On the LS-training site Lincoln lists what it perceives as LS competitors and reasons pro&con. Click on "competitive" when you get there. http://www.ls-training.com/
1. buckwheat: Maybe I was having trouble navagating, but I could only get the training site to give me competitors to the LS6 Sport. It showed BOTH 330i and 530i, not to mention 3.2TL, ES 300, 300M, and MB C-class. Is there a separate page for LS8 competitors? Does it show 540i? Jag S-type? MB E-class?
But I'm more in favor of relying on unbiased sources for my comparative and test purposes. That's why I'd rather go with automotive press than the manufacturer. A bit like saying I'll stick with Surgeon General's warning over what the Tobacco Institute puts out!
2. akirby: Some of the comments were insipid, but others were insightful. Seemed like many liked the LS (and its relative, the T-bird). Overall, most appeared to at least realize that Cadillac and Lincoln have a very very long way to go in recapturing their former markets. Now BMW, MB, Lexus, etc. are considered premier and cutting edge. What do Lincoln and Caddy lead in? 6,500 lb. gas guzzling SUVs?
I just got back from the show. I had a ball. I stood there for 6 hours answering questions and attempting to share my enthusiasm for the car with others. I got some real interesting comments from some folks and I was keeping notes. I will report on this in the LLSOC board in the Auto Show forum.
The LM folks there were real appreciative of our participation. Several times they asked me for help in answering questions.
For those who couldn't attend, you missed a great chance to experience things from the other side of the fence. Thanks JR for inviting us.
I have a 98 BMW528 and an LS8. It is a myth the the 528 has more room. It is actually smaller or feels so inside. The 528 is smooth and refined but doesnt feel as solid and imposing as the LS. The LS sport is more fun to drive. And the 528 also has plastic wood that looks about the same as the LS inside. Lots of plastic like the LS but fit and finish is a little better in the 528 but not significantly so. The cup holders in the 528 are really a joke. They have broken several times and cheerfully replaced by the dealer. The 528 tranny is shifting pretty roughly at 50k miles. It goes back off the lease in 3 weeks and I suspect it will need work on the tranny.
I haven't gotten involved in any of the discussions lately, but I think I'll toss in my $.02 worth on the exhaust system and air intake gains. From everything that I've read, along with my personal experience over the years, IMHO 3-5 HP gains here or there probably won't be felt in the seat of the pants or at the gas pump. A number of cars today, the LS included, already are fairly well tuned for a "higher performance level", if we could all figure out exactly what that means. Back in the late 70's, I took off the single exhaust system, and the intake manifold with the restricted secondaries from my Trans Am. I replaced these parts with a Hooker "side mount" header set, and a Holley single plane, high-rise intake manifold. These parts were significant departures from the stock parts, and the performance gains reflected that fact. A 400 cu. in. engine needs to breathe in order to produce power, and the stock parts severely restricted that. In recent years, I've added intake flow enhancers and better flowing exhaust parts to my 1996 Z-28. The results were barely noticible, despite the makers' claims of 3-5 HP for each mod. Why? Primarily because the 3-5 "Dyno Guaranteed HP" is achieved at wide open throtle. How often do we actually drive at WOT ? Secondly, the auto manufacturers, in many cases, have again realized that HP sells. They also have to contend with the EPA, and so forth, but today they're doing a better job of squeezing the HP from the engines right from the start. I'm not saying that there isn't room to improve, and as a serious "gearhead" I'm not saying that I'll ever be content with a stock automobile. What I am saying, however, is that serious "seat of the pants" gains are getting harder and more expensive to come by. Look at it this way... That 1977 Trans Am that I referred to, produced 200 HP stock, and let's be conservative and say that my modifications produced another 25 HP. That's 225 HP from 400 cu. in. The LS produces 252 HP stock, from 238 cu. in. That looks like progress to me, and it also looks like a "high output" engine if there ever was one, excepting race engines, of course. Sure, I'd like some more power, but what would be the cost, both in dollars and in driveability compromises ? I will now put on the Nomex suit and goggles...
Can't say I disagree with your basic premise. I just marvel that independent, non-biased, statistically significant performance test results usually can't be brought forward to substantiate the purported claims. Doesn't seem to be much definitive "proof" that the mods (a) significantly increase engine output (except maybe as you say at WOT) or (b) significantly increase performance measures like 0-60, 1/4 mile, or top speed.
These sorts of aftermarket mods often seem to cause concerns in regard to excessive noise, environmental quality, fuel economy, and warranty issues. Not to mention their relatively high cost for the claimed improvement. Maybe people like to spend the dough to have something to show others when they lift the hood? More a "show" than a "go" factor? Tied to a subjective output and performance gain placebo effect?
Excellent post, and I agree..manufacturers are squeezing as much power as they can out of engines. Also feel that with the electronics (PCM to us LS owners) controlling everything, its getting more and more difficult to get significant gains from mods. Also, if you add on 1 mod that says "increase of 5 hp" and another whose claim is "increase of 5hp", that doesnt necessarily mean a total of 10hp. Sometimes it means a total of 5hp combined. In the case of some mods on some engines, (ie big cone air filters sucking in hot underhood air) it means a LOSS of 5 hp.
I cheer what Brian and LLSOC are doing in testing mods for the LS. Im suggesting everyone else excersize caution before buying a lot of "performance improvement" mods until Brian et al can finish their testing, and let us know whats worth it and whats not.
