Future of Crown Vic, G.Mrq, Town Car

[twintornados]

Wondering out loud here...

 

A Crown Victoria (re-named LTD...???) powered by a 3.5L EcoBoost with a 6 Speed transmission combo from the upcoming F-150...

 

Edited June 24, 2009 by twintornados

[NickF1011]

Wondering out loud here...

 

A Crown Victoria (re-named LTD...???) powered by a 3.5L EcoBoost with a 6 Speed transmission combo from the upcoming F-150...

 

 

Would certainly be better than the 4.6/4-speed combo available now, but I don't see it happening.

[Cocheese]

If you really think a stock CV will beat even a Miata on a road course, let alone a Mustang GT, I feel sorry for you. Let me guess, you're going to tell me my head's in the sand...

 

... Yeah. Coming from a guy who claims the CV outperforms a Mustang, I'll even let you keep the grain of salt and just pretend it never happened. Kinda like pretending Ford never got rid of the almighty CV for retail sales. It stings, but I'll get over it.

 

There was video on this very site that showed just that. Sorry champ, your beloved Mustang was no match for the Vic. I know that hurts, but deal with it

 

The video goes like this. A camera is mounted behind the right shoulder of the driver in one of the Mustangs. As the clip starts, you can clearly tell the driver is looking up in his mirror, without warning, we see what had him so concerned as a Crown Vic goes flying passed on the right. Not long later, both cars easily pass a Miata. Another lap around the track, and the Vic is now stalking it’s next prey, a second Mustang. During this entire time, the first Mustang with the camera in it struggles to keep up with the ole’ Panther. Eventually, after riding the second Mustang hard, they come out of a corner, hit the straightaway, and the Vic has claimed another Pony as it whips passed. The video ends just after that. Probably less then 5 minutes and no more then 3 trips around the track. Two Mustangs and a Miata, eaten up and spit out.

 

I would also like to tell you the story my Cop buddy told me yesterday. One of his colleague got into pursuit with a stolen car. As much as the perp tried eluding the Cop, he wasn’t successful. Eventually, after giving up hope he’d loose the cop on the road, the stolen car veered off road and into a field. Chase ended when the perp bottomed out and was stuck. While being transported to the Station, the perp asked the Cop if he was in some sort of specially equipped Police Unit. The Cop smiled and said “no, just your average Crown Vic”. The type of car that was stolen; 2007 Ford Mustang GT.

 

Every time granny Smith goes for a ride in the snow, she gets to be a rally driver. Pretty sure I didn't dodge the NASCAR comment. It's a RACECAR! It's not a family hauler. The Taurus is a FAMILY HAULER, not a racecar! How can I be clearer? As for your amazing internet video, I saw one that had the Death Star over the NYC skyline. Thing is, I'm not a moron, so I ain't runnin' for cover! What are you doin' under the bed Cocheese?

 

Well if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck, it must me a duck. So using that theory, you must be a moron.

 

I'll be sure to tell my gf's grandmother in Arizona it is imperative that she go out and buy an AWD for those days a snow storm has hit and she wants to go play bingo.

 

I haven’t gone anywhere. I’m here on an almost daily basis, and have never shy’d away from any of your comments. The same can’t be said about you. I love how you keep throwing these personal jabs out (seriously, you think acting tough would impress my gf? I impress her if I order a salad instead of fries, or if I take her to go see “The Proposal” instead of “Transformers”. Acting tough might work for you in high school, but it doesn’t work so well with my lady) Clearly you feel your back is against the wall, and making it personal is the only thing you feel you can do in hopes the attention will get drawn away from your ridiculous. Nick and I have been on pretty much opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue, yet neither one of us has ever gone personal on each other. You on the other hand, keep showing what an utter joke you truly are.

 

But let’s not forget, you still haven’t answered my question about the SHO. Is it AWD 100% of the time, or just when the computer decides to engage all 4 wheels? And if it’s the latter, which two wheels are powering the car?

