I have to say they did a good job with this. I prefer this styling language over the current Cadillac one.
(http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-b376ba13-919877.jpg)
(http://img2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-7254887b-919879.jpg)
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-3cb9b9b8-919883.jpg)
(http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-8c4bea33-919887.jpg)
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-ce9aa68d-919884.jpg)
(http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-5edf58be-919885.jpg)
(http://img2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-10cf7be5-919888.jpg)
(http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-860b0dba-919889.jpg)
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-90734331-919890.jpg)
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-3cbc4b3d-919891.jpg)
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-94326646-919895.jpg)
The discussion pro/contra Ecoboost has already been done here 1000 times. It is what it is.
Continental? Needs a V8. Because the FWD Initech V8 Continental was such a hit. LOL.
Looks like a Jag-Huyndai, which is a compliment.
But srsly, Lincoln, how about a Continental Mark IX?
I believe the Mustang platform is now big enough that a personal luxury coupe can be built on it.
The name Continental is bound to elevate expectations for the car, but if it's just treated as a next-generation MKS with a more memorable name, it's fantastic.
Looks good, though I wish it channeled more 67 Continental. It's a little too conservative
Quote from: ifcar on January 12, 2016, 06:49:07 AM
The name Continental is bound to elevate expectations for the car, but if it's just treated as a next-generation MKS with a more memorable name, it's fantastic.
I kind of agree. It looks good for what it is, but what it is, is a car I don't have much interest in.
True, it doesn't look cool enough to be Continental.
Continentals always looked cool and edgy, sometimes even cooler than the Mustang. Even old people like a cool looking Continental.
Looks good but what bothers me on huge limousines like this or the Phaeton is the small distance between the front doors and front wheel arch. It needs to be lengthened in order for the car to appear more stately and have those "desirable RWD proportions."
5 minute botch job in Photoshop...
(http://s9.postimg.org/miwcew4in/image.jpg)
Dead on arrival.
I think it is too conservative. But I like an American luxury car co trying for something different than beating the Germans at their own thing.
The Germans are super conservative too though.
Somewhere between the paralysis at Audi and the Miley Cyrusesque vulgarity at Lexus lies the balance Lincoln needs to strike. Aside from non existent Alfa and to a degree MB the luxury market is too conservative in design... well beyond the point of "classic well aging" and just into the realm of flat out boring.
Those are the production door handles??? Those are badass.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 12, 2016, 08:58:24 AM
Those are the production door handles??? Those are badass.
I was going to say - those look awesome.
Overall, I like the design. I think it will age well
Trunk and taillights look sad, but otherwise a nice design.
The rear doors swing the wrong way.
You know what this car needs (aside from "RWD proportions")?
B R O U G H A M
THE RETURN OF THE '70s
No worries, Wimmer took care of it! :cheers:
(http://s27.postimg.org/fjp6i3whf/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/5l47vmn1v/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/t1w2ue8mr/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/fz51ov7sj/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/4bazubinn/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/nmnctfh2r/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/qfgkdghf7/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/62zdbhcmr/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/aau5k8e2b/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/649b4wegj/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/65j8ybgab/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/r3peweg4z/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
(http://s27.postimg.org/5as3yjj1v/wimmer_fotografie_photoshop_fun_2017_lincoln_con.jpg)
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 12, 2016, 09:58:51 AM
Trunk and taillights look sad, but otherwise a nice design.
What has now been seen cannot be unseen.
Is this an MKS replacement? If so, kudos for making something that looks a little less like a Taurus in a tux.
Needs fins and portholes.
Haha, the purple one is hilarious. :ohyeah:
Quote from: MX793 on January 12, 2016, 01:22:56 PM
Opera window. Buicks use portholes.
Oh yeah? Well explain all the Toyota Corollas with portholes that I see around here. Your answer cannot contain the word "Mexicans."
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 12, 2016, 01:37:46 PM
Oh yeah? Well explain all the Toyota Corollas with portholes that I see around here. Your answer cannot contain the word "Mexicans."
Dude, "Mexicans" is not the preferred nomenclature. "Latinos," please.
Quote from: 93JC on January 12, 2016, 01:40:16 PM
Dude, "Mexicans" is not the preferred nomenclature. "Latinos," please.
They always called me "beaner" back in school.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 12, 2016, 01:41:28 PM
They always called me "beaner" back in school.
Was this because you looked like Pancho Villa or because you farted all the time? :huh: :huh:
The 2017 Continental Brougham, featuring an 8.5 liter 180-hp V8.
Quote from: ifcar on January 12, 2016, 06:49:07 AM
The name Continental is bound to elevate expectations for the car...
Considering the last one was...
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/98-02_Lincoln_Continental.jpg)
... the bar was set quite low.
Quote from: shp4man on January 12, 2016, 02:04:35 PM
Was this because you looked like Pancho Villa or because you farted all the time? :huh: :huh:
Because the white people of Maine have only seen real Mexicans on TV and couldn't tell the difference from a Pacific Islander.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 12, 2016, 02:56:54 PM
Because the white people of Maine have only seen real Mexicans on TV and couldn't tell the difference from a Pacific Islander.
So you're a Pacific Islander?
Quote from: shp4man on January 12, 2016, 03:50:39 PM
So you're a Pacific Islander?
Only 25%. But in Maine that makes me an oppressed minority.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 12, 2016, 12:21:01 PM
The rear doors swing the wrong way.
RIGHT! The Suicide Doors would have put it over the top IMO! Yes they'd be expensive but fuck it.......
Cool door handles aren't enough to sway BMW, Merc, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura or even Cadillac buyers.
At least they went with a proper name that's well known and respected.
Suicide doors and recalling the spirit of the 67 would be. U take the badges off, a lot of those cars are damn near interchangeable.
Lincoln Continental Azera Edition
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-3cb9b9b8-919883.jpg)
(http://bestcarmag.com/sites/default/files/9878868Hyundai_Azera_(US)_-_Flickr_-_skinnylawyer.jpg)
Looking forward to getting one of these next time I call an Uber.
Quote from: Morris Minor on January 13, 2016, 05:15:06 AM
Lincoln Continental Azera Edition
(http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Lincoln-Continental-fotoshowImage-3cb9b9b8-919883.jpg)
(http://bestcarmag.com/sites/default/files/9878868Hyundai_Azera_(US)_-_Flickr_-_skinnylawyer.jpg)
Yup!
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 13, 2016, 08:57:03 PM
FWIW, I like the Lincoln version better.
Aside from the door handles.... :zzz:
(http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-show-floor-109-876x535.jpg)
(http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-show-floor-110-876x535.jpg)
(http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-show-floor-111-876x535.jpg)
(http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-show-floor-101-876x535.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/F3NzNX2.jpg)
(http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-show-floor-102-876x535.jpg)
I have serious doubts this product will be popular, but I like it. I like that it's not afraid to be about comfort more than about "performance" in the sports car sense. I like that it isn't a Cadillac, which is to say it hasn't unabashedly tried to out-BMW BMW. I like that it isn't fugly like a Mercedes-Benz, Lexus or Infiniti. I like that it doesn't look like a glorified Honda, like an Acura (and despite whatever similarities you see between this car and a Hyundai Azera this one's finishing and details make it look decidedly more upscale).
