Well the Land yacht SHO didnt make the list but some Lincolns did.
http://www3.forbes.com/business/12-new-cars-with-the-worst-one-year-resale-values (http://www3.forbes.com/business/12-new-cars-with-the-worst-one-year-resale-values)
Hard to dispute considering I bought my, then 3yo and 28k mile, MKS for $23,800. Sticker was $52k+. Good car to buy used, but painful if bought new without a crazy discount.
That's a LOT of depreciation! The SHO is TOO stealth to make the cut, LOL!
Lincolns have been notorious for poor resale for decades.
Hopefully I'll be able to pick up a 3.0 EcoBoost MKZ in a couple years for low $20's
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:48:17 AM
Hopefully I'll be able to pick up a 3.0 EcoBoost MKZ in a couple years for low $20's
Be it my opinion, i'd hold out for the 3.5EB 2.0 to come out of the Raptor/GT into a production car and go for that. The 3.0 will have less tuning room ..
Quote from: TopherSho on September 27, 2017, 10:51:19 AM
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:48:17 AM
Hopefully I'll be able to pick up a 3.0 EcoBoost MKZ in a couple years for low $20's
Be it my opinion, i'd hold out for the 3.5EB 2.0 to come out of the Raptor/GT into a production car and go for that. The 3.0 will have less tuning room ..
I was under the assumption that the Raptor 3.5 was more closely related to the regular F-150 3.5EB 2.0 than the GT's 3.5EB.
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:53:35 AM
Quote from: TopherSho on September 27, 2017, 10:51:19 AM
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:48:17 AM
Hopefully I'll be able to pick up a 3.0 EcoBoost MKZ in a couple years for low $20's
Be it my opinion, i'd hold out for the 3.5EB 2.0 to come out of the Raptor/GT into a production car and go for that. The 3.0 will have less tuning room ..
I was under the assumption that the Raptor 3.5 was more closely related to the regular F-150 3.5EB 2.0 than the GT's 3.5EB.
oh heck no, it is a 3.5eb 2.0, it is not a GT 3.5 by any means but it is pretty much all new compared to the 3.5eb 1.0 we all have currently.
Quote from: TopherSho on September 27, 2017, 11:01:20 AM
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:53:35 AM
Quote from: TopherSho on September 27, 2017, 10:51:19 AM
Quote from: Primalzer on September 27, 2017, 10:48:17 AM
Hopefully I'll be able to pick up a 3.0 EcoBoost MKZ in a couple years for low $20's
Be it my opinion, i'd hold out for the 3.5EB 2.0 to come out of the Raptor/GT into a production car and go for that. The 3.0 will have less tuning room ..
I was under the assumption that the Raptor 3.5 was more closely related to the regular F-150 3.5EB 2.0 than the GT's 3.5EB.
oh heck no, it is a 3.5eb 2.0, it is not a GT 3.5 by any means but it is pretty much all new compared to the 3.5eb 1.0 we all have currently.
Oh yeah, I know that the new 3.5 EB 2.0 is more closely related to the 2.7 EB than the original 3.5. Dual fueling, etc.
I'm talking about macro changes with turbos, tuning, intake, etc between the Raptor's 3.5, the new F-150 3.5, and the GT's 3.5. From what I've read, the GT's is more closely related to the enduro car's block, intake, turbo's etc, than it is to the standard production version.
Dang, missed out on the number 1 spot by a smidge, lol. It does make sense for the MKS Ecoboost to rank so high. My example is my car. It's a 2014, that sat on the lot and didn't sell originally till October 2015. Original owner put 61,000 miles on it. I bought it in July (I think) 2017. It has every option so the original price was $58k. I bought it for $19,500. The dealer I bought it from was the one who sold it when new. So in 3 years it went from $58,000 to $19,500... I cannot imagine the original owner was happy with the trade in value they got.
Quote from: Agentlongwood on September 27, 2017, 03:08:46 PM
didn't sell originally till October 2015. Original owner put 61,000 miles on it. I bought it in July (I think) 2017.
That is allot of miles. 61K miles in 21mos of ownership, that is assuming you bought it as soon as it hit the dealer lot in July. 2900Kmi a month and just shy of 35K/yr...
Quote from: lamrith on September 27, 2017, 04:49:44 PM
Quote from: Agentlongwood on September 27, 2017, 03:08:46 PM
didn't sell originally till October 2015. Original owner put 61,000 miles on it. I bought it in July (I think) 2017.
That is allot of miles. 61K miles in 21mos of ownership, that is assuming you bought it as soon as it hit the dealer lot in July. 2900Kmi a month and just shy of 35K/yr...
That's not completely outrageous. I was doing that a few years ago.
Was it specified purchase or lease? Possibly a salesman that can write off the miles?
Did 30K miles the first year I had my SHO. Home to work, plus many client site trips, plus trips to Florida from MD, etc.
Maybe its this guys fault. LOLOL
>>>>>>> Matthew McConaughey <<<<<<<
Actually his commercials increased Lincolns sales by a good margin I think I read somewhere.
Well as said above. There are FAST Lincolns to be had in the future.......
Had I seen this. I might have sprung for one instead of the SHO.
It's McConaughey's fault for the pricing having been so high to begin with. LOL.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
I bought my car at a small town dealership outside Tallahassee Florida. The sales lady I bought it from was the lady who sold it to the original owner. She said the original owner was a woman, on the older side (big surprise with a Lincoln...) who worked for the state of Florida agriculture department. Drove all over the state for work. Sales lady said the lady who originally bought it, paid cash and then traded it in on a super duty. Outside Tallahassee, EVERYONE wants to drive a pick up truck, so they had a hard time selling the MKS.