2012 Crown Victoria & Town Car

[armadamaster]

You can't really compare the Panther situation to any other automobile. It's highly appreciated by one group and largely ignored by the other. What to do? I say if the fleet market is the most profitable reason for building the car in the first place, why risk messing it up? The looks are not that important to law enforcement. Its function. However, you're bound to get some people looking with something that looks good. Americans are largely superficial. Young guys still drive their 400 horsepower 2004 Fairmonts around, don't they?

 

Bingo. And what's the bigger risk of the two? Alienating your dedicated Panther buying base by going with a "new" unibody platform in the vague hopes of attracting new buyers to an unproven Five Hundread/Taurus sized RWD car? Or putting a new body and interior on the existing Panther locking in your buying base and potentially attracting some younger buyers? Not forgetting Ford's current financial situation as well. I vote for the latter.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Armada Master

[jpd80]

As someone who's ready to spring for a G8 as a daily driver, I would certainly buy an Interceptor as an alternative.

I'll be intersted in your thoughts if you take the G8 for a test drive,

It's a LHD version our SS Commodore - guaranteed it's a driver's car.

[Traveler]

Many of us do not watch television that is in any way similar to those from the 50s. Rear projection, DLP, Plasma, LCD, SXRD, OLED, HDTV....need I go on....

 

The point was just because our newer televisions are square (or rectangular) now, doesn't mean that they are based on the same technology from its earliest days. The Panther platform has its beginnings form the seventies, but it would be naive to think that its the same car. Ford hasn't just put two or three bodies on the same old platform. Ford has constantly improved the car over the years...hence my other point about 400 horsepower Fairmonts. The Fox was not the same platform from '78. However, it was always a unibody. The Panther has been a BOF car and didn't possess the same inherit chassis flexes that the Fox had that was so difficult to get rid of.

 

The BOF idea is old-school and no doubt there are unibody sedans out there that are safe and rigid. However, Ford's position on the Panther is difficult. Why do police continue to buy the Crown Victoria? Its because it works for them. Ford, in efforts to keep their business, have made substantial improvements to the car over and over again and those of us who appreciate the Panthers have benefited from many of those same changes.

 

Ford already has the Taurus and currently they have the Crown Victoria, as well. No other competitor fields two distinctly different full size sedans. Dodge and Chevy have to build their Chargers and Impalas (respectfully) to meet the needs of both the general public and the fleet buyers. Taurus is aimed squarely at the general retail public while Crown Victoria appeals to just law enforcement and those that appreciate the RWD V8 sedan formula. Ford already has a profitable Panther platform. They need to address how to maintain the platform and keep it profitable. That's all. There are some degrees of compromise with the Chevy and Dodge that are that really that evident in the Crown Vic.

 

I'm just saying that I'm not convinced that Ford will sell any more unibody Interceptors than they would BOF Interceptors and would have a tougher time retaining its fleet business that trust the BOF Crown Victoria. The Panther is a very competent platform; its just that few can see past the grille and the flat dash to see that. There's a lot more car there than meets the eye.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Traveler

[wescoent]

I'll be intersted in your thoughts if you take the G8 for a test drive,

It's a LHD version our SS Commodore - guaranteed it's a driver's car.

 

To me, the epitome of everything my automobile should be was embodied in the last-generation BMW 5-Series. Simple clean looks, great handling, and a supremely functional interior, as well as some get up and go when required. The G8 to me is a true successor to that car. The BMW 135i also has my attention, and is appealing me as a sign that BMW hasn't lost that crazy twitch in their eye that significies a company run by true enthusiasts at heart.

[ShockFX]

The television dates back to the 40 and 50s, however we're not watching the same television. The Panther, while based on a platform from the 70s, has undergone so many changes and improvements, its really hard to compare it to a '79 LTD. The Panther's current frame (rebuilt in '03) is probably about as strong as some pick up trucks. That in itself allows for a super rigid chassis and better handling than even 10 years ago. Almost everyone who has driven one from 10 years ago and compared it to a new one, usually is completely surprised at how well it handles and responds.

 

I drove a '04 Towncar when my Mazda was in service (Mazda-Lincoln-Volvo-Mercury dealer). The seats are so soft they literally hurt my balls because I was sinking into the damn seat. It was like driving a huge pillow and was totally ungainly at the same time. Long story short, I drove the "top line" Panther, and I wanted to never be in one again. Ironically, I was driven in the back of the slightly stretched version a year later, and that was fine. But as far as driving one goes, forget about it, I'd rather not drive.

[twintornados]

Um...no.

