Can I tell the difference between 385 and 400 by the seat of the pants, probably not, but that really isn’t the point.  I can’t find any information in the order guide and the dealer didn’t know anything about the power change. I’ve shown examples of the information Ford was providing at the time of the purchase.  Would I still have bought the vehicle, I personally would not have, but my wife bought the vehicle so I can’t speak for her. This is not the only reason I wouldn’t have bought it, I just believe they decontented it too much to justify the purchase and I wouldn’t recommend it to others unless they could get an amazing deal on it.    I am going to email Ford customer service to ask them if they can tell me how to determine what my power rating is. Mostly out of curiosity at this point.     I don’t know if you recall the 99 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra lawsuit regarding the power rating  not being what was stated on their documentation. It does seem there are many in the forums that were not aware of this change.  I mention this for the sake of discussion. 

I’m not sure how I feel about it, more specifically the fastback. I definitely don’t hate it, but I like the current one, though a little long in the tooth. I’ll need to see some more pics to pass final judgment.  

making it even lower would make it even less of a crossover.  Its already low as it is

Just checked the Lincoln website, the 2026 Aviator is listed as 400 hp with 91 octane.

I thought they should have used the 2.3L in the Nautilus from day one to differentiate it from Edge.

Well to be fair, Jim has “no idea” about a lot of things.  Par for the course with this latest quote.  

Just like Nautilus... optional engine dropped from 310 to 285, sadly all that vehicle is missing is a good 70-80HP. Going down from it's glory days of 355HP in it's previous generation.  I feel like saying "Look ship the vehicle from China and keep the "adequate" engine overthere, and let us put a serious 2.3L tuned to 355HP" (like you can opt in the Ranger)

Its called Government subsidies, Jim.....

This carnage across multiple OEMs is an epic example of what happens when government and politics dictate what OEMs should build and what consumers should buy. Most likely nothing will be learned from it and endless examples will unfold in the future.

That is what people miss when discussing vehicle costs. Depreciation is a cost. Depreciation is the accounting process of allocating the cost of a tangible asset (machinery, vehicles, buildings) over its useful life, reflecting its wear and tear. Every mile driven reduces the vehicle's value; the decline isn't linear, but a curve.  https://www.jalopnik.com/2113914/how-depreciation-curve-works-cars/ You are paying for the loss in value of the vehicle when you sell it, not for every mile you drive.  Selling a vehicle bought for $18,000 at 120,000 miles means you lost/consumed $12,000 of its value, either way you pay for its use.