with a modern independant set up. Replies to this message: basils (Jul 05, 2005 6:01 pm) turbo301 (Jul 06, 2005 3:49 am)
#2574 of 3244 Re: About the R&H Package: [bruneau1] by basils Jul 05, 2005 (6:01 pm)
Replying to: bruneau1 (Jul 05, 2005 2:30 pm) I had a 2001 Crown Vic LX (lost in divorce). Recently I test drove an '05 LX Sport and didn't really notice any difference in quality of ride. I'm real picky too, so I was surprised. Does anybody else out there really notice a jittery or harsher ride with the sport package?
#2575 of 3244 Re: About the R&H Package: [bruneau1] by turbo301 Jul 06, 2005 (3:49 am)
Replying to: bruneau1 (Jul 05, 2005 2:30 pm) I don't know, I think that the solid axle has its place, and that place is under a car like the CV/GM. Just look what Ford has accomplished with the new Mustang's setup; that is proof enough that just because a configuration is old doesn't mean that it has to remain out of date... kind of like rear-wheel drive and full-framed cars! I'm not sure how close the current Panther's rear is to the new 'stang's, but it would be an interesting experiment to drop it in and see (appropriately sized-up for the car, of course ).
#2576 of 3244 2000 Grand Marquis-noise under brake pedal by havehadit Jul 07, 2005 (6:35 am)
When brake pedal is pushed there is a squeaking or squishing sound, like rubber rubbing against rubber. I've been under the dash and seems like the sound is coming from inside the flexible rubber boot. I tried some WD40 but didn't help. A mechanic yesterday said it could be the plunger going into the master cylinder. The noise is very irritating but I don't care to spend money unless the cause can be identified. Has anyone experienced this problem? Responses would be appreciated. Thanks, havehadit
#2577 of 3244 Handling Package by frasierdog Jul 08, 2005 (8:15 am)
"The handling package may be a little too firm for tradtionalists"   The handling package adds:   - Rear air springs - not firmer, allows load leveling in rear, big people or towing. - Duel exhaust - more power. - Larger sway bar - better handling - not a firmer ride. - Upgraded front bushings - better handling - Lace wheels - looks only - Different shocks - reduces the floaty ride.   This only makes the car more driveable. Replies to this message: turbo301 (Jul 08, 2005 8:31 am) euphonium (Jul 08, 2005 8:48 am) frasierdog (Jul 08, 2005 11:28 am) basils (Jul 08, 2005 12:10 pm)

Messages Page 258 of 325 1 ... 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 ... 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