Howdy, Stranger!

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





Where Is Ford taking the Lincoln Motor Company?

1126127129131132146

Comments

  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,879
    edited January 2013
    "The revival of the Lincoln brand takes a major step Monday with the unveiling of the MKC crossover, the smallest vehicle to ever carry the Lincoln name, but a large piece of Ford's strategy to return its remaining luxury brand to prominence.

    It's no accident that the first two products of what Lincoln says will be four all-new vehicles over the next four years are a midsize sedan -- the MKZ -- and the compact MKC. The growth in the luxury market is fueled by younger buyers looking for smaller, fuel-efficient and affordable status symbols.

    The MKC won't go on sale until 2014, but the concept that will be shown Monday at the 2013 North American International Auto Show will be very close to the production car."

    MKC crossover part of Ford's strategy to reinvigorate Lincoln (Detroit Free Press)

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,879
    edited January 2013

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Finally we get to see Max Wolff's future direction for Lincoln. I think this is a stunning vehicle that shares nothing with the Escape - even the wheelbase is different. Shorter front and rear overhangs really give it an aggressive look.

    Change the glass roof to a BAMR and replace the seats with the MKZ seats and I think you have the production version.

    The hood and front grille are especially striking.

    Drivetrains were not announced yet but I expect a 2.0L Hybrid for max fuel economy and a 2.7L EB putting out over 300 hp and torque as the top engine when it hits production.

    Adding that hood and grille to the MKZ would be a big boost IMO.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    I wouldn't call it stunning, but it is certainly well within the pack right now. I think it is sharp. I wonder though what the competition will be with 2015 models. (One of these articles says the MKC will not be released before 2016, which CANNOT be right, and the other says the 2014 calendar year, which implies 2015 model).

    I really like how they have integrated a new family look into a whole different vehicle type from the MKZ. It copies no one but Lincoln. Now, if they would only re-do the Nav in this style, with new engines, and soon.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,879
    The hood and front grille are especially striking.

    The grill has a winged victory look about it.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 905
    Looks really nice. I like it..
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Should be out no later than early spring next year. Just like the "spy" shots and articles showing a rebadged Escape - don't believe everything you read.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    Well, spring next year will make it a 2015 model.

    It has essentially the same grill as the MKZ, which is not a bad thing. That's obviously the new new new Lincoln grill.

    Wonder why they didn't just put the same horizontal bars on the 2013 MKS and MKT grill re-do's?
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    The grille is more upright on the MkC and the hood character lines extend into the grille and I think that's what makes it look so much better than the laid back flat hood and grille on the MKZ. Had Wolff had more time with the MKZ I bet that's what it would look like too.

    I don't think they wanted to debut the new grille on an existing vehicle.
  • berriberri Posts: 4,261
    So why in the hell is it taking Lincoln so long to launch this vehicle?
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Because they only started working on it 12-18 months ago.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    And why the hell is that??

    Seriously, I see the differences you point out, Allen, but I do not think they are significant enough to register with most people. The MKZ and MKC look like relatives in a way that the rest of the line does not.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Why did they just start working on it 18 months ago? Gee, I don't know - maybe because that's when they finally got Ford securely profitable and could afford to move forward with the Lincoln revamp?
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,204
    Bleagh! Another stupid SUV/crossover! That grille reminds me more of an Oldsmobile than a Lincoln.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,204
    Heck, I never associated the word reliability with European cars!
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 8,033
    Bleagh! Another stupid SUV/crossover!

    But that's what sells.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    Exactly. The SRX is easily Cadillac's biggest seller. Same for the Lexus RX. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean everybody else feels the same way.

    You gotta build what the customers want to buy or you'll be out of business.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    Agreed. Plus, the feedback on polls is showing that most people are pleasantly surprised and delighted by the design.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    I've been told it will launch 4Q2013, not 2014.

    Also - the designers are busy changing the MKZ to reflect this more aggressive design language which will distance it even more from the Fusion.

    All good news for Lincoln.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    As others have noted, that is what people are buying. Isn't the Cadillac SRX the best-selling Cadillac right now? It seems to be the most popular new Cadillac, based on what I see on the road.

