The New Navigator-

[kyle]

Maybe because nobody is impressed with the Navigator.

 

I couldn't agree more......it has nothing going for it. And don't tell me it doesn't use super unleaded-do you think the guy who is knocking down $250 a year gives a rats ass that his gas bill will cost him $400 more a year? If you say yes....you are not making that kind of change!

 

And the audi should be in the comparisson...do you think the people buying that vehicle cares if it is unibody vs body on chasis? Hell no, they are buying the name on the front of the vehicle and audi has a lot of cache....something lincoln only wishes they had.

 

Don't get me wrong-I am not a fan of C&D but like many of you have said-the design is just OLD. That instrument panel is the worst I have seen in 5 years. How many times are we going to have to see that same radio-heater control panel set up? It is way overused.

 

This is what you get when you have very poor management at top and turnover in the product development end. Just when you say it can't get worse it does.

 

There is tremendous amount of pressure on Fields and Ford right now.....if they don't start to put out some kick ass vehicles there is not telling how far they will fall.

[ZanatWork]

I'd call slowest, worst handling, longest braking (by about a dozen feet, at that), and tied for thirstiest the very definition of a "half assed" job.

 

Why aspire to be worst? Just desert the segment.

[DCK]

Let's just say you had unrealistic expectations.

 

As to a 'half-assed job on a shrinking segment'? Sorry, that's the way the cookie crumbles--spending a fortune on a dying segment is fiscally irresponsible. And the Navigator is not the 'worst' vehicle in the segment. Such one-dimensional analyses are flawed from start to finish. Consider that the QX56 is newer than the Navi, but its sales are down more than this year's Navi. Consider that the 'Slade is all new, yet has seen overall sales fall 10%, about as much as Navi and Mark LT sales would be down, had the Mark LT been onsale in volume last Jan. and Feb. Sales of the Lexus Land Cruiser clone are down 30%, as are sales of the 4Runner clone.

 

Hard to see why any of these truck-based SUVs should be declared 'best'. They're all losers.

When i read what you wrote the first thing that popped into my mind was "more bullshit from the spin doctor"(no offense its just what popped into my mind), If they plan to do a hack job from the beginning because they are cheap then they'd be better off just leaving the vehicle alone and let it die slowly like ford does with most of their vehicles. Your arguments are always deal with what is fiscally responsible on how Ford shouldn't invest more in vehicles because of the market, and that is plain propaganda at its finest. WOOHOO GOOD JOB FORD LET'S PUT OUT SHIT BECAUSE THE MARKET MAY BE REDUCING A BIT, that is your argument, I bet you loved the Freestar, ford put out utter shit that not anyone with a brain should buy, it sells like shit and people say why should Ford make another effort? They don't even try to compete in many segments it is so sickning and who knows if they even changed. Ford has done what you suggest for decades and it is sure paying off for them. The market isn't even shrinking much for full size luxury SUV's and you have the new competition. Your whole philosophy is well with new competition and a slighty smaller market why invest to be competitive, let's put out pure shit have it sell like pure shit and then in a few years leave the market all together with dismall sales why the competition still sells a hefty amount. That is what Ford has done with the minivan market, and with the ranger. Your arguments are more of a comedy sketch. You'd put ford into bankruptcy with assinine descisions, Ford future is in their product, the same product you defend decade long product cycle, uncompetitive engines, bland styling, cheap interiors, half ass redesigns and launching late to the party and still being uncompetitive....GM will have new Minivans and large crossovers........Ford seems like it will simply have the fairline to cover 3 different segments. Its like you wish ford to fail by praising pathetic, dimwitted penny pinching excuses that got ford into the position they are in today........Ford will only go out of business if they continue what they have been doing, but yet you seem to think it is in the best interest of the company.

 

"They're all losers" are you seious with that comment? I bet you think the same for the mini-van market where you have three major players a lot of minivans every year, because they are excellent mini-vans and do wonders for the brands image............but because the market isn't as big anymore.......Ford must be the big winner considering they invested nothing except purchasing the little chrome letters "free" instead on "wind"

 

Now americans are gladly giving ford the finger while they head over and purchase from toyota and it is sad but ford doesn't give too many reasons for anyone to spend their hard earned money on them. It is even sadder when you have one of the big 3 who now gets it, which is GM, and seem to have a very bright future(which i know you will bash with ill logic excuses becasue that is what you do) but the perception won't change for the Big 3 util all of them get it and improve.

