My parents' first new car was a 1970 Montego coupe. They liked it so much they added a Montego sedan to the ranks– just in time to transport this nascent pistonhead home from the hospital. They no longer own a Montego. And soon, no one else will either. At least not a new one. Ford is about to rebadge the current Montego (a gussied-up Ford Five Hundred) a Sable; just as they’re about to rebadge the Five Hundred (the Taurus’ replacement) a Taurus. Which leaves everyone exactly where they started. I think. Let’s take a look.
The Five Hundred, sorry, Montego, began life as an Audi A6-a-like penned by the same designer who gave us the A6. Ugly it ain't. Boring it is: a third grade piano recital on wheels. Needless to say, the Quicksilver Boys grossly underestimated the need for brand specific product differentiation. Adding an aluminum-toned spizzarkleprow, LED eye catchers and Xenon lighting to a Ford Five Hundred is no substitute for unique sheetmetal. It’s like putting lipstick on a sloth.
Even if the Montego had the svelte sheetmetal to lure the public into a Mercury showroom, there's precious little inside the car’s cabin to keep them there. Swing open those tall and imposing portals and the geriatric bling theme continues apace. Sure, the dark wood-effect trim and richly textured leather hides exude a slight amount of Teutonic flavor. But someone forgot to sweat the details. The chrome ringed gauges look great– provided you can ignore the wall o' matte black buttons on the center stack.
You can see where Ford—sorry, Mercury thought they had a winner. Although fundamentally utilitarian, the Montego’s cabin is also fundamentally huge. According to the age-inappropriate image on the official website, the trunk can swallow enough gear for a small rock band. Stratocaster owners: you can fold down both the rear seat (trunk pass-through) and the front passenger seat and lay your naked, unsecured axe across two rows. How great is that?
Anyway, the Montego’s back seat is Old School Caddy wide and reasonably cushy; there’s plenty of room for three real adults back there. Unfortunately, the space offers all the charm of an airplane hangar. A full complement of airbags (including a side canopy system) ensure five star crashworthiness all ‘round, save for rollover (four stars), which may explain the class-exclusive rollover sensor.
At nearly 201 inches, the turnpike cruisin' Mercury creams most any bump, lump or stump. The spoke-intensive 18" wheels keep things on course, but the noise from the Pirellis at cruising speed throws a howler monkey into an otherwise competent isolation chamber.
Ease the Montego into a corner and it’s clear that this is not your typical land yacht. Thanks to its Volvo-fettled underpinnings, this large, nose-heavy, front wheel-drive sedan does a superb job at keeping understeer at bay without sacrificing ride quality. Predictably enough, the Montego’s steering is to road feel what a Stannah stair lift is to a leg workout. But it’s accurate enough to place the big Merc with precision. And if you don’t, four wheel discs will save your bacon (them’s the brakes).
Of course, this assumes you can amass enough forward speed to get into trouble. Ford's last-gen Duratec V6 welcomes you with a coarse hum at idle that stays all the way to the mill’s modest redline (5700rpm). The powerplant’s 203 horses struggle to tow the Montego’s massive 3670lb frame from rest to 60mph in eight seconds— or any other accelerative metric you can name.
Luckily, the powertrain has a singular saving grace. Well, six of them. The Montego's close-ratio six cog slushbox canes the motor rapidly enough for most, netting respectable fuel economy (21/29) in the process. Even a certified lead foot will find the combination of a flat torque curve and an always-willing gearbox adequate at part throttle, if wholly unacceptable at full-tilt.
In short, the Montego is a fine car for buyers seeking an unassuming full-size sedan that’s a tiny bit more exclusive and sparkly than a Ford Five Hundred, for around $825 more (base to base). Too bad this niche exists only in the world of product planners and flak-talking spin-doctors. Everyone else flocks to well-established import sedans or “real” American cars like the Grand Marquis. In fact, Mercury’s royal sweetheart sports a competitive sticker price and frequently triples the Montego’s monthly sales numbers. Oops.
