Lack of reviews for 2017 MKZ?

[shortspark]

A recent Canadian review concerned primarily with the pricing of the MKZ:

 

http://driving.ca/lincoln/mkz/reviews/road-test/car-review-2017-lincoln-mkz-reserve-awd-3-0t-2

[KenZ]

A recent Canadian review concerned primarily with the pricing of the MKZ:

 

http://driving.ca/lincoln/mkz/reviews/road-test/car-review-2017-lincoln-mkz-reserve-awd-3-0t-2

 

It is a bit pricey, and probably more so considering the strengthening US $ vs. the Canadian $.   I don't know that he is necessarily considering what Lincoln dealer might deal for as compared to a Mercedes dealer.  Or perhaps cost of long term ownership.   IMHO, there is more to consider than just the sticker price.   I don't know the answers.  I just know that I have a great deal of joy driving my 3.0T MKZ!    

[newlinux]

I would say the reviewer didn't do enough research or purposely didn't compare apples to apples. That 9K (canadian) more for an M3 won't have many options, and is a much smaller car. MKZ compares more closely in class (size) to a 5 series, with only a few less horses than the M3. A BMW 535i xDrive can get up past 75-80K (US$) without a lot of effort. A fully loaded Black Label MKZ 3.0 will be around $63K (US) MSRP. I don't know about the Mercedes c43 he compared it to, but for me the closest C class comparison I found in the US was the C450 AMG C class, but that is a smaller car, more on par with the 3 series BMW. I was able to option out one I would be good with at $66K, but you're giving up 40 HP and some torque and getting smaller car.

 

I recently placed an order for a 3.0T (anxiously awaiting!). I cross shopped it with the Mercedes C450 AMG, the Jaguar XE and XF, Cadillac ATS and CTS (what I currently drive), and I took a peak at the volvo s90, Genesis g80 and audi S4 and A6. The Lincoln was more than I was expecting, both in price and car. Still, it was less than  the comparable Jaguars, Mercedes, and CTS I looked into. Despite not having some of the brand recognition of the other cars I felt it was the best car for what I was looking for so I went with it. Hope it works out. Others will come to different conclusions, but are looking for different things. 

 

 

Edit, above I had XJ instead of XF. I meant Jaguar XF - have updated the post

Edited September 9, 2016 by newlinux

[shortspark]

Yea, I did the same thing and in fact yesterday I test drove an MKZ Black Label and Jaguar XF.  I had to go 130 miles from home to find a BL dealer and the Jaguar dealer in the "big city".  I was most impressed with the Jaguar's road feel and handling, as to be expected.  The BL had the 350 hp motor which is about the same as the Jaguar I drove but there was no comparison in quickness, again, as to be expected.  The MKZ was just as nice on the inside (Chalet theme) as the Jag and looked just as good on the outside.  Of course, MKZ stole some of the frontal features from the Jaguar but that is not a bad thing.  

 

I had a Mercedes to trade that was mint and thought I would make a run at the Jaguar with a low ball figure for the car and a high ball figure for the Mercedes I had.  We were $5000 apart as they only offered $1500 off the $66,000 Jaguar so I walked out and went down the road to test drive the Lincoln.  I asked the salesman at Lincoln what he would give me in trade on the BL car and he gave the same figure as the Jaguar dealer quoted.  They look on the computer and give you what it says without consideration to any other factor.  That is why a car like mine that is a mint, garage queen needs to be sold individually to max out its resale potential.

 

It was a fun day and I was impressed with both cars.  I may buy locally, however, as I don't want to buy a car where the nearest dealer is over 100 miles away.  That ruled out the Jag from the start but I wanted to drive it anyway.  The BL I can buy in any big city and have local Lincoln service departments work on it but I would rather buy and have it serviced at the same dealership if possible.

