Leaderboard

Well, I finally found what I’ve been looking for, in my price range. This past Saturday I picked up a 2016 Lincoln MKC. 37,460 miles, $21,000, 2.3T engine with AWD. Upgraded real leather seats in dark brown and cream that I absolutely love. It had auto-high beams that I was skeptical about how well they flip off then back on and they’re surprisingly fantastic. As soon as any headlights show up in front of my they flip off, be it just over a hill or a mile ahead of me. Neat. Classic Ford, I already have to hit up my local dealership because the exterior thermostat is reading waaaay off(like -35F) therefor also throwing off the temp thst throws out the HVAC. It’s still under warranty and if it wasn’t I’d be dealing with the dealership I bought it from, well I’m doing that anyway incase it becomes lemon-worthy. I want them to know about it right away. They also legally had to instal the front plate bracket.. they said they were going to do it and I asked them not to but because IL is a front plate state they weren’t allowed to let it leave without the bracket on. I’m going to see if they drilled the bumper or if it was mounted through the grille this weekend to see if I can take it off.

No one knows what the dimensions are. It will be interesting to see. The current CTS is as big as a downsized 1980's full sized GM car. The one that it matches is a 1986-1991 Oldsmobile Eighty Eight.( 196 inches long, 72 inches wide). I thought that was odd. The trunk is smaller. The wheelbase is longer. So why didn't it have any interior room? This car CT5 will probably be 190 - 195 inches long. I know XTS is shorter than a CT6, but XTS has a bigger trunk. The CT6 is as a big as a 1990's C Body( Ninety Eight or Buick Park Avenue.). It rides on a longer wheelbase, but the width is about the same. So why is CT6's trunk only 15 cubic feet? XTS is as big as a 1990's H Body at 201 inches long, 73 inches wide( narrower by one inch) and the wheelbase is about the same. The reason I say all of this why is the packing different on these cars( CT6 and CTS).

I think it's hilarious that you are like the personal embodiment of a GM product. You're every bit as classless, and as much a piece of trash. It's no wonder you love them so much. ? @Drew Dowdell Is there any reason why we let let this vile, GM leg humping garbage pile continue to plague this site?

And that’s the sad part. The mainstream brand car should not look better than a luxury car, in any way IMO. I actually like how Infiniti did theirs though. At least they put some effort into the actual design aspect whereas it looks like the bean counters at Cadillac took over when it came to CT5s.

It's like they mashed up the Accord and Infiniti Q60's window but it jsut didn't work that well.

The Accord profile looks better, though, because it has a window there and not a pointless piece of black plastic. And the rear door window frame trailing edge leans forward, rather than being vertical.

The first luxury SUV; the Kaiser-Jeep Wagoneer. This, I believe, is the '66 Super Wagoneer ~

A. You said "cannot afford", I responded to that, and your response back centered around 'computer engineers'. I don't associate that profession with being unable to afford a car. B. The vast vast majority of people store at least some items in their vehicles for various reasons. Some keep a LOT of items in their vehicles (nothing wrong with that). Still others work out of their vehicles. These types of consumers aren't going to be in this market. C. I do NOT relish the thought of getting inside a vehicle regularly where who knows who has been doing who knows what. People treat public use items in generally terrible ways.

CLA had same overall length as ATS, with 3" less WB but 9" less legroom (FWD vs. RWD), IIRC. It's where the whole 'ATS is unliveable' claim falls apart.

Totally agree on the color comment. No we are not pansies bitchin, that back section from B to C pillar is terrible, but the rest of the auto is awesome enough to deal with that flaw. Life is not perfect, eat some chocolate and drink your wine and enjoy the majority of what we can!

I'd rather it evoked thoughts of something like an S5 Sport back if it was ditching the Art and Science lines and going the fastback route than an Accord..

And considering with each new generation, the standard bearer 3-series gets larger..as does the C-class and A4 I believe. Bigger and heavier is the norm for generational redesigns. Could be..since GM has given up on Europe, China would make sense as a target for sedans..but in China they would need a long wheelbase version. It's fun to speculate, though...the reality of the truth (or the truth of the reality) shall become apparent in due time...

Yup. Maybe the CT4 is more geared to be sold in China? And if they sell a dozen units here, well so be it?

Its really not that bad looking of a car. The front and back are almost....almost...stunning. Especially in that cherry red colour. The interior promises to be worthy of a Cadillac car. So...we are just a bunch of whiny little pansies bitchin' about nothing! Yes. The profile seems to look like a new Accord. The new Accord, to those who like sloping, fastback styling sedans, is quite striking and quite unique and quite pleasant to look at. The profile and silhouette only. Because the front and back of the Accord leaves a lot to be desired. I like it, but its ugly. But having that kind of sloping fastback resemble a Honda is not a bad feature. To those who like that kind of thing. Its just that I, want MORE for Cadillac. I DEMAND excellence for Cadillac as I hold Cadillac in very high regard. For me, its a shame that the stylists and designers for Cadillac dont seem to have that kind of pride that I hold for Cadillac, it seems.

I have heard that was the plan. We really need to see some dimensions of this car to know how it is sized, in and out. At least with real specs which I imagine will come in April then maybe we know what they are going for. I get they hold off on pricing until the fall though.

I’d assume the smaller trunks are related to the more aerodynamic short deck fastback shapes. Crumple zones are nothing new, the 80s Merc S class had them and a big trunk.

You are comparing FWD cars (XTS and 90s C/H bodies) w/ RWD cars. FWD cars usually have more interior space and a shorter wheelbase than a RWD car of the same overall length. Just the nature of FWD vs RWD packaging in general.

One of the jarring things on the 2003 Ion was that those rails surrounding the door opening were contrasting color. That threw the world into chaos. They could do that with the Saturn because of the plastic. I hope they don’t get that daring on the CT5 to try that lol

I would say they were building a scaled down Escala and then the Bean Counters showed up at the point of the B Pillar and said you have X amount of cash left, finished the car with X dollars and we ended up with that back end mess.

Better? Haha, that's a good one. Better at what, exactly? Looking a mashup mix of a Chinese knockoff of a Caddy concept and a Genesis G80? You're ate up. ?

The Infiniti Q70 has a nice take on a 6 light greenhouse w/ a curvy body below...

Don't all the major luxury brands pretty much have that same exact setup? Turbo-4 Hybrid Turbo-6

That spot just gets worse the more I look at it. And now that someone mentioned earlier, the profile does look a little too much like this...

Want to bet they cover that black triangle in carbon fiber on the V-series version?

It's amazing how color alone can completely make or break an interior. The top pic just doesn't look good. The design doesn't look good. Then you look at the bottom on with dark brown(saddle-looking color) contrasting with the black looks worlds better and the whole design just looks better. Same design, same shapes, but adding contrasting colors makes such a difference.

FCA also has the 2.4 L Tigershark SOHC 4cyl in the Cherokee, but like the GM 2.5 Ecotec it's low on power and torque (both under 200hp and 200 ft/lbs). I don't think it would be very good to power a hefty sedan..the 3.6 is a better base engine, IMO.

Lincoln doesn’t even use a N/A V6 in the MKZ. It’s a 2.0T, 3.0T or 2.0T hybrid.

Well, the new CT5 has solved a few issues: engine choice, replace two slow sellers with one seller (sales TBD), new(ish) platform that fixes the old platform issues. Back window and coupe profile aside, I like it. I really like the CT6 and maybe the CT5 should have cribbed from the larger model a little more.

The more I look at that C-pillar, the worse it gets. They completely botched it. It lets the entire design down. They should have made the Escala the way it was. They always do this. Make a jaw-dropping concept, and then make a production version that is more like a Chinese knockoff. What a shame.

With all the scientific evidence about protection from the sun, at least on the rear doors tinting to match should be a standard. I just do not get a luxury car being built with clear glass. In regards to the seating, the only way you can have a coupe roof line is to drop the rear seats below the front seats so the people sit in a hole and cannot really see out. No matter what, this is luxury and interior space should be superior over following a stupid ass Coupe trend that everyone has. They could have done so much better on this rear than they did. I love the rear end and front from B pillar forward, it is just this coupe roof line and the C pillar that I really am not a fan of.

Aluminum body panels at Pontiac... in late '40s (and again in the early '60s). Look, Blu! ~

Heard while channel surfing in my car yesterday. It sort of fits to hear "Come On, Eileen" the day after St. Patrick's Day.

