Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

qbrozen

stickguy said:

AWD is not just snow. Vs. FWD, it can also give better handling and balance on wet roads. And dry. The WRX is AWD for a reason!

I'm sure you just mistyped, stick, but balance and handling are not dependent on the driven wheels. Better acceleration traction in all conditions? Yes. That's it.

There is a reason why the Miata, one of the best-handling cars of all time, is NOT AWD.

stickguy

AWD instead of FWD. wasn't comparing to RWD here.

flightnurse

Mr_Shiftright said:

Well that's an argument that isn't as strong as it first sounds because invariably over-confidence in AWD often leads to mishaps. If you doubt this, I invite you to talk to any tow truck driver who operates in or near a popular ski area. If nothing else, and it doesn't convince you, you'll get some entertaining stories.

No matter how you cut it, your car is kept on the road by four small patches of rubber--if that rubber has no grip, it woudln't matter if you had ten-wheel drive. Same with mud, or sand.

So my advice to anyone with AWD is to choose your battles wisely, and if you do, then you'll have the edge--all things being equal.

I couldn't have said it better, but of course, the buying public and even people in this forum have bought the package that if you live in an area that gets snow, then you must have AWD...

flightnurse

So now that we are beating a dead horse again, Jaguar has finally updated their US website with the new XE, they have limited info, but do show the 3 models that will come here, but no pricing at this time. You can build one with limited options.

dino001

qbrozen said:

stickguy said:

AWD is not just snow. Vs. FWD, it can also give better handling and balance on wet roads. And dry. The WRX is AWD for a reason!

I'm sure you just mistyped, stick, but balance and handling are not dependent on the driven wheels. Better acceleration traction in all conditions? Yes. That's it.

There is a reason why the Miata, one of the best-handling cars of all time, is NOT AWD.

I disagree. Handling is absolutely affected by driven wheels. Try to enter a corner at excessive speed, then hit brakes or accelerator at different times and see how the car reacts. Depending on the propelled wheels, it will do different things.

nyccarguy

And the main problem with Audis is that I just keep hearing not so good things about long term reliability & customer service. From our own @graphicguy's binding issues with his former S4 to my parents' transmission issues with their leased A6 from 2002 to @roadburner's friend who says that Audi's are 60K mile cars to a statement that has been told to me by 2 industry insiders (1 the GM of a Chevy Dealership & 2 @isellhondas) "If we take an Audi in on trade that is out of the factory warranty, we immediately wholesale it."

roadburner

nyccarguy said:

And the main problem with Audis is that I just keep hearing not so good things about long term reliability & customer service. From our own @graphicguy's binding issues with his former S4 to my parents' transmission issues with their leased A6 from 2002 to @roadburner's friend who says that Audi's are 60K mile cars to a statement that has been told to me by 2 industry insiders (1 the GM of a Chevy Dealership & 2 @isellhondas) "If we take an Audi in on trade that is out of the factory warranty, we immediately wholesale it."

Don't forget driver100's clutch failure at 10k miles...

stickguy

buying a used on does scare me. Nice cars though. Most likely it would never be something that would end up being my choice (unless I was leasing possibly). Though I did find a really nice looking one recently. It's Purty.

http://www.royaleasing.com/detail-2012-audi-a4-4dr_sedan_automatic_quattro_2_0t_premium_plus-used-13407411.html

nyccarguy

I agree. They are nice looking. Well finished & drive great. But a risk no less.

qbrozen

stickguy said:

AWD instead of FWD. wasn't comparing to RWD here.

Well, the old Integra R dominates the old Impreza RS at the autocross.

qbrozen

dino001 said:

qbrozen said:

stickguy said:

AWD is not just snow. Vs. FWD, it can also give better handling and balance on wet roads. And dry. The WRX is AWD for a reason!

I'm sure you just mistyped, stick, but balance and handling are not dependent on the driven wheels. Better acceleration traction in all conditions? Yes. That's it.

There is a reason why the Miata, one of the best-handling cars of all time, is NOT AWD.

I disagree. Handling is absolutely affected by driven wheels. Try to enter a corner at excessive speed, then hit brakes or accelerator at different times and see how the car reacts. Depending on the propelled wheels, it will do different things.

