Lincoln LS still looks good

[Catalepsy]

So Carshark, what is a design that you do like?

 

Back on the LS... The issue wasn't design. It is a good looking vehicle for what it is. However, it has to play in the same field as BMW, MB, Audi and Lexus. There wasn't enough power and the young people who buy these cars wants it loaded with technology. It is not enough for a Lincoln to be just "good enough" to play in that field. it has to be better than all those cars inside and out. People who would buy these types of cars are extremely anti-domestic. You can't win them over with just anything.

 

 

 

No, they haven't. The T-Bird is majestically ugly and dated and ever-so-fifties kitsch-y. The '65 Mustang hardtop and convertible are tryptophantastic, and the fastback is hopelessly tacky. Of course, I expect to disagree with someone self-named "retro-man", since I've found that in general many of the retro designs that are so popular (HHR, new Mustang, Camaro concept) don't really resonate with me. When I see "retro", I read it as "old", and I don't like old. I don't think that you can expect many designs to stand the test of time when tastes change so often and so drastically. I think that people here have the bar set too low. Anything that doesn't offend the senses "ages well".

 

No it can't. Dull is dull. "Timeless" just means that that the design isn't good at any time. The BMW is the same as many other BMWs, and indeed, cars of the 80s-mid 90s: devoid of design detail, featureless as a potato. It's just that now that BMWs are aggressively overstyled, everyone's gone back to the dullness and said, "Hey! This is much better!" Pathetic. The fact that BMW can't find a happy medium between the boring 1-Series and 3-Series and the blind-you-at-40-paces 5-6-and 7-Series, X3, X5 and Z4 might be the reason they are losing money. Of course, few people here would not take up the chance to bash Lexus for their brand of conservative styling, yet I doubt any of you would say that the LS and Co. will "age well".

[Harley Lover]

The fact that BMW can't find a happy medium between the boring 1-Series and 3-Series and the blind-you-at-40-paces 5-6-and 7-Series, X3, X5 and Z4 might be the reason they are losing money.

 

I've read some uniformed opinion before, but when you think BMW is losing money, it's time to call it out:

http://www.autonews24h.com/Auto-Industry/BMW/1642.html

 

Really, take 2 minutes (or less) and find out some facts before you flaunt your ignorance.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

It wasn't the chasis so much as the front suspension setup. In taking it directly from the Jag S-type setup and bringing it to the US, and then deciding that we won't compete with JAG on power, they didn't design the front suspension in such a way to accomodate the wider MOD v8s that Ford NA used. They were then limited to the NA version of the AJ-V8 at a smaller displacement than JAG used at the time.

 

You have to remember, the LS was definitely a product of the Lincoln in PAG era. Well, development may have preceded that, but, the product was definitely in it. The LS would have been better served in the US market with the DOHC 4V 4.6L as its V8. Yeah, it did weigh more than the AJ did, and that would have affected handling, but, people getting the v8 option want to impress off of stoplights usually (in the US). And, at the time, the 300 HP and 310 lbs of torque were far more than the 265 hp and 245 lbs of torque that the 3.9L was making.

 

The other problem with the LS was that the whole car was very expensive to make. It had expensive electronics, the chasis wasn't simple, and a lot of stuff in it wasn't cost shared with other models. They chose to keep as much as possible the same under the skin between the two cars, yet, changed stuff to keep the LS non competitive with the S-type while not making it cheaper to build at the same time. While, the produced vehicle is a fine car, on the balance sheet, it was a disaster.

 

IMHO, Ford should have just borrowed the chasis, and then started working from there on a more american version of the whole thing. Go for the same body shell, but get all you can from the parts bin, except for the inside skin, and tweak it to have at least one other derivative. Can you imagine Ford having made a Mercury off the same chasis, with a mercury skin, to replace the sable with? Base powerplant could have been the Vulcan 3.0L with a 4AT (I believe that the ranger setup would have worked well there), which would have been fine for a Sable. The top powerplant could have been the same driveline from the base Lincoln LS, the D30 with the 5AT. We know that the sable never added a whole boat load of numbers to the Taurus line, so the loss wouldn't have been that bad. With a different front and rear and a mercury interior, the numbers on the LS platform would have been double what they were. Amortization of the production gear would have been far better.