I think they missed an opportunity with the styling. Exterior should have been a little more chiseled and the dash should have been more ambitious. But I do think focusing on the LUXURY in luxury car, rather than this goofy sport sedan bullshit, is the way to go. For the life of me I cannot understand why someone would buy a 4000-5000lb sedan for "sporty driving". Barring an older M5 or an NA Panamera I feel like with the premiums they charge you'd be better off getting the base luxury car and a Miata or even Boxster on the side.
One of the loudmouths at TTAC had a rare moment of clarity slamming some rough riding "sport sedan".... I'm paraphrasing here, but the essence of his statement was "NOBODY cares about BREMBO BRAKES and RING TIMES when they're SITTING IN TRAFFIC". Bumper to bumper traffic, I'd rather something that feels like my living room. I think Lincoln got the balance right in that regard. They just need to dial up the style.... not to where it's some garish nasty thing but enough to where it's eye catching.
I hope LUXURY doesn't just mean a buttload lf self-driving features and more ICE than any old man knows what to do with. True LUXURY should not be about gizmos, but about the ultimate in comfort. The seats, alone, should be so comfortable that they sell the car. And it should be dead silent inside so you can listen to AM talk radio on volume level 2.
I agree. I think a lot of the luxury companies are desperate and have latched onto the whole "sporty" thing for more marketing/SEO copy. I don't think it's what the people want.
I remember why I want this thing to be more chiseled.
(http://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Lincoln/2002-Lincoln-Continetal-DV-10-RMM-02.jpg)
Lincoln fumbled on this, and Chrysler picked it up and scored a touchdown with the 300C/Charger. A big part of American luxury is style and I'm just not sure this new Continental has enough. We will see though.
I think it will look a lot better in sunlight rather than car show lights reflecting off it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 14, 2016, 10:49:45 AM
I agree. I think a lot of the luxury companies are desperate and have latched onto the whole "sporty" thing for more marketing/SEO copy. I don't think it's what the people want.
I remember why I want this thing to be more chiseled.
(http://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Lincoln/2002-Lincoln-Continetal-DV-10-RMM-02.jpg)
Lincoln fumbled on this, and Chrysler picked it up and scored a touchdown with the 300C/Charger. A big part of American luxury is style and I'm just not sure this new Continental has enough. We will see though.
I don't think it was so much a fumble... Ford saw the overwhelming negative reaction to the retro designed Thunderbird, and decided to go a different route.
I think it looks pretty nice, especially in that blue. The blue interior looks shitty, but overall I like it.
I think the blue interior was made mostly as proof that Lincoln will build you what you want, even if you want blue. It's also to showcase how similar the production Continental is to the concept. The concept car was blue on blue.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 11:03:03 AM
I don't think it was so much a fumble... Ford saw the overwhelming negative reaction to the retro designed Thunderbird, and decided to go a different route.
Ooof.... letting the Thunderbird's failure dictate any decision besides canceling the Thunderbird was a mistake. It was more like the ThunderTURD am I rite??? :lol:
I feel like this Continental would have totally changed Lincoln's fortunes. They goofed trying to make a 5 series fighter. Again the success of the 300, Rubbermaid Prestige™ interior and all, shows the success this could have had. Wouldn't even have had to have been RWD (though it wouldn't have hurt I guess). O well, better late than never.
I like the blue interior, it looks really old-school.
I like the presence of some chrome trim in the interior. Very nice, and grey, beige and black interiors are boring as hell. I also agree with the luxury/comfort over sportiness for this type of car.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 14, 2016, 12:54:46 PM
I like the blue interior, it looks really old-school.
My second hand-me down car was my dad's Olds Toronado (late 80's model year I believe). Blue Exterior with Blue (cloth) interior. :lol:
That interior of that thing was ugly, but as a college kid I liked that car. Plenty of power and I still think it looked good on the outside.
I still think the Thunderbird was a good car, it was just grossly overpriced and traded too heavily on the nostalgia factor. It appealed mostly to old farts who remembered Thunderbirds from the '50s. To the rest of us it was a nice, sedate convertible that wasn't worth the money Ford dealers wanted for them.
The Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger are much less expensive cars than the Continental needs to be. They're direct replacements for the Intrepid, Concorde and 300M: they captured the market those cars covered, they had a few conquest sales from people who would have otherwise bought cars like the W- and G-body GM cars or Toyota Avalon, and they even had a few conquest sales from people who would have otherwise bought something like an Infiniti G35 or a Lexus ES. But it's still plays in a plebeian part of the market.
The Continental needs to attract a considerably higher average price point. It needs to be a car that is consistently sold for around its asking price, and that average asking price has to be $45,000+, and they have to sell lots of them. Making that retro-Continental would have been cool but whatever popularity it had would have faded as fast as the Thunderbird's. Probably even faster due to how much more expensive the Continental ought to have been.
The Continental needs to be a product that people under the age of 50 (ideally 40) would aspire to own. That's what sells BMWs, Mercedes-Benzes and Audis, and why every other luxury marque is considered a pretender: younger people don't aspire to own an Acura, a Lexus, or a Lincoln. You can sell old-folks-cars to old folks, you can sell young-folks-cars to old folks, but you can't sell old-folks-cars to young folks. A retro-Continental would have been a nostalgia-infused old-folks-car for old folks, just like the Thunderbird, and as nice a car as it might have been that image is something it wouldn't have been able to shake.
Quote from: 93JC on January 14, 2016, 02:24:08 PM
I still think the Thunderbird was a good car, it was just grossly overpriced and traded too heavily on the nostalgia factor. It appealed mostly to old farts who remembered Thunderbirds from the '50s. To the rest of us it was a nice, sedate convertible that wasn't worth the money Ford dealers wanted for them.
The Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger are much less expensive cars than the Continental needs to be. They're direct replacements for the Intrepid, Concorde and 300M: they captured the market those cars covered, they had a few conquest sales from people who would have otherwise bought cars like the W- and G-body GM cars or Toyota Avalon, and they even had a few conquest sales from people who would have otherwise bought something like an Infiniti G35 or a Lexus ES. But it's still plays in a plebeian part of the market.
The Continental needs to attract a considerably higher average price point. It needs to be a car that is consistently sold for around its asking price, and that average asking price has to be $45,000+, and they have to sell lots of them. Making that retro-Continental would have been cool but whatever popularity it had would have faded as fast as the Thunderbird's. Probably even faster due to how much more expensive the Continental ought to have been.
The Continental needs to be a product that people under the age of 50 (ideally 40) would aspire to own. That's what sells BMWs, Mercedes-Benzes and Audis, and why every other luxury marque is considered a pretender: younger people don't aspire to own an Acura, a Lexus, or a Lincoln. You can sell old-folks-cars to old folks, you can sell young-folks-cars to old folks, but you can't sell old-folks-cars to young folks. A retro-Continental would have been a nostalgia-infused old-folks-car for old folks, just like the Thunderbird, and as nice a car as it might have been that image is something it wouldn't have been able to shake.
