Ford Might Relegate Crown Victoria To Fleet-Only Sales.

[armadamaster]

I take it you place little faith in Consumer Report's evaluation of the Fusion as Ford's most reliable vehicle currently produced, ahead even of most of Toyota's offerings?

 

Don't even get me going on CR, God's gifts to the Automotive industry the Camry, just had a friend get rid of his brand new one after only a year because it spent more time in the shop than in his driveway. The first gen Tundra model was GOD when it debuted yet the FLEET of them we had at my former place of employment, required brakes every 5K to go along with the regular oil changes. The periodic spark plugs exploding from the heads were fun on the side of the road as well. Toyota corporate answered our query about these probs with "Our trucks aren't made for any type of commercial use". No, we were'nt pulling goosenecks with them, just baggies of machine shop supplies.

 

So I'll take anything CR says with a truckload of salt.

[Blueblood]

THE CV IS GONE? WHO CARES!!!

 

The fact is that even if there is no retail order guide for the 2008 CV,

 

THERE IS A RETAIL ORDER GUIDE FOR THE 2008 GMQ!!!!!!

 

The market does not support both models, so Ford is sticking with the one that does.

 

I work at a FLM dealer and we do not stock CVs. CAUSE THEY NEVER SELL! We do have a nice selection of new and preowned GMQs.

 

Go worry about something important. :P

 

Mark.

 

 

They don't sell because people don't want cars from the 70's anymore, if Ford had ever modernized the damn things they would sell, but ford is apparently too damned stupid to understand this simple fact.

 

Find me one Japanese company that hasn't updated one of their cars since 1990..

[Topgun]

THE CV IS GONE? WHO CARES!!!

 

The fact is that even if there is no retail order guide for the 2008 CV,

 

THERE IS A RETAIL ORDER GUIDE FOR THE 2008 GMQ!!!!!!

 

The market does not support both models, so Ford is sticking with the one that does.

 

I work at a FLM dealer and we do not stock CVs. CAUSE THEY NEVER SELL! We do have a nice selection of new and preowned GMQs.

 

Go worry about something important. :P

 

Mark.

Pretty easy for you to say that when you don't work at the plant . Thats like saying you can only sell one car line at your dealership.

[msalyer1956]

THE CV IS GONE? WHO CARES!!!

 

The fact is that even if there is no retail order guide for the 2008 CV,

 

THERE IS A RETAIL ORDER GUIDE FOR THE 2008 GMQ!!!!!!

 

The market does not support both models, so Ford is sticking with the one that does.

 

I work at a FLM dealer and we do not stock CVs. CAUSE THEY NEVER SELL! We do have a nice selection of new and preowned GMQs.

 

Go worry about something important. :P

 

Mark.

 

I have a 2000 CV and my wife and I love it. We ordered it just the way we wanted it because we couldn't find one we liked. We think they look better than the GM.

It is peppy, comfortable and quite economical to drive and mantain. We consistently get 27 mpg on trips. Sure a refresh is in order but keep the roominess, economy, classic good looks and comfort and Ford will have a winner. IMO

Edited March 27, 2007 by msalyer1956

[Traveler]

They don't sell because people don't want cars from the 70's anymore, if Ford had ever modernized the damn things they would sell, but ford is apparently too damned stupid to understand this simple fact.

 

Find me one Japanese company that hasn't updated one of their cars since 1990..

 

This right here is an example of why people don't even look at the Panther cars anymore. Blueblood...I'm not meaning harm by singling you out there, but most people do not realize that the Crown Vic, Grand Marquis and Lincoln Town Car have been regularly improved and reengineered over the years. The only resemblance to the 1979 Panthers are the basic design structures. The frame has been reengineered over the years, the suspension, the steering, the engine, the transmission, etc. Is a 78 Fairmont comparable to the 04 SVT Cobra? No, because while the design is similiar, Ford has constantly improved the platform to work. Was it time for a replacement? Yes, but did it still perform admirably? Yes.

 

In just the past few years, the cars have gotten a substanially improved hydroformed frame, its suspension modified with the shocks moved outboard to improve handling, tweaks with the Watt's linkage, rack and pinion steering, better transmission and torque convertor, the Mustang GT's 2V PI heads and a host of other things. Consider the Fail-Safe feature that allows the car to run without water for a few emergency miles. Also, there is the traction control that features very strong braking courtesy of the emergency brake assist feature. Then consider the many options that have been added that are not unlike those you'll find on other similar cars. The Crown Vic and its siblings are practically new cars that have been a work in progress over the past few years especially. Go back and do a indepth look at the car and where it has came from. Just since 2003, you'll find a lot of unadvertised features there.

 

If you took a Crown Vic from the 70s, 80s, 90s and today, you'd see a basic design there underneath but nothing brought over from 30 years ago that hasn't been extensively modified. Its a functional car with a function design. Its time for a replacement, but i feel that I can say confidently that the Crown Victoria and its siblings can still compete with any modern sedan in its class and likely last longer with less investment. These cars deliver exactly what the buyer wants and will probably last twice as long as a competitor. The real problem is people want the latest styling trend and they want to be like the next door Joneses with a new Camry or Accord in their garage.

[dr511scj]

They don't sell because people don't want cars from the 70's anymore, if Ford had ever modernized the damn things they would sell, but ford is apparently too damned stupid to understand this simple fact.

 

Find me one Japanese company that hasn't updated one of their cars since 1990..

 

This is so packed with half-truths it's hard to know where to start.

 

Half truth: CV is a "car from the 70s"

 

Truth: While the Panther platform originated in MY 1979, virtually every aspect of the car dates from 1998 or later: Styling -- 1998 (too old, of course), PI SOHC 2V engine -- 1999 (should at least have a 3V option if not some DOHC 4Vs), Rear suspension and brakes -- redone within the last decade, front suspension, redone for 2003.

 

Half truth: Ford is too stupid to "understand" the market

 

Truth: The volume of the CV/GMQ/TC niche has limited by CAFE standards for over twenty years. If Ford sold a "hot" Panther at a reasonable cost-plus price point (not the bloated MSRPs necessary to maintain the current price structure, but a price point that represented actual amortized costs and fair profits), sales would be brisk. But the MPG hit would cut into the sales of other, more profitable models because Ford would have to sell more high MPG models to keep its CAFE average compliant. CAFE also forced Ford to channel large vehicle buyers into trucks and SUVs. And so Ford consciously starves the Panther because its volume is artificially limited by regulations (note: PIs don't count against CAFE, so it's unclear why FoMoCo doesn't build a Hemi-killer for the boys in blue). And it's also unclear why Ford doesn't exploit the E-85 FFV loophole to allow a more competitive, restyled Panther to reclaim some marketshare.

 

Half truth: The Japanese would do better.

 

Truth: How many rugged BOF V8s have you seen from Tokyo lately.

 

Sure, Ford needs to improve CV power, economy and styling--all without losing the unique toughness and reliability advantages of the Panther's easy-to-repair BOF construction. But given Ford's cash crunch and the mounting pressure in Congress to drastically increase CAFE averages, I suspect they'll just let the Panther starve.

 

That's sad.