Mr. Farley, meet Lincoln

[NickF1011]

Lincoln doesn't necessarily need a "halo" car, it needs a focusing car, an Enclave or a CTS or a 300, something GM has done very well even when the division (Aurora) fails. I don't think the MKS is that car. (Incidentally, I'm not a GM fanboy--I drive a Fusion--I just don't know enough about the foreign luxury marques to give Lexus or Infiniti examples.)

 

Do those "focusing" cars seem to be helping though? Most of Cadillac's lineup is still in desperate need of help. Buick's sales are still dropping, Chrysler -- don't even get me started.....

 

Lincoln just needs product and more of it. The newer models are compitent. Class-leading? No. But at least they finally HAVE an entry in a few classes that they had neglected. First you enter a niche, then you work to take it over.

[danup]

I'll give you Chrysler--though it's not the 300's fault that the rest of their products are godawful--and I can't count Oldsmobile as a win since GM killed it, but the CTS and Enclave probably saved Cadillac and Buick in a way that simple Catera/Seville and LaCrosse/Lucerne redesigns wouldn't have. What the "focusing" car does is provide a mission statement. The 300 said that Chrysler was still a near-luxury marque, not the company whose Sebring looked like a Stratus with leather seats; the Enclave said that Buick was a no-compromises brand that was done making cars that looked great with dealer-installed landau roofs and front bench seats; the CTS said that Cadillac was going to compete on performance and style, as well as seat-comfiness. The MKS will probably be a successful car; it's nice-looking and it's on a good platform and it will probably continue Lincoln's upward sales trend. To be honest, I really like it. But right now Lincoln doesn't really say much, except that it's the car to buy if you love Harry Connick, Jr.

[wescoent]

I vehemently disagree that the Continental Concept was a styling dead-end. The core principles of the design was it being long, wide, and low, with very clean and uncluttered lines. There's a million different ways to go with that design. Give me some paper, a pencil, and ruler, and I'll design distinctive Continentals from today until 20 years from now. The concept had those classic principles, infused with modern detailing, such as the waterfall grill, and the stainless steel interior accents.

 

That might be an interesting design study... taking the core principles of the Continental design, and evolving it. They are very flexible core design principles, compared to the more rigid examples mentioned.

 

The current Town Car is a curvy design, but in a bad way. It attempts to use Jaguar styling cues on traditional American proportions... doesn't work.

[RichardJensen]

consider the MarkX concept with the egg crate grille, a Lincoln staple. It looks just as at home on the tbird based coupe as it does on the current MKx. Styling cues that point to certain things can make a model line cohesive in nature. You dont have to slap the same bits on everything.

I had hopes for the egg-crate grille a few years ago, but slab sides are decidedly out now, and the egg-crate grille sort of needs relatively simple sides (simple sides = simple headlight shapes = room for the egg-crate).

 

The MKR, by contrast, offers an array of options to expand on, from the chamfered shoulder, the bold C pillar, the afore-mentioned Bow-wave grille, and even the 'almost a continental kit' bulge in the rear decklid (which resoves the shoulder lines).

 

With the Conti you've got slab sides and knife-edge fenders, that's not enough.... You can't really 'play' with those elements, the way you can with elements on the MKR.

 

The MKR in toto is very cartoonish, to me, but that's what a good concept car should be--somewhat cartoonish, but with no end of ideas that can be elaborated upon.

 

=====

 

Re: focusing car

 

I don't agree with this concept, as it has sort of led to peaky product ranges, not plateaued product ranges.

 

As in: If you love the CTS, you'll probably like the XLR, you could possibly like the STS, you probably won't like the SRX, and you'll hate the DTS.

 

Or: If you love the 300C, you might like the 300, you could possibly like the Crossfire, there's an off chance that you'll appreciate bits of the Pacifica, and you will absolutely hate the Sebring.

 

It is better, IMO, for Lincoln to bring its whole lineup into a comfortable level of competence, than to put a dramatic attention getter out there that the rest of the lineup does not live up to.

