(first posted 3/27/2017) This 2017 Fusion Platinum represents the culmination of two decades-long trends: The Consolidation of Brands, and The Democratization of Luxury. Let’s examine each of these first before getting into our subject car.
The Consolidation of Brands
In the beginning, most brands sold a single car, meaning that when you bought a Ford, you bought a Ford. Sure, the models may have had names (Model A, Model T, etc.), but seldom were more than one on sale at any given time.
In the 1930s, GM sold different “models” as companion brands to give dealers additional sales volume, but without diluting the value of the parent brand. Cadillac’s LaSalle is the best known of these companion brands, but Pontiac was the companion to Oakland, Oldsmobile had Viking, and Buick had Marquette. Chevrolet was already the entry-level brand, and presumably had no need for an entry-level companion brand (although one could argue that captive import brand Geo would fill this role for Chevrolet many decades later). This proliferation of brands was seen as a defensive maneuver, much like how Proctor and Gamble monopolizes supermarket shelf space with their panoply of brands.
19 different models? I only see one…
In the same vein, variations of essentially the same vehicle manufacturers once sold as separate “models” (e.g. Bel Air, Biscayne, Impala), are what we would now consider to be trim packages.
This began to change somewhat in the 1940s and 1950s as manufacturers began to expand their product line with specialty models, like Corvette and Thunderbird.
The watershed year for this change, however, was 1960, when each of the Big 3 introduced their compact lineup (Ford Falcon, Chevrolet Corvair, and Valiant). Now, for the first time, when you walked into a showroom, you no longer had the false choice of body style variations of the same vehicle, but genuinely different vehicles within the same brand. The transformation from brands to models was complete with the introduction of intermediate-sized cars later in the decade, with the Ford Fairlane, Oldsmobile F-85, Pontiac Tempest, and Buick Special. Now one could buy from a full array of vehicles at the same dealership.
This proliferation of models came with a cost: The necessity to properly differentiate vehicles across brands becomes exponentially more challenging now that each brand had to have a full lineup, instead of a single offering. The resulting brand contraction got a quick start in the early 1960s, which Ford discontinuing their short-lived Edsel brand, and Chrysler ditching DeSoto. Imperial would soldier on as a separate make until 1975, and Oldsmobile lasted until 2004, but it wouldn’t be until the Great Recession of 2008 before the final, massive brand consolidation would occur with Pontiac, Mercury, Plymouth, Saturn, Saab, and Hummer taking dirt naps. Today, one and two-brand lineups are the norm. No manufacturer offers a mid-market brand anymore, outside of GM with Buick (although one could argue that Chrysler occupies this role at FCA, but then they don’t have a true luxury brand either).
The Democratization of Luxury
The second trend is what I call the Democratization of Luxury. Oftentimes, automotive trends unfold over years, if not decades, but again we can one can point to one specific year: 1965. In this case, we can even point to a specific patient zero: the 1965 Ford LTD. Paul has a phenomenal writeup on the LTD, which kicked off the entire Brougham epoch, and whose influence cannot be overstated.
The 1965 LTD brought luxury car style and amenities to lowly Ford buyers. Contemporary ads even dared compare the LTD to Daimler, Rolls Royce, and other high-end cars. It was so successful that it spawned a coterie of imitators, such as the Chevrolet Caprice, Plymouth VIP, and AMC Ambassador DPL. Overnight, midrange brands like Mercury and Oldsmobile were rendered obsolete. It just took years of inertia before the marketplace finally caught up.
Which brings us to our subject vehicle, the 2017 Ford Fusion Platinum. The Platinum trim line was introduced with the 2017 Fusion refresh as the new top-end model, above the previous range-topping Titanium model (which is still around). The Platinum has pretty much every available feature standard, including such former MKZ-only goodies as LED headlights and DRLs, Power tilt and telescoping steering wheel, and 2-position memory on the power seats and wheel. The only major option is All Wheel Drive.
Actual leather covered dashboard
Where Ford really upped their game on the Fusion Platinum was on the interior. Genuine wood trim, actual leather on the dashboard and console (which even the MKZ doesn’t have), and diamond-tufted leather seats create an interior that I think looks even more upscale than that of the MKZ. Indeed, off the top of my head I can’t think of a single car even close to the Platinum’s price range that has a leather-trimmed dash.
Speaking of that price, the Fusion Platinum stickers for $39,830, when equipped with AWD, its only option. A Lincoln MKZ Reserve optioned as similarly to the Platinum as I could configure stickers for $48,310, almost $8,500 more. And by optioned similarly, I mean almost identically (including the same 2.0L Ecoboost engine). Below is the sum total of the differences between these two configurations (note that not all the demerits are in favor of the MKZ).
- Heated rear seats on MKZ
- Power trunk lid on MKZ
- Electronic Adjustable suspension on MKZ
- Slightly better 14-speaker Revel audio system on MKZ (vs. 12-speaker Sony setup)
- Leather-covered dashboard on Fusion Platinum (plastic on the MKZ)
- LED fog lights on Fusion Platinum (no fog lights on MKZ)
- 4/50 warranty on MKZ (vs. 3/36 for Fusion).
That’s basically all you get for your $8,480 (plus the fancy Lincoln showroom that you will probably never set foot in again). Yes, both cars currently have piles of cash available on the hood, but assuming it is roughly the same amount in both cases, the dollar difference still stands. Generously assuming a 50% residual for the Lincoln, that $8,840 works out to an extra $120 or so per month on a 36-month lease (before taxes). Buyers fare even worse, as the differential works out to about $150 more per month on a 60-month note (again before relevant taxes).
Sure, there are a few ultra high-zoot options you can get on the MKZ that are unavailable on the lesser Fusion, such as a panoramic sunroof, 400HP 3.0T V6 engine, 20-speaker concert sound system, and upgraded Black Label interior. By the time you layer on these goodies, you are looking at over $60K, which is a lot to spend for a tarted-up Fusion. Indeed, once you reach the $60K price stratum, there are much more compelling alternatives you could (and probably should) be considering.
While I have used the Ford Fusion for this case study, almost every entry-level maker offers their own ultra-high spec “Limited,” “Premiere,” or “Platinum” models.
So if market cannibalization is nothing new – what makes these latter-day LTD’s any different their 1960’s counterparts? For starters, recall that many of the 1960’s luxury goodies like air conditioning, power windows, and an AM/FM radio, are now considered to be table stakes, and are items you would be hard-pressed to find unavailable on even the cheapest econobox today. Heck, even whitewall tires, power steering and brakes were options on most 1965 cars.
So as the standard equipment of most cars has continued to move up Maslow’s Hierarchy, the equipment available exclusively on luxury cars becomes more and more superfluous to most buyers (things like massaging seats or power-adjustable pedals).
Unable to differentiate themselves on features, luxury carmakers must now sell their wares more like other luxury goods, and less like cars. Or in other words, the way most other luxury goods have been always been sold.
This means selling the brand instead of the product. Lifestyle marketing. Selling on style and exclusivity (the latter of which actually increases as the price gets more ridiculous). So your Cadillac CT5, Mercedes CLA, or Lexus RX-350 becomes as much a fashion accessory as your Coach bag or Louis Vuitton shoes.
