Specs on the MKZ are in on the Lincoln website. The gas mileage is a huge disappointment: FWD-19/27; AWD-18/26. As you can see, this is LESS than the Zephyr (20/28)! So much for this new "fuel efficient" power train! Why is it that Lexus can put a more powerful motor in a heavier ES350 and get 21/30? Yeah, yeah, yeah the Ford uses regular and the 350 uses premium but, with that much of a difference in mileage it's a wash. Can't Ford do anything right for crying out loud??? No wonder they're headed for bankruptcy. Still no mention of fuel tank capacity. That was conveniently left out of the specs.
Fuel capacity is 20 gallons according to a spec sheet I linked to from BON.
Mpg of 19/27 is not too good in today's market. For comparison the heavier more powerful V8 LS is 18/25. So this is the much ballyhooed new fuel efficient drivetrain? The future don't look so bright. Oh well.
prius rated at 60 city, 50 highway. some vehicles are optimized for the epa tests. it's not like the etched in stone 15, oops, no, 10 commandments. props to mel brooks.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Yet if you look at the real world mileage of the 268 hp Toyota Avalon (a bigger car than the MKZ) it is close to the 22/31 EPA results. Even the RAV4 SUV with three rows of seating and 268 hp gets EPA rating of 21/28.
Therefore, no matter how you spin it, the MKZ should have better numbers. And it will only get worse as other manufacturers continue to increase mileage on like sized vehicles. Plus, how is it going to look when by 2008 the full-size GM SUVs will have better mileage than the AWD MKZ?
ONLY Ford would invest millions and millions of dollars into a new engine that yields LESS gas mileage than the engine it replaces. Isn't an important driving force for new engine development better mpg not worse? And this is going to be the workhorse powerplant for Ford for the next 5-10 years. Good grief!! With plants closing right and left, thousands and thousands of employees losing their jobs, bankruptcy looking them dead in the eye and virtually living on life support, Ford continues to make bad marketing and engineering decisions. It's mind boggling. I honestly believe the chances that Ford (or Lincoln or Mercury) will be around 5 yrs from now are no better than 50-50. And this comes from an 06 Zephyr owner.
The MKX is rated at mid 20's for mileage and it has a 20 gallon fuel tank with the AWD model. Hmm, any reason why I would not want to purchase MKX versus MKZ?
The Z will handle better since it's a sedan and it should be a bit cheaper than the X since it's smaller but we'll have to wait for X pricing to confirm that. If you're implying that it will get better mileage don't - mid 20's is the highway mileage. It uses the exact same drivetrain as the MKZ but weighs more so expect slightly worse mileage on the X (I'd say 1 mpg less but that's a guess).
It's not exactly a one-for-one replacement - you're getting 40+ more hp and more torque while still using 87 octane fuel with only a 1 mpg penalty. It is disappointing because Ford said the fuel mileage would be the same but let's keep it in perspective - if they had said it would replace the 3.0 and get almost the same fuel mileage we'd all be ok with it.
The bigger issue is how it compares to the competition, and this is an area where Ford continues to have problems. Not sure why but I'm trying to get some information from one of the engineers that might shed some light on it.
The MKZ may be on a par with the CTS. However, the CTS is no longer on par with the competition. It is a now relatively old design that should be significantly overhauled in 2008. Meanwhile, a brand new engine like the Ford 3.5 should be better right out of the box than the old Cadillace engine, don't you think? (Plus, the CTS has a 5 speed auto to the MKZ's 6 speed...that alone shouls have given MKZ a mpg advantage.)
I completely agree with gregg vw's assessment of bigt's post. An attempt to make the MKZ look good by comparing it to the bottom of the barrel in terms of target competition is extremely weak. The CTS is clearly no longer competitive in it's current form and will be getting a complete redo probably next year. To say "look, it's not so bad we're not the worst" doesn't really give a warm and fuzzy feeling.
Just saw in the USA Today that Ford will cut another 6,000 jobs by the end of the year. This is in ADDITION to the 30,000 cut announced in January. I knew things were bad but, not this bad. Looks like Ford will expire before the warranty on my 06 Zephyr.
In this particular case at this particular time cuts are a good thing. The market share is already gone - keeping excess workers and plant capacity isn't going to help that. Ford has to get leaner and meaner and will probably lose a bit more market share before it starts to turn around. They're laying a solid foundation with the CD3 and D3 cars and crossovers - they just need to get it done a little quicker and then they can start rebuilding that lost market share.
