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
If you can't figure out how to get there, I'll start moving posts. :shades:
I did not notice any of that on my test drive. And I checked for it.
By the way, I agree with your non-auto comments, too. Hell, I even agree with a good share of your comments about cars! Of course, I liked giowa, too. Remember him?
I know I shouldn't go in with my mind made up beforehand, without getting all the facts first, like say a politician visiting Iraq, and I will try hard not to do that. I can't help thinking though that the SURGE that would be provided by the ECO-boost twin-Turbo engine would be a WINNER for me, rather than the normal V6 available now. Of course if I'm wrong about that, I would admit it, unlike ... Oh never mind.
Glad you're on the RIGHT page, bruce. I would imagine the demographics would say that most Lincoln buyers are! But giowa - good grief, am I starting to sound like him???? Didnt he rant about things like V6 vs in-line 6 and why no pre-tensioners and blah blah? Oh, man, I need to take a long look in the mirror! :sick:
Anyway, driving it was a deal breaker. It was heavy and ponderous and trying to make any kind of a turn at speed caused the front end to plow severely. I can only hope the mks is a whole lot better than that Conti was.
The basic suspension on the MKS is firmer than many expect and that is true regardless of tire/wheel choice. However, the 18s provide much better isolation from broken pavement, expansion strips, or railroad tracks. They are also much quieter, even on nasty grooved concrete freeways. I really could not see much of a downside in terms of handling response such as quick lane changes, either. I am sure the 19 inch Eagle tires would provide a bit more ultimate grip but you would almost need a skidpad and testing gear to measure the difference.
FWD VS. AWD: When pushed hard through slow corners, the FWD will understeer a bit more than the AWD and you will get some front tire squeal if you really power through a slow turn. It is not bad, though - certainly not like an old Continental or cars of that ilk. For a front heavy car, it handles surprisingly well, IMO. An LS would trouce it in an autocross but the MKS just isn't that kind of car.
I am certain that the FWD version is quicker in a straight line and the engine sounds less labored under acceleration. To check for torque steer, I very loosely held the steering wheel at about 40 MPH and floored it. I even took my hands off the wheel for a couple of seconds. It pulled straight ahead up to 75 or so when I backed off. The only time I felt a hint of torque steer was accelerating from a dead stop while turning sharply. From my perspective, the concerns about TS are exaggerated. I felt more torque steer in a V6 Fusion that I rented a few weeks ago than in the MKS.
The only thing that has stopped me from ordering an MKS is the engine. It really needs more power to compete in its market, IMO.
Autoweek review of the 2009 MKS
MSN. com Review of 2009 MKS
Your thoughts ?????
BTW, who is "they"?
Cadillac went all FWD by the late 80s. Audi (FWD) became more prominent. The Continental went FWD to better compete with Cadillac. RWD Chrysler near luxury did not do well and went away. Acura was born. Infiniti and Lexus followed with some FWD models. Buick went FWD. Saab always was and kept FWD as it moved up market. Volvo eventually acquiesced and went FWD.
Meanwhile, stodgy Mercedes and less stodgy BMW stayed with what they knew, and really began to improve their lines to compete and grow their businesses. RWD began a real resurgance beyond these companies once traction control became more common, and AWD began to be added at least as an option. Stability control began to appear at the end of the century.
Now many of the reasons that FWD had begun to be used were less valid, handling had improved overall by leaps and bounds, and it became obvious again that RWD could more easily be tuned for better handling and balance than FWD without the penalty of fishtailing and poor winter traction. So, one could argue that the new RWD interest is 21st century.
As for V8s, they may continue to move further upmarket. The standards years ago used to have V12s and even V16s, but those were mostly replaced by V8s. It is conceivable that a luxury car soon will only require a V6 to have the proper panache in this era of oil shortages and market (if not government) demands for higher mpg.
I agree, it is conceivable - but not yet reality. Those cars with 6 Cylinders (Acura, Lincoln) are considered "near luxury" still. While that may change, the V-8 may also come back as gas prices stablize, and engine efficiency technology improves. The V-8 in my Lexus LS430 is small, very efficient, with VVT-i and gets me 19mpg city and up to 30mpg highway. The new MKS doesn't boast those numbers with the normally aspirated 6.
