Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Lincoln MKS

1353638404158

Comments

  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Correct on the TSX (and the Euro Accord is not the American Accord, which explains my previous statement that the TSX is not based on the Accord) and agreed on the rest. Except that the MKS should be as spectacular as possible, just because they can't afford to keep bringing out cheap rebadges like the Mark LT and the Aviator. Even our own gregg said something like this applies to the mks. Personally, I dont agree. I think they did a great job of bringing the Taurus to Lincoln showrooms ( :P ) With only a couple of minor faults, the S is a terrific interpretation of the existing S-80 derivatives
  • Wiki is wrong about this one. Badge-engineered and rebadged were terms that came into popularity back in the 1970ss and 1980s (and before, see for example the last Packards[Studebaker]) when you had brands filling out their line-ups by borrowing a model from a sister brand, and doing little more than changing the BADGING, and adding some chrome pieces.

    Canadian cars would often have different names on the exact copy of an American car. Or the Canadian Mercury pickup which was nothing more than the F100 with Mercury badges. The Merkur rebadge was a Ford Scorpio. The height of this was the Dodge Neon/Plymouth Neon.,.let's not even bother renaming the little sucker.

    Rebadging can be like the Fusion/Milan (some trim differentiation but nothing a body shop couldn't switch out in minutes), or it can be like taking an Opel from Europe and calling it a Saturn here. WIKI is getting b-e mixed up with platform sharing mixed up with platform engineering. Platforms are meant to be flexilbe and can spawn many sub-versions. Or you can use the exact same architecture under completely different bodies. But that is not a rebadge. Rebadge came from quick and dirty rebadging. Taurus to MKS is not that.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "I don't think a 40 gallon cooler would fit in anybody's trunk........ "

    :blush: Got me there! Rechecked and article says 60 Quart

    I'll have to look at interiors to see if guage cluster borrowed. I seem to remember someone ragging on the mks because it had the same guages as a Focus. I figured that was BS, Lincoln would not borrow from a Focus, would they?
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "Ok, so the Stype and LS were also badge engineering, right?"

    Yep. 10 out of 10!

    I dont wanna argue these definitions anymore. They is what they is. b-e, p-e, p-s whatever. One is 'based on' the other. If the other is a Jaguar, so much the better.
  • docrwdocrw Member Posts: 94
    I agree, Lincoln should shoot for spectacular. It just appears as though they have decided to go the Lexus route of solid and flawless (don't know if they've actually gotten to flawless yet) but did not add that dash of excitement that gets you to spectacular. I'm really hoping that the Ecoboost will deliver that. I'm looking for a larger sedan, that can seat an adult and two car seats in the back, for those times when we don't need the SUV and for my daily commute.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "So if Ford and Lincoln both need a full sized sedan, what is it you expect them to do, platform wise?"

    Here's my idea. Go back to the future and do it like the S-Type/LS pair.

    IOW, design the best, strongest, most "luxurious" (or sportiest if desired) platform you can for the Lincoln. Then dumb it down and cheapen it for the Ford. As opposed to designing the cheap one first and trying to add-on.
  • Agreed. Borrow down, if you want to enhance a model in the lower brand. Or design the Lincoln first. Or like you say, do a pair like the Jag and LS. They look nothing alike and who is to complain if a Lincoln has Jag in it?
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    YEs, the C&D review said surprisingly that the mks is on par with the Lexus for interior quality. Well done Lincoln if true.
    EcoBoost will certainly get the car moving better. Try driving a naturally aspirated Subaru Legacy and follow that wth the turbo version for an idea :) Gas mileage, though, wont be much, if any, better and will almost certainly be worse if u dig into that turbo too much.
    An adult AND 2 car seats in the back??? Man, that's a big back seat. That is the exact reason I got a Navigator rather than an Aviator. Just could not seat 3 comfortably in the back of the Aviator. For this application: "Have you driven a Grand Marquis ... lately." ?
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "and who is to complain if a Lincoln has Jag in it? "

    The Jag owners! :):) Cant please everybody!
  • docrwdocrw Member Posts: 94
    That's funny what you said about the Grand Marquis, my father said the same thing, when I told him we were looking for a larger car. Its certainly got the size, but everything else about it is a bit lackluster (to be kind). Although it would be cool to put a roof rack on it and scare the hell out of speeders late at night :) Plus, it would be a hard enough sell to get my wife to buy a Lincoln, never mind a Mercury. She has an MBA and is obsessed with reliability and resale value, so most of the time we have gone the import route.

