No AdvanceTrac in MKZ

[BORG]

I'm about to welcome a new MKZ into the family and I just discovered that AdvanceTrac is not offered. Why not? This technology is attached to so many lesser sedans, why not the Lincoln? An AWD sedan without AdvanceTrac doesn't sound like a healthy combination. You have all weather traction, just no way to control it once you're moving. Not such a good deal for a 38K sedan.

 

And while I'm on the subject, why don't they offer rear parking assist? The lack of some of these features has really surprised and disappointed me.

Edited November 13, 2006 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

I couldn't give you an explanation on the park assist, but part of me suspects that there may be some issues about Advance-trac and the Aisin transmission or (more likely) the Haldex box, but that's just an out-on-a-limb guess. You can get Advance-trac on everything except the CD3, D3, and panthers. Figure the panthers is because of heavy fleet sales, and the only 'x' factor on the CD3s and D3s is their Aisin tranny and their Haldex AWD box.

 

For the parking assist, I haven't a clue. Probably old habits die hard at FoMoCo headquarters and the finance guys said demand wouldn't justify cost of addding it.

[StevenJ]

Somebody on this board says that people that want that feature don't know how to drive.

 

Buy a MazdaSpeed6. You'll be a lot happier.

 

And that person would be me. ABS is all you need. Just keep thoose brakes from locking up. The only thing advanced crap is good for is preventing burnouts .

[BORG]

And that person would be me. ABS is all you need. Just keep thoose brakes from locking up. The only thing advanced crap is good for is preventing burnouts .

 

Advancetrac is extremely important on slippery roads. I have it on my LS and I have never been able to fishtail! It's wonderful!

[156n3rd]

Will you be replacing your LS?

[rkisler]

Advancetrac is extremely important on slippery roads. I have it on my LS and I have never been able to fishtail! It's wonderful!

 

Borg,

 

I second those remarks.

 

One evening I was driving my LS on an expressway at 80 mph when conditions abruptly changed from wet to ice. Those cars traveling with me started spinning in all directions, some hitting each other like billiard balls. Headlights/taillights. Headlights/taillights. I kept my head, slowed down gently and steered a path through this moving mess. And even though I was trying to be gentle in my movements, I could feel this excellent system working very hard to keep me from spinning.

 

I consider myself a decent driver with over a million miles of accident free driving. But this system saved my butt in this circumstance, and I wouldn't be without it if it's available on any car I buy. For those that don't pay quite as much attention to their driving, it can offset a lot of mistakes. And with RSC on SUV's the functionality only gets better.

 

Of course, the system isn't perfect. Some who drive aggressively might want to turn the system off if they want to hang their tail out. And there is little that can be done to prevent a violent trip roll.

 

As to why the MKZ doesn't have ESC, I'm not sure. The hardware is well tested, so ESC is primarily software, and it does take a lot of cold weather testing to ensure the calibration works correctly (sometimes 2 seasons if all is not going well). The Zephyr was a late start program, so they probably had no time to put it on. And the MKZ is adding the 3.5D and AWD, so maybe they just ran out of engineering resources or time. Adding ESC is certainly not impossible (Edge has RSC, Volvo has ESC on AWD models), so I would suspect an in-cycle addition. The lack of ESC on MKZ is not competitive.

 

BTW, Borg, I have over 15k on a Zephyr, and all of those miles have been totally trouble free. Build quality is excellent. 3D is just fine for most circumstances, so 3.5D will be even better. The transmission is faultless. And if they have stiffened up the ride a bit, so much the better. But....in terms of driving dynamics, it's sure not an LS.

[akirby]

Borg,

 

I second those remarks.

 

One evening I was driving my LS on an expressway at 80 mph when conditions abruptly changed from wet to ice. Those cars traveling with me started spinning in all directions, some hitting each other like billiard balls. Headlights/taillights. Headlights/taillights. I kept my head, slowed down gently and steered a path through this moving mess. And even though I was trying to be gentle in my movements, I could feel this excellent system working very hard to keep me from spinning.

