Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Where'd you hear that?
I'm beginning to think they just might dump Mercury. My first 2 cars were Mercs - a '64 Monterey convertible and a '67 Cyclone GT convertible 390/4barrel/4-on-the-floor as we used to call it.
I would miss Mercury, but in a way, they're already gone. The Marauder could have helped bring em back, but they screwed it up. Now they think they should market Mercurys to women. I guess there aren't enough women in the world who know Mercury is a car as well as stuff you don't want in your swordfish.
Theres no way the ES350 is going to need 6.8 seconds to hit 60; the Avalon weighs about the same, but uses, for lack of a better term- the "stupid" 5A, while the Lexus will use the much improved 6A (Toyota literature states that shifts occur up to 50% faster than the 5A). The Avalon has repeatedly posted between 6 and 6.2 when tested by C/D and MT, and even Consumer Reports (which does more of something like C/D's 'Street Start') got 6.6 seconds...
~alpha
If you've got something to say, say it.
With that ridiculous "D-L" gear shift, no one but Grandma and Grandpa are going to want this car over the others in it's segment. The Z *might* bring younger buyers into the showroom, but I doubt they'll be leaving in a new car. Another IDIOTIC decision.
Where'd you hear that?
Here:
link title
I don't think Mercury is dead but I do think they're (once again) changing some of the products that were previously planned. Chicago is typically where the Mercury products are introduced so the absence of any products there this week is a little scary.
Mercury is more important to the Lincoln dealers than to Ford's bottom line.
I am probably just as frustrated as you are. Maybe more so because I will be in the market soon and I have a long history with Ford/Lincoln products. I don't post all of my frustrations because you and others do a nice job of articulating many of problems.
I will say that the addition of the 3.5 is a step in the right direction. Will it be as quick as an Avalon or ES350? Probably not, but in this segment, the difference in 0-60 between 6.5 and 6 seconds flat probably won't make much difference in sales numbers. The serious performance buff has other options.
I like the feature and given a choice I'd get it but I agree that Lincoln won't lose many potential buyers by not having it for 07.
Remember - 800,000 people buy Accords and Camrys every year. Enthusiasts are a very small market segment by comparison.
Well, there ya go. Who needs SST in the Zephyr when you can buy a Cadillac as a second car and have the SST in there. Problem Solved! :>)
Seriously hondadude, enjoy your Z. I have the same engine in my LS and at 70K it runs like new. Since the Z is lighter than the LS (at least I assume it is, haven't checked) you'll likely get better performance than I do. But I don't need a Caddy to control the shifts: my LS has a Getrag 5 speed manual in it!
Noisy and growly? Maybe a wee bit, but with my Magnaflo cat-backs, I hardly notice :>)
BMW 3 series xi's seem a dime a dozen, and I like that the Lincoln isn't a me-too design (at least not on the inside.) The IS was nice, but a bit sterile. Of course, I've only sat in these at a car show, I ahven't driven them. Oddly, I've not seen any direct comparisons with the MKZ/Zephyr & the IS, which seems to match it better for price.
My point from earlier was that Ford's new engine is no technical marvel. There is no new technology here, they are just trying to catch up with Honda/Toyota but still cannot pass them up. Not only do Honda and Toyota get more power out of the same displacement they also get better fuel economy. 250 horsepower out of a v6 is nothing new and someone out there thinks by adding premium fuel you get more horsepower. The gas stations would love it if this were true, they could get $.25 more per gallon for nothing.
F.Y.I the Fusion/Millan/Zephyr are the only Ford vehicles getting the D-L shifters. The Edge and other new vehicles have D-3-2-1 or D-4-3-2-1 with OD lockout buttons. The reason for the D-L was cost savings.
b) The 250+ is on 87 octane. You don't get the extra hp by using premium fuel. You get the extra hp by advancing the timing and when you do that you need to use premium fuel to avoid knocking. So an engine tuned to use premium will generally have more power than the same engine tuned to use regular.
c) the reason for the D-L shifter was indirectly cost savings in that they chose not to make a midstream change, but it was originally designed to work with the CVT transmission both in the Fusion and the 500. When the CVT was ditched for the Fusion they chose not to change the shifter.
Is the engine power of the 3.0 Duratec adequate in most situations in the real world? How is highway passing power at 70-80 mph?
