EMDEE

I'm just a humble buyer and it sounds like a lot of people posting here are Ford employees, which is great. I am very pleased at the tone of responses - Ford employees seem to really understand the need for change, and that the need for change start with management. Ford's future has always lived and died at the level of senior management, people who insisted on having their fingers in every little detail of design, quality, efficiency and costs. People at lower levels have simply had to live with those decisions, many of which have been incredibly bad over the last several year. Now it finally looks like the people at the very top and going to clean house and get rid of a lot of incompetents whose business cards say "Manager." Hopefully, Fields and Mulally will spend a lot more time listening to designers, engineers, line workers and the people within the company who love cars and care about this company. It wasn't so long ago that Ford was leading the US industry in almost every regard. It lost that lead because the company became top heavy with managers who didn't understand squat about cars and why people buy them. They were motivated solely by financial performance and pleasing the stock market. They let the once superior product lines whither as they squeezed every last dollar out of them. They wasted a ten year lead they had with the Taurus. They killed off the technologically superior T-Bird (the big one) and dropped the great Mark VIII rather than spend a few bucks keeping up to date. Worst of all was their travesty with the Lincoln LS, very likely the most competent car FMC every built. With only modest continuing update and investment it would still be a leader in the field. Instead, they simply handed the market over to Cadillac, which was years behind them. As the Queen said in Alice in Wonderland, "Off with their heads!" Get rid of everyone who played a role in nearly killing the company and start listening to those who fought it.

I just read that same review in Automobile and read it as generally positive. The only thing they seemed to complain about was that it wasnt' a different vehicle, one tuned more for the sports CUV driver. They mostly compared it to its Mazda cousin, the CX-9. In short, they found the Lincoln better looking and Mazda tighter handling. But even there, they acknowledged the Lincoln did a better job of absorbing road imperfections and said the Mazda's sharper responses came at the expense of a fair amount of road thump. Big surprise. So take your pick. Which one you might prefer could depend on the quality of roads in your area. They also compared the MKX to the Murano and unless I completely misread what they were saying, they seemed to prefer the Lincoln (also gave its engine high marks). The same day I got Automobile I also received Autoweek. Autoweek also had generally positive, honest review of the Ford Edge. Neither magazine raved wildly about either the Edge or the MKX, but both gave ithe cars a very respectable assessment. Read it for yourselves. I think most manufacturers would be pleased with either review. People here seem to be making much more negative assessments than the reviewers.

To get the record straight, now that people have understood the "return of the V8" was a misunderstanding based on old materials: the MKS will debut with a single engine, the 3.7 liter V6. The twin turbo, direct injection high power version of the engine will NOT be available at launch. They're hoping to have it ready for the MKS's second year but aren't even certain about that. Like so many Lincoln and Ford products before, the car really won't be fully ready the year it launches. The good stuff was follow by a least a full year. I don't know why this always happens at Ford. We see so many other companies launching multiple versions of new models, with multple different engines, etc. all at the same time. And it's not just a matter of money, as Ford behaved this way even when it was drowning in cash.

