chocolat1701
Dedicated LVC Member
sure just make sure it gadiva
MKS 0-60 5.5 sec 1/4 13.9 @ 104mph
- Thread starter bigbuck15
- Start date
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
sigh. this guy was a special kind of stupid... good riddance. :lol:
anyways, for some life to this dead thread. one of the more powerful gen iv sho's (mks ecoboost can get the same treatment, just no one has done it yet that i know of.) has 435whp/521wtq. with 20% drivetrain loss, that's 522 awhp, 625 awtq.
that car runs a traction limited 12.11 @ 115.
but there is yet another faster SHO. this one runs a 12.09! word. fastest i know of.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd78bqY-irk
not to mention, a stock MKS shouldn't have any problem taking on any 2nd gen LS with a tune, intake and exhaust.
or a similarly equipped mark viii for that matter. last i checked, the exhaust and intake on the 2nd gen were already very good and upgrading didn't help much, if at all.for the money? :lol: there is plenty out there to whoop an LS "for the money" so its whatever really. if you like it, that's fine. but the LS isn't exactly a powerhouse.
the Hennessey MaxBoost 435 Lincoln MKS has 435 crank. which is 332 wheel. so while still a 70 hp increase over stock, Livernois Motorsports can do (and has done) better. see above.
besides, just Google John Hennessey along with a word like thief, crook, or lawsuit. see what comes up...
55% to the front? that's damn near 50-50 remember. and i can say torque steer, but that's not necessarily the case here.
again, 55-45 isn't bad. should be a fine handling car stock. there are many a front wheel drive car that can whoop rwd ass on a track. the old SHOs can do it. i know you don't like front wheel drive, but that doesn't make it bad. Tim the "Toolman" tracks a black 89 that destroys ac cobras and whatever shows up to Hallett that day. the people he races against are disappointed when they can't find a turbo or supercharger, and they just got smacked by a v6.
however, the problem comes when you tweak up the SHO/MKS. the car starts making more power than the rear clutch packs can handle. so you have to run less traction in the rear to balance the wheel spin with the front of the car. otherwise, the rear clutches slip and overheat. putting the car in limp mode.
a popular solution is front drag radials and rear street tires to slip some and not overwhelm the rear clutches.
It's really sad that the MKS page is so freakin dead. Nothing since July 20th. People must just loooooove these cars
and just because they don't post here, doesn't mean they aren't out there...
EcoBoost Owners Forum for one.
Ecoboost Performance Forum is yet another. and that's just the ecoboost.
over 5 years, they have sold nearly 70k MKS's. or 13.8k a year. (comparison, the mark viii was 126k over 5 years. 25k a year.)
with them still being under warranty, no need for anyone to come here to look for solutions to their problems. which, honestly, is the biggest draw to this site. almost everyone here came for repairs on the cheap. maybe they mod, maybe not.
no need for them to look for repair help. they MKS owners will infiltrate the forums in a few years.
Please name a car in the same class and price point as an LS that could beat it stock for stock. Not trying to be a jerk but I have been trying to find competing cars in the same year. As far as the MKS/SHO vs LS thing, I think that is not really a class match. 650 lb difference in weight? Wow! I really wish they would turn that engine around and lengthen the nose. That would be interesting.
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
He didn't say in the same class. He said for the money. Two entirely different things.
I said in the same class. I don't care what he said.
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
Well. I don't care what you said. I was responding to him.
JoshMcMadMac
Dedicated LVC Member
You keep adding constraints...Same class, same price point, and same year.
That's funny. That was my only post in this thread concerning any criteria. I am confused. Why do you say "Keep adding"?
JoshMcMadMac
Dedicated LVC Member
First, criteria was set as cost. Then, you chimed in. In your first sentence you add constraint by stating "class" as chris2523 pointed out. Additionally you put "stock for stock" in there too. To top it off, your next sentence adds even more constraint by claiming "same model year."