Edited August 31, 2006 by DCK

[ZanatWork]

If Ford wanted to feed their-and Lincoln's, specifically-perception problems, the new Nav is a fine way to do it.

[RichardJensen]

I'm not so much into defending Ford on this one as I am stating that the criticism of the Navigator thus far is largely unrealistic, vague, and hysterical. Your conclusions are far-fetched, your extrapolations bizarre and indefensible, and your analogies flawed.

 

You want to nitpick the Navigator, try this:

 

1) Uncoordinated design, of course that didn't prevent the 'Slade from topping the past Navi.

 

2) Lack of power--questionable decision to not invest in a marquee powertrain of somesort (e.g. a blower on a Navigator K or something).

 

3) Interior design that is more 'love it or hate it' than the outgoing Navi.

 

4) Investing in an extended length model instead of doing a more thorough sheet metal replacement. Does the Navi need a LWB model? 'Slade LWB sales are down more than standard WB models.

 

5) Lack of a 'sport/appearance' Navi with stiffer springs, blackout treatment, etc.

 

I mean you want to criticize Ford, do yourself a favor and make sense. Chicken little rantings are not sound arguments. If you find yourself using categorical statements ("every", "totally", "absolutely", "always", "never", etc.), you're wasting your time. If you're going to post to this board night and day, the least you can do is improve your thinking and debate skills. Hysterical ranting has no value in everyday life. Learning to put your objections in defensible statements does.

 

I don't always agree with marc-o, but he at least is able to structure his criticisms in sane language using defensible reasoning.

 

Maybe I'm being a bit preachy with all this, but for cryin' out loud, venting ones spleen is a pretty lousy way to spend the day, and thus far that's about all I've seen here. You guys are going to stroke-out, and for what?

Edited August 31, 2006 by RichardJensen

[xr7g428]

Let's consider what Lincoln could have done that would have actually been a bold move.

 

Build the first V10 powered SUV (in this size category, sorry Excursion fans). I realize there is no current transmission that would have dropped in. That is why it is called NEW product development. This segment is about superlatives. The vehicle must be the MOST something. The most powerful is not a bad way to go. At one time Cadillac was selling so many Escalades to professional athletes and pop stars that it lifted the income demographics for the entire brand. These people are young, and highly competitive. Most powerful is an attribute that they would well understand. Of course, the big seller would be the 5.4 equipped version. For those who are worried about political correctness, and MPG, this is not the segment where those values apply. And besides, we have already captured the worst gas mileage crown.

 

Build a "convertible" version. Add the worlds largest sunroof. Create a slight lift in the rear most section of the roof to return the entire roof panel covering the front two rows of seats. The first SUV to really take you to the great out doors. This is the hard top convertible as applied to the SUV.

 

Add a third set of doors, opening to the rear most row ala Mazda RX8. Suicide doors are a Lincoln tradition. This is a way to bring them back with out being gratuitous.

 

This is what I can come up with in 5 minutes. I suspect that others can do better. In Fords own words, the Navi is a vehicle that checks all the boxes. It's not about checking last years boxes, it is about creating a new one for the other guys to have to match.

 

Great products create their own economy. To say that we should over look a segment that is shrinking, is to say that we should over look opportunity. The Pony car segment was shrinking. WAS shrinking. Look at what a great product, like the Mustang, can do.

Edited August 31, 2006 by xr7g428

[DCK]

I'm not so much into defending Ford on this one as I am stating that the criticism of the Navigator thus far is largely unrealistic, vague, and hysterical. Your conclusions are far-fetched, your extrapolations bizarre and indefensible, and your analogies flawed.

 

You want to nitpick the Navigator, try this:

 

1) Uncoordinated design, of course that didn't prevent the 'Slade from topping the past Navi.

 

2) Lack of power--questionable decision to not invest in a marquee powertrain of somesort (e.g. a blower on a Navigator K or something).

 

3) Interior design that is more 'love it or hate it' than the outgoing Navi.

 

4) Investing in an extended length model instead of doing a more thorough sheet metal replacement. Does the Navi need a LWB model? 'Slade LWB sales are down more than standard WB models.

 

5) Lack of a 'sport/appearance' Navi with stiffer springs, blackout treatment, etc.

 

I mean you want to criticize Ford, do yourself a favor and make sense. Chicken little rantings are not sound arguments. If you find yourself using categorical statements ("every", "totally", "absolutely", "always", "never", etc.), you're wasting your time. If you're going to post to this board night and day, the least you can do is improve your thinking and debate skills. Hysterical ranting has no value in everyday life. Learning to put your objections in defensible statements does.

