That sweet sweet 2.7T

[walkabout]

I know most of my posts related to problems that I'm having or issues I need help with, but I thought I'd like to start a more positive thread for a change.

 

After two years and 24,000 miles, I still haven't stopped loving this engine . Its absolutely the most driveable engine I've ever owned.  Smooth as silk, never stumbles, and oodles and oodles of torque everywhere. 

 

My last two vehicles were from makes that are famous for their engines (Acura and BMW) . Both, did have lovely engines but nothing compared to the Ford.

 

I have a year left on the lease, and have been seriously thinking of downsizing a bit and getting an Audi Q5, BMW X3, or Acura RDX.  But, honestly, I don't know how I could go to a different drivetrain.

 

Its notable that the drivetrains available in the Ford pickup trucks and mass market SUVs are essentially superior to anything offered by many of the more upscale brands.

 

[akirby]

I feel the same way about the 3.5LEB in my F150.

 

Last night in the MKX I had to pass a slower vehicle after turning onto a 4 lane road. I hit the throttle. Nothing. I had to floor the damn thing to get it moving. I told the wife that I really wish we had been able to find a 2.7L MKX. In my truck I would have only had to blip the throttle about 25%.

[waltcmusic]

Edited July 9, 2018 by waltcmusic

[walkabout]

I'll consider it.  The new RDX does look pretty nice though.

[waltcmusic]

Edited July 9, 2018 by waltcmusic

[walkabout]

That's not true. Acura service and support was excellent, Lincoln service and support has been abysmal.  In fact, in terms of customer support, I'd say Lincoln is the worst company I've every dealt with (not just worst car company, worst company of any kind).  

 

The issue with the two TSXs we owned was about reliability.  I had a first gen TSX that had quite a few problems, but Acura comped repairs out of warranty and worked hard to resolve the issue.

We then had a second TSX (a wagon!) which was good mechanically but the interior totally fell apart after 40,000 miles.  The leather seat split down the middle and the control switch for the infotainment system was nonfunctional.

 

My Lincoln has had only two problems the dealer fixed - the grabby brakes and dead battery.  There are still a few electronic gremlins and a host of fit and finish issues.  So, its not like the ownership experience has been great.

 

All that said, Walt, I sincerely hope your own ownership experience is problem free. Its otherwise a fantastic vehicle.

[waltcmusic]

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by waltcmusic

[walkabout]

I would not have BOUGHT a first year.  I leased it.  I knew that if it was unreliable I could just walk away.

[Gurgeh]

I would not have BOUGHT a first year. I leased it. I knew that if it was unreliable I could just walk away.

I was reading up on reliability records of the various class vehicles out there. I ran across an interesting JD Powers article. They noted that while Consumer Reports lists the current gen of MKX as only average on reliability, if you pull out the first year problems, it turns out that for 2017 and 2018 the MKX has had the top ranking in reliability.

 

Similarity, JD Powers projects that the all-new Volvo XC60 will have terrible reliability (they put it at their lowest ranking), but this is based on the legion of problems in the previous year's redesigned XC90, which the XC60 is based on. So maybe Volvo has worked out the first-year kinks on the XC90 and the '60 will work like a charm. But that engine, with both turbo and supercharger (and for some an electric engine layered on top as well) and most of all the entirely-new and super complex electronics, it might be asking for trouble.

 

JD Powers ends the article by wondering if with the surge in complex electronics going into today's cars, are we seeing a turn in the long-term trend of ever-more-reliable automobiles?

Edited June 9, 2018 by Gurgeh

[akirby]

Go look at the latest JD Power reliability ratings. The difference between the best and worst vehicles is 1 visit to the dealer versus 2 within the first 3 years. Even the worst vehicles today would be considered good to very good a couple of decades ago.

[walkabout]

Consumer Reports doesn't rank the reliability of the current MKX as average, it ranks the MKX as much worse than average. It some of the least reliable vehicles in the midsize SUV class.

 

The average rating was an initial projection based on the last generation.

 

The MKX was one of their best vehicles in terms of road test score but is in their "not recommended" list due to poor reliability.

 

JD power is a poor source of data, an industry supported consulting firm that runs biased surveys. Never found it much use.

Edited June 9, 2018 by walkabout

[akirby]

.

JD power is a poor source of data, an industry supported consulting firm that runs biased surveys. Never found it much use.

Say what??? How are they biased? I’m pretty sure it’s a random survey as opposed to CR that only surveys their subscribers.

[waltcmusic]

Edited July 9, 2018 by waltcmusic

[walkabout]

Say what??? How are they biased? I’m pretty sure it’s a random survey as opposed to CR that only surveys their subscribers.

CR does only survey their subscribers. Their subscriber demographics match pretty well to the car buying public though and includes a wide swath of vehicles, including vehicles that are more than five years old. They also have an excellent response rate and a sample size that is about the times JD power.

 

The JD power survey has a low response rate and is only buyers who purchased their vehicle in the last three years.

[walkabout]

Most of the 2016 MKX common problems are related to electronics and interior accessories. Otherwise, it could be just as reliable as 2015 MKX, which is rated excellent (solid green dot), which has 3.7L V6.

The engine is not the issue. Cr shows excellent reliability for Ford engines across sizes and type of induction. You can't generalize from the overall rating to the engine.

 

The 2015 did have excellent reliability but it was long in the tooth. Ford tends to increase in reliability as the vehicle ages and they work out the bugs.

