The Ford 500 ...observation

[Mike Poore]

At the DC auto show I picked up a Ford BOLDMOVES 07 CAR booklet, and found on page 18 (they don't number them, you have to count)the most amazing claim. I quoteth:

"Five Hundred also has the largest trunk - incorporating grocery hooks to keep bags steadfast - of any sedan in North America. The low liftover height and big-time capacity make way for up to 8 golf bags (matching the 8 beverage holders in the cabin)"

Now, one might wonder why a car with seating for four, five if someone wants to sit on the hump, would need to carry 8 golf bags, and have 8 cup, uh, beverage holders? However, considering my F-150 with seating for two, in the Captains chairs, which has four cup, uh, beverage holders, which, doing the math, works out to two, cup, uh, beverage holders, per person; which I suppose is the correct ratio. Only difference is, depending upon how they were stacked, one might suppose 50 golf bags could be placed in the bed of said truck.

The other seemingly glaring inconstancy in the claim is that Ford seems to be forgetting the Crown Vic/Mercury GranMarquis/Lincoln Town Car, which one might argue, has a larger trunk than said Five Hundred.

I propose a new game while traveling ....spot the Five Hundred. I'm not sure I've ever seen one, although it might simply be a problem of picking out the amorphous transportation appliances from the crowd. :shake:

Better dump that stock, Joe.

[thePunisher]

guess what the 500 trunk has more capacity than the cv. in fact when we got our first 500 in at the dealer that was the one thing that stood out in my mind the most.....the massive trunk. its huge

[Shora]

The 500 has a luggage capacity of 21.2 (cu. in.) while the panther platform has a luggage capacity of 20.6 (cu.in.) which is not a big enough difference to show off about IMO.

Also, the 500 has less HP and a shorter wheelbase then a standard Crown Vic LX Sport.

[O's Fan Rich]

The rear leg room in a 500 is worth the price of admission if you have more than 1 friend to take along!

[magindat]

I drove a 500 with a CVT. That really makes up for the HP! It's kinda fun.

[Dragcity]

Unfortunately, I had to dump my stock a long time ago, when it was down to $18.50 per share. I took enough of a beating....


My poor Father is probably rolling in his grave. He started working at the Buffalo Stamping Plant as soon as it opened in 1950. He and his team of Machinists kept the place running for many years....

I fear the worst within 5 years, so sad....

[mrjones]

[QUOTE=magindat;465758]I drove a 500 with a CVT. That really makes up for the HP!

According the the Michigan State Police tests, it's also quicker than a CVPI. It ought to be quite a bit quicker when it gets the 3.5L V6.

[Canadasvt]

If I needed the extra interior and trunk space I would have purchased the 500. We have plenty of them around to drive here at work.

Sit in the drivers seat of a 500, get it all set up to where you like everything set up to drive. Then get out and sit 'behind yourself'. Way more room than the Maruader.

Nice car inside, but no performance and I don't like the look of the Passat/500.

[magindat]

According the the Michigan State Police tests, it's also quicker than a CVPI. It ought to be quite a bit quicker when it gets the 3.5L V6.

And if there's not enough room for a cage, there's always that roomy trunk to carry prisoners in...

[Power Surge]

Well first off, the 8 golf bag claim is just for people to visualize the size, being that most people know what the size of the average golf bag is. Sort of like when people compare something large to "the size of two football fields".

As for the trunk space, the 500 wins over the CV hands down. While the numbers may not be the big a difference, the flat layout of the 500 trunk makes it much easier to fit things in compared to the Panther trunk. Plus, the rear seats fold down in the 500, giving you the entire rear seat area added to the trunk for very large items.

As for the interior, the rear seating area is larger than any other car I've ever seen. You can fit 3 adults comfortably in the rear, 4 with a bit of a squeeze. It's amazing that such a small car has so much room inside, PLUS in the trunk.

Even with the 3.0, the car is not "slow" by any means, and the CVT with AWD option makes the car unstoppable in the snow.

The 500 may not look like much, but it's one of the most versitile cars Ford has ever built, and yes I own one.

[prchrman]

500 is a really nice all around car...very comfortable and great mileage...seats sit up a bit and I like that...rear leg room is great...my son gets 32 highway mpg...biggest issue is FWD...willie

[davidholland]

The 500 might be a great car. But I'm certain it will not last the cookie cutter design just is not exciting.

[magindat]

The 500 might be a great car. But I'm certain it will not last the cookie cutter design just is not exciting.

Neither was Taurus....