And yes, I also agree that things have come a long way, and getting 252hp out of 238 cubic inches is a major improvement since 1977. But its even better when you get 281 hp out of that same 238 cubic inches (Jag 4.0 engine) without any penalty in gas mileage.
Usually most folks poo-poo me when I dismiss the marginal gains of bolt on stuff! After 10 years of driveability experience, I will strongly say that it takes a complete package of goodies to make a real difference. More engine power/torque, different gearing, tires/wheels, etc. I think the $350 big MAF is cool, but I wouldn't spend that for <5% HP gain. I might do the exhaust just for the sound. I will probably just leave mine stock until I am ready to blow the thou$ands to do it all out ;-)
Now putting on my nomex too and standing <b>behind leadfoot4...
leadfoot4 and thomas_l: Lightweights! I never wear Nomex underwear..... Ooops different discussion
You all have valid concerns about performance gains. I for one, have always been skeptical about the advertised gains that the vendors claim.
That said, the reason that the LLSOC project car exists is to evaluate the products and claims from vendors and provide unbiased opinions about the products and claims. We will be using the GTech-Pro accelerometer to provide real-world feedback regarding acceleration along with dyno results. The GTech-Pro will probably give us better feedback since it takes into account things the dyno can't, like wind resistance.
We will also be doing normal driving testing. The daily drive loop that I have now is ideal for testing enhancements since it has a wide mix of elevation changes along with driving environments like traffic and open road.
Where we will differ from a lot of other testing is that we will weight seat-of-the-pants feel equally with meter numbers. We'll also tell you if we feel the expense is worth the switch. This is obviously a personal opinion, since what is considered inexpensive for one person may not seem like it for another.
Sheer numbers will only be one part of the recommendation. Driveability and liveability will play large parts in the evaluation. The good part is I'm ornery enough to not be beholding to any of the vendors, no matter what their reputation is. We want LLSOC members to be happy with their decisions about performance upgrades and the best way to be that way is to give you as much real-world info. as possible so you can make your own decisions. If I don't think a product is worthy of inclusion on our cars, either from a quality, lack of valid results or cost, I won't recommend it.
I think a better way to get performance gains would be thru the manufacturer, Lincoln, either alone or they thru another firm (e.g., Calloway, etc.). Then it would be available retail, be EPA certified, meet warranty standards & be fully covered, etc. Would be nice if Lincoln might create their own "SVT" operation. LS a prime candidate! Maybe they could call it their "HRL" Team: Hot Rod Lincoln Team!!!
If Lincoln were to offer their support/sponsorship of an independent firm upgrading their car, I agree that that option would be the most favorable way pursuing enhancements (ala Roush, Calloway, Saleen). I thought that Levy Morgan with Spirit of Detroit Motor Sports was working on this . . .
In any event, my LS8 sport is approaching 2 years old, and I'd love a little more performance . . . soon! If things drag out much further, I may be tempted to just wait and see what Lincoln has up their sleeve with regard to the 2003 model year, and forego spending additional money on my current ride.
Thats it, while they speak about the V6 sport there are references to the V8 sport after clicking on a model for comparison, then using the column on the left. I did not come up with any others on that site that would relate to non-sport models.
Factory won't get involved. Remember that Lincoln's name is synonymous with luxury, not full-blown performance. Just read the comments from the Detroit News survey.
Keep in mind the enthusiasts are the exception, not the rule for the Lincoln brand. We are a new kind of buyer for Lincoln and until they have some history with us it would be hard for Lincoln to justify going to a performance image, at least until the LS got a bigger market share of the Lincoln buyers. And it actually ends up a loop, how will the LS get a bigger market share if it doesn't get more performance to attract enthusiast buyers because it doesn't have more performance, etc.....
That said I agree with g-man on seeing a performance group within Lincoln similar to SVT take on the performance aspect of the LS.
Brian, I think that you'll be doing everyone a great service by evaluating the various "speed parts" that are available. Being the skeptic that I am, and also because I've gone down this road a few times, I'll play devil's advocate and throw in one more point to ponder. That is, long term reliability. This is one thing that you can't always predict, but for example consider a set of exhaust headers. On the surface, they sound like a great idea,(pardon the pun) but over the long haul, they can be a royal pain. The first set that I personally had, was on my previously mentioned Firebird. The gaskets lasted 3-5 months of daily driving, and the collectors rusted off the head pipes after 2 summers of driving. My second set of headers went on another Firebird that I had in the mid 1980's. This set I had aluminized, and they're still on the car, as far as I know. (I sold the car 6 years ago) The gasket technology had improved by then, and a set would last a full year. In all honesty, however, the thought of doing a gasket replacement every year is not enticing any more. Especially, when I think back and recall that the second Firebird didn't seem to benefit that much from the "upgrade". Edelbrock, however, assured me that my 0-60 MPH time was reduced by a full .5 sec. !!! I'm not trying to knock anyone or any company for trying to offer performance improvements. What I'm trying to say is that you have to pick your modifications carefully. What are you willing to trade off for the increase in performance? In the case of our LS, I'd have to say "very little". My wife and I travel a bit with the car, and I need it to be as reliable as possible. There's nothing worse that breaking some custom part when you're a couple hundred miles from home, and the replacement will take 4 days to get. If you don't stray too far from home, you might be willing to try mods that potentially may compromise the reliability a little bit, if the HP or g-force gain is potentially big. I realize that this kind of data can only be developed over time. It seems that I've thrown in $.04 for today, so I'll sign off until Monday. Happy motoring to all !!
