Last post on Dec 07, 2013 at 9:04 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
Lincoln Zephyr, Lincoln MKS, Lincoln MKX
#2674 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [akirby]
Feb 25, 2008 (11:25 am)
Well I'm glad we're talking again.
I don't see how you can include a car that's not on sale yet as filling a hole that's existed for 2 years, but I wont belabor the point. I will say that I like the exterior of the MK S enuf that when the MKS with AWD and the ecoboost engine FINALLY arrive (2010, 2011?) it MIGHT actually get a look from me. Though the fact that Lincoln stands to pocket a LARGER percentage of my hard-earned money than they did the last time I bought a sedan from them is NOT a selling point. I'd have to negotiate BELOW x-plan pricing for this reason or I woudnt buy it. After all, I'm not buying a car so Ford can make more money.
What cars does the MKZ compete with? It's been out now for, what, 3 years (including the Zephyr) and I've not yet seen it compared to anything. And that's probably a good thing for Lincoln. The MK Z IMHO should be a Mercury.
The Navigator could use a new interior as well. Just go back to the '06 version would be an improvement. Sell those current guages at antique stores. Oh, and if they dont improve both gas mileage AND HP then dont bother. Personally though I still love my Navigator, I get physically ill when I see the gas mileage display on the dash.
The MK X needs a new interior. The current one is go-kartish and too much hard plastic.
Town Car? Non-sequitor. Are u really saying the MK T will replace the TC?
MK S interior. Haven't sat in one, only seen pictures. Compare it to the competition, not prior Lincolns would be the correct thing to do. From what I've seen it is boring, uninspired the center stack is bleak black, the controls are parts-bin and what more can I say? Do I care that the dashboard, which I will probably never touch, is leather? Only from the standpoint that I would be very afraid that its' exosure to the sun would cause it to crack very quickly. Sit in S then sit in CTS and I doubt anyone will say the S is very good. Though I think I recall someone on here saying just that? Again, I'm working from photos in both CTS and MKS cases.
#2675 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [jeyhoe]
Feb 25, 2008 (11:40 am)
On the contrary, a leather dash says quality to me. The stitched leather dash board in a Jaguar XJ Vanden Plas really gets noticed over the molded plastic in most. Personal taste. Anyway, other than that black plastic panel in the center stack, it may actually turn out to be a classy interior.
My opinion of the MKS: I still can't get past the overall profile. I love the detailing from the roof pillars to the front of the hood, and the line below the side windows. It really does have some interesting touches. But even though it is over 10" longer than an LS, it is more stubby looking. Why would most people want a large car that looks smaller than it is? It was a real trick to make a long rear overhang actually look short! And even with that tallness--which often can confer greater interior room--the similarly sized but not as tall Buick Lucerne offers more leg room and more interior width. So I am not sure what the payoff is for compromising a sleek look as much as they did.
#2676 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [gregg_vw]
Feb 25, 2008 (11:58 am)
Never having experienced the luxury of a Jag or a leather dash, I'll defer to you and Allen here.
"But even though it is over 10" longer than an LS, it is more stubby looking. Why would most people want a large car that looks smaller than it is"
This to be honest means nothing to me. Almost a foot longer than the LS puts it in 7 series territory or more doesnt it? I really dont share your ability to see it as being smaller than it is. To me it looks as big as it is. Foreshortening, as pointed out to Joyce by Hemingway, does not apply here. It is what it is. Doesn't look stubby to me.
#2677 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [jeyhoe]
Feb 25, 2008 (12:26 pm)
And I hope for Lincoln's sake most people see it as you do.
Did you see Robert Cumberford's comments in Automobile? He agrees with you on the interior. He says, among other things, starting with the exterior:
1. Thankfully, there is no imitation spare tire cover stamped into the trunklid sheetmetal.
2. The excessive rear overhang may recall giant Lincolns of the past, but on this car it simply looks old-fashioned. A longer wheelbase, with the wheels moved farther away from each other, would have been better.
3. The chrome around the windows is nice. Definitely a BMW line, though.
4. Big wheels are good, but not when they are placed so far aft the engine that you wonder where the passengers will be able to put their feet. The awkward proportions make the car look tall and dumpy.
5. What could possibly be the purpose of stamped indent in the middle of the hood? It simply looks - and is - wrong.
6. The wiggly, thin lines on the lower front end attract the eye, to no good purpose.
7. Small round lamp and large, black-painted hole in the bumper have no particular reason to exist. One suspects that there was a sketch where this looked good, so it was carried over.
8. The rib (raised sides of the hood) is the best single surface feature on the exterior of the MKS, providing directionality and a sense of flow.
9. The crisp side line is good, but it leaves a little triangle of sheetmetal above the front corner lamp, which doesn't integrate well with the painted areas.
10. The small chrome flash on the front fender does what, exactly? Larger ones are the latest British leitmotif, as seen on various Jaguars and Land Rovers. Is this an expression of group solidarity?
