1998-2002 Lincoln Navigator
In today's brave new world of five-buck gas and energy-related panic, it borders on dangerous to admit to lusting after a three-ton station wagon. In fact, the desirability of such a vehicle would never have occurred to me but for the 10,000 miles I spent behind the wheel of, first a 1998, and then a 2002 Lincoln Navigator.
Most of those--95 percent--were long-haul miles, with the goal of getting a large enclosed trailer filled with 3,000 pounds of motorcycle from one edge of the country to the other. The rest were in around-town stop-and-go traffic in various cities, towns, and villages.
Those Navigators belonged to one of my riding buddies, and when he allowed as how he'd rather fly, and have someone else haul the trailer to Daytona Bike Week in February of 1998, I volunteered without a moment's hesitation. (Yeah, we trailered our bikes. Sometimes in a blizzard. Get over it.) That first trip, behind the wheel of what could be viewed as nothing more than a tarted-up Ford Expedition (which, itself, was a roofed-in Ford F-150 pickup) was a revelation.
I had driven Ford pickups and Expeditions, and found them pleasant
enough, but nothing about them inspired anything approaching Car Lust.
The Navigator, by contrast, grabbed me right away.
First, it was way quieter than the Fords were. This is always
good for a few ticks on positive side of the automotive equation.
Second, and equally important when you're about to spend days behind
the wheel, it was spectacularly comfortable. I just looked at my trip
notes from that first drive, and here's what I wrote about the seats:
"It doesn't matter where I put this beast's enormous leather throne. Regardless of the position--all the way back, all the way forward, tilted, reclined, upright, or whatever--I'm comfortable. Of course, this is impossible, but there it is."
This was true of the '98, and even more true of the '02 that replaced it, for the newer example was equipped with seat coolers that blew cold air through perforations in the leather. It was heavenly.
Then there's the ride, which was way more Lincoln than Ford truck. Much credit for this goes to the air bags used in place of the steel springs found on the donor Expedition. Rough pavement, bumps, potholes, and frost heaves were simply flattened by the Navigator's suspension. Meanwhile, the wagon's extensive soundproofing made all of the suspension's hard work sound like it was happening somewhere in the far distance.
I can't testify to the Nav's high-speed handling in the twisties, because I'm not an idiot. I call it a wagon, but know, deep within, that it's a high center-of-gravity SUV. As such, it has to be driven with respect, along with an awareness of the laws of both physics and unintended consequences. At prudent speeds--i.e., not much higher than the posted limits--it handled the curves without any drama.
The '98 Navigator's towing capabilities were limited by the 230-horsepower engine fitted to those first-year examples. The '99 debuted with 260 horsepower, and midway through the model year it was bumped up to an even 300. Having towed 4,500-pound loads with both 230- and 300-horsepower versions, I have to say that more is better. With the '98, I was always aware of the trailer as a load on the engine. With the '02, towing was effortless.
In fact, driving the Navigator, in general, was effortless. This is
only surprising until you realize that, despite its apparent bulk, the
Navigator is shorter (by seven inches) than a Crown Victoria. That,
along with the Master of All He Surveys driving position, makes for a
vehicle that's easy to maneuver in tight spaces, and for which to find
a parking spot.
And what about mileage? That's a good question, and one that doesn't have a very good answer, at least in the absolute. Towing 4,500 pounds, the Navigator averaged 9.9 MPG. Unburdened, I recorded 13 around town, and 16 on the road. Not good. But look at it from another standpoint--driving a Navigator 12,000 miles per year will burn about 1,000 gallons of gas. Over the same mileage, my sister's 2005 CRV burned 500 gallons.
The question then becomes one of priorities. Is it worth an extra $2,500/year to drive a Navigator rather than a CRV? To me, it is, especially since those first-generation Navigators can be had for chump change, while CRVs are a pretty costly proposition. And the CRV doesn't come close to the Navigator's luxury, comfort, towing capacity, and interior space.
Finally, there's the related question of wasting a non-renewable resource. Here's my take on that. The sooner oil becomes real-world scarce (as opposed to just being expensive), the sooner we'll get serious about finding a viable replacement. In fact, it doesn't take too much of a stretch to view the ownership of a Navigator as the fulfillment of one's patriotic duty.
