Lincoln MKC Forum banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
Looks like Ford can now squeeze 350 HP out of our 2.3s. So maybe the MKC will get a bit of a boost down the road but probably not until the reported 9 speed transmission is available. I suspect the torque of the 2.3 is close to the current transmission's limits.

Ford Focus RS gets 350 hp, 350 lb-ft, stall recovery tech
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
and hopefully a smoother shift. I drove the LR evoque with the 9 speed and not only is it a rocket and smooth, the gas mileage is much better than ours..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Ya know, I know a lot of folks are down on the MKC's mpg, but I bought (and still own) a 2002 Honda CR-V EX AWD with the first iteration of Honda's now venerable 2.4l 4 cylinder. Horsepower is in the 160 hp, 162 lb./ft of torque. The vehicle, in AWD form, weighs 650 lbs less than the MKC. At the time, we were scraping by as we had a new baby and my wife was still in med school. I hypermiled that CR-V before I knew what the term meant. I kept a rigorous log of fuel economy via a notebook, pencil and calculator. I drove at or below the speed limit and kept the a/c off unless it was in the 90's. With a lower posted speed limit at the time, I was routinely squeezing out about 24.5 mpg So, I am not at all shocked or saddened that I, in my first 1800 miles, am averaging 23.5 mpg in a car with 85 more hp and 143 more lb/ft of torque. And I have too much fun dropping it into sport mode to hypermile in the Lincoln.

And as much as I like to wave my man card around and brag about having owned 5 manual transmission cars over the course of the last 22 years of car ownership, I really feel like I could give Mustang driving me a serious race in the MKC given my shifting skills and the horrible manual in that car.

Regarding the power of the 2.3l in the new Focus RS, it's conceivable some of that could migrate our way eventually b/c it seems like the only thing they really did to the engine was improve the cylinder liners and head gasket. The rest of the power is coming from the improvements in the turbo, intake, and exhaust. Although, I thought I read somewhere that the trans on the MKC was really close to the limit in terms of the peak hp and torque it could handle???

On all my test drives, the only engine that impressed me as much as our 2.3l was the 325 hp (267 lb/ft of torque) 3.7l in the Infiniti QX50. Acura RDX V-6? Forget it. It felt dog slow compared to our 2.3l.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Update on my own question. Cobb says despite the hardware overlap, the expenses in their hardware and software research to make a version for the MKC wouldn't generate enough revenue to cover the costs. So no plans of ever making a tune for the MKC version.

JMS however confirms that their BoostMAX module (doesn't require any system flash) will work on the MKC ecoboost with no issues. They said that on a Mustang Dyno they picked up an additional 44HP with 93 octane, but haven't did any Dyno with the MKC to know for sure what the increase would be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
They don't want to DYNO the MKC because they will probably turn the transmission into steel wool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bkrell

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
I second Blankster's caution. IF you do a chip, make sure you have an idea how it tunes for HP.
One of my fondest memorymobiles was a silver Taurus SHO that I worked over with Eibach springs, a shift kit, and a chip. That chip re-mapped the injection, crossover from the long to short intake runners, and the redline. That Yamaha was already under rated at 220hp and probably pushed 275 with the chip. Two problems. First, the weenie 5" clutch that was overwhelmed in the first place wore like brake shoes on a racer. That was with (mostly) full restraint-no hot burnout launches. Second, and more pernicious, was the rev limit increase. Roasted the alternator bearings and the A/C wasn't sounding so good when I flipped it- I needed underdrive accessory pulleys to protect them.
So whether it is the trans, CV joints, or engine accessories- just know that more HP and torque will find the next weakest link.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
I suspect the 2.3 is "under" tuned for the MKC due to drivetrain limitations. FWD vehicles are not as "robust" as RWD vehicles in terms handling torque. Its the torque that breaks things. Increasing torque will cause torque steer, put more pressure on the torque converter (upgraded for the 2.3), internal transmission gears and the CV joints etc. are all designed for 305 Ft lbs. Bumping it to say 350 ft lbs or more will break things and oh by the way void your warranty.

My son boosted the turbo on his Subaru WRX (out of warranty) and guess what he broke the transmission and had to upgrade to a STI transmission at 6K just for the part (thanks Dad :)). Thank God he was able to to put it in himself or I would have been looking at 10K!

