Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Lincoln MKS

1252628303158

Comments

  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    You would have to leave the salesman a very large tip in order to spend $55,000 on an MKS. The highest priced version with every option has an MSRP of around $48,000. I bet you could buy one for a bit over invoice, though.

    The 2008 RL has a beautiful interior and would be a pretty good value for under $40,000. The engine is a real jewel, too. To be fair, however, it is a smaller car than an MKS and based on my recent drive in one, they ride about like a Honda Accord and have similar road noise. I haven't driven an MKS yet but assuming they are even better than the Taurus in ride and quiet, they will be pretty impressive, indeed.

    It is a crying shame that the twin-turbo engine is not available at launch. That would really take the MKS to a higher level and make it more unique. I also wish they would re-think the material used on the console and center stack.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    A fully loaded RL is $54K. You can't compare a base RL with a loaded MKS.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    I assume carolinabob was referring to the deep discounts on 2008 RLs for less than $40,000.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    So if they're only worth $40K then why don't they lower the MSRP to $40K?

    That's the argument that the Honda/Toyota fans used to use when Ford, Mercury and Lincoln had deep discounts and the imports were selling at MSRP. If it's good for the gander........
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    AMEN ;)
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    I agree!!??

    carolinabob was way off base with his post which is why I didnt bother to respond.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Has anyone seen the MKS commercial? My wife said she saw it the other night and now she understands why I was so interested in it. She said it was quite impressive. She says they were offering lease at $359.00 per month. She could not remember what was the down payment if any. I am assuming here that was for the base model. All out decked fully loaded I believe will be in the $450-$480 range again depending on the down.
    -------------------
    For those whom do not want to go that high in price, I believe you will truly like the new MKZ. Styling favors the MKR look and the interior is similar to the MKS with its own styling. :)
    -------------------
    The Mustang sports a leaner slightly meaner look. The directional turn signals are coming back as well. :shades:

    I've read all the postings on the positives and negatives and at this point I believe you get a lot of bang (MKS) for the buck compared to others. I am not sure they will sell 40,000 a year though. I think much depends on the economy. :surprise:
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    You are right jeyhoe, never say never. As for me with some of the models coming out of Chicago now, that is just putting them together. The parts comes from all over now. So the brake pedal used to stop a Lexus, could easily be the same type that stops a MKZ, just molded different. Just like my sister who works at the post office says that they get more packages from Fedex and UPS to move than anyone else. It is all intertwined now. So it all boils down to your own wants and desires. If I am right, I believe that is what it is suppose to be.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    I am not sure what you're really getting at in this and your next post. You sound a bit like a Lincoln salesman from Estonia or somewhere similar. I wont be buying or leasing an mkz or s tho no matter what u say. If I win one in a giveaway, I'd drive it. To the nearest Caddy dealer and trade it on a CTS :P With a stick shift.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    Isn't it true that Ford is using the same manufacturing philosophy for this vehicle as it does with its present Lincolns? That is, using a cheap Ford or Mazda chassis with minor upgrades and then naming the car a Lincoln with a hefty sticker price vis a vi the Ford or Mazda. Why not buy the Ford or Mazda?
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Yep. Lincolns, at least one of them, used to be a lesser Jaguar. Now they're greater mazdas, fords and volvos. Of course, an acura is just a honda and a lexus just a toyota and an infiniti usually just a nissan. And none of them were ever a jaguar! :D
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    But don't the top of the line vehicles that you mentioned use an exclusive chassis? I know that Ford uses an outdated Volvo platform for the Taurus and Sable. And that Mazda is going to upgrade it vehicles with new platforms in a year or two ;and that Ford will still use Mazda's outdated platforms for another two years after Mazda introduces its new vehicles.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    It reads ugly when someone else says it.

