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
The published acceleration difference, however, is large, significant, and widely reported. LS8 auto 0-60 time around 7.2-7.5. The LS6 auto 0-60 time in mid 9 seconds range. Does anyone think there is a comparable difference between a 2 second 0-60 time versus a 1% weight difference?
For those extolling the differences in weight balance and handling in favor of LS6 auto but viewing the acceleration figures as being of limited practical difference, guess I'm missing something. The numbers and reported test results appear to almost uniformly come to the opposite conclusion.
After 32,000 miles in my LS8 Sport and a couple thousand in my mom's '00 LS6 auto base, there is a HUGE difference in acceleration, passing, merging, etc. What I can do comfortably and quickly on a 2-lane road in my LS8 Sport, I can't do in her LS6 auto.
And the EPA mileage figure similarity is merely a result of a too small V-6 being used in such a heavy car. Plus final drive differences. The LS6 auto is much, much slower and doesn't produce much of a big difference in economy.
Just my $.02 worth on the V-6 vs. V-8 discussion that pops up from time to time. I have the V-8, but the two LS loaners that my dealer has are both V-6's, and the first LS I drove was one of these loaners. (My friend's TC was in for service) The difference in acceleration is indeed there, but it's not exactly a night and day difference. For most daily driving, I'm sure that the V-6 is more than adequate. The difference doesn't start to become noticible until 70 MPH or so.
regards,
Airwolf1000
I did have a dimple about the size of a silver dollar under the passenger rear door handle. In the center of it was visible plainly a circular spot about 1/2 size of a nickel. (Weld? I dunno) In any case this one did bother me. Dealer body shop fixed it and it looks just fine now.
Does Lincoln need to do a better job with body and paint quality? Definitely.
However, along this line, parked next to me yesterday at work was a brand new Mercedes ML430 SUV. The paint on my Autumn Red LS was *much* nicer than the Benz. Orange peel was quite easily visible on it.
Last V6 vs V8. At the autocross in Irvine, I was able to drive V6 manual, and V6 and V8 autos, all sport packages. This experience solidified the decision my wife and I had made to buy the V6 manual LS. While the V8 is undoubtedly a bit quicker, the better balance of the V6 made it the better car in the autocross, IMHO. I could plainly feel the handling difference between the two and ascribed it to the better balance of the V6. Not that I think the difference was major, not at all. But it was discernable.
Also, the 3 autocross circuits set up in Irvine, while similar, were not identical. Unless you drove each LS version on the same track, it would be even more difficult to discern a real handling difference, particularly if you drove your own model more than the other. On the Irvine autocross circuit I drove on, a V6 was not present. The only time I drove the V6 in Irvine was on the shorter Gymkana course and I was more aware of power difference than a handling difference. In all, I think most non-professional drivers would have a real tough time noting the weight and weight distribution differences.
However I found the fuel burn on the V6 about 25% better....which interestingly is almost the same as the cubic inch increase on the V8. It seems to be a trade off of how much we like to accelerate hard from mid-range speeds vs.how much pleasure we get from 3 or 4 more MPG.
As far as balance, I think options add to the factor. Are we comparing a LSV6 Sport Auto with FULL sized 17 inch spare and heavier Audiophile System to a LSV8 Sport Auto with the weight saving smaller spare and NO heavy audiophile? Or are we comparing a LSV8 Sport Auto with fullsized spare and audiophile against a LSV6 with small sized spare and no audiophile? Might be another 1-2% difference in balance variances right there.
But seriously, I understand completely your argument that the diff is small. I didn't own an LS at the time of Mania 1. We drove down in my Mark VIII, which I took out on the course a couple of times. So all the LSes I drove were provided by LM. I even got to drive Jim's blue manual. (Didn't like the mods he'd done - to each his own.) I'm not quite sure as I think about it now whether I was able to drive both engines on the same course. But I do plainly remember mashing each into/out of turns and coming away with a slightly better perception of balance in the V6. Like I said, by no means a major difference. But I could feel it.