The early failure rate for start-up auto ventures was tremendous. Have a book here at hand, American Trucks & Commercial Vehicles 1891-1996. It catalogs 1,250 makes... maybe 25 remain?

Glad that Whiskey ? is working my friend or was it a boiler maker? ? ?

I honestly hope this is not the case, I would rather they go on the bigger size than scale down.

Have to wait and see what the dimensions are.

Im one of those folks... Im disappoint because it has Honda Accord aspirations rather than Cadillac ones (nah...no Escala in this) despite what @Cmicasa the Great says. But it aint a bad looking vehicle. I get why the CT5 could never be as sexy as the Escala. Shorter vehicle with a much shorter wheel base. Therefore one should never expect a midsizer to exude a certain type of look that a bigger, and longer wheel base car can achieve, but, Cadillac could have done the controversial C pillar design a tad better, a tad more coherent and hella more sexier because its a damned Cadillac!!! But I dont have a problem with that C Pillar design per se. I do have a problem with the CT5 imitating a Honda. Kudos to Honda for making a FWD appliance car look desirable. (I like the new Honda Accord) Or Ford for its Fusion. Or Chevy for its Impala and Malibu, etc... Boo to Cadillac for not making its new CT5 more prestigious in terms of looks. I mean, it takes a page out of Honda's playbook. Not a bad thing per se, but not good for Cadillac trying to be unique and expensive.... But I said I was one of those folk that would buy a new CT5... Well...I would buy one. I like the way it looks. But Im disappoint because once again, yet another model does not inspire Standard of the World... Maybe, its because its the nature of the segment the CT5 is in. I dont inspire to a Mercedes C Class or BMW 3 Series either... I dont inspire to the last couple of E Class generations nor do I inspire to the 5 Series either. The last 5 Series I insipred to was the E39... Because all those models I mentioned, the last 15 years, are nothing but lease queen specials (along with their CUV counterparts) that have over extended debt morons lease them trying to impress their Facebook friends with them taking selfies and talking about how perfect their life is... So...there is that why I may not be impressed with the CT5, because Cadillac and BMW and M-B know that most of those leased cars in that niche are just broken cigar morons that will lease them so they dont try hard to design a wow factor car because its not about the wow factor exterior, but more about the badge on the hood....

I was about to say the same EXACT thing regarding the two problems. From a profile angle, that rear pillar just kills the flow. The front and grill look super sharp but the coupe look is getting way too played out (priotizing form over function).

Starting out a Charger at under 200 hp would not work and would be detrimental to sales. You're right ... the GM 2.5 makes about 190 hp but it also has remained unchanged for a while.

But 'sense of grounding' - however you choose to quantify that- is still no guarantee of business success. Hell, it's not even a guarantee of marital success. Again- Musk's twitter feed is not the byproduct of his marital status. The annals of automotive history are littered with happily grounded CEOs that crashed & burned their ventures- too many to count.

Musk already has 5 kids and has been married twice.. running 3 companies simultaneously may be a bigger issue....

Very nice..like the color combo.

Congratulations, very nice car. Let us know how it drives.

You know what, I like that. Good looking rig, and nice color too.

Is it just me, or did BMW and MB/Maybach collaborate on their respective grilles on their CUVs? This Maybach resembles a big baleen whale upfront. Pass.

What year is that Eldorado Biarritz? 1955?

We should probably get something straightened out here (of course- this will bounce completely off the tin ear of one member here) : There is no "Silverado frame". General Motors and the various divisions involved engineer & design a frame to underpin a number of vehicles from the clean sheet stage. In many cases a Tahoe is built on it, in others; an Escalade (and there are further differences & upgrades). An 'Escalade rides on a Tahoe' frame is every bit as legitimate as 'a Tahoe rides on an Escalade frame'. In other words; yes, these products are from the came company but no; the part doesn't 'belong' to one model over another. In still other words- this is not a point that carries any weight, water or importance.

For one.. Americans seeking a better vehicle than those asswipes in Germany can provide.

It's about time they start to ditch the 3.6. ??

Excited yes, very cool, but track record shows he has problems delivering. Hopefully he can do it this time. Will be exciting to get more info on this. Hopefully at least mid size and not a compact.