Traveler

That grille took me totally by surprise. What is Ford thinking?? That's the worst F-150 grille I've seen. Ford or the media may prove me wrong, but I'll say this. We all remember what happened in 2005 when both Ford and Chrysler released their competitive full size sedans at the same time. Chrysler received many accolades and Ford blended into the background. I'm not suggesting that the Dodge Ram will out sell the F-150, but I think the new Ram half-ton will do a number on Ford and GM retail sales to private customers. Chrysler has put together one heck of a truck. Its newly worked 5.7 Hemi will make 380 horsepower and 404 lbs.-ft. torque and deliver 4% better gas mileage than the 2008 model. They also claim that the Ram R/T will feature a higher performance torque convertor and a 4.10 rear that will guarantee it to be the quickest half-ton on the market...for those interested in acceleration bragging rights.

From the current PUTC article it states that aside from the current Ram, the designers took styling cues from the Dodge Charger on the front end and an exterior profile of the F-150, but with a lower reach over that has been a complaint levied against the 2004+ Ford since its introduction. It also mentions in the article that Dodge seemed to take inspiration from both the GM trucks and a bit of F-150 to bring the interior together. http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/autoshows/...odge/page1.html

Odd. I'd definitely have to see a tangible example before saying much more.

Very impressive!! I know that there's a lot of loyalty to Ford on here. I myself am very Ford biased, but have demonstrated that I will buy outside of the blue oval when I like something. The 2009 Dodge Ram may not take on Ford or GM in sales, but from what I've seen, I think you may be looking at the best looking, best packaged half-ton truck on the market upon its debut. I seriously cannot yet spot one thing that I do not like about it. The interior is absolutely amazing. The exterior carries over the Dodge-trademark look much better than I expected it to. On top of this, the Hemi is getting bumped to 380 horsepower! Chrysler needed something big and I think they've found it. If this new Ram has the reliability built into it, this truck will be an out of the park home run for Chrysler. I know my '03 has been great and August will make 5 years of ownership. If the new truck is built even better and will offer even better build quality, it will be a serious sales threat...at least in the retail business.

I see electric/petroleum hybrid technology as a fad; a band-aid for a hurt felt in the wallet. From a customer point-of-view, its a knee-jerk reaction to those who protest the gas price surges we see every few months. Plus, its also driven by a possible vindication from those who feel they are thumbing their noses at the gas stations and oil companies. Once we begin to see more fuel efficient gasoline and diesel engines, the hybrid will take a back seat. People enter into these hybrid vehicle purchases with little understanding about the downsides of such technology and react only to their initial pain at the pump.

I don't see Toyota touching GM or Ford. They may threaten the Dodge Ram, but even it I believe is secure for the time being. Factor in the black eyes they received with initial quality control problems and notable recalls and Tundra has sullied what could have been a much more formidable entry into the realm of serious half-tons. We've been talking perception in recent days and the perception of the F-150 is the best half-ton on the market. Nevermind the Super Duties. Furthering Toyota's plight will be taking on the Silverado. It is my belief that even Chrysler will retain its third place safely unless the company fails. The same would be the case for the F-Series. Only a terribly slumping Ford Motor Company would lose their truck title to Toyota. Roll out the Camrys and Corollas all you want, but the domestics know their truck customers and their customers are among the most loyal. If Dodge were to completely fold, I feel confident that most would walk into Ford or GM showrooms before Toyota. Its the nature of the client. When you want a truck, you want reputation; not a drag race. Even before I had even heard of the TwinForce/Ecoboost engine programs, I had a hunch that Ford would be the auto manufacturer to watch in the next decade. I think you're going to see Ford resemble itself from the eighties in their success. Ford looks prepared. Their quality is up, their cars are more respectable and can stand toe to toe with the Japanese models they compete against. I do believe the EcoBoost will be the turning point...for better or for worse...and I believe it will be for the better. I also think that Ford will revolutionize the truck market. I think people are ready for light duty diesel and I think that program will be another success for Ford. Ford is having to undo some damage that was done to its reputation, but I see that coming back quickly. I think Taurus will eventually come out of the sales slump and I think a redesigned Fusion will only enhance its success. Edge is a winner. Lincoln is poised for a major turn around. While a couple of Ford models I have doubts about (Flex and Fusion to name a few) I think the health of the company will make drastic improvements, especially at a time where Toyota's quality has taken a few hits...even in their car production. It may be that Honda could play a part in slowing down the Toyota juggernaut. I think Ford will be ready for the next decade and you'll see the Blue Oval gleaming again.