[Gurgeh]

Here's a link that pulls in the JD Powers rating. It shows slightly above average. But if you dig into the numbers, 2016 was well below average (not unusual for a launch year, though still, for a luxury brand not acceptable) but 2017 and 2018 were among the most reliable in class.

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/lincoln/mkx/reliability

Edited June 9, 2018 by Gurgeh

[Gurgeh]

Here are three more interesting news stories on reliability in general. The first is from a UK publication and compares the reliability of Volvo (mixed, but generally pretty bad), Lexus (best in all ratings) and Audi (somewhere in-between).

https://www.osv.ltd.uk/how-reliable-are-volvo/amp/

 

The second shows the overall rankings in the latest Power dependability report. Some interesting stuff. Lexus as usual is King of the Hill. But GM's Buick zooms to the top of non-premium brands (and in fact leads almost all luxury brands except for Luxus and Porsche). Lincon comes in better than average but not near the top. Biggest surprise, to me at least, is that Cadillac tanks, coming in right near the bottom just ahead of Range Rover and the Fiat-Chrysler brands.

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/jd-power-2018-us-vehicle-dependability-study

 

And last, I've added a story specifically about Cadillac, as I was curious.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2018/06/05/cadillac-steve-carlisle/661308002/

Edited June 9, 2018 by Gurgeh

[Rural_OC_MKX]

Back on the topic of how sweet the 2.7 is, after 2 years and 45,000 mile I still really enjoy it and have had no engine issues. There is one particularly steep grade on a road that I use occasionally where I set the cruise on 70 and on the way down it first brakes, then down shifts until the engine is turning about 4,000 RPM. On the way up with the same cruise control setting there is no down shift. I have a friend who has a 2017 5.7 Hemi Ram 1500 who did not believe that 2.7 liters would pull that hill without a down shift, since his truck does down shift, so I showed him and he is a believer now. When my wife gets a 3.7 MKX loaner when our car goes in for regular service, she always comments about the difference in power.

[akirby]

Here are three more interesting news stories on reliability in general. The first is from a UK publication and compares the reliability of Volvo (mixed, but generally pretty bad), Lexus (best in all ratings) and Audi (somewhere in-between).https://www.osv.ltd.uk/how-reliable-are-volvo/amp/

The second shows the overall rankings in the latest Power dependability report. Some interesting stuff. Lexus as usual is King of the Hill. But GM's Buick zooms to the top of non-premium brands (and in fact leads almost all luxury brands except for Luxus and Porsche). Lincon comes in better than average but not near the top. Biggest surprise, to me at least, is that Cadillac tanks, coming in right near the bottom just ahead of Range Rover and the Fiat-Chrysler brands.http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/jd-power-2018-us-vehicle-dependability-study

And last, I've added a story specifically about Cadillac, as I was curious.https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2018/06/05/cadillac-steve-carlisle/661308002/

Look at Kia at #5 - 1.2 problems per vehicle compared to Mitsubishi (5th from the bottom) at 1.8 problems per vehicle. That’s not a huge difference in the overall scheme. Most are in between. With either brand on average you’ll have 2 visits to the dealer in the first 3 years.

 

The difference is getting smaller and smaller to the point that ranking doesn’t mean as much any more as it used to.

[akirby]

CR does only survey their subscribers. Their subscriber demographics match pretty well to the car buying public though and includes a wide swath of vehicles, including vehicles that are more than five years old. They also have an excellent response rate and a sample size that is about the times JD power.

The JD power survey has a low response rate and is only buyers who purchased their vehicle in the last three years.

Low response rate isn’t bias. And of course they’re only surveying 3 yr old purchases - that’s what their VDS is representing - 3 yr old vehicles.

 

I think CR subscribers are by definition biased if for no other reason than to validate their purchases (unconsciously). That’s not to say their data isn’t valid just that it needs to be taken with a grain of salt like anything else.

[walkabout]

Low response rates always bring bias. The people who do respond are not random.

 

And few cars have stood problems in the first few years. Which is why, as you point out, there's no variability.

[elijahbird7]

About the 2.7L. My '16 turned 2 years old the first week of April, with slightly over 10,000 miles. I agree that this engine really makes this vehicle fun to drive, and it definitely would be my choice again unless they offer the 3.0L at some point.

[akirby]

Low response rates always bring bias. The people who do respond are not random.

 

And few cars have stood problems in the first few years. Which is why, as you point out, there's no variability.

 

I think it depends on how low the response rate is.  

 

If you look at 10 or 20 years ago there were a lot more problems even in the first 3 years.  And back then the cars were a lot worse when they got older.   Today's vehicles don't suffer age deterioration like they used to.  10 year old cars today usually have the original engine and transmission and are still rattle free.

[walkabout]

About the 2.7L. My '16 turned 2 years old the first week of April, with slightly over 10,000 miles. I agree that this engine really makes this vehicle fun to drive, and it definitely would be my choice again unless they offer the 3.0L at some point.

 

 

Yes! I'm not a HUGE fan of the MKX because of all the nagging issues I've had.  But, it would be hard to walk away from that engine.

[walkabout]

I think it depends on how low the response rate is.  

 

If you look at 10 or 20 years ago there were a lot more problems even in the first 3 years.  And back then the cars were a lot worse when they got older.   Today's vehicles don't suffer age deterioration like they used to.  10 year old cars today usually have the original engine and transmission and are still rattle free.

 

 

I think the 3 year old issue is why there is no variability.  And, the findings that come up are not believable.  In some years, I've seen brands that are almost certainly NOT reliable (like Jaguar) near the top.