By on September 24, 2014

MKCExterior3_rdax_646x396

You all know the story by now. Journalist gets Lincoln. Lincoln has some obvious flaws. Journalist says some over the top (but accurate) things about Lincoln. Lincoln gets mad, pulls access. TTAC’s commenters step in to save the day. But the story isn’t over.

MKCExterior1

In the 12 months since, Lincoln has been hard at work at their most critical launch since the MKZ. Other vehicles in their portfolio might be more important from a brand standpoint, but this is the four-wheeled ATM, the high-margin version of the Ford Escape that will lead a Lincoln renaissance among a crossover-crazed consumer set both in the United States and the all-important Chinese market.

The Fusion may have been a game changer in what we expect from mid-size sedan styling, but the MKZ didn’t move things forward in terms of value proposition. At the very least, the MKC offers some appreciable advantages over the regular Escape.

For starters, the interior is much nicer than either the rental-spec Escape I drove, or the higher grade Titanium versions I’ve seen while helping friends and family members shop for a new crossover. I still don’t like the push button gear shifter – it feels unnatural, and I instinctively reach for a gear shifter the same way that I find myself pressing on a phantom clutch pedal when I get in an automatic transmission vehicle.

MKCInterior3

Everything else, from the response of the MyFord Touch system, to the fit and finish of the interior materials, to the paint work and the panel gaps, seemed to be far beyond what I last experienced with a Lincoln product. I invite readers to take a look at the MKC on dealer lots and let me know if they see anything unsavory. I plan on doing so in the near future.

Although the Ford 6-speed automatic has never been one of my favorite transmissions in the industry, the new 2.3L Ecoboost engine is a peach. Throttle response is crisp, lag is minimal and the power delivery is linear and strong through the rev range. Given that this engine needs to move 4,000 pounds of crossover, it should be more than enough to motivate the 2015 Mustang Ecoboost. Hit the “S” button, and the throttle mapping, shift points and the active dampers all heighten their responses. It’s a bit much for what is ostensibly a plush luxury SUV, but it adds to the MKC’s already impressive dynamics. Then again, the Escape is one of the better handling CUVs, and starting with strong bones always helps.

That also comes with downsides. Like the Escape, the MKC’s rear seats aren’t the most comfortable or the roomiest. Fuel economy, never a strong point with the Ecoboost engines, was rather poor, returning about 15 mpg in town and 23 mpg on the highway. As I’ve said before, there’s plenty of boost with Ford’s newest engines, but a dearth of “Eco”.

MKCExterior4

Unfortunately, my time with the MKC was cut short, since Ford of Canada apparently needed the MKC back early for a charity event. I hope they weren’t afraid that a certain writer had gotten their hands on a Lincoln and was about to take it out behind the woodshed. The MKC may not be the best luxury crossover in its class, but it’s undoubtedly competitive – and that’s more than can be said for other products in its lineup. Not to mention, an encouraging sign for the future of the brand.

Ford of Canada provided the fuel, insurance and vehicle for the purposes of this review.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

107 Comments on “Capsule Review: 2015 Lincoln MKC...”


  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    How much did this one sticker for? I built an Escape the other night, having seen one on the road and thought “hmmm, a baby Evoque, that’s cool” and about crapped myself when a loaded one was give or take $36k. Granted, it’s got some toys, but it’s still a damn Escape. Ceratinly not going to do anything to sway my wife from her intended RDX purchase, and given the V6 in the RDX, I don’t blame her.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      The 2.3T comes standard with AWD and starts at $39K. With almost everything on it, you are looking at $45K.

      These are starting to crowd up my neighborhood as FoMoCo executive’s wives get them. My wife dismisses lesser Lincoln CUVs as garbage compared to her MKT.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        $40,000 base price and $45,000 loaded?

        No comment.

        (Shut up, DeadWeight! [But, it’s an Esc…] Hey! Zip it, buddy!)

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          For the 2.3T with AWD. The 2.0T with FWD starts at $33K. Personally, I think they should move the price down $3K-$4K. That would make it start under $30K and still give them a healthy bump over the Escape. The problem with a $45K MKC is that the new MKX should be right around that price. Plus, the MKT Ecoboost starts at $45K and has cash on the hood. This does not.