    I'll let one of the other folks take up this point with you. I will say that I know the Infiniti-Nissan connection is a lot looser than some of the others. Eg the Murano is FWD while the FXes are RWD. I think the acuras are just slightly modified hondas and while that may be a good thing for reliability, it aint so good for driveability as I can attest at least from driving a 2007 Accord for a week while my LS was getting bumper fixed. The accord is not a very nice driving/handling car. I expected a lot better.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    If Ford wants to use modified Ford or Mazda chassis on its lower price Lincolns thats one thing. But on Lincoln's top of the line vehicle, I think it should be something that can't purchase at a Ford dealer. I heard on the Speed Channel that Ford's new rear wheel drive chassis may not have a independent rear suspension.It all depends on whether Ford could afford to design one and keep the price of the car at list price below its competitors.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    At Rizza Lincoln Mercury in Chicago, one can get a good deal on an Msk at below the sticker. Right now one can order one for late June delivery at a reaonable price with options. Percentage wise the Mks is being discounted more than a CTS .The car is nothing special to make someone spend over list for one
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The new GRWD platform will be used for Lincoln's top vehicles and I'm sure it will offer an IRS. There will most likely be at least 2 flavors of GRWD - a less expensive, possibly smaller platform for the mustang and a larger, more expensive and more sophisticated version for Lincoln. Lincoln is now getting attention and funding as Mulally seeks to rebuild the brand now that Jag, LR and Aston Martin are gone.

    The only problem with the MKS sharing the Taurus platform is that it uses a transverse engine and it's FWD based. The platform itself is very good for what it is, and they've done all they can do to differentiate the MKS from the Taurus (100% unique sheetmetal, interior, (slightly) upgraded engine and LOTS of tech toys.

    They can still do better (center stack, RWD, better performance, etc.) but the MKS is the best that Lincoln has done since the LS came out in '99. Unfortunately it will take another few years to rebuild the brand after several years of total neglect.

    I was hoping the MKZ would get the MKS style interior - that's the one thing I didn't like about the MKZ/Zephyr and one reason I got the Fusion instead. Throw in a hybrid MKZ and it will do well.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Of course you would. No not a salesman, just a ford guy. I not trying to do anything here. If you want a Caddy, go ahead and get one. For me I have test driven the MKS, I like many things about it. There are a couple of minor things I am not sure about, but from what I can tell, they did their homework and made a serious effort to get it right. With the quality I have seen for myself, There wont be to many that could beat it on price as well. :shades:
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Hey! Today I received from Lincoln marketing a 4" x 7" marketing mailing for the mks. Inside were two things - a brochure and a same-size cardboard thingy supposed to show me the awesome new disppearing key pad in the B-pillar. "Touch the top of the keypad" it says "to enter a luxurious new realm". So I do. Nothing. Push some more, all up and down. Nothing. Push REALLY hard. 1.2 and 3.4 lite up. Whoopee! Wonder how much they paid China to make this thing? On the back it says it's magic. More like voodoo I think.

    The brochure touts all the "available" things like radar cruise control and voice navigation and adaptive headlights and rain-sensing wipers. Also that exclusive (like the Focus doesnt have it too?) sync system and such. There's one picture of the interior - a sepia toned B&W so the center stack doesn't look black. The interior actually looks reasonably nice in the photo, though I can see how they lit the dark areas brighter so it wouldnt look so blah.

    Strangely, the car doesn't seem to have any mechanical systems like engines or transmissions or drivetrains since none are mentioned. Oh wait, sorry. There must be an engine since a big picture of a little button says "Engine Start/Stop." Must not use gas either since no EPA numbers are given. All in all, typical Lincoln marketing. They must think I either have blue hair - or no hair. Unfortunately they are right in one of those guesses. If only this car actually had some decent mechanicals and an attractive interior. Cause the outside is nice. Even in sepia. They say I'll be getting more marketing brochures in the future. WOnder if I should write and tell em to save the money? Nah, they'd probably send em anyway.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Meanwhile, the other 90% of the recipients are saying "Wow, these are neat features! I'll have to go look at a MKS!". Mission accomplished.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Good Point! I guess like you I am glad marketing does not design cars as well. If you do go to take a look at the MKS when it is available, be sure to take that mailing packet with you. If you decide to get one, you might get a discount if you fuss enough that it is bad enough that they send you junk mail that really turned out to be truly junk.