 

The MKZ BL I would order is around $59,000 (that is with the 400hp motor, AWL and driver's package).  The Jaguar XF was $66,000.  I believe the MKZ offered the better value unless you really wanted a driver's car or needed a huge trunk.  I also configured a regular MKZ Reserve and it came in at around $47,000 (FWD and 350 hp - which is plenty for me!).  The regular MKZ Reserve may represent the best value for me, especially since the nearest non-Black Label dealer is only 35 miles away.  I asked the the Jag salesman what would happen if one day I went to the garage and the car would not start.  He said not to worry about distance as they would tow any disabled Jaguar to the nearest dealer no matter how far.  I said, "what happens to me"?   How do I get to the dealership that is over a hundred miles away?  Funny thing but he said, "yea, I know what you mean".  The local Lincoln sales manager said in such a situation they would come out and provide a loaner.  That is important to me.

 

The Black Label edition could be worth the extra money for people close by who can take advantage of the perks of BL but I can't.  And the Chalet theme I drove was just beautiful!  But for me and considering where I am located, a nice Reserve from the local dealer should fit the bill nicely.

[newlinux]

I went with black label 3.0T AWD with the drivers package, and I went with the vineyard theme. I live about 25 miles from a Black Label dealer. I probably won't use the black label perks too often, but I like the having the option of getting the drivers package and getting a non black interior. The reserve does look like a better deal, but I just wanted what I wanted :)

[shortspark]

I agree, that is why if I go with a Reserve I will settle for the fwd 350hp motor.  I just don't want a black interior and it is forced on you if you order the driver's package on the Reserve.  If I got the 400 hp awd, I would want the driver's package but not the black interior that comes with it.  The BL advantage in this is that you can still get the driver's package with the bigger motor and you are not restricted to black interior - any of the BL themes are available with the driver's package.  But the 350 hp is big enough for me and where I live in Texas the awd is really not needed.

[shortspark]

http://www.consumerreports.org/sedans/2017-lincoln-mkz-first-drive-review/

[brucelinc]

I am very surprised that they offer the 350 HP 3.0 with front wheel drive.  The ECU must apply some serious torque management to avoid torque steer and severe understeer when applying power out of a turn.  I suspect that the 350 HP is actually present and accounted for under limited conditions.

 

AWD is not just for us poor souls who live in the land of ice and snow.  It is a huge benefit on wet roads as well as just putting the power down when accelerating hard from a stop or slow roll.  It also puts the power down in a more balanced way when accelerating through corners.  My wife had a FWD Taurus that we recently traded for an AWD model.  The difference is significant.

 

I used to be critical of all wheel drive due to the extra complexity, weight and friction.  However, after experiencing it in my MKS, and seeing how it improved a mainstream sedan like the Taurus, I will never have a FWD or RWD car again. 

[brucelinc]

That Consumer report review is surprisingly positive considering the source.  I was not aware that the suspension was softened on the 2017s.   I am beginning to wonder if the 2017 car that I drove had way too much air in the tires.  I thought it was pretty firm.  Actually, it was the tire noise and thump that was more bothersome than the actual ride quality.  In any case, it is good to see a positive review.  I wish it had been with the 3.0 and AWD but I suppose most buyers will get the 2.0.  They really should have used the 2.3 in the MKZ, in my opinion, but they didn't ask me.   :)

[longislander]

I will be very interested to hear about the difference in driving feel between the 400-hp with "regular" AWD vs. the torque-vectoring. I am leaning toward ordering (in about 4 months) a Select trim with 400-hp and the 18-inch wheels and wonder how that chassis handles the power vs. the upgraded suspension/differential/tires included with the Driver's Package. I just don't want to deal with those low profile tires in my pothole-ridden area.

