Talk:Mercury Grand Marquis/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why does "Mercury Marquis" redirect here?

Whenever I try to look up info on the Mercury Marquis, I get redirected here for some odd reason. It should be known that both the Marquis and Grand Marquis were unrelated models at one point... --ApolloBoy 04:11, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Never mind, I see it's been fixed now... --ApolloBoy 00:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Tire Chirping Bruiser

What in the world is a "tire chirping bruiser?"

MSTCrow 03:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering this myself, but am pretty sure its a typo and bruiser was really supposed to be cruiser. FYI: I rewrote that sentence anyway since it wasn't ecyclopedia material. Gerdbrendel 23:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Ford or Mercury

The Grand Marquis remains badged as a Mercury since Mercury was not phased out in the US and replacing the bagdes on the vehcile for Canda bound Grand Marquis would apparently be too expensive. Gerdbrendel 04:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Rebadging the Grand Marquis in Canada would probably lead to a bit of confusion, since the Ford Crown Victoria is still sold in Canada (albeit only as a Police Interceptor to law enforcement or as a Special Service Vehicle for commercial fleets) and the Grand Marquis is nearly identical to it, body wise. Despite being badged as a Mercury, it's still officialy a "Ford" in all Canadian sales literature. S3BST3R 06:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)



Introduction date?

When the Grand Marquis was introduced to the US?

  • I'd say it was around 1983, when the Marquis was split into the Grand Marquis and a rebadged Ford LTD, but I'm not too sure. --ApolloBoy 01:22, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

According to my research the Grand Marquis was introduced to the U.S. market in 1975. Gerdbrendel 07:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but back then it wasn't a separate model, just a trim package for the Marquis. The Grand Marquis didn't become a model in its own right until 1983. --ApolloBoy 00:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


It couldn't have been 1983, I drive a 78 Grand Marquis. It's called that in the owner's manual, and in an issue of a car magazine I have from 1976. 16:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The Grand Marquis was introduced as a separate trim line in 1975. in 1983, it became the only trim line of the Fullsize Marquis, as the lower two trim levels became midsize. See Mercury Marquis.
Honestly, having two separate articles might not be the best. If the car becomes just Marquis again in the near future, there will have to be something done. It can probably wait for the time being, it's not a big problem as it stands now. --Sable232 00:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

In 1974, the Grand Marquis interior trim package was an option on the Marquis Brougham. In 1975 the Grand Marquis was introduced as Mercury's top of the line Marquis model, with Marquis Brougham moving to the mid-range model, and Marquis replacing the Monterey. Ford continued this same lineup through 1982. In 1983, the Marquis and Marquis Brougham nameplate were placed on Fox platform, and the full size RWD Panther sedans became solely "Grand Marquis" in two trim levels (base and LS) - previously the Grand Marquis and Marquis Brougham. The base model was later renamed the "GS" series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.17.246.141 (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Rear tailights

I'm pretty sure the chrome bar is above the license plate mounting and tailights Gerdbrendel 07:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Attention

I tagged this article with the attention tag, becasue it's has short choppy sections, and they all need to be seriously expanded.


Year to Year information source?

Am curious to know who updates the yearly changes list and their source. Most of the general non-GMQ specific items appear to be mirrored directly from another source but re-worded lightly.

  • After looking through the page revision history: "M75" white falcon, it would be courteous to cite your source. ;)

Fuel tank concerns?

I don't think this passage belongs here. It really only pertains to the Interceptor, and it is discussed at great length on that and the Crown Vic page. That section seems far too wordy anyway. I am inclined to remove it, unless there is a good reason to keep it. --Sable232 02:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Does anyone have a problem with condensing that section? The concerns mainly regard the Interceptor, and having that many paragraphs in this article seems unneccesary. Any thoughts? --Sable232 18:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Old post I just saw here. The issue was with all 4 panther platform vehicles, Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, Town Car, and Marauder. I just posted a link in the section to the section on the topic at the Crown Vic's page. Ejfetters 12:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite

I rewrote most of the article so it reads less like a timeline. Karrmann 02:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Mexican Market

A mention of the mexican market would be good, in Mexico the Grand Marquis was also sold, but, as in canada, as a ford (just like the Mercury Sable (except the new one), which is known and referred to as "Ford Sable"). So it's a Ford Grand Marquis, and interestingly enough, there's a Ford Logo on the Trunk (I'm not sure about the second and first generation, I'm talking about the third). However it is no longer sold, maybe because the Lincoln Town car is now sold. However, this makes an interesting case out of the "Ford Grand Marquis", the Front says Mercury, the rear says Ford. Is it like this in Canada? Anyway, a mention of all this wouldn't be bad (Sorry if I repeat myself...). Alessandro Malfatti (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Explaining my latest edits to the article

First of all, thank you Grk1011 for correcting my less-than-perfect editing of the intro section. I hope this time I will manage not to commit more blunders.