Just receive a call from the dealer and they said they replaced the tranny pan gasket (2nd time now) and it does not appear to be leaking (has been in 7 times for tranny fluid leaks). Has anyone else had their tranny pan gasket replaced because of leaks?
Definitely concur about aftermarket parts reliability. I've had several sets of headers that have rusted out from under me. Not to mention blown more than my fair share of exhaust gaskets. The Magnaflow setup, and Borla's for that matter, are both high marine quality stainless steel, that will last as long as the car. Both carry lifetime warranties.
I also haven't been at all convinced that the typical "shorty" header setup that is usually required for newer cars, buys very much in horsepower. That's why we aren't considering it on the project car. That and due to headers costing a pretty penny to develop and frankly, don't justify the cost to performance ratio not to mention the effort involved in making a swap which would put it beyond most LS owners resonableness tolerance, including my own
And the LS is a pretty good performing car. It has excellent driveability and handling characteristics. That's also why we aren't going to do too much to the engine system either. Same thing with the suspension. No lowering or stiff shocks, no 19" or greater wheels, no aspect ratios lower than a 50 series.
The biggest change that we might, and it is a big maybe due to the complexity, is a manual 6-speed swap. But since either a Getrag 6-speed or Tremec T-56 6-speed conversion hasn't been done before and since the computer reprogramming to let the manual work properly hasn't been done before either, we may not bother.
It sounds like they didn't torque the bolts properly the first time in the correct order. I seem to remember from my olden days that the trans. pan should be tightened by alternating back and forth across the bolt pattern and not tightening the bolts down to their final setting until all bolts were snugged down. This was to prevent the pan from twisting under the torque and not sealing the gasket properly.
What is it about the Jag that gives it more hp and better fuel economy than the LS for the similar V8 engine?
And more importantly, why isn't the LS using this, it is obviously a better selling feature when comparing this car to others. It seems obvious that MPG is one of the sticking points of most LS members and probably a reason why new buyers may look elsewhere to purchase. Being in sales, this one hit me hard, but the value of the car overweighted the MPG, but this was my analysis. Others may be different.
Welcome to the forum! This has been discussed several times. The engines in the S series Jags are basically the same as in the LS's, with one major exception. The engine in the LS V6 is pretty much the same as the engine in the Jag S class 3.0. The LSV8 engine is similiar to the Jag S class 4.0 The heads have variable timing, a technology that many automakers use. Its quite effective in getting more power, with pretty much no penalty at all, except for additional expense for the manufacturing of the heads. From my understanding though, Variable timing (VVT to Jaguar, VTEC to Acura, and other manufacturers call it different things) is not that expensive. Why doesnt Lincoln use it on the LS? 1)To keep cost down and 2) to differentiate between the S class and LS. Marketing execs feel if the LS has the exact same HP ratings as their Jag S class cousins, then why would people pay more for the Jag S class? Many others disagree with that theory, but thats the predominant reason why. Theres also different variations on the variable intake theme. Other more technical types on this forum can go into more detail..
The following is a scan taken by the poster of the following link: http://cv.clanhappy.com/IMBoring25/lincolnvert.jpg - It is a scan of a new Lincoln convertible/sedan as pictured in Motor Trend magazine, note the four doors and also note the caption beneath the rendering of the car on the top right.
This is off-topic, but I need to tap the knowledge base of this forum.
I recently sold my Miata (too small). I'm looking for a $20,000 - $30,000 convertible. I've looked closely at the Mustang GT 5-speed & like it a lot except for seat comfort.
Any thoughts on: A) A ragtop in that price range, or How to deal with Mustang seat comfort. I've considered & rejected Recaro due to 6-8 week wait, and the gamble ... unknown comfort for my body, and inability to get refund if dissatisfied.
This LS owner needs your help in finding his manual transmission drop-top summer car.
Gary, I'm amazed that your LS trannie downshifts so easily. I feel mine is too slow to downshift. Just did a check yesterday going up a big hill at 60 MPH in 5th, I had to nearly floor the thing to get it to downshift. I wonder if something is different between your very early build and my Jan 2000 trannies.
Re Mustang's, every year about this time my wife starts whinning about getting her a red Mustang convertable. Sounds good until you go and sit in one and drive it. I guess I can compliment the Ford engineers at what a great job they have done sprucing up a 1978 Fairmont chassis, but it's still an antique. I'd wait for the new 2003 DEW-98 light based Mustang. Hopefully then we'll finally have a new Mustang delivers on its image. In the mean time pick up a used Mustang that you won't lose much $ on during the next 2 years.
buckwheat - I like the Lincoln convertable rear end, looks nice and has a somewhat unique look. However, between the MK-9 and convertable front end sketch, Jerry and the boys still have some work to do.
There must be some variations in shifting characteristics or else we all see things slightly differently. I think my 4/99 build transmission is perfect. About 40% throttle unlocks the converter - 70% brings on a downshift. It is utterly predictable and while my percentages may not be exact in all speed ranges, the car always responds exactly as anticipated based on my right foot.
I like to shift manually in the lower gears for fun and just to avoid upshifts when there is no need for one. No matter how good an automatic transmission is, they cannot anticipate the traffic ahead or your intentions.
The Mustang convertible wasn't too well liked by Car & Driver in their recent comparison. They complained about seat comfort, too. I hate to say this, being a hard core Ford man, but have you looked at a Camaro?