Edited September 15, 2016 by longislander

[Zalvern]

That Consumer report review is surprisingly positive considering the source. I was not aware that the suspension was softened on the 2017s. I am beginning to wonder if the 2017 car that I drove had way too much air in the tires. I thought it was pretty firm. Actually, it was the tire noise and thump that was more bothersome than the actual ride quality. In any case, it is good to see a positive review. I wish it had been with the 3.0 and AWD but I suppose most buyers will get the 2.0. They really should have used the 2.3 in the MKZ, in my opinion, but they didn't ask me. :)

Funny, I had the same thoughts about how the 2.3L engine should of been the default gas engine.

 

As for DTV (for another user's question), I tried explaining how enjoyable it is after 3000 miles so far over in the ordering thread.

 

I'll compile a overall review as one who uses the vehicle daily. To me, that is the best review than some paid "professional" who can easily skew things on any vehicle.

 

I'll share my troubleshooting moments as well. No car is perfect. But good news is nothing is detrimental.

[brucelinc]

As for the driver's package, I think driver taste plays a big role. I am glad they offer it for those who place a lot of emphasis on handling and cornering. It should make the MKZ more attractive to those who like more of a sports sedan.

I put more emphasis on a quiet plush ride so I wouldn't want the sports tuned suspension part of it. I don't do autocross or even have many curves in my area so the DTV is not important to me, either. My MKS has vastly more power and performance than a stock 400 HP MKZ and it handles just fine for me and never feels like it overpowers the chassis.

You do not need a stiffer suspension and DTV just because it has 400 HP. In fact, those things would be a fine option for the 2.0. With less weight over the front wheels, a 2.0 with the drivers package would likely offer even better handling.

I am sure the enthusiast press will prefer the driver's package but my tastes do not necessarily match theirs.

Edited September 15, 2016 by brucelinc

[shortspark]

You guys are now confusing me.  I don't know what I want.  I don't want the black interior that goes with the driver's package on the Reserve but I want the 400 hp motor.  To get the motor with what I thought was a necessary feature for 400 hp - the driver's package and anything other than the black interior, I have to go 140 miles away and get a Black Label.  

 

Why do I want this motor?  Just because it is powerful I guess but I don't drive like a sports driver.  I'm too old for that.  We have nice roads in the country side where I live that are free of pot holes thanks to the lack of freeze.  No stop lights or signs or much traffic. They wind gently and are mostly flat.  All this makes a cruise an enjoyable thing.  I want power and feel but not stiff and "sporty", if you know what I mean.  Powerful luxury is what I'm looking for.  Do I want awd or fwd?  Will the 350hp be enough?  I don't know any of this so I will have to test drive - a lot.  The problem is they don't have enough dealers out here in the sticks and the few there are are not Black Label.  At best, they might someday bring in an entry level four cylinder MKZ.

[brucelinc]

Shortspark, I am only sharing my opinions and findings.  I do not mean to confuse you.  My point is that YOU are the best judge of what is right for YOU just as I am the best judge of what is right for ME and Zalvern is the best judge of what is right for HIM.

 

I agree that you should do your research, drive different versions and choose what you like.  Based on how you describe your area and your driving style, I can't imagine why you would pay extra for the driver's package or Black Label, but that is only my opinion.  I do think the AWD is important and that is the only way to get the 400 HP engine but, again, that is only my opinion.  Just don't expect the 400 HP AWD version to be some unwieldy beast that needs taming with a stiffer suspension or torque vectoring.  It has power but is very well controlled. Effortless power is a good description.

 

Again, I have an MKS that is tuned to well over 400 HP.  It will go from 0-60 is 3.9 seconds and I take to the track occasionally.  However, driven prudently, it is as docile as a 4 cylinder Camry.

[longislander]

Thanks for the good observations, Brucelinc. The Driver's Package suits my taste but I had a very bad experience with a 2012 Buick Regal GS equipped with the 245/40R19 tires. I replaced 3 tires in 19 months due to potholes or raised manhole covers. I want to get the 18-inch wheels - which design I like - along with the 400-hp engine. I am glad to hear that the "regular" AWD chassis/diff/suspension will be up to the task..