Edited November 21, 2007 by RichardJensen

[danup]

I agree that that can happen, as Chrysler has proven, but I think to say that it will happen is confusing causation with correlation. The DTS, which is about to get axed, is the last olive branch to the people who bought Cadillacs because the gov't hasn't yet placed a giant box-spring underneath the interstate system. The CTS and the SRX don't strike me as any more dichotomous than the MKZ and the MKX or any other sedan/crossover combo, except that people who like high-performance vehicles are less likely to like crossovers, and the STS is a good car that's on its way out, probably to be replaced by something sportier. If Chrysler had a decent mid-size platform and hadn't made the Sebring look like a clown car the existence of the 300 wouldn't have made it any less popular--it probably would have driven more people to it. At the very least, I'm not sure how you could say that the CTS or the 300 or the Enclave has hurt any of those marques.

 

"Peaky" product ranges are, in general, the product of great cars coming into bad product ranges, but you don't have to have a bad product range to bring out a marque-defining car. While you could make an argument that that's the end result of creating one great car, I don't see why that has to be--Oldsmobile, for instance, didn't go that way, and GM's next mid-size platform will debut with Buick. Now that Lincoln has a good product range having a "peak" would only help them, and it would take some of the pressure of creating an image off of Ford's crappy marketing department.

Edited November 21, 2007 by danup

[RichardJensen]

I would argue that Lincoln's lineup is not yet fully competitive--the products are good, and excel in certain areas, but there are several shortcomings in the process of being addressed:

 

MKZ looks too much like cheaper models

MKX ditto

MKS not on market, will need a more powerful engine option

Navigator needs a more powerful engine option

MKFlex not on market

Mark LT still on market

 

Getting a coherent look on those vehicles, improving engine options, and dropping the Mark LT should come before putting a great deal of effort into a single defining car.

 

---

 

Also, with Cadillac, it's my understanding that much of their future plans are up in the air due to GM waffling over RWD strategies. If Cadillac ends up on Zeta, I have doubts about their ability to sustain their accomplishments, yet Sigma faces a huge challenge in keeping up with the BMW platforms, given BMW's global distribution and higher volumes.

 

Finally, the SRX as a companion to the CTS seems to make less sense than the X3/3-Series or X5/5-Series. It might be because BMW has enough heritage so that their CUVs seem more sporty and more related to their sedans, it might be other factors (including the shape and size of the SRX), but the SRX doesn't seem to make a lot of sense compared with the CTS.

Edited November 21, 2007 by RichardJensen

[NickF1011]

I would argue that Lincoln's lineup is not yet fully competitive--the products are good, and excel in certain areas, but there are several shortcomings in the process of being addressed:

 

MKZ looks too much like cheaper models

MKX ditto

MKS not on market, will need a more powerful engine option

Navigator needs a more powerful engine option

MKFlex not on market

Mark LT still on market

 

Getting a coherent look on those vehicles, improving engine options, and dropping the Mark LT should come before putting a great deal of effort into a single defining car.

 

Hey! You forgot the Town Car!! (Something tells me that was intentional)

[BORG]

I would argue that Lincoln's lineup is not yet fully competitive--the products are good, and excel in certain areas, but there are several shortcomings in the process of being addressed:

 

MKZ looks too much like cheaper models

MKX ditto

MKS not on market, will need a more powerful engine option

Navigator needs a more powerful engine option

MKFlex not on market

Mark LT still on market

 

Getting a coherent look on those vehicles, improving engine options, and dropping the Mark LT should come before putting a great deal of effort into a single defining car.

 

---

 

Also, with Cadillac, it's my understanding that much of their future plans are up in the air due to GM waffling over RWD strategies. If Cadillac ends up on Zeta, I have doubts about their ability to sustain their accomplishments, yet Sigma faces a huge challenge in keeping up with the BMW platforms, given BMW's global distribution and higher volumes.

 

Finally, the SRX as a companion to the CTS seems to make less sense than the X3/3-Series or X5/5-Series. It might be because BMW has enough heritage so that their CUVs seem more sporty and more related to their sedans, it might be other factors (including the shape and size of the SRX), but the SRX doesn't seem to make a lot of sense compared with the CTS.

 

Cadillac is preparing an RX fighter called the BRX which will bring Caddy in on a very important segment.

