akirby
-
Posts
45,246 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1,639
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by akirby
-
-
I agree which is why it is silly to ask for empirical evidence on a forum.
<graph showing empirical evidence>
I find the irony in your post hilarious.
-
1
-
-
Is it just me? With the 05-09 models I thought the supercabs looked the best and that the supercrew bed looked too short. But on the current models I like the supercrew better than the supercab. The bed doesn't look as stubby. I've tried to figure out if they changed dimensions or something else in the design or if it's just an optical illusion.
-
Is top end horsepower really a characteristic that should really matter to anybody in a midsize family sedan though? You could probably count on one hand the number of times the average driver exceed 5000 RPM in their car in a given year.
I don't understand why people are so hung up on horsepower when it's low end torque that really matters in everyday driving.
-
With the death of the Town Car, Lincoln was reduced to sedans, an SUV, and 2 CUVs. At this time, Lincoln was falling to a dangerous sales level.
This approach, which is based on fwd (with the SUV excepted), certainly did not bring success at a needed level, or none of the arguments would be happening.
The product mix has been consistently criticized for being too close to the "source vehicles" and for being too conservative.
The answer is in your own words and you can't even see it. The reason the current Lincolns haven't been a sales success is that they aren't exciting enough and they don't offer knockout styling or new features or a dealership experience that can compete with some of the other brands. It has NOTHING to do with sharing platforms with Ford. This is what Richard has been trying to tell you - there is no cause and effect relationship with the platforms driving slow sales.
This is also why the whole premise of "...would take resources from where they're needed more" is junk; PROVE they're having a better overall use than they'd have bringing a potential spark to the showroom and to the perception of the brand. Ecoboosting much of the existing lineup didn't do it.I never said they're having a better success with whatever they're choosing to spend money on instead of putting it into a stupid halo car because none of us know exactly what would have been killed. But I trust Ford's judgement about what types of vehicles to build a million times more than some yahoo on an internet forum who doesn't build cars for a living.
I even pointed out where Cadillac did exactly what you're asking Lincoln to do. It was called the XLR and it no longer exists and it didn't do anything for Cadillac except siphon away profits. A great product led that turnaround. The DTS and STS were flops, so where is the "halo" effect of the XLR?
Halo cars can't sell other vehicles. Vehicles sell themselves.
-
It's NOT the platform - it's what you do with it.
None of the current Lincolns - including the MKZ - represent Lincoln's future direction that was only started about 18 months ago.
Big room is gone. Today's luxury buyer doesn't want huge bench seats. Lincoln has already said it's not even considering a "large" sedan. I think the biggest we can expect to see in the next 4 years is a stretched MKS on a stretched CD4 platform.
Lincoln hater is a little harsh. I think negatard is more appropriate.
-
Wouldn't it be dangerous to tow that much with such a (by comparison) light vehicle? I would think a 30K lb trailer would push a regular pickup (even a HD) all over the place.
-
I find Obama's idea of higher fines for carrying guns near school zones laughable. Do you really think some lunatic who is bent on killing as many people as they can before offing themselves is going to worry about higher fines?
This is the fallacy that the liberals won't admit or simply can't understand. None of these mass murders would have been stopped by a ban on "assault weapons" or high capacity magazines.
The newtown shooter could have done exactly the same thing with a handgun and a couple of clips. Or a hammer.
The libs just don't like guns (except when they're being used to protect THEM) so they look for any excuse to get rid of them with absolutely no thought to either the consequences or whether the proposed solution would actually solve the problem or not.
My objection is if we focus on gun control as the solution then we are ignoring any possible REAL solutions to the problem.
-
Unless they were told that this is all that we have and they had to take it or walk home.
Agreed but that seems highly unlikely.
-
I'm guessing they took the vehicle willingly then decided they didn't like it for whatever reason and the ambulance chaser took it from there. What I don't understand is how they can get an additional $25K out of the deal. Seems the most Ford would be required to do is buy back the vehicle.
-
maybe.
but you can't ask someone for a citation and when he obliges, complain about especially sense he and CR have more experience with the subject than you do. it just makes you appear unreasonable.
You can when the citation is nothing more than a subjective opinion.
When you make an objective statement and are asked to provide a citation then you should provide objective data to support your objective statement (such as decibel levels, etc.).
-
Implementing changes in rules/laws is a separate process. It's because of the lawsuits that the rules/laws change.
Not necessarily How would Ford losing this lawsuit or the customer winning lead to a change in the Wisconsin lemon law? It may get publicity for someone who wants to change it but that's all it would do. Somebody has to propose a change and work it through the change process.
-
But as with anything, many times rules need to be re-evaluated and updated.
Lawsuits do not change laws or rules. That is a separate process.
-
Looks right to me. But you should compare your gasoline usage in a new hybrid fusion not your old car. So it's probably 1/4 to 1/2 gallon of fuel or so compared to the electricity cost.
And if electricity usage goes up your rates could go up.