    Like you I wondered about the stats. Funny enough even Consumer Reports have not been given a car to get those stats yet, why? Anyway I ordered a later model one (October-November time frame). They should have some stats by then. Ford has invited me to a Web seminar on the MKS tomorrow. I let you know how it goes.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Probably right. Some folks are more susceptible to marketing than others. Two points I was trying to make are : Nothing that they pushed in the brochure comes on the car unless you pay extra for 'available' features. Except MAYBE sync. Not sure, but u can get that on a Focus. So the base car is really that. The other point is that the marketing is obviously aimed at people who want a rolling sofa with doo-dads. THe 70s and 80s Lincoln customer and the antithesis of where I and others thought Lincoln was going in this century. Nothing in there would tempt anyone who is looking for a driver's car. Like I said, no mention at all of any of the stuff that actually moves the car. Maybe that'll come in the next brochure. And if it does, they'll undoubtedly push the ecoboost engine - to be available later - cause the other one is not even competitive. And they'll push AWD cause FWD is nothing to brag about. As for steerin and suspension? Apparently it will have those things. :P
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Enuf already, datagen (Are u named after a dead computer company?) I wont be going to the Lincoln dealer and I wouldnt be so inane as to think they would care if the lights in my brochure worked or not. If I wanted to get a big discount on a mks, I'd wait about 6 months till they put 5 or 8 grand on the hood.

    Boy! A web seminar? Hey, gimme the url - I'd love to give them MY opinion ;)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    But even you have already said that this is not a driver's car - and I agree. So given this is an entry level-mid level luxury car why not emphasize those things that luxury buyers are interested in? There is nothing performance wise to emphasize except AWD and without the EcoBoost engine that becomes just a safety feature.

    I'm not saying it wasn't a little cheesy, but at least they're trying to emphasize a feature that the competition doesn't have. As opposed to doing glossy brochures with no info on the car or features.

    So what would you do to market the MKS (as is)?
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Jeyhoe, please calm down, touchy touch are we heh!! I was joking on the brochure thing OK?? I understand the pricing game and we both know where that goes. You know I was overseas discussing with some country locals about the US. Many in the discussion were critical of our policies and other things that have changed in resent years. I replied to them that I felt that their opinions were misdirected and should be towards their own government. Upon that statement many bowed their heads because they knew what would happen to them if they did such a thing.

    I went on to say that America is not the perfect game in town, but it looks like to be the best one, why? Not because we solve our problems, but because we strive to work out solutions towards improving situation where the problem resides. Like everyone else we have made our mistakes, but unlike your society we have to ability to say what is not right and strive towards correction. The ability to recognize the need for correction and to make an effort towards a goal makes us unique indeed that I believe is the core of our patriotism.

    Like America, automobile companies have made their mistakes and will continue to do so. Trying to develop a product that everyone will like is mission impossible. Getting one produced to get just 10% of the population to want and buy is no easy task as well. I will say that I have appreciated the effort made from all the car companies. They have truly come out with some innovative technology that were dreams and not even thought of just 5-10 years ago.

    Yet with all this advancement, sitting on their laurels, greed, pride, whatever you wish to call it has put all the auto companies in a challenging situation for the future of their very existence. To me they have a serious balance act to develop. How do you make a product that will run on X, have the cost of X, and yet support the infrastructure of X? A doctor told me once about Aids, he said “We have the cure for aids. Hell a shot of battery acid will kill aids, but unfortunately it will kill you too.”