    The Navigator would be an option but our house is 60 years old and the garage just isn't tall enough. That's one of the many drawbacks of living in the Boston area. To be able to afford a house in a suburb with a decent school system means having to make sacrifices in certain areas.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    So when they do GRWD it will be ok to share that platform as long as they come out with the Lincoln version first? (only half kidding)

    At this point I'd say the plan is probably to keep Ford on the D3 platform for the near future and to use GRWD for Lincoln and Ford sports cars. If the platform is designed right it can produce sedans, convertibles and coupes.
  • The Grand Marquis has precious little legroom in the back seat for such a large car, never mind it is unrefined, ill handling, creaky, plus doesn't offer stability control or state of art airbag protection. It was a great car for 1978 or even 1992.
  • docrwdocrw Member Posts: 94
    As I said, I was trying not to be too harsh, but you are exactly right.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    The Acura TSX sure looks likes an Accord.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Well, I was 1/2 kidding. But the price of a used GM might appeal to your MBA wife! And how much leg room do babies need? ;) And you can put the adult behind the front passenger and have that person scoot forward. Voila! Plus, they actually are reliable. Even CR recommends them!
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "The Acura TSX sure looks likes an Accord."

    Fooled you! Reverse Badge Engineering? Maybe that's the secret? :shades:
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    No one cares what the MKS is derived from. No one except those that built and desgned it, the folks at Motor Trend Etc and some people around these boards very interested in the ins and outs of car manufacturing. The MKS doesn't look anything like a Sable. And TSX looks like an Accord. Maybe people will care maybe they won't.
  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    "Have you driven a Grand Marquis ... lately."

    Actually yes! We fit 6 people in the car - 4 adults squeezed in the back seat. I remember riding in pre-98 “square” TC – three people sitting comfortably in the back without touching each other. Nowadays cars like Taurus and Avalon would pass for full-size. But that’s okay – it will force some people to go to gym.
  • Oh, geez, not this again. Of course they "look alike." They are 4 door sedans, contemporaries, butilt in a current style, by the same corporation. At the same time, it is not rocket science to figure out that they do not share a single body panel, exact dimensions, or trim pieces. They are not badge engineered, like Fusion and Milan are badge engineered.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    ? What has that got to do with the MKS?
  • You made the comment, sir, that the Accord and TL look alike. What it has to do with the MKS is that the Taurus and MKS bear a similar relationship as those two. Neither pair is badge engineered like Fusion/Milan pair is (or dare I say Edge and MKX). The TL did not have to turn drastic summersaults to not appear at all like the Accord, since the Accord, though plain, was not a Taurus-like dowdy lump.

    Many contemporary cars look a lot alike. In some ways, the Jaguar XF resembles the MKS or vice versa because of rooflines, door cut outs and so on. Ford did a good job of separating the looks of the Taurus and MKS (thank the universe), because a Taurus-looking anything is doomed. Still, if you look you can see the Taurus presence in the tall and chunky stance, and the short wheelbase and long overhangs. Not much they could do short of chassis changes to modify that.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Then again the prop rod under the hood of my Fusion doesn't bother me, either. Simple, cheap and effective.

    That bothers the hell out of me, sorry to say. It speaks of "simple, cheap and effective", which are not things to rave about on a nice car! I expect to see that on a Focus, maybe even a Mustang, and possibly the Fusion - I do NOT expect it on the Taurus and absolutely recoil at seeing it on a Lincoln. For what I pay for the Lincoln, I do not expect to see simple and cheap. It's one of the details that Ford doesn't think the buyer sweats, but is dead wrong on. Ok, most women don't care or don't know, and that's half the population, but any car guy who takes pride in a luxury marque will care. Is that enough of the buying public to go to the $5 expense to put struts under that hood? On Lincolns, yes.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I think you overestimate the average Taurus/MKS buyer. I think 90% of them would never even open the hood, male or female. And if someone decides not to buy a car based on that then they probably don't want the car in the first place. There are a lot of things where Ford "cheaps out" that bother me - lug nuts, speakers, etc. - but this just isn't one of them.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    The TSX looks like and Accord to me not the TL. The MKS is very nice looking unlike that butt ugly Taurus. At least someon at Ford relazied the Taurs is an ugly Betty. Speaking of Badge Engineering I have to wash my Milan today
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    Those cheaped out Ford parts allow them to pay thier legacy cots to retirees. You should feel good about it,
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The Grand Marquis has design and functional obsolescence to be sure. But it's tough as nails. You can drive that bugger over curbs and never hurt it! Cab drivers and cops prove that every day. The mileage on it is pretty good, the power is good, it handles remarkably good for the size, and you can't hurt it. It's virtually indestructable, all of that for $22,000? Sure, it's an old fashioned design, but you can save a trunkload of cash on one.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Why should I feel good about it?
  • Speaking of re-badges, the TSX is the European version Accord with an Acura grill and badges tacked on.

