New Lincoln MKS

[Roni]

If this artical is accurate:

"2009 Lincoln MKS Sedan Will Debut Ford's TwinForce Engine Technology...The New Sedan Will Put Out 415HP"


2009 Lincoln MKS Sedan Will Debut Ford's TwinForce Engine Technology...The New Sedan Will Put Out 415HP (The Torque Report)

If you look further in the artical you will find this:

"The Ford Mustang is going to receive a 5.0L TwinForce V8 and Ford's full-size pickups and SUVs will receive a larger 6.2L V8 with the same technology. The V8 engines will also have cylinder deactivation technology."


The reason I googled this new Lincoln is because they had this artical in my local paper that states this:

"Later this model year(2009), the MKS will be the first vehicle to offer Ford's new gasoline turbo direct-injection engine technology. Lincoln says the engine will make the MKS the most powerful and fuel-efficient all-wheel drive luxury sedan on the market."


Lincoln projects solid, high-tech confidence

I am thinking of getting a new Mustang in 2010

 

[Five Oh Brian]

Actually, the EcoBoost V6 that's coming early next year in the MKS is slated to make 340hp and 340tq. The 415hp figure is what Ford Motor Company believes they can safely tune this engine to, but it will not be in the MKS. An EcoBoost Mustang V6 at 415hp is more likely. An EcoBoost Mustang V8 has not been confirmed, and is very unlikely given the newest EPA fuel economy mandates.

In the meantime, I'll just continue enjoying my 440+ hp '07 Mustang GT that gets 24+ mpg on the highway.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

If this artical is accurate:

"2009 Lincoln MKS Sedan Will Debut Ford's TwinForce Engine Technology...The New Sedan Will Put Out 415HP"


2009 Lincoln MKS Sedan Will Debut Ford's TwinForce Engine Technology...The New Sedan Will Put Out 415HP (The Torque Report)

If you look further in the artical you will find this:

"The Ford Mustang is going to receive a 5.0L TwinForce V8 and Ford's full-size pickups and SUVs will receive a larger 6.2L V8 with the same technology. The V8 engines will also have cylinder deactivation technology."

Please note that the article you referenced is 14 months old. A lot of facts and figures have changed since then. Even the name of the twin turbo system has changed (from TwinForce to EcoBoost).

 

[bluecar]

If I'm not mistaken, I believe the engine is transverse mounted and even 4wd would not be the same as a longitude mounted engine rwd. I love the kick from the rear wheels. Alas, a dying breed. Luxo sedan lovers would be relegated to the Caddies and the Hemis.

 

[metroplex]

They tested the MKS AWD w/ the 3.7L V6 in Car and Driver. It is an understeering piece of dog***** with a decent interior and SYNC. It is not going to be an Audi killing beast and in fact, the MKS AWD V6 is $48k as tested. I could buy a 2009 Audi A4 3.2 Quattro with a 40/60 (front/rear) power bias that pulls 0.89G in the skidpad with MINIMAL understeer for the same price. Audi has switched over to the B8 or variant of the B8 for most of their new models, and have started to go with a 40/60 power bias to make it more fun to drive. The Subaru WRX STI has a similar split, as does the Audi R8 supercar and Audi S5 (which IIRC, is where the B8 first debuted). You can tell if it is a new Audi or old Audi by the headlamps and grille. The new architecture utilizes headlamps with LED DRL's that run underneath the HID projectors like white eyeliner.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

The vast majority of major auto magazine reviews of the new 08 MKS have been extremely favorable.

 

[metroplex]

The vast majority of major auto magazine reviews of the new 08 MKS have been extremely favorable.

I suppose if you like excessive understeer with pitiful roadholding at a $48k price tag, then yes it is favorable.

 

[Towelly]

I suppose if you like excessive understeer with pitiful roadholding at a $48k price tag, then yes it is favorable.

Have you even driven one or are you taking the word of cornershop rags as straight forward and Unbias ? Ha! I wouldn't beleive Cry and Dodger or Motorweak.....

 

[metroplex]

Have you even driven one or are you taking the word of cornershop rags as straight forward and Unbias ? Ha! I wouldn't beleive Cry and Dodger or Motorweak.....

Considering 90% of the power is transmitted to the front wheels in the MKS AWD, I wouldn't doubt C&D's analysis. If you want to pay $48k for a mobile iPod interface with leather interior, go right ahead. It just seems odd anyone on a Mustang forum would even like an understeer-laden POS like the MKS. The MKS is just an overglorified Ford Flex / Taurus / Sable, which are all built on the D3 platform. The D3 cars all weigh significantly more than a Crown Victoria, which already weighs 4200-4300 lb.

BTW, based on previous experience, Car and Driver was spot on with many of their reviews of American cars. The Crown Vic, GM Epsilon, Ford S197 Mustang, Bullitt, etc... I have yet to personally find an inaccurate review from their magazine. They even said the Bullitt was very fun to drive and S197 owners lambasted Car and Driver. Do they want every car magazine to bend over backwards and praise Ford for all its glory in making "perfect" cars?