BTW, the dimple I described in 3705 was actually nearer to the front door handle than the rear one. It was on the rear door an inch or 2 from the front door seam and about same distance down from the window.
Last thing: just got back from lunch with a coworker. I drove. He opined "It's hard to believe this car (my LS) is made by the same company that makes the Town Car." He had rented a TC for the previous 2 days in Austin and said he felt confident driving it "only when I had it pointed straight ahead." :>) He drives a Saab 9 5 turbo 5 speed BTW and loves it.
Bajabill brings up another excellent point as far as weight is concerned . . . the weight difference between a full tank of fuel versus a near empty tank more than offsets any weight bias differential that may exist for a given driver and "payload" the car may be carrying.
Not trying to pick a fight here, but I concur with giowa and bajabill that the weight bias / balance issue when comparing the LS6 and LS8 is insignificant while the horsepower differential is. FWIW, IMHO.
One positive note is that the pearlescent white paint on my LS is better than the clearcoat black on the BMW. It has plenty of orange peal.
It's not so much a lower first gear in the Getrag 6er that's the magic; it's the overdrive sixth gear. In fact, the first gear may not be any lower in the 6er. Not to worry, because the overdrive sixth gear enables the rear ratio to go to at least a 3:58 and still reduce the cruise rpm and at the same time decrease acceleration times. Lower rpm at cruise also increases MPG and reduces NVH. Right now, the Manual turns 3000 rpm at 75mph with the 3:07 rear. Not acceptable for the long haul! A sixth gear ratio of about .70 would be fantastic. Even an overdrive five-speed manual would do the job if cost is a problem. Toyota made the great W58 overdrive tranny from 1982 to 1996 or so in millions of Supras and Cressidas. Bulletproof to 650 hp and definitely world-class. At this point, I'd even consider the Tremec or BW American six-speed as used in the Cobra. And I'd take the IRS LSD differential unit from the Cobra as well. In any case, LM brought the LS Manual to life quickly and on a budget. It's time for finishing school. With a six-speed, a 3:58 rear with LSD, VVT and that's all, we are talking about at least 6.8 0-60 times with better NVH and CAFE numbers.
If I were doing lots of mountain driving and hill climbing the choice between a V8 and a V6 manual would be interesting, as would trying to get my wife to drive a stick. Think I'll keep the V6 Sport until there is a real screamer available. Say a 300 HP V8 Sport with a 6 speed manual. Then I may join the ranks of the vitriolic V8 defenders.
Most, if not all published reports I have seen have made the general comment that the LS possess a "nearly 50/50 balance"; which, to my way of thinking, applies equally to both the LS6 and LS8.
The distributed curbweight of the LS6 is:
(.51 x 3598)/(.49 x 3598) => 1835 lbs./ 1763 lbs.
The distributed curbweight of the LS8 is:
(.52 x 3692)/(.48 x 3692) => 1920 lbs./ 1772 lbs.
Front end weight of the LS8 is only 85 lbs heavier than the LS6. If the LS6 does in fact have a 50/50 balance as you state, the difference in front end weight would increase to 121 lbs. Still far less than the 300 lbs you state.
None of these calculations take fuel loads, payload, or passenger weights into consideration, nor how these weights would translate to the overall vehicle balance. My point is that the weight differences are so small between the LS6 and LS8 as to render this a moot issue for debate.
As far as the 2000 V8 having a noisy timing chain, I have not observed this to be a problem. Perhaps other 2000 LS8 owners have observed this problem and can elaborate? Further, the 3.9 liter V8 is far from a "new" engine as you assert, it has been in the Jaguar stable for a few years now, although I'm uncertain as to when it was actually put into service.
If a torgue converter housing can bolt to 3.9L block, it would seem that a bell housing could also.
As for '00 vs. '01 V8s, I drove my '00 immediately after a test drive of an '01 and there's no difference whatsoever.
There are valid reasons to prefer the V6, but there's no need to invent problems with the V8 to justify the preference.
