Class Action Police Cruiser Update (Crown-Vic)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cidQ9&ncidQ9&e=6&u=/ap/20050322/ap_on_re_us/crown_victoria_lawsuit
This is good for a laugh. Of course the plaintiff's attorney alleges
coercion on the part of Ford because they won't sell Crown Vics to PDs involved in the suit.
GMAFB!
15 rear-end collisions wind up in fiery infernos. How about some scientific basis using a control group of Impalas to see if they fair any better?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 22 Mar 2005 19:41:43 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

I think a better comparison would be to compare the CV's to Toyota Echo's (Toyota's the gold standard right?).
I mean if the CV has a fire after being rear ended by a truck @ 100MPG An Echo or Impala or Smart car should be fine in a similar accident no?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 23:13:57 -0500, Some ga wrote:

Yes, Toyotas are very crash worthy. I pick one out the wheel wells of my Lincoln now and then, and they look like new. Just a little smaller than before.
Rodney
-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The NHTSA studied the rear collision situation involving 1992 to 2002 CV two years ago. The result of the testing showed the CV far exceeded the federal standard for damage to the fuel tank. The standard is 30 MPH, the CV is designed to take a 50 MPH hit without damage to the fuel tank. The CV safety margin was dramatically apparent when the FWD Chevrolet and the FWD Dodge vehicles, the only others certified police vehicles on the market, where stuck at the same speed and destroyed at 50 MPH. The NHTSA closed its investigation of CV fires, with a finding that the CV was indeed safe as designed for its intended use.
The shark lawyers are simply trying to find another avenue to get Ford to pay off their legal costs, now that the NHTSA ruling has eliminated any chance of them winning a product liability case against Ford in any court.
By the way Toyota is a Japanese corporation and can only be sued in Japanese courts that do not allow class action cases or the large punitive damages, where the shark lawyers make their millions
mike hunt
Some ga wrote:

>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cidQ9&ncidQ9&e=6&u=/ap/20050322/ap_on_re_us/crown_victoria_lawsuit
mike hunt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:40:21 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@lycos.com wrote:

yup meanwhile how many police has ford killed???
hurc ast
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ford didn't kill anyone. The drivers of the vehicles, that hit the parked CV, did that. For the record more police officers we killed, during that time period on bicycle patrol than died in a CV when they were hit in the rear at high speed.
Try doing some research before you choose to comment on a subject that you obviously have little or no knowledge, WBMA. If you did perhaps then your posts would not make you look so foolish so often
mike hunt
snipped-for-privacy@mars.com wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:50:44 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

why mike police were killed
hurc ast

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:50:44 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

No class action suits against Schwinn or Huffy?? What the heck is wrong with them lawyers, anyway? :-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dave Starr, Senior Shop Rat Emeritus: 14,647 days in a GM plant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 22 Mar 2005 19:41:43 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

yup prolly would the rear axles prolly wouldent shear off too
lmfao hurc ast
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 22 Mar 2005 19:41:43 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Wasn't this foolishness put to bed last summer? Who keeps trying to bring it up?
I hope Ford does deny sales to anyone who is still pursuing this bullshit. The vehicle far surpasses Federal requirements in this area.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

lmfao where??
cv are CRAP
hurc ast
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
How can a guy who claims to know so much about cars be so far wrong to call the CV crap? The CV is cheaper to buy, insure, maintain and repair than anything in it price class. The CV is without a doubt the best car available in the US today at anywhere close to its price range. Every other car in that range is much smaller and with nothing more than a V6 engine. Given the proper maintaining the CV will easily outlast anything else in that price range as well. No other police vehicle even comes close to holding up as good as the CV. We serves them all by the thousands. Look at the Taxi fleets in NYC there are hundreds of them running with 500,000 miles to 1,000,000 miles in the toughest use a vehicle can be subjected too and on some of the worst street in the country. Give us a brake. Nobody here cares if you don't like Ford vehicles so don't talk stupid when trying to denigrate them
mike hunt
snipped-for-privacy@mars.com wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:40:25 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

lmfao
hurc ast
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:25:08 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@mars.com wrote:

Compared to a 500SEL? Yup. Compared to ANYTHING in it's price range? Nope!
Keep in mind part of the reason for the fuel tank punctures is the unapproved "devices" that police carry in the trunks of their cruisers. (that's what's puncturing the tanks & causing the fires).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

what are you saying? dont put stuff in trunk?????
hurc ast
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 04:47:58 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

the purpose of the crumple zone with rigid objects. The crumple zone is designed that way for a purpose.
So to dumb it down for you. "Yes, If you are going to be rear-ended by a truck carrying 30 Tonnes @ 50+ MPH make sure that your trunk is empty or at least that you don't have steel implements pointed in the direction of your fuel tank between your rear bumper and the path of the crumple zone.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:25:08 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@mars.com wrote:

Ahhh. A chebie fan, I see. LOL!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.