Lincoln MKS

1171820222358

Comments

  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    Do you mean 500/Taurus does not have hood struts?
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    There is hope - maybe they're getting it! The details matter in this segment.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I think they did/do. He was referring to the prop rods on the MKZ. I have no idea why this is so darned important to people. I'd be complaining about lack of electric tilt/telescoping steering wheel or manumatic shifting - things that really matter.
  • What matters or what doesn't is a personal thing... ;)
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    The 500 did not. In fact, one local dealer was installing aftermarket hood strut kits on 500s for around $120. They would do the same thing for Mustangs. I don't know if the new Taurus has struts or not.

    By the way, I have also complained about lack of manumatic and power tilt/telescope steering wheel. Thankfully, the manumatic appears to be a go. I still don't know about the tilt wheel. The S80 has a big unwieldly manual lever under the steering wheel so I am not holding my breath about power tilt/telescope on the MKS.
  • carjimcarjim Member Posts: 155
    Where would Lincoln be today had Reitzle and designer McGovern still been there along with enough cash to do what was right?
  • Well, for one thing, we wouldn't be calling this long long awaited new model Emm Kay Ess. What a stupid, stupid name. At least the alphanumerics of other manufacturers stand for something (model size, engine size or both). Oops, someone left me out of my cage. Sorry.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I think they did/do. He was referring to the prop rods on the MKZ. I have no idea why this is so darned important to people.

    Neither did Bill Ford, evidently, as they elected to cheap out on the $60 it would have cost to strut the hood. But, if you happen to lift the hood, which no self-respecting Lincoln driver should ever do, but I do, it's just so "Falcon" feeling when you have to prop the hood. It's a small thing, a detail I admit. But it's image. If the Lincoln name means anything more than a Ford, the hood should stay up. And there's no consistency either - the Explorer hood stays up, but the Lincolns don't? The MKX doesn't. Personally, I think they all should stay up except for the Focus, (which should be dropped anyway). But if they're going to cheap out - do it on the Fords. I really don't care if my Mustang has a prop rod - but I do care if my Lincoln does.... That short of thing.

    I agree totally about the Tilt/telescope electric wheel - all Lincolns should have that as well. These are the little things that make a luxury car a luxury car. And for years now, Ford didn't get that. They used to....Back in the 90's, the Town Car didn't miss a thing in the day. It had it all. Until the 98, anyway, when it became a cab for New York City.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Many posters are going to disagree with me on this one, but I have to get this off my chest. I would prefer AWD to be optional on the MKS - not standard. Here is why:

    AWD adds cost, weight, friction, and complexity. The additional moving parts, rear axles, U-joints, differential, driveshaft, transfer case to make the east-west engine route power north-south adds other mechanical noise and vibration sources. All of these parts are turning all of the time whether power is being fed to them or not. AWD hurts fuel economy and rolling acceleration.

    Better traction: No doubt about it but how often does the average customer need it? I live in snow country and many of us have a dedicated 4WD vehicle with higher ground clearance for the worst storms. I wouldn't drive an AWD luxury car through a 4 foot snow drift even if I could. FWD provides plenty of starting traction in most cases. Even my RWD LS with traction control is no problem.

    Torque steer: Sure, you feel it with a higher powered FWD car, but it can be pretty well controlled with suspension tuning, halfshaft lengths, etc. AWD on a TwinForce powered MKS makes total sense to me to control the torque steer and extra power but I don't see it being necessary on a 300 HP normally aspirated version - particularly since low-end torque is not very high.

    Handling: How many MKS drivers are going to set up cones in a parking lot, wet down the asphalt, and see how fast they can go around them? There may be a bit of advantage in emergency lane changes to avoid an accident but I haven't really seen data on that.

