(first posted 6/21/2013) Hangovers cannot be explained to the uninitiated. After a good long period of having pure merriment, you awake to find yourself regretting having ever been born. Despite all your desire to curl up and disappear, you cannot; your only alternative is to get up and make the best of it. What’s over is over, it’s time to face the music, the fat lady has sung – all of those tired cliches now come into play.
Lincoln had its own hangover in 1980. The late 1970’s had been very good to the Lincoln Division with the Mark V selling over 72,000 units annually from 1977 to 1979,
and the four door Continental selling around the 70,000 mark for those same years.
Then the ugly monster of a hangover set in for 1980; it’s name was CAFE.
Lincoln was courteous enough to ease everyone into the letdown. Well, perhaps that’s arguable, but the King Kong of Ford big blocks – the 7.5 liter, 460 cubic inch V8 – was terminated at the end of 1978, leaving only the 159 horsepower 400 cubic inch V8 as motivation in 1979. Think of it as that hiccup you get at the height of inebriation; you know what’s coming next and it will certainly put a damper on the fun.
Enter the 1980 Lincoln Continental.
This is the Lincoln that comes about after the doctor tells you to lose weight since you’ve been drinking too many empty calories and have become way to portly. Knowing you need to lose some of that beer belly, and knowing Dr. Uncle Sam has a lot of influence, the folks at Lincoln put the Continental on a serious weight loss program (a reaction can be found here).
Ten inches of wheelbase and a half-ton later, along with being bolted to a Panther platform, the new Continental (rechristened as Town Car for the ’81 model year) offered as much interior room as it ever had. Motivation, if you want to call it that, was by a 129 horsepower 302 or, in 1980 only, a 140 horsepower 351 cubic inch V8. Drag racers they were not.
Initial reaction by the buying public was much akin to the reaction one gets after losing one-quarter of their body weight: It looked good but people didn’t recognize it. This, mixed and stirred with a putrid economy in the United States, helped drive Lincoln sales downwards by around two-thirds. The only silver lining in that otherwise gray cloud was everybody else’s sales were down also. Lincoln would rebound for 1982, the year of our featured car.
I found this particular Lincoln at the Loafer’s Car Show in Hannibal. Lincoln, the creator of the seemingly never ending array of designer series cars in the 1970’s, was keeping the tradition going with 1982 having base, Signature Series, and Cartier Edition Town Cars for one’s motoring pleasure.
Seeing this Lincoln was a welcome sight amongst all the modified Hupmobiles, Camaro’s, and late model stuff that I didn’t bother with.
Back when my parent’s owned their most awesome ’78 PlymouthVolare, I got to spend many Saturday’s with my father at the Chrysler dealer for warranty work. It was about this time the dealer hedged its bets and branched out into a Ford-Lincoln-Mercury franchise. Of course, I always sat in each of the three cars in the showroom where there was always a Lincoln Town Car in one corner, a Chrysler Fifth Avenue in the other, and a wildcard parked behind the Chrysler.
What I then took as the quiet sophistication and overall elegance of this generation of Lincoln Town Car has always stuck with me. I even remember one particular Lincoln that was about this same color with a badge on it that said “Automatic Overdrive”. I thought the Town Car was the height of opulence; this thought was only enhanced when
I attended the 1982 World’s Fair in Knoxville, Tennessee. What should be parked in the garage of the “Home of Tomorrow” exhibit? None other than a Lincoln Town Car in the very color of our featured Town Car. And, wonder of wonders, it had a cellular telephone mounted in it; just hit a button and talk into the sun visor! It seemed Buck Rogers might even be envious.
This version of Town Car stuck around throughout the 1980’s, its only revision being a tweak of the corners for 1985. During that decade, as Lincoln would sell scads of these, I maintained my complete and utter awe of these cars. Being fortunate enough to ride in a number of them, it was the type of car I strived to possess as an adult. Yet when the thoroughly redesigned 1990 model arrived, these suddenly looked so last decade and like a shirt that had been left in the dryer too long.
Not certain which year it began, but I think these things look bare w/o the “Carriage Roof” option.
Two “designer facts” about Lincoln:
1. In the seventies, FoMoCo approached clothing designer Halston for one of their original Mark IV designer series. Apparently Halston did not like the color combination they chose for his version, so he was out.
2. In 1989, the Town Car was to offer a Gucci Edition trim. I guess the Gucci people backed out at the last minute because it was listed in some pricing guides but never materialized.
Trivia: The 1987 Town Car was the first production car available with a built-in factory CD player.
1985 Lincoln Town Car Signature Series – shown with optional Carriage Roof and Wire Spoke Wheels:
I know Halston was doing work for Braniff at the time so maybe he was too busy. Pucci did a lot of work for Braniff too but was eased out in favor of Halston in the mid 70s. I don’t know if that had anything to do with him not going with Lincoln, I can’t imagine a cat fight in the designer world.
As far as I know, the designers chose their themes within reason. Unless that situation was unique to Halston.
Cadillac has Gucci Sevilles in 79 and 80.
Gucci Sevilles were aftermarket though, they were really well done, factory like, but they were done by a company down here in Miami I believe.
Yes “Carmine”, you are correct.
In 1978, we were in Beverly Hills and there was one of these sitting on Rodeo Drive right in front of the Gucci store. I now know what the ultimate in paradise is like.
