Ford cancels MKS V-8

[Blue II]

Unless they find a way to make gas out of water, we will not see any big cars with 'Hurricane' motors.

 

When gas went over 3$, all bets were off. Now, "bigger is better" is over

 

 

A 5.8 Boss/Hurricane is still in product planning for the Mustang.

[RichardJensen]

Correction. The XC90 is probably the closest relative to the D3 Ford design. The S80 is a whole new platform based on the EUCD, as well all future Volvos.

Yeah. Should've made that clearer.

[Nels Nelson]

The MKS with a twin turbo V-6 is a mistake. It is another example demonstrating that Lincoln is directionless. Lincoln is not a performance brand. It hasn't been one since the '52, '53 and '54 Lincolns of Carrera Panamericana fame. KineticBrian keeps saying how the Lincolns of the sixties outperformed Cadillac and Imperial. A road test of the 1961 model year Lincoln, Cadillac and Imperial in Motor Trend had the Cadillac accelerating to 60mph in 10.4 seconds, the Imperial in 10.5 seconds and the Lincoln a distant third in 12.9 seconds. In a test of 1962 models, the larger Cadillac Fleetwood accelerated to 60 in 10.8 seconds, the Imperial in 11.0 seconds and the Lincoln was third again at 12.4 seconds. In 1970, '71 and '72 Motor trend held an annual "King of the Hill" test between the Marks and the Eldorado. The Eldorado consistently outperformed the Marks but they always picked the Marks because they were more luxurious than the Eldorado.

 

Lincoln will always be an also ran as far as performance is concerned. Especially in comparison to the "Ultimate Driving Machine". So why not go where Wolfgang Reitzle wanted Lincoln: American Luxury. This means distinctly American styling as displayed in the '02 Continental concept along with refined, effortless performance. It should, as the British say, be able to waft. This will not be the case with the twin turbo V-6.

 

I have a '96 SHO and have stated in previous posts my admiration for this engine. It is a jewel. The 4.4 liter Yamaha installed in a D3 would have at least given Lincoln a contemporary, competitive product.

 

One final comment, Audi installed a twin turbo 2.7 liter V-6 in the S6 and Allroad. In 2000, it was picked as a Ward's Ten Best. It put out 250 horsepower. Ward's only complaint, it was a pig when it came to fuel consumption.

[Edgey]

I don't think I ever trusted the rumor that the Yamaha V8 was heading for Lincoln considering its high-end expense. Ford has grown VERY predictable when it commits to projects. The Yamaha engine always struck me as something way too expensive and way too inappropriate for Ford NA applications.

 

I am even more doubtful of a artificially boosted V6 for the Lincoln sedan, especially a turbo version. If they are going to boost power, it might be by variable valve/cam timing or other inobstrusive and cost effective solutions.

 

The MKS generally seems like an uniteresting product, but it should appeal to the elderly audience with very familiar design and luxury performance. Although I can't quite figure out what it will offer more than what is already on the market, especially from Buick and Cadillac.

 

We probably have a better idea of the MSRP now that the V8 is out. I would expect it to top out around $43,000 which will make it very competitive with othe V6 large car rivals. With the V8 I would have expected something closer to $46,000 or $48,000 like the previous Conti. Not because the V8 is a a $5,000 option, but because the perceived value of the car goes up sbustantially. In the past, V8 powered cars pulled huge profit margins beause people were willig to pay a lot more for 'V8' badges.

 

I am growing concerned that Ford is spending a lot of time changing its product plans. The MKS is already an '09 product at this point and its almost entirely based on existing hardware.

Edited August 22, 2006 by Edgey

[blk05stang]

IMO If they did put the TTV6 in this, they would also need a MINIMUM of 5 year 60k warranty to give people peace of mind. I could imagine if they went with the standard year 36,000 mile warranty, your typical Joe-Schmo would either trade the car in with 35,999 miles, or not buy the car at all. Once the warranty was coming close to become expired, Joe would envision BIG dollar repair bills in his future since he'll probably have the opinion the TT was mostly "experimental" technology. I imagine if you showed Joe the same car with a V8 or the TTV6 he would choose the V8 due to he knows what is happening under the hood with some confidence. Since Ford does not use this TT setup on a regular basis people will be 1st interested into the products uniqueness then they will move onto something else with the fear of "If I buy that car, that engine will BLOW!"

