The Newest Orphan, Mercury.

[Dave@Moon]

AP Sources: Ford to announce end of Mercury brand - Yahoo! News

[RPrice]

Not a surprise. I've been reading rumors in the motoring press about the impending Mercury demise. I feel bad. The very first new car I ever bought was a '61 Mercury Monterey Hardtop.

Loved that car and drove it over 105,000 miles when I traded it in on a '67 Mustang.

Rog

[poci1957]

Ugh, don't get me started. Industry pundits have been arguing against Mercury for years and I have argued for it, as I also argued for Pontiac. My case has always been that Mercury is a badge engineered Ford but everybody knows it and as long as the upgrade is desirable enough and the marketing is good enough then Mercury should live (as should Pontiac at GM).

The problem is the numbers have shown I was wrong. The family put a Ford cousin in power at Mercury and she swore Mercury would be killed over her dead body. The upgraded interiors and grilles were (I thought) nice enough to attract people and the "Mercury Girl" commercial campaign was (I thought) appealing enough to attract positive attention (AND HOW!).

So what happened? Since 2000 the sales numbers are said to be down 74%, with 92,000 Mercurys sold last year. That is less than 1% of the market. And all with good cars and good commercials, just what I said would cure all ills. I admit the numbers have proved me wrong, and unlike GM with Pontiac, Ford gave it plenty of time and effort and did not bail out under duress. RIP Mercury and good luck to Lincoln.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Welcome to the club, Mercury ( see my avatar...).

Last in, first out ?

Looks like another example of the product / market overlap between different marques within the same corporate family.

When Mercury was introduced in '39, it was intended to be a bridge-model, between the entry-level Ford and the luxury Lincoln. There was no / little redundancy in the Mercury - it had ( slightly to moderately ) different styling than the Ford, a bigger engine, and no overlap with Lincoln.

Now fast-forward to the 1970's on to very recently: every model of Ford auto was replicated in the Mercury badge, except for a pick-up truck: Pinto=Bobcat; Mustang=Capri; Granada=Monarch; Fairlane/Torino = Meteor/Montego(?); T-bird=Cougar; LTD=Grand Marquis... and finally the Explorer=Mountaineer...

Now Mercury goes to join other noble badges that have squeezed-out by contracting market-share: De Soto, Plymouth, Pontiac, Edsel, La Salle, etc.

When I was a kid (1970's), some of my uncles used to tease Mercury-owning uncles that the Mercury ( at that point) was a "poor man's Lincoln"...

[Seldenguy]

And most everyone knows now that Mercury has folded the prestigious Lincoln line will become loaded with more models, probably right down to a sub-compact (Ugh!) I can feel Hank Sr and Edsels pain! --Bob

[Restorer32]

Little known trivia. Rights to the Mercury name and insignia was purchased by Ford from Kissel in the mid-late 1930s.

[poci1957]

Interesting, I did not know that. Just shows it is a great name for a car.

[LINC400]

Mercury was always a badge engineered Ford intended to fill the gap between Ford and Lincoln, and to compete with Buick, Olds, and Chrysler. In the 1950's and 1960's, the cars were different enough from Fords to be considered baby Lincolns. In the 1970's, the Marquis and Cougar continued this trend. But then they introduced cars like the Bobcat, Monarch, Zephyr, Topaz, etc. which were not baby Lincolns, but very thinly disguised overpriced versions of the Fords. Baby Lincoln is definitely not the same as overpriced Ford.

For the last twenty years Mercury has done very little to distinguish itself as anything other than an overpriced Ford with verticle grille bars. However, what needs to be done is not to kill the division, but to give it some decent product to sell to draw attention to the marque that is not simply more Ford clones.

I predict that Lincoln will now offer cheaper models and drop in price to fill the gap left by Mercury. So now we will have another great name diluted even more than it currently is. And insted of Mercury being an overpriced Ford clone, now Lincoln will be.

The problem is that all Detroit automakers stopped making cars for Americans that wanted to buy traditional American cars. Instead they tried to offer clones of Toyotas, Hondas, Lexus, and BMWs. The problem is they will never succeed with this mentality. They can make a car that is just as good or better than those foreign cars, but they will not sell because what the buyers of those cars like best about them is the nameplate. Then the traditional domestic buyers are left with nothing they want, and are forced to look elsewhere.

