We're in the midst of merger madness, folks, with corporate giants from Daimler-Benz and General Motors to AOL and EMAP Publishing displaying an "eat or be eaten" mentality when it comes to market share and positioning. We no longer think of car brands but instead use the term "automotive groups." For instance, the Ford "Group" now includes Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, Aston Martin, Mazda and Volvo. That's pretty amazing when you consider that, with the exception of Lincoln and Mercury, most of these companies had nothing to do with Ford 12 years ago.
By combining multiple automakers, the resulting conglomerate hopes to reduce costs and increase profits through shared resources and technology. Sharing platforms, for instance, between two nameplates within an automotive group means that the bulk of R&D costs incurred when creating a platform can be spread across multiple models. Such is the case with Lincoln's new LS and Jaguar's new S-type. While marketed as two completely separate models with separate price ranges for separate customers, both ride on the same platform, internally known as DEW98.
We recently had access to a 2000 Jaguar S-type for one week. Initially we were going to put the car through our standard battery of testing, but after pondering the fact that our recently acquired long-term Lincoln LS rides on the same platform, it seemed like a no-brainer to pit these fraternal twins against one another. Though Jaguar officials would likely cringe at the idea, cynical types (none of whom work here at Edmunds.com, of course) might go as far as calling the S-type a glorified Ford with a Jaguar hood ornament and a $15,000 price hike. To quell (or confirm) these rumors, we spent several days driving both vehicles on a combination of twisting mountain roads and open highways, as well as in rush-hour traffic around the Greater Los Angeles area.
Well before climbing into either the LS or S-type it became clear that these cars have distinct personalities. Jaguar has infused their newest sedan with a timeless shape that harkens back to the 1960s S-type Saloons. With quad headlights surrounded by a small, circular grille and topped by the ubiquitous leaping cat, the new model combines a classic heritage with classy modern ambiance-at least when viewed from the front. Certain editors found the S-type's hindquarters less than flawless. Comments ranged from "It has Chevy Lumina body lines" to "Were those taillights ripped from a 2000 Dodge Neon or Nissan Maxima?" One editor also noted that the Jag's roofline and taillight section is not only Ford-like, but also Taurus-like. Whoops! Bet Jaguar wasn't after that look.
While the S-type's appearance exudes history, the LS embodies the future, or at least the present, in terms of sport sedans. From the start, Lincoln aimed the LS squarely at the European and, specifically, BMW market. The LS' front end calls attention to this with its tight quad headlights, swooping central grille and clean hood lines. Unfortunately, Lincoln's past glimmers through in the chrome trim surrounding the grille and rear license plate. For a vehicle that's supposed to break from tradition and represent the "new" Lincoln, we'd like to see the LS completely chrome-free; but as they say, "Rome wasn't burned in a day." We also noticed that the Lincoln's more upright windshield angle gives it a higher roofline and overall heftier look than the swoopy Jag, but we generally like the LS' clean styling.
Though a sharp eye is necessary to spot the exterior similarities, even Mr. Magoo could see the family resemblance between the LS and S-type interiors. Jaguar did little to differentiate the S-type's switchgear from the LS' (or a number of other Lincoln products, for that matter). We spent over an hour carefully analyzing the two cars' interior bits and came up with more than a dozen items that are identical on both models. These include the climate control and audio buttons, the headlight switch, the trunk and fuel release buttons, the sunroof controls, the emergency brake handle, the seatbelts and the radio/temperature displays.
If we lowered our requirements from identical to near-identical, we came up with an additional 10 items that ranged from the steering wheel to the center folding armrest (Lincoln's had cupholders as part of the armrest, Jag's didn't) to the overall seat design and shape. Interior vents and door handles, along with exterior mirrors and power seat switches, were also congruent in both form and function.
We should note that while these similarities were undeniable, they didn't necessarily diminish either vehicle's ergonomic or aesthetic charm. On the contrary, both the LS and S-type possess generally appealing and well-conceived control layouts when taken as a whole. The Lincoln and Jaguar combine a straightforward design with large buttons and clear labels for simple, easy-to-use climate and audio systems.
