Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
The MKS can hold its own with FWD/AWD near-luxury sedans...but now it is not even truly an upgraded Ford (as the 2010 Taurus is so good), but rather a Ford with new Lincoln styling. The C concept at the Detroit show demonstrates some forward thinking, but I have no idea if something so innovative would ever get approval. Still can't believe how they took the MKT concept which (love it or hate it) looked like nothing else on the road and turned it into an innocuous station wagon, with the new Lincoln grill on the front. Sort of like how they messed up the MKX from taking it from concept to Edge-with-a-Lincoln-esque-grill.
BTW, have you looked at the mileage of some of the 09 V8s? The 5.7 372 hp Dodge Challenger (a rather large and heavy car) already gets 16/25 mpg. Not too shabby, and again begs the question, what clear advantage really is there with a complicated twin turbo V6 over a normally aspirated, well-geared V8? Just asking...
Whats the point with MKT - were not Mercuries supposed to be small premium cars? And MKT is nothing other than Ford Focus. Well for Audi it works - but Audi is an engineering company and it is the separate company in VAG.
Thats my question to American CEOs - why you need several brands if cannot differentiate them? Toyota does, Nissan does, even VW does.
The problem with american mfrs and brands is history - these brands were born decades ago when the automobile industry was totally different, and they have not adapted over the years. The imports were able to come in about 20 years ago and create new brands from scratch without the historical baggage or huge legacy dealer networks to support.
Ford finally gets it but it will take years to straighten it out. They are quietly consolidating and buying out dealers.
And just to clarify the RWD issue - Ford has put the GRWD program on hold and while we're all disappointed it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Ford's limited resources are better spent on smaller cars and improved fuel economy. What could be worse than for Ford to spend billions on new large RWD vehicles only to see gas prices go back up and sales dwindle again.
It's not just that it's RWD - it's the cost of a new platform when they already have capable, if not exciting, FWD/AWD platforms.
When Ford is in the black again and has the basics covered then they can afford to look at a new Lincoln platform. Sucks, but that's business.
It's not just fuel economy - it's the cost of the investment versus the payoff. Ford simply has other areas that need the investment more at the moment. In 2 years hopefully that will be a different story.
I took it out for a test drive, but not on the highway.
1) Very quiet.
2) Smooth ride (Even with 20" wheels, thought it would be tighter with those wheels). Not like a 80's Lincoln.
3) Steering was responsive for me. Where ever I turned the wheel it went.
4) Pretty huge interior which now that I am 40 I like.
5) Good seats. Not the best I have sat in but pretty darn good. Firm. I didn't mess with her lumbar setting though. Nice quality leather.
6) Over all I think the interior looks very sharp. Not award winning or innovative but presidential. There were some cheaper plastics like i have read in some reviews but the leather was top notch which I guess I value more.
7) The car is bigger than I thought now having seen it in my driveway but unlike the outgoing Towncar I think I would be ok parking it. I believe it has front and rear sensors for parking assist but I did not test that feature.
8) Didn't car for the massive grill. People who need a grill like that must be making up for some short-coming (yuk yuk yuk). In general don't like the exterior styling and still think the out going TownCar is one of the best looking cars on the road.
9) I thought the stereo rocked it out but only mention it b.c the reviews said it was lacking and I do not agree. Personally, this is something I almost couldn't car less about.
10) Pretty good turning radius for a large car. Again, I was surprised.
11) The engine was OK. I left it in auto and did not manually shift. It could go if pressed but it wasn't a rocket off the line. It was responsive off the line. It is more than adequate for me and my sister-in-law said it was a great highway cruiser. As a side note she and her husband said this was the first time they drove from NY to DC and their backs didn't hurt (as they did in the BMW).
12) Nicer over-all than the CPO 2005(6) LS430 I test drove in August that had 30000 miles on it. In fact, the MKS reminded me of the LS430 but felt just a little more solid. I would have to drive both back to back to say for sure, both were pretty fantastic.
I was sad to see the TownCar whither on the vine as it has since Ford was just riding it out to the 'livery only' market but now I think differently. This is a fine replacement and if I could afford one I would buy it. If the numbers I see on these boards saying it could be leased for $485/mo are true I would definitely consider it.
No market for RWD luxury cars? On what planet do you live? ALL luxury cars are RWD except of Audi which is unlike Lincoln is highly engineered, high content car with advanced AWD.
Not enough resources? What did Ford when there were tons of money? Waisted on SUVs, British luxury brand that nobody wanted and wants and self-inflicted fiasco. Lack of money is not an explanation - it is lack of focus and lack of vision.