 

Now, on to your double talk. Let’s see, we went from talking about the SHO being a “performance car”, to now talking about the Taurus being a “family hauler”. I don’t care what the Taurus is. It’s not what we have been talking about. It’s about the SHO. I told you performance is a major concern for me when buying a car. I told you that since NASCAR (along with performance cars like the Mustang, Challenger, Charger, Camaro, Viper, Vette, G8, CTS, etc) is RWD, then RWD must be the best choice. And because of that, I want Ford to build a RWD V8 sedan. But you don’t believe we should use NASCAR as an example because the majority of people don’t drive like the do in NASCAR, so therefore, performance shouldn’t be a major concern. Then of course you said the SHO should wet my performance appetite. So which is it? Performance doesn’t matter, or the SHO should be something I buy because it is performance? And if RWD has nothing to do with performance, why is the Mustang RWD?

 

Of course, after claiming people don’t drive like NASCAR does, that people should buy AWD vehicles because that is what rally cars are. Interesting how you discount one form of auto racing, then use another to try and prove your point. The funny thing is, I’m pretty damn sure more people are going to be driving in a relative straight line on an asphalt road, then those who are going to be whipping around a single lane gravel road out in the woods with hair pin turns and blind hills. But I guess that is the same logic that made you say an AWD SHO could do the same things my 4x4 does (ie pull my boat out of the water, navigate a dirt trail back in the bush). Not surprising, you went quiet on that issue after I pointed out your error.

 

The new Taurus, along with the SHO and the MKS, are all very nice looking vehicles. I would encourage somebody looking for a new car to buy one. Having said that, I would also tell them if they are looking for performance, they might want to look elsewhere since the SHO is not RWD, nor is it a V8. And because of that, I wish Ford would come out with a RWD V8 sedan. Much like what the Marauder should have been. I would also encourage them to get a suitable replacement for the Town Car. Not everyone lives in a climate where they have to be worried about snow covered parking lots, and those of us that do are able enough to navigate through them using our own driving skills, and not be dependent on the computer.

[rscalzo]

The day our CV's could outrun anything would be a day to behold. The only police service vehicle slower is the Impala. The MI tests prove just that. An idiot in a Ferrari can run off the road and get stuck and eventually get caught. Guess the CV can outrun the Ferrari too? I spent way too much time pushing a CV around the streets to put any validity in your statement.

 

Departments are dropping the CV in droves as the days are numbers and no one will buy proprietary emergency equipment for a CV knowing the vehicle will stop being produced in a year or so. then all the shields, console mounts and other equipment is unusable. While the early ones did have a few bugs, the new Chargers have been no more of a maintenance problem than the CV has been. With the Chrysler 100k warranty, the department doesn't worry that much. The guys driving them like them better than the CV even with the V6 which is more than enough for the city and found to be no slower than the CV engine / drive-train. Maybe if Ford put some effort into updating the platform if would have survived. In today's setup it's days are numbered. I don't see them leaving the market entirly but to won't be with the current platform

[7Mary3]

rscalzo hit the nail on the head. As someone with considerable experience in fleet maintenance, government, municipal, and utility fleets tend to stay away from vehicles that are being phased out, in particular vehicles that require considerable upfitting, like law enforcement. All that equipment that is specific to a particular vehicle becomes worthless when the vehicle is not available anymore. Not only is Ford set to loose there share of the police car market (unless they come up with something that will beat the Charger) but they are also well on the way to loosing the ambulance business too. The diesel E-series cutaway chassis has been dropped, and the whole E-series line is on the way out as well. GM has stepped up to the plate with a Duramax powered Savanna cutaway with a 14000# GVW.

[suv_guy_19]

The day our CV's could outrun anything would be a day to behold.

 

 

+1. I've seen enough episodes of Cops and To Serve and Protect to know that they're painfully slow.