    So there is a balancing act going on. Some efforts produce greats results in the public eye yet many can’t afford the product, while others can be down right lemons :lemon: no matter how low the cost. I believe the MKS was an attempt to achieve a balance. Did it? This remains to be seen, but again I do appreciate the effort.

    So I apologize if you believe I was too much on the subject. I will tone down my excitement and delightfulness going forward. :cry:
  • Jeyhoe, you like the MKS exterior and I do not. You abhor the MKT and I think it is bold and beautiful.

    Actually, there's nothing so "wrong" with the MKS. It is understated in the same way that the Jaguar XF is (neither are the bold moves they could have been), but also derivative of the Japanese luxury look that it just doesn't appeal to me. But those looks will be dandy for a lot of people.

    Still, a few tweaks by the designers could have made it pleasing to me too without putting off anyone else. The wheelbase is too short for the length. How difficult would it have been to extend it a couple inches? And the front overhang needs trimming. It looks so old school FWD. Of course Ford even puts lumpy long noses on its rear drive offerings. The new Australian Falcon looks like a FWD machine when compared to the competing Holden model.

    Bottom line, it is worlds better than the awful Town Car and the mediocre MKZ. I am hoping that the coming rear drive sedan will be less bulky in style and more like the MKR. In any event, the MKS will be stop gap. In a few short years, it will be completely re-done and I suspect all vestiges of the porky Taurus look will be gone. Then maybe I could consider it, FWD or not.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Well, since you asked ... I'd put $8000 on the hood right at the start. Why? Because mechanically, this car is a Taurus/Sable. And the Sable starts at $24000 and this car starts at $38000. Being a fairly honest guy, I'd have a hard time sleeping at night taking $14000 of buyers hard-earned money for exactly WHAT over and above a Taurus/Sable? I honestly cant say what the WHAT is. I mean, yeah the exterior is nicer to my eye, though not to gregg's. The interior is probably nicer than the Sable, but not nearly as nice as say Acura or Lexus. Do those looks add up to $14000? I dont think so. And almost all the great 'features' of the car are optional at extra cost. To paraphrase Jack London, there's no WHAT there.

    I think the Lincolns of today are WAY overpriced (Z and X I could argue the same thing, maybe more forcefully) Having fallen prey to this myself what with a white elephant called a Navigator in my garage right now, I have a sort of empathetic pity for folks buying new Lincolns. Personally it is something I will never do again. X-plan or no X-plan. I would not make the same argument were the mks anything like the LS. I dont feel 'taken' on that car as it's a great automobile, not a gussied Ford but as we know, related to Jaguar S-type.
    So my advice to anyone who really wants a mks is - visit a shrink. If that doesn't help, wait 2 years and pick one up for 1/2 price or less off a 2 year lease. Use the rest of the money for a long vacation. Call Elliot Spitzer for phone numbers to help set up that vacation. Live it up. :)
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    You don't have to exaggerate to make your point about the price difference. A loaded Taurus Limited (which still doesn't have all of the base MKS features) is $32K vs. $38K for the base MKS. So it's a $6K difference. You get some features like cooled seats, a leather dash, better seats, slightly bigger engine, more distinctive styling, quieter interior, etc. but I don't think folks will be comparing a loaded Taurus LTD against a base MKS. Most MKS buyers will be buying it to get the techno-goodies. From that standpoint you'd have to compare it to the other mfrs offering those features and I think the MKS will actually undercut those in price (for a similar size vehicle). It may be lacking in power or performance but again that's not necessarily a requirement for these types of vehicles.

    I personally decided the MKX was not worth the extra $6K over the Edge when I bought an Edge Limited 3 weeks ago. In some cases I preferred the Edge styling (grille and gauges/center stack) so it came down to whether the THX stereo and cooled seats were worth $6K. To me, for this particular vehicle, it wasn't.

    I don't think Lincoln will have any problem selling 30k-40k of these per year without having to put cash on the hood. Just think of it as the new Continental.