          Edit: after looking at Escape prices, the 2.0T FWD Escape Titanium starts at $29K.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Prices for what are compact CUVs are baths!t crazy.

            Give me damn Golf GTI with a Manual or a base Escape/CRV.

            GET OFF MY LAWN!

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            If I had $45K burning a hole in my pocket for a SUV/SUV, it would a Durango/Grand Cherokee with a Hemi or a Flex Limited Ecoboost. I would probably still have money left over too.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Hi kids, this is Matthew McConaughey.

            I just hit DeadWeight over the head with a Louisville Slugger, grumpy, cheap bastrd that he is.

            Carry on.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Alright Alright Alright

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            ” The problem with a $45K MKC is that the new MKX should be right around that price.”

            No, the problem with a $45k MKC is that a Q5/X3/GLK/RX350/MDX is right around (+/-$5k) that price.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            A comparably equipped Q5 with the 2.0T is about $6000-$8000 more. The MKC will have incentives sometime soon as well.

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            ” A comparably equipped Q5 with the 2.0T is about $8000 more. The MKC will have incentives sometime soon as well.”

            But more importantly, how well will the leases on each compare? And will people drop a couple options on a Q5 to have an Audi over a Lincoln? Magic 8-ball says: Yes.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            “But more importantly, how well will the leases on each compare? And will people drop a couple options on a Q5 to have an Audi over a Lincoln? Magic 8-ball says: Yes.”

            Good point. I don’t think Lincoln will get close to Q5 volume. Right now the lease is at $349/month with minimal money down in the Detroit area. I think It’ll get closer to the $299/month MKZ deals we have.

            MSRP means nothing. Expect to get 10% off MSRP by just walking into a dealership. I would expect the transaction price of an MKC with an MSRP of around $45K to sell for around $40K.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            I wonder how hard it would be to grey-import a Kuga with a diesel and six-speed and just tack on an Escape badge?

            Probably not worth it…

    • 0 avatar
      Krivka

      My daughter bought a 2013 Escape. One of the wheels had the studs and nuts stripped with the wrong lug nuts used at assembly and FORD tried to say it was not covered under the warranty. Then after six recalls, and going back three times for the last recall to be finally fixed, she traded it in. The A/C was never fixed priorly under the recall. Called Ford and they were nice, but still couldn;t get it fixed. Residual? It was valued at $13,000.00 under what she paid for it. I am sure there are a few good ones out there though, there has to be at least one.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        She should have lemon lawed it if it wasn’t fixed. It sounds like you called the customer relationship center. They know how to start that process.

      • 0 avatar
        S2k Chris

        Like I said, RDX…

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I will never argue with the RDX being an excellent value in the compact luxury crossover segment. I think the MKC looks better and is a better drive, but that isn’t as important in this category. I also think the RDX looks more like a CRV than the MKC does Escape.

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            “I also think the RDX looks more like a CRV than the MKC does Escape.”

            True, but also humerous, because the MKC basically IS an Escape, but the RDX has had many more changes under the skin, including a unique powertrain.

            If I could get a V6 in the CRV, I’d just buy it.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The MKC has a unique powertrain (2.3T).

            I am not a Honda guy, so I don’t know what the specific changes are between the CRV and RDX. The MKC does have some signficant changes from the Escape. It is wider, lower, has different suspension, and a lower center of gravity.

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            Didn’t realize the 2.3T was unique to the Lincoln.

            According to C/D, “It’s a significant 5.2 inches longer and 2.1 inches wider, and has 2.6 inches more between its wheels, however, than the latest Honda CR-V.” plus the aforementioned 273hp V6 and 6-speed versus the CRV’s 4cyl (and now CVT).

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The 2.3T isn’t unique to Lincoln, but the Escape doesn’t have it. The Mustang is the only other vehicle that has it right now.

    • 0 avatar

      The 2.3-liter turbo four isn’t unique to Lincoln. An uprated variant of it will be available in the 2015 Mustang, as the first engine upgrade over the base 3.7-liter N/A V6, and probably the volume engine for the Euro market. Still, the 2.3-liter seems to be a premium engine.

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        If by premium, you mean fuel, then you are definitely correct.

