- #2557 of 2770
-
Re: 2010 MKS Ecoboost pricing [datagen]
by brucelinc
-
May 17, 2009 (6:44 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: datagen (May 14, 2009 11:52 pm)
Datagen, as I recall, you were among the first to order a 2009 MKS about a year ago. I applaud you courage for that but it sounds like it turned out great for you.
I was kidding about the glorified Taurus comment....and trying to add a bit of fuel to the fire on this forum. We also have a 2008 Taurus so I am pretty familiar with the differences. The Taurus is an excellent car so using the platform for a starting point for the MKS is a good thing in my book.
I certainly do not expect the twin-turbo to pay for itself in gas savings. To be honest, I would have paid the extra $5,000 even if the fuel economy was worse than the base car. Having said that, I would not criticize anyone for buying the MKS with the standard 3.7. Once broken in, they run surprisingly well. According to the order guide, Linclon is expecting 65% of buyers to go for the 3.7 and 35% for the ecoboost.
|
- #2558 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [ak103]
by akirby
-
May 17, 2009 (6:44 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: ak103 (May 16, 2009 2:16 pm)
I don't recall anyone saying that (or dreaming it). It's exactly what it was advertised to be. And the reviews so far say it (and the MKT) have exceeded expectations.
|
- #2559 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [akirby]
by brucelinc
-
May 17, 2009 (6:51 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (May 17, 2009 6:44 am)
As usual, Allen, you nailed it. Anyone who thought the MKS with Ecoboost was going to be transformed into a BMW 5 series has not been paying attention to the vast amount of information available. The SHO with the track-pack might be very interesting, though.
|
- #2560 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [akirby]
by datagen
-
May 17, 2009 (7:17 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (May 17, 2009 6:44 am)
Hey no harm no foul. Like you was just making a comment.
|
- #2561 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [brucelinc]
by akirby
-
May 17, 2009 (7:18 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: brucelinc (May 17, 2009 6:51 am)
But we're still talking about large, heavy, FWD based vehicles with poor F/R weight balance. I think the SHO and EB MKS are about as good as it gets for this type of platform, but it will never match a performance oriented 50/50 RWD platform. Nor does it need to.
|
- #2562 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [akirby]
by ak103
-
May 17, 2009 (7:18 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (May 17, 2009 6:44 am)
Well, maybe not here they haven't. But its already been compared to a 5series in one review and has been discussed on several other forums. Which is dumb because the MKS even in EB form isn't a sport sedan. Even with the upgraded equipment in the Ecoboost model, I didn't think it was going to become some track oriented star. Which is fine, if you're looking for that there are other cars out there. I personally like the appearance package, it gets rid of some of the chrome on the car itself (wheels I don't mind).
|
- #2563 of 2770
-
Re: 2010 MKS Ecoboost pricing [datagen]
by speculator
-
May 17, 2009 (3:18 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: datagen (May 14, 2009 11:52 pm)
The 2010 Taurus shares the very same platform as does the Flex as does the MKS as does the MKT. The Taurus SHO will base at about 35-36K. Too much for a Ford. One can say that it is a higher priced Ford.
|
- #2564 of 2770
-
Re: 2010 MKS Ecoboost pricing [speculator]
by grega
-
May 17, 2009 (6:29 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: speculator (May 17, 2009 3:18 pm)
... its too much money for a Ford! What the hell does that supposed to mean when you haven't even seen the car in person of taken it for a test drive! Do you always make decisions without all the information? Obvious few on this tread have any business sense and I sure wouldn't do business with any of you people that are soo short sighted!
COMPARE the SHO or MKS vs. their direct competition and you will see (if you can open your eyes) that they are true values, regardless if its a Ford or Lincoln (UNSURPASSED quality to Toyota and Honda). Don't even give the domestic car companys a chance, "its too much money", what horse crap excuse without all the facts... just shows how STUPID you are!
You will soon see that this EcoBoost technology gives Ford an EXCLUSIVE for a premium and higher residual value for these cars. Why don';t you all just go buy a Chrysler product for $5K-$10K off and watch your residual value sink to $0 in 2-3 years... that what you deserve!
|
- #2565 of 2770
-
Re: 2010 MKS Ecoboost pricing [brucelinc]
by datagen
-
May 17, 2009 (7:03 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: brucelinc (May 17, 2009 6:44 am)
No problem brucelinc. Yes the 3.7 has surprised me some as well. I was not expecting the fuel economy I am experiencing (19-21 city, 24-26 hwy) and that is AWD. The noisy sound from it when you floor it seems to have calmed down some and it seems to have changed to a sporty engine sound as well. I will admit after all this time; the car still excites me to drive. I pick up my 2010 MKZ next month. Now they should have the ecoboost as a standard engine in the MKZ. With less weight, then run the reviews. 
|
- #2566 of 2770
-
Re: MKS EB [akirby]
by brucelinc
-
May 18, 2009 (4:57 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (May 17, 2009 7:18 am)
I am not saying the SHO will out-sports sedan the 5 series. However, it will take the D3 platform up several notches in handling. You cannot overcome physics but Ford suspension engineers can do a pretty good job with tuning. Look what they have accomplished with the solid axle Mustang.
The SHO will be much closer to "sports-sedan" territory than the MKS. The suspension is pretty significantly tweaked for better handling. With the twin-turbo and the other improvements and technology that is part of the 2010 Taurus, I think the SHO is a good value starting at less than $40,000. I can't think of anything in that price range that offers as much for less money.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