Yes, you are somewhat correct. I wanted to know this info for my benefit to add to some research I'm doing. I didn't mean to step on anyone's toes. Sorry.
KStromberg
Dedicated LVC Member
Ecoboost= potential
LS= failsauce central
End of story.
LS= failsauce central
End of story.
Ecoboost might be nice if it were turned 90 deg. Its not like they can't do it. They did it in the trucks so they should have all sorts of data to make it work. Hopefully we'll see something in a couple of years. If not, I might have to follow the platform to Jaguar.
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
you've never driven one have you?
KStromberg
Dedicated LVC Member
I've ridden in one and that was enough for me. Quite unimpressive to be honest.
That's not enough. You have to drive one to appreciate them. To be honest, its not even necessary to drive one hard to feel the merits of the design. It is by no means perfect and there are plenty of cars that are better in certain areas. It gets a little unsettled on rough surfaces where as the MKS feels more solid on the same surface due to it's substantial heft. The surprising thing is how light it feels to drive. It's a relatively light car anyway at less than 3800 LBS but it feels even less than that especially during direction changes. I will admit it could have used more power as it's always been a car that didn't quite have enough punch. That being said, 30-40 HP would push it beyond all of the Ecoboost cars in the power to weight department.
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
come on, i know you're not that close minded.that suspension is incredible, the car damn near drives itself at times, there is a set of twisties i can enter and exit with my foot to the floor in an LS that i simply can't in a mark viii or my brothers old SHO. the 5 speed is plenty capable, and a 2nd gen can go toe to toe in a straight line with any stock mark.
even the slower first gen is almost as fast as my 4.10 geared chipped 93.
and that's before we talk about heated and cooled front seats, heated rear seats, factory nav, surround sound, good seating, dual zone climate control, and all kinds of stuff. had ford marketed correctly, it really could have taken on the BMWs.
i'm with Robot on this one. i know you like going fast in a straight line, but if i'm flying through a back country road, i'll take the LS.
its better in snow too.
This is an interesting article too.
http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/112_0601_coty_2006_infiniti_m35_m45/viewall.html
thaywood
Dedicated LVC Member
The LS could have been the best car Lincoln ever made. But Ford let Cadillac have the market segment with the CTS. They didn't even try to compete. They thought "Hey, we won COTY in 2000. That's enough for us. Let's just let the car stagnate and don't even try to improve or market it to compete with Cadillac." And then it died while the CTS just kept getting better and better. Now look at Lincoln vs. Cadillac. Caddy has two very nice RWD cars and one rather fugly FWD car, an ugly FWD crossover, and a couple of Escalades. Lincoln has nothing but sideways engined wrong-wheel-drive junk that can't come close to competing with Cadillac. And although the Navigator is technically more advanced than the Escalade with its IRS and SOHC V-8, the Caddy has over 100 more hp than the Navi. The Escalade is arguably better looking as well. Lincoln is in the doldrums right now with little or no hope of escaping. Unless they come up with a good, RWD V-8 powered halo car soon, they'll go the way of Mercury. That will be a shame.
thaywood
Dedicated LVC Member
True, it's "close". But there still more power/torque going to the front. Any way you look at it, that's FWD, or front-biased AWD if you will. And I have read that torque steer is a problem on the MKS, SHO, and that piece of $h!t wrong-wheel-drive excuse for an imitation Explorer Ford's trying to peddle these days.
I'm sure it handles fine. AWD "should" handle quite well. However, I have to agree/disagree with you on the second point. FWD is inherently nose heavy and prone to understeer. A wrong-wheel-drive car has to be "set-up" specifically to handle. Even then the understeer can be hard to control. A FWD car can be set up to outhandle a stock RWD car on a track. But if the RWD car is set up to handle, it's doubtful the wront-wheel-drive car could match it. RWD is better than FWD in almost every conceivable way when it comes to handling and ride characteristics. RWD puts the drive wheels and steering wheels where they are supposed to be. It doesn't try to make the front wheels do something they weren't designed to do. RWD, when set up for handling, is not prone to understeer and there will never, ever be any torque steer in a RWD car.