I agree with both of you guys: The MT Lincoln convertible sketch presents a real nice rear end treatment and the body lines look good too, but the front end is out of place. Too much like an Evoq or an Imag.
BTW, re the Mark 9 concept, at least one automotive writer likes it. Go to http://www.autoextremist.com to read his view. This site presents an unconventional look at the auto industry. Worth reading. Lots of NASCAR and other race-oriented info too.
Convertibles: This may be over the $ limit, but I'll mention it anyway: Audi TT convertible. Or, hey, how about a BMW 3-series conv? Nah. OK, then here's the ticket: the new Chrysler Sebring convertible looks great. I think you can get one well-equipped for about $30K.
I'm becoming curious about the demographics of LS owners. Participants in this board seem to be mostly men in the 30s to 50s age group, which is to be expected of car enthusiasts who can afford a fairly expensive ride. Based on what I see on the road, the LS seems to be a favorite of older women. Seems like every time I see one at the dealership waiting for service, it has a box of Kleenex in the rear window shelf! Last week I got a call from an old friend I hadn't spoken with in a year. I mentioned my new car and he said "Cool! My (65 year-old) Mom has one and she loves it!"
I'm glad the LS is selling well, but wonder who's buying them. How many are driving enthusiasts and how many are people looking for Lincoln luxury in a smaller package? The responsiveness of the folks at LM to our group is especially gratifying if we are actually a minority among LS owners.
I live in a fairly small city in a rural area, so my viewpoint is pretty limited. You folks who live in more populous areas: Who do you see driving the LS on the road?
One place that has this data is Daniel Heraud's huge annual Road Report. Anyone have the '01 edition?
Most current one I have is the '00 edition. LS too new for '00. But data for Continental shows 87% male buyers, average age 66, 84% married, 34% have college degree, and average income $72K. For Town Car, numbers are 91% male, age 68, 84% married, 23% college, and $52K income.
'00 does list data for Jag S-type: 60% men, age 45, 78% married, 75% college, and $100K income.
For Catera: 78% men, age 56, 84% married, 59% college, and $80K income. For BMW 3 Series: 62% men, 39 age, 38% married, 64% college, and $62K income. BMW 5 Series: 80% men, age 50, 84% married, 67% college, and $135K income.
You folks ought to be ashamed of yourselves for your presentation of the Merc Marauder at the NY Autoshow. Take a look at my posts in the Marauder chatbox and respond, if you have the nerve. Yes, this is a one man post, but, trust me, many lookers had the same comments. Why even present a Marauder if you weren't really serious? Why tease those that really want a full size performance sedan? You were selling plenty of GM's, so why not put your bucks into "better cup holders" or "additional PC outlets"? (Sorry LS folks, but the L&M guys seem to have forgotten the M.)
I just buy my copy at a major bookseller like Borders or Barnes & Noble. The '00 edition runs 399 pages. It doesn't list a web site. The ISBN is 1-895100-05-04. The '00 edition was the 15th. In the author's section Daniel says "Thanks to strong distribution in the US with Barnes & Noble, in Canada with Firefly Books, and our relationship with Microsoft's CarPoint". He is Canadian. It is printed and bound in Canada. He gives both US and Canadian sales figures.
Here's what I think I know: 1) I've owned one for almost a year (manual, only audio options) and will on my car's anniversary post something memorable; 2) I drive my cars hard, both short-term (to work and back) and long-term (I expect the thing to last 200K miles, minimum), and typically take a 3000 - 5000-mile driving vacation in the autumn on an annual basis; 3) This car has been compromised in a number of areas, particularly as regards performance, emissions & mileage
Regarding Scottc8's observation that "In God we trust. . .all others bring data," the bulk of what the high-performance modification crowd (air filters, chips, exhaust systems, etc.) brings to the table is hype and talk. Is the acceleration "really" better, and if so, at what mpg or durability price? Brian's efforts to test these products are to be commended, but I won't be surprised if many of them don't produce. . .or if they do, that we won't be able to evaluate the durability effects.
Ever since I drove an MGB, then later a 240-Z, I've been having lively discussions with shade tree mechanics who thought that their particular modification was the answer to the maiden's prayer. In most cases, when the mod was discussed at length, it was at the expense of some other parameter that the general public considered important -- like say that the vehicle would continue to run a year hence or that fuel economy was still in the double digits. Clearly, in the electronic control age, making modifications are even more difficult, but with the LS's delivered emphasis on Ultra Low Emissions and avoiding the "fuel guzzler" tax, we're fighting an uphill battle.
Data rules. If modification XYZ makes an improvement, tell me about the fuel ecomony effects and how the longevity of the engine/transmission is affected. . .or not.
I assume you're looking for something sporty rather than a boulevardier--that would probably rule out the Sebring (auto only) and the Toyota Solara (pricey, auto only, lousy reviews--lots of cowl shake); both are front-drive and definitely aren't hot rods.
The TT is expensive even in base form and is not much bigger than the Miata; ditto the Merc SLK. The Toyo MR2 is reasonably-priced and gets great reviews, but it's also Miata-sized.
The BMW Z3 2.5 (inline 6, rear drive) is at the top of your range without options, but it's a bit larger than the Miata and has that Bimmer cachet. The Z28 and TransAm both run like stink, but their ergonomics are crummy, their build quality is questionable, and they're both out of production after '02.