[poci1957]

Hello Linc400, I agree with much of the above. Just to set you off, and I am not making this up, it was announced a few months ago that when the new Focus comes out in 2012 there was to be a Mercury Tracer version too. Now with Mercury gone? You guessed it, there will be LINCOLN version of the Focus! Someone at Ford should take a close look at our Cimmaron thread before proceeding on THAT! Todd C

CORRECTION CORRECTION it is now reported that the small Lincoln will be Focus SIZE but will not be the same as the Tracer. Whew! Maybe cooler heads prevailed? Sorry about the false alarm, Todd

Edited June 3, 2010 by poci1957 (see edit history)

[dship]

You never forget one's first car. Mine was a '56 Merc that I shared with my brother (bought in '65 for $35). We got our feet wet re: auto mechanics/body work on that car. I learned to drive a std shift with it. Other Mercs I onced owned were a '68 Cougar XR7 and two '86 Cougar Bostonian Editions (wife had 1, I had 1)....always a pleasure to drive....miss all those Merc's.

[West Peterson]

Mercury was always a badge engineered Ford.

No. The first ones were not badge engineered. They may look the same, but the Mercury is quite a bit bigger.

[TG57Roadmaster]

My grandfather worked for a short time on the Mercury pilot line after a stint

making Lincoln-Zephyrs before returning to Michigan's Upper Peninsula;

our family always had a fondness for them. My folks' first new car, also

the one they had when I was born, was this '56 Custom...

Now, I'll redouble my efforts to get one like it.

R.I.P. Mercury,

TG

[John_Maine]

Hate to see Mercury go, but I think we all could see the handwriting on the wall. The economic model US car companies used for many years just does not work these days with so many manufacturers that did not exist way back when. We used to have Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac, Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, DeSoto and Imperial. They had what, 99% of the market? Then they diluted their brands (most did) by offering compacts and intermediates, later trucks, vans, SUVs, CUVs and whatever else. Now US brands account for less than 50% of US sales. With people buying Toyota, Nissan, Honda, VW, Audi, BMW and all the others, there just isn't enough room for all the different nameplates. Mercury has been redundant for at least 10 years, unfortunately.

[Guest]

Hate to see Mercury go, but I think we all could see the handwriting on the wall. The economic model US car companies used for many years just does not work these days with so many manufacturers that did not exist way back when. We used to have Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac, Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, DeSoto and Imperial. They had what, 99% of the market? Then they diluted their brands (most did) by offering compacts and intermediates, later trucks, vans, SUVs, CUVs and whatever else. Now US brands account for less than 50% of US sales. With people buying Toyota, Nissan, Honda, VW, Audi, BMW and all the others, there just isn't enough room for all the different nameplates. Mercury has been redundant for at least 10 years, unfortunately.

Yes, the ecomomic model is gone and all of the big manufacturers did it to themselves. It happened slowly. I can't say if the imports would have led the charge if the U.S. manufacturers hadn't done it already to themselves first. They (imports) are doing it now too. Thirty years ago a luxury VW was unthinkable. Consider what this would have looked like in the 30's. If it happened in the 30's we would have said "well it looks like the market is responding to natural ebb and flow" meaning the shrinking of the middle class and the type of cars would be limited to the have and have not. I hope this is not a prelude to what our future might be about. Consider could it be possible they know something that we, and our governments (state and fed) are unwilling to face up to? you know you can't spend trillions and not eventually either pay for it or go bust. The rich know how to protect their money and the rest... well you know the story and so now you have the haves and have not. The people who buy Cadillac and the people who Chevy and not a Pontiac-Olds-Mercury or any other mid level car in sight.

Don

[Guest scottyz06]

:eek: Been hear'n about Mercury for over a year now .... guess it's true ....

[poci1957]

...the shrinking of the middle class and the type of cars would be limited to the have and have not. I hope this is not a prelude to what our future might be about. Consider could it be possible they know something that we, and our governments (state and fed) are unwilling to face up to?

The people who buy Cadillac and the people who Chevy and not a Pontiac-Olds-Mercury or any other mid level car in sight. Don

Don, once again you identify an unfortunate trend. 15 years ago while ordering trucks my boss at the Chevy dealership observed that the market was splitting. We should order some base trucks with automatic and air and little else, the rest completely loaded, with the middle shrinking. A few years later I saw Business Week saying that the retail market for clothing, toys, etc was splitting--basic cheap stuff for the Wal Mart shopper and higher end for the upscale mall or specialty store, with Sears, JC Penney, and others squeezed in the middle. Then Oldsmobile was killed off as being unecessary. The middle was being squeezed out and either moving down or (occasionally) up.

Even our own old car hobby seems to be following this. TV auctions or shows breathlessly promote (now) expensive cars and at the grassroots the hobbyist often decides quality is too much money or trouble and it is easier to have an amateur street rod or rat rod and play the common man card (like in POCI). The cars are either high end or low end and the middle class hobbyist is squeezed once again. Just a thought, hope I am wrong, Todd

[LINC400]

Hate to see Mercury go, but I think we all could see the handwriting on the wall. The economic model US car companies used for many years just does not work these days with so many manufacturers that did not exist way back when. We used to have Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac, Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, DeSoto and Imperial. They had what, 99% of the market? Then they diluted their brands (most did) by offering compacts and intermediates, later trucks, vans, SUVs, CUVs and whatever else. Now US brands account for less than 50% of US sales. With people buying Toyota, Nissan, Honda, VW, Audi, BMW and all the others, there just isn't enough room for all the different nameplates. Mercury has been redundant for at least 10 years, unfortunately.

I am really tired of the line of thinking that there are too many manufacturers and too many models. This is a line of B.S. started by the media and repeated by everyone.

Years ago you could get a 2 door, 4 door, convertible, station wagon, hardtops, etc. from almost every manufacturer in every size from sub-compact to full size. There were actual size differences between sub-compact and full size such as Pinto and Town Car or Chevette and Fleetwood. There were also choices in colors and options. Not 5 colors with option group A, B, or C. And Ford and GM made money on these cars. Lots of money.

Now if you want a 2 door, convertible, station wagon, etc., you are lucky if you can find one or two out of 20 different marques. Years ago you would have had your choice of 3-5 from each marque in 3-5 different sizes. So how is that too many models now?

The problem is that everyone has 4 door appliances with very little difference in size or appearance. So who needs 5 versions of basically the exact same unexciting car that isn't much different than the 2-5 versions offered by everyone else? When there were actual differences between the divisions, they sold. Years ago a Buick, Mercury, or Olds buyer would never look at a Toyota or Honda. But when there is not much difference in size, style, price, models, etc. why not look at them? This is how American manufacturers lost sales to the foreign ones. And they are not going to get them back by continuing to offer their own generic look-alike versions of foreign cars.

Plus Ford's problem is that they think the only car that should have any performance is the Mustang. Performance versions of anything else are usually not offered, half baked, or if they do get it right, not offered for very long.

Edited June 4, 2010 by LINC400 (see edit history)

[poci1957]

Plus Ford's problem is that they think the only car that should have any performance is the Mustang. Performance versions of anything else are usually not offered, half baked, or if they do get it right, not offered for very long.

Hello Linc400, I agree with your comments above, but especially the quote here. When the new Mustang platform came out in 2005 I said they should have done a Cougar too, complete with sequential taillights!

I think a Firebird would have saved Pontiac and a Cougar could have jump started Mercury. But, it doesn't matter now. Todd

[Guest Skyking]

I am really tired of the line of thinking that there are too many manufacturers and too many models. This is a line of B.S. started by the media and repeated by everyone.

Years ago you could get a 2 door, 4 door, convertible, station wagon, hardtops, etc. from almost every manufacturer in every size from sub-compact to full size. There were actual size differences between sub-compact and full size such as Pinto and Town Car or Chevette and Fleetwood. There were also choices in colors and options. Not 5 colors with option group A, B, or C. And Ford and GM made money on these cars. Lots of money.

Now if you want a 2 door, convertible, station wagon, etc., you are lucky if you can find one or two out of 20 different marques. Years ago you would have had your choice of 3-5 from each marque in 3-5 different sizes. So how is that too many models now?

The problem is that everyone has 4 door appliances with very little difference in size or appearance. So who needs 5 versions of basically the exact same unexciting car that isn't much different than the 2-5 versions offered by everyone else? When there were actual differences between the divisions, they sold. Years ago a Buick, Mercury, or Olds buyer would never look at a Toyota or Honda. But when there is not much difference in size, style, price, models, etc. why not look at them? This is how American manufacturers lost sales to the foreign ones. And they are not going to get them back by continuing to offer their own generic look-alike versions of foreign cars.

Plus Ford's problem is that they think the only car that should have any performance is the Mustang. Performance versions of anything else are usually not offered, half baked, or if they do get it right, not offered for very long.

