Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
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
I say this because even though there are beginnings to be a move towards more fuel-efficient vehicles, one thing that may be given up towards this quest is the speed and power that we all may be use too. I wonder is that such a sacrifice where with all that power and speed when there is no place to really use it legally. So in a sense it is like buying a 4-wheel drive vehicle and don’t 4-wheel drive.
I understand that many want to feel the power even if it is a short amount of time, but I wonder is it worth the price for such few seconds or hundreds of a second’s difference between the advancement being introduced and what is currently on the streets. Many have asked the question is all this power and the need for speed really needed? I would say no it is not needed, but it is wanted for even I will admit the sensation feels good (have enough tickets to attest to that) :mad: . Hopefully with the advancement of the electric engine (where acceleration and power is more efficient), we can have what we want, keep contributing towards the policeman's ball, and help the environment as well. :shades:
I understand that many want to feel the power even if it is a short amount of time, but I wonder is it worth the price for such few seconds or hundreds of a second’s difference between the advancement being introduced and what is currently on the streets. Many have asked the question is all this power and the need for speed really needed?
The role of the manufacturer is to meet the needs of the consumer. If you want to change consumer preferences, talk to them, not the manufacturer. If no one bought big SUVs (like last summer), the manufactures either stop making them or go out of business (like this summer). If everyone wanted a tiny slow car that got 100 mpg, they would be available.
It is the role of the OEMs to offer choices to consumers. Its up to the government to convince people they want something other than what they want. A gas tax would fix that, but they are too weak to try that.
You do have a point about the tax. In Europe it has force the existence a great mass transit system that was so efficient, it was cheaper, easier and less stressful to use than drive your car.
Yup, if it improved their bottom line, I am sure they would be motivated to make a change. Hence the hybrid ridiculousness of putting 2 complete drivetrains in each vehicle.
I bet you if these was a process where auto companies could make a vehicle that use another fuel source that was cheaper than oil and in abundance, they would waste no time of flipping the bird to the oil companies and moving on with their plans, especially if they could control that other source.
Yup, again I agree. However, right now we don't have this magic tablet.
All they would have to do is to crank up the marketing machine, put the support to the supply infrastructure in high gear,...
...and wait 15 years for the infrastructure to be in-place
Times a changing and there may be other agencies and organizations that needs to talk to the consumer other than the government.
Again I agree, it seems to work for drug companies who want to send people to the doctor to ask for designer drugs to treat problems they might or might not have, but hey healthcare in this country is in great shape.
Abandoning a segment like large trucks and SUVs would be suicide right now. You can't convince someone who wants an Expedition or F250 to buy a 4 cylinder fusion or ranger.
If a Ford customer wanted a smaller crossover or a nice midsized sedan or a nice small car - Ford had nothing. The Focus was basically a cheap car, the Taurus was a fleet queen and the Escape was too small. Ford lost a lot of customers simply because they didn't have the right vehicles.
Adding the Fiesta and making the Focus a nicer vehicle with better options plus having a full line of crossovers will give Ford a good base from which to start building again.
What you will see is the Expedition and Navigator sharing much more with the F150 - they won't have enough volume to dictate a one-off platform like before. And the explorer will be based on the D3 platform. These can still be highly profitable vehicles if built correctly even on lower volumes.
Nice to see the MKS has added another layer of smooth and quiet for the 2010 model year. It is what people expect of a luxury ride now.
I expect the Fiesta and the Focus to get all available amenities going forward to compete with similar vehicles from other mfrs. Sync was a major step in that direction. The old Ford would have made that available on higher end vehicles only.
The new Ford realizes that people will buy loaded Fiestas and Focuses and that they will make more profit off fully loaded vehicles.
A 355HP Ford Flex "family" vehicle that appeals to only "motorheads", "turboheads", and those with a "boy-racer" mentality.
What must Ford be thinking...??
Put the TwinForce engine in the Mustang and the SHO and leave it at that.
Read more...
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.f1de8ee/7
I think you severely underestimate the market for such a vehicle. Ford needs to offer vehicles for all buyers and there are Flex and MKS buyers who would not buy one without the Ecoboost engine option. They would be buying V8 models from competitors.
EcoBoost is simply the old gas guzzling TwinForce engine :lemon: design now rebranded due to gas rising to $4.00/gallon.
