awesome.
have you driven any other luxury SUV's that you're interested in or is the MKC the only one?
have you driven any other luxury SUV's that you're interested in or is the MKC the only one?
Test Drove MKC today
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
True, but the Explorer is a much bigger car. And when it comes to luxury, the brand is important. If feels different when let's say a valet attendant say: "Sir, your Ford is ready."
In term of the rear space, I really don't know what the fuss is about. Here are the rear specs of 3 hatchbacks from Edmunds:
2015 VW Golf
---------
Hip Room: N/A
Leg Room: 35.6"
Head Room: 38.1"
Shoulder Room: 53.9"
Cargo: 22.8 cubic feet
Car Length: 167.5"
Tank: 13.2 gal.
2014 Focus Hatchback
---------
Hip Room: 52.7"
Leg Room: 33.2"
Head Room: 37.9"
Shoulder Room: 53.7"
Cargo: 23.8 cu.ft.
Car Length: 171.6"
Tank: 12.4 gal.
2014 Mazda3 Hatchback
---------
Hip Room: 53.8"
Leg Room: 35.8"
Head Room: 37.4"
Shoulder Room: 54.4"
Cargo: 20.2 cu.ft.
Car Length: 175.6"
Tank: 13.2 gal.
The MKC falls within the realm of compact with a slightly bigger tank, cargo, 4WD, and CCD suspensions.
2015 Lincoln MKC
-----------------
Hip Room: 52.8"
Leg Room: 36.8"
Head Room: 38.7"
Shoulder Room: 55.3"
Cargo: 25.2 cu.ft.
Car Length: 179.9"
Tank: 15.5 gal.
So, I really don't know what the fuss is about. There's either too much expectations, or people just don't know what "Compact" Luxury Crossover means.
In term of the rear space, I really don't know what the fuss is about. Here are the rear specs of 3 hatchbacks from Edmunds:
2015 VW Golf
---------
Hip Room: N/A
Leg Room: 35.6"
Head Room: 38.1"
Shoulder Room: 53.9"
Cargo: 22.8 cubic feet
Car Length: 167.5"
Tank: 13.2 gal.
2014 Focus Hatchback
---------
Hip Room: 52.7"
Leg Room: 33.2"
Head Room: 37.9"
Shoulder Room: 53.7"
Cargo: 23.8 cu.ft.
Car Length: 171.6"
Tank: 12.4 gal.
2014 Mazda3 Hatchback
---------
Hip Room: 53.8"
Leg Room: 35.8"
Head Room: 37.4"
Shoulder Room: 54.4"
Cargo: 20.2 cu.ft.
Car Length: 175.6"
Tank: 13.2 gal.
The MKC falls within the realm of compact with a slightly bigger tank, cargo, 4WD, and CCD suspensions.
2015 Lincoln MKC
-----------------
Hip Room: 52.8"
Leg Room: 36.8"
Head Room: 38.7"
Shoulder Room: 55.3"
Cargo: 25.2 cu.ft.
Car Length: 179.9"
Tank: 15.5 gal.
So, I really don't know what the fuss is about. There's either too much expectations, or people just don't know what "Compact" Luxury Crossover means.
Rbreeze is right on the MKC size. It's 179.2". I mistyped in my previous post .
.
The true Compact Luxury SUV competitors are:
Audi Q3: 172.4"
Benz GLA: 173.9"
BMW X1: 176.5"
Benz GLK:178.3" <== for now
Lincoln MKC: 179.2"
The MKC is actually on the top end of the Luxury CUV segment.
The new Lexus NX is 182.3", belonging to the next catergory/class.
Contrary to most belief, the Buick also belongs to the compact class with a length of 168.4". Price, performance, and (IMO) brandwise, it's not in the luxury segment as most people would believe it to be.
Audi Q3: 172.4"
Benz GLA: 173.9"
BMW X1: 176.5"
Benz GLK:178.3" <== for now
Lincoln MKC: 179.2"
The MKC is actually on the top end of the Luxury CUV segment.
The new Lexus NX is 182.3", belonging to the next catergory/class.
Contrary to most belief, the Buick also belongs to the compact class with a length of 168.4". Price, performance, and (IMO) brandwise, it's not in the luxury segment as most people would believe it to be.
Psychoart, thanks for the reference. Note that entries at Wikipedia are at times an author's "opinion", and I don't agree with Wikipedia's "opinion" on what constitutes a compact (aka small) SUV in terms of vehicle length. At a length of 168.4" the Buick Encore (which is the same length as the Chevy Trax) is clearly a mini SUV, yet Wikipedia includes the Encore in its compact SUV category. With that said Wikipedia puts the Chevy Trax in its mini SUV category. Go figure. So there can be errors at Wikipedia. What Wikipedia need to do is announce the existence of the "sub-compact" SUV category and then place all appropriately-sized SUV's within that category.
With that said, my definition (size-wise) of the compact luxury SUV segment is/was my "opinion", which I stated... and today after giving it further thought I've decided to slightly widen my definition of the segment's length range from my previous 178"-184" to now 177"-185".
The M-B GLA, with a length of 173.9, represents a sub-compact SUV and is not on my radar. Neither are the Q3 or X1, which are also considered sub-compact SUV's.. at least by most people.
Tom, thanks for pointing this out. I'm not sure why I didn't include the Porsche Macan on my list of relevant competitor models in this segment, because that vehicle is definitely relevant and is very desirable! I guess because of its restrictive price (especially the price of its options) I subconsciously decided to leave the Macan off the list. I can't help but think now that if I win big on the lottery, the Macan will zoom right to the top of my compact luxury SUV shopping list!
Hmm.. on 2nd thought.. lottery win or not the Macan may still go to the top of my shopping list.
I haven't driven an MKC as yet.At this time I don't believe there is another available vehicle in this particular luxury category - other than the MKC and the Macan - for you (and me) to consider. There will no doubt be some interesting vehicles coming along - such as the redesigned all-new Q5 for m-y 2017 - but that vehicle and a few others are still a couple of years away.
/RB
Agree about the Macan S...to the extent I ordered one in March, equipped as close to the MKC as possible, but did not include (not offered) Cross-Traffic Alert. The MSRP was USD68,000. My wife nixed it during the dealer party displaying the Macan S. Her entry/exit was not easy...it has fairly high ground clearance, the roof line is low for its height, and the passenger seat is placed inboard, inset from the rocker panel, to the extent that she would bump her head getting in/out, going for the seat. She's maybe 5'1". The price/maintenance cost also may have influenced her ability to easy enter/exit!Tom, thanks for pointing this out. I'm not sure why I didn't include the Porsche Macan on my list of relevant competitor models in this segment, because that vehicle is definitely relevant and is very desirable! I guess because of its restrictive price (especially the price of its options) I subconsciously decided to leave the Macan off the list. I can't help but think now that if I win big on the lottery, the Macan will zoom right to the top of my compact luxury SUV shopping list!
Hmm.. on 2nd thought.. lottery win or not the Macan may still go to the top of my shopping list.
At this time I don't believe there is another available vehicle in this particular luxury category - other than the MKC and the Macan - for you (and me) to consider. There will no doubt be some interesting vehicles coming along - such as the redesigned all-new Q5 for m-y 2017 - but that vehicle and a few others are still a couple of years away.
/RB
Along comes the MKC...a perfect fit for both of us. And a good USD23,000 less, "comparably" equipped.
So my challenge has been to find something in this size/luxury category, that beats the MKC.
Still looking...
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
