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 3 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#21 of 152 euphonium, we must stop meeting by marsha7 Apr 07, 2005 (6:00 pm)
like this...I thought the only thing proven by the demise of the Marauder was that no one would actually pay an additional $5-7,000 for 60 extra HP and a cheap trio of 3 gauges sitting in front of the floor shifter...while we all seem to want the extra HP, since it probably cost Ford less than $100 in parts to do so, no one got suckered into paying mega thousands more for it...add an add'l grand, you have takers...add an add'l five to seven grand and it will rust on the dealers lot until the arrival of forever...
#22 of 152 euphonium, sorry but I don't agree by bigunit67 Apr 08, 2005 (1:58 pm)
The TC, GM, and CV have been around a while and dont have a lot of development costs to recoup. An article I saw last year in the USA today stated that the ave profit, as of the end of 2003, on each car was approximately 10,000 dollars. Knowing that, what ford attempted to do with the sticker of a Marauder was nothing but an attempt to milk more profit out of one product line to cover holes in the rest of it's lineup...NOT offer a competitive car at a realistic price.   Adding that to what Marsha7 says, taking an already high profit-margin car and attempting to milk several thousand more $$$ out of it is what turned the public off, not the concept of "more power". If you look around at the new 280 HP Avalon, the 265 HP Maxima, and many others, the public is addicted to ponies again, despite high gas prices.   When you see the sticker for a Chrysler 300c and then compare it (last model year) to the Marauder, Ford has a hard time justifying what they offered vs what others produced from scratch. I do agree with you that they should raise the content value of the TC. It should not be the price it is with a 240 HP engine powering it. However, I would wager most TC owners wouldn't be swayed by what a Ford or Mercury can offer since there is more to a town car than just what's under the hood (extra size, status, amenities, etc).   Whether we're 100% right or not, maybe SOMEONE at Ford is reading this and realizes what they're throwing out there is behind the times and they'll catch up soon.
#23 of 152 Keep The Basics by jsylvester Apr 10, 2005 (6:41 pm)
As long as the redesign doesn't mess with the basics, which in the case of my 94 Grand Marquis, a car that feels solid even after 11 years and 115,000 miles.   I'd settle for the same power, but I would like a 6 speed auto for better fuel efficiency. If they could add a couple of MPG to both the city and highway EPA rating, I'd be happy.   I'd even settle for the same exterior if they would update the interior, especially the horrible cup holders in the newer ones. The one in my 94 falls short, but it feels Swiss-made compared to the one I saw in a 2005 at the auto show. Also, go back the the better leather, thicker carpeting, and some interior chrome they had before the decontenting began.
#24 of 152 Yeah, Keep the Basics by ragdollgirl Apr 15, 2005 (8:17 am)
I agree with jsylvester, the basic car is great. I, too, have a 94 GM. Mine has almost 200,000 miles. It still looks and runs great, albeit with a few electrical issues that don't affect the performance. I'm about ready to scope out a new car and although I haven't yet looked closely at new GMs, I think I will get one, unless they have been seriously "decontented". I like mine so well I hate to have to go and reinvent the wheel, so to speak. I hope I am not disappointed when I do go look at new ones. If they have cheapened the leather, carpets, etc., maybe I will be. It doesn't appear as though Ford will be improving those items soon. Too bad.
#25 of 152 Soild rear axle, interior, power by fsmmcsi Apr 20, 2005 (7:27 pm)
The only problems I have with the Crown Victoria / Grand Marquis / Town Car are the completely outdated interior (sliding around on the flat seats is no fun), and the solid rear axle. You just can not have a smooth ride with a solid rear axle. Ford apparently did not have a competitive push before the 300 & Charger came along.   As for the engine, the 2006 Explorer has upgraded to the 292 HP / 300 Ft.-Lbs. three valve 4.6 V8 and the six speed automatic, and all of the other vehicles which used the two valve 4.6 apparently will also upgrade to that engine and transmission for improved power and better mileage. Replies to this message: jsylvester (Apr 23, 2005 2:43 pm)
#26 of 152 Re: Soild rear axle, interior, power [fsmmcsi] by jsylvester Apr 23, 2005 (2:43 pm)
Replying to: fsmmcsi (Apr 20, 2005 7:27 pm) You are correct, there are some compromises with the solid rear axle, but there are advantages. It is simple and durable, and usually requires only simple shock absorbers as any future maintenance.   On the interior, I'm guessing part of the update will be to make better form-fitting seats for the bucket seat option. Myself personally, I prefer the bench seat, but you do slide around on the leather.
#27 of 152 Ford Crown Victoria by xkss Apr 24, 2005 (11:17 pm)
They should drop the Crown Victoria name and replace it with the Falcon when the Australian Ford Falcon comes here in 2008.   check it out here.   Australian Fords Replies to this message: chuck1959 (Sep 08, 2005 3:15 pm)
#28 of 152 Australian Fords need to come here by xkss Apr 24, 2005 (11:22 pm)
Here is the Australian Ford FPV GT-P (FPV stands for Ford Performance Vehicles).   You can get it without the stripes.
#29 of 152 Keep the Vic! by basils Jun 07, 2005 (8:59 am)
Sorry, but the Falcon just looks way too dull for me. Reminds me of a cross between a '95 Mustang and a new Pontiac GTO. No real eye catching lines or distinct qualities about it. As for the Crown Vic....why change it so drastically? It's an original! Great ride...one of the best, very clean and simple lines, very reliable, smooth power delivery, rear wheel drive BENEFITS (yes, benefits), classy yet slightly retro in design, and not every "joe" on the block owns one. True, cops and taxis have them, but they aren't the same in appearance. The only thing that I would want them to do in 2006-2008, is maybe use a 3v 4.6, slightly upgrade the interior, offer all versions the same wide color choices, and maybe modernize the front fascia....but not too much, and leave the rear alone. Whatever they do I hope it looks great because I plan on getting a 2006 model....unless they butcher the design or turn it into a Falcon!
#30 of 152 the Vic needs to die by xkss Jun 25, 2005 (6:12 pm)
The Falcon has way more performance than the Crown Vic.

Messages Page 3 of 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 16 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

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