$7,000 premium for TwinForce :lemon: in the new Ford Flex with FE only equal to the Flex with standard 3.5L V6. Had Ford seen fit to use DFI in the standard V6 it could ahve be reduced to 3.0L, still produced 270HP and substantial FE improvement.
Why go to such extremes...??
On the other hand your "extreme" seems to be currently applying to a greater buying group then the "TwinForce :lemon: " (boy-racer, motorhead, turbohead) buying group. See all the Prius, TwoFor, etc, out there on the roads these days..??
"..Choices to consumers.."
Yes, Mustangs and SHO's to the 1% POWER group and 270HP FE conscious Flex "family" vehicles for the other 98%
Just what, where, is the market for a Ford Flex "family" vehicle with 355HP and relatively POOR FE. Ford Flex "family" vehicle, FWD vehicle, wherein that TwinForce :lemon: engine MUST be automatically derated/detuned in the low gear ranges.
The TwinForce :lemon: engine design was put on the Ford engineering drawing boards back when the early success of the retrograde Mustang seemed to indicate that the HORSEPOWER race could/would be restarted.
While everyone else was looking to DFI to improve engine efficiency and thereby FE Ford was in the midst of developing a new engine series for the upcoming HP RACE.
Then gas hit $4.00/gal.
And TwinForce :lemon: suddenly needed to somehow reflect environmental consciousness. Green tinted SNAKE OIL.
So the TWINFORCE :lemon: engine series was rebranded...
EcoBoost.
Probably even worse (better..??), closer to 100%, were the standard V6 to have DFI and only 3.0L to produce that same 270HP. The 2% gain would be made up by additional sales resulting from public recognition of the Flex's FE.
30MPG hwy and 250HP would be an easy "jump".
*** Leave the few Expeditions that are sold to those with enough money to pay for the FUEL.
Then so be it.
The suspension tweaking and sound deadening on the 2010s is very apparent. The car is almost eerie quiet. Even with the 20 inch wheels, there is almost no tire thump or other noise. At 75 MPH, you could whisper to a back-seat passenger and they would hear you. I cannot imagine anyone complaining about the ride, either - unless they are looking for something really stiff. The MKS is velvety firm - you can feel the road but there is absolutely no hint of harshness. This really does feel like a luxury car should, IMO.
With a name like ECOboost, we know the MKS will be economical. I was more interested in the performance. I can assure you that it seems to be adequate. At no time during the test drive did I hold up traffic from behind. Given some time and patience, I think it would be capable of passing another car on a two-lane road.
While we have no real hills in Minneapolis, it seemed capable holding it's speed when going up a grade. If you live in the mountains or in San Francisco, you might want to see if it could handle that. My wife would get a bit cranky if I asked her to get out and push because the car lacked power but that shouldn't be necessary here in the Midwest.
I would not be enough of a hooligan to challenge a Prius to a drag-race. They have the advantage of 2 modes of power compared to only one for the MKS. However, based on my drive, it seems that the ECOboost MKS should be able to hold its own.
I am really looking forward to the arrival of mine!
Anyway, I was worried that a 4400 pound car with a little 6 cylinder engine would be awfully slow. I travel between Minneapolis and Des Moines fairly often and the minimum speed is 40 MPH on the Interstate 35. I think the MKS will be capable of maintaining that. That is really all I care about.
You truly must be putting us on. You couldn't know this little about the car you are buying.
* Pronunciation: \ˈsär-ˌka-zəm\
* Function: noun
* Etymology: French or Late Latin; French sarcasme, from Late Latin sarcasmos, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein to tear flesh, bite the lips in rage, sneer, from sark-, sarx flesh; probably akin to Avestan thwarəs- to cut
* Date: 1550
1 : a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2 a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b : the use or language of sarcasm
Other than a very slight lag just off idle, the car feels like it has a large displacement V8. Lots of torque down low and very smooth. There is very little sound from the engine - even at wide open throttle. There is much less engine sound than I recall from the 3.7 MKS and much less than my wife's Taurus. If you are looking for a scream like an Indy car or a rumble like a NASCAR stocker, you will be disappointed.
