Last post on May 07, 2013 at 2:30 PM
You are in the Lincoln MKS
What is this discussion about?
Lincoln MKS, Sedan
#2509 of 2971 Re: MKS vs. Taurus vs. others [savetheland]
Mar 28, 2009 (6:22 pm)
Of course the CC will look dated after awhile, but I doubt it will ever look ugly, any more than any elegant or unique older car does as time passes and its lines fall out of favor. Ugly cars are ugly from the go-shot, like the Ford 500, the last American Motors Ambassador, the Aztek, the PT Cruizer Convertible, the current Chrysler Sebring hardtop convertible, the Ssangyong Rodius. The Koreans and Japanese have produced nothing currently that looks as good as the CC. The swoopy lines may not be your taste, but they are not ugly nor Japanese derivative. Park an Altima (one of the less bland Japanese midsize sedans) next to a CC and the Altima looks blah.
That's the MKS's problem. Not a bad car at all, and of course it you buy one, people are going to remark "what a nice car." (They would do so as well with a 2009 Mercury Sable.) But we all know it ain't no standout. The MKS needed more of the new dramatic Lincoln cues than it was possible to give it prior to production. It was drawn back when Ford still thought that the 500 had "classic lines" and would soon look better to the eyes of the public than the more daring Chrysler 300. Well, that will never happen, no matter how sick and tired we all get of the Chrysler (and we will if we already haven't).
Ford screwed up with this conservative, anonymous approach. They know that now. The 2010 Taurus is one result of that hard lesson.
#2510 of 2971 Re: MKS vs. Taurus vs. others [savetheland]
Mar 28, 2009 (10:45 pm)
Gregg, how do you define "Luxury car"?
#2511 of 2971 Re: MKS vs. Taurus vs. others [gregg_vw]
Mar 29, 2009 (9:02 am)
Ford hasn't had what I would call a breakthrough styling sensation for a good long while. They have apparently been afraid to step very far outside the box. In my opinion, some of the best looking Ford products for their time would include the '60 Starliner, the '61 Lincoln Continental, the '61 T'Bird, the '83 T'bird, and the 89 'T'Bird. The original Taurus was ground-breaking, too.
I think the MKS looks pretty good from some angles, especially the front. As you have said, it just isn't particularly distinctive. Having said that, I do think it looks as good or better than its direct competitors.
#2512 of 2971 Re: 2000 Miles in an MKS [brucelinc]
Mar 29, 2009 (12:39 pm)
The leather (Black) on my MKS is holding up fine, of course I have only had it for one month. In the back seat, I had a local upholsterer cover the cushion with a removable faux suede cover, as I have a 65 pound greyhound who accompanies me everywhere (service dog).
My previous car, an '06 Grand Marquis had Katskins white leather installed from the dealership and after 3 years and 26,000 miles really looked like crap.
I am 6'1" and 205 # and the front seats / steering wheel fit me fine. No complaints.
For an ashtray, I ordered one on Amazon that has a soft blue lighting and allows the tambour door to be closed over it, but still cannot use the cupholders while it is in place.
#2513 of 2971 Re: MKS vs. Taurus vs. others [carfanforever]
Mar 30, 2009 (9:01 am)
How do I define a luxury car? That is a tough one. Going on price alone, the car would have to retail for $45000 and upward. That usually eliminates some of the more questionable contenders. It is a four door sedan or coupe or four place convertible.
Many of those in hte "near-luxury" class are seen as luxury cars by many (MKZ, CTS, A4, S60, 300, ES350, G370, TL, etc.). Then you have further overlaps like the Acura TSX or the VW CC. The CC is little different from the A4 underneath, and by the time you equip it with V6, AWD, it is without a doubt in the near-luxury class. It's not always about the name...the VW Phaeton and Passat W8 were luxury cars, though ill-conceived for this market. The Mazda Millenia from the 90s (and the 929 for that matter) were more luxurious than the comparable Lexus of the time.
