2002 Mercury Mountaineer, No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.

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

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.