The transmission is extremely smooth. Whether using just "D" or the paddle shifters, I could barely feel the shifts and since the engine is so quiet I could barely hear the shifts either. On one occasion, I hit the rev limiter because I was too slow in shifting from 1st to 2nd. I was attempting to shift by sound rather than looking at the tach. Problem was there isn't much sound!
Truth be told, if I hadn't read all of the published tests with the sub 6 second 0-60 times, I would not have believed that it was that quick. The speedometer zings up the dial quickly but there is not much sensation of fast acceleration. The car is very high geared to achieve the 25 MPG highway rating. That also keeps it exceptionally quiet at cruise. One nice thing about all the torque is that it will accelerate pretty nicely without a downshift and without the transmission hunting for the right gear.
I really think this is the perfect engine for the MKS and if anyone passed on the 2009 because it didn't have a V8, they should give the ecoboost a try. I think they will forget all about the need for a V8. It gives up nothing in smoothness, power, quiet or refinement. I admit that it does not sound as cool as a high revving V8. I think the pros outweight the cons, though.
I have VERY good things to report (in addition to the standard fare associated with Ford's ethos or the current MKS iteration). The EcoBoost is a tremendous powerplant; and in a comparably-sized and weighted vehicle, it's a true performer. The steady rush of power throughout the rev range is much more akin to riding a wave than a kick in the backside, and it makes the vehicle deceptively fast.
The 2010 MKS has been improved; and as previously noted, the suspension seems to be more taut and responsive without loosing the feel that's decidedly favors luxury over performance. Cabin noise too has been mitigated, and it's apparent the lessons Ford learned with their silencing exercise in the Flex have carried forward in a manner that makes a tangible difference. Even though it would have been a clear "me too" effort, I wish Ford would go one step further to exploit the audio system in the manner of a sound silencing headset to dynamically dampen cabin noise as GM has begun doing, especially as it's mostly a "software" product that doesn't add to manufacturing costs. The extent to which it benefits ambient cabin silence is astounding in the form GM has done; and it would truly make the MKS silent.
The only concern I have about the MKS with EcoBoost is braking power. The Taurus/MKS is a LOT of vehicular mass; and both the size of the vehicle and nature of the EcoBoost's torque application can be ALARMINGLY deceptive. And while only a fool would try to race-up switchbacks in either a Taurus or MKS, a beefier 4 or 6-piston brake system would seem to be a more natural (and reassuring) alternative, not to mention larger rotors to spread the braking load.
I very-much like the 2010's improved 3-gauge instrument cluster and can't wait to try-out Active Park Assist in the MKS when an EB model arrives. It's clear that with all the weight that comes with the MKS, the EB is the engine to have powering it. And driving with the shift paddles is a hoot.
My only gripes with the 2010 EB MKS are the often-cited ones. At $54,000 (with Ultimate Package), it's priced at a point well above competitive vehicles. One must buy the MKS (in all flavors) DESPITE its relatively high price, rather than because of it. Also, the spate of high quality used vehicles available now and in the foreseeable future combined with heavily-subsidized recent sales leaves such a large residual delta that leasing an MKS (whose residual is comparatively poorer than most) is often a more expensive proposition than buying one. At the very least, leasing as a more affordable alternative to buying no longer applies. For all the great things the MKS is, it's NOT a $54K vehicle.
Furthermore, despite all the terrific technology and some very nice interior appointments, the MKS still has some half-hearted cheapness in many areas. And while it many not detract from the overall driving experience, cheap plastic (especially cheap FEELING plastic) is just something that nobody should find in a $54K car, nor is the sense that any interior component was made to be deliberately inexpensively (like the backseat climate and air vent controls in the center console). Shame on Ford for letting this slip through. This remains a fundamental difference between LM and say VW or Mercedes, whose ethos is simply that nothing in their vehicles will feel cheaply or poorly made rather than spending-up the budget on the biggest attention-getting items, only to have to economize in certain other areas. Why the heck would Ford want to risk anyone shaking their head because the sliding console cover feels like it was made from the tray in a box of gift chocolates? It's these stupid forehead-smacking little details that make me so mad.