    Keep in mind, I am not saying they shouldn't offer AWD. I am saying give buyers the choice on the naturally aspirated version. If AWD is standard on the MKS, it would not prevent me from buying one. If it is optional, I would happily avoid it.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Based on some recent comments I heard I think it's a safe bet we'll see a FWD MKS with around 280 HP. That could be a base 3.7L engine or a Direct Injection 3.5L.
  • All that you say makes sense. However, Audi and Subaru quit selling their larger FWD models because so few people wanted them, and because FWD does not have a luxury image with the younger drivers they are going after. Old guys don't care if their LeSabre is FWD, RWD or one front and one rear. They don't care if their RWD Town Car has a solid axle. Car guys do.

    Plus, it is true that AWD can manage greater hp better than FWD alone. However, with improved stability control systems that is becoming a moot point. You can bet if the MKS was RWD, there would be no question that most of them would be sold without the AWD option.

    Ford is hoping that the MKS will be something more than a car like the Lucerne or the old FWD Continental...something with some cred like the LS had. Thus, they have to do the AWD thing for the time being.

    Also, I would be surprised if the MKS AWD is actually a system where all four wheels are driven all the time. Won't it be Haldex-like, in that it will operate in FWD mode most of the time, except when the computer determines that some rear wheel action is called for?
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    You make good points, as usual, Gregg. Personally, I think AWD is more about image than substance and clearly image is important.

    Won't it be Haldex-like, in that it will operate in FWD mode most of the time, except when the computer determines that some rear wheel action is called for?

    Yes, but whether or not the computer is calling for traction, the parts are all still turning. In other words, when the front wheels are doing the pulling, the rear wheels are spinning axles, differential, and driveshaft. That is less efficient than rear wheels simply spinning on bearings.
  • Yes, you are right. But sort of my point too. It is not even "real" AWD, though it adds a bunch of moving parts anyway. More image than substance says it well.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Unless you're trying to put 380+ hp to the ground. Then it's a lot more than just image.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    I totally agree. At some point, a TwinForce MKS with 20" wheels, high performance tires, firmed up suspension, and standard AWD would be great. 380+ HP with FWD would be disasterous.

    Just curious - do we know what percentage of MKZ buyers nationally are going for AWD? Here in Minneapolis, it seems that the dealer stock is about 50/50.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Hey hey hey! It's MARK Ess.

    And the whole letters thing worked really well on Cadiallac. Really really well. HAve we seen the CTS?
  • It is Emm Kay Ess.

    Unlike Lincoln, for most other companies that use alphnumerics, the the letters and numbers designate car size or engine size or both. This is sort of true for Cadillacs too, in that CTS indicates C Class sedan (and TS is for touring sedan), STS is more the S Class size, and DTS is the contraction for Deville (and will probably disappear soon). Lincoln used the MK in an ill-fated effort to get people to say "Mark." It didn't work. So now they have S and Z and potentially R designating nothing that the consumer will ever pick up on. Plus they have the Mark LT (no consistency) and still use names for the Town Car and Nav. It is a jumbled mess and needs re-thinking.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    STS is more the S Class size,

    except the STS is more E class size, and 5 series size. The DTS isn't even up to S class size, and it's considerably larger than the STS - which is why I am not interested in the STS.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Which brings us back to the MKS.....if the specs on the concept hold true, it will be within an inch of the S-class in overall length. With its transverse engine layout, the thing should have a ton of interior room and a huge trunk. The new Taurus is certainly roomy and the MKS should be even better.

    Of course the MKS will not compete with the S-class. It will be at a much lower price point. However, I like the idea of offering at lot more car and more features at a similar price to cars that it does compete with.

    With loaded ES 350s in the low $40s, I would think the FWD V6 MKS would be a worthy alternative. I could also see the MKS being an alternative to the STS and DTS. None of these quite reach the level of the Lexus LS series or S-class but the MKS should look pretty compelling for those who like a larger luxurious car but prefer to stay south of $50k.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I'm very glad to hear the MKS will be S Class sized. I would have bought a Town Car had the Air Conditioner been fixed (needs a bigger fan) and the interior been more luxury like instead of a fancy taxi. If the MKS has the luxurious interior and size of the S Class cars, I could be lured back.... I don't enjoy paying a fortune for a sedan, but was kind of forced to to get the room I needed (Lexus LS).
  • I think the problem with the MKS is not its size--it is 203" long. But setting that length on a 114" wheelbase was not the best plan. No reason why they could not have placed the front wheels closer to the front of the car, FWD or not. It would be better balanced (not as much weight on the front wheels alone), and better looking. It is the short wheelbase that makes the 500/Taurus look shorter than it actually is.
  • savethelandsavetheland Member Posts: 671
    banker, STS is bigger than E-class. I compared E-class size to Lincoln MKZ (aka Fusion). The both have the same exterior size except E-class has higher roof and longer wheel-base. That creates illusion of bigger car. Naturally E-class is roomier because of wheelbase and roof.