The MKS is another 2010 Taurus in different clothes. Same exact size, same basic engines, same options. The C is not just a Focus...it is a small Lincoln like we have never seen. It is not a Versailles (thinly disguised Granada); it is akin to an Audi TT which is based on a VW Golf. It is innovative. I don't give it a snowball's chance of coming to market, but if it did, I'd buy it in a NY minute. I am so sick of excessively long overhangs to give the impression of a large car. I want the interior room on the smallest footprint I can have while still having some style. I'd buy a Mini if the interior weren't so tight.
Ford chose to continue using the CD3 platforms for now because they are consolidating the domestic (fusion) and european (mondeo) CD vehicles onto a common platform - why change now only to change again in a few years? Besides, there is nothing wrong with the current platform - if anything the Mazda6 is just now catching up with where the Fusion has been for 3 years already.
And in case you haven't been paying attention, the 2010 Fusion is blowing away the Camry and Accord in fuel economy - it's not even close. And that goes for both the hybrid and non-hybrid models. The 2010 Taurus is gorgeous and they're bringing over both the European focus and the Fiesta. They're moving the Explorer to a unibody platform for better ride and fuel economy.
Ford is the focus right now (pun intended) and that's where all the money and resources are going. Mercury was simply put on hold and Lincoln is getting minimal funding. Ford is the priority - that's where the money is.
Not to mention that Ford has not cancelled any future product development other than GRWD - they are still investing in new products and they're doing it without a government loan. They are also GAINING market share right now (including Lincoln) and will be in good shape by the end of this year.
It take money and resources to make the kinds of changes you're asking for, and Ford has neither right now beyond what it's already working on. Anyone who understands running a business and budgets understands that you have to pick and choose and right now they're choosing to work on things that will keep the Ford brand profitable from here on out - and that has to take precedence.
The new 2009 Mazda6 adopted the Fusion platform, because it is superior to the old 2003-08 Mazda6. If the Fusion package deserves any criticism, it is that the overall 2006 styling will be carried on for too many years...not much Ford can do about that now. Fortunately, it is still current, though in looks (a subjective thing of course) hardly competitive with the 2009 Mazda6. Being a Ford, having the best mpg, and now having stability control, SYNC, etc., it will do well. The Mazdas will suffer some, because both hp and mpg are down from the comparable Fords.
Umm....yeah, that's how market share works. In order for someone to gain market share, someone else has to lose it. To look at it another way - Ford lost LESS sales than the others did. What that means is that if overall auto sales were at the same level as in the past, Ford would be selling more vehicles. Gaining market share is the only benchmark you can use to quantify market success when the entire market is down.
What is the list price on a Mondeo in the U.K? This is an expensive platform......The platforms of these vehicles that are going to be used in the U.S . are going to be watered down versions of their European cousins to hold down cost along with watered down interiors to do the same......By the time it takes to get the new tooling and gov approval to manufacture these vehicles here these platforms and other tech will have all but have been made obsolete by their asian competition.
There is no comparison between UK prices and USA prices. Cars cost more in the UK - period. It's a totally different market.
If you've seen the U.S. versions of the Fiesta you'd see that it's not a "watered down" version of the Euro Fiesta at all. All Ford is saying is that it will use a common platform (starting point) for similar U.S. and Euro models. How much is different will depend on local market requirements - but commonality is the goal.
The Americans I guess don't deserve this type of vehicle according to Ford.
Who said that? Ford's plan is to do just that - bring over the European models with minimal changes. The U.S. version of the Fiesta is almost identical to the Euro version except for minor changes. Again, I don't know what you're complaining about here.
Of course it would cost more for Ford to import the Mondeo and sell it here. That's why they don't. But if they built it here (or in Mexico or Canada), that exchange rate penalty goes away. That is why, if Ford survives until 2010 and beyond, some of their best products will be able to be sold at competitive prices.
I share your disappointment that those in control at Ford made such incredibly bad decisions, backed up by exttraordinarily unreasonable salaries. However, this is no different than the out-of-whack situation that occurred in most industries who were feeding off the artificial and greedy go-go projections of the early 2000's. But Ford is poised to survive better than GM and Chrysler. It is at the moment doing better than Toyota and Honda in this country.
Will it survive long-term? I wouldn't bet on it. The damage Bill Ford did is still playing out. People other than him share the blame. To have been on the top in the late 90s and early 2000's, and continue to "redesign" by using previous designs and refine them was pennywise and pound foolish.
GM is in a lot of trouble and may need more life support. But at least they changed the Suburban and Silverado and Malibu and Caddy CTS and SRX every redesign legitimately. They didn't just do the front and rear clip and interior and call it all new. They are dying for a lot of bad decisions regarding product. The Pontiac line? OMG!, The wilting Buick line? Hummer? Saab? The Malibu and Impala and CTS and G8 and Solstice and Enclave and Escalade were overshadowed by too many divisions and too much duplication.
