By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
On this site, I'm not sure you're going to get satisfaction. Writing Mr. Ford is a good idea, and burning up the Lincoln hotline is too. They ought to buy that back from you, but without a safety related repeat issue, I doubt they will.
If I were you, I wouldn't buy another Lincoln. But they're machines, and these things happen. It's a miracle they work at all. I also have lots of friends, one who lives behind me with a 2000 who is delighted with hers. I also have a friend who had a 2000 that he let go when the lease was up and got a Sable because he felt it was going to be a lot of trouble.
It's still no Yugo......
Bought my Sport V8 flat out in 10/99. While I get it my head that I'd like another car about this time in ownership, I'm planning to continue the pleasure of driving it for another 3-6 years. I love the handling and acceleration available at freeway speeds. I don't push it to the edge, but my Kentucky hills' by-way roads give me plenty of opportunity to feel the grip as I take bends harder than I could with ordinary cars. At my larger than average size, I really enjoy the auto-seat setup & particularly the telescoping steering wheel. Don't think I'll ever buy again w/o those features.
As I said in a message not long ago, new tires and an alignment at 45,000 miles makes it drive like new again. I think its mechanical systems are holding up well. Yes I'm getting dings here & there, but they make it uniquely mine. When I get it shined up, I'm still quite proud to have it. Still get compliments.
I had several of the startup problems - dropped rear window, transmission reflash, radio grounding problem that blew it out. All happened in the first 6-9 months. All handled under warranty. Nothing's happened since.
If you do buy the 2000, check out whether it's received all the Technical Service Bulletins treatments or that they all can still be done at no cost to you.
Good Luck w/decison.
However:
I own a 1999 Jeep Wrangler (Chrysler product)
and my wife has a 2001 Ford Windstar (worse piece of junk since the pinto).
In comparison my LS was very trouble free. So to me the LS is Excellent.
So I bought the 2003. Since I have never owned a Lexus to compare this to I guess Ignorance is Bliss?
BTW, My sisters Accord should have been replaced under the lemon laws. In general however I think Toyota and Honda make better mid-range sedans then the Taurus and Monte Carlo.
I also think that most of the Japanese Iron is BORING. I would rather own a Jeep or a Mustang Cobra any day even if means I have to put up with some problems. The day I become a lemming and join the great unwashed in a boring/beige/proletariet machine please put me out of my misery.
The LS has a high owner loyalty rate and we have seen numerous repeat buyers/leesees.
Lincoln is now advertising up to $5000 rebates on the 2003 LSs. Combined with another $2800 or so that the "x" plan adds on, thats almost $8000 off a new model. How can you go wrong??
I called up my dealer to discuss the situation, and the best he'll offer me is $16000-16500 for my 3 year old, 25,000 mile, really sharp LS. This was a $39,500 car, brand new!! I won't do it, it's a waste of money, even considering how great the 2003s are......
* That's $0.95/mile
* $30.13/ day
Just for depreciation; doesn't count fuel, insurance & maintenance.
And, the car falls way short of the Lincoln LS in fun-to-drive, and directional stability
- Replace intermittent radio/CD at delivery.
- Replaced headlight covers.
- Replaced rear window regulators. (Prevent Maint only -nothing ever went wrong.)
- Replaced driver door beltline trim piece - broken hold-down clip.
I'm going to keep it around for sure. Recently put a 2002 airbox on it. Engine now breathes better, growls with authority and responds a bit better. Next, I'm putting magnaflo cat back system on it to pull some more ponies out. Soon will need new rubber. The OEM Firestones have done very well by me.
I will comment that I think the LS is overpriced. They must be a real hard sell right now. Was at the dealer week and half ago and probly 10 2003s on lot, all priced above $40k, most around $45-$47K. Around the same price as an AWD Aviator. There was also a new 2002 Vivid red LS V8 with $29,995 in the window. What a deal that would be. Of course, with rebates and all, can probly get a $47K sticker 2003 for under $40K. Still, that's $10,000 more than the '02.
Would I get another one? I'd love a 2003 with all the improvements. But no manual tranny avail any more. I'll just be happy with what I got for 150,000 miles at least. (Previous car was a MarkVIII. Sold to Sis-in-Law. It's now got 150,000 on it and running like a top.)