[armadamaster]

50 years continuous production and they haven't changed a darned thing, look:

 

 

Sounds like the Panthers, from what I've been told by some, Ford hasn't changed a damned thing in three decades:

 

[crownvicsparky]

this is what puzzles me.. I am sure someone on here will be able to fill me in... it has to be some bean counter thing.. .cause why is a company that needs more market share keeps killing markets that are available. Some examples are the old taurus, when ford started this way forward restructuring to gain profilt... which in my mind is marketshare the way business is today...what do they do? Kill the best product they that was selling... why.. well from what I researched.. there was big investestors that wanted that property in Atlanta... and guess what Ford needed money to restructure.... hmmm....

 

They killed most retail sales of the crown vic in Canada and from what I keep hearing the GM now too. and the TC unless you have a fleet connection.. is that now throwing away market share yet again???? Oh wait.. STAP went one shift and they could only build 48 hrs worth of vehicles in a week on one shift.. so I am guessing the highest bidder wins or something like that?? lol.. now STAP has down weeks but yet still no retails sales.. why??? I think the brass either have reasons I don't think of or there is room for improvement for better marketshare gains?... I read this forum daily and there are panther buyers to be had and appreciated if ford comes out with an updated product to fill the niche

Edited June 25, 2009 by crownvicsparky

[crownvicsparky]

lol... before I get trampled by the F150 guys.. I should redirect my last posting to the car market cause I think the F150 was the king over taurus... too many moons ago.. lol

[crownvicsparky]

I know this is a bit off topic .... but can someone confirm what is the current status of the Atlanta Plant? Has it been in fact sold? or is it still sitting there empty?

[armadamaster]

this is what puzzles me.. I am sure someone on here will be able to fill me in... it has to be some bean counter thing.. .cause why is a company that needs more market share keeps killing markets that are available. Some examples are the old taurus, when ford started this way forward restructuring to gain profilt... which in my mind is marketshare the way business is today...what do they do? Kill the best product they that was selling... why.. well from what I researched.. there was big investestors that wanted that property in Atlanta... and guess what Ford needed money to restructure.... hmmm....

 

They killed most retail sales of the crown vic in Canada and from what I keep hearing the GM now too. and the TC unless you have a fleet connection.. is that now throwing away market share yet again???? Oh wait.. STAP went one shift and they could only build 48 hrs worth of vehicles in a week on one shift.. so I am guessing the highest bidder wins or something like that?? lol.. now STAP has down weeks but yet still no retails sales.. why??? I think the brass either have reasons I don't think of or there is room for improvement for better marketshare gains?... I read this forum daily and there are panther buyers to be had and appreciated if ford comes out with an updated product to fill the niche

 

Because the Panthers are the exception to the rule, they are the cars that Ford does not want to sell, hasn't for years. That's the only logical explanation for no advertising, no updating, not-in-stock at dealerships (<Vic), annual decontenting, and standing orders to try and shove customers into everything else first. And all of this on a market segment THAT YOU OWN. It does defy all logic.

Edited June 26, 2009 by Armada Master

[nelsonlu]

this is what puzzles me.. I am sure someone on here will be able to fill me in... it has to be some bean counter thing.. .cause why is a company that needs more market share keeps killing markets that are available. Some examples are the old taurus, when ford started this way forward restructuring to gain profilt... which in my mind is marketshare the way business is today...what do they do? Kill the best product they that was selling... why.. well from what I researched.. there was big investestors that wanted that property in Atlanta... and guess what Ford needed money to restructure.... hmmm....