    I would never again buy ANY mid-size, near luxury or luxury car with a prop rod. After having a hood that just opens and closes, with no rod to thread or scratch, that's a corner they can cut for another customer. VW got rid of all prop rod use years ago. Ford could at least eliminate them for Lincolns. Not asking much.
  • emrnibbles1emrnibbles1 Member Posts: 48
    If what has been reported in the Wall Street Journal is true, the only vehicles that will be engineered by any American manufacturer will be Al Gore Specials. Or the MKS Gore Edition. Why? The Journal reported that GM , Ford And Chrysler are going to ask The Feds for tax breaks and possibly financial help. What will the manufacturers be asked of by the feds for its help?
  • Well, given Congress can't agree on anything, except pork for home districts, GM/Ford/Chrysler shouldn't count on financial help in the short run.

    An MKS Gore Edition wouldn't be a bad thing, given Cadillac is already planning a 4 cylinder model a la Audi A4/Acura TSX, AND an all electric one a la Volt. Lincoln needs to broaden its appeal soon, not only to the market that wants hybrids, plug-in hybrids, clean diesels, electrics, and so on, but also those that want more power. Cadillac is struggling with a much better line-up already than Lincoln even has planned. That LOONG-looking MKT thing coming in a year, plus some refreshed models, e.g. MKZ, isn't going to cut it.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    These companies should be able to sink or swim. If these companies can't compete, than the market place would be better without them. They have no idea what they are asking for. The government will be planning their products for them even if the majority of the buying public isn't interested in these products. Then these corporate welfare cheats would be in for really hard economic times forever dependant on the taxpayer for survival. The car enthusiast would have no choice but to buy foreign as it would probably be the end of investment into new designs that are able to compete with the best of the European and Asian marks.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    This is a sad sad comment. And unfortunately it just might represent Ford's attitude towards the customer. 'What they dont know (or see) wont hurt them.' No Lincoln should have a prop rod for it's hood - but the Z does. (The X might too for all I know.) I'm ASSUMING here that the S doesn't. Ford tried to save some money a few years ago by not painting the frames for the seats on the Navigators and Expeditions. Then, the frames started rusting and it cost them big bucks to fix. WHEN OH WHEN will they ever learn??? And how about this ...
    I almost lost a couple of fingers to a Town Car trunk once when I was given one as a loaner. I closed the trunk and it sorta popped open a little. I assumed that I needed to push it back down harder, so I put my fingers under the lip to pull the trunk back up in order to have a bit more play when I pushed it back down. But WAIT - the thing has a mechanism that pulls the trunk closed automagically unbeknownst to me!!?? I realized this when the trunk began crushing my fingers, despite my trying hard to pull the trunk up and trying to pull my fingers out. The guy from the rental car compay stood there dumbfounded and finally the LM Service advisor ran to the car and pushed the trunk open button. Point? Even a POS garage door opener wont crush you if it hits you coming down, it will auto-reverse. Ford probably left off the auto-reverse sensor to save $5.00 a car and figured lawsuits from a few crushed fingers would be cheaper in the long run.
    And for you, Allen, an intelligent guy, to say we overestimate Lincoln or Ford buyers because 90% wont open the hood? I mean, COME ON. Hey - I'll bet 90% wont change a tire either, but the lug nuts bother you and we both know how Ford SCREWED the pooch with the chrome lug nuts on the LS, which cant be removed with the lug nut wrench in the trunk. Or by a AAA truck in many cases. Further, I'll bet it's only 10% who dont open the hood. Most people want to see what's under there. Or, heaven forbid, add some oil or windshield washer fluid. I'm just surprised at this comment, Allen, and wonder if perhaps you watched the TV last night and the perhaps the inanity on display in Denver infiltrated your brain? ;)
    I swear Ford and maybe other car companies spend more money on PINHEADS whose only job is to try to save money by decontenting cars than the idiots will ever save from the changes. JUST BUILD THE DAMN CAR RIGHT. STOP TRYING TO SAVE 2 cents. FIRE the PINHEADS.
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    I frequently check under the hood...lots of stray cats in my neighborhood ;) , but one thing I don't get is all the political references here. This is about the MKS. You wanna talk politics? Take it to the Off Topic Chatter arena.

