Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Lincoln MKS

1878890929396

Comments

  • I currently have a Treo 680 (previous phone was a 650) in my last two vehicles (both Chryslers) my 650 synced up easily but my 680 had problems that were insurmountable. In the MKS the 680 works like a charm - couldn't try out the 650 because after giving it to my son it lasted less than 3 weeks before he lost it while snowboarding. Oh, well. Have you used your 650 in other vehicles?
  • No I have never paired it with Sync before. This is the first vehicle I've had that had this feature.
    It seems the phone will recognize sync, but the car after I have entered the pass code, and a few min. and it says pairing failed.

    The dealer's phone paired right off, he tried mine a couple of times, but no luck.
    I use the bluetooth with a ear bluetooth device with no problem.

    Sure hate to get rid of my 650.

    Thanks for your reply.
  • It's possible that the 650, being an older model (3+ years old), is not supported by Sync. I'd check their website for confirmation one way or the other.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,702
    There are problems with that model. Check www.syncmyride.com for more details.
  • Yeah, I'm finding that out. I've read nearly everthing on Palm and syncmyride, trying to find out which phones will work, before buying a new one.

    Thanks.
  • greggm2greggm2 Posts: 1
    edited March 2010
    I just ordered a new MKS and surprised to hear there is no under the hood light on a vehicle with this price tag. What other interior lights are missing that you would expect to be there? Is there a glovebox and center console light? Also, are there courtesy lights in the front floormat area?
  • tlmacsontlmacson Posts: 11
    Yes to all. I guess LM figured they could skip the underhood light because they put 2 lights in the trunk. Seems petty to me.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,702
    The map lights illuminate the glovebox just fine, and I can't remember the last time I needed to look under the hood after dark.

    You probably didn't realize that passenger doors no longer have locks either.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    Yep, I was shocked when I realized that I couldn't change the spark plugs in my MKS after dark without a flashlight. ;)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    When is the last time you used your brake assist? Probably never, unless you have been in a severe panic stop. The point is a car of MKS caliber should have an underhood light, whether or not you ever use it. After all, so many non-luxury rides (even many econoboxes) have had one as standard equipment for decades. Ford has made great strides cleaning up their intentional cheapness, but there are a few spots yet to polish on the MKS. In time.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,702
    I'm more in the camp of "why does any car need one"? There's nothing you can do without tools and if you carry tools you can carry a flashlight, because even with a dinky light you can't see well enough to do any type of meaningful repairs. And most people never open their hoods in the first place. Trunk light makes sense because of the spare tire or needing to get something out of the trunk at night.

    Maybe it gives the perception of non-cheapness but I doubt it's ever affected a sale.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    Gregg, you are preaching to the choir. No one is more fussy about the little things than I am. Prop-rod hood = no sale to me, for example.

    As for the underhood light, I was of course kidding. The fact is that I have never found an underhood light to be bright enough or positioned well enough to be of value. I probably had the hood open a thousand times on my LS and I honestly can't recall if it had a light under there or not.

    If an under hood light would have cost them a dollar to include, and they chose to spend that dollar to make the adaptive headlights work as flawlessly as they do, I would say they made the right decision. Short of really high-end vehicles, I haven't found any that include every possible doo-dad that technology can provide and that some buyers would find valuable or entertaining.
  • tlmacsontlmacson Posts: 11
    You folks are right - an underhood lite is seldom used but the MKS's competition (the CTS) has one. If you've ever refilled your washer fluid reservoir at nite (the jug was easy to find thanks to the trunk lite) like I have you'd appreciate having one. Holding the jug and a flashlite at the same time can be a challenge when you're trying to get as much washer fluid as possible into that narrow reservoir opening; believe me two hands on the jug works better than one.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    Allen, your defense of every little bonehead cost-savings decision notwithstanding, I want a hood light in my cars, and there is one on all three of my vehicles. I don't need it or want it for repairs. It is bright enough to pour windshield washer fluid in with, and it is bright enough that I can find the oil (or transmission) dipstick, as well as hold the dipstick up to the light and tell if the level is normal or not. It helps me connect the battery when I use jumper cables. It tells me if a plastic cover or shield is loose or missing. As for the dollar savings going to better headlight operation, don't kid yourself. Those headlights will operate flawlessly whether or not a hood light is included, or the reliability Ford has worked so hard to achieve takes a tumble.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    I get it that the addition of little things can often provide value beyond their cost. Given the choice, I would rather have an underhood light than NOT have it - even though I never add fluids or check under the hood at night unless I am in my well-lit garage or maybe at a gas station which has a nice bright parking area.

