By on February 8, 2014

2015-Lincoln-Navigator-02

Lincoln has debuted an updated version of its Navigator full-size SUV. Finally.

The new Navigator is set to feature HID headlamps, LED accent lights and a front fascia design more in step with Lincoln’s other offerings. By kissing the chrome, Paul Wall-reminiscent grille goodbye, the 2015 Navigator has a much more stately split grille design that makes for a classier mug.

Replacing the 5.4-liter V8 is Ford’s twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost engine putting out around 370 hp and 430 lb-ft of torque. This powerplant puts the power down using a six-speed automatic transmission which, coupled with the available 4.10 final drive, will actually tug quite a bit.

The updated interior features a redesigned gauge cluster, a push-button start, SYNC with MyLincoln Touch and plenty of leather and wood paying homage to Lincoln’s brougham roots.

While pricing and other details have yet to be announced, you can expect these to begin hitting showroom floors this fall.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

52 Comments on “Chicago 2014: 2015 Lincoln Navigator Stars In “2 Grilles, 2 Turbos”...”


  • avatar
    bomberpete

    Oldsmobile texted from the grave — it wants its waterfall grill back.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      I’m starting to see bits of Oldsmobile in other Lincolns. Take a look at this Olds Silhouette and then the MKZ front. Just widen the Silhouettes grill a bit and it looks like it could have been the design inspiration. Have we entered the era of the Oldsmolincoln?

      http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/2001-2004_Oldsmobile_Silhouette_–_01-20-2012.jpg

  • avatar
    The Heisenberg Cartel

    Two grilles, one cup….

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Damn it, like I said a few days ago, I still like it. I like it better than the current Escalade appearance wise.

  • avatar
    SaulTigh

    I’m with you PrincipalDan, I think I’m in love. I explored everything Lincoln has on their website about this, and I’ve pretty much decided to go for it in a couple of years. I’ve never had a new vehicle, ever, and that looks like a swell 40th birthday present.

  • avatar
    Ion

    Wait so the six is the sole engine? I know the Ecoboost is strong but I’d still have the 5.0 as an option for the “no replacement…..” crowd.

    • 0 avatar
      TEXN3

      Better yet, the 6.2l V8.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        This has to be CAFE pressure. Anyone shopping in this segment would likely prefer a V8. If they offered one, they might as well not offer the V6. Not offering one will cost them sales. Not that I feel sorry for Ford, but I do despair at the intentional failure of our educational system that got us where we are.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Sure because a twin turbo V6 is such a step down from a normally aspirated V8. The only bad thing you say about the ecoboost is that the longevity of these motors is yet to be determined. They outperform V8s while giving equal or better fuel economy. Talk to someome that actually owns one and better yet uses it for towing.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            It isn’t like Ford has been sued for defects of design in the 3.5 liter Ecoboost, owners see rising oil levels as their sumps fill with gas, CR has been unable to detect real world fuel economy gains for the DI turbos, or there are Ecoboost forums where Ford fanatics tell each other that seeing 12 to 17 mpg is really the equivalent of 22 mpg and that there are other manufacturers that make trucks that use more gasoline.

          • 0 avatar
            Spartan

            ^ Exactly. I have an F-150 with the EB and I test drove the 5.0L and the 6.2L. The EB is clearly the standout and I don’t miss the V8 exhaust note at all. The 6.2L was a close second, but you need an oil refinery to fuel it.

            I tow with my EB well over 5,000 miles a year and I’ve had zero issues with my truck.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            I will be sold on the Ecoboost as a workhorse as soon as it is offered on the Super Duty.

            Same as with GM’s new aluminum DI cylinder deactivation engines.

            If it is just as good (or better), put it on the HD trucks and save some cash by cutting the iron block 2v fuel-loving V8s completely from the line. The 6.0L and 6.2L are still around for a reason.

          • 0 avatar
            Onus

            They wont get rid of the basic Iron engines. The plus side is they are stupid cheap to produce in comparison to these newer engines.

            Plus Heavy Duty trucks don’t have the fuel economy cafe related issues of their light duty brothers.