 

Because at that point if I have to settle for the medicrity that is unibody I'd look at the Chrysler LX platform first because by then they've had ample opportunity to work the bugs out. Also by then we can get a real world feel for the long term durability.

 

Now if they put that Interceptor body on the existing/tweaked B-O-F Panther platform and fixed that f&*king snout, absolutely.

 

Bugs should have been "worked out" well before Chrysler hung the 300 badge on it seeing as it was a previous-gen MB chassis

 

The whole side profile is a carbon copy of the 300C

 

Which is a carbon copy of a previous generation Benz chassis that Daimler was sending to the scrap heap

Edited October 23, 2007 by twintornados

[twintornados]

How 'bout a panther chassis with an IRS set up and some type of active suspension? Has it been done? Can it be done?

[Traveler]

I drove a '04 Towncar when my Mazda was in service (Mazda-Lincoln-Volvo-Mercury dealer). The seats are so soft they literally hurt my balls because I was sinking into the damn seat. It was like driving a huge pillow and was totally ungainly at the same time. Long story short, I drove the "top line" Panther, and I wanted to never be in one again. Ironically, I was driven in the back of the slightly stretched version a year later, and that was fine. But as far as driving one goes, forget about it, I'd rather not drive.

 

 

I have zero seat time in a Lincoln Town Car. Never driven one, however my Vic doesn't drive like a huge pillow. The HPP makes all the difference in the world with a large sedan like this. Chances are if you were bobbing down the road, you had the standard suspension with one exhaust pipe and proabably a 2.73 rear end. That is the car for the seniors. Plus, I'm not exactly sure of the weigh differences, but I'd imagine that the Lincoln weighs more than a Vic or Marquis. Not sure about the Lincoln seats, either. I drive mine for 7 hours at the time and they don't bother me. I'd imagine that the Vic has firmer padding than the Lincoln. Not sure though.

 

As for the handling, I've had several "sports" sedans that couldn't follow my Vic into a set of curves. Even had one of those small M3 BMWs (the early 90s model) try me from a light one day with a backward S set of curves ahead. I jumped him off the light by a couple of lengths and try as he might, he couldn't or didn't have the confidence to try staying with me through the curves. Only after did he do a flyby like his rear was on fire.

 

I've driven both non-HPP and the HPP set-up and there is a world of difference. I've ridden in a CVPI before and the ride and handling is very similar to the HPP; pleasantly firm with more confidence in the steering.

[armadamaster]

Bugs should have been "worked out" well before Chrysler hung the 300 badge on it seeing as it was a previous-gen MB chassis

Which is a carbon copy of a previous generation Benz chassis that Daimler was sending to the scrap heap

 

Heh....2000 Focus anyone?

 

Any new automobile product is liable to require some "bugs" to be worked out.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Armada Master

[Traveler]

Bugs should have been "worked out" well before Chrysler hung the 300 badge on it seeing as it was a previous-gen MB chassis

Which is a carbon copy of a previous generation Benz chassis that Daimler was sending to the scrap heap

 

The 300 doesn't use the same chassis. These cars were already well into the design phase before Daimler injected influence into them. If you do a little searching, you'll find that it was the rear suspension that DaimlerChrysler used in the cars and that they shared very little else...maybe the basic design of the transmission. That I can't remember exactly.Which has made me wonder, however regarding the Mercedes suspension parts. Will the LY carry over these pieces or will it be engineered out of the cars entirely? Does anyone know?

 

The only Chrysler car that I know of that borrowed extensively from Mercedes was the Crossfire and it was assembled and imported from Germany on the first generation SLK (I guess) platform with the Chrysler body.

 

Edit:

 

The 300C will use a Mercedes five-speed automatic, as well as a Mercedes steering system, seat structures, and electronic architecture. It also borrows many suspension components and a basic design from the Mercedes E-class.

 

That is a quote from pre-production information supplied to the media and provided by allpar.com.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Traveler

[P71_CrownVic]

Many of us do not watch television that is in any way similar to those from the 50s. Rear projection, DLP, Plasma, LCD, SXRD, OLED, HDTV....need I go on....

 

Thats the exact point he was trying to make. Good for you.

[suv_guy_19]

Thats the exact point he was trying to make. Good for you.

 

No he wasn't. He told me what he meant above.

[P71_CrownVic]

To me, the epitome of everything my automobile should be was embodied in the last-generation BMW 5-Series. Simple clean looks, great handling, and a supremely functional interior, as well as some get up and go when required. The G8 to me is a true successor to that car. The BMW 135i also has my attention, and is appealing me as a sign that BMW hasn't lost that crazy twitch in their eye that significies a company run by true enthusiasts at heart.

