Now for something completely different....Lincoln MKZ Hybrid

[daschtick]

Trust me, I know these cars couldn't seem more different, but my wife and I are looking for a replacement for her aging '05 TSX, and it has come down to a new Civic Touring or a loaded CPO Lincoln MKZ Hybrid.

We like both cars, obviously for different reasons, yet they do share many similarities. They both cost about the same to purchase, and return about the same MPG and burn regular gas. The Lincoln has more presence, is more luxurious, and has the best ride quality, but the Civic Touring is just more fun to drive, and is probably a bit more practical. Having driven sport compacts my entire life, the Civic feels more 'natural' to me. However, I am fascinated by the technology and silent propulsion provided by the Lincoln. Fully loaded CPO MKZ Hybrids are a great buy, as Lincoln is not known for high resale as it is, then throw in the hybrid powertrain, and many run for the hills. Interestingly enough, the hybrid powertrain is actually much more mechanically simple, as it replaces a transmission, starter, and alternator with a couple of electric motors, a planetary gear set, and inverter electronics. The original warranty is 4/50 with an 8/100 on the hybrid components. A CPO gets a 6/100 warranty. Cars that once listed for $45-50k in 2013 and 2014 are now available for $20-25k today with 20-40k miles on them.

The biggest complaints on both cars seem to center around the electronics interface, neither of which I am very concerned about. That said, I would be interested in any thoughts on this admittedly unusual comparison.

Sponsored

 

[Billy4202]

Its a different comparison, but not one without merit IMO. In my own experience, it comes down to long-term ownership costs. The Civic's should remain low, the Lincoln's will only get higher. Our family used to be a Ford family but realized what a money pit it was, and we haven't really looked back. The remaining two Fords in the family have issues with relatively low mileage (<150k). That alone, personally, would sway the decision towards the Civic.

 

[Pearl]

Yes, there is depreciation and other costs involved but the fact that you're even asking this in a Honda forum already says a lot. IMO, get that Lincoln and enjoy it for a little while and then come back in a couple years after the 10th gen Civic is a little more sorted.

 

[CBR600F4i]

Personally I think there is only one right choice and you already know what it is.

 

[daschtick]

As I said, I fully agree that this is an odd comparison. Having owned our '05 TSX since new (now with 230k utterly reliable miles), and our '92 Legend prior to that, we are very familiar with Honda/Acura. That said, we have also looked at the ILX and TLX, and neither one of them caught our interest. They seemed expensive, lacked some features we want, and returned middling fuel economy on premium fuel. I think they also do not feel all that 'improved' above our existing TSX. We also looked at the Accord Hybrid Touring, which has everything we want, but my wife is just not that interested. I personally think the 2017 looks really nice, but this is also going to be $10k more than the Civic. Honestly, we took out the Civic Touring on a whim, and were completely impressed by the overall package. It has all of the features we want, and it sells for a price we are willing to spend. If this was a decision based only on specifications, the Civic is a clear winner. However, since emotion comes into play, it is not that simple.

With regards to long term ownership costs, I feel that the Civic will be less than the MKZ, but not much less until 150k+ miles. After that point, I am concerned that the Lincoln might become a huge liability. However, for the first few years, I would expect the Lincoln to be similar, as the largest expenses should be tires (which are nothing exotic), and brakes (which seem to last forever on cars with regen braking capability). Depreciation is another area where I would give the nod to the Civic. Even purchased new, I would be surprised if the Civic was not worth more at year 10 than the CPO Lincoln, which would be at year 12 or 13, even though the Lincoln had a much higher initial cost.

That said, I feel that the Lincoln would probably cost more to own as it ages, however, since most of the mechanicals are essentially Ford Fusion parts, it should be fairly reasonable to keep going barring a major component failure, in which there is a much higher probability with a Lincoln hybrid.

Decisions.....

 

[daschtick]

IMO, get that Lincoln and enjoy it .

Okay....done.

In the end, as much as we liked the Civic, and felt that it would probably represent the best long term value, I just couldn't shake the Lincoln out of my head. My immaculate condition, Lincoln Certified Pre-Owned, top spec 2013 MKZ Hybrid, with 25k miles and nearly all of the options, cost less than the 2016 Civic Touring I was looking at.

So far, we have really been enjoying this car, as it has far exceeded our expectations. It looks great, rides and especially handles better than expected, and has been averaging 41.3 mpg overall. We also really like is that it is indistinguishable from the standard gas version, even down to the functional dual exhaust outlets. The only identifying feature is a small '2.0H' badge on the rear trunk in place of the standard '2.0T'. Hybrid motoring on the down low!

Would I recommend this choice to others? Probably not, as the Civic is almost always the safe bet. But being a car/technology sort of person, I am really enjoying my new toy.

 

[uokrol]

^^ That's what I tell people too!

 

[inv4zn]

It's owner dependent really.

My friend went from a heavily modified '05 STI to a '13 altima hybrid (he got married..lol) and his monthly gas bill went from $400 to $40.

So cost of car aside, for some people it really does save money.

Sponsored