 

 

I don't know, perhaps this is my Mr. Cheapskate bleeding through my fingers? :shrug:

[LincolnFan]

any thing about this new 'V8'? is it the boss? is it some re-engineered 4.4? is it a V8 Duratec (3.5/3.0 with 2 more cylinders)?

 

however, if it might show up on the MKS, i doubt it's the Hurricane/Boss, it's 6.2L i know it's not the Discplacement, it's the Physical size of the whole engine.

Edited August 22, 2006 by LincolnFan

[ZanatWork]

FYI I have yet to drive a turbo 6 that gets significantly better mpg than a similar powered V8

 

 

Well, it IS an all-new motor....

[Edgey]

IMO If they did put the TTV6 in this, they would also need a MINIMUM of 5 year 60k warranty to give people peace of mind. I could imagine if they went with the standard year 36,000 mile warranty, your typical Joe-Schmo would either trade the car in with 35,999 miles, or not buy the car at all. Once the warranty was coming close to become expired, Joe would envision BIG dollar repair bills in his future since he'll probably have the opinion the TT was mostly "experimental" technology. I imagine if you showed Joe the same car with a V8 or the TTV6 he would choose the V8 due to he knows what is happening under the hood with some confidence. Since Ford does not use this TT setup on a regular basis people will be 1st interested into the products uniqueness then they will move onto something else with the fear of "If I buy that car, that engine will BLOW!"

I don't know, perhaps this is my Mr. Cheapskate bleeding through my fingers? :shrug:

 

I doubt most people will even understand what VVT is, especially the sort that buy Lincolns. People are only interested in simple facts and impressions about a car. I doubt anybody will be scared away by added engine technology as long as it has enough pick up and does so in a smooth and pleasent fashion. People might become disinterested if the HP is lower than the competition or the MPG and MSRP don't quite convince people to chose V6 sedan over the competition's V8. However, I don't see many V8 powered sedans in this price range beyond the Lucerne.

 

Ford is reliably commited to improving quality and I'm convinced a big reason many of these pet programs are being cut is because they can't gurantee the desired level of quality at a reasonable expense. Consequently you end up with potentially exciting contributions being cut out because bringing that type of technology to Ford is very difficult to prioritize when your budget is so strained.

Edited August 22, 2006 by Edgey

[RichardJensen]

IMO If they did put the TTV6 in this, they would also need a MINIMUM of 5 year 60k warranty

Man, everyone's an expert.

 

BTW, Lincoln powertrain warranty is 7/70.

[Edgey]

Man, everyone's an expert.

 

BTW, Lincoln powertrain warranty is 7/70.

 

It takes quite a bit of money to gurantee quality like that....because it takes even more money to fix for a company this large. Imagine what would happen if the 3.5L developed a headgasket defect like the vaunted 3.8L? Yikes!

Edited August 22, 2006 by Edgey

[retro-man]

.....it's the Physical size of the whore engine.

Now there's a visual!

[LincolnFan]

XFD, sorry.

[KinneticBrian]

The MKS with a twin turbo V-6 is a mistake. It is another example demonstrating that Lincoln is directionless. Lincoln is not a performance brand. It hasn't been one since the '52, '53 and '54 Lincolns of Carrera Panamericana fame. KineticBrian keeps saying how the Lincolns of the sixties outperformed Cadillac and Imperial. A road test of the 1961 model year Lincoln, Cadillac and Imperial in Motor Trend had the Cadillac accelerating to 60mph in 10.4 seconds, the Imperial in 10.5 seconds and the Lincoln a distant third in 12.9 seconds. In a test of 1962 models, the larger Cadillac Fleetwood accelerated to 60 in 10.8 seconds, the Imperial in 11.0 seconds and the Lincoln was third again at 12.4 seconds. In 1970, '71 and '72 Motor trend held an annual "King of the Hill" test between the Marks and the Eldorado. The Eldorado consistently outperformed the Marks but they always picked the Marks because they were more luxurious than the Eldorado.

