Lincoln MKS Ecoboost

So, I was browsing The Truth About Cars yesterday, and someone commented about the Lincoln MKS Ecoboost and saying that they were cheap. That had me perusing my local classifieds to check these out. So, in a nutshell, these are just badge engineered Taurus SHO's, but they look nicer outside and are nicer inside, and strangely cheaper second hand than the Ford counterpart. You can pick a clean, grandpa-owned example up in the low 20's. I bet these will dip even lower in a couple years. They stickered in the $50k+ range a couple years ago! I am thinking one may make a good all weather daily driver.

Anyone have any experience with these or the Ecoboost 3.5 TT mill?

I'm listening...

They are not exactly SHO's, as the MKS came first, and the SHO has some chassis improvements in it that the MKS does not have.

I know the engine really well, but am pretty darned biased. I did the emissions calibration and certification for all 4 of the first Ecoboost cars.

While I always preferred to drive the SHO, Rod Millen drove one up Lincoln Pass in Colorado- beating out similar cars other than a BMW, I think.

In reply to alfadriver:

Interesting. Yes, I read that these actually were the first of the Ecoboost cars. They are down about 10hp from the SHO.

I wonder what there is out there to tune a car like this, or if they are even reliable.

Oh, and some hotlinked goodness:

In reply to SilverFleet: While they have different numbers, the engines and power are exactly, exactly the same. Which is to say that the MKS is under rated slightly.

There isn't much tune available- as there isn't much left in the fuel system to even make more power- kind of a side consequence of direct injection, as the mechanical pump just isn't capable much more than it is. Some guy did want to meet with us about what does what- but we are not really allowed to. He could find a lot of the functions, but had no idea what they did. One guy kept modifying until it blew up.

In terms of reliability- I've not heard of any issues. Not to say that there are no issues- but nothing has come up with the engine or calibration- as I'm sure we would be on the short list of who to call to bitch to.

A lack of tuneability will keep me from blowing it up, so that's probably a good thing.

I wonder what maintenance costs are like, or if it's easy to do the simple stuff, like oil changes, spark plugs, etc.

I think these cars will be a real bargain in the next few years, as they are largely forgotten.

Can't remember where the oil filter is- but the plugs are 100k at least durability. So IF you did them, unless you drove a LOT, you'd just need to change them once.

The cars we ran out to 150k, I don't recall ever changing the plugs.

In reply to alfadriver:

That's the thing: I do drive a lot. Right now, I'm doing 26k per year. I want my next car to have a bigger interior and more creature comforts than my Mazda, so I've been looking at cars like this. I know they get kinda terrible gas mileage, but if I buy right, that won't be as much of an issue.

interesting.

seems like a nice DD.

You and I must think alike. We've both followed Regal GS as a DD possibility, and this was another candidate of mine as well for a DD (and the Genesis 5.0 R-spec). My wife refers to pretty much any Lincoln as a "fart car" and forbids me from buying one. I'm not passionate about them and I pick my battles so its not happening, but yes, an incredible deal and for whatever reason they depreciate worse than the SHO. Its like everyone is saying hey look at that MKZ/C, and completely ignoring what was supposed to be Lincoln's halo car I thought. I even went to a reveal party for these the year they came out. Full bar, catered, really nice. Just like the SHO, they are sort of a 5/4's scale car, just a little huge feeling, but can't argue the comfort factor. Very few seem to do anything with them. I think they are actually pretty sharp looking.

The Lincoln depreciation thing is interesting, because I've noticed it with the MKT, as well. We've been kicking around replacing the Taurus X with a ~2 year old MKT or Flex for a while, and if you price them out used, the MKT is clearly the better bargain. The pricing is fairly close, but basically every MKT has the Ecoboost motor, AWD, power everything, leather, etc, and that's not true of Flexes at all.

I like the looks of the MKS and the SHO a lot. I suspect that the SHO might have a stiffer suspension setup, but I don't necessarily need that in a DD, which is what this would be. So yeah, maybe in a few years when the truck is paid off, I might have a gander at these.

I have found examples of Ecoboost cars dipping below $20k here. Like this one:

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=02346&endYear=2016&modelCode1=MKS&sortBy=derivedpriceASC&showcaseOwnerId=38748360&startYear=2010&makeCode1=LINC&numRecords=100&searchRadius=100&showcaseListingId=364786677&mmt=[LINC[MKS[]][]]&listingId=386241485&Log=0

I haven't been in a Lincoln since my grandfather had his then-new early 90's Town Car right before he passed. Also, I am Italian, so it's perfectly OK for me to drive a Lincoln. I showed my wife and she said it looked better looking than the Taurus, and I agree. I cannot stand the rear of the Taurus. The Lincoln doesn't set my soul on fire, but it looks a lot better IMHO, especially with the EcoBoost Appearance Package. And seriously, they still have Keyless Entry.

When I'm ready, I will be cross-shopping this, the GS (preferably the AWD one), and maybe a Charger R/T. It all depends on what my work status is and if I work from home more.

Of course, this can all change in 5 minutes, and I'll get something completely opposite, like a AMC Eagle 4x4 wagon with a Jeep 4.0 swap.

If you can do without the turbo engine, I've found a few 3.7's for around $10k. Lota car for that money.

I did enjoy driving them.

I also did not even consider this car at all. I did not realize the similarity to the SHO but the Regal GS is still at the top of the list because of the manual.

