New Spy Pics of Five Hundred

[retro-man]

The Falcon (available as coupe, sedan, wagon, Ranchero, Sedan Delivery, Convertible, and re-styled on a 3 year cycle) was also unibody. All mopar cars in the 60s were too I think. That argument doesn't hold water.

[retro-man]

That would be sweeeeeet! :happy feet:

"It's got a Lincoln motor and it's really souped up, but that Five Hundred body makes it look like a pup."

[DCK]

If Ford wants to engineer and style the 500/Montego to appeal to us "geezers", as some of you have stated....what's wrong with that? I would never consider buying some of the cars some of you consider "stylish". Just not my bag. Conservative styling is fine with me. It looks good a long time (in my eyes anyway). You know "different strokes" etc.

 

There are 80-100 million of us born since WW 11, we have the money to buy not talk, and we do buy cars.

 

My complaint is I don't see Ford advertising the features/benefits of the 500/Montego cars to the people most likely to buy them.

You have a valid point, and ford is really srewing up by not advertising the good features of the 500. But you can have a car appeal to the mass crowd without being without a doubt the boringest car in history......................the 500 has absolutely 0 distinctive design cues the entire design from inside out is 100% generic dull and boring................I believe older people would like the car a little more stylish...........of course nothing radical like what honda is doing with their designs but the 500 definately needs more distinctive lines.

[Ralph Greene]

It's true I like the looks of our Montego Premere better than the 500. Though the grille has to go I would think.

 

Also the colors of these cars change the looks more than most cars I believe. Example....The black/charcoal interior of our Montego looks much richer than the tan model....and that's not only my opinion, but that of the Linciln/Mercury dealership sales staff also.

 

We chose the Monrego over the 500 because of the simplicity of the Premere package which includes all the options we wanted and we wanted HID headlights. if you haven't driven a car with them, you will notice a big improvement in night vision...and i don't have night vision problems.

 

My brother who drives a Infinity Q 45, a car that sells for about twice our Montego, thinks the Montego is a screaming bargain and plans to buy one as soon as the 3.5 is avaolable.

[Edstock]

"I would say that the car could be fixed just by stretching the frontend 6 inches between the front of the door and the rear of the wheel well. "

 

Here's a MK S quickie with a 6" forward movement of the front wheels to a BMW-like front overhang.

 

The point is, a Haldex powertrain chassis that is AWD ONLY doesn't need the FWD nose-heavy weight distribution.

 

[Len_A]

It's true I like the looks of our Montego Premere better than the 500. Though the grille has to go I would think.

 

Also the colors of these cars change the looks more than most cars I believe. Example....The black/charcoal interior of our Montego looks much richer than the tan model....and that's not only my opinion, but that of the Linciln/Mercury dealership sales staff also.

 

We chose the Monrego over the 500 because of the simplicity of the Premere package which includes all the options we wanted and we wanted HID headlights. if you haven't driven a car with them, you will notice a big improvement in night vision...and i don't have night vision problems.

I love the grill of my Montego Premier, as does my wife. Mine is Merlot with the tan two tone interior. Love it way more than the gray. My wife likes the gray as well. Both of us love the HID headlights. Once the car is detailed, it looks great (and mine is always detailed, even in the winter). I've been stopped in the grocery store parking lot by at least three Accord or Camry owners. It seems to attract some attention but it's not translating enough into sales.

[Edstock]

Here's a quickie of the 500 with wheelbase extension

 

Edited September 4, 2006 by Edstock

[ZanatWork]

You have a valid point, and ford is really srewing up by not advertising the good features of the 500. But you can have a car appeal to the mass crowd without being without a doubt the boringest car in history......................the 500 has absolutely 0 distinctive design cues the entire design from inside out is 100% generic dull and boring................I believe older people would like the car a little more stylish...........of course nothing radical like what honda is doing with their designs but the 500 definately needs more distinctive lines.

