Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
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
Fusion SE - AC, power pkg, stereo, wheels opt:SYNC/sun
Fusion SEL - Leather + SE + blind spot, nav optional
Fusion Sport - big engine, slushbox
Accord DX or VP or whatever they call the base now - AC, power pkg
Accord LX-P - alloy wheels, 6 speaker stereo
Accord EX - 6-cd changer, sunroof
Accord EX-L - Accord EX w/leather, nav optional.
Hmm seems pretty similar to me.
What I mean by the SHO being a trim level is that if you don't want the SHO package then you can get the same vehicle in SE, SEL or Limited trims. Calling it a different model is just marketing BS.
As for trim levels and options - the SE IS the base model. If you want more options you get the SEL, then the Limited. Are there people who want to get the SE model but with only one or two options instead of the SEL? Of course! There always will be. But for every one of those people who don't buy a Ford for that reason there are hundreds more who will step up to the SEL model to get that option and Ford makes more money.
And that doesn't even consider the dealer's viewpoint. I can't believe you own a dealership and think everything should be optional. Not everyone is willing to wait and custom order a vehicle, especially when the Honda and Toyota dealer down the street has one of every color and option package sitting on the lot ready to roll.
Either you don't own a dealership or you haven't set foot in it for a long time. Why don't you go ask your sales manager whether he wants the current packages or a la carte options on a base vehicle and tell us what he says.
I think you're stuck in the 70's. It's a different world now.
Ford can't win, no matter what they do.
I have suede seats in my Mountaineer, and they hold up like iron. I'm thrilled with them, and also don't care if my wood in my Lexus comes from the Brazilian Rainforest or from North Carolina...... It's pretty, it holds up, and I like it.
Marsha might be right about your spam filter. Also, I always email a person - not just a general email address. I emailed the Internet Manager and cc'ed the GM.
Some of the times posted seem almost too good to be true. It would do Ford no good to give the press a "ringer" but 13.9 in the quarter at 111 MPH seems pretty incredible for a 4400 pound car with 355 HP. Given the weight, frontal area, and the 2.77 gearing, I expected 0-60 in the low sixes and quarter mile times in the mid-high 14s and the upper 90s for speed at the end of a quarter. It will be interesting to see if the production versions are as quick as the pre-production models driven by the press.
Lots has been written about the initial impressions of the twin-turbo MKS - most of it being extremely encouraging and positive. I have been a bit surprised with all the talk about suspension changes. The Lincoln Order Guide makes no mention of this. Ford press releases mention the sway bars being slightly larger in the twin-turbo models but there has been no talk of "sport tuned suspension" or the like. The press, OTOH, has talked about much sportier handling due to stiffer springs, struts, bushings, etc.
While you can't undo poor weight distribution, a relatively mundane suspension and high center of gravity, Ford typically is good at tweaking and improving handling - IE: the Mustang. I just hope they haven't gone overboard in the firmness to the point of making the MKS ride too stiffly. There are some who think the base car is too firm. I think it is about right but I wouldn't want it much firmer.
Anyone have any real inside information on the difference in the suspension tuning of the base vs. Ecoboost models?
So if this was all planned then was the weight distribution situation on purpose? With all the technology/testing at their disposal, It is hard for me to believe that the weight distribution was an error.
If the suspension tuning is different on the Ecoboost model, it is likely in an effort to improve handling. The assumption, I suppose, is that anyone who wants a car that goes like a scalded monkey will also want it to handle better than the average mid-luxury sedan. I just hope they didn't make the ride too stiff to suit me.
The order guide lists "functional differences" between the 2009 and 2010 models and also lists the differences between the ecoboost model and the base car. They make no mention whatsoever of suspension differences or "sports" suspension or anything of the kind. The Taurus order guide, by contrast, makes a major point of the sports suspension package in the SHO compared to the base Taurus.
I guess I will see how the ride is when mine comes in.
But some people have to buy Lincoln, or it will go away. Enjoy your car. Me, I will wait for a Lincoln that people really notice when I drive by. The MKS is not it (it could be a model from any number of near-luxury nameplates...except it is a bit too tall, and the wheelbase is too short for the size of the car). Am hoping the MKT will come off better in the marketplace...at least the wheelbase is a bit more proportional to the size, though not by much.
It still amazes me that Ford can draw such large cars that look smaller and shorter than they are. Why? What is the point of that?
And to the look of the car, that's personal preference. I happen to think the MKS is one of the best looking sedans in its relative segment at the moment. And honestly, there aren't too many sedans you can buy today that people really notice when you drive by. Especially if you live in the tri-state area and the like where high end vehicles are rather common.
That is a big difference between you and me. I don't have the need to be noticed.