Sorry, I should have said "better handling" is not dependent on driven wheels. Yes, they will handle differently, but not necessarily better.

Mr_Shiftright

To each his own I guess is the final say. I had the opportunity to drive a RWD vs AWD Porsche back to back and I thought the AWD car pushed a lot in the turns. It's more work. For driving pleasure I would have chosen the RWD. Snow is not an issue where I live, so it's hard to justify the weight and expense of AWD in this zip code. The reason I bought a used 4WD truck was for flooding conditions--i.e., the ground clearance. I guess some AWD like Subaru do lift the car, which is nice--but my friend's Mercedes AWD doesn't seem to have any more ground clearance than normal. He doesn't seem to care or notice the AWD--it just came that way.

Michaell

Mr_Shiftright said:

To each his own I guess is the final say. I had the opportunity to drive a RWD vs AWD Porsche back to back and I thought the AWD car pushed a lot in the turns. It's more work. For driving pleasure I would have chosen the RWD. Snow is not an issue where I live, so it's hard to justify the weight and expense of AWD in this zip code. The reason I bought a used 4WD truck was for flooding conditions--i.e., the ground clearance. I guess some AWD like Subaru do lift the car, which is nice--but my friend's Mercedes AWD doesn't seem to have any more ground clearance than normal. He doesn't seem to care or notice the AWD--it just came that way.

When the wife wanted the Subaru Outback, she wanted something more "wagon-y" than the SUV's she'd been driving.

Once she got behind the wheel, that myth was shattered - the Subaru has the same height as our old Mazda CX-7. Same or better ground clearance as well.

If only Subaru had continued to make the Legacy wagon ... that would have been perfect.

m6user

Let me be perfectly clear.  I don't consider AWD  a need but I find it very nice to have many days during the winter and on some rainy days.  It always seems that the people that are so sure it doesn't help get you around more efficiently in the winter are those that live in Florida or Arizona for example.  I have a rwd truck and have had plenty of rear wheel drive cars.  And like I said, equipped the same and driven with common sense the awd will be much easier to get around on slippery, snowpacked roads.  Ground clearance isn't a big deal for me as it is rarely a factor in the Midwest. But slushy or hardpacked snowy roads are very common and awd makes much more secure footing when in traffic and pulling or merging into traffic.

I never said anyone has to have awd but you guys make it sound like anyone that has it doesn't know how to drive.   Comes off a little arrogant IMO.

robr2

Michaell said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

To each his own I guess is the final say. I had the opportunity to drive a RWD vs AWD Porsche back to back and I thought the AWD car pushed a lot in the turns. It's more work. For driving pleasure I would have chosen the RWD. Snow is not an issue where I live, so it's hard to justify the weight and expense of AWD in this zip code. The reason I bought a used 4WD truck was for flooding conditions--i.e., the ground clearance. I guess some AWD like Subaru do lift the car, which is nice--but my friend's Mercedes AWD doesn't seem to have any more ground clearance than normal. He doesn't seem to care or notice the AWD--it just came that way.

When the wife wanted the Subaru Outback, she wanted something more "wagon-y" than the SUV's she'd been driving.

Once she got behind the wheel, that myth was shattered - the Subaru has the same height as our old Mazda CX-7. Same or better ground clearance as well.

If only Subaru had continued to make the Legacy wagon ... that would have been perfect.

Subaru dropped the wagon for a couple of reasons. First it wasn't a great seller. Second was the fact that it's MPG wasn't that great and affected their CAFE number. The Outback is considered an SUV and it's MPG doesn't count against CAFE.

nyccarguy

Michaell said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

To each his own I guess is the final say. I had the opportunity to drive a RWD vs AWD Porsche back to back and I thought the AWD car pushed a lot in the turns. It's more work. For driving pleasure I would have chosen the RWD. Snow is not an issue where I live, so it's hard to justify the weight and expense of AWD in this zip code. The reason I bought a used 4WD truck was for flooding conditions--i.e., the ground clearance. I guess some AWD like Subaru do lift the car, which is nice--but my friend's Mercedes AWD doesn't seem to have any more ground clearance than normal. He doesn't seem to care or notice the AWD--it just came that way.

