1989 Ford Crown Victoria Reviews - Page 3 of 5

1989 Ford Crown Victoria ltd 5.0 from North America

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1988
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 5.0 Automatic
Previous carFord LTD

Summary:

Nice

Faults:

Dash light and tail lights goes out together I've replaced all fuses, dimmer switch and headlight switch problem still occures.

General Comments:

Once running the car is a good car, but you shouldn't have to put in more work then what youve actually paid for the vehicle.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 13th October, 2006

10th Mar 2007, 22:38

Once you dash lights and brake lights go out together it means your headlight switch is bad. I had to replace my headlight switch. It is kind of a pain to get to, to replace, because you have to reach back and release the button and pull switch out a angle at the same time.

1989 Ford Crown Victoria LX 5.0 V8 from North America

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 5.0 V8 Automatic
Performance marks 1 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.5 / 10
Distance when acquired128000 miles
Most recent distance128000 miles
Previous carBuick Park Avenue

Summary:

Too gosh darn slow

Faults:

Oil leaks everywhere.

General Comments:

All I can smell is burning oil when driving this car. I used to own a 2000 Interceptor and can say that was the best car I ever owned. This 89 is one of the worst. It dosn't have any power. I can get it over 75. It has no pickup at all. I wouldn't mind the fact that it gets bad gas millage, but it doesn't have any power to show for that. I bought the car because of its size, but now think it may be safer to have a smaller car that can get out of its own way.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th November, 2005

15th Nov 2005, 23:42

First of all, why would you try to compare an 89 Mercury Grand Marquis to a 2000 Police Interceptor. This review is almost completely bogus because they are not even in the same league as eachother. Yes, they are all based on the same platform (Crown Vic, Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Towncar), but you own two completely different models and packages and there is an 11 year technological difference between the two. The 2000 Police Interceptor has a special suspension package, braking system, and the one HUGE difference... A HIGH PERFORMANCE MOTOR!! For the police interceptor model, it came with a high-performance version of the 4.6 liter V8 that I'm not sure, but should put out at least 250hp and over 300lbs of torque.

Now the cheap 89 MGM that you bought only left the factory with 160hp/260trq at best, at least that's what my 87 MGM LS 2 door left the factory with. Plus after 16 years of driving, drivetrain loss, and abuse, there isn't much left to work with. On top of that yours is beat and burning oil (bad sign, could be many different problems), so I'm not surprised that yours is a lot slower than mine. Mine happens to be decently quick, and does 90 mph with ease. (For those old guys out there, I'm a safe driver and I don't drive that fast normally, just trying to prove a point) It has to be the most reliable and comfortable car I have ever driven, and it was worth every penny I paid for it.

My suggestion, stop trying to compare performance to an old luxury car. Be happy or sell it to somebody who will enjoy your old "box style" Mercury Grand Marquis, because its not a sports car, just old style luxury. I drive my 87 daily while I still have my performance cars (guaranteed they would blow the doors off your 2000 PI, got a 11 second 96 Eagle Talon TSI AWD) to enjoy also.

1989 Ford Crown Victoria LX 5.0 Litre from North America

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 5.0 Litre Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired148000 kilometres
Most recent distance173250 kilometres

Faults:

Water Pump

New Muffler, tailpipe and catalytic converters were cut out.

Poor heater output when it is cold. I don't mean -15 Celsius, but at -30 Celsius.

General Comments:

After the tune up I did and your basic service and catalytic converters were removed I was so impressed with the 31 MPG on the highway for this size of care. Why would you go to a Civic? I don't think it is to save money. However, I would buy one 'cause they are easy to drive, but I wouldn't because of 92 cents/Litre. Cost per mile people I believe overlook. "Yeah let's spend $20 000 to save $600 a year on gas." That makes a whole lot of sense.

Smooth ride and I can kick back on the highway in comfort. I think people have forgotten about comfort. Not just Vics, but of how most were built back then.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st July, 2005

23rd Jul 2005, 09:36

Yes I get 30 MPG on mine too. Imperial MPG. Some people just don't know the difference.

6th Aug 2005, 18:17

First of all I see there is somebody else that disagrees with the mileage I had stated. That is your lack of ability to pay attention to what is written above. Cruising down the highway at 110 km/hour it will. You notice how I did not say 69 MPH. You think maybe that 31 MPG would then mean Imperial Gallons? I think so. Sorry to read that you get crummy mileage on your '92. I think those are the 4.6 L motor? Simplicity is always better therefore I wish they still made the 5L motor. (That is a 302 cu. in. for you yanks). As I stated earlier, although I don't think it was sent through, it doesn't matter to me if it is metric or not. Just that you need to pay attention to the details. 31 MPG...31 MPG... just in case you missed it?...31MPG.

Average review marks: 7.6 / 10, based on 14 reviews