    Thanks!
  • emrnibbles1emrnibbles1 Member Posts: 48
    But there is a market for these vehicles that were in your post. A market that was identified by the automakers. I fear that congress will try to legislate a market. If that be the case there will be no market for a true Lincoln rwd performance sedan. Instead it will be a performance sedan that is designed by legislature.
  • Yeah, well, we can all be afraid of a lot of things that ain't going to happen in this universe. Congress designing anything. Good one.

    Now, let's remember that Congress did bail out Chrysler and Chrysler at the time more than made good on the deal, even if they had to do it with 62 iterations of the K car. I'm not recommending it now, but you will note Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were too important to let go down the toilet .bowl. That may no longer be true with Ford. Maybe help for Lincoln is in order. The MKS can't save it alone, because the numbers just won't work. I think the MKT coming is a big long fat thing that will splat down just as next summer driving season brings $5 gas. Where's the hybrid MKZ? What are the plans to extract more mpg out of the MKS? The MKZ, dumb as it was for Lincoln, could easily jump in nowas Lincoln's answer to Caddy's 4 cylinder, because it sure ain't a CTS competitor.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    Lets use the taxpayer to bail out every company or financial institution. Lets reward bad management and financial irresponsibility. If Ford can't and the others can't compete than they should fail and be allowed to go under even though I own a Ford dealership. It wasn't a great idea to bail out Chrysler. For one thing, because of the Chrysler bailout, the unions never had to face the fact that the manufacturers had to compete with foreign manufacturers that produce a better car at a cheaper price. The manufacturers couldn't give in to union demands and remaim competitive. The unions didn't have to care because when union jobs are at stake the G will bailout ones employer. And in order not to cause disharmony with the union, the bailout was a heaven sent gift to the boneheads who were in charge of Chrysler. The natural progression was to let Chrysler fail. Let the union jobs become obsolete . In the long run the domestic auto industry would have been more able to compete with its foeign competitors. The Chrysler bailout was the precedent that made it possible for other mismanaged companies to beg for government help. Does IBM need to be bailed out if it becomes unable to compete? Does every company that employs over 5000 people need a bailout if it meets financial hardship?
  • wjtinatlwjtinatl Member Posts: 50
    Jeez... I was thinking the MKS looked like a pretty intriguing deal. 40k very nicely equipped (no AWD in the south), cheap to service, unlike our Lexus and by most reports a pretty decent driver. But then I learned about the prop rod for the hood. Now, I'm a car guy (Camaro SS, Focus SVT and 2 Ford SUV's) and realize that today's cars don't have much to offer under the hood to anyone without a EE and a 50K computer diagnostic tool. But... that damn prop rod is cheap, and implies cost cutting elsewhere in the car. Is the leather on the seat going to wear thorugh in 4 years? Will the sunroof leak at the first hard rain due to clogged drain tubes? Will the shifter handle come off in my hand 4 years into ownership? All these things have plagued the other wise very reliable Ford products I own and ultimately taint the ownership experience. Frankly, if it weren't for the great service at my local (and family owned) Ford/L-M dealership in North Atlanta, I'd likely have given up on my lifelong Ford passion. GM has finally figured out the details, Chrysler never will. Ford has a chance to be the swing vote in the U.S. auto industry. Please Allen Mullaly and Ford, sweat the details and the American public will respond.
  • ronsmith38ronsmith38 Member Posts: 228
    I can't believe the MKS has a hood prop rod. My 2008 Sable does not. It has 2 gas cylinders.
  • Not going there. Your views are your views and nothing stated here will change anything. Let's get back to the MKS. So guys, does it have hood struts or not??
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    THANK YOU!! I was thinking I would have to start moving and deleting...I may still do that anyway. Again, it's about the MKS and only the MKS. I really don't want to shut this discussion down, but if you can't keep your comments strictly about the car, then your participation will be made read-only here. We have a multitude of discussions that cover a variety of topics where your posts would be more appropriate. Use the handy-dandy search to your right.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    I don't know. I cheked out the car at the dealer but didn't pop the hood. My Milan has a prop rod though and it's badge engineered too.
  • Re: the Panthers...you can save a boatload of cash on the Ranger too, and it will go over curbs. The F150 will go over curbs. And it is at least as quiet and is a lot more rigid than a Grand Marquis' body is. :P

