Ford Inside News banner

21 - 31 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
Sorry.....

.....but Mercury is DEAD for a GOOD reason. Why can't we let it stay DEAD.
Or Ford could fix it and expand their market for more profit and more jobs. What GM always did better IMHO was the way they did platform sharing, although they usually did too much of it. But, when you compared sister cars, such as the Cutlass, Regal, Century, Grand Prix, Grand Am, Bonneville, Monte Carlo, Malibu, (did I miss any of the A/G body cars of the 70s-80s?), they shared no sheet metal or interiors across brands. Ford and Mercury OTOH shared most sheet metal and used only trim such as grilles, taillights, and side body molding to differentiate sister cars. They should've gone much further to attain that goal as they had done in the past. And they can again.
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
Or Ford could fix it and expand their market for more profit and more jobs. What GM always did better IMHO was the way they did platform sharing, although they usually did too much of it. But, when you compared sister cars, such as the Cutlass, Regal, Century, Grand Prix, Grand Am, Bonneville, Monte Carlo, Malibu, (did I miss any of the A/G body cars of the 70s-80s?), they shared no sheet metal or interiors across brands. Ford and Mercury OTOH shared most sheet metal and used only trim such as grilles, taillights, and side body molding to differentiate sister cars. They should've gone much further to attain that goal as they had done in the past. And they can again.
I had the opportunity to drive a MonteCarlo and GrandPrix back-to-back in the 90's
and
they drove COMPLETELY differently as well as looking diifferent;
from the 'feel', they weren't only from diff mfgs but diff continents!

imho Mercury was denied its own design-philosophy.
ex: the MonSABLEtego... it's last refresh had completely unique sheetmetal from the A-pillar forward
BUT
it still looked undifferentiated / obviously designed by the Taurus's team

Lincoln comments, separate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
Platform sharing doesn't have to be a negative thing. It's just that it took Ford too long to figure that out and that short-sightedness cost us the Mercury division.
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
partly for SullyND's desire for a 'heretical' Mustang 4-door (actually 2!)
& partly for Syr's "...I think casting Mercury as a sporting, rwd brand...makes a lot of sense."
& with the Mustang-architecture frontend from the CD4-3-Fwd-Rwd-Poll
I
wonder
*IF*
the Mustang-sourced drivetrains could be grafted ON to other rear compartments???
specifically ones that neither Ford nor LINCOLN would be tempted to use!

Capri > Focus sedan rear compartment (with dual-back)
Puma* > Fusion rear compartment (ditto^)
MetaSpace > S-Max rear compartment
&
the following with height-adjustable suspensions;
low = for the street/highway/loading,
high = for not-so-softroading
:
Bronco > Escape rear compartment
Mariner > Everest rear compartment = Territory too??
^ all 5-doors ^
Mesa > T6 pickup cabin &(or just) bed

wonder if small front-only electrics could provide AWD-like traction? ...to keep the drivetrains simple

* I'm too superstitious to use THE NAME


edit:
Capri, Mariner, MetaSpace
1.5EB
2.0EB
2.3EB
2.7EB

Puma, Bronco, Mesa
2.0EB
2.3EB
2.7EB
5.0v8

one trim: al cantara upholstery with leather bolsters + various gizmo pkgs
& instead of Sync/MFT, 'just' integration of "bring-along" tech
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Capri
Puma*
MetaSpace
Bronco
Mariner
Mesa
it occurs to me that at one time (like Model T times) that all of those would have been considered ONE vehicle - just with different 'coachwork'.
&
btw imho this 'lineup' is MUCH Less likely than the FalconThunderTaurusBird
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
Lincoln has too few vehicles what with only the MkZ, MkS, MkT, and Navigator and it needs to move up market. It needs a real 3 series fighter, which could be done easily on the Mustang platform especially when the GT and Boss 302 have been compared favorably to the M3; Lincoln's version should be a coupe, a sedan, and a convertible. I would want them powered by the 3.7L and the EB 3.5L. Also, a stretched Taurus would be a good place to start for a solid replacement for the Grand Marquis. Lastly, a Capri as both coupe and sedan based on the Focus would be a smart way to go. Sold on the shame floor as the Lincolns rounds out a nice selection of vehicles.
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
^ short reply, T'Cal
otoh
-- imho the current XZST from Lincoln could super-easily have been Mercurys (some may say "ARE") ... also & especially my MKE(Focus**) & MKuGa might be even better as Mercs
(offtopic
-- without a Continental, Lincoln doesn't really even EXIST!)



** to my way of thinking
the Focus, tho it may offer even more 'stuff' than I'd ever want cough*Titanium*cough,
just isn't "Nice" enough - in the way that Mercurys were a "bit nicer than" Fords


sent from my hurrying-me-out-door Public Library
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
There was a time in the mid 90's when I considered that maybe Mercury should work to become competition for BMW. Instead of names, I thought that the various models could all be designated XR-numbers. The coupes would be odd and the sedans even, such as XR-1 would be a subcompact coupe and XR-2 would be a subcompact sedan. The compact XR-3 (based on the Mustang platform) would be a BMW 3-series coupe fighter while the XR-4 would be the sedan version; I imagined a stretched model becoming the midsized XR-5 & XR-6. The large Cougar would become the XR-7 coupe to stand along side a sedan version of course called the XR-8. The XR-9 would've basically have been the fullsized Marauder sedan with no coupe version. The XR-1 & XR-2 would've been FWD and the rest RWD, but all Mercurys would've come with higher end standard features such as IRS, airbags, EFI, and ABS all standard.

Perhaps when Lincoln finally takes off and moves up market there will be room for Mercury of some sort again...
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
There was a time in the mid 90's when I considered that maybe Mercury should work to become competition for BMW. Instead of names, I thought that the various models could all be designated XR-numbers. The coupes would be odd and the sedans even, such as XR-1 would be a subcompact coupe and XR-2 would be a subcompact sedan. The compact XR-3 (based on the Mustang platform) would be a BMW 3-series coupe fighter while the XR-4 would be the sedan version; I imagined a stretched model becoming the midsized XR-5 & XR-6. The large Cougar would become the XR-7 coupe to stand along side a sedan version of course called the XR-8. The XR-9 would've basically have been the fullsized Marauder sedan with no coupe version. The XR-1 & XR-2 would've been FWD and the rest RWD, but all Mercurys would've come with higher end standard features such as IRS, airbags, EFI, and ABS all standard.

Perhaps when Lincoln finally takes off and moves up market there will be room for Mercury of some sort again...
belated

if I take your comparo to BMW to mean "not as plush" as MB or Lexoid, then that fits my 'vision' too
dunno how many other Merc lovers agree...
...for me a big diff between 'M' & 'L' is that Lincoln *needs* to be a bit over the top -- to the point that I personally shouldN'T want one, not even a base model.

Wonder how high (large) it'll be possible to go if they wait until 2020 to reLaunch Mercury?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,270 Posts
I always wished Mercury would compete with Acura. But for that to happen, Lincoln would have had to step up, which it never seemed able to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2b2
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
Top