The Volvo-Mercury is a bowl of corporate porridge that’s so "right" even Goldilocks smells a trap from a mile away. It’s no match for smaller cars in its class and lacks the swagger of its Panther chassis partner. Even with (another) retro name and modest upgrades, the Montego's successor faces an uphill battle in 2008. Ford’s money would have been better spent whipping the old Crown Victoria, Mercury Marquis and Lincoln LS into shape.
73 Comments on “Mercury Montego Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
The Sable will have the new 3.5-liter V6 and standard stability control–which hasn’t been available on the Montego et al.
Unfortunately, the C-pillar remains the same, and that’s where the Montego and Five Hundred have fallen down vis-a-vis the Passat that inspired them. In the quest for an exceptionally functional full-size sedan, said pillar is too thin and plain to lend the car any character.
On pricing, I think you’ll find that after adjusting for feature differences the Five Hundred and Montego are within a few dollars of one another.
In my research, the 2005 Montego has been below average in reliability, but the 2006 has been outstanding.
My price comparison and reliability site’s page for the Montego:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Montego.php
Sajeev,
I think this is a good review. But I wish you’d waited a few months for the update. Ford/Mercury has addressed the major concerns reviewers like you have pointed out (weak power, interior boredom plastic).
I expect the updated version to be a reasonable alternative to 300/Lucerne/Avalon/Azera, differentiated with AWD and great interior space.
Good, balanced review. It sounds like the Mercury is a reasonable, useful car with few demerits. Do we really care that it is outsold by obsolete cars such as the Grand Marquis? I certainly don't.
SherbornSean:
You go to battle with Toyota and Hyundai with the 100+ days’ supply of the car you have now, not yet with the car you wish you had.
ya know it used to be that if you wanted a unique ride, you bought a “foreign” car. These days, you buy a Mercury Montego. I have never seen one on the street in philadelphia.
Also, the other day, I saw a station wagon lookin thing that I had never seen before. It had smart lines, and seemed just the right size.
It was Ford Freestyle.
Amazing.
And this morning in Detroit I was totally surrounded in jam packed 85 MPH rush hour traffic and I could not spot one “foreign” car. (Except for the Mazda I was driving.) At one point I was totally boxed in by Trailblazers/Envoys.
It’s no wonder the Detroit boys can’t come up with winners consistently (in cars at least.) They’re entirely insulated from the real world.
I think starlightmica’s comment would be more accurate as:
“You go to battle with Toyota and Hyundai with the press car available to you now, not yet with the car you wish you had.”
I love the reviews on this site, but ShearbornSean does bring up a good point. For people looking for information on a possible new car, this review is for a car that has probably already ended production. Though I’m sure there are no “new” Sables available yet to test, his criticism is valid.
SherbornSean: Its a good time for a Montego fan like myself (reference to the 70s models) to give the new model a once-over before it disappeared. You know, just for old time’s sake.
You know that we’ll review the Taurus/Sable as soon as we can get our hands on one, right?
Martin Schwoerer: I think Ford should care. There’s no loyalty to the 500/Montego, but there’s plenty to the Panther chassis. And both are heavy on fleet sales too, so that’s not a big difference. If Ford freshened the Panther (ride the coattails of the Chrysler 300) instead of investing hundreds of millions(?) in a new platform and factory, I bet they’d sell more, have a better ROI or any other financial metric you wish to judge a car on.
Using the 300 as proof, I still question the relevance of a large FWD chassis from an American company. That’s not true to the brand, it only chases the foreign competition.
And its yet to work.
There’s still talk of this D3 chassis replacing the Panther and the Explorer. Might look good on the balance sheet like it did in 2004, but its gonna displace a lot of people loyal to those brands. (FYI: the Explorer outsells the Freestyle just like the Grand Marquis to the Montego)
Reviews limited to 800 words. Not enough space for the details you want. I agree they should be there but not with the current rules in place. Perhaps a spec page or expanded stars section?
