mustang6172

I'm looking at the color options for the Taurus on Fordvehicles.com and I see two shades of red (one of which is ugly), an ok shade of blue, one black, two shades of white, and three shades of gray. What happened to yellow, green, purple, orange, and pink? I admit that some of those don't offer great resale value, but it brings niche buyers.

We're much better off without Mercury. The real qustion is why didn't someone kill it 10 years ago when it was still a good idea. I think a Mustang-based Lincoln would be a good idea, but don't call it a sports car: it's a "personal luxury vehicle". The two biggest obstacles are the shape of the roof (it needs to allow grownups to sit in the back), and the rear axle. I don't think a solid rear axle would float with the luxury crowd. Now who is going to pay $45,000 for a Mustang that isn't fast or a Mustang?

I don't want to live in a world where people drive front-wheel-drive trucks. SUV's are fine though...

So you want something that can fit a couple of dogs and can tow it behind a motor home? Buy a Taurus.

Chevy did bring back the El Camino. They called it the SSR. It was a pathetic affair.

The new Taurus took 3 years to design. Ford started working on it when it realized the 500 was going to be a dud. Throwing a new grill on the 500 and renaming it Taurus was a knee-jerk reaction to poor sales. And when it began production of the 500 it had taken a few years to redesign a Volvo S80. The current generation Mustang started off in 2000 and didn't finish until 2005. A lot of that time was spent refitting the Dew98 chassis as the D2C.

We were off the S197 5 years ago! We're on the D2C platform now.

My bad. I checked my textbook and 10% is the limit. As to the labeling of E10, a lot of states use E10 as an oxidized gas for winter-use after MTBE was banned.

If anyone is still wondering, Alan Murphy was a rock session guitarist who died of AIDS in 1989.

You want body-on-frame?

Has anyone else been having problems with melting headlight reflectors on the 2004 Focus (particularly on the driver's side)?

A modern engine can tolerate E20. I don't see why E10 would be of any concern.

No one can outlaw Pony Cars with fuel economy standards. It's 2010! We live in a world where you can have 500 horesepower and still get 35mpg. And while I'm here... I'd like to see the Mustang made a few inches narrower and the rear window moved back several inches with the tail of the car shortened to make a hatch back with more rear headroom. There's no way you can have a V8 and the Ecoboost V6. They'll cost the same price, make the same horsepower, and everyone will buy the V8 because it's cheaper to maintain. The same thing happened to the 2.3L turbo in the 1980's. The Mustang is already too small to squeeze in a hybrid battery. I wouldn't be opposed to the 2.5L Duratech engine being installed, but a better candidate for a serious fuel miser would be the 2.5L Duratorque Diesel from Europe.

Rumors of Mercury's demise have been floating around for 10 years now. I call this "clousure".

Mustang's D2C chassic could make an acceptable 30-45K 2 seater, but the chassis has some limitations to overcome. A good sportscar needs 4-wheel independent suspsension; not a live axle rear with MacPherson struts in the front. A proper sportscar needs a much more elaborate chassis. That's pretty expensive to develope.