The Ford Interceptor

[mikem12]

Oh they will most likely build it, but I doubt it will look like the concept. Just like the concept Tonka truck they showed as an F150. People were estactic but Ford made it bland just like always.

 

 

 

 

If they build . . . I will buy.

[68fastback]

Oh they will most likely build it, but I doubt it will look like the concept. Just like the concept Tonka truck they showed as an F150. People were estactic but Ford made it bland just like always.

 

A Ford rep in NY told me that one of the key Tonka 'tests' was reaction to the slat grille design to be used in the Fusion -- dunno if that's true, and I'm sure there were other objectives, but I found that interesting.

 

I know it's easy to say, but the Interceptor would have defined its own segment, imo, if available two years ago. I think it's beautiful and far nicer than the 300C, but it's late in that segment, imo. So I think were looking at a keystone vehicle to be used in multiple flavors in the future.

 

Certainly it has great potential to underpin several other vehicles as mentioned in above post(s), and replacing the panthers. Putting IRS in it as a concept can be just to guage reaction to IRS in general, not necessarily telegraphing any particular design implementation. Stuling-wise it's very refreshing and commanding -- a winner to my mind.

 

A control blade design would be my pref for a balance of ruggedness, versatility and modest expense -- with an SLA variant for SS apps. I almost can't see it going another way, but I've certainly been wrong before <lol>

 

-Dan

.

[mackinaw]

What's the internal room like, wider than a Crown Vic? More legroom as well?

 

Hard to tell because the vehicle was on a turntable and you could only look inside as it rotated on by. My first overall impression is that the Interceptor, and the Lincoln MKR, are not as long as they appear in pictures. Both are over a foot shorter than the current Crown Vic but with a 6" greater wheelbase. Should make for a decent amount of interior room.

[NickF1011]

Hard to tell because the vehicle was on a turntable and you could only look inside as it rotated on by. My first overall impression is that the Interceptor, and the Lincoln MKR, are not as long as they appear in pictures. Both are over a foot shorter than the current Crown Vic but with a 6" greater wheelbase. Should make for a decent amount of interior room.

 

Well, using the Crown Vic's length as an indicator doesn't say much. The front and rear overhangs on the current Panthers adds about 12-18" of useless length to it.

[matthewq4b]

Well, using the Crown Vic's length as an indicator doesn't say much. The front and rear overhangs on the current Panthers adds about 12-18" of useless length to it.

 

 

 

Ya there called bumpers some thing new vhicals lack

 

In all seriuosness there is no extra space in the ass end. as the truck is butted right up against the rear bumper basically. And you wanna tlak about over hangs get a load of the front over hang on the fusion nothing to sneeze at.

 

Matthew

[Biker16]

Ya there called bumpers some thing new vhicals lack

 

In all seriuosness there is no extra space in the ass end. as the truck is butted right up against the rear bumper basically. And you wanna tlak about over hangs get a load of the front over hang on the fusion nothing to sneeze at.

 

Matthew

one word......

 

discontinued!

[NickF1011]

Ya there called bumpers some thing new vhicals lack

 

In all seriuosness there is no extra space in the ass end. as the truck is butted right up against the rear bumper basically. And you wanna tlak about over hangs get a load of the front over hang on the fusion nothing to sneeze at.

 

Matthew

 

And despite the trunk coming all the way back to the ass end of the Crown Vic, it still ends up being a somewhat useless cargo area. The trunk in the Five Hundred appears that it would be much more useful for every day stowing and it doesn't have the need for ridiculous overhangs a'la 1984.

[matthewq4b]

And despite the trunk coming all the way back to the ass end of the Crown Vic, it still ends up being a somewhat useless cargo area. The trunk in the Five Hundred appears that it would be much more useful for every day stowing and it doesn't have the need for ridiculous overhangs a'la 1984.

 

 

You wont say that first time you have a large square load. I would take the depth any day.

 

I think the CV is the only car out there that will swallow a 27" CRT TV standind up right and still be able to close the trunk. To date I have not been able to find a load that would not fit in the trunck of the GM , Unless it was furniture. And even then most chairs will fit in the trunk of the CV (unless or course it is a lazy boy) Even the 32" CRT came home in the trunk of the CV.