When the wife wanted the Subaru Outback, she wanted something more "wagon-y" than the SUV's she'd been driving.

Once she got behind the wheel, that myth was shattered - the Subaru has the same height as our old Mazda CX-7. Same or better ground clearance as well.

If only Subaru had continued to make the Legacy wagon (& Sedan with a Turbo) ... that would have been perfect.

Michaell

robr2 said:

To each his own I guess is the final say. I had the opportunity to drive a RWD vs AWD Porsche back to back and I thought the AWD car pushed a lot in the turns. It's more work. For driving pleasure I would have chosen the RWD. Snow is not an issue where I live, so it's hard to justify the weight and expense of AWD in this zip code. The reason I bought a used 4WD truck was for flooding conditions--i.e., the ground clearance. I guess some AWD like Subaru do lift the car, which is nice--but my friend's Mercedes AWD doesn't seem to have any more ground clearance than normal. He doesn't seem to care or notice the AWD--it just came that way.

When the wife wanted the Subaru Outback, she wanted something more "wagon-y" than the SUV's she'd been driving. Once she got behind the wheel, that myth was shattered - the Subaru has the same height as our old Mazda CX-7. Same or better ground clearance as well. If only Subaru had continued to make the Legacy wagon ... that would have been perfect.

Subaru dropped the wagon for a couple of reasons. First it wasn't a great seller. Second was the fact that it's MPG wasn't that great and affected their CAFE number. The Outback is considered an SUV and it's MPG doesn't count against CAFE.

 I understand why Subaru dropped the wagon. It doesn't mean I have to be happy with that decision

graphicguy

Cadillac dropped their wagon, too. It had a lot of good press. Unfortunately, there's still that stigma that goes with wagons.

I remember when having a Mercedes Wagon was height of knowing you made it. Had neighbors who had zero need for a wagon, but bought a Mercedes Wagon for the cache it supposedly gave them.

kyfdx

graphicguy said:

Cadillac dropped their wagon, too. It had a lot of good press. Unfortunately, there's still that stigma that goes with wagons.

I remember when having a Mercedes Wagon was height of knowing you made it. Had neighbors who had zero need for a wagon, but bought a Mercedes Wagon for the cache it supposedly gave them.

I always saw it the other way.. the Mercedes wagon people were "old money", that just bought a wagon, because they wanted a wagon... The S-class people were the "nouveau riche".

robr2

kyfdx said:

graphicguy said:

Cadillac dropped their wagon, too. It had a lot of good press. Unfortunately, there's still that stigma that goes with wagons.

I remember when having a Mercedes Wagon was height of knowing you made it. Had neighbors who had zero need for a wagon, but bought a Mercedes Wagon for the cache it supposedly gave them.

I always saw it the other way.. the Mercedes wagon people were "old money", that just bought a wagon, because they wanted a wagon... The S-class people were the "nouveau riche".

Me too. E Class wagons were for those with old, moldy money. They also had a Grand Wagoneer at the shore house.

laurasdada

I grew up in the era of FWD and "Hot Hatches." My first car was an original VW Scirocco, followed by an arrest-me-red Mitsubishi Mirage Turbo. Being a lifelong resident of New England, and a skier, I never had any real issues with FWD and all-season tires (until my lovely '05 Acura TL). I told folks why add the price, complexity and performance/MPG drain of AWD when FWD and snow/winter tires would likely be more than enough 99% of the time? Even FWD with all-seasons got me where I was going. Of course, ground clearance is another factor...

But, my TL was just not as good in the snow as previous FWD'ers. So, I bought snow tires on dedicated alloys (great deal at Tire Rack) and that problem solved. I had plenty of room to store four tires, and the cost of the tires/2x yearly swap was still less $ than AWD options. Of course, then I want nutsy, cuckoo and traded the TL for the V8/RWD Jaguar XK. With Summer tires. My first RWD, a whole new world of no go in snow. I mean, 1/8" and I couldn't get out of my driveway! Luckily I had the option of an AWD SUV...

