Beachboy

When I was in high school, my buddy's dad's secretary was an older spinster who had a fully decked out '68 Buick Electra Limited, every option EXCEPT a radio. We always thought that was so strange, but I now kind of understand her reasoning. Not into the rock music of the '60', and she just preferred the serene ride of that big Buick.. As for music royalties, my annual renewal included a $25 charge for the royalties.

They're still doing the discounts, at least as of last Tuesday. I have the "select" plan on an annual basis, and even with the discount, it still costs $125/year. This will probably be the last time I resubscribe, since being retired, I just don't drive the car that much, and when I do, I prefer peace and quiet. On the rare occasion when I do listen, it's either the '60's channel or the '70's channel. Between the cost of Sirius and my other electronic communications bills (phone, cable TV, internet), I'm sorely tempted to cut all the connections and enjoy life as a hermit!

Are there any statistics out there regarding the number of car owners who have Sirius XM equipped radios, that keep up their subscriptions once they have to start paying for them? I've kept mine up for eight years now, although I swear every year will be the last time. Every year, I have to call Sirius and threaten to cancel my subscription, then they come back with a "discounted offer" and I accept it. But in light of the fact, I probably don't listen to the radio over 2-3 hours a year total, it's still not a bargain. Just curious how many others out there are still paying for the service.

Have you tried talking to Crutchfield about upgrading the stock sound system? If it's doable, they can tell you what you need and you can install it yourself or they can refer you to a licensed installer. The sound systems in most new cars are so highly integrated into the overall scheme of things that it's extremely hard to rip everything out and start over fresh without spending huge sums of money.

I have a yearly contract for the "Select" plan, and the normal annual renewal cost is $204.88. After calling SXM and threatening to cancel it, they magically find a "discounted" rate, and I end up paying $122.90. That's still too much for how little I listen to the radio, now that I'm not using the car for daily commuting anymore.

Does anyone know how many car purchasers keep Sirius XM for the long term? I've paid for the service going on six years now. With my factory Ford radio (not Sony), SXM sounds as good as FM to my ears. But I get sick of having to call SXM every year and threaten to cancel my subscription unless they give me a discounted offer. Why don't they just offer loyal customers the best price upfront? Even with the discounted price, it's still not a good value for me, as I only have the radio turned on maybe an hour or two a month. I just prefer peace and quiet when I'm driving (a far cry from when I was a teenager!).

I can see these types of features and options as helping differentiate Lincoln from Ford, but they don't really appeal to me. I guess I see the increased maintenance costs of some of this tech stuff being a nightmare a few years down the road. Unlike the old days, the quality of materials and workmanship between Lincoln and Ford products is pretty much the same, as they roll off the same assembly line. Not like Lincoln vehicles are lovingly hand crafted in their own assembly plant. Weren't Lincoln Continental (along with Thunderbird) bodies built by Budd, back in the early-mid sixties?

Just a small garage and it has to share room with an Explorer. At least I put my vehicles IN the garage -- most of my neighbors use their garages for overflow storage and park their vehicles on the street.

Thanks for your input guys. I have a lot to think about. I was comparing overall dimensions last night between my Milan and a new Fusion, and I became concerned that the Fusion has grown to 2.7" longer and 3.4" wider than my Milan. My Milan is already a tight fit in my garage, so the increased length and width may be a deal breaker. I was shocked to see the new Focus is even wider than my Milan. On the plus side, I'm planning on buying or building a new house next year, so concerns over size may be moot. I think I can probably rule out the Lincoln. The more I look at it, that bat wing grill just doesn't cut it with me, although I love the interiors. If I could combine the exterior of a Fusion with the interior of a Lincoln, then I'd be happy. I know I need to go look at these cars in person, rather than trying to figure everything out from Ford's website.