Further Reading
Curbside Classic: 1986 Ford LTD Crown Victoria – The Final Ford
Curbside Classic: 1965 Ford LTD – It Launched The Great Brougham Epoch
“…Pontiac had companion Oakland, Oldsmobile had Viking, and Buick had Marquette.”
Technically, wasn’t it actually the other way around, with Pontiac being the companion make to parent Oakland?
Yes. Otherwise though, a great article!
Indeed…an excellent article!
Of course I would want to swap rims so I could have tires with more sidewall that can better handle the rough roads. Wow, real wood in the Fusion, that is impressive and I assume the Hybrid version is also available at this level. The Ford Fusion Sport is another interesting Fusion since it sounds like a sleeper.
The Platinum trim is available on both the hybrid and Energi models.
Honestly, the Fusion could almost be an entire brand in itself. You have everything from basic sedans to luxury sedans, AWD sport sedans, hybrid and plug-in hybrid models.
It is quite an impressive range for one car. Four trim levels (if the fleet ‘S’ is still around, that is) and five different engine options (2.5 NA, 1.5 turbo, 2.0 turbo, 2.7 turbo, 2.0 NA+electric).
But still no hatch for Americans! Grrr
And no wagon either. Since the almost identical Mondeo is available as a wagon, it wouldn’t cost that much to build a Fusion wagon for the North American market.
I got to test a 2017 Fusion Sport for a week and came away very impressed. The turbo V6 has phenomenal torque. Overall a great performance model and indeed, a sleeper. I blew off a few performance oriented sedans at the stoplights.
And this is just the U.S. model.
The UK/Europe equivalent Mondeo is available in high-end Vignale trim complete with fancy dealer “relationship manager” services a la Lincoln Black Label
Some other Ford models are also available with the Vignale label. Like the Ford S-Max Vignale below, a D-segment / midsize MPV.
Poor old Ghia, out trim-levelled to public extinction.
And in Europe there is also the luxury of being able to get a wagon.
and a hatchback, though I don’t think as a Vignale
Isn’t there also an Edge Vignale?
The Vignale models are: Kuga, Edge, Mondeo, S-Max.
The new Fiesta joins that list as well next year.
Not to mention hatchback and wagon versions.
Or a Ford Mondeo wagon + Vignale.
I want a Fusion wagon…
In hybrid. The car above is gorgeous.
Wouldn’t that be a Ford Edge? Same platform. Taller, yes, but not far from the picture attached to the post. Or maybe the Edge is a Fusioin hatch? Again, taller, but not much different. I do love my Edge so far because it is a “wagon”. Hard to get true car wagons anymore. The CUV fills that gap because we all need niche cars. WE’ll all be driving these pods soon.
And how many have been sold?…. This must be the 1st joint model available on both sides of the “pond”, a comparison road test would make interesting reading.
I bet the Fusion is cheaper?.
Hope the paint is also better on the Lincoln – the Ford looks like orange peel.
Are they done in the same plant?
Yes according to wiki:
Along with the badge engineered variant Ford Fusion, the MKZ is manufactured at Ford’s Hermosillo Stamping & Assembly plant…
I’ve been testing an MKZ during then past few days and I can tell you it must be the shiniest new vehicle I’ve driven in the past few months. While journalists have been talking up the new Continental during the past few months, the MKZ is overall a beautiful car too.
First thing that caught my eye was the orange peel and it isn’t exactly subtle. I can assume the problem is not the atomization and distance of the robotic gun but more along the paint having time to flow before being baked.
I believe the Fusion is the finest Ford product to come along in a very long time.
Future CC, indeed.
Platinum? I guess that is Ford’s answer to Chevy’s “Premier”. Phooey.
Premier has to be the worst designed automotive badge of the current decade. The font literally matches nothing else on the car.
Mr. X bought a 2017 Fusion Titanium just after Christmas, so we sat in the Malibu Premier at the Detroit Auto Show. We both were very very disappointed not just in the Malibu Premier (not nearly as nice as the Fusion Titanium, let alone the Fusion Platinum), but the entire Chevrolet and GMC lines. I would easily rate Chevrolet worst in show from this year’s auto show.
If Ford was “answering” GM, then it was a mic-drop answer.
With Platinum taking over from Titanium as the top model, where do they go from there? White Gold?
There IS still a differentiation in the luxury brands. We are simply following a classic retail pattern here. There are only so many different ways to compete. Price, features, quality, quantity, and service. When the differentiations in one area becomes too narrow, competition shifts to one of the others. BMW and Lexus, at least, are in a positive ‘customer experience’ frenzy right now. When I take my BMW in for a service appointment, it’s like a five star hotel reception – I am greeted and escorted to the waiting room and offered coffee and pastries, while awaiting my personal service advisor. My advisor takes me to a private office to discuss the reason for the visit. If the appointment reason will take more than an hour, I’m given a new equivalent level BMW loan car. All service requirements including wiper blades, brakes, and lights (but not tires) are free for the first 36 months. When the car is ready and I come to pick it up, the advisor discusses what was done. The car is valet-service brought to me, freshly washed. I’ll then get two phone calls and a survey checking on my customer satisfaction.
I don’t see Ford doing that for Ford customers, even if they buy the Platinum model with every feature my BMW offers.
You’ve nailed it, and explained fully why some buyers are quite willing to pay more for the premium experience.
That’s exactly the point of my article. The difference isn’t in the product any more, but in intangibles like the ownership experience.
Some people will always to pay for this experience, but those who don’t won’t get any less of a car.
Absolutely true. The shift to service happened because there is almost no way to differentiate on features any more. Almost all features are electronic and thus computer controlled these days. I have a friend who works for Texas Instruments in the computer chip area. He says the first chip of a new design costs ‘a million dollars’ because of design, tooling, manufacturing set-up, and testing. The second chip cost ‘1/2 penny’ , so once the original costs of design etc. are covered the subsequent chips are pure profit, and soon become very cheap. If Hyundai buys a half million chips in the second year of manufacture, they’re going to get a pretty darn good price because Mercedes/BMW/Cadillac/Lexus paid for developing those chips in the first year.
The dealer experiences are getting remarkably close as well, at least based on the cars we have. The Jeep dealer is extremely courteous, I always get a good loaner car, the service bay is immaculate, they have a great waiting area, and my car is always returned washed inside and out. So, in that regard it is exactly like the BMW dealer (actually, the Jeep dealer waiting area is much nicer, with better food and beverages). The Jeep’s warranty is one year shorter than the BMW, and not all maintenance items are covered free of charge during the warranty period, but the difference is minor, not major. BMW simply bakes the maintenance costs into the selling price, while Jeep doesn’t, so it’s unfair to say that BMW has a genuine advantage there–either way you pay for maintenance…
So based on these dealership experiences, the “luxury” brand and the “regular” brand are pretty close. I’ve never owned a Lexus, though I know people who do, and they swear by the service experience–but I can’t imagine it is that much better than my Jeep dealer’s. I guess the next frontier is having the luxury brand dealers bring the customer a loaner while they pick up the customer’s car for service, so the owner never has to visit the dealership at all.
Agreed. I brought my puny Toyota pickup in for service the other day – they met me at the curb, offered me the same coffee and danish as the BMW dealer offered Lokki, and generally treated me like royalty. But I really didn’t care. If I want coffee and danish, I’ll go to a bakery, not a car dealer. Sell me a good reliable product with an efficient service department, and I don’t care about the silly bells and whistles.
