Welll, BMW, Audi and Mercedes probably not. But they were never considered 'competition' in the first place.
Cadillac, however, should get nervous. I just compared images of the CT6 to the Conti. 'Boring' came to my mind...:yikes:
I've been following this thread off and on all day in between duties and must say you are quite the amusing character. :facepalm:But... yeah. Ford is FORD. Everything else was, is, and will be, subservient to that truth.
And now you know the rest of the story.
It's funny how GM can't justify a CTS coupe at this time when Mercedes can justify a C Class coupe, an E Class coupe, and a E Class convertible, and BMW can somehow manage to justify a 4 series coupe, and a 6 series coupe and convertible. Audi, by offering a A5 convertible, still manages to do something Cadillac can't. Don't know how that works for their profits, but if you look at these and imagine yourself rolling through Bel-Air in the sunshine, it can't be all bad.I'll say that you are right on there not being enough sales to justify a cts AND an ats coupe. The coupe market is niche in general. I think caddy made a mistake in doing the boring ats coupe and should have instead continued with the larger cts coupe and continued the dramatic and polarizing styling. I fully support and hope continental gets a luxury/sport coupe version and I've posted that comment elsewhere on FIN. As for cts sales, I've yet to hear Cadillac or JDM say that sales are disappointing, I only read trollsters saying that..in fact JDM has said in an interview, that cts sales are in line with expectations given the price and size increase relative to the second gen cts.
I actually never took the time to think of it this way, but this theory seems to work.And that is a good thing for maintaining the integrity of your core brand. But it has been an ongoing issue for Dearborn when it comes to how to handle other brands. They had no Alfred Sloan to set up the brand hierarchy and after the death of Edsel (the son, not the brand) they never really had any vision to do so. The Edsel brand, the Continental Division, Mercury, Merkur... they were all peripheral, not integral. It still lingers to this day with Lincoln.
Um ... This care is on a bespoke platform built for China .. how is that different? No one who has a chauffeur cares about "driveline deficiencies" and you have no data on whether something like LaCrosse or CT6 rides better than the Conti -- we have no data.What makes you think this is a great car for China??! Do you think that after a coupla decades of German stuff and market-specific Buicks and Caddys that they will happily ignore some of the driveline deficiencies the Continental has?
How condescending of you. China may be run by a bunch of control freaks, but they didn't just fall off the turnip truck.
THIS. Lincoln is doing a pretty **** great job, making this car feel special, unique and "it spoils you" ... not just a "look I am RWD , large sedan, you should like me"Most buyers of this type of car in China are DRIVEN, not driving themselves. They sit in the back seat, and want a comfortable, smooth driving car, which the Continental aims to be. Again, not everyone wants some canyon carving super-sedan.
I am not calling the chinese unsophisticated -- actually no one is. We're saying that if what matters is NVH, we have no data. NVH has nothing to do with RWD, longitudinal engines or anything. However, you seem to be making assumptions about this based on some miguided set of priorities.A good platform doesn't need to carve canyons. It's superior NVH characteristics will make it a superior passenger's car as surely as it will make it a superior driver's car. Again: Audi, BMW, etc.
I find this cynical attitude towards the sophistication of the Chinese to be amusing and troubling, in roughly equal measure.
I ave 2 small corrections.Fact: Lincoln is ham-strung by having to use hand-me-up platforms from their mainstream corporate owner.
Opinion: Since I am anal enough to know which wheels are driven and also highly opinionated about what proportions look good on large sedans, I am (and people like me are) not likely to shop Lincoln (I still sigh when I see the mostly mint Lincoln LS models that still ply our streets), although I might wish to.
Well, you'll be around at least another 3 years. I expect the first D6 will be the Explorer/Aviator debuting sometime in 2018 as as 2019 model. I think the next will be the MKZ in 2019 as a 2020 model. I expect the D6 Continental not before 2021 as a 2022 model. Ford usually has seven year cycles.I'll hover around this site seeking more intel and contributing but if they don't nail it with the upcoming D6, I'm through.
Fact: That thing actually rides on a platform developed by Audi for the A8. The Audi A8 platform is the more sophisticated because it is made from aluminum (it was called the ASF; Aluminum Space Frame). VW Group took that platform and modified it in steel for the Bentley and for the VW Phaeton. The Bentley Continentals (how's that for usurping another automaker's stuff) are certainly not based on a Golf. The only Audi based on any VW was the TT and the A3 which were based on the Golf.This thing ...
... rides on FWD platform and is based on the LAST GENERATION Audi A4 which arguably is based on the Golf.
It seems to me no one cares about those origins. It also seems obvious that no BMW 7series buyer really cares about the Bentley. So, it seems clear to me that there are 2 groups of buyers of large luxury cars, and the recent offerings from BMW, MB, Lexus and most importantly Cadillac have been ignoring the aspiring Bentley buyer -- even though the "base mode" Flying Spur costs $200k ... and there is plenty space to be the "budget Flying Spur" of the market place.