When that T-Bird came out, dealers in Edmonton were asking $50K+.
Dealers everywhere were asking asinine amounts of money for them.
I wouldn't mind having a used one, but they're still commanding stupid prices. $24,000 for an '03 with 55,000 kms? :facepalm:
I like blue seats, but the all blue interior reminds me of my grandma's '97 Thunderbird.
Really like this car though!
The T-Bird was a two-door Town Car for three times the price. It wasn't a good car; but it was a good metric of how far the automakers had strayed from building vehicles that people actually wanted.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 03:09:50 PM
I wouldn't mind having a used one, but they're still commanding stupid prices. $24,000 for an '03 with 55,000 kms? :facepalm:
Haha, yeah. I've looked into them in the last year or so, just idle musing on my part, seeing what a second car might run me. They've held their value very well.
Now, if you want to see
really ludicrous used car prices, look up Plymouth Prowlers...
Quote from: SVT666 on January 14, 2016, 02:38:36 PM
When that T-Bird came out, dealers in Edmonton were asking $50K+.
WOW! The T Bird I owned (I took over my mom lease) wasn't worth 35K in my eyes! Let alone 50K! It was a head turner (a couple chicks thought it was a Bentley) but not much else. That money would have been better spent on a Corvette......
Quote from: 93JC on January 14, 2016, 03:41:37 PM
Haha, yeah. I've looked into them in the last year or so, just idle musing on my part, seeing what a second car might run me. They've held their value very well.
Now, if you want to see really ludicrous used car prices, look up Plymouth Prowlers...
I know. There was one for sale at Stormy's Used Cars in Belleville last year, a '99 for... $47,000.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 14, 2016, 03:39:28 PM
The T-Bird was a two-door Town Car for three times the price. It wasn't a good car; but it was a good metric of how far the automakers had strayed from building vehicles that people actually wanted.
It was based on the LS, and it really wasn't that bad. It was an entry-lux convertible cruiser... not a sports car.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 04:08:46 PM
It was based on the LS, and it really wasn't that bad. It was an entry-lux convertible cruiser... not a sports car.
People assumed it was going to be a sports car, and when it wasn't, they shit all over it.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 04:08:46 PM
It was based on the LS, and it really wasn't that bad. It was an entry-lux convertible cruiser... not a sports car.
It was the size of and handled more like the Town Car.
I've driven them quite a bit, as the 3.9 V8 ones tend to eat ignition coils. They were really just toys for rich old guys. Most of the ones I work on are low mileage garage queens.
:hesaid:
A retro-styled Continental would have met the same fate.
Quote from: 93JC on January 14, 2016, 05:33:22 PM
:hesaid:
A retro-styled Continental would have met the same fate.
As cool as it looked, I agree.
You know, the more I look at it the more I like the look of this car. It reminds me a lot of the '61 Continental which—let's be frank—is pretty much the only one anyone remembers fondly.
The '61 Continental was a pretty big departure from the styling norms of the day, particularly Cadillacs. The 1959 and 1960 Cadillacs were comical looking, festooned with huge tailfins and a gaudy grille. We look back on them now and appreciate that they were a product of their time, but times were changing in the '60s. The Continental went from looking like a Mercury with the front end of a '61 Chrysler to something entirely different. It was shorter than its predecessor but it was low. It looked longer. It looked a hell of a lot sleeker. It looked quite unlike anything that had come before, and other manufacturers quickly began aping the look of the Continental (take a look at a '64 Imperial or '65 Cadillac...).
What I see in the new one is the same sort of approach to its design. Some will decry it for being "boring", but the way I see it it's clean. It's got a couple subtle little lines down the doors but otherwise it's smooth, not unlike the '61.
Since we've already started the comparison to a Hyundai Azera, let's explore it further:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Hyundai_Azera_V6_GLS_2014_%2815506694761%29.jpg)
(http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-rear-three-quarter.jpg)
The Hyundai is very much a product of its time. The way the beltline sweeps up from front to back: everybody does this. Hyundai does this on every car they make, which makes the Azera look like an overgrown Elantra. Don't get me wrong, a perfectly good car, but the Lincoln does not share any of its proportions with the Azera. Other than the superficially similar lights and tailpipes they have nothing in common. The differences in proportions are more pronounced from a side view:
(http://image.internetautoguide.com/f/auto-news/2011-la-auto-show-2012-hyundai-azera-details-via-twitter/34240276/2012-hyundai-azera-side-shotjpg.jpg)
(http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-side-profile.jpg)
I love the look of the Lincoln for what it does here. None of that 2010s beltline. By comparison it looks much longer and sleeker than the Hyundai.
I agree with 93JC. When I first saw the car I thought it was pretty boring and generic, but the more I stare at it the more I think it's just a very cleanly styled sedan with good proportions (other than maybe having a slightly longer hood, I think it's great, especially the greenhouse). I'm especially thankful they didn't stick their favorite Lincoln grille on there and left the front end clean and understated:
(http://assets.forddirect.fordvehicles.com/assets/2014_Lincoln_MKS_J1/BP2/BP3CYPBUILD/BP3CYPBUILD_136B520B-BDBB-0C71-148B-311B148B311B.png)
(http://www.lincoln.com/cmslibs/content/dam/brand_lincoln/en_us/continentalreveal/desktop/gallery/CTN_1_GalleryexFLIP_1.jpg)
phew
I going to take a careful look at it at the local auto show. My wife thinks we should get something a bit more upscale than the Escape.
What platform is this thing on? I'm a fan
Quote from: thecarnut on January 14, 2016, 06:31:19 PMI'm especially thankful they didn't stick their favorite Lincoln grille on there and left the front end clean and understated
And the Hyundai Azera front end , so we can safely put any comparisons between the two to bed:
(http://bestcarmag.com/sites/default/files/5217886hyundai-azera-2.jpg)
:facepalm:
Quote from: CALL_911 on January 14, 2016, 06:34:46 PM
What platform is this thing on? I'm a fan
Ford Fusion I think.
I keep staring at this picture (http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-rear-three-quarter.jpg) and one thing that I neglected to mention that really jumps out at me now: the vertical separation between the rear wheel well and the greenhouse. Or rather, the comparative lack thereof.
Compare it to a Lexus ES:
(http://image.automobilemag.com/f/129504317+w1000+h667+q80+re0/2016-lexus-es-350-rear-three-quarter-01.jpg)
Look at how much sheet metal there is there compared to the Lincoln. All it does is serve to accentuate the fat, ugly, bland ass of the Lexus.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 04:08:46 PM
It was based on the LS, and it really wasn't that bad. It was an entry-lux convertible cruiser... not a sports car.
It didn't do anything well. There is no reward for what you gave up in practicality.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 14, 2016, 07:30:48 PM
It didn't do anything well. There is no reward for what you gave up in practicality.