        • 0 avatar
          turboprius

          Does the two-liter require premium fuel? If not, then the two-liter is definitely the more logical choice for the MKC. In CR, it’s been more reliable than the 1.6 in the Escape and the Fusion. Also, there isn’t AWD, so there’s a fuel economy advantage.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            All the Ecoboost 4 bangers need premium fuel hit their advertised power figures and likely fuel economy numbers as well. They can run on less, but performance will suffer. The 2.3T and 2.0T actually need 93 octane to get advertised figures.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Horsepower drops 10%-15% if you run the ecoboost I4s with regular gas. Per Lincoln, torque figures are unchanged when running regular on the 2.3T.

    • 0 avatar
      superchan7

      CUVs are the hot market segment, so manufacturers naturally gravitate towards feature-bloating that segment to maximise profit.

      It’s nuts, $30k to get a decently equipped RAV4, CR-V or Escape. At that price a Prius V would be a pretty good buy just for the fuel savings and similar interior space. If you’re in Canada, the Chevrolet Orlando seems to be a good value too.

      Tread very carefully if you must have a CUV. They are priced to rip off these days. You get much better value out of large hatchbacks or real MPVs, both of which are more honest cars for the vast majority of buyers.

      My friend got a Cherokee for $24k, lightly optioned but with AWD. Pretty good value IMO.

      • 0 avatar
        S2k Chris

        “Tread very carefully if you must have a CUV. They are priced to rip off these days.”

        I musn’t. My wife must. And she doesn’t care if it’s a ripoff, and neither do I as long as she is happy and leaves me to my old sports car.

        • 0 avatar
          superchan7

          See if she can get a Cherokee, ditch the AWD, then add the cost back to around 23-24k with a nice option package or so.

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            We wanted to love the Jeep, but it’s too narrow, and if we got one it certainly would be AWD (I live in Chicagoland) and I want the vented seats. In her words “your second car is an Acura, i want something nice for my only car!”

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          Oh, No! We lost another one to spouse abuse! Um, what’s the sports car?

        • 0 avatar
          alsorl

          Just something to keep in mind when spending a little more for a CUV. Trade in value is not a rip of these days on CUV’s. I’ve been offered 14k on a 2010 Mercury Mariner with 110k miles. And coworker just got $22k for his 6 yo Lexus RX with 123k miles and it was not garage kept and has some paint and leather issues.

          • 0 avatar
            dtremit

            It certainly won’t be worth pennies, but I’m not convinced the Lincoln will hold significantly more value than the $10k cheaper Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      SatelliteView

      I don’t understand…. 36k for a loaded, CUV is a lot? It’s like$27k in 2002 dollars. All regular CUVs when loaded reach $30ish k, this one is just $6k more….. probably because of turbo engine and a radar cruise control

      These stupid comments about prices are ridiculous. Same as “it does not come with a stick”. Well guess what, it does not come with drum brakes and a carburetor either

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        It’s not 36k.

        It has a base price of 40k.

        It can be optioned up to 45k.

        And no matter how many reviewers, critics & so-called authorities get it wrong, it IS compact CUV that is essentially the same vehicle as a Ford Escape (despite an idiotic article in the equally idiotic Jalopnik today, it is not wider nor longer than an Escape) with the ability to get a slightly larger displacement motor.

        If you think 40k (let alone 45k) is NOT pricey for what is effectively a 4 person, compact CUV, with a quite tight rear seat at that, that gets worse fuel economy than many CUVs and even SUVs much larger and more capable than it, good for you.

        What’s remarkable to me is that anyone could defend this, of all things, based on PRICE. If one is to try and defend this based on anything, do it on something OTHER than price.

        • 0 avatar
          Ion

          Actually the MKC starts at 33,100. The Evoque is 41,100. Considering the non – enthusiasts I had with me at the auto show thought the MKC was a bargain evoque and the GLA and RDX have higher base prices, I’d say the MKC is priced fine.

          • 0 avatar
            alsorl

            I agree with the pricing of the MKC, it will have rebates as well coming soon. There is also that value of driving an American made product, for most on this site this means nothing. But, for some it does add value.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            @Ion – The base price of the 2.3 liter MKC *IS* 40k.