 

The other option for an LS derived sable driveline would have been using the same base driveline from the LS, but making the v8 option the SOHC 2V. I can't imagine ford having a problem selling them if the enthusaist market is what everyone says it was. Granted, around the same time, there was the whole flop of a Marauder thing. Maybe this could have been the Marauder instead?

[CarShark]

I've read some uniformed opinion before, but when you think BMW is losing money, it's time to call it out:

http://www.autonews24h.com/Auto-Industry/BMW/1642.html

 

Really, take 2 minutes (or less) and find out some facts before you flaunt your ignorance.

Cool your jets, hotshot. I misspoke. I should have said profits are down, rather than losing money.

 

And to everyone else: It's true. I don't really like car design from before I was born in 1986, and I don't like dull cars. IMO, I think the phrase "age well" is overused. I've heard it used to describe Camrys, Accords, and pretty much all cars from the 80s. To me, design is only good for the time that it is in. As I explained above, tastes change.

 

That said, I do think that a design can evolve. My example for that would be the new Mini.

 

I don't like the old Mini. I think it's too upright. I think the chrome grille is tacky, and makes the car look constipated. And the whole thing looks dinky to me. However, I re-he-he-he-heaally like the new Mini. It looks sleek. It looks cute. It looks more substantial. It's a marvel!

 

Other examples of cars that I like where the design has evolved are the Chrysler 300 and the legendary Corvette. Also, I like all the Cadillacs except the STS and DTS, boxy cars like both gens of Scion's xB and Honda's Element and Hummer's H3 and my guiltiest pleasure, the Malibu Maxx, and round cars like the Buick Enclave and Pontiac Solstice and Mazda CX-7 and Dodge Caliber.

 

However, my all-time favorite design isn't even sold here, though the one we get isn't so bad. It has to be the European Honda Civic. 3 or 5 door. I know it's very polarizing, and I myself dedicated a whole thread so people could point at it and laugh derisively. However, something has happened. I have grown to love everything about it. The power bulge leading to the Honda H. The glass effect between the narrow slit headlights. The aggressive, angular greenhouse. The spaceshippy detailing of the door handles. The chrome-y gas cap. One of the few really interesting rear ends on a car I've ever seen, with the curving of the red taillight bar crossed by sharp lines and creases. The flush triangular taillights!!! Even the Aztec-ian rear spoiler is all right with me.

 

Whew! I need a shower. But before I go, I just wanted to say something. When I said what I said, my intent was not solely to relieve myself all over your LS bonfire, which unfortunately, I appear to have done. My point was to challenge the very idea that a design could "age well", whether that was possible or even desirable. I've said how I feel in previous posts. Of course, styling woes aside, it doesn't take away from the fact that the LS is a good car, and America let another good one...right down the middle...slip by them. I see no and low mileage examples in the paper for Focus SE money. If it wasn't for me not needing (thanks to out bus system) and my worries about fuel consumption, I would snatch one up so fast.

Edited May 8, 2007 by CarShark

[jpd80]

It wasn't the chasis so much as the front suspension setup. In taking it directly from the Jag S-type setup and bringing it to the US, and then deciding that we won't compete with JAG on power, they didn't design the front suspension in such a way to accomodate the wider MOD v8s that Ford NA used. They were then limited to the NA version of the AJ-V8 at a smaller displacement than JAG used at the time.

 

You have to remember, the LS was definitely a product of the Lincoln in PAG era. Well, development may have preceded that, but, the product was definitely in it. The LS would have been better served in the US market with the DOHC 4V 4.6L as its V8. Yeah, it did weigh more than the AJ did, and that would have affected handling, but, people getting the v8 option want to impress off of stoplights usually (in the US). And, at the time, the 300 HP and 310 lbs of torque were far more than the 265 hp and 245 lbs of torque that the 3.9L was making.

