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
Lincoln and Ford have done very well but Mercury is obviously struggling with lack of product.
Well, there's one guy here who COMPLETELY agrees with you, for what that's worth, beating the horse a little further.......
Don't you mean "TwinForce" :lemon: ???
That isn't likely to happen as long as the Turboheads, Boy-Racers, and MotorHeads are willing to lay out an extra $7,000 for the otherwise NEEDLESS HP level of that engine.
Once Ford has pocketed all of those PROFITS then we are likely to see DFI introduced for actual, not "phantom", FE improvement. Were the standard engine in the Flex to also have DFI the truth of the matter would be obvious. So Ford dare NOT do that,..... yet.
What might have been had Mulally gotten there sooner. ::sigh::
Just rebranding it EcoBoost will not fool enough of the US public to make a difference.
For some reason, I had never realized those old Continentals had front-hinged hoods.
While Lincoln has always enjoyed a niche spot among devotees and as a contrarian alternative to Euro and premium Japanese luxury vehicles, Ford will have to make more of the unpolished gem it has in Lincoln, while also finding a more appropriate place in the marketspace for Mercury (but that's another discussion). Lincoln will have to become more than just a heavily chromed rebadged large vehicles or another trim level of the new Ford vehicle platforms which raised the bar so suddenly and substantially that Lincoln found itself immediately playing catch-up culturally. When comparing the MKZ to the Fusion, as one would compare the ES350 to the Camry, there's no doubt as to which manufacturer pursued two missions from a common platform and which decided how many ways it could dress-up the same (albeit very good) foundation. For the kinds of price premiums Lincoln commands, enough vehicle differentiation just doesn't exist, and Bridge of Weir leather just doesn't cut it.
The previous poster who asked where Lincoln would be if Mullaly had arrived 3 years earlier is spot on. And while his prescience (and perhaps he alone) has saved Ford from a GM-like fate in both his flight to quality and foresight, the fact is that Ford is now facing the same economic constraints beyond their control as everyone else that limits them from making the kind of "ground up" investment engineering new Lincoln vehicles from their own premium DNA requires. Fortunately, the new Ford vehicles are so promising that when combined with positive sentiment and support for improvements thus far, they may very-well tide Ford over until the Mondeo-derived platform can underpin the next generation Fusion/Milan/MKZ, and the successor D3 platform can become everything the Taurus/MKS/(Sable?) wants to (and should) be.
One note that is lost in the reviewers' indignance about the MKS' price is how much of an improvement it happens to be to vehicles past. In fact, it's superior to the cherished LS overall, and it only wanes when compared to the current state of the art. Even so, there are more than enough positive points about the MKS to make it a perfectly reasonable, albeit expensive, choice. And given how the current financial scenario has turned every metric on its year, its greatest value is a harbinger of the good things to come once Ford has come into full flower.
While I absolutely support the "global" platform initiatives, I certainly don't support the wholesale replacement of Ford's North American vehicles with their European equivalents that are, in truth, already fully mature vehicles. While a 1-for-1 certainly makes sense for the Blue Oval brand, there is simply no worldwide Lincoln equivalent. One would hope that Ford might create an exportable Lincoln brand to other world markets given the kind of lead-time they have to adopt the Mondeo into the next MKZ and whatever Volvo-based successor to the Taurus/MKS will happen to be. Even if it proves to be more of a rebadged variant than unique identity, one would hope each would be free of any evidence of being rushed to market and embody the essence of applied refinement in all respects, from performance and handling to interior space and fit and finish.
Ford has earned my business, and my household includes a Flex and will soon include either an MKS Ecoboost or Taurus SHO. Even if the MKS doesn't quite "deliver" the promise, it demonstrates that the promise is genuine and made in good faith with every likelihood of occurring. Until then, especially in this redefined economy, the only way to ensure Ford is able to deliver upon that promise is to support them until they do. Buying decisions have become very existential matters to manufacturers; and customers are going to have to accept newfound responsibilities to patronize and support the manufacturers they want to exist.