It rode well, it had adequate power, and to many, it looked good. The low sloping rear fenders were especially nice, in an age of fat-arsed cars. I'd happily own one for weekend cruising.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 14, 2016, 04:10:11 PM
People assumed it was going to be a sports car, and when it wasn't, they shit all over it.
T-bird has never really been a sports car. Even the 2-seater first generation was more cruiser than racer. More a lower cost personal luxury car. A poor man's Lincoln Mk_ or Caddy Eldorado.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 14, 2016, 07:30:48 PM
It didn't do anything well. There is no reward for what you gave up in practicality.
It looked good, or at least distinctive, and it was a convertible. That's about it. Very similar to the Chevy SSR.
Is there any reward for what you give up in practicality for a convertible, other than whatever pleasure you derive from driving around without a roof? Convertibles are heavier, noisier, more expensive, don't handle as well because they have a flimsier chassis... The only thing a convertible can do better than its hardtop counterpart is not have a roof.
To say the Thunderbird "didn't do anything well" and "there is no reward for what you gave up in practicality" is nothing more than an admission that you just don't like convertibles and don't get the fascination with them that some people have. But, letting go of that hang-up and looking at it more objectively, I don't know how you can say "it didn't do anything well". It was a comfortable car that rode well, had more-than-adequate power and looked cool. That's all it was meant to ever do. That's pretty much all any convertible can aspire to do.
Doesn't Sean Own a two seat convertible?
This car seems to be missing something. Now what can it be?
Oh, I know what it needs!...........
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--mGAGtsRU--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/bkrg79gqc5m9qdxj7arp.jpg)
Now they just need to add some padded vinyl, starting at the top B-pillar and ending at the base of the C-pillar, terminating with a chrome strip. This way, you still have the look of a vinyl roof but retain the panoramic sunroof. Needs opera lamps, whitewalls, wire wheel hubcaps and rear wheel spats, too.
On a serious note, what is up with that tooth-gap in the bottom of the grille?
(http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/01/2017-Lincoln-Continental-front-three-quarters.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&fit=around%7C660%3A*)
I don't think going full on retro was necessary. I have been thinking about it and I can summarize my gripe with the design as follows:
Too much Flying Spur.
Flying Spur looks a bit downmarket and old, largely because of how rounded off and bulbous it is. I see a LOT of that in this design. Going full on retro obviously would have been retarded but the old Continental still resonates with young folks today. Here is a screenshot from a music video that came out this year (pardon the awful rims)
(http://www.imcdb.org/i877511.jpg)
This dude could have used any car for his video and he used an old Continental. It's a classic, timeless design and a huge part of it is that strong straight shoulder line. The new Continental's shoulder line looks like Bashar Assad's chin by comparison. Missed opportunity
To me this new Lincoln reminds me of when the Five Hundred came out. Innoffensive, interesting, but unremarkable.
The Five Hundred was NOT interesting. That was the most generic boring sedan ever made.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 15, 2016, 08:40:57 AM
The Five Hundred was NOT interesting. That was the most generic boring sedan ever made.
Its Volvo bones made it interesting.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 15, 2016, 08:29:26 AM
To me this new Lincoln reminds me of when the Five Hundred came out. Innoffensive, interesting, but unremarkable.
I think it's a bit better than that but I largely agree. It's high quality with some cool details, but overall the exterior is pretty boring. Most interesting thing about the interior is the seats which is also not a good thing.
IMO Lincoln, Cadillac, and Infiniti are all going about it wrong.
To make me go wow, that's a sweet luxury car, the brand has got to go for the really high end for their quintessential model. Like what Lexus did with the LS or Tesla did with the model S. Really like any brand should.
Make a statement of what you're about.
What's the statement of this car? "Well, it rides as good as the luxury (not sport) versions of the Germans. It has an interior that's not as nice. It has sweet door handles"
I don't think that's a good statement to make
Like sporty goes on about Cadillac for.... Make a statement. Electrify it. Or Make the interior wayyyy better than the Germans. Or give it a bigass engine.
This will sound crazy but w/e, its me. Engines don't matter anymore. BMW is selling 80K 528i's. Statements have to be made through design and tech. Bolder interior/exterior, PHEV tech. Electrification is the new "big engine" in the luxury realm.
I've spoken about Cadillac ad nauseum but I think Infiniti and Lincoln are playing it smart. Nobody is going to buy a 100K Lincoln/Cadillac/Infiniti so looking to build statement cars, which would cost that much, doesn't make sense. Where those brands can eat is in that 40-50K range, where Germans generally suck at in value, particularly with midsizers. Germans cannot make something as big or loaded as a TLX for the same money. What will take these second tier brands over the top is style. Again the Chrysler 300 is STILL a warmed over 1998 E320, but it still makes a statement on the street, like Ving Rhames in a Stacy Adams ad (you guys wont get why that is hilarious). Thing is, style is essentially free.... look at Mazda or Kia. So these companies need to turn up the style and design a good bit to survive. Nobody will cared that the 04-07 TL/TSX were super Accords because they looked damn good in and out. Same story with these and this in particular.
Quote from: Rockraven on January 15, 2016, 08:29:26 AM
To me this new Lincoln reminds me of when the Five Hundred came out. Innoffensive, interesting, but unremarkable.
:hesaid:
Quote from: HotRodPilot on January 15, 2016, 09:08:01 AM
What's the statement of this car? "Well, it rides as good as the luxury (not sport) versions of the Germans. It has an interior that's not as nice. It has sweet door handles"
I don't think that's a good statement to make
Again :hesaid:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 15, 2016, 09:57:33 AM
like Ving Rhames in a Stacy Adams ad (you guys wont get why that is hilarious).
You want some breakfast youngsta......... :lol: :lol:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 15, 2016, 09:57:33 AM
Again the Chrysler 300 is STILL a warmed over 1998 E320,
No it isn't. Why do people keep saying that?
Shared components include the rear suspension design, front seat frames, wiring harnesses, steering column, the 5-speed automatic transmission's design, and a derivative of the 4Matic all-wheel drive system.
The rear suspension design is sort of E class, but really it's a warmed over LH car. The LX cars are getting up there in years, but they work alright so no one really cares
Quote from: Gotta-Qik-G8 on January 15, 2016, 10:10:17 AM
You want some breakfast youngsta......... :lol: :lol:
You got to learn the difference between GUNZ N BUTTA
Quote from: 93JC on January 14, 2016, 10:09:06 PM
Is there any reward for what you give up in practicality for a convertible, other than whatever pleasure you derive from driving around without a roof? Convertibles are heavier, noisier, more expensive, don't handle as well because they have a flimsier chassis... The only thing a convertible can do better than its hardtop counterpart is not have a roof.
To say the Thunderbird "didn't do anything well" and "there is no reward for what you gave up in practicality" is nothing more than an admission that you just don't like convertibles and don't get the fascination with them that some people have. But, letting go of that hang-up and looking at it more objectively, I don't know how you can say "it didn't do anything well". It was a comfortable car that rode well, had more-than-adequate power and looked cool. That's all it was meant to ever do. That's pretty much all any convertible can aspire to do.
