09 MKS review

[igor]

the passenger seat was all the way back .. the driver seat was further forward.

 

Igor

[RichardJensen]

2) As with the new Stang and F150, I dislike the center stack, simply too busy in my opinion.

While Ford could do more to differentiate the buttons by use (different sizes, etc.) the number of buttons is a challenge when you've got Aux input, Sync, AM, FM, CD, and Sat radio.

 

You can go the 'Media' button route, which has one button that cycles through the media types, or you have a separate button for each. IMO there is no 'good' answer to this challenge. There are merely two 'adequate' answers, both with serious drawbacks.

 

However, on balance I favor the multiple button solution. Why?

 

Because you can memorize the button locations, and then immediately switch from, say, FM to MP3 player, where a 'media button' would require you to (possibly) cycle through other options before getting to MP3 regardless of how long you've owned the car:

 

In short--many buttons = steeper learning curve but better performance one their locations have been memorized.

 

one button = shallow learning curve but impaired usefulness.

[Noah Harbinger]

Now Igor, in the pic of the rear seat, are the front seats pushed all the way back? Simply ask because my wife's Altima looks to have more rear leg room than this MKS, which would be a shame.

 

I've sat in the back of a Taurus, and in the back of an Altima. No comparison.

 

Is it just my imagination or do a lot of Fords offer exceptional 2nd/3rd row space?

[rmc523]

Yes, you got the interior coloring I went with .

 

I love the MKS, absolutely LOVE the car. I think it's just about the perfect compromise between a sport sedan and an CUV. I couldn't be happier, it's the best all around luxury vehicle. I would wait for the 2010 Taurus before dismissing the MKS however. I agree that the 2010 Taurus may make the case for the MKS a little harder, but right now I think the MKS obliterates it on so many levels.

 

Have you gotten an MKS? IIRC, I know you were talking about it, but it hadn't happened yet.

 

I've sat in the back of a Taurus, and in the back of an Altima. No comparison.

 

Is it just my imagination or do a lot of Fords offer exceptional 2nd/3rd row space?

 

No, it's not your imagination, unless my imagination is the exact same as yours. Then there's the GM route (especially the 3rd row) where theres not much room. GM vehicles also seem to (in most cases) suffer from what I call 'short door sydrome'. The rear doors on many of their vehicles seem really short to me. See CTS, any GMT900 (at least the short ones), or many other vehicles.

[V8-X]

the passenger seat was all the way back .. the driver seat was further forward.

 

Igor

 

Thanks Igor! Looked a little cramped and wanted to verify.

 

While Ford could do more to differentiate the buttons by use (different sizes, etc.) the number of buttons is a challenge when you've got Aux input, Sync, AM, FM, CD, and Sat radio.

 

You can go the 'Media' button route, which has one button that cycles through the media types, or you have a separate button for each. IMO there is no 'good' answer to this challenge. There are merely two 'adequate' answers, both with serious drawbacks.

 

RJ: I do understand this reasoning and it's logical. I guess I'm just old school and prefer a much cleaner and sleeker look. Personally, I don't need or want many of the options vehicles have in them today, but seem to either come standard with them or plugs where the buttons should be. This isn't just a knock on Ford, as all vehicles are going this route. Even though I think the Ford stacks are ugly now, there are many out there that look much worse.

 

I've sat in the back of a Taurus, and in the back of an Altima. No comparison.

 

Is the rear seat leg room of the Tauras same as the Freestyle? My brother owns a freestyle and sitting in the 2nd row of the Freestyle feels much more cramped than the back seat of the '04 Altima. Not the newest Altima, as it is actually smaller on the inside than the model it replaced.

[exploder48]

I think it's quite simple, most folks complaining about how expensive the MKS seem to be out of touch with the luxury market as a whole. Especially in a day and age that without much work at all, a 3 series can be had for over 50K.

Amen to that Michael. It seems that most of my customers for the MKS are Lexus/Mercedes people who realize that they are paying too much for the so-called status of driving a luxury car. Compare the numbers, whether it be lease or buy, and they are shocked at how much the MKS gives that is equal to or better than their current vehicle at a much better cost. I have come to realize that on these forums there will always, always be somebody who must take the opposite side when something positive about Ford or Lincoln/Mercury is put out here. It's been said before that cars foster objective opinions and what works for some will never work for all. My next vehicle, after the MKZ goes back, will be the MKS. So there!!! (LOL)

[RichardJensen]

RJ: I do understand this reasoning and it's logical. I guess I'm just old school and prefer a much cleaner and sleeker look. Personally, I don't need or want many of the options vehicles have in them today, but seem to either come standard with them or plugs where the buttons should be. This isn't just a knock on Ford, as all vehicles are going this route. Even though I think the Ford stacks are ugly now, there are many out there that look much worse.

