Deanh Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I agree. I think they're holding a few cards up their sleeves to surprise everyone. the R is STILL my favorite Lincoln concept ever.....beautiful... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I agree. I think they're holding a few cards up their sleeves to surprise everyone. Me too. IMHO, the surprises are about 36 months away. The reason is the dealership re-build is still in progress to display 'em. I could be wrong, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddysystem Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 the R is STILL my favorite Lincoln concept ever.....beautiful... Yes and it would be interesting to see it updated with some of the design language from the MKZ (hips and tail) and/or MKC (grill) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I had drawn this a while back.... I should update it with some of the newer styling cues. I think the could really work well on this type of vehicle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 The basic structure for Mustang can be extended for sedan use....christ, we are not talking a limo here....it would likely need a 6 to 12 inch stretch to create a luxury sedan....maybe a little more if they want to import it to China. It would seem that a 12 inch addition behind the front seats should give ample room for a luxury sedan That would involve a tear-up of the whole rear floorpan as well as the safety cage, and I'm not sure, given how tightly the IRS/fuel tank/rear seats are packaged, but my guess is that those pieces are all but a single unit, and that trying to alter one aspect of that packaging would be like unraveling a hem. I don't think we're ever going to see a sedan based on the Mustang. I think Ford keeps doing the math on RWD Lincolns and it keeps adding up to 'no deal'. Eventually, it might add up, but if it's done, expect it to be largely unique product, not one that shares much behind the firewall with the Mustang. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseodiaga4 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I wonder what the 3 concepts are pinned up on the black divider on the right? I think those are the drawings of the covered coupe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I zoomed in on them as much as I could. The top looks sedan-ish The middle which looks like the roof line of the covered car looks like a 4 door coupe and the bottom one could be a 2 door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) the R is STILL my favorite Lincoln concept ever.....beautiful... And you know what infuriates me to this day? The tread width and wheelbase coincided with Falcon's measurements while For NA swears blind that it had nothing to do with the antipodean. something wonderful could have been done while saving the far flung bastion of a bygone era. That would involve a tear-up of the whole rear floorpan as well as the safety cage, and I'm not sure, given how tightly the IRS/fuel tank/rear seats are packaged, but my guess is that those pieces are all but a single unit, and that trying to alter one aspect of that packaging would be like unraveling a hem. I don't think we're ever going to see a sedan based on the Mustang. I think Ford keeps doing the math on RWD Lincolns and it keeps adding up to 'no deal'. Eventually, it might add up, but if it's done, expect it to be largely unique product, not one that shares much behind the firewall with the Mustang. Consider Jaguar's use of Dew for a moment to produce the XK, XF and XJ. The XK has its rear seat positioned inside the rear wheel wells just like Mustang yet the larger XF and XJ have that seating position moved to forward of the rear wheel wells. I get what you're saying though, the sums have to add up otherwise the whole project becomes something other than making money as its reason for being - that does not play well with the accountants. Edited June 12, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Jaguar is not the best example to cite--in the same way one would not cite Cadillac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) Jaguar is not the best example to cite--in the same way one would not cite Cadillac. The difference is those marques use bespoke platforms, one we know for sure was way too expensive for Ford/Lincoln at the time, what I'm on about is looking at what Ford has achieved with Mustang, Falcon and even Territory Ute and know what can be done to take all that much further into vehicles that can be used as high end offerings. Not saying to use those vehicles as they stand but to consider them as a starting point and inspiration for something much better.... I know that Jaguar and GM were not the best examples in terms of cost/execution but that's the areas I feel that Ford could show superiority with RWD Lincolns that seem truly unique yet share a lot under the skin with lower ranked Fords - sounds familiar I know but given the right economic climate anything could be possible.. Edited June 12, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 12, 2014 Author Share Posted June 12, 2014 The Mustang do about 70-80k alone. A Lincstang sedan would mostly get an exportable U.S. made Falcon replacement while challenging the rear-drive sedans from GM and Chrysler. Lincstang coupes would do 40k at least. I don't expect any full-size rear-drive sedans from Ford though. In good years, the mustang can sell over 100K a year no problem. I still don't see a dedicated RWD sedan platform from Ford anytime soon, unless they can figure out how to put the mustang front end clip on a fusion passenger compartment. Going back to the Mustang Lincoln...how about stretching the wheelbase out to increase the rear seat room and adding small suicide style doors (ala Saturn) behind the drivers and passenger side doors to make access to the rear seats easier? It would be easy to keep the MKRs styling that way. Other thoughts...it would come with the 2.7 V6 as the base engine with the V6 3.5 EB and/or 5.0L as the optional top end engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I know it's not popular with some, but I think a four door Mustang would print