we may be saying goodbye to Mercury

[Dragon7665]

my mom who is in her mid 50's would'nt be cought dead driving a Mercury or a Buick right now. heck, my parents are new car shopping and they are looking at a VW GTi, and a 2008 Honda Civic Si right now. nothing from the big 3 (Ford, GM, and Toyota, I no longer consider Chrysler part of the big three, or four, or even five)interest them right now. since they want a fuel efficient sports sedan.

Hmmm Chrysler's out of your Loop since they want/have Fuel Efficient Sports Sedan(Sedans/SUV's/Etc), but new CAFE Standards are pushing them down the throat of every manufacturer..... The other problem with your BIG3 list, is that GM is the Original Innovator, who in recent years perfected their Original Concept, with the Help of Daimler-Chrysler/Toyota/and Honda..... Ofcourse Ford/VW/Audi/ and Porsche all have/ will have their own variation on DOD(Displacement On Demand, which is the Term GM up with in the 70's, and Cadillac used in the 80's)...

Try Googling VDE's(Variable Displacement Engines) or Displacement On Demand, and you'll find a list of Various Manufacturer/Press Articles on the subject....

Here is Ford Media's Hybrid & VDE Release...

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=6445

Now as for the new Fuel Efficient Sports Cars/Sedans/Trucks, don't worry too much, cause CAFE Standards are becoming even tighter to keep them from happening for much longer...... The New Camaros/Challengers/Mustangs/Etc slid into the Lime Light, and CAFE is slamming the door behind them(The reason why GM won't be releasing another RWD High Horse Impala SS anytime soon)

[Dragon7665]

Badge engineering worked great for the Big 3 for many years. GM made a fortune selling the same cars as Chevies, Pontiacs and Buicks.

As long as the public was gullible enough to fall for that scam, badge engineering was probably the single biggest money-making angle the Big 3 ever had.

Yep they were able Laugh All the way to the bank when it came to changing a little sheet-metal here and there, then rebadging, but as always with Greed, they got Lazy.... It just got to be to easy for the General Public to identify what was the same as what, and then they started losing buyers... When it became apparent that sales were suffering due to their choices, they instead listen to their Bean Counters, and Drove even more Customers away.....

Could it possibly be that today's car buyers have actually smartened up???!!! Do they finally realize that a "Mercury" is nothing more than a "Ford" with a chrome grille and a sticker price $1000 higher?

If so, then the carmakers will be in a heap of trouble. Oh, wait...they already ARE in a heap of trouble...

Yes sad to say, but My Generation was the First, and Every Generation since has gotten progressively pickier..... Heck I Grew Up reading Auto Mags, along with Factory Shop Manuals, and I was able to point out Platform/Part Sibilings at a young age.....

Take for Example the Last Cougar that Art pointed out as being geared towards women, it was actually a Rebodied Mitsu Eclipse(Ford and Mitsu partnered up, after Chrysler dropped their Mitsu ties by dropping their Eagle Lines) , that was passed off as an American Sports Car(Just like what Ford has done for years, with Rebadged/ReSheet Metaled Mazda's)..... My Generation and those that have followed, easily figured out alot of the changes, and also found out that the Original Versions were actually alot more fun/generally better cheaper deals....

[Zoom Zoom]

Take for Example the Last Cougar that Art pointed out as being geared towards women, it was actually a Rebodied Mitsu Eclipse(Ford and Mitsu partnered up, after Chrysler dropped their Mitsu ties by dropping their Eagle Lines) , that was passed off as an American Sports Car(Just like what Ford has done for years, with Rebadged/ReSheet Metaled Mazda's).....

The FWD Cougar was a coupe version of the first generation Ford Contour/Mondeo. I'm afraid you are badly mistaken about any Mitsubishi influence or joint venture, because there was none. Where in the world did you hear about a Mercubishi? Failure of the FWD Cougar was because Mercury didn't know how to sell the car to an audience they had no clue about, along with the fact that the car only had barely average performance and was hampered by odd and contrived "new edge" styling cues. Yeah, the young ladies were lined up for miles to visit the L-M dealers....NOT

The Chrysler/Mitsubishi joint venture continued past the death of the Eagle line (Sebring/Avenger, anyone?), and don't forget that Eagle also sold non-Mitsubishi badge engineered Chrysler and even Renault products through the years.