Yeah, I don't understand why they hadn't put forced induction on the RX-8 by now. As for the pics...don't really like it. I know they feel the need to freshened up, but the ground effects raise the ricer factor too high and the front fascia looks like a Praying Mantis. I had also wondered why Nissan hadn't done a TT 350Z and then saw the Nissan GTR or whatever its called. Why did they take the 350Z front end off and replace it with something that ugly. Why not recall the 350Z 'Twin Turbo' badging from the early nineties. It was being compared to the Corvette even then. The 350Z is a handsome car as-is. Not sure I'd want a two-seater in that price segment, but its good-looking despite that.

Whatever the plan...its moving forward with a RWD platform. I imagine that Ford will get it right. Ford wants to hold on to the fleet business and I think those who appreciate the Panthers for those same qualities, will probably be accepting of whatever Ford has to offer. I may be wrong, but I think Ford understands the need to produce a modern interpretation of the Panther to please the loyalists, the fleet buyers and hopefully, some new customers as well.

With skis I can see your point. They are more long than large. The openings and the liftovers are similar, but just by the considerably wider width, the Crown Vic is more accomodating for bulky stuff than a Mustang and I believe in some items, the Taurus as well. Getting back to hatchback subject, there are often compromises in structural integrity (or can be) with hatchbacks, but I do miss not having one. No bigger than the '90 GT was that I had, it could swallow a variety of items. Of course, the rear hatch still exists on things like wagons, mini-vans and SUVs, but not so much on coupes and sedans any more. That's one thing I like about the Magnum, although obviously not too many share that sentiment since it will be cancelled shortly. Even though it looks more like a fastback wagon (EPA classifies it as a truck), the rear seats fold flat and you can slide stuff in there. Its a sportier car than most wagons (which I like), but the slope of the roof, not only impedes visibility but also storage of larger, bulkier items. Fix the roof line and now it looks like a station wagon again. Car trunks are sometimes hampered by higher liftovers and the tailight assemblies with surrounding structure. The Taurus is certainly big enough for most. The Crown Vic, by my own experience, will certainly suffice. Most full-size cars have enough trunk space to be satisfactory.

Aw, come on Nick...you know that's a stretch for sure. I've been there. Now, the old fox body hatchbacks were awesome! With that hatch raised and those back seats folded flat, you really could haul some larger items with that car. With the SN95 introduction in '94 that changed. The trunk opening is too small for large items. The trunk is rather small, the pass through is too small an opening, the rear seats don't lay flat and you certainly can't manuever much past the front seats. When our child was small, I had to work at it (turning and twisting) to get our travel system stroller into the trunk of the Cobra.

For the record, I could understand Ford trying to revive the Ford version with the Taurus name, but why dredge up that overplayed Sable name. Egh! I wasn't a big fan of Montego either, but at least it didn't sound like a fur coat or something. I'll have to say Ford is doing a pretty good job here and there with their styling. I think they may be carrying the 3-bar a bit too far. Some vehicles it looks good on; others it doesn't. Edge is one vehicle I would likely consider. I like them. Of the three brands, Lincoln is the one standing head and shoulders over Ford and Mercury in exterior styling. I'm not really crazy about FWD standard vehicles as discussed in another thread, but the styling exhibited by Lincoln really is catchy. Even the Flex version for Lincoln looked good. That said, however, Mercury just isn't looking good to me these days. None of the Mercurys really do. Grand Marquis is still the same conservatively styled car, but even it doesn't look as good as it did in 98-02. Sable takes a backseat to Taurus and to me, Milan is plain on the front and just ugly on the back end. I like to think I'm fair and unbiased in most cases and I'll give credit where its due. Lincoln looks dern good. The one thing about the MKS though...I wish they would've adopted MKZ-like taillights. To me, the MKZ is the best looking Ford sedan made right now. Of course, for the money, I could probably buy a Infiniti G sedan and have a lot more fun, but I'd still take a look at the Lincoln if I were buying in that price range.