P.S. I would kill to find one of these!!!
Re: first car with CD player- My 1986 Mazda RX7 GXL came with a factory in-dash CD player, along with the cassette and radio.
A contrary opinion, if you please. For two wonderful years, my father drove a white 1978 Lincoln Town Coupe. It was my favorite of all his cars. Then it was traded on a white 1980 Town Coupe. That was my least favorite of all his cars.
When these came out, I considered them downright ugly. The coupe was even worse. The cars looked like they had been styled with no tools but a straightedge and a compass for doing the perfectly round wheel openings. This was not a Lincoln. This was a cheap imitation of a Lincoln. These would not get any real traction until Cadillac went fwd in 1985, when these suddenly became “traditional luxury”.
It took me years to come to terms with these. I eventually came to tolerate them, but I never really loved them. These plateaued in my mind as a box Panther with a little more rear legroom and nicer seats. A perfect substitute for a Crown Victoria – which is the better deal or in better condition.
One small nit to pick, when the fuel situation went to hell in the summer of 1979 with prices spiking and regional shortages and gas lines, sales of the big ’79 Lincolns plunged. The model year was as good as it was only because the first 3/4 of the model year had been decent. There were a lot of leftover ’79s sitting on dealer lots for quite awhile after the ’80 models came out.
When these came out, I considered them downright ugly. The coupe was even worse. The cars looked like they had been styled with no tools but a straightedge and a compass for doing the perfectly round wheel openings. This was not a Lincoln. This was a cheap imitation of a Lincoln. These would not get any real traction until Cadillac went fwd in 1985, when these suddenly became “traditional luxury”.
You saved me having to say the exact same thing. Thanks!
I will add that the these, and the early box Panthers just didn’t “fit” on their underpinnings properly. Maybe the wheelbase was a couple of inches too short, or? But the difference in the fundamental design between GM’s and Ford’s downsized full-sizers was rather remarkable. The biggest single problem was that the Panther had its front wheels set further back, creating too much front overhang. That’s for starters…
All the ” luxury” tac from the pre 1980 models did not scale down well on the 80 model and made them look.like a clown car. What was FoMoC o thinking off?.
A friend of mine’s mother had one of these TCs. It was like riding in a leather-swaddled cloud. We would use it to go to band rehearsal on occasion, and the mantra “Don’t slam the trunk!” still rings in my ears.
I liked these but then I was always part of the anti-H crowd. I realized the GM H-platform was much more modern and fuel/space efficient but when you parked an 85 Town Car next to an 85 Olds 88/98 the Oldsmobile looked like the world’s nicest A-body Cutlass Ciera.
I’ve wanted one of these for many years just for the upright Rolls Royce rip-off grille, carriage lamps, vinyl top, every brougham-y styling cue rolled up into one.
I definitely agree with you on that. In so many car comparison situations, it’s a battle between practicality and outward appearance.
The Mark VI is even more, it has the oval opera window, fake gills, hidden headlamps and the tire hump.
These cars are still everywhere! Many of them in pristine condition. My friend’s dad growing up owned a navy blue one with navy leather for a number of years. I believe it was an ’88 model. We used to pretend we were riding in a limo when we rode around in it.
I always liked the stately presence of these Town Cars, and still do. As with the other 1st generation Panthers, their slab-sides and narrow track make them look like they should not be able to move. Continuing the floating living room look of their predecessors. However, I always preferred these Town Cars to the 80’s RWD DeVille and Fleetwood/Brougham. Though those Cadillacs certainly looked more road worthy, they couldn’t match the presence of the Town Car with their bigger stand-up grille and blade-like front corners.
A few years ago I opted to not go to a local estate auction. A friend did. He told me there was an immaculate ’86 Town Car for auction that was not on the flyer. It was a gold/champagne color with just a wee bit over 50,000 miles. The auctioneer had to work to get it to sell for $500.
I worked for Budget Rent A Car in this era. They famously had the $39.99 a day Town Car.
Am I the only one who thinks the 4 door looks nicer as it breaks up the otherwise huge rear panel?I saw a very straight dark blue Town Car like this being driven by a John Lennon look a like on a visit to Blackpool!
Of the box Panther Continental-Town Cars, I prefer the 1980-84 version to the slant-backed version that followed. I like the sharp edges on the front and rear fenders and the recessed rear lights. The 1985-89 model was probably more reliable with the EFI engine, and certainly by the numbers is much more frequently seen on the road today than the 80-84.
I never did understand the strategy going on at Ford in the early 80s. If you’re Lincoln in 1979, my understanding is the Connie is the bread and butter model (Town Car a top trim version, Ford’s “Fleetwood”), the Mark V the personal luxury car, and the Versailles the compact “Seville-Benz fighter” (wishful thinking, I know).
Then comes 1980-81…the Panther Continental is renamed the Town Car (bread and butter model), the Panther Mark VI is the personal luxury coupe, and yet it comes in a 4 door version which from everything I can see was identical in dimensions and powerplant to the Town Car, just with different trim, then in 1982 they introduce the Fox Continental to replace the Versailles as the Seville-Benz fighter. I don’t have the hate for the Mark VI that many do, but I never understood the idea of the 4-door version when you already had the Town Car out there. Probably why the Mark VII was so different, customers probably didn’t get the point either.