    OK, the CTS has an underhood light and the MKS doesn't. You also know that the MKS offers things that the CTS, STS, or DTS do not. Living in deer country on a twisty county blacktop road, I have come to appreciate headlights that swivel in the direction I turn the steering wheel. Somehow, many cars costing more than mine lack that feature and apparently the owners get along fine. My dual panel moonroof is much appreciated by me but my neighbor with his Acura RL seems satisfied with his little single panel one.

    I have yet to find an automobile that is completely perfect - or that I wouldn't change or add something if I could. In the price range that I can afford, they all have compromises. The question is when does the compromise become a deal-breaker.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    Oh, come on. A hood light that has been standard equipment on most vehicles for years is not the same thing as including or leaving out options like swiveling headlights or a dual panel moonroof. Like a glovebox light, coat hooks, and a remote trunk release, it is an inexpensive, ubiquitous item; it just should be there.
  • xando05xando05 Posts: 36
    Funny you should mention the Healy USA Today review. Turning every negative into a positive:
    After reading that goofy review back in 2008, I went out and leased a brand new 2009 MKS. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    edited March 2010
    This lack of an underhood light was really starting to bother me. I decided to look over my MKS a bit closer. Those dirty cost-cutting cheapskates left out the lighted ashtray, the vent windows in the front door glass, the full-sized spare tire and the gas cap!! :D
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    Funny. So go ahead. Ignore my point. I am not saying the car isn't wonderful or that you made a poor choice, or that it isn't very well-equipped, or that this is even an important issue. It certainly does not rise to the level of for example using a prop rod v. struts. I say once again (and no more) that given the tiny cost of an underhood light, and the fact that every other luxury car (and most non-luxury cars) in the world has one, it should be there. Period. Regardless if YOU ever use it.
  • laxmanlaxman Posts: 30
    I agree that there should be light under the hood. All cars should have a full size spare and not the "donut". However, these things are not deal breakers. If you enjoy the car overall and feel that you have to have these "little things" you can go out and drop a few hundred dollars and have them installed or added.

    Yes, you would think that a $40K+ car would have most things...well it does. It just doesn't have everything. If you want everything then drop an additional $20K to $40K more on a vehicle that has everything supposedly. But I suspect even then there will be something to complain about. Something that is missing. Of all the car "rags" I have read, critic reviews and personnel experience, to my knowledge, there has yet to be a vehicle labeled as perfect. There are the "ultimate" cars but they are not perfect. Just some of the best of what is available...not "all inclusive".

    So yes it is a forum and we can state the pro's and con's or our "wishlist". Just remember...life is short. If what you have or the life you live is not what you want...then do something about it. Everyone have a blessed day :-)
  • rsblaskirsblaski Posts: 68
    What I find more perplexing is that my '09 MKS does not have turn indicators in the side view mirrors. These have become almost universal on better quality cars. My last two cars had them and I was really surprised when I finally noticed the MKS didn't.
    Did the '10 model add these?
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,702
    And really expensive cars like MBs and BMWs don't have a keyless entry keypad, either, which is a million times more useful than an underhood light IMO. You can nitpick all you want but for every feature you want that's missing I can find one that the competition doesn't have.