 

Truly one of my favorite cars of all time, the BMW M5:

 

 

Or the Jaguar XJR

 

 

I love the clip in Jeremy Clarkson's Head to Head DVD where he and Tiff drive those two.

[rmc523]

The fact that you are in fact on to something makes me think it can never happen. Makes too much sense.

[rmc523]

Ultimately, I think the debate over the future of the Panther and its possible replacement are sized up with just two questions:

 

1. Can Ford expect to sell retail RWD production Interceptors in sufficient numbers to justify building it?

 

2. Will the Ford fleet faithful embrace a production Interceptor more so than a modified Panther?

 

The situation with the Panther is most unique. Its retail business is drying up. Its fleet business is holding relatively steady. What make more sense? Do you make sufficient modfiications to the Panther platform in hopes of luring a little more retail out of their old cars or do you invest big bucks into a platform that has only hopes of a modest increase in business? The Interceptor isn't going to likely be a boon for Ford. Its still a niche market and you risk your fleet business.

 

To me, it looks like Ford should put a new Interceptor-inspired body on the old frame, install some new engine/transmission options and just attempt to address the perceived weaknesses that the car has within reason.

 

What if Ford launched a new brand (hear me out before you condemn this post) called 'FLEET', where the Panthers could continue to live on by themselves, while replacements for the Ford lineup are created. Other cheap models could also be developed to sell. FLEET would be rental/fleet ONLY. NO RETAIL SALES. Period! This way it wouldnt really have to worry about resale values, etc. The cars could be built cheaply to serve as rental cars, where Ford could make some money off of them. Also, if Ford wanted to, they could not sell a single Ford branded vehicle to rental fleets, instead selling FLEET vehicles (which would recieve a different badge), keeping Ford product resale values up.

 

It may be a stupid idea and not worth spending money on, but, I thought of it, so I posted it.....

[rmc523]

Um...no.

 

Because at that point if I have to settle for the medicrity that is unibody I'd look at the Chrysler LX platform first because by then they've had ample opportunity to work the bugs out. Also by then we can get a real world feel for the long term durability.

 

Now if they put that Interceptor body on the existing/tweaked B-O-F Panther platform and fixed that f&*king snout, absolutely.

 

Have you seen the Interceptor in person? IMO it looks good. I liked it when I saw it at NAIAS this past year. I also LOVED the MKR, that car was AMAZING!!! I want one NOW!!

[rmc523]

So is this guy like the guy who designs Aston Martins and the new Jag. He can only do one design?

 

He doesn't have 'one design' per say, he has certain design cues that he uses that can tie all of his designs together. Also, eventually there comes a point where you begin to run out of ideas for a while, until something inspires you eventually to design something different. I know I have a similar 'problem'/situation. When I draw cars, there are similar design themes in most, if not all of the stuff I do. IMO, if something works, why not continue to use it? If there is a certain design cue that makes a car look good, why not use it repeatedly (to an extent of course)?

[armadamaster]

Have you seen the Interceptor in person? IMO it looks good. I liked it when I saw it at NAIAS this past year. I also LOVED the MKR, that car was AMAZING!!! I want one NOW!!

 

 

I tried to see both at the last Houston Auto Show. But, instead Ford reps informed me that those concepts on went to the major cities, I guess the 4th largest city in the nation isn't "major".

[armadamaster]

What if Ford launched a new brand (hear me out before you condemn this post) called 'FLEET', where the Panthers could continue to live on by themselves, while replacements for the Ford lineup are created. Other cheap models could also be developed to sell. FLEET would be rental/fleet ONLY. NO RETAIL SALES. Period! This way it wouldnt really have to worry about resale values, etc. The cars could be built cheaply to serve as rental cars, where Ford could make some money off of them. Also, if Ford wanted to, they could not sell a single Ford branded vehicle to rental fleets, instead selling FLEET vehicles (which would recieve a different badge), keeping Ford product resale values up.

 

It may be a stupid idea and not worth spending money on, but, I thought of it, so I posted it.....

 

Yes and no, I was initially disgusted by the decision to turn the CV fleet only, but after some more thought, it could be made really doable for Ford if they had enough sense to do it right. What they shoulda woulda coulda done was make the CV special order only for retail, since it pretty much has been anyway for years anyway, and make sure it's the first choice for every fleet sedan that goes out the door, not just cops and taxis. When companies call to order a sedan or sedans, make the CV the default choice. Keep the GMQ for retail ONLY and the TC can straddle the fence for retail and livery.

 

Of course if Ford employed common sense to their product line the Panthers and Ranger would not be in the position they are in at present.

[Anthony]

This many years later, people are still thinking the LX cars are built on a Mercedes platform? Oy vay.