After a recent OS install, I lost some of my links.
Anybody have it in their favorites?
Some bone head scuffed my rear bumper in the parking lot.
1. 11/99 test of LS6 Sport manual. Weighed 3,642 pounds. With 50.5/49.5 percent distribution. That gives 1839/1803 pounds distribution.
2. 2/00 test of LS6 base auto. Weighed 3,611 pounds. With 51.4/48.6 percent distribution. Gives 1856/1755 pound distribution.
3. 5/00 test of LS8 Sport. Weighed 3,800 pounds. With 52.1/47.9 percent distribution. Gives 1980/1820 pound distribution.
Compare to Road & Track...
1. 9/99 R&T had an LS8 Sport with a 3,800 pound curb weight and 3,930 pound test weight. It had a 53/47 percent distribution.
2. 7/00 test of LS6 Sport auto with a 3,760 pound curb weight and a 3,940 pound test weight. Also had a 53/47 percent distribution.
If there is any meaningful difference, and a small one at that, must be with LS6 manual. R&T results imply hardly any real difference between LS6 and LS8. The C&D LS6 Sport auto vs LS8 Sport has only 124 pounds more on the front of the LS8 Sport.
As for power comparison, I've always concurred with C&D's 11/99 test of LS6 Sport manual: "more serious complaint lies in the notable lack of power... clearly over-stressed when attempting to launch the 3,642-pound machine from a standstill. Acceleration remains vividly underwhelming. Zero to 60 comes in a modest 8.0 seconds and the quarter-mile drifts by in 16.3 seconds at 86 mph. Hardly memorable performance by any measurement." Their 2/00 test results for LS6 auto were abysmal in this class. 0-60 in 9.0 seconds.
2. 11/99 Motor Trend test of LS6 Sport manual. Weighed 3,598 pounds. With 51/49 distribution. 0-60 in 7.4 seconds. 1/4 mile in 15.7 seconds at 88.5 mph. Pulled .83g and went 63.6 mph in 600 ft slalom.
3. 1/00 Motor Trend test of LS8 Sport. Weighed 3,671 pounds. With 52/48 percent distribution. 0-60 in 7.2 seconds (w/3.58:1 final drive). Quarter mile in 15.4 seconds at 90.7 mph. Pulled .84g and went 63.2 mph in 600 ft slalom.
Published tests appear to show LS6 Sport manual as being the weight and weight distribution champ. Still a bit slower accelerating than LS8 Sport. And the skidpad and slalom numbers don't appear to clearly favor LS6.
Over 12,679 posts since the beginning of the original LS Topic (my first post #12) this same subject has repeated itself countless times, nothing wrong with that it ranks right close to hopes, dreams, aspirations of the V8 manual that re-cycles more frequently but alas any realization of this coming to frution anytime soon is still only that dream whether daytime or nocturnal it emits frustration to many.
"I love to quote my father who used to say "Why do you always have to get the stick shift? Why don't you get the automatic? You don't have the nonsense with the gears." Of course, when he was a kid, if you had an automatic, that meant you were a rich, successful guy, whereas to me, it meant that you were a big, fat lazy guy."
"Two serious questions for Jaguar S-Type owners, or potential owners:
1)Do you know the horsepower ratings of the S-Type and the Lincoln LS?
2)Would it concern you if they both had the same horsepower?"
Anyone care to predict the outcome?
Lincoln and Jag focus their advertising in different areas. Their target demographics are also different. Does anyone have Daniel Heraud's 2001 Road Report? I have the 2000 edition. In it he puts the S-type in Luxury Cars ($35-70K) and LS in Luxury Cars (under $35K). He wrote that for S-type: 60% of owners were men, 78% of owners married, 75% with college degree, average owner age of 45, and average income of $100,000. He didn't have any demographic data for LS.
S-type and LS look significantly different on outside and inside such that the casual observer wouldn't likely recognize the similarities.