Mercury would seem a fairly easy fix and should have been done years ago. Ford is the everyman’s car, Lincoln is the big luxury and Mercury is the tweener. Put new skins on make them sexy and use some good upscale materials (not too much) and blam you are done.
Michael, wouldn’t most ‘06 cars have decent reliablity? I’d think the ‘05 reliability is a hargbinger of future problems with the ‘06.
Matte black grill, rear drive, V8, and this would be a decent Maurader. It’s really not a bad looking vehicle.
I used to own a ‘93 SHO. Fast car, decent handling, looked great. Everything broke but the Yamaha engine :)
How about that Ford? Another M5 beater with a 6=speed Manual? Put it on the market, overprice it, and let me pick up a used one 3 years later for 1/2 price.
Sajeev,
Thanks for the reply. I don’t think anyone disputes that the Panther needs a serious update, if only to protect Ford’s livery and police fleet franchises.
I am surprised that the AARP crowd continues to be loyal to the Marquis over the Montego. I would think they’d appreciate the simply laid out interior, the room, the AWD and higher seats (easier ingress/egress) but I digress.
I look forward to your review of the new Taurus/Sable/X.
StarlightMica,
Just so we are clear, I am NOT accusing Sajeev or TTAC of picking on Ford by cherry picking an old model to review, because I know it’s not how they operate.
What I’m saying is that the 500 and Montego have been out for 3 years, have been judged against their peers, and been found lacking in power and interior refinement.
The fact that Ford is in the process of bringing out an update that addresses these concerns tells me there’s a chance Ford “gets it” and will have a winning product.
You are correct that if I HAD to buy a large family sedan today, I would not pick the Montego, nor would most consumers, unless they needed AWD or were Ford loyalists. But I might wait a few months and see what the Sable has to offer. That’s all.
Wasn’t one big selling point for this platform the available AWD? Funny, but it’s March in New England, snowing outside right now, and I don’t see Ford advertising this option. I do see a million Subaru ads on TV, though.
In concept, this car makes total sense: Huge interior & trunk space, handsome styling, affordable price, available AWD, good handling, and fuel efficient for it’s size. Yes it’s boring, but this still SHOULD HAVE made the Grand Marquis obsolete.
But here is my gripe with Ford: It seems like Standard Procedure when they have a decent product- Zero effort is put into the marketing. It leads me to believe that Ford/Mercury lost confidence in the entire lot of Chicago D3’s (500/Montego/Freestyle.) Why?!
I have driven a friend’s Ford Freestyle a number of times, and I’m convinced that it’s the best kept secret in the industry. Who would have thought that you can get a Volvo-based, 5-star crash rated, AWD, 7-passenger CUV starting around $26-27k after incentives?
Jerseydevil: The reason you have never seen them is that Ford failed to get the word out, and miserable sales ensued.
To Ford Marketing: Maybe this is just too logical, but why didn’t you immediately start marketing the Freestyle as a Minivan alternative when you discontinued the Freestar? (And let’s not even talk about that head-scratching ad campaign that focused on the divorced couple/single mother w/ kids, but somehow basically IGNORED THE PRODUCT.)
With the new names and 265hp 3.5L, I will be curious to see how they handle the marketing of the “new” Taurus/Sable.
SherbornSean: I am surprised that the AARP crowd continues to be loyal to the Marquis over the Montego. I would think they’d appreciate the simply laid out interior, the room, the AWD and higher seats (easier ingress/egress) but I digress.
I think the reason they stick with the Marquis (or the Crown Vic or Town Car) is because they don’t want to have to learn new control layouts or have to remember what their new car looks like when wandering amongst the handicapped parking spaces. They can trade their 5 or 6 year old car in on a new one and everything will be exactly where it was on the old car.
