One is not assured of accolades solely on account of noble birth. History is full characters who embody that cautionary statement, and here we have an automotive version. The Marquis – an aristocratic nameplate born in the 1960s as the top-line Mercury – eventually became this… an unmemorable, mid-priced, mid-sized sedan. Nearly indistinguishable from its more common Ford LTD brethren, the 1983-86 Marquis avoided both praise and scorn. It simply existed in a bland, anonymous manner unbefitting higher nobility.
Mercury unveiled the Marquis nameplate in 1967 as an upscale Ford LTD coupe. Though sharing LTD’s overall appearance, Marquis boasted a standard Marauder V-8, an “ultra luxurious interior,” and other upgrades that justified a 19% price premium over the Ford. Though an interesting concept, and well done for what it was, the original Marquis wasn’t exactly a hot seller, as only about 10,000 were produced for 1967 and ’68. Marquis got somewhat lost in Mercury’s lineup of full-size near-luxury cars, which then included the Park Lane and Brougham as well.
1969 brought about a new full-size Mercury, and this car adopted the Marquis name – not because of the previous Marquis’ sales strength, but because it fit into Mercury’s naming convention – a glitzy name beginning with M. This generation represented Peak Marquis. Marquis eventually spawned the more upscale Marquis Brougham and Grand Marquis, and over 1.1 million were sold over 10 model years. Despite (or perhaps because of) being corpulent and excessive, its strongest sales years came at the end of its long reign. While certainly not everyone’s idea of automotive nirvana, at least this car was clear about what it was trying to be, which is more than can be said about many subsequent Mercurys.
Downsizing occurred for 1979 with the Panther-body Marquis. But in 1980, Mercury was hit with a cataclysm. Divisionwide sales fell 48% as the energy crisis drove buyers away from the larger cars that many people associated with the brand.
Unfortunately, the Mercury division suffered a chronic identity crisis – and this was no more apparent than in the early 1980s. Mercury’s best-selling car of 1981 and ’82 was the subcompact Lynx, and then for the following three years, it was the resurgent full-size Panther (Marquis / Grand Marquis). In between these extremes lay the intermediate models that are often overlooked four decades later – largely because they were badge-engineered Fords with only the slightest trim variations, and none of them broke through with outstanding sales success.
Among those intermediate models was the Cougar… no not that Cougar, but rather the poster-child of name debasement shown above. Introduced for 1981 on the rear-drive Fox platform, and a virtual clone of Ford’s bland Granada, this Cougar represented the epitome of squarish, plain car design. Even a foxy model with a live predatory cat couldn’t make this car exciting. It lasted for two years, and was then replaced by our featured Marquis for 1983.
Both Ford and Mercury borrowed names from their respective full-size car lines for the Granada/Cougar replacements. Ford went with LTD; Mercury with Marquis. In Mercury’s case, the larger Panther-body car continued as the Grand Marquis (most ’79-’82 examples had been sold as “Grands” anyway), and the lesser Marquis nameplate instead went to this new mid-size car. Well, new might not be the right term to use here…
The LTD/Marquis was essentially a reskin of the Granada/Cougar, which itself was a restyled Fairmont/Zephyr, which debuted for 1978. Therefore, Ford entered the mid-’80s with a six-year old “new” car in the crucial mid-size market. That’s not quite a recipe for sales success.
Offered as sedans or wagons, Marquis carried a base price of $7,893 for 1983 – a scant 1.5% more than Ford’s equivalent LTD. For the extra $116 Mercury buyers received… well, Mercury badges, a different grille design, and somewhat awkward-looking tail lights with black panels, which eventually gave way to more conventional lights two years later.
Though certainly not a bold effort at a new car, there were some enhancements over its short-lived predecessor. Styling, for one, was much improved… now including actual style. Whereas the Granada/Cougar featured vertical front and rear panels, on the Marquis these sloped gently, providing a flowing design augmented by a rear window that sloped at a 60° angle. Somewhat contradictory to the ethos of a 1980s traditional sedan, Ford touted the aerodynamic efficiency of this design, which achieved a respectable drag coefficient of 0.38 (as perspective, Ford’s “wind-cheating” Tempo achieved a Cd of 0.37).
