Lincoln MKS Ecoboost

SilverFleet wrote:

Harvey wrote: IMO for folks considering the Regal GS, the Regal GS manual is not very good. I had one for a couple of years and the gearing, turbo lag and throttle calibration made driving it very annoying. They are terrible in stop and go and when cruising you don't get any power in 6th gear. Also the wheel hop from the front end is bad in any traction limited situation. I would get an AWD auto version before I went FWD/Manual on them.

I'm likely be going with an automatic with flappy paddles for my next DD. Traffic is so berkeleying brutal around here on my daily commute that it's taking the enjoyment out of driving a stick. If I go the Regal route, that thing is getting a tune. If I go the MKS way, I'll likely just keep the thing stock. 355hp is a lot for a daily driver!

It would be interesting to talk to you after a month of owing an MKS with the flappy paddles. To see if you used them much.

I never really saw the point.

In reply to alfadriver:

I probably won't use them all the time, but it would be nice to have.

SilverFleet wrote: In reply to alfadriver: I probably won't use them all the time, but it would be nice to have.

LOL- I DO get that.

SilverFleet wrote:

Harvey wrote: IMO for folks considering the Regal GS, the Regal GS manual is not very good. I had one for a couple of years and the gearing, turbo lag and throttle calibration made driving it very annoying. They are terrible in stop and go and when cruising you don't get any power in 6th gear. Also the wheel hop from the front end is bad in any traction limited situation. I would get an AWD auto version before I went FWD/Manual on them.

I'm likely be going with an automatic with flappy paddles for my next DD. Traffic is so berkeleying brutal around here on my daily commute that it's taking the enjoyment out of driving a stick. If I go the Regal route, that thing is getting a tune. If I go the MKS way, I'll likely just keep the thing stock. 355hp is a lot for a daily driver!

The tune I got from Trifecta made the GS better, but still not great.

alfadriver wrote:

SilverFleet wrote:

Harvey wrote: IMO for folks considering the Regal GS, the Regal GS manual is not very good. I had one for a couple of years and the gearing, turbo lag and throttle calibration made driving it very annoying. They are terrible in stop and go and when cruising you don't get any power in 6th gear. Also the wheel hop from the front end is bad in any traction limited situation. I would get an AWD auto version before I went FWD/Manual on them.

I'm likely be going with an automatic with flappy paddles for my next DD. Traffic is so berkeleying brutal around here on my daily commute that it's taking the enjoyment out of driving a stick. If I go the Regal route, that thing is getting a tune. If I go the MKS way, I'll likely just keep the thing stock. 355hp is a lot for a daily driver!

It would be interesting to talk to you after a month of owing an MKS with the flappy paddles. To see if you used them much. I never really saw the point.

I've had them and never used them.

I've had them and never used them.

I don't really understand paddles, even in more performance oriented cars. I have only used them a few times, but the movement just isn't my natural reaction when I think I need a different gear, and there seems to be a bit of a delay which is probably more psychological than in reality. Reminds me of the old manual automatics from the Chrysler cloud cars. They work but it just doesn't feel right.

I've got an 8 speed auto in my Grand Cherokee and it has the paddles. I'll use them very rarely, mostly when I come down this big hill that has a roundabout at the bottom. Even then, just putting it in Sport Mode does everything you'd like to accomplish other than hanging out in he high RPM range.

So this is a biased opinion here...

One of the best features of the SHO and MKS is the hill mode calibration- it's supposed to be for slowing the car as you decend a hill. So it works that if you ride the brakes, the trans will downshift for you.

What's cool about it, the time of the brakes is fairly short- and it kind of let the hill mode to be a great track shift schedule- it downshifts quite correctly as you enter corners.

At least it worked well on the last trips I went on. Very much eliminated the need for the paddles.

In reply to alfadriver:

I noticed when I last rented an ATS it had a hill descent mode, or something like it anyway. Caught me by surprise, but it was a totally cool feature and made long descents less distracting, I just lifted off the throttle and kept driving.

I just looked locally and there was one of these for 22K with 50k miles. Not too bad. I think that is cheaper than the SHOs are selling for around here.

alfadriver wrote: So this is a biased opinion here... One of the best features of the SHO and MKS is the hill mode calibration- it's supposed to be for slowing the car as you decend a hill. So it works that if you ride the brakes, the trans will downshift for you. What's cool about it, the time of the brakes is fairly short- and it kind of let the hill mode to be a great track shift schedule- it downshifts quite correctly as you enter corners. At least it worked well on the last trips I went on. Very much eliminated the need for the paddles.