I’m a Grand Marquis loyalist – on my 2nd one at 40 years of age. I love the Panther, but would never buy a Montego by choice.
The thing the Grand Marquis has that the Montego lacks is a proven track record, simple, dependable, a smooth and durable V-8 rwd powertrain, in addition to room and comfort. They are a great car to keep long term – they last a long time, simple to maintain and repair, and are comfortable to drive. They drive quite well – a testiment to the talent Ford had as recently as the early 90’s.
The Montego is what you get when you have a commitee of MBA’s design a car – let’s take a platform we already have and try to cob something off of it to sell to the rubes who drive a Grand Marquis. On paper it looks good to those who would never drive an American sedan, but it is a cheap imitator.
I’ve owned large FWD sedans before – they feel worn out by 120,000 miles. My old 94 Grand Marquis was sold only because my wife didn’t want an 11 year old car to be our primary vehicle – we still took it on all our road trips over our Toyota. It didn’t have a single thing wrong with it at 11 years old – other than some valve stem seal oil leakage into the combustion chamber.
They are still great cars, even though they have been badly mismanaged over the last decade – all the American styling traits have been removed, both inside and outside.
The reason old folks and others return to the panther cars is because of their bulletproof reliability, smooth ride, and good price. The reason almost nobody buys the 500/Montego nor will they buy the Taurus/Sable is because the styling flat out sucks!!! It looks like an inflated 10 year old Passat and totally misses the mark of what would appeal to their target market…old guys who want big American cars.
SherbornSean:
Understood. From the little I know about the D3 gestation from Businessweek and other rags, it’s a sad story. It goes something like this:
- styling didn’t do well in focus groups, but they built it anyway, blaming the bubble shape on the proportions of the Volvo underpinnings
- despite the underwhelming interior and lack of techno-gadgets, the starting price was supposed to be thousands higher, right up against Avalon’s sticker. DCX sunk that idea by lowballing the 300, and then the 3rd gen Avalon came out with its laser cruise control & climate controlled seats.
- if you’re going to put 3 LATCH connectors in the back seat, can’t you spend the extra development money in to ensure they’re all usable at the same time?
- the 3.5 V6 was delayed, of course
This summer, the vehicle that should have come out at the introduction will finally arrive. Little wonder Grand Marquis outsells Montego 3:1.
My M-B C320 wagon is dying: electronics, transmission and suspension. Never again!
I’m going to buy a Grand Marquis GS with the performance option and a few other goodies. Where else can I get a roomy, comfortable, V8-powered RWD car that lists for $33k and carries a $5500 rebate?
And just imagine if Ford had been smart enough to update the Panther platform, bring trim, fit and finish up to 21st century standards, and keep the price in line. The Chrysler 300 would have been no match, let alone Chevy Impalas, Toyota Avalons and other FWD poseurs.
I am still stymied that these cars (along with 500) dont sell better. I think the styling is “handsome” enough. Yes, the power is on the lacking side but should still fit the bill for the target audience. So where did Ford go wrong? AS was pointed out, I think marketing is the most likely culprit.
MW:
March 16th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Wasn’t one big selling point for this platform the available AWD? …and I don’t see Ford advertising this option.
They are advertising the heck out of the AWD Fusion here in Ohio. The 500/Montego doesn’t seem to get any ad time here (AWD or otherwise) since the fusion was introduced.
Im 33 years old, and my daily driver is a 2005 Ford 500 limited. I purchased for wayyyy under invoice it in 2006 from a Ford dealer in Las Vegas.
That was more than a year, and 26,000 miles ago. My 500 has never been in the shop for anything other than scheduled maintenance. The car climbs the Tehachapi Pass (about 3700 vertical feet over 30 or so miles) every day, and when I ask it to pass a truck, the duratech engine does it with a little noise and rev, but it does it every time.
BTW, with this mountain communte, I still average 27 mpg during the summmer, and 25 in the winter.