Ford embraced the aero-look during the 1980s, and the Marquis can be considered “Aero Lite.” It has a contemporary design, but without cutting-edge design features such as aircraft-style doors or concealed wipers as appeared on other Ford products of the mid-’80s, such as the 1983 Thunderbird.
Comparing this 35-year old Mercury to modern sedans with their portly rumps and chunky sides, one gains an appreciation for an overall design effort that produced a rather graceful profile.
The Marquis’ greenhouse was opened up with the addition of C-pillar windows, though the various windows created a bevy of vertical lines cluttering what was otherwise a cleanly-styled car. Yet overall, this was a good-looking design for its day – actually, it would have been a great-looking design in 1981, if Ford had just used this instead of the overwhelmingly dull Granada/Cougar.
Marquis also received a new interior. Sort of. Though different from its predecessor sedan, this new car used the dashboard and center console from the 1980-82 Thunderbird/Cougar XR-7. Such hand-me-down parts-bin picking came off as rather pitiful.
Despite this relatively austere-looking interior, our featured car is a Brougham, identifiable by – among other details – the door pull strap, which was unavailable on base models. And yes, this is the “luxury seat and door panel trim,” though it sure doesn’t look too opulent. In addition to these mighty Brougham luxuries, this particular car came equipped with air conditioning, AM/FM stereo, and power windows/locks. The “flight bench seat” had three seating positions, but any middle passenger would be squeezed in width and would need to straddle the bulky center console.
Marquis was billed as a “driver’s car” in some early ads, which wasn’t quite accurate. No one would mistake this for a sports sedan. For example, consider the instrument cluster. The above image of a similar car’s dashboard shows the typically domestic silver-backed gauges, and instrumentation wasn’t exactly plentiful. Although reasonably comfortable, the Marquis’ interior and driving environment wouldn’t receive any awards for ergonomics or innovation.
The front license plate here identifies this Marquis as a 1985 model, a fact I corroborated by checking the VIN, but at first I assumed it was a final-model-year ’86 instead. Why?
…Because the car sports a factory-looking center high-mounted stop lamp (CHMSL), mandatory for ’86+ US passenger vehicles. I wasn’t aware of these cars offering CHMSLs before the ’86 models, so either I’m mistaken, or someone took the effort to install a factory light on an older car. If anyone has insight to shed on this, I’d love to hear it.
Marquis spotters need to rely on specifics like brake lights because over its 3½-year lifespan, the Marquis received few changes. 1984 models saw detail changes like adding fuel injection to the available V-6. 1985 brought about a new grille (which Mercury claimed “helps reinforce its luxurious image”), body-color side rub strips, redesigned tail lights, some minor trim changes, and slightly wider tires. And for the short 1986 model year, the center brake light was the only change.
For our featured car’s year, Marquis sedan prices started at $8,996 for the base model, and for an extra $327 buyers could spring for the Brougham, which added upgraded interior trim (upholstery, door trim, carpet, etc.), additional lights and mirrors and a digital clock. Our featured car likely carried a sticker price of about $12,000 – or about the price of Honda Accord LX. Marquis Wagons, also available in base or Brougham trim, listed for about $500 more than sedans.
Engine choices for 1985 included a standard 88-hp 2.3-liter carbureted 4-cylinder (perfect only for patient drivers), or an optional 3.8-liter fuel injected V-6. The V-6, spritely in a malaise-y way with 120-hp and 205-lbs/ft of torque, carried a $418 premium for 1985 Marquis sedans (it was standard on the wagon), but for most drivers was well worth the cost.
In terms of driving, Marquis’ softly sprung suspension, tuned for traditional comfort, provided a floaty ride, typical of what one might expect from a Mercury sedan. A sport version of this car was offered, but was produced in shockingly low numbers: Just 134 V-8 Marquis LTS sedans were made – sold only in Canada and only for 1985. For those who think Ford’s LTD LX sport sedan was a rare sight, just try finding one of the equivalent Mercurys!
Consumer Guide summed up the Marquis by describing it as “a basic, mid-size sedan whose most exotic feature is gas-pressurized shock absorbers.” Certainly an apt portrayal – though while lacking in excitement, the Marquis accomplished its unexciting task very well. It was well-made, reliable, decent-looking, and had no irredeemable faults. But it wasn’t what most mid-1980s sedan buyers yearned for, either. Front-wheel drive, European driving characteristics, Japanese-like quality of materials… these traits were undeniably taking hold of North American buyers’ preferences at the time. A car with none of these characteristics was doomed to struggle against an irrepressible current.
