I feel sorry for Mercury. For years they were a Ford in a tuxedo, and even on the rare occasion when they got a unique body (1957-60), it tanked so badly they went right on back to being a slightly spiffier Ford LTD, Torino, or Mustang. But things really spiraled downward during the last ten years of Mercury’s life on Earth.
Like this! Take a storied name–Monterey, slap on a satin silver grille, extra trim, and a few additional gadgets onto a Windstar, and here ya go! While it wasn’t a bad idea for L-M dealers to have a minivan, the Monterey was a noticeably shallow and cheap way to replace the Nissan Quest-based Villager.
I will say one thing. The changes made, as thin as they were, did look reasonably nice. The satin-finish vertical bar grille, fog lights and waterfall Mercury emblem did make it look a bit more special than the Windstar, but how many people actually bought them?
It was introduced at the 2003 Chicago Auto Show and became available in the fall of that year. Powered by a 4.2L V6 unavailable on sister Windstar, and using the name of a one-proud full-size Mercury, it was a cheap way to keep a minivan in the line. But while the recently-departed Villager had a unique selling point, a loaded-up Windstar was not really much different from one of these Mercs, save a few trim bits and the exclusive V6.
I think the Monterey was meant to compete with the Chrysler Town & Country, but while the top-trim Mopar minivan sold pretty well, the Monterey didn’t. Maybe that was just because of the Mercury clientele, who tended to be more interested in Sables and Grand Marquises, not a kid-hauler. But you could get leather, middle-row bucket seats and all sorts of other goodies on these. It was a nice van for the time, but most people shrugged off not just the Monterey but also the Windstar, and headed for their local Mopar emporium instead.
Also, by the mid 2000s, the Honda and Toyota minivans were rapidly increasing their presence as well, as they had become much more conventional than their very JDM-oriented offerings available on these shores in the ’80s. Net result being, the Monterey never really took off, and was discontinued after the 2006 model year, with approximately 32K sold during that time.
This article had a rapid gestation, for I took these photos just today around lunchtime. The lot had some other interesting vehicles, such as a 1995 Riviera, 46,000-mile 1988 Celebrity and a Lincoln LS V8, but I wanted to share this one first, to let you know there really was a Mercury Monterey made after the 1970s!
The Villager was Nissan based.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_Villager
Thanks, I was thinking of the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe. Fixed.
The 62 Monterey we had was worthy of the emblem. This, not so much.
The first time I drove a Lincoln LS, I didn’t see what everyone was complaining about. It was pleasant and everything else worked. The three that followed… now I understand the gremlins. The joys of being a driver for an auction company.
I liked the LS–a good-looking, good-driving, comfortable car. Test drove two of them in 2006 and gave serious thought to buying the first one. The second one had the misfortune to be parked next to an ’03 Marauder. Game over for the LS.
Speaking of the Marauder, one might call that Mercury’s last high note amidst their slide into irrelevance. Might still be too new for anything other than a capsule, but if I ever put together some COAL submissions like I’ve been meaning to, it just might have its day.
The wife had a 64 and I am in perfect agreement with 67Conti.
Someone at work drives one of these and she’s always blasting that newfangled young people music.
“Get off my lawn!”
(c:
These vans were (are) terrible. During my stint in the service department of a Ford-Lincoln-Mercury mega dealer, I drove loads of them along with their Freestar/Windstar siblings. They aged like milk – worse than the Focus, worse than the Taurus, easily the chintziest, least robust vehicle Ford has built in the past decade.
Transmissions were like wear items (even more so than other minivans), electronics were horrid, they rust like 21st century Dodge Aspens, and they simply drive badly, even the lower-milage ones. It’s like they took a Vulcan Taurus, cheapened it even more, added 1000 pounds and did everything they could to make it chintzy and unpleasant.
This is example is in surprisingly good condition, even though these are <10 years old most have already fallen into BHPH yellowed-headlight-not-washed-in-three-years hell. Resale values reflect their crappiness and I wouldn't be surprised if equivalent Chrysler and Toyonda vans are worth double. Hell, I'd take a U-body GM over one of these, at least those were smooth and comfortable.
When I briefly sold Fords in 2011, they had a whole row of Windstars out back for some rust-related recall. A bit later some friends were looking for a minivan and I checked out a 2006 Windstar that we’d just gotten in on trade. It was loaded with leather and everything else, but wouldn’t start and already had rust bubbling up in the rear wheel wells. Not confidence inspiring on a car that was only five years old!