[Breadfan]

I've sorta eyed the 500 as a possible commuter car option in the next year or so for me. I'd like to move further out from the city, and if I do, I'll need a commuter car...I'll have trouble driving the Marauder in VA traffic 70 miles a day. ;)

The 500 looks like a nice option, their resale value is pretty bad, plenty in a small radius near me between 13k and 17k with 30k or less on the clock.

The AWD's are harder to find, and I'm not sure how easy it will be to spot a CVT online. When were CVT's originally introduced? I'd be curious to try one.

At anyrate, they'd hold their own in bad weather, get good gas mileage, and look comfortable. Styling is boring though...but they look like in a year or so a decent lower mileage one will be under 10k in price. That sounds like a good option.

I hear these are based on Volvo chassis too, I wonder how their reliability will be.

[Vortex]

Well, I own one of each and here are my observations: the trunk is probably a bit bigger in the 500/Montego but not nearly as deep. No way to put in a trunk organizer for instance. That said, you can fold down the rear seats and even the front passenger seat and I bet you could fit a pretty good size ladder in there. Regarding interior room, the seats are totally different from the MM, in the 500/Mon you sit up like you were driving a minivan or something, making it very easy to get in and out of. Visibility is great but the center console does squeeze your right leg a bit. The back seat is like having an extended Town Car, no kidding. On performance, well, the 3.0 is adequate and will cruise on the highway at 75 mph all day long with no problems and get 29-30 mpg doing it. Mine has the 6 speed and is not AWD. Around town it gets around 22 mpg, great for a car this big. Looks-wise, its pretty invisible. Not pretty but not ugly either, just plain Jane. All in all, a great daily driver with lots of capabilities and good milage to boot. I think if you are looking for a pratical car and can get a good price, it is worth it. I do see more and more of them around now (the 500, I hardly ever see Montegos) Oh, as of now the only real differences between the 500 and the Montego is the Montego uses more sound deadening material and the headlights are HID which are fantastic. My 2 cents.

[Power Surge]

They actually make a nice trunk organizer for the 500, I have one in my 06....

http://www.myford500.com/photos/data/500/1362500_029.jpg

As for looks, I agree the styling doesn't set the world on fire, but since Ford obviously has someone with a mental deficiency styling their cars lately, I think the 05-06 500 looks pretty decent. We added 05 Mustang wheels and the factory TSB fender spats to ours, and it makes the car look much nicer than stock...

http://www.myford500.com/photos/data/500/1362500_026.jpg

[RCSignals]

The 500 might be a great car. But I'm certain it will not last the cookie cutter design just is not exciting.

Still. it looks better than it's competition

[gpfarrell]

The Taurus had revolutionary styling... when it was introduced just over 21 years ago. Since then it's continually muddled it's way toward mediocrity. The 3rd gen jellybean cars at least made an effort to be a conversation piece again, it's just nobody had much nice to say about how they looked.

I think all the AWD cars are CVT.

From what I can tell, most folks driving a 500 are happy with it and would buy another one. Problem is, it was such a dud introduction into a Hemi-powered 300C market place that not many folks ever bothered to drive one.

No home run, but maybe a basehit that the 265hp motor will help them to build on.

Oh, my '78 Marquis has a bigger trunk, but won't get 29 mpg ever.

[jimlam56]

If I needed the extra interior and trunk space I would have purchased the 500. We have plenty of them around to drive here at work.

Sit in the drivers seat of a 500, get it all set up to where you like everything set up to drive. Then get out and sit 'behind yourself'. Way more room than the Maruader.

Nice car inside, but no performance and I don't like the look of the Passat/500.

Well said.
I have driven plenty of them as rentals, and continue to be amazed at the total lack of performance this car has. It reminds me of a 4 cylinder Camry.

[Vortex]

They actually make a nice trunk organizer for the 500, I have one in my 06....

http://www.myford500.com/photos/data/500/1362500_029.jpg

As for looks, I agree the styling doesn't set the world on fire, but since Ford obviously has someone with a mental deficiency styling their cars lately, I think the 05-06 500 looks pretty decent. We added 05 Mustang wheels and the factory TSB fender spats to ours, and it makes the car look much nicer than stock...

http://www.myford500.com/photos/data/500/1362500_026.jpg

Hey, I stand corrected. I had asked at the dealer how much it costs for a cargo net and they said $60 so I bought a generic one at Pep Boys for $20. I like that organizer, I wonder how much those go for?