            You’ve limited pricing & referred to the 2.0 in your statement.

            For those who want/need the extra .3 liters of displacement – 40k base price and yippee.

          • 0 avatar
            Ion

            That’s not a base price then, thats a price with an option.

        • 0 avatar
          chainyanker

          Same wheelbase but different track, length, width, and height so not inaccurate to say it has different dimensions.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            I’d love to know more about this “different dimensions” thing (hint: it’s been discussed extensively here before by people who actually work the line).

            Do you mean Lincoln carved out interior trim, pieces and altered the size/shape of other interior components so as to be able to claim it has 1″ more interior width in the rear vs the Escape?

            The MKC & Escape are built at the same factory (Louisville Assembly Plant), on the same line, on the same chassis.

        • 0 avatar
          alsorl

          You can also price out a Camry for $33k. That is mind blowing for a grandma four door to drive to church every Sunday.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Your insane if 36k for what amounts to a focus is reasonable.
        Don’t remember compacts that got fullsize mpg being nearly 30k in 2002.

    • 0 avatar
      alsorl

      Your option of the RDX is not a bad choice. But, it is so damn boring and bland for $40k, it’s like the nun of small SUV’s. And it is also recommended to only use super unleaded which increases the cost of ownership greatly. I’m no Infiniti/Nissan fan. But, even the QX50 has a little more grand feel and quality on the over priced acura RDX. I only say this as a former Acura owner that lives in Florida and the interior basically melted off and all the silver painted bits rubbing off made it look like a 200k mile car with only 45k miles on her. And dealer basically said nothing, and said it’s still running right? No warranty on the melting dash.

      • 0 avatar
        S2k Chris

        Well, the RDX that I’ll be buying will be a base AWD, with a street price of about $35-36k, and for my money, I can’t find anything better. I agree it’s not very exciting, but it’s reliable, it’s relatively powerful, it’s not a turbo*, it’s a good size for us, and it’s got a pseudo-fancy badge to keep my wife happy. The only thing I see disrupting it is if they come out with a more-crossover like Honda Pilot that’s smaller than today’s model. Otherwise, I’ve tried and tried to find something I’d rather spend the money on, because agreed it’s dull, and I can’t. I also don’t care about premium fuel; both my cars require it, and I’ve tried regular in my TSX and gotten crap mileage, so it’s false economy to step down to it. I can afford the extra $6 a fillup of a $35k CUV.

        *I don’t like turbo 4s in heavy vehicles, and I don’t like complex powertrains in appliance cars I buy for my wife.

  • avatar
    Davekaybsc

    Note to Cadillac: people like knobs and buttons in their cars. If Ford can learn that lesson, so can you.

  • avatar
    FormerFF

    15 mpg? Yeesh, my wife’s 3.5 liter Explorer gets 17 on cold start short trips with the A/C on.

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      My bigger, heavier, more powerful 06 Durango with a Hemi and trailer tow package gets about 13mpg around town and 22 on the highway at 75mph. If the MKC with a 2.3 EcoBoost is only one or two mpg better than that something is way wrong.

      Maybe the MKC needs Norm’s Trifecta Tune chip to boost it up to 40mpg. Yeah, that’s it.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      That’s what I’m thinking. Put a regular 3.5 in there and be done with it.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      15/23 is about what my V6 Sedona gets, with a smoother sound and lot less drama than a turbo.

      Just put a V6 in this boat.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      15/23 is literally what my Mazda Tribute gets. Or rather, it would if I ever did any city driving.

      Similar platform (in fact, the spiritual predecessor to the current Escape).

      Same class of vehicle.

      Thirteen years later.

      Cost me $5K.

      133K miles and no problems.

      And I can actually see out the back.

      And the back seat is comfortable enough to sleep in.

    • 0 avatar

      Ok, perhaps i’m alone in this but

      if I was to pick between a 2.3 Turbo motor that makes like, 300lb-ft at 2000rpm and noticeable turbo lag, or a 3.5L 24v V6 that made more power but like 40lb-ft less torque 2000rpm higher, I would actually PREFER the turbo motor – assuming they are both averaging comparable MPG.