I guess I expect more out of car than just not having a roof. It was a parts bin hodge-podge. It was at least better than a Sebring convertible, which was the ultimate "Generic car without roof". :lol:
I'm probably being too logical about something that isn't logical to begin with. Is it any more sensible to buy a car for handling/acceleration vs. buying a car for the way it looks? I suppose not.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 16, 2016, 05:55:20 PM
I guess I expect more out of car than just not having a roof. It was a parts bin hodge-podge.
Name me a single convertible that isn't a "parts bin hodge-podge".
Quote from: 93JC on January 16, 2016, 06:45:35 PM
Name me a single convertible that isn't a "parts bin hodge-podge".
Miata? :huh:
Quote from: 93JC on January 16, 2016, 06:45:35 PM
Name me a single convertible that isn't a "parts bin hodge-podge".
LeBaron?
Quote from: 93JC on January 16, 2016, 06:45:35 PM
Name me a single convertible that isn't a "parts bin hodge-podge".
S2000
Boxster
Quote from: Rockraven on January 16, 2016, 10:12:43 PM
Boxster
The original Boxster shared quite a bit with the 911. Current one still shares some parts.
Mustang
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 16, 2016, 06:56:37 PM
Miata? :huh:
Damn near half its parts are from the 3. GTFO.
Quote from: 93JC on January 17, 2016, 01:44:53 AM
Damn near half its parts are from the 3. GTFO.
All cars share parts these days.
Quote from: 93JC on January 17, 2016, 01:44:53 AM
Damn near half its parts are from the 3. GTFO.
Other than the motor and parts of the interior, what is? :hammerhead:
The Miata/Spider, S2000, and Boxster were designed from the outset as convertibles, and the platforms were engineered as such, instead of reinforcements added to turn a standard unibody into a convertible. The Miata may use some Mazda parts bin stuff, but it's hardly a "parts bin hodge-podge".
Roadster... a 2 seat car with a convertible top, designed from the outset as such (Miata, S2000), or designed in conjunction with a solid roof version (Corvette, Viper).
Convertible... 2 or more seat car with convertible top, designed from existing unibody with added reinforcements to strengthen structure.
If 93JC is using the latter definition he may somewhat have a point.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 17, 2016, 07:32:30 AM
All cars share parts these days.
Precisely, which is why "it's a parts bin hodge-podge" is a stupid fucking complaint.
Quote from: 93JC on January 17, 2016, 11:19:42 AM
Precisely, which is why "it's a parts bin hodge-podge" is a stupid fucking complaint.
Your statement is a parts bin hodge podge. You used the same letters over and over again.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 17, 2016, 11:30:00 AM
Your statement is a parts bin hodge podge. You used the same letters over and over again.
From the Latin alphabet no less. So original :pee:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 12, 2016, 07:09:55 AM
Looks good, though I wish it channeled more 67 Continental. It's a little too conservative
The concept version was far more stylish. Spent much time admiring it last year at the NYIAS. Those added glitzy touches even seemed like overkill, thinking FMC / Lincoln was trying too hard. The Continental concept looked less conservative and had more elements brining something from era's past ('67) without it looking too retro. The critiques likely led Lincoln to go with a less risky design when finalizing plans. 12,000 RPM, I do agree with you but what a far cry this vehicle is compared with the MKS model it is replacing. BTW, FMC had to contend with pending threats of lawsuits from Bentley for stealing their design. I did not see the Bentley resemblance whatsoever. If anything came out of the attention, Bentley was bringing much attention to Lincoln and paying Ford a compliment.
Sedan sales are way down but there are few cars on the market today that speak "Large American Luxury Sedan" -- feeling good about the new Continental's chances for success.
Quote from: Atomic on January 17, 2016, 01:45:58 PM
The concept version was far more stylish. Spent much time admiring it last year at the NYIAS. Those added glitzy touches even seemed like overkill, thinking FMC / Lincoln was trying too hard. The Continental concept looked less conservative and had more elements brining something from era's past ('67) without it looking too retro. The critiques likely led Lincoln to go with a less risky design when finalizing plans. 12,000 RPM, I do agree with you but what a far cry this vehicle is compared with the MKS model it is replacing. BTW, FMC had to contend with pending threats of lawsuits from Bentley for stealing their design. I did not see the Bentley resemblance whatsoever. If anything came out of the attention, Bentley was bringing much attention to Lincoln and paying Ford a compliment.
Speaking of Bentley, I'm surprised there hasn't been a legal dispute over who owns the Continental name. Granted, Lincoln used in first, in 1939, and continued to build the first generation Continental until 1948, when the name went dormant at FoMoCo for the first time. Meanwhile, Bentley built their first Continental in 1952, after Lincoln had shelved the name. Then Lincoln revived it in 1956. Both Lincoln and Bentley Continentals were produced concurrently until Bentley dropped the name in 1965, where it remained unused until 1984. Bentley Continentals have been built ever since. With the exception of a one-year hiatus in 1981 (not counting the Mark Series), the Continental name was a mainstay at Lincoln from 1956 through 2002.
Considering both companies have long and storied histories using the Continental name, I suspect neither one can legally lay exclusive claim to it. This is probably one of the few times in automotive history when two unrelated companies have been able to build and sell two different cars sharing the same model name at the same time. It really shouldn't matter, however, since I'm positive absolutely no one will ever cross-shop a Lincoln Continental with a Bentley Continental!
Quote from: 93JC on January 17, 2016, 11:19:42 AM
Precisely, which is why "it's a parts bin hodge-podge" is a stupid fucking complaint.
I guess living in cold and desolate Alberta makes people cranky. :lol:
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on January 17, 2016, 10:07:54 PM
I guess living in cold and desolate Alberta makes people cranky. :lol:
I was a lot crankier when I lived in Alberta. I'm pretty chill now living in BC.
C'mon man, it's just such a lame complaint. It's the sort of complaint douchey magazine reviewers pull out of their bag of rote complaints when they can't articulate why they don't like a car. I'd rather you just said "I don't like the styling of the car, I thought it was a cheesy way of trying to capitalize on the nostalgia older guys had for the original Thunderbird. I thought it was terribly overpriced [it was!]. I don't like 'cruiser'-type cars, they don't appeal to me." At least that would be an accurate reflection of what you really feel about it, as opposed to "it uses parts from the Ford parts bin, wah wah wah, boo-hoo" bullshit.
I don't think it's an invalid complaint when a car should ideally be more bespoke and it's slapped together, not very special parts.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 18, 2016, 01:01:27 PM
I don't think it's an invalid complaint when a car should ideally be more bespoke and it's slapped together, not very special parts.
It was a fucking Ford Thunderbird, not a god damn Bentley.
(... which, by the way, uses a slew of VW parts...)
Quote from: 93JC on January 18, 2016, 02:06:22 PM
It was a fucking Ford Thunderbird, not a god damn Bentley.
(... which, by the way, uses a slew of VW parts...)
Yeah, but they're hidden a lot better, and the car feels a lot more special than say, a Phateon or Passat. The Thunderbird's interior is a damn Lincoln LS with painted trim pieces. Ford couldn't have spent any more money to at least make the interior more special?