History of Diamond Star Motors

History of Eagle Automobiles

[Harry P.]

The Chrysler/Mitsubishi joint venture continued past the death of the Eagle line (Sebring/Avenger, anyone

I don't know what the Chrysler/ Mitsubishi situation is at this time, but it was still alive and well a few years ago. My current car is a 2001 Dodge Stratus RT coupe...which is nothing more than a Mitsubishi Eclipse under different sheet metal. All Mitsu mechanicals, even the dash and interior trim is the same as the Eclipse. In fact, a few years ago I bought one of those faux "carbon fiber" interior dress-up kits. I didn't buy the "Dodge Stratus" kit, but instead I bought the "Mitsubishi Eclipse" kit, because it had more pieces! It all fits my "Dodge" interior perfectly!!!

Oooops...looks like I fell hook, line and sinker for "badge engineering" myself!!!

[Biscuitbuilder]

NOTE TO FORD IDIOTSi mean EXECUTIVES:

Save Mercury At All Costs or Lose A Dedicated and Loyal Fanbase of Paying Customers FOREVER

ledsled,

Nice try, if it worked, but frankly, it won't. Mercury started out in '39, simply because the sales department at Ford convinced Old Henry (who signed the checks) and Edsel, his son and the figurehead president of Ford, that a new car was needed to fill in the imagined gap between Ford and the Lincoln-Zephyr (at that point in time, Lincoln Zephyr sold in the price range of the middle of the Buick lineup). Valiant try it was, but for one failing: Sales numbers never got close enough to justifying a totally different car (only the engine and mechanicals were shared with Ford, chassis and the body were unique to Mercury only in '30-'40. So, from '41 through '48, a Mercury was a Ford body, all dressed up, with a 6" longer chassis up front, along with a longer and somewhat unique front clip. Enter 1949:

For '49-'51, Mercury got again, a unique body shell, longer frame, still a more potent flathead V8 than Ford, and guess what? For all the "icon" status that bathtub Mercs have today in the enthusiast world, it never was a car for the buyer under age 40 or so--rather it was pretty much another car, solid and plump, for solid and plump middle aged and older buyers--sales never really took off, at least not enough to warrant an all new unique body for 1952. And that loyal, dedicated fan base for those '52-'56 Mercs? You guessed it, by and large, middle aged and elderly car buyers. But there's still more!

For '57, Mercury got an all new chassis, and completely unique body shell, which shared almost nothing with any Ford or Lincoln, apart from mechanical stuff. Its Chassis was that of the Fairlane 500 series, and seems to have been positioned as it was, to amortize new tooling for the coming-for-'58 "Utopian Turtletop", AKA the Edsel Citation. While Edsel sales tanked right out of the starting gate, Mercury sales for '57-'58, even in that era of glitz, glamor and kitsch, were abysmal in comparison to the rest of Fomoco, even worse when compared with the rest of the industry.

Even the Cougar, when introduced in '67 didn't really break that mold--while Mustang-based, but longer, and with some of the prettiest styling of the 60's, sold only tolerably well, but apparently barely enough to justify it's existence, so those Cougars floundered pretty badly as well.

All this is proof that a marque having a history of only marginal sales, no matter what is done to enhance it, only serves the manufacturer if it can give additional sales and market penetration using existing tooling shared with another marque to offset the costs associated with marketing it, and manage to enhance the bottom line along with it. If that goes away, then why throw good money after bad?

Mercury almost never has had the young market enjoyed by Ford, or any others in the low priced field, even with buyers more affluent. As Harley Earl observed, years ago: "You can sell an old man a young man's car, but you can't sell a young man and old man's car", and from all appearances, Mercury never was able to attract many younger buyers, for whatever reasons.

And, the bottom line in all this is the bottom line, period. It goes like this: "When your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep is your downfall". You should know that from your own life experiences. Trust me, in business, it's no different.

Biscuitbuilder

[Biscuitbuilder]

I hardly would consider Mercury an "Old Peoples Car".

Then, I might suggest hanging around a Mercury dealership for awhile, watching to see who all drives on the lot--chances are you will see as many white heads of hair there as any place at the mall on Wednesday afternoons at 1pm--their customer base averages out at nearly 50yrs old, in my experience, having sold Lincoln-Mercury for about half a year some years back.