 

About half of the large items I have hauled around in the CV would have not fit in the 500.

 

Also the spare does not need to stay where it is if you have a large flat load. It is no big deal to kick it off the shelf and in to the lower portion of the trunk. If the rear seats folded flat you could carry 4x8 ply wood and close the trunk . I have carried 4x8 sheets of ply wood in the trunk of the GM. You have to tie the trunk shut but it will fit all the way up to the back seats laeving about 3 Foot hanging out the back of the car.

 

I would take the depth any day. If the seats folded Flat it would be about as usefull as a Sport Track.

 

 

Biker16 posted

 

one word......

 

discontinued

 

As for discontinued hmm still seem to be for sale. And for the forseable future. At least for the next 3 years. And even then Ford has not said it will be cut at that point.

 

Kinda like how you said the TC was discontinued :rolleyes:

[jpd80]

You wont say that first time you have a large square load. I would take the depth any day.

 

I think the CV is the only car out there that will swallow a 27" CRT TV standind up right and still be able to close the trunk.....

 

Maybe you should extoll its virtues with large flat screen TVs?

[matthewq4b]

Maybe you should extoll its virtues with large flat screen TVs?

 

Lol well with flat stoage avaible of 4' by just under 5' I think your covered. (1219 mm x 1524 mm) for our imperial challenged members.

Not very many cars can swallow 4' wide items length wise in the trunk.

 

The Panthers unfortuntly had the potential to be so much more if they had received a comprehensive update 5 or 6 years ago.

 

Now the question is what will be done with them.

Will the Interceptor replace them and the Full size RWD sedan finally fades in to history.

Or will the Interceptor compliment them. If STAP was flexed to take the Intercpetor and the CV GM TC Ford might be able to milk a few more years of profitable sales outta them befor pulling the plug. It would also give fleets some direct comparision time between the 2. Even if the Interceptor is built we are going to have to face the fact that it is still going to see high fleet sales. Just a fact for Lower end RWD sedans.

 

I,m not wound up on the Interceptors double A arm rear suspension. We know where the Stangs proposed and built IRS finally ended up.

 

Yes a bit better ride. A little more stabilty in the corners on rougher surfaces. But at the huge loss of traction at acceleration. If they do an Interceptor the CB IRS has to be the IRS used. With the Boss Engine the double A Arm suspension will be a big handicap. In performance and reliabilty over either the CB IRS or a SRA.

 

You never know what Ford is going to do. The Panthers may hang around yet. No one in there right mind would have predicted we would even be seeing these still in production 28 years after the fact. And 15 years after the last major body rework.

By the time the cars are guessed to be chopped they will be sporting over 30 year old base body-chassis structure technology. I think the only other car to have a run that long on the same basic platform was the Beetle. I mean think about it when these were designed, Henry II was running the show at Ford.

 

 

And the really amazing thing is when these cars were introduced the high tech item on cars at the time was electronic ignition ! NO air bags, No antilock, No EFI, it really is amazing they have been able to be retrofitted with all the latest equipment and Still perform expctionally well in the much more stringent modern crash ratings.

Not like the Beetle that started life with a carb and ended it with one.

 

As much as evry one like to trash the CV GM they do thier intended job better than a lot of the current stuff out there.

Rag on the dated design but they have aged extrmely well and better than alot of stuff.

 

 

Matthew

[Roadrunner]

Matthew,

 

Your post makes it sound like they never updated the CV but instead had to retrofit things as vehicle standards tightened. I call shenanigans.

[matthewq4b]

Matthew,

 

Your post makes it sound like they never updated the CV but instead had to retrofit things as vehicle standards tightened. I call shenanigans.

 

As of 07 Nothing in the chassis or the Base body structure was any different than in 79 dimentionaly. (Save for the front suspention)

 

The body super structure it's self has had no major modifications over the years to increase it's crashworthyness. But piles of minor changes usally to accept new equiptment or to meet new standards.