I am like a lot of you, puzzled that Ford did not spend more money marketing the car. It is a great car. Boring exterior, but still a great car for the money.
–C. Alan
z31-
They are advertising the heck out of the AWD Fusion here in Ohio. The 500/Montego doesn’t seem to get any ad time here (AWD or otherwise) since the fusion was introduced.
Thats true and even in Cleveland, I have not noticed many more AWD Fusions or even ever seen one of these Montegos. The AWD G35 on the other hand…
I think we can all agree Ford has no idea how to sell passenger cars or CUVs. I have been seeing a ton more Mazda C-7s than Edges around. Mazda has the benefit of not having awful jingles, “I LIKE TO LIVE ON THE EDGE!”
K.
I’ll never forget this part of Dan Neil’s review of the Montego.
“I’ve seen better plastics on prison lunch trays”.
I’ve never seen a Montego on the road. I see a single 500 every few months. I wouldn’t touch the CVT until reliability is proven (or not).
I like the car and find it quite elegant. I think the conservative design will age better than the gangsta look of the 300 and it is clearly a more modern look than than the Impala.
Lots of room, state of the art safety thanks to Volvo, decent handleing for FWD and available AWD and a high seating position. I think this car is under appreciated and don’t know why Ford gave up on marketing of it. If I were in the market for a larger sedan, I would definatly take a look (particularly at the fire sale prices). The fact that it is so rare is actually a good thing.
Pity about rebadging it a Taurus though (Says Ovalised Microwave melted rental car to me. Sable is ok though I just hope they dont slap that bling fusion rasor grill on it.
Kurt B:
I’ll never forget this part of Dan Neil’s review of the Montego.
“I’ve seen better plastics on prison lunch trays”.
And like prison lunch trays, the ford platics will probably last 20 years (barring riot duty). You can’t say the same for the fancy plastics VW/Audi uses.
What I can’t understand for the life of me is how Billy Ford let such bland styling get to production. It should have been axed while it was still ON PAPER. Does the mgmt or board really even care about the company anymore?
The 500 should have been the 427 concept of a few years ago. Hell, they could have simply changed the sheet metal, engine and suspension settings on the Panther platform to get to the 427/500.
Or even stretch the LS/S-Type platform to get the 427/500.
That way, the Montego would have had a much better starting point. But as we see, if you start from $#!t, you can only get fertilizer.
The problem as I see it is the 500/Montego, while being described as being large cars, look like the small or mid-size cars. I know they are roomy inside, but they just don’t look like a big car. That’s why the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis still sell well, they look like the large cars that they are. People that want a large car want it to to look like a large car. It’s not that hard to figure out.
The 500 might be selling at fire sale prices but it comes at a “price:” resale value. In my area there are 2006 models with 20,000 miles selling for as little as $13K. A good deal for those that want one slightly used.
I agree with Karesh about the 05s reliability.
The first few batches had to be pushed off the line.
http://onthehoist.com/index.php/2004/10/01/p31
That, and Ford’s cliam they would have the highest resale value of any recent Ford. Guess that didn’t work out.
Right on, great and well thought out review. I agree with you. I couldn’t imagine trading my Crown Vic for a 500 and I’m sure Marquis owners feel the same way.
How many of you have driven a Grand Marquis lately? I rented one last fall and thought I had shot through a time warp to the seventies. Everything from the speedo to the door handles/locks reflected stale, decades old ideas. I guess they plan on making the things until nobody will have them any more, since the tooling was probably amortized in the late eighties. It drove like a ‘75 Dodge Monaco.
I think people buy them for one thing…easy to get in and out of for aged, large bodies.
taxman100:
I drove a 1992 Grand Marquis for 7 years, 130k miles, never disapointed me, sold it a year ago for $1500, it’s a shame how Ford neglecting these cars.