I know your trying to justify these mpg numbers on the MKZ but they are extremely disappointing. This 3.5 engine was supposed to get a 10% imnprovement in MPG over the 2.0 Duratec. It was hyped up that way two years ago on many websites.
Even a lowly Hyundai Azera (which has a nicer interior in my opinion) gets 19-28 mpg. And this car is a 3.8L instead of a 3.5 liter. (The 07 Azera may of dropped their city figure to 18mpg)
I was not trying to justify them as much as explain them. I think the highway mileage is too low and it is disappointing.
But I don't remember ever hearing about the 3.5L getting BETTER mileage than the 3.0 (assume 2.0 was a typo). All I remember hearing is that it would get the same fuel mileage while producing a lot more power.
i guess we will have to wait for real world feedback on the 3.5. don't forget it is tuned to use regular gas, and does not yet have vvt, etc... rav4, 3 rows of seats, marketing doesn't get any better than that. real world, a different story. plenty of highlander buyers drank the same koolaid.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Your' re right 10% was an overstatement. But from the attached article I didn't expect fuel economy to go down with this engine. The article states 4% improvement in mileage with the engine and 7% improvement with the 6 speed. link title
Another article that says fuel effciency will be improved. These people writing these articles must of got their information from some Ford source. link title
"at this particular time cuts are a good thing".......I doubt very seriously that those 36,000 people losing their jobs would agree with you. Obviously, you aren't one of those 36,000! My gut feeling is as these people leave the plant on their last day they aren't going to say "this is a good thing." I believe they will be cursing the brain dead mgmt at Ford for putting the company in this position with their backward and bumbling decision making not to mention an engineering dept that is 3-5 yrs behind the competition. "Ford has to get leaner and meaner.....correction, Ford has to get smarter and more innovative. Anytime a company is forced to get leaner and meaner that indicates they have already screwed up and it's time to sacrifice their loyal workforce. "They're laying a solid foundation".....how, by introducing new powertrains that are less efficient than the old powertrains? Really, now. Sometimes things are so indefensible that you should leave them alone.
I know we talked about this but now it is all over the news. Most of the news is that it is stupid to purchase a car that does not have this feature. Ford had a commercial that they are committed to having all of there cars with this by 2008-2009.
ES350 vs MKZ: the Lexus has more HP, more torque, higher compression, is 150 lbs heavier and yet delivers 10% better mpg. Go figure. Maybe Ford should buy its powertrains from Toyota!
I'm not making excuses, but those early reports with the 7% mileage improvement also said it would only mkae 250 hp. So it's possible they traded fuel mileage for 15 more hp.
What I'm saying is it doesn't really matter what Ford estimated or how it stacks up against the old engine. What matters is how it stacks up against the competition and that's where it seems to come up short, at least in highway fuel mileage.
Would it be better to keep those 36,000 people on the workforce, lose more money and send the company into bankruptcy? That would impact even more people. I lived through yearly 10-15% downsizing at my company for 5-6 years. It stinks but sometimes it's necessary.
The fact is Ford has lost market share - a lot of it due to bad product decisions and engineering but some of it out of their control - but regardless of the cause it's gone and it's not going to come back overnight. The competition does not have 36,000 more employees on the payroll than they need and Ford can't compete with them if they have that much dead weight.
This is survival - plain and simple. Fields already said job cuts and reductions in volume are not the way forward, but it's a necessary first step to position the company to start growing again.
In the long run, what keeps the company in business is good for all the employees.
I definately think there are trade-offs here, and they don't all favor the ES350.
Fuel Economy: ES350 wins with a combined 25.5 vs. 23.5
Fuel Type: MKZ wins with 87 vs. 93
Fuel expense: THE MXZ surprisingly wins here. $100 in gas gets you 850 miles in the ES350 and 854 in the MKZ. (Assuming 3.00 for 93, 2.75 for 87)
Performance: The ES350 claims 6.8sec for 0-60, Edmunds recorded a 7.1. There are no times for the MKZ yet, but the Zephyr claims 7.26 while Edmunds got 7.6. With the new Engine, the estimates are about 1 second quicker. Assuming a lower real world number improvement(.8), the MKZ wins. 6.5 claimed vs. 6.8 claimed, or 6.8 Edmunds vs. 7.1 Edmunds. MKZ wins.
be the bringer of bad news, but the aditional 6,000 job cuts are probably going to pay for Mullaly's salary. He is getting something along the lines of $25 Million in total compensation...
Does anyone know if ford has plans to replace the current wood designs on its steering wheels with the more conventional type. The wood on the sides is very interesting and diferent but especially on the Navigator it looks bad.