 

 

The Camry was easily the most boring car in the market (okay, maybe excepting the Taurus) and Toyota kept its ads active.

[DCK]

The Camry was easily the most boring car in the market (okay, maybe excepting the Taurus) and Toyota kept its ads active.

True but the camry has the reputation of being the best car for someone just interesting in getting from point A to point B, Ford as a company has a poor reputation so they need something to pull people into the show room. Also the 2007 camry is a lot more stylish and edgier than previous generations.

[DCK]

Your point Pioneer? The new camry looks more stylish and edgier than the previous gen...............just because it may resemble a mazda 6 doesn't change that fact.

[MGallun]

people i have talked to about the 500 didnt like the taurus looking front end and the engine they said seemed kinda lacking, before i said anything about the chrome grill many said it would look cool with that and if it had a larger engine they would probably buy it, they all drove it and said it handles and rides great, all you guys bashing it probably would try to design something totally stupid car would fail and you would be fired in 1 week... its a fine car and these new changes and engine WILL sell... just watch.

[Topgun]

http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/09/01/spi...ndred-facelift/

If those are the changes on the exterior and a new 3.5 L engine to go in it,Bill Ford has another DUD to try and sell.

[Hemiman]

"I would say that the car could be fixed just by stretching the frontend 6 inches between the front of the door and the rear of the wheel well. "

 

Here's a MK S quickie with a 6" forward movement of the front wheels to a BMW-like front overhang.

 

The point is, a Haldex powertrain chassis that is AWD ONLY doesn't need the FWD nose-heavy weight distribution.

 

 

 

As I said on another thread, this looks great! Changes the whole balance of the car!

 

Here's a quickie of the 500 with wheelbase extension

 

 

 

Looks a lot better, not as dramatic as the Linclon with the same treatment, but still a major improvement. Kinda takes it to a more Mercedes look as opposed to the VW look.

Edited September 5, 2006 by Hemiman

[Len_A]

If those are the changes on the exterior and a new 3.5 L engine to go in it,Bill Ford has another DUD to try and sell.

Not necessarily. The new grill will get noticed, and the new engine should be a nice improvement. How Ford markets and advertising the 2008 Five Hundred will help determine the success or failure ofthe the updates.

 

 

 

An interesting quote of some favorable commetns from January 2006's Consumer Reports:

 

Form vs. function In AUTOMOTIVE DESIGN

 

A striking contrast between the Chrysler 300 and Ford Five Hundred is how they balance styling and usability. The angular styling of the Chrysler 300 draws a lot of attention. But the high beltline and small window area create large blind spots in the rear and make it hard to see overhead traffic lights. The long hood that gives the car its striking profile also robs interior space.

 

The exterior styling of the Ford Five Hundred, on the other hand, is fairly bland, but its ergonomics are much better than those of the Chrysler. The large windows and high seats provide a sweeping view out, the low doorsills and tall roof line make for easy access, and the trunk is significantly larger than the Chrysler's.

 

There are other examples of over-eager designers forgetting the human factor. The Infiniti FX SUV is styled for sporty looks, but the result is a claustrophobic cabin. The Pontiac Aztek's bisected rear gate obscures the view. Many GM four-door sedans, such as the new Pontiac G6 and Buick LaCrosse, have sloping, coupelike roofs that inhibit head room and access to the rear seats.

I found the comments interesting.

[Hemiman]

Uhhhhhhh Employee pricing?

 

 

Did employee pricing apply the the Chicago cars? IIRC, it only applied to 2005 model yr cars. My wife wanted a Free Style last summer & we settled for a Free Star cause the Free Style offered almost 0 $ in discounting from sticker. I may be wrong about this.

 

BTW the Free Star has been a great van. Even the 90deg V-6 has been acceptable and you all know how I loath 90deg V-6's

[rkisler]

"I would say that the car could be fixed just by stretching the frontend 6 inches between the front of the door and the rear of the wheel well. "

 

Here's a MK S quickie with a 6" forward movement of the front wheels to a BMW-like front overhang.