Another option if all the Ford anti-Panther guys and Ford agree on it. Why not kill the Crown Victoria? Switch the police over to the Grand Marquis and you're all set. Truthfully, since the Vic is now only fleet anyway, it really shouldn't be an embarassment. Most people don't know the Vic exists...that is until all two tons of it is filling their rearview mirror. Law enforcement has used Mercurys before. That way Mercury could still cater to the retail, pick up all the fleet business and the Ford Panther disappears. Plus, Ford can throw out all the Crown Vic grilles and trim and just run Grand Marquises aside from the Town Car production. Oh, and to add...it gives Ford the opportunity to import their G8 fighter from Australia under the Ford badge. It introduces a new RWD platform for retail first, law enforcement gets interested and allows for the Panther to finally be phased out.

You see, this is a good reason why Ford has two full-size sedans. If one can't fulfill your need, chances are the other can. Ford isn't going to do a major hack job on the Panthers. They're good cars with trusted design that happens to have a few compromises. Thing is the Taurus is a fairly new design that also has compromises. The Panther will suffice for those who enjoy them. The 3v engine would be nice, but aside from that, there's no need to tear it up. Of course, Ford has eliminated the HPP package so I wouldn't be interested in a new Panther now anyway. I guess I bought mine at just the right time to drive for a long time and then I'll be ready to see what Ford is offering by the time the my Vic wears out. The only points I attempt to make is that these are really good cars. I never gave them much credibility either having driven Mustang V8s up to the time I bought. The last Mustang I had was a '01 Cobra and I still had it when I bought the Crown Vic. I didn't expect to buy the Vic; it just so happened I liked it a lot better than the Five-Hundred. It actually reminded me more of a Mustang (like a big automatic GT) which I was accustom to. The Five-Hundred felt like the old person's car at that time. It was just numb to the world. The HPP Vic was much more enthusiastic and gave me plenty of room, comfort and the options I wanted. The D3 isn't capable of winning over the Panther owners, but then again this really isn't a Panther owners vs. D3 owners. I have a feeling that all these D3 supporters don't even own them where as the Panther owners speak out of experience. That makes a difference in any argument.

I like the interior. Looks like the center stack isn't quite friendly for a left-side switchover, but that is one interior I wouldn't mind sitting in every day. Actually the back seat sort of resembles the Crown Vic a bit. Like the frontal area a lot!

The Panther has a 19 gallon tank and the D3 a 20 gallon tank. One gallon makes it very small???

With all due respect though, a rental doesn't equate to daily ownership. I can't really see the spare creating a problem with luggage of all things, however everybody packs different, I guess. Never been a problem for my family. Still, I'll still take the full size spare. Plus, you don't have to unload your trunk to get to the spare either like you do in the Taurus or Five-Hundred. Pull it right over the cargo and off the shelf. You see, most people don't think about emergency situations like that. I'm not for sure. Does Taurus offer a fail-safe system? If so, that's good. Another plus. If not, then that's a big check for the Panther so that if you blow a hose, you can likely make it home or to a service center without having to call a tow truck. Like I said before, two different cars for two different types of owners.

I liked the old Monte Carlo SS models in the late eighties. Personally, I think they were a much better built car than the Camaro IROC-Z and Z28s during that time. Arguably better-looking too. However, the Lumina coupe followed by the Monte Carlo shaped like a Butterball Turkey began the tarnishing of the Monte Carlo name. Followed by the origami-swan Monte Carlo that finally was put out of its misery. I guess some like them, but since most of them have either a 3, 8 or 24 in the back glass, you know they aren't being bought for their looks. Funny too, because you never hardly see any Fusion drivers with NASCAR memorabilia in the window or stuck to the car. Must be a Chevy thing.