    No luxury brand can afford to be without one of these in its line-up.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    lincoln already has the MKX, which is a direct competitor to the SRX. however, the MKX does not sell very well. The MKC will definitely draw the attention of more consumers.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    I thought that the MKC will be a size smaller than the MKX. Are these two going to overlap? Or is the MKC going to replace the MKX?
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 8,033
    I thought that the MKC will be a size smaller than the MKX. Are these two going to overlap? Or is the MKC going to replace the MKX?

    AFAIK, they will both be offered - compact vis a vis mid size 2 row CUV.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    The SRX is smaller than the MKX and larger than the MKC. Much like the CTS was an in between vehicle which is now being replaced by a smaller ATS and a larger CTS.

    Not sure if Caddy is planning to make any changes but if Lincoln makes the new MKX look like the MKC on a new platform with all the new Lincoln features I think it will be a great one two punch.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    You gotta build what the customers want to buy or you'll be out of business.

    Exactly right. The Japanese, (Toyota for example), tried for a decade or two to "tell the stupid, fat, lazy Americans" that they didn't NEED large Pickups, and spawned the T-100, which was an embarrasing try at breaking into the F-150 market. Other than extreme Toyotaphiles, it didn't work. So, the Tundra was born, which was in the cabin, a shameless copy of the F-150 interior and dash, but also very cramped inside, short legroom, headroom, poor load ratings, tow ratings, initially no V-8. I had one, so I know. They tried to blow that body out a bit in about 04 and called it a "real full sized truck now" - which it wasn't, although a V-8 was finally offered. Finally realizing that they couldn't convince us of what we needed, and were going to have to actually compete for the light truck market, the overly large "Bulldog Tundra" was introduced at EXACTLY the wrong time, as our domestic light trucks were downsizing a bit for economy. It was a very poor strategic move on Toyota's part, and has failed them miserably to date. Toyotaphiles buy them, but it attracts very few domestic truck buyers. And, they still have no heavy duty trucks to sell us.

    Nissan - different approach - they brought out the Titan(ic) big from the start with a large V-8, very thirsty large V-8, and were projected to KILL the dominance of the Ford the first year. It was a pretty good truck, but lacked options, and had some weaknesses, like poor brakes and weak suspension mounts, and had so many introductory defects that Nissan sent over a team of Japanese engineers to figure out what was wrong. So, it improved over the years, yet never even cracked the American market with sales. Personally, I liked it out of the gate, it fit the "fat lazy Americans" well, but sales are so miserable, it's not profitable. The Frontier, which is built on the Titan Platform, shortened up a smidge, is a great little truck, my personal favorite little truck, and sells well, so at least they got their engineering costs back on the platform through that.

