NLPRacing Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Yeah. But you can do anything with concept cars. This is where I post pics of the Continental or 427, in order to start that whole debate... I guess they do: Link for GM's patent on the Midgate Then, I guess the question would be, why show something in a concept that you can't ever use in production? I wonder how the turntable models described the concept? Maybe it went something like this..."Here's the Excursion Desert concept featuring GM's patented mid-gate that we will never be able to offer on a FoMoCo vehicle" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 It's possible the designers didn't know the midgate was patented, or at that point (I don't know the date of the concept, but the patent date, I think, was 2001), it wasn't. Corporate legal spends very little time around concept cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Ford could still use it even if it's patented - they'd just have to pay GM and that might kill the business case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Ford could still use it even if it's patented - they'd just have to pay GM and that might kill the business case. Actually, GM might not give them permission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 That Conti concept is gorgeous...hopefully, Mr. Mullaly sees it in a corner somwhere and asks why it wasn't built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 That Conti concept is gorgeous...hopefully, Mr. Mullaly sees it in a corner somwhere and asks why it wasn't built. I hope you are right. The Continental would give people a real reason to look at Lincoln. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 (edited) If Ford could adapt the features from the Freestyle FX concept to the Navigator & Expedition, then they would have vehicles that could bury the EXT and Avalanche. A full size pickup for those trips to the Home Depot and a three row SUV to tow the boat or camper and take the family camping on the weekends. Sounds like a winner to me! 2003 Ford Freestyle FX Concept Edited October 3, 2006 by NLPRacing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoss96racing Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 If Ford could adapt the features from the Freestyle FX concept to the Navigator & Expedition, then they would have vehicles that could bury the EXT and Avalanche. A full size pickup for those trips to the Home Depot and a three row SUV to tow the boat or camper and take the family camping on the weekends. Sounds like a winner to me! ya... thats why the trailblazer xuv is selling so well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 ya... that's why the trailblazer xuv is selling so well This.. ...is not this... If the rear windows would of rolled down and the whole roof and pillars moved forward, making it a true SUT, then it would of done better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morgande Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I have a love-hate relationship with the LT. When it first debut, I loved it. I thought it was well done, but I always knew it was very cheap for Ford to do because it was simply a reskin. Then I began to realize just how simple it really was. Its not that the LT isn't nice..because it is. But Ford did such a good job with the Lariat, there simply isn't enough difference between the two to justify the price. For the cost of the LT, I can buy a lariat that is just as nice. Outside of the grill, there is no difference. One thing I give Ford Credit for is putting the DOHC 5.4 in the Blackwood. That was a pretty good engine. Granted, the new 3valve has the same HP rating...but the old DOHC puts out a lot more torque in the lower RPM range than the newer 3v. Take a look at these specs (from Edmunds.com): 2002 Lincoln Blackwood HP - 300 @ 5000rpm TQ - 355 @ 2750rpm 2006 Mark LT HP - 300 @ 5000rpm TQ - 365 @ 3750rpm Both engines run on 87 octane. The 3V has 10 more lb/feet of torque. But the 4V peaks at 1000 RPM less! I would argue that the Blackwood should be better at towing a load than the LT is because of this. Why Ford decided to ditch the 4v for the 3v on the lincoln offerings doesnt make sense when you look at these numbers. Also, the Denali and Caddy trucks require 91 octane fuel. Ford took the EXACT same powerplant in the F-150 and dropped it in the Lincoln. There is not one thing different between them. Why? Ford could have recalibrated the engines for higer fuel. That would bump the power numbers up, and wouldn't result in much of a difference in cost if anything. Even if the numbers were only 10-15 HP or so difference, it would help seperate the LT for the F-150 in power, same as the Blackwood was different than the F-150 in power. I don't want to pay a massive premium for consmetic differences. If your going to do platform engineering...then do it right! Lincoln cousins to the Fords should have something that means pemium that just a grill and some different color leather! Who ever is the product managers for the LT and the Navigator should be domoted to sanitation engineering! 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.