 

I consider myself a decent driver with over a million miles of accident free driving. But this system saved my butt in this circumstance, and I wouldn't be without it if it's available on any car I buy. For those that don't pay quite as much attention to their driving, it can offset a lot of mistakes. And with RSC on SUV's the functionality only gets better.

 

Of course, the system isn't perfect. Some who drive aggressively might want to turn the system off if they want to hang their tail out. And there is little that can be done to prevent a violent trip roll.

 

As to why the MKZ doesn't have ESC, I'm not sure. The hardware is well tested, so ESC is primarily software, and it does take a lot of cold weather testing to ensure the calibration works correctly (sometimes 2 seasons if all is not going well). The Zephyr was a late start program, so they probably had no time to put it on. And the MKZ is adding the 3.5D and AWD, so maybe they just ran out of engineering resources or time. Adding ESC is certainly not impossible (Edge has RSC, Volvo has ESC on AWD models), so I would suspect an in-cycle addition. The lack of ESC on MKZ is not competitive.

 

BTW, Borg, I have over 15k on a Zephyr, and all of those miles have been totally trouble free. Build quality is excellent. 3D is just fine for most circumstances, so 3.5D will be even better. The transmission is faultless. And if they have stiffened up the ride a bit, so much the better. But....in terms of driving dynamics, it's sure not an LS.

 

If they didn't have enough engineering/testing resources to put the 6F tranny into the MkZ then it's a safe bet they didn't have enough to properly do ESC.

 

But it's not just software. You need the yaw sensors and the ability to brake each wheel individually - a traditional ABS setup won't work.

Edited November 13, 2006 by akirby

[StevenJ]

Advancetrac is extremely important on slippery roads. I have it on my LS and I have never been able to fishtail! It's wonderful!

 

Well my car has traction control and I have my own experiences. I have found it to be interfering with driver input since it makes it harder to get started in teh train by applying too much brakes and engine braking during take off. I've done well over the speed limit on the highway with the traction control off. Let me tell you something, it is the ABS that saves you, not the traction control. If it weren't for the ABS, the brakes on my car would have locked up and I probably would have spun out several times. And this was during a cold morning where it had rained a bit the night before with the traction control off. That's my opinion anyway.

[ZanatWork]

Between ABS and AWD, I thinkn the MKZ is a pretty safe ride.

[akirby]

Well my car has traction control and I have my own experiences. I have found it to be interfering with driver input since it makes it harder to get started in teh train by applying too much brakes and engine braking during take off. I've done well over the speed limit on the highway with the traction control off. Let me tell you something, it is the ABS that saves you, not the traction control. If it weren't for the ABS, the brakes on my car would have locked up and I probably would have spun out several times. And this was during a cold morning where it had rained a bit the night before with the traction control off. That's my opinion anyway.

 

Advancetrac is stability control, not traction control.

[waymondospiff]

But it's not just software. You need the yaw sensors and the ability to brake each wheel individually - a traditional ABS setup won't work.

Excellent point - do the CD3s & D3s use four-channel ABS or three-channel ABS?

 

The NA market Mazda5 doesn't have stability control (available in Japan & Europe) because Mazda decontented the 5 so it'd be less pricey here in the US. They switched from a four-channel ABS system to a three-channel - cheaper to build & no stability control.

 

Well my car has traction control and I have my own experiences. I have found it to be interfering with driver input since it makes it harder to get started in teh train by applying too much brakes and engine braking during take off. I've done well over the speed limit on the highway with the traction control off. Let me tell you something, it is the ABS that saves you, not the traction control. If it weren't for the ABS, the brakes on my car would have locked up and I probably would have spun out several times. And this was during a cold morning where it had rained a bit the night before with the traction control off. That's my opinion anyway.

Very valid when talking about traction control - which uses ABS sensors to monitor wheelspeed at the drive wheels vs. non-drive wheels and applies the brakes and/or retards the engine output when there is a discrepency. Stability control however uses ABS sensors at all four wheels to monitor individual wheelspeed and takes information from yaw sensors and steering wheel angles to determine the desired path of travel and compares it to the actual path. Using individual brakes, stability control will create "drag" on the wheels to bring the vehicle back onto the desired path.