    Therefore MKS is much larger than E-class. But is it S-class size? Wheel-base-wise I do not think so. Car that big cannot be FWD.
  • Actually, the E Class does NOT have more room than the MKZ...they are in the same size class: mid-size. The STS and S Class are much more close in size, as you point out.

    And FWD cars can actually be any size. Remember the original Toronado from 1966? The Cord 810/812? Nothing short about those wheelbases. FWD cars can be designed with any size wheelbase. Placing the engine slightly behind the drive wheels (for better balance), rather than slightly in front is no more difficult engineering-wise, but it does necessitate putting some real money into new design and tooling--which companies like Ford and Audi have resisted doing. However, Audi is now starting to mount the engine further back with some of the models in the pipeline. Any company sticking with FWD architecture in their luxury segment will eventually have to move in that direction to compete.

    Ford couldn't afford to do the MKS that way, as they need the car like yesterday. But the car can have the requisite interior room with a shorter wheelbase precisely because the engine is mounted so far forward.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Yep, the S-class has a 205" length on a 124" wheelbase while the MKS is 203.8" on a 114" wheelbase. Definately a longer wheelbase is preferable for many reasons - except turning circle.

    I am not trying to defend the MKS here but remember this platform has its roots in the prior S80. To re-engineer the hard points to accomodate shorter front overhang/engine relocation would probably be nearly as difficult as starting from scratch. It seems to me they are just going to have to play the cards they were dealt if we want an MKS at all.

    The transverse engine/transaxle pretty much has to stay in line with the front wheels unless there is major re-engineering of the entire assembly - and that isn't practical since the basic engine/transaxle is used in other applications like the Edge, Taurus, etc. If you move the whole kit and kaboodle forward to eliminate overhang, you run into hoodline clearance and a host of other issues. Plus, you are still moving a lot of weight forward. In short, big cars need to be RWD.

    The situation not perfect but it is what it is....
  • Yes, I agree, and that is pretty much what I was trying to say.

    However, when and if the MKS is re-engineered, either they need to go RWD, OR they need to make the engine longitudinal and move it back (not forward) on the chassis. Think the proportions the Acura Vigor had. On that car, the engine was not hanging out in front of the drive wheels.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Yes, Gregg, we are on the same page with this - our posts were written at about the same time. It seems to me that the MKS is sort of a stop-gap measure before a proper RWD platform is ready. This makes me think that the MKS will be a relatively short-lived model. Another possiblilty is that when the new RWD platform is ready, the MKZ will bite the dust and leave the MKS as the entry level Lincoln. That would be OK with me.

    Ultimately, I would like to see a strong competitor to the ES350 and FWD/AWD would be OK for that. Secondly, I would like to see a large RWD flagship Lincoln to replace the Town Car and represent American luxury at its finest. Third, I would like to see a RWD CTS sized luxury/sport sedan - kind of like the Lincoln LS only with dramatic styling and top notch interior. Frankly, I don't care what they do with the SUVs and cross-overs, but if they have the silly things, they need to be better than the Navigator and MKX.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    With all due respect ... (doncha hate it when a post starts this way?) ...

    Lincoln has been developing the MKS for what, 4 or 5 years? Ford and Mercury started selling their versions of this chassis in 2005. Volvo STOPPED selling their version of this chassis in 2006 or 2007. Lincoln has yet to release theirs and latest I hear is next summer at the earliest. And now u think it's a 'stop-gap' short-lived model? It might be, but not because is was planned that way!

    I must say I wonder why folks are waiting for this car, and hoping it'll fulfill their expectations. ANd that when it doesn't, it'll be becasue it's really not meant to be a great car, just another stop-gap Lincoln. And this RWD flagship that folks are always talkin bout, that's what, minimum 5 years away? MINIMUM? By then, the democrats will have outlawed any engine larger than 2 belts with guinea pigs and so a lot of this will be moot. Chrysler and GM have already cancelled some vehicles in anticipation of new mpg standards to be achieved as soon as Toyota invents "unobtanium". Ford has a terrible record of mpg and is in line to get scalped if new stds come into play. A flagship Lincoln with RWD or AWD and a big V-8 or even twin-turbo V6 (which is not really a twin turbo V6 BTW) will need sales of hundreds of mini-Fords for every big Lincoln sold to keep in tune with CAFE.
    Seriously, Gregg & Bruce, do u ever feel like you're p_ssing into the wind here? :) Lincoln is for blue hairs. That's it. They tried and failed and threw in the towel with the LS. Get a Cadillac cause it'll be years, maybe a decade, before Lincoln can compete again and that assumes they even want to. All just MHO.
  • Don't disagree with a word of it, except... (don't you also hate that?)

    The Democrats aren't responsible for all the craziness. Nor are the big oil Texans, even though they ought to know better than some of the bonehead policies they have also espoused. It is all about big business and multi-national corporations. Making big money is not a bad thing of course, but geez, you'd think the people who really control stuff would take information from all sides and sift it before declaring victory.

    Ford and Lincoln certainly didn't use their many resources to make good decisions. They acted like a smaller version of so many power centers who have come to believe they can simply discount what doesn't fit with their own philosophy.

    All parties, all persuasions, all religions...anyone who thinks they are "right" without at least considering other perspectives, will fall into the pit that Lincoln is in. Your humble opinion is noted, and Cadillac is the best choice of the two now. Those of us who loved many past Lincolns hope for the best.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Yeah, me too. Always been a Ford guy. (Didnt really want to get too far off topic with politics, though it should be obvious which bunch of losers are scre..... i*(^&6)(*) oops, almost went there again:>)
    I am hoping for the best as well, but I'm also at the point where a bird in the hand ... you know the rest. The CTS is a beautiful car that really does handle and ride as well or better than the LS and gives the Germans the run for the money right now. If that's the kind of car u want, and you'd like it to be American then either get a 2006 Lincoln LS, or a 2008 Cadillac CTS. (Heck, maybe even the right Chrysler 300 would be close enuf.) But the MKS is going to be a FWD appliance and I just done see what the fuss is about. It looks like an AcuAurora and will ride like a Volvo with probably lots of torque steer like the S60 T5 that I test drove when I bought my LS. OK, could be AWD and cut down on that, but cuts down on mpg as well and that's becoming too important to scrimp on.
    Ah, what the heck, I cant afford any of the above 3 options anyway so who cares?
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Seriously, Gregg & Bruce, do u ever feel like you're p_ssing into the wind here?

    Yes, but I am optimistic that the wind will evenually die down or my pressure will increase!

    Seriously, I am not saying that the MKS will suddenly make Lincoln the "gotta have it" brand. Far from it. It is FWD based when the major competitors are RWD. The styling is not revolutionary in the least. Ford does not have a reputation for fuel economy. No Lincoln, including the upcoming MKS is an enthusiast-oriented sport/luxury sedan in the CTS mold. It is disgusting that the MKS was not introduced within a year of the 500/Montego instead of 4 years later. I get all of that.

    I am hard-headed Ford loyal so maybe I cut Ford more slack than most buyers but I am encouraged by the new leadership in Dearborn as well as some of their latest products. The new Taurus and Sable are excellent vehicles. Anyone considering a Camry or Accord should see how much more car they can get for the money.

    Instead of focusing on where the MKS fails to compete, I see some areas of opportunity with it while a proper RWD platform is being developed.