Linc, your post is the only one that makes sense.......

I don't understand the thinking today. What used to work years ago just isn't accepted any longer. It isn't just cars, it's becoming our way of life. Everything we do is different from the way we did it before. It's finally showing in our economy.............

[Guest 1hooligan]

Sorry to see Merc go!!! Purchase my first NEW car, a 1969 cougar XR7, convertable, 428, four speed. It took months to get. Wish I still had it for sure, but will always be looking for one just like it. I still think it was and is the best looking car mercury ever built. If I remember it was about $4700, lots of hours of work back when wages were $1.50 per hour. I still do not understand how I seemed to always have some cash in my pocket? And yes I fully agree, it did not die, they intentionally killed the brand.

[Guest bkazmer]

as some have mentioned, the next Lincoln models are critical to the success of the make and the Lincoln Dealers. Most Lincoln dealers are Lincoln Mercury and nothing else. They need enough sales volume to keep the doors open - if it doesn't come from Ford, they will need to take on another line.

I do think the "differentiation" Mercury offered had become too little to justify its continuing. Maybe a Zephyr is needed to avoid over dilution of the Lincoln name - oh, yeah, they recently used and then dropped that name.

[john2dameron]

Just my thoughts. A lot of people will probably disagree. That's okay. Plymouth began life as a dependable (yeah, I know, that was a Dodge word) line of family cars at a good price with conservative styling and sold very well. Then the performance craze hit hard in the mid-fifties and just as Plymouth began marketing powerful cars, their build quality, especially the bodies, went south. Remember 1957. From then on things swung back forth. Sometimes very nice looking (the GTX's), sometimes awful (1962 Plymouths are among the ugliest cars ever built). Sometimes decent quality, often times not (Horizon was an awful car).

Things swung back and forth so much that people stopped trusting Plymouth. Meanwhile every Plymouth model had a Dodge clone. People perceived Dodge to be a better car and Plymouth died. Even as a lover of most things on wheels I did not care.

Then GM. Oldsmobile established a performance image in 1949 but Pontiac was considered a staid, dependable family car. Then starting in 1957 Pontiac went hard after the youth performance market and began to trod on Oldsmobile's space. A few years later Buick did the same thing with the GS. Suddenly, instead of competing with Dodge and Mercury, Pontiac and Buick were competing with Oldsmobile. Sadly, GM chose to kill Oldsmobile and retain Pontiac. That is the saddest decision the American automobile industry ever made except when Packard merged with Studebaker. Perhaps if GM had axed Pontiac a few years ago, we would still have Oldsmobile as a performance car and Buick could still be the mid-priced family car.

Unlike some brands Mercury has consistently offered good value, good performance, and good styling in the same car. If the Crown Vic had been axed, the Grand Marquis could have soldered on as a great family car and Mercury would not have had to offer clones of the other Ford lines. However, we reached the point when Fords biggest competitor was Mercury and likewise, Mercury was Ford's biggest rival. This just will not work so another worthy brand bites the dust. Mercury and Oldsmobile, rest in peace. Plymouth, and to some extent Pontiac, good riddance.

Mercury and I were born the same year. Since that time I have witnessed the birth and death of Kaiser, Frazer, Henry J, Allstate, Muntz, and the Willys Aero line. I have also seen the death of Packard and Studebaker, Hudson and Nash, and De Soto plus the others I have mentioned and maybe some I am overlooking. Will it ever end?

[Dynaflash8]

It's pretty simple. If all of the U.S. auto makers hadn't stooped to build the same cars with the same engines and bodies and different names we would never have lost Olds, Pontiac, Plymouth and Mercury. Soon Buick will bite the dust in the same manner. The new Buick is something nobody would want. I can only assume they discontinued the Park Avenue after 2005 because it was too good and lasted too long. I recently drove my 2005 Park Avenue 3,000 miles, of which 1,000 was stop and go, and I averaged 29.5 mpg for the whole trip. Add to that, that the car was big enough for all of our luggage, and we have a lot. Since the day GM put a Chevrolet engine in a Cadillac it's been a fast downhill slide for the American auto makers.

[Guest Skyking]

Meanwhile every Plymouth model had a Dodge clone. People perceived Dodge to be a better car and Plymouth died.

Chrysler killed off Plymouth hoping those buyers would go to Dodge. Even though the cars were close, that wasn't the case. For some reason people have a mindset with names. If it's not the same name they'll go elsewhere.