Specific highlights of the LS interior included the comfortable seats, stellar sound system (though bass could be a little tighter), quiet ride, and clean appearance. Gripes focused on the combined seat height/tilt control that made it difficult to get the driver's seat exactly where you wanted it, and the cheap looking/feeling plastic around the window switches. A somewhat rubbery-feeling steering wheel rim, along with a cruise control on-off toggle switch that was hidden behind the steering wheel spokes (making it hard to tell which direction to push to turn the system on or off) gave our drivers pause for frustration. These issues paled in comparison, however, to the LS' blatant lack of interior storage space. With a glove compartment stuffed with a CD changer and a center console jammed with a cell phone, there was nowhere left to put our personal belongings, except for in the migraine-inducing cupholder openings (possibly the most annoying cupholder deployment design in the history of the automobile). Lincoln needs to address these areas if it hopes to compete with world-class luxury sedans.
The Jag's interior, while a cut above the Lincoln's, had problems of its own that went beyond the preponderance of Ford switchgear. Once again, the overall layout was functional (though some staffers didn't approve of the "smiley face" design) but some serious flaws kept it from living up to what we'd expect from a $50,000 automobile. Items like the shallow and dull wood grain trim with ash pattern (the Lincoln's fake wood used a deep brown, burled pattern that actually looked better), the insultingly cheap plastic panel beneath the steering column, and a one-touch down window for the driver (and no one else) left us unimpressed. Don't forget that a $30,000 BMW 323i has one-touch up and down windows at all four locations. And, as with the LS, the S-type offered no substantial interior storage, leaving our keys, pens and wallets to slide around on the Connolly hides.
Subtle items, like the quality of the seat leather, the "controlled" opening of the glove compartment and cupholder doors, the amount of "cush" in the seat cushions, and the design of the turn signal stalk felt very Jaguarish. Still, we wished for more than one cupholder (for the entire car), an increase in rear seat legroom, and a navigation system that would operate while underway. This last point might seem logical for safety reasons, but what happens when you have a passenger that is willing to program the system while you continue driving in the general direction of your destination? The navigation screen in the S-type is even pointed straight back (as opposed to being canted toward the driver) making passenger involvement quite logical...if it were only possible. Come on, Jaguar (wait, make that Ford).
Speaking of high-tech devices, the S-type does include one item that no Lincoln offers. It is a voice-activated system to operate the audio and climate control functions, as well as the cell phone. By pressing a small button on the steering wheel and saying words like "RADIO" and "95.5" you can tune stations. The same procedure works to adjust the cabin temperature, answer the phone, or advance to a different CD track. It took us a few minutes to master the system, but once we remembered to speak loudly and clearly, it was quite effective. We never could get the system to adjust for temperatures in the 70s (it seemed fixated on "82" and would go there whenever it got confused) but if we used the equivalent Celsius setting, for instance 22, it always obeyed promptly. Just for fun we tried speaking in New York, Southern, and Cockney accents. It didn't like any of them and ignored us (proving the car is more British than its Ford switchgear would suggest).
As one writer noted during our test, "It takes more than real wood, a pretty face, special tuning and a J-gate shifter to make a Jag." Thankfully, we can report that more than just those items separate the S-type from the LS. For instance, although the Jaguar uses the same 4.0-liter V8 as the LS, (it's described as a 3.9-liter V8 in the Lincoln, but they can't fool us), a combination of intake system and valvetrain tweaks gives the Jaguar 31 more horsepower and 20 more foot-pounds of torque, for a total of 282 and 267, respectively.
Driving each vehicle back-to-back you'd be hard-pressed to notice any difference in real-world performance, though various magazine tests put the S-type over a second quicker in zero-to-60 runs. Both engines feel powerful and smooth with a broad torque band that never quits from idle to redline. Additional sound-deadening material masks the Jaguar's increased horsepower while the Lincoln's throaty V8 rumbles pleasantly beneath the passenger compartment and gives the LS a more purposeful feel.