Yep, the rear suspension rusted so bad it would cause the control arms (or something major like that) to quite literally break off – we had this lovely example towed in on a flatbed one afternoon. Guess it missed the recall.
I didn’t usually take pictures of customer cars at that job (invasion of privacy and all that), but I couldn’t resist the hilarity of a “Safe Ride” taxi with the rear suspension completely demolished due to rust. I always wondered if there were passengers in it when the axle gave out… that must’ve been a hoot.
Why in god’s name anyone would buy one of these for taxi service is beyond me – most minivan cabs around here are GMs or Hondas.
OT, but I really need to write a CC post on what it was like to work at that dealership one of these days…
I thought only the 2nd gen Windstar and the Freestar/Monterey had the rusting issues and that the first gen just suffered from normal rust belt rust.
Back in 2008 dad’s 93 Legacy’s driver side rear strut tower broke in a parking lot while he was inside due to 15 years and 343K miles of living in NY. He limped it home 30 miles on the axle stop.
@ Max. P – Please do write something, it would be interesting
My Volvo dealership used to be a L-M-Volvo dealer, now they’re down to just L-Volvo, but they still use a Monterey identical to this as a customer shuttle. Not a bad van from a passenger perspective, especially for it’s age.
Compared to the Pontiac Montana my Subaru-Suzuki-Buick-GMC dealership is still using as a shuttle, the Monterey is worlds nicer.
These things rust prematurely in New York which is shoddy build quality.
My team was issued a Freestar as a cargo vehicle so we over loaded it up with luggage and I babied it over the mountains north of LA on I-5. Also a bunch of the electrics did not work and I could not figure it out. Also another driver almost killed the tranny so that was another stressor. I swear it had not been washed in years.
Back in the Fall I and some others tried pulling a dead woman (was not sure of that at the time) out of one of these as it was becoming engulfed in flames after she did not negotiate a turn and hit a dump truck offset head on.
Those are my three reasons why I hate these and will be glad when they are almost all gone.
We rented a Windstar for our PA vacation, & what impressed me most was its terrible turning-circle; our U-turn became a 3-point turn at an intersection, which was very embarrassing. Our XL20 Sienna’s much better here, in addition to the gas mileage from its smaller yet more powerful VVT engine, & more luxuriant interior. So even aside from quality issues, Ford’s FWD vans were simply outclassed technically.
I don’t recall ever really seeing any marketing for these so how would a shopper know they existed? Also, families with kids don’t usually just drop in to a Mercury dealer, especially if it was an L-M dealer without a Ford store. And if there was a Ford store, I’m guessing there was usually cash on the hood of a Freestar, not that a Freestar was such a compelling prospect either, but no need to head next door and spend more money. FoMoCo lost the whole minivan plot back in the WindStar days when instead of introducing a driver side slider like everyone else went with the “King-Door” option instead. Yeah, OK, no sale there.
A quick Youtube search reveals this as the only Monterey commercial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIX-Nb6FoxM
Even the voiceover sounds unenthused.
The King door was a 1 year only stop gap until they could do the required engineering for the second sliding door, it was a good short term solution.
Typically in this era unless you were looking for the absolute cheapest strippo version you could find the Mercury was the better value, since so many things came standard on it that were options with significant price tags.
Never heard of them. Doesn’t sound like I missed much.
I never understood why they’ve had to revive the “Monterey” name for a minivan, I always thought this was one of the worst decisions Mercury has ever made, every time I think of the Mercury Monterey I always think of their entry level full size car.
At the time, the head of Ford determined that all Mercurys should start with the letter “M”, all Ford cars with the letter “F”, and all Ford SUVs with the letter “E”.
This is how you get the following:
Montego
Monterey
Mariner
Milan
Mountaineer
Then the Fords were:
Focus
Fusion
Five Hundred
With SUVs as:
Escape
Explorer
Expedition
Excursion
Which goes down as one of the DUMBEST ideas ever. I imagine the Mustang and Crown Vic were big points of contention when that board meeting took place.
The Mustang, like the Ranger, was untouchable due to its iconic status, and the Crown Vic was like your sleazy, perpetually-stuck-in-1980’s-Brookyln cousin-in-law Vincent: you’re embarrased and maybe a little annoyed that he could be related to you, even by marriage, but you can’t deny you don’t appreciate the money he makes from his “taxi” business. Oh, and for some reason the feds are always keeping tabs on him.
