2017 Lincoln MKT

midsize luxury SUV / 4-door SUV

2017 Lincoln MKT 4-door SUV

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Moderate overlap front
Side
Roof strength
Head restraints & seats

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Headlights (varies by trim/option)
Front crash prevention
Optional system
Basic

Child seat anchors

LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

  • Standard blind spot detection
  • Optional lane departure warning
  • Optional lane departure prevention

Key

  • G
    Good
  • A
    Acceptable
  • M
    Marginal
  • P
    Poor
  • Superior
  • Advanced
  • Basic

Some ratings use a scale of Poor to Good. Others range from Basic to Superior.

Moderate overlap front

Rating applies to 2010-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2010 Lincoln MKT 4-door 4wd

The Lincoln MKT was introduced in the 2010 model year. It is structurally similar to the Ford Flex. Frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Ford as part of frontal crash test verification.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics
Technical measurements for this test

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

Test ID VTF0822
Footwell intrusion
Footrest (cm) 7
Left (cm) 11
Center (cm) 14
Right (cm) 12
Brake pedal (cm) 4
Instrument panel rearward movement
Left (cm) 6
Right (cm) 5
Steering column movement
Upward (cm) 0
Rearward (cm) 6
A-pillar rearward movement (cm) 2

Driver injury measures

Test ID VTF0822
Head
HIC-15 194
Peak gs at hard contact no contact
Neck
Tension (kN) 1.5
Extension bending moment (Nm) 9
Maximum Nij 0.35
Chest maximum compression (mm) 44
Legs
Femur force - left (kN) 1.9
Femur force - right (kN) 1.2
Knee displacement - left (mm) 0
Knee displacement - right (mm) 0
Maximum tibia index - left 0.41
Maximum tibia index - right 0.47
Tibia axial force - left (kN) 1.2
Tibia axial force - right (kN) 3.5
Foot acceleration (g)
Left 57
Right 129

How the moderate overlap front test is conducted

Side

Rating applies to 2010-19 models

Tested vehicle: 2010 Lincoln MKT 4-door 4wd with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and standard front seat-mounted torso airbags

The Lincoln MKT was introduced in the 2010 model year. It is structurally similar to the Ford Flex. Side ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Ford as part of side crash test verification.

Rating applies to 2010-19 models

Tested vehicle:2010 Lincoln MKT 4-door 4wd

The Lincoln MKT was introduced in the 2010 model year. It is structurally similar to the Ford Flex. Side ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Ford as part of side crash test verification.

Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Driver head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Rear passenger head protection
Technical measurements for this test

Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side

Test ID VTS0903
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm) -8.5
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Driver injury measures

Test ID VTS0903
Head HIC-15 101
Neck
Tension (kN) 0.8
Compression (kN) 0.8
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 27
Lateral force (kN) 1.3
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 31
Average deflection (mm) 26
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 2.70
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.40
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 1.6
Acetabulum force (kN) 1.6
Combined force (kN) 3.2
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 0.2
L-M moment (Nm) 84
A-P moment (Nm) 13

Passenger injury measures

Test ID VTS0903
Head HIC-15 139
Neck
Tension (kN) 0.1
Compression (kN) 0.3
Shoulder
Lateral deflection (mm) 14
Lateral force (kN) 1.0
Torso
Maximum deflection (mm) 27
Average deflection (mm) 23
Maximum deflection rate (m/s) 3.10
Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) 0.20
Pelvis
Iliac force (kN) 0.3
Acetabulum force (kN) 2.7
Combined force (kN) 2.8
Left femur
L-M force (kN) 0.3
L-M moment (Nm) 81
A-P moment (Nm) 31

How the side crash test is conducted

Roof strength

Rating applies to 2010-19 models built after March 2010

Tested vehicle: 2010 Lincoln MKT 4-door 4wd

Overall evaluation
Curb weight 4,899 lbs
Peak force 21,010 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio 4.29

How the roof strength test is conducted

Head restraints & seats

Rating applies to 2011-19 models

Seat type: Power leather seats

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry
Technical measurements for this test
Seat type Power leather seats
Geometry
Backset (mm) 34
Distance below top of head (mm) 26
Seat design parameters
Pass/fail Pass
Max T1 acceleration (g) 10.4
Head contact time (ms) 63
Force rating 1
Neck forces
Max neck shear force (N) 77
Max neck tension (N) 554

How the head restraint & seat test is conducted

Front crash prevention

System details

  • Optional Collision Warning with Brake Support

Package name

  • Optional 201A + Adaptive Cruise Control and Collision Warning with Brake Support for 2014 Models
  • Optional Technology Package for 2015 to 2018 Models

Applies to 2014-19 models

Overall evaluation

  • This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
  • Autobrake not available.
Basic
Basic
with optional equipment

How front crash prevention is evaluated

Headlights

Trim level(s)

  • All trims
Low-beam headlight type HID projector
High-beam headlight type HID projector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:
car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler car-simpler 0 ft 100 ft 200 ft 300 ft 400 ft 500 ft 600 ft Low beams Optimal low-beam illumination High beams Optimal high-beam illumination High-beam assist credit

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual right curve, fair on the sharp right curve and inadequate on both left curves.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was fair on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was fair on the gradual right curve and inadequate on the sharp right and both left curves.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and all 4 curves.

Technical measurements for this test
Trim level(s)
  • All trims
Low-beam headlight type HID projector
High-beam headlight type HID projector
Curve-adaptive? Yes
High-beam assist? Yes
Overall rating
Applies to 2017-19 models
LOW BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Amount glare
exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge 95.2 m None
Straightaway left edge 44.8 m None
250m radius right curve, right edge 65.8 m None
250m radius left curve, left edge 42.5 m None
150m radius right curve, right edge 52.8 m None
150m radius left curve, left edge 39.6 m None
HIGH BEAMS Average minimum useful
illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge 135.4 m
Straightaway left edge 117.6 m
250m radius right curve, right edge 70.3 m
250m radius left curve, left edge 61.6 m
150m radius right curve, right edge 53.2 m
150m radius left curve, left edge 49.0 m

How headlights are evaluated

Child seat anchors

Applies to 2017-19 models

Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim Reserve
Seat type leather

This vehicle has 3 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

1 3 6 4
G Good
A Acceptable
M Marginal
P Poor
Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol
Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol
Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol
Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
No hardware available

Details by seating position

1
Tether anchor
hard-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
easy to maneuver around anchors
3
Tether anchor
hard-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
easy to maneuver around anchors
4
Tether anchor
hard-to-find location
other hardware could be confused for anchor
Lower anchors
not too deep in seat
not too much force needed to attach
easy to maneuver around anchors
Technical measurements for this test

Seat position 21

3

Lower anchor A
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 2-4
Force (lbs) 33
Clearance angle (degrees) 59
Lower anchor B
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 2-4
Force (lbs) 30
Clearance angle (degrees) 64
Tether anchor
Location Bottom seatback
Confusing hardware present Yes
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

Seat position 23

1

Lower anchor A
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 2-4
Force (lbs) 21
Clearance angle (degrees) 63
Lower anchor B
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 2-4
Force (lbs) 19
Clearance angle (degrees) 56
Tether anchor
Location Bottom seatback
Confusing hardware present Yes
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

Seat position 33

4

Lower anchor A
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) 0-2
Force (lbs) 8
Clearance angle (degrees) 87
Lower anchor B
Open access rated No
Depth (cm) -2-0
Force (lbs) 25
Clearance angle (degrees) 88
Tether anchor
Location Bottom seatback
Confusing hardware present Yes
Has contrasting label
within 3 inches of tether anchor
No

How child seat anchors are evaluated