But, man plans and God laughs. Life changes and I suddenly-ish needed a 52 week car. Or a second car. Logic and maturity took over, hence adios glorious V8 sound, hello sensible pair of shoes Jag XF AWD. Could I have gone RWD XF with snows/rims? Of course, with the traction/stability control, snow mode tranny and good snows, I likely wouldn't have had any issues as, generally, a good job is done in snow plowing around here (even with 10' of snow this winter!). But, with nowhere to store a set of tires/rims (without paying to do so), I chose the path of least resistance and went AWD. No worries about the freak storm before/after snows have been swapped or storage and charges to swap tires.

So, I pay for my laziness. Need AWD? No. Glad I have AWD? Yes. XF was a champ in the blizzard I drove through last month on my way to ski Maine. Sad said blizzard was east of the mountains and didn't dump any new snow at the resort!

So, understand and choose your poison. No "wrong" answer.

laurasdada

Oh, yeah. And what's cool is that most of the time the XF has a RWD bias, I believe it is 90% of the torque goes to the rear axle. Pushing the snow button changes it to 30/70 with the computer deciding upon when to make it 50/50.

robr2

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

stickguy

No EL in that. And those wheels are hideous.

robr2

Well the definition is all over the place now so if it starts under $40, it's EL.

benjaminh

My guess is the new Continental will be a top of the line model with a starting msrp north of 50k. But, with the likely rebates and discounts you might be able to score a "base" model in the low 40s....Guilty pleasure, I guess, but I think it looks pretty good. But kinda wish they'd gone with "suicide" doors lol....

stickguy

Absolutely

Mr_Shiftright

Yes, that's right, AWD does not improve handling...it improves acceleration. Which is where I got the idea of "over confidence" from---that you might end up going faster than you can safely stop.

I think a car with a good set of snow tires will beat an AWD on all seasons every time in cornering or braking because cornering ability on slick roads or during obstacle avoidance/braking is the job of tires and suspension, not the drivetrain.

Here's an interesting VIDEO from the UK that demonstrates this.

graphicguy

robr2 said:

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

Bentley has their panties all up in a bunch over this car. Lincoln has given it the go ahead, BTW. Have no idea on pricing. Supposed to be on a stretched Fusion platform. So, see this at your LINCOLN dealer sometime in the near future.

roadburner

robr2 said:

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

Big, FWD(or FWD biased AWD), expensive for what you get- yawn...

robr2

graphicguy said:

robr2 said:

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

Bentley has their panties in a bunch over this car. Lincoln has given it the go ahead, BTW. Have no idea on pricing. Supposed to be on a stretched Fusion platform. So, see this at your LINCOLN dealer sometime in the near future.

They'll get over it. IMHO, the Flying Spur has some resemblance to a late 90's A8. The Continental has some last gen 9-5 in the rear as well.

Yes, it will be built on the CD4 platform which will be stretched. 3.0L EcoBoost with AWD and an interior resplendent with chrome. Production begins next year as a 2017 model. And yes, the Continental name is a GO!!

carnaught

And yes, the Continental name is a GO!!

Wonder if this will spike a resurgence of names over letters/numbers for models......Fleetwood, Eldorado anyone?

Mr_Shiftright

Regarding American cars recapturing the luxury end of the market, I think any new names will have to make sure that affluent 40-50 year olds take notice. "Continental" fortunately shares an alliance with Bentley heritage.

markcincinnati

I have to assume that the reason these players (and many others) offer AWD options for their F and R drive models is first and foremost a marketing/market penetration decision.

We can (and often do) debate the efficacy of AWD or if a given 911 performs better or is easier or harder to drive if equipped as RWD or AWD, etc etc.

I have to assume that BMW, to pick one, had managers and engineers who were against AWD making its way into the BMW family. Today it is the rare BMW that cannot be had with AWD.

The reason for the proliferation of AWD models is -- wait for it -- because they are popular, they sell well and if you don't offer an LPS or ELLPS with AWD, and all of your competition does, you will lose market share, lose revenue, lose profit, and you will lose your job. It doesn't even matter if it can be proven that AWD is better, the same as or worse than whateverWD. AWD rules the income statement or if it doesn't "rule" it certainly is way too large a percentage of sales to be overlooked.

Bring out a new high zoot premium vehicle of the species SEDAN and offer it with only two wheels driven, and, well pretty soon the car magazines will be apologizing to the market on behalf of the company justifying their not class leading sales on the oversight -- no AWD = lower sales.