Unfortunately, that sense of purpose is lost once power leaves the engine compartment and enters the transmissions in each of these vehicles. We've already established that the five-speed automatic in our Lincoln LS is truly horrific in terms of responsiveness. A quick stab at the throttle can easily confuse the tranny, leaving it halfway between gears for several seconds before it abruptly figures out what to do, then drops a gear and sends a violent lurch throughout the vehicle. This can be particularly fun if it happens in mid-corner. Using Selectshift does little to alleviate the problem because of the lag time between moving the shifter and actually getting the tranny to shift.
Because of its softer shift calibrations, the S-type's automatic is never quite as brutal as the Lincoln's. However, the car still suffers from lagging upshifts under full throttle and occasional missed downshifts. As usual, the requisite Jaguar J-gate shifter is almost useless in terms of manual shifting, but the S-type's target audience will probably never notice. Considering the effort that Ford put into developing each of these models, it's hard to believe they would neglect proper development of such a major drivetrain component.
But if the lame transmissions and common interior pieces point to a shared platform, the handling traits of each vehicle couldn't be more distinct.
In the Lincoln, for instance, small bumps and expansion joints are transmitted directly to the passenger compartment of any LS riding on the sport package (as does our long-term test car). Thus equipped, the Lincoln remains flat and composed, soaking up mid-corner bumps with aplomb and inspiring a level of confidence usually reserved for sedans from the other side of the Atlantic. Steering is appropriately weighted with no discernable on-center dead spot, making the car an absolute blast over back-country roads. As far as suspension tuning and steering feel goes, the LS is a near-perfect example except for the occasional harshness over larger bumps.
In sharp contrast, the S-type displays a far more gentlemanly demeanor when asked to play. Lighter steering, softer springs and smoother upshifts serve to remind drivers that Jaguar sedans are first and foremost luxury cars, even when sharing design elements with an uppity American. The S-type feels stable and well mannered when driven hard through a set of tight S-turns, but performance is clearly secondary to this car's mission. While this particular S-type was not fitted with Jaguar's optional sport package, we recently track-tested a model with the larger wheels and stiffer underpinnings. Though ultra-stable at high speeds and easily capable of spirited travel, it still couldn't match our sport package-equipped LS in terms of driving precision or passion.
Additional similarities between these models, like the commodious trunk with low liftover, fold-down 60/40 split rear seats (but no interior release handles, requiring you to open the trunk), and excellent outward visibility added to the cars' appeal. But negating these finer points were obvious issues of build quality on both vehicles. Our long-term LS had a Stabilitrak problem that caused the warning light to come on within minutes of leaving the dealer showroom. After nearly two months of badgering Ford, the dealer was finally able to retrieve the necessary part to effect repairs. The LS also suffered a broken plastic cover over the driver's seat track and the cushion on the steering wheel's center hub is still noticeably misaligned.
We'd like to think the extra money charged for an S-type would insulate buyers from these types of problems, but our test model's misaligned and peeling rear window molding did little to confirm Jaguar's claims of improved build quality in recent years.
When viewed separately, both the LS and S-type display a number of appealing character traits. Either model can serve as a comfortable and confident ride, though the LS' crisper handling, larger rear seat and lower price tag seems like the better deal to our way of thinking. The Lincoln also doesn't have to shrug off any stigmas about being an "underpriced Jaguar."
The S-type is also an excellent luxury sedan in terms of ride, handling, creature comforts and image. The car received an unsolicited thumbs-up from an Audi driver and one of our company executives had nothing but praise when he returned from a short trip. But as critical car guys, we're disturbed by the flagrant Ford switchgear, the cheap interior bits and a deplorable lack of interior storage space (this is true of the LS, too). We were also not too thrilled with the car's drooping window trim, but no other serious build-quality issues turned up during our one-week loan period.
As far as personalities go, the LS and S-type each offer distinct takes on what a luxury sedan should be. The LS combines comfort and luxury with athletic road manners to break the "grandpa's car" reputation that currently dominates this marque's image. If you want BMW 5 Series interior room at BMW 3 Series pricing (and you don't mind an indecisive automatic transmission) give the car a look.
