We haven't had a chance to strap our test equipment to any EcoBoosted Lincoln MKS (or any other EcoBoosted product from FoMoCo, for that matter). But, last night, we did the next best thing: We took the twin-turbo V6 Lincoln to the local drag strip, in Milan, Michigan.
The direct injection 3.5-liter makes a substantial 355 horsepower (on premium fuel, anyway) but it also has a big ol' all-wheel-drive sedan to pull around. Nonetheless, the car rips off 14-second runs all night long. In the cool of the evening, the MKS EcoBoost posted one 13.9-second run, but earlier in the 75-degree afternoon repeated runs in three different cars yielded near-identical runs in right at 14 and about 104 mph. Good stuff.
For perspective, in our more formal testing the 2006 Shelby GT-H Mustang ran a 13.9 @ 101.1 mph. A 2010 Mustang GT ran the quarter in the mid-13s. The MKS nips anything that could be considered a competitor by at least a few tenths. Both the Caddy STS V8 and Infinti M45 get it done in 14.4. Keep in mind, the MKS figures are are not subject to our weather correction, as the other numbers quoted here, but we don't expect the numbers would change significantly if they were.
A Flex EcoBoost, on hand for giggles, will do the deed in 14.5. Presumably, an MKT woud do pretty much the same.
Incidentally, Milan Dragway is pronounced "MY-lin," not "mee-LAHN," like some kind of fancy-pants Italian Mercury sedan.
stephen987 says:
07:39 AM, 05/21/09
Yeah, those are impressive numbers. Shame about the styling though.
Still want that motor in a Fusion or a Mustang, btw.
1487 says:
08:47 AM, 05/21/09
So 0-60 should be in the mid to upper 5 second range. Sounds good to me. I read that the SHO was supposed to be good for a 5.5 sec run to 60.
compliance says:
09:07 AM, 05/21/09
I guess I am the only one who was expecting better? a 300hp Mustang GT beats this by a half second. Yeah it's lighter, but that's still disappointing. Hopefully it does a lot better in something lighter and more sporting.
billt9 says:
10:24 AM, 05/21/09
EcoBoost Mustang!
The engine only adds an extra 150 lb over the V6 AWD MKS.
stovt001 says:
10:33 AM, 05/21/09
Compliance, I imagine that has to do with the AWD. Good for launch and grip, less so for sustained acceleration. All in all i think that's a pretty solid showing.
I myself like the styling, but I've been known to have less than popular taste in style before.
Still, in the end, I can't see why I'd pay more to get this than the Taurus SHO. I just don't see enough value added.
greenpony says:
10:41 AM, 05/21/09
Last I heard (this was months ago) the engine was slated to go into the Mustang for 2011 as kind of a special-edition (reborn SVO?) model. Ford was going to gauge public acceptance of the turbo V6 as an alternative to the traditional V8. Given the power figures and estimated mpg numbers, the only thing I can imagine holding this back would be cost.
altimadude00 says:
11:04 AM, 05/21/09
This would definitely be an improvement over the current Mustang V6
How about an SHO Fusion?
stephen987 says:
12:23 PM, 05/21/09
Amen, altimadude00 and greenpony!
xprojected says:
01:08 PM, 05/21/09
A 3.5L turbo might be a bit much for a Fusion, but as they hope to push the tech to other engines, I could see a 3L Ecoboost pumping up the Fusion/MKZ lineup.
firstwagon says:
01:24 PM, 05/21/09
I'd like to see a regular fuel version as the base engine for the Mustang.
Give the base Camaro some real opposition.
arumage says:
01:32 PM, 05/21/09
That's a pretty good 1/4 mile run for a 4400 lb. AWD car. Imagine what it would be like in a 3500-3600 lb. Mustang! It would probably run in the very low 13's and return 26-27 mpg.
stephen987 says:
02:32 PM, 05/21/09
@xprojected: how about an ecoboost 2.5L four?