Looking for a mid-size domestic car recommendation

Take a look at a Mercury Grand Marquis GS. My one son just purchased a brand new 2004 for under $19,000! Six passenger car with room in the trunk for their luggage. High tech 25 MPG V8, loaded, leather the works.

mike hunt

steve wrote:

Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:

The new Chevy Malibu is getting very strong reviews in the press, and the friend of ours who bought one is happy with it.

John

Argh. Yesterday's leftover crapola at today's prices.

...with all the power of a V6.

Besides, the OP asked for recommendations on a *mid-size* car, which the Clown Victoria/Grand Marquis de Sade is not.

The GM is hardly leftover anything. Except for body on frame construction, which many believe to be a plus, it is totally new from the ground up over the past few years. It is true he asked about mid sized cars, but he currently has a larger than current midsize cars. The fact is most mid sized V6 cars cost MORE to buy. Ones purchase decision should certainly consider value for the dollar as part of that decision.

mike hunt

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:

Ask the people who were sent home early many days from the local Honda plant in Marysville OH because the parts ran out (just in time manufacturing). Even so the manufacturing process is still a small part of the total, R&D, PM, design, etc take up a big chunk and the Japanese companies won't let us "inferior" Americans help with that much at all.

Unfortunately loopholes in the law and relaxed standards don't make something right. Even if they are still marketed as American your still helping the Japanese economy more than the American economy. And I'm not even starting on the believed reliability that companies like them have earned. I get to hear co-workers on the phone all day scheduling maintenance and repairs of their Japanese cars all while telling others how reliable they are.

True not now, before the "merger" just a few of the Chrysler executive board and a few others held majority shares and controlling interest. Post merger they all sold off their stock and retired and the stock was bought up mostly overseas. After making the mistake of buying one Chrysler and having to replace most of the Mitsubishi parts in it I won't make the same mistake again weather its owned my Americans or anyone else :)

And Wall Street

Hardly. Although the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis have had a number of tweaks over the years, it is probably the oldest automobile design still in production in North America.

If you like the vehicle, fine, but calling it "totally new from the ground up" would be worthy of a politician or PR flak.

John

The CV/GM are definitely large cars. It sounds like you've never driven one. They are hard to beat for the money. My mother has a Grand Marquis and it gets great mileage (pushes

30 on the highway), has plenty of room for 6, a huge trunk, and her current GM has had zero problems in four years. This is her second Grand Marquis. The previous was a '92 model, and it never had a failure in almost 9 years of driving. It is certainly not the vehicle for the person enamoured with buzz words, or the street racer, but for the target audience (frugal old farts who are looking for a good car at a good price), they are hard to beat. I personally wouldn't be caught dead owning one, but that is becasue of the image, not the overal quality or performance of the vehicle.

Mid-sized cars to me are not Malibus - Malibus are compacts (at least in my mind). For a mid-size domestic car, one of the current GM products mid-size cars (Impala, Century, etc.) is a good choice, although they also suffer from the old guy car syndrome almost to the same extent as the CV/GM. If you can put up with the weird styling and less than mediocre reliability, the newer DC entries have the best wow factor. Although I like the looks, I just can't bring myself to buy another Chrysler product, even if they are now Diamler-Chrysler products (seems to me things are actually getting worse in the reliability area since Diamler took over).

Eventually the Ford 500 might be a good choice, but it is bland looking to me - at least in the pictures. I'd like to see one in person and drive it.

The Accord and Camry are also bland, but worth a look. These days they are close to being domestically produced vehicles. I am not a fan of Toyota (almost as bad as Chryslers in my book), but many laud Camry's as super reliable. My family has had great luck with Hondas, but they are more expensive for what you get.

Best advice is to try a number of different cars that appeal to you and then research your first choice. I suggest you don't get hung up on domestic vs import. The lines are definitely getting blurred. If you are a union guy, it might be worth focusing on the union vs non-unon shop. In which case there are both domestic and "import" brands that will fill the bill.

