mmarshall

The Continental, unlike the CT6, was also hampered because either the auto press simply did not do any early official reviews of it, or, for whatever reason, did not release those reviews until much later. Even Consumer Reports seemed to delay somewhat in its initial write-ups. We had a lot of discussion about that here on Car Chat. The car was already on sale, at dealerships, before even the first sneak-peek road-tests were released. I did a review/test-drive of one myself, at a local Ford/Lincoln shop, and beat most of the actual press-releases.

IMO, though, the Continental was well-worth the wait. True, the CT6 had a more Germanic and handling-friendly RWD/AWD chassis compared to the Continental's FWD/AWD, which probably attracted it more to the auto press. But the Continental, IMO, had better and more solid sheet-metal, better-quality hardware inside and out, a true-American-bling interior that we have not seen from Ford in decades, and, IMO, simply did a better job of re-creating traditional American luxury than the CT6 did. I was strongly tempted by both the Continental and the 2017 MKZ refreshening before I decided to go with the Lacrosse.

MattyG

I wonder if the Conti's styling resemblance to the MKZ and it's similar drive train might have held it back. Ford didn't exactly roll out big press hype on it. But still at 1000 units/month, that's better than some of the naysayers were claiming it would sell. The CT6 has that German chassis tuning but, that styling... and Cadillac's reliability rep.

LexBob2

I was somewhat surprised to see MKZ sales vs. Lacrosse. The MKZ is doing pretty well. I've been seeing a lot of TV ads for both the Continental and MKZ. They might be paying off. Year to date MKZ 23,155 (-9%) and LaCrosse 17,042 (-24%).

UDel

I think you can justify a 100K price much more with a V12 or tt V8 though 100K is still a lot for a Lexus.

mmarshall

For that matter, Lincoln's overall reliability hasn't exactly been in the Toyota/Lexus range....and, to be honest, though I liked both the MKC and the 2017-refreshed MKZ, their overall build-quality left something to be desired. They simply have, IMO, a loosely-built feel inside and out. The Continental and MKX, perhaps because of their higher prices, avoided much of that. I agree that the MKZ's Continental grille and front end may be taking some Continental sales up front, but there is simply no comparison in the interior, even in the premium Black Label versions. The MKZ, though nice, is essentially a dressed-up version of the Ford Fusion inside, whereas the Continental's interior, particularly for those seeing it the first time, will knock one's socks off. Lincoln finally put, into the Continental's interior, what they have been lacking for decades....we also see that with the new Navigator. One thing, though, in the MKZ's favor, for those who like power, is the fact that you can also get it with the Continental's top-level 400 HP twin-turbo V6 and AWD.

I respect the CT6's chassis, and its Germanic roadability....despite the fact that the one I test-drove had what were (apparently) crappy tires that flat-spotted and caused a noticeable shimmy until they warmed up. It was also well-designed from a rear-seat room/headroom point of view and comparatively easy entry/exit....perhaps because some of them might end up being chauffer-driven. But the rest of the car simply doesn't impress me much. IMO, like the XTS, it rides too firmly for a Caddy flagship (certainly not as smooth as the former DTS), it has a loose feel to its doors/interior/hardware, it costs significantly more than the Continental for what you get, and the standard 2.0L turbo four, in my book, is simply not an acceptable base engine for a luxury-class flagship. In fact, in my book, particularly for the traditionalists, the new Buick Lacrosse, despite the Leatherette and faux-wood in its lower-line models, is actually a better "Cadillac" flagship than its own CT6.

mmarshall

On a serious note, folks, while it is not necessarily cast in stone, if any of you, here in Car Chat, are interested in any of these entry-level luxury or full-luxury cars we've been discussing in this thread, particularly from GM or Ford...the Lacrosse, CT6, XTS, MKZ, Continental, Impala, or maybe even the CTS, particularly if your interest is serious and you are contemplating owning or leasing a new one, then now may be the time to get cracking. Either buy or lease one off the lot, or get your factory-order in. None of these sedans seem to be selling well, time does not appear to be on their side, they are getting eaten up by the luxury-SUV market, and I would not bet on at least some of them (maybe even all of them) being around long than another year or two. There is (currently) tremendous pressure in the industry to covert assembly plants from sedans to SUV production, for obvious reasons. Indeed, that's what happened to my beloved Verano sedans....Buick is converting the Orion, MI plant to Encore production, and dropping the Verano stateside, limiting it to the Chinese market. Even if large sedans aren't dropped altogether in the U.S., their assembly is likely to be moved to China or Mexico, which would make it more difficult and time-consuming to factory-order something that is not sitting on the lot or readily available. So, I'm not necessarily saying to run down to the dealership tomorrow morning and get a new car on the spur of the moment...but keep this in mind if you are a fan of these cars, or plan to get one in the future.