Also, with all of the great technology for has available, there's no excuse for Lincoln vehicles not to be at least a superset of its Ford/Mercury equivalents. For example, the Active Motion seats in the Taurus are FANTASTIC. That a customer might have to look at both vehicles and think to himself, "You mean I CAN'T get those on the MKS?" Boggles the mind. The same is true of the way the collision avoidance warning portion of the Adaptive Cruise control is implemented. Ford means to tell me that Taurus drivers get a visual warning MKS drivers don't? It's hard to rationalize these things when Ford differentiates its common-platform vehicles less than most other makers.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a Ford loyalist, both for the cars it now makes and in principle given the economic realities of the automotive manufacturing marketplace. I simply won't buy a GM, no matter how bloody fantastic the CTS-V may happen to be. I also know that Ford has come an unbelievably long way in a very short time, all without the benefit of a $50B tailwind or debt amnesia. But part and parcel of rebuilding their philosophy from the ground-up HAS to be a best-in-class attention to detail on the small, cheap fixes if they want to sell $54K cars with the "big boys" who don't have negative histories to overcome. Plus, GM may not always may crappy-feeling interiors by comparison forever...
The MKS I REALLY want to own is the next version they make. In the meantime, I understand that if I want Ford to survive to produce the next version, I have to be willing to buy the current version until then. And even so, the current MKS is a car that I will undoubtedly enjoy for all the great things it brings to the table. I just look forward to the day when I can make such a sizable purchase and know that I've bought the best-in-class in all respects, and am free from the "tsk, tsk" kind of minutiae altogether.
Please name these competitive vehicles that are priced well below $54K. Don't forget you'll need the V8 versions to get the same power and performance.
For example, the Active Motion seats in the Taurus are FANTASTIC. That a customer might have to look at both vehicles and think to himself, "You mean I CAN'T get those on the MKS?" Boggles the mind. The same is true of the way the collision avoidance warning portion of the Adaptive Cruise control is implemented. Ford means to tell me that Taurus drivers get a visual warning MKS drivers don't? It's hard to rationalize these things when Ford differentiates its common-platform vehicles less than most other makers.
What you fail to realize is that the Taurus is Ford's first attempt to take the Ford brand upmarket. They'll do the same with Lincoln and the MKS but not right away. It's simply a matter of timing and which brands gets the $$ when. The fact that Ford took the Taurus so far is actually good news for Lincoln fans because it means Lincoln will move even further upmarket (presumably with even better interiors and features) in the next round of updates. The MKS was caught in between and will take another year or two to get up to speed.
It does make me wonder if bankrupt GM (which has more new models and more differentiation within those lines coming than Ford does) made the better or worse decision by accepting government help. Time will tell.
One thing we do know is that we have a new order of excellence in the industry overall. If Lincoln dies (I hope it doesn't), it won't be missed nearly as much as Cadillac (or Packard or Chrysler for that matter...can't imagine that Cadillac or Chrysler will make it if Lincoln can't). But if Lincoln bites the dust, we will continue to have excellent choices for luxury rides regardless.
I don't think any of this says the MKS is a red-headed step-child or that Ford has forgotten about it. The biggest "need" it had was a stronger engine - and it got it. There was also room to tweak the NVH control, ride and handling - and it got that. The MKS also gets the active park assist which is not available on the Taurus. It has the power tilt/telescope steering wheel that is not on the Taurus - although the Taurus has adjustable pedals. The MKS has the dual panel moonroof and the Taurus doesn't. Take a look at some smaller details like lining inside the door cubbies, the sealing around the front doors, and the quality of the leather, the warranty, etc.
No question the Taurus needed a lot more help than the MKS. The Taurus has moved up market and now the Limited comes close to the base MKS in content and in pricing. As Akirby mentions, this leaves room for Lincoln to move up, too. Frankly, at this point, I don't think the Lincoln name carries enough clout to make it viable at a much higher price point but that could change. We now have the MKT which is getting great reviews, the MKZ which is greatly improved, and the ecoboost MKS. Compare this line-up with where they were in 2007.
Speaking of pricing, help me understand what competitive vehicles with the same level of content and performance are available for less than an Ecoboost MKS? Don't say the SHO - it's not even aimed at the same buyer and cross-shoppers will have a clear choice once they see and drive them both. Genesis? E-Class? RL? STS? GS? What?
Acura RL 3.7 AWD Smaller. 325/270. $55K loaded.
Infinit M45 4.5L AWD Smaller 325/336. starts at $56K.
