I'll have to check this out. How are you liking the new Continental? I have un-retired myself, still working the Funeral Home, and now a 'swap-driver' at our Ford Lincoln dealership. Have driven a little bit of everything, including the new Conti's. I'd like to try and take one for a week, if possible, to get a good evaluation. I Love my '16 MKX with the 2.7 Ecoboost, and my wife's '15 MKS can't be beat for a car for tri-state drives ( NJ to Cleveland). How do you compare the Conti to the MKS you have had ?
Compared with the MKS, the Continental is most improved in rear seat space and seat comfort. I have the 30 way seats and they are fabulous. I would also say that the interior materials are higher quality and the exterior body panel fit/finish is better. In terms of styling, I think the Continental is very bland. I preferred the appearance of the MKS but I don't buy cars based on how they look. I preferred the THX sound system in the MKS over the Revel system in the Continental, although I am not an audiophile by any means.
In terms of ride quality, there isn't much difference. In comfort mode, it is a little bit more compliant but the difference is not striking. Same with quietness of the interior....maybe a bit better but not a huge improvement. The Continental does drive with more precision and handles curves much better than the MKS. It is a far more nimble handling vehicle.
The 3.0 is a quieter engine than the first gen 3.5 ecoboost. It also provides excellent and smooth power...effortless as they say. The transmission shifts smoothly, never hunts for gears and kicks down quickly for passing. However, it does have 2 major flaws. In stock tune, upshifts under WOT are terrible...power is cut before, during and after the shift resulting in surging and sagging instead of steady power delivery. In spite of the 3.0 making more power and torque than the 3.5 and the Conti benefiting from a 3.39 gear vs 2.77 in the MKS, the Conti is only slightly quicker than the MKS. They put this nice engine in the Conti and then dumbed it down due to the transmission. The other flaw is too many RPM at cruising speeds with the 3.39 gearing. The way it is geared currently, the Conti uses more fuel on the highway than the MKS did with its 2.77 gear. I solved the terrible WOT upshifting with a tune but no other Conti owners will do that and risk the warranty. It needs the 8 speed transmission for sure. Overall, in stock form, the MKS engine, transmission and gearing was superior to the Continental. Again, my Continental has an aftermarket tune that improved it dramatically.
My MKS exceeded my expectations in about every way. My expectations for the Conti were probably too high since I was expecting a pretty big upgrade. I like the Conti and am glad I bought it but I doubt if I keep it as long as I did the MKS. It is an upgrade in several ways but it also falls a little short of my expectations in a few areas.