MattyG

^^^ Yep, I agree with the mid and larger size sedan shoppers looking at Buick vs Cadillac. Unless you're in the C&D crowd which urged GM to create German rivals domestically, you'll usually tend to look for comfort and reasonable reliability. And truly, a 4 cylinder does not belong in a luxury flagship, but that's what happens when bean counters, executives chasing market share, stock dividends will do.

What's interesting now is how MB is going back to inline sixes. That's because those same bean counters have suddenly discovered that making V6's and I4's are two different processes and costs. When you had to downsize you would lop off two cylinders, and voila, you've got a V6. Now, you just add two more cylinders to that inline four and have a nice inline six.

The Continental's issue to a certain extent is its transverse drive train vs say, an Audi with a proper longitudinal setup. And the Conti just looks a little too much like a MKZ on the side profile. People might not want to look closer and decide on the extra dollars.

With the LS 500, that's going to be the real test for Lexus as a luxury brand. If it doesn't do well for whatever reason, you're going to see a slow fix coming from Toyota. The fact that they went with a styling revision of some sort on a "new and improved" model already is not a good sign.

mmarshall

One significant thing on both cars, though, is that they both offer AWD. Audi simply does it with a different Quattro system, which, like Subaru, is not dependent on a sideways-mounted engine.

And the latest Quattro system, BTW, is not the traditional Audi full-time AWD any more. Audis sets it up now like (except for Subaru) most of the other automakers.....AWD on demand, when the two regular drive-wheels start to spin. That is done for fuel-economy reasons, to lessen drag on the system.

True, but IMO, it's hard to fault the looks of ether one, even if they almost twins forward of the rear C-pillars. Lincoln improved the looks of the MKZ tremendously last year when it got the Conti-style grille, easier-to-use *****/buttons, and upgraded interior.

MattyG

I think it's now a question of market trends lagging behind press or online forums. If people shop around, the Conti might not make sense until Ford starts offering deep discounts to move some units. The platform you're talking about though doesn't play well with Lincoln's RWD heritage. That's going to be an issue for the small subset of people who actually know Continental. Now you've got a gussied up long wheel base MKZ. It's different with the Audi's. They've got tech and amazing handling on their side. Subaru is a mass market brand.

mmarshall

The Continental and MKZ, despite their body/styling similarity, actually come from two different platforms. The MKZ is derived from the mid-sized Ford Fusion, while the Continental comes from the full-sized Ford Taurus. Both, of course, are transverse-FWD/AWD.

Fizzboy7

It's way too soon to really judge most of these cars.
The Camry just came out and I am starting to see a decent showing on the streets. Most dealers already have a good selection. My local dealer is saying all come with a turbo and TDI. I have reported them to the BBB for false advertising (they know exactly what these come with).
The Continental has been out a little longer, but I have only seen one and it was in limo service. Generally, cars with dumpy butts appear overly feminine and do not sell well. People looking for a prestigeous sedan want a trunk with some visual mass.
Still have not seen one CT6 yet in Los Angeles. At lease in photos, it has minimal presence.
LC is too new. Saw one last week and it caught my eye. Had presence.
LS I don't think has been available for more than four weeks, so there's no way to judge that yet.
TheCross has hardly been for sale. Another one to wait for.

Fizzboy7

It's not as bad as you are stating. Yes, SUV growth is rising, and many are eating into sedan sales. But the successful sedan designs with a good reputation are doing just fine. No one is panicking over at Honda and Toyota. It really comes down to survival of the fittest. If you have a quality and wanted car, people are still going to drop their dollars. If you have a weak offering, then you are vulnerable to outside trends hurting things more than normal.

Aron9000

All this talk about the Cadillac CT6, you need to keep one thing in mind with this car. It was not designed for the US market. It was designed to sell in China. Thus the weird size, not quite an S-class, but bigger than an E-class, that is what sells in China. Thus the base 4 cylinder engine, that is what sells in China. Thus the huge price spread on this model, that is what the Chinese market dictates.

Still though, I think Cadillac's management have their heads up their asses. 3 similarly sized sedans(XTS, CTS, CT6), their prices all overlap at around 50-60k depending on options, they all look similar. I mean seriously guys???? Cadillac has only two SUV's, the XT5 crossover and the huge(and hugely priced) Escalade. The gulf between those two vehicles is enormous, plus Cadillac doesn't even offer a compact SUV to slot below the XT5 in size/price. Mercedes has 7 different SUV's, BMW 5 different SUV's, Lexus has 4 different SUV's.

Cadillac is seriously mis-managed IMO, how could they not see this SUV trend coming, I mean they were the pioneers with the luxury SUV back in the early 2000's. Everybody had to have themselves an Escalade back then.

mmarshall

Yes, I agree....I wasn't trying to imply that all sedans were in really bad shape. The Lexus ES350, for instance, continues to sell quite well.....as do Camrys and Accords, and a few others. But, in general, sedans are currently out of favor with the American buying public.

mmarshall

Agreed.....but don't try to sell it in America with Chinese-specs.

Cadillac is well-aware of that compact-CUV lack, and is currently working on the XT3, which hasn't been released yet.