Maybe a Zephyr?

Howard · #1 August 25th, 2009, 06:06 PM

I drive a 98 Conti that now has over 140K miles on it and I'm starting to think about the need to replace it in the next year or two. I've sat in a Zephyr and an MKZ, but have not taken one out on the road. Is there a chance that I would be satisfied with an 05 or 06 Zephyr when my Conti finally gives up the ghost, or will I just feel cheated by the smaller engine and car?

candycane · #2 August 26th, 2009, 12:27 PM

i think u will feel the main diff. in the ride quality side of things...do u need the size of the Conti anymore? the v6 in the Zephyr in adequite.

pro-five-oh · #3 August 27th, 2009, 09:15 AM

I liked the Zephyr, until I drove a Fusion and realized it was the same car for less money. Yeah, yeah, the Zephyr has great Lincoln gadgets, but I thought the Fusion was actually more fun to drive and didn't ride any worse.

The MKZ is a bit nicer, especiallyt the 2010 model. But the 3.5L engine is what really makes it better, but its nothing like comparing the Continental vs. it's Taurus sibling.

I'd get an MKZ and put Zephyr badging on it. But I'd rather have a Caddy CTS instead.

Philip · #4 August 27th, 2009, 12:08 PM

I've liked the Zephyr and it's renamed twin MKZ from day one and have many times thought either would be a nice replacement. Also thought it would be a breath of fresh air at the gas pump after 13.8 average city driving in the Mark. At Lincoln.com you can option and price your new car and even view the window sticker online. The new MKZ boasts 18 city and 27 highway (IIRC) which is not necessarily an improvement for me over my present vehicle's EPA numbers from it's respective sticker. I'd like to remain brand loyal in the future, but I need to see some more sensible fuel economy expectations. I could see a Lincoln shared platform with the Mazda 3 aimed at the premium segment but with modern day fuel economy. BMW did it

Nick · #5 October 18th, 2009, 12:53 PM

I was fairly happy with the MKZ. With the 3.5L, it's relatively comparable to the InTech, but you won't get the same torquey feeling or the really nice growl. In terms of polish and features, the MKZ trumps the Continental easily. Drive one and see how you like it. I was happy enough to wonder what I might do to the car if it were my daily driver.

KStromberg · #6 October 20th, 2009, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

I was fairly happy with the MKZ. With the 3.5L, it's relatively comparable to the InTech, but you won't get the same torquey feeling or the really nice growl. In terms of polish and features, the MKZ trumps the Continental easily. Drive one and see how you like it. I was happy enough to wonder what I might do to the car if it were my daily driver.

So you're saying it's refined then because I know that car has some snap.

Nick · #7 October 22nd, 2009, 02:06 PM

It's more refined in terms of ride quality, sound deadening, interior material selection and fit, and handling versus the Continental. It's a nice car, but it's still a step or two behind others in the price range. The gap is much closer than it was though. Besides Lexus, cost to own on the Lincoln is probably the lowest over time due to the parts sharing of the platform. It probably wouldn't be a bad car to have for the next 10 years.

LINCOLNLUVA · #8 November 16th, 2009, 08:18 PM

Hi Guys,
I sold Lincolns up until just before the coming of the great flagship MKS. Not the same thing. The ride is small car feel. They put the bells, whistles and navi in to give the feel of 'Lincoln', and yes they use less gas, but they're not Conti's and TCs. No air ride or feel of luxury, captain-like seats, and they cost just a little less that the big dogs. Remember the LS?, they had mustang engines but you could feel every bump on the roadway. Just something to think about; even though I'm not an expert on them anymore.