For the moment, the V-8 RWD cars still hold the Pennant in the luxury arena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_6T70_transmission
Ford did this to keep the performance minded people happy as a higher ratio delivers more torque and performance at the expense of higher engine RPM and a bit worse fuel economy. For myself, I would be much happier if Ford could put the 2.77 ratio axle on this car. With the uncertainty regarding gas prices, I dont' think I want a car, no matter how good it is, if it only gets 24 MPG highway. If the MKS got 28 MPG, it would compete better on fuel efficiency and I would feel a WHOLE LOT BETTER about this car. Perhaps when the ecobost engine arrives, maybe FORD can back off the performance a bit on the non-ecobost version to give us closer to 28 MPG. If Ford can do this, I think I will definitely buy the MKS. If not, I am leaning against it.I will wait 5 or 6 more months to see what will happen.
I do believe they should offer a fuel stingy option, whatever that is, along with a 300 hp GDI 3.7L and the EB 3.5L 340-350 hp version.
The drawback to that 2.77 gear is the inability to hold overdrive at slower speeds, on hilly roads, or when accelerating. Under those conditions, you might find the 3.16 or 3.39 ratio actually provides better real world mileage because it would not have to downshift as much.
If they ever have a direct injection version of the 3.7 as the base engine, it would likely improve fuel economy. It might even have sufficient torque to handle the 2.77 final drive a bit better and we could have our cake and eat it, too. As it stands today, I think the 3.16 with FWD and the 3.39 with AWD will provide better drivability than the 2.77 and real world mileage may not be much different.
Here's the Review Cars. com You Tube review
What do you all think ?
Honestly, the car was quieter and had less road noise than my Lexus, by quite a bit. Could be the tires I have on my car, but it was what it was. I had no issues with the car.
I think the key phrase is "stiffer than you might expect." That is the first thing I noticed. It is much firmer than our Taurus and even firmer than my LS. I was not expecting that. My dealer admitted that he had gotten push-back from TC owners who were expecting a softer ride. I personally found it nicely controlled but I wouldn't want it any stiffer.
I have driven both the AWD with the 19" wheels and a FWD with the 18s. Both are firm but the 18s are a bit softer and they are also quieter on concrete roads. On smooth asphalt, I can't say there was much difference - both were very good - among the quietest cars I have ever driven.
It is high praise indeed when Nvbanker says he likes it. He is comparing it to his Lexus. They are pretty much the gold standard for smooth and quiet.
I think that the standard 18 inch wheels afford the best ride, but the Ultimate package includes 19s.
I liked the leather seating in the MKS, but am more impressed overall with the Hyundai Genesis. :confuse:
Well, have I got news for YOU. Now I dont know how fast Ford's development cycle is, but I did just read that they awarded LAST WEEK a contract to Honeywell to develop the turbos for the 3.5 L engine for the MKS.
I'd love to see the microsoft Project schedule that has THAT available to YOU in 12 months! Good luck. (Source - BON) (And good luck with reliability of a Honeywell/Ford turbo developed in less than 12 months. Er - make that TWO turbos :surprise: )
Well, the article said "develop" not produce. We undrstand there's a difference. Maybe the writer of the article doesn't?
Honeywell's cool. Just seemed to me like a tight schedule if development was just starting.
(pssst - your tiara is crooked!)
I am new to post, but have been folowing this thread for a little while.
My gf and I stopped by a Lincoln / Mercury dealer in NY recently to look at the MKS. She was interested in it from the moment the first commercials aired, and as she described it to me, I had to go see for myself. We looked at a 'How fast was I going officer?' Red AWD, a Black Ultimate, and a Cinnamon Fwd that we test drove.
The Good,
Materials - good quality throughout the car. Soft seats with good padding (a rarity these days) front and back. Lots of leather / leatherette in the doors. Soft touch materials all over the cabin.
Quality Switchgear - the buttons move with resistence, the shifter moves with a solid sound and feel. The button surfaces on the audio system seem to be well made, and the knobs (THX system) are rubbery and provide good feedback.
Features - anyone who knows anything about this car already knows this. Plenty of cool stuff. I have a gripes section about this too, though.
Quiet – when driving you can barely hear a thing from the outside world.