I know someone on this forum - KenZ - has the FWD with the 350-hp engine. I'd love to hear his experience with regard to torque steer?

Edited September 15, 2016 by longislander

[Zalvern]

You guys are now confusing me. I don't know what I want. I don't want the black interior that goes with the driver's package on the Reserve but I want the 400 hp motor. To get the motor with what I thought was a necessary feature for 400 hp - the driver's package and anything other than the black interior, I have to go 140 miles away and get a Black Label.

 

Why do I want this motor? Just because it is powerful I guess but I don't drive like a sports driver. I'm too old for that. We have nice roads in the country side where I live that are free of pot holes thanks to the lack of freeze. No stop lights or signs or much traffic. They wind gently and are mostly flat. All this makes a cruise an enjoyable thing. I want power and feel but not stiff and "sporty", if you know what I mean. Powerful luxury is what I'm looking for. Do I want awd or fwd? Will the 350hp be enough? I don't know any of this so I will have to test drive - a lot. The problem is they don't have enough dealers out here in the sticks and the few there are are not Black Label. At best, they might someday bring in an entry level four cylinder MKZ.

Everyone has a different desire in performance and that's why sometimes, you just gotta go with your own gut instinct and desire.

 

The 350 FWD version will be fine. People forget that while the horsepower ratings are high, they are very well controlled by torque and throttle management systems.

 

Things like AWD and DTV, they're simply assists for the tires to perform with. First thing is always have the right rubber for the road for best performance. FWD however will have understeer and wheel hop tendencies due to weight design but ONLY if you push the drivetrain beyond a certain extent when cornering, braking, or accelerating from a stop. When it comes to daily street or highway driving, most people blow the whole handling thing out of proportion. The Internet and car reviewers are especially guilty of not being realistic day-to-day measurements. Plenty of simple FWD cars handle just fine with the right tires.

 

When desiring to perform more at higher power and speeds levels comfortably, that is technology like DTV becomes more of a need. Otherwise you have to slow down or yield to the vehicle's limitations to stay safe. Thinking on it: DTV will only be in higher power applications because that is where it is more needed. The 2.0L is too slow at higher speeds (tuning does not count) due to its weight, especially when adding both AWD and DTV systems. I figure this is why the system is only on high power vehicles (Focus RS is smaller designed but still heavy for its class and cranks 350 HP and TQ which is considered very high in hot hatch performance). A balanced HP and TQ ratio is also important according to the developers (GKN) of the system, so the reasons why an engine gives more power has to do with more than just speed itself.

 

My work involves traveling and communiting a lot on the highway. I cannot stress how often I have to fight my way to keep with or ahead the flow of traffic. Lane changing, out maneuvering slow drivers and lane hoggers, and ramp merging. Some of the worst are those who deadlock traffic and refuse to keep a safe opening distance. I can't stand people who try to ride next to me or in my blind spot. I speed up if people dare try to get close and keep my distance. It's more unsafe than people who speed past you, and wish it was a law to always keep a radial distance when its possible. Bad enough on the many phone users who are on the highway...its awful nowadays.

 

Since I have to put up with these highway wars, I wanted a vehicle with exceptional handling and power to obliterate the average vehicle. The Driver's MKZ in stock form achieves this perfectly. The average driver is not tuned anyways. Most high performance owners drive more respectfully (in my area of work at least) or just want to keep thier distance than your typical Honda driver or cheap used Luxury car. AWD and DTV simply let me outpower many while handling the vehicle with extreme confidence, not just so so confidence. If I wanted to, weaving through traffic at 80 to 100 mph is a breeze, faster than AWD only vehicles because DTV gives cornering, lane changing, and merging power to the rear wheels. But I do not perform like that because I always expect the unexpected with other drivers.