      MPG is not the be all end all deciding factor anyway. Some people LIKE turbo engines.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    They finally found something that grill looks good on.

  • avatar
    Ihatejalops

    If I had an Abraham, and someone took it away from me, I’d have a moment of smugness and pride knowing that I can now get something else.

  • avatar
    koshchei

    How does it compare against the new Jeep Cherokee?

  • avatar
    MLS

    “I still don’t like the push button gear shifter – it feels unnatural, and I instinctively reach for a gear shifter the same way that I find myself pressing on a phantom clutch pedal when I get in an automatic transmission vehicle.”

    A ridiculous complaint—you’d get used to the push buttons in a few days’ time and then reach for those the next time you drove a vehicle with a traditional gear shifter.

    I rent a different car every week, and at first I might find myself reaching for the handbrake when there’s only a foot pedal. Or grabbing for the column shifter when it’s actually console-mounted. Creatures of habit, and all that. But after a day or two I adapt to the new interior, just as you must eventually stop trying to step on the phantom clutch pedal.

  • avatar
    Turbolove

    Lexus NX eat your heart out!

    • 0 avatar
      S2k Chris

      For all its (ugly) flaws, the Lexus is not likely to be worth 33% of its original sales price in 3 years like the Lincoln will be.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Sssshhhhhh. I need people to buy them so I can purchase one used.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        S2k Chris, I do not believe that anything Lincoln can compete with any comparable Lexus. Lincoln is an American icon that caters to unique tastes and sensibilities. I would be very surprised to see anyone under age 50 driving a Lincoln product.

        As far as value-retention, I know several people who bought their Lexus product new and still drive it 3, 5, 7 years down the road. What hits the used-car lots tend to be leased vehicles.

        I don’t know anyone who actually bought a Lincoln product. The people I know who drive Lincoln, lease it. Can’t beat the deals like 0-0-0 and <$400/mo for 36 months. Of course then there is the full-coverage insurance you have to carry on leased vehicles. That'll water your eyes.

        Were anyone to ask me about recommending a vehicle in this size and class, Lincoln would not come to mind.

        • 0 avatar
          dtremit

          If any Lincoln has a chance to appeal to the under-50 set, it’s probably this one. That’s a pretty big if, though — and I say that as a fan of the brand.

          Leasing seems to be a more economical option for new Lincolns — comparing a loaded Escape Titanium, the closest MKC you can configure comes in at about a 27% premium, but the lease payment on the MKC only comes in at a 21% premium (given similar terms).

          I compared resale prices on the Edge and MKX a while back, and the Edge actually often has a higher resale. Not as a percentage of MSRP — the actual resale price.

          Given that, either Lincoln is incredibly optimistic about the MKC’s resale, or they’re very consciously subsidizing lease residuals in order to prop up transaction prices.

        • 0 avatar
          Turbolove

          Derek likes it and that says allot since he recently has been looking through this segment.

          The insurance on a lease is not much different than on a new car or car loan. Not unless you like to carry around surety bonds as collateral like we can in Ohio and a few other states.

          But as I get older and the cars I purchase are also a few years old, liability insurance is all I need.

        • 0 avatar

          “I don’t know anyone who actually bought a Lincoln product. The people I know who drive Lincoln, lease it.”

          My neighbor has a 2008 Lincoln MKX, in the pearl white color and with the light grey leather and light wood grain, and I believe it has the backup camera, navigation and panoramic sunroof as well. Her husband surprised her with it on Christmas of ’08 (it was brand-new), and she’s kept it in very good condition. It looks as new as the day it left the showroom. The design has aged well, in my opinion, and is much better than the refreshed (2011 and later) MKX. I do know that they financed it, but paid it off within a year.

        • 0 avatar
          WaftableTorque

          Speaking of under 50, I saw the strangest thing today. There was a Chinese girl no older than maybe 24 driving her MKS Eco-Boost. You could tell it was hers because she customized it with some Sanrio seat headrests, pink hearts dangling from the rearview mirror, and catprint stickers on the trunk lid.

          I had to look away, the cognitive dissonance was affecting my mental health.

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          “I don’t know anyone who actually bought a Lincoln product.”