OK - I am removing the "introduction" section. It is somewhat of an additional lead, but it 1) deals with the Marquis, which has its own article 2) repeats info provided in the lead as such or details provided below. If you believe some info from this paragraph should be introduced in the lead, please change the lead accordingly.

I am removing the comparisons to other models from the 1992 paragraph, as they are pretty OR - I am myself bordering on POV calling the GM "rather conservative", please feel free to rectify this should you find it appropriate. I also find the reference to the minivan thing OR.

As concerns transmissions and engines, I believe they are Ford's, rather than Lincoln Town Car's, the TC might have happened to be the first vehicle to receive them... I removed the rambling about OHC and American and non-American manufacturers, as this was not quite apparopriate to discuss in this article. The section on "reception" is entirely OR to me, so it went too ;)

I also refurbished the 1995 section to arrange it chronologically rather than by exterior and interior, and try to remove subjective "review" of the features and other OR. PrinceGloria (talk) 02:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think we can get rid of the intro section, but I think we should first transfer some of its info to the lead paragraphs, basically where the "grand marquis" name fit in to the marquis line. The Ford Crown Victoria could use some clean-up too, I am slowly trying to improve it with the hopes of GA one day. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 03:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks pretty reasonable. I decided to remove the options list from the Middle East section for the obvious reasons. --

Sable232 (talk) 03:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Engine Options

I owned a 1981 Grand Marquis GS with a 4.2 liter V-8 and a 'Variable Venturi' carb. There were 3 engine options that year, the others were the 5.0L and 5.8L. In 1982 the engine options were the 4.2 and 5.0. The 4.2 was dropped as an option for 1983 and the 5.8L continued as an engine option through the 1989 model year. The 5.0 became the sole engine in 1990 until it was replace by the 4.6 overhead cam modular V-8 in 1992.

Info based on oil filter interchange table from K&N filters. Verifiable in any auto parts lookup.

I also owned a 1988 Grand Marquis GS equipped with a towing package and an automatic load leveling system. I don't know when the load leveling system came about, but that was one of the KEY factors that made it a favorite for a lot of taxi fleets.

End of production

Although there has been growing word online that Ford is replacing the Police Interceptor with a new-generation model (Ford is making the complete announcement 1st-quarter 2010), has there been any serious claims from Ford about ending the production of the Grand Marquis or Town Car?

If not, it seems premature to add any word about it (another way of saying it is: if anything in this article needs a reference, that would be it!) SteveCof00 (talk) 22:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I believe you're right. It's almost certain that the St. Thomas plant is getting closed in September 2011, but the Grand Marquis and Town Car haven't actually been formally set to be discontinued at that time. It's possible that one will get dropped earlier than the other, so it's just speculation to say that either one will end production when the factory closes. --Sable232 (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


Suggested Changes

There are a couple of changes that I want to talk about because I think they could have potential for improving the article.

  • The 2003-current versions are different enough from preceding versions that it probably could stand to be broken down into a 4th-generation subsection.
  • There could probably be a section dedicated to the different trim levels...this part alone could help the 2005-later content improve (it rambles on a bit after not talking about it at all before). The section about this in the Lincoln Town Car article is very well-written and could serve as a basis for format.
  • It may just be me, but I'm finding that the header paragraph and introduction begins to word itself twice...

SteveCof00 (talk) 07:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Fix what you can! Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Changes Made So Far

As it can be seen, I went ahead and created a separate subsection for the 2003-later models (under the skin, they are different cars, which is why i made the suggestion). The production figures tables SHOULD be correct... I've also tried to eliminate some of the unneccessary duplication of content terms.

As far as trim-packages go and my suggestion about that; I just need to find more information about that. Anyone know when Mercury went to GS/LS? (1983 or 1988?) There is another question though: did Mercury have a 1980s Grand Marquis wagon (aka, a non-woodie Colony Park?) like Ford did the LTD Crown Victoria? This is just so I can clarify some information. SteveCof00 (talk) 23:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

They started using "LS" in 1983 but I don't think the base model became "GS" until 1988.
All Mercury fullsize wagons were Colony Park (technically, "Grand Marquis Colony Park") models and all, at least in some years, came with woodgrain. "LS" was available on the Colony Park as well. --Sable232 (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


