You are here: Forums Future Vehicles Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis

Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis

152 messages,  Last post on Jun 07, 2008 at 4:54 PM

You are in the Future Vehicles Forum. Your Host is kirstie_h

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

Messages Page 14 of 16 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#127 of 152 Inventory by ionosphere1 Jan 04, 2008 (10:30 pm)
Thanks for all the information. Regarding inventory, I myself recently looked on the Mercury website and looked at inventory of about 10 dealers in this part of the state: my dealer had 1 (the one I testdrove) and none of the oher 9 had a single LS and only 1 other dealer had 2 GS's. I checked this about a week ago so it's probably still the same.
#128 of 152 Inventory by peetiedog Jan 05, 2008 (3:02 pm)
What part of Washington are you in? Must be western Washington, near Spokane and Coeur D'Alene, ID area. If so, the dealers out in that area that carry Mercury are usually smaller and are combo stores (Ford/Mercury or Ford L/M). Otherwise one would think that in the greater SeaTac region (from Bellingham, WA down to Salem, OR, and from Aberdeen, WA over to Walla Walla, WA), there would be more of a selection available. There are multiple times more than 10 Mercury points in that region, and the dealer can run a regional locate as quickly as a cross town locate. For a customer who's anxious to have his car sooner, I would. If the exact car exists, maybe the customer would be willing to pay $100-$150 more in transport charges, to have the Seattle dealer trade to get the car from the Portland dealer. Then he could have the car within a day or two, rather than in 3 or 4 months. Also the dealer can have the sale today, rather than months from now; and take the chance that the customer becomes disillusioned and changes his mind on the whole purchase. Maybe it would be worth the dealer splitting the transportation charges, as a smaller bird in the hand may be worth more than a larger bird in the bush. Besides, customers shouldn't have to search out surrounding inventory, not when dealers have the tools to search more efficiently. But, that's how I think; maybe my thinking is warped. I'm just an old factory trained guy who thinks that customers still appreciate service.
#129 of 152 Inventory by ionosphere1 Jan 05, 2008 (4:10 pm)
I looked at the inventory of all the dealers Mercury's website included for my Seattle zip code, which showed dealers near the coast and Canada too. Is a rare car in these parts. My dealer didn't even have a model for me to see when I went there. I had to wait a few weeks them to have one and they said it took them a few months to get it. Replies to this message: paisan (Jan 05, 2008 4:36 pm)
#130 of 152 Re: Inventory [ionosphere1] by paisan Jan 05, 2008 (4:36 pm)
Replying to: ionosphere1 (Jan 05, 2008 4:10 pm) I bet they have a ton in FLA   -mike
#131 of 152 New special offer by ionosphere1 Jan 08, 2008 (9:18 pm)
As predicted, at exactly 9:00 Pm my time (midnight Michigan time), they changed the special offer deal, as they had to, as the date passed. Interestingly,they significantly decreased the interest rate for the Grand Marquis, but they did not change the dollar amount of $5,500 ;-(. Wonder why they did not increase the dollar option with it. Also strange that for the Sable, the interest rsate is a lot higher. And now the date's been changed to 3/31/2008. I still figured out that even though the interest rate is much lower, I'm still better off to take the cash reduction instead, even for 60 months.
#132 of 152 Check this out by ionosphere1 Jan 08, 2008 (9:32 pm)
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/editorials/ford-death-watch-40-mercury-rip/   If what he says is true, everyone better buy a Grand Marquis like me while you still can!!!!   Don't know what he's talking about though regarding questionairre and only 4 vehicles. He's wrong on both counts.
#133 of 152 $4 & $5/Gallon Gasoline... by hpmctorque Mar 05, 2008 (11:31 pm)
and the recently enacted 35 mpg by 2020 law are what will finally sink the CV/GM/TC. I'd be really surprised if production continues beyond the '09 model year. By then, there will be enough late model, low mileage used ones on the road to satisfy the ever diminishing demand. For proof, look at resale values for the '03-'07 models. Not very good, and proof that demand is declining.   Think about it; expensive gasoline will make these cars, rugged as they are, uneconomical for law enforcement and taxi service. For limo-type service the Taurus/Sable/(new for '09) Lincoln MKS will be better overall choices in the expensive gas era. Replies to this message: euphonium (Mar 06, 2008 8:14 am) peetiedog (Mar 07, 2008 10:31 pm)
#134 of 152 Re: $4 & $5/Gallon Gasoline... [hpmctorque] by euphonium Mar 06, 2008 (8:14 am)
Replying to: hpmctorque (Mar 05, 2008 11:31 pm) expensive gas era. ??   That gas is expensive is no more true than it was 40 years ago when it was .35 a gallon. If your income has not risen at least 10 times in the last 40 years, it is not the price of gas that is the problem.   Everything else has gone up. Why should gas be exempt from price increases?
#135 of 152 Re: $4 & $5/Gallon Gasoline (euphonium) by hpmctorque Mar 06, 2008 (9:42 am)
Well, you make a good point there, but from what I've read, oil at $103/barrel just surpassed the old record established in '81, in inflation adjusted terms. I suppose much depends on how you want to look at it, but I think record high - and rising - gas prices will prove to be a strong headwind for the old body-on-frame big Fords.   I don't presume to know where gas prices will top out, or whether they'll stay high, but it's a virtual given that demand from China, India, and other emerging countries will continue to support relatively high prices. Replies to this message: peetiedog (Mar 08, 2008 12:50 am) euphonium (Mar 08, 2008 12:04 pm) peetiedog (Mar 08, 2008 2:03 pm)
#136 of 152 Re: $4 & $5/Gallon Gasoline... [hpmctorque] by peetiedog Mar 07, 2008 (10:31 pm)