The Mitsubishi Eclipse GT seems a reasonable alternative; available with a manual V6 & in the price range. A bit larger than the Miata, but it's front-drive.
Slunar may have hit on the best alternative--a low-mileage '99 Mustang for a couple of years until the new 'Stang is available. You might have the same seat problem there, though.
A note on Recaros: I had 'em in my '79 Mustang (they were factory-installed) and they were fantastic. I'm sure they were the base models at that time, but I loved them; absolutely great. Is there a Recaro dealer near you so that you could at least try one in a showroom? An alternative is to go to an office furniture store--Recaro makes office chairs, and you might be able to get some idea from them. Also, if you're going to keep the car for several years, a 6-8 week wait for a good seat shouldn't be that big a burden; I'd say it's worth reconsidering.
If I could afford a weekend ragtop, the Mustang GT would probably be at the top of my list, even if I had to get a Recaro (or a Scheel) to make it right. Remember, this opinion and a couple of dollars will get you caffeinated at Starbuck's.
This could be kinda costly, but what about new cams? That shouldn't be too hard to do. They will most likely have a detrimental affect on mpg. Maybe some idling issues also. I guess it would depend on how aggresive the stock cams are. Maybe this could be something for the LS-GT. Just my $.01
I'd rather just bolt on the VVT heads than play with the cams. VVT automatically changes the timing with rpm. Also there are emission compliance concerns. Should be bolt-in. Someone should check on the cost!!! Also I would like to see the demographics on the buyers of the Manual. I bet they are slightly different than those of the Autos. No senior ladies here!
"Just has me burned up that I'm sure the vast majority or S-Type drivers wouldn't know or care what a VVT head was if one fell in their laps, while Ford's Preimer Auto Group has decided that LS drivers can't have the good "go fast parts". "
If the LS heads were exchanged with the Jag (& all the other necessary stuff) I bet Jag marketing could sell the feature as CVT (constant valve timing) and most Jag owners would consider it a premium vs the 'inconsistent' variable valve timing of the LS.
Out here in affluent (and over taxed) southern New England I have yet to see a women (besides my wife) behind the wheel of a LS. LS's are probably too low brow for the BMW & Mercedes driving rich folk I live amongst. The top demo. driving an LS appears to be a 40-50 year old male who looks like a salesman.
However S-types are a different story, I'd say 8 out of 10 S-Types I see are being driven by women, generally in the 50 - 65 age group. If I haven't yet convinced you that there is too much $$ floating around here, I'd say the # of S-Types I see on the road out numbers the # of LS's by at least 3 to 1.
I just have to wonder does the Heraud's info. accurately reflect who is actually driving the car. I'll bet that 60% of Jag's are bought by men, but a fair # of them are actually bought for their wives to drive.
Most of the S-Types I see women drivng are 3.0's (V6) and most of the (much fewer) 4.0's I see are driven my men. Just has me burned up that I'm sure the vast majority or S-Type drivers wouldn't know or care what a VVT head was if one fell in their laps, while Ford's Preimer Auto Group has decided that LS drivers can't have the good "go fast parts".
The Jaguar engine as an option in the LS, complete with Jag logo on the covers. Jaguar would maintain their superiority over us because we'd be "borrowing" their engine, and we'd get the ponies.
I share cdnpinhead's concern with longevity. If an air filter, for example, could deliver a 10 hp gain but at the expense of ANY measurable amount of additional dirt entering the engine, I would reject it.
By the way, it was gschwartz who posted the "in God we trust . . ." quote, not me. Personally, I am absolutely certain that my car runs better when it is clean and freshly waxed, and haven't a shred of scientific data to back that up.
As I mentioned a little while ago, we are changing the names of some of our discussions to drop the various "Part" indicators.
Now that we have moved to our new platform, we no longer have the requirement to stop and restart discussions after the numbers of posts exceed a certain limit. Since this discussion can continue as long as anyone wants to talk about the Lincoln LS, there is no longer a need for the "Part XIII" that has been included in the discussion name. Down the road, that could confuse our newer members so I have removed it. I altered the name of the original LS discussion in the Archives to distinguish it from this one.
Pat Host Sedans and Women's Auto Center Message Boards
I agree. My cousin in Irvine, a big insurance co. executive, bought his wife a new S-Type 3.0. She is near 60. I talked to her on Thursday and showed her our group car picture at LS Mania. You're right. The average S-Type driver doesn't know, doesn't care about VVT, so why waste it on them? A Jag is just an ornate and different-looking rolling appliance. Most of the men I see driving Jags appear to have "alternative orientations". Many look like Gerry McGovern (can I borrow that Nomex suit from someone now?)
Comments
But I'm more in favor of relying on unbiased sources for my comparative and test purposes. That's why I'd rather go with automotive press than the manufacturer. A bit like saying I'll stick with Surgeon General's warning over what the Tobacco Institute puts out!
2. akirby: Some of the comments were insipid, but others were insightful. Seemed like many liked the LS (and its relative, the T-bird). Overall, most appeared to at least realize that Cadillac and Lincoln have a very very long way to go in recapturing their former markets. Now BMW, MB, Lexus, etc. are considered premier and cutting edge. What do Lincoln and Caddy lead in? 6,500 lb. gas guzzling SUVs?
The LM folks there were real appreciative of our participation. Several times they asked me for help in answering questions.
For those who couldn't attend, you missed a great chance to experience things from the other side of the fence. Thanks JR for inviting us.