    And when the GRWD platform shows up they can go after that market.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    OK. point taken. Haven't priced out a loaded Taurus.
    Another data point though - my LS sport with every option except heated seats, stickered at $37,500, which is less than a base mks FWD. I paid about what a mkz costs.
    Interesting that you, a former LS owner, have eschewed the Lincoln offerings for your last 2 cars and gotten the Ford versions instead. I think that says a lot.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Interesting that you, a former LS owner, have eschewed the Lincoln offerings for your last 2 cars and gotten the Ford versions instead. I think that says a lot.

    Not really in my case - the LS was a splurge item that I did enjoy but decided that I didn't need such a vehicle as a daily commuter, so I took a cheaper, more fuel efficient route. I may consider a Fiesta when the time comes to replace it, depending on whether I'm still commuting every day. My drive is about 25 minutes, 11 miles and there is nothing fun about it. 10 years ago it was, before the development and traffic congestion hit the area. I'd rather have a cheap commuter car and a nice, fun sports car to use on weekends. As soon as I get these darn kids through college.

    My wife, OTOH, is a good example. The Aviator offered enough over the Explorer to justify the added cost. However, we couldn't make the same argument about the MKX. I don't think it's a bad vehicle and Lincoln is better off with it than without it, but it definitely needs some improvements in 2010 to stay competitive. Throw in a MKS style grille, some unique sheet metal, upgraded interior with MKS luxury features and a 300 hp 3.7L base engine and you can call it complete.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    I understand.

    What I dont understand is what you and you wife and me and my wife and Ford and Lincoln are going to do in the future. Today's latest headlines: gas at $12.00/gallon soon and Obama is expected to crush McCain. Either of these alone would destroy the economy. Both together look like doomsday to me. We're in some pretty sh*t now, man is all I can say. Just freaking nbelievable. And NO ONE will drill for oil in ANWR. Oh, ne other headline - American farmers are going back to using MULES. Next Pinto Ford sells may have legs instead of wheels. Gimme some more drugs, doc, I need more drugs.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    ">Ford would be in a better financial position if it would phase out Lincoln and Mercury. I believe that GM, not to mention their foreign competition, have gained more than a slight tech edge in vehicle platform design. Ford could compete with Chevy and Pontiac along with its low to mid price foreign competition much sooner if it didn't have to waste resources on Lincoln and Mercury.Presently, Ford has to use warmed over tech from Volvo and Mazda to produce its present vehicles that would compete with its rivals products of five years ago. For instance, it will take Ford 4 or 5 years to produce a newly designed modern rear drive platform that may or not have independent rear suspension for its Crown Vic etc replacements . Which may not be much better than its present platforms if it doesn't have irs.Lincoln has lost all of its cache among younger more affluent buyers who have a yearly income of over 125000.00 per year. Its seems that Cadillac has made in-roads into this segment of the market with its CTS.Most of the people in this income class when asked in a marketing survey which American manufacturer has the best ability to compete with its foreign luxury competition has Cadillac as the most often brand name mentioned by its respondents . Lincoln barely is mentioned ahead of Pontiac. Ford could compete more readily by saving overhead that these two failing divisions utilize. Unfortunately ,For Ford ,when the consumer hears Lincoln, they see a Ford . They don't see much of a different between the two brands. When they hear Cadillac they see CTS.This car has gave Cadillac such a boost in the consumer satisfaction, that they are waiting to see what Cadillac is going to do next.From a marketing stand point, it would be very difficult for Lincoln to regain brand satisfaction among consumers considering all of the competition that it has to compete with. Cadillac had its same dilemma with consumers as Lincoln.Unfortunately Cadillac beat Lincoln to the punch with more modern luxury performace vehicles that rival many of the features of its foreign rivals.Now Cadillac has Lincoln over a barrel. Its true that Cadillac is more costly to purchase than a Lincoln, but in the segment that Lincoln is attempting to compete in, this is a liability as cheaper equals cheap. The intelligent thing for Ford to do is to discontinue Merc and Lincoln and use the money that would be save by going on a crash program of producing more modern low priced vehicles. This way Ford would still be in business 10 years from now.
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,191
    I typically only drop in here very occasionally – but I noticed that there had been close to 100 posts since I last visited, so I decided to scan a few – largely to see if anything about the MKS specifications had changed, since last I visited . . .