 

I don't agree with marc-o, but he at least is able to structure his criticisms in sane language using defensible reasoning.

 

Maybe I'm being a bit preachy with all this, but for cryin' out loud, venting ones spleen is a pretty lousy way to spend the day.

I think it is obvious you do all you can to sound like sophisticated auto journalist, but with your ill witted arguments, your sophnistication goes out the window. My argument stands, go read my post again, everything i said in it is true.........your good at spinning bad news and shitty products to sound like the best thing for ford, go spend your time defending Ford products that are good not the uncompetitive crap they put out. You can bash my character or my debate skills all you want, I don't care, this is simply an internet forum, yeah i rant, sound like a jerk, and don't use the best english........but when it all comes down to it my srguments stand and are truthfull. Just look at your above post, propaganda at its finest with no substance, like I said you're very with propaganda, spin, and bullshit.

Edited August 31, 2006 by DCK

[RichardJensen]

yeah i rant,

Why?

 

Is it fun? Do you think it improves your ability to make sense of the world around you? What, in short, do you get out of it?

 

BTW, there was nothing in your argument that could be logically refuted, beause none of it was logically constructed. There were ad hominem attacks, broad categoricals, exaggerations, but nothing that could conceivably be questioned, except for your argument that luxury "SUV" sales are declining. In fact luxury BOF SUV sales are declining--across the board, and they have been for a few years.

 

xr7g428's post, on the other hand, makes sense. I can see eye-to-eye with most of his points, except the argument that the pony-car segment was declining: It is still a smaller segment than it was in the mid-90s, and it likely will remain so, even after the Camaro and Challenger arrive. Since 2002, decline or growth in the pony-car market is pretty much limited to the Mustang itself, so there's no reasonable comparison there. The convertible edition seems ridiculous, but a giant sunroof doesn't. Ford provides 'performance' trims on Volvo, Jag, and LR models, it seems reasonable to suggest a 'wretched excess' trim of the Navigator as well. Even if it doesn't do that much better in comparos, it's something to look at. Of course, counter balancing that is that Ford, more than GM, etc., has been a target for environmental protesters. A to-the-9s Navigator with abysmal gas mileage might do more harm than good. It's an open question. It is, in fact, a question that can be studied, discussed, etc. At least it's something other than the broad rejectionism that constitutes the core of most of the stuff on this topic (and a lot of stuff on this board recently).

Edited August 31, 2006 by RichardJensen

[ZanatWork]

It tied for worst FE in the comparo. That was sort of the capper for me.

 

I'd like to state that I was VERY glad to see the Expy fare so well in the WSJ comparo. It appears what makes a good big SUV doesn't necessarily translate to the luxo-barge class.

 

I still maintain that the Nav may add to the perception problem...and as that's among the domestics' main battle, adding to the issue seems like a poor decision.

[Hemiman]

While I hate the new Navi,(actually I think all luxo SUV's are stupid) I can address the engine issue.

 

The 5.4 with DOHC 4V heads and VVT on the int & ex. Is good for 75hp per litre. That's the same as the new Duratec 3.5. This would yield 405 HP. It would also improve the fuel economy by about 7% . Amazingly, this is using off the shelf technology, yet Ford wont do it. It's almost like they want to kill Lincoln, or maybe it's all part of the plan to bring it down th Pontiac status.

 

Richard, the reason we rant, is because we are "car guys" who actually like Ford and want tham to do well. It's perplexing to watch how the "non-car women" who now dominate Ford management just can't see the obvious.

 

PS. As for the dash, I kinda liked the one in my 71 LTD the had the long rectangular speedo that went all the way accross drivers side.

[SysEng]

PS. As for the dash, I kinda liked the one in my 71 LTD the had the long rectangular speedo that went all the way accross drivers side.

 

Yeah, those were OK. Similar to the mid-80s CV as well. But truth is, these "new" K-car dashes really turn me off. Getting silly when a Civic goes LED tail and some other lights and electronic digital dash while Ford tries to copy a well known loser of a welfare wagon onto their Lincoln model ( let alone the rest of the fleet ).

 

I believe your right about the 5.4 power output. I'm also pretty sure the 6R can't handle the wallop which is why its achored at 365#.