Joe
From everything that I've read, along with my personal experience over the years, IMHO 3-5 HP gains here or there probably won't be felt in the seat of the pants or at the gas pump. A number of cars today, the LS included, already are fairly well tuned for a "higher performance level", if we could all figure out exactly what that means.
Back in the late 70's, I took off the single exhaust system, and the intake manifold with the restricted secondaries from my Trans Am. I replaced these parts with a Hooker "side mount" header set, and a Holley single plane, high-rise intake manifold. These parts were significant departures from the stock parts, and the performance gains reflected that fact. A 400 cu. in. engine needs to breathe in order to produce power, and the stock parts severely restricted that.
In recent years, I've added intake flow enhancers and better flowing exhaust parts to my 1996 Z-28. The results were barely noticible, despite the makers' claims of 3-5 HP for each mod. Why? Primarily because the 3-5 "Dyno Guaranteed HP" is achieved at wide open throtle. How often do we actually drive at WOT ?
Secondly, the auto manufacturers, in many cases, have again realized that HP sells. They also have to contend with the EPA, and so forth, but today they're doing a better job of squeezing the HP from the engines right from the start. I'm not saying that there isn't room to improve, and as a serious "gearhead" I'm not saying that I'll ever be content with a stock automobile.
What I am saying, however, is that serious "seat of the pants" gains are getting harder and more expensive to come by. Look at it this way... That 1977 Trans Am that I referred to, produced 200 HP stock, and let's be conservative and say that my modifications produced another 25 HP. That's 225 HP from 400 cu. in. The LS produces 252 HP stock, from 238 cu. in. That looks like progress to me, and it also looks like a "high output" engine if there ever was one, excepting race engines, of course. Sure, I'd like some more power, but what would be the cost, both in dollars and in driveability compromises ?
I will now put on the Nomex suit and goggles...
These sorts of aftermarket mods often seem to cause concerns in regard to excessive noise, environmental quality, fuel economy, and warranty issues. Not to mention their relatively high cost for the claimed improvement. Maybe people like to spend the dough to have something to show others when they lift the hood? More a "show" than a "go" factor? Tied to a subjective output and performance gain placebo effect?
I cheer what Brian and LLSOC are doing in testing mods for the LS. Im suggesting everyone else excersize caution before buying a lot of "performance improvement" mods until Brian et al can finish their testing, and let us know whats worth it and whats not.
And yes, I also agree that things have come a long way, and getting 252hp out of 238 cubic inches is a major improvement since 1977. But its even better when you get 281 hp out of that same 238 cubic inches (Jag 4.0 engine) without any penalty in gas mileage.
Also keep in mind an engineer's axiom. In God we trust; all others bring data.
Now putting on my nomex too and standing <b>behind leadfoot4...
You all have valid concerns about performance gains. I for one, have always been skeptical about the advertised gains that the vendors claim.
That said, the reason that the LLSOC project car exists is to evaluate the products and claims from vendors and provide unbiased opinions about the products and claims. We will be using the GTech-Pro accelerometer to provide real-world feedback regarding acceleration along with dyno results. The GTech-Pro will probably give us better feedback since it takes into account things the dyno can't, like wind resistance.
We will also be doing normal driving testing. The daily drive loop that I have now is ideal for testing enhancements since it has a wide mix of elevation changes along with driving environments like traffic and open road.
Where we will differ from a lot of other testing is that we will weight seat-of-the-pants feel equally with meter numbers. We'll also tell you if we feel the expense is worth the switch. This is obviously a personal opinion, since what is considered inexpensive for one person may not seem like it for another.
Sheer numbers will only be one part of the recommendation. Driveability and liveability will play large parts in the evaluation. The good part is I'm ornery enough to not be beholding to any of the vendors, no matter what their reputation is. We want LLSOC members to be happy with their decisions about performance upgrades and the best way to be that way is to give you as much real-world info. as possible so you can make your own decisions. If I don't think a product is worthy of inclusion on our cars, either from a quality, lack of valid results or cost, I won't recommend it.
Brian
In any event, my LS8 sport is approaching 2 years old, and I'd love a little more performance . . . soon! If things drag out much further, I may be tempted to just wait and see what Lincoln has up their sleeve with regard to the 2003 model year, and forego spending additional money on my current ride.
Factory won't get involved. Remember that Lincoln's name is synonymous with luxury, not full-blown performance. Just read the comments from the Detroit News survey.
Keep in mind the enthusiasts are the exception, not the rule for the Lincoln brand. We are a new kind of buyer for Lincoln and until they have some history with us it would be hard for Lincoln to justify going to a performance image, at least until the LS got a bigger market share of the Lincoln buyers. And it actually ends up a loop, how will the LS get a bigger market share if it doesn't get more performance to attract enthusiast buyers because it doesn't have more performance, etc.....
That said I agree with g-man on seeing a performance group within Lincoln similar to SVT take on the performance aspect of the LS.
Brian
Being the skeptic that I am, and also because I've gone down this road a few times, I'll play devil's advocate and throw in one more point to ponder. That is, long term reliability.
This is one thing that you can't always predict, but for example consider a set of exhaust headers. On the surface, they sound like a great idea,(pardon the pun) but over the long haul, they can be a royal pain. The first set that I personally had, was on my previously mentioned Firebird. The gaskets lasted 3-5 months of daily driving, and the collectors rusted off the head pipes after 2 summers of driving.