    Skipping past all the Political “stuff”, a couple of posts that caught my eye referred to “The Good Old Days” – when Jim Rogers and Mark K ( trans. engineer ) were contributing on the LS board. Those were, indeed, interesting times. One reason I bought my first LS was that participation.

    As OW knows, I have been posting mostly in the Pontiac G8 forums. I have found that, though I certainly enjoyed some of the “bells & whistles” provided by the 2 LSs I had, I am more interested in the RWD handling dynamics and the V8 TQ provided by something like the G8 GT. And I am willing to forego a level ( or 2 ) of interior fit, finish & materials as well as a few features I have had before, in order to have a sedan that has close to a 50\50 F\R weight balance, RWD and capable of a 13.5-ish quarter mile.

    The G8 GT is ( clearly ) not designed to be directly comparable to the MKS. It will not have several features ( standard or optional ) that the Lincoln will offer. But it is a 4DR Sedan – that looks like it will be dynamically superior to the Lincoln – and offer all the luxury & refinement that ** I ** require. Though it will certainly lack a number of features & “tech toys” that Lincoln will offer.

    [[[ Must feed TQ addiction. ]]]

    And the G8 GT’s EPA MPG estimates are comparable to RWD V8 sedans such as the BMW 550i – and the highway estimate ( and early return from buyers agrees ) is exactly the same as an Infiniti G35 – a smaller & lighter Sport Sedan, with a 3.5L V6.

    (((
    Let me reiterate: I am most emphatically ** NOT ** trying to convince anyone here that the G8 GT is ‘better’ than the MKS. )))

    I am not really surprised that Lincoln has veered ( ? ) away from trying to compete with BMW – or even Caddy, in the Sport Sedan segment.

    But I am ( still ) rather disappointed. As I posted in several ways some time ago: If Lincoln had introduced an LS with ( a version of ) the Jag’s Supercharged V8 and the Jag’s 6-speed ZF automatic trans. – and at a price point that reasonably & realistically reflected the incremental additional cost of only this upgraded drivetrain ( essentially a “Lincoln LS – R” ) I would have bought one. Period. In a heartbeat. In 2004 ( when I did buy a left-over 2003 LS ), or 2005, or 2006, or 2007.

    [ The Jag S-Type R was just a bit too much money for me – and still used that odd ‘J-Gate’ instead of a real manumatic function – via the shift lever or paddles. ]

    Since I really do want a RWD V8 Sport Sedan for my next purchase, and the MKS does not fit, I will continue to check here occasionally – but only to see if Ford \ LM ever does seem to be moving toward producing sedans I’d find interesting again.

    Carry on!

    Oh, and this recent post:
    “What about the TATA Nano Vanden Plas edition?”
    Absolutely cracked me up . . .

    - Ray
    Y2K and 2003 Lincoln LS V8s – fast receding into the rear view mirror of my memory . . .
    2022 X3 M40i
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    Ray;

    Completely agree. And u may have missed it but I posted here or mabe on the LS board that I had been visiting the G8 board and that I was not surprised that I saw some of our old LS folks over there. I dont blame u in the least. Unless u want a FWD rolling sofa, no need to go into the Lincoln showrooms for at least several years if ever.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    The G8 is a better drivers car than the MKS simply because it uses a Sigma platform as does the CTS. The Mks is a front wheel driver which limits handling because of torque steer. Given time , the same luxury gadgets will make its way to the mid to lower cost segment of the market. The Mks was to be a rear driver originally with the use of a modified Ford of Australia Falcon chassis,but Ford couldn't keep the price of the vehicle below 45,0000. Too bad.They may have had something to take on the CTS performance wise. Ford would have had to open a new line dedicated to this vehicle. It was cheaper to use the existing Taurus line for this vehicle thus the front wheel drive.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Torque steer isn't the big problem - it's the fact that the nose is too heavy and the chassis is not balanced.

