Ask the Car People.SM


Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego

3623 messages,  Last post on Feb 13, 2011 at 9:08 AM

You are in the Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Five Hundred, Mercury Montego, Sedan

Messages Page 61 of 363

#597 of 3623 ANT by alpha01

Apr 12, 2004 (3:43 pm)

I understand your point, and I agree that acceleration is just one aspect of a vehicles overall package. I just feel a 200 hp powerplant is disappointing in an otherwise all new effort. I dont care that we'll get the 3.5L in a year. That will be fine for then- but what about now? Consumers looking to purchase now but wanting power will NOT purchase the car. Reference the above post.
 
I think the Quest is not selling well because of its overwrought design and tepid reviews. The Titan and Armada certainly arent selling poorly, and arent THAT FAR off targets.
 
I was at the NY Auto Show again today (didnt have much time on Friday). I saw the Ford display. For all the money Ford has spent on interiors, I feel that it only really shows in the Lincolns, whose interiors are classy and well done without an obvious look of trying too hard. I HATE that the 2005 Focus has a different, much uglier, less stylish center stack. The Freestar/Monterrey also failed to impress, BUT if I was in the market, I suppose I could overlook that given the NOW $4000 rebate. Thats insane for a vehicle less than a year old, though precisely what was expected. The Five Hundred on the display table had a pleasant exterior, but generally boring interior. Looks roomy, and the seats APPEAR comfortable.
 
Seriously, what is the deal with the Mariner. Its a frekin Escape for God's sake, and its STILL not on sale, despite being at LAST YEARS NYIAS. The spiral notebook like brochure says the FALL. WHY?
 
~alpha

#598 of 3623 Ford's underpowered engines by andy71

Apr 12, 2004 (5:38 pm)

It seems like Ford uses the lowest output engine for its own cars where as companies owned by Ford get higher output and more refined engines.
 
Example 1: Ford Focus(2.3L) 145 Hp
           Mazda3 (2.3L) 160 Hp
 
Example 2: Ford Taurus/500 (3.0L) 200 Hp
           Mazda6 (3.0L) 220
           Lincoln LS (3.0L) 232Hp
           Jaguar X type (3.0L) 232Hp

#599 of 3623 by ANT14

Apr 12, 2004 (5:59 pm)

Alpha,
 
For those who believe 200HP isn't enough, then will obviously try other vehicles. It's only US, because of our resources, that are aware that a 3.5L will be implemented into the vehicle in the future. The majority of other consumer's, will not so they'll miss out, and that's obvious the risk that had to be taken in Ford's behave.
 
It doesn't how much we analyze the situation, and complain (trust me, I've done my share part over the engine) but to there was NO way the 3.5L could have been ready for this vehicles debut. And this is the best situation Ford could have done, given the circumstances. And it's really not as bad, as the 200HP might state.
 
The Mariner was delayed to coincide with the Escape Hybrid debut. And you also don't wish to do it at the same time the Montego launches, so other factors were taken into consideration.
 
Andy,
Numerous engines are tailored, depending upon the brand. Toyota has it's 3.0L, where it would make 194HP to 210HP in Toyota, but 220HP in Lexus. (Now 3.3L).
 
Nissan's 3.5L does 230Hp on the Quest (a bit more on the Altima/Maxima) but makes 260HP-287HP ON Inifniti products, etc.
 
Same thing with Ford, Jag, Lincoln, Mazda. IN some cases (like Jag and Mazda) they have the original engine architecture, but they fit their own heads and tune it for a bit more power.

#600 of 3623 Quest by samnoe

Apr 13, 2004 (10:24 pm)

has 240 hp, not 230.

#601 of 3623 andy71 by badgerfan

Apr 14, 2004 (5:57 am)

Just for kicks I went back and looked at CR's acceleration data for the 3.0 Duratec in Taurus vs 3.0 Duratec modified and with 5 speed automatic in Mazda 6.
 
Taurus 0-60 in 8.3 seconds. 45-65 in 4.9 seconds. 1/4 mile in 16.4 seconds. Curb weight 3325 lbs. CR mileage test: 15 city, 31 highway, 22 overall
 
Mazda 6: 0-60 in 8.1 seconds. 45-65 in 5.3 seconds. 1/4 mile in 16.5 seconds. Curb weight 3355 lbs. Cr mileage test: 14 city, 30 highway, 20 overall.
   
Seems all that tweaking Mazda did with variable valve timing and a 5 speed automatic did nearly nothing but allow Mazda to publish a 10% higher horsepower rating, but with worse mileage, and in only one acceleration test did it beat the Taurus.
 
