Last Mercury rolls off the assembly line

[2o6]

The Crown Victoria and Grand Marquis are considerably outdated and softer than ANY of the cars I've been mentioning.


Besides, I mentioned a quite a few, large, soft cars, who's mechanicals aren't as old as sin.

The Caprice i'll bet a lot firmer and larger than the CV or Grand Marquis; it's essentially a stretched Pontiac G8.


I'm not saying that the market for big and soft will die, but the market for such an antiquated car will.

[hounddog]

No one here has ever, not once, stated the Panther platform is a relevant vehicle. 

Including me, and on several occasions I specifically posted to the contrary. 


I am saying the segment will not die anytime in the near future, and the car industry is seemingly not recognizing this.

[2o6]

No one here has ever, not once, stated the Panther platform is a relevant vehicle. 

Including me, and on several occasions I specifically posted to the contrary. 


I am saying the segment will not die anytime in the near future, and the car industry is seemingly not recognizing this.

Lexus ES, Camry, Lacrosse, Azera, Avalon, forthcoming XTS, to name a few. There are quite a few choices in this market.

[CALL_911]

Does your combined age even equal mine?

Somehow, I suspect your not exactly "up" on what older Americans are looking for on cars.

The generation (i.e. your parents) who want those large sofas on wheels is dying off. Your generation grew up with more dynamic cars. If there was such a bustling market for cars like the CV and its kin, you'd think that there would be a legitimate successor, no? The Taurus is infinitely more dynamic than the CV. Why do you think Buick is refocusing its target market?

Personally, I wouldn't know about old people and their choices, but the market has spoken, has it not?

Also, isn't the Caprice fleet only?

[2o6]

The generation (i.e. your parents) who want those large sofas on wheels is dying off. Your generation grew up with more dynamic cars. If there was such a bustling market for cars like the CV and its kin, you'd think that there would be a legitimate successor, no? The Taurus is infinitely more dynamic than the CV. Why do you think Buick is refocusing its target market?

Personally, I wouldn't know about old people and their choices, but the market has spoken, has it not?

Also, isn't the Caprice fleet only?

Even so, new soft cars are still quite dynamic in comparison to the ones of old. A new Lacrosse is a lot sharper than the LeSabre from the past. The new Regal is a lot sharper than the old ones, and even more than the old Regal GS from a few years back. Even the old Lucerne is better than the old FWD Park Avenue in terms of drive.

[Tave]

Good God you two, every car today is more dynamic than its 1980's equivalent, just as every car in 1980 was more dynamic that its 1950's equivalent. It's called progress. The Crown Vic failed because it was a dinosaur, not because the market for large, comfortable cars has vanished. That cars continue to improve with every successive generation should come as a surprise to no one.

[FoMoJo]

Most old farts I know are driving pick-ups, Cadillac CTSs, Pontiac G8s, Acuras and the occasional Taurus.  To me, the Taurus would be the natural successor to those who drove Mercury Marquis.

[2o6]

Good God you two, every car today is more dynamic than its 1980's equivalent, just as every car in 1980 was more dynamic that its 1950's equivalent. It's called progress. The Crown Vic failed because it was a dinosaur, not because the market for large, comfortable cars has vanished. That cars continue to improve with every successive generation should come as a surprise to no one.

I think both of you are misinterpreting what we're trying to say.


We are saying that the market for these cars is dead. Not the market for soft cars.

[Xer0]

The population is aging, and these cars providfed everything the aging population loves;
Soft ride.
A feel of genuine luxury.
A belief that size equals luxury.
Reasonable power.
Acceptable economy to people with higher disposable funds.
The last bastion of "yesteryear" engineering, something they are familiar with.
Styling they can relate to.

You can't seriously believe that the GM has a "genuine" feeling of luxury with "reasonable" power and "acceptable" fuel economy.  Its a car thats dirt cheap to buy and dirt cheap to maintain that is outclassed by pretty much everything.

[CALL_911]

Good God you two, every car today is more dynamic than its 1980's equivalent, just as every car in 1980 was more dynamic that its 1950's equivalent. It's called progress. The Crown Vic failed because it was a dinosaur, not because the market for large, comfortable cars has vanished. That cars continue to improve with every successive generation should come as a surprise to no one.

Except that the Taurus isn't even a direct successor. The fact that the CV doesn't even have a real successor says something.

[280Z Turbo]

The Camry is better than the Grand Marquis in every way, but is also soft and comfortable. Probably more so.

You don't need a ghastly 20 ft long monster to be comfortable. What matters is a high hip point, soft springs, and a good suspension design.

[280Z Turbo]

Except that the Taurus isn't even a direct successor. The fact that the CV doesn't even have a real successor says something.

Yes it is. The RWD thing doesn't matter. When was the last time you saw granny doing powerslides in the church parking lot?