I know the old SHO's handle quite well. But they're not that great. I have a friend who has a 1991 (I think) SHO with the 3.2L V-6 and slushbox. It's a nice car and it does take a curve with composure, but based on my seat-of-the-pants evaluation, my old '88 T-Bird Turbo Coupe would have eaten that car for lunch in the twisties. And Tim must have some serious money and upgrades tied up in that SHO to make it outhandle a Cobra. In fact, I'd have to see that one to believe it :lol: I've never had the honor of riding in or driving a Cobra, but I find it highly unlikely that any wrong-wheel-drive car that hasn't received extensive modifications could come close to it on the track.
So why not just make the damn car rear-biased AWD and not have to worry about any of that? Ford knows people are going to mod these cars. It would just make so much more sense to just make the car RWD like it should be rather than this overcomplicated and underbuilt wrong-wheel-drive junk that's gonna fly apart as soon as it gets too much power added. And OMG!!! I've seen wrong-wheel-drive cars with drag slicks on the front and regular tires on the rear :lol: They are so stupid looking!!! I'm sorry, but I recently saw a picture on Google of a POS little Civic at a drag strip with big @$$ slicks on the front and I just about fell out of my chair laughing at how completely idiotic it looked!!! :lol: again!!!!Let a few more folks try to make them faster and watch all that wrong-wheel-drive junk start falling apart or exploding. Then they'll start posting.
chris2523
93 Mark VIII
some FWD cars are only prone to oversteer because that's how they get set up. struts, springs, and sway bars will make the old SHO quite tail happy. i've read its same with the mazda 3. oversteer is "safer" than understeer, so that's how cars get set up.
other cars just handle badly. front or rear drive.
Tim has plenty of upgrades on his car. but i do not have a list of mods. although i am sure its quite extensive.
and FWD with drag slicks is silly. RWD is better to launch, but lets stick to handling for a minute.
the SHO didn't get the auto til 93-95 with the 3.2. so its either that, or an ATX swapped 91. possible, they are out there, but unlikely.
the later cars, especially the autos, had loosened up quite a bit. the earlier cars were much better handlers. the struts/springs and sway bar combos had gotten quite soft by then.
the new SHOs have gotten up to around 435whp/521wtq. factor in a conservative 20% drivetrain loss (its probably more. no one is really sure.) that is 522hp/625tq. and Darrel (the biggest power numbers i've seen. listed above) and Mike (not far behind Darrel) haven't broken anything of note yet. all while running very low 12s.
other cars just handle badly. front or rear drive.
Tim has plenty of upgrades on his car. but i do not have a list of mods. although i am sure its quite extensive.
and FWD with drag slicks is silly. RWD is better to launch, but lets stick to handling for a minute.
the SHO didn't get the auto til 93-95 with the 3.2. so its either that, or an ATX swapped 91. possible, they are out there, but unlikely.
the later cars, especially the autos, had loosened up quite a bit. the earlier cars were much better handlers. the struts/springs and sway bar combos had gotten quite soft by then.
the new SHOs have gotten up to around 435whp/521wtq. factor in a conservative 20% drivetrain loss (its probably more. no one is really sure.) that is 522hp/625tq. and Darrel (the biggest power numbers i've seen. listed above) and Mike (not far behind Darrel) haven't broken anything of note yet. all while running very low 12s.