The S-type is much more luxurious than the LS. Interestingly, the LS is much more sporting. Auto press commented extensively on the way the LS has a more sporting, aggressive ride and handling set-up, even base and more so with Sport Pkg. Jag doesn't even have manual tranny option.
While the 300M may be the "poor man's LS", the LS is better said to be the "smart buyer's Jag S-type". Don't think Ford would want that to get out!
I believe the V6 Auto get 0-60 at 8.8 seconds, not 10.2 seconds. And Ive rarely seen any reviews for the LSV8 getting 7.2 seconds for the 0-60 times.
But once again, who cares? Its which one best suits your needs. Some of us must be living in areas with absolutely no acceleration lanes to the highway, forcing mad 0-60 dashes each day to and fro from work. I actually find myself facing more curves and handling situations myself. Thats just me
What I can't figure out is why you keep (wrongly) repeating the mantra that the LS6 is the superior handler. All due to a less than 1 percent (Sport automatic) difference in front-rear weight distribution? All of about 125 pounds weight. The non-Sport LS, 6 or 8, can't hold a candle to the Sport Pkg. And the LS6 auto base is completely outclassed by the LS8 Sport.
The 2 published times I'm immediately aware of for the LS6 Sport Manual are 7.4 and 8.0 seconds 0-60. Average it out and it is around 7.7. Probably with a standard deviation of around .25. The same figure for LS6 auto would be around 9.25 seconds.
Just in case anyone cares enough about this topic to wonder why I keep coming back to it: I think driving enthusiasts are a small minority of LS owners, and probably S-Types as well. Some of this is no doubt due to Lincoln's somewhat half-hearted efforts at promoting the LS as a performance car, at least initially. Have to wonder how serious Lincoln will be about the future of the LS as a SPORT sedan. Yes, there are people at Lincoln who share our enthusiasm but ultimately the bean counters rule. As they must.
The Jag costs about $10K more. It was designed to be inherently more opulent inside (and to have classic Jag lines outside), so it is always going to be marketed upscale. The LS was deliberately made sportier, though it varies on that scale from LS6 base auto to LS8 to LS6 Sport auto to LS8 Sport to LS6 Sport manual. The Jag's sales are limited in US by its smaller dealer network. But Jag gets some volume back by Lincoln not selling overseas. (Would be interesting to see how Ford would market both in Europe or Asia. Guessing Ford might've sold only LS6 Sport manual, to keep cost down and fuel economy up.)
Looks like VVT is a good thing for the V6 as well, if they get 240, that's 20 more than the 2002 V6 of 220. But the torque is kinda low, could that be due to the weight of the car or different tranny config? In any event, if Lincoln can approach some refinements such as these for the LS, it will make future buyers have more warm fuzzies and reviewers will harp less on the gas mileage.
So for me, the V6 Sport is the ticket. If I routinely hauled a full load of pasengers and luggage, or lived in the mountains, my priorities might be different.
Again, I have a personal preference for 6 cylinder engines. Look at what Nissan and Acura can do without 8 cylinders. Ditto for BMW. Lots of smooth power, without the "drawbacks" associated with 8 cylinders. (Costlier maintenance, more fuel usage, more weight).
To me, that translates to more efficiency. I dont know if I'll fall for the argument that the 3.9 V8 in the LS is more efficient/better than the 260hp V6 in the new Acuras...
Additionally, if we look back to 1999, when the LS was introduced. I6 in the 1999/2000 BMW 5-series? 193hp. V6 in the LS? 210hp. V8 in the BMW 5 series? 282hp. V8 in the LSV8? 252hp.
Course the BMW engines are different now, but at time of LS introduction, the V6 engine was very in line with the 6 cylinder competetion of the day. The LSV8, less so.
Im not saying 252hp isnt good, Im just saying that if Lincoln had 2 LS's, a V6 putting out 210hp, and a V6 putting out 252hp, my choice would have been instant back when I purchased the car. The 252hp V6 would have been sitting in my driveway this very second!