money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 And you know what infuriates me to this day? The tread width and wheelbase coincided with Falcon's measurements while For NA swears blind that it had nothing to do with the antipodean. something wonderful could have been done while saving the far flung bastion of a bygone era. Consider Jaguar's use of Dew for a moment to produce the XK, XF and XJ. The XK has its rear seat positioned inside the rear wheel wells just like Mustang yet the larger XF and XJ have that seating position moved to forward of the rear wheel wells. I get what you're saying though, the sums have to add up otherwise the whole project becomes something other than making money as its reason for being - that does not play well with the accountants. The XK is not on the DEW98 platform if I remember, XK was introduced in '96 and has it's own platform which at this point is dated and then some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Regarding rear wheel drive...do the people who matter (i.e., actual, paying customers, not people posting their fantasies on the internet), really care? Yes, BMWs are rear-wheel-drive, but Cadillac is showing the futility of going toe-to-toe with the BMW. The main differences between the two layouts appear to be visual (a transverse-mounted engine results in a stubbier hood and more front overhang) and handling. But the people who are after top-notch handling can already get a BMW 3-Series for $369 a month, according to the billboard I see every day. (Whether the 3-Series is at the top of its game in this area is another matter, but BMW still has that reputation among the general public.) The MKS does look awkward, although I believe part of that is because of the overall limitations of that particular platform, not just because it is front-wheel-drive. A drive through upscale neighborhoods around here shows that the most popular vehicles are either luxury crossovers or the big GM SUVs (although NOT the Escalade, but more likely the Suburban or Denali). Lincoln really needs a larger companion to the MKC and upcoming MKX right now, not a rear-wheel-drive sedan or coupe, much as I would like to see a Mustang-based coupe for Lincoln. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I know it's not popular with some, but I think a four door Mustang would print money. Not popular with anyone...except you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBirdStangSkyliner Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 My use of the term "dedicated platform" miscommunicated what I was thinking. I don't want to see a highly compromised car because it is built on a platform that was never designed to be very flexible or for this specific use. A new RWD platform does need to be designed to be flexible or modular as other makers are either planning on doing, or already successfully doing. As long as it is a good platform designed to be scalable, there is no reason it can't be used by Ford and Lincoln and be a coupe, sedan, roadster, or CUV. Heck, FoMoCo could partner with another company and jointly share development cost. Just do it and do it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 12, 2014 Author Share Posted June 12, 2014 The MKS does look awkward, although I believe part of that is because of the overall limitations of that particular platform, not just because it is front-wheel-drive. A drive through upscale neighborhoods around here shows that the most popular vehicles are either luxury crossovers or the big GM SUVs (although NOT the Escalade, but more likely the Suburban or Denali). Lincoln really needs a larger companion to the MKC and upcoming MKX right now, not a rear-wheel-drive sedan or coupe, much as I would like to see a Mustang-based coupe for Lincoln. Hopefully that will be fixed with it moving to the stretched out Fusion platform in a year or two. I like my Taurus SHO, but at the same time I much prefer the seating position in my Mustang or even the Fusion I sat in the other day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Not popular with anyone...except you. Yeah, time to go back to two door F150 and Wrangler. No one wants a four door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Not saying to use those vehicles as they stand but to consider them as a starting point and inspiration for something much better.... The Mustang's closest comparison is the Corvette. Neither vehicle is a suitable starting point for a platform, nor should either vehicle be part of a platform family. Any RWD platform would have to be largely unique, and would have small volumes. I doubt that Ford could do its RWD much better than GM has done alpha in terms of breadth of supported product, and alpha is not shaping up to be this year's success story. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Regarding rear wheel drive...do the people who matter (i.e., actual, paying customers, not people posting their fantasies on the internet), really care? Yes, BMWs are rear-wheel-drive, but Cadillac is showing the futility of going toe-to-toe with the BMW. The main differences between the two layouts appear to be visual (a transverse-mounted engine results in a stubbier hood and more front overhang) and handling. But the people who are after top-notch handling can already get a BMW 3-Series for $369 a month, according to the billboard I see every day. (Whether the 3-Series is at the top of its game in this area is another matter, but BMW still has that reputation among the general public.) The MKS does look awkward, although I believe part of that is because of the overall limitations of that particular platform, not just because it is front-wheel-drive. A drive through upscale neighborhoods around here shows that the most popular vehicles are either luxury crossovers or the big GM SUVs (although NOT the Escalade, but more likely the Suburban or Denali). Lincoln really needs a larger companion to the MKC and upcoming MKX right now, not a rear-wheel-drive sedan or coupe, much as I would like to see a Mustang-based coupe for Lincoln. The BMW 3 took 40 years to get where it's at today, even the CTS took over 10 years to get where it's at. This