1994 Lincoln Mark Viii Base Sedan 2-door 4.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Lincoln Aviator fuel economy revealed

Ford finally revealed some of the last details, such as fuel economy, for the non-hybrid 2020 Explorer. So it's no surprise that its classier corporate twin, the 2020 Lincoln Aviator, has had its own fuel economy data released by the EPA. Though, like the Explorer, we only have information for the non-hybrid versions. The 2020 Lincoln Aviator has just two engine options, a base turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 with 400 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque, and the same engine coupled to a hybrid system with 450 horsepower and 600 pound-feet of torque. That base engine is the one we have fuel economy numbers for, and it's shared with the Ford Explorer ST, though the ST's version makes an extra 15 pound-feet of torque. With all-wheel drive it gets nearly the same fuel economy as the fast Ford with 17 mpg in the city, 24 on the highway and 20 in combined driving. The Explorer ST gets one more mpg in town. Unlike the Explorer ST, the Aviator does offer rear-wheel drive with this turbocharged V6. This model gets improved fuel economy of 18 in the city, 26 on the highway and 21 in combined driving. This isn't too surprising, since all-wheel-drive vehicles often do a little worse when it comes to fuel economy. We'll be especially curious as to how the Aviator hybrid performs. We doubt it will match the Ford Explorer hybrid, since that crossover relies on a less-powerful naturally aspirated 3.3-liter V6. But it might give the all-wheel-drive four-cylinder Explorer a run for its money, since the rear-drive V6 Aviator is only 1 to 2 mpg behind it. Related Video:

Junkyard Gem: 1977 Lincoln Continental Mark V

For the 1977 model year, Ford debuted the new Lincoln Continental Mark V, one of the biggest of the personal luxury coupes that were all the rage during the era. While 400 pounds lighter than its Mark IV predecessor, the Mark V was still a thirsty, 4,652-pound symbol of American exceptionalism. Here's an example of a first-year Mark V, spotted in a San Francisco Bay Area self-service wrecking yard. If we are to judge from the sun-baked interior, top-down rust, and moss growing on the bodywork, this car spent at least 20 years decaying outdoors before coming here. Still, flashes of its original opulence may be seen here and there. For example, the Cartier clock (which probably failed by about 1983). There were Cartier Edition Mark Vs (along with Givenchy and Pucci versions), but all the Mark Vs got the Cartier clocks. With the 1973 Oil Crisis just a few years behind and the 1979 Oil Crisis a couple of years ahead, some attempt to improve fuel economy was needed in the engine compartment. This car has the 400-cubic-inch version of the 351 Cleveland V8, rated at 179 woefully inadequate horsepower and 329 good-enough pound-feet of torque. Outside of California, the 208-horse 460-cubic-inch V8 was an option. These cars were very comfortable on the highway, with their soft springs and cushy seats. No, the wood isn't real. Worth restoring? No way, not when you can find nice one-owner examples for four figures. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. "To its owner, Continental Mark V is more than a new car. It's a Mark of tradition." Related Video: Featured Gallery Junked 1977 Lincoln Continental Mark V View 25 Photos Auto News Lincoln Luxury

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.