I found a site that lists 0-60 times for vehicles (that are factory stock)

http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60_Quarter_Mile_Times/C_0-60times.html

They say the 1993 Chevrolet Caprice Classic will run from zero to sixty in 8.5 seconds.
(I’m assuming that's without the LT1 since is was not available until the 1994 model year) Which is still not bad for a big heavy car.

My leviathan will hustle from 0-60 in 8 seconds flat ...

They also list the Impala SS 0-60 times as around 7.2 seconds *give or take a second, depending on the year model* (as Chevrolet would tinker with every model year)


Also the Crown Victoria’s Modular V8 is very much related to the Triton V8 in my Expedition (and the F-150 truck line) The Caprice would have had a hard time beating the Crown Vic had the Vic had the engine from the Expedition.

Well I have never driven a Grand Marquis, nor have I even ridden in one. But I can tell you from driving my grandmother's Crown Vic that it has an amazingly smooth ride. The good thing about it is that you don't even have to slow down for speed bumps Whenever you go over any bump in our Corolla you have to slow down to 10 mph and still need brace for impact





Well that's the number they came up with in their test. Also those models all have the same engines anyway, though some of them are tuned differently I guess. And you have to admit 330 lb-ft is a hell of a lot of torque, even for a car that weighs over 4,000 pounds. Plus maybe the car they got was just a paticularly well-built example


Anyway here is the rest of the brochure, it is not very big, only 4 pages including the front and back covers.


Pages 2 and 3




Page 4




I zoomed in and cropped parts of the brochure to make them easier to read, unfortuneately that means the quality is not too good, sorry. I hope they are still legible anyways.

If you think the Crown Vic is cushy, try the Mercury Grand Marquis(and I'm not just talking about the suspension here). Before and after I bought my 1994 Plymouth Voyager, I had opportunities to buy Mercury Grand Marquis that I had to pass up. The one before the Voyager was a 1990 and the one after the Voyager was a 1993. Both had full-size spare tires which I liked, but the '93 was so luxurious my parents wanted to sleep in the back seat. Unfortunatley, the '93 was too expensive.

that's sounds strange, especially for the non-SS non-police version

Yes, I will post pictures of each page soon. Hopefully they will not be so blurry so they are easier to read.

So, do you have the rest of the pamphlet?

And with that cushy suspension the driver wouldn't even feel it




Seeing as that we now know the mind-boggling 0-60 times for the regular Caprice, I wonder why they ever needed to create the hot-rod Impala in the first place? Though I suppose it was more about image than the actual performance...

Anyway, a little online searching for the 1995 Impala SS came up with... 7.0 seconds?? Hmmm... who would have thought?

I knew it! Damn automotive journalists! They wouldn’t know a good sedan if a Crown Victoria ran them over ...

(just kidding of course)

@ Zero-to-60 times ... wasn’t the Impala SS (of the same generation) faster than the Caprice? What were it's zero-to-60 times?

Ok well, as it seems no one else wants to comment, I will end this once and for all.

The winner is... Chevrolet Caprcie!
Do note that both the Ford and Chevy are very good cars though, as said in the brochure (and is also my personal opinion) The Caprice a just a lot more "sporty" with it's better handling, less body lean, and much, much faster engine than the Vic. 0-60 in 6.6 seconds That's faster than a lot of sports cars! The Crown Vic's time was only 8.5 seconds, which is not bad but certainly not astonishing either. The CV is more of a luxury "boat" while the Caprice is more like a sports car in a large shell. If you want a better ride, and a more relaxed luxury feel, get the Vic. If you want good handling and lightning fast acceleration, get the Caprice. And If you want both, get a BMW

Well, I think you may be over-anylizing it a bit there. The front page is just supposed to be an introduction, it isn't suppoesed to give away which one is better. I suppose I shouldn't have posted the picture, as it sort of creates a bias if you look at it a certain way...