Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
It's also in the Edge, Flex, Mustang, etc. Just put the seat back a little further and it's fine. I've driven 8 hours to Florida and then back again with no problems.
Some have removed the headrests and turned them backwards although that eliminates the safety benefit.
I have been reading this forum since I have a Lexus IS and my family is expanding which means my next car has to be larger. Starting to think it may be smart to pick up a 1-2 year old used MKS (when it gets to that point) as it may be a great value for what you get at a price that will be significantly lower than the luxury competition.
Naysayer's? I own a Milan and I am a fan of the MKS. I just think the headrests are ridiculous in the fact that thye were smushing up against my head and I hope there is something that can be done about it.
In 1977 when the Yankee's were courting Reggie Jackson as a free agent George Steinbrenner picked him up from the hotel in his Lincoln. Reggie said to him and I am paraphrasing here: "Don't you know a Lincoln ain't nothing but a Ford with a different badge on it". That was the perception of a rich man 30 years ago and I wonder if it has gotten any better.
A lot of people didn't like seat belts back in the 70's either. Like others have said once you get used to them they're not bad at all, just different.
I will agree that it would have been nice to have active head restraints rather than passive but I can understand Ford not having the resources to engineer them right now.
How are other mfrs coping with the new head restraint requirements? Maybe Ford is being more aggressive (more protection)?
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/template.MAXIMIZE/menuitem.f2217bee37- - fb302f6d7c121046108a0c/?javax.portlet.tpst=1e51531b2220b0f8ea14201046108a0c_ws_M- - X&javax.portlet.prp_1e51531b2220b0f8ea14201046108a0c_viewID=detail_view&itemID=4- - 96bbe634cea0010VgnVCM1000002c567798RCRD&pressReleaseYearSelect=2004
As to the rear end looks, I don't mind it. I think it's attractive, in a Saturn Ion or Hyundai Elantra sort of way....and that's my concern. I'm wondering too, what the rear end of a Lincoln is supposed to look like now, the MKZ or the MKS? Seems there is no common theme definable yet. It's confusing.....
This is yet another case where you think Lincoln should build the car you want and if they don't then it's a failure.
http://www.shopsar.com/PhotoGallery.asp?ProductCode=SD2965%2DDU113
I was considering the MKS until I drove it. You're right, I am upset that Lincoln didn't build the car that Lincoln should have built (ride and refinement issues); other than those issues, it is a very nice car. But I'm not that upset, as a Lexus dealer will be more than happy to take my money. I suspect that most of the people that want to turn Lincoln into a division of BMW can't afford a Lincoln anyway, much less a BMW. So I suggest Lincoln heed the desires of past buyers and serious potential buyers of their brand, and not those of some boy racer wannabes. Should I want a BMW, I'll buy a BMW.
.
The D3 is the best they could do under the circumstances, so the question is how well did they do with what they were given? I think pretty well.
Where did you get 2015 for GRWD? I think it's 2012 worst case and more likely 3 years (2011).
The MKS cost far less than the LS - 90% less by some estimates due to platform sharing - and can therefore yield much needed profits at very low volumes.
Can anyone tell me what their experience was in test driving this car? Thank you
Most who have criticized the MKS ride were expecting it to be soft and cushy - like a Lincoln Town Car, Cadillac DTS, or Buick Lucerne. It is quite a bit firmer than any of those. It is also a lot firmer than the Taurus upon which it is based.
Let us know what you think after you drive one.
I also give them credit for the interior changes for the 2010 MKZ - pretty significant for a mid cycle refresh.
But I agree that it will take them years to get out of the hole the company dug for them a few years ago when they were treated like red-headed stepchildren.
The 4 cylinder ecoboost is way behind the 3.5L. I think the best case is we see the I4 EB late next year following the 3.5L next spring/summer, if they can pull it up that far. Don't forget the 3.5L EB is not just for cars - the F150 will also be using it and that IS a fuel economy project.
Comparing Lincoln to Mercedes is apples to oranges though, because the Merc is a RWD sport sedan and the Lincoln is a FWD luxury sedan. That said, the MKS is still a base model IIRC. From what i understand a Twin Turbo version of the 3.7L is in the works that will put out 300+ hp. (I could be going off of old info that has since changed, but I remember hearing this somewhere.) The point that the other poster was trying to make is that a company can offer a high class sedan with less than 300 hp. Mercedes currently offers a base model E class with 268hp for $53k and Lincoln offers a base model MKS with 275hp for $39k.
In a comparison that's more accurate, the Cadillac DTS has a 4.6L V8 that only puts out 275 horses as well and that car starts at $43k. Just throwing that out there.
Look at Cadillac with their much better/more integrated line-up. They still have major problems in making decent sales in this environment. Even so, they have still lots of new models coming (new CUV, CTS coupe, CTS wagon, new small RWD sedan, plus a planned DTS/STS replacement). How will Lincoln ever catch up? The resources aren't there, and present lineup cannot sustain them over the next several years. It's a tough place to be.
I'm not ready to throw in the towel on the MKT yet. I think those prototypes have padding under the camo and the production vehicle may still be very close to the concept car. It's also possible they'll have both a 3 row and 2 row model with the 2 row model using the concept rear design while the 3 row model has a more conventional rear to accomodate the extra seats.
If it looks like a flex or navigator rear though I agree that's not good at all.
2010 Mks(Standard 3.7 Direct Injection 310Hp, Sport suspension option, 3.5 ecoboost 360HP)
2010 MKZ(Standard 3.7 273 Hp, Optional 3.7 D.I. 300-310HP, manumatic, standard traction control, updgrade suspension option)
2010 MKT(Standard 3.7 D.I. 310 Hp, 3.5 ecoboost 360-370 Hp optional, more sporty suspension than flex)