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

Where Is Ford taking the Lincoln Motor Company?

1757678808190

Comments

  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Because they only started working on it 12-18 months ago.
  • And why the hell is that??

    Seriously, I see the differences you point out, Allen, but I do not think they are significant enough to register with most people. The MKZ and MKC look like relatives in a way that the rest of the line does not.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Why did they just start working on it 18 months ago? Gee, I don't know - maybe because that's when they finally got Ford securely profitable and could afford to move forward with the Lincoln revamp?
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Bleagh! Another stupid SUV/crossover! That grille reminds me more of an Oldsmobile than a Lincoln.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Heck, I never associated the word reliability with European cars!
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Bleagh! Another stupid SUV/crossover!

    But that's what sells.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Exactly. The SRX is easily Cadillac's biggest seller. Same for the Lexus RX. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean everybody else feels the same way.

    You gotta build what the customers want to buy or you'll be out of business.
  • Agreed. Plus, the feedback on polls is showing that most people are pleasantly surprised and delighted by the design.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    I've been told it will launch 4Q2013, not 2014.

    Also - the designers are busy changing the MKZ to reflect this more aggressive design language which will distance it even more from the Fusion.

    All good news for Lincoln.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Member Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    As others have noted, that is what people are buying. Isn't the Cadillac SRX the best-selling Cadillac right now? It seems to be the most popular new Cadillac, based on what I see on the road.

    No luxury brand can afford to be without one of these in its line-up.
  • lincoln already has the MKX, which is a direct competitor to the SRX. however, the MKX does not sell very well. The MKC will definitely draw the attention of more consumers.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Member Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    I thought that the MKC will be a size smaller than the MKX. Are these two going to overlap? Or is the MKC going to replace the MKX?
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    I thought that the MKC will be a size smaller than the MKX. Are these two going to overlap? Or is the MKC going to replace the MKX?

    AFAIK, they will both be offered - compact vis a vis mid size 2 row CUV.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The SRX is smaller than the MKX and larger than the MKC. Much like the CTS was an in between vehicle which is now being replaced by a smaller ATS and a larger CTS.

    Not sure if Caddy is planning to make any changes but if Lincoln makes the new MKX look like the MKC on a new platform with all the new Lincoln features I think it will be a great one two punch.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    You gotta build what the customers want to buy or you'll be out of business.

    Exactly right. The Japanese, (Toyota for example), tried for a decade or two to "tell the stupid, fat, lazy Americans" that they didn't NEED large Pickups, and spawned the T-100, which was an embarrasing try at breaking into the F-150 market. Other than extreme Toyotaphiles, it didn't work. So, the Tundra was born, which was in the cabin, a shameless copy of the F-150 interior and dash, but also very cramped inside, short legroom, headroom, poor load ratings, tow ratings, initially no V-8. I had one, so I know. They tried to blow that body out a bit in about 04 and called it a "real full sized truck now" - which it wasn't, although a V-8 was finally offered. Finally realizing that they couldn't convince us of what we needed, and were going to have to actually compete for the light truck market, the overly large "Bulldog Tundra" was introduced at EXACTLY the wrong time, as our domestic light trucks were downsizing a bit for economy. It was a very poor strategic move on Toyota's part, and has failed them miserably to date. Toyotaphiles buy them, but it attracts very few domestic truck buyers. And, they still have no heavy duty trucks to sell us.

    Nissan - different approach - they brought out the Titan(ic) big from the start with a large V-8, very thirsty large V-8, and were projected to KILL the dominance of the Ford the first year. It was a pretty good truck, but lacked options, and had some weaknesses, like poor brakes and weak suspension mounts, and had so many introductory defects that Nissan sent over a team of Japanese engineers to figure out what was wrong. So, it improved over the years, yet never even cracked the American market with sales. Personally, I liked it out of the gate, it fit the "fat lazy Americans" well, but sales are so miserable, it's not profitable. The Frontier, which is built on the Titan Platform, shortened up a smidge, is a great little truck, my personal favorite little truck, and sells well, so at least they got their engineering costs back on the platform through that.