If you want proof, look to the Asians for it. They keep the same names for decades............

[poci1957]

If you want proof, look to the Asians for it. They keep the same names for decades............

Yes, interesting, isn't it? Note also that the # 1 or 2 selling luxury car in America is now Lexus. If you look at the Lexus line you will find they are mostly upgraded Toyotas at a different dealer with premium prices. And to the buyers the upgrade is worth it for extra luxury and prestige, real and perceived. Who do you think they got THAT idea from and who USED to do it very well? The Big 3 of course, especially GM.

[Guest Skyking]

Yes, interesting, isn't it? Note also that the # 1 or 2 selling luxury car in America is now Lexus. If you look at the Lexus line you will find they are mostly upgraded Toyotas at a different dealer with premium prices. And to the buyers the upgrade is worth it for extra luxury and prestige, real and perceived. Who do you think they got THAT idea from and who USED to do it very well? The Big 3 of course, especially GM.

One thing the Asians are very good at is coping ideas, while we keep changing ours...............to try to keep up. It's not working!

[Guest]

Then GM. Oldsmobile established a performance image in 1949 but Pontiac was considered a staid, dependable family car. Then starting in 1957 Pontiac went hard after the youth performance market and began to trod on Oldsmobile's space. A few years later Buick did the same thing with the GS. Suddenly, instead of competing with Dodge and Mercury, Pontiac and Buick were competing with Oldsmobile. Sadly, GM chose to kill Oldsmobile and retain Pontiac. That is the saddest decision the American automobile industry ever made except when Packard merged with Studebaker. Perhaps if GM had axed Pontiac a few years ago, we would still have Oldsmobile as a performance car and Buick could still be the mid-priced family car.

Yes, Pontiac went to performance in the latter part of 1956 (this saved them from being dropped as a division) Untrue that Pontiac began to trod on Oldsmobile. Ask the Petty family how Olds felt about performance and racing by 1958. Olds wanted to get out of racing bad. For Lee Petty's 59 Olds they had to get their parts (used) from others who were getting away from Olds too because of no factory support! As far as Buick G/S goes the original ones and the Olds 442 and the Z-11 Chevelle and year later SS396 Chevelle were cars GM never wanted to build but were to told to build by the corporation after the success of Pontiac GTO ( they couldn't ignore the money end of it ). FYI Lee Petty's 394" 1959 Super 88 was ten miles an hour slower that Fireball Roberts 1959 Pontiac 389" Catalina! That would be HUGE in todays racing!

One thing the Asians are very good at is coping ideas, while we keep changing ours...............to try to keep up. It's not working!

Dear SKYKING, The Asians and Germans are the ones the AMERICAN car companies have been copying for the last twenty years. American cars have come a long way in fit and finish since the mid 70's but because of their reputation in those years they have been playing catch up ever since. Public perception is a hard thing to overcome even after you get it right.

Don

Edited June 5, 2010 by helfen (see edit history)

[Guest Skyking]

Dear SKYKING, The Asians and Germans are the ones the AMERICAN car companies have been copying for the last twenty years. American cars have come a long way in fit and finish since the mid 70's but because of their reputation in those years they have been playing catch up ever since. Public perception is a hard thing to overcome even after you get it right.

Don

Don, I was talking about coping ideas, something they never seemed to have on their own and probably never will.... True, the fit and finish came later because our standards changed. Look at todays restorations. No way did the cars of the past have laser straight panels like they are receiving today, at least by most good restorers. Public perception is a very hard thing to overcome today and it will eventually kill the U.S. auto industry.

[Guest]

Don, I was talking about coping ideas, something they never seemed to have on their own and probably never will.... True, the fit and finish came later because our standards changed. Look at todays restorations. No way did the cars of the past have laser straight panels like they are receiving today, at least by most good restorers. Public perception is a very hard thing to overcome today and it will eventually kill the U.S. auto industry.

You mean like Mechanical fuel injection by the Germans in the 30's? Or Electronic fuel injection in the 60's ? Or disc brakes in the 50's by the English? OR the Suzuki swift at 80 mpg? How about the first the first electric car the Lohner-Porsche that made it's debut at the Paris Exposition in 1900. Or the first hybred, the Lohner-Porsche Mixed in 1902. Nissan new Leaf all electric at the end of this year or the new L1 VW ( it gets 200mpg ) at the end of this year also. Point is everyone has talent. When you look at the evolution of the fighter plane for example (in particular WW2) even though everyone is far away from each other their the ideas seem to evolve at the same time.