First thing Mulally did upon ascending the throne was to kill the Five Hundred and Freestyle and rename them Taurus and Taurus X, but everything else more-or-less stayed in place.
Cousin Vincent is only embarrassing because he knows where the family really comes from, and shallow attempts at keeping up appearances isn’t going to fly with someone that real. Between him and your iconic rockstar cousin keeping true to his own roots, the F family, following the latest trends and fashions, just seem like the disposable drones they are.
By 2005 the decision was to limit the Crown Vic and 4th gen Taurus to fleet sales starting in 2006. The Five Hundred was to take the place of both. The Five Hundred did not sell and it seemed that sales of the out going 4th gen Taurus outsold the Five hundred by a lot as the Five Hundred only sold 107,932 and the taurus sold 304,851(I am not sure how many were sold to fleets but I see a lot of them out there on the roads with dealer stickers on the trunk/dealership tag bracket(the 2005 models had a grill without a chrome bar in it and revised tail lights)
A lot of folks found the Montego/Five Hundred bland. I liked the looks but found the cars underpowered (203 hp was not enough to make that thing scoot)
I do like the revised 2008-2009 Taurus. From a distance the front end resembles the 86-91 Sable front end. I had a 2008 Taurus (before it was rear ended) and my folks have a 2009. They are very nice long distance driving cars.
As for the Ranger, from what I heard, Ford had been trying to kill that truck off from 2004 and kept giving it a reprieve until 2011, so i am not sure it really mattered to Ford that the Ranger did not keep to the F naming scheme.
As for the vehicle of focus, the Monterrey, well like the Sable, Milan and Montego, ford never bothered to advertise them so I am sure most folks never knew they still existed(in the case of the Sable) or that it was made(in the case of the Milan and Monterrey)
My ’07 500 was a shitmobile. $1400 worth of repairs in only 8 months. And with 78,000 miles on it. I traded at 93,000 miles. I lost money on the trade and I didn’t care. A note and a car that nickels and dimes you is no fun. Avoid these like the plague.
The Mercury Montego has at least one thing in common with the Rover (née Austin) Montego: both are two of the dullest vehicles ever made.
And remember the Freestyle wagon/crossover, and later the Edge crossover.
Another confusing piece of this plan was why they used the Montego name at all. Generally you don’t revive a name when the final version of a car previous to the would-be revival was a lousy vehicle, and there is very little love spared for the 1972-76 Montego. Sure, the GT versions of the first couple years were intriguing, but by the end it was just another portly, big-hipped 70’s “intermediate”. A much more sensible plan would have made the large sedan Monterey instead of the van, since a name with some brand currency should go to your bigger-market product, revived Meteor (disused since ’64) on the Fusion-based sedan, and called the van Montclair (if you wanted to keep using M-based heritage names.)
Problem with name outliers at Ford? Just change the first letter, and say hello to the Frown Victoria, the Fustang, and the Fanger.
One of the television stations here has at least one of these puppies.
Winter before last I had to do a series of live updates one morning for said station. The one sent for the broadcast happily idled away for about 90 minutes and it looked surprisingly good for its lot in life. It was heavily loaded down with miscellaneous equipment. I saw it (or its twin) just a few weeks ago, still loaded down and working its tail off. I would love to know its history.
The only reason I feel like I see this car a lot is because I pass one on my way to work every day. It’s black, and from what I’ve seen, the owner is an elderly lady. Sure, I see one from time to time, but they were never really popular when new. And for that matter, Freestars and Windstars seemed to drop off the face of the earth all together about 5 years ago. As far as minivans go, even “luxury” minivans, this was a pretty sad, uninterested effort.
Cash for Clunkers culled a LOT of the first-gen Windstars and probably a few of the rattier second-gen. I think it was one of the top traded-in vehicles.
I guess C for C was good for something after all. 🙂
The Monterey minivan seems like a good example of how Ford and GM just never understood the minivan market. In the boom years, they used BOF vans which were just downsized big vans (sound familiar?). Then, when they finally decided the fad wasn’t going away, they came up with stuff like the Windstar/Monterey which didn’t sell any better than the BOF minivans. Ford’s final true minivan effort really was half-assed, rivaling GM in engineering them as cheaply as they possible could.
After a few years of experimentation, Toyota and Honda finally got on the right track and are now giving the originator and undisputed leader of the category, Fiatsler, a run for their money with really decent products.
OTOH, maybe Ford and GM played it correctly, instead focusing on SUVs like the Tahoe and Explorer during the boom minivan years which did, indeed, eventually overtake minivans.