My point, wait until you drive the 500 with the 3.0 Duratec before you pass judgement on its inadequate engine, and if you think it is inadequate, then buy something else or wait for the 3.5. I'd certainly rather Ford release 500 this fall than wait a year for another engine option.
 
In the meantime if you want a real bargain, pick up a Taurus or Sable. Just saw a local add for a new Mercury Sable LS Premium well equipped including no charge leather, illuminated keyless entry, ABS, autodimming rear view mirror and automatic temperature control, along with all the standard features in the top model Sable including the 3.0 Duratec. MSRP $24325. Net price with all rebates and discounts: $17675. Good performance at a bargain price.

#602 of 3623 Actually by alpha01

Apr 14, 2004 (7:06 am)

If you want a REAL bargain, you can pick up a 35000 mile 2002 Taurus SEL for about $11,500, maybe a little higher certified- probably worth it. THAT is a bargain.
 
~alpha

#603 of 3623 Alpha01 by badgerfan

Apr 14, 2004 (7:44 am)

I agree, used is even more of a bargain. I prefer to buy new as I keep my cars a long time and prefer to control all the maintenance. A certified used with an extended warranty is a very valid and cost savings approach, no doubt about it and I would definitely consider that route next time.
 
That could apply to just about any car you buy, but with Taurus/Sable's (undeserved in my opinion) "rental car" image, high depreciation makes it even a better deal purchasing a year or two old used car.
 
Somebody better buy new though, or the used car supply would dry up.

#604 of 3623 30 Duratec will be fine. by mschmal

Apr 14, 2004 (10:49 am)

All the gear heads here seem to be upset over the 30 Duratec.
 
I sell Fords and I can tell you that as long as the car FEELS like it can safely accelerate into traffic, no one will care what the published horsepower ratings are.
 
People only ask "is this a 4 cylinder or a 6 cylinder" these people don't even understand that a thoroughly modern 4 cylinder like the Ford/Mazda 2.3L offers the same type of performance as an old tech 6 cylinder like the 3.0L Vulcan in the Taurus.
 
People just think 6 cylinders are better then 4 cylinders.
 
GM is well aware of this perception and sticks to old tech low output OHV engines instead of moving to DOHC engines and saves about $800.00 per unit..
 
When a customer tests drive a car, they care about how it feels. If the 500 has a tight feel. Feels well put together and creates an overall impression of value it will sell.
 
Ford's target demographic for this vehicle is the 40's something empty nester who is moving out of a mini-van or suv. (SUV customers will go for the AWD version). These people didn't buy the SUV or Mini-Van for str8 line performance and they aren't going to decide whether or not to buy a 500 over str8 line performance.
 
Initial quality will be way more important to the success of this vehicle than horsepower figures. Hence the 30 Durotec is a good choice, its' been around almost 10 years, its proven reliable and Mazda has put plenty of refinement into it over the years.
 
Obviously, if you try to evaluate the 500 as a Porsche or a Lexus, its going to loose. The questions actual customers will be asking are "will this carry my family comfortably," "will this be reliable," "will my friends and co-workers laugh at me," "is this vehicle safe."
 
I for one know I'll be say to my customers "this is built on the same platform as the Volvo S60" "this AWD system is the same one used by Volvo" "the safety systems in this vehicle were designed by Volvo" "this care uses VOLVO technology."
 
Remember its more fun to drive a slow car fast then a fast car slow
 
Mark

#605 of 3623 by grbeck

Apr 14, 2004 (7:56 pm)

In GM's case, those ohv V-6s may not bother the GM faithful, but I do think those engines are a stumbling block in the effort to win over import buyers. Just as customers think that six cylinders are better than four, most import buyers think ohc is better than ohv.
 
"Gear heads" have more influence over other car buyers than their numbers would suggest. If several sources aimed at gear heads note (relatively) slow acceleration figures, that is a hurdle the sales force will have to overcome for prospective customers. Most family sedan buyers don't expect a rocket sled with four doors, but they will be reluctant to buy a vehicle that is branded "slow."

#606 of 3623 by ANT14

Apr 15, 2004 (4:19 am)

Ironically GM is fully aware that it's OHV engines deter some of it's buyer's... If not, they wouldn't have made an engine deal with Honda, for them to supply their 3.5L SOHC V6 into the Saturn.
 
And which is why they have placed their new 3.6L DOHC V6 (high feature) into their Rendevouz, Larcross, etc. Or even the Caddy XLR, which they could have placed the 5.7L OHV V8, but they chose the sophisticated Northstar instead.
 
But obviously they don't see it as a priority, and are concentrating on interiors instead which is desperately needed as well.

Messages Page 61 of 363

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement