1965 Lincoln Continental All Original on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lincoln MKC prototype caught partially covered, reveals some changes

When Lincoln pulled the wraps off the MKC Concept at the Detroit Auto Show earlier this year, we said that the very attractive concept was going to closely mirror the production vehicle. With few exceptions, a clad prototype recently caught running on public roads seems to substantiate our statement.
From what the pictures reveal, the disguised Lincoln MKC production mule and show concept seem to share the same waistline with identical sculpting over the wheels. The midsection of the two also appear to match with the same flare and styling. The lower rockers have been cleaned up a bit, mainly to be more practical in the real world (the deep chisels on the show car would have collected mud and snow).
Taking a look at the exposed front bumper, we see a very similar lower fascia complete wtih the metal skid plate on the chin. The window profile also seems to match the concept, though we're still unclear exactly how that C- and D-pillar section is going to look. Of course, and it always seems to be the case when concepts evolve into production vehicles, the MKC gains four normal door handles, standard-sized mirrors and a slightly smaller wheel/tire package. We expect the production version of the Lincoln MKC to debut later this year.

Living Life Large: Driving $2 million worth of cars in one week

Monterey Car Week has quickly become one of my favorite events of the year. There's something for everyone – classic car shows, modern concepts and new vehicle debuts, auctions, racing, and so much more. From a media perspective, there's also a chance to drive a ton of cars. Many automakers bring their latest wares out to Monterey for us to test during our limited free time, and it's a great opportunity to experience fantastic metal against a gorgeous backdrop. That's exactly what I did this year. Instead of flying into Monterey and being driven around, my journey started in Los Angeles and ended in Napa, and I managed to get behind the wheel of some $2 million worth of new cars. Some were old favorites, and many were new experiences. But looking back, this was one of the best weeks of driving I've had in years. Rather than try to come up with some common arc to tie these cars together, here are my notes on all the cars I tested in California earlier this month, presented in the order in which they were driven. 2016 Mazda CX-3 The CX-3 pictured here isn't the exact one I drove in California, but it's close. The only difference was color – my delivered-to-LAX tester wore Mazda's awesome new Ceramic hue (pictured below on the MX-5 Miata). I used the CX-3 to slum through crummy Los Angeles traffic for two hours on the way out to Santa Barbara, with a quick stop at In-N-Out Burger on the way for good measure. A lot nicer inside than I remember. Everyone praises Mazda for its excellence in engineering and design, but there's a lot to be said for the improvements in overall interior refinement. Quiet, comfortable, and well-equipped; the CX-3 made sitting on the 405 freeway a lot more pleasant. Not all that functional. I had a hard time fitting a week's worth of luggage for two people inside. The cargo area and rear passenger compartment were filled, with only enough room on top to see out the back window. A Honda HR-V would've swallowed all that luggage with plenty of room for more. So good to drive. Not surprising, since this wasn't my first time in the CX-3. I knew this CUV would be good on twisty roads, but on the highway it's really exceptional. Road and wind noise are minimal and the overall ride quality is a comfortable sort of sporty. This is definitely something I could drive every day – it's enjoyable during commuting and entertaining on more interesting roads.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.