Ed

I'm a fan of the car too, but Dan is likely to come back and say that the GM/CV twins:

• are seriously, possibly dangerously, underbraked

• are not size- or space-efficient

• are pretty darned slow for the gas they use

• do not ride or handle like a modern car of the same size

and he will be mostly right. A 300 V6 is probably superior in all respects and can be had for similar money.

The EPA rates cars by interior space. The current Malibu has all the space and then some, of, say, a 1979 Malibu and it isn't that much smaller. The previous-gen Malibu was a little small but again interior-wise it was up to the mark of the Seventies/Eighties RWD cars of the same name.

Until the oil sludge blows your motor apart at 65K mi, of course.

:)

Although they may look similar the 92 or even the 2000 models have little in common with the 2004. The GM and the CV have been upgraded several times over the years. There have been improvements to just about everything, the engine, tranny suspension as well as a new stiffer frame. Any one who believes they do not perform or handle well would be well advised not to try to outrun a cop chasing you in one of them today. As to durability, from what we see in our business, there is nothing within 20K that can touch them. ;)

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

Apparently you do not know much about the CV and GM if that is what you believe. By design I guess you mean RWD. RWD IS the design of the future except in small cars. Look at Cadillacs and Chryslers newest cars. ;)

mike hunt

John Horner wrote:

Perhaps you should try reading the domestic content label on the new car sticker next time you are out buying a car.

Hi Mike... I see you found the Chrysler group.

The old technology give away on the CV is the wheelbase. Everytime I see one on the road (not often) I wonder where the people in the backseat put their legs.

I suspect you can get a great deal on one. Don't seem to be selling at all in my area. I test drove one and thought it was pretty decent though it would be hard for me to consider giving GM any of my money again. The Maxx version is interesting but they forgot to perfect the rear shade latch before going into production. Doesn't even work in the showroom.

My 2 cents says; "Century, Regal, LeSabre, Park Avenue".

Or another way to look at it is this way: Go to a retirement community and look at what the old men there drive. They've spent their lives trying out every different combination and tend to pick better bets than their Kia buying grand-kids.

Oh yeah. Did I mention that mid-sized GM's are really cheap on insurance & gas as well? Just something to keep in mind when you are doing your cost calculations. If you've any doubts look at what Warren Buffet drove for years.

| > Germany 55.4% | > Europe, without Germany 20.7% | > USA 16.2% | > Others 7.7% | >

| > Shareholders exceeding 5 % total 17.6% | > Deutsche Bank AG 10.4% | > Emirate of Kuwait 7.2% | >

| > Free Float 82.4% | > Institutional Investors 54.4% | > Private Investors (1.8 million) 28.0% | >

| >

| > I don't think there are a lot of "high up executives" as shareholders, | > though it is correct to state that only a minority of the shares are held | > in | > the USA. I don't know who holds the 17.6% of shares not quoted. | >

| True not now, before the "merger" just a few of the Chrysler executive board | and a few others held majority shares and controlling interest. Post | merger they all sold off their stock and retired and the stock was bought | up mostly overseas. After making the mistake of buying one Chrysler and | having to replace most of the Mitsubishi parts in it I won't make the same | mistake again weather its owned my Americans or anyone else :) |

Don't forget where most of the corporate taxes on profits are paid as well...hint...where the corporation is headquartered. Why do you think companies like Black & Decker move their headquarters outside of US borders? Why for the favorable tax treatment there, of course! Don't be _fooled_ by the crap that since it's "built" in the US, it's a US car..helps the US economy...keeps the jobs in the US, etc. It's all hogwash. Most of the money you spend goes to the country where the HQ is located and pays many people that work at the HQ (which ain't here folks!)

The car may be "domestic", from a legal definition, however the company that produced it is not. A larger percentage of the profits, as a general rule, leave the US on its way to the high wage salaries, R&D, design teams, etc. of the host country where the HQ is location as a result.