I really don't like to call the auto industry American or German or Japanese or Korean ect. These companies are global corporations with no real national interest at heart. The interest is in making money as in any business. BTY in the auto industry the first large companies to venture into foreign lands were not the Germans or Japanese or English (I'm not talking about small entrepreneur's), but were American companies.

Don

[30 Hupp]

I usually don't venture beyond responding to technical posts on our forums... However, while reading through this lively discussion, something came to mind.

I wonder if the majority of American car buyers have 'evolved' to view automobiles more as appliances than ever before. We have SO many other things to keep us entertained today (the Internet, home theater, techie gadgets, etc.) that a car is just transportation. Given the traffic congestion in metropolitan areas and the increase in miles driven, perhaps the love affair is waning... Maybe the aging of the population is also a factor.

If the manufacturer's market research indicated that the public wanted more than boring four door transportation boxes, wouldn't they try to lure buyers with something different? Or is only the bottom line driving the styling department? I suspect the later is probably true. I would be a bit more interested in today's cars if they just offered more exterior & interior color choices.

Just my humble opinions...

Paul

I agree with you, Paul.....I know it's probably not feasable these days.....but it sure would be nice to be able to order your new car the way you wanted it. ( Like you used to do!)

Dale

[earl e rizer]

As a Canadian I miss the Meteor brand that was killed off years ago! Why? 2 of my early cars were a 57 Meteor Rideau 500 and a 56 Meteor Niagara. Does anyone else on here remember the 1960 Frontenac?:confused:

[poci1957]

As a Canadian I miss the Meteor brand that was killed off years ago! Why? 2 of my early cars were a 57 Meteor Rideau 500 and a 56 Meteor Niagara. Does anyone else on here remember the 1960 Frontenac?:confused:

I have seen pictures. I am fascinated with Canadian Ford products and especially Canadian Pontiacs. Would love to drive around the States in a 1960s Mercury pickup! Todd

[John_Maine]

As a child, I was fascinated by Canadian versions of US cars, both when we went to Canada or when I saw them on the streets at home. Meteors, Monarchs, Dodges and Pontiacs. My cousin who was service manager at a Ford/Meteor dealer on PEI always had a new Meteor, right up to 1976. I think that was his last one before switching to Crown Vics. I had another cousin that had a '69 Beaumont, 6 cyl., automatic 2 door hardtop. He traded a '58 Strato-Chief. Of course, only a car nut would recognize a '64 or newer Meteor as a Mercury with Ford dash and styling cues. The average person wouldn't know the difference but I'd love to have one. Had another cousin that had a '65 Valiant which was our Dart with a Valiant interior. Of course, Frontenac was a 1 year only Mercury/Monarch version of the Falcon, replaced by the Comet. I've bought some Canadian dealer literature at Hershey the last couple of years. The auto pact of 1968 was the beginning of the end, though, although even up to a few years ago, Canadians could still by different versions of US cars - Chrysler Intrepid, Chrysler Dynasty, Pontiac Tempest (Chevy Corsica).

[starfireelvis]

Don't forget about the Richelieu! I think I saw one at Carlisle recently (last fall or this spring) in the Car Corral.

Sorry about the spelling if it isn't correct--I didn't take French in high school, because I didn't want to be called "Michel" for two years...

Mike

[padgett]

A lot was the increasing federal infuence that began in 1968 but the real kicker was the national 55 mph speed limit. Before that, most imports were buzz bombs that were OK around town but you did not want to be in one over 60 mph.

The 55 coupled with the fuel economy emphasis caused by the embargo of 1973 and the mini-panic of 1979 triggered the death of the Great American Land Barge (GALB).

Of course the American companies helped mainly fueled by the mindset that there was no profit in small cars. Large engines rulled while the imports were learning to package high-efficiency powertrains in more and more comfort oriented packages.

To an America used to big cubic inches and 3:1 top gears, the idea of a fourspeed lockup trans and a engine measured in liters required an investment few were willing to make.

Outside companies grew up in regemes that taxed displacement and gasoline heavily. The result was high-end BMWs and Mercedes with 2.5 liter engines, mostly diesel with mid range cars sub 2 liters and real economy cars under 1 liter.

Initially these were designed for the mostly narrow, slow speed roads at home and not the cheap gas and wide open spaces of the US but they learned and we helped.