    I can't believe that something you can add yourself for $10 in 10 minutes would be a deal breaker.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    My Lexus LS460 doesn't have one either, so I think it's pretty irrelevant at the price point of a Lincoln.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    Excuse me, but no one, and certainly not me, said anything was a dealbreaker here. It is just nuts sometimes how a comment or feedback gets enhanced or misinterpreted. One apparently can't say anything that might be construed as constructive feedback without somebody getting all defensive about it. No car is perfect, and it is ok to truly love a car that is not absolutely perfect. Why anyone would even need to be reminded of that is beyond me.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,702
    Sorry - I was responding to Bruce's no-sale statement about prop-rods. You never said it was a deal-breaker.

    The point is a car of MKS caliber should have an underhood light, whether or not you ever use it. After all, so many non-luxury rides (even many econoboxes) have had one as standard equipment for decades. Ford has made great strides cleaning up their intentional cheapness, but there are a few spots yet to polish on the MKS.

    If you had just said "I want an underhood light" then I would say fine. But you were implying that it was somehow required for the MKS to be competitive or that it was a huge mistake for Ford not to provide it - neither of which I agree with.

    every other luxury car (and most non-luxury cars) in the world has one, it should be there. Period.

    Apparently the WAY more expensive LS460 doesn't have one either. And I thought Lexus could do no wrong.......
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,415
    Allen said:
    But you were implying that it was somehow required for the MKS to be competitive or that it was a huge mistake for Ford not to provide it - neither of which I agree with. And neither of which I said nor meant to imply. If that is how you choose to interpret it, then no wonder you get into so many pissing matches. For the record, a hood light is NOT required for competitiveness and leaving it out was NOT a huge mistake.

    I prefer one for the reasons I have already clearly stated. But apparently I cannot say what small things I think should be included as a matter of course (like I think coat hooks should be included) without someone's hackles going up. I would never not buy a car that did not come standard with a hood light if I really liked the car. They are cheap to install (but of course that is why I think they should just be there...Ford saves almost zip by this move).

    You thought Lexus could do no wrong? Where do you get that from? Did I somehow imply that too? I merely think that both these cars should have a hood light. That is my preference and does not imply anything else.

    BTW, I just used the hood light on my F150 (standard equipment) when I needed to use jumper cables yesterday. Of course I could have just called my motor club and not opened the hood at all on either vehicle. Didn't care to wait, To each his own.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    At the risk of further inflaming this discussion, my observation on some high end cars is they may not put a light in there because they don't WANT you to lift the hood. Why I say that is my LS460 has the battery nearly under the cowl, and it is mighty hard to attach jumper cables to it. You really have to work at it, and put them under this cowl piece, or somehow take it out. Not sure how you jump this car, but clearly, Lexus doesn't want you to, so why put in the hood light? Practically no user serviceable points under there besides the oil. Now, Mercedes S Class doesn't use an oil dip stick, you get the oil level inside on the dash in a readout, so there is truly no reason to open your hood, particularly at night, right? ;)
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,088
    edited March 2010
    My wife and I have had 29 Audis, 3 BMW's, 3 VW's and, as I recall, a Chrysler Cordoba with fine Corinthian leather (all since 1975) -- yep, I am an old fart at 58.

    I started down a path over the past 10 years of thinking it would be a good thing to have an American car. But I believe in voting with your dollars (in other words, if you buy a car you think is inferior but you buy it "just because" it was built in the US, well, you actually are contributing to the demise of the US car company who made your "inferior" ride; competition breeds better cars, i.e.) -- and there haven't been any American cars that even came close to the Germans, until the CTS came along.

    Lincoln? Never even on the LONG list until about 6-7 months ago when I saw an MKS sitting in the space next to my 2009 Audi in a parking lot. I made a mental note to put in on the list (but I am 13-15 months out from ordering a new car and 17-18 months out from taking delivery.)

    Ford? Below Lincoln, until I saw a couple of TV shows (no pun intended) featuring the SHO -- but even tho, it was powerful and glitzy, well, it was NOT a member of the LPS crowd (which I believe the MKS should be).