 

Lincoln will always be an also ran as far as performance is concerned. Especially in comparison to the "Ultimate Driving Machine". So why not go where Wolfgang Reitzle wanted Lincoln: American Luxury. This means distinctly American styling as displayed in the '02 Continental concept along with refined, effortless performance. It should, as the British say, be able to waft. This will not be the case with the twin turbo V-6.

 

I have a '96 SHO and have stated in previous posts my admiration for this engine. It is a jewel. The 4.4 liter Yamaha installed in a D3 would have at least given Lincoln a contemporary, competitive product.

 

One final comment, Audi installed a twin turbo 2.7 liter V-6 in the S6 and Allroad. In 2000, it was picked as a Ward's Ten Best. It put out 250 horsepower. Ward's only complaint, it was a pig when it came to fuel consumption.

 

Nels - If you're going to quote me, you need to get it right. Never did I say that the Lincolns outaccellerated the Cadillacs or the Imperial. When I made reference to the 60's Lincolns shaming them, it was a statement that was in the context of the style of the cars, not the sheer firepower under the hood. The only comment I did make with regard to that is that when Ford launched the Elwood Engel styled Continental, they made sure the car had enough performance under the hood to match it's good looks. In other words they did not, for the sake of cutting corners, drop some wheezy engine from a Ford Fairlane under the hood.

 

The only reference I made about Lincoln outperforming Cadillac was the Secret Service vehicles and the MPFI powered Town Car vs the HT4100 series Fleetwood Brougham.

 

As for Lincoln being an "also ran" in performance - why should it be? How would successfully challenging the so-called "Ultimate Driving Machine" be such a bad thing? Why not make Lincoln a luxury performance brand over time?

[Misteredog]

Idle speculations: A 3.7 - 3.8 litre naturally aspirated V6 with modified heads putting out about 300 hp, or a Ford designed and built 60° 4.7 litre V8 built off the Duratec 35 architecture, more power than the Yamaha and no hefty licensing fees paid to let Ford build them in a Ford plant. Yamaha shouldn't have any problems meeting Volvo's demand but I doubt if the could have met Lincoln's if the MKS sells anywhere near as well as it needs to. But only time will tell.

[waymondospiff]

As this topic rambles along, and I'm enjoying following it, I have a couple thoughts:

 

1. How many GS430s vs. GS300s does Lexus sell? How many E350s vs. E550s at Mercedes? 530s vs. 550s at BMW? M45s vs. M35s at Infiniti? I believe the V6 outsells the V8. But, what if the model had no V8 halo? Like, say, the Acura RL?

 

2. Fuel economy is not the driver. Turbo V6s are not exactly fuel efficient.

 

3. Ford was (alledgedly) going to build a licensed version of the Yamaha at Lima. This would have reduced the production costs. And 315hp is very competitive in the class. In fact better than the Northstar.

 

And most troubling, 4. if Ford isn't willing to pay to put a premium engine in their premium product, why should I spend my money on it when ALL of its competitors have premium engines in their products?

 

As a consumer, why would I buy a MKS with a V6 knowing Ford scrapped the V8 model due to cost? Why not buy the Cadillac STS with the 3.6L? At least I know Cadillac didn't cut corners due to costs.

 

Scott

[Nels Nelson]

Nels - If you're going to quote me, you need to get it right. Never did I say that the Lincolns outaccellerated the Cadillacs or the Imperial. When I made reference to the 60's Lincolns shaming them, it was a statement that was in the context of the style of the cars, not the sheer firepower under the hood. The only comment I did make with regard to that is that when Ford launched the Elwood Engel styled Continental, they made sure the car had enough performance under the hood to match it's good looks. In other words they did not, for the sake of cutting corners, drop some wheezy engine from a Ford Fairlane under the hood.

 

The only reference I made about Lincoln outperforming Cadillac was the Secret Service vehicles and the MPFI powered Town Car vs the HT4100 series Fleetwood Brougham.

 

As for Lincoln being an "also ran" in performance - why should it be? How would successfully challenging the so-called "Ultimate Driving Machine" be such a bad thing? Why not make Lincoln a luxury performance brand over time?