An unrelated comment: Certainly Ford had the downsizing hangover just like GM and Chrysler but I will say that I don’t think the 1975-79 Lincolns looked “bloated” quite like the GMs of that ERA did. When I look at a ’76 DeVille I really do see a big, bloated vehicle. I believe another commenter once referred to the ’71-’76 GMs as “jellybean” models and I can definitely see that.
Conversely, the last big Connies wore their size well. They didn’t look “bloated” so much as “imposing”. I think it was the slab sides and the generally square shape, a shape that would continue into the 80s on both the B/Cs and the Panthers. So while clearly CAFE and Oil Crisis Part Deux made the downsize necessary, I never thought the Lincolns needed it in an aesthetic sense like the DeVille, Eighty Eight, etc. did.
For 1980 Lincoln really wanted to double up on models, similar to what Cadillac did in 1980 also, Cadillac came out with a Fleetwood Coupe, which was pretty much a Coupe deVille wtih Fleetwood trim and a thick landau roof
Deville-coupe/sedan vs TownCar coupe/sedan
Fleetwood coupe/sedan vs Mark VI coupe/sedan
I imagine these choices were made before the Versailles was ditched, there was supposed to be a 2nd gen Versailles ready to go for 1980-81 too, but that was delayed and the Fox Continental replaced, I think that the low sales of the early Panther big Lincolns, combined with the Versailles becoming the Continental, the dropping of the Town Coupe, and then the new Mark VII resulted in a more cohesive line up with the Town Car, Continental and Mark VII by 1984.
Ahh, so the Mark VI sedan was supposed to be the “Fleetwood”…that actually makes sense because having shrunk the Continental (“shrunk” should be the correct tense here) perhaps they were afraid merely adding a “Town Car” trim option wouldn’t be enough, the top of the line 4-door had to look different.
Perhaps it was an attempt to compete with Cadillac too…after all the Fleetwood sedan of 1980 was really identical to the DeVille except for the limousine–ahem “formal”–rear window and some different trim. I suppose Ford thought if they made a Mark VI 4-door for their “Fleetwood” at least it’d be a little different looking on the outside than their bread and butter car other than a smaller rear window and some script as was the case at GM.
I actually think the Mark VI 4-door is a pretty good looking car.
Still waiting for the CC on the Mark VI…if the aqua coupe was still around the town where I grew up, I’d get some pictures of that, but haven’t seen it in about 10 years now.
Some of my earliest driving was done behind the wheel of my old man’s black over grey Mark VI sedan, I went around a corner so fast one time and the car leaned so much I thought the driver side mirror was going to hit the street.
There was no other option for Ford really, I imagine that Lincoln management wasn’t ready to slide the Mark down to the Fox chassis for 1980, though that would have been the logical outcome since it was a platform mate to the Thunderbird/Cougar, this was probably a good move since the 80-82 Fox T-Bird/Cougar was not popular at all.
I guess they thought, if were going to use the Panther, lets try a 4 door Mark, if the Versailles replacement had been ready for 80-81, I imagine that the Mark may have remained a coupe.
There was the CFI fuel injection starting in 1981. It was a throttle body style system and is pretty reliable. Its two short comings are that they allowed a very large adaptability of fuel control IE the computer was able to add and subtract a large amount of fuel from it’s base setting. So when the single O2 sensor would start going it would “learn” to be so rich that eventually it wouldn’t run. Early Chrysler systems had the same problem. The other problem was that it was a 9v computer so during cranking with a weak battery the computer can have problems due to insufficient voltage. The first GM systems were also 9v.
However the port EFI 5.0 is better and people actually learned how to work on them and their OBD system was much more user friendly for technicians outside of a Ford shop. They are still everywhere around here too, far more common than Caddys of the era.
The problem with the Chrysler system was the opposite. My 81 Imperial still sports its original EFI which I have successfully kept running flawlessly (and it is a joy to drive!). Chrysler’s system was problem to run lean, a common trick on Chrysler cars (Imperial or just 318s with O2s) was to disconnect the O2 which would make them run in open loop with a slightly higher enrichment that was used during cold starts and warm up. The stoichiometric tolerances on the Imperial were so close many cars went into what was termed “Lean Lock” where they would stall without pedal application. That is what primarily caused Chrysler to offer to retrofit cars to carburetors, rather than pure mechanical failure. The overly lean mixture was dialed into the computer in an effort to squeeze the most MPG out of the car at cruise as well as help control NOx which was the biggest obstacle in tuning the engine for EPA certification. The NOx problem also was the primary reason why the 318 was used instead of the 360. The 360 was the intended motor for the car during development and testing. Chrysler reengineered a lot of the parts for the EFI system in the late 1980s and released updated ECM modules that helped tremendously.
As for Ford EEC III, I have much more experience with EEC IV (as most do), but from what I understand a lot of that run rich was due to various vacuum leaks that got covered up by the system adapting to the leak. On carb systems, mechanics were forced to find vacuum leaks because that was the only way to make the car run smooth. With computers, the computer would adjust for the perceived air flow, but depending on where the vacuum leak occurred it would occur during different load conditions and at different times (depending on EGR application) which would cause intermittent rich conditions.