Sure looks competitively priced to me and in most cases with more equipment.
Are you seriously saying that a $55K MKS is overpriced compared to a $55K Infiniti even though the MKS has more power and more room and at least the same number of gadgets if not more? Just because you might prefer the Infiniti styling over the MKS styling?
Maybe we should factor in an automatic MSRP adjustment for every vehicle based on whether you like the styling or not?
Gregg, you strike me as a styling connoisseur and I respect that. Most of the time I agree with you although appearance isn't so important to me. For what it is worth, it seems that a lot of people think the MKS is pretty striking. When I was test driving an MKS for about a day and a half recently, I was almost embarrassed by the number of people - friends, neighbors, and strangers - who just gushed over it. Granted, I live in a land of SUVs, minivans, and pick-up trucks so this reaction doesn't mean much. However, a lot of people seem to think the MKS is pretty striking in spite of the height, overhangs, etc that neither you or I like.
The only real competitors of the MKS that I have driven are the Acura RL and the Caddy STS. I think the MKS ecoboost blows them both away by a country mile.
Further, you can argue that the MKS is fairly priced, given equipment levels (it is) and competitive models (which the A8 definitely isn't), but at the end of the day if people say that's a lot of money for a Lincoln, then it is. I preferred the Lexus (and lately Hyundai) approach of bringing out a model that matched or exceeded other luxury marques, and then undercutting them by many thousands in order to get really established. That the Genesis is actually selling, even if not in huge numbers, is success, considering it is from the same company that built the very cheap and very bad Excel some years ago. And now next year, the Equus is coming here--a large very luxurious very well equipped RWD V8 sedan (a car that could start horning in on A8 territory) starting at about $50K. If an upstart Korean company can do that, and trust me, the Chinese will soon start getting this stuff right as well, Lincoln has to aim higher (and not just pricewise) if it is to survive long-term.
As an aside, I never put much stock in bystander reaction to a model without considering all the factors. Most people are prone to be polite and complimentary when a new model that you are driving is brought to their attention. And new Lincolns are relatively scarce out there in the herd, whether you are talking MKS, MKZ or MKX. Suddenly seeing what seems to be a quality built car with decent styling will easily elicit praise. But fantastic styling can certainly sell cars at times. Quality and reputation can also sell even dowdy cars. Lincoln really doesn't have either situation right now. While Ford models may be eliciting praise for initial quality, Lincoln is stumbling a bit there. Sales are way down as well. And meanwhile, Lincoln doesn't have the cash to do anything more than it is already doing right now.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/18/customer-satisfaction-study-puts-big-3-in-top- -five-cadillac-tie/
How many they can sell with that strategy remains to be seen.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/18/hyundai-kia-overtakes-ford-as-worlds-4th-larg- est-automaker/
The sales manager at my dealership has informed me that mine is "on the ramp in Chicago" and is supposedly ready to ship. It has been a tad frustrating to see dealers get and sell ecoboost MKSs with later build dates than mine. I am still glad I ordered because no dealer has had the color combination or equipment that I want.
The situation, as I understand it, is that the first 2-300 ecoboost MKSs built underwent intense quality checks and they found a software calibration issue (according to the zone manager.) So, the process was to make the correction in calibration and continue building the cars and shipping the ones after the fix was made. In the meantime, they go back and make the fix on the first cars one at a time and those get shipped later.
This process helps assure quality and avoids TSBs and warranty work so it makes sense. It does, however, delay delivery to the customers who ordered cars early. I am sure my slight frustration will melt away as soon as the car arrives, though.
Nearly a month ago, I was told that the early cars had software "issue" and would be recalibrated and shipped. Today I am told that there is a part involved that is on back order. It seems they have appropriate parts to keep the line moving so cars can be built and shipped but the early ones like mine have to wait. :mad:
We have looked all over the country for a car similar to the one I ordered so my dealer can do a swap. There are none in a suitable color combination with the right equipment. I am not a rookie at ordering cars and have never had a problem. However, this has become a royal pain in the @ss. My dealer is bending over backwards to make something happen and is nearly as frustrated as I am. Next step is to see if there is a suitable car ready to ship to another dealer that we can get shipped to us instead.
Being hard-headed Ford loyal sometimes has its drawbacks.