 

The Lincolns had been equipped with the 430 CID MEL V-8 since 1958. Why would they put any other engine in the '61 Lincoln Continental. And if they wanted to make sure it had the power to match its elegant looks why did they only use a two barrel carburetor. Again demonstrating that Lincoln was not interested in best in class performance, only good enough.

 

As an aside when asked what was his favorite Ford, Carroll Shelby said that out of the more than 100 cars he has, if he could keep only one, it would be his '67 Lincoln Convertible.

[wescoent]

As this topic rambles along, and I'm enjoying following it, I have a couple thoughts:

 

1. How many GS430s vs. GS300s does Lexus sell? How many E350s vs. E550s at Mercedes? 530s vs. 550s at BMW? M45s vs. M35s at Infiniti? I believe the V6 outsells the V8. But, what if the model had no V8 halo? Like, say, the Acura RL?

 

2. Fuel economy is not the driver. Turbo V6s are not exactly fuel efficient.

 

3. Ford was (alledgedly) going to build a licensed version of the Yamaha at Lima. This would have reduced the production costs. And 315hp is very competitive in the class. In fact better than the Northstar.

 

And most troubling, 4. if Ford isn't willing to pay to put a premium engine in their premium product, why should I spend my money on it when ALL of its competitors have premium engines in their products?

 

As a consumer, why would I buy a MKS with a V6 knowing Ford scrapped the V8 model due to cost? Why not buy the Cadillac STS with the 3.6L? At least I know Cadillac didn't cut corners due to costs.

 

Scott

 

V6 models for luxury sedans easily outsell the V8 models, by very large margins.

 

315 is definately not even close to competative anymore. BMW has a 360hp V8, Mercedes has a 380hp V8, and Lexus will soon be there as well with their new 380hp V8. Bringing out the Yamaha motor is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Now, if Ford hits them with a twin turbo V6, although it isn't a V8, it'll get the rags talking about how Lincoln is bringing somethign different to the table, and not just lambasting them for handicapping the MKS with an also-ran V8.

 

The 3.5L V6 will be a very premium product. Heck, Cadillac's 3.6L engine is in the G6, Aura, and Buick Lacrosse. The Northstar is in the Buick Lucerne as well. Why should Ford deliberately handicap its products just for the sake of Lincoln exclusivity? The MKZ with the 3.5 will blow the doors off a CTS 3.6, and be freely revving the whole time doing it.

[Hugh]

Idle speculations: A 3.7 - 3.8 litre naturally aspirated V6 with modified heads putting out about 300 hp, or a Ford designed and built 60° 4.7 litre V8 built off the Duratec 35 architecture, more power than the Yamaha and no hefty licensing fees paid to let Ford build them in a Ford plant. Yamaha shouldn't have any problems meeting Volvo's demand but I doubt if the could have met Lincoln's if the MKS sells anywhere near as well as it needs to. But only time will tell.

I looked back at some earlier posts I put up and I mentioned something along these lines. My number was 5.1L for a 8 cyl. I figured: 3.5/3=1.16 repeated so: 3.5 + 1.17(2cyl bank) = 5.2L. I used the mod V8/V10 as a reference.

I there any rumors out about a possible V8 based on the D35 architecture? It makes sense to me.

[matthewq4b]

Obviusly Ford has figured out that the MKS will not fill the role as flag ship adequatly.

So if it is not going to be the flag ship why spend the cash on fitting a V8? Turbo and AWD the V6 not twin just turbo.

The MkZ and MkS are supposed ot appeal to younger buyers. Well a V8 in the MkS may actually be a negative. But a high tech high HP AWD V6 would be a good thing.

 

Ford just has to offer a upscale V8 Sedan in addition. If the rumors of the TC not dieing are true they may be partially true. The TC may be dieing but the full size RWD sedan segment for Lincoln is not. Maybe they are going to Move the Fleet sales on to the GM stretch. And offer a new RWD Lincoln with out the TC name plate. HMM seems a perfect way to get the Conti sow car in to the line up with worrying about it being diluted with fleet sales. And planning a contingency to prevent it.

 

In this segement Fuel milage is not big concern to be honest.