 

They killed most retail sales of the crown vic in Canada and from what I keep hearing the GM now too. and the TC unless you have a fleet connection.. is that now throwing away market share yet again???? Oh wait.. STAP went one shift and they could only build 48 hrs worth of vehicles in a week on one shift.. so I am guessing the highest bidder wins or something like that?? lol.. now STAP has down weeks but yet still no retails sales.. why??? I think the brass either have reasons I don't think of or there is room for improvement for better marketshare gains?... I read this forum daily and there are panther buyers to be had and appreciated if ford comes out with an updated product to fill the niche

 

The reason is (even though certain Panther supporters here will never admit them even when confronted with evidence):

 

That particular market is dying on its own due to its fuel inefficiency. Even the law enforcement market is downsizing its vehicles in light of the gas prices and governmental mandates on increasing fuel efficiency (remember that law enforcement is government, after all). Despite the claims that updates to the Panther platform could have increased its fuel efficiency, it appears rather clear to me that no update can add except marginally to its fuel efficiency. Sure, you can play with the transmission, with the shape of the vehicle, and with the tires. That will take away some of the alleged appeal of the Panther platform.

 

This can be seen in that none of the Panther's current competitors is: 1) selling well or 2) fuel efficient, either. The only "mainstream" RWD large sedans on the markets right now get these mileage figures (in comparison with the Crown Victoria/Grand Marquis' 19 combined):

 

Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger: 15 combined with V8/6.1L, 19 combined with V8/5.7L

Hyundai Genesis: 19 combined with V8

Pontiac G8: 18 combined with V8

 

If you add large FWD V8s (which defeats the point about those Panther supporters' arguments that "certain parts of the market will never go FWD):

 

Buick Lucerne: 18 combined with V8

Chevrolet Impala: 19 combined with V8

 

In comparison, large FWD V6s get (I realize that some of these are not as large -- in particular, the Nissan Maxima is still classified as a midsize by the EPA) -- note that Taurus/Sable gets 21 combined, but the Taurus is said to be getting an increase for 2010:

Chevrolet Impala: 22 combined with V6/3.5L, 21 combined with V6/3.9L

Honda Accord: 22 combined

Hyundai Azera: 21 combined with V6/3.3L, 20 combined with V6/3.8L

Nissan Maxima: 22 combined

Toyota Avalon: 23 combined

 

Certainly, nothing has been selling great the last year or so, but certainly the claims that Ford is ceding a large market to the competitors by not producing Panthers any more are not supported by the evidence. It is not a large market any more, if it exists still. Ford, like every other automobile manufactures, has to increase fuel efficiency due to market conditions even when discounting CAFE. (I brought up CAFE only because I'm sure that someone well yell, "The Obama Administration is to blame!" The downturn in Panther (and other RWD large cars) sales was happening long before the CAFE went up.) I have no idea what will happen with the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger, but I doubt that they will sell well if they survive. The Pontiac G8 is being killed, and GM currently does not plan a replacement. We'll have to see if the Hyundai Genesis does as well as believed; I doubt it. (I don't think Hyundai will lose money on the Genesis, but I doubt that it will become a big seller.)

 

There is also no evidence that supports the suggestion that the platform can/could have been hybridized. No manufacturer in the world is producing or close to producing a RWD hybrid, and I hardly doubt it's that nobody thought of it. Moreover, even though GM has hybridized such massive vehicles as the Cadillac Escalade/Chevrolet Tahoe, none of GM's large hybrids sold well even in comparison with its own conventional cousins.

 

In short, it is my belief -- and I expect at most, I'll hear only rabid wailings about how Ford could have done more with the Panther platform, rather than any solid evidence that doing more with the Panther platform would have made sense as far as cost/benefit are concerned, and I'll possibly hear paranoid accusations against the Obama Administration -- that the Panther platform (and its competitors) was being killed mostly by market forces, rather by Ford ineptitude or governmental interference. Sure, I'm sure the platform could have been updated to make it more attractive and allow Ford to continue to dominate the particular segment of the market. But when the segment is quickly disappearing, 100% domination of a 1% market segment still only gets you 1%. It's not worth it.

 

(It also boggles my mind that certain of these rabid Panther fans suggested not developing the D3 platform at all. Doing that will merely be ceding a larger market to the Avalon/Azera/Impala-type of vehicles. It makes no sense.)