    My point, of course is, you can't MAKE your customers like your product because it's what they really need - you give them what they want to buy, or they'll buy it somewhere else. Only Japanese arrogance would presume otherwise.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Member Posts: 1,380
    Blagh blagh. Appearance is eye candy and it works for short term, but you can only fool customers so long. I had 11 Lacrosse CXS, loaded, ruby red jewel tint, lots of metal flake. What a beautiful car according to all comments I got. But what a piece of junk. Worst vehicle I ever owned in my 56 years of driving. Lemoned it for a whole lotta reasons.
    Think of the old box looking Mercedes. They were nothing toward nice looking but they sold and sold well. Most buyers were likely returning customers.
    Bumped into an aquaintance last night, he admiring my MKS. Mentioned the lemon and he said a friend of his was having horrible experience with new Lucernne. Also said problems with American were why he stuck to foreign names these days. I could not argue against that because my wife has a KIA with 80,000 miles.
    I believe Ford/Lincoln needs to take a hard look at some basic concepts of building.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Member Posts: 1,380
    My MKS is short of perfect. Quite a number of smaller items that bug me. Example being the sealing around openings and finish at those points. Others have complained about the poor sealing around the doors, allowing splash, dirt to get into that area and transfering to clothing. I can give the Lacrosse as an example of an excellent attempt at sealing the doors and other areas. They brag of their triple seal and it extends to the outer edges effectively. (I had issue in this area, one of the seals on all four doors separated at the factory splice) Also at the leading edge of the door, there was a seal to contact the fender when closed. On mine, they did not make contact, but I saw some that actually worked. That should be a hint.
    Last weekend I washed MKS and KIA Rondo. Again the poor design on the MKS showed to an extreme compared to the KIA. All of the extra places dirt was hiding made the wash an extreme chore. And in the washing I noticed things that are from years gone by with Ford. Wake up Ford. Many of those crannies don't have finish paint. It was like they got a primer/dusting of paint and without those extra high gloss coats the dirt adheres and with high humidity it appears that black mold grows into the paint. That just says cheap. Add to that the poor quality sealer that is used to fill voids which deteriorates and flakes the paint off. It sure does not say quality. And this situation extends to the trunk area where all kinds of road dirt/film accumulates and is hard to remove. Again it grows black crud. Ford/Lincoln definitely needs to revisit design to address such. Hood area as well.
    And you know those little stickers of information that are in many places. They darned sure should not be coming loose when washing. One that does not is that stupid one on inside glass, rear door, that brags about union built and quality. They can leave that one off.
    And what is it that seat belts get so stained turning dark and unable to clean? Also says cheap.
    And those little rubber bumpers that are at doors/hood/trunk, I had two of them pop off during the wash.
    And the center armrests, the dye on the leather has worn off, noticed at 18K miles.
    Lots of small things that scream cheap, enough to force thinking foreign on my next purchase.
    As to the clowns that are trying to reinvent the "Hot Rod Lincoln", go elsewhere and do it.
    Quality is the number one seller of vehicles.
  • edward53edward53 Member Posts: 113
    You complain about Lincoln's build quality. Have you compared the build quality of BMW, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, Mercedes, and Cadillac to Lincoln's?
    I bet you will find that the build quality of these vehicles is far above the quality of your MKS. You will also find that the platform engineering for these vehicles is far superior to any platform that underpins any Lincoln.
    I agree with you about not wanting a Hot Rod Lincoln . Lincoln doesn't need a Shelby Lincoln that uses a Mustang platform . That would really be vulgar.

    Lincoln needs something uniquely its own.