I don't think many people really get what the role of TC is. Have you ever driven around New York for a few hours, or even the downtown sections of almost any of our larger cities? The TC owns those streets. I would bet that on any given day there are more Town Cars on the streets of Manhattan than any other single model car. And it's not just because the TC is a good buy, which it is. It is generally loved by the drivers and owners of the livery business, as well as by the customers who use their services. Is it the most luxurious car on the market? No, but would you really want to put a mega-luxurious car into livery service? Of course not. The TC has evolved just the right blend of reasonable luxury, unmatched durability, and more than adequate panache. No one is ever embarrassed to be seen in "driven" Town Car. On the contrary, it is the hallmark of luxury transportation, which is not the same thing as "luxury car" or luxury sports GT. The extended wheelbase version has the roomiest rear seat this side of a Maybach, with 6 inches more legroom than the standard TC, which itself has 4 inches more than the Crown Vic or GM. The long wheelbase Crown Vic only brings it up to the size of short wheelbase Town Car. The extended TC stands alone. As for power, though it doesn't measure up to today's luxury cars, it has more horsepower than the BMW 7 series of just a decade or so ago when the German's biggest engine was 3.5 liter inline 6, which everyone thought was so mega-powerful. Today's top luxury cars have more horsepower than they can possibly us in way in places like Manhattan. I ride in these things as a passenger quite frequently and have never heard a driver complain about inadequate power. There's more than enough to hustle through city or freeway traffic, just not enough to impress the writers at the various car magazines. If you haven't ridden in one lately, check it out. The interior has good quality leather, real wood (not plastic) and generally high quality dash. It's not a Lexus, but neither does the Lexus have the qualities desired by livery business. Perhaps most importantly, these things typically run for 500,000 miles with very low maintenance costs compared to any alternative. A lot of them get a quarter million miles on them in the first year and a half. No other car that has been tried in this kind of service has a durability record anything like it. I've ridden in some with over 800,000 miles. Some with 200,000 miles feel almost indistinguishable from new. (of course, some that aren't well maintained can feel like a wreck before 100,000, that's equally true of cars like the MB S class.) So lighten up on the TC. Within it's niche, it has been a high water mark in American automotive design. If Ford really abandons it, it will be just one more incredibly stupid move by management, the kind of move that is rapidly killing the company. A relatively inexpensive new body and interior are all that's needed. If Ford had any brains, they'd do an update, perhaps adding IRS and one of the 300 HP larger block mod motors. All they need is sitting in the parts bin. It absolutely part of the Lincoln heritage and nothing will change that. They can kill it only at their own risk. Given their other idiot decisions in recent years, they will probably let it die and lost yet another market niche they owned. No, I don't work for Ford or any automobile company. But I do have a lot of experience in the field as a customer of the companies and people who buy these cars.

My source, which is a Lincoln engineer, says the difference is between the TT direct injectin 3.5 V6 and the Yamaha V8. If the $2000 difference were simply between the base 3.5 V6 and the Yamaha V8, the difference would have been acceptable since the bigger engine was part of the top end model. It was always expected to cost substantially more than the base MKS, which will use the base 3.5 just like the MKZ, the Edge and the MKX. (don't you just love those crazy Lincoln names? Who is going to remember anyof them?) The problem with the V8 was that it another $2000 over the cost of the TT 3.5 V6. Why? Because the 3.5 V6 is being made in vastly larger numbers, right here in two plants in the US. The V8 is made in Japan in much smaller numbers and would then have to be shipped to the US, or possible sent in parts and then assembed here. As far as I know, there wasn't a plan to manufacture it in the US Just for accuracy, the 3.5 DOES NOT employ variable exhaust valve time or a specially tuned intake, just as it doesn't require premium fuel to make its HP numbers. Ford made a big point of the fact that this is a highly efficient design in its most basic configuration and as such is still able to match or beat most competitors power ratings, even though the competitors almost universally require premium, use expensive vaiable exhaust valve timing, and tuned air intakes. The point was that Ford consequently has a lot more power to squeeze out of this engine if and when it chooses to employ additional technologies,while the competitors have already played their best cards. People here comparing this to the days in the 1980s when Ford supercharged the hoary old 3.8 liter V6 for the T=Brid Turbo Coupe are making an absuird comparison. In that case, Ford was desparately trying to squeeze more power out a 1950's era engine (three quarters of its old V8). The engine was already grossly out of date by any measure. This time, they're exploiting the most modern high technology internal combustion engine produced in the US, and engine that was designed from the ground up to use such things as turbocharging and direct injection. Beyond that, there are several tricks left, including an increase to 4 liters, they can use if more power is needed, all on the drawing board from the day the block was first drawn. This is not the old Ford way of doing things. Can Ford do turbocharging? They sure seem to have done pretty will with supercharging in the GT and the Shelby. These days, any car company can hire the upper rung of engine designers. They just have to be willing to pay the price. It sure looks like they've done all the right things this time around.