Edited June 25, 2009 by nelsonlu

[NickF1011]

this is what puzzles me.. I am sure someone on here will be able to fill me in... it has to be some bean counter thing.. .cause why is a company that needs more market share keeps killing markets that are available. Some examples are the old taurus, when ford started this way forward restructuring to gain profilt... which in my mind is marketshare the way business is today...what do they do? Kill the best product they that was selling... why.. well from what I researched.. there was big investestors that wanted that property in Atlanta... and guess what Ford needed money to restructure.... hmmm....

 

They killed most retail sales of the crown vic in Canada and from what I keep hearing the GM now too. and the TC unless you have a fleet connection.. is that now throwing away market share yet again???? Oh wait.. STAP went one shift and they could only build 48 hrs worth of vehicles in a week on one shift.. so I am guessing the highest bidder wins or something like that?? lol.. now STAP has down weeks but yet still no retails sales.. why??? I think the brass either have reasons I don't think of or there is room for improvement for better marketshare gains?... I read this forum daily and there are panther buyers to be had and appreciated if ford comes out with an updated product to fill the niche

 

The Taurus was a heap of steaming crap long before Ford pulled the plug on it the first time. They lost no marketshare getting rid of that thing except in the low-profit fleet market, to which I say kudos to Ford. The same argument holds true for the Panthers. Their retail share is diminished so far already anyway that nothing short of a full redesign is going to help it. And if Ford is going to go through that much trouble, they are going to do it in the form of GRWD which can be shared across the board with other vehicles instead of redesigning Panther.

[NickF1011]

Because the Panthers are the except to the rule, they are the cars that Ford does not want to sell, hasn't for years. That's the only logical explanation for no advertising, no updating, not-in-stock at dealerships (<Vic), annual decontenting, and standing orders to try and shove customers into everything else first. And all of this on a market segment THAT YOU OWN. It does defy all logic.

 

Let's be realistic here and use the correct cause-and-effect. It was the lack of retail sales in the first place that led to Ford no longer wanting to update it, not the other way around. Panther sales have been dropping year over year for over a decade now, long before they were considered outdated by most.

[jpd80]

The Taurus was a heap of steaming crap long before Ford pulled the plug on it the first time. They lost no marketshare getting rid of that thing except in the low-profit fleet market, to which I say kudos to Ford. The same argument holds true for the Panthers. Their retail share is diminished so far already anyway that nothing short of a full redesign is going to help it. And if Ford is going to go through that much trouble, they are going to do it in the form of GRWD which can be shared across the board with other vehicles instead of redesigning Panther.

If GRWD is based on Falcon, the costs are already mostly born by FoA and the platform for USA might

cost as little as $200 million, maybe even include AWD and a good turbo I-6 that could share with F 150.

Also have next year's all new Territory as Explorer CUV replacement. All these off the one platform.

Edited June 25, 2009 by jpd80

[Cocheese]

The day our CV's could outrun anything would be a day to behold. The only police service vehicle slower is the Impala. The MI tests prove just that. An idiot in a Ferrari can run off the road and get stuck and eventually get caught. Guess the CV can outrun the Ferrari too? I spent way too much time pushing a CV around the streets to put any validity in your statement.

 

Departments are dropping the CV in droves as the days are numbers and no one will buy proprietary emergency equipment for a CV knowing the vehicle will stop being produced in a year or so. then all the shields, console mounts and other equipment is unusable. While the early ones did have a few bugs, the new Chargers have been no more of a maintenance problem than the CV has been. With the Chrysler 100k warranty, the department doesn't worry that much. The guys driving them like them better than the CV even with the V6 which is more than enough for the city and found to be no slower than the CV engine / drive-train. Maybe if Ford put some effort into updating the platform if would have survived. In today's setup it's days are numbered. I don't see them leaving the market entirly but to won't be with the current platform

 

Well if you don't mind, I'm going to believe the guy I've know for since grade 9, who I've had plenty of beers with, over a guy who shows up here once and a while and bashes the Crown Vic.