Still, the LSV8 is a great car. Period.
Engine torque is measured at the engine flywheel. Transmissions and vehicle weight have no influence on engine torque. Both will affect acceleration, but not rated torque or horsepower.
Mark
I'm in Germany on a business trip, and sure enough, many of the cars are diesel. I've got a rental Audi w/ many creature comforts (automatic climate control, high-end sound system, excellent seats, etc.) and a diesel mated to a manual. Drives great so far, and it's nice to already be used to the German manual shift pattern. (thanks, Getrag). I'll be interested to see how many (if any) S types I see tomorrow on my drive to Switzerland. Too bad we'll not be seeing any LS's over here.
Well I wrote that first bit yesterday, and today I'm back from Switzerland. My Audi A3 with a 1.9 litre diesel certainly made a believer of me today. It's very strange to be driving at 105 mph (love them autobahns) in a car with a <2 litre engine that feels as solid as the LS, and then in the bargain getting passed by a minivan. I'd be interested in hearing from any of the Lincoln guys who may have test-driven the LS over here where it's possible to drive at high speeds in heavy traffic legally.
Saw no S type Jags, one Maxima, one STS Cadillac, and more unavailable in the States cars than you could shake a stick at. The real impression was with the quality of the driving. Everyone signals, everyone uses rear-view mirrors, everyone is considerate; in short everyone drives like a truck (professional) driver. What a country! You guys need to get over here and see what cars & driving are supposed to be all about.
When I get home I'm going to see if any of the bigger Audi's have manuals. BMW's are quite expensive and carry a lot of image baggage I could do without. Who's tried an Audi relative to the LS or BMW?
Last year I looked at the Audi A-6 with a 2.7L turbo engine. It can be had with a sport package and a 6 speed. You would get LSV6 Sport handling and 0 to 60 times of about 6 seconds. It is just as fast as an Audi A-4 Sport but much roomier. The main reason I went with an LS was that I needed an automatic and the Audi A-6 2.7T was about 7 grand more.
I was in Italy in April and can echo your observations of the automotive scene. There'll be more details of my trip in the upcoming premiere issue of "Lincoln Synergy"
Have a safe trip. Don't get carried away on the autobahn
Artie
Enjoy yourself on those high speed autobahn cruises while you can . . . you're not missing anything here in Phoenix! I was seriously considering an Audi A6 2.7T with Quattro before ultimately selecting the LS8. The A6 has three engine offerings, 2 of which compare (in both hp and torque) closely with the LSs. The base A6 is a FWD platform, but the Quattro option provides AWD capability. The base 2.8 liter aluminum V6 engine provides about 200 hp, while the 2.7T is the same basic block (with steel cylinder liners, thus reducing overall displacement) but adds twin turbos, resulting in 250 hp. The A6 also has a 4.2 liter V8 engine option, but it was way more than I wanted to pay (about what a BMW 540 goes for). The 2.7T with Quattro was $5K more than my LS8.
I believe all Audis have manual transmissions as no-cost options, but you will be hard pressed to find one on a dealer lot. Most Audis are equipped with the tiptronic/SST type automatic transmissions. Here in Phoenix, there are only 2 Audi dealerships (one in Scottsdale, and the other on the Camelback corridor) and I did recall seeing a few manuals on the Scottsdale lot, but those had been ordered in advance. Tucson has only 1 dealership. Good luck finding service if you're not in one of these two cities while in Arizona!
The A6 interior is about the same size as the LS, maybe even a little larger. The A6 layout is more elegant in appearance and has nicer materials, but, option for option, its at least $5K more than an LS. I took the base 2.8 liter A6 with Quattro for a reasonable test drive, but concluded I liked the feel of the LS better. The AWD system provides a different sensation in high speed cornering than either a FWD or RWD provides, and it definately didn't feel as well balanced as the LS. The AWD could come in handy in the mountains though (or generally outside our dry desert). The A6 is very nice, I just concluded the LS had better balance and was a better value. FWIW