    Ford is finally developing a new GRWD platform for Lincoln (and presumably a cheaper version for Ford). This wasn't feasible until Mulally forced global platform engineering between Europe, Australia and North America. Why they didn't do this years ago is still a mystery. It should have been done for the 2nd gen LS.
  • jeyhoejeyhoe Member Posts: 490
    "It should have been done for the 2nd gen LS."

    Absolutely agree with that.

    I dont understand how you can say this though:

    "Torque steer isn't the big problem - it's the fact that the nose is too heavy and the chassis is not balanced. "

    I mean its a good assumption, but not having driven the car, that's all it is isnt it?
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    Isn't the car unbalanced because all of the drive train is over the front two wheels which also causes the nose to be too heavy? Ford is projecting a 4 or 5 year timeline for its new rwd platorm. In automotive terms that is a lifetime. Lincoln needed to do something exceptional now to keep the brand n the game. The Mks might have done it if it had a modern rwd platform.This might have given the Lincoln division some buzz with the motoring enthusiast market. My logical side tells me that Lincoln probably won't be produced by then but my emotional side hopes that it will be.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I mean its a good assumption, but not having driven the car, that's all it is isnt it?

    That was a general statement about FWD cars in general not handling as well as their RWD counterparts. It wasn't specific to any vehicle.
  • cowbellcowbell Member Posts: 125
    I know it''s close to Memorial Day weekend, but is the moderator around?
  • carolinabobcarolinabob Member Posts: 576
    I didn't. It was a RL with the technology package. MSRP-$52,000, asking price-$39,000. Of course that is a 2008 in a bad market for the RL. Based cost of MKS on the Lincoln website. Regardless, Lincoln needs to sell a car that is distictively not a Ford clone. It also needs to come fully loaded without a lot of expensive packages.
    I will test drive the Lincoln and am hoping for the best.
  • docrwdocrw Member Posts: 94
    Now that we've put this subthread to bed, does anyone have any new info on the MKS.

    I am secretly, well openly now I guess, hoping that they will see the light and intro the ecoboost engine sooner rather than later. By sooner I mean by the end of this year or the very beginning of next year. When Hyundai's flagship is putting out 375hp, Lincoln really can't afford to be maxing out at 100 fewer ponies. Is the technology not ready or are they just trying to milk sales of the base engine before releasing the turbo?

    I would think that Lincoln would realize that they do not have the luxury of time and need to make as big an impact as possible with their new flagship. But it seems that that has been, and may still be, their problem. Either they don't see the urgency or don't know how to make an impact.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    If it is the latter of your question, it would be pretty stupid for Ford to play that game. I am sure there are plenty of execs and lawyers trying to make adjustments to the rapidly changing fuel price situation. There may be an urgency for them to incorporate the eco-boost, but I do not believe they are going to make it in time.

    They may have to following Chrysler’s route with a gas promo of their own. Some of my partners whom have ordered the MKS are already thinking about alternatives (FWD rather than AWD, etc). According to the numbers on the web site and other places, there's not much difference in MPG between the two. I guess it depends on your driving habits. From what the experts are saying, a lot depends on that.

    I believe the ecoboost has been a little misleading. If you think the ecoboost will give you better mpg from the 3.7 power plant, you may be mistaken. Save on a Comparable V8, maybe with some of the numbers Ford says it can spit out. So much depends on what the driver wants and like the gas prices, which may be changing just as fast also. :confuse:
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    I agree they need the Ecoboost sooner rather than later. The reason is not fuel economy - the Ecoboost is NOT an economy engine - it is a performance engine. The fact that it provides the HP of larger V8 while delivering better fuel economy than a larger V8 is a bonus.