Then again, the new navigators interiior is just short of horrible, in terms of design. The last model was really awesome in that respect.
Glad so see ford fight it out with this lincoln. Wonder if they will add cornering lights like in the MKS...
They will have to sell a bunch of MK xyz's to pay that salary. Yikes, I hope he can turn it around and I hope his solutions are not just workforce cuts. How about some lead-edge technology and designs. Given the current foreign car price points (such as Lexus and Merc) it seems like we should be able to produce a car to give them a run for the goods (our dollars). Well if he turns it around he deserves the cash. I wonder what his auto background is. I bet he does not drive a Ford product!
As for the Navigator, that grill looks terrible to me but it will sell in youth market. They eat all of that stuff up, big rims, big grills, heck they even put it on their teeth!
Check the news. Ford is offering buyouts to ALL 75000 American workers (ie UAW). After they are GONE, Ford can either hire a new work force who will work for more typical AMerican wages as Toyota, Honda etc have done. Or of course they can simply move ALL their production to Mexico or China. I wonder what they will do ...
Hi everyone, Does anyone have any idea of what a good lease money factor is from Lincoln/Ford Red Carpet Lease? I am going to xplan a 07 MKZ. As a former BMW owner I am very impressed with what Ford has done with this car.
I purchased from Manhattan in Rockville. I started off over the internet looking at the Hybird and then saw the Zephyr on the floor and purchased it. It was a good experience. I have enjoyed the car and most likely will trade into the 07 because now I want the fully loaded version of it. All it takes is one drive into downtown DC to realize you must have a Nav system. Not too sure how good the one is in this. I know that the Mercury SUV one got slammed on one of the forums here. Hopefully it is not the same one!
I have heard plenty of owners and prospective owners indicate that they like the ride of the Zephyr. The MKZ will have a bit firmer suspension tuning. As soon as you drive an MKZ, I will be interested in your impressions of how they compare in ride compliance and handling.
Sure, any ideal when the first ones will start showing up? I am trying to decide what color I will like. Also I am trying to decide if I want to go dark or light interior. At first I did not think I would like the dark interior but then I rode in a Caddy DTS with black and it looked really nice. Hmm, the choices... :shades:
Having had a light tan carpet and seat interior, I say go black, and get the silver dash option instead of wood. It should look great. The black especially on the carpet is so much easier to keep clean. The light carpet shows everything. I do not need navigation or cooled seats(I hate the perforated seats). Will get the siver interior and the wheels and satellite radio.
I was, It was the FWD MKZ. She miss read the info on the car. Also, it was about 20 cars available to test drive. MKX, the new Navi and the Lincoln Mark LT and the MKZ. She thought the one we got into was AWD. Then I checked the key ring it said FWD. Also, I could tell by the seat of my pants how the car accelerated that it was FWD.
Also, the event I went to was called Savor the Dream event. check out the schedule and when it might be coming to your town.
Thanks, but I just ordered a fully loaded AWD to be picked up NOV 20th that is why I was asking, overseas Military until then, but thanks for the info.
Makes no sense to me to split off the test drive discussion to its own thread. There are only a few people posting here in the first place. At least fix the link! :mad:
Does any one know the gear Ratio's of both the AWD and FWD MKZ, and how that will effect off the line acceleration, I know the AWD weighs 206 LBS or so more, but will the AWD gear Ratio's neutralize the weight difference and be quicker off the line with better 0-60 times, but less 1/4 mile times.
Based on the Edge info the AWD will have lower gearing to offset the extra weight. I wouldn't count on it being quicker - at least not anything you would notice without a stopwatch.
Lincoln in the short term, has alot riding on this car. I hope that when the 07's launch they will support with favorable lease programs to get the car out and visible on the road. A nice way to do this would be to roll out a promotional program to the general public or at least via the A/X/Z plans available widely to employee's, friends and family of Ford workers. This does fly against conventional wisdom which is to milk the early birds, but I think Ford needs to do something more aggressive to get the MKZ out on the road in numbers.
Comments
Still no mention of fuel tank capacity. That was conveniently left out of the specs.
Mpg of 19/27 is not too good in today's market. For comparison the heavier more powerful V8 LS is 18/25. So this is the much ballyhooed new fuel efficient drivetrain? The future don't look so bright. Oh well.
some vehicles are optimized for the epa tests.
it's not like the etched in stone 15, oops, no, 10 commandments.
props to mel brooks.