Thanks.
As for Ford, the four speed automatic in our 1994 Thunderbird V8 needed two separate repairs totaling $700 or more.
How about the passing power of the car on the highway? Is it commendable?
Thanks.
The new 3.8-liter V6 also has the best power stats in the minivan segment. Gas up with premium and it delivers 244 horsepower and 253 pound-feet of torque. That's exactly as much horsepower as the Odyssey's V6 along with 13 more lb-ft of torque. Fill the tank with regular and Kia says you'll still get 242 hp and 251 lb-ft.
i dont understand the issue with the 250 hp..the 221 is fine and passing at highway speeds is no problem...will 29 hp really matter that much?? the only issue is that the engine noise is a bit loud when you punch the pedal for acceleration..though with the radio on you really dont hear it that much
the ride comfort is wonderful and outside noise is really at a minimum
with the new "zephyr" of next year im sure there will be a nice discount towards the end of this year if you can wait
The transmission God has been on the TC forum recently, though.
MKS production date has yet to be finalized, mainly because the "Way Ford-Ward" plan re-routed it elsewhere. Your looking at 2007.
I understand it hasn't been finalized and I am not trying to hold you to a hard date. But....are you pretty comfortable saying the report in Automotive News indicating a 2/2008 date may be overly pessimistic?
Sorry, guys, I know this is not the MKS forum but there have been some undies in a wad over the seemingly long delay in getting the MKS in production.
Wngine production, (and the number needed for that vehicle, the "Fairlane" concept, and 3 other vehicles is really the hurdle which needs to be solved soon.
Updating the Zephyr to the MKZ seems to be strong evidence that Ford has decided to to move much faster and much more aggressively than in the past.
If they really do this, and use the internet/customer relationship to their advantage, then they have a chance. I can't begin to tell you how much difference it made to have an advocate (J. Rogers), at LIncoln, while I had repeated early release and dealer issues. Rather than being remembered as the "worst" car I ever had, I think of it as my favorite.
Unfortunately, now that they know this may not be the best move anymore, they still have a "new" 2006 Explorer using the 2002 body shell, a 2007 Navigator (and Expedition) using the 1998 body shell, and even the "all new" 2007 Sport Trac is still using the 2000 doors, roof, windows, etc. It will take several more years for them to work this stupid policy out of their vehicle fleet.
I think it just demonstrates their fundamental contempt for the consumer. "Aw, just throw a new grille on it and they won't know the difference"
I do hope Lincoln has a plan for the 2010 MKZ that includes a new body shell. The present Zephyr and MKZ are EXACTLY the same car (recent hype notwithstanding), except for two thin strips of chrome added to the front brightwork and (of course) the 3.5 liter. Thus, the 2006 Zephyr is in reality also the 2006 MKZ. By 2010, it will have put in its time, in its present guise. Does Lincoln really know that? Do they really get it? I certainly hope so, because by then I will be in the market again, and I would love to buy a Lincoln this size that could stand against any of its competition.
I hadn't given much thought to a Zephyr because I don't generally like to pay more for same vehicle plus nicer interior. By the same logic, I'd almost never consider Audi or Lexus versions of entry class counterparts.
I have to say though, Lincoln won me over on this one. They did a great job putting the Zephyr together in fit and finish, and the six speed auto-tranny is a big bonus. I'm now considering the Zephyr as a solid option compared to the Acura TL, while I don't expect the Zephyr to perform the same, they represent very different but very interesting alternatives at around the same price point.
How about the "New" Camry still being based on the older platform. How about the "New" Highlander being based on the same. How about the "New" RX being based on that same old platform as well. How about the "New" ES350 based on that same platform.
How about the "new" Accord not having a completely new chasis either. The "New" Ridgeline, the "New" Odyssey, the "New" Pilot as well.
It may seem like Ford and GM are the only ones that do it, but more or less they are the only ones that get caught. It is like people speeding in a big group and two people get pulled over.
Sorry NV, they use the same body shell with a different front clip as a 1997 Expedition. The doors and all the glass are all interchangable.
"You're missing an important concept. The small pickup market is shrinking. So it doesn't make sense from a business standpoint to make a huge investment to update a vehicle that's in a shrinking market segment"
Maybe the market is shrinking for them because their product stinks? The american car companies tend to think the customer will be fooled by a new color, a new name or a revised grille. The Japanese companies improve their products every few years and always strive for excellence.