I don't think my F-150 has that mode, nor does it have paddles, but it does have a small rocker on the side of the shift lever for manual shifting when you put it in "M". The only time I've used it was when driving in the mountains, I'd manually put it in a lower gear to get engine braking. Though, it does have a "Tow/Haul" mode, I never tried that when not towing, it might have done the same thing.

On the topic of tuning the Ecoboost motor, as you can imagine there's a pretty good aftermarket for the F-150 version. Intakes, downpipes, exhaust, tuners, etc. I still have almost 3 years of warranty left and I'm not touching it until that's up, but when it is, I must admit I'll be tempted....

Is there a Lincoln cousin to the Ecoboost(ed) Explorer Sport?

OHSCrifle wrote: Is there a Lincoln cousin to the Ecoboost(ed) Explorer Sport?

Ford Flex, Ford Explorer and Lincoln MKT all share the same platform.

This platform in its "sedan version" is also the Ford Taurus and Lincoln MKS.
In its "short SUV" version it is the Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX

alfadriver wrote: So this is a biased opinion here... One of the best features of the SHO and MKS is the hill mode calibration- it's supposed to be for slowing the car as you decend a hill. So it works that if you ride the brakes, the trans will downshift for you. What's cool about it, the time of the brakes is fairly short- and it kind of let the hill mode to be a great track shift schedule- it downshifts quite correctly as you enter corners. At least it worked well on the last trips I went on. Very much eliminated the need for the paddles.

Our 2012 focus behaves that way when you shift into sport mode.

First time I experienced it in a hilly area...brilliant. I agree, no need to tell the car to shift because it seemed it was always in gear I wanted.

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: I also did not even consider this car at all. I did not realize the similarity to the SHO but the Regal GS is still at the top of the list because of the manual.

The Regal GS has the most annoying to drive manual transmission ever. It's like they saw what Nissan has been doing with throttle lag in both directions and decided that it wasn't annoying enough.

I WANTED to like the GS. I still do, on paper, but I couldn't like the actual car. Too frustrating to drive to drive smoothly.

alfadriver wrote: First- all the power is made, but with the limitation that the entire powertrain, including the emissions hardware, has to make it to 150k miles. And with realistic fuel. But it's not as if we are leaving things out there that are obvious.

Nuh-uh, my guy told me that you guys deliberately keep power off the table because that is the sort of thing big companies do. He has a 600hp car with a bone stock D16 including the axles and valve cover gasket so I think he knows what he is talking about !!!

(that was sarcasm)

Part of me thinks the big push for "abuse management" isn't necessarily so much for warranty claims, but so they can use lighter-duty drivetrain parts for a little better fuel economy and emissions. You don't NEED that super beefy trans to tool down the road, you only miss having it when the tires spin and grab or you shift into gear under high power or other TRANSIENT shock loads, so add code to the computer so the shock loads can't happen in the first place. Voila, you have 300hp trucks that weigh 3 tons with drivetrains that don't grenade all the time anymore.

I mean, yes it is good overall, but people expecting to be able to do the dumb things they used to do will be disappointed. My only beef is that sometimes driving spiritedly with these features makes you have to do the dumb things you were taught not to do. I have to spike the throttle on my (not a Ford) car to put the trans into "sport mode" because it looks for X throttle opening rate. I don't DO that, I roll into the throttle, which tells the trans to upshift three times before I get to 50% throttle, then it downshifts twice aftter I finally get to crushing carpet...

In reply to Knurled:

Not sure if you think the failure management things are new or not- but they are not by a very long long time. The computer based ones are new- as new as comptuers are. But there has always been some kind of failure avoidance management. Floating points on a distributor was an easy mecanical engine speed limiter.

The sport mode stuff- I can see how annoying it is to get in and out of. I prefer the more direct "switch" method- so that the driver tells the car by really obvious intereaction that's not in-out like just looking at throttle rates.

The MSK/SHO/Flex/MKT trans is a good example of that- a simple down shift into S allowes the driver to engage the hill mode, but that plus moving one of the paddles, and it's in paddle mode. Pretty easy to drive really gently to get into the "manual" mode. Not to say that all of our products are that way- just that I liked this particualr set up and calibration.

Knurled wrote:

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: I also did not even consider this car at all. I did not realize the similarity to the SHO but the Regal GS is still at the top of the list because of the manual.

The Regal GS has the most annoying to drive manual transmission ever. It's like they saw what Nissan has been doing with throttle lag in both directions and decided that it wasn't annoying enough. I WANTED to like the GS. I still do, on paper, but I couldn't like the actual car. Too frustrating to drive to drive smoothly.

