- #2242 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [speculator]
by akirby
-
Dec 23, 2008 (9:38 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (Dec 23, 2008 9:02 am)
I think you're missing the point. There is only so much you can do with a transverse engine FWD platform, even with AWD. It's never going to handle like a LS no matter who engineers it. The ride is already much firmer than a TC which has turned off some current TC owners. It's as sporty as possible.
It's quite simple - to build the car you want requires a new, sophisticated, expensive RWD platform that simply doesn't exist right now. Lincoln has plans to build it but first they have to get through this economic crisis. What more can they possibly do RIGHT NOW?
|
- #2243 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [akirby]
by speculator
-
Dec 23, 2008 (7:35 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Dec 23, 2008 9:38 am)
Just three words: Audi, Acura, and Hyundi. Audi uses a fwd and awd platform and yet will out handle and out perform the MKS. I know about the price of these cars. But yet Acura makes the TL in standard fwd and also with a sophisticated awd system as an option. Both versions will out handle the MKS and is in the same price range. Hyundi managed to produce a sophisticated premium rwd vehicle which is also in the same price category as the MKS. Which is another vehicle that can out perform the MKS. It's pretty bad when a relatively new companies as Hyundi and Acura are ahead of the curve while Ford ,even in decent conditions, was behind. They decided to stay behind while using the profits from SUVs and trucks to produce new SUVs and trucks while forgeting about their car lines. The sad part is is that they thought they could catch up to these rivals in terms of new platform tech with the MKS.
|
- #2244 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [speculator]
by datagen
-
Dec 23, 2008 (7:55 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (Dec 22, 2008 7:27 pm)
I think there may be some confusion here. Yes I know what Ford intended but there was a balancing act going on here. I believe the MKS is in a class by itself. The size of it alone tells you clearly that even though it was meant to be a direct competitor, it is turning into a indirect one. It was designed to provide something different from the high-end main steam where performance amongst the other competitors is very close and looks not much difference as well. I am not sure is there a thing called workmanship when over 70% of the work done on vehicle today in the manufacturing world is performed by computers and robots.
Yet as long as man is the source there will always be imperfections. Like beauty this is all in the eyes of the beholder. For example some say the pickup on the MKS is lacking. Others say due to the transmission design it is fine, while others are waiting on the ecoboost looking for speed. My old man use to tell me that the latest is not necessary the greatest, and what may seemed to be out dated, may still serve its purpose just fine. With all the latest computer languages that are used today, many banks still use the old language of Cobol due to its stability and low support cost. So the incorporation of the old and new in this vehicle was a balancing act indeed.
I have never seen the perfect car no matter what the cost. Like everything else it is a percentage decision. There are some things I do not like about the MKS, but my percentage of likes was higher than my dislikes, hence I purchased the vehicle. As we nick pick from out own worlds, lets take a moment to appreciate the overall intent of the engineers and designers for their effort to create a product towards the satisfaction of all no matter how impossible it would have been from jump street.
|
- #2245 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [speculator]
by akirby
-
Dec 24, 2008 (7:04 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (Dec 23, 2008 7:35 pm)
Audi uses a longitudinal engine design, not transverse which yields slightly better weight distribution. And the TL is much smaller than the MKS - the RL would be a better comparison.
What does Hyundai have with the Genesis that Ford didn't? A new RWD platform.
We all agree that Ford should have developed a world class RWD platform years ago, but they didn't. In the meantime, the MKS is a very good vehicle, although not perfect.
|
- #2246 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [akirby]
by speculator
-
Dec 24, 2008 (8:58 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Dec 24, 2008 7:04 am)
What makes it a very good vehicle? Audi still uses front drive on some of its vehicles. If they found a way to mount the engine longitunally on these vehicles why couldn't Ford? Why doesn't Lincoln have the same sophisticated awd system as Acura or for that matter Audi? And It doesn't matter if the MKS is a larger car. It's not that hard to modify a system for other use. Why not have a full time awd option? The system that is presently used is based on Volvo's. When the Volvo's system was road tested against the Audi's awd system on a European Auto show ,the Audi's system clearly out performed the Volvo's system in the Nurbering test course.
|
- #2247 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [akirby]
by emrnibbles1
-
Dec 24, 2008 (10:23 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Dec 24, 2008 7:04 am)
What does this car do that is better than others in its price range? What will make me purchase this vehicle over a Audi or DTS. The DTS has less torque steer. Has a engine with more horse power and the DTS is slightly more expensive than this car and still has higher sales. Is available with all of the equipment except for Nsync that is touted as standard on the MKS.
|
- #2248 of 2770
-
Re: MKS turkey giveaway [akirby]
by emrnibbles1
-
Dec 24, 2008 (10:40 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Dec 09, 2008 10:10 am)
Many of these vehicles are more expensive than the MKS and are smaller since the size of the car seems to matter when making excuses for Ford's latest wannabe whenever someone criticizes the car by comparing it to others in its price range. Ford needs to sell about 35 thousand of these turkeys to break even on it with the heavy discounting that is taking place. Right now most dealers are discounting about 4500 dollars and some over 5000 dollars to get them off the lot.
|
- #2249 of 2770
-
Re: MKS turkey giveaway [emrnibbles1]
by akirby
-
Dec 24, 2008 (11:10 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: emrnibbles1 (Dec 24, 2008 10:40 am)
You don't have a clue how many Ford needs to sell to break even (and neither do I).
Right now there is NO cash rebate on the MKS - only employee pricing plus 0% for 36 months with normal interest for 48 months and longer. That's a little over $1600 in incentives from Ford not counting 0% which most people can't take anyway. It doesn't matter to Ford how much the dealer discounts the vehicle off MSRP.
And if those aren't the right vehicles to compare, please post the ones that should be used and their November sales.
|
- #2250 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [speculator]
by emrnibbles1
-
Dec 24, 2008 (11:11 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (Dec 22, 2008 9:23 pm)
The Ford family isn't stupid. Would you invest in a losing prop? Let the taxpayers do it. If Ford survives thats frosting on the cake. If it liquidates, only the taxpayers and employees suffer. Right now Ford and GM are just about penney stocks.
|
- #2251 of 2770
-
Re: Real Facts about Linciln MKS [speculator]
by akirby
-
Dec 24, 2008 (11:21 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (Dec 24, 2008 8:58 am)
If they found a way to mount the engine longitunally on these vehicles why couldn't Ford?
Because it requires a totally different front clip design and different transmission/transaxle setup. The D3 platform was already setup for AWD and could easily be modified to handle 340 hp. If they were going to the trouble of changing the engine orientation they might as well just make a new RWD platform.
Why doesn't Lincoln have the same sophisticated awd system as Acura or for that matter Audi? And It doesn't matter if the MKS is a larger car. It's not that hard to modify a system for other use. Why not have a full time awd option?
Ford's AWD system is not the same as the Volvo system. Ford's system can transfer up to 100% of the torque to the rear wheels by computer based on throttle and steering inputs BEFORE any slip occurs. This is a big advantage over the Volvo Haldex system especially in performance driving. I'm not saying it's better than Audi's system - quattro is pretty sophisticated - but it's no slouch either.
And the MKS does have a full time AWD system - it operates all the time. If you're talking about being able to lock the torque split front and rear then that's 4WD and you don't need that on a luxury sedan.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