    By the way , I had a 1975 Mercedes450 SEL. The build quality and platform engineering on that car was far superior to my Father's Lincoln MK 5. The car would literally run rings around the MK5 on the skid pad. I also had a Jaguar XJ 12 coupe. Build quality was not as good as Mercedes but better than Lincoln's ;however, Lucas electronics and bearing seal problems were a nightmare . Yet it was more fun to drive than the Lincoln.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Member Posts: 1,380
    I was in a friend's Lexus and it seemed nice. Also the saying about the Olds Aurora, "They ride like a Lexus." seemed true. But you know how that first impression, that short test drive is, it does not tell much. Ownership or having the vehicle for awhile reveals all.
    Don't be so quick to lump Cadillac in. I'd say many of the things about them are likely much like the Lacrosse. Many of the same components, such as three bad batteries in first year and a defective oil filter from the factory. I did give them a check after the Buick and found the same horrible hard seating where I could feel structure through the padding and likely the wires for seat heating. Got in and bounced hard on the seat several times to imitate settling in from a long ride. Of the GM's, Chrysler's, and MKS, MKS wins hands down when it comes to the seat. (Not including head rest)
    As to the others, I'd have to do some serious testing. Perhaps the biggest BMW might be different, but of the others I've heard they ride hard and are a chore to drive. One commented, "I prefer the Lincoln because I'm not tired after driving it.", compared to a BMW.
    MK5, not sure what year that would have been, but if on Taurus body, it would have been lacking a lot. Only the first version of Taurus/Sable seemed solid although somewhat under-powered with that version of 3.0L. After the first one, they lightened it a lot and a particularly weak spot was the window frame attaching to the door. It bent easily allowing poor sealing and they were noisy. And with that I'm reminded that I noticed a piece of that rubber window track popping from its place on my MKS. Ford is cheap on those window tracks it seems as well as low quality carpet.
  • I think the MKS is a decent car and very well equipped. My problem with the MKS is that it always looks so clunky. Parked on the street next to other cars it often comes off as half-baked, with clumsy and unimaginative lines, and a bulky presence that still does not look like money. Lincoln was controlled by half-wits when this thing was drawn and approved. Thank goodness for new blood.
  • ...the guys who took the admittedly provocative and polarizing MKT Concept and turned it into the MKT. In trying to tone the concept down, they ended up with a dowdy station wagon with a controversial grill.

    http://www.conceptcarpictures.org/cars-L/pics/lincoln.mkt.concept.625.jpg
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    For once I agree 100%. Neither one is exciting. Can't wait to see what Max has in store for the other Lincolns.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    MK5, not sure what year that would have been,

    The Mark V way predated the Taurus by 11 years, circa 75. It was a Panther platform, about 22 ft long, and just gorgeous for the day. A true luxury car, Eldorado competition, soft, cushy, opulent, square but with a forward stance. 460 V8, 7 mpg, miserable acceleration - but enviable at any setting or event. :shades:
  • There were no Mark models that shared anything with the Taurus. The 1988-94 Continental was based on the Taurus, but shared no interior or exterior styling with the Ford. It was noticeably roomier than the Taurus as well. The 1995-2002 Continental was also based on Taurus architecture, but with a slightly different wheelbase, more interior room, and huge front and rear overhangs.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    edited January 2013
    I've driven and ridden in a '96 Continental, and I like it. It's not a Lexus LS or Mercedes E-Class, to be sure, but it's nice nonetheless. I'd take one over, say, a Cadillac DeVille or STS, or a Buick Park Avenue.
  • Not that there is anything wrong with your assessment, but if more people had agreed with you, the car would not have been discontinued in 2002 with no replacement.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Yeah, true. I knew mine was a minority view. In one way cars are like people. You may like someone that most people don't, or dislike a popular person.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    You could argue the LS was the Continental replacement. Although the Continental/Town Car crowd hated the LS with its firm bucket seats and smaller interior.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited January 2013
    The LS was out more than 2 years before the Continental was killed. It was the "small" Lincoln. The Continental was the "middle size" Lincoln, kind of like the STS was for Cadillac. The STS lasted longer, but that genre of car (too big to be a sports sedan but too small to appeal as much to the Town Car/DTS crowd) withered away as tastes changed. Still, the Continental was a success for Lincoln for a long time. Had they updated it with the times, it might still be for sale. I suppose one could argue that the MKS is the new Continental. However, it is too tall and not stylish enough to carry that water.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Member Posts: 181
    edited January 2013
    The Mark V was built on the old full-size platform. Lincoln didn't switch to the Panther platform for the Marks (the Mark VI) and the "standard" Continental Town Car/Coupe until the 1980 model year.
  • keystonecarfankeystonecarfan Member Posts: 181
    It's not only too tall, it's also too narrow. The taillights and trunk lid design accentuate these traits. If the next MKS is as big an improvement over the current one as the 2013 MKZ is over its predecessor, Lincoln will have a winner. Until then, I'll definitely pass on the MKS.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I thought the LS bore too much resemblance to a contemporary Mitsubishi and the "LS" moniker a rip-off of Lexus.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited January 2013
    Actually, the MKS is wider than the 2002 Continental, which did not seem narrow at all. It was a big car, even then. The other weird thing...cars are often able to carve out more legroom by being taller (explains why subcompacts are often so tall), like the MKS. However, the 2000 era Continental was shorter in height than not only the MKS--by a lot--but also 2 inches shorter than the 2013 MKZ! Not as wide either.