It’s my understanding that Ford is trying to do this for Lincoln customers, but it has been an uphill battle. A big challenge is that there aren’t many standalone Lincoln dealers.
For example, there is one Lincoln dealer serving all of Harrisburg, and it also sells Fords. It’s a good dealer – for Fords. We have no complaints about how we’re treated, but we own a 2014 Ford Escape, not a Lincoln. It’s hard to achieve great differentiation in the level of service provided when both marques are sold out of the same showroom, and all of the customers bringing their vehicles back for service /maintenance deal with same service writers and technicians.
(This dealer is located along a main commercial street in the western suburbs that sees plenty of pedestrian and motor traffic. It’s telling that the Lincolns are parked in the back of the lot, out of sight of people driving or walking by the dealer. Out front are the Escapes, Explorers, Fusions and Mustangs.)
Cadillac has also been trying to upgrade the dealer service experience, and has been running into stiff opposition from some of the dealer body. Plenty of them think that they survive by selling an XTS or maybe an XT5 to retired senior citizens who are content to much on donuts in the lounge for several hours while their vehicles get serviced.
The dealership experience is definitely a problem. In Richmond (not a huge city population-wise but 1.2M+ in the metro area) there are no standalone Lincoln dealers. While negotiating on the pre-owned Fusion I bought from the Ford dealership closest to downtown, I was staring at a new Continental parked 10 feet away. As Geeber noted, the place works okay as a Ford dealership but if I were viewing it from a (prospective) Lincoln owner’s perspective it would fail miserably in a number of dimensions.
I assume you’re talking Richmond Ford-Lincoln on Broad Street. I’ve dealt with them recently, but they’re definitely a very good Ford dealership. There’s nothing luxurious about them like I’d expect at the Mercedes or BMW (or Acura next door) dealerships three miles west on the same road.
And this is going to be the big problem for the American marques: You go in for service, and you’re not just among your equals and betters, you also have to put up with your lessers, too. (/sarcasm off)
Meanwhile, BMW and Mercedes are raking in the sales to the badge whores. Those people who will happily lease a prestige car they cannot possibly afford to buy, just because they don’t want to be publicly admitting what they can actually afford.
That and it is a great way to experience the ownership of a Benz or Bimmer without getting boned on these marques “famous” unreliability feature. The person that leases the Benz or BMW gets rid of it before it hits 40,000 miles and thus avoids all the “issue” that these cars get once they hit 50,000 miles.
While I’m sure the facilities themselves are nicer at a BMW dealership, that pretty much mirrors the customer service experience at every dealership I’ve worked for. I assumed that was standard operating procedure. Even the Honda dealership I was at for several years started giving loaner cars, albeit usually a Chevy Sonic or something of that ilk.
When Hyundai started doing Concierge service, I thought THAT was a real game changer. The only really pleasant dealership experience you can have is Zero dealership experience, in my opinion.
Don’t forget the driving experience as well. I know Tom is comparing the Fusion to the Lincoln MKZ, but when comparing the Fusion to something like a 3-Series or C-Class, the Fusion Platinum is going to handle like the same $22,000 Fusion S with cloth seats, 4-speaker stereo, and manual climate control.
Part of the luxury brand experience for me personally is the performance. $39K for all the Platinum’s features is still a good value, but the lack of handling comparability to something RWD and German is what would make me see this car as less of a bargain.
Brendan, you would be surprised how different a Fusion S handles compared to the upper trim level variants. I’ve driven them back-to-back and can safely say that the SE models feel like a mainstream mid-size sedan with Germanic handling while the Titanium trim Fusions (especially the ones with AWD) feel far more expensive than they are.
So is the Ford a Lincoln or the Lincoln a Ford?
Seems much more the latter. Lincoln is pretty much dead except as a badge.
And btw, C&D ranks the Fusion in the bottom half of the class.
Lincoln posted sales gains last year in a segment where most brands had year-over-year declines, so talk of Lincoln being dead is far from the truth.
Wood trim? Where? Maybe I’m blind but I don’t see it.
I’ve never understood car companies canabalizing their own brands. Since FoMoCo doesn’t have Mercury any more, it would seem better to keep Ford cheaper and everyday use oriented and Lincoln more luxury oriented.
I’ve owned Fords through the years and I’ve liked them but they will never be anywhere near luxury cars to me. They are Fords, they simply *can’t* be luxury! They can be nice, my old Eddie Bauer Explorer certainly was nice, but the Ford name doesn’t have any luxury cachet.
At least Chrysler once made huge touring Imperials and had some cachet, though today the 300 (in high trim) is the only thing they make that I’d consider near-luxury or even luxury.
If you embiggen the picture above, you can see strips of wood under the outer vents, and under the aluminum trim pieces on the doors and dashboard.
I see it now. Hmm…that’s nice but I’d rather have more obvious wood, preferably something that stands out more.
Something that yells “WOOD!” rather than makes you go “What’s that funny stuff down under there?”
They are Fords, they simply *can’t* be luxury!
Bingo! It’s all in the head now. How much truly superior is an Audi to a VW, really? Some fancy plastics and leather, and, importantly, many more personalisation options. Stick an Audi grille onto a Seat Leon, sell it in an Audi dealership, and allow more paint and interior options. As long as the customer can be made to believe he or she is getting an Audi, and the actual product is sound, who’s really going to notice?
Reminds me of a doctor friend of mine who could well afford an Audi or better, but is quite content with a Skoda. He knows what he’s getting in engineering terms, so why pay more?
For some people, the fact that the Ford brand isn’t a true “luxury” brand is a bonus, and also what helps to sell a Fusion Platinum or King Ranch Edition F-150.
Many small business owners and professionals – particularly in small towns and rural areas – cannot drive a BMW, Lexus, Mercedes or even a Cadillac, because that would alienate their customers (whom they see regularly around town and at various church and school events). They can drive an ultra-deluxe Ford without generating negative feelings from their clients/neighbors.
Which is why it’s too bad Mercury is defunct.
I get the idea of near luxury because luxury is too “flashy”.
From Ford’s financial perspective, it makes more sense to upgrade the trim and features of existing Fords than to spend money on different grilles, taillights and trim (not to mention advertising) to create a Mercury.
Particularly when customers appear to have no problem with simply buying the extra-fancy Ford instead of a Mercury.
Exactly. It’s the difference between “having” and “bragging.” Having nice things is perfectly acceptable, commendable, a sign that one’s hard work has paid off. Having a flashy expensive car, though? Bragging. Makes it look like they’re lording their money over you.
And in communities in the hinterlands where there isn’t a great degree of income stratification, riding around in a Caddy sometimes comes across as trying to look like some big shit that you’re just not. Hell, where I grew up, having a car phone (distinct and different from a cell phone) in the mid-1990s sometimes was perceived as “you ain’t that important you need a car phone.” Same for cell phones until the mid-2000s.
What a change in community standards and expectations there’s been over the last 50-60 years. Back then (in my admittedly limited experience) Americans were more inclined to flaunt what they had and didn’t think of it as bragging – it was just natural.
I had an American lecturer in seminary who showed us photos of the Oldsmobile 98 he had ‘back home’. Here he made do with a fifteen-year-old Holden Statesman with wire mags and whitewalls – which looked even odder than it sounds.