            Now the epa is trying to improve fuel economy on this level of vehicles but it is nothing in comparison to cars and light duty trucks.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          These vehicles don’t sell in large numbers. A facelift probably won’t change that.

          With low volumes, it makes sense to offer fewer choices, which means reducing engine choices. Despite what you may read in the comments section of this website, Ford has done well with marketing its turbos, so the Ecoboost label is probably a smart choice (albeit not one that will please diehard fans of all things VTEC.)

  • avatar
    darkwing

    I’m sure it’ll look great picking me up to go to the airport.

  • avatar
    crm114

    Lipstick on a pig.

  • avatar
    Tosh

    Hello 1989!

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      1999 maybe.

      The luxury SUVs I can think of from ’89 were the Range Rover/Disco, the Grand Wagoneer, and the LaForza (I guess). All of those were much smaller than this and went for the rugged look over the bling.

  • avatar
    alsorl

    Looks like it has more quality opposed to the Ghetto feel of the Cadillac Escalade.

  • avatar
    brianyates

    You’re not being fair to pigs. Have those engineers heard of drag coefficiency. That vehicle is ugly.

  • avatar
    hubcap

    Just my .02 but give me a fully loaded Durango Citadel over this truck and day of the week and twice on Sunday. And if you want a bit more bling, how ’bout an LR4.

    I’m not trying to rain on anyone’s parade but to me there are so many other choices I’d choose before this most of which would also save a good bit of money.

    • 0 avatar
      redav

      Personally, I’m confused.

      Does Ford want Lincoln to die? If yes, then why spend any money on new models? If no, why release this and the MKZ? It doesn’t make sense either way.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @redav
        Unless it goes to aluminium it will die or the price will rise to pay off the ‘CAFE tax’, like what’s occurring with the $1 500 surcharge to the US Federal Government with the Chev SS.

        • 0 avatar
          Onus

          Al that’s not a cafe tax on the SS. I know its confusing. The us has a overall tax if you fail to meet cafe, and also has a gas guzzler tax for vehicles that just get horrible fuel economy.

          On a side note no domestic has ever paid a cafe penalty ever.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Only because of loopholes big enough to drive SUVs through.

            The whole silly law only exists so the Federal octopus can exert control over the industry and levy a tax on those who fail to comply with its whims right or wrong.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The threshold of Australia’s luxury car tax has two different tiers, which vary based upon fuel economy. (And that’s a tax that disproportionately hits brands other than Holden and Ford.)

            I wonder if the members of the Aussie Disinformation Duo that post here are complaining to their governments about their own gas guzzler tax. (It’s a fair guess that the answer to that is “no.”)

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @Onus
            I thought if a manufacturer can’t meet CAFE requirements a tax is levied on the vehicle. The amount of tax payable was the excess fuel over and above what CAFE required.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @Pch101
            Out for a bit of a s’troll today ;)

            You are correct for once, sort of.

            The luxury car tax has a bracket set at 7 litres per 100km of fuel.

            If a vehicle uses 7 litres of fuel or less per 100km the tax is set at about $77k, other vehicles are set at $60k.

            As for your trolling ‘Aussie Duo’ comment, you are totally incorrect. The tax doesn’t target a specific country, brand, style or whatever non commerical vehicle (read a real commercial vehicle not pickup).

            ALL vehicles are taxed at the same rate, anything other than that would be a protectionist/socialist tax.

            Now, using your self proclaimed wisdom of the motor vehicle industry, give me an example of how the tax unfairly targets imported prestige vehicles.

            Oh, make sure your example isn’t some half baked bull$hit as you normally provide.

            I want links to support your opinion.

            If you can’t provide this then your are indeed a troll.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            7 liters per 100km?
            Luxury?

            That’s about as closed as a market can get.
            Need to go your own countries problems before you complain about others.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        These reskins are cheap. In terms of expense, it’s about the same as the cost of what would otherwise be more obvious badge engineering.

        Shutting down the dealer network would cost a fortune, as would designing entirely new unique vehicles. This is a more cost effective approach.

