LA 2015: Lincoln Gives 2017 MKZ 400 Horsepower, All-Wheel Drive, Second Chance at Life

by Mark Stevenson

Published: November 18th, 2015

la 2015 lincoln gives 2017 mkz 400 horsepower all wheel drive second chance at

Lincoln will give its MKZ the Continental treatment for 2017, including a 400 horsepower, 3.0-liter twin-turbocharged V-6 engine and all-wheel drive.

According to the automaker, the engine will be exclusive to the brand. The 400 horsepower and 400 lbs-ft of torque will be kept in check with Dynamic Torque Vectoring available in the optional Driver’s Package.

Driver’s Package? Lincoln? I like the sound of this.

The MKZ will also be available as a hybrid, powered by a 2.0-liter four-cylinder GTDI engine and hybrid powertrain good for a combined 245 horsepower routed to the front wheels only.

Lincoln will bring the new MKZ to dealers in summer of 2016.

#2017LincolnMkz #Lincoln #LosAngelesAutoShow #MKZ

Mark Stevenson

More by Mark Stevenson

Comments

Join the conversation

5 of 143 comments

Lichtronamo on Nov 18, 2015

The exterior of the new LaCrosse looks much higher end than the MKZ refresh - note the hood cut lines. Same with the interior.

Like Reply
- Scoutdude on Nov 19, 2015
  
  The hood cut looks much better on the Lincoln since it goes all the way to the grille and headlights rather than that having that separate header panel which looks much cheaper to me.
  
  Like
Ponchoman49 on Nov 19, 2015

It's funny but I have always preferred the cheaper Fusion over this odd looking overly plain sided mess. The removal of the Oldsmobile inspired grille helps but it looks too Jaguar. Removing the 3.7 V6 is a mistake. Ford is having themselves a major turbo fetish these days. They are going to pay dearly for that!

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- VolandoBajo on Nov 20, 2015
  
  Ford must have a Phantom of the Turbo hiding high up in the machinery in some Ford building, a Phantom that keeps whispering "CAFE is the question. Turbo is the answer" into the ears of senior Ford management. They were singing that song as far back as 1988 where the Turbo-ized Thunderbird was supposed to be SOOO much stronger than the 5.0L SportCoupe Thunderbird, and BTW, it got better EPA mileage, supposedly as an added bonus. Unfortunately for those who fell for the turbo spiel, the V8 could and did kick its rear end every day of the week and twice on Sundays, once on the highway and once at the strip. And while turbos have gotten more reliable, and perhaps will last longer these days, to many they are just a gimmick to tweak out a few extra HP from a small displacement engine. But if you increase the pressure inside the cylinders, it is inevitable that you will be putting more strain on the drivetrain. Unfortunately for the middle class, or what is left of it, CAFE requires Ford to discourage all but a handful of buyers from buying a big block, NA V8 with tons of torque across the power band. If I had the money and the space, I would be collecting as many samples of decent hard-running V8's and would keep them tuned up and running right. I doubt that anyone is inclined to start collecting great turbos of the past, whether Ford or anyone else's. OK, maybe the odd Ferrari, but otherwise, they are soulless machines with overworked engines. I understand why manufacturers flock to the turbo "solution", but I see no reason to want one.
  
  Like
- Maxb49 on Nov 25, 2015
  
  @VolandoBajo This is not 1961 and turbos are not a gimmick. The are exhaust driven superchargers required for the operation of the world's most reliable piston engines (industrial and marine diesels), required for piston driven engines at high altitude, and required for every large over the road semi (good for 1,000,000 miles). They have been used in cars for literally decades, and there is nothing that a naturally aspirated engine can do that the same engine fitted with a turbocharger cannot do better. Don't forget the million mile Saab with it's original turbo. Turbos are superior to belt driven superchargers because they have only one moving part - the turbine shaft. From a performance perspective, one could argue that many turbo cars feel inferior because the engines to which they are attached are designed towards low output. This is not a fault of the turbochargers design, rather it is a fault of the automaker. That said, turbos can't fix other problems facing these V6s, like noise, vibration, and harshness. That's a design flaw.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
Buickman I like it!
JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.