The S-type also succeeds by providing a trademark Jaguar look with an appropriately luxurious feel. But a glance at the instrument panel will quickly betray its Ford origins to anyone familiar with Blue Oval switchgear. Is this unacceptable in a British luxury sedan costing over 50 grand? If you like Jaguar body lines and don't mind Ford buttons, probably not.
By combining multiple automakers, the resulting conglomerate hopes to reduce costs and increase profits through shared resources and technology. Sharing platforms, for instance, between two nameplates within an automotive group means that the bulk of R&D costs incurred when creating a platform can be spread across multiple models. Such is the case with Lincoln's new LS and Jaguar's new S-type. While marketed as two completely separate models with separate price ranges for separate customers, both ride on the same platform, internally known as DEW98.
We recently had access to a 2000 Jaguar S-type for one week. Initially we were going to put the car through our standard battery of testing, but after pondering the fact that our recently acquired long-term Lincoln LS rides on the same platform, it seemed like a no-brainer to pit these fraternal twins against one another. Though Jaguar officials would likely cringe at the idea, cynical types (none of whom work here at Edmunds.com, of course) might go as far as calling the S-type a glorified Ford with a Jaguar hood ornament and a $15,000 price hike. To quell (or confirm) these rumors, we spent several days driving both vehicles on a combination of twisting mountain roads and open highways, as well as in rush-hour traffic around the Greater Los Angeles area.
Well before climbing into either the LS or S-type it became clear that these cars have distinct personalities. Jaguar has infused their newest sedan with a timeless shape that harkens back to the 1960s S-type Saloons. With quad headlights surrounded by a small, circular grille and topped by the ubiquitous leaping cat, the new model combines a classic heritage with classy modern ambiance-at least when viewed from the front. Certain editors found the S-type's hindquarters less than flawless. Comments ranged from "It has Chevy Lumina body lines" to "Were those taillights ripped from a 2000 Dodge Neon or Nissan Maxima?" One editor also noted that the Jag's roofline and taillight section is not only Ford-like, but also Taurus-like. Whoops! Bet Jaguar wasn't after that look.
While the S-type's appearance exudes history, the LS embodies the future, or at least the present, in terms of sport sedans. From the start, Lincoln aimed the LS squarely at the European and, specifically, BMW market. The LS' front end calls attention to this with its tight quad headlights, swooping central grille and clean hood lines. Unfortunately, Lincoln's past glimmers through in the chrome trim surrounding the grille and rear license plate. For a vehicle that's supposed to break from tradition and represent the "new" Lincoln, we'd like to see the LS completely chrome-free; but as they say, "Rome wasn't burned in a day." We also noticed that the Lincoln's more upright windshield angle gives it a higher roofline and overall heftier look than the swoopy Jag, but we generally like the LS' clean styling.
Though a sharp eye is necessary to spot the exterior similarities, even Mr. Magoo could see the family resemblance between the LS and S-type interiors. Jaguar did little to differentiate the S-type's switchgear from the LS' (or a number of other Lincoln products, for that matter). We spent over an hour carefully analyzing the two cars' interior bits and came up with more than a dozen items that are identical on both models. These include the climate control and audio buttons, the headlight switch, the trunk and fuel release buttons, the sunroof controls, the emergency brake handle, the seatbelts and the radio/temperature displays.
If we lowered our requirements from identical to near-identical, we came up with an additional 10 items that ranged from the steering wheel to the center folding armrest (Lincoln's had cupholders as part of the armrest, Jag's didn't) to the overall seat design and shape. Interior vents and door handles, along with exterior mirrors and power seat switches, were also congruent in both form and function.
We should note that while these similarities were undeniable, they didn't necessarily diminish either vehicle's ergonomic or aesthetic charm. On the contrary, both the LS and S-type possess generally appealing and well-conceived control layouts when taken as a whole. The Lincoln and Jaguar combine a straightforward design with large buttons and clear labels for simple, easy-to-use climate and audio systems.