[Power Surge]

Hey, I stand corrected. I had asked at the dealer how much it costs for a cargo net and they said $60 so I bought a generic one at Pep Boys for $20. I like that organizer, I wonder how much those go for?

It's about $300 retail. It's a Ford part, through the accessories catalog. The wife loves it. The netted section you see also folds back down so the entire thing is flat like a trunk floor.

[Mike Poore]

It's about $300 retail. It's a Ford part, through the accessories catalog. The wife loves it. The netted section you see also folds back down so the entire thing is flat like a trunk floor.

Give Ray (The Dealer) a call and he'll hook you up.

BTW, I saw one (my first) at the L/M dealer's today, a Montego, and agree that the world has passed this car by. It's roomy, comfortible, and I suppose, with the new 3.5 engine, should be able to get out of it's own way. You guys are right about the trunk, it's a friggen cave, and I kept looking in, then up, to see how it managed to go so far forward with the seat up. I think the Lincoln version, the MK-Z, or some such, will prolly tip the 40K mark, but am guessing you can get basically the same car somewhere in the mid-twenty's, with a blue oval on it. :)

No matter, you still have to wonder at the way Ford markets their products, or not. :nono:

[Breadfan]

Actually I don't think there is a Lincoln version, and if the Town Car goes away, Lincoln will not have a big sedan anymore...

The MK-Z is the "Zephyr" but somehow FLM figured why have a cool name like "Zephyr" becuase a few letters and a dash are much cooler as a name.

The Zephyr is on the same line as the Fusion/Milan

So you get Fusion/Milan/Mk-Z

and then

FiveHundred/Montego/Aint-Nothin!

[Mike Poore]

You've made my point, Mike. There ain't no telling them toasters apart! :shake:

[Breadfan]

You've made my point, Mike. There ain't no telling them toasters apart! :shake:

Do you think Ford Management knows what a Cimmaron is?

Because I don't think they do, and they're making the very same mistake.

[Bluerauder]

I propose a new game while traveling ....spot the Five Hundred. I'm not sure I've ever seen one, although it might simply be a problem of picking out the amorphous transportation appliances from the crowd. :shake:
Personally, I like the Ford Five Hundred. :D Have had one twice as a loaner while the Marauder was in the shop for service work. It is definitely NOT a Marauder; but it was a nice car. Had even considered one for the wife when she was looking for a new car. However, she opted for the Ford Freestyle LTD (crossover) instead.

I just wish that FoMoCo wasn't fixated on putting that 3-bar chrome grill on everything they make. :rolleyes:

[RCSignals]

The Taurus had revolutionary styling... when it was introduced just over 21 years ago. Since then it's continually muddled it's way toward mediocrity. The 3rd gen jellybean cars at least made an effort to be a conversation piece again, it's just nobody had much nice to say about how they looked.


Funny. I thought the first Tauras was just an insipid box.

the jelly bean style with everything round was actually the best of them all. (quality wise etc, not entirely style wise) The roundness was toned down for the next year.
Taurus only suffered from lack of further development. In many ways Ford is still suffering from the effects of Nasser.

[dwasson]

The neighbor has an AWD Five Hundred. I got to drive it. It isn't quick but it handles pretty well for a car that size. The CVT feels strange until you get used to it. I'd be happy if dad or mom bought one. It's not a bad car, it's just dull as dishwater.

[Mr Johnson]

I just wish that FoMoCo wasn't fixated on putting that 3-bar chrome grill on everything they make. :rolleyes:

Amen. I actually prefer the current looks of the car and wish they would just update the powertrain. But I guess Ford considers it a failure to sell > 100K units of a "bland" car when Chevy considers it a success to sell 100K HHRs because they are "hip". Seems like Ford would be making more per vehicle on a Five Hundred than Chevy does on an HHR too.

[KillJoy]

I test drove a 500 the day befire I got the MM.

The car uses a CVT Transmission. No shifting at all.

The car had zero acceleration worth noting.

But.....it has "Command Seating" :woohoo:

KillJoy

[chrish]

got the cvt on my escape hybrid......it ROCKS

[GAMike]

The 500 is based largely on the Volvo S80, which went on sale in 1998 as a 99 model, but was 6-7 years in development, as the shape was first seen at a car show (Frankfurt I think) in 1992.

So while it may be a nice car, it really is a little long in the tooth......Like the 500 AWD though. A good AWD value right now(Volvo AWD's are awesome in inclement weather due to the Haldex AWD system....if the 500 has this system even better) vs. Audi, Subarau, and the other overpriced Germans.