Ford really really screwed up. But now they have a chance to make it. Conditions are such that they will have to succeed in almost impossible conditions. But of the "pathetic 3" I'd bet on them. And please look at Audi, which committed to FWD/AWD. Even in 2008, which was awful for just about everybody (and remarkably so for Toyota and Honda), they not only increased market share, but increased year-to-year sales. If FoMoCo can survive by giving quality and value as Audi did lacking any RWD, like Audi which now has a RWD sports car and is planning more, Ford may be able to make Lincoln a real player again. Ford must survive first....at any cost. Then Lincoln may once again be more than a Studebaker with lipstick (final Packards).
So now Lincoln is competing with Mini. Nice. And Mini is RWD BTW (just kidding, okay).
And I still did not get answer: what is Mercury for?
Ford and Opel always considered in Europe as a cheapo brands. Ford had superior handling starting with the first Mondeo (a.k.a. Contour) - but interiors were always on cheap side and it hurt Ford's reputation in Europe tremendously.I don't know may be they improved with the last Mondeo. In fact VW at least last 20 years considered as a more premium brand than eigther Ford or Opel. And there is nothing extraordinary about Mondeo price - it is more about tax structure than real cost. In Germany all cars has firmer suspension and better (firmer) seats just because roads are extremely smooth and well-maintained and speeds are considerably higher than in USA.
For Audi it took long-long time of consistent development of excelent AWD cards to get even close to MB and BMW. And even now many people do not consider Audi as an equal to MB and BMW. Cadillac and Lincoln in the past at least 60-70s were very prestigious brands, more prestigious than Audi and likes. But GM and Ford managed to squander prestige and for what? Cheapening brands did not bring them more money - just opposite.
And Ford changes its mind every month - Lincoln will be in PAG, not lets put it back with Ford, wait three years and you will see RWD luxury Lincoln, No there will be no RWD luxury Lincoln - only Ford clones, wait no - there will be no big Lincolns - Lincoln will now compete with Mini. No-no-no - Lincoln will compete with Buick. No we changed our mind again - Lincoln will compete with Huindai. No - with Kia (and we actually had Lincoln-Mercury-Kia dealership in Sunnivale - believe it or not).
BTW, the last two Mondeo redesigns have been lauded by European press and public alike. The latest Mondeo won all sorts of accolades there. Its interior stands up to any of its competition. The Mondeo has definitely helped Ford's reputation there...along with the Focus, the new Fiesta, the new Ka, the new Kuga, the European Fusion, C Max, S Max and Galaxy. Not a clunker in the bunch. In 2008, the most difficult selling year in many years, Ford became the second best selling nameplate in all of Europe.
So continuing to whine about it is totally pointless. They know what to do, they just can't afford to do it right now.
Again - why is that SO hard for you to understand?
Again, Ford deserves a spanking (the 500 styling was just so incredibly dumb), but the things they do right need to be acknowledged. I am no fan of the fat, tall MKS with too long overhangs, but it sure can hold its own against the S80, and most other FWD based large sedans.
Fusion also is 6 inches longer and 2 inches wider than Mazda6. SO what is the point?
Regarding Mullaly - they still change strategy for Lincoln very often and what is Merucry for is not clear at all - it is total mistery at this point. BTW BMW is not a niche car player - they sell cars by millions all over the world.
Mercury was put on hold for the same reason - to focus on Ford first, Lincoln second. It's #3 on the priority list, and will stay there as long as is necessary. Look at all the new Ford products released in 2008/2009 and you'll see where Ford is spending their money. Revised F150, mustang, escape and focus. All new Flex, MKS, MKT. Heavily revised Fusion/Milan/MKZ and Taurus. New Ecoboost 3.5L engine, new 2.5L, 3.0L and 2.5L Hybrid powertrains with best in class fuel economy.
Add in plans for 2010 including the Fiesta, Euro Focus, Transit and Transit connect plus new engines for mustang and F150 and an all new unibody Explorer and anyone can see that Ford is investing heavily in it's CORE brand - the one that will bring profitability and market share. THEN they can afford to spend more on Lincoln and finally Mercury.
You think this is a lack of focus because they're ignoring Mercury and to some degree Lincoln. I say it's just the opposite - for the first time in a long time Ford has a CLEAR strategy for success and is executing it as well as can be expected.
Just because they're not building what YOU want them to build doesn't mean they're failing. Try to see the big picture for once.
