mercurymichael
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by mercurymichael
-
-
I have a 2015 Edge with the shade and wish I had not bothered with this option. Very poorly designed compared to shades in other similar vehicles. It needed to mount higher and closer to the seat backs to truly be of use. I find it is more in the way than of use. When not in use, the pull part of the shade hangs down and covers the one tiny little cargo light. The cabin of the car lights beautifully with multiple ceiling lights and ambient floor/door lighting not so much in the cargo area. One of my few complaints about an otherwise awesome vehicle.
-
Lincoln Sentinel was used on a concept, it's a somewhat sinister or ominous word but it's aesthetically interesting. Cosmopolitan is the name of a women's fashion magazine or a feminine drink...it would turn off allot of customers...especially men. Capri is another name now associated with a formerly popular Women's fashion trend. It's clear car guys with a fetish for the forgotten retro shouldn't be naming cars.
The point of using the cosmo name is not only it's past use with Lincoln but the true definition of the word fits quite well with worldy traveler theme of the the other Lincoln names. Not a hard concept.cos·mo·pol·i·tan1/ˌkäzməˈpälətn/adjectivesynonyms: worldly, worldly-wise, well travelled, experienced- familiar with and at ease in many different countries and cultures:
-
Cosmopolitan is another great name from Lincoln's past that compliments the Continental name. I like Zephyr and Capri as well, however, they have a muddied history going from Lincoln to Mercury and back to Lincoln in the case of Zephyr. I like the idea of worldly traveler names for Lincoln: Navigator, Aviator, Continental, Cosmopolitan. Town Car is still a great name even though it may be a little damaged. The right car could cure that quickly.
-
1
-
-
Why have Mercury when you can use Ford brand without any need for appreciable external changes.
And I agree Titanium and greater trim levels spell big trouble for Buick...
I would hazard guess that there is far more money to be made with high series Fords in the rest of the world,
trying to sell them in the USA woulkd probably run contra to the aspirations of Lincoln but boy, could you imagine it..
I guess that is my point. The last four Mercury models produced did not have appreciable external changes and had sales increase during a recession. Plus it gave Lincoln dealers a little traffic.
Just seems like it goes against all of the arguments to shutter Mercury and salvage Lincoln.
-
Looks great, but wasn't this the entire point of Mercury?
-
1
-
-
MK is better then dippy, fluffy name like Versailles.
Versailles was a dippy car and not worthy of the name Versailles or Lincoln!
-
favorite Ford = 1956 Thunderbird
favorite Mercury = 1957 Turnpike Cruiser
favorite Lincoln = 1956 Mark II
other favorites are almost the entire Thunderbird run , Cougar run (minus sedans and wagons), Mark Series I-XIII, 76-78 Marquis, 77-78 Town Car, 86 Sable, 58 Edsel, 67 Galaxie 500, MKX, 56 f-100, 77-78 f series, 86 f series
Just too name a few
-
Can I opt out now? I'll let the gov't keep everything I've already put in (14 years), but stop taking anything else from me and I'll forgo any future claims. Fair enough?
I wish this was an option! 25 years in to it and I would still walk away from it all if I could. I feel I can do much better saving on my own than letting Washington piss it away!
-
but 3 of the 4 nearby L/M dealers when I lived in AZ looked like they were stuck in an early 90s time warp.
L/M product has been stuck in an early 90's timewarp as well!!
-
Well, which options would you specifically limit to Lincoln that shouldn't be available in a Ford?
I think the only areas where limitations should exist at all really are in powertrains (apparently in the works), audio (Lincoln already gets the THX-certified systems not available in Ford products) and in warranty/loaner/service plans (also in the works). Is there really a valid reason something like heated/cooled seats shouldn't be available in a Ford (or Seat or VW) and only in a Lincoln (or Audi)?
This was your same arguement for eliminating Mercury so maybe Lincoln should be next since there is apparently no point to having any options or models above a Ford. They may throw Lincoln a transmision or engine, but it will end up in a Ford somewhere along the way--it will not be a Lincoln exclusive. Audio systems can always be upgraded if Ford's are not up to snuff. And if quality is truely job one and delivered then warrently/loaner/service cars are somewhat mute and so will Lincoln be if these features and a polorizing nose clip are all they have to offer for a premium price.