My second set of headers went on another Firebird that I had in the mid 1980's. This set I had aluminized, and they're still on the car, as far as I know. (I sold the car 6 years ago) The gasket technology had improved by then, and a set would last a full year. In all honesty, however, the thought of doing a gasket replacement every year is not enticing any more. Especially, when I think back and recall that the second Firebird didn't seem to benefit that much from the "upgrade". Edelbrock, however, assured me that my 0-60 MPH time was reduced by a full .5 sec. !!!
I'm not trying to knock anyone or any company for trying to offer performance improvements. What I'm trying to say is that you have to pick your modifications carefully. What are you willing to trade off for the increase in performance? In the case of our LS, I'd have to say "very little". My wife and I travel a bit with the car, and I need it to be as reliable as possible. There's nothing worse that breaking some custom part when you're a couple hundred miles from home, and the replacement will take 4 days to get. If you don't stray too far from home, you might be willing to try mods that potentially may compromise the reliability a little bit, if the HP or g-force gain is potentially big. I realize that this kind of data can only be developed over time.
It seems that I've thrown in $.04 for today, so I'll sign off until Monday. Happy motoring to all !!
I also haven't been at all convinced that the typical "shorty" header setup that is usually required for newer cars, buys very much in horsepower. That's why we aren't considering it on the project car. That and due to headers costing a pretty penny to develop and frankly, don't justify the cost to performance ratio not to mention the effort involved in making a swap which would put it beyond most LS owners resonableness tolerance, including my own
And the LS is a pretty good performing car. It has excellent driveability and handling characteristics. That's also why we aren't going to do too much to the engine system either. Same thing with the suspension. No lowering or stiff shocks, no 19" or greater wheels, no aspect ratios lower than a 50 series.
The biggest change that we might, and it is a big maybe due to the complexity, is a manual 6-speed swap. But since either a Getrag 6-speed or Tremec T-56 6-speed conversion hasn't been done before and since the computer reprogramming to let the manual work properly hasn't been done before either, we may not bother.
Brian
And more importantly, why isn't the LS using this, it is obviously a better selling feature when comparing this car to others. It seems obvious that MPG is one of the sticking points of most LS members and probably a reason why new buyers may look elsewhere to purchase. Being in sales, this one hit me hard, but the value of the car overweighted the MPG, but this was my analysis. Others may be different.
Jeff
I particularly like the rear end styling.
I recently sold my Miata (too small). I'm looking for a $20,000 - $30,000 convertible. I've looked closely at the Mustang GT 5-speed & like it a lot except for seat comfort.
Any thoughts on: A) A ragtop in that price range, or
This LS owner needs your help in finding his manual transmission drop-top summer car.
Re Mustang's, every year about this time my wife starts whinning about getting her a red Mustang convertable. Sounds good until you go and sit in one and drive it. I guess I can compliment the Ford engineers at what a great job they have done sprucing up a 1978 Fairmont chassis, but it's still an antique. I'd wait for the new 2003 DEW-98 light based Mustang. Hopefully then we'll finally have a new Mustang delivers on its image. In the mean time pick up a used Mustang that you won't lose much $ on during the next 2 years.
buckwheat - I like the Lincoln convertable rear end, looks nice and has a somewhat unique look. However, between the MK-9 and convertable front end sketch, Jerry and the boys still have some work to do.
I like to shift manually in the lower gears for fun and just to avoid upshifts when there is no need for one. No matter how good an automatic transmission is, they cannot anticipate the traffic ahead or your intentions.
The Mustang convertible wasn't too well liked by Car & Driver in their recent comparison. They complained about seat comfort, too. I hate to say this, being a hard core Ford man, but have you looked at a Camaro?
Bruce
BTW, re the Mark 9 concept, at least one automotive writer likes it. Go to http://www.autoextremist.com to read his view. This site presents an unconventional look at the auto industry. Worth reading. Lots of NASCAR and other race-oriented info too.
Convertibles: This may be over the $ limit, but I'll mention it anyway: Audi TT convertible. Or, hey, how about a BMW 3-series conv? Nah. OK, then here's the ticket: the new Chrysler Sebring convertible looks great. I think you can get one well-equipped for about $30K.
George
Here is a link to some streaming video of the Mk9.
http://liveautos.net/ny01mk9.ram
Also, video of the Lincoln press conference at the NY Auto Show.
http://liveautos.net/ny01lincoln.ram
I'm glad the LS is selling well, but wonder who's buying them. How many are driving enthusiasts and how many are people looking for Lincoln luxury in a smaller package? The responsiveness of the folks at LM to our group is especially gratifying if we are actually a minority among LS owners.
I live in a fairly small city in a rural area, so my viewpoint is pretty limited. You folks who live in more populous areas: Who do you see driving the LS on the road?
Scott
Most current one I have is the '00 edition. LS too new for '00. But data for Continental shows 87% male buyers, average age 66, 84% married, 34% have college degree, and average income $72K. For Town Car, numbers are 91% male, age 68, 84% married, 23% college, and $52K income.
'00 does list data for Jag S-type: 60% men, age 45, 78% married, 75% college, and $100K income.
For Catera: 78% men, age 56, 84% married, 59% college, and $80K income. For BMW 3 Series: 62% men, 39 age, 38% married, 64% college, and $62K income. BMW 5 Series: 80% men, age 50, 84% married, 67% college, and $135K income.