No, the MKS may not be everything it could be, or even should have been. Then again, neither was Ford. But, of all the manufacturers worldwide, none seem to have gotten religion like Ford has, nor do their vehicles reflect the same degree of passion or promise. If part of ensuring I'm able to drive the results of Ford's full potential is owning one good, but less-than-perfect MKS in the interim, I'll glady do so and enjoy myself while I do.
I don't understand why people think we have to get rid of SUVs. What about people who need to carry 7 or 8 people comfortably AND/OR need to tow 7500 lbs? Even if you take out the soccer moms who could get by with a crossover, there are still folks who need a large SUV, even if it's a much smaller market. Why not work to make them as fuel efficient as possible - like Ford is doing by putting the Ecoboost 3.5L into the F-150.
It's like George Carlin once said - anyone who drives faster than you is a maniac - anyone who drives slower than you is an idiot. Seems to me most of the people who want to get rid of SUVs are driving midsized vehicles. If they applied the same logic to themselves they would be asking why not drive a Prius or an Escape hybrid or a 4 cylinder Focus - after all, they get much better fuel mileage than a Flex. People in glass houses........
As for the ES350/Camry vs. MKZ/Fusion - have you seen the 2010 MKZ? I think the interior is much better than the earlier models - it's a mini-MKS in fact. That only leaves the fact that the MKZ shares door panels and a roofline with the Fusion - something that will be fixed in a couple of years, just like Lincoln did with the MKS and the Taurus, and the MKT and the Flex - no shared body panels. Throw in the rumored 3.7L plus a few standard Lincoln amenities and I think the MKZ will blow away the ES350.
I agree with everything else. Lincoln was committed to return to RWD but then the economy tanked and gas went through the roof and resources were needed elsewhere. But if you look at where Ford has positioned the Taurus I think it's clear that Lincoln will be moving up with new platforms and more differentiation - it will just take longer before they'll be able to accomplish that.
While there will be a small need for these vehicles as you stated in terms of towing, a large family (in number and possibly shape), or in hauling capability but unless you're doing these activities every day the #1 question becomes why have one. Not trying to tell people what to buy and I agree if you can afford it buy it - but I ask to be real with and about the purchase.
Cadillac has the very good RWD CTS, but most of the rest of the line is stumbling (DTS, STS, Escalade). However, we know a swoopy XTS large sedan is coming, as well as a RWD ATS (BMW 3 competitor). The CTS coupe is almost here. The CTS wagon is now available. And the new SRX is getting very good reviews, and does seem offer more class than its MKX rival. I'd love to see Lincoln get back into using some really stately style again. Something with presence that goes beyond MKS and Navi presence (simply because they are so tall). Something that people aspire to.
The Aspire " is no longer around to laugh at."
I'm sure there are more fuel efficient alternatives to whatever vehicle you're driving today. Wouldn't the same argument apply to you?
But honestly I can't get past the mentality of "this is nothing but a rehashed & badged Ford / Mazda 'fill in the blank'". And haven't gotten into all the "Mark-*" / Mmm-Kay" alphabet-soup nomenclature. I would rather they go back to real names when new models are brought into the fold. But I still believe there is an actual need for a proper RWD / V8 (at least EB V6) vehicle in their stable in order to be competitive and be in the price-points they want to be in. but again, I see this as being many years down the line.
I look at more than fuel efficiency when purchasing a vehicle - this is where being a car nut REALLY comes in handy. I think about how I'm actually going to use the vehicle as well as its quality, robustness, repairability, CTO, mileage...the list goes on and on. I was actually told by many friends, family and coworkers I should have bought a larger truck / SUV, I needed to have that larger truck / SUV, how better it was to have the larger truck / SUV, blah, blah, blah. Most of them have either gotten rid of theirs, it's sitting in the driveway / garage & they're now driving a crap-box or trying to figure out how to unload them while crying every time petrol prices increase.
