chevys Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Ford's new Fiesta police car. Thats good enough for the local yocal police imo. They are nothing but ticket writers anyway. The state boys should get something better but it would save the tax payers a lot of money. If anybody wants to make the argument about high speed chases they will fail because the CV cant catch anything anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 If anybody wants to make the argument about high speed chases they will fail because the CV cant catch anything anyway. Ummm, think radio ........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Ummm, think radio ........ ( in HEAVY Arnold Swartzanegger accent )" Vhat about da CHopp-arse.....?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ( in HEAVY Arnold Swartzanegger accent )" Vhat about da CHopp-arse.....?" If by "CHopp-arse" you mean chopper (helicopter not Harley) lots of precincts don't have them, but I've never seen a cop car without a radio for communication. Also keep in mind that in some areas the police are not allowed to follow the suspect in a high speed chase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Guys, the problem is the price, CV without police equipment is sold for less than $25K. PDs are balking at paying for AWD and EB V6. You can't expect to sell the SHO for $37K and then offer it to PDs for way less. An AWD 5.0 V8 Taurus at around $30K might stand a chance but even that's expensive to most PDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 If by "CHopp-arse" you mean chopper (helicopter not Harley) lots of precincts don't have them, but I've never seen a cop car without a radio for communication.Also keep in mind that in some areas the police are not allowed to follow the suspect in a high speed chase. just wait until they can call in Onstar or Synch and literally turn cars off........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Guys, the problem is the price, CV without police equipment is sold for less than $25K. PDs are balking at paying for AWD and EB V6. You can't expect to sell the SHO for $37K and then offer it to PDs for way less. An AWD 5.0 V8 Taurus at around $30K might stand a chance but even that's expensive to most PDs. But you wouldn't have to include the nicities that the SHO has on it - that'd lower the price.....by how much, I don't know, but it'd lower the price. just wait until they can call in Onstar or Synch and literally turn cars off........ Or how about this, I was thinking about it this morning: Police SYNC - it runs all the computer stuff through sync. ::chime:: [please say command] "Police" ::chime:: "Run plate check" ::chime:: "ABC123" I hope that made sense.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Does it make sense for Ford to lengthen the chassis of the present Taurus, beef up the suspension, and tweak the motor for police duty? CAP is underutilized as is and building another 50,000 vehicles on the line makes sense to me. Ford lengthens the chassis of the CV now for cab duty, and probably could do same for Taurus. Make it look visually different than regular Taurus so that it doesn't get the onerous "Police" badge. Utilize CAP and get some of the police market. Looks to me like Ford is going to do something and might as well be reworked Taurus for police duty. If they can visually differentiate it from regular Taurus at minimal cost, it may work. It makes sense to a degree, but lengthening the the Taurus will be way more costly than lengthening the CV was due to the unit type construction of the Taurus. To be honest Ford might as well save the money and abandon the segment for now. Yes the Taurus can still be used and sold as a police car but it should be marketed as a light duty cruiser not intended for SS applications. Ford needs a modular GRWD platform that is AWD capable that can under pin in part or whole the Stang the Lincoln Flagship the Falcon the OZ Utes plus Fords and Merc's Full Size offerings. At this point any future development costs in to the D3 Sedans is pointless. The basic chassis is now over 10 years old. And by the time the current D3's finish their run it will be time for replacement. If this iteration of Ford's full size FWD offering fails it will be time to step away and start from scratch. At that point and time a GRWD chassis should become a priority. If the new Taurus meets with success then it will give Ford some breathing room financially to get a GRWD chassis organized. Now that the CUV segment has cemented it's self into the market place and pretty much taken over the mid sized SUV's they really should have there own dedicated platform just as the mid sized SUV's did and not a hashed over car platform. This would allow this segment and vehicles to reach their full potential. If some fore thought is used some of the GRWD Sub assembles could be used in the CUV platforms. Ford has or is planning to consolidate basically rest of the segments across the globe but the full size segment is still admist a case of schizophrenia with multiple one off platforms with no apparent long term plan of consolidation in place. The full size segment has traditionally been the most profitable per unit in the car segment for all manufacturers. Ford's inability to to get this segment consolidated on too one platform is costing them untold profits and has cost them untold billions trying to fit a new vehicle in to the segment that does not fully replace it's predecessor. The money spent on the D3 Sedans and their wagon variants (3/4's of which have already been axed) would have had the GRWD basically platform bought and paid for. Ford's inability to consolidate the Full size segment has been their biggest blunder since the reorganization. And the longer it is dragged out is just that much longer it is going to take them to reach the full potential of the company. This is the one segment Ford has really dropped the ball . And even if the new Taurus takes off sales wise it is still a failure to a degree cause It will not do what really needs to be done, and that is replace a pile of one off platforms in the segment. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 But you wouldn't have to include the nicities that the SHO has on it - that'd lower the price.....by how much, I don't know, but it'd lower the price. CVPI sells for less than $25K, with Taurus you still have to add AWD and the EB V6 - not much profit left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 CVPI sells for less than $25K, with Taurus you still have to add AWD and the EB V6 - not much profit left. why the need for EB.....stock taurus would already give the CV a run for its performance numbers.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 why the need for EB.....stock taurus would already give the CV a run for its performance numbers.... I see, If PDs could live with a D35 or even a D37 Taurus then there would be no need for EB. The AWD would eliminate arguments about poor snow drivability too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 why the need for EB.....stock taurus would already give the CV a run for its performance numbers.... Zero to sxity times are not far off but where the CV performs better than the V6 counter parts is accleration when already traveling at at Hwy speeds. In those circumstances the CV's torquier V8 makes all the differance. Also EB is still untested for long term durability in the real world let alone SS applications there will be teething problems do not kid yourself. Until EB has a few years of proven track record in real world applications it is best to leave it out of SS aplications. Even the Mod motors after sevral years of proven service in SS applications sprouted a whole host of issues as soon as they were dropped in the trucks. Let the EB engines get some real word track time on them befre they are thrown to the lions in SS aplications. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I see,If PDs could live with a D35 or even a D37 Taurus then there would be no need for EB. The AWD would eliminate arguments about poor snow drivability too. I only think AWD would be necessary in certain states...and hell, they have made do with just RWD anyways....FWD is known to have better traction in sl;ippery conditions due to the weight over the drive wheels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 If you ever watch Cops or To Serve and Protect, you can see that the CV is embarrassingly slow....everything leaves it in the dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 We're forgetting something, here we go now the lightbars will still fit :D & wanted to add #4 - T6... Bronco... Interceptor5(door) all Ford has to do is keep the LEO customers for a couple years and they could offer a Lot of choices Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ford4v429 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Doesnt anyone think if Ford just updated the staunchy old CV with some more sporty sheetmetal folks would buy it? then the same old body could live on for cops and cabs, and one less plant to shut down. I know they want to 'push' certain models, but why not keep some variety out there- all sales are good sales arent they? what would it cost to reskin the CV vs whats been spent on every other model in the last ten years? Does the CV have some inherent flaw that it NEEDS to be killed(like they aint gonna build that engine/tranny anymore or something), or is it just that its selling in such low numbers/slim profits that it aint worth investing in? Just seems a shame the same old cars no longer worth investing in- even though no real investment has been thrown its way in a decade or three... wonder why its failing? it gets decent MPG, has room under the hood for any engine(ecoboost v6?), is one of the most tried and true vehicles on earth. and is preferred by most PDs as the best/most durable available...the only failing of the crown Vic is Ford put a great design out to pasture and forgot about it. Seems like everyones saying 'nobody wants big cars' therefore the CV must die...look at the new Challenger- I bet its bigger than a CV, most folks think its very desirable looking car- except its still got a lot of Chrysler reputation tied to it...would it be impossible to make the CV appealing as something other than a round roofed 4 door sedan? I just think its a shame such a good design was allowed to slowly fade away- wonder how many folks at Ford are suprised its lasted completely unchanged/with practically zero investment for what 21 years? Maybe instead of being suprised they should see there is still a place for that car- the reason the 'place' has shrunk is solely due to lack of trying to do anything with it besides let it rot. then again, Maybe if all passenger cars lasted like a CV, they wouldnt sell any cars in a few years- planned