 

The other problem with the LS was that the whole car was very expensive to make. It had expensive electronics, the chasis wasn't simple, and a lot of stuff in it wasn't cost shared with other models. They chose to keep as much as possible the same under the skin between the two cars, yet, changed stuff to keep the LS non competitive with the S-type while not making it cheaper to build at the same time. While, the produced vehicle is a fine car, on the balance sheet, it was a disaster.

 

IMHO, Ford should have just borrowed the chasis, and then started working from there on a more american version of the whole thing. Go for the same body shell, but get all you can from the parts bin, except for the inside skin, and tweak it to have at least one other derivative. Can you imagine Ford having made a Mercury off the same chasis, with a mercury skin, to replace the sable with? Base powerplant could have been the Vulcan 3.0L with a 4AT (I believe that the ranger setup would have worked well there), which would have been fine for a Sable. The top powerplant could have been the same driveline from the base Lincoln LS, the D30 with the 5AT. We know that the sable never added a whole boat load of numbers to the Taurus line, so the loss wouldn't have been that bad. With a different front and rear and a mercury interior, the numbers on the LS platform would have been double what they were. Amortization of the production gear would have been far better.

 

The other option for an LS derived sable driveline would have been using the same base driveline from the LS, but making the v8 option the SOHC 2V. I can't imagine ford having a problem selling them if the enthusaist market is what everyone says it was. Granted, around the same time, there was the whole flop of a Marauder thing. Maybe this could have been the Marauder instead?

 

Perfectly illustrated.

I think you can see after Ford 2000 started why FoA and the Mustang group did exactly what you suggested.

They used what parts the could and junked the rest.

Such an expensive platform would have sunk the Falcon and Mustang.

It's just a pity they couldn't have collaborated a little more but thems the breaks.

Edited May 7, 2007 by jpd80

[Harley Lover]

Cool your jets, hotshot. I misspoke. I should have said profits are down, rather than losing money.

 

You continue to flaunt your ignorance. Did you even attempt to read the story in my link? Here's an excerpt:

FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) _ Automaker BMW AG said Wednesday that its pre-tax profit this year is set to rise above the 4.12 billion euros it posted in 2006 on the sentiment that its car sales will also rise.

 

Chief executive Norbert Reithofer said the company planned ``to beat the record pre-tax profit achieved in 2006.''

 

So, NO, BMW's profits are not down, they're UP. If you can't get a fact as straightforward as this correct, why should anyone listen to your opinions?

Edited May 8, 2007 by Harley Lover

[NickF1011]

You continue to flaunt your ignorance. Did you even attempt to read the story in my link? Here's an excerpt:

 

So, NO, BMW's profits are not down, they're UP. If you can't get a fact as straightforward as this correct, why should anyone listen to your opinions?

 

Eh, depends on their deferred tax burden from 2006. Keep in mind that they are talking about PRE-tax profit. Plenty of companies post pre-tax profits and actually lose money overall.

 

Not disagreeing with you, just thought I'd point that out.

[CarShark]

You continue to flaunt your ignorance. Did you even attempt to read the story in my link? Here's an excerpt:

 

So, NO, BMW's profits are not down, they're UP. If you can't get a fact as straightforward as this correct, why should anyone listen to your opinions?

Well, I guess we have different sources, because I was talking about this article. LINK Just go to Google news and type in BMW and profit. There are several articles saying the same thing. I'm not ignoring you. Edited May 8, 2007 by CarShark

[TomServo92]

Well, I guess we have different sources, because I was talking about this article. LINK Just go to Google news and type in BMW and profit. There are several articles saying the same thing. I'm not ignoring you.

 

That articles says the net income dropped. It doesn't say they're losing money. The article also states that a big part of it is due to increased cost of raw materials and a stronger Euro.

[CarShark]

That articles says the net income dropped. It doesn't say they're losing money.

I know. I amended my statement to reflect that.

 

The article also states that a big part of it is due to increased cost of raw materials and a stronger Euro.

I know that from reading the article itself. I had thought that BMW sales were down (like many other makers) but as it turns out, I was looking at Mercedes instead.

