MkZ tested by Car and Driver

[Rofl Wafflez]

I think C&D missed the mark with the purpose of this car. If they walked into this test drive expecting BMW-esque handling, of course they will walk away disappointed.

Looking at the "Lows" they listed:

-Uncomfortable seats- This is probably subjective. Autoweek LOVED the seats in the 2.0T model they tested.

-FWD-based platform inhibits handling- This is a low? Of course it will inhibit it's handling! The ES, LaCrosse, and TL have the same issue! I don't understand how you can consider that a low when all other competitors carry the same package. Compare the MKZ test numbers to the TL SH-AWD that C&D tested a while back and you'll find the numbers nearly identical and the Lincoln did it with a significantly inferior AWD system.

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad

TL SH-AWD- .86g
MKZ AWD- .85g

Zero to 60 mph

TL SH-AWD- 6.2 seconds
MKZ AWD- 6.3 seconds

Braking, 70–0 mph

TL SH-AWD- 178ft
MKZ AWD- 169ft

Finally, they complain about the price of the model that was tested. I'm not sure I'D be willing to pay $50k for a fully-loaded MKZ V6 AWD, but those cars are going to be making up less than 5% of sales with the 2.0T and Hybrid models making up the VAST majority of sales. I'm not sure sending C&D a fully-loaded AWD V6 model was a smart thing for Lincoln to do since it's not a very good representation of what most buyers will be purchasing, but that's Lincoln's fault.

So, when you take out the subjective front seats and their complaint about it's FWD limitations that every vehicle that it competes with has, the car doesn't seem to have very many negatives. They didn't complain about MyLincoln Touch which I am shocked about. I was pretty sure the car would've gotten panned because of it.

I've heard people on other sites complain about the weight of this tested car, but I think people keep forgetting how unnecessary that gimmicky glass roof is and how much weight it adds (probably around 150-200 lbs) over the single panel moonroof. 4100 lbs means it still weighs 400 lbs less than an MKS AWD model. An Acura TL SH-AWD model weighs 4000 lbs. Take out the glass roof and I bet the MKZ weighs less.

I'd be more interested to read a test drive of a FWD V6 MKZ without the glass roof. That car probably weighs some 300-400 lbs less than the one C&D tested.

[AM222]

-FWD-based platform inhibits handling- This is a low? Of course it will inhibit it's handling! The ES, LaCrosse, and TL have the same issue! I don't understand how you can consider that a low when all other competitors carry the same package. Compare the MKZ test numbers to the TL SH-AWD that C&D tested a while back and you'll find the numbers nearly identical and the Lincoln did it with a significantly inferior AWD system.

I think that's the point, the guys at Car and Driver were probably expecting something better from Lincoln's comeback car, not just a car that can match an entry-level premium/luxury sedan like an Acura TL.

Honestly, I think Lincoln shouldn't be going after Buick or Acura, they should aim higher and target Cadillac again (like in the past) and other established luxury brands like Mercedes, BMW, Jaguar etc.

I was wondering why a company that once made luxury cars like this...

...is now making cars that compete with these?


I think the new MKZ is a good car, but it seems a bit more Mercury than Lincoln.

[ZanatWork]

As I keep saying, and it keeps getting noses out of joint at another Ford news site:

1. Lincolns ARE gussied-up Fords...so they should be Mercuries. Mercury at least has a racing heritage and was supposed to be just upmarket from Ford.

2. Ford killed the wrong division, and shouldn't bother with Lincoln until it learns how to make true luxury cars.

I LIKE Mercury, in fact I LOVED Mercuries. When I criticize the current Lincolns, it's because they have the wrong freakin' badge on the trunklid.

Also, they need to learn how to tune the AWD system for performance cars. The same complaint hindered the last Fusion Sport.

[Iiari]

As I keep saying, and it keeps getting noses out of joint at another Ford news site:
2. Ford killed the wrong division, and shouldn't bother with Lincoln until it learns how to make true luxury cars.

Here's my way of looking at it... What's a luxury item at all? Arguably, something that is bespoke, rare, and of a clearly elevated nature in some regard, be it craftsmanship, technology, or performance.

By those standards, I would argue that there really are NO luxury cars at all under $100,000. Only MB and BMW have bespoke platforms, but they are hardly rare (together making up 50% of the parking lot at my workplace, of which half of those are 3-series) and some would argue that their mainstream models don't really offer elevated anything. In an auto landscape where a Ford Focus or Kia Forte and a BMW 5 series or Lexus GS really, if we're being honest, have shocking amounts of reliability, performance, and option overlap across their range, what's "luxury?" What's "special?"

My answer is it's all about branding and what that brand says about the buyer. I believe nothing under $100,000 is "luxury," everything under that and above $35,000 is "upscale." The question is just at what level of investment by the mass manufacturer. MB, BMW, and VW/Audi (and Toyota/Lexus, GM/Cadillac, and Tata/Jaguar to near but lesser extents) are investing enormous amounts to be what I consider "high upscale." Several automakers (Honda/Acura, Ford/Lincoln, GM/Buick, Geely Volvo) are holding back and betting that the huge investment in "bespoke" isn't worth it and are staking out the "low upscale" market. Nissan/Infiniti is in-between but seems to be about to make the investment jump (racing, performance models, etc) to "high." Outside of reviewers, to an average "upscale" buyer, will a 40K MKZ or TL be that much less satisfying, less upscale than a similarly sized or optioned 60K 5 series or GS? Will the public distinguish between "low" and "high" upscale?