It's the auto vs stick phenom -- everyone knows and agrees that sticks are superior but they linger on lots unsold and unloved. Go figure.

Sarcasm is difficult to do in these things sometimes.

Because you know It's all about that bass,
'Bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass

With apologies to Meghan Trainor for slightly changing the lyrics.

bass = $$$, of course (signed, Captain Obvious)

flightnurse

kyfdx said:

I always saw it the other way.. the Mercedes wagon people were "old money", that just bought a wagon, because they wanted a wagon... The S-class people were the "nouveau riche".

I agree with this, the problem I saw with the Caddy wagon was the interior room was on the small side, rear leg room was horrible... I still like the MB wagon, has a nice look to it but then it only comes in AWD..

flightnurse

robr2 said:

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

Let's get the name correct, Ford for some stupid reason is calling it a Lincoln Continental, personally I think the Lincoln name needs to be dropped, make the new Continental something you want as aspire to own..

flightnurse

Mr_Shiftright said:

Yes, that's right, AWD does not improve handling...it improves acceleration. Which is where I got the idea of "over confidence" from---that you might end up going faster than you can safely stop.

I think a car with a good set of snow tires will beat an AWD on all seasons every time in cornering or braking because cornering ability on slick roads or during obstacle avoidance/braking is the job of tires and suspension, not the drivetrain.

Here's an interesting VIDEO from the UK that demonstrates this.

Just as people became over confidence with ABS stopping their car faster...

tlong

"It's the auto vs stick phenom -- everyone knows and agrees that sticks are superior but they linger on lots unsold and unloved. Go figure. "

So tell me where those lingering stick shifts are. I recently visited a few dealers and even on the models that offer stick, nobody had any.

robr2

flightnurse said:

robr2 said:

So will the new Continental be an ELLPS? V6, AWD, big 19" wheels......

Let's get the name correct, Ford for some stupid reason is calling it a Lincoln Continental, personally I think the Lincoln name needs to be dropped, make the new Continental something you want as aspire to own..

I respectfully disagree. It makes no sense for Ford to create a new "brand." The cost would be prohibitive.

sda

Perhaps we'll see names like Capri, Mark, Town Car come back? Versailles, probably not. I do miss the days when most car names were not some combination of letters, numbers. There were some great names like Wildcat, Galaxie, DeVille, Starfire, Skylark, Imperial, Fury, etc.

graphicguy

Continental has a storied name. Did a little research last night on the Continental (which is a moniker that Bentley also uses). At different times, the Continental was indeed a separate Ford brand. Mostly though, it was a model of Lincoln (usually the top Lincoln model).

Again, not sure where Ford is taking Lincoln. Aside from what appears to be a very successful ad campaign for the brand with McConnehey (sp?), I'm not sure how they can sustain the models they have if their only differentiation from the similar Ford models is a little chrome on the grill and some interior differences.

I mentioned in another thread that several months ago, I was offered a %75 gift card to test drive a Lincoln. I drove an MKZ and their small SUV (can't recall the model). They were not bad drives at all. And, were nice in most respects. But, they were also about $10K for the exact same drive in a Fusion or Escape, save for a few extra niceties.

Nonetheless, they're pretty cars. Scoff if you must, but if the Continental comes out and is anywhere near reasonably priced, it will do well. Maybe not our cup of tea. But, Hyundai has proven that when you bring a nice car to market, that may have only 90% of the capabilities of the stalwarts in the category, the cars will sell.

graphicguy

markcincinnati said:

Sarcasm is difficult to do in these things sometimes.

Because you know It's all about that bass,
'Bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
It's all 'bout that bass, 'bout that bass

With apologies to Meghan Trainor for slightly changing the lyrics.

bass = $$$, of course (signed, Captain Obvious)

Mark...I never would have pegged you as a fan of teen pop songs......(j/k).

Mr_Shiftright

I read somewhere that Ford was thinking of starting prices in the $75K range for the Continental.

flightnurse

robr2 said:

I respectfully disagree. It makes no sense for Ford to create a new "brand." The cost would be prohibitive.

