By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Which GM crossover? It's not just the software that's different - different engine and different rear end also.
Controls on the PCM would possibly give Ford an edge on changing settings between different vehicle types.
I presume the MKS will get the new transmission from the get-go.
Yes, the MKZ has the Aisin 6 speed, NOT the 6F.
I haven't seen the torque curve of the 3.5 but based on a short drive in an MKZ, it felt pretty gutless under 4000 RPM. I think it would benefit greatly from deeper gearing in the lower gears.
That reminds me of my 2000 Intrepid ES. It feels like it doesn't have much get up and go from 0, but it has great passing power.
Yes the MKZ has the Aisin unit, if it had that 6F, it would help. I dislike the Aisin unit anyways. Luckily their high failure rates are linked to the 5 speeds which Toyota, VW, and a few other use, the 6speeds seem to be fine.
It's a positive sign whenever I start a forum. Now I just need to open a MK-R one, although there's one sort of tied to it. Let's see what I come up with.
So? And, how do you know? If it's a new RWD platform, a good one, it doesn't matter if it's shared across the board.
Problem has been product cycles were never close to one another in timing, to allow for such integration...till now.
Like in any job, when you have one slacker, everyone else begins to slack because they see that person getting away with it. So it taints the working pool, and kills productivity. So when the pool is tainted, you need to empty everything out and start fresh and make sure there's enough bleach so it doesn't happen again.
Not so fast. GM has two – one for Caddy another for Holden and other GM brands. Then DCX also has one RWD platform for Chrysler and another for Mercedes. Note that RWD is not shared between luxury and mainstream RWD cars.
One example us the Taurus/Continental duo. Same platform, just totally tailored differently to suit different audiences.
Now you said Lincoln LS did not sell. But Jagaur does not sell eigther but still they manage to get true luxury plaform.
Then the whining will be "It's a dated platform".
Jaguar has the aluminum DEW98 that is working great for them. You don't take them 10 steps back by placing them in a AU Falcon platform.
As it is, there's enough whining from armchair critics complaining about a C1 Focus, when in reality, it's just 4 structural members that seperates the C170 from C1.
But still Mazda3 wins every comparo and every other car beats Focus. How it is possible if Focus is the same car as Mazda3? And where is 2.3L in new Focus? Where is hatchback? Where is SVT?
"Jaguar has the aluminum DEW98 that is working great for them. You don't take them 10 steps back by placing them in a AU Falcon platform. "
What do you mean by "working great"? Jaguar looses money year after year. But when LS lost some money - now it is a big deal - Lincoln has to move from "fine" platform to mainstream Falcon. You can never make Lincoln luxury marque again. Luxury means perfection.
It's not till recently where that trend is bucking a bit. People ARE willing to pay $25K for a subcompact Jetta, or $30K+ for a compact S40. So now is the time when vehicle architectures can be spread among globally. And even then, we'll still have vehicles that are specific to the US market such as an Accord.
However, the 500 has the best utilization of space in the world - that trunk and back seat are absolutely cavernous! You could easily put 4 bodies in that trunk. Whoever styled it, had a Passat next to it for inspiration, you can tell - but something we Americans haven't figured out yet, is why Americans buy Passats and Camrys - and it isn't because they're ugly!! Americans drive the Passats because of how they DRIVE, despite their ugly appearance and dismal reliability record. So, why make your Ford, which doesn't drive nearly that well, ugly like a Passat? Same with Camry, people buy them not because they're boring, they buy them because they're the easiest car in the world to drive, and because they are dead-bank dependable.
To get Americans to drive OUR cars, we have to offer something the foreigners DON'T offer - which used to be style, size, power, and comfort! (See; 86 Taurus, 83 T-bird, 90 Town Car, 83 Cougar) Those were the cars that made Ford famous and prosperous..... They were completely different than a Toyota - and were appealing. Now, we're trying to replicate the foreigners, and it won't work - ever.
Lemme just say at this point that the S could be a car I would look at replacing my LS with. But only if the guages dont look like a 74 granada and the shifter doesn't look like a 2007 Fusion. But they probably will, sadly. In any case, my wife has said she's picking out the next car and she likes Infinitis and I just saw the 07 G35 and it has a manual transmission option (short throw 6 speed no less) so I gotta believe that's what we'll be driving in a year or 2.
After I sell the Navigator, our 9 or so year foray into Lincoln vehicles will be over. It has been a good ride, we reached higher to American Luxury and our dreams were realized. However, I aint going BACK to the future of Mexican second-class cars with Lincoln. To me that's a nightmare. If they can't or wont design and build a vehicle in the USA that excites the senses when you get in and push the pedal, to heck with them.
Geez, I just realized that by the time Lincoln does build something exciting, assumng they are working on it as Allen and Alan say they are, gee, I'll be of the age of a Town Car buyer so it will be a dont care for me! Life is strange.
:sick:
Anyway, the MKS is about my last hope of having a reasonable replacement for my LS and still remain a Ford man. The Jag XF (when it arrives) or a slightly used XJ is still a possibility but I am waiting for more information on the MKS.
I like the interior of the concept and can live with the exterior. It sounds like the production version will have the split grille with cues from the MKR. Actually, the front of the MKS concept was my favorite view. I hope they make some changes to the rear to get rid of the Aurora look. The C-pillar treatment has been done to death already but I like it OK.
My biggest concerns are more about the mechanical side of things. The original LS V8 would do 0-60 in the low to mid 7s. The newer VVT models would knock about a second off that. I am skepical that a 3.7 V6 MKS can be as quick as a late model LS particularly if the MKS is burdened with the weight and rotational mass of a stupid AWD system. I am looking for stronger performance as well as more luxury in my next ride.
Also for the MKS to be on my shopping list, it must have a proper gear selector - not the D-L foolishness.
I guess we wait and see....
Still, in photos, it looks smaller and tidier than it actually is. I have never understood why a company would design a big car to look small. (Ford did that with the 1996 Taurus...the immediate impression it gave, before people got used to looking at its odd proportions, was that it was smaller than the 1995 it replaced.) So those who go for boats like the TC won't gravitate toward it, and those who like the E Class/BMW 5 series/CTS/Lexus GS/Audi 6/Infiniti M size sedans won't like its extra heft either.
Granted, it is supposed to have gobs of interior space (although I hope they do something about increasing interior width over the 500...the 500's shoulder and hip room is only in mid-size territory). Maybe those who went for the LeSabre-sized full-size will like it. It will be interesting to see how it all falls out.
It really bothers me on the MKZ - 190 inches long on a 107 inch wheelbase - shorter than a Camry.