    You keep telling me to get a Cadillac. The DTS is nearly as out of touch as the Lincoln TC - strictly for the blue hairs. The CTS is really impressive for a medium sized sport/luxury sedan but I already have a medium sized sport/ luxury sedan - the Lincoln LS. I am ready for something a bit larger with more room and luxury. The STS would fit my needs and wants pretty well. The problem is that with my brand loyalty to Ford, buying a GM product would almost feel as bad as cheating on my wife. ;)
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The STS would fit my needs and wants pretty well. The problem is that with my brand loyalty to Ford, buying a GM product would almost feel as bad as cheating on my wife.

    I used to be you. Hard headed and bled Ford Blue. Drove Lincolns for 16 years. But when my lease on my 03 Navigator was up - I decided to go back to a large luxury sedan. Well, that left me with a Town Car, and in 1997, that was a beautiful and excellent car. But today - it's more of a Limo type of vehicle, not enough luxury, and has a weak Air Conditioner - not good for either of my homes. That ruled it out, though I still like to rent them when I travel.

    Where to go from there? I wasn't yet impressed with Cadillac at the time, though I checked them out. The interiors were too spartan, dark and cheap looking then. They are improved now. Tried an S-Class, and loved it - however, even the demos have gremlins and problems that I just can't abide. Too much down time, too expensive to fix after warranty and we have a snotty dealer here too.

    Loved the Q-45 too. Snotty dealer again.

    Tried the Lexus LS 430. Very boring car, but the technology it has is astounding, and it never breaks down. Reliability was high on my list, gizmos, options and technology is too. The Lexus gave me two out of three. Ok, so it's boring as hell.....I know..... Compromise.

    Now, the MKS has promise - but the FWD isn't a favorite of mine with that powerful engine. Also, based on the dimensions of the car, it sounds exactly like my Continentals - built on the Taurus platform, the wheelbase was very short, so although the car was large inside and beautiful - the overhangs were ridiculous!! The engine hung out over the front wheels, giving the car some pretty miserable handling characteristics. Any serious dips or bumps and it bottomed the shocks out in the front every time. It was a beautiful car, under-engineered.

    If the MKS is the same - I'm too smart now to overlook it like I did 16 years ago.... But, I'll give it a look. The MKR sounds like a better option. Meanwhile, I'm bored stiff in my Lexus - but not unhappy. It's like that Honda commercial that asks, "What do you think about when you don't have to think about your car?" Problem is: Car guys think about their car all the time, and there truly is nothing to think about in an LS 430. It just gets you there comfortably, quietly, and reliably. ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz :sick:
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Nv, many months ago, I believe it was you who said something to the effect of "I didn't leave Ford - they left me." If I am misquoting you, I apologize but that is exactly what I was feeling when Bill Ford was in charge. Now I have a little bit of hope.

    Here I am driving a pristine 2000 Lincoln LS with 110,000 miles on it. I have had a few good years financially and would like to upgrade but my brand of choice has nothing to offer. Still I will wait a bit longer and see if the MKS will work for me.

    I am pretty confident that the MKS will be worlds better structurally than the Continental - and they have learned a thing or two since the Continental days about suspension tuning for a good balance of ride and handling. FWD is certainly not my first choice but I can live with it if otherwise the MKS has the comfort, quiet, luxury, quality and performance that I am looking for.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Exactly what I said re: buying my Lexus instead of another Lincoln, and as I (and you) watched Bill Ford systematically bury the company in uncertainty and lethargic coasting....I just had to get out. I could be brought back though, as Lexus, good as it is, is boring. A little less boring than a Town Car though...

    And GAWD, I wish they would dump the Alphabet Soup.
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_mks#Specifications

    Width is 75.5 in. (1912 mm)

    Does that include the side view mirrors? My garage door (I live in San Francisco) is 90 inches in width.