 

Changes such as increasing panel thicknesses to extra welds in the fire wall for air bags. The frame still uses the same dimentions but has had numerous minor modifications to increase it's strength. the biggest being hydroforming the frame and the addtion of a front suspention subframe. The seat belt anchor points were slightly modified to increase their strentgh. Even thought they are the same design as in 79

 

Body mounitng points are in the same location and design as 79 but have seen several minor modifications to the mounts them selves to increase NHV dampening . The Rocker panel is the same design as 79 but is now twice as resistant to side impacts than the orginal. The Panthers have seen continuos retrofitting here and there though out their life.

What has needed to be retrofitted to meet the increasing standards has been. If you think the basic 79 Chassis and super structure is as impact ressistant as a 2007 model your smoking crack. Although both are identical to look at (save the front suspention).

 

The basic design of the cars has remined the same since 79. But there have literally thousands of small but important changes made to help the cars to coninue to meet the every increasing standards and mandatory safety equipement.

 

The Panthers were well thought out and planned cars. Considering they were designed when the digital calcuator was high technology, and having the unplanned ability to be upgraded with minor cost over nearly 30 years. It is truly amazing.

 

The Panthers have now pretty much hit the wall with the current superstructure. The chassis is anouther matter. A frame is a frame is a frame What will make or brake it is what is hung off it. (as long as the basic design is sound)

The Panthers Chasssis has always been the strongest of any BOF car. Much stronger than Caprices ever was. This is part of the reason they hvae had the staying power they do.

 

Not sure what the design crew was thinkning back in 75 when they started work on the Panthers but I'm sure none of them could have imagined that the cars chassis and super structure still be inproduction well in to the next century.

 

Yes things have been retrofitted and changed as standards increased. Most all of the changes were under the skin and interior fittings and are not visable unless you start tearing things apart and dirtectly compare them to the orginal incarnation with a micrometer.

 

The basic dimentions of every thing are the same as 79. (except for the front suspention) All the superstructure below the roof line will interchange with the 79 models. You could bolt a 79 body on to a current 2007 chassis and vice versa.

 

The cars have been changed and retroffited to meet the ever increasing standards.

 

the basic superstructure and chassis has had no major upgrades save for the front suspention.

 

Matthew

[NJSteve3]

The basic design of the cars has remined the same since 79. But there have literally thousands of small but important changes made to help the cars to coninue to meet the every increasing standards and mandatory safety equipement.

 

The Panthers were well thought out and planned cars. Considering they were designed when the digital calcuator was high technology, and having the unplanned ability to be upgraded with minor cost over nearly 30 years. It is truly amazing.

 

The Panthers have now pretty much hit the wall with the current superstructure. The chassis is anouther matter. A frame is a frame is a frame What will make or brake it is what is hung off it. (as long as the basic design is sound)

The Panthers Chasssis has always been the strongest of any BOF car. Much stronger than Caprices ever was. This is part of the reason they hvae had the staying power they do.

 

Not sure what the design crew was thinkning back in 75 when they started work on the Panthers but I'm sure none of them could have imagined that the cars chassis and super structure still be inproduction well in to the next century.

 

I was a subscriber to Motor Trend and Car and Driver when the downsized LTD was rolled out, My recollection is that the reviewers thought it an improvement from the previous land yacht, but still lagged the full size Chevy - those Chevys were everywhere, and the Olds sold well too. It took awhile, but the dog is having it's day.

[jpd80]

Sorry to jump in,

 

Matthew, what about a retro bofy on the CV? I'm thinking Mid to late'50s Customline, Crown Victoria 2-Door and Mainline Utes.

[matthewq4b]

I was a subscriber to Motor Trend and Car and Driver when the downsized LTD was rolled out, My recollection is that the reviewers thought it an improvement from the previous land yacht, but still lagged the full size Chevy - those Chevys were everywhere, and the Olds sold well too. It took awhile, but the dog is having it's day.

 

Yes I will admit the Early Caprices were a better unit in terms of ride and handleing. The early GMC units were more refined. This was Fords first crack at a BOF A Arm suspension since the early sixties. And the first 4 link rear suspension. And the first BOF mid sized (for then) in years. I call it a mid sized in 79 since the true full size LTD was still offered in 79 as a wagon.

