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
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.
But that's what sells.
You gotta build what the customers want to buy or you'll be out of business.
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.
No luxury brand can afford to be without one of these in its line-up.
AFAIK, they will both be offered - compact vis a vis mid size 2 row CUV.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
http://www.conceptcarpictures.org/cars-L/pics/lincoln.mkt.concept.625.jpg
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:
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?
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 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).
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.