    There are a lot of reliable used cars you can get for $22K and they won't depreciate as quickly. Everything is trade-offs of course, and the GM will make sense for some buyers. The only people I tend to see in new, civilian ones are old. I'm sure a shiney new one reminds them of the Detroit boats they drove in the 60s, 70s and 80s. They demand nothing of the car beyond that it is big, roomy, has power equipment, and goes from A to B with a floaty ride. They don't even notice that there are comfortable cars to be bought that don't clunk and shudder over road irregularities. Let's not even get started on the interior trim...

    Anyway, I think the MKS was designed to pick up the slack here. Just as people went to downsized big cars in the 1970s (those "downsized" things seem humongous now), the last of the holdouts will move to Lucerne and Taurus and MKS type cars.
  • My Milan has a prop rod though and it's badge engineered too. Touche. ;) It's also more attractive than a Fusion, and at least the last time I looked, had a cover over those awful gaping console cup holders that have taken over most cars (not all of us want a permanently uncovered dirt catcher right between the seats...how expensive would it be to include a cover on the MKZ?).
  • cowbellcowbell Member Posts: 125
    I found this image of the MKS engine bay:
    http://image.motortrend.com/f/auto_shows/coverage/los_angeles/9498847/112_2007lo- s_angeles_05z+2009_lincoln_mks+engine.jpg

    image

    It does not appear to have a prop rod. There is not one in the field of the image, and it does not look like there is a place at the front of the bay for a prop to go when down. And, in the top center of the picture, you can see what looks like the bottom of a hood strut.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    Touche. It's also more attractive than a Fusion, and at least the last time I looked, had a cover over those awful gaping console cup holders that have taken over most cars (not all of us want a permanently uncovered dirt catcher right between the seats...how expensive would it be to include a cover on the MKZ?).

    Thats why I bought it because I thought it looked better than the Fusion. Unfortunately Mercury took away the cup holder cover right after the '06 model year. I have no idea why they took it away I like the cover but my '08 doesn;t have it. :( My salesguy told me the MKZ didn't have the cover bcuase they gave it the sliding console lid instead.

    I am happy to report the MKS DOES have the covers and they look very nice ;)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    There is no prop rod on the MKS, so don't get your underwear in a bunch.

    What I'm saying is that IN MY MIND (not yours) a prop rod doesn't equate to cheap therefore it doesn't matter to me whether a car has a prop rod, springs or struts.

    The difference between that and cheap chrome clad lug nuts is that the prop rod works and the lug nuts don't - they fail and then you can't get the wheel off.

    There are a lot of things Ford has cheaped out on that make a difference - not having electrically adjustable seat backs and tilt steering, brick stereos, etc.

    I don't see anything in the MKS that indicates Lincoln is "cheaping out". And since the MKS doesn't have a prop rod there's no need to continue the discussion.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    From hood struts to cupholder covers. I guess if that's all you can complain about then Ford is doing a good job.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Amen
  • Ford is doing a good job with a very bad situation...one previous management was largely responsible for. If they had an unlimited budget, I would be far more critical than I am. :P

    As it is, Ford has a few good products and some excellent plans--mostly for the Ford brand. But I cannot see Lincoln surviving long-term with their current and proposed line-up. I realize that the Ford brand will pay the bills, if anything ever does that there again. The MKS is simply a better or more up to date Lucerne (not a bad thing).

    What Lincoln needs to field one of these days/years is a car with the presence Lincoln Continentals once had. There isn't much out there today that has the wow, gotta have it factor, unless you go well north of $100K. The Lexus formula isn't bad (great cars with me-too to almost forgettable styling), but as Cadillac has proven with the CTS, there is room out there for good cars that goes in their own stylistic direction.
  • pmerk28pmerk28 Member Posts: 121
    ? I had a Mountaineer, have a Milan, and I am a fan of the MKS (holding off till the turbo motor though).
Sign In or Register to comment.