1979 Lincoln Mark V Cartier Edition Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Lincoln Navigator Review | 900 miles in mid-century opulence

PORTLAND, Ore. — Driving the 2019 Lincoln Navigator on my usual 80-mile evaluation route just wouldn't be sufficient. The quick jaunt through downtown Portland and out into wooded mountain roads couldn't possibly do justice to a vehicle intended for the literal long haul. All those seats; all that cargo space; all that comfort and opulence. What the Navigator needed was a road trip, so I took two of them — within five days, over 900 miles and a grand total of 20 hours and 17 minutes in the 24-way power-adjustable, massaging, ventilated saddle. The first journey would be from Portland down to Bend, Ore., and then working my way gradually back through central Oregon backroads. This included winding two-lane highways where the Navigator's excellent adaptive cruise control system maintained its distance (and my sanity) when stuck behind parades of Outbacks, before the 450-horsepower EcoBoost V6 of Raptor fame could dispatch them from across the dotted yellow line. Enough really can't be said about how masterful this engine is — so smooth, so powerful and so quiet. It's perfect for a Lincoln. It also got 20 mpg over the course of the full 900 miles, which compares to the EPA's 21 mpg highway rating. Pretty good given the mountainous terrain and the liberal throttle applied to keep up with a pair of substantially sportier cars I was trailing as part of a photo shoot. Not that the Navigator was really able to keep up with anything once the road got tighter and twistier through the lava fields of the Willamette National Forest. Though I still concur with my initial praise of the Navigator's independent rear suspension and steering that "provides consistent, appropriate and reassuring weighting," there's no getting around the laws of physics. This is a gigantic land craft pushing three tons that's best kept at a relaxed pace – also perfect for a Lincoln. As for the ride, which disappointed during my Navigator first drive in Southern California, the "omnipresent nervousness" I reported didn't really materialize on better pavement in Oregon and later in Washington. True, it's not quite as supple as a unibody Range Rover or Mercedes GLS would be, but it doesn't suffer from the near constant vibration over even the smallest bumps you get in a Chevy Suburban or GMC Yukon XL. On the subject of comfort, though, those 24-way front seats can't be ignored.

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.

NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe

According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"