 

The name is a killer for most people though. Stability control and Traction control sound like the same thing. It's not, and if not for the ignorance of the consumer stability control would be demand by car shoppers today. It's a huge advantage, not just for "poor" drivers but also for above-average drivers. The limits at which a stability control system intervenes are usually well above the range of "spirited driving" on public roads, only operating when things get well out of hand.

 

Scott

[kyle]

Excellent point - do the CD3s & D3s use four-channel ABS or three-channel ABS?

 

I am almost 100% positive that it is a 3 channel system....very few companies use a 4 channel setup....but suprising hyundai is one of them.

 

and borg...I like the rear camera/back up assist...no reason why it is not on that vehicle..hell ford pioneered that product on the explorer?

[Edstock]

AWD chassis dynamics are rather more even than than RWD and FWD.

 

IIRC, the Haldex drive system in the Z is capable of side-to-side power variation as the system reacts to control wheel-spin.

 

Altogether, it should be a very stable vehicle, so the absense of a system like AdvanceTrac might not be such a big deal — but it should be optional on the 2K8.

 

With the right tires and brakes, the Z should be a really nice ride in the country.

[jasonj80]

I am almost 100% positive that it is a 3 channel system....very few companies use a 4 channel setup....but suprising hyundai is one of them.

 

and borg...I like the rear camera/back up assist...no reason why it is not on that vehicle..hell ford pioneered that product on the explorer?

 

 

D3 uses a 4-channel, CD3 3-channel.

 

ESC will be Std on all '08 Focus, '08 Fusion, '08 Five-hundred

[waymondospiff]

D3 uses a 4-channel, CD3 3-channel.

 

ESC will be Std on all '08 Focus, '08 Fusion, '08 Five-hundred

Thanks for that.

 

Excellent news on standard Stability Control. If the competition doesn't yet have it, that could be a very good selling point.

 

Scott

[BORG]

I am not replacing the LS with the MKZ, it's actually replacing the Aviator. The Mercury Mountaineer was an option but we're done paying $100 for gas each week for just one car.

 

The MKZ is an OK car, a little overpriced but the V6 is easy to live with. Handling has improved since the Zephyr, although it lacks a solid and stable feel. The steering is hard to get use to, it's very quirky because you get a lot of torque response when taking a corner but it's otherwise very lose. I'm not use to that 'rubberband' feel. The whole car feels really numb and anomalous, it's not a well connected machine and you can tell you're not riding a very carefully engineered machine. The Mercury Milan I tested is actually much more direct and pure, I would rather have that car over the sloppy MKZ and its hard/ flat seats and ergonomically unpleasant interior design. It's a much better value and feels a lot more comfortable and responsive. It really comes down to the drive-train and the Lincoln badge, that is the major reason we're going with the MKZ. The car is not particularly more attractive or better equipped (the THX system is not very good and was actually broken in the tester) than the Milan. If this had been a year ago, there is no way I would have chosen the Zephyr over the Milan, it's just not good enough to be worth the premium. Fortunately, Ford has opened its pocket books with some rebates on the MKZ now so it's a better buy.

 

When it comes time to replace the Lincoln LS, I will probably look for something really different from FoMoCo, or look at a CTS.

 

Ironically, the only thing that I really can't live with in the MKZ is the dashboard. It's defining feature is absolutely it's most unpleasant to live with. Its tall, blocky, and just hideous! As soon as I got behind the dash of a Milan, I felt a LOT more comfortable. It's clean and unobtrusive with a tasteful and easy to use design. It really reminds me of my LS, but with crisper and more modern design.

Edited November 13, 2006 by BORG

[MGallun]

when somebody has that many negatives about a car before the actually own it, i would think they would look elsewhere lol.

[BORG]

when somebody has that many negatives about a car before the actually own it, i would think they would look elsewhere lol.