But even now, Ford is still giving the minivan market a shot with stuff like the Flex and the imported Transit Connect.
Neither Ford nor GM offered BOF minivans and they were far from downsized full size vans. The Aerostar was the best selling minivan for a number of years since it had the ability to actually tow and eventually had available AWD. Yes the Chrysler triplets outsold the Aerostar when you combined all three but by the time Ford had the Aerostar, Windstar and Villager Ford sold the most minivans. The Astro and Safari twins also sold very well too since it also had real tow capabilities and AWD too.
Wow thats funny Never realized they had unibodys on the astro and aerostar. Looks like there is even arguments about it on the vehicles respective forums. From what I can tell they were built much like the xj and zj jeeps with essentially a hat section frame welded to the bottom of the body.
The have always been listed as being based on the ranger and s10 respectively which I’m sure causes some confusion. It looks like they may have even used some of the same subframe parts.
Yes the Astro/GMC safari were unibody frame vehicles. They used to make them in a plant in Maryland.
Baltimore, to be specific. Pretty sure that plant produced the very last Astro to roll off the line, and then was no more.
I know it built intermediates back in the day (my ’82 Malibu was built there, the ’79 may have been as well) but not sure what else was in its history.
Nothing chassis wise in common between the Ranger/Aerostar and Astro/S10 other than engines, transmissions, and some wheels and/or brake parts.
Having a full length frame rail on a unibody is quite common and pretty much every unibody “truck” type vehicle has full length frame rails going back to the Econoline.
I had an ’03 Windstar and don’t miss it one bit. It did it’s job alright. When I was shopping back in ’05 I was also shown an ’04 Monterey. Not only did it have the 4.2 engine it also had a disappearing 3rd row seat. It was a selling point at that time because Honda’s Odyssey was so equipped. Two things made me go for the Windstar instead. I liked the dash design better as it was driver centric and the price was better. Better than the Monterrey’s and much better, $5000.00 better than the Odyssey or Siena.
Later it became known that the Monterrey and Freestar received transmissions with only 2 planets going around the sun gear where as the old Windstar had 3 planets. The triplets maintained the orbit but the twins shredded the teeth of the sun gear.
Somebody mentioned recalls for some rust issue. Some rust issue indeed. At least one death occurred when the rear axle snapped in two and plenty folks saw the sub frame crumble. Control arms had the nasty habit of braking off the sub frame, luckily during low speed maneuvers.
I feel lucky.
The Monterrey does have one notable thing about it, being the first vehicle with front parking sensors. It must not have been a big draw since they didn’t add it to their other vehicles in the short term. I kind of would have expected them to add it at least to the Lincoln SUVs or the Town car.
Oh, yes. The salesman made a big deal of it.
You know what? I have eyes.
Is the 4.2 v6 the same as in the F-series? Being a Freestar/Windstar clone it must be just as crappy. Ive heard nothing good.
Mercury sure had fallen. Outside of the ’49 coupes that were notorious for being lead sled fodder, and the ’67-’68 Cougar…what else with the Mercury nameplate was actually ‘cool’? Sucks too, since ‘Mercury’ is a pretty strong nameplate.
You’re giving short shrift to the ’69-’70 Cougar, though it did lose the plot in ’71.
Other ‘cool’ Mercuries, to me at least, include the Comet Caliente in the early 60’s, all three generations of Marauder (’63-’64, ’69-’70, ’03-’04), ’68 to ’71 Cyclone, and the fox Capri (the 5.0 and turbo versions). Gets pretty sleepy after that though.
57 turnpike cruiser?
Seriously what was the point of Mercury? I know it was to compete with mid range GM cars, but were the GM mid rangers really necessary? Surely Ford could have just stretched up or Lincoln down into that segment!
I feel like there’s a million of these (well, the Ford version at least) in Canada. They love them up there.
That there is the best value. It says so right on the windshield! These, and the Windstars/Freestars, were B-L-A-N-D. In this case that’s too bad, because the Villager (nee Nissan Quest) was quite a great little hustler.
I never understood how Chrysler and eventually Toyota and Honda could get this category so right, and Ford and GM miss the mark by so much.
Yes, I know it’s a Windstar and I know how awful Windstars are. But even so, there is something about the styling touches on these that make them really attractive. Maybe if I found one cheap . . . . Then I remember that it’s a Windstar.