--David Drucker
Note from Chris: Okay, everybody--we've already checked "Massive Sprawling SUV debate" off
our list of things to do on this blog, and I think we did it pretty well. If
anybody missed out and wants to revisit, check these two posts:
http://www.carlustblog.com/2008/04/car-lust--1973.html (the
comments)
http://www.carlustblog.com/2008/04/suv-fracas.html
I'd ask that anybody who comments on this post refrain from covering this well-trodden and blood-soaked ground. Don't refight the SUV war. Let's actually comment on what we like and dislike about the Navigator above and beyond its status as an SUV. Either that or let's indulge in the traditional amusing irrelevancy that we all enjoy from time to time.
Brian on July 28, 2008 at 08:20 PM
I think there's a "dream" of what you will do with your monster SUV, which typically would be rolling through the outback exploring undiscovered country, maybe with a little ranching thrown in. Certainly some mountaineering, mud-bogging, etc. But what you REALLY do with it is probably more like driving back & forth to work, going to the bank, going to the grocery store, and getting a pizza, usually the lone occupant of said SUV. Needless to say, using it that way with $5 gas is a liiitle bit massochistic. But what really blows my mind, is that you're hauling motorcycles with it! You're using a vehicle that gets at most 16 mpg to haul vehicles which get at least 40 mpg. Regardless of how it looks, feels, and drives, which I'm sure is superb, unless you've got loads of cash man, ride the damn bike!
Brian on July 29, 2008 at 02:42 AM
I just can't help it, this is the only viable alternative to the SUV:
http://www.amazon.com/JL421-Badonkadonk-Land-Cruiser-Tank/dp/B00067F1CE
Yep, I thought it was a joke too until I read the reviews:
http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B00067F1CE/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Freeky!
David Drucker on July 29, 2008 at 03:47 AM
Mochi & Brian: It was four full-dress touring bikes, and when I towed them it was generaly because the other three riders didn't have the extra time to ride 2500 miles (each way) to where we and our wives wanted to be. I'd pick the rest of the group up at the airport, we'd ride for a couple of weeks, and then they'd fly home. And, Brian: four bikes getting 40mpg = 10mpg.
Ian on July 29, 2008 at 08:17 AM
Anthony: "The Nav is probably the best looking of the big SUVs."
Hmm, can't say I agree there. I don't really like any of them, but I always thought the Navigator was among the ugliest. Then again, I tend not to like Lincoln styling in general.
I really can't think of anything I like about the Navigator, to be honest. It's almost as if it's the exact opposite of what I want in a car.
I'll agree with Jim that Diet Dew is awesome, though.
Steaming Pile on July 29, 2008 at 09:58 AM
I'll give you that, A.C. Lincoln did a much better job making their truck look like a Lincoln than Cadillac did making a Chevy Tahoe look like a Caddy. Maybe that's because people have this perception of Caddys as being these rolling pieces of art, much more so than a Lincoln. So just about anything Lincoln might do to an Expy to make it a Lincoln would be fair game. Just putting a Continental grille on it should suffice. Less is definitely more in this case. The new one, however, is simply godawful, trying to out-chrome Cadillac or something and getting it totally wrong. I saw a picture of it at Jalopnik or someplace, and I cringed.
That said, I still don't know why luxury makes can't just make luxury cars and leave the truck people to make the darn trucks. I don't see any of these luxo-SUVs becoming classics that people fawn over like the '59 Eldorado or an early 70s Continental (hint, hint) or a 60s T-Bird. If carmakers just stuck to what they were good at (or focused on their core competencies), everybody'd be happier, IMO. If that's a meta-comment, you can blame it on me for spoiling everybody's fun.
Nathan of Brainfertilizer Fame on July 29, 2008 at 11:12 AM
I still throw up in my mouth a little bit when I think of Oldsmobile making an SUV.
The Car Gods struck them down, though, so I suppose they got their comeuppance.
David Colborne on July 29, 2008 at 01:03 PM
Well, it's no Canyonero, but it'll do...
