Hey Sandman,
UNfortunately, I'm not on the panther program (panther is the nickname for the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis programs) but I have always toyed around w/ thoughts on how to design a more desirable/useful police vehicle. Anyway, here are a few of my thoughts on the things you bring up, and perhaps I will throw a few items of my own in there
Listen up, Ford. You currently have the corner on the police cruiser market, but only because Chevy for some reason or other decided it was time to get out of the game (killed the Caprice). Before that, you held a mere fraction of total sales. The competition's latest offerings are somewhat uninspiring when comparing performance stats to the Crown Vic (acceleration, handling, braking), but they are catching up. Here are some suggestions to improve your product:
the CV is currently THE choice among police cruisers, but your right, it really is because there is not much suitable from the "other" side of Detroit. The Impala, while a decent car, just doesn't seem to be suitable for Police use. One thing I have noticed, is the dramatic increase in use of SUVs among police departments, and not just for special units (like the K9s and SWAT or whatever) but as regular cruisers; I dunno, that does kinda make sense to me, at least to a point anyway.
1. Make the damn windows go up and down faster. Officers, especially in urban areas, are rolling through town more and more often with the windows down, in order to listen to what is going on around them. This is part of the Community Policing initiative. If we have to jump out to chase the bad guys on foot, we want to hit our Stay Run and be off. We don't want to have to wait until the window rolls up all the way some time tomorrow, or leave it down and wonder about the security of the car and the weapons inside it (shotgun, AR-15). Hell, the windows on my Windstar go up faster!
Good point, not many folks think about the window speed thing. Another side thought to this, is what about a remote control of some kind, like many of the aftermarket alarm systems offer (I know a lot of K9 units have remote rear door openers) for window control, etc.? Though this does bring up the point, of how much more are Police depts willing to pay for vehicles? It can cost a lot of money to put together parts specifically for low production vehicles (which is why things like that only happen when there is high demand, and marketing is POSITIVE everyhting will sell well. Good examples - Bullitt, Cobra; Bad Example - Blackwood) Either way you do it (hi-speed smart window motors or remote control setup) its gonna cost more, such is life.
2. Give us independant rear suspension. If you can make it work for the heavy Explorer, and survive 400 hp/400 ft-lbs in the Mustang, you can make it work for the Police Interceptor. This will further refine the ride and increase the handling advantage enjoyed by the PI over its competition. It will also likely cure the harmonics problems you have with the current PI/CV in that they have to be speed limited or the driveshaft harmonics will quickly destroy the tranny.
A compromised IRS design (designed to fit into a platform originally designed for a solid axle) is not the panacea many people believe it to be. Likely ride will improve, but ultimate handling ability likely will not improve appreciably (despite dramatic cost increases) The Mustang solid axle suffers from a heavily compromised suspension geometry due to many factors beyond the control of the guys designing the suspension (and the Cobra IRS suffers because of the same factors, plus a few more). Fortunately, the CV does not suffer from as many of the geometry limiting factors, and actually gets a parallel 4-link design w/ a watts link (this is good for a solid axle setup) The handling limitations of the CV/PI stem not necessarily from the suspension design, but from the massive heft of the vehicle, and the somewhat soft suspension tuning (some decent seats for you guys would help too). As to the driveshaft harmonics issue, this is the first I've heard of anything like that, but even if it is true, there are other, far better ways to fix somehting like that, than going to an IRS rear (the IRS in the Mustang is actually worse for transmitted harmonics than the solid axle) Bottom line here, I wouldn't want an IRS in the car, for many reasons, not the least of which is that it really won't help, despite a hefty cost hit for it.
3. Learn how to make an auto tranny that lasts. PLEASE! the current crop is junk! Send out some techs to Level 10 Performance if you have to, and learn what works and what doesn't. It's got to be cheaper to engineer a tranny that will hold up vs. replacing or reparing every other one under warranty. Ford is seriously behind the power curve compared to the rest of the industry when it comes to auto trannies. Make it a 5 speed auto overdrive, and give us some steep gears for the rear so we have some grunt off the line. 0 - 60 in 8 seconds is great to shoot for, but you keep missing the target. Also, the PI as equipped for street duty typically has so much extra weight in radios and equipment that you might as well add 1 - 2 seconds onto whatever time you get empty. Shoot for a 0 - 60 of 6.5 seconds, Ford.
You'll get no argument from me that Ford needs to improve its auto transmissions. And I have always thought cruisers need to be quicker off the line.
4. Give us rack and pinion steering so our alignment will last for more than one shift. 'Nuff said on that topic.
Ooooohhhh, rack and
pinion I thought you said "Rack and
Peanut" steering (I guess you had to see that Simpson's episode)
Honestly, that's likely another issue where there is no r&p setup designed for the car (a lot of the blue-hairs like the recirc. ball steering, go figure . . .)
I don't disagree at all, but can kinda understand why it isn't there.
5. Do whatever you have to in order to get us to 300/300 on the engine. Drop the 5.4L in there if you need to. And don't tell me about some BS concerning how it won't clear the wiper linkage assembly. REDESIGN the wipers then!
I dunno who told you the wiper linkage design was the only thing keeping the 5.4 out of the car, but that is utter BS. Heck, we know the motor will fit in the Mustang (and have done it) but it still doesn't go in the car on a regular basis, for many many reasons.
That said, I agree wholeheartedly that the car needs more grunt, at least the new Marauder motor would be a good step in the right direction.
6. Bring back the sloped rear windshield. Fuel economy has gone down the toilet with the new body style.
Can't say that I'm convinced that a drop-off rear windshield will hurt fuel mileage much at all. I've seen aerodynamic studies of airfoil shapes w/ a drop-off shape like that where form drag was dramatically reduced. I'm guessing your fuel economy issues come from someplace else, but who knows.
7. Bring back a 4 headlight system. Wig wags work much better (better visibility to those in front of you) with a 4 headlight vs two headlight system.
I'm doubting this will happen. What about putting some driving lights in the push bar assembly (I've seen some depts have this) and wire them in as wig-wags w/ the regular lights?
8. Heated mirrors, backlight, and a connection for a heated lightbar should be standard with the PI.
I can't recall if the heated mirrors and backlight are available on the regualr CV or not (I assume they are) but I don't see why Ford wouldn't add them to the PI package if enough departments were asking for them. As for the heated lightbar, IIRC the lightbar conversion work is done by outside conversion companies, and they would be the ones responsible for doing somehting like that.
9. Up the alternator output so that at idle, my battery doesn't slowly die when running the lightshow. Alternatively, take a hint from Chrysler; their Jeep patrol cars have a switch which bumps the idle about 250 rpms. This keeps the alternator in an rpm range that will output max amps.
I agree, somehting should be done here, and there are plenty of possible solutions. Ask your dept. procurement guys to start asking for stuff like this.
10. Fix the damn engine so that it doesn't start knocking on full throttle after 30,000 miles. You have had a problem with this since the 4.6L was dropped into the PI. It's about time you fix it.
Dunno what to say here, only that Ford's powertrain guys are constantly working to improve the durability of the engines. There are several issues related to this that I know have already been resolved. Hopefully any new CV/PIs you guys get won't be doing anyhitng like this.
11. The stock brakes are great, but all too often departments are replacing the pads with generic parts when the time comes to change them. This kills their performance. My car is currently running on burned rotors because of this. Change the pad configuration between the normal sport package and PI vs. the standard CV so that only high perf. pads are available. Larger rotors would also help. My car sits at 4600+ lbs with me and all my gear in it. That is a lot of weight to try to stop from 100+ mph!
I'll be honest here, no way in he11 would I redesign a good brake system because the police dept. decides to cheap out on pads at replacement time. Would you ask me to redesign a gas tank if they kept giving you crappy gas?
12. Give us a bigger fuel tank, and relocate it under the passenger rear seat. 19 gallons? I go through 1/2 to 3/4 tank on every shift. Range for pursuit driving is severly limited. I would rather give up some trunk space for added range (larger fuel tank). I'm thinking at least 26 gallons.
Federal, and Ford internal design requirements only allow the fuel tank to extend into certain areas, and anywhere near the passenger compartment is not one of them (because of a few notable issues years ago) There is more to this one, but I can't really talk about it.