I know some guys swear by them, but to me those older Buick FWD models are probably responsible for ruining Buick's image. I know the 3800 V6 is suppose to be a good motor, but the rest of the car is questionable. I borrowed a older Buick Park Avenue a few months ago. Probably a late nineties and that was the biggest rattle trap I've driven in some time. Its good to see Ford making its way up, but I'm not sure that's saying much with Chevrolet of all makes, right behind Ford. Aside from the Silverado, Tahoe and Suburban, I can't imagine their public perception score being so high. Must be a lot of diehard Chevy fans out there. Its not that I hate Chevy. Its just that they pale in comparison in perceivable build quality to Ford in the past 2-3 years. Ford owns Chevy in that regard.

From a personal point of view, I don't need to carry a nine foot long object in an automobile. Few people likely ever will. But its one of those "if I ever" type things that manufacturers feel the need to add. I've got a truck to go to Home Depot on. Plus, if I've got a nice car, I don't want to be picking up lumber or extension ladders on it and risk damaging the upholstery or whatever. Some will like to know they can though. The two pics are really not a fair comparison, because it doesn't fully reveal the full width of the Vic with it turned at an angle. However, carefully note that the interior walls of the Taurus trunk has to taper in more than with the Vic. Far as the seats...I tried both in '05 extensively on a test drive. I found that the seats in the Crown Vic were just as comfortable as the Five-Hundred. Taurus may have improved, but it wasn't available when I bought and having sampled the Taurus at the last auto show, it was to me comparable to the Five-Hundred still. One thing about the seats in the Crown Vic are that they aren't really what you'd call a bench seat. Mine has the traditional column shifter, but both the driver and passenger seat comes together and meets in the middle. The Crown Vic seats are wider and one critical feature about them that I love over the Taurus and every other sedan out there. The seat bottoms actually extend underneath my knees for maximum support. Now you want to talk about maximum support and maximum comfort (or so it seemed)...when I sat in the 300C SRT-8 was I blown away how comfortable the seats were. They were a bolstered on the sides a bit high for most, but were they comfortable!

You've never fully used a CV trunk then, suv_guy. There was a guy I knew some years ago with a Grand Marquis. He had a part-time job delivering newspapers. I personally saw him put a full size metal newspaper rack in the trunk and close the lid shut. I'll bet you the Taurus doesn't have a large enough trunk opening nor the depth to do that. Large bulky objects...the Crown Vic owns. Also, I haven't read of the Taurus having the load-level suspension. Does it? If it doesn't, all that space seems wasted when the rear wheel is bottoming out on the wheelwell. You start adding cargo and that softly-sprung Taurus is going to squat badly. If I'm not mistaken, the Panther's HPP suspension is rated up to about 1000 pounds. My experience with fold-down seats is they are often not as comfortable as a fixed backseat. They lack the concave molding in the seat to give you maximum comfort over the long haul. Not sure about the Taurus or the 500 for that matter. It may be better than most. I didn't try the back seat of the Five-Hundred I test drove in '05.

Monte Carlo must not be too delightful since its out of production now. They must've surveyed 25 miles within the range of a NASCAR Speedway to get that car added to the list. Strange.