The fuel injection system on the Chrysler Imperial was actually 23v. There was a power module in the hydraulic plate that converted base voltage to high voltage and distributed it.
By early Chrysler systems I was referring to the common wide spread systems not the unique Imperial system.
On the EECIII it was a slowly dying O2 that made it run richer and richer until if floods. Not sure what the LT and ST fuel trims that were allowed since live data was not possible w/o the Ford tool. The early common Chryslers allowed 30% on both which was enough to flood the engine. Seen both do it more than once. Later Ford systems and the common GM systems limited the fuel trims to around 20% which prevents that so rich it floods condition from occurring.
So, my 1981 Lincoln Town Car has been running extremely rich to the point that it floods itself. you seem to know what you’re talking about when it comes to ford tbi. Hopefully you can help me out. one of the injectors is pumping too much gas which is causing the flooding. My mechanic swapped it out for a new one to no avail. I also replaced a faulty O2 sensor to no avail. Do you think you could help me out with this problem? How many O2 sensors do I have and where might they be located?
The Ford CFI system like other early EFI systems has only 1 O2 sensor and it is located in the passenger side exhaust manifold.
The fact that you say that only one injector is spraying too much fuel means that it is not an issue with the O2 sensor. Each injector is responsible for providing fuel for 4 cylinders. They are divided so that it feeds 2 on each bank. That way the O2 sensor sees an average of both injector’s fuel delivery.
If replacing the injector did not solve the problem then the next thing to do would be to swap the injectors and make sure that it is still that side that continues to provide too much fuel. If the injector that is supplying too much fuel stays on that side the next step would be to carefully check the wiring between that injector and the computer. There is always power to the injector when the vehicle is on and the computer opens the injector by providing the ground. So a short on the signal side can cause the injector to open w/o the computer commanding it to open. If there is no short then the most likely problem would be the computer itself.
Is it likely that the computer would be signaling one injector to spray too much and not the other one? It seems since if they are in-sync they’d be being commanded to spray by the same signal, not two separate signals. Also, would you know where the computer is located?
I will call my mechanic in the morning and tell him what you just told me.
And thanks, not many people know what you know about such an obscure fuel system.
The V engine CFI systems are “2 channel” ie there are separate drivers (transistors) for each injector. They actually alternate their firing A-B-A-B ect. The computer does only use one set of sensors to determine the pulse length for both injectors. Which is why if it is not a short it almost certainly has to be an internal problem in the computer.
If the mechanic has a modern automotive oscilloscope he can check and compare the length of the pulse commanded to each injector.
Do you have an idea where the ECU is located and what it might look like? I think the car has a EEC-III computer from 1978 from research online but I’m not sure. My mechanic agrees that the problem lays in the wires or the computer itself.
This is exactly what happened to a TBI-equipped ’86 2.8V6 Blazer I had. One of the two injectors “stuck” open and dumped huge quantities of fuel down the intake, enough to kill the engine unless the throttle was held wide open.
The culprit was a shorted injector driver in the ECM that supplied a constant 12V to the one injector, holding it open. A used ECM got me back on the road again.
I have a suspicion that the “held-open” injector itself may have begun failing and developed a low internal resistance…possibly placing too much load on the ECM driver causing it to fail…much like a low impedance speaker can take out some amplifiers.
I agree that replacing the ECM will probably fix Will’s problem…replacing the injector was probably a good move IMO.
Yes the CFI engines from 1983 and earlier used a version of the EEC-III computer. I can’t say for certain on the location of the computer on the Lincoln that year but in general in that era Ford put them behind the passenger side kick panel or under the dash on the passenger side.
I agree with Junkboi that an internal short in the injector could overload the injector driver causing it to fail but before replacing the computer I would make certain that there is not a short in the wiring. A quick test is to disconnect the computer and injector and using an ohm meter to see if there is any continuity between the signal wire and ground.
Mmm, mmm, mmm, I am loving Lincoln week here at CC! Growing up in the land of Kiwis, we of course didn’t get Lincolns, but I distinctly remember when I saw my first Panther Town Car – it was in a book entitled “American Cars” that I got out of the town library as an 10 year old in 1984. It included photos of an ’82 chocolate-brown TC and an ’82 bustle-back chocolate-brown Conti. I studied the two pics for hours, trying to imagine myself in each car, and working out which I liked best. I didn’t know what wheel track was then, but I knew the TC’s (gorgeous turbine) wheels were tucked a bit too far inside. Nevertheless, it was the TC 10-year-old me vastly preferred over the Conti – I mean the TC had presence man! Still does in fact, and every time I see one come up for sale locally (we have a few private used imports here now), I am sorely tempted. When I look in depth at aspects of the design – eg front overhang, narrow track – I think it shouldn’t work. Yet somehow it did then, and still does now as a Curbside classic!
There are a few out there. I remember riding in a stretched 80’s Town Car at a relatives wedding many years ago.
Shrank? Shrunk? Shrinked?
My head hurts.
The down-sizing of the Lincoln was pretty much inevitable since there was no way to go but down; they certainly couldn’t make the thing any bigger. The real problem with the 1980 cars is the didn’t have their own style. Ford was simply trying to pass off what was seen as “traditional luxury” in a much smaller package. The car didn’t have its own unique design language and instead seemed like a hotch-podge of styling cues from the past slathered on liberally.
