Whining sound from under hood?

[Telco]

OK, I got sucked into it again. But hey, I guess if we look at it as a healthy discussion of differences of opinion...

The only reason to not include the dipsticks to monitor fluids has nothing to do with how advanced cars are getting, but with car manufacturers looking to either save a manufacturing buck or help their dealers land more maintenance work.

All the nannies are being legislated by the government, not installed by the manufacturers by choice. Traction control wouldn't exist on the high end sports cars if not for safety mandates outside what is needed to keep the car from puking the transmission during the warranty period but even that can be achieved by simply dialing back the power right before the car shifts which the OEMs already do. If not for the legislated nannyism, the OEMs would not waste a nickel researching them. Now if some of the folks here benefit from having the car help do the driving that's great, but I don't like the interference. I'll say it again, the car's computer system should be my servant, not my partner and never my master. This is one of the reasons my truck is limited by wind and not by a governor, at least until I figure out a way to get the truck up to 255MPH as that's where the governor is currently set .

And, I have no problem with cars updating and modernizing so long as said updates improve how the car operates without interfering with the driver. I even invested close to a grand in equipment to allow me to test, troubleshoot and alter computerized vehicles. Sadly, it only works on GM products or Dodge diesel trucks or I'd have an LS that goes a bit faster than most. If I liked the car enough to keep it, I'd look for similar software for the car but since I don't, I haven't looked.

 

[1LoudLS]

don't believe that horse crap for anything... car manufactures sell cars to anybody with money... if every super car and high end sports car didn't have those nannies, their customers would end up killing themselves off. the manufactures DO want to research those kinds of things so they can keep their customer base alive and coming back... everybody likes to think that they are a professional driver, but few really are.



and really you do want the manufactures trying to save money anywhere they can, if the manufactures let the engineers put everything they wanted into every car without the consideration of cost, no body would be able to afford them...

 

[Telco]

I disagree, but I'm not in charge of the car companies. I will also continue to disagree that there is never a need to be able to check fluid levels without putting the car on a lift and breaking out the tool set aside from the differential (and I'm not very happy that there's no dipstick on a 4WD transfer case), or that the computer can do it better. If there is a liquid in my engine, I want a way to check it.

 

[LS4me]

Watch out for GM vehicles. Ever since the advent of OnStar someone has had their finger on the abilities of their cars. Their event data recorders can't be disabled and have been used in the past to prosecute a driver. EDR's are going to, if not already, be gummint mandated.

Just like Lincoln will never listen to the enthusiast and make another car like the LS, manufacturers will never listen to the <.000000001% that want access to all fluid levels. Just look at the procedure in the OM to change a rear light bulb. Basically, take it to the dealer and let them do it. Fluids and their environment are much better today than they were years ago. Engines are tighter, transmissions are made with higher quality parts (mostly).

I totally understand your position, but I venture to say that most of us look for leaks and have the fluid flushed routinely . According to a transmission expert a flush is all one needs. If there is crap in the filter there are bigger problems that a look at the dipstick won't cure.

 

[joespanova]

You guys make your points , but I agree with Telco on his ........I want to check fluid levels , period.
Which has me wondering , as good looking as the LS is , why the hell did they stop making it....they could have just updated it as BMW or so many others do with their various models?

 

[joegr]

You guys make your points , but I agree with Telco on his ........I want to check fluid levels , period.
Which has me wondering , as good looking as the LS is , why the hell did they stop making it....they could have just updated it as BMW or so many others do with their various models?

They stopped making it because they were losing money on them. They just couldn't sell enough of them and they cost too much to make. There are lots of possible reasons why they couldn't sell enough, but it is clear that Lincoln is making more money by selling cheaper wrong wheel drive cars.

This is why I find it so funny that so many on here are arguing for design changes that would have added more cost to the car without adding any features that would make it easier to sell to 99% of the people. Most of the people on this forum weren't even willing to buy the LS when it was new.

 

[LS4me]

You guys make your points , but I agree with Telco on his ........I want to check fluid levels , period.
Which has me wondering , as good looking as the LS is , why the hell did they stop making it....they could have just updated it as BMW or so many others do with their various models?

The big reasons are the dealers were trying to sell "mini-Continentals" to blue hairs (not understanding what it was), lack of (dealer paid) advertising (YouTube some of the commercials!!) and the biggest reason is Nasser's decision to NOT go global with the LS. There would never be enough U.S. only sales. Lincoln is selling approximately the same number of MkZ's as they did LSes. The difference, as Joe pointed out, is the "Z" uses the much cheaper Fusion platform.