 

 

The MkS the MkZ and the Conti would round out Lincolns line up nicely. Add a MkZ coupe and you are pretty much covering where all the sales are in the mid luxery segment in NA.

 

Does not surprise me that Ford Dropped the V8 for the MKS. But you can be sure Lincoln will not be with out a V8 in the line up for any more than a year or 2 at most.

 

Lincoln has the most loyal buyer group for Large V8 Sedans. Even with years of neglect an ugly ass body the TC still sells. It is still out selling the Zephyr.

 

So I bet Ford came to the realization that the MkS will not replace the TC nor capture it's buyers V8 or not.

But the MkS in addtion to a new Full size V8 RWD sedan will actually increase Lincoln's sales instead of just maintaning them if the TC segment was cut and the MkS replaced it. If a new TC is built at STAP it will help utilize a under utilized plant. Lowering the costs on all products built there.

 

May be all the bitching that has been done here about losing the TC and the lack of some what current RWD in the Ford line up has hit home. You never know what will happen. Ford can get a new updated V8 RWD Lincoln sedan for rather minimal cost just by utilizing the current TC as a starting point. We have seen what can be done with Panther, the Conti Show car was proof of that. It was a hit amd can be built at a under utilized plant that turns out some of the highest quality product in the Ford line up.

 

If your going to do this why would you spend the Money trying to stuff a V8 in to the MkS to fill the role as flag ship? Think Ford learned this lesson hard with the 500.

 

Doing this would be a big boost to the Lincoln name plate. And beat the planned Imperial to the punch. The MkZ the MkS the Conti and a 2 door MkZ would round out Lincolns auto line up near perfectly.

 

 

Matthew

[EMDEE]

People seem obsessed with the number of cylinders an engine has, as if a V8 is inherently superior to a V6. If that were the case, we'd all be screaming for modestly priced V12s and V16s. The two things that matter most in engine choice, for me at least, are the engine's power and it's refinement. Number three is its fuel economy. If you can agree on these points, you may have to agree that Ford and Lincoln are making the right choice here, especially at this moment in time.

 

The twin turbo, direct injection version of 3.5 V8 for the MKS is not a maybe. It's a fact and the supplier orders have been placed. The engine has been running around Dearborn for a while now in F150s and the feedback from those who've driven it is fantastic. One quoted right here on BON described the engine as a "beast," and he was referring to its power. It is not unusual for turbo charged engines to produce more useful power across a wider range of RPM than most unblown but similarly rated engines. It's currently rated as having a minimum of 350 HP, though the engine is deisgned to be as large as 4 liters (or as small as 3). So more power is available if needed. And we're still talking about a version that hasn't exploited (or needed to exploit) variable output valve timing, premium fuel, or multiple stage air induction - cards that have already been played by most of the competition.

 

The alternative was the 4.4 liter Yamaha V8, which has had nothing but lukewarm reviews so far. Like the earlier SHO V8 from Yamaha, it's a bit of a wimp, with only 315 HP, producing 0-60 times in the Volvo S80 of 6.2 seconds, or about .2 seconds quicker than the current Lincoln LS. Oh wow. I can hardly wait. Using it in the MKS would add $2000 to the cost of the car. So what are you V8 fans asking? Do you really want Lincoln to charge $2000 more for a substanitally less powerful - and no more refined - engine just so you can say you have a V8? How 80's can we get? Maybe Lincoln should apologize to Cadillac for making a highly refined V6 that puts out a lot more power than their normally aspirated Northstar V8? Or to Chrysler for outpowering it's basic hemi? I think not.

 

Lastly, having a V8 these days may even run the risk of backlash because of the price of gas. Sales of all V8 SUVs are down, as are those of 300 hemis, Cadillac STSs, Infinity M, and many others. Sales of more economical cars and 6 cylinder cars in general are up. Does anyone here seriously doubt that gas will remain below $4 a gallon by this time next year?

 

This one time, I think Lincoln and Ford are making the spot-on, right choice, giving us an engine with more power, higher tech, and likely better fuel economy in the bargain. They may even be able to sell "fewer cylinders" as a product benefit given the times we live in.