I always like the Cougar better.
For the price the dealers were asking for the cars, sure. That it uses a bunch of parts that also happen to be shared with the LS doesn't make it intrinsically bad. If they built the car to meet the price point it was originally meant to hit, and assuming the design and manufacturing of a completely different set of interior pieces costed nothing: would the interior have been any 'better', even if it used bespoke parts? It would have been different, to a point, but better? 'Better' materials? Tighter tolerances?
I'd argue no: it was built to a price point, and it used parts that were shared with a car that hit a similar price point. It didn't share interior parts with a Festiva, it shared parts with a god-damned Lincoln. Is that so bad, is that such a fucking travesty that it ruins the car?
Quote from: 93JC on January 18, 2016, 11:16:20 AM
C'mon man, it's just such a lame complaint. It's the sort of complaint douchey magazine reviewers pull out of their bag of rote complaints when they can't articulate why they don't like a car. I'd rather you just said "I don't like the styling of the car, I thought it was a cheesy way of trying to capitalize on the nostalgia older guys had for the original Thunderbird. I thought it was terribly overpriced [it was!]. I don't like 'cruiser'-type cars, they don't appeal to me." At least that would be an accurate reflection of what you really feel about it, as opposed to "it uses parts from the Ford parts bin, wah wah wah, boo-hoo" bullshit.
+1
Quote from: Rockraven on January 17, 2016, 10:29:08 AM
Roadster... a 2 seat car with a convertible top, designed from the outset as such (Miata, S2000), or designed in conjunction with a solid roof version (Corvette, Viper).
Convertible... 2 or more seat car with convertible top, designed from existing unibody with added reinforcements to strengthen structure.
If 93JC is using the latter definition he may somewhat have a point.
Neither of those are definitions I've ever hear before.
Quote from: 93JC on January 18, 2016, 11:16:20 AM
C'mon man, it's just such a lame complaint. It's the sort of complaint douchey magazine reviewers pull out of their bag of rote complaints when they can't articulate why they don't like a car. I'd rather you just said "I don't like the styling of the car, I thought it was a cheesy way of trying to capitalize on the nostalgia older guys had for the original Thunderbird. I thought it was terribly overpriced [it was!]. I don't like 'cruiser'-type cars, they don't appeal to me." At least that would be an accurate reflection of what you really feel about it, as opposed to "it uses parts from the Ford parts bin, wah wah wah, boo-hoo" bullshit.
There is a sense one gets as to whether or not a car was slapped together, or whether it was well engineered, and it often hinges on a lot more than sharing parts with lesser stablemates. Ferraris use a lot of Fiat switchgear, that doesn't make them parts bin hodgepodges. Even dropping in an entire drivetrain can work if it's been well sorted out (The Audi TT comes to mind).
The Thunderbird just didn't feel right from the driver's seat, part of that is the inside just didn't mesh well with the outside.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 18, 2016, 03:48:08 PM
The Thunderbird just didn't feel right from the driver's seat, part of that is the inside just didn't mesh well with the outside.
Fair comment.
Quote from: 93JC on January 18, 2016, 02:50:35 PM
For the price the dealers were asking for the cars, sure. That it uses a bunch of parts that also happen to be shared with the LS doesn't make it intrinsically bad. If they built the car to meet the price point it was originally meant to hit, and assuming the design and manufacturing of a completely different set of interior pieces costed nothing: would the interior have been any 'better', even if it used bespoke parts? It would have been different, to a point, but better? 'Better' materials? Tighter tolerances?
I'd argue no: it was built to a price point, and it used parts that were shared with a car that hit a similar price point. It didn't share interior parts with a Festiva, it shared parts with a god-damned Lincoln. Is that so bad, is that such a fucking travesty that it ruins the car?
My mom traded an LS for the Thunderbird. The T Bird also lost a lot of little things that the LS had. The digital display for your secondary systems was changed to Idiot Lights, It didn't have memory for your seats and driving position and like Kev mentioned it had painted pieces instead of the wood that was used in the LS! For what it cost Ford could have left all that shit intact! ;)
C'mon man, wood wouldn't have suited that car at all.
Quote from: 93JC on January 18, 2016, 05:17:49 PM
C'mon man, wood wouldn't have suited that car at all.
I disagree! Especially in the color combo I had. In Merlot with the tan package wood would've looked 50 times better than the silver painted pieces!
(http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb199/TWOBIGHEDZ/Picture336.jpg)
I guess we'll agree to disagree. :cheers:
Quote from: Madman on January 17, 2016, 08:27:32 PM
Speaking of Bentley, I'm surprised there hasn't been a legal dispute over who owns the Continental name. Granted, Lincoln used in first, in 1939, and continued to build the first generation Continental until 1948, when the name went dormant at FoMoCo for the first time. Meanwhile, Bentley built their first Continental in 1952, after Lincoln had shelved the name. Then Lincoln revived it in 1956. Both Lincoln and Bentley Continentals were produced concurrently until Bentley dropped the name in 1965, where it remained unused until 1984. Bentley Continentals have been built ever since. With the exception of a one-year hiatus in 1981 (not counting the Mark Series), the Continental name was a mainstay at Lincoln from 1956 through 2002.
Considering both companies have long and storied histories using the Continental name, I suspect neither one can legally lay exclusive claim to it. This is probably one of the few times in automotive history when two unrelated companies have been able to build and sell two different cars sharing the same model name at the same time. It really shouldn't matter, however, since I'm positive absolutely no one will ever cross-shop a Lincoln Continental with a Bentley Continental!
International copyright laws from that long ago are pretty messy, with the US for some time not joining the Berne Convention for over 100 years. And unlike today, where there is implied copyright in the US, there was a time when US copyright holders actually had to register, similar to a patent (of course, not nearly similar in the standards, since patents are pretty rigorous and copyrights are granted/upheld much, much more freely). Of course, that's assuming that the same of a car can legally be considered an original work of authorship. Trademark law could be an avenue to protection, but since the hallmark of mark disputes is source confusion, the fact that they're in different markets might make it irrelevant. Plus, I'm not entirely sure how courts would classify the name; trademarks need to be more than generic or descriptive to get protection.
It might also might be as simple as the two companies making a gentleman's agreement not to care since they are in two vastly different markets.
Use of the Continental name predates Lincoln and Bentley: there were at least three different "Continental Motor Cars" companies in the 1900s. It is possible that Ford never applied for copyright for the name either; as they have been known to make that oversight on other cars (such as the GT40).
Quote from: Rockraven on January 14, 2016, 11:03:03 AM
I don't think it was so much a fumble… Ford saw the overwhelming negative reaction to the retro designed Thunderbird, and decided to go a different route.
They sure did - the Mustang.