[hounddog]

You can't seriously believe that the GM has a "genuine" feeling of luxury with "reasonable" power and "acceptable" fuel economy.  Its a car thats dirt cheap to buy and dirt cheap to maintain that is outclassed by pretty much everything.

The Caprice?

Also, isn't the Caprice fleet only?

For now. 

[2o6]

The Caprice, 300, Taurus and Avalon are all roughly the same size.




(Edit. Bad syntax)

[Raza]

RIP Mercury.  You will be missed.  By someone.  Probably. 

[Xer0]

The Caprice?

The Grand Marquis, which I'm sure you already knew considering i directly quoted your post talking about that very car.

[hounddog]

GM

The Grand Marquis, which I'm sure you already knew considering i directly quoted your post talking about that very car.

Either way, it is a luxurious car.  Soft, plush, cushy, decent nav and options.

It is luxury by definition;

luxury  (ˈlʌkʃərɪ) 

? n  , pl  -ries 
1.  indulgence in and enjoyment of rich, comfortable, and sumptuous living 
2.  ( sometimes plural ) something that is considered an indulgence rather than a necessity 
3.  something pleasant and satisfying: the luxury of independence   
4.  ( modifier ) relating to, indicating, or supplying luxury: a luxury liner   

[C14 (in the sense: lechery): via Old French from Latin luxuria  excess, from luxus  extravagance] 


A Crown Vic would not be luxury since it is base.  GM costs more, has more, gives more = luxury.

I never wrote a single word about it (Panther Platform) being a relevant car; as I have written above, and, ad-nauseum in other threads.

[280Z Turbo]

RIP Mercury.  You will be missed.  By someone.  Probably. 

[hounddog]

Ok, perhaps not every model will be missed.

[Xer0]

 

Either way, it is a luxurious car.  Soft, plush, cushy, decent nav and options.

It is luxury by definition;

luxury  (ˈlʌkʃərɪ) 

? n  , pl  -ries 
1.  indulgence in and enjoyment of rich, comfortable, and sumptuous living 
2.  ( sometimes plural ) something that is considered an indulgence rather than a necessity 
3.  something pleasant and satisfying: the luxury of independence   
4.  ( modifier ) relating to, indicating, or supplying luxury: a luxury liner   

[C14 (in the sense: lechery): via Old French from Latin luxuria  excess, from luxus  extravagance] 


A Crown Vic would not be luxury since it is base.  GM costs more, has more, gives more = luxury.

I never wrote a single word about it (Panther Platform) being a relevant car; as I have written above, and, ad-nauseum in other threads.

The GM is none of those things.  It isn?t appreciably comfortable in comparison to what is out there at similar price points, there is nothing rich about it as the design, materials, and general fit and finish are second rate, and it sure as all hell isn?t anywhere close to sumptuous.  You want to make the comparison that the GM is more of a luxury car than the CV go right ahead and make it now, but the car itself is anything but luxurious.

[hounddog]

[ifcar]

A Crown Vic would not be luxury since it is base.  GM costs more, has more, gives more = luxury.

They were never more than a few hundred dollars apart comparably-equipped when they were both available, and could be had with all or most of the same options. Just like every other recent Ford vs. Mercury.

[CALL_911]

The GM is none of those things.  It isn?t appreciably comfortable in comparison to what is out there at similar price points, there is nothing rich about it as the design, materials, and general fit and finish are second rate, and it sure as all hell isn?t anywhere close to sumptuous.  You want to make the comparison that the GM is more of a luxury car than the CV go right ahead and make it now, but the car itself is anything but luxurious.

[2o6]

There was nothing wrong with the Tracer/Escort.


I would take one over the GM J-body cars, Shadow/Sundance, or even the Mazda it was based upon.

[hounddog]

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Ford_Crown-Victoria/

http://www.carsdirect.com/2007/mercury/grand_marquis


two grand difference, and the GM had options the CV did not.  Mostly exterior, but more = more. 

[2o6]

They start at virtually the same price.

[Onslaught]

RIP Mercury.  You will be missed.  By someone.  Probably. 

LOL. Not me. That country guy who had a song about them could be sad.

Should have killed it off years ago.

[ifcar]

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Ford_Crown-Victoria/

http://www.carsdirect.com/2007/mercury/grand_marquis


two grand difference, and the GM had options the CV did not.  Mostly exterior, but more = more. 

Comparably-equipped. The Crown Victoria, like all the other Fords, had a base model that the Mercury didn't. Midlevel and upper-level were near identical in price and feature content, just like the other Mercuries.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

There was nothing wrong with the Tracer/Escort.

I had a '95 Tracer Trio as a winter beater for 2 years! It never missed a beat until I fell asleep driving it.........

[WookieOnRitalin]

Why are you guys listing the Azera? Wasn't it discontinued by Huuuhyuuuuuundai?