Spent the past 3 days with a 2017 Fusion SE 2.5 while mine was getting it’s passenger rear door replaced due to hit and run damage. These are nice enough cars but luxury just doesn’t quite come to mind no matter how many electronic features it has. I would be willing to bet the Lincoln equivalent to these drives smoother and quieter too. These Fusion’s have a nice ride/handling/steering and braking balance baked right into there DNA. The main weakness is the drivetrains.
The base 2.5 is just adequate but makes a bit more noise, is slower and uses more fuel than a rental Malibu and recent Sonata we also drove last year. The optional and costly 900.00 1.5T is barely any quicker, only a little more economical and has the annoying stop/start and the 2.0T brings much needed power to the table but with V6 gas mileage.
If anything Ford should drop the 2.5 and make the 1.5T std across the board but improve it with the new DI/SFI dual fuel injection system it’s bigger V6 brothers use and around 190-200 horses
The MPG figures for the 2.0T are almost identical to those of the 2.5. Granted, the 2.5 isn’t exactly a fuel sipper, but still. The 2.5 should have died a long time ago and the 1.5T should be the base engine. (Mine is a 2013 and I consider the 2.5 to be barely adequate, there’s no reason at all it should still be in the lineup for ’17. The reason I’m willing to put up with is is that I was still a bit leery of a turbo engine in a used vehicle.) The 1.5T is rated at 23/34/27, which still lags behind some competitors, but it’s respectable at least.
Mr. X has a 2017 Fusion Titanium. A few years ago, he was DD’ing a 1997 Lincoln Town Car, and in our fleet we have a 1977 Thunderbird Town Landau and a 1978 Lincoln Continental Town Coupe as play cars.
The Fusion’s nicer inside than all of them, rides nearly as well as that Town Car did, and could run circles around any of them while using half the gas. The 2.0 EcoBoost in that car is damned near as quick to 60 as my Fiesta ST was, and it has plenty of power for just driving.
That said, if you go sit in the 2017 MKZ, you can see and feel the difference. Mr. X sat in the MKZ at the auto show and literally said “Now I see why it’s 10,000 more.”
I have a 2013 SE with the 1.6L Turbo ( I believe only available in the ’13 model). I am very happy with the handling on this car (and I was driving an A6 for the preceding 6 years). It was one reason I preferred it over a Malibu. I assume there was some Euro influence regarding the handling aspect. My main complaint on the car is gas mileage versus power. The hwy mpg was advertised as 37 for this engine which is so unachievable I am surprised there wasn’t a class action suit regarding it. Even on a flat 55 mph highway with the wind behind me I could not get the aforementioned mpg. In real world highway driving this little 4 simply does not have the power to reasonably cruise. It is terribly affected by rain, cold, wind, hills, bugs on the windshield, you name it. I assume the 1.5 would suffer the same results. If I had to do it over again I would get the 2.0 L Turbo. That would keep the turbo from kicking in so often and negating the thriftiness of the engine. Essentially, giving me similar/same gas mileage as the 1.6, but with much more power if needed. Oh, and regarding the interior which did not get the greatest reviews… I commute 50 miles a day and find it to be comfortable and haven’t had any quality issues.
I miss a Ford with the luxury of a manual transmission as well as HVAC and sound system controls I can understand and use easily.
Then there is the real luxury of simplicity that just can’t be bought at any price: hand crank windows; rubber/vinyl floor covering; no A/C; a real spare tire/wheel.
IIRC they offered a manual Fusion as a special-order only thing up until the facelift. Too bad they spent the last 50 years doing everything they could to do away with special ordering…
I’m with you, Constellation. I don’t need a fashion accessory, rolling condo or four wheeled vibrator. I have a life. Not a “lifestyle”.
Gadgets and tech do not equate to me as luxury. Any car can have them, as the article points out.
Leather is as common as vinyl used to be in the 60s. It’s no longer special and indicative of “luxury”. Engine and transmission tech in all cars is on a level unimaginable in the 60s.
I’d be “surprised & delighted’ with no recalls or electrical problems, reliability, ease of service and long life.
Is a Focus Titanium worth the premium with that awful Powershift automated manual ? Or any Focus with that troublesome trans ?
We’ll be in the market for a new vehicle later this spring, and I’d consider a Focus Titanium. The deal-killer is that transmission.
Yes. A shame as I like the styling of the sedan. Too bad I am pretty much done with manuals for this lifetime
People who drive “four-wheeled condos” probably think of their lives exactly the same way. There’s no reason to think your values are superior to theirs.
My 2014 Fusion has the 1.6T engine and six-speed manual. I love the transmission; it is so easy to shift that I can rest my elbow on the console and just move my wrist. The 1.6 has more power than I ever use and gets great mileage.
Oddly I bought the car used in December 2013 with about 800 miles on the clock, 300 of which were put on by the salesman. I think someone bought the car and after a week their significant other made him trade it in for an automatic.
Ugh, my FIL tried to sell me on these when they first came out and he got one as his demo.
Well Pa, I like the outside, but there’s too many buttons inside and I don’t like the powertrain.
If I had to pick a daily driver from any of these I’d be leaning towards the 56 Chevy…
Plus that the size of that frigging console is obscene.
Are all of you console complainers 6’5″ or something? I was expecting to hate the car when I test drove one because I heard so many complaints about it. Driving how I normally drive, it doesn’t bother me. And that’s coming right out of a car with *NO* console. Granted I’m 5’10” so maybe it’s a tall person thing.
The only issues I have with it are the position of the cup holders (which they appear to have fixed) and the fact that the storage binnacle under the radio/HVAC controls is way deep and has no sides, limiting its usefulness.
No Chris. For me it’s the ridiculous waste of space for a plastic log.
As windows become smaller, visibility worse, A & B pillars thicker, interiors darker and more closed in from crash protection, the consoles become larger, wider, taller. The interior becomes more constricted and less “roomy” inside. I can’t stand this trend.
I’m 5’8 and have discovered I hate having that stupid piece of plastic in the way of my knee and despise the effect of sitting in a bathtub like some old fool in those Cialis ads.
Like fixed rear windows, frameless door glass and digital gauges, huge consoles are a particular peeve of mine. Especially when a smaller, closer to the floor console unit could do the same thing.
This is form overriding function in a big way. Like spoilers on Cavaliers.
Same here. Almost all vehicles have a console these days but there are ways to make them that aren’t overly confining. The Taurus’ is especially bad, but the MKS’ was ok. The Impala and LaCrosse is kind of ok, but the XTS is bad. Part of the reason I got a 300 was for the fact of the low sitting console design.
“plastic log”
Phrase of the year so far!
Something naughty in that somewhere…
Do you like manspread or something while you’re driving? Mr. X, before the 2017 Fusion Titanium, had a 2013 Taurus-the poster child for oversized consoles. I’m a 5’9″ 220 pound lard-ass, and I always felt like there was a ton of room in that Taurus. Not really sure how big one would have to be to feel cramped in those cars.
Also, LOL at plastic log!
This is one the of things I love about my good old W-body 2013 Impala. The console is much narrower and lower set and my leg or knee never comes close to it. It opens up the front seat room considerably compared to the new stuff. The 2017 Fusion rental I had wasn’t bad and way better than the ridiculous Taurus setup.