Continental is not a new Brand for Ford, look at Fords history and you will see it.

flightnurse

graphicguy said:

Continental has a storied name. Did a little research last night on the Continental (which is a moniker that Bentley also uses). At different times, the Continental was indeed a separate Ford brand. Mostly though, it was a model of Lincoln (usually the top Lincoln model).

Again, not sure where Ford is taking Lincoln. Aside from what appears to be a very successful ad campaign for the brand with McConnehey (sp?), I'm not sure how they can sustain the models they have if their only differentiation from the similar Ford models is a little chrome on the grill and some interior differences.

I mentioned in another thread that several months ago, I was offered a %75 gift card to test drive a Lincoln. I drove an MKZ and their small SUV (can't recall the model). They were not bad drives at all. And, were nice in most respects. But, they were also about $10K for the exact same drive in a Fusion or Escape, save for a few extra niceties.

Nonetheless, they're pretty cars. Scoff if you must, but if the Continental comes out and is anywhere near reasonably priced, it will do well. Maybe not our cup of tea. But, Hyundai has proven that when you bring a nice car to market, that may have only 90% of the capabilities of the stalwarts in the category, the cars will sell.

Having owned a true Continental, they were cars in which people aspired to own, It wasn't until the mid 60's in which Lincoln and Continental shared the same name. Lincoln has started to turn itself around but to offer a car to start in the 70's it shouldn't have a Lincoln name attached to it.

sweendogy

@flightnurse please spare us the elitistsh1t. "Having owned a true ..." Do you consider the current 320 you drive a "true bmw."? Prob not but you bot it(or got a good lease deal). Ford doing what Christler / fiat did- and acura should do bring back the past as well. Love the idea of this car- it's got 50 patents on the seats-- must be pretty cool.

markcincinnati

tlong said:

"It's the auto vs stick phenom -- everyone knows and agrees that sticks are superior but they linger on lots unsold and unloved. Go figure. "

So tell me where those lingering stick shifts are. I recently visited a few dealers and even on the models that offer stick, nobody had any.

I did say sarcasm was difficult to convey in these posts -- stick shifts are unloved because the MARKET has determined the automatics, NOT the stick shifts are superior. This, however is not said with sarcasm.

Perception is reality -- sticks are not perceived to be as VALUABLE by those who actually buy cars. The "supposed throngs" longing for stick shift cars are statistically insignificant and practically irrelevant.

If there are any stick shifts on dealer lots, they have probably been there for a long time.

When I bought my 2014 S4 the dealer did have ONE manual trans version in stock. My wife and I took it for a test drive -- it was a blast. However, my S-tronic (7 speed dual clutch) auto trans beats it by a country mile.

The MARKET has spoken. In some respects, I guess I'm just the messenger willing to accept the MARKET's decision.

markcincinnati

By the way, for those who poo-poo AWD and say it ia unnecessary of that it contributes to building a false sense of security, why does Porsche offer 20 different 911 models and market most with AWD?

My answer is because the MARKET wants and is willing to pay for it.

But the protests about AWD are about as loud, maybe louder, than those howls about the dearth of manual transmissions that can be had in this market segment.

I would, however, assume that Porsche would not offer so many, nearly all in fact, of the cars they bring to market with AWD if it actually eroded performance.

Ferdinand Piech (hope that is spelled correctly) said he thought all cars would offer AWD someday (and he said that in the '80s) -- those who championed RWD proclaimed "no way". BMW lovers said there would never be an AWD BMW; and Mercedes folks said there would never be an FWD Mercedes.

Hmm?

Mr_Shiftright

AWD doesn't erode performance-- it actually helps performance, but it's just not related very much to handling and braking--in some cases, detrimental to it. There are Porsche drivers and Porsche drivers, and each chooses his weapon depending on the battle he wishes to fight. Something for everybody---that's good marketing.

robr2

flightnurse said:

robr2 said:

I respectfully disagree. It makes no sense for Ford to create a new "brand." The cost would be prohibitive.

Continental is not a new Brand for Ford, look at Fords history and you will see it.

I am quite aware that Continental was once a distinct brand tate Ford used. It existed for only two years before being folded into Lincoln in 1957.

To bring it back today would be a financial fiasco. It makes more sense to focus on strengthening the Lincoln brand rather than resurrecting a brand that hasn't been used for almost 50 years.