Replying to: hpmctorque (Mar 05, 2008 11:31 pm) You're right, the CV/GM/TC trio probably won't continue beyond the '09 model year, and definitely not past the '10 model, but it's not due to the gas mileage. It's due to another short-sighted decision from the ivory tower's executive round table. I'd be one of the first to admit that the Panther Trio in it's current configuration, is too long in the tooth to be a viable long term product offering. I just happen to believe that a nice facelift, a mild interior re-do, and a few up-dated gizmos would allow the old girls to soldier on for another 3-5 years (providing a sizeable up-tic in sales), until a new (worthy) rwd replacement could be brought to market. There hasn't been a significant face-lift in a decade, so they were long overdo, yet kept selling pretty well given the lack of attention afforded them, if you ask me. But alas, the time has come to bid adieu. Ford decided to move away from rwd platforms, in favor of fwd & awd. At the same time, GM and Chrysler developed a newfound affection for rwd, especially for their higher end cars, as did Lexus and Infiniti. And we all know what BMW, Jag and Benz feels about rwd; even Audi is moving to a rear-bias to their Quattro AWD system (especially for their high performance cars) to more simulate rwd predominant balance. And now, even Ford has recognized that it needs to re-develop more rwd offerings (duh!), and have started looking at their new Australian rwd platform for a possible North American adaptation. My question is: Ford, why give up your rear-wheel drive market to your competitors (even if for only a couple years), only to have to come back later and spend lots of money trying to win it back? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Sounds like another of those famous Ford blunders in the making to me.   Oh, and by the way hpmctorque, have you looked at the fuel economy ratings on the Taurus/Sable and even the Fusion/Milan/MKZ (no #'s on the MKS yet) compared to the CV/GM/TC? There's only between 2-4 mpg difference. And while that can represent a 10-15% improvement, many people would gladly trade that small of a difference for the other benefits the old Panther-girls offer. Things such as balance, durability, ride quality, stability, handling, safety, lower NVH, lower maintenance (especially front-end work), etcetera. When I take my Town Car on a road trip, let's say an 800+ mile round trip from Napa, CA to Los Angeles or Las Vegas. I average upwards of 21-22 mpg for the trip (and I average about 75+ mph trip speeds). Once I rented a Ford Fusion V6 for a trip to Las Vegas, thinking I'd save a lot of gas money. I only averaged 24 mpg for the trip, the ride quality while nice for a small car, was not even close to my Town Car. A lot buzzier, plus I felt a lot more exhausted and wound-up when I got there and when I got back home. The extra $13.00 I saved on the round trip (about 4 fewer gallons of gas $3.19 per gal), wasn't worth the lack of comfort, frustration and stress that came with the smaller, buzzier confines. What some people don't take into consideration is that those smaller, higher revving engines have to work a little harder than the loping, long legged, large car V8 engines when it comes to hill climbing and passing. And I don't believe they come anywhere close to the big, slower turning V8's when it comes to longevity either. I'm convinced that my Town Car's life expectancy is easily 250,000 or even 350,000 miles or more. I'd just like an updated version as would a lot of other people I know and talk to. And as far as gas goes, most of the big, comfy car buffs, like me, don't mind spending $200 - $250 a year in feeding costs for the benefits of a traditional, full sized rwd luxury car. Also I'm of the mind that there's no substitute for extra steel around you if in a major accident (say Town Car vs Accord in a head-on).   As for as law enforcement is concerned, there is no substitute for rugged, well balanced, reliable, durable and economical (maintenance & repair wise). Suspensions, steering racks, transaxles (transmissions), tire wear, cooling systems, and more on the Taurus for example, would cost law enforcement agencies far more than the additional fuel charges of the Crown Vic cruisers. California Highway Patrol (and other state's trooper agencies), along with large municipal law enforcement agencies (like L.A.P.D. and L.A. County S.O.) have intensive endurance testing programs for their police cruisers. And year after year, the old fuddy-duddy Ford Crown Vic just keeps on coming out on top, in spite of it's age and weaknesses. Besides, when you're responding to an officer in distress' call for back-up, or when in pursuit of a fleeing felony suspect (jumping over curbs & bottoming out on road dips), I don't think anyone is too concerned about another couple miles-per-gallon. Besides they're the government, they just pass the costs on to us. Taxi services are just as concerned or more about durability, longevity and maintenance costs, which once again tend to favor the good ole Crown Vic. And as far as limo & livery services are concerned, how many front wheel drive stretched limo's have you seen lately, even Cadillac DeVilles (DHS); they're almost as rare as stretched Hummers. Even the livery trade doesn't want fwd cars. They cost too much for maintenance & wear, reliability & durability is far worse, and comfort & ride quality is nowhere near as good. Next time you see a few limo drivers take your own unscientific poll, you'd be hard pressed to find 10% of the owners & operators who'll disagree with that. These people are business people, they don't buy Town Cars because they're all Lincoln enthusiasts; they buy them because they are the best product & value on the market for what they need. My question is: Why, why, why Ford, would you give up this market that has become your birthright, only to have to try and fight to get a piece of it back later? I just don't get it. The MKS, as nice as it is, will not really replace the Town Car with the limo & Livery market, sure you'll see a few stretched MKS' and executive livery cars (sort of a fashion statement, like a stretched Navigator). I think the Chrysler 300 will probably get the lion's share of that market, and Cadillac is working on a full size rwd vehicle that I'm sure will eventually take a piece of that market as well. When Ford does finally bring a viable rwd car to market 4 or 5 years from now, they'll have to fight to get back into that market, which will be expensive; and do you really expect Chrysler and GM to just hand their market share back to Ford, or do think they'll fight like the dickens to keep it?

Messages Page 14 of 16 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Future Vehicles Future Crown Vic and Grand Marquis