And now, his take on the interior of the car:
A. The instrument panel is a mess; curves, squares, vents, and knobs have seemingly been put wherever it was convenient (and cheap) to do so.
B. The rectangular center stack panel containing the stereo and climate controls looks like something you might have seen in a 1970s delivery truck.
C. The navigation screen is usefully large, but the bright band above it looks cheap and will likely cause a reflection in the windshield.
Anyways, Joe, you liked the exterior of the LS, so I am not surprised you like the conservative tone of the overall shape of the MKS. I always liked the side character line/shoulders of the LS, but to me it did not make up for the dumbed down BMW look front end and the uninspired rear styling. But it does age well. I don't think the MKS will.
#2678 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [gregg_vw]
Feb 25, 2008 (12:28 pm)
The DTS still sells to the over 80 set...
Hey! I'm well under 80! I'm a youthful 42!
#2679 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [jeyhoe]
Feb 25, 2008 (12:34 pm)
I don't see how you can include a car that's not on sale yet as filling a hole that's existed for 2 years
Ok, there is a hole NOW, there won't be a hole 6 months from now. That's a little different from having a product gap with nothing planned to fill it.
Though the fact that Lincoln stands to pocket a LARGER percentage of my hard-earned money than they did the last time I bought a sedan from them is NOT a selling point.
And here is the big point I think you're missing.
Why can BMW and MB afford to make low volume specialty performance models? Because they're making money! If Lincoln isn't making money on their basic lineup then how can they afford to make something exotic and extraordinary? The more quickly Lincoln can turn a profit the quicker the purse strings will open up for the things that enthusiasts want.
If you're not willing to pay dealer invoice (X plan) then why should Lincoln care about you as a customer? Sounds like you have champagne taste with a beer budget. You won't buy any popular vehicles below invoice (not counting rebates).
From what I've seen it is boring, uninspired the center stack is bleak black, the controls are parts-bin and what more can I say?
Bleak black? Parts-bin? Did you even look at the closeup pictures? That center stack is not plain black - it's a textured finish and looks very nice to me, plus there is a wood appearance package that we have not seen yet. I think it looks classy. Could it look better? Sure, but that doesn't make it bad. Check out the closeups:
#2682 of 4409 MKS center stack
Feb 25, 2008 (7:49 am)
Picture was too big to display here, but look at this closeup picture. Notice the textured appearance. This is not a cheap black plastic piece. And once again I'll remind everyone that there IS a wood appearance package listed as an option that we haven't seen yet.
#2683 of 4409 Re: Through the past, Darkly [akirby]
Feb 25, 2008 (1:26 pm)
To reply to your picture, I'll plagiarise gregg's post:
"B. The rectangular center stack panel containing the stereo and climate controls looks like something you might have seen in a 1970s delivery truck."
And you know darn well that X-plan is NOT dealer invoice. Why cant u stay honest and on topic? It's not on ME as a customer to be sure Lincoln takes enough of my money to be profitable. I dont walk into a dealership and say "Please sell me a car at whatever it takes to pay your outrageous labor costs, executive perks, buy-out costs and lawyer fees." Do YOU? NO, I go in there intent on getting the very best deal I can for myself and my family. In fact, I almost ALWAYS go in knowing more about the car than just about anyone who is selling the thing. And since I already KNOW that I got my LS at X-plan and I KNOW that the MKS is much cheaper to make than the LS, then I KNOW there's more money to work with in there and I will negotiate with that knowledge. Since there's only 3 Lincoln dealers left around here now (there were 6 in 2001) my chances may be diminished. But I would consider that Ford's loss, not mine, as I would NOT expect to pay less for the car than they require to make money. And I will add that having purchased 2 brand new Lincolns in the past 7 years, I already KNOW that Lincoln does not care about me as a customer.
And please, enuf with the Jag XF already. It really doesn't do your argument any good. I encourage ALL readers of this thread to take a look at the JAG XF and wonder what a Lincoln based on that platform may have looked like. And of course DEW-98 wasn't perfect. What is? That's why a good platform gets REFINED which has happened to DEW-98. I'm not sure what it's called, let's say DEW-2005 for grins. The XF rides on it. And it's "only" $49K, so Lincoln could have sold one for a Lincoln price. And there aren't many convertibles around that DON'T have extra cross-bracing over their siblings with fixed metal roofs. And we've been over the engine fitment so many times it's boring already. The 4.2 V8 would satisfy me just fine! As would a 340hp eco-boost V6 which would also fit, eh? Why cant YOU admit that might have been a good idea?
IF I was in the market for a car right now, Lincoln would NOT even be on the radar. And that from a guy whose last 3 vehicles have been Lincolns. I would look at the Infinit M and G, the Jag XF, the CTS, ... Even when the S comes out, it won't compete well with any of these. IMHO.