 

The point is, a Haldex powertrain chassis that is AWD ONLY doesn't need the FWD nose-heavy weight distribution.

 

 

First, my compliments on your photoshop of the MKS and the 500, but....

 

Reduction of front overhang is difficult to achieve in vehicles that start with a FWD layout. Whether they are FWD or AWD, or whether the engine is longitudinal or latitudinal, the engine and transmission are essentially in front of the front wheels. (Sorry, I tried to find a schematic on the web to show this and failed). If one attempts to drag the front wheels forward to get BMW-style minimal front overhang, you drag the whole powertrain with it. So, front crash protection would be reduced, weight distribution gets even worse, and the engine would literally be poking out of the hood.

 

Manufacturers try their best to minimize front overhang on FWD, and usually try to disguise what's left by sweeping or layering the front end so when viewed from the side you don't tend to notice as much.

 

So, I think what you see is what you get for the front end proportions on the D3 platform. Of course, the wheelbase could be lengthened, within the overall weight limits for the platform structure and suspension.

 

The basic D3 architecture will present a lot of constraints on the final design of the MKS. In addition to front overhang, the high seating position partially dictates the high roofline and will be very difficult to modify drastically to get "sexy" styling. And the high seating/roofline also sets up the front and rear height. Unfortunately, there are limits to how much you can smoosh this height down witout blowing the whole platform. This will be a very, very tough job and some late nights for the Lincoln designers.

[Hemiman]

First, my compliments on your photoshop of the MKS and the 500, but....

 

Reduction of front overhang is difficult to achieve in vehicles that start with a FWD layout. Whether they are FWD or AWD, or whether the engine is longitudinal or latitudinal, the engine and transmission are essentially in front of the front wheels. (Sorry, I tried to find a schematic on the web to show this and failed). If one attempts to drag the front wheels forward to get BMW-style minimal front overhang, you drag the whole powertrain with it. So, front crash protection would be reduced, weight distribution gets even worse, and the engine would literally be poking out of the hood.

 

Manufacturers try their best to minimize front overhang on FWD, and usually try to disguise what's left by sweeping or layering the front end so when viewed from the side you don't tend to notice as much.

 

So, I think what you see is what you get for the front end proportions on the D3 platform. Of course, the wheelbase could be lengthened, within the overall weight limits for the platform structure and suspension.

 

The basic D3 architecture will present a lot of constraints on the final design of the MKS. In addition to front overhang, the high seating position partially dictates the high roofline and will be very difficult to modify drastically to get "sexy" styling. And the high seating/roofline also sets up the front and rear height. Unfortunately, there are limits to how much you can smoosh this height down witout blowing the whole platform. This will be a very, very tough job and some late nights for the Lincoln designers.

 

How did Acura do it? I would guess that they put the trans in front of the engine.

 

http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/re...92801031990117/

[Edstock]

"Whether they are FWD or AWD, or whether the engine is longitudinal or latitudinal, the engine and transmission are essentially in front of the front wheels."

 

Not to start an argument, but the AWD Chrysler 300 is not arranged that way.

 

You're right for sideways engine orientation, though. I was only wondering if it was possible to be less nose-heavy with an AWD-only chassis, with a sideways engine lay-out. I guess hanging the crankcase ahead of the front axle eliminates sending a driveshaft through then engine crankcase/oil pan to the rear.

[rkisler]

"Whether they are FWD or AWD, or whether the engine is longitudinal or latitudinal, the engine and transmission are essentially in front of the front wheels."

 

Not to start an argument, but the AWD Chrysler 300 is not arranged that way.

 

You're right for sideways engine orientation, though. I was only wondering if it was possible to be less nose-heavy with an AWD-only chassis, with a sideways engine lay-out. I guess hanging the crankcase ahead of the front axle eliminates sending a driveshaft through then engine crankcase/oil pan to the rear.