My 95 Aerostar had the best AWD Ford ever came out with. It was labeled Electronic 4 Wheel Drive. It was absolutely seamless. I would load up the kids and drive to the Wal-Mart parking lot and play in the snow. She would not do doughnuts. I could stab the throttle and yank the wheel to make the van pivot 90 deg. That was an awesome vehicle. It would seat 7 passengers and get 27 mpg. That is another example of poor management by Ford. The Aerostar was replaced by the FWD Windstar in 97. IDIOTS
2006 Lincoln LS in Cashmere Tri-Coat Metallic.
2006 Lincoln LS in Cashmere Tri-Coat Metallic.
KStromberg
Dedicated LVC Member
All I can say is this. I have seen those nasty rotarys at the track or even the civic hatchback that I remember was running 11s. If you talk to 99% of those guys (and I have) they are replacing transmissions left and right in those cars. On the rwd side of things here in Mark8 land we had Burbank LSC running 10s on a stock transmission with a shift kit. Maybe I am wrong, but you will never accomplish that on a fwd platform with a stock tranny. You might be ok if you can build the tranny to the gates of heaven with endless pieces of unobtanium. Look at Toyota. They knew what had to happen when they designed the Supra. It's rwd. Front wheel drive cars are not meant for blasting down the track reliably. The weight transfers to the rear on every car on this planet unless you are racing in reverse. Therefore, make the drive tires at the rear and leave the fwd car home for a commuter and going to the grocery store. End of story.
lincoln_zero
Dedicated LVC Member
St b
Really?
Theres a ton of second Gens for 5 thousand bucks here in ontario with around 150K kilometers. No luxury car in that price with same miles beats the LS. Lay off the crack.
Mark 8 drag times
Dragtimes.com
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Lincoln-0-60-mph-Times.html
15.1 at best for a mark 8 stock. Lincoln LS is a 14.8 with more weight. Eat it.
Do a tune to both cars, LS still wins. (Yes everyone and their mothers is aware the mark 8 has more bolt on, but sorry, if i want a drag car, ill take a 5 litre mustangs and walk your marks all day). And best part? LS uses less gas, has more luxury, looks sexier, and sadly, rated better by consumers reports. LS also didnt send Ford down the tubes with terrible reputation like ALL the marks did with their [sarcasm] fantastic reliability. I mean after all, that's why Ford still builds the marks right? Cuz they were reliable and sold well? And yes im aware the LS is discontinued due to poor sales. But thats just it, LS guys dont go into the mark 8 forums desperately trying to convince them our cars are better.
Nugh.... as i said earlier, no traffic for the mks because the LS is being scooped up by young kids who know a few basic mods gets them killing 4 bangers all day, and running up with the Infiniti and Acura guys. Deny it all you want. Your the one stuck in the 90's not us LS guys.
Now seriously enough with the "Mark 8 is better cuz with MORE mods and money pitting its faster" crap. Come back when your mark 8's get the seat air conditioning.
Really?
Theres a ton of second Gens for 5 thousand bucks here in ontario with around 150K kilometers. No luxury car in that price with same miles beats the LS. Lay off the crack.
Mark 8 drag times
Dragtimes.com
http://www.zeroto60times.com/Lincoln-0-60-mph-Times.html
15.1 at best for a mark 8 stock. Lincoln LS is a 14.8 with more weight. Eat it.
Do a tune to both cars, LS still wins. (Yes everyone and their mothers is aware the mark 8 has more bolt on, but sorry, if i want a drag car, ill take a 5 litre mustangs and walk your marks all day). And best part? LS uses less gas, has more luxury, looks sexier, and sadly, rated better by consumers reports. LS also didnt send Ford down the tubes with terrible reputation like ALL the marks did with their [sarcasm] fantastic reliability. I mean after all, that's why Ford still builds the marks right? Cuz they were reliable and sold well? And yes im aware the LS is discontinued due to poor sales. But thats just it, LS guys dont go into the mark 8 forums desperately trying to convince them our cars are better.
Nugh.... as i said earlier, no traffic for the mks because the LS is being scooped up by young kids who know a few basic mods gets them killing 4 bangers all day, and running up with the Infiniti and Acura guys. Deny it all you want. Your the one stuck in the 90's not us LS guys.
Now seriously enough with the "Mark 8 is better cuz with MORE mods and money pitting its faster" crap. Come back when your mark 8's get the seat air conditioning.