[V10]

the 265 hp and 245 lbs of torque that the 3.9L was making.

 

The 2000 - 2002 LS V8 was rated at 252 HP and 267 lb ft of torque. It is believed that the 2002 V8 LS has more HP due to a revised air box but Lincoln chose not to change the HP ratings because it may have taken away some of the thunder from the improved 2003 3.9L V8.

 

The 2003 to 2006 LS V8 was rated at 280 HP and 286 lb ft of TQ, although I believe that it makes more HP than that with the revised PCM code.

 

Although the AJ V8 is incredibly more refined than any mod motor, I do agree with your point, that is it would have been a better marketing decision to put the 300 HP 4.6L, 32V mod motor in the 2000 LS. Ford could have spent it's $$ on putting VVT on the 4.6L 32V motor instead of wasting all the $$ setting up an AJ-V8 production line in Lima. Even though the 4.6 would have been cruder than the AJ-V8, the LS's car rag reviews would have been much more postitive due to the extra HP & TQ which would have resulted in more LS sales.

 

Another better engineering decision would have been to use the rear end out of the MN-12 cars instead of the Jag rear end. This would have lowered cost, given a stronger rear end and made available a limited slip rear end. With it's open rear end the 2003+ LSs have trouble putting all their power to the road under less than perfect conditions.

 

BTW the 4.6L, 32V will fit inside a LS engine bay, but it neither has acceptable clearance to the shock towers nor could it be installed from the bottom of the LS.

[BORG]

I love my LS. I am CONSTANTLY complimented on the car. When I drive the MKZ, I don't hear a thing. In Fact, I get "What happened to your good looking car?" That was a heart breaker when I heard that! The LS is an aspirational car, I feel uplifted and exhilarated when driving it. The MKZ might as well be a a Taurus, it blends in with the wallpaper and is merely functional, not aspirational. I didn't really want it, but it's fuel efficient. It's a well appointed and reliable appliance that I can beat up on (which you can't really do because it handles like ass and has no torque). I'm a remarkably irresponsible driver in the LS, but the MKZ is reminds me of my old Taurus, it doesn't let you play and is unforgiving when you push it. The MKZ seems like a wiser purchase overall because it's more reliable and fuel efficient, but I don't keep them that long so the LS wins out hands down. The LS scares me as a long term commitment because it's a VERY high-tech and complex machine and I had many initial problems. The MKZ is comparatively low tech and basic.

 

[wescoent]

I love my LS. I am CONSTANTLY complimented on the car. When I drive the MKZ, I don't hear a thing. In Fact, I get "What happened to your good looking car?" That was a heart breaker when I heard that! The LS is an aspirational car, I feel uplifted and exhilarated when driving it. The MKZ might as well be a a Taurus, it blends in with the wallpaper and is merely functional, not aspirational. I didn't really want it, but it's fuel efficient. It's a well appointed and reliable appliance that I can beat up on (which you can't really do because it handles like ass and has no torque). I'm a remarkably irresponsible driver in the LS, but the MKZ is reminds me of my old Taurus, it doesn't let you play and is unforgiving when you push it. The MKZ seems like a wiser purchase overall because it's more reliable and fuel efficient, but I don't keep them that long so the LS wins out hands down. The LS scares me as a long term commitment because it's a VERY high-tech and complex machine and I had many initial problems. The MKZ is comparatively low tech and basic.

 

 

Interesting comparing the MKZ with the LS. In my opinion, the MKZ replaces the LS V6, where the LS V8 will be replaced by the MKS. You're comparing a decontented V8 Jaguar S-Type with an upcontented Ford Fusion. The LS was just way too much car for Lincoln's usual customers. Style-wise and feature-wise, the MKZ is a better Lincoln, while the LS was a better car.

 

That being said, for my next car, I am on the lookout for a used LS. Awesome cars with horrifying resale value... how could it get better??

[RichardJensen]

Awesome cars with horrifying resale value... how could it get better??

Well, for Ford it could get a lot better :lol:

[armadamaster]

They always looked like a ripoff of a Mitsubishi Diamante to me.