If you want to believe that, I have a time share to sell you.Fact: That thing actually rides on a platform developed by Audi for the A8. The Audi A8 platform is the more sophisticated because it is made from aluminum (it was called the ASF; Aluminum Space Frame). VW Group took that platform and modified it in steel for the Bentley and for the VW Phaeton. The Bentley Continentals (how's that for usurping another automaker's stuff) are certainly not based on a Golf. The only Audi based on any VW was the TT and the A3 which were based on the Golf.
Opinion: Yes, people do care about these origins.
Read these sites. If they are wrong, send in corrections. Meanwhile, leave your time-share in your will.If you want to believe that, I have a time share to sell you.
What are your references? I've shown mine.The A8 platform was reingineered from the A4. So if Ford is "hamstrung by Ford platforms, then that A8 and Bentley are hanstrung by A4 origins. You can put "FACT" before whatever you want, it does not make them so.
Thanks for reminding me how dumb I am. It's likely that most of the time, you're a pretty nice guy.The Golf reference is a stretch, no doubt (and I acknowledge that), but one needs to be dumb to think that VW Golf engineering is completely separate from the Audis -- this is VW after all. Calling Bentley a Golf is a stretch, for sure, tho.
Yes, I am dumb and believe in pixie dust. Feel better?Simple FACT is that Lincoln was given freedom to build its own platform for the Continental and they did using bits from the CD$ (which is currently the best platform Ford has) -- Ford then build the Chinese Taurus on the same hard points to spread the dev cost even further.
If you believe in the pixie dust about A8/Bentley, then how is this such a stretch for you?
"Why is this happening? We don't know what to do! We've tried nothing, and it didn't work!"
I've been following this thread off and on all day in between duties and must say you are quite the amusing character. :facepalm:
Regarding this issue of Ford's upper management, I'd agree with you if Allan Mullaly was still CEO. He internally stated the desire to get rid of Lincoln and after his retirement his dislike of the brand was finally revealed.
However, Mark Fields is now at the helm and it's extremely obvious that he sees the value of having a strong Lincoln brand and the updated MKZ and the new Continental are strong evidence of that; there is simply no disputing that. The fact that the Continental has received so much praise from journalists and consumers alike just confirms that it will make quite the impression once it hits the roads and showrooms. Its also been compared to other midsize luxury vehicles in its segment (5 series, E class, etc. and rightfully so).
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of consumers don't care about platforms, wheel drive type, proportions, or any of that advanced mumbo jumbo. Most people don't even know the difference between a Focus and a Fusion let alone the fact that the Continental is on a heavily modified version. Only we auto enthusiasts really pay attention to that and we are an extremely small minority of the overall market; (however it seems like we are an outspoken majority because we read and participate in forums like these daily). Most drivers just want a comfortable, competently powerful, handsome vehicle that draws some stares. Lincoln's offerings, specifically the Continental delivers on all fronts. Even if it doesn't have night vision. :toyota:
valid points Samesun.This one post illustrates how ill-informed and hostile you are, ignoring facts that don't support your opinion...congrats, you are an official FIN member. Why do so many of these Lincoln discussions degenerate into criticizing the competition rather than acknowledging where lincoln (ford) may have some weakness? I'm a proud Cadillac CTS coupe owner, and I get lots of attention at gas stops, car washes etc. I love driving my Cadillac and I believe they are on a very good and unique, path. I would happily buy a new Lincoln if one should ever appeal to me again. That's Lincoln's biggest issue...they have made themselves irrelevant. The consumer doesn't care. I so hope that the continental is a stunner in person...Lincoln needs a swagger car, something that everyone notices and desires...like the 300 used to be. And lincoln needs the tech to back it up. Good enough isn't enough when the competition is this good.
Not all the people at FIN are like that.......I can say the same thing about a looot of people at GMI, that are fanboys that think that GM products are perfect and are total [email protected]!This one post illustrates how ill-informed and hostile you are, ignoring facts that don't support your opinion..congrats, you are an official FIN member.
Not all the people at FIN are like that... but the ones that are do tend to drive down the collective IQ a quite a bit. Based on my observations, they tend to be a bit less forgiving of trolls over at GMI, and the quality of the discussion is much better as a result.
The Q3/Tiguan/A3/Golf are the same platform. The A4/Passat were the same platform. The Touareg/Q7/Cayenne are the same platform. There is plenty of overlap between the brands, beyond just platforms as well, all the way to transmissions, engines, etc.Fact: That thing actually rides on a platform developed by Audi for the A8. The Audi A8 platform is the more sophisticated because it is made from aluminum (it was called the ASF; Aluminum Space Frame). VW Group took that platform and modified it in steel for the Bentley and for the VW Phaeton. The Bentley Continentals (how's that for usurping another automaker's stuff) are certainly not based on a Golf. The only Audi based on any VW was the TT and the A3 which were based on the Golf.
Opinion: Yes, people do care about these origins.
You do seem far more willing to argue points that directly conflict with reality. So, I grant you that your issue probably isn't IQ, it is probably something more insidious.Not all the people at FIN are like that... but the ones that are do tend to drive down the collective IQ a quite a bit. Based on my observations, they tend to be a bit less forgiving of trolls over at GMI, and the quality of the discussion is much better as a result.