It didn’t help that the cars didn’t drive very well. Seems that Ford though they could make a 3800 lb Lincoln ride like a 4800 lb Lincoln and went with an ultra-soft suspension that floated and bounded all over the place. Added to the gutless engines and horrid AOD, it just didn’t make for a very nice car. The Cadillac of the era was in fact surprisingly good driving car. It was, for its day, quite well buttoned down and felt much better on the road.
It is no surprise these things didn’t sell since the really weren’t worth the money.
The big issue with the AOD in the early 80s was the tendency of equipped cars to stall during panic braking. That was well documented by the enthusiast rags who noticed it when doing their brake testing. The AOD transmission did not uncouple in lock up in OD when emergency braking was applied and when the car reached a low enough speed, it stalled. Of course that caused the loss of power steering, and eventually the assist for the brakes. While it never created a dangerous situation as what happened with the X cars at the time, it was somewhat of a controversial topic for Ford.
http://books.google.com/books?id=kY7Uj6pCZ0oC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Popular+Science+April+1980&hl=en&sa=X&ei=B9HEUf7wM-ryyAHLu4GADQ&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Popular%20Science%20April%201980&f=false
Page 38
That is a very interesting article. Their thoughts on the Chev vs Ford certainly don’t jive with the common opinions around here.
“The LTD was the shortest car in this group, yet the roomiest….”
“With just the base suspension (LTD), it gave about the best combined ride and handling…”
“The (LTD) steering, ride and on-the-road handling were good and markedly superior to the Caprice.”
“The (Caprice) steering was vague and imprecise, and the car was susceptible to both bump and roll steer….”
I loved these early box LTDs. The ones with HD suspension were the best. In my taxi driving days I drove an LTD cop car for a summer and it just stormed. The visibility and low cowl made the cars nice to drive, too. The later ones, like 1990, were great prairie cars. In fact, I know several prairie guys who had them. They were all 302 with the FI set-up, HD suspension and the much improved AOD. Now the lovey Caravans, believe it or not. I was riding on one last time I was there and it actually sailed down the long highways very well.
“Motivation, if you want to call it that, was by a 129 horsepower 302 or, in 1980 only, a 140 horsepower 351 cubic inch V8.”
I don’t have any reference handy, but I thought that the 351 continued to be available to the general public through 1981 in all of the Panthers. (After ’81 Panther 351s still existed, but only in Ford and Mercury police package models.)
I believe that GM dropped the 350 from B-bodies after 1979, and from C-bodies after 1980. The Olds and Buick wagons, which switched from the C-body to the B-body in 1977 but continued to use the same engine lineup as their C-body stablemates for a few years after that, may have also continued to offer the 350 through 1980. Like Lincoln, Cadillac used a larger engine through 1979, then went to the smaller 368 in 1980-81. Unlike Lincoln, Cadillac didn’t offer a sub-350 CID engine until 1982.
I’m not sure what the last year was for the 360 in Chrysler R-bodies. I’m thinking 1980?
1980 was the last year for the 360 in the 49 state R-bodies; 1979 was the last year for California models.
The resource I had listed 1980 as the last year for the 351 powered Lincoln’s; there could have been a few 5.8’s in the ’81 models.
I pulled out my copy of the “Standard Catalog” to see what it says.
On the FoMoCo front, it shows that the 351 wasn’t offered in Lincolns in 1981, so I have to take back what I said earlier. Oddly, though, it shows that the 351 was still offered in ’81 in the LTD and Marquis, which seems counterintuitive. The text covering the Marquis states that in non-police models, it was only available with the trailer towing package. The LTD text doesn’t say that, but if it’s accurate for the Marquis, it’s probably true for the LTD as well. Could this explain why the 351 was offered in lowly Fords and Mercurys in 1981 but not in Lincolns? Was there no towing package available in Lincolns, or was the 351/towing package combo intended mainly for wagons (which Lincoln didn’t have)?
On the GM side of things, the Standard Catalog indicates that the 350 was offered in all fullsize Oldsmobiles and Buicks (both B-bodies and C-bodies) through 1980. It shows that the 350 was dropped from fullsize Chevrolets after 1979. The same seems to have been generally true of fullsize Pontiacs, although the 1980 Pontiac entry suggests that the 350 may have still had some limited availability in fullsize ’80 Pontiacs. A list of engines in the text doesn’t mention the 350, but an engine availability chart shows it having been available in California and in Safaris (or pehaps this means California Safaris?).
The Standard Catalog shows 1980 as the last year for the 360 in Chrysler R-bodies, as Jason stated earlier.
“Unlike Lincoln, Cadillac didn’t offer a sub-350 CID engine until 1982.”
Didn’t they offer a V6 starting in ’80? I know the other RWD C-Bodies (98, Electra) did.
The 350 was definitely still an Electra option in 1980, there’s a commercial, which sounds like it was narrated by Regis Philbin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etqSgWqXJxs
(watch out for the “zing” of that V6…might just be able to outrun a golf cart from a red light)
Cadillac going to the 4.1 V8 and the ‘look alike’ FWD DeVilles helped Lincoln make a huge comeback in the mid 80’s.