 

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Enthusiast...178.A13628.html

Edited November 22, 2007 by BORG

[mackinaw]

While "Auto Extremist" often comes off more as "Auto Whiner," I think DeLorenzo has nailed this one. As good as the upcoming MKS looks to be, it's styling is hardly distinctive. Some of the concepts shown in the article are quite good and, more importantly, really look like a Lincoln.

[silvrsvt]

Cadillac is preparing an RX fighter called the BRX which will bring Caddy in on a very important segment.

 

LOL the BRX reminds me of Brick for some reason...plus isn't the Vue smaller then an RX..always invisioned it as the same size as a Escape

[Watchdevil]

The Sentinel preceded the introduction of the current Town Car and it gave visual clues where the next designw as going. It was very goth and extreme like something from a Batman movie... However, the current Town Car borrowed a few cues and softened up the look quite a bit.

 

The MKS looks too much like they slapped a bow wave grille (which to me looks traditionally Olds identified) on an Infiniti or BMW and borrowed taillamps from a Hyundai XG, Kia Amanti or Suzuki Forenza. To me it's just Lincoln's composite me-too entry that desperately tries to incorporate every design feature that is acceptable to the traditional import market it is aiming for.

 

I like the MKR very much save for taming the cartoon smiley face... Something about it looks Iosis kinetic yet there is something very Mark VIII about the greenhouse. So for me it works. I even like the modern interpetation of the classic three spoke steering wheel.

 

The "MacGovern Mark" concept was very nice and unmistakingly Lincoln. They were certainly filled with exquisite interior details. The exterior look was fresh and dramatic when first presented. However many of those cues in the front end were presented on other production Ford, Mercury and Lincoln models so they are not going to seem as fresh today.

 

The Continental concept was great when it was presented as well but the design was not matured and refined enough to give it a serious production car look. Looking back on it some of the proportions and details were a bit off.

 

The Thunderbird based Mark X is a favorite of mine. It looked very production ready and it seems like it was probably under serious consideration before the plug was pulled on the LS and Tbird platform. I love the front end and grille design and I believe the rear end was executed handsomely.

 

The next generation Mustang will be the ultimate test whether it can be evolved from a retro design without loosing the appeal that makes it a recognizable icon.

[Nicks99GTOtherAccount]

IMO, there was no 'next' with the Continental inspired concept cars. That's the problem with them. It's like "okay, now what?" You get a car that looks good for a while and then what? You revive the '70s Lincoln look with covered headlights, upright grille, and oval opera windows?

 

MKR at least provides something that can be developed.

 

 

You know, this is what everyone said about the current Mustang. I remember reading a post, by some saying "What's next, a return to the fox body?" I just don't buy it. Designs evolve over time. Sometimes they are revolutionary, sometimes they are evolutionary. Retro inspired designs will evolve and reflect the tastes at a given point in time. This can best be seen in cars such as Corvettes and 911's. They are thoroughly modern interpretations of their past.

 

When is the last time you heard someone complain that a current 911 shares the same silhouette and styling cues of a 1969 911? I mean, where does the design go from here? It looks like a retro 911, what are we gonna do? Maybe the next model will look like a 1970's version. Oh, I forgot, the 1970's cars kind of look like a 911 too.

 

The Continental was hit, the pictures don't even do it justice. Hell, Chrysler took the same "concept" and put it in to production with the 300. Many of Fords recent concepts have been hits, but they've followed them up with bland product. Anyway, the great concepts are dead and missed opportunities in the past. There is no reason to dwell on them.

 

I agree with the article from the standpoint that a Lincoln must be a Lincoln (and not Fords take on Lexus). The market doesn't need another me too Lexus. What is needed is something different, something that stands out from the crowd. I've not been a fan of most of Cadillac's new designs, but the CTS is a hit. Its head over heals better than the previous CTS. It can not be confused with a Lexus, BMW or Mercedes. In my opinion, its almost lust worthy. I can honesty say I want a CTS, and while I think that the MKZ and MKS are nice cars they don't make me want them.