Lincolns are basically good vehicles, IMHO. A bit overpriced and with a mediocre at best dealer network. Depreciation? It's not good, but I'm not upside down as some are.
One downer for me right now: they're paying $$millions to Magic Johnson to be their spokesmouth. This money would be much better spent improving, say, the materials used in the LS so that it might not be as overpriced as it is. How many more Buicks has Tiger Woods sold? Personally, I'm less likely to be impressed or to buy a car whose mfgr is paying huge sums of money to a celebrity.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-07-23-dealer-service_x.h- tm
Now, what you could do to benefit from this situation, is probably find a year old used LS or probably a demo vehicle, that way you benefit from the depreciation. Same advice I give to Taurus buyers, just buy them a year old and for $13K
For the CTS, I don't think you are. The American car that competes with the LS is the CTS. With no incentives, it's moved significantly more units this year than the LS -- and this is the significantly improved '03 LS.
Go figure.
ball joint recall
license plate lights replaced under warranty
could use the tranny reflash but I don't care enough to risk going to the dealer quite yet
steering wheel clunk, quite common but again don't care enough to risk the potential collateral damage from dealer as they effect the repairs.
Headlights never fogged, as of yet...
rear windows, in spite of my best efforts no failures yet. When they fail that will likely be the problem that has me get the other issues above resolved.
My main gripe is the rapid depreciation, which I feel is worse than many other brands. Knowing what I know now I'd never buy a new Lincoln again. A clean low mile used one is the way to go.
As always, YMMV
Is the depreciation in real dollars worse than the Lexus in my earlier post? Or the one by Ant14?
If they base it on actual purchase prices, then that's something different. Do you know which method they use?
BTW: My cousin learned, painfully, that KBB is a lot more accurate than Edmunds in estimating value of used vehicles.
Lincolns and Cadillacs are notoriously poor at holding value. That shouldn't be news to anyone.
Finally, why would it surprise anybody that the brand new CTS is mildly outselling the 4 year old LS? Don't forget, it's not only new, but cheaper too.
I wonder if this is because they moved Lincoln out of the Premier Auto Group, or the result of the competition mentioned by other posters.
By the way, despite all those problems, it is nothing compared with owning british sports cars like I did in the past -- that is why I am not upset. However, it is a mistake to mislead new buyers into believing that car has no problems, or the same problems as other cars -- the first year LS simply was the product of poor manufacturing quality control -- the vast majority of posters on this forum at that time had problems -- but the car is so much fun, and Lincoln is usually so good about fixing the problems, it had to be accepted.
A) Bought a 98' Camry LE-V6, decently loaded, for $24,3XX. There weren't any incentives for his vehicle at that time. His insurance (clean record) came to roughly $1050 yearly. His vehicle required premium gas and spent $1320 yearly. During that time, out of warranty expenses came to $1200, this included a new A/C compressor, windshield wiper motor, power window motor, rear light bulb sets. Regular maintenence yearly (according to the maintenence manual) came to $680 (estimated yearly). He traded in his car 2 months ago and received $10,200.
While we see that A) had less of a depreciation than B...B had less of an overall operating cost for the vehicle overall. Mainly helped by cheaper parts, regular priced gas, cheaper insurance (attributed to cheaper parts and availability of them). SO B might have gotten less money for his trade in, A payed for higher operating costs.
One question - is the power window motor a weak spot in general on vehicles, particularly Ford makes? My '92 F150 power window died early, replaced under warranty. A couple friend's Ford's had similar issues. I literally only ever open the window at fast food drive-thru's, which is not often. Seems like they don't last very long.
PS - thanks for all the great Ford company info in your posts, I'm sure many here are grateful for all the good info.
I bought new this time and don't care about the Depreciation as much as I am going to keep this one a long time. Hopefully by the time the warranty is out I can bolt in a supercharger and get another boost good for a couple years.
One of the things Caddy has done well with the CTS is marketing. I think they have positioned the car to a bit younger crowd than Lincoln has with the LS. Caddy has used product placement (look how many cool movies the CTS is in lately and you know GM paid for that), Racing with the Le Mans series cars that had the same art and science theme (great styling tie-in), and some good old Led Zeppelin to get people to notice their commercials...