Big car buyers got used to the size, for one, and gobbled up Panthers by 1985.
I like the box. Owned an 85 and a 86, the 86 came first. Getting used to it took some doing with too many things like the lights dimming and brightening automatically. Thought I was going to get shot before I got that adjusted. Then there was the blind spot that just about got me killed. Loved the wing windows even though the missing turn out meant that the ventilation wasn’t as good as it could have been.
Overall, now that I think about it the 86 and later EFI paired with a 351 is what they were missing. The 302 was good but I would up going to a 77 Impala wagon with a 350/350 combo because it would haul much more. I expect I would have stayed with Lincoln were it not for that.
Seeing a town car pulling a tool trailer with ladders used to freak out some of my customers. In Texas if you don’t have a truck you might not be taken seriously. Jason, I had forgotten about the 82 world fair and it brought back memories as do comments about your aunt in cut and shoot. Grangerland is about 5 miles from cut and shoot and that brought your previous story home. Good job, your stuff is very enjoyable.
My gramps was a Lincoln man starting in 64; the 83 he purchased was his final one. In 89 or so Gramma insisted they get a bloody Volvo 740 (non turbo.,.yeesh). I loved sitting in the drivers’ seat and playing with all the switches and gadgets, power everything was incredible to me (our cars were always bottom-rung impala wagons till ’88 or so). The early ones are still my favorite…I like that rear end treatment a whole lot. It was silver with grey interior. Somewhere I have a pic of g and g in front of the Lincoln in the mid-eighties, complete with pleated, puffy dress clothes…they look like members of the Reagan administration…
Except for the Mark VI 2-door was there anything uglier to come out of the 1980s?
Upright, sharp edge styling needs the scale and proportions of the Mark V to work properly. These looked tall and narrow.
The details were also a complete failure. Especially offensive were the sunken-in window frames (like all early Panthers) and those horrible, horrible wheel openings. Such a let down compared to how elegantly this area was handled on the Mark III and Mark IV.
The facing Cadillac redesign, even then in its fourth year, would go on another 12 virtually unchanged. The division must have had a party when these Lincolns came out.
After finding success in the late 1970s with large Continentals and Mark Vs, Lincoln desperately wanted to replicate that success but was severely constrained by the 1980 CAFE requirement. Cadillac was able to continue what was essentially the 77 design until the 1985 FWD models came out because they invested heavily in FWD platforms that helped their overall CAFE figure. Plus Cadillac of course tried the V864 and the HT4100 in the big cars (which the 4.1 was never conceived to be installed in) out necessity to buy time for the FWD cars. So it was interesting how all three decided to handle downsizing. Chrysler with their R cars tried to keep them looking big buy tried everything humanly possible to lose weight, GM tried an entirely new design for 1977, Ford tried to keep their look as close as possible on a smaller package.
The headaches were enormous and not what most people bought into when they signed up.
I don’t see any difference between the approach taken by GM in ’77 on the B/Cs and what Ford did with the ’79 Panther. The Panther was a copy of the GM and both were simply downsized versions of their predecessors, right down to the carryover powertrains and in the case of GM some carryover suspension parts.
GM also tried to keep their look as close as possible on a smaller package – the ’77 SDV was 100% Cadillac. The main difference between GM and Ford was that Ford’s design executions were far worse around this time. Ford lost Iacocca and I believe several key design staff to Chrysler and it showed in everything from the Fox based Futuras, Tbirds and Cougars over to the TCs and Mk VIs.
Mitchell kept an eye on Cadillac until the day he retired but no one at Ford was minding the ship. Styling entered a dark age after the Granada and did not recover until ’83. Losing design talent is a bitch.
The Fox and X-cars were both clean sheet designs and a better example of divergent downsizing philosophy.
Ford really didn’t have time to copy GM’s work unless they saw some leaked info. But you are correct that they both followed the same basic formula of following they basic archetcture of their predecessors both full and mid size and shrunk the interiors and weight to more or less where their mid sizers had grown to, but kept very similar interior dimensions as the full size. In other words they returned them to the general size of cars when they only had one car or 1959.
1959 Chev ~3700lbs, 211″ long, 80″ wide
1977 Chev ~3700lbs, 212″ long, 77″ wide
1959 Ford ~3600lbs, 208″ long, 77″ wide
1979 Ford ~3600lbs, 209″ long, 77″ wide
Yes there is a little rounding going on there and of course the weights vary depending on the exact equipment.
Mid-50s cars were more of a golden age for dimensions than late-50s cars. The tall height and resulting easy ingress/egress are closest to the modern crossovers people like so much. Shadow areas were relatively small. I bet you would find the dimension of a 2014 MKT crossover and 1954 Lincoln Capri to be quite similar.
The ’59s were longer / lower / wider and entirely different cars. A ’59 Lincoln was at least 2 inches wider, 10 inches longer and 1,500 lbs heavier than the enormous ’82 subject vehicle. OAH was about the same, which made the ’82 look tall in comparison to its height.
Cars nowadays are really tall but that gets hidden from your eye by the high beltlines and long greenhouses. BLs didn’t get much lower than on this Lincoln, which further exaggerated the height dimension, a trend at the time. The ’77 B/Cs were taller than their predecessors and it took just one recently hired ex-GM guy to make that, and the rest of the dimensions, known within Ford at least a year before design freeze on the Panthers. They were truly a copy.