I test drove a ’13 Impala and it made a good impression on me–definitely lots of room inside and a standout in the unobtrusive console category. Plus it looked good (black LTZ with the 18″ alloys) and had plenty of power with the 3.6. All things considered, though, the interior ended up being one of the things I liked least about the car. Plenty of space, yes, and reasonably comfortable seats, but the materials quality was a big letdown and the I found the dash design quite bland. It was one of the ways the platform really showed its age. in good and bad ways.
Thank you for saying that, as I was about to.
+1
I’m stuck on/in 1990s vehicles because of these issues (console, visibility), as well as pre-infotainment electronics and pre-ammonium nitrate Takata air bags.
I suppose it’s the outflow of luxury generally being much more widely available. In the 60s, James Bond flew to exotic locations around the world that were impossible to reach for the average movie-goer. Already ten years ago, the whole concept of 007 had to be revamped because Thailand and Brazil could now easily be reached in economy class with some saving (I can’t afford it right now though, neither can I afford a car) and was no longer exclusively luxurious. What was once considered opulent is now available to the average Joe. How to top it? Send the man to space? The introspective (and disappointing) entries that followed indicated the producers still haven’t found any answers. Neither did Ford, or GM.
Tellingly, in his new appearance, James Bond drove a Mondeo, one of the Fusion’s predecessors.
VERY well articulated, Tom.
And herein lies the difference with GM vs. Ford. As I’ve stated multiple times on CC…
From the 1958 Thunderbird forward, FoMoCo has allowed its Ford brand to maneuver wherever needed to best benefit the Ford brand, Mercury and even Lincoln be damned. The results are obvious – and stunning for a mass-market car.
GM kept Chevrolet (excepting Corvette) in more confined quarters to protect its other brands – which worked in the 1960s – but as the Sloanian ladder crumbled, so did Chevy’s perception. Yes, I know the market share of Chevy within GM has increased, from 50% to 70%…but it’s 70% of a pie that has shrank from 53% to around 16% of the market overall.
Today, how many people will buy a Ford or GMC pickup/crossover, but not a Chevy because Chevies are “cheap”?
IMO, current “real people, not actors” marketing is doing nothing to help. That should be Tier 2 regional advertising at most, helping to support a national Tier 1 Chevrolet branding initiative. Like Ford, and virtually everyone else does. Like GM used to do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztdy44Gh_2E
In the present environment, where luxury is expected and demanded, Ford has both driven – and benefitted from – the democratization of luxury, perhaps more than any other company. Period.
And while GM is turning out perhaps the best-equipped Chevies in its history – with more premium models and packages coming, particularly in the trucks – I see another good decade until public perception catches up, bringing increased sales and customer retention.
Lincoln and Cadillac’s best moments have always been based on style and successful branding. You are indeed selling the brand, the experience, the exclusivity. I, for one, think there’s LOTS of room upmarket for both. But both have a long way to go.
Both, at one time, offered models that competed with Rolls-Royce and Duesenberg.
As always, our mileage may vary.
Today, how many people will buy a Ford or GMC pickup/crossover, but not a Chevy because Chevies are “cheap”?
Drives me insane. Wife bought a 2016 Terrain and wouldn’t even test drive an Equinox. I know I could have gotten a couple of grand more knocked off the price of the Equinox.
Ah, yes, you could have saved some, but – would you be as happy, if you get my drift? Happy wife, happy life.
It’s her money…
It’s just my analytical mind. Thinking way over feeling in my personality.
Complaining to you guys is just talking to someone who might actually understand. 🙂
Oh, I understand VERY well, Dan, and I wholeheartedly agree with you!
I’m one of those people who would pick a GMC over a Chevy 24/7. GMC’s styling is usually less brash (Denali excluded), and it’s rare to run into a base GMC model – they’re out there, just as nastily-cheap, but certainly not in the numbers as the Chevy. Except for Corvette, no one “aspires” to a Chevy.
I don’t know how Ford pulled it off to where they successfully straddle the low-to-mid-high market. This Fusion is evidence of that. I covet a Mustang GT convertible or F-150/Expedition King Ranch.
But I will say in 2010 for the first time in 30 years we bought a domestic car (Edge) and finally fled back to the Japanese 5 years later. Too many (stranding my wife) cooling issues. YMMV.
Well, Dan, my wife loves her mechanically-identical-to-the-Terrain Equinox. Only a couple options that I’m aware of that are different. The Equinox even comes with that noise-cancellation feature to make the drive extra quiet.
Exactly. My mother bought her first Ford last year in 40 years of driving- mostly Buicks and the occasional Oldsmobile. Wouldn’t even consider the Malibu because it was a Chevy.
As I’ve said before on here, though, it all worked out- the Fusion is probably the best-built car she’s ever had and she couldn’t be happier with it. It’s the basest of base models too- ironically probably cheaper than the equivalent Chevy.
Love it!
Ford seems to be doing something right. I saw in a recent magazine that Ford was ranked the “coolest” manufacturer.
Granted, it was my son’s Boy’s Life, which probably has a high percentage of kids whose dads drive F-150s. Still, it surprised me.
But my mom has an Edge, and honestly it’s not very impressive. It drives great for a CUV but fit and finish is pretty poor.
I take it that Fusion is your car, Tom? If so, excellent color choice. Ford had a similar color, Bordeaux Reserve, for the 2013 model year, but quickly axed it. I’m guessing they found enough demand to bring it back.
As for the MKZ, there are still a number of meaningful differences between it and the Fusion. The Lincoln has active noise cancellation standard, but the Fusion only has it equipped on hybrid models. I know the Fusion is already a quiet car but if you sit in one back to back with one that has active noise cancellation there’s a noticeable difference. The MKZ also has continuously controlled damping and Lincoln Drive Control, which again, make a noticeable difference in ride and handling. There’s also the free loaner and vehicle pick up/drop off program that every Lincoln customer gets with their purchase (apparently even CPO buyers get a loaner vehicle now). That may be a huge deal for some people, plus its a pretty nice perk.
I totally agree with your views on the democratization of luxury, and I think 2007 was another year that featured a paradigm shift for automakers. In this case though it was technology, not a specific car, that changed the game. I’m talking about the debut of Ford Sync. Having bluetooth and a USB port standard on even the lowliest Focus trim level instantly dated a lot of product for sale at the time. For a while cars like the Fiesta had better electronic interfaces than cars that cost four times the price. This really brought a whole new level of parity between mainstream vehicles and their more expensive counterparts. In Ford’s case you had it with “MyFordTouch” and “MyLincolnTouch,” literally the exact same infotainment systems. Seems like the Blue Oval dropped the pretense with Sync 3, as its called that on everything.
My point is that the demand for technology in every vehicle segment changed the standards of democratization so much that the push for service-oriented luxury brands was likely inevitable, and probably had to happen in order to prevent lost sales. I wouldn’t be surprised if the future of luxury even changes the idea of car ownership itself, as Cadillac just launched a subscription based model for certain markets.
Very well reasoned, Tom. Seriously, will you consider writing a book? This world needs all the intelligence and insight it can get.