Biscuitbuilder

[TimKustom]

Coming from a household that has both a Lincoln & Mercury (as well as several Chevy's), I hate to say that I think Mercury needs to go to keep Ford alive. My wife bought a 2000 Cougar new and still loves it. It's not my favorite car in our fleet mainly due to the unimpressive powertrain. The Cougar still looks good, has aged well, and has a nice interior (IMO) Oh yeah, you can put a lot of ###### in it too.

I get a lot of crossed looks when I say I drive a Lincoln. Funny thing is most of the "non-car" people that see our Mark VIII ask "Is that a new car, who makes it?" I love their look when I tell them it's 11 year old Lincoln! They should have been paying attention when they bought that SUV...

Something Ford could try is to eliminate the badge engineering and incorporate a "NEW" car MODEL and call it a Mercury. Might not be a bad idea for Lincoln either, since they haven't really had anything "New" either in some time. After all, isn't that how they started out anyway?

[Biscuitbuilder]

Coming from a household that has both a Lincoln & Mercury (as well as several Chevy's), I hate to say that I think Mercury needs to go to keep Ford alive. My wife bought a 2000 Cougar new and still loves it. It's not my favorite car in our fleet mainly due to the unimpressive powertrain. The Cougar still looks good, has aged well, and has a nice interior (IMO) Oh yeah, you can put a lot of ###### in it too.

I get a lot of crossed looks when I say I drive a Lincoln. Funny thing is most of the "non-car" people that see our Mark VIII ask "Is that a new car, who makes it?" I love their look when I tell them it's 11 year old Lincoln! They should have been paying attention when they bought that SUV...

Something Ford could try is to eliminate the badge engineering and incorporate a "NEW" car MODEL and call it a Mercury. Might not be a bad idea for Lincoln either, since they haven't really had anything "New" either in some time. After all, isn't that how they started out anyway?

Uh, not really! Lincoln started in 1920, founded by Henry M. Leland, who was instrumental in the first Ford Model A of 1903, before going out on his own, founding Cadillac who also produced their first car in '03. After selling Cadillac to GM, and ultimately leaving the General in 1917, the Lelands, father and son, got into the business of mass producing the Liberty V12 aircraft engine for WW-I, then founding Lincoln in 1919. Henry Ford bought Lincoln, just ahead of the bankruptcy lawyers in 1921, turning that company over to his son, Edsel, to run.

Lincolns, from 1920 until 1939 were uniquely their own car, in all aspects, building V8's and later V12's exclusively that were huge in comparison to any Ford engine. Beginning in 1935, Lincoln introduced the Zephyr, which while using Ford style solid axles, torque tubes and transverse springs in the manner of Ford, used a flathead V12 based on the Ford flathead V8 design, but there the similarities ended.

It wasn't until 1949 that Lincoln used anything like a Ford engine, that being the 331cid Ford flathead V8 truck engine, then introduced Ford Motor Company to OHV engines for 1952, but regressed somewhat to using body shells based largely on Ford and Mercury shells from '52-'55, going to a unique body shell for '57 and beyond. It wasn't until 1967 that Lincoln shared a body shell with a Ford again, that being the Thunderbird, Lincoln's MkIII Continental using the same basic body shell as the short-lived Thunderbird 4dr Landau. This body sharing continued through the years of the massive Lincoln Continentals MkIV and MkV, and then in the Fox platform era of Thunderbird and Continental.

So, "badge engineering" only gradually filtered up into Lincoln over those years.

Biscuitbuilder1

[Joe Handley]