The enthusiast will always know the difference, but I argue the average buyer doesn't care and as car prices go up, "lower" will be a high volume place to be and that Ford is probably making the right business call killing Mercury (which was too low) and keeping Lincoln as "low upscale." I think the Lincoln brand is too damaged to ever be elevated to "high upscale" in the public mind. Cadillac had its more glorious past and name to be the foundation of its resuscitation. If Ford ever wants to do true "high upscale," then they'll need to create a new brand altogether.

The danger here for Lincoln in "low upscale," though, is what happens when the "high upscale" brands decide to directly compete with the "lower upscale" brands. What happens when, as a recent Motor Trend editorial proposed, when a future MB A class can be had for less than a fully outfitted Fusion? That's the danger of being "low upscale" Lincoln.

[2b2]

Ooooooooooooo ^philosophy

think one of my bigger problems is "bespoke"
thought it means "custom" as in "customized"/personalized/tailored
&
not at all sure if (like custom upholstery) picking stuff off an available list really counts
(tho custom-tinted paint does...imho?)

...By those standards, I would argue that there really are NO luxury cars at all under $100,000...

AGREE that pricepoint IS a major threshold

...If Ford ever wants to do true "high upscale," then they'll need to create a new brand altogether...

tell the truth, Iiari
Did Nruggiero PAY you to post this?

...Outside of reviewers, to an average "upscale" buyer, will a 40K MKZ or TL be that much less satisfying, less upscale than a similarly sized or optioned 60K 5 series or GS? Will the public distinguish between "low" and "high" upscale?

I don't think it sucks, "Car and Driver" was probably just expecting a car that was much better and much more luxurious than the Fusion it's based on...
...making it drive and handle differently from lower priced Ford model is an even bigger step in the right direction.
Many people will probably still consider the MKZ as a Lexus ES350 or Acura TL competitor and not as a Cadillac CTS or Mercedes E-class competitor.

I really REALLY wonder if...
- one could sufficiently disguise an A6 &or ES
- tell reviewers it was the new Ford-based Lincoln
IF they'd still say it was too much like the Fusion?

1. Lincolns ARE gussied-up Fords...so they should be Mercuries. Mercury at least has a racing heritage and was supposed to be just upmarket from Ford.

2. Ford killed the wrong division, and shouldn't bother with Lincoln until it learns how to make true luxury cars.

I LIKE Mercury, in fact I LOVED Mercuries. When I criticize the current Lincolns, it's because they have the wrong freakin' badge on the trunklid.

Also, they need to learn how to tune the AWD system for performance cars. The same complaint hindered the last Fusion Sport.

[AM222]

I really REALLY wonder if...
- one could sufficiently disguise an A6 &or ES
- tell reviewers it was the new Ford-based Lincoln
IF they'd still say it was too much like the Fusion?

The Audi A6 is not just like any transverse engined mid-size sedan.
One thing Audi did was move the front wheels forward and move the longitudinally mounted engine backwards to improve weight distribution. (The Quattro V6 carries 55% of its weight up front, typical FWD-based cars carry 58%-60% weight up front)
They did this by positioning the front differential ahead of the clutch, this allowed them to move the front axle forward by about 4 inches.


The A6's Quattro system is also RWD-biased, 40% front and 60% rear.

Aside from improving weight distribution, they also fixed the proportions.
Audi A6 with a longitudinally mounted engine.


VW Passat with a transverse engine.


Unlike the Fusion and MKZ, the A6 and similar sized Passat ride on different platforms.

[2b2]

^ I know, AM222 (TY for posting the info)
but was trying to make a point about reviewers
crossreference: GLEAN

&
here's a LINK to the Autoweek review thread

[AM222]

^ I know, AM222 (TY for posting the info)
but was trying to make a point about reviewers
crossreference: GLEAN

&
here's a LINK to the Autoweek review thread

The difference between the two tests is Car and Driver did a more complete Instrumented Test/Road test, while Autoweek just did a Driving impression.
This explains why Autoweek's review talks more on ride quality and NVH (when it was driven on public roads), while Car and Driver focuses on more things like handling (skidpad), quarter mile, braking etc.

I believe instrumented tests usaully allow you to push the car more which usually reveals more of the car's handling characteristics.

If I recall correctly, instrumented tests are usually done in closed courses/ facilities and not public roads.

[2b2]

TY2, AM222

yet
when moving beyond charts & numbers to words,
imho the thoughts and feelings (& proclivities) of the reviewer come into it
so
I'm gonna "borrow" a post from MKII that's in a locked-thread elsewhere:

English is my 1st language but could someone translate for me what this bit from this writer means............the MKZ never recedes far enough from a driver’s awareness to become secondary to the driving experience. That’s a necessity in the entry-luxury arena, even in the sportiest entries; to put it in cinematic terms, the car doesn’t generate a suspension of disbelief.

imho
that passage suggests (to me) that the reviewer doesn't really LIKE cars
and resents being reminded he's IN one

[ZanatWork]

John Phillips' column has a pretty telling statement, which echoes what I've been saying (and which is likely getting me banned from BON): "I'm just worried that you guys euthanized Mercury so that Lincoln could become Mercury".

Great, now I'm a freakin' prophet.