Why even present a Marauder if you weren't really serious? Why tease those that really want a full size performance sedan? You were selling plenty of GM's, so why not put your bucks into "better cup holders" or "additional PC outlets"?
(Sorry LS folks, but the L&M guys seem to have forgotten the M.)
Where can I go to find info. on that publication? Haven't heard of it before.
Thanks,
Brian
Brian
Bless you for your pragmatic approach to the LS.
Here's what I think I know: 1) I've owned one for almost a year (manual, only audio options) and will on my car's anniversary post something memorable; 2) I drive my cars hard, both short-term (to work and back) and long-term (I expect the thing to last 200K miles, minimum), and typically take a 3000 - 5000-mile driving vacation in the autumn on an annual basis; 3) This car has been compromised in a number of areas, particularly as regards performance, emissions & mileage
Regarding Scottc8's observation that "In God we trust. . .all others bring data," the bulk of what the high-performance modification crowd (air filters, chips, exhaust systems, etc.) brings to the table is hype and talk. Is the acceleration "really" better, and if so, at what mpg or durability price? Brian's efforts to test these products are to be commended, but I won't be surprised if many of them don't produce. . .or if they do, that we won't be able to evaluate the durability effects.
Ever since I drove an MGB, then later a 240-Z, I've been having lively discussions with shade tree mechanics who thought that their particular modification was the answer to the maiden's prayer. In most cases, when the mod was discussed at length, it was at the expense of some other parameter that the general public considered important -- like say that the vehicle would continue to run a year hence or that fuel economy was still in the double digits. Clearly, in the electronic control age, making modifications are even more difficult, but with the LS's delivered emphasis on Ultra Low Emissions and avoiding the "fuel guzzler" tax, we're fighting an uphill battle.
Data rules. If modification XYZ makes an improvement, tell me about the fuel ecomony effects and how the longevity of the engine/transmission is affected. . .or not.
The TT is expensive even in base form and is not much bigger than the Miata; ditto the Merc SLK. The Toyo MR2 is reasonably-priced and gets great reviews, but it's also Miata-sized.
The BMW Z3 2.5 (inline 6, rear drive) is at the top of your range without options, but it's a bit larger than the Miata and has that Bimmer cachet. The Z28 and TransAm both run like stink, but their ergonomics are crummy, their build quality is questionable, and they're both out of production after '02.
The Mitsubishi Eclipse GT seems a reasonable alternative; available with a manual V6 & in the price range. A bit larger than the Miata, but it's front-drive.
Slunar may have hit on the best alternative--a low-mileage '99 Mustang for a couple of years until the new 'Stang is available. You might have the same seat problem there, though.
A note on Recaros: I had 'em in my '79 Mustang (they were factory-installed) and they were fantastic. I'm sure they were the base models at that time, but I loved them; absolutely great. Is there a Recaro dealer near you so that you could at least try one in a showroom? An alternative is to go to an office furniture store--Recaro makes office chairs, and you might be able to get some idea from them. Also, if you're going to keep the car for several years, a 6-8 week wait for a good seat shouldn't be that big a burden; I'd say it's worth reconsidering.
If I could afford a weekend ragtop, the Mustang GT would probably be at the top of my list, even if I had to get a Recaro (or a Scheel) to make it right. Remember, this opinion and a couple of dollars will get you caffeinated at Starbuck's.
Also I would like to see the demographics on the buyers of the Manual. I bet they are slightly different than those of the Autos. No senior ladies here!
"Just has me burned up that I'm sure the vast majority or S-Type drivers wouldn't know or care what a VVT head was if one fell in their laps, while Ford's Preimer Auto Group has decided that LS drivers can't have the good "go fast parts". "
If the LS heads were exchanged with the Jag (& all the other necessary stuff) I bet Jag marketing could sell the feature as CVT (constant valve timing) and most Jag owners would consider it a premium vs the 'inconsistent' variable valve timing of the LS.
Also, I don't see how anything could confuse newer members more than the spell checker.
However S-types are a different story, I'd say 8 out of 10 S-Types I see are being driven by women, generally in the 50 - 65 age group. If I haven't yet convinced you that there is too much $$ floating around here, I'd say the # of S-Types I see on the road out numbers the # of LS's by at least 3 to 1.
Most of the S-Types I see women drivng are 3.0's (V6) and most of the (much fewer) 4.0's I see are driven my men. Just has me burned up that I'm sure the vast majority or S-Type drivers wouldn't know or care what a VVT head was if one fell in their laps, while Ford's Preimer Auto Group has decided that LS drivers can't have the good "go fast parts".
Brian
I share cdnpinhead's concern with longevity. If an air filter, for example, could deliver a 10 hp gain but at the expense of ANY measurable amount of additional dirt entering the engine, I would reject it.
By the way, it was gschwartz who posted the "in God we trust . . ." quote, not me. Personally, I am absolutely certain that my car runs better when it is clean and freshly waxed, and haven't a shred of scientific data to back that up.
Scott
As I mentioned a little while ago, we are changing the names of some of our discussions to drop the various "Part" indicators.
Now that we have moved to our new platform, we no longer have the requirement to stop and restart discussions after the numbers of posts exceed a certain limit. Since this discussion can continue as long as anyone wants to talk about the Lincoln LS, there is no longer a need for the "Part XIII" that has been included in the discussion name. Down the road, that could confuse our newer members so I have removed it. I altered the name of the original LS discussion in the Archives to distinguish it from this one.
Pat
Host
Sedans and Women's Auto Center Message Boards