 

 

 

Is the rear seat leg room of the Tauras same as the Freestyle? My brother owns a freestyle and sitting in the 2nd row of the Freestyle feels much more cramped than the back seat of the '04 Altima. Not the newest Altima, as it is actually smaller on the inside than the model it replaced.

As a designer, I prefer simplicity--unfortunately, it's not always possible (and in some cases, it's not desirable either).

 

Also, the Taurus/Freestyle etc. are 'chair height', they can seem cramped if you're used to a wide gap between the edge of the seat cushion and the back of the front seat, but not necessarily so, when you consider the height from the seat cushion to the floor. Also, they're a bit narrow in hip dimensions....

[NickF1011]

Also, the Taurus/Freestyle etc. are 'chair height', they can seem cramped if you're used to a wide gap between the edge of the seat cushion and the back of the front seat, but not necessarily so, when you consider the height from the seat cushion to the floor. Also, they're a bit narrow in hip dimensions....

 

I prefer being able to stretch out my legs. As someone with bad knees, it feels terrific to be able to straighten out my legs as much as possible now and then during road trips. Movie theaters are another place that usually kill my knees after about 90 minutes or so unless I can straighten em out at some point.

[rmc523]

I prefer being able to stretch out my legs. As someone with bad knees, it feels terrific to be able to straighten out my legs as much as possible now and then during road trips. Movie theaters are another place that usually kill my knees after about 90 minutes or so unless I can straighten em out at some point.

 

I agree.....I like being able to stretch my legs every once and a while. In movie theaters, I try to sit where there's open seats in front of me so I can put my legs up on the back of the chairs in front of me.

[RichardJensen]

In movie theaters, I try to sit where there's open seats in front of me so I can put my legs up on the back of the chairs in front of me.

In movie theaters, I try to wear big hats talk loudly on my cell phone and practice playing the trumpet. I'm not very good at it yet, but I keep hoping....

[rmc523]

In movie theaters, I try to wear big hats talk loudly on my cell phone and practice playing the trumpet. I'm not very good at it yet, but I keep hoping....

 

LOL

[silvrsvt]

Also, the Taurus/Freestyle etc. are 'chair height', they can seem cramped if you're used to a wide gap between the edge of the seat cushion and the back of the front seat, but not necessarily so, when you consider the height from the seat cushion to the floor. Also, they're a bit narrow in hip dimensions....

 

I think you hit the nail on the head, my parents have a Sable and when I drove it, it felt like it was tight in the hip area vs my Mustang (or their Explorer they replaced it with). Plus I felt like I was sitting up too high in the car, due to the command seating.

[silvrsvt]

$15,000 for the Lincoln name plate and a nicer interior ? Not from my wallet. Especially when all of us knows it rolls down the same line as the Taurus. (I still shed a tear for the Wixom plant every time I drive by !)

 

Obviously your not Ford's target demographic for the MKS...its the same deal as Coach handbags or other "luxury" items, you really don't need them, but they are "nice" and there is a demand for them, or at least used to be by people who can (or more recently cannot) afford them. Why limit yourself to selling a 25K car when you can make a 40K car and make a 15K more profit on it?

 

I've been in the FWD Continental that was based on the old Taurus platform and it wasn't anything super special over a loaded Taurus either, even with it being built in a different plant...which BTW prob cost Ford even more money then just building it in Chicago or Atlanta at the time.

[Ralph Greene]

I just looked over the options and standard features of the MKS. It seems to me to be a terrific bargain in near base form, with just a few options. Paying X plan on a window price of around $39,000-$40,000 (FWD) would be a very competitive vehicle.

 

Load it up to the $50,000 level, and the competition gets tougher, and I think there are better bargains for that kind of money. I also suspect, in about 5 years, a well maintained near base model would have about same value as a loaded model. So If I were buying one, (and I might in a year or so), I would stick to near base model as much better "value". It's a terrific $40,000 window sticker car I think.

 

The residual value on a near base model might be class leading, but I doubt a $50,000 version would be. We all like Ford products, and wish to support Ford, but you can't be stupid about your purchases. I would be willing tp pay a little more for a near base MKS, than a new Taurus optioned up to about same level. If for no other reason than just the generally fantastic service from my L/M dealer.

Edited January 5, 2009 by Ralph Greene

[blksn8k2]

My ex-boss at work is a Honda fanatic and his son-in-law just bought an MKS. His only comment was that he would be leery of the reliability, especially all the electronics. I think he is just pissed that he couldn't talk the kid into an Acura. The ex-boss drives an older Prelude and his wife has a TL.

[Len_A]

Well Acura will be building a V8, let's see if this helps RL sales.

 

My only concern is when the Egoboost 3.5L does finally come into the MKS, the 340HP/340TQ. of power isn't enough considering the competitions V8's. 2 years ago it WAS competitive, now...its, "eh, ok"....

Honda canceled plans for an Acura V-8 - Link Here