What the MSK needs is a suspension look at- if one can source the bigger brakes off of later ones, or even SHO's, and then a little stiffer suspension- it would be a reall nice driving cruiser.

IIRC, Rod Millen's biggest problem with the car in the race were the brakes.

Mild mods (intake, methanol) ran a no drama 13.3 @ 102 (basically neck and neck with an STS-V)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e921i8lPEDA

You wouldn't be losing at many stoplights at all.

IMO for folks considering the Regal GS, the Regal GS manual is not very good. I had one for a couple of years and the gearing, turbo lag and throttle calibration made driving it very annoying. They are terrible in stop and go and when cruising you don't get any power in 6th gear. Also the wheel hop from the front end is bad in any traction limited situation.

I would get an AWD auto version before I went FWD/Manual on them.

The MKS was intended to replace the Town Car and it seems that the MKS has also followed suit with that famous Town Car depreciation.

alfadriver wrote: There isn't much tune available- as there isn't much left in the fuel system to even make more power- kind of a side consequence of direct injection, as the mechanical pump just isn't capable much more than it is. Some guy did want to meet with us about what does what- but we are not really allowed to. He could find a lot of the functions, but had no idea what they did. One guy kept modifying until it blew up. In terms of reliability- I've not heard of any issues. Not to say that there are no issues- but nothing has come up with the engine or calibration- as I'm sure we would be on the short list of who to call to bitch to.

Point 1, obviously someone forgot to convey your message of "Isn't much tune available" to Livernois and the other tuning houses that do these....they're making good power without maxing the pump and even more power with some other fueling option. There's even a few ecobricks(Flex) floating around that will give a '15 Mustang GT a run for its money.....

Point 2, the biggest issues have been a limited number of cracked pistons before 60k when stock, and the AWD clutch system throwing up the ghost and turning your awd car into a fwd burnout machine.

In reply to yamaha:

Unless there adding a second set of injectors, the most one can get with a stock mechanical pump is about 420hp. And to get that, well, I would really like to see their calibration.

IMHO, there's a difference between making power and doing reliably. I've seen the video where a tuner grenaded his car at the drag strip. I sure hope that his warrentee was denied.

The cracked piston thing is a very different issue- has nothing really to do with modificaions and making power. But easier to get if a tuner thinks they know better (which they don't).

(or put in a different way, I've never once been impressed with aftermarket tuners.)

In reply to alfadriver:

Yes yes, I know your dislike for them as its been well documented here. It is similar of my dislike to the "engineer" who half ass designed the cam/timing sprocket for the last generation SHO(96-99)....and I want his head on a stake displayed out front of your Dearborn offices permanently. The cracked piston thing has only been known of in a few completely stock late 2010-early 2011 for some reason....so it was probably just a faulty batch of pistons that reached the assembly line.

alfadriver wrote: In reply to yamaha: Unless there adding a second set of injectors, the most one can get with a stock mechanical pump is about 420hp. And to get that, well, I would really like to see their calibration. IMHO, there's a difference between making power and doing reliably. I've seen the video where a tuner grenaded his car at the drag strip. I sure hope that his warrentee was denied. The cracked piston thing is a very different issue- has nothing really to do with modificaions and making power. But easier to get if a tuner thinks they know better (which they don't). (or put in a different way, I've never once been impressed with aftermarket tuners.)

I've often wondered why it is so common for people to think "I can engineer this better than any giant multinational company with armies of the best engineers/facilities/testers".

But then again, if you are optimizing/specializing for one variable only and you are not money limited, then I guess you have multiple advantages over that company (at that one thing).

Harvey wrote: IMO for folks considering the Regal GS, the Regal GS manual is not very good. I had one for a couple of years and the gearing, turbo lag and throttle calibration made driving it very annoying. They are terrible in stop and go and when cruising you don't get any power in 6th gear. Also the wheel hop from the front end is bad in any traction limited situation. I would get an AWD auto version before I went FWD/Manual on them.

I'm likely be going with an automatic with flappy paddles for my next DD. Traffic is so berkeleying brutal around here on my daily commute that it's taking the enjoyment out of driving a stick. If I go the Regal route, that thing is getting a tune. If I go the MKS way, I'll likely just keep the thing stock. 355hp is a lot for a daily driver!

In reply to rcutclif:

They have to cover many variables/emissions/warranty/etc.....which means they tune on the excessively conservative side of things to reduce warranty claims and shut the hippies up.

Aftermarket tuners can extract some of that extra potential because they don't have to worry about those things and they hate the hippies anyways.

In reply to rcutclif:

Here's the thing- I know 100% that they are changing the durabiluty of whole system. Which is ok, as long as you know what you are sacrificing.

What gets me is that 1) they think that the factory engineers delibertyly keep power off the table, and 2) their- change the calibraiton via bralle to make power is the way to go.

First- all the power is made, but with the limitation that the entire powertrain, including the emissions hardware, has to make it to 150k miles. And with realistic fuel. But it's not as if we are leaving things out there that are obvious.

For the second- if one understands what they are compromising, you can get some power that is a whole lot less risky. On an engine like this- it's not nearly as straightforward as adding boost and more fuel. And if you don't understand that, then the risk will (and I've seen it) grenade the engine.

I think I can safely say that many of the safeguards are there to keep the turbo alive. Not the emissions hardware. So doing it wrong will take out the turbos- which I'm sure people would not want to do vs. burning the catalysts.