Hackett 100-Day Review - Page 9 - Ford Inside News Community
 122Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #81 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-15-2017, 10:52 PM
Ford Explorer
 
wingsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,851
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Yeah, it had a nice plastic engine cover with a big TF. But the big internal joke was that they put an old pushrod motor in it to drive it on and off stage and photo opps.
2b2 likes this.

**********************

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
wingsnut is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #82 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-15-2017, 10:56 PM
Ford Explorer
 
Andrew L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 5,929
Send a message via AIM to Andrew L
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Just for reference...


From the Wikipedia: The Lincoln concept featured an independent rear suspension, with MacPherson Struts up front. The engine selected for the MKR concept introduced the new generation of Ford twin-turbocharged engines. The prototype TwinForce 3.5L twin-turbo, direct-injection gasoline V6 was also capable of running on E85 ethanol, producing up to 415-hp, and 400 pound force-feet (540 N∑m) of torque.

Not saying you are wrong Wings just posting what Ford said in their press or what they advertised with the concept. Under all of that probably was what you mentioned the old 3.8 Essex.
2b2 likes this.

Current Car: 2013 Lincoln MKZ Hybrid Reserve Ice Storm 2.0h CVT
Previous Cars
2008 Ford Focus SE Sedan White 2.0L Duratec I4 4 Speed Automatic
2004 Lincoln LS V6 Luxury Cashmere Tri-Coat 3.0L Duratec V6 5 Speed Automatic with SST
1999 Mercury Sable LS Premium Toreador Red Clear Coat Metalic 3.0L Duratec V6 4 Speed Automatic
Andrew L is offline  
post #83 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-15-2017, 11:00 PM
Ford Explorer
 
wingsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,851
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

To be honest, I never saw what was under the hood. I am only reporting what everyone seemed to know within Ford.
So who knows. But those turbo locations are quite suspect.

**********************

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
wingsnut is online now  
 
post #84 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 01:10 AM
Focus RS WRC
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 866
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Everything on this thread since I brought up the MKR indicates that this car could have been built as a successor to the Lincoln LS.

My belief is that the Ford family shareholders and the chairman thought that the MKR was too good/hot/desirable for Lincoln, the brand that does not have their name. I'll continue to believe that until Ford shows me that they're serious about giving Lincoln some steak and sizzle. The MKR was poised to do just that and they shot it down.

Hackett; the ball is in your court.
glyphics is offline  
post #85 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 01:35 AM Thread Starter
Ford Kuga
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,812
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by glyphics View Post
Everything on this thread since I brought up the MKR indicates that this car could have been built as a successor to the Lincoln LS.

My belief is that the Ford family shareholders and the chairman thought that the MKR was too good/hot/desirable for Lincoln, the brand that does not have their name. I'll continue to believe that until Ford shows me that they're serious about giving Lincoln some steak and sizzle. The MKR was poised to do just that and they shot it down.

Hackett; the ball is in your court.
A concept really has no connection to reality, it's entirely a facade on-top of a borrowed platform probably plucked from the Ford backlot and butchered to the point it barely drives. No engineering has actually gone into that and I would not be entirely surprised if the engine is just a cover over the Mustang V6 that was in the D2C at the time. Ford would never have handed off a prototype engine to a prototyping company to build their concept. Remember Ford doesn't actually make their concepts, they are contracted out by coach-builders like most carmakers.

Last edited by Assimilator; 08-16-2017 at 01:38 AM.
Assimilator is offline  
post #86 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 01:01 PM
Ford Falcon
 
rmc523's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 2,603
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assimilator View Post
The MKR was actually built on the D2C platform and was suppose to have a 405HP 3.5L V6 "Twin Force" engine which was a precursor to EcoBoost before it picked up that name. Lincoln was suppose to use the "Twin Force" name instead of EcoBoost, they even had MKS prototypes running around with big "TF" engine covers. Not sure what was imaginary and what was actually in the rolling concept.
I still think Lincoln should've (they still could) used the TwinForce name, while Ford uses EcoBoost. Instead they tried to carry over the good image EcoBoost had to Lincolns, but it also just reinforced the tarted up Ford connection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by glyphics View Post
Everything on this thread since I brought up the MKR indicates that this car could have been built as a successor to the Lincoln LS.

My belief is that the Ford family shareholders and the chairman thought that the MKR was too good/hot/desirable for Lincoln, the brand that does not have their name. I'll continue to believe that until Ford shows me that they're serious about giving Lincoln some steak and sizzle. The MKR was poised to do just that and they shot it down.

Hackett; the ball is in your court.
NO. NO. NO. Borg correctly pointed out why not.

Again, MULALLY WAS READY TO APPROVE IT; IT WAS NOT FEASIBLE TO PRODUCE. WE WOULD'VE GOTTEN IT IF IT WERE. It has nothing to do with it being "too good."

Current Vehicles:
2009 Ford Flex Limited w/ AWD
Light Ice Blue/White Suede Roof | Med. Lt. Stone Interior | Vista Roof
2018 Ford Mustang GT Convertible
Lightning Blue | Black Top | Black Interior
rmc523 is offline  
post #87 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 01:49 PM
Ford Explorer
 
wingsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,851
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Twin Force does not work as well on an I4 turbo

**********************

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
wingsnut is online now  
post #88 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 04:49 PM
Ford Falcon
 
rmc523's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 2,603
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingsnut View Post
Twin Force does not work as well on an I4 turbo
What do you mean?

From what I understood, the TwinForce name referred to the combination of DI and Turbocharging, not twin/dual turbos.
Assimilator likes this.

Current Vehicles:
2009 Ford Flex Limited w/ AWD
Light Ice Blue/White Suede Roof | Med. Lt. Stone Interior | Vista Roof
2018 Ford Mustang GT Convertible
Lightning Blue | Black Top | Black Interior
rmc523 is offline  
post #89 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 05:11 PM
Ford Explorer
 
wingsnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,851
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmc523 View Post
What do you mean?

From what I understood, the TwinForce name referred to the combination of DI and Turbocharging, not twin/dual turbos.
Sure, but still not as well. The cool fact is that it worked both ways with a V6 twin. DI is more about economy than it is power however, so the Force component is minimal. Ford tunes their GTDI primarily for a balance of power and FE. I have grown accustomed to the 2T designation now, canít say I would be more excited if it were 2TF. Or 35TF. Starts to sound like transmission codes.

**********************

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
wingsnut is online now  
post #90 of 182 (permalink) Old 08-16-2017, 05:27 PM
Ford Falcon
 
rmc523's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 2,603
Re: Hackett 100-Day Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingsnut View Post
Sure, but still not as well. The cool fact is that it worked both ways with a V6 twin. DI is more about economy than it is power however, so the Force component is minimal. Ford tunes their GTDI primarily for a balance of power and FE. I have grown accustomed to the 2T designation now, canít say I would be more excited if it were 2TF. Or 35TF. Starts to sound like transmission codes.
Well, they wouldn't have been badged "2.0TF", they would've received their own additional logo, like when models got "2.0" + an EcoBoost badge.

They had a TwinForce logo:



So it would've been "2.0" + a TwinForce badge (likely under the 2.0).

Current Vehicles:
2009 Ford Flex Limited w/ AWD
Light Ice Blue/White Suede Roof | Med. Lt. Stone Interior | Vista Roof
2018 Ford Mustang GT Convertible
Lightning Blue | Black Top | Black Interior
rmc523 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Inside News Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome