Drew Dowdell

And GM chose the DOHC route to silence critics like yourself and SMK who think HP per Liter is important. It is all marketing and all of the manufacturers doing it. Horsepower is an easy number to fudge since it is only measured at the peak. In the case of naturally aspirated engines, simply spin the engine fast enough and you'll make the horsepower the marketing department wants.... but us end-users rarely see that horsepower because it is so high up in the RPM band. Ford 3.7 liter DOHC - 305 hp at 6500 rpm (F-150) GM 3.6 liter DOHC - 305 hp at 6800 rpm (Colorado) Chrysler 3.6 liter Pentastar - 305 hp at 6350 rpm (Ram 1500) In all of the above cases, you'll never see that horsepower because the transmission will shift before you even get there. Now in that same space, if I'm not at all concerned about valvetrain layout.... I can fit a pushrod V8. GM 5.3 liter Ecotec3 - 355 hp at 5600 rpm (Silverado) OR 376 hp at 5600 rpm if running E85 Chrysler 5.7 liter Hemi - 395 hp at 5600 rpm (Ram 1500) So if you only have so much engine bay to fill... would you pick from the 3.6 liters or the 5.x liters above? What if you're looking for a small, lightweight engine for a sedan? Perhaps a Buick Lacross or Cadillac XTS... both of which have received complaints about soft low end torque.. GM 4.3 V6 Ecotec3 - 305 lb-ft @ 5300rpm GM 3.6 V6 DOHC - 264 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm Between these two engines, at no point in the RPM band does the 3.6 exceed the 4.3 in torque. Given that the 4.3 is physically smaller than the 3.6, which of these would you choose? Turbo charging brings in a new variable, but we haven't seen a turbo-pushrod since the 1990 Pontiac Grand Prix McLaren. A turbo-DI 4.3 V6 would be awesome.

I have never had an issue with the NVH in the modern pushrod engines. As I mentioned, I drove for 20 miles with one in 3rd gear and never noticed anything until the fuel economy instant readout seemed relatively low. The OHV V6s could out-MPG 4-cylinder DOHC units from Toyota... and in 2007 the 3900 could produce highway fuel economy with a 4-speed auto nearly equal to the current PentaStar + 8-Speed of today. The 3800 was the first V6 to be ULEV certified and the 3500/3900 engines had VVT to improve emissions further. GM is not anywhere near a brick wall on their V8s. Due to the relatively small packaging of the pushrod V8s, they can simply increase the displacement. That's what the 6.3 is for... and they can go all the way to at least 7.0 if they need to. And that 7.0 will fit in the same or less space than a 5.0 DOHC. Probably the best comparison to make is the new GM 4.3 Ecotec3 V6 Silverado verse the GM 3.6 DOHC Colorado. Fuel economy is roughly the same (when adjusting for the heavier, squarer vehicle the Silverado is), Torque in the 4.3 is a good bit higher, but that is mostly tuning. And yet the 4.3 is physically smaller and lighter than the 3.6. Wherever you can put a DOHC engine, I can fit a pushrod engine with 50% more displacement. Every time I see a car with a 3.6 liter DOHC V6 in it... there is a little voice in the back of my head saying "You know, a 5.3 V8 would fit there with space left over...." GM has already done it.

That was at least partially the result of the gearing. Off the top of my head, I don't think the 3800 was paired with anything but a GM 4-speed automatic. 4th gear was too tall and 3rd gear was too short... when you needed more power and a downshift, the transmission was forced to take the engine out of its comfort zone. The 3900s paired with a 6-speed manual wouldn't feel the same..... so it's not a matter of just the valvetrain layout. Well, they did make a lot of improvements to the 3.9L. But at dang near 4.0L, it was still low in HP and although I have not driven one, I would bet it still feels a bit lacking at highway speeds, regardless of gear count, because of the low hp. Especially when compared to GM's own smaller 3.6L, at far more hp. My point again, adequate hp and torque is what would satisfy most, not just torque. No. You're getting into Horsepower Per Liter which is a false metric... and is in fact the very opposite of the ideal. The 3.9 liter is physically much smaller and lighter than the 3.6 DOHC. Also, in 2006 when the 3.9 came out, the 3.6 was not producing vastly more horsepower. It was rated at 255hp and 252 ft-lb at 3100 rpm. The 3.9 liter produced 240 horsepower and 240 lb-ft of torque with at least 90% of the torque available from 1500 rpm to 5500 rpm. So the 3.6 was not "vastly more powerful", though it was later capable of it. The 3900 was more of a replacement for smaller, peakier, DOHC V6es of the day. Basically, a 3900 from GM was roughly equivalent to a 3.0 DOHC from Toyota or a 3.2 liter SOHC from Honda from the same era in output, yet it was lighter, less complex, and had a broader torque curve. I've had 3900s on long trips and they could return fantastic fuel economy. They were also incredibly smooth.... one time I had left the shifter in 3rd gear by accident (a quirk of the Lucerne's shifter gate) and drove for 20 miles before realizing anything was amiss. The Malibu with a 3500 could get better highway MPG than a Toyota 4-cylinder simply because the 3500 didn't have to work as hard to maintain speed. But people looking at horsepower per liter as if it mattered killed those excellent pushrod V6s. All of this changed with small displacement, turbo-charged, direct injected engines like the Ecoboost... but back then, there was only one in the mainstream market - The GM LNF 2.0T. My point again... HP is just a measurement of torque at a certain RPM..... HP cannot exist without torque, so just skip a step and measure the torque. If the car has satisfying torque, HP is irrelevant.

That was at least partially the result of the gearing. Off the top of my head, I don't think the 3800 was paired with anything but a GM 4-speed automatic. 4th gear was too tall and 3rd gear was too short... when you needed more power and a downshift, the transmission was forced to take the engine out of its comfort zone. The 3900s paired with a 6-speed manual wouldn't feel the same..... so it's not a matter of just the valvetrain layout.

Those would normally go for UberBlack, but only the very newest ones will still qualify for the age requirement which is less than 5 years old. I can't see these as being super profitable to run in UberX service. In UberX service, you want the best fuel economy possible. A previous generation Lincoln MKZ hybrid or Ford Fusion Hybrid might be a good idea if you can find one cheap.

You say you're not feeling torque when you drive, you're feeling horsepower...... that makes zero sense. Horsepower is just a measurement of torque. (torque * RPM)/5252. An engine capable of producing 300 lb-ft at 1500 RPM is delivering just 85 horsepower at that same RPM An engine that must turn 3,000 rpm to produce that same 300 lb-ft is delivering 171 horsepower at 3,000 rpm. So which one delivered more power at their respective RPM? Neither, they both produce the same 300 lb-ft. One engine just takes twice the number of revolutions to do it and made a bunch more noise. I rarely ever look at horsepower numbers anymore because they are too subject to manipulation (see the 3.0DOHC V6 from GM that only produced its stated maximum horsepower at red-line, which was never reached due to the transmission shifting before that point). Give me as much torque as possible, as far down in the RPM band as possible (or over a range that begins low in the RPM band, such as in Turbo-DI engines).

I was going to pick the Passat TDI, certified pre-owned.... really base model.

Too old. There isn't a 3800 series car left that meets the maximum age requirement.

The vast majority of LaX retail buyers (and Encore buyers, and Enclave buyers, and Verano buyers) opt for the higher end trims. Buick has told me that the Enclave is unusually skewed towards the upper trim levels compared to the Acadia and Traverse. Rarely do the LaX or Enclave roll off the lot with less than the Leather Group trim ($37k base for LaX, $45k base for Enclave) and Enclaves with AWD have a high take rate ($47k base). Most retail Veranos and Encores also sell with at minimum of the leather group. ($27k and $30k respectively) Buick has some of the best conquest rates lately. The two most traded in vehicles? Brace yourself..... The Lexus RX and the Acura MDX. The base prices don't really mean much if Buick doesn't sell many of them. Those trims seem to be mainly there to get in at a specific price point or for rental fleet buyers..... though every Buick I've rented lately (1 Verano, 2 LaX, 1 Encore) has been equipped with leather also.

How the dealership knows SMK is on the lot: They see him out there with a yard stick measuring the overall length of the cars.... then they pop a Xanax and go out to greet him.

I was actually going to make a series of contests for this and vary the factors each time.

I hadn't heard of it before (I was dealing with a family medical issue during SEMA last year)... but it was a SEMA concept... i think they should build it. At least we know a 3rd gen avalanche would have looked pretty darned good. X10000

I hadn't heard of it before (I was dealing with a family medical issue during SEMA last year)... but it was a SEMA concept... First, I hope all is well with your family, Drew. Second, That's a very clean and awesome concept. I wonder if anybody will make something like that in the aftermarket. Thanks, all is fine now. I doubt anyone would make an aftermarket version. It would require an all new bed box.

The chassis is the least of it. As long as the chassis is stiff enough, you can make the car do just about anything you want.

I hadn't heard of it before (I was dealing with a family medical issue during SEMA last year)... but it was a SEMA concept...

Luxury for me is ultimate comfort. For a luxury car, I could care less about ultimate handling as long as it is at least competent. Luxury to me is a modern day 76 Eldorado.... 8 liters of engine and a 5,000 rpm red line, cushy ride, and fantastic sound system. The S-Class is as close as I have found. It's like driving a cloud.

Ah, so you're after Lincoln being able to do some sort of brand snobbery. That's not going to come all at once.. and certainly not within this generation of vehicles. But if Lincoln keeps it consistent, they can get at least to the level of Lexus and Audi in terms of image. I think they're 5 - 10 years away from that at least. With BMW and Mercedes doing everything possible to close the gap from the other direction, Lincoln has pretty good chances. The next step for Lincoln is the Continental. Then they need to hit it out of the park with the Navigator (and I think it needs an optional V8 just for bragging rights, the Ecoboost is insufficient for the ballpark they want to play in). Get those two right, and I think Lincoln will do well.

I was here for one of the really bad ones. I even got video of it. I flew in on Sunday and found out that monday was a holiday so the office was closed. Suprise day off! I have a Wrangler Unlimited as my rental, so I took the top off and drove out to Banff on Monday. I may spin back there for one last look today after work.

And yet, the last paragraph of the writeup states that Ford should pass on a version of this, so as not to steal the Lincoln's thunder.This would not have happened if what was under the skin was as spiffy as what's on display. And before anyone brings up the Escalade, let the record show that I regard it as a happy accident, and have called it an exception to the rule in previous posts. Maybe this, too, will be an exception to the rule. But I'm not going to bet the farm on it. Should that rule apply to the RX/Highlander/Venza as well? How about the QX60/Pathfinder (both of which are huge sales successes). How about the MDX/Pilot and RDX/CRV? Also all sales successes.... Audi Q3/VW Tiguan A3/Jetta It seems like you just don't get why manufacturers make luxury versions of family brand vehicles. Which is fine, but don't pick on just Lincoln for doing it when most of the industry does the exact same thing. I havent' driven one yet, but on paper, it seems that Lincoln has made a decent case for why the MKX is worth more..... the challenge for Lincoln will just be convincing buyers of it.

I mean that sail panel on the bed... it looks like the Avalanche

I'm having visions of an avalanche...

While I'm not on vacation anymore, I am still on the road for work (Calgary).

I don't mind the MKX being on the Edge platform for the same reason I don't mind the MKC being on the Escape platform. In both cases, the Fords are at or among the best in their respective classes in terms of handling, drive, and ride. There is no need to reinvent that wheel. Save the money that would go into that work and invest it in other areas that will more greatly distinguish the Lincoln from the Ford. I think Lincoln is 90% of the way there.

I'm seeing an awful lot of "Kabong is not the target market for a luxury car". I mean almost everything you quoted above was pointing out where the MKX does better than the Ford or matches the luxury import rivals. Engine - retuned for more power and (most importantly) more torque Suspension - same geometry but with variable dampening Stereo - competitive with the high end systems at Lexus and Mercedes Seats - match anything from Benz (and I assure you, the Edge seats do not)