My point was and still is, a large number of people bought those size and types of vehicles just because they were the "it" vehicle, to show off, to not be stuck with the soccer mom / dad minivan tag but then tried to pass off the purchase as "needing" the vehicle. Again, nothing wrong with them & buy what you like, but be real about why you purchased it.
If you and your wife actually used the Nav's space and hauling capabilities, man, I salute both of you - you're a rare breed indeed.
Right - because your run of the mill Expedition/Suburban/Tahoe is such an "it" vehicle. :confuse:
Most people buy SUVs/CUVs over minivans because they simply hate minivan styling and wouldn't own one to begin with. They like the high seating position and styling of the SUVs and they see all their friends driving them and they think "Hey - those must be useful vehicles". Getting rid of them just because gas prices went up temporarily was just a knee jerk reaction that happened across the board. That just means they were living beyond their means to begin with.
The same can be said of V8 mustangs - does anyone really NEED a V8? Of course not. I'd even go so far as to say that most V8 mustang drivers don't ever use the extra hp. Does that make them show-offs or posers? Or is it that they just like the way it sounds or the way it drives?
All I'm saying is don't make assumptions about other people's motivations.
Buying a Mustang V6 is like getting married without a honeymoon.
Right - because your run of the mill Expedition/Suburban/Tahoe is such an "it" vehicle
Yes, as most bought them due to marketing hype, falling into the "gotta have it & bigger is better" and as most started loading them up with wheels, screens and systems, which the OEMs started doing as well correct? Which by the way, started defeating the purpose of having a large vehicle which sole purpose was to carry large loads and large amounts of people right? And I thought we were talking about the Nav, since this is a Lincoln-inspired forum (though this also applied to other makes / models)? :confuse:
And I didn't make the assumptions. As stated I actually talked to the people and that's what they told me - so how is that making assumptions? I just asked them why they bought it, one of the biggest responses was "Look at it -isn't it the best?, next to "Did you see it in so-n-so's video or MTV Cribs / ESPN / VH1 / So-N-So car show episode?". 90 percent of the people I've talked to have said that, finally admitting to that after they said, of course:
they needed it, but couldn't tell me why they needed it, just that they needed it
it's soooooo safe - for them of course after they plowed into someone, which some of them did because they were running their mouth on the celly, or doing something else stupid while driving. And no, I'm not saying people who drive SUVs are stupid, or only stupid drivers talk on cell phones while driving. One of the worse was a woman who wrecked her 2008 Tahoe right in front of work last month, trying to cut across 3 lanes of traffic, while doing 60 (in a 40mph zone). Basically yanked the wheel, that whole physics thing took over, and that's all she wrote. She was a little scratched up, the truck rolled a couple times.
safer and great in winter, yet they slip and slide just as much as any other vehicle, sometimes more as there is more mass to the vehicle and again, that whole momentum thing in physics. I saw them doing 360s just as much as smaller vehicles when we had the multiple freezes this past winter and before. They're actually more dangerous because most have this false sense of safety and drive more reckless / careless.
it's so spacious and can haul a lot of stuff - most never went to home Depot, Lowes or any type of hardware store, don't have a trailer hitch or anything that uses a hitch - so what were they hauling around besides their behind - nothing. Also never put anything it the back of it - don't know how to remove the seats. This line was usually used when talking about going on vacation - but wait, they took a plane and then rented a car?
they can carry a lot of people - they were single or married and was only the two of them or them a one small child. That diaper bag and stroller must triple in size when they got put into vehicles. And they must've hauled those people around when I was sleeping. This too was tied to the "great for vacation line".
And this is not just people I know, but people I've talked to at the car media events, car / truck shows, people I meet at industry events, the trade shows, coworkers, friends of people I know, folks on shows I've watched. For the last time, not saying there is anything wrong with buying those types of vehicles, or performance vehicles or any type of vehicle for that manner, just don't give a load of an answer when asked why you bought it.
Well, I'm off to Lowes to get some bags of quickrete and other things. No seriously, I am.