Therefore, no matter how you spin it, the MKZ should have better numbers. And it will only get worse as other manufacturers continue to increase mileage on like sized vehicles. Plus, how is it going to look when by 2008 the full-size GM SUVs will have better mileage than the AWD MKZ?
With plants closing right and left, thousands and thousands of employees losing their jobs, bankruptcy looking them dead in the eye and virtually living on life support, Ford continues to make bad marketing and engineering decisions. It's mind boggling. I honestly believe the chances that Ford (or Lincoln or Mercury) will be around 5 yrs from now are no better than 50-50. And this comes from an 06 Zephyr owner.
The bigger issue is how it compares to the competition, and this is an area where Ford continues to have problems. Not sure why but I'm trying to get some information from one of the engineers that might shed some light on it.
Fuel
Fuel Tank Capacity: 17 gal.
EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Manual: 17 mpg / 27 mpg Automatic: : 18 mpg / 27 mpg
Range in Miles: (City/Highway)
Automatic: 306 mi. / 459 mi. Manual: 289 mi. / 459 mi.
thanks.
I know your trying to justify these mpg numbers on the MKZ but they are extremely disappointing. This 3.5 engine was supposed to get a 10% imnprovement in MPG over the 2.0 Duratec. It was hyped up that way two years ago on many websites.
Even a lowly Hyundai Azera (which has a nicer interior in my opinion) gets 19-28 mpg. And this car is a 3.8L instead of a 3.5 liter. (The 07 Azera may of dropped their city figure to 18mpg)
But I don't remember ever hearing about the 3.5L getting BETTER mileage than the 3.0 (assume 2.0 was a typo). All I remember hearing is that it would get the same fuel mileage while producing a lot more power.
don't forget it is tuned to use regular gas, and does not yet have vvt, etc...
rav4, 3 rows of seats, marketing doesn't get any better than that. real world, a different story. plenty of highlander buyers drank the same koolaid.
link title
These people writing these articles must of got their information from some Ford source.
link title
"Ford has to get leaner and meaner.....correction, Ford has to get smarter and more innovative. Anytime a company is forced to get leaner and meaner that indicates they have already screwed up and it's time to sacrifice their loyal workforce.
"They're laying a solid foundation".....how, by introducing new powertrains that are less efficient than the old powertrains?
Really, now. Sometimes things are so indefensible that you should leave them alone.
What I'm saying is it doesn't really matter what Ford estimated or how it stacks up against the old engine. What matters is how it stacks up against the competition and that's where it seems to come up short, at least in highway fuel mileage.
The fact is Ford has lost market share - a lot of it due to bad product decisions and engineering but some of it out of their control - but regardless of the cause it's gone and it's not going to come back overnight. The competition does not have 36,000 more employees on the payroll than they need and Ford can't compete with them if they have that much dead weight.
This is survival - plain and simple. Fields already said job cuts and reductions in volume are not the way forward, but it's a necessary first step to position the company to start growing again.
In the long run, what keeps the company in business is good for all the employees.
Fuel Economy: ES350 wins with a combined 25.5 vs. 23.5
Fuel Type: MKZ wins with 87 vs. 93
Fuel expense: THE MXZ surprisingly wins here. $100 in gas gets you 850 miles in the ES350 and 854 in the MKZ. (Assuming 3.00 for 93, 2.75 for 87)
Performance: The ES350 claims 6.8sec for 0-60, Edmunds recorded a 7.1. There are no times for the MKZ yet, but the Zephyr claims 7.26 while Edmunds got 7.6. With the new Engine, the estimates are about 1 second quicker. Assuming a lower real world number improvement(.8), the MKZ wins. 6.5 claimed vs. 6.8 claimed, or 6.8 Edmunds vs. 7.1 Edmunds. MKZ wins.
salary
Does anyone know if ford has plans to replace the current wood designs on its steering wheels with the more conventional type. The wood on the sides is very interesting and diferent but especially on the Navigator it looks bad.
Then again, the new navigators interiior is just short of horrible, in terms of design. The last model was really awesome in that respect.
Glad so see ford fight it out with this lincoln. Wonder if they will add cornering lights like in the MKS...
As for the Navigator, that grill looks terrible to me but it will sell in youth market. They eat all of that stuff up, big rims, big grills, heck they even put it on their teeth!
Chief
Also, the event I went to was called Savor the Dream event. check out the schedule and when it might be coming to your town.
Savor the Dream
Chief
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/f0efe50
Why? Because we are going for more granular topics with descriptive titles. Makes it easier for new folks to find what they're seeking.
Chief