PS: He is insisting that I add an intake system to the MKC so you can hear the turbo. I told him its a Lincoln and I don't want to hear the turbo. Moral of this story; When your son is very young think twice about buying him lots of toy cars. He's now 24 and he's driving me nuts with all the stuff he wants to do on his car. Of course when he has dad to "help" money is no object.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
I guess my question would be "Why?" The 2.3l is a perfect match for this car. Just this evening I was driving my daughter around, hit the accelerator and said "Ya know, I am missing my Mustang less and less!" I almost feel embarrassed to drive mine fast. When I bought it, I thought I would put it in comfort mode and just cruise. But it's too **** addicting to drive this car fast. Second, any tune alone is not going to get results that are worth the money. I paid a few hundred bucks for the Ford Racing (admittedly very mild) tune for my Mustang that was only worth 16 peak hp but 60 lb/ft of torque down low. It was barely perceptible and left me required to run 93 octane. Not worth it at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I agree the 2.3l is already shockingly fun to drive, but having come from BMW for so many years, the MKC is very far from a sports SUV. Still, I'm really impressed with the engine, although the sound could be much better if they are going to allow you to "hear it" like they advertise in the cabin noise cancelling info. The BMW had the low rumble and awesome turbo backfires on heavy acceleration, but with the continuous transmission there is no chance of that on the MKC. My wife's Infinity SUV also drives like this, and it's great for all the normal driving, but sometimes it's nice to have the aggressive side too. Anyhow, JMS says theirs will add 44HP and tons more torque which is significant and bound to be noticeable, but if it's also bound to break stuff, then probably not worth the $299
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
I agree the 2.3l is already shockingly fun to drive, but having come from BMW for so many years, the MKC is very far from a sports SUV. Still, I'm really impressed with the engine, although the sound could be much better if they are going to allow you to "hear it" like they advertise in the cabin noise cancelling info. The BMW had the low rumble and awesome turbo backfires on heavy acceleration, but with the continuous transmission there is no chance of that on the MKC. My wife's Infinity SUV also drives like this, and it's great for all the normal driving, but sometimes it's nice to have the aggressive side too. Anyhow, JMS says theirs will add 44HP and tons more torque which is significant and bound to be noticeable, but if it's also bound to break stuff, then probably not worth the $299
If it was as simple as a $299 accessory Ford would have done it. Again the first thing that will break will be your warranty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I'm not a mechanical guru, but if adding 30-40HP instantly breaks stuff, I would question the quality of Ford's parts in the first place. Many years ago I worked in engineering for GM. I remember times when they did stuff to dumb down products to make sure they weren't as nice as the Cadillac or Corvette versions. Since Ford is using the same engine as the Mustang, maybe they dumbed it down to honor and protect the Mustang enthusiasts. It would be a bummer if you knew the old lady in the comfy Lincoln had the exact same performance as your "sporty" Mustang. Just a guess, and if that's true, I'm fine with that. The Mustang has been their glory forever, so I would have no issues with that case. Regardless, the performance isn't bad from the start, but the fact that I've read Ford dealers have been offering tunes for the same engine in the Mustangs (which do not affect the warranty) then I would guess that there's some room to give on the Lincoln side too without hurting anything. I may enquire with my dealer just for fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
I will be interesting to see if there is anything out there but my dealer never mentioned it and I asked. Remember the stuff has to last for 4 years (term of full warranty and longer term for the powertrain) so there is a balance between performance and durability. Lincoln may not want the risk. Mustang is rear wheel drive with acompletely different drivetrain that will support much more horsepower and torque. The 2.3 Mustang and the 5.0 share transmissions and rear end so bumping the 2.3 is not a big impact. MKC is based on a Ford Escape (they share many underside parts including the engine cradle) and the 2.3 is the highest rated engine in that platform. The MKC uses the Escape transmission with a stronger torque converter due to the 2.3s output. If you dealer will install a non-Ford chip they will have to warranty it - Ford/Lincoln will not unless it is certified by them (which is the case with the Mustang although see below). If you go to some outside tuner and something breaks Ford/Lincoln will walk away.