Don't you think that's a rather small sample size compared to the millions of SUVs sold over the last 10-15 years?
90 percent of the people I've talked to have said that
And I know just as many people who drive large SUVs who DON'T say that.
Now if you're just talking about blinged up vehicles with huge wheels and that type of stuff then I would be more inclined to agree with you. But my comment that started all this was about SUVs in general, not specifically about Escalades and Navigators.
I'll be sure to ask for your approval before I buy my next vehicle.
Had the SUV or mini van been available, I would have still chosen the station wagon over the other choices. After the kids entered college, we joined the Town Car crowd. Fond memories of the '67 Country Sedan include a 390 4v with dual glass packs. First tracks at White Pass were frequent.
i grew up with rwd and still prefer it.
people like me will pass on and maybe that preference will go too.
not my kids, though. they love that v8 rwd feeling.
if they have to compromise, that will be their decision.
i drove a focus stick for 4 years and for the most part i enjoyed it, but when i had to drive in snow, i hated it.
i replaced it with a fusion awd, which has less of that fwd feel, although the steering is too light for my taste.
i still like it, but i would like it better if it had that 3.4 v8 from the last gen SHO.
the explorer has been passed on to another kid, but i still enjoy driving it.
our family has many great memories over the years going places and more will still happen.
one more thing. i wanted my lincoln when i turned 50, and so did my wife when it was her turn. we just haven't quite make it work, yet.
Also, I would feel safer in a collision if I had the SUV and the other driver had the Miata, rather than the other way around...carry capacity for Home Depot is simply a bonus...all this worked really well when gas was under 2 bucks a gallon...
May I ask how many have you sampled in that time frame?
And no, just not talking about the blingy-bling. And to repeat yet again, which by the way is kind of a grind, just because you and your wife got your Nav due to it's size, ability to swallow large loads or number of people and actually used it's size and ability doesn't mean everyone else who bought one, or a vehicle like it, did so for the same. Myself and others here are telling you that's simply not true, and as usual, you got your britches in a bunch because people disagreed. And in terms of an "it" vehicle, isn't the CUV the "it" vehicle now, just as the full-size trucks / SUVs were (as well as the extra-large versions), just as the Explorer-size SUVs were, the minivans before that, the station wagons before that... and other vehicles in other classes? Each class of vehicle has / had an "it" vehicle, a vehicle folks wanted that may have met all their needs, some of their needs, maybe none of their needs, but that vehicle was the thing to have at the time. And sorry again, was just trying to keep it Lincoln, you know, stay with the theme of the topic, but you brought up Expedition (which the Nav is) and Suburban / Tahoe in a previous response so I included all as well.
In terms of giving you approval, I really could give a fu-man-chu what you like, buy, drive, rent, whatever. As long as you're happy with your purchase I'm ecstatic - I'm not making your payment nor loaning you the money to buy it, why should I care or give approval? :confuse:
You're trying to accuse me of making assumptions, which in the end is something you're doing. Usually the back and forth discussions are pretty good but this has gotten to be really boring and way off-topic of the forum - you can respond if you like but I'm moving on. Happy hunting
George Carlin said "Anyone who drives slower than me is an idiot. Anyone who drives faster than me is a maniac." I think the same analogy applies here.
There are those who need enclosed trucks and those who want to drive the trendy vehicle of the day -- I'd go with about a 1 to 5 ratio.
Station wagons came and went, minivans came and went, SUVs came and it looks like they might have, well, gone.
Time will tell.
That 5:1 ratio I referred to earlier means that ~85% of the market may well go away, but the folks who always needed them will probably still be able to get them. Minivans are still available, and God knows they were never trendy & have been shunned by a large fraction of the auto-buying public for the past 10-15 years -- I think they were okay for the first few years before they developed the dreaded "suburban drone" image. Station wagons too, but to a lesser extent -- in Europe they're all over the place.
I see Lincoln moving upmarket, as soon we get a proper RWD Lincoln flagship :shades:
Getting close to buying something, but right now it won't be a warmed over '98.