Speaking of names, if the current Taurus was called “Grand Marquis” FoMoCo could move a lot more of them. Ford dumped Mercury because of low sales. The cars were fine. But people don’t flock to dealerships for cars that aren’t marketed. I haven’t seen a Mercury billboard since the “sign of the cat” days. Can you imagine a retro Cougar based on the current Mustang? Wayyyy Cool! I think the departure of Mercury has hastened Lincoln’s demise.
It should be pointed out that the author keeps referring to the Monterey as a sister vehicle to the Windstar. The two were never sold along side each other. The Windstar was put in the microwave and lazily became the Freestar for 2004. It was also available with the 4.2 V6.
Freestar–a Windstar by any other name…
I forgot they renamed the Ford version the last couple of years. I think potential buyers did too! 🙂
Ford certainly had its woes with minivans. Even when they sold, they were a bit off the mark. The second gen Windstar in 1999 finally looked competitive, and the top line trims with the two-tone were pretty good looking as minivans go.
We drove the 1999 or possibly an early 2000. I doubt it was the top trim as those were quite expensive. I recall a lot of interior noise. It was summer and the streets were clean but the tires still found a few pebbles and they were very noticeable hitting the bottom of the van. The interior was monochrome and boring.
We went on to look at a ’99 Town and Country LX. Despite being a a five year old design, it was obviously a nicer van. Since the Plymouth Voyager was still around, even the base LX T&C was very nicely trimmed. We found a T&C with the CD / Equalizer (on top of the standard high end 200w 10 speaker Infinity system), the 3.8, rear air and few more items for a sticker of $29,895, which didn’t seem too bad. We had them add wheels to the one we wanted and took it home.
In light of the reliability issues, I’m glad we didn’t get the Ford. You certainly don’t see the second gen Windstar around anymore, but I regularly see the ’95-2000 Mopars.
This renamed third gen Freestar lost any styling mojo the second gen had. The Fords were bug-eyed and plain. The Monterey exterior trim helps some, but that interior is still a dud compared to our base ’99 T&C LX.
My in-laws bought one of these right after my FIL retired. They used it to see the grandkids and travel around the country a lot. It was a prescient purchase, as shortly after my FIL retired, my MIL had a massive stroke and the van was used to haul her and her power wheelchair everywhere.
When my FIL died, my MIL moved up here to Michigan, as we’re the only “family” she has. There’s a longer story to this, but I don’t want to divert. However, I ended up being the keeper of the Monterey. The one they bought is rather up-market, it has almost all of the toys. Luckily, my in-laws bought the van in Texas and retired to Tennessee, so there’s been no issues with rust. Even two years in Michigan have barely affected it, OTOH, we only drive the van when we need to take her somewhere. She’s progressed with her therapy, so much so, she can get in and out of a regular car. We drive the Monterey less and less.
I’ve driven standard vans and other extended minivans before, but this thing just doesn’t respond well. All inputs seem like they get filtered and the responses from the controls seem slow and clumsy. The trans makes a weird vibration and the 4.2 isn’t that smooth for a V6, either. I thought only the old 3.8L Buick was odd-fire (sarcasm). I much prefer the feel of a similar generation Chrysler minivan or even the GM U-van. Even in extended forms, they seem more lively and responsive.
But, that big tank is good at one thing: Once you get on the highway, it eats the miles. Too bad the seats are less than supportive, because if they were better, I’m sure I could do more than 2 hour stints behind the wheel. I’m not real enthused with the seats in the Aztek (actually NONE of the GM’s designed in the 90’s have good seats), but I can withstand six hours of those more easily than I can two hours in the Monterey’s seats.
I like the minivan form factor and I really wanted to like the Monterey. But it just doesn’t deliver on a multitude of levels. If you’ve read my posts before, you know I am/was a big Mercury fan, but after living with this thing it’s probably a good thing they finally cancelled this van. Of course, by the time these things hit the market, Ford (and GM) were already plotting their exit. Just as well.
i was expecting the mercury version of a ford explorer to be honest.
That would be the Mountaineer. Though I do give ’em credit for an M-name that sort of made sense, if you ordered the 4wd version.
I almost bought a used one of these (2005 I think) back in late 2010, after totaling my Focus wagon. Saw it sitting on the local Buick dealers’ used lot. Drove REALLY nice, had EVERYTHING, but I wasn’t sure I really wanted a minivan-sized vehicle. I drove the GM minivans of that vintage, and they didn’t compare at all. I ended up getting a low-mile 2006 Chevy HHR (for way more money). For sure better gas mileage, but I’m not sure I made the right choice.