I've owned an LS V8 for the last 5 years and participated daily in the Lincoln Luxury Sport club, formerly LS club. I can't believe all this debate about whether the LS did or didn't sell well in its early years. It did, selling over 55,000 cars in its first model year, dropping modestly in the second and third, rising again somewhat with the '03 model, then declining more rapidly between 04 and it demise this year. There's no debate about this; the numbers were posted every month and every year. A great number of loved our LSs dearly and still prefer it to the Cadillac CTS. So why did it lose sales? The usual Ford reasons. First, they all but stopped advertising it afte the first year. Second, they did next to nothing to educate their dealers how to sell it. Most of the Lincoln salespeople knew next to nothing about the car and tried to sell it as a junior Town Car, leading to lot of disappointed elderly ladies who thought it should ride softer. Then to make matters worse they dropped the two-tier model setup, eliminating the V6 and the "standard" (slightly softer) suspension). All you could get after 04 was the V8 Sport model, in two levels of trim. Sales collapsed as result. So much for the necessity of have a V8 in every Lincoln, as is being argued regarding the MKS. Dealers stopped ordering the cars and the knowledge level and enthusiasm of the salespeople got even worse. The sad fact is that the 05 and 06 models were superb cars, superior to the CRS in every way. Whether Cadillac gained anything, other than car mag raves for its "V" model is unclear. Long term tests of the CTS V are describing as a largely unrefined, and not very durable, muscle car. It all yours if you want it. Still, we have some Lincoln engineers in the LLSOC and they have been up front about some inherent problems with the design of the LS. There are few opportunities for cost savings, and it will never ride with the sophistication of the best BMW and Benzs. It has no apologies to make for its handling, however, which was developed at the Nurburgring at least five years before Cadillac knew what country the track was in. The LS also could not be modified for fit the Ford modular 8 cyl. engine family, so only the expensive Jaguar engine was available. The suspension parts were too expensive. A lot of thise problems were characteristics of a more expensive car, but Lincoln didn't have the heritage to sell without discounting. Still it was and still is a great car, the only one in my 40 years of car ownship that I've kept, happily, for more than two years. Lastly, a few folks on this forum need to stop assuming that all V6s are equal, or that all V8s are inherently more powerful and more refined than V6s. It's nonsense. The twin turbo direct injection 3.5 V6 that will be the top engine in the MKS is more powerful than most V8s. The 4.4 Yamaha V8 wasn't even close to being competitive with it, despite its higher cost. It beats the 5.7 liter Chrysler hemi and all versions of the naturally aspirated Northstar; more power than the Nissan V8 and all Lexus V8s except for the new 07 engine. More power than all but the latest Benz and BMW V8s. The only Audi V8s that put out more power are themselves twin turbo, direct injection engines. Note that I'm not even bothering to compare it to the competitions V6s. Oh well, but I guess it's "only" a V6.

People seem obsessed with the number of cylinders an engine has, as if a V8 is inherently superior to a V6. If that were the case, we'd all be screaming for modestly priced V12s and V16s. The two things that matter most in engine choice, for me at least, are the engine's power and it's refinement. Number three is its fuel economy. If you can agree on these points, you may have to agree that Ford and Lincoln are making the right choice here, especially at this moment in time. The twin turbo, direct injection version of 3.5 V8 for the MKS is not a maybe. It's a fact and the supplier orders have been placed. The engine has been running around Dearborn for a while now in F150s and the feedback from those who've driven it is fantastic. One quoted right here on BON described the engine as a "beast," and he was referring to its power. It is not unusual for turbo charged engines to produce more useful power across a wider range of RPM than most unblown but similarly rated engines. It's currently rated as having a minimum of 350 HP, though the engine is deisgned to be as large as 4 liters (or as small as 3). So more power is available if needed. And we're still talking about a version that hasn't exploited (or needed to exploit) variable output valve timing, premium fuel, or multiple stage air induction - cards that have already been played by most of the competition. The alternative was the 4.4 liter Yamaha V8, which has had nothing but lukewarm reviews so far. Like the earlier SHO V8 from Yamaha, it's a bit of a wimp, with only 315 HP, producing 0-60 times in the Volvo S80 of 6.2 seconds, or about .2 seconds quicker than the current Lincoln LS. Oh wow. I can hardly wait. Using it in the MKS would add $2000 to the cost of the car. So what are you V8 fans asking? Do you really want Lincoln to charge $2000 more for a substanitally less powerful - and no more refined - engine just so you can say you have a V8? How 80's can we get? Maybe Lincoln should apologize to Cadillac for making a highly refined V6 that puts out a lot more power than their normally aspirated Northstar V8? Or to Chrysler for outpowering it's basic hemi? I think not. Lastly, having a V8 these days may even run the risk of backlash because of the price of gas. Sales of all V8 SUVs are down, as are those of 300 hemis, Cadillac STSs, Infinity M, and many others. Sales of more economical cars and 6 cylinder cars in general are up. Does anyone here seriously doubt that gas will remain below $4 a gallon by this time next year? This one time, I think Lincoln and Ford are making the spot-on, right choice, giving us an engine with more power, higher tech, and likely better fuel economy in the bargain. They may even be able to sell "fewer cylinders" as a product benefit given the times we live in.