        • 0 avatar
          bomberpete

          Unless they’re going to reveal some fresh thinking with product, I’m convinced Ford is letting Lincoln die on the vine while pretending otherwise.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Money talks, BS walks. The lack of real dollar investment into Lincoln tells us everything that we need to know about the company’s plans.

            Lincoln has little potential in the US and almost zero potential abroad, so it justifies very little capital investment. I’m sure that Dearborn won’t mind if the mild reskin strategy is successful, but corporate isn’t going to support any serious spending initiatives unless the brand can justify them.

            That’s smart thinking, although Ford is negligent in its approach to luxury cars in general. In most circumstances, I would argue for a two-brand strategy, but in this particular case, it would be wiser to start moving the Ford brand up the ladder so that it can cover both ends of the spectrum. (Otherwise, it should have kept parts of PAG.)

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    I’d love to see this drag race the caddy. With that 4:11 rear end I bet it would give the Escalade and it’s V8 a good spanking. I know it will tow circles around the caddy.

    And i have never liked the looks of any Navigator, but damn this one looks really good!

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Yep the 6.2 that gets the exact same mpg as per EPA, well ignore the real world of the EB V6.
      The same 6.2 that has much more power, in addition to better gearing.
      The same escalade that doesn’t cheap out and actually gives the customer solid axles, vs cheap IRS.

      I mean, are you being serious right now?
      I mean completely ignoring all brand preferences, obvious is an understatement.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        I’m dead serious. Those V6 eco-boost engines pull like a mother. Surely you remember the Buick GN w/its turbo V6?

        I wouldn’t call IRS cheap and it makes the 3rd row much better. But for towing I prefer the solid rear axle on my Tahoe.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      I guess if we are going to be drag racing luxury SUVs, you can already get a good idea of things from the pickups:

      TruckTrend recorded a Silverado High Country 6.2 with 14.6@96.6. and a 3.73 ratio F-150 EB 14.8@95.

      So I think it would be a close one.

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    Horrendously bad. Not a single redeeming quality. Absolute garbage.

  • avatar
    pb35

    I’m not in the market for one of these behemoths but I do find the paint color of this example very appealing. Not enough to trade my 7 year old XC90 family hauler, however. It’s paid for!

    Having said that, make mine an Escalade.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    I like the way it looks, and I’m sure it’ll tow like a boss. There’s no full size SUVs that can tow longer and heavier travel trailers other than the Navigator right now. Since the Navigator finally looks the part inside and out, I may consider one to replace my F-150 in the future.

  • avatar
    Atum

    I remember back when the four-cylinder Grand Vitara got 19 MPG.

    Times have changed. I’ve also heard about problems with EcoBoost Ford vehicles that haven’t occurred with the naturally aspirated engines (2.5, 3.7, 5.0, etc.)

  • avatar
    VCplayer

    I’m not sure why this vehicle is making people upset, it’s just a placeholder until they do a redesign based on the new F-150 platform.

    It would be nice if they had redone the Expedition/Navigator when the current gen F-150 came out, but common wisdom at the time was that the segment was doomed, so Ford opted not to throw any of its cash at it while the future of the whole company was in question. Water under the bridge at this point, Ford can’t undue decisions from back then.

    This re-skin isn’t anything special, but the other options are A) just keep making the current one or B) kill the model until the new one is ready. I think Ford’s choice makes sense for the position it’s in. The MKC will hopefully hold Lincoln over until the real new Nav is ready in a few years.

  • avatar
    FJ60LandCruiser

    Why does Ford insist on throwing turbochargers at V6′s, trying to make V8 power, while increasing mechanical complexity, chances of breakdown, increased cost, and not much better fuel economy?

    It’s like they don’t want to accept that EcoBooze isn’t as great as they keep hyping it out to be.

    Plus, this ugly turd looks like someone fitted the new Lincoln Corporate grille to a 10 year old Expedition, kind of how gangbangers in the South put Caddy grilles on whatever POS GMC truck they obtained (stole).

  • avatar
    carguy

    At best it looks like a minor refresh of a 10 year old SUV.

    If you like retro that’s OK but make mine a black Escalade.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India