In all seriousness, I kind of agree with Dave on this one - it's not something I would lust for, but it does seem to be well suited to do its job, which is basically fit the role of "Personal Luxury Vehicle" in a way that a CAFE-adhering car simply can't anymore. Let's face it - even if Detroit thought a super-boat Cadillac or equivalent would sell, they're not allowed to make them anymore, so they make these instead. In that capacity, and in that light, I think the Navigator isn't a bad road to travel down. Sure, it's kind of ugly, but it's not like '70s luxury boxen were particularly attractive, either.
sillypickle on July 29, 2008 at 02:37 PM
It does my heart good to see the word boxen used in everyday internet conversation.
Mochi Mochi on July 30, 2008 at 08:00 AM
"Boxen"/bok'sn/ /pl.n./ [by analogy with VAXen] Fanciful plural of box often encountered in the phrase `Unix boxen', used to describe commodity Unix hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable.
sillypickle on July 30, 2008 at 09:12 AM
Where did you get that definition? I got the word from Brian Regan, and never knew that it was used outside of such references.
Mochi Mochi on July 30, 2008 at 03:55 PM
"Boxen" - seems to have pretty wide use - I think I've heard it used more than once in casual tech conversation - references:
http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/b/boxen.html
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/boxen
(also CSLewis reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxen_%28C._S._Lewis%29 )
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=boxen
Anthony Cagle on August 02, 2008 at 09:24 AM
I have to admit I have never used the "-en" phraseology and am attempting to live my entire life without doing so. And I was a VAX geek for quite a while. But then, I never read LOTR or played D&D either.
OldCarGuy on August 05, 2008 at 05:36 AM
David Drucker: "In today's brave new world of five-buck gas and energy-related panic, it borders on dangerous to admit to lusting after a three-ton station wagon."
Heh. I admit that I did a double-take to determine whether this was Car Lust or Car Disgust. Though I'm not a fan of the Navigator's styling, still I'm glad it was the former.
David Drucker: "I can't testify to the Nav's high-speed handling in the twisties, because I'm not an idiot. I call it a wagon, but know, deep within, that it's a high center-of-gravity SUV. As such, it has to be driven with respect, along with an awareness of the laws of both physics and unintended consequences. At prudent speeds--i.e., not much higher than the posted limits--it handled the curves without any drama."
Well stated.
David Drucker: "The question then becomes one of priorities. Is it worth an extra $2,500/year to drive a Navigator rather than a CRV? To me, it is, especially since those first-generation Navigators can be had for chump change, while CRVs are a pretty costly proposition. And the CRV doesn't come close to the Navigator's luxury, comfort, towing capacity, and interior space."
We own big and small vehicles, so we are fortunate to be able to choose according to the needs of the trip. We just returned from a 2,500 mile trip in the 2000 Suburban 4X4, interior loaded with people, dogs, coolers and gear, and the roof loaded with luggage. The Suburban performed flawlessly. It was smooth, quiet, comfortable and cool, thanks to GM's typically wonderful air-conditioning. We got 16 mpg. A friend's minivan, which doesn't hold or haul as much, got a little over 20 mpg. There is a time and place for a full-sized SUV to shine. Thank you, David, for bringing this one to light. And for giving me an idea for a possible car lust piece of my own.
soccer mom on September 09, 2008 at 03:25 PM
Dang!! I'm about to buy my first Nav in the morning (2002), and I feel like an idiot! Well, at first I was pleased as punch, but after reading Rob's comments, I feel not only like I need to find another vehicle, but rather STUPID!!
I am a mom of 5, (yes, some play soccer) wife and primary caretaker of my mother. Sure, maybe I do need a mini van, but the Navigator seems to provide more room and other things that the mini vans just could not.
Heck, am I really making that big of a mistake? I mean, assuming you all are 'grown up guys', is it really a bad choice or do you have something to gain from all the negative talk?
That Car Guy on October 27, 2008 at 08:15 AM
I just don't understand the "Bling" thing. Why buy a Navigator when an Expedition is virtually the same thing, and the accelerated depreciation of the Lincoln would buy you a nice second car (Probably new!)?
Cherry Emery on September 25, 2009 at 05:54 AM
Really nice fetchers,nice interior and nice blogging .
http://crash456.blog.co.uk/2009/09/25/new-cars-vis-a-vis-old-cars-7037795/
JuWan L. Harris on October 26, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Hi,
I love Navigators. I'm getting a Navigator just like the one on the picture. My aunt has 2 of them;a blue 98, and a Silver 01.