It seems to me that Ford is playing a very dangerous game. They are trying to be all things. Companies that play this game, for example retailers, that try to be all things to all people are usually not very good at anything except being mundane.
-
I don't think the issue with Mercury was that there wasn't money to invest in it, but it was what would have been the point? With it gone now though, they had better continue to move Ford upmarket while successfully turning around Lincoln big time.
To be fair to Ford though in one of your points, the coupe market is small and likely best served by the Mustang only at this point. I wouldn't mind seeing a Fusion coupe or something even smaller like the Reflex concept, but I don't think it's really critical at all to Ford's bottom line.
I don't disagree with the coupe market being small, however noone is truely playing in that field either--Ford could own it and that would take them farther than a super car of sorts. A Fusion based t-bird would be no different than the LTD II birds of the late 70's -- the highest volume thunderbirds ever. I would also prefer a serious minivan to competer with Chrysler/Honda/Toyota. Ford has never had a real contender here. The Wind/Freestar was a nice try, but missed the mark on several key things.
-
Well it should be extremely easy to come up with something that looks better than that.......
Based on their current fleet it would prove rather difficult for them I think!
-
What would it accomplish right now? Ford's turnaround is coming along nicely. I believe another Ford GT type of vehicle would just be a distraction. If they are going to do something expensive and in-your-face with an unknown chance of long-term success, they may as well develop a bold RWD Lincoln sedan flagship instead.
I completely agree. There is alegedly no money to invest in Mercury, which based on recent years could not have added up to much. They have not put nearly enough into Lincoln. There is no Thunderbird, which could very easily be Ford's halo car. There is no replacement for Ranger or Panthers. Outside of Mustang there are no convertibles or coupes. No mini-vans. Bottom line the money could be spent more wisely in other areas.
-
That's quite a tap dancing job. I'll give you props for skillfully avoiding answering the question.
So why do you think Lincoln went from #1 US luxury to #6? There certainly was no new product in that time period. The last Continental failed, the Mark VIII was left on the vine to die just like its stablemates Thunderbird/Cougar. Their #1 vehicle Town Car was updated twice, but not in anyway beyond making it a good fleet car. They did get the LS that was getting them some attention, but again left out to die. They got a rebadged Explorer that failed, a rebadged F-150 that failed and a rebadged Expedition that launched well, but has been largely ignored since. Nassar had no use for L/M and as I recall even said so. His only interest was PAG. I don't think he even saw Ford as more than a truck brand.
As I have said before, Ford completely ignored their car business in this same time period that L/M began to fail. While I have no hard evidence, it is a pretty easy assumption that all the money that was wasted on PAG could have easily kept Ford in the car game, one they owned in that lates 80's early 90's.
As far as the dealership experience, that should always be the focus for F/L and is something that L/M has already achieved according to many surveys including JDPower.
As far as focusing on 'tophats' as a point of differentiality, they are merely turning Lincoln into Mercury, something that many on this site have beat into the ground as being pointless. While Ford as not shared it's product plan for Lincoln's future and they may have the most incredible cars in the world on their way, based on the 'tophat' statement and Ford's recent track record with L/M, it does seem a little unlikely that Lincoln will become anything special. This is not my wish for such a great marque, but they are going to have to go farther for Lincoln with unique engines, drivetrains, driving experience, bodywork, luxury etc. or they will have to kill Mercury all over again.
-
Oh the sacrifices we must make!
It's also part of why the average car price is $35,000!
-
Well, to be somewhat fair, they won't all deploy in a single incident depending on the number of occupants and type of accident.
Just the same you have to pay for all of that mandated crap. Just like child safety items--I have no children and have no use for it, but I have to pay for it just the same--not mention the added weight and space so much of these 'safety' features take up,
-
I do not understand why a leased vehicles are counted as sales. Dosn't FoMoCo still own the vehicle during and at the end of the lease? They simply are turning a new vehicle into a used vehicle.
-
I agree the only way Thunderbird would or should return in this decade is a 4 door coupe and on a next generation rwd global platform. Both Lincoln and Ford need some sort of a halo car. The Taurus/MKS/MKT are not it imho. They are okay, but they are not show stoppers by any stretch of the imagination.
As a halo car it would and should be pricer. I think one of the many problems with 2002 Bird was not so much the price as much as it didn't seem justified.
