rmc523 Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 (edited) 17 hours ago, akirby said: Where do you guys make up this stuff? RX is $53k - $73k. Nautilus is $53k - $77k. Huh? The Black Label hybrid STARTS at 80k.... I got to $91k MSRP without adding dealer accessories..... And I'm sure the 2027 model will be more. Edited September 9 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorpsychology Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 17 hours ago, akirby said: Where do you guys make up this stuff? RX is $53k - $73k. Nautilus is $53k - $77k. BMW X5: $72,100, Popular optioned: $75,950, M Sport Professional: $89,000 & up. 🤷🏻♂️ https://www.bmwusa.com/build-your-own.html#/series/X5/sports-activity-vehicle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 4 hours ago, rmc523 said: Huh? The Black Label hybrid STARTS at 80k.... I got to $91k MSRP without adding dealer accessories..... And I'm sure the 2027 model will be more. Lexus has no black label equivalent as far as I can tell. Comparably equipped they're virtually the same price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 4 minutes ago, akirby said: Lexus has no black label equivalent as far as I can tell. Comparably equipped they're virtually the same price. You missed his point. At its price range, it's competing with both the RX and the X5. He's arguing that switching to RWD will help it better compete with the X5 side of the equation at the price point they're charging. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 15 minutes ago, rmc523 said: You missed his point. At its price range, it's competing with both the RX and the X5. He's arguing that switching to RWD will help it better compete with the X5 side of the equation at the price point they're charging. My point is it's already competitive with Lexus. X5 is far higher when comparably equipped but with the better powertrain. I agree the new one will go toe to toe with X5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew L Posted September 14 Share Posted September 14 (edited) On 9/8/2026 at 12:38 PM, Andrew L said: Funny, I had suggested a while ago they try to build more things on CD6 to try to get what they can out of that platform but was told over and over that "no CD6 is dead" "there's no business case" "they are better off using C2" So there is a discussion going on in the MKZ Facebook group and someone commented that Ford gave up on Ford sedans a very long time ago that the MKZ is nothing more than a re-badged Mazda and that all MKZs share a ton of parts with Mazdas. I informed him he was wrong that CD3 was Mazda based but CD4 was an in house Ford design and a merger of EUCD. He then told me that I was wrong that CD4 and CD6 are just warmed over and stretched CD3. I told him his information is very wrong and not sure where he's getting it to which he told me he works for a T1 Ford supplier and gets his info from Ford engineers. Thought you guys here would find that hilarious. Edited September 14 by Andrew L 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 15 Share Posted September 15 15 hours ago, Andrew L said: So there is a discussion going on in the MKZ Facebook group and someone commented that Ford gave up on Ford sedans a very long time ago that the MKZ is nothing more than a re-badged Mazda and that all MKZs share a ton of parts with Mazdas. I informed him he was wrong that CD3 was Mazda based but CD4 was an in house Ford design and a merger of EUCD. He then told me that I was wrong that CD4 and CD6 are just warmed over and stretched CD3. I told him his information is very wrong and not sure where he's getting it to which he told me he works for a T1 Ford supplier and gets his info from Ford engineers. Thought you guys here would find that hilarious. Or maybe we've had it wrong this whole time!! 😛 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExplorerDude Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 On 9/8/2026 at 12:38 PM, Andrew L said: Funny, I had suggested a while ago they try to build more things on CD6 to try to get what they can out of that platform but was told over and over that "no CD6 is dead" "there's no business case" "they are better off using C2" There are significant winds of change happening that are not yet clear or fully baked. It appears that eventually in the 2030’s there will be a platform consolidation of sorts. C2 and CD6 look to be replaced with a single platform, C3. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 10 minutes ago, ExplorerDude said: There are significant winds of change happening that are not yet clear or fully baked. It appears that eventually in the 2030’s there will be a platform consolidation of sorts. C2 and CD6 look to be replaced with a single platform, C3. Interesting. I wonder if this C3 will be FWD or RWD or somehow capable of both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExplorerDude Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 9 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Interesting. I wonder if this C3 will be FWD or RWD or somehow capable of both? That is unclear. This appears to be a major rethink influenced by the learnings of the UEV platform. The ultimate goal is always on taking cost out and reducing complexity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 (edited) 1 hour ago, ExplorerDude said: That is unclear. This appears to be a major rethink influenced by the learnings of the UEV platform. The ultimate goal is always on taking cost out and reducing complexity. I'm glad to hear that they're going to use learnings from CE1 to apply to the other platforms. Wouldn't make sense otherwise..... So with that in mind, I wonder if "C3" refers to an ICE platform approach using the "3 block" method (i.e. CE1), rather than a specific FWD or RWD oriented platform like they have now (C2 = FWD, CD6 = RWD). Meaning unique front/rear blocks could be used to allow for FWD or RWD as needed, but both falling under the "C3 approach"? Obviously just spitballing here.... Edited September 17 by rmc523 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 1 hour ago, rmc523 said: I'm glad to hear that they're going to use learnings from CE1 to apply to the other platforms. Wouldn't make sense otherwise..... So with that in mind, I wonder if "C3" refers to an ICE platform approach using the "3 block" method (i.e. CE1), rather than a specific FWD or RWD oriented platform like they have now (C2 = FWD, CD6 = RWD). Meaning unique front/rear blocks could be used to allow for FWD or RWD as needed, but both falling under the "C3 approach"? Obviously just spitballing here.... The biggest issue with this is that a midsized product vs a full-size product is often separated by difference of 2-3 inches in width, which a lot harder to do then just stretch the platform out to make it longer, due to crash regulations with the passenger cell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeStang Posted September 17 Share Posted September 17 6 hours ago, rmc523 said: I'm glad to hear that they're going to use learnings from CE1 to apply to the other platforms. Wouldn't make sense otherwise..... So with that in mind, I wonder if "C3" refers to an ICE platform approach using the "3 block" method (i.e. CE1), rather than a specific FWD or RWD oriented platform like they have now (C2 = FWD, CD6 = RWD). Meaning unique front/rear blocks could be used to allow for FWD or RWD as needed, but both falling under the "C3 approach"? Obviously just spitballing here.... If Ford's gonna be able to apply both the lean skunkworks engineering process, and the assembly tree methods across their entire lineup over years, decades, it's gonna be massive. That's game changing, like a massive competitive advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted September 18 Share Posted September 18 (edited) 2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said: If Ford's gonna be able to apply both the lean skunkworks engineering process, and the assembly tree methods across their entire lineup over years, decades, it's gonna be massive. That's game changing, like a massive competitive advantage. Others will copy it. Especially China. Edited September 18 by Texasota Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseodiaga4 Posted September 22 Author Share Posted September 22 (edited) build & price for the 2027 model https://www.lincoln.com/build-price/nautilus/2027/choose-model?intcmp=reveal-bb-fbc&intcmp=nfbcSplit-cta-chooseModel-nautilus Edited September 22 by joseodiaga4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoomerSooner Posted September 25 Share Posted September 25 It would be great if the "excite" setting buttoned down the handling a bit more. When relaxed, the Nauti is a great, quiet, smooth ride. But with all the electronic geegaws and gimmickry on the car--and there's a LOT--a really buttoned down handling setting would be great. Also, for the love of all that's right and just, I hope they have made the A/C vents manually controllable. That's the dumbest feature ever. 1 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.