    So the 2000 era Continental was not a bulky block of a vehicle, even if it did have enormous overhangs--that contributed nothing to interior room. Still, it had way more interior room, and more rear legroom on a significantly shorter wheelbase than either the MKS or new MKZ. Somehow Lincoln has lost track of how to style a luxury sedan that doesn't look like a block, and at the same time make it really roomy. What is up with that?
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes Member Posts: 1,019
    I've noticed the resemblance of the LS to Mitsubishi Galants and Diamanté also. While not striking, I thought the LS was a clean design that has held up well. My '05 with the '06 sport wheels and metallic red paint was a sharp car.
    2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The 1995-2002 Continental was also based on Taurus architecture, but with a slightly different wheelbase, more interior room,

    Au Contrare, Gregg: Having owned both, you are incorrect on the interior room - the 2005 on Continental was much smaller inside than the previous model, particulary in the rear seat. It was ultra tech and ultra luxury, ultra powerful with the In Tech V8, but all the room went into the trunk, not the cabin. The limosine roofline the pre 95 had, was gone, and so was the headroom and legroom.
  • I'm not saying the 1995 did not give up rear legroom, compared to the 1994. What I was saying is that if you chopped off the ridiculous overhangs that were the style then, this Continental car with a wheelbase of 109 inches offered more interior room (with a lower roof and less width) than the 2013 MKZ does with a wheelbase of over 112".

    I hate that Ford has forgotten how to carve out interior room. This is a usual complaint about the subcompact class Fiesta, the compact class Focus, the midsize Fusion and MKZ, and the "large" class MKS. It is not as if the styling is so cool and so far better than rivals that making the interiors smaller is worth it (like with the Aston Martin Rapide, to use an extreme example).
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    What do all those cars have in common? European platforms. Rumor is CD4 (Fusion/MKZ/Mondeo) is based mostly on the old EUCD Mondeo platform.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I hate that Ford has forgotten how to carve out interior room

    That is a major complaint I have with Ford products. The new Explorer is atrocious for it's size and the Taurus is just plain pathetic in the interior dimensions and room aspect. I think this is one area where they could learn from GM. Sit in a traverse and then an Explorer. Heck, even Toyota trumps the Explorer big time in this area.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Explorer, Taurus, Flex, MKT and MKS are all derived from a Volvo platform and all suffer the same problems with interior room and a very high beltline. The next generation should fix that when they all switch to a CD4 variant (2013 Fusion/Mondeo/MKZ).
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Member Posts: 1,380
    The LS is still a bit of a head turner. As to resemblance's, there are only so many ways you can build a vehicle without breaking the rules necessary for a quality vehicle. If oil prices go high and stay long enough to support major body changes, you will see everything go aerodynamic. As it is, prices shoot high and most people start dumping trucks/large SUV for small fuel efficient. Fuel prices drop and they get tired of riding in a sardine can, they start buying bigger vehicles. Because of lag to change production, about half the time it seems what is on the lot is out of sync with what buyer's want.
    Even luxury cars are effected. Some buyer's can afford anything, including $10 gas, but that is a very limited market, and about half of them want to stay with the style. Hence such horrible creations as a Cadillac Cimaron (Chevy Citation) and a Lincoln that was on a Ford Granada.
    I personally look at TCO, total cost of ownership, when making a purchase. Insurance is one variable that should be looked at closely. Surprisingly, the insurance for a new 11 Lacrosse loaded was no more than what it was for an 09 Malibu LT2. I was told the main reason was safety. Yet I pay a little more for a year older 10 MKS, mostly base.
    I certainly have not popped those chrome strips on the roof, but they do break the roof lines. Somehow GM found a way to get rid of those trim pieces on Lacrosse, maybe better welding. That narrow channel existed, but it's paint was a flawless as any smooth surface.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    You mean the Versailles?

    image
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited February 2013
    Lincoln sold less than 4,200 cars in January. Even Volvo outsold Lincoln again.