What I don’t get is that the car has an 8 second 0-60 time and all kinds of people are calling it underpowered? I know everyone wants a car to burn rubber like the 60’s vintage GTO, but I would consider 8 seconds to be perfectly adequate, especially for a car that purports to get good fuel mileage for its size.
Something else is going on here. Never drove one, but from what I am hearing about the CVT (close-ratio 6-speed probably not that different) is that acceleration is more like a jet takeoff than a car takeoff. A jet takeoff has the engines “spooling up” and making a lot of noise without much happening, the engines continuing to make a lot of racket, which seems to distract a person from the fact that you are starting to sink back in your seat, and then you are suddenly staring at the ground from a distance, wondering how you got from Point A to Point B. A car takeoff is supposed to make you notice that you are going right away, some tailing off of the surge, and then the sense that you are reaccelerating as the gear change catches the center of the power band, along with some orchestral backup of the engine pitch rising and falling — the vroom-vroom effect we all made as kids to imagine we were driving race cars.
Do you suppose the car is really that slow (it is supposed to be faster than the 300M in one or other powertrain configuration, or at least on paper)? Or do you suppose there is something psychological at work here? In the absence of the vroom-vroom engine sounds and the jerks of the gear changes, do we suppose that the car isn’t going anyplace?
In a way it is really too bad — we tear into Ford for not anticipating high gas prices and being too wedded to selling SUV’s, and here Ford comes out with a car, with a high seating position and tons of room to appeal to people driving SUV’s, with the 24V 3L from the Taurus, admittedly too small an engine for a vehicle that size, but mated to transmissions (the 6-speed and CVT) that are supposed to transmute that combination into big car, adequate acceleration, and good gas mileage.
All car makers are subject to the same laws of physics, and all of the variables in a car — interior room, mass for safety, stiffness, and quiet, acceleration, gas mileage. When they stick that 3.5 L in that thing, all of the car critics are going to sing the praises of how much better it is, but it is not going to get the same gas mileage, no matter how they tune the bigger motor, and in the same breadth we are going to tear into Ford for manufacturing gas guzzlers when gas goes back to $3/gallon this summer.
Maybe the gas mileage of this thing isn’t all that great after all — do people know what you get when you drive it TTAC style and what you get when you drive it granny style?
Paul Milenkovic:
It’s a known fact that one of the top priorities when choosing a car is power, I suspect this is why we (in America) don’t get BMW 318, or 520, also small cars like Mazda 3 comes with a 1.4L to 2.0L engines in Europe, the 2.3L is an American special.
After all, take a Grand Marquis, almost the same size as the Montego, not much more HP, but that V8 does all that magic off the line with better torque and smoothness .
I’ve had several hundreds of vehicles over the last few years. A Crown Vic Police Interceptor has always been one of my favorites for highway cruising.
A little over a week ago I bought my third one in as many years for $3200. It’s got 96k miles and never saw active police duty in the small town I did the auction for. Instead it was used by the department of public works as an errand vehicle, and it was maintained like clockwork every 3000 miles. By the way, if your city has a well organized government attached to it (think gentrifiers, not slumlords) then I strongly advise you attend their next annual auction.
The Interceptor simply does wonders for my daily commute (for obvious reasons) and is an extremely comfortable cruiser. I can easily cruise at 85 to 90 and all the other cars go off to the right. Not even a Rolls Royce can lay claim to that fame.
Before this one I had a 98 model with 177k (bought for $1065 on Ebay believe it or not, it just needed headlights), a 95 model used by the local detective (bought for $1500 with very nice cloth seats in it), and an 89 Mustang Interceptor with only 90k miles (bought for $1500, used by the chief as a spare vehicle over the years).
I’ve also owned Camrys (including a 94 that I put 239k miles on), Accords, A4’s, Passats, Impala’s, Intrepid’s, and over a dozen Benzez (one of which was north of 100k) . The only cars that gave me more daily satisfaction on the highways than the Crown Vic Interceptors were the Audi A8 (1st gen) and the Jaguar XJ series. The Audi had a compact feel that I simply loved, and the XJ’s (late 90’s and early 00’s) brought forth this amazing feeling of calmness and serenity in the daily commutes. For some reason the Lexus sedans always had this feeling of detachment (except for the IS300 which was just quirky) while the Jaguar XJ’s still offered a genuine connection to the driving experience.
You know what? I can still smell those beautiful British leather seats and hear the crispness of the Karmann stereo system. I really believe anger management classes and the various forms of stress related therapies wouldn’t exist at all the patients were driving XJ’s instead.
After reading mnumerous reviews on this site, I’m convinced that there are no manufacturers capable of making a decent interior. Also, any car not capable of 0-60 in less than 8 seconds is not worth the metal it was stamped from.
numerous (sorry)
Steven Lang:
That is a sweet deal on a Interceptor. 96K miles for 3200? What year was it, where did you buy it and how can I get to my local governmental auction?
cheezeweggie -
No interior is perfect but typically VW/Audi’s and Acura’s seem like the most commonly praised interiors on this site.
No one buys these because their resale value is awful. They may start off “cheap” because they are priced thousands under MSRP but in the long run they cost a lost more to own when one takes into account depreciation. Period. Why would you pick this car over its Japanese counterparts? Unless you lived in Detroit like a previous post mentioned…..
While the Five Hundred and Montego have a side profile that looks like a larger version of the previous generation Volkswagen Passat, from some angles the Five Hundred does have a resemblance to the First Gen Taurus.
The three-bar grill of the new Taurus and Taurus X manages to give them a different appearance from the older Five Hundred and Freestyle, but the new Sable really looks about the same as the old Montego. I was hoping that it would get a new, more distinctive, grill. Maybe something with a light bar like the old First Gen Sable.
Here in Colorado, the all-wheel drive Five Hundred, Freestyle, Fusion, and Escape have all been advertised heavily on TV this past winter. And Mercury has been running ads with Mercury spokesperson, Jill Wagoner, promoting the all-wheel drive Mercury Milan and Mariner.
I would disagree with the comments that some of you have made about the timeliness of this roadtest. I suspect that 2007 Ford Five Hundreds, Freestyles and Mercury Montegos are going to be sitting on dealer lots well into 2008, even with all the factory incentives.
I’ve even read on another website that Ford is considering making available to their dealers, kits, that would replace the old Five Hundred, Freestyle and Montego grills and chrome trim with the grills and trim from the newer Taurus, Taurus X and Sable. (But they’d still have the old clunky 3.0 liter V6s.) But, hey, it worked for Kaiser back in 1952.
I sure hope the 3.5 liter V6 turns out to be a good engine. While the new Taurus/Sable won’t be able to compete with the Avalon, it should give the Hyundai Azera and Kia Amanti a good run for the money, and I think it should be a better car than the elderly Buick LaCrosse, Chevy Impala, Pontiac Grand Prix. It should even be better than the crappy V6-powered Buick Lucerne, Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Magnum. No threat to the V8-powered versions, though. The Grand Marquis and Crown Vic don’t have anything to worry about, either.
Oh, and what’s up with the Lincoln version of the new Taurus/Sable, the MKS? Supposedly it was going to get the same Yamaha-build 4.4 liter V8 as the Volvo S80. Then I heard that Ford couldn’t afford the Yamaha V-8 and the MKS was supposed to get the same 3.5 V6 as the Taurus/Sable. And then the MKS stopped showing up at auto shows.
I like the comment that the 500/Montego is a great car for the price, after mentioning the great below-invoice deal. Ford doesn’t need people thinking it is a great buy at $7k under MSRP, because that means they don’t make any money. They need people to think it is a great car AT MSRP, and it would seem pretty clear that people don’t.
For the record, I think with some minor sheet metal tweaks it could be a really sharp car.