The end of luxury started with the Japanese imports in the 70s and 80s. Once they got reliability and quality up to a standard, they also started dumping what were once “luxury” options as standard equipment. They figured that per unit, adding a decent stereo to EVERY car was not much more than offering a base unit and then upgrades. This same effect happened to all luxury options. When was the last time you saw a car on a dealer’s lot with rollup windows, no radio, no A/C, and no side mirrors? When did you last see vinyl seats? Drum brakes? Manufacturers have learned that packages are the way to go. You build one model, then several packages with preset “options” and voila, you sell it. No strippers, no custom orders, just 3-4 packages of the same model in various colors for the consumer to choose from.
Formerly optional features becoming standard as well as in packages coming from overseas manufacturers made the whole process more efficient.
The logistics were part of that standardization. Plus the level of standard features was a boon for marketing.
And they simplify it even further with ever-fewer colours too.
Seriously, no custom orders must make life heaven for the production guys. Crank them out in the various trim levels and colours according to pre-determined ratios and ship them out to the dealers, as individual as so many washing machines….
What price pride of ownership though – can you still feel it is ‘yours’?
I feel I should point out that the way Japanese manufacturers approached U.S. merchandising was quite a bit different than the way the same companies did business at home, so a lot of the inferences people draw about the rationale tend to be off-base.
In Japan in the ’70s, buying a new Toyota Corolla (for instance) was not substantially less complicated than buying a new full-size Chevrolet in the U.S. You had a bunch of body styles, a bunch of trim levels, a bunch of engine choices (as many as 10 at certain points), and lots of options. Japanese automakers didn’t offer that range in export markets for logistical reasons, so what showed up in the U.S. (etc.) was really just a small slice of the pie.
The U.S. range tended to start more or less in the middle, with more standard features than the low-end JDM models, in part because it was an obvious selling point and in part because it made life easier for American dealers.
In the ’80s, the Voluntary Restraint Agreement limited the maximum import volumes of each of the Japanese manufacturers, so they compensated by adding more content to help push unit prices and unit profits. Again, that was specific to the U.S. and other markets with import caps, not a reflection of JDM business strategies.
Low-line JDM cars continued to have roll-up windows, drum brakes, and bias-ply tires for a surprisingly long time — at least into the early ’80s, on cheaper models.
Thanks for the perspective, Aaron. I forgot how the VRA distorted the market for Japanese cars in the 1970’s and 80’s.
Very interesting post, and I think very accurate regarding domestic luxury–and to a slightly lesser degree–Asian luxury brands. I think what kills Lincoln (and Cadillac too) is the fact that so many components are blatantly shared with the “lesser” brands, with the primary distinctions being relatively minor cosmetics and perhaps dealer experience.
The lethal mistake that I believe Detroit made was that it didn’t respond to the LTD by making the upmarket brands still nicer, so that the latest innovations, higher quality materials, etc. were unique to the more expensive cars. Prices for the premium cars would have risen as a result, but the rise could have been controlled in such a way as to not kill too much volume. I believe that if you look at the pricing curve on “Value,” “Upper Middle” and “Luxury” brands through the years (including imports), you’d see Detroit brands move closer together price-wise over time. Then the Germans redefined the high-priced end of the Luxury market, while Cadillac stayed a smidgen above Buick and Olds, which themselves were pretty close to Pontiac and Chevy. No longer were the premium domestic brands in the more expensive price bands for the luxury category, hence they were very prone to the loaded Fords and Chevrolets… In essence, Cadillac and Lincoln became “Medium Standard” brands, and most of the former medium price brands vanished as they became irrelevant–why buy an Oldsmobile when you could get a Chevy (value) or a Cadillac (“prestige”) for about the same money?
Far more than price is at play, however. The other defining element of a successful brand is a distinctive point of view. When company leaders spend their days focusing on who their brand is for and what it needs to deliver, the results can be spectacular (Cadillac in the 1950s, Pontiac in the 1960s, Olds in the 1970s). Today, the Germans lead the market in creating very distinctive brands/products that utilize shared components but mask them well. VW Group is arguably the leader, with most Audi customers being only vaguely aware (if at all) of the Volkswagen connection. And of course there’s Lamborghini and Bentley, both perceived as ultra-exclusive brands but both of which in reality share a lot of VW group components. BMW group, with Mini and Rolls-Royce, also provides a great example of 3 very distinctive brands that effectively camouflage common parts. Whether these brands are aiming a different markets (BMW Group) or different slices of the same market (Porsche vs. Audi), it’s the brand character that justifies the pricing premium and drives the purchase decision.
Detroit lost sight of these truisms about premium and luxury brands, so now a Ford is a better choice than a Lincoln based on content, and neither brand represents “luxury” in the exclusive, aspirational sense.
Great comment!
VW Group is arguably the leader, with most Audi customers being only vaguely aware of the Volkswagen connection.
In my area, many of the VW stores have Audi and Porsche stores next door. It would be hard to believe that most people think an Audi is a different car. The difference in execution is apparent by looking at the J D Power and Consumer Reports ratings for quality and reliability for the two brands however.
That being said, when I compare my bottom trim 2014 Jetta wagon to the cars that preceded it, a low trim 98 Civic (crank windows, no cruise, no a/c), 02 Escort (cruise, air and power windows, but also lots of noise and vibration) and my 06 bottom trim Focus (crank windows again), not to mention previous VeeDubs to the beginning of time, I can’t believe its a VW.
And VW’s announced product strategy going forward is to move the brand farther upmarket, with the void below filled by Skoda and Seat…and I bet Skoda and Seat move upmarket too.
Audi owners may think of the VW Group in the same way that Oldsmobile or Buick owners would have thought of General Motors: i.e., acknowledging the “family” relationship while still feeling like they had a “superior” product. But overall, I don’t know any Audi owners (and I know lots of them) who think that they are just driving a nice VW.
VW definitely has tried to move upmarket, and also become more “Americanized.” In the U.S., ironically, I think that has placed them in the dreaded “middle” of the market, as their sales will attest. VWs are typically undercut on price by the volume Japanese brands so they lose on “price/value” (also reliability), while not offering enough snob appeal to be seen as a genuine upscale brand. In Europe, with SEAT and Skoda, the VW Group can move the VW brand upmarket and still have the lower price segments covered, which is not an option stateside.
It’s kinda hard to be upscale when your name means “People’s Car”. Of course, I doubt many people bother to know that, but still.
Agree. It will be interesting to see how this brand strategy plays out over time. Ferdinand Piech pushed the VW brand into some rather strange directions, with the Phaeton being the prime example of a stretch too far. Piech’s hubris often tempered his brilliance…
Unless you speak German.
European buyers still regularly pay a premium for the Volkswagen-branded version of cars available more cheaply (and sometimes better-looking) in SEAT and ŠKODA forms, and then pay a premium on top of that for the Audi version, sooooo.
In Europe, with SEAT and Skoda, the VW Group can move the VW brand upmarket and still have the lower price segments covered, which is not an option stateside.
There was a lot of buzz among VW discussion groups last fall when VW registered the Skoda brand and several model names in the US.
In China, VW appears to be a prestige brand. While we in the US laffed at the idea of an $80,000 VW Phaeton, it sold well enough in China and it has been followed by the Phideon, which is only slightly smaller.
The US is not the center of the universe for VW. VW designs for it’s largest markets, Europe where it dominates, and China where it is roughly tied with GM for market leader. VW is only now introducing competitive SUVs, because only recently have SUVs gained popularity in it’s home European market.
Excellent analysis. I believe (based on what I’ve read here at CC so it’s got to be the truth!!) Cadillac chasing volume in the ’70s mixed in with Chevy coming out with luxury models (therefore crunching the center brands) killed the effectiveness of the long-outdated Sloan Model. Back that up with the half-assed Cadillacs of the ’80s and ’90s and you’re down to one house brand with a less-than-sterling reputation because of GM’s “the customer is our beta” mentality.
Besides luxury features being available on downmarket cars, I suspect the availability of powerful engines in downmarket cars also contributed to the collapse of the Sloan ladder.
Last summer, I mooched a ride in a pre WWI Pierce Arrow. As we cruised around the grounds at the Gilmore, the driver talked about how effortlessly the car runs at 60 on the street. What was the best a Ford or Chevy of that era could manage? In the 20s, when the police drove a T or an A, a perp with a Lincoln could simply run away from them.
Then Ford introduced an inexpensive V8. Even Snopes is unsure whether the Clyde Barrow letter of 1934 is genuine or not, but it praises the power and speed of the Ford V8 which made it Barrow’s preferred get away car. Barrow was killed while at the wheel of a stolen Ford V8.
Then the SBC was introduced. The horse power race was on and the collapse of the Sloan ladder started in earnest. Chevies and Fords grew and grew, each introducing a new top trim model, exceeding the former top trim. The Bel Air and Fairlane were topped by the Impala and Galaxie. The Impy and Galaxie were topped by the Caprice and LTD.
As Tom says, introduction of compacts further blurred the lines. You could buy a Chevy Caprice that was larger, more luxurious, more powerful and more expensive than a Buick Skylark…so what does the Buick brand stand for anymore? Is a Cavalier suddenly “aspirational” if you stick a Cadillac badge on it?
Then years of Zero APR financing offers, financing for ever longer terms and leasing make “luxury” affordable for more and more people, as every dealer wants higher priced, higher margin, luxury models to offer people who could not have qualified for them previously. Just as the Olds and Buick dealers did not want to see prospects pass them by to buy a compact at the Chevy store in the early 60s, now the Chevy and Ford dealers don’t want to see a prospect pass them by to buy a Lincoln or Caddie.
300C Platinum has a leather dash.
My ’90 Acura Integra still goes to the dealership for service. The PO did it for the first 25 years, why should I break the chain?
Last visit was because the Acura-branded battery, dealer-installed in 2013, gave me a slow start.
I went to the dealer and they took me in without an appointment. They called Acura of Bellevue (WA) to get a copy of the 2013 service order. They gave me a fresh cappuccino instead of a stale cup of coffee. They tested the battery and recommended that I either drive the car more often or get a trickle charger.
They washed the car, inside and out.
Total charge: $0.00.
That’s why people buy Acuras instead of Hondas.
I went to the dealer and they took me in without an appointment.
I went to an Acura dealer a few years ago to look at an RSX. I parked right in front of the showroom. Walked over to the RSX and looked it over. No sign of a salesman anywhere. I walked up to the door and checked their hours…yes, they were supposed to be open. I opened the door and walked in. Finally found all the staff in back watching TV.
Ultimately, the sales experience was about like a Ford dealer, or worse. I walked out empty handed.
Smart, smart article. You covered a lot of ground very well.
+1
The democratization of luxury means that a luxury brand today is overwhelmingly experience over content. I’ve driven Fusions and MKZs and Continentals and the Lincolns ride a little better and have a better interior (Lincoln has finally done a pretty good job in differentiating the brand, given the same platforms and option sets). But, the experience, from dealership to literature to delivery and service (see the Lincoln Black Label “brand”) makes the difference palatable for the target market.
All modern cars perform admirably…you can get from here to there as rapidly in one as the other, hero stories notwithstanding. The BMW “handles” better? Where in the real world? It’s about feel! And that’s OK, hasn’t it ALWAYS been about feel?
While all the “extras” in 1960s cars are considered “table stakes” today, why is it they chintz on spare tires in new cars? I’ve never understood that. More than once I’ve gone out and bought real wheels and tires to replace the cheap “doughnuts” that came with the cars.
Packaging efficiency and weight reduction, I’d wager. Plus fix-a-flat didn’t exist back when full-size spares were common (though I’ve never used the stuff myself, I understand that some car manufacturers have dropped the spare entirely in favor of it.)
Not to mention that there’s no place for a full-size spare in most cars anymore. Under the trunk mat seems to be the default location, you can’t fit a full-size there because it’d be way too tall, and I don’t know about you but I’m not going to devote 1/3 of my trunk space to a full-size spare. Yeah, the donuts are chintzy and not particularly safe for long-term use, but I’ll put my faith in it to get me from where the flat occurs to the tire shop.
My dad bought my mom a ’74 Hornet Sportabout way back when and it came with a collapsed temp. spare and a can of Fix-a-Flat 🙂 .
Also, modern tires are much more reliable, and AAA much faster, than in previous eras.
Agreed about trunk space being at a premium, especially in the convertible I drive. I still went out and bought a matching rim and, when it came time for new tires, I took the best of the old and put it on the rim. Flip the tire upside down, and it buys you some space to stick a couple of grocery bags. But that car isn’t meant to carry much in the truck, anyway. I live in a rural area and tire stores aren’t a) close or b) open.
Too bad Chrysler didn’t provide accommodations in their cars to allow you to carry spare automatic transmissions along.
CAFE. Weight reduces fuel mileage and every increment is a big deal.
Besides the other reasons (which are probably primary) I would guess that on cars with AWD systems the manufacturer would not want people running a practically new tire with three worn tires for a long time as one might be tempted to do. At least with a doughnut you have a constant glaring reminder you have to get the tire fixed or replace them.
A fair number of more expensive new cars do come with full-size spares, judging by what I see around town. One drawback is that full-size spares don’t seem to come with a matching alloy wheel, so you see cars with polished alloys on three wheels and a black-painted steelie on the fourth, sporting a tire of clearly different age than its mates.
Nissan keeps me as a customer (I’m on my 5th Nissan) because of the dealer experience. It’s been the same across state lines and four different dealers
I don’t get treated as if it is my fault when the vehicle has an issue that needs attention from the dealer. I can schedule an appointment and if my wait is more than an hour, they will drive me to where I need to be and pick me up when my car is ready. I am texted the next day (I requested that I be contacted by text instead of voice a long time ago) to make sure that I am happy with the service and they clean my car inside and out if it needs it. They follow up with an email survey.
I don’t get the private office consultation nor the pastries and fancy coffee, but I didn’t buy and pay the extra for a place that does that. And I end up with a vehicle that I trust to take a thousand mile trip on a whim and that I can afford to own.
Perhaps certain dealerships’ level of luxury reflects on the cars they sell, requiring you to be as comfortable as possible, because you’re going to spend an awful lot of time there?
Curious.
In any event, nothing is free, and the more comfy surroundings, free car washes and amenities there are, what you pay for the car and subsequent service reflects that.
I think FoMoCo is doing a good job with the Ford brand. I just don’t understand the reason for the Edge or the Flex. They are both dead ends. I drove many rental Escape and Edge. I did not like the Edge I much preferred the Escape. Lincoln, if it wants to stay alive as a luxury brand, needs to have a halo car. A dedicated, exclusive platform, RWD, and V8 and/or a V12. That should not be a problem for Ford since it has been supplying V8 and V12 power plants to Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Land Rover. FoMoCo needs to look back to the days when Edsel persuaded old Henry to buy Lincoln and try recreate that separation.
Great article!
It’s not the RWD V8/12 you seek, but the Black Label Continental is a subtly sweet ride. A friend bought one and it is mighty impressive.
Yeah, and the new Continental has been a very poor seller so far. That was not a hard one to predict! Give me a BMW or Mercedes anyday over some tarted up crappy Ford with a Lincoln label slapped on it.
A car that you own and that doesn’t own you. It’s the Millionaire Next Door mentality. It’s quite an intelligent proposition, I think, the democratization of luxury. Poor people own stuff, rich people own their money. Truly wealthy people don’t need to brag about their wealth so they drive high end Camry’s and Fords (as is stated in the book). In middle-class Vancouver, everyone seems to own a luxury car (ie Mercedes or BMW). It’s rare to see a Platinum Ford product in my neighbourhood.
I mean if you own a lot money, would you really want to be noticed these days? Ransom/family anyone? I suspect a typical Merc, Beemer owner would throw their hands up and say… “I really don’t have any money, I’m leasing this car!!! My McMansion is a co-op! Plleeeeease believe me!!!” Woops, that got dark in a hurry. Apologies.
This is surely a good car, but it doesn’t feel american at all. And why the 2.0 engine? The gas cost next to nothing in the US…
I would rather drive a car with a lazy V8 than a 2.0 liter engine…
I think the main problem with Lincoln is that their cars just aren’t special anymore. When I see one of these on the road, I have to get up close to see the badgeing because they all look just like ordinary Fords to me. They don’t stand out from anything else on the road. Cadillac is a little bit better; at least I mostly recognize them at a glance when I see them without having to get close enough to see the logo.
If you aren’t competing on style, price or features, then what’s left?
Basically engines and electronic nannies
…and at the risk of sounding like an old curmudgeon, I think it’s too bad that some of the luxury features that were once luxuries are standard equipment now.
It’s no wonder I don’t buy new cars. $40,000 for a FUSION?!? Not to mention the fact that it loses $10,000 in value the minute you drive it off the lot.
It all depends on how you look at it cost wise. If you buy the car with the notion that you are going to trade it in on a new car in about a year or two then the depreciation factor is eye opening
However if you are buying the car with the eye to keep it for years and years and years then $40,000 is not really that bad because by the car is done with (i.e. driven till the wheels fall off) the car is not worth much anyway and you got your money’s worth on it.
Take my folks, in 1993 they bought a brand new top of the line Taurus. It was a bit pricy but they kept that thing until 2009 when they traded it in on a 2009 Taurus. The 1993 Taurus served them well for those 16 years and they got their money’s worth on it. In 2003 my folks bought a brand new top of the line Mercury sable wagon. As of today(3/28/17) it is still serving them well 14 years later.
Their 2009 Taurus was kind of pricy but I have no doubt that they will get year and years out of the thing.
As for the Fusion, they are nice cars and I have liked them since they first arrived in 2006. The Fusion(now in its second generation) get high marks for reliability. Everybody that I know that owns one says it is one of the best cars they have ever owned. So spending $40,000 on a Ford Fusion is not a bad thing(you can actually get lower trim levels for much less) especially if you factor in that the person owning it will most likely keep the thing for 10 years or so
I was on this subject this morning and still am with you all.
Iowa – yes, I want a proper, full sized spare. I don’t want the mini-tire thing and a canister when I drive across Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, as I do often. I do have a Transit Connect that has exactly that item I want – a proper spare.
My Ford dealer service is bad. It is bad no matter which car I bring – Transit Connect or either of two Mustangs or my wife’s Explorer. Nothing is quick. Warranty recall notices result in waiting lists for unavailable parts. I don’t believe it would be any better if I had a platinum whatever rather than a stripper TC with rubber floor mats. It is every man’s car, a Ford. The service is going to be indifferent. I know and accept that. So give me the cheapest bottom of the line one rather than make me feel like since I got a platinum something better, almost a Jag or Lexus, I’ll get great attention. Just fix my car in a timely, polite manner.
Baby lincolns are epic fail
There is a difference between “Luxury” meaning comfortable and well appointed, and “prestigious” which means that the car casts a positive reflection on the owner. Back in the old days the plebeian makes were basic transportation modules and the high end “Marques” had more equipment and better engineering. They were also bigger, more expensive, and more impressively styled. These cars were therefore more luxurious and conferred more status to the owner. While most all of Today’s new cars have the creature comforts and power assists that doesn’t make them more luxurious, it only makes them comfortable. I think a high end car has to convey status to their owner to justify it’s existence.
I agree with Jose. Does anybody really w a n t any of these cars? I can’t think of any reason to buy any of them. ‘Luxury’ and ‘prestige’ today seem only to indicate a willingness of your desire to spend, but your ability to do so means nothing to me. To say nothing of those who spend equivalent amounts on any number of trucks.
The final definition of luxury will probably be drivetrains not available to the masses; either because of fuel economy regulations or the risks inherent in having a 500 HP electric vehicle in every driveway.
There is no need for GM to sticker Suburbans north of $50K except for CAFE.
I specced out a 2017 Fusion SE with the appearance package that includes fog lamps, stylish 18″ wheels, a leather wrapped steering wheel and a rear spoiler, the pretty burgundy velvet exterior paint, remote start, 2.0 EB engine upgrade and a moonroof and the MSRP is a very reasonable 28360 and about 26K after incentives. That is a lot of car and enough lux for me and would make a nice replacement for my 2013 Impala when the time comes.
But there is one little problem. Not one SE ever seems to be optioned this way and most have the base 2.5 or the optional 1.5T engines only. The Impala is perfectly fine for now so we will see what future Fusions and Malibu’s will bring to the table.
I’m OK with some level of options once considered luxuries, like power steering, windows, mirrors & locks. airbags, etc…. like what came standard in my mid ’90s Toyota Camry and Nissan Altima. And at least the stock radios in these cars have round knobs and big buttons, so I can change a setting or station before the car runs off the road. The cars also either came with or easily accommodate a full-size spare.
But the staggering levels of technology availble today means you now have to consider replacing a vehicle once the warranty has ended. Maybe what makes a Lincoln MKZ worth more than a Fusion is the extra years coverage.
Given the notion of unintended consequences, I sometimes wonder what would be the worst that could happen if something like an ‘Active Noise Cancelling System’ malfunctions?
Happy Motoring, Mark
I would never, ever consider owning a Ford, GM and especially a Chrysler product ever again. I’ve had such BAD luck with these brands in the past. Toyota and Honda are still the gold standard for engineering, quality, reliability, value, style and driving satisfaction.
My review is late to the party. Ford discontinued the Fusion Platinum for 2019.
I wonder if the Lincoln Division pushed to kill it. I bought a 2017 Platinum, AWD. Made no sense to get the near identical Lincoln.
Every time I see ‘Platinum’ on a Ford, my mind misreads it as ‘Plutonium’.