I wonder if it's as bad as my 2009 WRX was. There was an obvious disconnect between the driver input and what the engine would do, and it was frustrating. It would also rev-hang all the time (rev up without ANY driver input). I've read that you can alter that throttle lag with a re-flash, so I wonder if it's as simple as that on the GS.

Knurled wrote:

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: I also did not even consider this car at all. I did not realize the similarity to the SHO but the Regal GS is still at the top of the list because of the manual.

The Regal GS has the most annoying to drive manual transmission ever. It's like they saw what Nissan has been doing with throttle lag in both directions and decided that it wasn't annoying enough. I WANTED to like the GS. I still do, on paper, but I couldn't like the actual car. Too frustrating to drive to drive smoothly.

I will say that I have not driven one yet but, you are kind of describing my 9-5 Aero up to a point. It is geared to make its power in 3rd gear at like 40 to 80 mph. Other than that it does not feel like it has 270 hp. On the other hand the GS may be worse do to the motor being smaller = less torque before the turbo pumps it up.

On flappy paddles. I thought I'd love them, but now I have them on our MkC I rarely see the point. There are occasions when I'm coming to a certain corner or series of corners that I know that I use them, but it's usually to force a couple of quick downshifts. Even then I use it less and less. I find the Sport mode on the auto is great for 99% of driving. Now, if I were on a track or autocross that may be different. But who take a Cute-ute lux SUV tot he track? I'd love to try the hill decent that Eric mentioned. That may make flappy paddles null and void.

SilverFleet wrote:

Knurled wrote:

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: I also did not even consider this car at all. I did not realize the similarity to the SHO but the Regal GS is still at the top of the list because of the manual.

The Regal GS has the most annoying to drive manual transmission ever. It's like they saw what Nissan has been doing with throttle lag in both directions and decided that it wasn't annoying enough. I WANTED to like the GS. I still do, on paper, but I couldn't like the actual car. Too frustrating to drive to drive smoothly.

I wonder if it's as bad as my 2009 WRX was. There was an obvious disconnect between the driver input and what the engine would do, and it was frustrating. It would also rev-hang all the time (rev up without ANY driver input). I've read that you can alter that throttle lag with a re-flash, so I wonder if it's as simple as that on the GS.

Like I said, I had my car tuned which includes throttle remapping and power upgrades. It still wasn't good. The first time I got into my Focus ST and drove it I remembered what a car is supposed to do when you hit the gas and the Regal just doesn't do it. All the throttle remapping does is make the pedal really touchy across the board as compared to kind of soft in most gears stock. Yes, boost comes on more quickly which generally makes cruising in higher gears available to you without having to downshift, but it's not a great trade, because you still do not have linear feedback from your inputs, you just have a different non-linear feedback.

And then the car just cannot be driven at all at slow speeds without using the clutch constantly. In first the car is way too sensitive to inputs and if you let it slide into lower RPMs it starts to bog and if you hit the gas a little too hard it lurches. So you shift to second which minimizes the lurching, but again the car will bog if you let it go down too low in the RPM range.

There is just no way I would get the GS with a manual ever again unless something was changed from one year to another. If you were considering it then try one of the later cars and see if they made it better. Mine was a 2012. Try all the low speed scenarios I talked about up there and also try cruising in sixth at highway speeds and attempting to pass.

I actually owned the car for a couple of years so I know what the car does.

In reply to Harvey:

Actually, I have a big problem with how most cars are calibrated to drive slow. Particularly ours.

Based on how badly it's generally done, it seems as if it's the hardest thing in the world to do. I know it's not- but it drives me crazy how bad it is.

SilverFleet wrote:

Knurled wrote: I WANTED to like the GS. I still do, on paper, but I couldn't like the actual car. Too frustrating to drive to drive smoothly.

I wonder if it's as bad as my 2009 WRX was. There was an obvious disconnect between the driver input and what the engine would do, and it was frustrating. It would also rev-hang all the time (rev up without ANY driver input). I've read that you can alter that throttle lag with a re-flash, so I wonder if it's as simple as that on the GS.

It's like that but I haven't experienced a WRX anywhere near as bad. They're just... frustrating. It's not a power issue, it's a response to inputs issue.

alfadriver wrote: In reply to Harvey: Actually, I have a big problem with how most cars are calibrated to drive slow. Particularly ours. Based on how badly it's generally done, it seems as if it's the hardest thing in the world to do. I know it's not- but it drives me crazy how bad it is.

One of the things I love about the Focus ST is how easy it is to drive slowly.

In reply to JohnRW1621:

Thanks. Didn't realize ALL those were cousins.