Even looking at the lighter ’59 Chevys and Fords you cannot conclude the ’79s went back to any good ole day because you would be ignoring the overall length which is what can make a car so cumbersome to maneuver and park. Today’s popular models, like those from the mid-50s, are more manageable because they are shorter.
Yes the Lincolns and Caddys lost more than their lesser cousins but the overall compro is still very interesting. I didn’t mean that the 59’s were some special golden age but that they are shockingly close in overall dimensions and weight to the first down sized cars. Cars had been slowly growing larger and larger only to have the dimensions reset to where they were about 20 years with one redesign.
There’s a fatal flaw in your comparison: the 5 mph bumpers in the newer cars account for probably at least a foot of extra length. If you compare wheelbase lengths, and could measure the actual bodies (less bumpers and support/crush structure), you’d find that the downsized cars are much closer to the 1955-1956 cars than the longer/wider 1959s.
And the weight is also a mostly meaningless comparison, given the weight of the bumpers, safety equipment, and general higher level of equipment and features. Apples to Oranges.
1955 Chevy ~ 3400lbs, 197″ overall 188″ less bumpers, 74″ width 115″ wheel base
1955 Ford ~3400lbs, 199″ overall, 76″ width, 115.5 wheel base. I couldn’t find a measurement w/o bumpers for the Ford.
Definitely not an apples to apples comparison but still very interesting.
And the “clean sheet” design of GM’s FWD X bodies was the most recalled GM product in the corporation’s history, aside from GM’s current ignition switch maladies.
The best thing one can say about this vintage of Town Car is that the accompanying Mark VI’s looked even worse.
The author’s mention of the “Automatic Overdrive” badge made me chuckle.
I remember seeing these Automatic Overdrive badges on Ford Motor Company products in the day and I did not care for it. I don’t like extra or unnecessary badges on a car.
A relative of mine was a Ford executive back in the day. This very badge, Automatic Overdrive, came up in a conversation the two of us were having about tasteful automobile styling one time. My relative very seriously told me the primary reason for the badge was to jog the memory of the new car dealer sales staff to mention this feature to a potential buyer during the walk around. I felt sad for both Ford and the Ford/Lincoln salespeople. Good sales training and execution was all that was needed — an ugly additional badge was not!
(Perhaps one day we should have a CC on unnecessary, extraneous automobile badging. There are many, many examples. Drives me crazy.)
Well during the same era Park Avenues came with badging that said: 4 speed automatic. I assume it was to jog the memories of the salesmen as well…
That is both funny and sad. I never cared for them either but Ford stuck it on so many of the early cars equipped with the AOD.
I think that the “Automatic Overdrive” badge was there because it was quite a selling feature at the time. It reminded me of a time when your car would tell the public that you had an automatic transmission with a big chrome “Powerglide” or “Dynaflow” or “Ford-O-Matic” label.
The 1979 Mark V was actually longer than the 1958-’60 Lincoln…on a 10 inch shorter wheelbase. Bumpers.
I’ve always felt that the 1980 Mark VI looked like a fetal Mark V. Carrying over all the styling cues (gills, opera windows, heavy side trim, huge c pillars, formal grill and spare tire hump) on the smaller car just squished everything together without enough sheetmetal between. Add this to the short wheelbase and the large greenhouse and the results were reflected in the sales numbers.
The early 80’s was absolutely the WORST era in automotive history. Everything that Ford, Mercury and Lincoln offered back then was crap! Absolute crap! The ’80-83 Mark V was the biggest disgrace to the Lincoln brand since the Versailles. The ’82-87 RWD Continental’s with the sickening bustle backs were the last of Lincoln’s mucked up design disasters.
Enough of the mark vi hate. It is a beautiful car as is the subject car town car. A good improvement to the 85 to 89 cars is to ditch the Reagan bumpers for the better bumpers off the 80 to 84 and Save the fenders in case of an accident. The old bumpers look better too
Hands down (my biased opinion) 80-89 was one of the best looking designs for the Town Car. My 89 (in the picture) literally saved my life from a rear end collision that in a smaller car would have taken me out. I have owned several since and it is hard for me to drive almost anything else.
It’s really pitiful that Lincoln decided to go into manufacturing velvet lined shoeboxes on wheels with the ’80-89 Towncar. Ford went through some really difficult and awful times in those years with such unflattering designs. At least the Towncar in 1990 improved in the looks department when it was heavily restyled with smoother and rounder lines, but those Lincoln’s still suffered from crappy materials and spotty workmanship. That’s why the Japanese and Germans squashed Lincoln and Cadillac back in the ’80s and ’90s. And they still are today:)
Andei por algumas ruas de algumas cidades pequenas perto da fronteira com o México no Texas. Vi vários carros grandes década de 80 e 90 inativos. Minha imaginação decolou. São bairros mais pobres. Os carros foram adquiridos quase de graça e o comprador não sustentou um sonho. Até mesmo num país mais ajustado como os EUA, a fraqueza humana de origem histórica e extremamente complexa se aflora. Mas Deus existe para todos. Em meio a fraqueza humana, a história vai se fechar magnífica e justa independentemente das desigualdades que os próprios humanos deixaram acontecer.