Quote from: Madman on January 17, 2016, 08:27:32 PM
Speaking of Bentley, I'm surprised there hasn't been a legal dispute over who owns the Continental name. Granted, Lincoln used in first, in 1939, and continued to build the first generation Continental until 1948, when the name went dormant at FoMoCo for the first time. Meanwhile, Bentley built their first Continental in 1952, after Lincoln had shelved the name. Then Lincoln revived it in 1956. Both Lincoln and Bentley Continentals were produced concurrently until Bentley dropped the name in 1965, where it remained unused until 1984. Bentley Continentals have been built ever since. With the exception of a one-year hiatus in 1981 (not counting the Mark Series), the Continental name was a mainstay at Lincoln from 1956 through 2002.
Considering both companies have long and storied histories using the Continental name, I suspect neither one can legally lay exclusive claim to it. This is probably one of the few times in automotive history when two unrelated companies have been able to build and sell two different cars sharing the same model name at the same time. It really shouldn't matter, however, since I'm positive absolutely no one will ever cross-shop a Lincoln Continental with a Bentley Continental!
Agreed, Madman. I thought the exact same thing just prior to hitting "post" but was thinking someone would pickup on this and you did. Lincoln must have kept its copy right / trademark status or reapplied, unless a name like custom, sport, premier that might be considered commonplace and available for other manufactures, too. Dunno but it would be interesting knowing the rule.
Quote from: Submariner on January 21, 2016, 05:32:16 AM
They sure did - the Mustang.
Which was a success. Although the Mustang was also really good at being a Mustang beyond its retro looks.
Quote from: MX793 on January 21, 2016, 06:37:34 AM
Which was a success. Although the Mustang was also really good at being a Mustang beyond its retro looks.
That's kind of my point. There are ways to do retro right, and the Mustang was one of them. The old Continental concept looked damn good, and at the right price, would have maintained much of it's visual exclusivity.
What we got was a fairly bland, fairly forgettable design with a name that evokes not images of the 1960's land yacht, but the 80's-00's Taurus-based rubbish we were told was America's answer to the Euro-sport imports. That powerful, smooth InTech V8! The computer controlled air suspension! The melted Town Car styling! America!
The only thing that stands out are the 30 way power seats.
Yep it needs more hard edges and testosterone. The old concept looks better than most high end luxury sedans today and it wouldn't take much to keep most of that edge in production form. We will see what happens though
So if the MKS was a re-bodied Taurus and this "new" Continental is built on top of a stretched Fusion, how exactly is this a game-changer for Lincoln? Its little more than yet another FoMoCo parts bin re-hash, no different than the stuff Lincoln has been peddling for years.
Look at what Tata has been doing with Jaguar. If Ford had the vision, they could have done the same, instead of flogging off the company for pennies on the dollar. Jaguar also has brand recognition around the world, enabling vast global sales potential. Lincoln barely has any brand equity in North America and absolutely none whatsoever anywhere outside North America, making export potential nil.
In this increasingly globalised world, a USA/Canada-only brand is doomed to fail. Just ask Plymouth, Oldsmobile, Saturn, Mercury and Pontiac. Acura, too, while you're at it.
Quote from: Madman on January 21, 2016, 02:32:56 PM
So if the MKS was a re-bodied Taurus and this "new" Continental is built on top of a stretched Fusion, how exactly is this a game-changer for Lincoln? Its little more than yet another FoMoCo parts bin re-hash, no different than the stuff Lincoln has been peddling for years.
:rolleyes:
Can you at least
try to not be a twat?
I don't think Madman is entirely wrong here, Ford doesn't seem to be able to make the Lincoln brand stick in the US, or other markets like China.
The Continental and MKC and MKX are nice, but I literally can't remember the rest of their lineup
Quote from: 93JC on January 21, 2016, 02:54:00 PM
:rolleyes:
Can you at least try to not be a twat?
Okay, genius. How about answering the question instead of resorting to cheap personal attacks?
Lincoln were heading in the right direction with the LS, but they let it wither and die on the vine. Meanwhile, Cadillac is at least trying to produce world-class premium cars that are distinct from other GM brands. Sure, it will take a long time for consumers to forget the bad-old-days of the Brougham-tastic barge, but at least they're trying to shake off all that negative baggage.
Ford either needs to get serious about Lincoln or give it a mercy killing. Half-measures like these only serve to damage the brand even further.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 21, 2016, 10:45:42 AM
Yep it needs more hard edges and testosterone. The old concept looks better than most high end luxury sedans today and it wouldn't take much to keep most of that edge in production form. We will see what happens though
The old concept looks like the original Nissan M45, which looked old when it was new (because it was old).
Quote from: Madman on January 21, 2016, 03:18:34 PM
Okay, genius. How about answering the question instead of resorting to cheap personal attacks?
Lincoln were heading in the right direction with the LS, but they let it wither and die on the vine. Meanwhile, Cadillac is at least trying to produce world-class premium cars that are distinct from other GM brands. Sure, it will take a long time for consumers to forget the bad-old-days of the Brougham-tastic barge, but at least they're trying to shake off all that negative baggage.
Ford either needs to get serious about Lincoln or give it a mercy killing. Half-measures like these only serve to damage the brand even further.
I agree.
Also agree with Raza's statement. Not a fan of the previous Continental concept.
Quote from: Madman on January 21, 2016, 03:18:34 PM
Okay, genius. How about answering the question instead of resorting to cheap personal attacks?
It's not a cheap personal attack, it's a reasonable request I don't think you're capable of fulfilling.
There's no point in talking to you about this car because you've already decided it's a Ford Fusion with a spit shine, despite the fact it is so obviously not. It's damned near the size of god-damned Audi A8, and you're going to sit there and tell us this is a "half-measure" "FoMoCo parts bin re-hash"? Are you fucking kidding me? Take your bullshit and fuck right off.
:popcorn:
Quote from: 93JC on January 21, 2016, 05:03:45 PM
It's not a cheap personal attack, it's a reasonable request I don't think you're capable of fulfilling.
There's no point in talking to you about this car because you've already decided it's a Ford Fusion with a spit shine, despite the fact it is so obviously not. It's damned near the size of god-damned Audi A8, and you're going to sit there and tell us this is a "half-measure" "FoMoCo parts bin re-hash"? Are you fucking kidding me? Take your bullshit and fuck right off.
:lol: :golfclap:
Quote from: Gotta-Qik-G8 on January 21, 2016, 05:46:41 PM
Save me some.......... :partyon:
Hold on, I'll go make some more.
Look, I hope I'm wrong about the Continental.
I think it would be nice if the Continental were a success. After all, Lincoln desperately needs a home-run hit right now. I just don't see anyone choosing this over a 5 Series, an E Class, an Audi A6 or a Jaguar XF. At least the Continental looks sufficiently different enough from the unloved MKS to discourage any unfavourable comparisons.
Will the Continental prove to be greater than the sum of its parts? I hope so. But it has an uphill battle in front of it.
EDIT: Looks like I'm not the only one who has doubts about the Continental, either.
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/21/2017-lincoln-continental-debate-featured/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/21/2017-lincoln-continental-debate-featured/)
Madman Madman Madman
We saw what your approach did for Cadillac. We have been over this ad nauseum. Luxury buyers don't give a shit about platforms. Say it with me now one more time. Luxury buyers don't give a shit about platforms. Need proof.... again we have been over this ad nauseum. The Toyota Avalon XXXLE... sorry, Lexus ES, is only outsold by the 3 series and C class in the luxury sedan segment. That's right, it handily outsells the ATS AND CTS COMBINED. MKZ outsells the ATS/CTS as well (not combined though).
You look at cars through the lens of magazine reviews and other meaningless bullshit. The reality is a car's success is measured by how many people buy it, and how profitable it is. By that measure, Toyota has the clear segment winners with the ES & RX... minimum effort, maximum profit and sales. And the ES and RX are damn good cars too. The average buyer gains nothing from the "Ring tuned" RWD platforms used in the competition.
Plus claiming this thing is a warmed over Ford Fusion is like saying a Bentley Continental is a warmed over Passat. Look everyone knows I enjoy my fair share of hyperbole but the reason a lot of it gets people tight is because it's at least somewhat rooted in reality. Ford took the 100% correct approach with this by not inventing a brand new limited use platform for a low volume car. Nobody who buys this will know. Again Cadillac tried your method and GM will be paying the price for years to come. All that is wrong with this thing is the less than exciting styling. But the ES is a top seller so who knows?
So, it's Continental, then?
https://youtu.be/st21dIMaGMs
So Cadillac is garbage but we've unanimously decided this Lincoln is a goddamn Bentley? :wtf: this board sometimes...
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 22, 2016, 10:19:40 AM
So Cadillac is garbage but we've unanimously decided this Lincoln is a goddamn Bentley? :wtf: this board sometimes...
Show me one post that says anything like that.
Quote from: thecarnut on January 22, 2016, 10:20:41 AM
Show me one post that says anything like that.
Quote
Cadillac is garbage, but I have unanimously decided this new Continental is like a Bentley.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 22, 2016, 10:19:40 AM
So Cadillac is garbage but we've unanimously decided this Lincoln is a goddamn Bentley? :wtf: this board sometimes...
Come on man.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 22, 2016, 11:17:18 AM
Come on man.
See Madman's autoblog link. It says it all.
Y'all hopped on the Madman hate train real quick. I'm here to tell you that you're wrong. You think this Continental is going to sell better than Cadillac? Pass me one of those blunts, cuz you're on some strong shit. Lincoln's brand is worth a quarter of Cadillac's, which is half of the Germans/Lexus.
It's not a bad car, but it's not special nor worthy of praise beyond the Cadillac CTS.
I think Cadillac also doesn't have their pulse on the market correctly, but I don't think this Continental will be a rousing success, either. But not because of its underpinnings
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 22, 2016, 02:16:29 PM
See Madman's autoblog link. It says it all.
Y'all hopped on the Madman hate train real quick. I'm here to tell you that you're wrong. You think this Continental is going to sell better than Cadillac? Pass me one of those blunts, cuz you're on some strong shit. Lincoln's brand is worth a quarter of Cadillac's, which is half of the Germans/Lexus.
It's not a bad car, but it's not special nor worthy of praise beyond the Cadillac CTS.
The link, like my sentiments on the Continental, have nothing to do with platforms though. The car just doesn't have the gravitas needed for an American comeback flagship, but I think the cause of that is 100% design. It's very boring in and out.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 22, 2016, 04:38:58 PM
The link, like my sentiments on the Continental, have nothing to do with platforms though. The car just doesn't have the gravitas needed for an American comeback flagship, but I think the cause of that is 100% design. It's very boring in and out.
What if Lincoln offered a Scat Pack? Would that do it for you?
I think this car will be successful with Lincoln buyers. It may also win over some Buick buyers and maybe be cross-shopped with the Caddy XTS.
I think it will do about as well as the MKS, but I think Lincoln needed a statement car. This isn't that.
Quote from: SVT666 on January 22, 2016, 06:31:05 PM
I think it will do about as well as the MKS, but I think Lincoln needed a statement car. This isn't that.
Agree. The name Continental should have been used only for a first rate luxury sedan. The car is okay, but they've wasted the name on it.
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 22, 2016, 06:35:46 PM
Agree. The name Continental should have been used only for a first rate luxury sedan. The car is okay, but they've wasted the name on it.
It should be a car that turns heads, and not because it's crazy looking or covered in chrome. It should be handsome and dripping with class.
2017 Lincoln Continental reimagined as a coupe
(http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/legacy_thumbnail/800x450/format/jpg/quality/85/http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/29cfcf01eef801be0bb2fab2adfb1027/203290048/cdauto_ContinentalCoupe_illus_12016_1.jpg)
(http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/crop/2048x1150+0+1/resize/716x402!/format/jpg/quality/85/http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/71ff3e9811de7b1b7e41ba4e8414b7e/203290050/cdauto_ContinentalCoupe_illus_12016_2.jpg)
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/20/2017-lincoln-continental-coupe-render/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/20/2017-lincoln-continental-coupe-render/)
It should be more like a fat, luxirious Mustang, IMHOMO.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 22, 2016, 02:42:46 PM
I think Cadillac also doesn't have their pulse on the market correctly, but I don't think this Continental will be a rousing success, either. But not because of its underpinnings
+1
I was most disappointed by Lincoln today at the Chicago auto show. The Continental looked nice (although already dated) but the rest of the lineup looked like overpriced Ford.
Lincoln has a lot of work to do just to match Buick. Infiniti, Lexus, Cadillac, and Acura are in a whole different league.
Matching is irrelevant. For example Jaguar is a legit German competitor, and Lincoln's cynical super Fusion outsells its whole brand several times over. From a business standpoint I would say Lincoln is one of the strongest luxury brands, precisely because they don't try to be what they're not.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 18, 2016, 05:54:05 AM
Matching is irrelevant. For example Jaguar is a legit German competitor, and Lincoln's cynical super Fusion outsells its whole brand several times over. From a business standpoint I would say Lincoln is one of the strongest luxury brands, precisely because they don't try to be what they're not.
No no no no
Lincoln doesn't match the volume of Cadillac, Acura, and is less than half the volume of Buick.
Why do you keep saying Lincoln is a strong luxury brand when it's literally the weakest one out there.
They have the MKC and MKZ and that's it; those cars are ok, but they have nothing in other segments worth a damn.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 18, 2016, 06:11:21 AM
No no no no
Lincoln doesn't match the volume of Cadillac, Acura, and is less than half the volume of Buick.
Why do you keep saying Lincoln is a strong luxury brand when it's literally the weakest one out there.
They have the MKC and MKZ and that's it; those cars are ok, but they have nothing in other segments worth a damn.
Most of Cadillac, Acura and Buick's sales are from SUVs. In the car markets Lincoln is in they all pretty much match. But Acura and Lincoln's cars are definitely the most profitable. Lincoln is not the most aspirational or high end brand, but then it doesn't have to be. If a Lexus ES/RX is good enough to be a top seller at a "legitimate/healthy" brand then a super Fusion/Escape/Edge is too.
continental is pretty nice luxury. it's bones appear to be the taurus bones.