1950 Mercury on 2040-cars
Vacaville, California, United States
Transmission:Manual
Vehicle Title:Clear
Used
Mileage: 3,200
Model: Other
Exterior Color: Black
Year: 1950
Interior Color: Gray
Trim: Chrome
Number of Cylinders: 8
Drive Type: Rear
1950 Mercury
3150 miles on body off restoration - black exterior - grey interior. Restored in the late 80's the beautiful merc attracts everyone's attention. No expense spared in the build of this car as it truly looks like it has just been rolled of the showroom floor, also winner of many Northern California car shows. It also runs as good as it looks, a great daily cruiser! Engine: 1950 Merc flathead v8- balanced, 3/4 cam, 3 stromberg carbs, dual headers and exhaust, porter mufflers, 3 speed with overdrive. Body: All metal stock body, nosed and decked, custom paint, all new glass, rubber, moldings, chrome and stainless. Interior: Completely restored to original upholstery, dash, radio, gauges, floor mats and upholstered trunk. Wheels: Stock hubcaps and beauty rings. Any questions please ask! |
Mercury Tracer for Sale
1953 mercury 2 door sedan hot rod project low reserve(US $1,350.00)
1956 mercury montclair lead sled custom gorgeous red
2004 mercury marauder high performance sedan rare american muscle car
1951 mercury leadsled - chopped - show quality paint - one of a kind - lqqk !!!!
1963 mercury meteor automatic 2-door coupe(US $17,900.00)
1941 mercury sedan: suicide doors, frame and body only(US $600.00)
Auto Services in California
Zoe Design Inc ★★★★★
Zee`s Smog Test Only Station ★★★★★
World Class Collision Ctr ★★★★★
WOOPY`S Auto Parts ★★★★★
William Michael Automotive ★★★★★
Will Tiesiera Ford Inc ★★★★★
Auto blog
Junkyard Gem: 1979 Mercury Marquis 2-Door Sedan
Sun, Jul 25 2021As the creator of the now-much-overused term "Malaise Era" (which I say started in 1973 and ended in 1983, full stop), I have a certain affection for the big two-door Detroit cars of the late 1970s. When such a car is built on the very first model year of Ford's long-lived Panther platform and I find one in a junkyard, I must document it. The 1979 Mercury Marquis is such a car, and this one was found in a San Francisco Bay Area self-service yard last month. Since Ford built the Grand Marquis all the way through the demise of the Panther platform— and Mercury itself— in 2011, it's easy for us to forget that the model name started out as just the plain old Marquis, back in the 1967 model year, with the Grand appellation used for the car's top trim level. While today's Junkyard Gem has some of the features of the Grand Marquis and Marquis Brougham trim levels for 1979 (notably the padded vinyl landau roof and power windows), it lacks the huge chrome lower-body moldings of those cars. Instead, it's a regular Marquis 2-door sedan with a big load of expensive options. That landau roof has suffered greatly from its decades beneath the vinyl-disintegrating California sun. The Panther platform was a big technological upgrade from the late-1950s-vintage chassis technology of full-sized Fords of the 1960s and 1970s, and it stayed in front-line service in much the same form through 2011. Though its ride and handling were much improved, the 1979 Marquis was quite a bit smaller than its predecessors, and that caused some grumbling among Mercury shoppers. Some ham-handed junkyard shoppers really tore up the interior of this car while extracting a few bits and pieces, but we can still admire the Pine Green pleather of the glorious Twin Comfort Lounge front seats. You had two engine choices when buying a new '79 Marquis: the base 302-cubic-inch (5.0-liter) Windsor V8 making 129 horsepower or the optional 351-cubic-inch (5.8-liter) Windsor V8 rated at 138 horsepower. This one appears to be the 351, the same engine as had been swapped into the pizza-delivery Mercury I drove in the middle 1980s. New cars sold in California around this time had these giant emissions-numbers stickers on the side glass. Later, they went on the underside of the hood.
NHTSA advances investigation of Ford Crown Victoria headlights
Sat, Aug 15 2015The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening a preliminary evaluation into reports of suddenly failing headlights on 517,945 examples of the 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis. The government started looking into this problem in April when the North Carolina Consumers Council filed a defect petition with the agency. Now, the inquiry has moved to the next step. According to NHTSA's documentation (as a PDF), it examined its own database and worked with Ford to come up with a total of 3,609 complaints of the front lighting control module suddenly failing. When this happens, drivers lose the low-beam headlights, but the high-beams can be used by holding the stalk. Sometimes turning the switch off and on fixes the issue. Additionally, there are 15 allegations of crashes, and one reported shoulder injury. NHTSA's preliminary evaluations "evaluate the scope, frequency, and consequence of the alleged defect" and don't necessarily lead to a recall. NHTSA looked into this problem once before in 2008 and 2009 and decided that a recall wasn't necessary. Ford also extended the warranty on the front lighting control module for these vehicles. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlights Date Investigation Opened: AUG 10, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15028 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: After receiving a defect petition (DP15002) concerning the loss of headlights and other exterior lighting in model year (MY) 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) analyzed Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) complaints received from consumers and identified a total of 605 reports (for all submission dates) alleging headlight failure. The complaints indicate failures of both low beam headlights typically while driving, a defect condition that was evaluated under a prior ODI investigation (PE08066). Most consumer VOQs indicate that the headlights failed suddenly and without warning leaving the driver with no forward lighting, however some report the headlights flickered or dimmed prior to turning off. In some cases drivers were able to turn the headlights back on after a period of time while others reported the headlights would not come back on at all.
NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe
Mon, 17 Dec 2012According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"
2040Cars.com © 2012-2024. All Rights Reserved.
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the 2040Cars User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
0.023 s, 7789 u