obsolescence wasnt implemented enough in the CV design- I truly think that was part of the equation as to why it needed to fade away- nothing else can handle its abuse level= its overbuilt= will likely outlast others=would need replaced less frequently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 1)Doesnt anyone think if Ford just updated the staunchy old CV with some more sporty sheetmetal folks would buy it? then the same old body could live on for cops and cabs, and one less plant to shut down.2)Does the CV have some inherent flaw that it NEEDS to be killed(like they aint gonna build that engine/tranny anymore or something), or is it just that its selling in such low numbers/slim profits that it aint worth investing in? Just seems a shame the same old cars no longer worth investing in- even though no real investment has been thrown its way in a decade or three.....wonder why its failing? it gets decent MPG, has room under the hood for any engine(ecoboost v6?), is one of the most tried and true vehicles on earth. and is preferred by most PDs as the best/most durable available...the only failing of the crown Vic is Ford put a great design out to pasture and forgot about it. 1) I've posted this several times, and I think even once on this thread, but here's an update for the CV: 2) Flaws: I don't think it'll pass 2011 safety regulations (but I could be wrong about that) without investment. I believe the Panthers are the last models or will be the last models to use the powertrains they do. Sales are only to fleet for CV, mostly fleet for GM, and mostly limo for TC, and profits likely drop as the parts slowly become obsolete, and it's not like they can spread costs with those parts over other vehicles since most of the stuff the Panthers use isn't used anywhere else in the lineup anymore. In short, it just isn't worth investing in since they'd have limited return on that investment anyway.....even if they did remake them into great cars, I wouldn't see younger people clamoring into a Ford dealer to get the new Crown Vic :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armadamaster Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Good ideas and kudos on the above two posts, more than enough to get the Panthers through to 2016. FAIL: Proposal for a F-150 based Interceptor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Good ideas and kudos on the above two posts, more than enough to get the Panthers through to 2016. FAIL: Proposal for a F-150 based Interceptor Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Panther chassis will never see 2016. Ford might have a new RWD full sized car by then, but it won't be an old BOF Panther. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN12Fan Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Does the CV have some inherent flaw that it NEEDS to be killed(like they aint gonna build that engine/tranny anymore or something), or is it just that its selling in such low numbers/slim profits that it aint worth investing in? I read that Ford is going to phase out the current line of Modular engines in favor of the new 5.0L Coyote and 6.2L Boss. I expect the old 4R70W tranny is going to be discontinued as well. The Crown Vic getting a new 5.0 and a 6R80 would certainly boost performance, but the car would have to have some investment to install the new powertrain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 (edited) That's as cruel as giving grandad a new heart and lungs just before you bury him? Edited September 1, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Doesnt anyone think if Ford just updated the staunchy old CV with some more sporty sheetmetal folks would buy it? then the same old body could live on for cops and cabs, and one less plant to shut down. I know they want to 'push' certain models, but why not keep some variety out there- all sales are good sales arent they? what would it cost to reskin the CV vs whats been spent on every other model in the last ten years? Does the CV have some inherent flaw that it NEEDS to be killed(like they aint gonna build that engine/tranny anymore or something), or is it just that its selling in such low numbers/slim profits that it aint worth investing in? Just seems a shame the same old cars no longer worth investing in- even though no real investment has been thrown its way in a decade or three... wonder why its failing? it gets decent MPG, has room under the hood for any engine(ecoboost v6?), is one of the most tried and true vehicles on earth. and is preferred by most PDs as the best/most durable available...the only failing of the crown Vic is Ford put a great design out to pasture and forgot about it. Seems like everyones saying 'nobody wants big cars' therefore the CV must die...look at the new Challenger- I bet its bigger than a CV, most folks think its very desirable looking car- except its still got a lot of Chrysler reputation tied to it...would it be impossible to make the CV appealing as something other than a round roofed 4 door sedan? I just think its a shame such a good design was allowed to slowly fade away- wonder how many folks at Ford are suprised its lasted completely unchanged/with practically zero investment for what 21 years? Maybe instead of being suprised they should see there is still a place for that car- the reason the 'place' has shrunk is solely due to lack of trying to do anything with it besides let it rot. then