 

Sure, Edstock, you're right on the Chrysler 300, but this platform starts as RWD, like BMW and Mercedes. So the engine is longitudinal, with the transmission behind. Then there is a takeoff from the tail of the transmission that runs forward, then goes to a front diff and ultimately to the front wheels. This requires a shaft through the oil pan.

 

This arrangements works ok. Advantages are you can keep the front overhangs and effect on weight distribution is not a huge factor. Disadvantages are, you have to make sure you are going under the engine at a bearing and you have to be careful about the angle of the front drive shafts in relation to the front wheels. Requires mods to front suspension to accomodate spindle. Also, there is often times a bump in the passenger side floor to clear the takeoff, and the whole setup tends to want to push the car up in the air to maintain clearances with the engine/transmission/front suspension. Not so challenging in an SUV, but very challenging in a sleek sports sedan (like 3 series awd).

 

The powertrain layout in the D3's is set with the platform although I think Ford did make some front end changes to adopt a unified powertrain mounting strategy for its V6's which provides more commonality between D3 and CD3. Any architectural changes in the front end are now likely to be prohibitively expensive from an investment standpoint. Which gets me back to the challenge the Lincoln designers are going to have....

[NLPRacing]

How did Acura do it? I would guess that they put the trans in front of the engine.

 

http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/re...92801031990117/

 

Wikipedia Link

 

Production began in 1991 and the vehicle went on sale as a 1992 model in June of that year, slotting between the Integra and the Legend. A 2.5 L longitudinally mounted I5 engine rated at 176 hp was the only available engine.

[wescoent]

I just noticed that Ford seems to be taking cues from the new Mercedes S550 for the tail-light design, which I think is a fantastic idea. It capitalizes on the already S-Class-like tail-light shape.

 

Ford will either win or lose with the details of the 2008 Five Hundred. If it gets Fusion-like interior cues, the new HVAC/Radio head units, and the exterior design is smooth and flowing, then I can see sales breaking 10,000 per month, assuming you can get into one for $22,000-$32,000. As I've said before, it will make it onto my shopping list if that happens.

[Hemiman]

Wikipedia Link

 

 

Now I've got a million ?'s about it's design. I guess I'll have to get a look under the hood of one.

[SysEng]

If those are the changes on the exterior and a new 3.5 L engine to go in it,Bill Ford has another DUD to try and sell.

 

 

Yeah, what he said. More important however, is the simple fact that there are over half a dozen competitive makes in that bracket from Detroit alone. Thats a lot of makes to divide up the market. And that makes the segment a tough sell even with a winner. Afterall, by any account the Mustang IS a winner. But it still has to share the market with a lot of other stuff. Even if the Mustang is a better buy, its tough to get that message across with so much noise from the competition. A potential Ford customer isn't telepathic and doesn't have x-ray vision you know. Meanwhile the D3 is still a warmed over Volvo S80. Volvo isn't exactly the sexiest marque in the business, or the biggest market penetration either. Why do you suppose thr Swedes sold it???

 

And finally, those in the "know" in the industry ( not me, my mechanic ) will say that the cancelled Taurus was replaced by the 500. If your not in the know, you probably recognize Taurus... but what the (!) is a 500? :shrug:

[silvrsvt]

And finally, those in the "know" in the industry ( not me, my mechanic ) will say that the cancelled Taurus was replaced by the 500. If your not in the know, you probably recognize Taurus... but what the (!) is a 500? :shrug:

 

 

Wrong...the Fusion and the 500 replaced the Taraus. The Taraus was a D sized car with a CD sized interior. The Fusion covers the lower end of the Taraus market and the 500 gets the upper market. If Both sold at their projected Rates between each verison of each vechicle...they can sell at least 500K units a year. So far the Fusion is exceeding its goals, where as the 500 is underperforming at the moment.

[Roadrunner]

 

Unfortunately, this reminds me of a '06 Pontiac Grand Prix from the B-pillar back. Maybe it's the C-pillar that is giving me that impression.