But along they way the concept of a "full sized car" also changed from the idea that six passengers should be accomodated to five, and now four. If you need more, get a van.

However Americans still wanted their Crown Vic's and Grand Marquis and Park Avenues unfortunately these were older Americans who did not drive much and kept cars far past the "sell by" date. Young Americans are growing up with moree of the European concept of luxury not requiring a long wheelbase or a big engine. Sure, some are still caught up in the HP race but not many and the dynamics are much different now.

Tire technology has improved enormously since a 10 second car meant many cubic inches and a long wheelbase plus some means of loading the rear axle. Many are still built that way but it is no longer necessary or even very efficient.

So the reason we are loosing Mercury (like Oldmobile and Pontiac) is not because there is no mid-range market but because the mid-range is no longer in the same place.

Look at the Ford web page and you find five cars and fifteen "other". That is twenty different "Fords" ranging from one high MPG car (Fiesta) through Crossovers, SUVs, and Hybrids before getting to trucks. Where would Mercury fit ?

Real question is what is the effect on dealers ? Often the purpose of line reduction is to drop dealers. Lincoln/Mercury has been combined for some time, mainly to give Lincoln dealers a low line that wasn't a Ford so not sure if there would be any reduction. This need is still there. So maybe another Zephyr is in the future.

[John_Maine]

I believe Ford is planning to expand the Lincoln brand - thereby hoping to keep current Lincoln/Mercury dealers afloat as Lincoln dealers. My local Ford garage sells Ford and Mercury but not Lincoln - so maybe with this change they will get Lincoln. The closest Lincoln/Mercury dealer sells other brands - Kia, Hyundai - so maybe they will survive without Mercury. The problem with adding more models to Lincoln, ie: a version of the Focus - is not to cheapen it.

[LINC400]

I believe Ford is planning to expand the Lincoln brand - thereby hoping to keep current Lincoln/Mercury dealers afloat as Lincoln dealers. My local Ford garage sells Ford and Mercury but not Lincoln - so maybe with this change they will get Lincoln. The closest Lincoln/Mercury dealer sells other brands - Kia, Hyundai - so maybe they will survive without Mercury. The problem with adding more models to Lincoln, ie: a version of the Focus - is not to cheapen it.

Yes, now instead of people commenting about Mercury Bobcats, Lynxes, Tracers, Monarchs, etc. being badge engineered Fords, We will have Lincoln Focuses and Fiestas. Much better.

[poci1957]

Yup, since Packard (and probably before) it has been a risky, risky move to exploit a luxury name on a smaller or cheaper car. My Lincoln dealer points out that lots of smaller, "near-luxury" cars are sold by BMW, Mercedes and Lexus, I say to do that without hurting your image is one of the toughest moves in the business. Hope they can, Todd

[Guest]

Yup, since Packard (and probably before) it has been a risky, risky move to exploit a luxury name on a smaller or cheaper car. My Lincoln dealer points out that lots of smaller, "near-luxury" cars are sold by BMW, Mercedes and Lexus, I say to do that without hurting your image is one of the toughest moves in the business. Hope they can, Todd

Risky, Yes Todd, but remember GM's old divisions and price structure? The first time it was compromised was in the depression era. Olds and especially Buick were so bad off that the corporation allowed them to offer cheaper models into Pontiac's market which in turn put the squeeze on Oakland. The corporation continued this and in a turn of events in the opposite direction in 1940 when Pontiac was allowed to market the large "C" body. That is why alot of people including people who have responded to this thread say Pontiac intruded into Olds/ Buick / Cad. market. True it is but it was done the other way around first. Then this was taken away from Pontiac in 1949. Pontiac had only the "A" body and Olds was allowed to market down into Pontiac price structure again with their "A" body ( the series 76 and 88 ).

The biggest thing Ford Motor Co. must overcome is to try to catch loyal Mercury buyers. Olds and especially Pontiac customers have scattered in the wind for the most part. Many have felt betrayed. Brand loyalty takes so much time to build and cultivate and to throw it out the window. I did hear somewhere ( Pontiac community) that when GM accepted the bail out money one of the conditions was Pontiac would go. Ford on the other hand is in a much better position.

Don

Don

[John_Maine]

Got a letter today from Ford telling me about their decision to stop Mercury production and that warranty and service support would continue at my Ford dealer. No surprise there. We have a Mercury Mariner that was purchased at a Ford/Mercury dealer.