 

BTW, the key reason you want low compression in an engine like that is because it guarantees advertised performance under all circumstances. Hi-comp engiens using computer control to deal with regular gas will alwyas put out reduced prformance to compensate for the lousy gas Which is why you'll always hear me propose 9.25:1 or less on compression even while calling for 4V, VCT, VVT technologies. Seems out of place to most car guys. But for most OTR work, this is how you get performance on the street.

[xr7g428]

I can see eye-to-eye with most of his points, except the argument that the pony-car segment was declining: It is still a smaller segment than it was in the mid-90s, and it likely will remain so, even after the Camaro and Challenger arrive. Since 2002, decline or growth in the pony-car market is pretty much limited to the Mustang itself, so there's no reasonable comparison there.

I have to agree that the segment will probably not be as large as it once was. Mustang once sold about a half million copies all by itself. Mustang just illustrates that the right product can reverse the trend. I do not see how you could dispute either the Mustang sales numbers, or the new entries into the segment.

 

 

The convertible edition seems ridiculous, but a giant sunroof doesn't.

 

I was using the word convertible in its literal sense, meaning to change from one thing to another. I did not mean to imply it in the traditional sense of a giant rag top. God help us if Ford did that... Mea culpa. My meaning was unclear. I was thinking of a cross between the current sunroof designs and the folding hard top. The idea is that they could merge these two ideas into a very large sunroof panel design for SUV's. I like the idea of being able to really open up the vehicle for a drive through the country side. Maybe too strange, but it would get some press.

 

Ford provides 'performance' trims on Volvo, Jag, and LR models, it seems reasonable to suggest a 'wretched excess' trim of the Navigator as well. Even if it doesn't do that much better in comparos, it's something to look at. Of course, counter balancing that is that Ford, more than GM, etc., has been a target for environmental protesters. A to-the-9s Navigator with abysmal gas mileage might do more harm than good

 

I do not believe that you can appease these groups by being the best of the worst. They are insulted by the very existence of these vehicles to begin with. This is exactly the kind of compromise that takes the edge off a product. You cannot satisfy the average of two buyers. You will decrease the satisfaction of one of them, and still not sell the other one. What we need are people who LOVE the product who will evangelize amongst their friends.

 

Large SUV's are still the best way to haul a bunch of people to go camping in the woods, or to the home improvement center. Park in front of Home Depot or Costco and count the number of new cross overs and cars pulling U Haul trailers. These people are questioning their choice. I would not give up on this segment just yet. By the same token, large SUV's are not the best choice for single commuters. I would look for a more pragmatic balance in the mix.

 

I am optimistic that the Fairlane might capture the utility of a mini van while effectively cloaking it in something that carries no mini van stigma. Perhaps the current Freestyle could be tweaked to do the same thing. What ever they do, don't picture it in ads with a mom driving the kids to soccer practice! The life style we aspire to, is probably not the one we live.

[Watchdevil]

It is truly 1959 again.. with overstylized tasteless gaude... I remember most cars back in the 50's being cleaner and better looking designs before the 1958 models came out... Looks like history repeats itself...

 

Nothing like looking at a mouth full of braces and a dashboard that looks like it belongs in a Fairmont derivative...

 

Maybe it's time for Lincoln to kill this beast... and the Mark LT truck too... Get back to the core of what Lincoln should be about...

[ZanatWork]

The buyers will decide what lesson Lincoln learns.

 

If it actually does meet sales goals (stranger things have happened), Lincoln will learn that it has enough loyalists to peddle mediocrity...at least this time around.

 

If it fails to sell, Lincoln will either have to decide to improve it ASAP, or declare the shrinking segment unworthy of investment.

 

Tell ya next year.

[DSenstad]

They learned quick with the MKZ, lets hope they see that they need a difference with the Nav.

[RichardJensen]

They learned quick with the MKZ, lets hope they see that they need a difference with the Nav.

Well, in all fairness, I think the AWD and engine were planned.

[ZanatWork]

In theory, so are the engines supposedly coming out in the next 1-2 years. The Hurricane and/or the diesel would help...one or two categories, in any case.

[one2gamble]

I really just dont think the expi makes a good platform for a lux SUV.

 

The last gen Gator was decent but it always looks like somethings simply missing.

[Michael Reynolds]

I really just dont think the expi makes a good platform for a lux SUV.

 

The last gen Gator was decent but it always looks like somethings simply missing.

 

Which is why they should have tweaked the design, and given it design cues that stood out and refined the interior. If those two things were addressed properly, I would venture to guess that most consumers would be willing to forgive the Navi's horsepower ratings (or lack there of).