 

Seriously, if you guys don't like the Panthers, why are you on this forum? I don't see any of the Panther Mafia on other sections bashing the rest of Ford's fleet. Your jealous is showing.

 

PS, I'm sure in the hands of a capable driver, while going against someone with limited skill, a Focus could keep pace with a Mustang. Watch Top Gear. Just because a car is faster in a drag race, doesn't mean it's faster on the track.

[NickF1011]

Seriously, if you guys don't like the Panthers, why are you on this forum? I don't see any of the Panther Mafia on other sections bashing the rest of Ford's fleet. Your jealous is showing.

 

It's not that we don't like them. It's that we don't like how outdated they have become. I loved the Marauder when it came out. Considered one for short while, but decided against another guzzler to park next to the Mustang. Unfortunately, the car has seen nothing in the way of updates since then to make me want to consider one now. Realistically looking at the situation, the only hope I'm holding out for is a new sedan built on GRWD, or a far more likely near-term solution -- a new SHO.

[chiefstang]

I don't see any of the Panther Mafia on other sections bashing the rest of Ford's fleet.

 

 

 

 

PS, I'm sure in the hands of a capable driver, while going against someone with limited skill, a Focus could keep pace with a Mustang. Watch Top Gear. Just because a car is faster in a drag race, doesn't mean it's faster on the track.

 

Too funny! Kinda like a Crown Vic outrunning three sports cars?

 

 

If I offended you Cocheese, it wasn't my intent. I'm just breakin' balls.

 

That said, I see no point in arguing with you anymore. It's rather pointless. You're stuck in your ways, and I'm stuck in 2009... Like it or not.

 

It's not that the CV is a bad car. It's OK. But that's it. It's OK at performance, it's OK at safety, it's OK in the styling department, and it's an OK ride. Kinda like the Taurus, OK all around, but not great anywhere. Your arguments make little to no sense:

 

Point: They're not good in the snow.

Counterpoint: Learn to drive.

 

Point: They're not fast.

Counterpoint: I saw a video on the internet that had a fast one.

 

Point: They're not a performance car.

Counterpoint: Well, NASCAR's RWD.

 

Point: AWD gives better performance.

Counterpoint: Well, NASCAR's RWD.

 

Etc...

 

Etc...

 

Etc...

[StapRoboSitter]

Let's be realistic here and use the correct cause-and-effect. It was the lack of retail sales in the first place that led to Ford no longer wanting to update it, not the other way around. Panther sales have been dropping year over year for over a decade now, long before they were considered outdated by most.

 

Lack of retail sales was not the cause... Lack of redesign caused a lack of sales... why buy new when you can buy a 5 year old that looks the same and will last just as long?

 

There were plans for new Sheet-Metal for the retail Cvic to differentiate it from the Interceptor (was a go for 2006, cant remember if it was new skin for Interceptor or retail... assume retail since the police love that they can crack up a car and steal a fender off a 10 year old scrapped car) ... and then Nasser decided to scrap it and pay out $10 billion or whatever in Firestone lawsuits... then with the whole 90mph rear impact explosion, that was just the nail in the coffin, another excuse not to spend money on a "flawed design"... The Platform is aged and does have many issues in relation to a modern vehicle... How many cars out there won't let you fold down the rear seats to access the trunk?

 

Ford has been trying to kill off the Panther since the 500 went on the drawing board... it has nothing to do with Retail sales, it has to do with Ford not wanting to update and spend any more money on the platform...

 

Remember the Probe? Ford wanted to cancel the Mustang, so instead of cancelling it they hoped the probe would outsell it thus, the people have spoken and no one wants Mustangs anymore... Ford typically has an overlap of a few years with their "replacement" cars so they don't look like the bad-guy in cancelling a line...