 

So depending on your life style and driving atmosphere will determine you best options. 2.0T fine with the city speed limits. 3.0T when you want something that still gives the power thrill beyond 40 mph. AWD for better traction odds and wheel control. DTV when wanting to corner and maneuver at high speeds and only use the brakes because something is in front of you, hah. Tunes and mods not accounted for because not everyone is comfortable with them. If the car is rarely going to see highway speeds or so, then DTV won't help much other than some off the line acceleration since 70% of power can go to the rear instead of just 50% with AWD only.

 

From how you guys voice your thoughts, DTV doesn't seem nessecary or could be something you only realize when its actually applied. Though depends how often you're actually using all that power daily. The guy who loves to time attack and autocross would get more out of DTV than the drag strip person.

 

You can go by the reviews of others and thoughts, but do go out there and test all your options and choose wisely. I just knew what style I needed for driving enjoyment and to me, this MKZ is an awesome all-rounder vehicle.

 

Pardon any typos or so. Typed this on my dinner break.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Zalvern

[shortspark]

Thanks guys, you all have explained things very nicely and eloquently.  It will help a lot in my decision.   And yes, I certainly plan on test driving several of these vehicles in different configurations, even if I have to travel a ways to do so.

[brucelinc]

Good post, Zalvern.   I now better understand why you like the drivers package and summer tires so much.   Makes total sense!  Just to contrast your situation with mine:  My commute is a combination of busy pot-holed streets and busy frost-heaved freeway.   As for highway travel, we drive from Minneapolis to Des Moines a few times per year to visit family.   Interstate 35 is so straight that I could average 140 MPH if not for speed limits - no curves to slow down for.   We also go to the tracks in Brainerd, MN and Rock Falls, WI and, again, there are no curves that cannot be taken at nearly twice the speed limit.  For family vacations, we either fly or rent a car because I don't expose my personal car to the roads and parking lots that are found in vacation spots that we enjoy.  

 

My preference is for a car that isolates me rides softly and quietly but carries a BIG kick.    I don't always USE all of my car's performance on the street but I like knowing it is there.    I do love taking my car to the drag strip and beating Mustang GTs and Hemi Challengers.  :)    I service my cars myself and would rather have an internal organ removed that take my car to the dealer, let alone having a stranger drive it.

 

For these reasons, I will pass on the drivers package and Black Label.   I do like the Black Label themes but not enough to pay so much extra to get one.   

[drolds1]

Fusion Sport vs. MKZ.

 

Surprising results. No hard information. It reads like haven't driven either one.  Try to ignore the fact that they keep calling the MKZ the "MXZ." :banghead:

[Zalvern]

Fusion Sport vs. MKZ.

 

Surprising results. No hard information. It reads like haven't driven either one. Try to ignore the fact that they keep calling the MKZ the "MXZ." :banghead:

Yeah seems to mostly be just speculation, but in regards to performance...the MKZ is the all round better vehicle which is honestly how it should be. The Fusion's shadow was more due to how much more one has to pay for little gain.

 

Even tuned, the Sports will get a torque jump, but I forsee the MKZ having better top end without the Sport getting serious into modding. Simply put: The Sport will have to work harder than the Z.

 

Now if you compare a fully loaded Fusion Sport (stickers about 40k) to a Reserve Driver's MKZ (about 48k sticker) I do find the MKZ worth the 8 grand more. Mods can rack up fast in cost. Plus reliability from manufacturer is higher and expected. Things like that you have to think about to justify a price difference.

 

-More Power

-Better Handling

-Bigger Turbochargers/Coolers (according to my Lima Engine Plant X-Plan sponser, the 3.0T has better turbos than the 2.7L. Along with better cooling system).

-Better Stock Tuning

-Only about 100-150 lbs heavier than the Fusion Sport (with DTV which justifies its weight in performance gain). The power gain ratio to weight does improve rather than decline like previous year MKZs.

 

Both cars suffer limited interior choices though as a weakness. Though the Fusion Sport is SE trim level...I find that aggravating as I rather have a Platinum Fusion with the 2.7L Sport treatment. A Sport Platinum Fusion still wouldn't outclass a Driver's MKZ in my opinion. Tail lights on Fusion Sport are "half-done" due to SE treatment.