          I almost bought a 2008 MKZ with 46k for just over $10k, but when I got to the Lincoln dealer, it had been sold. Then I saw a 2005 LeSabre with 78k for $6k on the lot and I grabbed it.

          I would have preferred the MKZ, since I wouldn’t have had to move the washer/dryer in my garage, and I have to rely on intimidation rather than speed when two lanes merge.

          There aren’t many used Lincolns around to buy. If they’re being leased, people must be buying them when the lease ends.

  • avatar
    PRNDLOL

    Were those photos taken at the Scarborough Bluffs? Because-

  • avatar
    sirwired

    Just “Lincoln”!?!?!?!!!… you didn’t get the memo it was now “The Lincoln Motor Company”? Clearly you are about to be kicked out of the loaner pool again for such apostasy!

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    The “base model” sounds like a decent deal (kinda like how the old MKZ could be had with the V6 OR the hybrid powertrain standard) but the loaded model would be a bit hard to swallow.

    I predict that for those of us who are hardcore used car buyers this will be a screaming deal with depreciation like the old MKZ was over a same year Fusion.

    • 0 avatar
      slance66

      That’s what I’m hoping. If…if that 15 MPG is weird error (Canadian Gas?). My wife’s RX350 gets 19.5 in almost all suburban back-road, no highway driving, and I think that’s bad.

      Parting shot: saw one two days ago and actually liked the grille on it. Strangely it works on this shape better than others.

  • avatar
    George B

    I like the looks of the Lincoln MKC. Hope Lincoln prices it right compared to its near-Luxury competition. I could see it being successful at Acura RDX mid 30s price levels.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    My 5300lb Q7 which is regarded by every motoring publication in history as being “heavy” gets better gas millage than this!!!

    I sincerly hope Ford at least upgraded the gas tank over the regular Escape or this thing is seriously going to have about a 225mi range.

    The Q7 will do over 400. And no, its not a diesel.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Derek got worse MPG with the MKC than my wife gets with her 5900 lb MKT. Besides the Fiesta ST, and maybe the Focus ST, I don’t think he’s ever gotten over 20 MPG with a four cylinder ecoboost engine though.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        All derpy styling makes the MKT a heavy boy.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          Well, if you start with an old Volvo sedan platform (which was heavy to begin with), slap extra safety stuff on it, giant wheels, a hodge podge of Lincoln styling cues, add more NVH stuff, extra seats, and a huge glass roof, a twin turbo V6 with all its plumbing, and stretch it half a foot between the wheels, the car will be heavy.

          • 0 avatar
            LectroByte

            V6? I’m pretty sure that 2.3 Ecoboost is a 4 cylinder. 15/23 is pretty sad, on premium gas no less. I’m happy my first wife bought that RAV4 with the V6 before they quit making them, she says it gets around 24mpg, mostly in town/suburban commuting.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The V6 I was referring to was in my MkT. I’ve driven the MKC for a few days with the 2.3T and I got exactly the same fuel economy as I did with my MKV GTI. 26.5 MPG.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      They didn’t. Same tiny 15 gallon tank as the Escape.

      I don’t see much luxury in gassing up again every 4 days but that’s something most buyers won’t figure out until it’s too late.

  • avatar
    carguy

    The push button gear selector on the dash is silly but the rest of the car looks good. If you stay away from the 2.3 engine then the MKC is well priced and delivers acceptable mileage.

    For those who think its over priced, a reminder that a fully loaded X3 2.0 can top $50K while you can get a decently configured MKC in the mid and high 30s.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      But why compare a “fully loaded” BMW to a “decently configured” Lincoln? How much is the decently configured BMW, for an apples-to-apples comparison?

      • 0 avatar
        dtremit

        Poor choice of words, but I think his point still stands:

        A base MKC 2.0 FWD is $34k; a comparably equipped X3 sDrive28i is about $41k, and still missing a couple of features.

        If you look at a “popular configuration,” a MKC 2.0 AWD in Select Plus trim is $41k. A comparable X3 xDrive28i is a bit above $48k.

        I’m not sure you can plausibly call the EcoBoost 2.3 comparable to BMW’s I6, but a truly loaded MKC 2.3 AWD tops out under 50k. A loaded X3 is more than $58k, and doesn’t offer a few of the Lincoln’s features like cooled seats.