    Most dealers are still waiting for the "2013" MKZ. There is no rhyme or reason for not calling it a 2014, and skipping the 2013 model year...except it is too late to do that now. From here though, there is no way but up (or out).

    And here comes an explanation from the Detroit News:

    "Lincoln sold 453 MKZs, down 73 percent compared to last January. Ken Czubay, Ford vice president, U.S. marketing, sales and service, said Ford is taking extra time to comb over all-new MKZ sedans, the first of four all-new products for Lincoln over the next four years. As a result, Lincoln will not have a full-stock of MKZ sedans until early April."

    Just wow.
  • At least the Versailles got its own roof line after the first year or two.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    It was based on the Granada, which I believe was based on the Maverick frame, but it was luxurious and looked like a lincoln, at least in the front. I sort of liked 'em anyway.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    I think if we could somehow erase the Granada and Monarch from our collective memory, that Versailles would be much better remembered today. I think it's actually a nice looking car, especially in that color scheme. But, the second you park a Granada next to it, it's so blatantly obvious that they're the same car.

    I feel the same way about the Zephyr, or Mark Z, or whatever they call it these days. It actually looks nice, but the second you see a Fusion, the magic is gone.

    Oh, and I know this is gonna date me, but I caught a Lincoln commercial on tv last nite, one where a black early 90's Town Car is driving across the desert plain, gets hit with a cgi fireball, and emerges as some new Lincoln. I made a comment about how that's exactly what's wrong with Lincoln...the Town Car was actually nice and luxurious, while that new thing just doesn't look like a luxury car. Well, one of my friends said "That's because you're old!", and another one said "You like that Town Car because it looks like something out of the 70's!"

    So, maybe I'm out of touch? :P
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    And when you park a Cadillac SRX next to a Chevy Equinox, it is obvious they are the same under there. And when you park a number of Acuras next to the Hondas, you get the same feeling. And when you park an Escalade next to a Tahoe.....and on and on. But it seems only the Fords get that knock.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    Oh trust me, I'm not too fond of those badge-jobs, either. I was just pointing out Lincoln-specific examples since this is a Lincoln forum.

    In defense of Lincoln though, I always thought they did a fairly good job with the Navigator. It doesn't come off nearly as badge-engineered, IMO, as the Escalade does. And even if I didn't know the SRX was based on the Equinox, I think I'd still have problems calling it a Caddy.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    That said, it's looking like the similarities are over in the new Lincolns. The new Z looks NOTHING like a Fusion, nor does it share an inch of sheet metal or glass with it. The S & T already are that way so the Z was the last one to get unique bodies. They are promising to keep that trend going. As for the Navigator, (I owned a 99 and an 03) I loved them until the 07 Remington shaver front end ensued. Never have warmed up to that, or the 62 F-150 instrument panel inside, and didn't buy one. They've been promising a new Navigator for years now, and it keeps getting set back so that the current model is old enough to vote now.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The new Navigator was waiting for the new F150 because it can't support a bespoke platform with current and future volumes. I expect it and the Expy to share the F150 platform and some engines but have a totally unique interior and exterior and drivetrains.

    The MKZ doesn't have any new engines because they aren't ready yet.

    BTW - Lincoln just took 3rd place behind Lexus and Porsche in the JD Power 2013 VDS. This measures problems with 2010 model year vehicles.
  • Actually, the Z does share the windshield and front door glass. That's not much and not very noticeable, but it is still too much, given that most brands do not do this anymore. By the way even though the Equinox and SRX do share some underpinnings, they share less than you seem to think. The Chevy in the GMC Terrain are exactly the same underneath.
Sign In or Register to comment.