I'm planing to buy a conti 2000. I've never had lincoln. The only thing that stoping me from buying is the car reliability . I heard that they are very high maint. Is that true?
please help :confused:

Its not that the car is high maint. but the parts to fix the car are expensive. The only thing that goes wrong in the car is air bags but since its a 2000, it only has bags in the back(good thing), so less expensive to fix even if it breaks down. It should be ok since its a 2000. another thing is the tranny, make sure it has been taken care of.

which one is more reliable? Lincoln Conti 2000 or Cadillac De Ville 2000?
please help.

IMO, the Continental is more reliable then the Cadillac. The problem areas are the transmissions and the rear bags (as previously stated). But neither are that big of a problem if you maintain your car, get your fluids changed often and keep the car free from salt as much as possible. Here in NY, that's hard, but I do wash my car often in the winter to help prevent the salt from degrading the rear bags (98 and newer only had rear bags).

Cadillacs tend to have more electronic and engine troubles, but they're both fairly reliable, but both have very expensive replacement parts.

Thank you guys for the help.:)