G.M.'s Decline started in 76 when the bastige roger smith made all the corporate divisions use the same parts for all models.I worked a Fleetwood Fisher Body at the time,building the cabs for all the Cadillac models(the cars were finished at the Cadillac Main Plant)including the Eldorado and Olsmobile Toronado.By 1980 we were building Olds 98, Chevy Caprice,Station Wagons,AND Taxi cabs For fleet service,on a line that was exclusively Cadillacs for 70 years.It was extremely demoralizing.I don't expect ANYONE tounderstand,Ive heard ALL the Bullsh8t about "at least you got a job" We were ,at the time called the" Quality Craftsmen of The World" And Cadillac WAS the BEST car that G.M. offered at the time.(it still is in my opinion).When they bought in all the other divisions, and started using "generic" parts on all the cars there was no longer the feeling of pride that had for decades marked us as the Flagship of the Fleet.Like I said, If youve never worked on the assembly line I don't expect you to understand,But WE EARNED every penny we made! roger smith the bastige was the ONLY person responsible for what happened to G.M. He was a god da## accountant!!! He NEVER ran production,or even did any kind of job related ot the building of an automobile!All he knew was numbers.To hell with the workers that made the product or to the product itself.The sorry bastige retired and left G.M. just a shell of it's former self,while takin a couple million dollars in "retitrement pension" and stock options PLUS his Fu*#&! golden parachute options. That is the WHOLE problem today, these cars are designed,an engineered by been counters and NOT by men who WANT to build us a good looking,safe reliable automobile.The car guy's hands are tied by the accountants, and how much can we save/make for the company.

That's what I've been wondering for years, especially after hearing about Ford's accountant engineering of the Pinto and Explorer, Chrysler's 4 speed transaxles (the notorious Slip Oh No) being done the same way, GM's re-engineering of the Turbo 350 to work ok in applications that a Turbo 400 could have done no problem.........

Edited June 1, 2008 by Joe Handley

[rollinoldskoo]

Maybe if Mercury actually had a car or two that they could call their own, they could drive a little traffic into the showrooms.

How cool would it be if Ford made a new "Cougar" (based on the existing Mustang platform)...

ok now..... when is Jimmy Flintstone releasing these

[Modelmartin]

The English excelled at badge engineering also! The Mini came out as an Austin, a Morris, a Riley, and a Wolseley and much later as a Rover. The basic Austin sedan from the 60s came out as at least 5 different makes. I think they added Vanden Plas.

I have noticed that badge engineering progressed form shared platforms with different body/interior/engine in the 50s all the way to actually just GLUING on different badges and applying different stickers in the 80s and 90s. Sort of what NASCAR is now!!! The American car companies would be smart to do what the Japanese do and have one brand with a full range of cars from economy to luxo-barge. The Japanese luxury divisions(Acura, Lexus, Infiniti) actually have different cars for most part. I am not aware of too much badge-engineering going on in Europe aside from the English.

I personally think it was a shame that GM let Olds go as the Corporation was started with Olds. They were the original division. The are tossing out their history and heritage. They kept Saturn which seems to be just selling Opels now! I would rather have an Opel. It is an actual marque with a history!

Don't get me started on SAAB which was always an interesting and unique car. Now it is basically Opel powered and they use the same platform as the Malibus! You got to love (NOT) the SAABaru and the SAAB badged SUV. OY!

Andy

Edited June 1, 2008 by Modelmartin

[Nick F40]

The English excelled at badge engineering also! The Mini came out as an Austin, a Morris, a Riley, and a Wolseley and much later as a Rover. The basic Austin sedan from the 60s came out as at least 5 different makes. I think they added Vanden Plas.

I have noticed that badge engineering progressed form shared platforms with different body/interior/engine in the 50s all the way to actually just GLUING on different badges and applying different stickers in the 80s and 90s. Sort of what NASCAR is now!!! The American car companies would be smart to do what the Japanese do and have one brand with a full range of cars from economy to luxo-barge. The Japanese luxury divisions(Acura, Lexus, Infiniti) actually have different cars for most part. I am not aware of too much badge-engineering going on in Europe aside from the English.

I personally think it was a shame that GM let Olds go as the Corporation was started with Olds. They were the original division. The are tossing out their history and heritage. They kept Saturn which seems to be just selling Opels now! I would rather have an Opel. It is an actual marque with a history!

Don't get me started on SAAB which was always an interesting and unique car. Now it is basically Opel powered and they use the same platform as the Malibus! You got to love (NOT) the SAABaru and the SAAB badged SUV. OY!

Andy

ahhh I forgot about the Minis. I agree with you on the NASCAR part and that US should have one brand with a full range of cars from economy to luxo barge. SAAB Yeah the Integra is still Integra it's just Honda over there with JDM. Well the Europeans are smart. I like Opel too.

[Merkur XR4Ti]

The English excelled at badge engineering also! The Mini came out as an Austin, a Morris, a Riley, and a Wolseley and much later as a Rover. The basic Austin sedan from the 60s came out as at least 5 different makes. I think they added Vanden Plas.