They only way they can improve the MKS AWD EcoBoost V6 is by transferring most of the power to the rear wheels right from the start: 40/60 front/rear or even a 50/50 split. However that is unlikely to happen since the D3 was intended from the start to be a front-wheel drive platform, or at least use a transverse mounted engine and transaxle. The Taurus/Sable AWD use a Haldex-style AWD system, which favors the front wheels. So with 340 hp, you will end up with even MORE torque steer and excessive understeer on the FWD or AWD trims. Ford isn't smart or bold enough to make a car that would actually compete with Cadillac or Audi. The MKS is nothing more than a Lincoln 500/Taurus, just like the Lincoln MKX (Edge), MKZ (Fusion), and MKT (F-150), although the MKZ AWD is a pretty good deal at $31k w/ X-Plan. It has a lot of understeer as well, but is significantly less expensive than the MKS AWD ($48k).

 

[ranger04]

I read in left lane that the 2010 mustang GT will have a new 400 hp and 400 foot pound 5.0 V-8 that will get 15% better mpg than the current 4.6. There are mustang 5.0 test mules running a round Detroit as we speak. Just because an engine makes more hp or has a few more cubes doesn't mean it will have to use more gas. The new duratec 2.5 in the escape has 171 hp, 21 more than the 2.3 it replaces, but it gets better mpg than the 2.3. There has been alot of rumors, but the most common is a new 5.0, so many in fact that I wouldn't be afraid to bet money (if I had any) that the mustang will be getting a 5.0 V-8, not a 6.2 huricane or a 5.8 boss, but a 5.0 direct injected 400 hp engine that gets better mpg than the 300 hp 4.6. Left lane goes so far as stating it will be in the 2010 model. With this motor being so high tech, I'm sure it won't be as mod friendly as the 4.6, maybe more so to FI. So for those who like to tinker and mod your engines, keep your 3v and build it. For the lazy guy's, buy a 2010 GT. Anyway you slice the pie, there's a new 5.0 V-8 comming. Also the owner of my dealership went to Detroit for a new prduct review. He told me not to get to attached to my 07, cause I will want to be trading it in for a 2010. When I asked him why, he would only say, "a very fast 5.0 is comming".

 

[metroplex]

The new 2.5L DOHC I4 does get 171+ hp and is already available in the US and European Mazda6. It was supposed to be available for the 2009 Mazda3 but we may see it in the 2010 Mazda3. It is a direct-injected version of a slightly modified 2.3L DOHC I4. For details, just look at the 2009 Mazda6. It was already available in Europe for at least a year.

Speaking with some of the people that worked on the 5.0L and 6.2L V8 engines, there were never any plans to implement the 6.2L into the Mustang platform. It was designed to be for the F-series from the get-go. The 5.0L modular "gen 2" is slated for a 2010+ Mustang, either as a special edition first or standard engine from the get-go.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

I suppose if you like excessive understeer with pitiful roadholding at a $48k price tag, then yes it is favorable.

I'm not saying that I (or the typical Mustang enthusiast) likes understeer, but you should consider that the target audience for this car is not likely a performance enthusiast. The lay person needs understeer built in to the chassis settings to keep them safer should they corner too fast. Personally, I prefer oversteering setups that promote "tail-out" cornering, but I'm sure that I (we) are in the minority and the MKS is set up for the masses.

Car magazines (and us enthusiasts) value performance (straight line and cornering) way more than the general public. The MKS is a great vehicle for the general public's needs. Go out and drive one. I have!

 

[metroplex]

Brian,

I understand that Lincoln has a different target demographic in mind than the Mustang platform, but the average customer is going to look at the dollar figure and the amount of performance they get. For $48k, I have a choice between a fully loaded Audi A4 3.2 Quattro with 40/60 (front/rear) power bias, Lexus IS-F (8-speed auto w/ 5.0L V8), BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, Cadillac, etc... the MKS AWD pales in comparison to all of these other cars in terms of handling, performance, and driving pleasure. I just don't see the value in the MKS AWD when you can buy a comparably priced Audi, BMW, or Lexus that would run circles around the MKS and provide the same or better luxury.

Every production car is going to have understeer for safety and liability reasons, but when "EXCESSIVE" understeer is highlighted, along with a sub-par 0.82G of roadholding force (a Mazda3, Fusion, and Bullitt is capable of at least 0.85G), it sends out red flags. The Ford Flex and MKS AWD had comparable handling specs which doesn't strike me as indicating the MKS is going to be fun to drive. For the same money as the MKS AWD, I'd look at a 2009 Audi A4 3.2 Quattro (0.89G roadholding, MINIMAL understeer, much better straight line acceleration).

Ford needs to let the D3 die a quick death and get on with it. I seriously doubt they can do much with the Haldex-style AWD in terms of shifting more full-time power to the rear wheels, so you will always end up with the excessive understeer and more torque steer from the 340 hp engine.

 

[NastyStang113]

I love people who speculate.

 

[metroplex]

The news that the MKS was expected to receive the EcoBoost V6 was already released months ago. The current MKS AWD just doesn't handle anywhere as good as a foreign car of the same price.

I would pay at most $35k for the MKS AWD. I don't see any justification to sell it at $48k.