However, it is true that old man cars like the Town Car, DTS, Lucerne lose more sales every year. Younger audiences tend to prefer a different feel in their driving machines. It's funny, because the MKS has been criticized in the press for leaning too far toward the comfort-wallowy end of the spectrum. It is definitely a compromise, a bridge vehicle if you will, to move Lincoln away from old man car company, without making a huge leap away. As a compromise, it may not fill the bill for some traditional buyers as well as for some who prefer not to drive as if their vehicle will tip unless they crawl through every sharp corner.
What's next? Bench seats?
And as for the apparent dissing of the Magnetic ride control of the DTS, you should try it. Soft and plush under 40, quite controlled beyond that. Definitely an improvement over soft at all times or harsh at all times.
As for the bench seats, you can do things on those you can't with buckets....
Interesting video on MRC: http://www.gm.ca/media/vehicles/cadillac/showcase/innovations/mrc/video_en_CA.ht- - ml
Yes I will agree that many cobblestone streets were smother that concrete and blacktop roads we have here. Yet their roads are better because their tax rates are higher. The average European paycheck has between 28-37% taken out for taxes no matter their level of income. As we demand better from our automobile makers, we need to demand more from our infrastructure as well. I for one care more about quality and luxury than speed. I get enough tickets with the engines I have now. The center stack of the MKS does have plastic, but it looks ok to me. Besides who around here is an expert on cheap and expensive plastic? Is there plastic that looks cheap that is really expensive? Is there expensive plastic that looks expensive? Or is there cheap plastic that looks cheap. Yes I know plastic can look cheap but I do not see this cheap look on the center console. What I do see is a balance of different technical and luxury areas that I have to give the designers credit for that balance.
Where they lack points with me as with many others in the trunk opening. I do understand it as in the design of the vehicle. I do not have huge coolers that will test the opening. Everything I have put in it (duffle bags, suite cases, etc) seems to fit and so the opening is less of a concern.
Now as far as the automakers are concerned, we as the public bought what they made. The numbers in sales of the so-called good vehicles between them is not enough to even mention. So what if as example Camry got 22%, Accord got 25%, Escort got 19%. The rest went to a bunch of vehicles (mostly SUV and others) that were not needed for the times required. What does matter now is finally the message is clear. What many do not understand is that corporate do not listen to complaints, comments, nor remarks. Only the numbers wakes them up and when they go below acceptable levels, then the eyebrows gets to raising and the heads starts turning. The engineers have their marching orders (make it better, at a cost, and more efficient), so until corporate follows rather than lead, (history has shown their leadership can lead these companies to oblivion) another 75-80 years from now, the same thing will happen again (if they last that long).
As an example, I understand there was a debate between upper management at Ford and the MKS engineers on the engine and type of fuel it would be going out the gate. Even when the price of gas was under 2 bucks a gallon, the engineers felt a powerful V-6 on regular fuel was the way to go. Upper management wanted a bolder statement by making it with a V-8 on premium gas. Eventually the engineers won and I guess that can account for the pretty good sales the MKS has enjoyed lately. Realize this, even if there was a car made that everyone liked, that was perfect in every way, no one and I mean no one would buy it. Why, because we are a society of criticism rather than praise. So the last excuse would be that everybody else would want one and there would be no individualism.
Now, can we get back to the MKS?
:confuse:
Collision Avoidance Technology
Forward Collision Warning (not available on Toyota), blind spot monitoring, cross traffic alert, auto parallel parking (yeah Lexus has it, but the Ford system actually works and is a lot cheaper), SYNC (Lexus still doesn't have a decent iPod interface), yeah, sounds like there is no technology here. Oh yeah I forgot about that whole direct injection and turbocharging thing.
Oh and I think it would be fantastic if Ford would continually re-invent the wheel on each new vehicle by creating a totally new platform. There is no reason to refine an existing one, just throw all the tooling away and make something brand new so each vehicle costs $125,000.
Compared to the Lexus ES350, its bigger, cheaper and has more features.
European CD platform is more expensive than CD3. Mazda designs cheaper platforms than European Ford and that was the value of Mazda for Ford. Ford does not need Mazda otherwise. Ford makes excelent platforms for Focus and Mondeo. Japanese simply know how to make things cheaper than Germans. If they did not then nobody would buy Japanese cars at all (not many people buy them in Europe anyway because Japanese cars are cheap, ride is not up to standards established by Mondeo and Passat, look is plain and they depreciate fast).
On a feature by feature basis, they have a lot in common, but the fact that the MKS costs 1/2 of what the S 550 costs does constrain things somewhat. The number of S550s sold (especially right now) doesn't exactly make it the hottest market segment, but at least now we understand the frame of reference comparing a $40,000 car to a $100,000 car.