[Vortex]

You are right, it is based on Volvo engineering. Have to say again it is rock solid and though it isnt close to a sports car, it make much more sense for most family needs than those 4WD SUVs I see everybody driving. I pass lots of em when they are stuck at the gas station.

[Mike Poore]

From what I'm reading the less than stellar performance will be addressed by the replacement of the 3.0 with a 3.5L V6 engine, boosting HP from the torrid 203 to at least 260. Also, a 6sp Auto will be added and the CVT dropped. Perhaps, by then, they'll have found some way to loose the Gillette razor look, they refer to as a front grille. I still find it incredible that Gillette has a face/leg shaving product called a Fusion. :D

[Bluerauder]

From what I'm reading the less than stellar performance will be addressed by the replacement of the 3.0 with a 3.5L V6 engine.
I've seen and heard that power criticism on both the Freestyle and the Five Hundred; but to be honest --- both have enough power now to meet the need. The CVT keeps it in the proper power band all the time and the acceleration is quite deceiving. My wife noticed that during the test drive when she jumped quickly to 65 and still thought that she was under 45 mph.

While some folks may prefer the 3.5L and increased HP for greater loads or towing capacity, I see very little advantage with a 15-20% decrease in gas mileage.

On the highway at cruising speeds in the Freestyle, that little Duratek 3.0 will make the jump from 65 to 90 for passing in a heartbeat. That is my observation. I just haven't noticed the "anemic" performance that "Car & Driver" seems to claim.

[Power Surge]

Well, maybe some of you guys have driven duds, but my 06 3.0 CVT AWD 500 is pretty damn quick. Not going to win any races against any real performance cars, but it's far from slow.

And for what it's worth, my decision on this car for the wife, was to replace her Explorer. I was looking for great and comfortable interior room, good gas mileage, versatility, and all weather traction. Basically, I wanted a car that could take the place of an SUV, and the AWD 500 does the job in spades.

[quota]

Good car but dull car... Fact is that it does not sell. I think that FORD should have released the "new interceptor" (see other threads) rather than the 500. The "new interceptor" would have been coming later but sure that lots of buyers would have accepted to wait. Would have been all better for FORD : less investment (the 500 does not replace anything in their range) and more sales...

JP

[RCSignals]

It's no more dull than most of the equivalent Toyotas, or the Impala

[Mach1]

The 500 is based largely on the Volvo S80, which went on sale in 1998 as a 99 model, but was 6-7 years in development, as the shape was first seen at a car show (Frankfurt I think) in 1992.

So while it may be a nice car, it really is a little long in the tooth......Like the 500 AWD though. A good AWD value right now(Volvo AWD's are awesome in inclement weather due to the Haldex AWD system....if the 500 has this system even better) vs. Audi, Subarau, and the other overpriced Germans.

Yes, It does use the same Haldex system that is in the Volvo. I like the Fusion style grille, and the Duratec 3.5 should make it a pretty good ride. Ford didn't take any chances with the styling though, very conservative, like a suit and tie. But I am starting to like them, especially with the improvements coming. I wonder if it would have sold better if they just called it the Taurus?

I have 145,000 miles on my 03 Taurus with the 3.0 Duratec...maybe in a couple of years, I will have to trade it in on a used 500.

[Mike Poore]

[quote=Mach1;466569] I wonder if it would have sold better if they just called it the Taurus?quote]

From everyone's comments, this is a very good transportation appliance, and exactly nailed it's intended purpose. Mainly, it seems to me, Ford's marketing people always miss the mark, Mustang excepted, and royally screw up anything they touch. I go back to the Probe debacle, then the Thunderbird, said 500 Hundred, now the Edge-uhh.
The first ads for the 500, as I recall was a gentleman and very elegant woman driving serenely down a wet street with cars spinning/sliding at them from all directions, with the lady seemingly not noticing. My Barbara would have **** her pants! :eek: Now the $30,000 Edge-uhh driving on the side of buildings by people who will never be able to afford them, except on the used market. Another home run, that just slips on the wrong side of the foul pole?

[GreekGod]

Funny. I thought the first Tauras was just an insipid box.

the jelly bean style with everything round was actually the best of them all. (quality wise etc, not entirely style wise) The roundness was toned down for the next year.
Taurus only suffered from lack of further development. In many ways Ford is still suffering from the effects of Nasser.

You may recall, RoboCop introduced us to the very futuristic looking Taurus. It was widely considered an engineering masterpiece, and state of the art, plus it made Ford a leader in sales and profit.