 

The 79's has so many changes between 79 and 80 you could not even pratically list them all. Almost no anciliary parts were carried over to the 80 modle year. From head light switches to wiper motors to the dash super structure to door latches a huge portion of the electrical gear was revised. As were most of the of the suspention settings, spring rates sway bar rates ETC. Almost every fitting was upgraded or redesigned the list is enormous. You could almost call the 79's their own modle.

 

Then again in the 83 modle year a shit load of other stuff was revised. And again in 86. Then again for the mild update in 88. In 92 all that remained was the chassis and body super structure still unchanged from 79. Only rear disks were added. Nothing was changed between 79-94 in 95 ther were front suspention changes and again in 96 in 98 and the biggie in 2003.

 

The basic body superstructure has remained the same since 79 To give you an idea of how far ahead Ford was thinkning with the panthers, the cut out in the firewall used by the SEFI EEC-IV ECM and the later incarnations was in the 79's, only with a rubber plug in it instead of a conector.

Pull the panels off a 79 and a 92-current. and all the supports and superstructre is the same except for the green house. If you cut the roof of a 92- current and remove the fenders, the doors from the 79 will bolt on and close.

 

Ford planned this car for a long production run. But I do not think they planned for a 30+ year run.

 

The reason we have not seen any thing but the 4 speed in the CV's is because the floor pans fire wall anmd trans support would have to be revised and changed to accept any trans with more cogs. They were designed to handle the C6 FMX and AOD and that is it the ADOE and the 4R70W are all out growths of the orginal AOD.

 

The Cars were orginally designed to handle the 460 but it was never used. The nearly as big 351M did find it's way in to some 79's and 80's here in Canada not sure if any 335 Series V8 eqiupped cars ever made it states side.

 

If a tranny with more cogs is be used in the panthers a shit load of structural changes would need to be made plus a pile of interior fittings would ned chaged as well And Ford would need to retest NVH and crash worthyness etc. In fact the front suspention sub frame ungrade in 2003 in reality was about as complicated.

 

If they are going to change up to more cogs might as well redo the whole body and interior. Since the body and chassis changes that are going to be required and will need nearly the same amount of testing.

 

The Panthers althou not the best on the market when released have evolved in to one of the best cars on the road and certainly the most durable. They were nothing spectacular when released but they had a lot of upgadeability built in to them. And have managed to out live every single car built in the same time period and many others years after wards.

 

The one thing that blows me away is the fact that the Panthers out lived the Taurus. I would ave never guessed in million years that would ever happen. I figured the Taurus spelt the end to the CV GM TC in the late 80's.

 

Shows ya what I know

 

 

Matthew

[matthewq4b]

Sorry to jump in,

 

Matthew, what about a retro bofy on the CV? I'm thinking Mid to late'50s Customline, Crown Victoria 2-Door and Mainline Utes.

 

 

Could work. Since it is a BOF and shares the basic layout as cars since near the begining of time your choices are almost limitless. Personally I,m partial to the late sixies Galaxies. (IE 1968 Hint hint) That is where I would go for inspiration.

 

68 galaxie

 

Full size Fords of the past

 

But a retro CV based on the a 56 or 57 would rock. In 58 they just got ugly in my opinion

 

Matthew

[sa_seahawker]

I have mixed reactions to this:

 

1. LOVE LOVE LOVE the front end!

2. HATE HATE HATE the rear.

 

The interior isn't what I was hoping for either. I think this 'retro' theme is starting to become over-used. The interior of this thing has me having flashbacks to my dad's old malibu where the cheap foam interior dried up and cracked. Granted modern technologies don't allow for too much of that now-a-days, but the the thought is there. It's like trying to revive a Pinto as a new moniker. Once that thought is there, it's toast.

 

Also, are we going back to the extensive use of cheap plastic chrome pieces around taillamp bezels and trim pieces? Ditch it. Monochrome looks better with minimal chrome. Just like your wife's make-up....less is more.