But price and competition alone don't wholly define luxury or near luxury. The Saab sedans have been in that price range for a long time, but usually don't impart a real luxury feeling (they are not particularly quiet, interior materials and styling is sub-par). So a luxury car needs to be not just well-equipped and "well-pedigreed." Controls should be smooth and well-damped. Interior materials should be quality and pleasing. It should be QUIET in all operations. It should appear to go about its business effortlessly. It should have most of the latest bells and whistles.
The MKS sort of falls between near-luxury and luxury. Within its range, it tries to cover both areas. It should be quieter and the engine shouldn't sound so strained under hard acceleration. There could be more suspension choices. Other than styling (which is unique and the importance of that need not be diminished), it is little different from the Taurus. Time was even when Lincoln shared a platform with a Ford, the Lincoln got a different wheelbase, unique suspension, a quieter ride, nore opulent interior. It remains to be seen if the greater Ecoboost availability on the Lincoln will create enough distance from the 2010 Taurus to justify the extra coin,.
#2514 of 2971 Re: MKS vs. Taurus vs. others [gregg_vw]
Mar 30, 2009 (9:27 pm)
Thanks for the answer.
#2515 of 2971 Re: 2000 Miles in an MKS [DRUDDELL]
Mar 31, 2009 (5:39 am)
Thanks, Druddle. I am glad you like your MKS. I look forward to owning one, myself. No car is perfect but an ecoboost MKS should come as close to fitting my needs/wants as anything else available. I was not totally thrilled with my LS when I bought it but now, 10 years later, I find it is a tough act to follow.
#2516 of 2971 Minor nit-picks
Apr 02, 2009 (12:43 pm)
I have a sangria red MKS with the ultimate package. After one month, I find the car to be a great ride--quiet, smooth riding yet not "floaty" and handles nicely overall. I am a gadget guy and love the electronic toys.
I only have two small nits to pick on this car:
The "bookshelf" (actually the door storage) is too tight to put a book in comfortably. My '06 Avalon had door storage that would tilt out so you could put in a book and remove it easily.
The only other thing that could use improvement is the keyless entry. Rather than have to go to the driver's door to unlock the car without using a key or the transmitter, I liked that with the Avalon, I only had to walk up to any door or the trunk with the fob in my pocket and any door could be opened.
Since I haven't taken any long distance drives yet that haven't involved going through a mountain pass (I live in Pahrump, NV and we go to Las Vegas frequently) I haven't been able to see what kind of mpg it will get on "flat" highway travel. It gets around 21mpg going "over the hump to Pahrump". With a few more miles on the car, I am hoping this will improve.
Apr 09, 2009 (6:02 am)
My dealer had the order guide for the 2010 MKS and he gave me a copy. I haven't seen it online, yet. Anyway, nothing earth shattering but here are a few of the changes for 2010:
The formerly optional "Technology package" is now standard - push button start, rain-sensing wipers, etc. The wood door trim is now part of the Ultimate package but is a stand-alone option also. They also indicate that the instrument cluster is new. I haven't even seen a picture of that so I don't know what "new" means. All models have the paddle shifters instead of the toggling lever. It appears that the rear sunshade is now standard.
The Ecoboost model, of course, includes AWD and 19" wheels. Otherwise, it is available in base or Ultimate trims. There is an optional "Ecoboost appearance package" but that is late availability. It includes body cladding, metallic interior trim, 20" chrome wheels, spoiler, and other trim items. I wouldn't want this package, anyway.
Many colors have been changed. I was kind of leaning toward the White Chocolate but it has been replaced with White Platinum. I also was considering Sangria red but it has been replaced with Red Candy Metallic tint.
Strangely, and unlike the Taurus, no adjustable pedals, blind spot warning, or massaging seats are available according to the order guide.
I am looking to place an order fairly soon for the Ecoboost model with the wood door trim and Ultimate package. I am still on the fence in terms of color.
#2518 of 2971 Re: 2010 MKS [brucelinc]
Apr 09, 2009 (6:45 am)
You probably won't find any discernible difference between the new colors (if they're replacements). Ford likes to change the name periodically but the actual color difference is minimal - half a shade if that much.
I don't understand the lack of adjustable pedals, BLIS or massaging seats. Let me see what I can find out from my sources.