 

That is the problem with Lincoln. Their offerings are nice, but I don't drive by my local Lincoln dealership and say "Man I've gotta have that car". Well, I will admit that I'm partial to the MKX, but the rest of the lineup just blends in in a car market that wants individuality.

[RichardJensen]

The Sentinel preceded the introduction of the current Town Car and it gave visual clues where the next designw as going. It was very goth and extreme like something from a Batman movie... However, the current Town Car borrowed a few cues and softened up the look quite a bit.

Town Car owes more to this concept than the Sentinel:

 

 

Stretch it and squash it and -bam- instant Town Car.

 

Edited November 22, 2007 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

Town Car owes more to this concept than the Sentinel:

 

 

New Jaguar?

 

[RichardJensen]

No. 1994 Aston Martin Lagonda concept.

 

Timing is just about perfect for cross-pollinating the '98 Town Car.

[danup]

Now that thing is some (admittedly kind of attractive to this film noir fan) dead-end retro-futurism right there.

[Biker16]

There's a point in all that gobbledygook, but it's pretty darn hard to find.

 

This is Pete at his absolute worst. Covering up his statements of the obvious (Lincolns should look like Lincolns) with so much crap and hysteria that it is simply impossible to take him seriously.

 

And what is up with the devotion to yesterday's concept cars? GIVE IT A REST. The 2000 Continental was NOT all that and a bag of chips. It wasn't even the bag of chips. It was everything that Pete excoriates in J Mays' retro futurism.

 

The Mark IX, Mark X, and Continental were all patent exercises in retro futurism. What the Continental concept didn't lift from the '61 Continental, the Mark coupes did.

 

---

 

Not buying it Pete. Your insights aren't.

It covers quite well what is/was wrong with ford.

 

IT is very important to understand what was wrong in order to prevent a repetition of those blunders.

 

While GM was toiling away and doing the heavy-lifting on Cadillac, Ford was hopelessly nowhere with Lincoln. Sure, there were signs of life when the LS was present and accounted for, but Ford's legendary warring fiefdoms and bankrupt "culture" worked overtime to make sure that Lincoln was underserved and forever lost in Dearborn's legendary bureaucratic wilderness. It didn't help, of course, that Ford "marketers" (and I use that term derisively) ripped the heart out of any legitimate positive initiative that was brewed for Lincoln, giving new meaning to the term "inept" at every turn.

 

Explain the Focus brand in America, the Taurus, the Windstar, the LS. Inept is the right word ford it.

 

Your comment only draw my ire because you were defending these same marketers, 5 years, ago. just like now, attacking anyone who says ford isn't perfect, or points out ford's flaws.

 

5 years ago I said Ford had no vision I was right.

 

You can't gloss over 18 years of "ineptitude,a and broken corporate culture.

 

 

Here Is the change in ford.

 

They don't do stupid things that don't make sense

 

They also are doing what most enthusiasts and industry analysts say they should be doing, and they are actually executing.

 

The new products while not perfect are consistent in their goodness, if not greatness. It gives the enthusiast, and stockholder hope.

 

the time of apologizing for poor performance has come to an end.

[goingincirclez]

Wow... I can't decide which is uglier, the Town Car or that Aston concept. :eek5:

 

Pretty please Richard: Is death an option?

 

(BTW just curious if you see the "Sentinel" in "Art & Science"? I have to say with humility that it always seemed familiar to me, but I was shocked when I only just yesterday bothered to find those pics at the same angle and put them side by side. Did GM hire that designer?)

Edited November 22, 2007 by goingincirclez

[RichardJensen]

(BTW just curious if you see the "Sentinel" in "Art & Science"? I have to say with humility that it always seemed familiar to me, but I was shocked when I only just yesterday bothered to find those pics at the same angle and put them side by side. Did GM hire that designer?)

TBQH, I can't get past the slapdash nature of the Sentinel. I could see Cadillac designers borrowing somewhat from the Sentinal, but more from Ford's "New Edge" language as seen in other concepts (c.f. GT90). The difference is that the Sentinel's lines are continuous front to rear (such that those lines are), where the Caddy's are broken up at several points.

