Spied: '09 Lincoln MKS under hood…

[Ovaltine]

Full article: http://www.leftlanenews.com/lincoln-mks-future.html

 

 

"We've had a lot of spy photos of the Lincoln MKS recently, but here's the first shots of what's under the hood of these prototypes. Spy photographers from KGP were pretty surprised to discover that there wasn't the highly vaunted twin turbo TwinForce V6 that they were expecting to see.

 

This means that the standard engine will likely be Ford's new 3.5-liter V6 that's currently in the Taurus, Edge and Lincoln MKZ. While that engine has plenty of go for the MKZ, it's not really appropriate in a car that's designed to compete with BMW, Lexus and the like because it'll be a bit down on power given the expected curb weight. The MKS will share Ford's Volvo-derived D3 architecture with the Taurus and Sable. "

 

:boring:

 

-Ovaltine

Edited July 24, 2007 by Ovaltine

[suv_guy_19]

Full article: http://www.leftlanenews.com/lincoln-mks-fu....html#more-4994

 

 

"We've had a lot of spy photos of the Lincoln MKS recently, but here's the first shots of what's under the hood of these prototypes. Spy photographers from KGP were pretty surprised to discover that there wasn't the highly vaunted twin turbo TwinForce V6 that they were expecting to see.

 

This means that the standard engine will likely be Ford's new 3.5-liter V6 that's currently in the Taurus, Edge and Lincoln MKZ. While that engine has plenty of go for the MKZ, it's not really appropriate in a car that's designed to compete with BMW, Lexus and the like because it'll be a bit down on power given the expected curb weight. The MKS will share Ford's Volvo-derived D3 architecture with the Taurus and Sable. "

 

:boring:

 

-Ovaltine

 

where have you..and they...been...its an over 300 hp di 3.7...with tt coming 6 months later....

[wescoent]

I think it's been pretty well-documented that Ford isn't going to have a STANDARD Twin Turbo engine in a Lincoln.

 

The base engine, from what I gather, will be the GDI 3.7L Duratec. 300-330hp or so.

 

The Twin Force will follow as a late availability

[RichardJensen]

what is amazing is how KGP, with their magical x-ray vision, discovered the displacement of the MKS motor.

[suv_guy_19]

This is Ford fellas. Do you honestly think an all new vehicle will debut with a new powertrain?

 

I mean, come on. You must think this company has more than one powertrain engineer or something. :rolleyes:

 

 

what do you mean....the 3.7 litre will be new...

[SVT_MAN]

What's amazing to me is that this is some breaking news to KGP.

 

What amazes me more is that KGP automatically knows the specifications of the engine just by looking at the special coding on the engine cover of this car. I never knew that L-I-N-C-O-L-N was Ford's codename for their 3.5L V6. That's pretty tricky.

 

I hope KGP releases their amazing cipher to the public. Who knows what other engines we can determine from special coding on future spy shots! We'll all be so much more well informed with it. /end sarcasm

Edited July 24, 2007 by SVT_MAN

[rmc523]

What amazes me more is that KGP automatically knows the specifications of the engine just by looking at the special coding on the engine cover of this car. I never knew that L-I-N-C-O-L-N was Ford's codename for their 3.5L V6. That's pretty tricky.

 

 

That's what I was wondering too!

[suv_guy_19]

I don't know. Isn't it just a bored out 3.5? Anyway, that's the project the lone engineer must be working on, making the TT not available for the new vehicles launch.

 

 

well then maybe they should launch the engine early and not really ready....or better yet...maybe they should wait six months to launch the car...would that make you happier...because you know its so easy to design a new engine and make sure its reliable so that you get the public back...the real problem is not engine size, its public, not enthusiast perception that is important....and that is what ford is addressimg

[Michael Reynolds]

This thread is absolutely useless. A rumor'd article doesn't mean jack shite, especially when the evidence to support it is fortified by pictures of an engine cover.

 

Ovaltine, give it a break.......

[NickF1011]

well then maybe they should launch the engine early and not really ready....or better yet...maybe they should wait six months to launch the car...would that make you happier...because you know its so easy to design a new engine and make sure its reliable so that you get the public back...the real problem is not engine size, its public, not enthusiast perception that is important....and that is what ford is addressimg

 

Or maybe Ford should have had the foresight to see that their engine lineup from 6-7 years ago was woefully inadequate and should have been developing these engines way back then.