-AWD capable doesn't really mean that much if you don't need it. If saddled with that or FWD, many including myself would probably rather have AWD than FWD. My preference is RWD. -Modern. Well, the modern Panther is relatively modern. Kind of a generic term. Taurus more trendy/styling...yes. -Larger inside. You gain a inch or so in rear leg room witht the Taurus and give up more than that to the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis in terms of hip and shoulder room. I am intrigued about the Falcon as jpd80 speaks of and if its a feasible possibility for the US. At least as a future option for a RWD platform. -Small outside. Its not by much. In length, yes. It certainly has a much taller greenhouse but with not a lot to show for that in terms of headroom. Its the carry over of the "command seating" touted in the 500 that gives it the height. -Bigger trunk. Yes, total volume but not necessarily in usefulness. I can carry a large load in the well of the Vic and still tote that full-size spare that I don't believe is optional on the Taurus. I've had to use it and believe me, its nice not to have to limp on the barbie tire and not have to go straight to the tire shop to keep from limbing. -More horsepower. Maybe 23 peak horsepower more. Crown Vic has over 40 lbs.-ft of torque more than the 3.5 Duratec. -Safer. Actually, take a look at NHTSA. The Crown Vic comparing side bags to side bags against the Taurus are identical in front, rear and side collision. Both get triple 5 stars in collision. Guess what? Crown Vic scores another 5 stars for rollover. Taurus gets 4 stars. According to NHTSA. You get the side air bags on the Panther, you've got 5 star protection and safer from a rollover. -6 gears. Don't necessarily need them. I guess it would be nice, but my guess is the Taurus needs more gear to push nearly two tons down the road with a 3.5 V6. Not sure what the FE abbreviation is. Probably obvious. As for the inside and outside being nicer. If you're talking about aesthetics...I'll give you that on the Taurus interior. Build quality, I don't know. Outside a person can be easily swayed by the pretty chrome, jeweled headlights/taillights and side vents. I'd say they're pretty even in exterior build quality as far as sheetmetal and other add-ons. The point is there's no way the Taurus can be clearly shown to be head and shoulders over the Crown Victoria or Grand Marquis. Two different cars for two different types of owners.

Four options I see for RWD Ford: 1. Import from Australia 2. Share platform with Mustang 3. Soldier on with the Panther with new body 4. Drop RWD sedan all together I myself favor #2 for cost sharing and similar powertrain/drivetrain sharing with the Mustang.

I'm not. Just attempting to make the point that the D3 wasn't the savior that everyone thought it would be. Furthermore, I'm also stating that despite the styling, the Panther can still perform the duties of a full size family sedan just as good if not better than anything else offered domestically. Especially for the money. I think my past posts will show that I have no animosity toward the D3. I think its a good car for sure and part of its failures has been on account of Ford's lack of past quality commitments to their FWD sedans and their lack of good marketing strategy. Ford needed a better RWD flagship car and by all appearance, they put all their eggs in the D3 basket and didn't invest into a solid Panther replacement. When all is said and done, the Taurus is a good car to compete against Impala, LaCrosse, 300 Touring, Accord and Camry and maybe even Avalon on the top-end. That said, however, I feel convinced that the Crown Victoria can offer just as much comfort as the Taurus, nearly as good gas mileage, more usable interior room, similar options, longer lifespan and better performance. Sure, I'd prefer a car with a more up to date look. I would have probably bought a Dodge Charger R/T if the incentives had been there, but having a past in V8 Mustangs, I felt comfortable with the HPP Vic and it has served me well thus far.

Not sure what your point is there. Anyway, we're not comparing retail vs. retail but customer vs. customer, in my opinion and I'm saying that if you put both cars to the test, the Taurus will not show many any more than the Crown Vic will. Put aside the styling and the immediate resale value. Okay, I'll give you two or three miles per gallon. All I saying is that the Taurus has not wooed its customers and the Panthers have long since proven themselves to their primary customers. As for the 20 year old Panther, that would be 1988. Nothing really that significant in 1988. The original Panther design debuted in 1979, was revamped in 1992, then in 1998 and received a brand-new frame and other modifications in this decade, most notably in 2000-2003. The retail customer benefits from the same changes made for the Panther's primary customers, law enforcement. The demands on the car required for long shifts pass right along to the few remaining retail customers. Those are the attributes I can appreciate especially when adding the options that I want personally. That makes for the best Ford sedan in my opinion. I don't have to worry if a Taurus can hold up or not. The Crown Vic I can feel more confident in and enjoy driving it more.