Last post on Feb 13, 2011 at 8:08 AM
You are in the Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego
What is this discussion about?
Ford Five Hundred, Mercury Montego, Sedan
#2024 of 3623 This is sitll a Ford
Dec 15, 2004 (11:29 pm)
I think people really need to keep in mind the whole purpose of the 500 when they are talking about it.
This car is all about getting alot of car for you money and I think it more than delivers in the value catagory ESPECIALLY as an SE or SEL.
People keep bashing on Ford but as you read this, Ford is on the way to becoming the LARGEST producer of AWD passenger cars. This is the AUDI of the masses.
Yes there are some glaring oversites I can't for the life of me figure out why there is no AdvancTrac espeically after the recent study about how stabilty control can cut accidents by over 50% in SUVs...NOTE that AdvanceTrac with RSC is STANDARD in Explorer.
But if you look at the Taurus then look at the cars the Five Hundred goes head to head against (the Impala, the 300 touring, etc), I think this is a great entry.
In the final analysis though, Ford is all about trucks and SUVs.
At my dealership, we have no 2005 Mustangs (sell the same day they arrive) 4 Crown Vics (not counting CVPIs), 8 2004 Mustangs, 12 Five Hundreds and about 20 Focuses.
We then have over 30 Escapes, 50 F-150s and over 80 Explorers.
Yeah we have Freestars but there isn't much interested there.
Dec 16, 2004 (1:34 am)
Why no Advance Trac? Simple. Ford can only get the parts to build so many right now. Those parts, understandably, are going first to SUV's and trucks...
Ford still remembers, no doubt with some bitterness, how many Focii they sold with the stability system you could get at the time. I think the number was more than four but less than pleasing...
Yes, the Five Hundred is in a different class. And the time will come when you can get Advance Trac. It ain't now, though.
#2026 of 3623 Purchased Montego about a month ago
Dec 16, 2004 (6:54 am)
I have been driving the Montego Premier AWD for about a month ( i just posted about my very pleasant buying experience on the "prices paid" forum). Anyway, I have to laugh when I read some of the comments and reviews out there. If someone is looking for a sports car then buy a sports car. If they are looking for a family sedan then this is a terrific car. We have absolutely no acceleration problems, plenty of merging and passing power, lots of room for the kids items, and (what sold us on the car) great visibility compared to other models we test drove. Sometimes I wonder if car designers are so involved in "looks" they forget that a driver has to see out in ALL directions to drive. Anyway, all in all, I feel i made a good choice and the car is terrific
My only complaints are the small touches that cost the auto maker next to nothing but creates a much nicer feeling for the customer instead of a "why is the manufacterer so stupid" feeling.
Those improvements would be lights in the glove box and under the hood, optional navigation system, optional stability control, and lighted controls for radio,etc. Small complaints but it would leave the driver with a much nicer feeling about the manufacturer. Well, hope my review helps some people out there.
#2027 of 3623 2 jsylvester
Dec 16, 2004 (7:15 am)
what mpg city/highway do you get on your GM?
#2028 of 3623 Re: GM vs. Montego [jsylvester]
Dec 16, 2004 (9:14 am)
I've been driving a Crown Vic for several years, they ceratinly are extremely durable, reasonably comfortable, and surprisingly economical. But they don't use space very efficiently -- for that reason alone I'd go with the Montego. I do mostly urban driving, the CV/GM are a real pain to park, they're wider and longer than almost any other cars on the market, I can't even fit one into my garage and get out the door! The GM/CV trunk is huge, it's fine for luggage or shoeboxes, but its awkward depth and lack of a fold down rear seat or even a pass-through make it real pain if you make a trip to the home centre to pick up building or maintenance supplies. Not to mention that I can't even fit my dad's wheelchair in the CV's trunk! Add to that the Montego's better handling, superior rear seat room and more comfortable seating position along with excellent crash scores that promise good structural integrity and it seems like a much better car for most people.
#2029 of 3623 build quality
Dec 16, 2004 (11:40 am)
GM/CV has proven build quality. Montego's predecessor, Tauras was a problem (some of you might know it's cozy Jewish nickname - Tsures - what loosely could be translated from Yiddish as 'disaster'). What reliability Montego, with it's 6 speed or CVT trannies, AWD, etc. will have, still remains to be found out. Also, none of the above sound like inexpensive to fix problems. CV/GM, on the other hand, is not bullet-proof, but reasonably reliable and cheap to fix & maintain. I just wonder what mileage it get per gallon and how I can convince my wife to get one for her. So far she fights tooth and nail, says about "Driving Miss Daisy", etc.
#2030 of 3623 Re: build quality [fsv]
Dec 16, 2004 (12:08 pm)
Not all Tauri have been disasters. I'm on my second, and admittedly do not put high miles on in a short time,I do about 10K per year. But my 1990 Taurus was an excellent car for the ten years and 98K miles I had it, and my 2000 Taurus is going great at 4+ years and 43K miles. Unlike some of the Camcords reports of recent vintage, I have not had a single rattle or squeak develop in either of my Tauri.
Yes, I missed some of the Taurus intermediate years where Ford had head gasket issues (only the 3.8 L engine) and had some transmission problems. But, by and large Taurus has been a very good car for a lot of people. I wish they kept the name and tacked it onto the new Fusion due for release next fall, but with Ford's corporate decision to start all Sedans with "F", the name is going away.
Taurus simply blew away the competition in innovations, features, handling, and performance, back when it was introduced.
I won't be in the market for 5-6 years, so by then I will have a choice of a Fusion or Five Hundred, which will have had several years history under their belt by then.
I expect Five Hundred will prove to be a very reliable vehicle, even from the first model year.
Dec 16, 2004 (4:25 pm)
...and Taurus is NOT the Five Hundred/Montego's predecessor. Taurus/Sable will be replaced by the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan. Five Hundred/Montego were most probably originally slated to replace the CV/GM, back in Jack Nasser's day. Fortunately, wiser heads prevailed, Nasser is gone, and the Panthers live on to be sold to the faithful, all at a tidy profit for the Ford Motor Company.
#2032 of 3623 Bench seat??
Dec 16, 2004 (7:00 pm)
I wonder if Ford would ever consider putting a front bench seat and column shifter in the 500? This would be a huge selling point with my wife.
I know... some would be offended, but it is a family-hauling sedan.
Dec 16, 2004 (7:07 pm)
I doubt it seriously. Airbag configurations and safety concerns are rapidly making bench seats a thing of the past. The coming Toyota Avalon will not have a bench seat available either. The center position is almost impossible to protect to the same degree as the outboard positions, not to mention there are safety concerns about interference with the driver....