It depends on the use that the power window mechanism must endure. For example, the Taurus in the above example, the issue was that the rubber seal that's at the bottom of the window, on the outside side, was craked and warped, which led to water leaking into the interior structure of the door itself, WHERE the power window mechanism is housed. The reason to this was because the person parked the car, with western exposure hitting the driver's side of the car, where the FL sun ate up the rubber seal. Again, this is the rubber seal where the window pane itself rises out from.
So that explains how it was damage. Water leaked inside the housing, and by luck it happened that the water would drop into the mechanism (which is sealed and heavily bolted) but the mechanism itself was bathed in water, BECAUSE the lower part of the doors drainage holes were blocked with dirt (And the crackling plastic/rubber pieces from the above issue).
Personally, it would have been easy to just open up the mechanism, and dry it out, and it would have worked. BUT because of time constraints, the person was told "HEY it's broken and needs to be replaced". You would be amazed at how many times that power window mechanism just needs a "SHOVE" to unlock it from it's stuck position, and repair places will tell you it needs to be totally replaced. More $$$ for their pockets, and those motors usually retail $80-180, depending on the brand.
So far industry wise, VW is the one with the common power window problem, it's a defect from the supplier and they had a recall for it. One of the holding pins were plastic, and kept warping causing the window to just fall into it's door casing.
The early LS's had a similar supplier issue, and mainly occured with the rear doors. I personally have never had a window problem with my car, but living in FL I just avoid opening windows all together. The driver's side window is the only one which I open. But overall Ford's power window mechanisms, aren't problematic, it depends on the supplier, and on which vehicle they were fitted into.
Also, it's something that commonly breaks down on everyone's vehicles sooner or later. People just love ramming that button, and keep it held down when the window itself is at it's limit. I remember back when Mercedes Benz, used a relay/sensor. When the window would reach it's limit at the upper most, and bottom most level, it would it would null the button, to prevent the window from jamming. Not sure if they still use that now.
With the "one touch up and down" systems, that's pretty much the case, and helps lessen the above case senario. BUT I would say 90% of the time, when a power window fails, just open up the interior trim panel, get into the system, use a good hammer or a crowbar, and force that arm braket to unjam. I've been able to help some friend's vehicle that way. 8 times out of 10, a repair shop will tell you the whole mechanism needs to be replaced, when chances are, it simply jammed.
Vhkat,
The reason A) didn't depreciate overall, more than
The Taurus is just everywhere, and saturated in the market as well, BUT there's many of them in the used car market, from rental car companies which unload them after 2-3 years of use. When the market is saturated by such a vehicle, it's less wanted therefore causing less value come in at trade in. No one treats rental cars nicely, I admit...
EXAMPLE: When I've had relatives come into town which have had to rent a vehicle. I usually take the vehicle within the 15 minutes they drive out of the rental car agency, ram it into a curb (depending on the vehicle, each one has a different way of de-adjusting it), causing the alignment to screw-up. Then return to the rental car agency, where they are "NICE" enough to upgrade you to a bigger vehicle for your "BAD" experience. TIP: Do not do this with a Crown Vic/Grand Marquis, their alignment is VERY hard to de-adjust.
But my example was to show that even if the person paid a price premium because of the reputation of reliability that vehicle A) had, in the end he probably did receive more money for his trade in, but overall that reliability premium wasn't that aparent because the vehicle itself required costlier service and running costs.
Overall, I say if depreciation is an issue, and your the habit to switch vehicles every 3-5 years, then maybe a vehicle Lease might be better. ONLY IF, you are able to keep it within the milage constraints. Many of the currently leased vehicles have rediculous residuals that the automaker's will take a hit for when the consumer trades them in.
Why did I state 3-5 years, because that's when the depreciation of a vehicle hits the hardest, then levels down. If you lease at a 1 or 2 year period, you will definatly see a harder hit in depreciation reflected by your monthly payments. At the 3 to 5 level, it's lessened and most common.
GM is commonly known for giving their current leasing customer's the option to trade in their leases ahead of time, as long as they purchase or lease another vehicle from them. This is a common tactic for them to increase sales in the new car market, but they take the residual hit from this.
They do well in this tactic, ONLY when the person has some monetary catastrophy where at the end of the lease they must purchase the vehicle for whatever REASONS, then you will see the overinflated residual price, that they wish you to pay.
1)The Taurus had a higher trade-in value of +43% compared to Camry's -42%, and;
2)The Taurus owner saved about $1,000 a year over the Camry owner.
ANT14: Your depreciation claims in favor of the Camry over the Taurus aren't backed by your numbers. You explain why the Camry depreciated less w/o backing it with data, undermining your arguments. Deal with YOUR facts, please. Thanks.
* $0.95/mile
* $30.13/ day
Depreciation ONLY.
I don't see any hard evidence that the Lincoln LS costs that much.
Lincoln paid $34K (MSRP $38K) now worth $17 per Edmunds, 26.6K miles - owned since 10-2000.
depreciation $18 a day - 65 cents a mile
Lexus paid $31K now worth $27K per Edmunds, she's put 18K miles on it since July 2002.
depreciation $10 a day - 22 cents a mile.
I'm not sure cost per mile is a good metric as it rewards high miles. Hope I didn't make any math errors...!!
I've got a problem with that comparison. I think it's pretty well accepted that the first year's depreciation is by far the worst, yet it isn't included in the Lexus calculation.
Also, I believe that Kelley BB has more realistic prices.
Further, even is the two cars are different, they should be appraised as being in the same condition, and same color.
Regards
It's my experience that KBB is a lot lower than Edmunds TMV. This says to me that KBB represents selling, & Edmunds represents asking.
Also, it's a pleasure having a rational discussion. Thank you.
You posted some interesting figures for depreciation for a Taurus vs a Camry. But you then came to the wrong conclusion based on the numbers you presented and you can't seem to understand why people are calling you on this. Here's why:
Camry cost $24.3K Sold for $10.2K Depreciation = $14.1K
Taurus cost $19.3K Sold for $8.4K. Depreciation = $10.9K
Taurus depreciated $3200 LESS than the Camry. Less by % calc too. I hope that explains it.
The other beef I have is your 'EXAMPLE' in post 1258. That is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Seriously, think about what you're doing here. It could be considered a form of thievery. Not to mention the hidden damage you might possibly do to the front drive and steering on these cars. Maybe the next renter is a family with kids ...
As in, WHEN most calculate depreciation, they are going by the numbers that KBB or Edmunds publishes, not taking into account the overall ownership costs, of the vehicle themselves. Granted, one vehicle (as the Camry showed) had an expensive item that needed replacement, soon after warranty expired which escalted it's ownership costs as well. Ideally, it was ironic that the "reliable" Camry would have one too many items that needed repair/replacement, but it showed real world circumstances.
Overall the whole point to the original post was, that even if a vehicle might have a lower depreciation (as set forth by Kbb, Edmunds, Black Book, etc), many times it all evens out depending on ownership/running costs. MANY-- Being the key word.
However, I do agree that calculating from actual price does make a LOT more sense than from MSRP, for the individual buyers anyway. For example, and get back to LS topic, I just bought a LS V6 base for less than $24k, MSRP was $33K+. If I were to lease it, the RV is 41% for 3yr-36000 miles, very very bad. But, if you use the transaction price, the RV would have been 54%, which is pretty much in line with the import sedans (selling at or near MSRP) in this class. And, to think that you can get a Lincoln LS at a V6 CamCord price, only fools wouldn't jump on the deal.
If this indeed is the case, may I suggest that you go for leasing a V6 Premium? You can get ALL $7500 incentive and apply it on a shorter term (lease) deal! I know that Premium costs a lot more ($6000?), but your actual cost over the 3 years is not much: 3500 - 6000*41% = 1040, plus maybe 300 bucks in finance charge.
There's one more incentive that may take another $1000 off your lease, but I haven't confirmed it with my dealer. If you have a '98 or newer Mystique, Cougar or Villager, which were all discontinued, you can get additional $1000 off toward a Lincoln purchase(/lease??) or $500 for a Mercury. I think Ford calls it "drive back to Lincoln Mercury" or something similar. I used this 1000 on my LS.
As of my deal, it's something like this:
MSRP: 339xx
Price b4 rebates: 303xx
Normal rebates: -5500 (must finance through FC)
Mystique rebate: -1000
Net price: 238xx
Hope this helps.