Lincoln's base buyer is, was and always will be, until they change their business model, the over 60 retired demographic who don't want to do anything but turn the key and go. They don't do maintenance and, as Loud pointed out, most likely don't know, or care, how to open the hood. They don't care about cornering, romping on the loud pedal or doing anything else exciting in the car! It even took Edmunds.com 2 years to realize the battery was in the trunk; and then wondered why(????). The LS has become so inexpensive that people could afford them that never could when new.

 

[joespanova]

Well , although I didn't buy mine new..........I love the car and the design . I'll keep it as long as I can. Even IF .....I have to periodically replace the damn DCCV valve. LOL

 

[joespanova]

From Wikipedia>>>>>
In spite of Ford's initial success with the LS, a lack of meaningful updates to the car prevented it from staying competitive and, ultimately, caused sales to plummet.[10] The LS went from a peak of over 51,000 cars sold in 2000 to less than 9,000 sold in 2006.[11] Given this situation and Ford having no interest in further investments into the LS in favor of other products for Lincoln,[10] production of the Lincoln LS at the Wixom Assembly Plant was ended in April 2006.[12] The Wixom plant itself was idled a year later. The de facto replacement for the LS was the front-wheel drive Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ.[13]

 

[LS4me]

From Wikipedia>>>>>
In spite of Ford's initial success with the LS, a lack of meaningful updates to the car prevented it from staying competitive and, ultimately, caused sales to plummet.[10] The LS went from a peak of over 51,000 cars sold in 2000 to less than 9,000 sold in 2006.[11] Given this situation and Ford having no interest in further investments into the LS in favor of other products for Lincoln,[10] production of the Lincoln LS at the Wixom Assembly Plant was ended in April 2006.[12] The Wixom plant itself was idled a year later. The de facto replacement for the LS was the front-wheel drive Lincoln Zephyr/MKZ.[13]

Wikipedia strikes again..... Remember where they get their information. The reason for the low 2006 sales is they only made '06 for about 6 months. The dealers also didn't purchase the LS as it was on the way out and Zephyr on the way in. Trust me, the main killer of the LS was the dealer network. The second reason was not going global.

The Zephyr (the name was changed in '07, IIRC) was NEVER the replacement for the LS; De facto or otherwise. Once Lincoln killed the LS there was no intention of replacing it.

 

[joegr]

To add to the fire.

The LS was a joint project with Jaguar (Ford owned Jaguar at the time). Then, they sold Jaguar off...

 

[Telco]

Yeah, I'm aware of GM's event recorder. But as you said, that's going to be in all of them before long. Don't know why one couldn't be disabled though. I'd have to investigate that one. I do know that OnStar can be disabled by simply unplugging the antenna. GM's satellite system can barely pick up the bird when inside a regular house garage with the antenna, it's not going to pick up anything without it. And, at least in 2010 you could order a vehicle from the factory with OnStar delete. Saw a pickup on the dealer's lot that didn't have that dumb little antenna on it, and asked about it.

Incidentally Joe, I would have been willing to buy a new LS when they came out had I had the money to do so. Was raising kids then and didn't have the money. I could swing one now though.

 

[joegr]

The LS has an event recorder already. You can't disable it without also disabling the SRS.

 

[joespanova]

Wikipedia strikes again..... Remember where they get their information. The reason for the low 2006 sales is they only made '06 for about 6 months. The dealers also didn't purchase the LS as it was on the way out and Zephyr on the way in. Trust me, the main killer of the LS was the dealer network. The second reason was not going global.

The Zephyr (the name was changed in '07, IIRC) was NEVER the replacement for the LS; De facto or otherwise. Once Lincoln killed the LS there was no intention of replacing it.

No argument here........I hear ya, its a shame ..........they killed a great car.

 

[1LoudLS]

Yeah, I'm aware of GM's event recorder. But as you said, that's going to be in all of them before long. Don't know why one couldn't be disabled though. I'd have to investigate that one. I do know that OnStar can be disabled by simply unplugging the antenna. GM's satellite system can barely pick up the bird when inside a regular house garage with the antenna, it's not going to pick up anything without it.

keep in mind that you are only disabling the systems ability to locate itself with GPS or connect to the call/data center via cellular towers, the system is still on and monitoring the cars systems, but also I do not believe the event recorder is part of the onstar system. as joe mentioned with the LS its part of the SRS system, I would expect this to be the case with most brands the system can just has access to read data from all the cars systems (with current generations)

what I would be worried about when disabling the system would be how integrated with the other cars systems... in addition to reading data from the car, current generations also have the ability to lock out the ignition switch, and also shut the motor down. if the engineers were good about it, all you should have to do it unplug the module, however one of the main selling features is theft stop and recovery, the last thing you want is theives disabling those features easily by just by pulling a fuse out.