    My point, of course is, you can't MAKE your customers like your product because it's what they really need - you give them what they want to buy, or they'll buy it somewhere else. Only Japanese arrogance would presume otherwise.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Blagh blagh. Appearance is eye candy and it works for short term, but you can only fool customers so long. I had 11 Lacrosse CXS, loaded, ruby red jewel tint, lots of metal flake. What a beautiful car according to all comments I got. But what a piece of junk. Worst vehicle I ever owned in my 56 years of driving. Lemoned it for a whole lotta reasons.
    Think of the old box looking Mercedes. They were nothing toward nice looking but they sold and sold well. Most buyers were likely returning customers.
    Bumped into an aquaintance last night, he admiring my MKS. Mentioned the lemon and he said a friend of his was having horrible experience with new Lucernne. Also said problems with American were why he stuck to foreign names these days. I could not argue against that because my wife has a KIA with 80,000 miles.
    I believe Ford/Lincoln needs to take a hard look at some basic concepts of building.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    My MKS is short of perfect. Quite a number of smaller items that bug me. Example being the sealing around openings and finish at those points. Others have complained about the poor sealing around the doors, allowing splash, dirt to get into that area and transfering to clothing. I can give the Lacrosse as an example of an excellent attempt at sealing the doors and other areas. They brag of their triple seal and it extends to the outer edges effectively. (I had issue in this area, one of the seals on all four doors separated at the factory splice) Also at the leading edge of the door, there was a seal to contact the fender when closed. On mine, they did not make contact, but I saw some that actually worked. That should be a hint.
    Last weekend I washed MKS and KIA Rondo. Again the poor design on the MKS showed to an extreme compared to the KIA. All of the extra places dirt was hiding made the wash an extreme chore. And in the washing I noticed things that are from years gone by with Ford. Wake up Ford. Many of those crannies don't have finish paint. It was like they got a primer/dusting of paint and without those extra high gloss coats the dirt adheres and with high humidity it appears that black mold grows into the paint. That just says cheap. Add to that the poor quality sealer that is used to fill voids which deteriorates and flakes the paint off. It sure does not say quality. And this situation extends to the trunk area where all kinds of road dirt/film accumulates and is hard to remove. Again it grows black crud. Ford/Lincoln definitely needs to revisit design to address such. Hood area as well.
    And you know those little stickers of information that are in many places. They darned sure should not be coming loose when washing. One that does not is that stupid one on inside glass, rear door, that brags about union built and quality. They can leave that one off.
    And what is it that seat belts get so stained turning dark and unable to clean? Also says cheap.
    And those little rubber bumpers that are at doors/hood/trunk, I had two of them pop off during the wash.
    And the center armrests, the dye on the leather has worn off, noticed at 18K miles.
    Lots of small things that scream cheap, enough to force thinking foreign on my next purchase.
    As to the clowns that are trying to reinvent the "Hot Rod Lincoln", go elsewhere and do it.
    Quality is the number one seller of vehicles.
  • edward53edward53 Posts: 111
    You complain about Lincoln's build quality. Have you compared the build quality of BMW, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, Mercedes, and Cadillac to Lincoln's?
    I bet you will find that the build quality of these vehicles is far above the quality of your MKS. You will also find that the platform engineering for these vehicles is far superior to any platform that underpins any Lincoln.
    I agree with you about not wanting a Hot Rod Lincoln . Lincoln doesn't need a Shelby Lincoln that uses a Mustang platform . That would really be vulgar.

    Lincoln needs something uniquely its own.

    By the way , I had a 1975 Mercedes450 SEL. The build quality and platform engineering on that car was far superior to my Father's Lincoln MK 5. The car would literally run rings around the MK5 on the skid pad. I also had a Jaguar XJ 12 coupe. Build quality was not as good as Mercedes but better than Lincoln's ;however, Lucas electronics and bearing seal problems were a nightmare . Yet it was more fun to drive than the Lincoln.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    I was in a friend's Lexus and it seemed nice. Also the saying about the Olds Aurora, "They ride like a Lexus." seemed true. But you know how that first impression, that short test drive is, it does not tell much. Ownership or having the vehicle for awhile reveals all.
    Don't be so quick to lump Cadillac in. I'd say many of the things about them are likely much like the Lacrosse. Many of the same components, such as three bad batteries in first year and a defective oil filter from the factory. I did give them a check after the Buick and found the same horrible hard seating where I could feel structure through the padding and likely the wires for seat heating. Got in and bounced hard on the seat several times to imitate settling in from a long ride. Of the GM's, Chrysler's, and MKS, MKS wins hands down when it comes to the seat. (Not including head rest)
    As to the others, I'd have to do some serious testing. Perhaps the biggest BMW might be different, but of the others I've heard they ride hard and are a chore to drive. One commented, "I prefer the Lincoln because I'm not tired after driving it.", compared to a BMW.
    MK5, not sure what year that would have been, but if on Taurus body, it would have been lacking a lot. Only the first version of Taurus/Sable seemed solid although somewhat under-powered with that version of 3.0L. After the first one, they lightened it a lot and a particularly weak spot was the window frame attaching to the door. It bent easily allowing poor sealing and they were noisy. And with that I'm reminded that I noticed a piece of that rubber window track popping from its place on my MKS. Ford is cheap on those window tracks it seems as well as low quality carpet.
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,423
    I think the MKS is a decent car and very well equipped. My problem with the MKS is that it always looks so clunky. Parked on the street next to other cars it often comes off as half-baked, with clumsy and unimaginative lines, and a bulky presence that still does not look like money. Lincoln was controlled by half-wits when this thing was drawn and approved. Thank goodness for new blood.
Sign In or Register to comment.