 

Overall, with the exception of the front end, I was hoping for something a little more modern. Seeing as how this is 2007 now, I think it's time to let the retro stuff stay with the niche vehicles like the mustang or gt. Just my opinion

[2pintsplease]

If built, I think it will have the same base V6 as the Mustang (4.0L SOHC V6, unless the 3.5L V6 is the base engine in the Mustang by then) and the same base V8 used by the Mustang GT (probably the 4.6 3 valve), maybe detuned slightly. If the Mustang gets the Hurricane, then this car may get it also. I certainly don't see it getting the Shelby engine.

 

 

I love this car. Its great to see that Ford has made a love it or hate it car again. Better to not have some people buy it because they hate it than to have them not buy it because it is boring. Ford have taken a copied silhouette that was distinctively Chrysler and turned it into something instantly identifiable as a Ford. Personally I like the brutish front-end, and just imagine it actually parked next to a Super Chief in your garage. Possibly the best matched cars ever...if you think that there are another two cars that go more hand-in-hand I'd love to know. I'm not sure if I like it quite as much as the Continental, but that doesn't really matter as this could very easily become the next Continental if it is put into production as a Lincoln. It certainly wouldn't take a lot of work to turn it into a retro version of the 65 Continental, which was an epic car. Hell, if Ford brought back the suicide-door Continental Convertible, it could be the pin up needed to get Ford back into shape.

 

Just a warning: I know a fair bit about the Aussie Falcon, but my experience of American cars extends only as far as I have read, so bear with me if I don't get every fact right.

The 6-speed manual is most likely pure fantasy, although the Australian Falcon does have an optional one. I just don't see it happening in America. It seems that the majority of Americans have always chosen automatics over manuals. And it makes sense that they do. Even a skilled driver can't make a manual gearshift any faster than an automatic can these days, and anybody who tries will end up having big repair bills for clutches and eventually the gearbox. Automatics seem to be the American way, and at any rate they suit the cars. Now I heard somewhere (I don't remember where) that it is going to share the 2008 (Thats 2009 in US model years) Falcon Orion platform. This is likely seeing as it has a very similar track and wheelbase as the Falcon, with only slightly longer overhangs, as is the American way. Theres no word on the new falcon V8 yet, but it is definitely getting the 3.5 268hp Duratec V6. I think that based on this I can make a fair assumption that if the Falcon and Interceptor share platforms, then the latter will also get the 3.5 Duratec, which sounds like its going to be a great engine. I owned a Taurus with the old 3.0 Duratec, and really enjoyed it. From the on-paper figures, this version promises to be equally good compared to current engines. While the 4.0 straight 6 engine has great torque and can last for 900,000km, it is heavy on the gas and runs out of steam around 6000rpm. The Duratec is more powerful than the larger, less economical 4.0 Aussie in the non-turbo form. The Falcon XR6 Turbo has been wildly popular, so you can count on the Duratec getting turbo'd, at least downunder. The mustang V6 is such an antique it won't be likely to make any new models.

 

There's nothing flash about the 4.6, but I can see the 5.0 making a comeback. With those power figures it sits right in alongside General Motors' Holden's flagship, so the demand is threefold: Interceptor/Crown Victoria replacement; Mustang; and Aussie Falcon. The 5.4 V8 currently in the falcon has been coaxed to 391hp, but thats only 25 more than the top 4.0 Turbo, which has plenty more potential. More to the point is the low revving nature of the engine. This is great if you want to tow Titanic around on a trailer all day, but for a sports-sedan it is uninspiring. This is part of the reason behind the huge demand for the 4.0 Turbo in this part of the world. So I'm going to go against the grain and say that there is a good chance that the 5.0 Cammer will make it to production. It will be nice to see the 302 make a comeback, considering Fords long history with this displacement.

 

One last thing: Bring back the fullsize station wagons! They may only be a niche but people have forgotten how practical these things actually are! Unlike SUVs you have acres of luggage space, you can reach the roofrack, and they don't roll over easily. On the falcon they are being phased out bit by bit but its time for a comeback! And an XR6 Turbo wagon would be the ultimate surf car....

Edited January 20, 2007 by 2pintsplease