[mkoesel]

I figured: 3.5/3=1.16 repeated so: 3.5 + 1.17(2cyl bank) = 5.2L.

 

Wait - you figured what now?

 

3.5L x 1.33 = 4.65L ~= 4.7L

[Blue II]

Wait - you figured what now?

 

3.5L x 1.33 = 4.65L ~= 4.7L

 

A V-8 version of the 3.5 Cyclone would be too long and not fit in the MKS engine compartment.

Edited August 22, 2006 by Blue II

[mkoesel]

315 is definately not even close to competative anymore. BMW has a 360hp V8, Mercedes has a 380hp V8, and Lexus will soon be there as well with their new 380hp V8. Bringing out the Yamaha motor is like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

 

Bingo. Question is, why couldn't they make the Yamaha motor more competitive? Audi has managed to remain surprisingly competitive with their 4.2L V8.

 

Now, if Ford hits them with a twin turbo V6, although it isn't a V8, it'll get the rags talking about how Lincoln is bringing somethign different to the table, and not just lambasting them for handicapping the MKS with an also-ran V8.

That outcome is not at all out of the question. However, this turbo had better bring the goods. If its laggy and anemic it won't get favorable reviews. 350hp, 350ft-lb is where they need to be, and smooth power delivery.

 

The 3.5L V6 will be a very premium product. Heck, Cadillac's 3.6L engine is in the G6, Aura, and Buick Lacrosse. The Northstar is in the Buick Lucerne as well. Why should Ford deliberately handicap its products just for the sake of Lincoln exclusivity? The MKZ with the 3.5 will blow the doors off a CTS 3.6, and be freely revving the whole time doing it.

 

Absolutely. And I think everyone will agree the 3.5L in naturally aspirated form is great for the entry trim level. It is the idea of having a flagship without a V8 that seems risky. Not necessarily bad, just a little risky.

 

A V-8 version of the 3.5 Cyclone would be too long and not fit in the MKS engine compartment.

 

I won't argue with that since I have absolutely no details of the D3 engine compartment and packaging constraints. However, I wasn't even trying to remotely to address such an issue.

 

Rather, I was saying that I am pretty good at math, and I can't figure where this 5.2 came from. That's all.

[Walt]

I can see it now. This new MKS hitting the newstands in a magazine comparo against the 5.7L 300C and the Northstar 4.6 Buick Lucerne, instead of being compared against the competition that Lincoln wishes to aim the sedan toward. Lincoln really needs to blow the media away with this car or else they'll continue to stumble. If Lincoln can not prove to the public nor the media that there is any substantial benefit for going with a more exotic six-cylinder, it will sputter. Eight cylinder engines are traditionally more popular and accepted more easily. Its a gamble for Lincoln.

 

The Cadillac SRX, with their Northstar V8, was at the top of my list for a new vehicle.

 

Then, I was really interested and excited when I first read about Lincoln's coming MKX. However, that interest and excitement "crashed and burned" when I learned that Lincoln was only putting in a measly little V6 in the MKX, and no option to get a real engine; a 300+ HP V8.

 

I don't care about turbos or supercharges. I want a V8 in any luxury car (luxury crossover in this case).

 

The final "death" for me even considering the MKX, was the Ford's cheap copy called the Edge. At least there isn't a cheap copy of the SRX anywhere in GM's lineup.

[NLPRacing]

Wait - you figured what now?

 

3.5L x 1.33 = 4.65L ~= 4.7L

 

That's what I cam up with too. It has never made sense to me for Ford to pay Yamaha a licensing fee to manufacture a mediocre performing V8. It would make more sense to take a little time and develop their own V8 based on the Duratec35. The Duratec35 makes over 75 HP per liter on 87 octane gas and with out DI. A Duratec35 based V8 should be able to make 325+ HP without a problem and maybe as much 400 HP with DI and all the gimmicks. I guess the question is, what makes more financial sense for Ford, a TTV6 or a Ford developed high tech V8? I think both would have a place. A sporty MKZ with a a TTV6 and 6 speed manual and a sporty MKS with a high winding V8, steering wheel mounted paddle shifters connected to a manumatic 6 speed.