    So, I am now looking at the long list (which, for the time being at least, includes two Americans: Lincoln [and Cadillac]) and starting here, as usual, with Edmunds.

    Yet, I find out that pages and pages are devoted to an underhood light and that an MSRP $55,000+ MKS won't have one.

    My nearly $80,000 Audi A8 didn't have one, my $53,000 A6 didn't and my $49,000+ A4 doesn't have one. But, then again, there is no dip stick (on new Audis) and, other than windshield washer fluid refills, no reason I can think of, ever, to open the hood -- but it doesn't have a prop stick, for what that is worth.

    I am keen to learn how they drive (and not the kind of learning even an hour long test drive would likely reveal.) I gather they are quick and fast. I have downloaded the on-line brochure and they certainly seem to be a lot of car for the money.

    But, other than the glaring underhood light omission, how does it drive on a curvy stretch of road. How are the brakes, the sound system the seats (supportive or Barco Lounger?) etc?

    Assuming they go ahead and add the underhood light, well, this Lincoln "could be a contender!"

    I am all ears, regale me with your driving enthusiast's impressions, opinions and facts.

    And, BTW, it seems to me the hood should be only able to be opened by the service department with their special key. I mean after all, there probably aren't even "any user serviceable parts" under there anyway, are there?

    Even the battery in my German cars is either under the back seat or in the spare tire wheel well. And, at least with the cars I am familiar with you can "never a jump-er or jump-ee be," the electronics won't tolerate that crap. Skull and Crossbones, Jumping is "verboten!"

    Seriously, give up your best Car and Driver, Motor Trend or Road and Track review for someone looking (better said, hoping) to vote 'merican with his dollars about a year or so from now.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Posts: 814
    Mark, I have had an MKS ecoboost since late September so I will share a few thoughts. Keep in mind that I am a Ford guy but I am not afraid to criticize them when I think they deserve it. I drove a Lincoln LS for 10 years because from the time that model was discontinued until the MKS ecoboost arrived, they didn't have anything that I would even consider and I was about ready to jump ship.

    The MKS is softer and more of traditional American ride than a CTS. The CTS is smaller and more nimble - more like my LS. The MKS is certainly firmer and more handling responsive than a Cadillac DTS or Buick Lucerne but would not be the handler that the CTS is. The MKS seats are nicely bolstered and very supportive - again, not the lounges that you would find in a Cadillac DTS or Lincoln Town Car. In terms of quietness, the 2010 MKS is among the best.

    The brakes have been criticized by the enthusiast press. If you did several 0 - 100 MPH and back to 0 stops in a row, no doubt they would pale in comparison to a more sporting machine. I have absolutely no complaints about the brakes but I really haven't put them to a harsh test, either. The pedal feel is like every other Ford I have ever driven - some would say soft - but I would say progressive in feel.

    I think you will find the Sync and Nav systems to have the best voice recognition and most friendly capabilities in the industry. The adaptive headlights and rain-sensing wipers are superb.

    The Ecoboost engine is fantastic, IMO. It is every bit as smooth as my LS V8, would eat it alive in acceleration, and gets better mileage. The car is geared very high - 60 MPH is around 1500 RPM. Since the torque peak is 1500 rpm, you have lots of power without downshifts and no engine noise until you put you foot in it. The AWD system is very confidence inspiring on wet or slippery roads.

    The MKS is not perfect by any means. It is heavy, its weight distribution is not optimal and it is built on the same platform as a $25,000 Taurus. Ford basically did about all they could do with the platform and the available technology to build a competitive entry. They did a pretty good job of hiding the inherent shortcomings.

    Much depends on the driving dynamics you like and what is important to you. Would I put the MKS up against an Audi A8, Lexus LS series or BMW 7 series? No way - not in the same league. An A6, Acura RL or Cadillac STS? Absolutely. CTS? Not in the same size class or aiming for the same market but I prefer the MKS hands down.

    I hope you give the MKS ecoboost a good once over and let us know your thoughts.
Sign In or Register to comment.