I have no sympathy for people who take a short test drive, buy the car because it is pretty, and then complain about something that they should have noticed before purchase. Gregg, I am not suggesting you would do that but we all know some people do.
I doubt that very many people have done as much research on the MKS as I have. I have driven a number of 2009 MKSs. I had one for a weekend to evaluate. I have read about everything that has been written about them. The only thing that kept me from owning one was the knowledge that the twin-turbo was coming.
As has been pointed out, I am not obligated to take the car that I ordered. The order simply assures me that I will have the option of buying the car equipped exactly as I want. I have seen nothing, so far, that would stop me from accepting the car after an extensive examination and test drive of the particular car I ordered. In fact, based on the early reviews by the press, I am more excited than ever.
OTH, I also think Gregg is right in that the car does look smaller than it is. There’s something about the rear quarter view / C pillar treatment that just makes the car look stubby. The Lexus G series has the same thing going for it.
I agree the front is pretty striking. Overall, I think the car looks pretty upscale and somewhat distinctive - just not strikingly attractive! I have been driving an LS for 10 years. I got the first one my dealer sold in May, 1999. Anyone who noticed it (and few did) thought it was a Mitsubishi. I think the MKS makes a much stronger statement than the LS did.
By the way, Lincoln has updated their website with more information on the 2010 MKS and the "build and price" section is functional.
By the way, the window sticker shows EPA ratings of 17/25 so the ecoboost picked up 2 MPG over the 3.7 base AWD model. Time will tell if real world FE is better. With the 2.77 gearing, I would expect good highway mileage at cruise.
I certainly don't want to do long term damage to the engine. What sort of damage could this cause?
Now when I say overfilled, it is a bit difficult to tell exactly where the top of the oil is on the dipstick. However, the top hole (at the full mark on the dipstick) is definitely not empty. The oil definitely goes over this hole for at least 2 or 3 mm. It is just hard to say how much further up it goes since the oil is so new. I am checking on level ground first thing in the morning, before using the car for the day. I am removing the dipstick, wiping it before reinserting, then removing it for the read.
Thanks for any thoughts.
This happened to a friend of mine with his Taurus. It calls for 5.5 quarts and they put in 6. They drained some out and all is well. No more Jiffy-lube for him, though.
The manager told me that it was a full quart overfilled. He told me that they had a problem with the bulk supply and that they had to break out the individual quarts. They made a mistake. I don't know if his determination of a full quart too much was from a measurement or from an estimate.
So, after 4 days and about 200 miles of driving with a quart too much oil, should I worry about damage down the road? I notice the service today is not listed on the owners website service history. I suppose I should ask them to make sure it is logged properly in the service history.
I have had a total of 4 oil changes at a dealer over the last 20 years and there has been a problem with each of them. I have not had good luck.
1. Once in the early 1990's, I noticed on the receipt that 10W40 oil was used, I asked why since that is not what the owner's manual called for. The answer was that they used 10W40 because it was hot in this part of the country.
2. In the late 1990's, I had a sable with the bigger engine option. On the receipt printout, I noticed that the volume of oil used was not correct for my engine. No big deal, I added more at home. I pointed it out to them but they didn't believe me. I didn't have the printout anymore since it was a few months down the road.
3. With my towncar in the mid 2000's, they cross treaded the oil pan plug. Of course, this was noticed at my next oil change at my regular place. I was standing right there chatting with him inspecting the underside of the car when I saw he was having trouble removing the plug. Of course, he had a suitable replacement in his drawer.
4. current oil overfill issue and they sure didn't believe me until they saw it for themselves.
Sort of unbelievable.
Lots of points for this salesman. I have bought 3 cars from him already.
I do not have the blind spot indicators and sometimes I thought I could use them with the high shoulders and all. Due to this body style I have become a more cautious driver (safer, well that may be another story). My garage and driveway is a little tight so backing up in it sets all the sensors off so much that you think the car was going into cardiac arrest.
I just got my wife the new 2010 MKZ loaded. It may keep me off the couch a couple of month. It seems a little shorter and lighter than my Zephyr. That 3.5 does not play on this body. The stabilizers strain to keep an even keel when you gun this fella. Don't need an Ecoboost here. You will get enough tickets with the 3.5 alone. We took it down to Ohio for the holidays (wrong answer). The PoPo was everywhere and it was a strain keeping those horses under control.
The MKS would have been much better suited for that trip. The one big thing I did notice between the two is the nav system. You can see there have been some upgrades and the way it looks right now, I do not see those types of upgrades being available for previous models with the nav package. One feature on the MKZ is there is a keypad on the screen where you can punch your radio station numbers in. This is good because it cuts down the distance you take your eyes away from traffic. On the MKS, you have to look lower on the mid console. Who knows, I may be able to suggest the upgrade as a safety feature. You think they would buy that?
