My biggest concern with this idea of a FWD/AWD/RWD all in one platform is will trying to be all things to all people mean they'll be less than competent? ... Ford is taking an already difficult job and making significantly more difficult.
The rumors make CD6 sound like an outright engineering miracle, ha ha. I still believe it's just a version of CD4 for Explorer and Aviator.
I believe Ford's stance on the universal platform concept is that it sounds good in theory but in practice it doesn't make any sense. At Ford, each new platform is now becoming an offshoot of each other, similar tech and systems but less confines to make it work with all. I would not be surprised if Lincoln gets a variant of a Ford platform for it's next C/D cars and Crossovers.
I won't be at all surprised if D6/CD6 keeps some aspects or even parts(bin) from CD4
I believe has some parts(bin) from both CD3 and EUCD
All I'd want is for many-many vehicles be ABLE to go down the same assemblyline
has Not been the case...in practice, if not in theory
for example & to belabor the point
COULD a FusionZ be made on the EdgeMKX's assemblyline without million$ to make changes('improvements')?
(since I'm belaboring) could a Taurus/MKS/Explorer share an assemblyline with a Flex/MKT?
even (& I doN'T know):
Do the Edge,MKX;Flex,MKT use One or TWO assemblylines up at Oakville?
my concern is largely for Lincoln to be able to Plan for relatively-niche vehicles...
...like a MARK
I'd really Really like for FLincMoCo to start building 117.9" wlb Mark & Aviator precursors
This Year! on what I presume to be an under-used portion of Oakville
(getting slightly worked up over something completely unrelated...) I see NO reason to continue building either the MKS or MKT, as is, effective immediately