[igor]

we are talking about optional engines ... BMW 3series launched with completely carryover engines and 1 year after launch fgot complete overhaul ... Ford will launch the MKS with its core engine ready - the 3.7l DI 330hp V6 ... the optional engine will be a "late option" BIG DEAL .. it is not the first time or the last time an optional engine is a little late.

 

and about the 3.7l .. there are so many changes in the Lincoln engine that it truly should be considered a new engine .. or do you want to claim that the 300some hp engine is truly just a version of the 363hp engine? And if you do, what will you say about the VQ engines.. the Toyota engines and others? a lot of engine development is evolutionary, tech-adding etc ... so if you are critical of Ford, look how others are doing it ..

 

Igor

[Traveler]

Ford should have indeed had the 3.5L V6 in development several years ago. Personally, I think (as do most) that the 3.0L should have been replaced in 2005 when Ford had the Five-Hundred and the Fusion. Ford was too slow to react to a rising demand in cars instead of truck-based SUV and trucks.

 

Consider how long Ford went with just the Crown Vic (Grand Marquis) and Taurus (Sable) as their sole family car offerings. No Fusion and No Five-Hundred through the first half of the decade. They just weren't prepared for the inevitable and were doing what they did best...pickup trucks and truck-based SUVs.

 

Now, I may not be ready to go out and buy a 08 Taurus because people are heralding it as the second-coming of Ford. However, I can see the need for this car. It should have been in 2005 what it is now. People were saying that the Five-Hundred should have been called Taurus, but Ford was too busy on the "F" naming game to listen. Of course, perhaps it was good to give the Taurus name a break to recover from the rental car stigma. Now, three model years later, Ford is on the verge hopefully of righting itself from past minor wrongs.

 

The 3.5 should have been viewed as essential to success, but for whatever reasons, Ford stayed with the 3.0L and perhaps did so for a bit too long, extending any kind of recovery due to shortsightedness. I think Ford is on the right track now with Fusion, Taurus and the Edge. These three represent what Ford is doing right. Hopefully, Ford can see the successful formula here and appropriately apply it to replacements for the Focus and Crown Victoria. Mustang must follow its own course of success. In a way, it stands alone from the other Ford cars.

 

Any word on the 3.5 making it into the base model Mustangs? I would imagine that the 3.5L would make a better choice than the 4.0L being used currently.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Traveler

[MGallun]

well, wouldnt say its underpowered.. since a rental sable this past weekend out ran a altima 3.5, the sporty one too... lololol.

[igor]

^^Mustang is to have the D35 next year with the refresh - the Cologne V6 is dead ..

 

Igor

[LincolnFan]

35 or 37? And whoa looks like I was wrong about Ford and I owe them an apology if the 3.7 is as different as you as you claim Igor. Looks like the MKS is going to kick butt, Japanese and Nazi butt.

[2005GTP]

You mean to tell me Ford cannot test both standard V6's and TT's at the same time? Just because we do not have photos of the TT's doesn't mean they are not out there.

[NickF1011]

You mean to tell me Ford cannot test both standard V6's and TT's at the same time? Just because we do not have photos of the TT's doesn't mean they are not out there.

 

They have definitely been testing the TwinForce V6's. I do believe the TT program was started well after the D37 program though, so naturally it's a bit further behind. It's also just a more complex setup which will likely require more durability testing than a naturally aspirated engine. Would be nice if it was available yesterday though.

[ZanatWork]

I'm sorry, but what a bunch of drooling goobers the negatards be.

 

One prototype-ONE-gets its engine photo'd, and off some people run with all the "typical Ford" moron-a-thon...despite the facts that MANY manufacturers release the standard version of a given model before its performance sibling.

 

911 ahead of 911 turbo? Yep.

 

5 series ahead of M5? Golly!

 

CTS ahead of CTS-V? Unbelievable!

 

 

Now, negatards...yes, you...if you're going to be so visibly stupid, please only annoy those in your neighbohoods and communities, okay? Cancel your internet subscriptions, and quit spreading your mentally-crippled froth across what should be a fine source of informaiton and entertainment.

 

It's for the greater good, something you could never really understand.

 

SO...please, cancel those subscriptions, and make the internet a better place with your absence. Thank You!

[SVT_MAN]

ZanatWork: I agree with you. The only company I know of that releases performance variants alongside the regular models is Chrysler. We all know how well their story turned out ..

[TomServo92]

ZanatWork: I agree with you. The only company I know of that releases performance variants alongside the regular models is Chrysler. We all know how well their story turned out ..

 

Don't the SRT variants trail the release of the regular models? I don't recall any of them being available at initial release but I could be wrong...