I added a new section documenting the Grand Marquis engine lineup. The table I added is in line with the article the Town Car has (along with several other car articles). So far, it's just a start, as it probably needs some looking into to find the horsepower and torque figures, but this can be an useful addition. SteveCof00 (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
That's not a very useful place for that, especially when the table gives little more that the infoboxes already provide. For a car with a wide range of engine options a table in each generation would be helpful, but for a car with two, prose would do it. --Sable232 (talk) 23:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
The information on the Middle East-market versions was very thorough, but not well-organized. I've made a few changes to fix that up and it should be easier to read through and make changes to in the future. SteveCof00 (talk) 23:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Export Markets

Does it make sense to list Canada among export markets when this car is built in Canada (St. Thomas, Ontario)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.37.97 (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

"Export markets" probably isn't the best heading for that section. Canada is mentioned because of the sales situation with Mercury being absent from there after 1999. --Sable232 (talk) 03:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Conventional wisdom would have it that the country where a vehicle is produced is not an export market, but the lead-in content explains the situation fairly well (from 1999-2010, one could only buy a Mercury in the United States or in the Middle East). In other markets, the car was sold as a Ford. I think it should probably be left alone as is, but if not, the best course to take would be to mention in the timeline when Canadian sale of it as a Mercury (and overall) ended. --SteveCof00 (talk) 21:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
When I was in Montreal this past month there was a newish (2006 or 2007) Mercury Grand Marquis taxi. Not sure if they just brought it north of the border. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Model Year Consensus

As there have been a number of edits and reverts, it's probably worth bringing this up on the talk page. As I've understood it, if a car is still in production "xxxx-present" is the appropriate entry. After production ceases (at the end of this month or so), the entry will depend on the model year of the last cars produced. Although it is traditional to begin production of a model year in the early summer, sometimes production of a model year can run long in the case of popular models or in the more likely scenario of Ford not wanting to make any 2011 Mercurys. The wording of all the announcements I've read makes it seem like 2010 is the end. However, if there are 2011 model-year Grand Marquis (like there will be 2011 Crown Victorias/Police Interceptors and Town Cars), then it can be said as such AFTER production has ended (making it in the past, not the present). --SteveCof00 (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I am in favor of listing production as present since it is still being produced, but the model year range should be something that is known since the car is being discontinued. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
As the discontinuation of production has been given a date that is fairly close to the present day, it might be appropriate to use model-year range instead. The bigger question here (which may need some verification, perhaps) is what the model year will be for the final cars produced. That way, there won't be as many back-and-forth changes as there are now--SteveCof00 (talk) 19:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Both should read "present" until a reliable source indicates that production has actually stopped. In the case of the Grand Marquis, Autoblog and Jalopnik (and probably countless other sites) will probably make a big deal out of its demise, so we'll know. The EPA fuel economy data shows a 2011 Milan but no others. But again, the end-of-production press may note the final model years. --Sable232 (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

File:2011 Mercury Grand Marquis Ultimate Edition.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

Image-x-generic.svg

An image used in this article, File:2011 Mercury Grand Marquis Ultimate Edition.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


Apparently, the image needs source infomation, among other things...however, if that can be provided, I would like to see that image stay. --SteveCof00 (talk) 03:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Delete fuel-tank and intake manifold sections?

I'm thinking these two sections should probably be deleted from the article. For one thing, they are both essentially blank (and have been for a long time). When one actually reads the link used for the fuel-tank section, it only goes into depth about high-speed crashes related to Ford police cars. While the intake-manifold issue might actually apply to (some) versions of this car, it's also two sentences. If this is deleted, it won't disappear from article space, which is why I think these should be deleted due to their being blank and being covered elsewhere. --SteveCof00 (talk) 09:17, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


I agree. It seems ludicrous to mention some mechanical shortcoming,actual or perceived.Would you expect to read about some leak in a fuel line on a P-51 Mustang airplane? NO !!! Just delete this useless and unnecessary entry please.76.171.125.202 (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Ford Crown Victoria

I suggest redirecting the Mercury Grand Marquis article with this one. 166.137.191.25 (talk) 16:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

See discussion at the top of this talk page. They were not always similar. Bahooka (talk) 16:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to disagree with the redirect suggestion. While yes, the Mercury was openly similar to the Ford in many ways, there were also times that the nameplate existed before the Ford (before 1980) and had its own bodywork (1992-1997, with the Ford taking on the Mercury roofline from 1998-2012). While it is likely a good idea to consolidate automobile articles if need be, there are cases where it just won't work. For example, the same logic in this suggestion can be applied to redirecting most any Chevrolet, Buick, Oldsmobile, and Pontiac article into each other, along with Chrysler, Plymouth and Dodge. In other words, creating chaos is likely a poor alternative. --SteveCof00 "suggestion box" 19:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
I can't go along with that suggestion at all, since the models were not coterminous. ObtuseAngle (talk) 00:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)