The 2015+ S550 Mustang EcoBoost 2.3L I4 engine and drivetrain

This article seems to indicate that Ford Racing will back it (limited to 36 months) and Ford walks away

Ford offering factory-spec EcoBoost reflashes that don't void warranty*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
I'm not a mechanical guru, but if adding 30-40HP instantly breaks stuff, I would question the quality of Ford's parts in the first place. Many years ago I worked in engineering for GM. I remember times when they did stuff to dumb down products to make sure they weren't as nice as the Cadillac or Corvette versions. Since Ford is using the same engine as the Mustang, maybe they dumbed it down to honor and protect the Mustang enthusiasts. It would be a bummer if you knew the old lady in the comfy Lincoln had the exact same performance as your "sporty" Mustang. Just a guess, and if that's true, I'm fine with that. The Mustang has been their glory forever, so I would have no issues with that case. Regardless, the performance isn't bad from the start, but the fact that I've read Ford dealers have been offering tunes for the same engine in the Mustangs (which do not affect the warranty) then I would guess that there's some room to give on the Lincoln side too without hurting anything. I may enquire with my dealer just for fun.
Cadillac has no trouble coming up with stout engines. Lincoln is Ford's Cadillac. If they truly have a problem with putting good engines in these cars, that's part of the problem.

I think the only engine they are reserving from Lincoln is the 3.5l EcoBoost for anything midsize or smaller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
...The 2.3 Mustang and the 5.0 share transmissions and rear end so bumping the 2.3 is not a big impact. MKC is based on a Ford Escape (they share many underside parts including the engine cradle) and the 2.3 is the highest rated engine in that platform. The MKC uses the Escape transmission with a stronger torque converter due to the 2.3s output. If you dealer will install a non-Ford chip they will have to warranty it - Ford/Lincoln will not unless it is certified by them (which is the case with the Mustang although see below). If you go to some outside tuner and something breaks Ford/Lincoln will walk away.

The 2015+ S550 Mustang EcoBoost 2.3L I4 engine and drivetrain

This article seems to indicate that Ford Racing will back it (limited to 36 months) and Ford walks away

Ford offering factory-spec EcoBoost reflashes that don't void warranty*

This is all correct regarding transmissions and engines in the Mustang vs. Lincoln.

And as someone that had a Ford Racing tune in their Mustang, yes, the Ford Racing warranty takes the place of the factory warranty, IE you do LOSE it. And to get the Ford Racing warranty, you must let your dealer install the tune, which they basically pull a figure out of the air dollar-wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
Cadillac has no trouble coming up with stout engines. Lincoln is Ford's Cadillac. If they truly have a problem with putting good engines in these cars, that's part of the problem.

I think the only engine they are reserving from Lincoln is the 3.5l EcoBoost for anything midsize or smaller.
Cadillacs are rear wheel drive using the 8 speed from the corvette.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
But does the SRX???


SRX is FWD and the 3.6 is 308 HP but the torque is only 265 lbs-ft. The MKC 2.3 is 305..


Also beware that since these cars are run by software, the manufactures have been known to play with the engine management a bit for durability purposes. As an example, on hard acceleration they can retard the timing a bit just before the shift to lower the torque of the engine into the transmission.. Some of the chips play with stuff like that. With the chip it will be marginally faster but there may be long term durability problems..


Bottom line for me would be to leave it alone until the powertrain warranty expires (in 6 years) but I usually replace a vehicle after 4 years. Also note Ford Racing will warranty the engine for 3 years - But you would be giving up the additional three years on the Powertrain.


But I'm a 60 year old guy who keeps the ride setting on comfort :) and appreciates the Lincoln for what it is, well appointed, quiet, nice riding vehicle. The only fun car I have now is a 2014 Jeep Wrangler (No Corvettes for now with the daughter in College) which after riding in that all day in city traffic makes me really appreciate the Lincoln.


Now that said - GM and Ford are working on a 9 (maybe 10) speed automatic for small FWD platforms. It probably will built a bit stronger that the current units. The rollout of that may include a performance bump for the MKC 2.3. But with all the problems FCA is having with their 9 speed transmission they will be very cautious.
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top