Comments: 1-15, 16-17
The transmission had to be rebuilt shortly after purchasing the car due to the abuse and neglect of the state highway patrol. A catalytic converter was replaced as well. Some suspension components have been replaced from everyday wear and tear. The orignal alternator finally gave out at 188,000 miles. Overall, the only thing I've had to deal with is routine maintenance.
This car is very comfortable and handles well. The low end the performance is marginal, but it performs well on the high end to pass on highways. I love the tight secure ride of a police package Vic. I maintain my car to police specs. I don't settle for cheap replacement parts. I still keep pursuit rated tires on it and I still install performance brake pads and stiff heavy duty shocks. It has truly been a pleasure to own and drive this car. I cannot get over how reliable and functional this car is. I was so impressed with the car that I bought another 1995 P71 for my wife to use as an everyday driver. I can't understand why the general public isn't attracted to this car. I love it and you won't see me driving anything else.
Some of the original parts are crap.
The general public doesn't go for these cars because they've been made to feel guilty about driving a big "gas-guzzler" and conned into buying smaller, slightly more economical cars which give loads of trouble and fall to pieces in a few years.
My experience with 2 models of Grand Marquis is that they have been the most reliable and satisfying cars I have ever owned.
Actually to the previous comment gas isn't that bad on our cars, my 92 grand marquis gets 22.9 MPG when I'm driving in 9 to 5 type traffic. Check out www.crownvic.net.
"Conned" into buying more economical cars?
What a stupid remark.
Not everybody feels the needs to drag around nearly two tons of metal with them every time they go somewhere, and the associated higher gas consumption and difficulty parking.
At least the reviewer doesn't brag about causing other drivers to get out of his way, or even pull over, when they think he is a cop, unlike most of the other CVPI reviewers on this site, who seem to get off on playing at being a police officer.
Old police cruisers will actually attract attention from real law enforcement officers, but not the kind you want. The reviewer's wife will soon find out that, if she has not already.
I would much rather drive a Crown Victoria or Grand Marquis than my little economy car, but I can't afford it.
The "conned" comment is quite true for a lot of us.
We drive overpriced overcomplicated fragile little front-drive cars when a simple rear-drive old-fashioned design would be more reliable and cheaper to run.
Thank God we have cheaper gas prices in the USA than in most of the rest of the world.
In Europe it's even worse, they've put a phone box on wheels and called it a Smart car.
British people are not forced into buying SMART cars by anything other than high UK fuel costs (approaching $4 per gallon), high cost of living (average house cost £150k) and low salaries (£13-15k average)
Where I work several people have recently given up on car ownership because the people concerned just cannot afford it anymore.
Yea...i agree with all the comments here... I own a '97 Crown Vic PI... i used a paint cleaner on it,-improved it.
But you know what?...in reality, they are not really gas guzzlers... certainly there not great on gas... but a gas guzzler to me is: 14 miles on highway, 9- 11 in the city. Crown vic--->23 higway and 17-19 city is not really bad! I don't believe it is...'great car! I've owned 19 used cars since I was 18 years old...I'm 52 now, and beside a 97 Firebird (which I totalled) and my parents's '67 thunderbird, (back in 1972),this is the nicest car I've owned.. (i had a 77 Cutlass, but it only had a 140 hp 260 ci V8...so the crown vic blows that away., (maybe not in style, but everything else) people think this car is large..heh..it weighs 3800 lbs... little less...?
I pulled it up to my friend's (mechanic) parent's 1970' (something) "deuce and 1/4"...buick electra 225, with a 455 ci motor, weights 5200 lbs... the crown vic looked like a mid-size car next to it! Now,that's a gas hog!...heh...later------Bob Butta.
The Grand Marquis and Crown Victoria are not really that big of cars. The Toyota Camry (2002) and newer are almost as big, but weigh about 500 pounds less.
These cars were huge in the 1970’s and hold on to that image, but walk around one that is parked beside a new Taurus, Accord, or Camry and you will see that the 1992-1997’s are not really that big, but the 1998 and newers are slightly larger.
I drove a 1995 Crown Victoria from 1995 to the middle of 2003 and the car was trouble free all the way up to 215,000-miles when a rear brake caliper seized up one day. I sold the car to a friend of mine for $275-payments of $25 a month, she is elderly and on a very small pension, and she still drives the car today at 230,000-miles.
I averaged 23.5 mpg driving half of it in the city and half on the high way. These cars are very aerodynamic and cut through the wind very well. They have super bright head lamps and have a very solid and safe ride. I have see collisions between these cars and other vehicles and I must say the occupants of these cars usually came out unharmed while the other party was hurt. I guess it is the weight of the vehicle because any grand marquis would never hold up to a Ford F-250.
Bottom line, these are great cars, but have become way outdated for our era. They need to make better use of their overall size. These cars are fairly large, but have the same amount of room inside as a Ford Taurus or Accord. These cars are still suffering from the 1980’s downsizing and have not grown since.
Great cars are these and anyone should go 200K-miles before any problems come.
I pulled into the post office a few years ago in my 1995 NON-POLICE Crown Victoria and accidently ran up on the curb and the front wheel fell down in to the ditch. I got the car pulled out and no damage at all.
My sister hit the same spot (Very narrow pull in-lots of people do this) in her Toyota Prizm/Crolla, or what ever it was, she had two of them, but one was one name and one was the other, anyway her car had a totally broken front suspension and a shattered transmission housing. Her insurance called the car a total loss and paid her virtually nothing for the car. I think it was only 3-years old at the time and she gave like $14,000 for it and got $6,000 for it. I do remember it only had 28,000-miles on it.
I will keep my Crown Victoria, 250,000-miles and still going strong, but does use lots of oil and spark knocks really bad in the summer and the dealer can't fix it, even after new sensors and carbon cleaning (s) 4- of them.
This Ford vehicle is among the few vehicles from Ford namely F-Series E-series and Mustang that does not need a transmission repair or replacement sooner than a Dodge.
What Crown Victorians do not know is that this vehicle is a toaster oven waiting to toast its occupants to death once it gets rear ended by a fast approaching vehicle.
At least 20 Police officers have died due to poor design and location of Crown Victorias fuel tank in the rear and within the crush zones of the car. Other car manufacturers keep fuel tanks out of the crush zones.
Check Crown Victoria Safety issues on the internet. I thank God that I found out just in time and did not buy this bed of death.
Bed of death? Haven't heard that one before...
Crown Victorians? What about the owners of the Mercury version? Grand Marquesans?
Does the Lincoln version, the Town Car, suffer from the same problem?
Overall accident rates show these cars to be amongst the safest on the road.
Bed of death is a bit extreme. Apparently when a police car is stopped on the interstate and someone hits it from behind at 70+ mph it pushes the gas tank over some bolts on the rear axle and causes an explosion.
70+ MPH... just think about that...
How many cars would keep you alive at all when hit at that speed. Seems a moot point all in all. I would admittedly prefer to die on impact rather than burn, but the fact remains these cars are about as safe as it gets. Check out the real stats by looking in the injury and death columns.
http://www.safecarguide.com/mak/ford/idx.htm.
Not to say Ford couldn't (and probably would have by now) redesigned this issue out, but that would be an admission of guilt in a court of law. Ain't lawyers great!?
I was first on the scene of a Honda Accord (one of the "safest" cars made) that hit head on with a Dodge Minivan at probably no more that 30MPH each. Let me tell you something... weight is your friend and the way the transportation board tests vehicles isn't too relevent unless you drive into brick walls. Brick walls don't hit back.