    Thanks in advance
  • No, the width dimension rarely includeds side mirrors. If it did, the actual body width would be less than most subcompacts are. However, almost all vehicles with mirrors (unless you have tow mirrors) are less than 90".
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Check out Left Lane News for pics of the MKS without camo. (supposedly)

    Exterior body styling is down the list a long way when I make buying decisions but I think this is the most expressive face on a Lincoln in years. The divided grille, like the MKR, really makes the car. Also the "c" pillar is different from the concept and less Japanese, IMHO. Even the taillights are different from the concept and the Olds Aurora look is gone.

    Overall, I like what I see. If this is indeed the real thing, I think they did a good job. If the MKS works for me mechanically and dynamically, I will be proud to own one.
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    Would you happen to have any link? I'm getting the same pictures/sketches originally brought up.
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    Nevermind, found it.

    Here's the link, thanks brucelinc.

    http://www.leftlanenews.com/lincoln-mks-future.html
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "Check out Left Lane News for pics of the MKS without camo. (supposedly)

    Exterior body styling is down the list a long way when I make buying decisions but I think this is the most expressive face on a Lincoln in years. The divided grille, like the MKR, really makes the car. Also the "c" pillar is different from the concept and less Japanese, IMHO. Even the taillights are different from the concept and the Olds Aurora look is gone.

    Overall, I like what I see. If this is indeed the real thing, I think they did a good job. If the MKS works for me mechanically and dynamically, I will be proud to own one."

    OK, I looked at the photos. My opinion? Eh - it's OK I guess. Front end is nicer than before with the Pontiac-Lincoln look. (Linciac? Ponticoln?) Rear end looks very much like the CTS/DTS with the addition of the huge amber light insert. (Lincilac? Caddicoln?) Profile is nice, not sure how people will like the chrome strips running the length of the roof. Me? I like chrome. In just the right amount. This is OK with me.

    The interior? Eh. Doesn't look like a luxury car interior to me. Compared to the CTS interior, it's pretty 2nd rate. It is heartening to see the manumatic shifter though. But what of a navigation system? That tiny 'screen' at the top of the dash cant possibly be a nav system can it? And if not, where does it go? In the concept, the nav system was where this tiny screen is. It is amazing to me how much this interior looks like the concept interior yet looks so much cheaper. I know it's partly the pictures, but it's still pretty well 3rd rate vs the concept interior.

    Last, having seen 3 or more mockups of possible Lincolns at maketing opinion events, I'd have to say I'm still disappointed in what I see here. Any of the mockups I've seen would have been better than this, IMHO.

    One thing is for sure, NOBODY who left an opinion on left lane or autoblog like the stupid name. Oh well, Lincoln marketing folks are very highly paid and I'm sure they know what they're doing ...
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    The body looks awesome. I actually didn't have a problem with the wide body grill that originally popped up last year. I admit that the divided grill shown here is just as good, showing how much the MKR concept has influenced the MKS. I like chrome, I think it adds a lot to the image of a car and the MKS provides just enough chrome for it. I think the tires/rims could be bigger because right now they look to be 17". I was pleased to hear they were going for 20" rims when it originally came out.. I hope they at least go that route or 19" at least.

    The interior shown here:
    http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4994&id- - g=3&idi=1
    ...Isn't SO bad, my only problem is the "navigation system." You're right, if that's it I don't know how the hell it's going to work so efficiently and it's not even "shaded" to protect the screen from glare during daytime driving. The interior shown by Media.Ford.com (again at first) was very appealing in my eyes and I hope they still go that direction with the interior. Bluetooth, "Touch-Screen" GPS navigation, and a handful of more features really got my attention from considering the MKZ, and instead opting to wait for the MKS.

    Media.Ford.com:
    http://media.ford.com/images/06_products/mks_6.jpg
    http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_display.cfm?vehicle_id=1372&press_subsec- tion_id=421&make_id=93

    I hope this MKS turns out great and am still interested in buying it. I'm just waiting for official word on features, etc.
  • theman123theman123 Member Posts: 170
    Hey guys I hate to burst your bubble. The pics of the Interior I've seen before. Those are at least a year old pre-production version of the interior. That little screen your talking about is not production ready either. The only thing that can fit into it would be the new "Sync" system multi information display. We all have to assume that the MKS is going to have Navi. I mean that's not even a question because they offer it on the MKZ. It would make no sense not to offer it on Lincoln's "flag ship" sedan.