Oh, and the 2X cupholders are for R & L handed users, and two fisted drinkers.

[gpfarrell]

Funny. I thought the first Tauras was just an insipid box.

the jelly bean style with everything round was actually the best of them all. (quality wise etc, not entirely style wise) The roundness was toned down for the next year.
Taurus only suffered from lack of further development. In many ways Ford is still suffering from the effects of Nasser.

Box? Wasn't that the Fairmont?

The Jelly Bean may have been a better car than the original Taurus, but it was also using 1996 technology instead of 1986 technology... so it should have been much better.

Relative to competitors available in the marketplace, the original Taurus was a grandslam. Likewise, the '89 - '95 SHO was about the same car (suffering from the lack of development you mentioned)... in '89 the original was was amazing (even without enough clutch) but by '95 the advantage it held over everything else had shrunk considerably.

[96DiamondVIII]

Why are they dropping the CVT? Do they not have one that can handle the bump in HP or something? I had a CVT on the Maxima rental I had for 2 weeks last year, and thought it was pretty damn cool. (And that Maxima had about 260 hp...)

[Master]

And really, from a consumer point of view, if you aren't into doing your own shifting, do you really care if its a CVT or a 6 speed auto? Either way, its a car with a mind of its own that is guided by some Ford programmers idea of how a car should shift. CVT, Auto - average consumer won't give a damn as long as they aren't required to think or do...
As for HP, I recall that any Ford in this segment from the 70's likely had an inline 6. A 200 or 250 with about 120hp max. It was always plenty and got about 25mpg. Suddenly, in the year 2007, everyone needs close to 300hp to be happy. Its ludicrous. And the car mags speak out of both sides of their mouths. They'll slam a car that wont do 0-60 in under 7 seconds, but then complain when one wont get stellar mileage. The editors of these magazines should take a stand and decide what it is they want: Power or efficiency. Tell me: Why does your wife need 260 hp to get groceries (yes, sexist example) or your kid for going to his/her part time job, or even us if its the second car in our stable? We need to curb our apetite for HP in absolutely every vehicle that manufacturers make. I was first attracted to Tempos in 1988 becuase of how well they handled. The handling, meaning conservation of energy in corners, more than made up for the anemic power plants. Here is Ford with one of the only cars in the segment with 4 wheel independant suspension and all anyone can talk about is hp. Silly. I always have, and always will be able to eat Acuras, Hondas, Cobalts and Neons on the track, and its because of handling, not power.
Rant done. Unless I think of something else. Carry on.

[dwasson]

There have been many good points made here. But I think that a major part of the problem is that we are discussing transportation appliances in enthusiast terms. The 500 was never intended to be exciting. I suspect that most of the people who buy them are judging them on reliability, comfort, and cost of operation. Which is how it should be. But to ask if anyone likes the 500, or the Chrysler Sebring, or the Toyota Camry, is meaningless. If those cars are operating properly they are unremarkable.

I think that unltimately the only way to properly judge a transporation appliance is coolly and without emotion.

[Master]

Very, very true. At one point in my rant, I think I may have alluded to this idea. Maybe not, though. It was a rant, after all :)

[dwasson]

Very, very true. At one point in my rant, I think I may have alluded to this idea. Maybe not, though. It was a rant, after all :)

YOu did. You just ran afoul of my habit of restating the obvious.

[Shora]

Let's be honest. The 500 is straight up boring. I don't care how big its trunk is (less than 1 cu. ft. larger than panthers) or how well it will take you to the supermarket. The car has NO style and it is front wheel drive (no, I wouldn't pay extra for a part-time all wheel drive since it will just cost me more to maintain out of warranty).

For around the same money, one can get a plain jane 300. While it doesn't have the Hemi, big wheels etc. as the 300C, it's got style. The view out the rear truely sucks, but I would deal with it and many of its other short commings.;) Why else would people buy coups/ sports cars as their only cars? STYLE. Nobody wants to buy a brand new car that won't get a second look from ANYBODY.

Think of it this way. If one can only afford one car (and not an expansive one at that) I would rather be seen in a simple 300 rather than a 500.

I have driven the 500 (friend's) and I think it's really well made and a great all around car like you all mentioned but, it is so boring that I would hate owning it (especially as an only vehicle). I would buy a used something else before I by a 500.

Edit:
Please Ford, WAKE UP! Release the Interceptor because when GM releases the new rear wheel drive Impalas, Cameros, Pontiac Firebirds etc. you will have no chance to compete with your current line up.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/<o:p></o:p>