Who's winning?
Nothing at all wrong with reengineering or updating or restyling the same platform. But you cannot, for example, take a door from any previous Camry generation and bolt it on the update. You can however take a 1998 front door from a Navigator and bolt it on to a 2007 and it will close into the space perfectly. Same with a 1993 Ranger door into a 2006. Same with a 1991 Explorer into a 2001. (The 2002 Explorer actually changed the body shell--but the 2002 again will fit into the 2007 opening).
Heavily revising or changing the front clips or tailgates is not at all like the change GM has done with every generation of their big utes, or what Toyota has done with their model changes. Modifying the cowl, windshield and side glass is pricey, but most companies do it for the integrity of the design, if nothing else.
"Fixing" the 1996 ovoid (weird) Taurus by modifying the rear roofline, trunk and front clip was a definite improvement, but it was still stuck with the cowl, side glass and side sheet metal of the ovoid monster, so at least from some angles, it still didn't look all of a piece.
Still, the fact that the two of you insist you do not see the same body shell where it still is may mean Ford is on to something...
It's simply a matter of business priorities.
I don't care for Chevys.
In the recent past, Ford brass have admitted that styling changes have been too conservative--and that similar changes in the pipeline would unfortunately continue to be so (such as the 2006 Explorer and 2007 Navigator/Expedition). Explorer sales have not received the expected bump. On the other hand, the 2007 big GM utes are doing better than forecast. Maybe I am wrong (it has happened more times than I even know!), but I cannot help but think that a product that looks truly fresh has a better chance of picking up sales.
This body shell recycling had as much to do with decimating Freestar?Windstar sales, for example, as the shrinking minivan market itself. Still, Ford must make the best of it and I'm sure they will.
Posting here because it was a Chevy-Honda dealer and while there I looked at a few Chevys, including the new Tahoe. I owned a '97 Tahoe for 3 years. The only GM vehicle I've ever owned. It was a fine, reliable vehicle with a powerful engine. But the interior kinda sucked. And it had more body roll than a bowling ball. Well, they finally have the interior handled. The new ones have an excellent interior. Not quite a Navigator, but heads above previous Tahoes. The exterior is better too, in a more evolutionary way. Sticker was $48K for fairly well loaded one. A bit of an 'ouch' there.
It was interesting to walk around this dealership and compare the Chevys to the Hondas. The Chevs seem to have quite a price advantage now. Can get a Malibu for about the same as a Civic. An Equinox for $8000 less than a Pilot and an Avalanche for about the same as a Ridgeline (ugh).
That little HHR is a nice alternative to the PT Cruiser too. OK, nuff Chevy talk.
The Explorer, Ford's Golden Child, has laid an egg in the market. Despite it's many upgrades, it didn't fool anyone because it looks just like the old one with a new grille.
The Ranger, which is mostly from 1982 and partially from 1993 is nearly dead, except for the Phone company fleet, because no one cares to buy a new 20 year old truck. Despite it's many upgrades, it didn't fool anyone because it looks just like the old one with a new grille.
The Navigator, the original and one time undisputed king of luxury SUV's is largely ignored. Despite it's many upgrades, it didn't fool anyone because it looks just like the old one with a new grille.
Ford is surrendering the minivan market. The Windstar is one of the biggest flops in memory. Despite it's many upgrades and a fancy new name, it didn't fool anyone because it looks just like the old one with a new grille.
The Focus is basically exactly the same as the one introduced in late 1999. There is an all new, vastly improved Focus sold in the rest of the world, but Ford thinks Americans don't notice and don't deserve the better one, and they wonder why their "market is shrieking"
Crown Victoria/Lincoln Town car. Is Jimmy Carter still president?
Here's the 1999 LS. We'll produce it unchanged for 7 years and then act surprised when sales fall off.
They did introduce the 500 and Freestlye, but designed these vehicles to be so bland that they already look like 10 year old designs.
Can you name a Honda/Toyota/Nissan that gets pumped out for 10-15 years? No.
The Japanese focus on making a fresh, excellent product, and know the sales will follow, and they do.
Ford emphasizes a new grille design and thinks Americans will be fooled.
Check their slice of the pie. It didn't work.