Specific highlights of the LS interior included the comfortable seats, stellar sound system (though bass could be a little tighter), quiet ride, and clean appearance. Gripes focused on the combined seat height/tilt control that made it difficult to get the driver's seat exactly where you wanted it, and the cheap looking/feeling plastic around the window switches. A somewhat rubbery-feeling steering wheel rim, along with a cruise control on-off toggle switch that was hidden behind the steering wheel spokes (making it hard to tell which direction to push to turn the system on or off) gave our drivers pause for frustration. These issues paled in comparison, however, to the LS' blatant lack of interior storage space. With a glove compartment stuffed with a CD changer and a center console jammed with a cell phone, there was nowhere left to put our personal belongings, except for in the migraine-inducing cupholder openings (possibly the most annoying cupholder deployment design in the history of the automobile). Lincoln needs to address these areas if it hopes to compete with world-class luxury sedans.
The Jag's interior, while a cut above the Lincoln's, had problems of its own that went beyond the preponderance of Ford switchgear. Once again, the overall layout was functional (though some staffers didn't approve of the "smiley face" design) but some serious flaws kept it from living up to what we'd expect from a $50,000 automobile. Items like the shallow and dull wood grain trim with ash pattern (the Lincoln's fake wood used a deep brown, burled pattern that actually looked better), the insultingly cheap plastic panel beneath the steering column, and a one-touch down window for the driver (and no one else) left us unimpressed. Don't forget that a $30,000 BMW 323i has one-touch up and down windows at all four locations. And, as with the LS, the S-type offered no substantial interior storage, leaving our keys, pens and wallets to slide around on the Connolly hides.
Subtle items, like the quality of the seat leather, the "controlled" opening of the glove compartment and cupholder doors, the amount of "cush" in the seat cushions, and the design of the turn signal stalk felt very Jaguarish. Still, we wished for more than one cupholder (for the entire car), an increase in rear seat legroom, and a navigation system that would operate while underway. This last point might seem logical for safety reasons, but what happens when you have a passenger that is willing to program the system while you continue driving in the general direction of your destination? The navigation screen in the S-type is even pointed straight back (as opposed to being canted toward the driver) making passenger involvement quite logical...if it were only possible. Come on, Jaguar (wait, make that Ford).
Speaking of high-tech devices, the S-type does include one item that no Lincoln offers. It is a voice-activated system to operate the audio and climate control functions, as well as the cell phone. By pressing a small button on the steering wheel and saying words like "RADIO" and "95.5" you can tune stations. The same procedure works to adjust the cabin temperature, answer the phone, or advance to a different CD track. It took us a few minutes to master the system, but once we remembered to speak loudly and clearly, it was quite effective. We never could get the system to adjust for temperatures in the 70s (it seemed fixated on "82" and would go there whenever it got confused) but if we used the equivalent Celsius setting, for instance 22, it always obeyed promptly. Just for fun we tried speaking in New York, Southern, and Cockney accents. It didn't like any of them and ignored us (proving the car is more British than its Ford switchgear would suggest).
As one writer noted during our test, "It takes more than real wood, a pretty face, special tuning and a J-gate shifter to make a Jag." Thankfully, we can report that more than just those items separate the S-type from the LS. For instance, although the Jaguar uses the same 4.0-liter V8 as the LS, (it's described as a 3.9-liter V8 in the Lincoln, but they can't fool us), a combination of intake system and valvetrain tweaks gives the Jaguar 31 more horsepower and 20 more foot-pounds of torque, for a total of 282 and 267, respectively.
Driving each vehicle back-to-back you'd be hard-pressed to notice any difference in real-world performance, though various magazine tests put the S-type over a second quicker in zero-to-60 runs. Both engines feel powerful and smooth with a broad torque band that never quits from idle to redline. Additional sound-deadening material masks the Jaguar's increased horsepower while the Lincoln's throaty V8 rumbles pleasantly beneath the passenger compartment and gives the LS a more purposeful feel.
Unfortunately, that sense of purpose is lost once power leaves the engine compartment and enters the transmissions in each of these vehicles. We've already established that the five-speed automatic in our Lincoln LS is truly horrific in terms of responsiveness. A quick stab at the throttle can easily confuse the tranny, leaving it halfway between gears for several seconds before it abruptly figures out what to do, then drops a gear and sends a violent lurch throughout the vehicle. This can be particularly fun if it happens in mid-corner. Using Selectshift does little to alleviate the problem because of the lag time between moving the shifter and actually getting the tranny to shift.