-
@akirby - I was mistaken and my cellphone actually has bluetooth. The one it replaced didn't. I prefer to spend my money on my iPad and my laptop (went for the newest one last June - Macbook with Retina display). Thus, I get the cheapest phone possible since I really dislike talking on the phone. The only reason I upgraded is that my students wanted to be able to send me texts and my old phone didn't have a decent keyboard. I have PanTech II.
GadgetGirl is very particular about where she spends her money
Right now she wants to exchange it for an Energi!I was just kidding but I didn't think it was possible to buy a cellphone today without bluetooth.
-
I agree, but the famed Vince Megna is representing this case.
Frickin' ambulance chasers........
-
Would any one know where the photo cell is for the automatic head lights?
Mine seem to be on an awfull lot. Even in day light but not all the time.
Thanks
Lenny
Is there a sensor on the top of the dash near the windshield? That's where it was on past vehicles. You could even cover it with a tinted cone to make it come on sooner.
-
Why is Ford mimicing Toyota by using Ford platforms for their luxury marque?
What they're doing NOW isn't necessarily what they'll be doing in 5 years. And I assume you have not looked at the Lexus ES and RX sales volumes compared to the RWD models.
-
I'm almost certain that the adaptive cruise was introduced on the MKS, and I think adaptive headlights were, as well. Heated and cooled seats are also Lincoln exclusives.
Adaptive LED headlights no doubt. Heated and cooled seats debuted in the LS and Aviator and Navigator way back in 2003 or sooner but they are now offered in several Ford models as well. Which I guess fits the "developed for Lincoln and passed down to Ford" definition.
Add the D37 and Bridge of Weir leather. I want to say adaptive cruise control, but I'm not 100% certain.The D37 is used in the F150 and Mustang. Same for adaptive cruise (Fusion and Taurus I believe). Although they may have debuted in a Lincoln first. The timing was close.
You kind of proved my point. Lincoln is a glorified options designer not a vehicle designer. No wonder their vehicles arent selling.You said technology, not platforms. Those features require technical engineering.
I dont deny that luxury options are part of the package but recycling Ford platforms simply isnt cutting it for Lincoln(look at their sales). Even Lexus has stopped the practice putting the ES on a Lexus specific platform instead of a Camry platform.The ES now uses the Avalon platform. Try again.
-
If those are the rules and Ford followed the rules then STFU. If you don't like the rules get the rules changed but don't sue a company for following the rules.
-
First off Ford has things all wrong with Lincoln. The technology shouldnt be flowing from Ford to Lincoln, if Lincoln truly is a premium brand it should be flowing from Lincoln to Ford. The best engineers in the company should be working for Lincoln, definitely too much bean counter involvement that has reversed the just flow. Second dont follow Cadillac's path and try to copy the Germans. The ATS is an absolute disaster in the marketplace. What Lincoln needs is a totally homegrown flagship car designed by Americans for Americans, a car that is designed for American roads and driving conditions. A big stylish, powerful, American car with presence like the old days but not a throwback, truly modern. If Car and Driver doesnt like it because it doesnt drive like a Porsche 911 too bad. Then if Ford wants to build a car or suv off the platform let them start from scratch on the platform and have at it.
Lincoln Ride Control? Push button shifter? Retractable sedan roof? THX audio? Which Ford did these come from?
-
Make sure that priority was changed from 99 to 10-19. 10-19 are for retail orders. 20-99 are for dealer orders. 10 is the best. 99 is the worst. It's probably just a placeholder and has been changed but make sure.
-
The arguments about the program stealing resources and what-not are complete bunk, as Ford wouldn't risk anything from a volume-seller for a niche vehicle.
Again...I can't begin to understand the opposition.
Every dollar that Ford spends on a vehicle or platform is a dollar that it can't spend on something else. And there are ALWAYS more projects on the list than Ford has resources (people, facilities and cash). If you add a new platform or vehicle then something else has to come off the list. Could be a new hybrid or a new truck or something else totally unrelated. But when you have X resources and they are 100% utilized you can't add something without dropping something else. That's just how businesses and budgets work.
The opposition is about whether Lincoln should be spending that money and resources NOW. If they spend too much money on low volume low profit ventures instead of investing in higher volume higher profit vehicles then they won't be able to sustain themselves long term. And if they don't make a decent profit they won't be around. It's that simple. It's called survival.
-
3
-
-
Same here, one pump so far. Tried it -> click -> slide it out a bit -> click -> further -> click -> a bit more -> success.
That's what SHE said..........
-
1
-
-
You're missing the ability to drive 20 miles or so without using any gasoline. So your effective fuel economy will be much higher if you keep it charged. Whether it's worth it or not to you is up to you and how you drive. It would be difficult to recover the cost difference unless you do a lot of short trips.
Lincoln MKZ Lane-Keeping Demo: Very Cool!
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
How would it work if you were in normal traffic where you were changing lanes a lot?