As far as bringing back another two seater, the Mustang is already basically a two seater--I don't even think small children would be comfortable sitting in the back of one! Therefore as to not compete with the Mustang, the Thunderbird should set 4 comfortably.
Sadly however, I am not so sure that the Thunderbird would fit into the Ford of today. Ford is still obsessed with trucks, cuvs and suvs and now tiny little cars. They seem to be giving up on their own traditions (brands, nameplates and large cars) if they do not fit into one of the afore mentioned categories and perhaps they are justified to do so. Thunderbird was always Fords design leader, an aspirational and inspirational car, a halo--granted with a few misteps along the way! I think Ford has given this position to the Mustang. Not quite where Thunderbird was once positioned, but icon and powerful in its own way.
-
Not bad for a suv. I'm not a fan of the grill at all and the tail end is a bit of a mess--a weak spot for not only Ford, but many car companies these days. The taillights are fine, it's the actually tailgate that is bad.
-
This all happen because they didnt have the balls to invest properly in Mercury and give it a real direction; i am starting to care less and less about this subject simply because its the same back and forth wiht most of the members on here and I honestly dont have anything new to say on the subject. I will eventually have to replace my Milan; when Mercury was around I wanted to stay in the Ford Family but now not so much; Almost every car company now a days is making descent cares so its more of a matter of Style than realiability.
Finally, someone else gets it! I could not agree with you more. I stayed loyal to Mercury all of these years hoping that Ford would turn it around and make it what it was and could ultimately have been. Now I have been freed from this loyalty. All of the arguements that Mercury was just a different grill and taillights (sometimes not even that much!) are basically correct, however this was Ford's doing, not some drastic change in the marketplace as some would have you believe. No doubt the bean counters had most if not everything to do with this treatment and why Lincoln is in its current state. Even if Mercury sales were made up of fleet and employee sales--it still out performed Lincoln, especially when you pull the fleet queens (Town Car and Navigator) out of the equation.
-
One thing: Average transaction price. Lincoln's is higher. Much higher. Lincoln stays. Mercury goes. It's really that simple.
They have to sell them a lot better than they currently are or the average $ becomes irrelivant quickly!
-
Lincoln needs to set its sights a lot higher than Lexus. It is where they should have been all along. They do not need to compete in every vehicle category. 2-4 superior cars, maybe 2 sedans, a cuv and a coupe. Rebadges are not going to cut it in the real luxury world. Mercury could have and did survive this abuse and worse, but Lincoln will not. Ford let the competition get too far ahead of it. So unless there are serveral significant new vehicles waiting in the wings, they are going to have a very tough time ahead. I know what Ford has announced as their plan for Lincoln over the next three years, however I do not believe it is enough to make Lincoln a serious contender in the luxury world. It actually puts them more in line with where Mercury was in its heyday. Don't get me wrong, I most definately want Lincoln to survive. Keeping in mind that they "remained comitted" to Mercury less than 6 months ago, I just hope they know what they are doing.
-
Sharing a platform to produce 2 basically identical vehicles (same features, price range, performance, etc.) just to have different styling is a waste of resources in today's automotive environment. Make one great vehicle or 2 totally different great vehicles.
That doesn't leave a lot of room for Lincoln the way things stand today where the biggest difference is price tag. Don't tell the folks at Honda either. Or GM or Chrysler or toyota for that matter.
-
You might want to brush up on your styling...the only different hardpoint on the Sable was the C-pillar (which was the fad in the 1980's with Mercury being different then Ford...I truly wonder how much that cost to change)..all the other changes where done in plastic, which is much cheaper then new sheet metal stampings...but not as distinctive. The Sable was about as different as the MKZ is vs the Fusion...and everyone complains about the MKZ not looking different enough vs its lesser sibling.
Actually the Sable had a longer wheelbase which Taurus changed to with the first major refresh.
Why Americans reject build-to-order cars
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
I have found that dealers frown on ordering. They always push for what is on their lot or they want to search inventory and find it for you as opposed to taking the time to order.
There are also limited options as compared to the past. Colors, especially interior, are extremely limited. Options are lumped into packages, forcing you to buy things you may not ever consider or want. For example you cannot just order heated seats, you have to a buy a trim level and then an option package which often times includes things that are in no way related to the option you are after. If manufacturers offered options singularly, I think you would see a vastly different end result on what people would buy.