isn't the 60s when any US manufacturer can hit 300k with any car model. The Caddys platform are being shared with other divisions at least. Why a vehicle have to bust 200k units in it's first year to be labeled "success"?, if that's the case the Fusion should had been cancelled in 07. The XTS is the best (maybe next to the A8) for big,fwd luxury sedans and it's barely busting 2000 cars a month. A new MKS would match those numbers at the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) The BMW 3 took 40 years to get where it's at today, even the CTS took over 10 years to get where it's at. This isn't the 60s when any US manufacturer can hit 300k with any car model. The Caddys platform are being shared with other divisions at least. Why a vehicle have to bust 200k units in it's first year to be labeled "success"?, if that's the case the Fusion should had been cancelled in 07. The XTS is the best (maybe next to the A8) for big,fwd luxury sedans and it's barely busting 2000 cars a month. A new MKS would match those numbers at the most. No one is saying that the ATS is a flop because it's not selling 200,000 units annually. No one is even saying that the ATS is a bad car (it's not). I don't believe, however, that it met GM's internal sales projections for its first year on the market. ATS sales have declined for this year, and it's only the second year the car has been on the market. That's not a success, no matter how you slice it. Edited June 12, 2014 by grbeck 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Why a vehicle have to bust 200k units in it's first year to be labeled "success"? It's about total program volume. Alpha doesn't have it, and it would be quite unrealistic for Ford to assume that they could do 'alpha' so much better than GM, that they could turn GM's failure into a rip-roarin' success. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) It's about total program volume. Alpha doesn't have it, and it would be quite unrealistic for Ford to assume that they could do 'alpha' so much better than GM, that they could turn GM's failure into a rip-roarin' success. Nor would i dismiss the idea out of hand either, knowing how dysfunctional GM was, still is behind the curtain. Look at the prices being charged, it's no wonder that volume is down. ATS: $33K -$58K while the CTS: $44K - $72K. Originally, I felt that GM simply split the old Sigma CTS sales in two but recognize that the Coupes will add volume. And then you have Camaro below it - all vehicle sales combined, I can envisage GM producing ~200K/yr but across 5 vehicle types. Ford could do an "Alpha" better by doing less and sharing more. For a start, Mustang could be shared with Lincoln as an MKR coupe in 2.3 EB and 5.0 V8. Such a reach up would have the same effect on costs as say developing the MKZ off the Fusion. For the RWD sedan, Mustang's front half could be merged with CD4 Taurus powered rear half giving a that approximates a CTS or slightly larger. not saying to definitely do the latter, simply pointing out that Ford is more adept at using existing engineering modules where as GM is more prone to starting platform after platform on RWDs after realizing the shortcomings of the previous version. IMO, That's where Ford takes the more measured view and executes much better. At the moment Ford is miles in front with costs by doing nothing, whether that's the right way to look at products for Lincoln remains to be seen. And let's face it, when it comes to North American returns Ford/Lincoln swallows Chevrolet/Buick/GMC/ Cadillac whole - either Cadillac's premium pricing doesn't to add significantly to GM bottom line or the rest of GM's brands don't make anywhere near as much as the Ford brand competitors. Edited June 12, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fgts Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Nor would i dismiss the idea out of hand either, knowing how dysfunctional GM was, still is behind the curtain. Look at the prices being charged, it's no wonder that volume is down. ATS: $33K -$58K while the CTS: $44K - $72K. Originally, I felt that GM simply split the old Sigma CTS sales in two but recognize that the Coupes will add volume. And then you have Camaro below it - all vehicle sales combined, I can envisage GM producing ~200K/yr but across 5 vehicle types. Ford could do an "Alpha" better by doing less and sharing more. For a start, Mustang could be shared with Lincoln as an MKR coupe in 2.3 EB and 5.0 V8. Such a reach up would have the same effect on costs as say developing the MKZ off the Fusion. For the RWD sedan, Mustang's front half could be merged with CD4 Taurus powered rear half giving a that approximates a CTS or slightly larger. not saying to definitely do the latter, simply pointing out that Ford is more adept at using existing engineering modules where as GM is more prone to starting platform after platform on RWDs after realizing the shortcomings of the previous version. IMO, That's where Ford takes the more measured view and executes much better. At the moment Ford is miles in front with costs by doing nothing, whether that's the right way to look at products for Lincoln remains to be seen. Take into account GM already have a updated mid-large fwd platform in place like Ford and of course an Alpha will cost that much to complete have you seen it's competition prices? (BMW wants 76k for a base 6 Series with a 300 hp engine where a more powerful V-sport CTS run 7k less loaded). I don't see the scenario where Ford hack-up several platform to get a rwd sedan and ending up spending more then just putting the sedan on the Mustang platform . I mean look at the old Fox platform to see what Ford can do with a Stang platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (BMW wants 76k for a base 6 Series with a 300 hp engine where a more powerful V-sport CTS run 7k less loaded). To many BMW buyers, price is irrelevant. Or at least, that $7k is nothing to get a Bimmer over a Caddy. BMW IS the ultimate driving machine, you know. I mean look at the old Fox platform to see what Ford can do with a Stang platform. You didn't just say that, did you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.