 

Well, you'd be surprised

 

Really, it does come down to the drivetrain. Since I complained so much about the car, I should compliment the drivetrain. It is much smoother and more powerful than the D30, especially off the line. The D30 isn't so bad when it's up to speed, but it under hard acceleration that the D30 really shows its inadequacies. Its like riding a garbage disposer, it's extremely coarse and unresponsive. There is NOTHING there when you mash the pedal, no torque to speak of. The D35 is still toque-less, but it pulls through the gears a lot quicker and MUCH smoother. That really is the key, it's very easy to live with even if it's not a hot-rod engine.

Edited November 13, 2006 by BORG

[matthewq4b]

I normally can not stand all the extra trac control ABS ect crap but ESC is some thing that actualy works very well. AWD RWD or FWD it is a nice option to have. Especially if you live any where that gets the white stuff.

 

More often than not the ESC will save your butt when road conditions change greatly and unexpectedly such as driving over bridges in winter etc.

 

I can live with out ABS and trac control and be happier for it but the ESC is some thing that even I would like to have to have in car (as long as you can disable it)

 

Matthew

[BORG]

Prepare to be flamed by the "triplets are god" group. They are more radical than the Panther Mafia.

 

I did praise the Milan! That car deserves more attention.

 

When I get a chance to spend more time with the MKZ, I may be kinder. But I can't emphasize what a difference the D35 makes. I mean its not magical, but it's a nice glimpse at what is to come for the rest of the fleet.

[RichardJensen]

you can tell you're not riding a very carefully engineered machine

Well, your statements about the Milan prove otherwise--if the CD3 architecture was not 'carefully engineered', the Milan would be equally, if not even more sloppy. The MKZ is just not engineered to YOUR preferences. Odds are I would find it an even more comfortable daily driver than the Milan, but then again, I'm a big fan of comfort these days, not cornering on rails and all that stuff.

 

Lease the Milan, f'r cryin' out loud. Lincoln badge ain't worth that much compromise.

[BORG]

Well, your statements about the Milan prove otherwise--if the CD3 architecture was not 'carefully engineered', the Milan would be equally, if not even more sloppy. The MKZ is just not engineered to YOUR preferences. Odds are I would find it an even more comfortable daily driver than the Milan, but then again, I'm a big fan of comfort these days, not cornering on rails and all that stuff.

 

Lease the Milan, f'r cryin' out loud. Lincoln badge ain't worth that much compromise.

 

I meant to illustrate that the adjustments made to the Milan to make a Lincoln come off as compromises rather than carefully engineered adjustments. The steering is needlessly numb and loose. I don't mind the suspension tweaks, but there is a great deal of wallow in the handling but it's no softer than my very nimble Lincoln LS. The track on the car is very narrow, it doesn't feel sure-footed and that's one of the problems with a softer suspension on this chasis.

 

And I want the D35 and I'm willing to believe that I will adapt to the MKZ as long as the drivetrain is good.

 

Sound isolation is good, not as good as my LS but it's very close. There is more road noise and engine noise, but it's not substantially worse.

 

One of the things I do like about the MKZ over the LS is that it seems a little more rugged. There is much more travel in the suspension and better ground clearance. It looks like a car better suited to rougher terrain and certainly more appropriate for snowy conditions. I wouldn't feel as apprehensive about taking this car across unpaved roads or blasting through water logged roads. It's more rough n ready than the autobahn ready LS.

Edited November 14, 2006 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

Sound isolation is good, not as good as my LS but it's very close.

Bearing in mind, of course that the LS was designed to sell for thousands more than your MKZ, right?

[BORG]

Bearing in mind, of course that the LS was designed to sell for thousands more than your MKZ, right?

 

The Lincoln LS also started around $29,000 back in the day. And it topped off around $39,000 before the 2003 update. I can tell you unequivocally that the MKZ does not compare favorably to the kind of value the LS presented.

Edited November 14, 2006 by BORG

[RichardJensen]

The Lincoln LS also started around $29,000 back in the day. And it topped off around $39,000 before the 2003 update. I can tell you unequivocally that the MKZ does not compare favorably to the kind of value the LS presented.

Well, the last LS V6 sold was $32,640 to start, with the appearance package taking it up to $36k. Most of the stuff on the "Appearance package" is standard on the MKZ, so you're looking at about a $6k price difference.

 

For that much, the LS dang well should've been a more refined vehicle.