I have an offer of $6000 for my 10 year old LS with 112,000 miles on it. The offer is from a co-worker who knows how fussy I am with cars. My LS looks like it just came out of the showroom. Frankly, I feel a little guilty about selling it for that much, though - particularly to someone I see everyday! The guy wants it for his 18 year old daughter who only cares about the sound system and the moonroof.
You are right about needing the no b*tch contract. I already told him that I guarantee NOTHING and that the early models like mine had a few issues. His silly daughter just fell in love with it, though. The first time it snows, she will probably wreck it, anyway.
The 2010 MKZ is a pretty nice car. How would you compare it with your MKS in terms of ride, quietness, and overall refinement? Is your Z FWD or AWD?
No.
If anything we have a "penchant" for "rooting" for the underdog.
All the press drove pre-production MKSs with the appearance package but that option will not be available until later. They should have had it ready for those who want ecoboost with a bit more difference from the base car. I didn't really want it but a lot of people seem to like the appearance package.
I have driven both and I am buying an MKS. However, your priorities may be totally different than mine. If you like sharp, sporty handling, tightly controlled ride, and good comfort in a smaller package, you will probably prefer the CTS. If you lean more toward quieter, softer luxury, and lots of room front and rear, you may prefer the MKS. They are vastly different cars and are both excellent at what they do. They just do different things well!
What is your current ride? What 3 things are most important to you in a car?
I'm 6 '2 ., so i need some room, comfort important , also dependable , quieter car.
I never heard that you can get a car for a day to try , is it true ?
The base MKS comes with 18" Goodyear Comfortred tires. They are very quiet and ride nicely but the MKS is much firmer than the old Continental - much better handling with more control. The Ultimate Package includes 19" Goodyear RSA tires. It is a bit firmer than the base car with the 18" tires and I found them to generate a bit more road noise. Optional are 20" Michelins. They look awesome but are a bit firmer than the 18s or 19s. Depending on how sensitive you are to ride/quiet, you might want to try different MKSs with the various tire/wheel combinations. All are very good - not harsh at all - but there are subtle differences.
Datagen, I can't wait to hear your thoughts on the Ecoboost and the Taurus. I expect to be behind the wheel of one in the next couple of weeks myself. We can compare notes.
For 2010, Lincoln MKS was been treated to a ground-up review of its structure in an effort to improve upon its already ouststanding noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) characteristics. Additional bracing and strategically placed sound-deadening materials have produced a new level of cabin isolation, providing MKS drivers with a sense of sanctuary.
The structural enhancements have been supplemented by suspension improvements designed to further improve NVH while also enhancing the driving experience when pushed hard. Mounts and bushings have been extensively revised, and spring/shock tuning and front suspension geometry has been reworked to give drivers exceptional handling capabilities in a full-size luxury vehicle.
In addition to the refinements found throughout the MKS line, EcoBoost models take the tuning one step further. Larger stabilizer bars front and rear provide flatter cornering characteristics, and an entirely new front subframe aids in further adjustments to the suspension geometry. Combined with dual roll restrictors, the EcoBoost MKS is equipped with handling dynamics perfectly matched to its powerful, responsive engine – without sacrificing the luxurious ride Lincoln owners demand.
The benefit is more power from a smaller engine. The idea is that smaller engines use less fuel but the direct injection and turbos give them the power of larger engines. From my gearhead perspective, the big benefit is massive torque at very low RPM. That allows the use of more economical gearing. The MKS ecoboost is rated 2 MPG better highway mileage than the non-ecoboost AWD MKS but it has 85 more HP and runs like a scalded ape.
I know you realize this already, but just to be sure we are all on the same thoughts, Cadillac is a GM car, and the MKS is a Lincoln (which is part of Ford) so on that level, no, they are not at all the same.
If you mean is the GM direct injection engine as good as the Lincoln direct injection engine, then its worth noting that the MKS with EcoBoost uses turbo-charging as well. Using relatively small, efficient turbos gets rid of the lag people associate with the 70s and 80s turbo cars. In a straight line and on the highway, its a hoot to drive. The 3.6 liter normally aspirated (no turbo) in the CTS isn't as powerful, but the car is still very engaging to drive.
I think Brucelinc was pretty spot on that if you enjoyed the Town Car, the MKS in a standard trim level would be a great match, but if you wanted something more sporty, I would look at the EcoBoost MKS and the CTS. Either way, you will probably want to drive them both, there are subtle differences that might affect the day-to-day life.
I really like the navigation system in the MKS. I also really like the connectivity through SYNC for a cell phone and iPod. The iPod/phone interface in the Cadillac is a lot clunkier. I also don't like the temperature readout for the climate control for the Caddy is at my knee level.