Thanks for your input, Waldo. I'll look into the Fusion SE with the Luxury Package you suggest. My Milan has the 2.5 L 4 cylinder, and I find it's often straining to maintain highway speeds with the A/C on and on hilly roads, so I'm apprehensive about going to an even smaller engine. I also have concerns about the longevity of a turbo'd engine, after family experience with both Chrysler and Mercedes turbo'd engines in the late 80's. I know Mercury had become nothing but a clone to Ford by the time I bought my Milan. Mercury seemed to infuse a Fusion with some of the gimmicky, undesirable features of an MKZ in 2010, in an attempt to differentiate themselves from Ford. I had hoped maybe Lincoln used a better grade of leather, or more supportive seats than a Ford, in addition to better sound deadening. For me, quiet ranks near the top of my wish list on my next new vehicle. I'll wait until the 2016's start hitting the showrooms and see what I think.

Time to trade in my 2010 Mercury Milan, and since the Mercury brand is defunct, I'm in a quandry. Do I downgrade to the Ford brand or upgrade to Lincoln? I assume I'd have to go to the Fusion Titanium series at a minimum to get the content I had on my Mercury. Is the MKZ appreciabily a better vehicle for the money, than a hard loaded Fusion Titanium? By "better", I mean, build quality, materials, sound deadening, etc. Lincolns have always had steep depreciation, so in the long haul, are they a poorer choice than a Ford (or Toyota, Honda, etc)? I don't really want or need the electronic gimmicks on either one, but you seem stuck with them if you want the top of the line model. My driving is typically high speed Interstate trips, so I definitely need the biggest engine available. Or would my money be better spent with a V-6 top-of-the-line Camry or Accord? I typically keep a vehicle 5 years or 75,000 miles. Thanks for any recommendations or advice.

Mine lasted almost exactly 3.5 years. Died on Christmas morning, as we were ready to go visit family -- a real inconvenience! Replaced it with another Motorcraft. The dealer claimed the original battery and the replacements are identical, but for some reason, Ford will warrant the replacement for something like 8 years, but won't extend the same warranty on the original.

I'm getting right at 29-30 MPG in mostly highway driving. I used to consistently get around 34 MPG with the same driving habits, but the mileage has fallen lately. I attribute much of the loss due to winter grade gasoline, plus the government's fairly recent decision to allow more ethanol in gasoline will definitely hurt mileage too. Around here, it's becoming impossible to find "pure" unadultrated gasoline. Another fuel related situation I've noticed here in Kansas is that major-branded gas stations have all but disappeared.

The dealer from whom I purchased my Milan was originally a Lincoln-Mercury dealer, with the Ford brand being sold by a separate dealership. Since the demise of Mercury, the Lincoln dealership has taken on Hyundai and Mazda, probably in order to actually SELL enough vehicles in order to keep their sales staff employed and enough revenue to pay the utilities! I'd like to think I was getting Lincoln-quality techs, but I don't know if the same techs service Lincolns as well as Hyundai. I have noticed a mix of parts brands they use on my Milan ---- Hyundai branded injector cleaner and occasionally a Mazda branded oil filter.

My dealer recommended a tranny fluid flush at 45,000 miles, so I had it done. I never know if the service tech's recommendations are legit or simply generating extra income. I regret having the flush, as my transmission has leaked badly ever since (6 months). I'll probably take it back lateer this month, but considering it's a 100 mile round trip and a day off work, it's not something I want to do. I'm losing faith in Ford mechanics to do anything right. 03/29/2014 - as a follow up, I took my car back to the dealer some six months after the original transmission flush, since I noticed it was leaking transmission fluid. The tech determined the transmission dipstick tube was defective or damaged, and replaced it. Since the transmission didn't leak a drop prior to the flush, I can't help but believe the first tech somehow damaged the dipstick tube. In re-reading the maintenance manual, Ford states that a flush is not necessary just because the fluid is discolored, unless the discoloration is accompanied by a burnt odor. I feel the tech mislead me into having the transmission fluid flushed 100,000 miles early. But I was also concerned that if I had declined the flush, and I had any issues with the transmission at some point down the road, Ford might decline the warranty, due to me not having it serviced as recommended by the dealer. Damned if I do and damned if I don't!