2003 Mercury Grand Marquis Ls Ultimate Leather 23k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?

When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names

Junkyard Gem: 2007 Mercury Mariner Hybrid

Once hybrid vehicles from Honda and Toyota proved to work well in the real world of American streets during the early 2000s, other U.S.-market manufacturers climbed aboard the gasoline-electric bandwagon. Ford introduced the Escape Hybrid for the 2005 model year and sales proved quite strong; its Mercury-badged sibling, the Mariner Hybrid, appeared the following year. The Mariner Hybrid never induced many vehicle shoppers to sign on the line which is dotted, despite gasoline prices going absolutely ape in 2008, though it remained available all the way through the Mercury brand's 2010 demise. Here's one of those rare trucks, found in a Denver-area yard last month. The Escape/Mariner Hybrids got amazing fuel economy for tall, truck-shaped machines, though the serious penny-pinchers with long commutes skipped anything built in the 21st century and began driving up the prices of the once-scorned Geo Metro XFi, gas-sipping champion of the previous decade. The Mercury brand was on the ropes by this time, with not much to distinguish the once-distinctive Mercury machines from their near-identical Ford counterparts. The 1999-2002 Cougar was the last Mercury sold here with no twin brothers over in the Ford showrooms. I do see the occasional Escape Hybrid in places like this, though such gas-saving small SUVs tend to retain their value well enough that it takes a crash to retire one. This Mariner Hybrid hit something hard and either flipped on its side or scraped a guardrail for some distance. The airbags deployed and, presumably, spared the occupants from serious injury. That's the good news. The bad news is that fixing this kind of damage to a 13-year-old vehicle made by a defunct brand just isn't worth it to insurance companies, hybrid-electric powertrain or not. We can assume that the battery pack lives on in another Escape/Mariner. Navigation, Bluetooth, and other features that were considered pretty slick in 2007. This truck was in pretty good shape until the very end. Jill Wagner proved that you can bury a Mercury emblem in volcanic soil and it will grow into a brand-new Mariner Hybrid. That's how science works! You can go to the same field and tap on a Mercury emblem, if you want to get a regular gasoline Mariner. Featured Gallery Junked 2007 Mercury Mariner Hybrid View 20 Photos Auto News Green Mercury Automotive History Crossover SUV Hybrid mercury mariner mercury mariner hybrid Junkyard Gems

NHTSA investigating 500k Ford and Mercury cars for lighting failures

The Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis might be long gone as new models in showrooms, but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration might check them out yet again for a potential problem. At the urging of North Carolina Consumers Council, the agency may open another investigation into the front lighting control module on vehicles from the 2003-2005 model years, and NHTSA estimates the issue could affect 517,945 vehicles. If the module stops working, it can cause a complete failure of all forward lighting, including the headlights. NHTSA previously investigated the issue in 2008 and 2009 but found no need for a recall, according to Bloomberg. Ford also extended the warranty on the part to 15 years or 250,000 miles. To prompt this new request, the North Carolina Consumers Council received a letter from a woman experiencing the module's failure. Upon further investigation, the council found 604 complaints of this problem on NHTSA's website, including seven crashes. Furthermore, the group has alleged that dealers told customers that the parts to perform the replacement weren't available, despite the extended warranty. According to the government agency, "A defect petition has been opened to evaluate the issue and make a grant or deny decision." Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker tells Autoblog via email, "We will cooperate with NHTSA, as we always do." You can read the council's complete letter to the Feds in PDF format, here. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlamp/exterior lighting Date Investigation Opened: APR 01, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: DP15002 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received a petition from the North Carolina Consumers Council, Inc. requesting a defect investigation of an alleged defect condition resulting in headlight and/or exterior lighting failure on 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles. The petition letter is attached for review. The petitioner alleges a defect in the lighting control module that powers the headlights which can result in the loss of vehicle headlights and/or all exterior lighting while driving. ODI has previously investigated this issue under PE08-066 which was closed without a defect finding.