    IMO, the reason they need the Ecoboost is to add some "buzz" to an otherwise very ordinary vehicle. The MKS has been described as a replacement for the long-discontinued Continental. Maybe, but the old Conti had more power, a more upscale interior, and an adjustable suspension. The EPA ratings at the time were similar to the base V6 MKS. Obviously, the MKS is superior in many ways but I would expect more progress.

    Speaking of fuel economy, let's face it - a 4200 pound vehicle is not going to be stellar in that department and still maintain the performance and drivability that buyers expect of a $40,000+ vehicle. Having said that, I am surprised that the highway mileage is only rated at 24 for FWD model. I am also surprised that the AWD model is only one MPG less. The FWD Taurus is 28 and while the AWD model is 24. I know from experience that the Taurus FWD will easily exceed 28 on a highway trip. With such a small bump in engine size, I expected the MKS to do nearly as well despite the 400 lb. difference in weight.

    We should be seeing some driving reports on the MKS soon. I hope the magazines and online auto sites can get their hands on an Ecoboost test mule soon, as well.
  • Don't forget the 2008 EPA figures are significantly lower than how these were previously calculated. The Conti's ratings would drop too if recalculated.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    Yes, you are right about that. I looked up the revised numbers and the Conti would be 22 highway using today's calculations. If it had the benefit of a 6 speed transmission with a tall overdrive like the MKS, it would likely be just as good or even better than the MKS.
  • And cars have become heavier, even since the Continental. My loaded 91 Olds 98 Touring Sedan barely weighed more than a current VW Rabbit.

    Large sedans tend to weigh nearly 1,000 lbs more than they did 15-20 years ago. Find a way to cut weight (and retain all the safety and rigidity of current cars) and mileage will be a lot better.
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    Funny you would think that they would be ahead in that area. I can understand the weight increase due to all the new technology that has been added. It seems where they cut in one area (lighter wheels, smaller tires (even the spare), headlights, lighter (yet stronger glass), they increase in weight (engine, overall size, safety features, etc). That could be a great plus for the ecoboost is the weight of the engine itself compared to a V8 or even a V6. Great point!!!
  • datagendatagen Member Posts: 107
    You have a point brucelinc, They will need the ecoboost and the AWD to move that extra 400lbs to the point where it has similar movement like the Cadillac CT and STS's.
  • brucelincbrucelinc Member Posts: 815
    One of the problems with the FWD layout is that you can only put so much power through the front wheels without torque steer and traction issues. A move to the Ecoboost will necessitate AWD which adds even more weight. And, Gregg is right again - cars have gotten heavier with more rigidity, safety equipment and goodies.

    For as much as I complain about the MKS, I will probably end up buying one! I really would like to replace my LS before winter. But I also would like a step up in performance as well as luxury. Another thing that we don't know about the Ecoboost MKS is what else will be part of the Ecoboost package? If they try to make a sports sedan out of it with stiff suspension and black-out trim, it will not appeal to me so much.
  • speculatorspeculator Member Posts: 116
    Awd on the Mks will not make it perform as a CTS or STS. As the MKS is a front wheel drive vehicle the drive wheel bias is to the front wheels when the awd is not engaged.Also,because the entire drive train on the MKS is in front of the vehicle this gives the vehicle much less of the weight distribution ideal of 50 percent towards the front and 50 percent towards rear.For deal handling ,the vehicle should be as close to possible to the 50/50 weight distribution. Also the faster one goes in a front wheel driver the more torque steer becomes more of a phenomenon. The CTS V and STS V have an optional awd but when the awd is not engaged the drive wheel bias is to the rear wheels. Also, because the CTS and STS are rear wheel drive vehicles, they are closer to the 50/50 weight distribution ideal.
Sign In or Register to comment.