Design (subjective) - beautiful. My gf and I agreed that it looks best in black. I love the chrome detail across the roof sides, around the windows, and the bottom of the doors. Love the front and rear design, especially the taillights with those slanted backup lamps, wicked cool. Front Xenon’s that turn with the road look great too. The design inside and out is a no frills, uniquely American expression of luxury. It's about time Lincoln.
Trunk – large – great, its one of the reasons people prefer larger cars.
The Bad,
Trunk - opening - What the heck? Such a small access point for a large trunk. How am I supposed to go shopping or pack for a flight / vacation with a trunk who's opening is so small that its just uncomfortable to reach into certain areas. My gf noted that certain items could probably be better loaded from the folding rear seat. In a 40 - 48K car, this is unacceptable.
Headroom with sunroof - I found that both front and rear headroom is a bit cramped if you go for the (otherwise awesome) sunroof option.
Intrusive head restraint – I think its federal law now for cars to have revised head restraints. Some companies have dealt with this by offering active head restraints that don’t push your head forward unless there is trouble. Ford deals with this by offering headrests that push your head forward all the time. I’m 24 years old and I was not comfortable with these headrests, since I like to sit straight when driving. There was a recent article in Motortrend, when they tested a Ford Flex, noting the same thing with the headrests.
Rear visibility - this is insane, the rear window is so small from the inside that it could be used as a pillbox in time of war. Maybe they will have a few trashed up MKS's in that new Terminator movie coming out? :P
Sound System - this is one of the reasons I went to the dealer. I asked him 'what kind of system is this'. He goes 'its THX certified' I say, 'no, that's its certification, in other words, how the sound could be channeled, what brand is this system?' I did not get a straight answer. This is a no name system! Ford needed to give it Mark Levinson, Bose, or some other big brand top notch system to help raise the status of the Lincoln brand.
Sound System 2 - We brought some CD's with us, and with certain music this system distorts it (metal) with other music, there is an insufficient front channel (instrumental + vocal) when compared to our 2003 Avalon's JBL. The sound system did provide a better '3D' concert effect than our Avalon, but the individual notes were not as crisp as the 10K premium (over a new Limited Avalon) for this Lincoln would have you believe. Sorry for the rant
Materials - Not enough Wood - The red MKS with its lighter colored wood made this issue less apparent, but in black with the darker colored wood it really shows. Why is there no wood in the doors? Why does our Avalon have more wood / wood like material on the steering wheel (I don't know if the Av's wood is fake, but the Av is 10K less new so it’s still a fair question)? The steering wheel in particular, the wood is only on the upper top part, and does not go around the whole of the upper rim. This looks more like cost cutting than design choice to me. To really stand out, they could have wood on the rear armrest too. I have seen Lexus do this and it is really classy. It would certainly impress your friends. They could also have put some wood in around that rear vent control stack - tastefully - so that rear passengers understand they are traveling in class.
Power - you’re kidding right? A 28K Mazda 6 is now going to have the same (almost the same) engine as this flagship! I knew this going in. Ford would impress me more if they naturally made the engine break 300 HP with Direct Injection and airflow management, instead of the turbos they will use in the future. Still it’s OK if you’re willing to accept it. Its not a deal breaker for me.
Features – Ford spends millions of dollars promoting technology like Sync, and in the spirit of the ‘high tech’ nature of this car, why is the hard drive (HDD) one of the smallest in the business? The Cadillac CTS, one class size less, has 4X the space, with 40 gigs vs. 10. Lincoln could have spent a few more dollars (HDD’s aren’t that expensive these days) per car and given it a 100 gig HDD. The ads would have been great “the smartest car – with the most memory in the industry, and Sync” etc. They could have easily set a precedent, making Lincoln the first brand to have triple digit HDD's.
The Finish Line,
Thank you for putting up with my rants/raves. Overall we really liked the car. The test drive was on pretty decent roads so I can't say anything meaningful about its ride.
Very nice car. Instead of giving themselves huge bonuses last year, Ford's top brass could have taken that money and gave this car a world - beating audio system, bigger trunk opening, and active head restraints. More wood would have been nice too. I would probably have been sold. :sick:
Have to say though, the Mark Levinson system delivers some random notes that you never hear in another system. It is amazing....
The article (u should read it