And given the utter disaster that was British Leyland in the '70s, it's fair to say badge engineering was an enormous mistake for the Brits as well.

[Aaronw]

The badge engineering is just another example of boring, thoughtless behind the times American car manufacturing. The US auto manufacturers have never really caught up with the fuel economy thing, from the 70's onward it has been a shell of what it once was.

When fuel economy was becoming an issue what did the US manufacturers offer? The Pinto, the Vega, the Gremlin and I can't even think of a Chrysler attempt. Ok, that was take one, I can see a little stumble, so what was take two, the Pinto, the Chevette, the Pacer and the Omni (Chrysler didn't even try they just bought a Mitsubishi, based on the other offerings probably a good move). What did we get outside the US. The VW Beetle (a 30 year old design by the 70's and still a better car), the Mini (maybe not a great car but it has some style), and then the Japanese cars, Corolla, B210, Civic real cars with good economy, good reliability and much higher standards than the comparable US cars.

By the 80's most of the big 3 had given up and were just rebadging Japanese cars in the economy segment while they continued to spend the bulk of their effort on big traditional American cars. Ok, Ford gave it a shot with the Escort, perhaps an improvment over the Pinto but not even close to the quality of comparably priced Toyotas, Nissans or Hondas.

By the 90's the Big 3 were finally starting to offer cars that at least gave the Japanese cars a decent run, in my opinion still not up to the standard of the Japanese cars, but when given a nudge for being "American made" were competitive.

Then the SUV craze hit and the Big 3 dumped the progress they had made and once again dropped the economy car as anything more than a cheap car. They also dumped the one thing that really made them different from everything else, being American made. Now you run into the odd situation of an "American" car built outside the US while some "Foriegn" cars are being built in the US.

The US auto industry is cheap and lazy, if they want to survive they need to become innovative, creative and proactive. Instead of treating the consumer as idiots what if they actually made the lines different, even if only skin deep. There have been many love it or hate it car designs, so why not offer the Ford in a futuristic design and offer the Mercury version in much more traditional sheet metal or offer one in a performance version and another in a luxury economy version etc. Offering the same car with a minor change is just a duplication with no real gain. People should be buying the car for something more than the name. In the 70's Ford had the Mustang, a high performance "Pony car", Mercury offered the Capri a very different sporty car, in the 80's the Capri was just a Mustang with a different grill.

On another website someone mentioned the complete lack of support for the Chevy Colorado, while they push the full size Silvarado. In the Colorado Chevy has finally managed build a truck to compete on a fairly equal basis with Toyota for the compact truck market. I say this as someone who believes Toyota makes the best small truck in the world and has for a long time, what does Chevy do with it? Nothing, they try and push their full size truck which (again my opinion) is the weakest truck among the big 3 as an actual work truck (and what the full size truck is supposed to be) while the Japanese are beginning to eat there way into full size truck sales, an area traditionally well in the hands of the Big 3.

If the US auto industry does not change its ways and lose its sense of entitlement (to sales by US consumers) we wont have a US auto industry for much longer. The days where someone would plunk down their hard earned money for an inferior product because it is "American" made are quickly vanishing, when was the last time you saw a Zenith TV?

Harry your Cougar is great, Mercury should fire its designers and hire you.

Edited June 4, 2008 by Aaronw

[gasman]

looks like Mercury will live after all. and there getting new product.....sorta

Mercury to become Fords Saturn

I would think Ford would kill Mercury's entire current lineup if this happens. the Mondeo would replace the Milan. The Kuga would replace the Mariner. and I would think we would get the S-MAX and maybe the Ka. Ford US is already getting the Fiesta (Finally), the Euro Focus (Finally) the Transit Connect and possible the Euro Ranger

[Nick F40]

oh, so european...... Mondeo, US Escort?

That Mercury Ka looks no different! We're gettin the Euro Ford's?

FIESTA.........YES!!!

So that means I5 turbos in the US Focuses?

"So the Pantera, 1971-1977 Capri, XR4Ti and Scorpio were the future of Mercury after all....who knew?"

So this true, I didn't know that except for the Capri and the XR4Ti WAS Mercury's Sierra Cosworth

Edited July 22, 2008 by Nick F40