 

http://www.diseno-art.com/encyclopedia/veh.../ford_gt90.html

[7Mary3]

Just got back from the Los Angeles Auto Show, and noticed a few things. Fist off, Lincoln and Mercury had separate displays, though they were next to each other. FWIW, not a Panther in sight, no TC or GMQ. Good thing? You be the judge. The Mercury display was a ghost town, fewer vistors than Suzuki. There were more people at Lincoln, but still not too crowded. The Cadillac display was packed, people all over the new CTS. Regardless of who Cadillac copied, or how old Lutz is, I would have to say Cadillac is at least in the game. A wide variety of models, a distictive style, and people are interested. Lincoln has an overdone F-150, an overdone Expedition, an overdone Taurus, something to make limo's out of, and an upcoming car that's going to try to compete with the CTS/3 Series/I Series/C Series. Ford allowed Lincoln to die and pinned their luxury hopes on Jaguar. Now they are going to sell Jaguar (at a huge loss) and try to revive Lincoln. Just imagine what Lincoln could have been with 1/3 the money Ford spent on Jaguar.

[wescoent]

I think criticism that the MKS doesn't look enough like a Lincoln is unfounded, even in light of the McGovern concepts.

 

 

 

I rest my case. Lincoln was using those headlights in 1993, LONG before Acura was relevant.

[wescoent]

Ford allowed Lincoln to die and pinned their luxury hopes on Jaguar. Now they are going to sell Jaguar (at a huge loss) and try to revive Lincoln. Just imagine what Lincoln could have been with 1/3 the money Ford spent on Jaguar.

 

Bingo. A dollar invested in Lincoln and Mercury will return tenfold a dollar invested in Jaguar Land Rover, global or not.

[rmc523]

No. 1994 Aston Martin Lagonda concept.

 

Timing is just about perfect for cross-pollinating the '98 Town Car.

 

That's an Aston Martin? I thought it was that Bugatti sedan concept of several years ago.

[bystander]

While "Auto Extremist" often comes off more as "Auto Whiner," I think DeLorenzo has nailed this one. As good as the upcoming MKS looks to be, it's styling is hardly distinctive. Some of the concepts shown in the article are quite good and, more importantly, really look like a Lincoln.

 

 

I agree with you, Mac. Over the past few years DeLorenzo has failed to point out Ford's glaring product and strategy miscalculations while consistently focusing on what GM needs to do to reclaim its role as the world's dominant automobile company. Perhaps he thought Ford was simply too f'up to waste much bandwidth on.

 

But he didn't pull any punches in this article, and in my opinion, he painted a pretty accurate picture of the bald-faced incompetence at Lincoln over the last ten years. I don't think his point was lost or muddled in the least. Lincoln has been and continues to be mismanaged to such a degree that its brand image (i.e. what a Lincoln is supposed to be) is totally unclear. The new product on the horizon (MKS) does very little to correct this because it is virtually indistinguishable from any number of Japanese products. DeLorenzo also points out what many, many Lincoln observers have for years been practically screaming--that the 2000 Continental concept showed the way toward a Lincoln design language that was distinctive, proud, and entirely identifiable as Lincoln's. The MKS gives the consumer no reason to consider it over the Infinitis, Lexuses it so blatantly emulates. Cadillac has at least made a credible effort to attract younger customers through innovative, attractive design and engineering investment. Lincoln, with the MKS's me-too styling and unimpressive mechanical specifications (a V6 in a luxury flagship?!?) has made a credible effort to become nothing more than a commodity product.

[RichardJensen]

Cadillac's 'credible effort' has not changed consideration among the poseur elite. That's per GM's own research, as reported in Ad Week last summer.

 

And for all the plaudits about the Continental concept being 'entirely identifiable' as Lincoln, that statement should be caveated thus:

 

"The 2000 Continental concept was identifiable as a Lincoln to anyone who has ever seen a 1961 Continental, because it looks like one, but with all the corners rounded off and an ugly face"

 

The Continental Concept did not look distinctively like a Lincoln because Lincoln itself has been a total hodge-podge since the early 80s at the least. Or perhaps you can tell me what these vehicles have in common besides their drivetrain?