[Traveler]

The structuring of the LX cars are a bit different, however. The 300 was immediately (or nearly so) available in the "C" model, which did possess the 5.7 Hemi. That model, in itself, was a step up from the 250 hp 3.5L V6. The SRT came later, but buyers actually had three engine choices with the 300 from the start and one of those already boasting 340 horsepower and 390 lbs.-ft of torque, rear wheel drive, traction and stability control, optional AWD and an automatic with manual shift mode. Compared to the Five-Hundred that debuted the same year, the 300C was a performance model.

 

Chrysler's Hemi craze did cool considerably, but I still applaud their structuring with their LX cars. Moving up in trim levels didn't just mean more standard equipment and more chrome. It meant more performance, as well.

 

Now you have to keep in mind that the 300/Charger/Magnum/Challenger will be on a new platform from what I've read come 2009-2010. Chrysler has an opportunity to boost these cars' popularity again which certainly had a more significant successful debut than the Five-Hundred and has the image behind it with the Hemi engines. The current SRT-8s offer 425 horsepower, naturally aspirated. Of course, the 300 and Charger get a gas guzzler tax, but it delivers the performance and most buying these cars aren't going to mind the gas penalty unless premium gas goes through the roof. Ford ain't on no cake walk and they better not make too many assumptions. Chrysler's LX cars are the one thing they did reasonably right and in a year or two, they get a chance to one up the Taurus and Sable considerably if they play their cards right.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Traveler

[TomServo92]

The structuring of the LX cars are a bit different, however. The 300 was immediately (or nearly so) available in the "C" model, which did possess the 5.7 Hemi. That model, in itself, was a step up from the 250 hp 3.5L V6. The SRT came later, but buyers actually had three engine choices with the 300 from the start and one of those already boasting 340 horsepower and 390 lbs.-ft of torque, rear wheel drive, traction and stability control, optional AWD and an automatic with manual shift mode. Compared to the Five-Hundred that debuted the same year, the 300C was a performance model.

 

Chrysler's Hemi craze did cool considerably, but I still applaud their structuring with their LX cars. Moving up in trim levels didn't just mean more standard equipment and more chrome. It meant more performance, as well.

 

Now you have to keep in mind that the 300/Charger/Magnum/Challenger will be on a new platform from what I've read come 2009-2010. Chrysler has an opportunity to boost these cars' popularity again which certainly had a more significant successful debut than the Five-Hundred and has the image behind it with the Hemi engines. The current SRT-8s offer 425 horsepower, naturally aspirated. Of course, the 300 and Charger get a gas guzzler tax, but it delivers the performance and most buying these cars aren't going to mind the gas penalty unless premium gas goes through the roof. Ford ain't on no cake walk and they better not make too many assumptions. Chrysler's LX cars are the one thing they did reasonably right and in a year or two, they get a chance to one up the Taurus and Sable considerably if they play their cards right.

 

While all that's true, the SRT is considered the performance model in the line-up, not the "C".

[Traveler]

Oh yeah, I realize that. My point was just that aside from the SRT model, which was designed heavily for performance, the 5.7L Hemi model does signficantly improve performance over the Touring model and was certainly head and shoulders above its competition in terms of performance, even if not classified as a true performance variant.

 

The SRT models are sort of in a class by themselves. I doubt most 300C buyer would even consider a SRT-8 because of the fuel penalties that require a gas guzzler tax, average mileage of about 13 mpg, a firm ride, expensive tires, etc. These are performance sedans with a few luxurious qualities. Actually, only the Magnum SRT-8 is exempt from the gas guzzler tax.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Traveler

[Anthony]

While all that's true, the SRT is considered the performance model in the line-up, not the "C".

 

Which is a bit of a stretch since the "C" (which you would not consider a performance model) is comparable or much more performance oriented then the competition's supposed "performance" models. The SRT-8 is just one more rung up the ladder. Kinda like the difference between a Mustang GT and a Mustang Cobra. The Cobra did not make the GT any less of a performance model compared to most other cars...just the Cobra.

[TomServo92]

Which is a bit of a stretch since the "C" (which you would not consider a performance model) is comparable or much more performance oriented then the competition's supposed "performance" models. The SRT-8 is just one more rung up the ladder. Kinda like the difference between a Mustang GT and a Mustang Cobra. The Cobra did not make the GT any less of a performance model compared to most other cars...just the Cobra.

 

I suppose you're right but in the case of the MKS there is no GT or C between the base model and the performance model (at least as far we know now).