It does give one food for thought.....CR gave the MKX a very good review from their Road Test, but no Reliability data available yet. It might be best to wait a few months and see if things change/improve.

 

I would actually be more interested in the MKC because that is the better size for us, but the owner issues with that one have been massive. Unfortunate. Again, great looking vehicle.

 

I'd rather just get a Ford Edge Sport--loaded comes to about $45,000. Same car underneath.

 

What's up with the Lincoln reliability issues? They're just Fords underneath and the Edge doesn't have problems with the same mechanical components.

 

I looked at some Predicted Reliability info on the Ford Edge and MKX and they are just about the same. Both were rated Average overall.

 

Almost all the issues are from 2014 and 2015.
I really want to believe in the MKX and MKC...

 

???

Most new vehicles today don't have a traditional steering pump...the assembly is driven by an electric motor.

It (marginally) improves MPG by not needing power from the engine to drive a hydraulic pump, and, of course, is less complex and more reliable, but also makes it more difficult for engineers to dial in steering-feel.

 

I got a chuckle from C&D's comments about pricing. Seems like they are following the Cadillac pricing model.

Lows:
Priced as if the past 25 years never happened.

I did notice that Lincoln is offering incentives on the MKX. Low lease rates, 0% financing, $1,000 cash, so along with dealer discounts, that does get the final price down to a more realistic level.

 

Today's luxury nameplates, yes, cost big money. The MKX I reviewed last year (admittedly a loaded top-line model) ran about 60K. Top-line versions of the upcoming Continental and CT6 will run a lot more than that. And, just today, I posted a full-review of a Toyota Land Cruiser (a Toyota nameplate, mind you, not a Lexus, that listed for 85K....the Lexus LX570 version would cost even more. Even the Ford nameplate, in some cases, can ask a fortune for some of their products....witness the six-figures they will want for the upcoming Ford GT.

 

I just priced an MKX with the 2.7 turbo engine, AWD, Nav, and the 22 way seat. It was $54K or about the same price as a moderately equipped RX350. On the MKX, but not available on the RX were the turbo engine ($2000) and the 22 way seat ($1500). It is not cheap, but is not as overpriced as the recent Cadillacs.
Steve

 

You identify exactly the problem.

The Toyota Land Cruiser is an established nameplate, from an automaker with a stellar reputation obtained over decades of selling quality, reliable products. The Land Cruiser is a benchmark for the type of vehicle that it is, known around the world for decades.

The MKX is an overpriced Ford Edge, from an automaker that hasn't had a true reputation for luxury automobiles in over 40 years.

Comparing a Land Cruiser and an LX570 to anything with a Lincoln name on it is silly.

 

Then that says a lot for the 2Gen Edge, as the 2Gen MKX is head-and-shoulders above the original one in many ways. The original Edge/MKX left a lot to be desired....especially the original MKX, which was little more than just a rebadged appliance.

Yes...from an off-roading standpoint, I agree. What I was trying to point out, though, was that we're talking about a mainstream vehicle-manufactuer (Toyota), rather than a luxury-nameplate (Lexus), still selling vehicles at 85K. Nothing from Ford (and here, I'm referring to Ford rather than Lincoln) runs that kind of money, except for maybe some very large Ford trucks and the Ford GT, an exotic performance car like the Nissan Skyline/GT-R.

 

I agree, with this.

 

Again, you are totally missing the point. Nothing from Ford runs that kind of money, because Ford doesn't offer a vehicle with the reputation that the other cars have earned, worldwide, throughout decades. Toyota and Nissan didn't just wave their magic wands and introduce those high priced cars--they developed them for years and years.

You compare Ford, which did everything in its power in the 70s and 80s to destroy the Mustang nameplate--one of it's most valuable assets.

What about a Corvette? It doesn't fit with Chevy's lineup or pricing structure? But it continues to exist, as it does, because of the reputation that has been cultivated by Chevy over the years. The fact that Chevy isn't a lux nameplate is irrelevant in the analysis. Same as the Land Cruiser.

 

Actually, in the 1970s, the government itself did more to destroy muscle-cars more than the auto companies themselves......only the Pontiac Trans-Am survived as anything that was even close to a true muscle-car. But, yes, the Pinto-based mid-70s Mustang was a joke....even the 5-liter Cobra II version was barely 150 HP.

Yes, I'll agree on the 'Vette. Forgot about that one.