 

So the nice thing is the MKZ justifies its reason for a higher price, and balances it out fairly. This does NOT mean the Fusion Sport is bad, it does great for its lower price offering well and imo better to buy than a 2.0T MKZ if performance is the main desire. But for Lincoln to gain its luxury marks back, it simply needs to be better than the Blue Oval siblings in all aspects.

 

Hence why I feel the 2.3L going in as the standard engine over the 2.0L would of greatly helped the entire MKZ line, as it can easily outperform the 3.7L NA engine which was subpar. My thoughts on Fusion Sport vs. a 2.3L MKZ would change after testing the two.

 

I'm happy for both the Fusion and MKZ, but really glad the MKZ has greatly improved itself. The Fusion is good for its price range (but needs to work on that horrible depreciation...but due to lifestyles today, I expect car depreciation to get worse as a whole).

Edited September 16, 2016 by Zalvern

[shortspark]

Oh, oh.  Today I saw a brand new CLS 550 and fell in love.  I think it has the M278 engine, a truly magnificent Twin turbo V8!   Also, the nearest Jag dealer to me just got in an XF Prestige in British Racing Green with lattie brown interior.  The CLS is gorgeous but this Jaguar is the most beautiful car I ever saw other than F Type and Aston.  I don't care about the money and because of that realization I know for certain that I am now in serious, serious trouble!!

[brucelinc]

Shortspark, you might want to add the Continental to the list for consideration.  I will be test driving one on Monday.  

[Zalvern]

Shortspark, you might want to add the Continental to the list for consideration. I will be test driving one on Monday.

Was going to suggest this, seeing how Shortspark is looking at full size sedans (MKZ is mid-size).

 

My dealer asked me to come check out the few they got in and see what I think (they like hearing my thoughts and opinions). No 3.0T in yet but I'll check the 2.7T AWD out. There is more behind the 3.0T than just .3 liters in engine size that makes it a big upgrade over 2.7T.

 

I'm sure it'll ride very nicely and focus more on rating aspects like that. The 3.0T version gets DTV standard, so it should be pretty boss in handling for its comfort suspension.

 

Curb weight is listed around 4224 lbs, and if its like the MKZ listing, then lesser option models will be lighter. The Conti's larger size didn't add that much more which is a nice improvement. CD4 vehicles do have good handling for what they are.

 

A tuned Continental is going to be a sick sleeper as well. I feel both cars will be close in performance ratings with slight edge for the MKZ.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Zalvern

[shortspark]

Yes, the Continental is on my radar screen too.  I saw one at the Dallas Auto Show this past spring.  It was white with chalet interior - a real beauty!  So many great cars out there today that it is hard to decide.  But no, I really don't want a full size sedan.  I have a big Mercedes SUV right now and don't really utilize it.  The CLS that thunderstruck me only seats four and the XF I spoke about is mid size (XJ is Jaguar's full size saloon and the XE is their "compact").  And my primary interest in Lincoln has always been the MKZ, which is also midsize.  

 

It is just Judi and I, no pets or kids/grand kids and we don't have folks in the back seat very often, maybe one other couple at most.  The Continental, like the S class, XJ, G90 and similar sedans are true boats with rear seat comfort built in as an important factor.  For us, the back seat is mostly irrelevant and would be folded down 90% of the time.  I really think the MKZ is the sweet spot in the Lincoln range right now for our situation but if I were to seriously consider a full size, the Conti would be high on my list.

Edited September 17, 2016 by shortspark

[brucelinc]

The axle ratio for the 3.0 Continental is 3.39 and it is 3.16 for the MKZ. That could be enough advantage to offset the small weight difference in terms of acceleration. The Continental has aluminum fenders, hood and trunk lid among other weight saving measures.

Edited September 17, 2016 by brucelinc