[ShockFX]

This many years later, people are still thinking the LX cars are built on a Mercedes platform? Oy vay.

 

They sourced a lot of parts and engineering from the last gen E-Class. It was a good example of how to properly share parts, from the top down, not the bottom up.

[Traveler]

The Crown Vic is heavy fleet...very little retail. However, to completely remove the CV from retail is wrong for the long-term IMO. Surely, Mercury still has the Grand Marquis to offer, but personally, I like the Crown Vic better. That's a personal call. I also agree that the Vic should be available for purchase in retail if someone wants it rather than having to go through 'channels' to get one through a fleet purchase. The assumption is made that people will either buy fleet models used or can buy a Grand Marquis.

 

There is no reason for both Taurus and Crown Vic not to co-exist under the local dealer's sign. Buyers are not likely to cross-shop, but why would Ford not want to have an alternative to either on their lot for customers to choose? Chrysler cannot do that; Chevy can't either. Only Ford builds two full size sedans.

 

What the Vic needs is major restyling on the exterior and a a new dash and console with new front seats. Keep the undercarriage the same and carry over the suspension and brakes. Yes, even the SRA. The size of the car alone tames the tendencies of the SRA that have plagued the Mustang for years. Plus, when they redesigned the suspension geometry, it improved handling and seemed to bring with it a more controlled feel in the driving experience. Very very seldom is the SRA a problem.

 

Ford guys should be able to find common ground here. If Ford can continue to build the Panther and improve it to maintain fleet sales and to possibly improved slightly the retail sales, they should keep it. Those that cannot bear the thoughts of owning a Panther, have the Taurus to consider. Again, what car manufacturer builds two full-size sedans? Why build yet another unibody sedan making it RWD when the sales may not justify the development? The Australian Falcon made better sense, but ultimately the Panther seems to win out on common sense. Its already accepted in the service fleets as the gold standard. They need only make improvements to win a few retail customers and satisfy their fleet customers. Taurus can take care of the rest.

 

Keep the Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis name so as not to alienate your current customers. Put a production-friendly Interceptor body on it with minor changes to serve the Ford and Mercury customers. Modify the dash and make sure that a floor-shifter/console package is readily available for retail customers. Drop in the 4.6 3v V8 with a 6 speed automatic. Offer a diesel as an option and then consider the Twin Force V6 as a future option. Keep everything else under the body as-is and the Panther can roll on for another decade.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Traveler

[wescoent]

The Panther is a vehicle built for a purpose: long distance highway driving. It has a big trunk for all your stuff, big comfortable seats, its huge size keeps it planted and secure on any road surface, and its simplistic construction allows it to go for hundreds of thousands of miles without any mechanical issues.

 

This is great for its market. Cops and taxis can beat on it to Kingdom Come, and expect stellar reliability, and retirees can jet all around the country in air-conditioned comfort.

 

The Panther is great at what it does. Not long ago, my job would require me to travel long distances by car fairly often, and I could think of no other car I would rather do it in.

 

However, this CONCEPT of a vehicle is outdated, and will not survive long. Mercedes and Lexus can sell big V8 sedans with floaty driving characteristics and huge overhangs all day long, but in the MAINSTREAM segment, people simply do not want this kind of car anymore. For MOST buyers, the Taurus does absolutely everything they want out of a large family sedan. It packages its size far more efficiently (if not aesthetically), is far more fuel efficient, and seems more normal.

 

There is no place for a mainstream V8 RWD sedan anymore. There is a place for RWD V8 sedans, though. People looking for performance and style will come flocking when a V8 RWD sedan with those characteristics is built. Hence, 300C and Charger. The Panthers have neither performance nor style, which is why they have become so fleet-reliant.

 

Instead of trying to force the market to want the Panthers, why can't Ford just build a RWD sedan that people actually want?

 

Ford could certainly build the Panthers until the end of time, and satisfy most of the people who buy them. Eventually, falling sales will fall below the fixed costs to run the plant, and that will be the end.

[NLPRacing]

I tried to see both at the last Houston Auto Show. But, instead Ford reps informed me that those concepts on went to the major cities, I guess the 4th largest city in the nation isn't "major".

 

It was at the State Fair of Texas. I guess Dallas is more of a major city then Houston...

[NickF1011]

The Panther is a vehicle built for a purpose: long distance highway driving. It has a big trunk for all your stuff, big comfortable seats, its huge size keeps it planted and secure on any road surface, and its simplistic construction allows it to go for hundreds of thousands of miles without any mechanical issues.

 

For some reason that sounds an awful lot like another vehicle that Ford currently sells...oh yeah...the Taurus!!