2003 Lincoln Navigator Road Test
Edmunds.com
Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,316
2003 Lincoln Navigator Road Test
No one else really matters. Just as you can brush aside the neighbors with the Prius who sneer at you every time you back your SUV out of the driveway, you can dismiss the tiresome environmentalists who claim that efforts to mine the oil reserves on national forest land are short-sighted and ultimately inadequate to the task of keeping trucks like yours nourished.
0
Comments
"The only thing that would give me pause would be long-term reliability. Ford has had a number of recent quality problems, and here comes the Navigator with a very large percentage of new parts, components and features. While watching our Ultimate test vehicle's power-operated running boards, liftgate and seats move back and forth, I couldn't help but wonder how long it would be before something broke. Now I'm sure Lincoln has done a good amount of durability testing on its new truck, but that wouldn't stop me from worrying."
I have currently the 2003 Lincoln Navigator under review. It is just a Sick Baby. Compared to my 1997 Toyota 4Runner SR5, 2004 Toyota Sienna Special Edition and 2005 Mercedes Benz ML350, I find the purchase of the 2003 Lincoln Navigator a big mistake hence the domestic car manufacturers have taken almost 100 years to build cars with an overload of electronics but it might take them about another 100 years to realize the importance of durability, reliability and components quality - even in the face of hostile competition from import products of the like-sign.
The Toyota 4Runner SR5 is driven to customers's locations of about 200 to 300 miles weekly with over 365,000 miles in it but as strong and maintenance free as rock and free from underneath rusts or electronics dysfunctional conditions; compared to the 2003 Lincoln Navigator only used for occasional long family trips but almost completely rusted underneath with multi-ferrous and spurious electronic problems ranging from dysfunctional deployable running board that retracts and extends even while driving, liftgate unintended opening and closing while starting the car, side view mirrors that shifts off rear view to the disadvantage of the driver, battery constant drainage, to an undetectable roof leakage and broken cosmetic plastic seat linings. These are just in addition to false positive alerts for issues such as low oil pressure, door, liftgate and rear glass door ajar warnings.
Even sensible labeling of important operating procedures such as the Airspring shut off button before lifting up for repairs, battery removal and installation and, fuse box which you have "dig" out from passenger side compartment.
Ford Motors and its Auto manufacturing sibling have the opportunity of copying legally by learning from the Asian guys on how to produce quality, reliable and long lasting products - especially components arrangement and location for user-friendly, minor do-it-yourself maintenance activities and vehicles that have any resalable values. But the trio choose to produce quantity and dumping of useless electronic featuristics that lack durability, thinking that vehicle buyers are babies that are excited over senseless toys.
Predicating upon the above conundrum and honest assessment verbosity, I am of the advisement for anyone who wishes to buy an SUV of this magnitude under this strangulating economy, should test-drive SUVs from imports such as Toyota Sequoia, Nissan Amanda and the likes.
SmartSoul2014