LOL a minivan? conversely, i just rented a kia sorrento for 5 days and i was surprised how it corners pretty flat with no feel of fwd understeer (unless i presume, you drive it like you stole it ).

ha, plastic is still plastic. my dash is covered in leather.

 

I have to disagree. Anti-Korean bias is not out the window (though, of course, that window is much smaller today than it was 15 or 20 years ago). But I still run into the "I-won't-even-look-at-a-Kia" (or Hyundai) syndrome more than I care to. That, of course, can make it more difficult to give good, objective recommendations when someone asks you for advice....and then deliberately won't listen to part of it.

As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to vehicle-maufactuting they have caught up to, and even exceeded, the Japanese in some ways.....Kia, to an extent, even more so than Hyundai. At one time, Toyota/Lexus and Honda/Acura products were the ones that generally came from the factory best-screwed together in terms of assembly-quality and effects. Now, although there are a number of outstanding Japanese examples left (the Honda Ridgeline I just reviewed is one of them) it's difficult to tell the average Korean product from the average Japanese product coming off the assembly line.

I think you are confusing the now-defunct MKS with the mid-size MKZ. The Conti has the same grille and front end as the new face-lifted (2017) MKZ. The MKZ used to have one of those awkward (IMO) Lincoln wing/tooth grilles, but, this year, in a mid-generation face-lift, it got a Conti look-alike front end. In fact, forward of the C-pillars, it is difficult to tell a Contl and a new MKZ apart.

I learned that lesson a long time ago. That's why it is often best not to make too many judgmental comments before actually seeing (or driving) a new vehicle in person. Of course, some people can tell at a glance whether they will like the general styling of a new vehicle or not.

 

Looking back at the Japanese brands, quality and reliability was something they had to earn. It wasn't something they could sell in a commercial, but a trait and reputation that had to be seen firsthand by simply having their cars last a long, long time. Word spread quickly.

It also didn't hurt that at the time, when these brands were really trying to make inroads into our market, American quality was kind of on the decline (real and perceived). I think the Japanese capitalized on that and embraced it as an avenue into this market. Toyota and Honda really focused on that facet and were successful because of it.

They still kind of live and die on that reputation, regardless that the gulf in quality and reliability isn't nearly as bad as it was in the early 80s or late 70s.

The Koreans, frankly, have a tougher mountain to climb because that gap in quality and reliability isn't nearly as bad as it was in the 80s. They don't have the luxury of competing against poor quality cars. But, the same principles that Toyota and Honda had to endure still apply today: the only way they can shed that reputation is by sheer volume of cars just lasting a long time and without much trouble and that word-of-mouth, "hey, this car is great and was trouble-free." That just takes dogged effort and time. You can kind of see them cresting that corner, but unfortunately, it takes a lot more today to prove that than what Toyota and Honda had to improve upon back then.

 

True, but what you are talking about is water over the dam. It's not a question if IF.......the Koreans have already DONE that. If the public doesn't (or won't) accept that, then that's not on Hyundai or Kia. But, for the most part, although there is still some anti-Korean bias still left, the public no longer has their heads in the sand.

 

Saw 3 more Continentals today. All livery vehicles.

 

............at a funeral home?

 

On the streets of DC

 

I saw one yesterday. It was in the Ford-Lincoln dealership where my friend and I were getting info for our $50 gift cards from the auto show.

Actually, on a slow Thursday morning, there was one guy looking at it who said he was close to getting one and was waiting for his sales rep. Still a rare site on the roads around me.

 

Sales numbers can be very misleading. What a company is expecting to sell vs. what everyone else thinks a car should sell is worth discussing only if you know what that manufacturer wants to achieve. Lincoln has already stated that their line up of cars are not designed to compete with the German cars. I am more interested to know of how much money a car is selling for versus how many units are sold in certain circumstances.

I also want to add that I think people really dismiss and underestimate how important the size of the car matters in North America, especially the USA. Americans like larger cars, SUVS or trucks. Historically, Japan and other import models are usually a slightly smaller size alternative to domestic products. This FWD Conti is larger in every single dimension than the current regular wheelbase LS460. It has a longer wheelbase, wider, longer, heavier, more power, better acceleration times. I could only assume that a 5-series or GS will feel much smaller inside.

As for the the whole FWD vs RWD debate, historically Americans have no issue with FWD models. Offering this new Conti with RWD will make no difference to the Lincoln brand, how long has Cadillac trying to gain relevance for their cars and they have been offering RWD STS models and three generations of CTS on a RWD for more than 10 years now and they are no further ahead of where they were in the past. I am happy for Lincoln as they have finally discovered what type of brand they want to be, and they should stick to trying to make it from this perspective.

 

So Ford and Lincoln are doing that program at the Chicago show now, too. They've been doing it here in D.C. for several years now. This year, though, it is a little different. Ford still does the $50 Mastercard on the dealer-test-drive (limit: March 31), but Lincoln, instead of the former $75 card, now donates in your name to one of six or seven charities....your choice.


Yeah...the first time you open the door and see that Continental interior, it can be overwhelming. With the possible exception of the 1Gen Buick Enclave (which came close), I haven't seen something like that from Detroit for decades.

 

I personally find that Buick interior horrible, materials aren't good, acres of cheesy fake wood...

 

^^ that's a first generation Enclave. The 2nd is improved in material selection and still has a wood option steering wheel, just less wood hah

 

Improved, but not what I would call "excellent" at all.

 

Oh, I agree that the actual materials weren't the best (I mentioned that when I did the Enclave review a number of years ago). It had what I thought was a very plush look on the surface, if the same old GM plastic underneath. But, surface flash or not, it was, IMO, still a big step forward from what Buick (and the rest of GM) was giving us at the time....bargain-basement rental-grade. As Hoovey pointed out, later models of the Enclave traded the extensive plastic-wood look for slightly better quality but less plush-looking materials.

 

Saw a nice looking beige Conti yesterday. I simply love this car. Looks good in traffic. Its a much larger car that people give credit for.