Source of Production Figures: Standard Catalog of Ford, 1903-1998
Marquis did not sell badly, though not great, either. Over 300,000 examples were made over the model’s lifespan, and during 1984 and ’85, production topped the 100,000 mark. Sedans outnumbered wagons by about 5-to-1. This generation of Marquis sold about half the number of units than the largely similar Ford LTD – and interestingly, this was a virtually identical proportion that the 1981-82 Cougar sold compared to Ford’s Granada.
The Marquis’ tepid dynasty continued into 1986, but production was cut short as the Chicago Assembly Plant where these cars were produced was retooled for Taurus/Sable production. Ford’s thinking in terms of mid-size cars certainly shifted with the Sable, though annual sales of this generation of Sable weren’t much different from the peak two years (’84 & ’85) of Marquis sales. Still, not many folks wept as the Marquis slipped into history.
When we look back on the Marquis, we can see several things: A staunchly conventional sedan built in the waning years of traditionalism… A placeholder until Mercury could come up with a more definitive offering in this segment… An insipid sedan that fell through the cracks in our collective memory. But what I see more than anything else is a lost opportunity. The Marquis was a decent car, but Mercury needed a product that would distinguish itself in at least some aspect — the Marquis simply did not accomplish that goal. For a division struggling to clarify what its purpose really was, a directionless car in the mid-size segment was just about the least helpful product imaginable. Instead, the once noble Marquis slumped into obscurity…. with Mercury itself not far behind.
Photographed in Garnet Valley, Pennsylvania in April 2019.
Related Reading:
1985 Ford LTD: The Father of the Brougham Era Becomes the Surrogate Mother of the Aero Era Paul Niedermeyer
Vintage Reviews: 1983-86 Ford LTD, LTD/LX & LTD Brougham: Lethargic, Tuned or Dutiful? GN
Is it just me or is the design of the front end shockingly similar to the 2010-2012 Lincoln parked right next to it, despite being almost 30 years older?
An important reminder from user’s manual :
“Your Mercury Marquis exhaust system is incompatible with bananas”.
I became a fan of these cars belatedly. When they were new I considered them complete retrograde retreads. Even Chrysler was offering “modern” cars via the K platoform, while these things were relics from the days when they shared showrooms with Mavericks and Pintos. I wondered why anyone would buy one and was afraid that my Mom might be lured into one when she was looking for a car in 1985.
But about 1989 or 90 I got a ride in one that a friend had bought. His father saw it being traded in at a local L-M dealer and bought it before they even cleaned it. It was two things – a nicely done, comfortable sedan and a screaming deal. One was on my short list when my 83 Colt got totaled in 1991 and I found an 86 Marquis wagon that was loaded to the gills with options. The Sable had been out for a few years and NOBODY wanted these. I still remember the price: $2675. From an L-M dealer at a tent sale. For a car that had stickered at between 12 and 14K five years (and 106K miles) earlier.
The V6 was a great match for this car, but the choice of transmission was everything. For some reason my high-option car did not come with the four speed AOD but with a 3 speed C5. That C5 made for a fabulous powertrain. OK, the fuel mileage was not great, but it drove just like a car should with lots of torque and no stupid axle ratios.
I cannot help you on that high mount light, as mine was a wagon which attached it to the exterior top of the liftgate. These were popular options for a few years for people who were into safety and for those who wanted their cars to appear newer than they were. A great find – these have become quite rare.
I was fortunate enough to get “stuck” with a Cougar four door sedan when it was new and drove the heck out of it. Then I ended up getting a used ’85 LTD partly because I loved the Cougar.
These cars were everything you could want in a full size car, without the full size. The quiet ride, the corny luxury touches like the “floating” chrome rectangles in the speedometer, the faux wood trim, and the luxury velour interior was available in a car that handled like a small car. Living in the car as I did back then meant that I needed that comfort. Driving around the Rockies on back roads and highways meant that I appreciated the size.
I am a fan of these cars. Sure, they weren’t special when they were new, ignored as used cars as they aged, but they were damn fine rides.
My Cougar and LTD had the V8 with the three speed. Nothing exceptional, but it climbed the mountains better than the GM X and J cars I drove earlier, or the Escort wagon I had for one summer, when the X car, (Citation), was forever in the garage for repairs. Both the Cougar and the LTD were dependable and well made. They were not light cars. Gas mileage was definitely worse than what I now get in my 2003 Ford CV Sport, without the torque or power.
But back in the 1980’s, what I wanted was a dependable American car that could climb 11,000 foot mountain passes, not beat me up getting across the mountains, room enough for a week’ worth of dress clothes and not be an embarrassment for the company. So, these cars were great for me back then.
Sure – I’d love to have another.
You’re spot-on. Thes cars drove pretty quite nicely, and were good for long trips–pretty quiet, pretty brisk, not gas miser, but not gas hogs. My dad’s got 19-20 mpg, only about 23 on trips with the 3.8 and 3-speed.
Sold it in 1994 to a young kid in the Air Force. It was in excellent shape, only 70k miles, his mother took one look, didn’t even haggle, $2700. I think it stickered around $11,200 or $11,400
These were great used-car buys in the late ’80s and ’90s. I recall that as a senior in high school (1989-90), we were assigned a project where we set up a hypothetical budget for our future adult family. You had a certain income, two kids, and were required to find a house, car, food budget, insurance, savings, etc. for the project. For my project, I bought a used Ford LTD, and justified it because it was a well-built car available cheaply.
Ironically, my wife has told me that her high school assigned a similar project, and for hers, she remembers choosing a used Crown Victoria. I guess she’s a little bit classier than I am…
My Dad’s 79 Mercury Zephyr wagon which he bought used, had a CHMSL, I always wondered if it was an option from the factory. It looked stock.
A terrific find. In all my car hunting I’ve only found one comparable LTD so this Mercury is a real catch.
Agreed about how this should have come about in 1981. I think it would have kept momentum for the Fox bodied Fairmont/Zephyr going a bit stronger a bit longer. It would have still waned regardless, but Ford could have used that momentum in the early 1980s after some of their other duds at this time.
I think there is a parallel to be drawn here between Ford/Mercury and Plymouth/Dodge. It’s almost like Ford Motor Company and Chrysler/Daimler-Chrysler/Cerebrus were *actively trying* to kill a brand off by making Mercury and Plymouth so similar to their counterparts that there was no reason for them to exist anymore.
I believe it was C&D that had the running joke about the de Sade Edition
this edition was craptastic and 10 out of 9 people thought it was ridiculous
For those who think Ford’s LTD LX sport sedan was a rare sight, just try finding one of the equivalent Mercurys!
Something to be emulated decades later when there would be the Crown Victoria LX Sport and the Grand Marquis LSE (all the LX Sport additions but wearing the “M”). I’ve seen one LSE on AutoTrader and there was one that was owned by a former commenter over at TTAC.
What do you mean former?
I don’t think the guy comments anymore. Maybe he does.
Was it you, VanillaDude?
I always found something strangely alluring about a Grand Marquis with a floor shifter and some of the suspension/engine tricks from the Police Interceptors.
The Grand Marquis LSE was so rare that I’d never heard of it until recently… and I actually owned a Crown Victoria LX Sport (though by the time I bought my CV in 2007, I think the LSE was out of production).
Something about the LSE always seemed more “honest” than a Marauder but then I’ve always loved a “sleeper” over a car that’s more show than go.
That taillight panel and the LTD one will interchange with the Fairmont Futura coupe’s.
Grand Marquis’ got silver-backed gauges too, but the Ford Division equivalents had white-on-black ones.
There was a cab company around here (the now-defunct Benways Taxi in Burlington, VT) that used LTD and Marquis sedans and wagons up to the turn of the millennium. I think they must’ve had a contact in Florida who sourced one-elderly-owner ones for them. It must’ve burned their fleet manager that Fox bodies were made another seven years, but as short-wheelbase coupes only.
At least this car sat on the competent Fox platform, it may have been dull as dishwater but if I had to choose, this would be miles ahead of its pre-Fox/Panther predecessors.
As a lifelong Chevrolet fanatic, and well aware of how Chevy’s perception vs. Ford has suffered since at least the launch of Taurus/Sable…I’ve taken a greater interest in how the automakers have shepherded their medium-upper line brands vs. the Flagship.
IIRC, Plymouth was sold with Chrysler, and Dodge dealers were usually separate. My guess is that a scenario was set where each dealer wanted what the other had. Might ChryCo have become overly sensitive to dealers’ wishes after the 1962 downsize debacle, which Aaron Severson noted in Ate Up With Motor, where 80 MoPar dealers turned in their franchises on the spot after viewing the upcoming ’62s?
https://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/chrysler-downsizing-disaster-1962/
(Paul also wrote also a compelling study on the ’62s here at Curbside. If you’re gonna read one, read ’em both.)
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/automotive-design-history-1962-plymouth-dodge-brilliant-blunder-or-suddenly-its-1977/
However it happened, it’s easy to argue that by the time Omni/Horizon appeared, Plymouth was largely redundant.
Then again, were they ever that far apart after, say, 1948? (Except for 1962-64 when Dodge rushed out the 880 and left Plymouth in the mid-size-only lurch so to speak.)
And didn’t ChryCo go on a drive to make as many of their dealers as possible full-line back in the ’80s? I remember an uncle of mine, a lifelong Jeep mechanic from Willys to MoPar, ended up retired when the franchise was pulled and given to a full-line dealer.
Ford gave its bread-and-butter division the 1958 Thunderbird. If any car served as an announcement that they were going to build the Mothership even if it hurt Mercury, this was the one. Then again, what percentage of Ford dealers were actually full-line? Probably high enough that Mercury could be dropped without much pain.
Only in the past ten years, with Pontiac and Olds out of the way, has Chevrolet been allowed to offer more upscale vehicles, in many cases finally matching or even exceeding Ford – although the all-important truck battle remains divided between Chevy and GMC, vs Ford vs. Ram.
I personally don’t think GM can become JUST Chevy and Cadillac fast enough, but the dealer network will have to change to full-line first, which is probably fraught with great legal risks if I had to guess…but then again FoMoCo and especially ChryCo headed down that road…
I’ve said elsewhere that the dynamic for most of the postwar era was;
– Ford Division was the name on the door, it had free rein to invade Mercury’s turf.
– Chevrolet had to leave room for Buick-Olds-Pontiac in terms of new models but the #1 sales slot, while they had it, was important enough to the Fourteenth Floor that Chevy was given leave to match Ford model-for-model.
– Plymouth sharing a sales channel with Chrysler really limited their move upmarket, they had no way of getting salesmen not to upsell Fury VIP intenders to a Chrysler Newport, and when they got a breakout hit lower down Dodge’s dealer lobby at corporate was strong enough to wrest themselves a version within a year (see -1970 Duster, ’71 Demon).
Plymouth never had its own dealer network. At the dealer level, Plymouth had always been sold as a “kid brother” companion to the corporation’s other three divisions – Dodge, DeSoto and Chrysler.
In the depths of the Great Depression, this gave Plymouth instant market coverage, and helped the brand reach the number-three spot in sales. During the 1940 model year, Plymouth came very close to ousting Ford from the number-two slot.
In the more flush postwar era, it hindered the brand, as most dealers wanted to sell a customer one Plymouth, and then move them up to a more profitable Dodge, DeSoto or Chrysler. It also prevented Plymouth from moving upscale to match Ford and Chevrolet as they began invading the medium-price market in the late 1950s.
The real beginning of the end for Plymouth came in 1960, when the corporation took the Plymouth franchise away from Dodge dealers, and gave them the full-size Dart as compensation. This was a restyled Plymouth, and was a direct competitor to Plymouth. Dodge even advertised it as being competitive with “Car C,” “Car F” and “Car P!”
Lynn Townsend tried to restore some distance between Dodge and Plymouth, but the effort didn’t last very long. It’s telling that Plymouth’s biggest successes after the mid-1960s were in peddling the low-cost, no-frills offering in a particular segment – the Valiant, Road Runner and Duster. Plymouth’s attempts to move upmarket with the VIP and Satellite Sebring Plus never gained traction.
Ersatz luxury at finest!
This car was 10x better than Granada’s that preceded it (I was thinking of the 75-80 Granada, but also the forgettable Fox Granada…and Mercury variants). Pretty decent with the 3.8 V6
I thought the Ford LTD had a better tail lamp treatment…
But the best thing was, that my father was tired of the ‘tin can’ as he called our Fairmont. While he had been a GM person, he found himself giving rides to coworkers with GM cars in the shops. The tin can had been pretty reliable, my dad liked the dealer, so he got an 85 LTD, 3.8 V6, similar to the subject car. First car he ever had with AC. It was a good car. For me, it meant I inherited the Fairmont–with a 4-speed!
“The Marquis was a decent car, but Mercury needed a product that would distinguish itself in at least some aspect — the Marquis simply did not accomplish that goal”
I’m not sure that would make a difference. Like you said, the Sable didn’t sell any better than the Marquis. Nearly every time Ford tried to spend the extra money to distinguish Mercury, it fell flat. Witness the Contour-based Couger, the first-generation Tracer that replaced the Lynx, and the last Marauder.
Once Ford started moving upscale with the LTD, Mercury was redundant. It just took Ford way too long to put it out of its misery.
Lee Iacocca killed Mercury.
Nah, the Alfred Sloan model really only worked when each division only sold one car in several trims. Once each division started covering multiple segments, there was little need anything other than your mainstream and luxury divisions. It just took a long time to get there.
You have to think about the times when Ford developed the Fox LTD/Marquis. The early 80s were not “good times” financially for Ford, GM or Chrysler. Everyone thought gas prices would skyrocket. The Fox LTD/Marquis were developed on the cheap for Ford.
Using the existing Fairmont chassis, the back and basic body shell reminded me of a Ford Fairmont 4-Door sedan with the rear of the Ford Fairmont Futura grafted on. The back window, rear decklid, and tail lights look like they will interchange with the Ford Fairmont Futura. The Fairmont Futura had the baby 77 to 79 Thunderbird look.
These cars were simple, dependable, and had the bugs worked out of them by 1983. Ford’s only front wheel drive at the time was the Escort/Lynx twins. The Tempo/Topaz came out in 1984. GM was still selling its G-Body RWD cars and Chrysler kept the M-Bodies in production so the LTD wasn’t too much out of line. Many people at the time were still leery of front wheel drive cars.
Ford got three generations of compact/midsized cars out of the Fairmont chassis. Think of how long the Falcon chassis lasted. It was under the Falcon, Maverick, and the first generation Granada. I remember driving an 1984 LTD wagon and how low the seating position was. Not the best car but not the worst either.
Delaware plate. Nice.
Real nice writeup on a car that’s easy to forget existed. One thing snagged my eye, though:
Wait, what? Some of the flossier Chryslers of the ’80s had similar chrometone gauges, and probably some Buicks and Cadillacs, but most US-brand cars of that time had gauges with black field and white legend (maybe with some colour at [55] mph or near the ends of the engine temp gauge if there was one). Those brushed-chromelike gauges were one of the things that differentiated a Mercury from its nearly-identical Ford twin.
I probably should have written “stereotypically domestic.” I didn’t mean to imply that most US cars had those silver gauges, but rather than it was a feature seen only on domestic cars.
Ah! Yep, I agree; I can’t think of any non-US-brand cars with them, and their use on US-brand cars goes back a ways (’65 Dart, ’62 Valiant…)
I liked the gauges illegible.
They were just for decoration anyway.
If I wanted to know how fast I was going, I can always ask the nice cop that stopped me.
My family had one of these, back in the day, just as I was getting my license. What I found unusual was the big spread between the horsepower and torque numbers with the 3.8 V6. You don’t see that so much any more. I remember some of the ad material at the time compared that torque number with one of Ferrari’s contemporary offerings. For the era, it was fairly quick off the (straight) line…
I love cars like this. Not everybody – or every car – has to be a daring, stylish leader. Sometimes, simply doing your job competently and unassumingly is just as important. To me, this car is a Fairmont Deluxe. I don’t see “bland”, “name debasement”, “forgettable”… I see an honest sedan with just a few nice extras.
This is exactly the kind of used car I would have bought in the early 1990s. Chrysler did the same thing with the Plymouth Caravelle, which this car actually resembles. At the time I drove a Reliant (another basic “honest” sedan, if a bit smaller) and thought a Caravelle would have been a nice upgrade.
I am also a fan of these cars. My grandmother had one as a primary car (her second, then new, Grand Marquis was reserved for mostly longer trips). When she died, I got it — a two-year old ’86 with the V-6 in Spinnaker (think Wedgewood) Blue. It was nicely optioned, but not loaded. I really liked driving it — in fact, wore through the front tires in about a year and a half of “spirited” driving. It was quiet, well made, handled well for a wagon, and got decent highway mileage. And boy, could you pack some stuff in it! With the rear seat down, it would easily hold two wingback chairs.
My sister had an ’83 LTD sedan — also a nice car for what it was back then. It had fancy checked cloth seat inserts which I always thought a bit racy for a family sedan.
This car should have hit a great niche as a Mercury for the older lady who wanted something classy and comfortable and A Known Quantity but smaller and easier to manage with better economy than the enormous Grand Marquis. Mercury typically had a better dealer sales and service experience than a Ford dealer. These also had roll down rear windows unlike their GM G body equivalents.
BUT this ended up as a neither nor car. No V8 rendered it uncompetitive with the GM G bodies and Plymouth Gran Fury/Diplomats, plus the G bodies and Chrysler equivalents were a lot plusher. This was a much nicer Fairmont, and the Fairmont began life pretty starkly appointed. The Fairmont also suffered from slightly awkward styling with a lot of cheap looking creases. This had much better styling. There were better alternatives if someone wanted a nicer Fairmont in 1985. The K cars and Caravelles and FWD LeBarons were better at the Economical Family Car role and the A cars were nicer and much more modern. I don’t think people knew what it was either. This chassis had gone from Zephyr to Cougar to Marquis and no one who had a gunboat 1977 Marquis would recognise this thing.
@ Big Beat, these look exactly like the Caravelle.
Cars evolved and dated faster in the ’80’s than they do now. Is a CR-V radically different than what a 10, or even 15 year old CR-V is like? Some options have changed and there are more beepy “safety” features but the car isn’t fundamentally different. Compare this car with a 1977 equivalent and the differences are a huge gulf.
It’s a fine car, but there were better choices in 1985, and most people chose something else.
3rd brake lights came out in mid year of 85. There were two 85 Escorts. Early Escorts had sealed beam headlights and mid year models had flush mount headlights. A lot of cars changed mid year in 85. I had an Ltd like this and it had a 200 straight six with a c5 auto.
I can’t believe this 1985 car has quarter vents. Cornering the heavy smoker market?
I had a college instructor in the 90’s who drove one of these (probably LTD) and that’s exactly what she did. She’d crack that window open and smoke, tapping the ashes out the window while still able to use the AC. Maybe that’s even why she bought the car!
A friend in college drove an 83 Marquis, passed down from his parents. He drove that thing mercilessly. We gave him the nickname Psycho because of his driving habits. It’s a real testimony to the car that it lasted the couple years he drove it!
You had taken a picture of my 85 Mercury Marquis in the parking lot of the Farmers Market and had a big article on it I just spotted it and my wife’s aunt was the original owner of that 85 Mercury Marquis flagger11Clark@aol.com and that third brake light did come with a 85 Mercury Marquis if you would like any more information feel free to contact
An 86 Marquis “brougham “ was my first car. I got it in 1998 from my grandparents who bought it used They got it from one of the last doctors that made house calls. It was only 2 years old and had 70K miles on it when they got it. They gave it to me with just shy of 200k miles. I grew up with this car and loved it. It wasn’t perfect but it was special to me.
It was a rwd car that my grandparents preferred when everything was going to fwd.
they may have been a redesign of the fairmont… but it was a great car for my family and the first car I had when I got my drivers license. I would love to have another in the same dark blue now
I wanted to like our 85 Tan Marquis Brougham, especially since it was my wife’s grandfathers last car and it was handed to us. But oh my, what a pile. When he first bought the car, Mercury was running deep discounts on these, and most were loaded. He had pretty much everything except cornering lights and the wing windows.
At 9000 miles, which is when we got the car, then 4 years old, the AC was dead, headliner falling and a recall.
I told the dealer that it just didn’t drive well. When we picked it up, the service writer agreed that there was clearly something wrong and that a few mechanics had driven it. They all agreed that it had drivability issues but had no idea why.
We drove it about 8000 miles and took it to a mechanic who said the intake was bad and it had done other damage. So, an engine rebuild.
At 20,000 miles it started leaking oil so it needed an intake gasket. By 22,000 miles, I was done. The free car ended up costing us about $4200 in repairs in two years.
I sold it as is to a man who was thrilled with it!
That was until the engine threw a rod, at 24,589 miles!
It went to the junkyard.
That was all for us. We went over to Chevrolet.