[DSenstad]

Fords biggest problem with the LS was advertisement, period.

 

Mitsubishi Diamante, That is too funny. The Mitsubishi always looks 3 designers short of being a hit while the LS had elegance to it.

 

Mitsubishi Diamante....

[akirby]

Fords biggest problem with the LS was advertisement, period.

 

Lincoln stopped advertising it AFTER they cancelled plans to sell it in Europe and to make other variants off the same platform essentially leaving it stranded on a too expensive platform with no other vehicles below or above it.

 

Lack of advertising was the result, not the cause.

[NickF1011]

Interesting comparing the MKZ with the LS. In my opinion, the MKZ replaces the LS V6, where the LS V8 will be replaced by the MKS. You're comparing a decontented V8 Jaguar S-Type with an upcontented Ford Fusion. The LS was just way too much car for Lincoln's usual customers. Style-wise and feature-wise, the MKZ is a better Lincoln, while the LS was a better car.

 

That being said, for my next car, I am on the lookout for a used LS. Awesome cars with horrifying resale value... how could it get better??

 

I see Ford still hasn't found a better way to mount a keyless entry keypad yet. Good lord those number pads look horrific.

[akirby]

I see Ford still hasn't found a better way to mount a keyless entry keypad yet. Good lord those number pads look horrific.

 

The SUVs have them on the black part of the door window trim or the B pillar. I heard the new MkS either has it hidden like that or it's using a new Smart Key system.

[Edstock]

"Good lord those number pads look horrific."

 

Aw, c'mon, get a grip. An Aztek looks horrific.

[NickF1011]

"Good lord those number pads look horrific."

 

Aw, c'mon, get a grip. An Aztek looks horrific.

 

Alright. I'll admit "horrific" is a bit strong a word for the keypads.

 

How about "Extremely cheap-looking and having no business at all on any vehicle trying to pass itself off as a luxury car"?

[ANTAUS]

I think the keypads are one of the best things Ford has kept on their vehicles, and I'm happy they will continue to use those. Now as for placement, thats where the issue lies. "Some" of the new products have it on the black B-pillars, which hides it a bit better rather than having it on the door or theres some that have it on the window ledge. The last Escape had the worst placement under the door handle, down by a few inches which made it stand out.

 

The new MKS supposedly has it on the pillar, BUT instead of being "push button", it's more like a touch-screen variety that "beeps" when you touch the buttons.

 

I wouldn't care for Smartkey for the entry feature, since it's useless for me if I keep my wallet in the car. I still prefer the Keypad, but I welcome a "Smartkey" option that I can disable if need be.

 

We'll see what the outcome will be.

[Traveler]

Keypads on a Ford product are about as ordinary as the blue oval emblem. I don't even think twice when I see them...even those mounted near the door handle. Aside from a Mustang, Focus or Ranger, fleet cars and work trucks, its just so common now that I don't even notice.

[one2gamble]

Instead of a keypad why not a fingerprint reader?

[96 Pony]

I will never, ever understand how Ford just abandon the LS (Motor Trend's '99 Car of the Year) and the Thunderbird (Motor Trend's '01 Car of the Year) the way they did, especially since they were some of the best built, engineered and styled cars that had come out of there in a long time. Critics loved both of them.

 

T-Bird I kind of understand why it didn't sell due to slow production, dealer markup and well - the idea of spending $40k for a FORD is somewhat ludicrous. And it was a limited edition supposedly.

 

LS however, there is no excuse. When it first came out there was a little movement by BMW customers over to the LS. It was getting rave reviews. Had it been marketed correctly and perhaps, rethought their V8 option, it would still be around.

 

MKZ to me is a cheap imitation of the LS V6. Don't get me wrong - it is a nice car, nicely styled and I am glad that it is selling and hope that Ford markets the hell out of it. But to me, it just isn't the in part the successor to the Mark VIII, which the LS was.

 

MKS I have great hopes for and from what I see so far, love it!

 

But LS=missed opportunities.

Edited May 12, 2007 by 96 Pony