Because of its softer shift calibrations, the S-type's automatic is never quite as brutal as the Lincoln's. However, the car still suffers from lagging upshifts under full throttle and occasional missed downshifts. As usual, the requisite Jaguar J-gate shifter is almost useless in terms of manual shifting, but the S-type's target audience will probably never notice. Considering the effort that Ford put into developing each of these models, it's hard to believe they would neglect proper development of such a major drivetrain component.
But if the lame transmissions and common interior pieces point to a shared platform, the handling traits of each vehicle couldn't be more distinct.
In the Lincoln, for instance, small bumps and expansion joints are transmitted directly to the passenger compartment of any LS riding on the sport package (as does our long-term test car). Thus equipped, the Lincoln remains flat and composed, soaking up mid-corner bumps with aplomb and inspiring a level of confidence usually reserved for sedans from the other side of the Atlantic. Steering is appropriately weighted with no discernable on-center dead spot, making the car an absolute blast over back-country roads. As far as suspension tuning and steering feel goes, the LS is a near-perfect example except for the occasional harshness over larger bumps.
In sharp contrast, the S-type displays a far more gentlemanly demeanor when asked to play. Lighter steering, softer springs and smoother upshifts serve to remind drivers that Jaguar sedans are first and foremost luxury cars, even when sharing design elements with an uppity American. The S-type feels stable and well mannered when driven hard through a set of tight S-turns, but performance is clearly secondary to this car's mission. While this particular S-type was not fitted with Jaguar's optional sport package, we recently track-tested a model with the larger wheels and stiffer underpinnings. Though ultra-stable at high speeds and easily capable of spirited travel, it still couldn't match our sport package-equipped LS in terms of driving precision or passion.
Additional similarities between these models, like the commodious trunk with low liftover, fold-down 60/40 split rear seats (but no interior release handles, requiring you to open the trunk), and excellent outward visibility added to the cars' appeal. But negating these finer points were obvious issues of build quality on both vehicles. Our long-term LS had a Stabilitrak problem that caused the warning light to come on within minutes of leaving the dealer showroom. After nearly two months of badgering Ford, the dealer was finally able to retrieve the necessary part to effect repairs. The LS also suffered a broken plastic cover over the driver's seat track and the cushion on the steering wheel's center hub is still noticeably misaligned.
We'd like to think the extra money charged for an S-type would insulate buyers from these types of problems, but our test model's misaligned and peeling rear window molding did little to confirm Jaguar's claims of improved build quality in recent years.
When viewed separately, both the LS and S-type display a number of appealing character traits. Either model can serve as a comfortable and confident ride, though the LS' crisper handling, larger rear seat and lower price tag seems like the better deal to our way of thinking. The Lincoln also doesn't have to shrug off any stigmas about being an "underpriced Jaguar."
The S-type is also an excellent luxury sedan in terms of ride, handling, creature comforts and image. The car received an unsolicited thumbs-up from an Audi driver and one of our company executives had nothing but praise when he returned from a short trip. But as critical car guys, we're disturbed by the flagrant Ford switchgear, the cheap interior bits and a deplorable lack of interior storage space (this is true of the LS, too). We were also not too thrilled with the car's drooping window trim, but no other serious build-quality issues turned up during our one-week loan period.
As far as personalities go, the LS and S-type each offer distinct takes on what a luxury sedan should be. The LS combines comfort and luxury with athletic road manners to break the "grandpa's car" reputation that currently dominates this marque's image. If you want BMW 5 Series interior room at BMW 3 Series pricing (and you don't mind an indecisive automatic transmission) give the car a look.
The S-type also succeeds by providing a trademark Jaguar look with an appropriately luxurious feel. But a glance at the instrument panel will quickly betray its Ford origins to anyone familiar with Blue Oval switchgear. Is this unacceptable in a British luxury sedan costing over 50 grand? If you like Jaguar body lines and don't mind Ford buttons, probably not.
Add A Comment »