    On that note I love the front of the car it looks like a Lincoln. the Back is too understated. I like the back of the MKZ better than I like that back of the MKS. But that's a personal thing. All-in-all I think the MKS is a sweet looking car. All Ford has to do is nail down the quality the interior fit-and-finish. Of course the price I think they have themselves a winner.

    Question has anybody figured out what they are going to do with engine? Is it going to be the Yamaha V8 or the "Twin-Force" 3.5 V6 putting out 400Hp that they are bragging about. Personally, I would like to see the "Twin-Force" because it's something different and it's outside the box. By it being a V6 it would get pretty decent gas mileage. The only thing they would have to do is figure out a way to make the "Twin-force" work off regular gas instead of premium. Like all other premium engines require.

    Now all Lincoln needs to do is bring the MKR to the streets. And a sexy two door barn burner. Too me, Lincoln would be a serious player in the luxury CAR market again. Nice find who ever found these links.

    :shades:
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    You're right about the GPS, it's just a matter of where to put it. I think the original interior layout provided by media ford was perfect. And I do believe they have officially cut the V8 from the plans and are going with the Twin-Force V6. 400Hp is a lot on a V6, and considering the gas mileage will be fairly decent is great to hear guessing by the looks that the car will look heavy, but hopefully not too heavy.

    I also want either the Boston surround system in the car or the THX that's in the MKZ.

    I just cannot wait for this car to hit the market.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Inside info is the prototype interior is structurally correct but has none of the production finishes applied. So you won't see black plastic like the picture. I suspect the instrument cluster will also change.

    The small screen is for non-nav vehicles. Nav screen is bigger but I'm not sure if it's in the same place or different. You can see the cutout in the dash for the THX II center speaker so that's a given.

    It should debut with a FWD 3.7L putting out around 280 hp but tuned for FE using regular gas. AWD would be optional and *might* offer more power (300-330 hp) using direct injection and possibly premium fuel. The twin force 3.5L (or 3.7L) should be out 6 months after launch with 350+ hp and standard AWD.
  • keystone2k9keystone2k9 Member Posts: 25
    Thanks. I was looking for the AWD 3.7L...
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Jeyhoe, I was hoping to read some of your wit and wisdom!

    Others have addressed the Nav, interior, and engine questions but as for body styling: Based on what they had to work with, the D3 platform, don't you think they did a great job? This looks NOTHING like a Ford Taurus or Mercury Muskrat (aka, Sable). It is far from completely original, but it not a quick and dirty badge job like the MKZ and it does have some strong features. We are never going to get the Continental concept of 2002 but the grill, roof line, and side view of the MKS look a lot more upscale than I would have expected, based on it's origins.

    We both have LSs. Did you think it was a styling sensation when you bought it? I sure didn't. I bought mine in spite of it looking like a Mitsubishi. To my eyes, the MKS makes a much stronger visual statement than the LS. By the way, I hate the name as much as anyone but I have had a great car with no name for 7 years so I am used to that.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "Jeyhoe, I was hoping to read some of your wit and wisdom!"

    I was hoping I had some! :>)

    I gotta admit you got me there with the name thing. Here I am driving an "LS" and complaining about "MKS". Seems pretty silly now that I actually apply my wisdom to it! Though just to keep on the devil's advoctate side, doesn't it seem that they really meant that "MK" be pronounced "Mark" and then it would be a "Mark S" and a "Mark Z" and that those names make sense vis-a-vis Lincoln's history?

    As for looks, d_mn, got me again. I do recall thinking the LS couldda been better looking. THough I must admit it's looks really grows on you (well, me anyway). The whole look of the thing is an understated elegance. And the profile, with great wheels on it, is very athletic looking. The Mitsu rear end is the only weak part IMHO.