 

besides... why invest money in a car that is still highly profitable as-is?? Squeeze that turnip!! (I would love some major investment in either the platform... or at very least... STAP)

[NickF1011]

Lack of retail sales was not the cause... Lack of redesign caused a lack of sales...

 

That's a fallacy with no facts support it.

 

Ford's sales back in the 90's are archived here on this very site. They were declining year-over-year almost every single year since its last refresh for the '98 MY Let's use Crown Victoria as an example:

 

1998: 111,531

1999: 114,669

2000: 92,047

2001: 95,261

2002: 79,716

2003: 78,541

2004: 70,816

2005: 63,939

2006: 62,976

2007: 60,901

2008: 48,557

 

The overall segment was/is declining. These sales dropped despite GM basically handing Ford the service vehicle segment after the 1996 cancelling of the Caprice. Are you going to claim that Ford was conspiring to kill this vehicle as far back as the 90's? The Five Hundred wasn't even a glimmer in anyone's eye at that point.

 

Today, I doubt even a new GRWD-based sedan would sell in numbers comparable to what the Panther was doing in the 80's and early 90's. Why? Because the segment is much smaller now. The difference? If the car was built on GRWD, the costs to keep the product fresh could be shared amongst several different lines of products instead of trying to make enough money on only 3 vehicles to support the platform. The concept of single-vehicle-single-platform is over at Ford. The current Mustang and the Panther are likely the last of the breed.

 

besides... why invest money in a car that is still highly profitable as-is?? Squeeze that turnip!! (I would love some major investment in either the platform... or at very least... STAP)

 

More conjecture. I've seen no evidence from anyone in the past several years that the Panthers are anywhere close to as profitable as they were during the 90's. I'm going to assume that's because it simply isn't true anymore. If you can supply evidence to the contrary, I'll gladly change my mind.

Edited June 26, 2009 by NickF1011

[Bored of Pisteon]

Doesn't anybody think that another reason why sales are down is because these cars seem to last a long time?

 

Why would anyone with a mid 90's Town Car or a 2000 Grand Marquis with less than 100,000 miles go out and buy a new one when that one (considering proper maintainence of course) is running just fine?

[taxman100]

The cars last forever, and they never make any changes to them. So, why buy a new one? I can get a used 2008 Grand Marquis LS with 30,000 miles for $15-$16 k, and drive it for 8 years with little concern.

 

I'm considering a new one only because they are going to eventually stop building them, and more modern auto designs are more fragile, full of gadgets I have no interest in paying for, and more expensive to maintain.

 

With the new Obama-mobiles coming out, new cars will never be that desirable again.

[Bored of Pisteon]

The cars last forever, and they never make any changes to them. So, why buy a new one? I can get a used 2008 Grand Marquis LS with 30,000 miles for $15-$16 k, and drive it for 8 years with little concern.

 

I'm considering a new one only because they are going to eventually stop building them, and more modern auto designs are more fragile, full of gadgets I have no interest in paying for, and more expensive to maintain.

 

With the new Obama-mobiles coming out, new cars will never be that desirable again.

 

Indeed, because the more chances I have on buying a Panther cheap. The more likely that I'm going to jump on the deal. I don't care how many miles it has on it either.

[nelsonlu]

Doesn't anybody think that another reason why sales are down is because these cars seem to last a long time?

 

Why would anyone with a mid 90's Town Car or a 2000 Grand Marquis with less than 100,000 miles go out and buy a new one when that one (considering proper maintainence of course) is running just fine?

 

By that logic, no one would buy any new Toyota Camrys. (No, I am not saying that Camrys are as trouble-free as popularly perceived, but they are popularly perceived to be trouble-free, and there are certainly a lot more old Camrys around than old Grand Marquises.)