The 500 and the Montego have some of the best overall packaging in the industry, and the worst marketing. Not everyone care about 0-60 times. But then again some of the fastest muscle cars of the 60’s could not do 0-60 in 8 seconds.
These cars are roomy, very comfortable on long drives, and have huge trunks. If they were marketed like the Fusion with “challege commercials” putting them up against there competition, they would sell much better. What else out there can you put 8 golf bags in the trunk of. Also, available AWD another thing it’s competitirs lack.
This car suffers from the wrong marketing. It needs to be put up against it’s competitors.
Sajeev, I enjoyed reading the review. I recently drove a top trim level Five Hundred and found it pretty decent. It isn’t a driving enthusiast’s car, then again it isn’t supposed to be. It’s got more room than any sedan short of a Town Car, and the best ride out of all family cars on the market. But Partsisparts is right, Ford cannot get its marketing down right and their entire model lineup suffers as a result.
100% of sales is marketing. Take the worst car imaginable. Market it right, and it will sell. Maybe not for long, but initially it will sell.
A lot of the problems come from Ford dealers themselves, who refuse to sell customers the cars they ask for. I swear to God, last March my father went into a dealer to buy (CASH!) a diesel Expedition that sat on the lot. The veteran car dealer wasted an hour of our time telling us unrelated stories trying to talk us into a differnt vehicle. I’m not the only one with such experiences.
Oh, and what’s up with the Lincoln version of the new Taurus/Sable, the MKS?
One has to wonder if Ford, should the MKS come about, will change the nomenclature back to Continental.
What I don’t get is that the car has an 8 second 0-60 time and all kinds of people are calling it underpowered?
Paul Milenkovic: 8 seconds isn’t terrible, but its how the job gets done. The 3.0 Duratec is buzzy and coarse, you feel like you beating on the poor machine just to get what V6 Camry/Accord/Fusion etc does with little stress. Its a bummer.
——————
One has to wonder if Ford, should the MKS come about, will change the nomenclature back to Continental.
Maxb49: From what I heard, the Lincoln MKS production car will be unveiled at an upcoming auto show. Ford and Mercury wised up to new names, but I doubt Lincoln will do the right thing…they follow Cadillac’s plan for success. Its easier to follow, ya know.
Playing second fiddle doesnt work very well in auto business (after all car is the second most expensive item for many people after house)
Example: Mitsubishi/Subaru/Suzuki are all second tier while Honda/Toyoda/Nissan(?) are considered as first tier. Most people want to make a safe choice and go with the pack leaders and they are rewarded (sometimes in intangible benefits).
Moral of the story is that Mercury is in the pits and doesnt have strong product that is eye catchy. Mercury is neither a safe choice nor has a cool product. Lose lose situation if you ask me.
All these comments re: traditional full-size unabashed American cars in my view is indicative of a latent discontent at what has happened in recent years. The ‘85 Deville was the first blow, and I’m wondering what will be the final straw.
A shame that Ford has left the CV/GM wither on the vine, but at least they’re still building them (albeit largely for fleet use).
I’m hoping the ‘09 Impala is not some rebadged Holden, otherwise my hope of getting behind the wheel of a (new) vehicle that looks and feels American will likely be extinguished for good.
Another good review Sajeev! The last Mercury that remotely interested me was the Maurauder… too bad Ford does not let Merc have its own true identity.
86er: I’m hoping the ‘09 Impala is not some rebadged Holden, otherwise my hope of getting behind the wheel of a (new) vehicle that looks and feels American will likely be extinguished for good.
I own a rebadged Holden… first GM car I have owned and enjoyed in a long time (I am a long-time GM truck buyer though.) The Aussies never lost the feel of what a V8 RWD car should be like. GM here in the US can use the help.
I own the Holden rebadge too (2006 GTO) It is not your average GM car…. Can’t wait to see the G8…