again, Maybe if all passenger cars lasted like a CV, they wouldnt sell any cars in a few years- planned obsolescence wasnt implemented enough in the CV design- I truly think that was part of the equation as to why it needed to fade away- nothing else can handle its abuse level= its overbuilt= will likely outlast others=would need replaced less frequently. But just updating the CV only makes the underlying problem worse. The CV is an orphan in the Ford universe. The whole panther lineup is a low volume group, sharing nearly nothing substantial with any other Ford vehicles. They are produced in a vastly underutilized facility. Tooling for sheetmetal is designed for older tech stamping facilities, not the newer style and currently preferred transfer presses. New sheetmetal will require quite an investment, an investment that sales cannot justify. It does not make financial sense to dump cash into technology that is dedicated to one and only one low volume platform. Ford is not flush with cash, they have to carefully choose where to invest what they have, and the CV and its siblings are pretty far down the list. And why in the world would the police need a stretched Taurus? Instead of a stretch it would need a "console-ectomy" to get that huge waste of space needed to mount equipment out of the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 But just updating the CV only makes the underlying problem worse. The CV is an orphan in the Ford universe. The whole panther lineup is a low volume group, sharing nearly nothing substantial with any other Ford vehicles. They are produced in a vastly underutilized facility. Tooling for sheetmetal is designed for older tech stamping facilities, not the newer style and currently preferred transfer presses. New sheetmetal will require quite an investment, an investment that sales cannot justify. It does not make financial sense to dump cash into technology that is dedicated to one and only one low volume platform. Ford is not flush with cash, they have to carefully choose where to invest what they have, and the CV and its siblings are pretty far down the list. And why in the world would the police need a stretched Taurus? Instead of a stretch it would need a "console-ectomy" to get that huge waste of space needed to mount equipment out of the way. why are we treating the LE market differently than the daily rental market. both serve no purpose other than money losing ways to keep planst open to fulfill UAW contracts. A business practice Mulally, Fields and Bill jr have walked away from. just walk from it. let CHrylser and GM lose money on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 why are we treating the LE market differently than the daily rental market. both serve no purpose other than money losing ways to keep planst open to fulfill UAW contracts. A business practice Mulally, Fields and Bill jr have walked away from. just walk from it. let CHrylser and GM lose money on it. The daily rental market is a bit of different animal traditionally Rental fleet are not kept long and then end up in the used market after just a year or 2 killing resale values plus they are no different than the consumer vehicles, Most PD's keep their units till 100K and then the bulk of them end up as Cabs and they are stripper specials buckets no console and vinyl rear seats. There is nothing wrong with gov't or non rental fleet sales as long as your not dumping them at a loss. And unfortunately that is the practice that the manufacturer's have done in the past. The sales in to that market is not the issue it is the way the manufacturer's handled it. Fleet sales at loss are no better than consumer sales at a loss and just as stupid. Non rental fleet sales are a good way to lower production costs. Like any manufactured good the closer you are to the maximum capacity of the facility the lower the production costs are per unit. Even if the fleet sales are a break even proposition they still increase the margins on consumer destined units by getting the production facility closer to maximum capacity/efficiency. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joihan777 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 (edited) You guys are forgetting something: Somewhere earlier in this thread it was mentioned that since the panther's investment was paid off a long time ago, the current panthers are pretty much "free money" or something like that. Ford COULD do that again.... Except this time make a tough RWD car more mechanically interchangeable with other Ford products to further increase profit. Of course the safety profile must be improved too. I'm thinking a RWD only variant of the Taurus that is somewhat unique (different front/rear & the proposed dash-ectomy) but could be parallel evolved. The sheetmetal would be unique & "fleet friendly" i.e. easier to repair/ replace. The overall design would last 10+ yrs and the console and mounting points would be as close as possible to the current panther for easier integration to municipal fleets. After a certain time, the investment could be paid for and the line would again be profitable. One problem would be the initial cost would steal away from other resources. I think Ford would need to have multi-year purchase agreements with a large percentage of NA municipalities in order to do this though. Edited September 1, 2009 by joihan777 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.