    You're 3 for 3 now. I do actually think the Mark S is a fine looking car. I can see it's Volvo roots in the profile, and the back seems to evoke the current Caddys and the front end is part Lincoln, part Pontiac but overall, I think the design works. Now if it only had all-aluminum racing-inspired supsension, anti-dive geometry, handling on the order of a BMW 5-series, near 50-50 weight distribution, a manual transmission option, ... it would be a real contender. As it is, it's a nice looking FWD appliance whose torque steer with the twin force will probably pull the wheel right from your hands. (I base this on the torque steer I experienced when test driving this car's smaller brother, the Volvo S60-T5. I considered that vehicle when I bought my LS. But vs the LS I found the Volvo though definitely quicker with that turbo, didn't handle as well, ride as well, had less room inside and the torque steer was troublesome.

    The way to buy the Mark S IMHO, would be twin-force with AWD. Fully loaded, that might be north of $50,000? That's out of my league anymore, but best wishes to those who can afford one.

    Speaking of the Mercury Muskrat (I like that), have u seen the new commercials for that car? Our old friend Jill, dressed very tamely, let's the new idea out of it's box (ala the Mariner commercials) and lets it grow. Pretty lame, IMHO. The absolute WORST thing about the Mercury ads are the tag lines. "Smarter than ever before" Jill says of the new Sable. Really? In what way? And then the inane:

    "Mercury. New doors opened." Gawd, gag me will ya? Talk about saying NOTHING about why I would want to buy this car. "Smarter and with new doors?" Ah, where's the Buicks please?
  • Mercury has been turned into the dumbest thing on four wheels. Stupid tag lines. Stupid re-do's of Fords. Stupid all about "enhanced interior materials." Elena Ford should slink away into her burrow and stay there. If that's all they want to do with the brand, make Mercurys Ford "elite" models or some damn thing. But a whole division of NOTHING but blatant badge engineering? It NEVER was this bad at any other time in Mercury history.

    Look at how bad off Saturn was a very short while ago. Someone figured out how to fix that. All the money being spent on trying to turn Ford around, and this sort of crap is all they can come up with for Mercury. For shame.

    At least Lincoln gets the MKS. Still, we are reduced to absolutely hailing a Taurus with a unique body and engine, even though it is FWD and hardly a stunner. Reminds me of the last Continental, also based on the Taurus and FWD, but with its own body, wheelbase and engine. Hardly tore up the marketplace with that formula, did they?

    I wish 'em well, but gosh, what they could have done by 2009 with some real effort. Woulda could shoulda. Still hope they make it.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    I hate to say this but Mercury is dead. Rather than give it a proper burial, they are just letting it decompose like a squashed skunk in the middle of the road.

    I thought that the MKS really should have been a Mercury and replaced the Grand Marquis. That would have given Mercury something other than a gussied up Ford. Of course, had they done that, Lincoln would have been dead since there is not currently a proper Lincoln in the fleet.

    As for the LS styling, for some reason, I get a lot more compliments on mine now than when I bought it in May of 1999. The styling really has aged pretty well. The MKS is a bit more "in your face" but I like it. Take a gander at a pic of the MKS next to a Cadillac STS and I think many will say that the MKS makes a stronger statement.

    I don't love the MKS mechanically. I would much prefer RWD and a V8. The TwinForce AWD sounds interesting but I really don't want to wait for it. I will probably buy an MKS shortly after launch. Whether it be the FWD or AWD version will depend on the difference in power and performance. If the FWD is 280 HP and the AWD has direct injection and 320 HP or so, I will probably go AWD, even though I hate the additional weight, rotational mass, and cost.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I came up with another possibility for Mercury. Ford is quietly combining Lincoln/Mercury dealers with Ford dealers (I assume they're helping unless this is just a natural progression due to volume - it's happening all around me).

    With a Ford/Lincoln/Mercury dealership Mercury no longer needs to provide high volume vehicles to keep the Lincoln/Mercury dealerships open. Mercury would then be able to produce niche vehicles or at least smaller volume vehicles and would not have to simply clone Fords anymore.

    Definitely a long shot but a possibility - no?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

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.