Recently purchased a 1982 Lincoln Town Car Signature Edition, as an ol’ dude”s seasonal toy. At 71, I’d always longed for an “old classic”– one that could be driven without restoration. Although a few years ago, as a member of the Sierra Club and a lifelong environmentalist, I would’nt have considered even looking twice at such a gas guzzler. BUT….. at $4995 with new tires and (really) NO RUST, how could I say no? After driving it for a week, I’m in love! I’ve sat in less comfortable ‘Lazy Boys’ at rest than my TC moving over a dirt road. The 302 power package is just right, and propelling this beast at 24 mpg. overall. What’s not to like?
When Ford restyle onto the Panther platform, it seemed that it was done by a committee that refused to make any decisions on styling gimmicks needing to be stripped from the smaller car since it was just fine for a HUGE car, but not for the Panther. Stupidly, they put everything from 1979 onto the smaller 1980. Not a single brave soul spoke up. Everyone was afraid of screwing it up, I guess.
So we ended up not just having to deal with the size change, the wrong placement of the front wheel, the over-high greenhouse and the right angled straightness of it all – we also had to deal with the Panther design filled with 1970 styling gimmicks too.
It took Ford years to grow a pair and fix the overwrought nastiness of this generation. By 1988, it almost looked OK. While Ford never did fix the front heaviness, it at least stripped some of the silly 1970 gingerbread off of it.
So I was never a fan of this generation. It just isn’t proportionally correct. Worse, was the two door coupes. They were absolutely ridiculous looking. The sedan and coupe never looked like it was of one piece. You look at the side of these cars when they are painted a dark color, and the reflections are all over the place as though the doors and fenders were from different cars. Beats me why that always was the problem because it was gone with the new Aero generation that replaced it.
As to driving them – they were heavy. You sat deep in them and you were surrounded by tufted velour and it was as though you were driving a casket. Many of my customers loved this and were unhappy with the modern redesign that replaced it, but this generation completely lacked a modern lighter handling and road feel. It was just a lot of heaviness and plodding silence.
Lincoln got lucky with this generation. It was more popular than it ought to have been.
It would be interesting if someone could write up a history of the development of the Panther platform and how and why Ford made some of the decisions it did. But I don’t know if any source documents or individuals involved are still around. I have an issue of Motor Trend from 1974 detailing GM’s plans to downsize its cars, so Ford may have rushed the program in response. Initial Panthers were awkwardly styled, but the cars eventually turned out quite good, once the 302 got port fuel injection, the styling was refined a bit, and then thoroughly updated in the early 90’s.
I have always loved this version of the Town Car. Back when they were new my friends mom would often take me home from school in one. I was raised in a Mercedes household so the Lincoln to me was exotic and very different!
Said friends mother always had a certain scent to her. In my adulthood I realized it’s called “alcoholism” glad I survived her rides home.
Still love this Town Car though.
Thank you. This makes up for that gritchingly ungrammatical movie title.
I think these are fine-looking cars (and that is the only good thing I can say about ’em). I do not think the previous ’79 or subsequent ’90 models looked better; to me the older car looks ridiculously overweight with rare exception; the ’85 facelift was a grotesque disfigurement, and the ’90 looks like a caricature.
Just screams ‘retirement community old man`s car’, but hey, I LOVE it! I`m 70 years OLD.
Of the three downsized big Detroit luxury sedans (Cadillac, Lincoln, Chrysler), the Lincoln suffered most; it’s way to squared off, too busy with cut lines, and misproportioned. The Cadillac (both 77–79 and 80-later facelift versions) was best; the Chrysler New Yorker on the short-lived R body in between, but closer to the Cadillac than Lincoln. I find the Mark VI front clip to be cleaner (and more like ’77-79 Lincolns) than the Town Car front clip, as long as you avoid those weird coach lamps (or whatever they called them) on the headlamp covers. The rest of the Town Car looked better than the Mark VI though. Interiors were slightly nicer on the Mark VI but not all that different.
The lights were referred to in the design studio as “Little Orphan Annies” as they looked like the cartoon character’s big empty eyes. Lincoln Design Heritage by Jim & Cheryl Ferrel has lots of info on the design and development of the downsized Lincoln line.
Moved to Texas 40 years ago this month, next door neighbors were a retired couple who owned one of these as their only car. They’ve been gone for probably 15 years ago, these were pretty common with the retired folks back then, of course the car universe is much different now, which I grouse over, because when cars like this roamed freely, I was too young to indulge in them, now that I’m the target age, the cars themselves are gone. Guess that’s the contrarian in me too; I often appreciate something more once it isn’t available anymore….wonder why that is.
I remember talking to the husband when I was out on the driveway about how the price of R12 was going sky high (this must have been in the early 90’s) and all our cars still used R12 as R134 wasn’t quite introduced in all cars yet. He had a leftover 24 pack of cans of R12 that he let me have, guess he didn’t have the use for them anymore, probably cost him $.50/can but with scarcity they were going up much faster in price. The summer lasts forever here, I can’t believe I lived here 4 years with a non-air conditioned car I brought from up north (but there were maybe 10% of the current population back then so much fewer traffic jams meant you had a chance of keeping cool since other than stoplights you were going most of the time and could count on the breeze through the window frames.