 

I have still seen no evidence to rebut my assertion and belief that the Panthers were doomed because they are not fuel-efficient and cannot be made fuel-efficient in a reasonable manner and thus cannot survive in the long-term in the marketplace, rather than any mismanagement on Ford's part or any governmental conspiracy. (Certainly, GM's and Chrysler's own RWD large vehicles are not selling, and despite Hyundai's optimistic press releases, I am not seeing any evidence that the Hyundai Genesis is selling like hot cakes.)

Edited June 26, 2009 by nelsonlu

[matthewq4b]

That's a fallacy with no facts support it.

 

Ford's sales back in the 90's are archived here on this very site. They were declining year-over-year almost every single year since its last refresh for the '98 MY Let's use Crown Victoria as an example:

 

1998: 111,531

1999: 114,669

2000: 92,047

2001: 95,261

2002: 79,716

2003: 78,541

2004: 70,816

2005: 63,939

2006: 62,976

2007: 60,901

2008: 48,557

 

The overall segment was/is declining. These sales dropped despite GM basically handing Ford the service vehicle segment after the 1996 cancelling of the Caprice. Are you going to claim that Ford was conspiring to kill this vehicle as far back as the 90's? The Five Hundred wasn't even a glimmer in anyone's eye at that point.

 

Today, I doubt even a new GRWD-based sedan would sell in numbers comparable to what the Panther was doing in the 80's and early 90's. Why? Because the segment is much smaller now. The difference? If the car was built on GRWD, the costs to keep the product fresh could be shared amongst several different lines of products instead of trying to make enough money on only 3 vehicles to support the platform. The concept of single-vehicle-single-platform is over at Ford. The current Mustang and the Panther are likely the last of the breed.

 

 

Uh ya sales were starting to decline in 2000 b then the cars had not seen an update for nearly ten years

 

The 92 CV GM went on sale late in 1990. Thik tha fact that thed been on the market for ten years unchanged might not have some thing to do with it ?

 

And you can not count the GM and CV separatly after 98 since they literally were badge engineered.

 

GM Sales

 

1998: 114,162 Combined 225,693

1999: 122,776 Combined 237,445

2000: 122,572 Combined 214,619

2001: 112,034 Combined 207,295 Not bad for a vehicle that had not seen an update in over ten years.

2002: 80,271 Combined 159,988

2003: 86,986 Combined 165,527 Non visable chassis update & Maurader added good for addtional 6K sales

2004: 79,329 Combined 150,145

2005: 64,617 Combined 128,556 6,383 sales less than the brand new D3 sedans

2006: 54,688 Combined 117,695 11K more sales then D3's 15 full years production no major changes

2007: 50,664 Combined 111,565 11.9 More sales than the new and old D3 sedans

2008: 28,766 Combined 77,343 8400 more sales than the D3 sedans 17.5 years of production no major changes.

 

 

The Panthers have out sold the D3 Sedans every year except the intorductory one.

 

And the sales of the panthers have fallen at almost exactly at the same rate as the D3's.

 

After 17.5 years of production with no major power train interior or sheet metal changes they still manage to out sell Fords other vehicles in the same segment that is over a decade newer styling and and 2 decades younger technically.

 

 

Right when they reached the end of thier life cyle (2001) sales fell off. And salesa have been falling at about the same pace as the new D3 sedans. So if the panthers are finished due to lack of segment interest the D3's must be as well with lower sales in a newer package and who's sales have falled almost lock step with the Panthers. And Ford had some pretty deep discounting on the D3's in 08.

 

In the production life of the D3 sedans profit's between the Panthers and the D3's favour the Panthers.

 

No investment has been made in them and they have been decontented in that time (lowring production costs further) the D3's have had initial develpment costs and a face lift and new powertrains fited.

 

If the panthers were redundant then so were the D3's.

 

If the Panthers had recived half the dollars earmarked for the D3 Sedans the return would have been atleast equal to or better then the D3 sedan investment.

 

 

Matthew