        All that being said, I’m skeptical of how many people are actually going to be cross-shopping the two.

  • avatar
    Dan

    This segment is exactly where Lincoln needs to be, sure it’s 5 years and a million uncontested import sales late to the party but at least they’re here now. That’s better than GM’s done with Cadillac.

    It’s a sharp looking little car, the Escape already drives pretty well and it sounds like they hit the interior here too, the price is no more egregious than everything else lately, they’re going to sell heaps of them.

    To other people. The $40,000, 4 cylinder cute ute remains a knee slapper in my book.

  • avatar
    TW5

    Lincoln needs to move all of its white-collar operations to San Francisco.

  • avatar

    I don’t love that floating center stack and its grid of buttons (which seems very 2005), but other than that, it looks swell. I *do* like this implementation of Ford’s digital instrument cluster, because the main one (with the large speedometer and two LCDs flanking it) is an eyesore.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      The first thing I noticed was that silver trim on the sides looks like it was pulled straight out of a Fusion. Not sure if the Escape wears that trim as well, but it’s probably the most distinctive bit of the Fusion’s interior. And now it’s in a Lincoln. Premium!

  • avatar
    Hummer

    For 47k I can get a real SUV with a V8 with more power and better fuel mileage.

    Seriously why do people continue to buy this throwaway crap, look at an old rendezvous, that’s what this will look like in 3 years to everyone with rose colored glasses currently interested in this, when the next version comes out.

  • avatar

    According to autonews states the MkZ is now the best selling US luxury car.

  • avatar
    Johnny Canada

    “Unfortunately, my time with the MKC was cut short, since Ford of Canada apparently needed the MKC back early for a charity event.”

    Derek, don’t play this game with Ford. Get full access, or nothing. Plenty of other stuff to write about. Ford’s absence (limited access) from TTAC reviews speaks volumes to their product confidence.

    You’re not here to make friends, Derek.

  • avatar
    shaker

    I’m sure that the MPG that Derek experienced was a result of some spirited driving, but nonetheless, this “Eco Boost” is a step backward.

    So, it allows acceptable acceleration in a 4,000lb vehicle, as long as you don’t mind a little turbo lag.

    If any vehicle should be a hybrid, it should be this one – an extra 200 lbs in batteries would probably increase the city mileage by 20%, with the same “off the line” torque, and no lag whatsoever.

    No, a hybrid system may not be appropriate for towing duty, but I’d guess that very few small crossovers are used for that anyway.

    What Lincoln should do is offer a hybrid powertrain as a “no-cost option” as a fall-back position (they’ve done it before), because once the real-world mileage of these things gets out, it will be a dead-CUV walking.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    On the surface I don’t mind this car. Looks good, pricing seems OK (relative to all the other cars that seem way too expensive the past 4 years) and nice specs. Looks decent.

    I think the engine would be hard to swallow. Without pricing Acura or Lexus, their V6 engines can’t possibly get worse than this, and they’re going to have a more luxurious feel as well. Not to mention probably avoid a lot of turbo problems.

    And I say this as a fan of turbo engines… But I’d still prefer a 6 cylinder if available.

    Honest question….. What would a Chevy a Tahoe average in a similar situation?

  • avatar
    Nick

    ’15 mpg in town and 23 mpg on the highway’

    I hate to be sour but…are they kidding? It’s 2014 and they ‘manage’ to produce a vehicle that’s almost as efficient as my dad’s old Crown Vic with a 4.6L V8? ‘Eco’ my butt.

  • avatar
    SMIA1948

    Lincoln will (and should) die unless Ford figures out that every Lincoln must be bigger (including having a longer wheelbase) than the Ford with which it shares a platform.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • N8iveVA: Well they are two different companies. Hyundai only owns 33.88% of Kia.
  • Tsavo: They are dumping a massive amount of cars. Their website has almost 2000 pages of cars for sale.
  • SaulTigh: I flew to LA last September and got into town a good 36 hours before the rest of my party so I had some...
  • Rich Fitzwell: Edit ruthlessly EB White
  • thelaine: Prove it, Lou. Quote them, saying these numbers are wrong.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth