(how is it that in almost ten years we’ve never covered this car?)
In 1965, the Ford LTD launched The Great Brougham Epoch. And those iconic three letters—whose true origins or meaning will never be divined because they are of an occult nature—came to stand for all the symbology of that era: big, heavy, wallowing, boxy sedans sitting on frames and topped with poofy vinyl wigs, interiors upholstered in “panty-cloth” or tufted velour upholstery and slathered with faux wood, and commonly sporting Pep Boys-grade fake wire wheel covers. Yet in 1983, the LTD moniker was suddenly kidnapped from that dying dinosaur and grafted onto something altogether different: a rather compact, lithe and decidedly Euro-inspired unibody sedan with very obvious aerodynamic aspirations.
Why?
Let’s just say the winds of change were blowing, all the way to Dearborn.
The 1965 LTD launched a turning point in the history of the American car, and was one of Lee Iaccoca’s greatest and most influential hits. The packaging of the blatant visual cues of luxury on and in what had always been a low-cost sedan line was a breakthrough, and its characteristics would come to utterly dominate the American market, as well as influence the global one.
It was a very astute business move, as it pulled Ford’s big sedans out of the sales slump they were in all during the early 60s, and brought them significantly closer to parity with the full-size Chevrolet, even surpassing it in 1970 and 1971. The LTD name came to stand for the most desirable full-size affordable sedan, knocking the Impala nameplate out of its long-held throne.
And the LTD’s hallmarks would soon be seen all through the Ford line, even in Iaccoca’s other great hit, the Mustang, in the form of the Mustang II Ghia. If there’s any doubt, this confirms that the LTD was the more influential of the two.
Before we talk about how the LTD name was cleft from the breast of its true namesake, let’s make sure we’re perfectly clear about what the 1983-1985 Fox-LTD is: a Fairmont that had a quick trip through the wind tunnel on the way to the sound-deadening shop. But the 1978 Fairmont was conceived with a very different mission than the LTD; one could say quite the opposite. It was a rather bare-bones and lightweight Volvo/Euro Ford-inspired update on the original Falcon concept, designed to compete in the compact class against the more modern FWD compacts about to be spewed by the millions from GM’s (with an assist by Chrysler) factories until Ford could build its own FWD compact. Which meant that its original brief was a bit transitory.
It did stick around through 1983, after which it was replaced by the FWD Tempo. But its sales, which had been very strong in its first two years, were rather modest by that time. The smaller FWD Escort had already made some of its original brief redundant.
The 1975 Granada, which was essentially the LTD concept downsized, was another feather in Iaccoca’s rapidly-swelling cap. We recently crowned it as “The Most Malaise Car Ever”, thanks to its 1960 Falcon underpinnings, feeble six, and poor performance and handling. But it was a hot seller in its first couple of years, like almost all new Lido-mobiles. By 1980 though, its sales had shriveled up to under 100k.
Since the Granada was anything but space or fuel efficient, in 1981 it was reincarnated on the Fairmont’s Fox platform. And Iaccoca finally had his broughamy-way with the Fairmont, whose clean Euro-inspired styling undoubtedly was foisted on him by the Euro-centric executive wing at the glass house. “Built for a changing world”? 1970s brougham styling grafted onto a boxy RWD Fairmont? Sure, except the world was changing in a very different direction.
The Fox-Granada’s rather gruesome re-style, an almost perfect 9/10 version of the genuine (Panther-platform) LTD, was not well received. But then the Panther LTD wasn’t exactly a hit in its early years either. Ford’s top-heavy, small-footed styling was in as deep a funk as was Ford stock, which hit 68 cents in 1981, the year Ford almost went bankrupt.
Iaccoca had been determined to keep pushing the boxy LTD look, but during Ford’s downsizing it came off as clumsy. GM’s downsized ’77 B/C and ’78 A Bodies were boxy out of necessity too, but came of much better; we’ve covered that contentious issue here. If a Fox platform car ever deserved to wear the LTD moniker, it was this mini-me version. The Granada name was presumed to still have some brand equity, and Lee was still at the helm when these decisions were made.
But he was long gone by the time these final Iaccoca-mobiles hit the market. On July 13, 1978, Henry Ford II fired him after Lee got a bit to presumptuous, and replaced him with Phillip Caldwell as President (middle), and with Donald Petersen as COO (right). By 1980, Petersen was president, and Caldwell had replaced HFII as CEO (in 1979), and even as chairman in 1980. Hank was finally ready to hand the reins of the family company to a non-Ford, a first since John Gray held them in 1906. And it sure wasn’t going to be to Lee Iaccoca.
Just as well, as desperate Chrysler embraced him and the Iaccoca-look with open arms. There’s no question Lee was the right person at the right time to bully Congress into bailing out the mortally-wounded company with a fat loan guarantee. And the K cars were the right car at the right time, despite them looking like a shrunken LTD. It was the safe way to package such a relatively bold new small FWD American sedan. No more Airflows, thank you.
Meanwhile back at Ford, Petersen, a thoughtful, understated and deliberate engineer, and in every way the opposite of Iaccoca, pursued two primary objectives: First, improved quality through the adoption of Deming’s well-known principles that had long become a religion in Japan. Ford had a lot of catching up to do with the first task, but “Quality is Job 1” came to stand for something, and was a critical component of Ford’s remarkable turnaround in the 80s.
The second, aerodynamics, was of course for the obvious functional benefits of fuel efficiency, but there’s no doubt Petersen and Ford saw it also as a way to make a clean stylistic break with the Iaccoca-brougham era, and redefine Ford for a new decade that emphasized new qualities. (My tribute to how Petersen saved Ford is here)
Of course in Europe aerodynamics had long played a significant role, especially at pioneering companies like Citroen. But when conservative Mercedes adopted a decidedly more aerodynamic form for their new W126 S Class in 1979, the writing was on the wind tunnel wall.
Ford’s Probe 1, built by Ghia and based on a turbocharged Fox-Mustang, came out that same year, and was the first in a line of ever-more slippery Probe concepts. Its Cd of .22 was radical for the time, and allowed it to deliver twice the fuel economy of a typical 2+2 sporty coupe of the time.
The fruition of Ford’s new aero-love showed up in the showrooms a few years later. In September of 1982, the European Sierra, later sold in the US as the Merkur XR4Ti, previewed what we would see on the 1984 Tempo, more or less.
And that same fall in the US, Ford officially launched Aero-Era with the dramatic 1983 Thunderbird. The Great Brougham Epoch was now over, as far as Ford was concerned. Well, not completely, of course.
The brougham formerly known as the LTD was now renamed LTD Crown Victoria, and continued on its boxy way for some more years as a tribute to Lee Iaccoca and the era the original LTD had spawned, until it was finally replaced with the aerodynamic CV in 1992. And that didn’t go over well with its increasingly geriatric clientele, so it soon sported a chrome grille and then a more formal roof line. Those LTD genes were hard to kill.
As a semi-aerodynamic companion to the Thunderbird, Ford gave the boxy Granada the heave-ho, did some aero-tweaks to the Fairmont, ditched the Granada name, and in a questionable move, bestowed the prized LTD moniker on the resulting car. The ad makes it quite clear that Ford was stretching a bit in calling it an LTD. Shrinking, actually.
Just how much of an actual improvement the aerodynamic refinement made is probably academic. But clearly the new LTD was intended to make the most of its time on the EPA dynometer. The standard engine was nothing less (how could it be) than the Lima 2.3 four, now up to 90hp. The ancient Falcon 200 (3.3 L) six making 92hp was optional, as was the brand new 3.8 L V6 (110hp), available with the new AOD Clunk-O-Matic transmission. Some sources show the lo-po 302 V8 as available in 1983, but not the initial brochure. It wasn’t available in ’84 and ’85 either, except in the LX (more on that later). Let’s just say that in 1983 Ford’s Mailase-era drive trains were struggling to keep up with the new dynamic aero look. Or was the idea that they wouldn’t have to struggle quite as hard, thanks to the improved aerodynamics?
As a sop to brougham lovers who weren’t quite ready to go cold turkey, there was even a Brougham version. Americans don’t turn on a dime, when it comes to their cars, as Chrysler found out at its peril in 1934 and 1962.
And digging a bit further, in the 1984 LTD brochure is this throwback. Oh my…the internal battles at Ford between the brougham bros and the aero dudes must have been epic.
But it was obvious who was really winning the war despite losing a few skirmishes. Petersen took driving seriously, and became an avid student of the Bondurant School of High performance driving. Not surprisingly, Bondurant quickly switched to Ford Mustang GTs and the new LTD/LX, a package that was essentially a Mustang GT four door sedan.
The LTD/LX was a vindication of the Fox Body’s superb adaptability, something that had not been seen ever before to this degree, covering the gamut from economy sedans (Fairmont), sporty cars (Mustang), and luxury sedans (Lincoln Continental and Mark VII), and quite a few iterations in between. The LTD and its LX versions were just two more along the way. Fox enthusiasts have been having fun with its plug-and-play capabilities ever since.
Essentially the Fox-LTD was just a place holder for Ford in the hot mid/large sized sedan segment until its aero-wunder Taurus arrived for 1986. Of course the Taurus redefined that segment, and quickly came to dominate it, until it self-destructed due to the shocking stupidity of Ford’s ugly re-style in 1996. What a way to kill the goose that was laying the golden egg, year after year. But that was long after Petersen was retired.
So that’s the history of how the Fox-LTD came to play the role of the automotive St. John: “Repent brougham-lovers, for the reign of aerodynamics is at hand”. A transitional car, in form, if not in name.
I had a bit of a soft spot for this LTD in its day, but the name sure bugged me, which alone would have kept me from buying one. Me, drive an LTD? In Santa Monica in 1983? Perish the thought. So what would have been a better name for it?
Of course I did buy an ’83 TBird Turbo Coupe, given what a sucker I was for aerodynamics and high-tech turbos at the time. But the minute I opened the door on it, I was faced with a dashboard that was all-too similar to this one. Ford’s renaissance was a bit cash-squeezed, and Fox-body building blocks had to be shared, all over the place.
The back seat area was of course not shared with the Thunderbird, and was a reasonably-comfortable place to be, unless one was spoiled by really big cars. Ford’s upholstery and interior parts were showing signs of improvement, and these cars generally gave the impression of being pretty well screwed together, for the times and country of origin. They certainly felt a bit more substantial than the early Fairmonts, and weighed about 300 lbs more as a consequence. But a base LTD sedan still weighed in at just under 3,000 lbs.
I’m rather amazed at how these cars have disappeared from the street-scape here. I looked in my files, and saw that I did shoot this one back in 2009, which is pretty apparent from the CCs in the background. But I just never got around to writing it up. I think I was waiting to find an LX. Good luck with that.
And it appears to be a Brougham version, too.
Which is confirmed by the interior, although that steering wheel is not stock.
And then there’s this Mercury version which I shot in 2010, and also never posted. Mercury played the same game as Ford, bestowing the prized Marquis name on it, and escalating its donor to Grand Marquis as a consolation.
You will not be surprised to know that the Fox-Marquis wasn’t exactly a roaring success, just barely cracking the 100k mark in its second and third year. But then what Mercuries were? Since you asked, the Sable had some pretty decent years, with sales in the 115k to 130k or so range.
For that matter, the Fox-LTD wasn’t exactly a huge success either, but it certainly helped fill an ugly hole in the line-up after the early demise of the Fox-Granada. Sales amounted to 156k, 205k, and 216k over its three-year run. And that’s only slightly worse than the Taurus in its less-than-full-year maiden 1986 outing, when it sold 237k times. In 1987 Taurus sales really took off.
The youthful owner of this car strolled up as I was shooting, and he told me he has big plans for it, including a “restoration”, and that supposedly he has a buyer who will pay big bucks for it after it’s restored. This gauge was laying on the hood at the time, and somehow I forgot to get the full story on it.
I do know where he bought it, as there is a shot at the Cohort by Curtis Perry of it sitting on a car lot in Portland. The dorky wheel covers were the instant give-away. It’s a small world after all.
I forgot to ask the owner what’s under the hood. Technically, the 2.3 four was still listed as the base engine, but it’s hard to imagine anyone buying one by this time. So undoubtedly it’s the 3.8 Head-Gasket-Blow-O-Matic. Or were these earlier versions of the 3.8 somehow more immune to that terminal contagion?
non-stock wheel covers
So there it is, Ford’s transition-mobile, with one wheel in the Brougham Era, one wheel in the Volvo-boxy era, another in the Aero-Era, and the fourth wheel in the V8 performance sedan era. Did I miss another? Fortunately there was someone at the steering wheel that could manage to make it all work as well as it did. Which it sort of did, somehow.
Finally! This is a write up that I’ve always wanted to see. I was fascinated with these cars as a kid but never got close to one until 1994 when got an opportunity to ride in a Marquis. It smelled like motor oil and seemed tired but I found the ride and interior comfortable.
My favorite version is the HO 5.0 equipped police package versions from 84-86 if I remember correctly. They were known as four door Mustangs.
You may not have written it up in the past several years but you’ve certainly done it justice now!
These are very handsome cars and I even like the typical, upright, early 1980s Ford interior. Just a pity the engines weren’t much chop. I know they didn’t want to sabotage the Taurus but I’m a little surprised the LTD only lasted 3 years. I suppose if gas prices had gone up again, the Crown Vic would’ve been axed and the LTD would’ve taken over.
Gas prices were expected to skyrocket. That’s why legacy name like LTD was put on this car. The Crown Victoria was expected to die leaving this as the top of the line. The Taurus was a huge gamble and it’s success was not guaranteed. Nothing really worked out as expected. Gas got cheap, the Crown Vic got more popular, the Taurus was a home run and the LTD faded away. Ford kept the LTD in production until the success of the Taurus was proven, giving them a plan B if it failed.
+1!
Not being a Ford fan, these didn’t impress me very much. The Fairmont genes were too strong to hide.
In retrospect, this was a smart play by Ford, given the strong buyer interest in smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles, coupled with the uncertainty of future fuel prices at the time. I haven’t done the math, but these mini LTDs seem to represent a decent percentage of total Ford car sales in the years they were offered.
Ford lucked out when gas prices stabilized, and the Panther cars took off, with older buyers finally getting “used to the size”.
One commercial had a older couple in a Panther LTD and hubby goes “Honey, I thought cars were getting smaller?”
Yep, that’s why Continental and Marquis moved to the fox chassis in 1982/3 as well. The Panther Crown Vic/Grand Marquis/Town Car would have quietly bowed out, just Chrysler did a few years earlier when the big Monacos and Furys became “Royal” and “Gran” and the B bodies wore their regular names.
Well, there’s a substantial difference, inasmuch as the Fox was a smaller car than the Chrysler B Bodies by a substantial margin. These only had a 105.5″ wheelbase, compared to the 116″ of the Chrysler B. And this LTD was smaller than the Taurus. So to assume that it was going to take the role of the big cars is rather questionable.
But recall that in 1981-82 when this car was being planned, everyone was still freaking out over the still-new CAFE and the highest gas prices anyone had ever experienced. We were entering a world of shortage and scarcity and we were all going to have to learn how to live with less. Like a Fox sedan as our “full sized” Ford.
Sales of the Panther LTD were plummeting after 1979, to the tune of a total of 356,535 in 1979 to 141,292 in 1980, and the slide continued through 1983 to a nadir of 113k. Whether or not they were more roomy than a fox chassis doesn’t matter much when a car is becoming unprofitable and the target demographic is leaving in droves (we just saw the result of this recently). More than likely the Panther would have lasted right up to the point the Taurus debuted, at which point the Crown Victoria and LTD would have both been replaced by it.
So where would Lincoln have fit into this original plan? If Ford pulled the plug on the Panthers and the Fox sedans this would have left only two cars in their lineup: the Taurus-Continental and the Mark VII. Maybe at some point they had a stretched Fox body in the works to become a downsized Town Car.
Same thing, the 82 Continental was to be… the next Continental. Lincoln had only two cars in their lineup often, the big Continental (town car was a trim level), and the Mark series. The Versailles briefly broke that formula, but Lincoln was pretty consistently a two model division through the 70s
Lincoln’s sales plummeted 59% in 1980, when the Panther was introduced across the model line. With hindsight, keeping the Panther alive proved wise, but the future of it looked mighty grim initially. It should prove telling the also Panther based Mark VI moved to the Fox chassis as well for the Mark VII.
In 1985, our Air Force Security Police outfit in Japan received two LTD Police package units – LX’s with a few more police specific parts. Up until then we had a mixture of Toyota Mark II (4 cylinder), K-cars, and and a Slant 6 Volare. The first time I drove one I was responding to a Robbery exercise and punched it – it left a good 6 feet of rubber. Though a little tight inside, they were great cars.
The name of this car is no mystery. During the dark days of the early 80s the plan was to axe the Panther LTD and use this as the large sedan going forward. The Pontiac Bonneville of that time did the same thing. But the funny thing was that the LTD Crown Victoria started an uptick in sales and Ford let things ride.
I hated these at the time they were new and was relieved when my mother bought an LTD Crown Vic in 85 (yes, that was still its name then) instead of one of these, which I considered a retrograde placeholder until Ford could design a decent mid size sedan.
Then something odd happened. A friend got a used one and I learned what fabulous cheap used cars these were. I bought an 86 Marquis wagon which I came to love. My Marquis (3.8 V6 and a C5 3 speed auto) was a really nice driving car. I missed it immediately after I bought Mom’s 85 Vic. The Vic had something like half the miles on it but I hated the LoPo 5.0/AOD.
These cars felt like a night and day difference from the Fairmont. Why these did not stay on the road longer probably comes down to that 3.8. Thunderbirds of that vintage have gone extinct too.
One note, the 86 Taurus sales numbers suffered from a short model year, which I believe started around January. I only knew this from learning about the short 86 model year that these cars had.
Are you saying there was a specific plan or are you saying the plan was to see how things played out? Because it’s a bit hard to see how the Fox LTD would continue to have a role alongside the Taurus, since it was a smaller car, with a 105.5″ wheelbase and smaller interior due to being RWD.
Meaning, this could not be their “large sedan going forward”. It had zero future relevance once the Taurus was conceived and arrived.
I recall reading in the car mags fairly regularly around 1981-82 that Ford would be killing the full size LTD “at the end of this model year”. But it kept getting a stay of execution. The Fox body mid size car was the only fall-back Ford had in the fall of 1982 and changing the name of the car from “Granada” to “LTD” when it was restyled for 83 was the logical way to transition into a world where there was no large Ford.
As you note, within another couple of years the Taurus plan got going and changed everything (as did the renewed popularity of the big Crown Vic to take care of the traditional buyers).
IIRC the plan for the Taurus from inception to take the helm of both the Fox LTD and Panther, effectively becoming the defacto “full size” Ford. It seemed to switch to “lets see how things play out” only happened when large car sales rebounded, and it probably wasn’t until around 1988 when the aero update of the Panther would have been greenlit that the chassis would have any guaranteed future.
I believe (and this comes from a few sources) that Ford only kept the Fox LTD around just in case the Taurus did not go over so well and they way if the plug had to be pulled on the Taurus because it bombed, they did not have to rush to get a midsize car ready to replace it. The LTD (Fox Body) sold in respectable numbers. However the Taurus was such a huge success that Ford could not make enough Taurus to satisfy the demand so there was no need for the LTD so it was killed off after a short year.
This fear that the Taurus would fail and the need to keep the Fox LTD in production was well known and was discussed in length in Eric Taub’s Taurus Bible (Taurus: the making of the car that saved Ford)
I had always assumed the LTD continued in 1986 primarily for fleet sales, similarly to how the fourth generation Taurus continued into 2007, despite the midsize Fusion effectively replacing it in 2006.
I never bought the notion that the LTD was a parachute in case the Taurus failed. So a billion dollars in development and tooling goes *poof*, and plan B the keeping aging Fox to keep buyers happy? How sustainable for the company could that possibly be? A year? More than likely any real life plan B in case the Taurus proved “too radical” would have been adding conventional features like a grille, just as we saw on some in the preproduction photos.
I had recalled reading somewhere that Taurus production took a bit to get ramped up and that it got a late start in the 1986 model year. But after a few minutes of noodling around online, I can find no confirmation for that. Wiki claims that the Fox LTD kept being built as a hedge, but I agree with you that this is not the way I remember it.
JPC, I believe that’s true. These excerpts are from a 1985 newspaper article:
“All 1986 Ford products except for the Taurus/Sable are scheduled for public introduction on Oct. 3. Ford says the Ford Taurus, also sold as a Mercury Sable, won’t be ready for introduction on that date.”
“Ford officials, meanwhile, bristle at characterizing the slowdown as a ‘delay.’ In their view, Ford never promised when it would begin selling the cars and it isn’t about to speed up the process to meet a deadline.”
Translation? It was a delay.
> More than likely any real life plan B in case the Taurus proved “too radical” would have been adding conventional features like a grille, just as we saw on some in the preproduction photos.
Not just preproduction photos; a Taurus with a conventional grille actually made it into the first Taurus brochure, where it was shown on the base L models. In actuality, the Taurus L had the same front styling as other Tauruses.
In a world with higher gas prices it could have continued as a RWD alternative for “traditional buyers” .
The LTD/Marquis was not a bad way to restyle the quickly-aging Fairmont, even if the front end was a smidge too chromey for my taste (fixed on the LX). The later Marquis had big, bold taillights that I liked.
That extra-busy greenhouse was always my main problem with the design. There were so many pillars and glass dividers, and the upper door frames were quite busy looking too. The Crown Vic had much the same problem, although the thicker C pillar sans quarter windows helped there. As with the Fairmont, I liked the looks of the wagon best of all.
I agree. But at least the windows wound down. 😉
My first car was a Marquis Brougham inherited from my parents when I was 16. Had it for four years. It blew head gaskets twice with the 3.8. I then inherited a 1988 Thunderbird which also ate head gaskets for lunch. However, they drove well and my Marquis was the best shampooed and vacuumed car on my high school parking lot. Fox enthiastics need to check out the ultra rare Marquis LTS which was only available in Canada. Only a few examples still survive.
It would have been kind of cool had Ford grafted the LTD front onto the Futura/Z-7 coupe. Too close to the ’83 aero T-bird for comfort?
In the summer of 1985, my dad got one of these to replace the family 1980 Fairmont (to my benefit, which I inherited–my first car). He called the Fairmont the ‘tin can’, but it had proven to be a fairly reliable tin can, and economical to run, and good on gas with it’s 4-cyl, 4-speed (though it knocked on regular, so it needed premium….)
During a test drive with the V6, without really trying to hard, just trying to accelerate briskly, the car chirped the tires, and I was impressed! “Buy this car!”
His had the 3.8 with the THREE-speed auto. It was his first (of only two) car with a/c and power windows and locks. It proved to be a decent car over 9 years and 70k miles–at around 7-8 years, the brake booster needed to be replaced, the A/C wasn’t working well, seals/rings needed to be replaced. I’d say that’s pretty good.
I’d say the car averaged 19 mpg, mid 20s on long trips.
The fact that my dad, who had felt GM cars were better in the 1970s chose to buy ANOTHER new Ford, shows how much GM’s reputation suffered from 1980 to 1985. Several co-workers and one neighbor all were unhappy with their 1980-83 GM cars, and my dad noted it.
I would like to add that the LTD did not knock the Impala off as the most desirable affordable luxury sedan as Chevy quickly countered with the Caprice as an option in 65 and a full blown line in 66. The Impala would do battle with the Galaxie 500 and Caprice would handle the LTD. I dont have the sales figures in front of me but i do know that up until around 76 with about 3 or 4 bumps in the road…………….the Impala was the number one selling car in the US!
Big Chevys kept #1 status, even though Ford sold lots of wagons and LTD’s. The plainer Galaxies fell off the map, but Impala stayed popular in early 70’s.
Caprice gained, and then was the prominent big Chevy after ’77.
1957 and 59 were model years where big Ford out sold Chevy.
And the Galaxie founded a 2nd life in Brazil when the 1965-66 Galaxie was made there until 1982 or 1983 I don’t remember exactly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdOlUzb7ItU
This is the definitive Fox-TD article – very enjoyable.
We were car- (Ford-) shopping when these were new. We kids got coloring books with each page devoted to a different Ford model. I remember thinking that among the other “aero” designs featured, two of these things were not like the other – the big and little LTDs.
I must admit that I wasn’t crazy about their looks. The sloping rear panel reminded me of a Fairmont sedan that was now sporting a hockey cut.
I think I had that coloring book, too!!
Attempting to transform the honest, boxy, compact car Ford Fairmont into a Ford Galaxie/LTD replacement was about as successful as putting thick lipstick and a push up bra on your Granny would be.
We had two in our family – my dad got a two tone blue fairly high spec one in around 1989 or so and then my younger brother got a fairly low spec one in the butter cream color a year or so later. Both were V6 powered and I assume it was the 3.8 but not positive. Eventually the cream one died for good (engine control unit died along with some other issues) and then my brother inherited my Dad’s until that transmission started to die in 1995 and many miles later and he got a company car to replace it. I think my Dad replaced his with a horrible (also well used) Celebrity wagon.
I guess they were comfortable enough and did the job, I wasn’t ever really a fan of either one, the dash was an anachronism of an earlier time and I was too into Japanese and German cars at the time. Even now, when I rarely see one, I get a bit nostalgic but have no desire to get a closer look or anything.
But good that it finally got its day here!
I agree, the dash was an anachronism, a ‘broughamish udate’ on the Fairmont dash (the Mustang 79-83 Mustangs were the best Fox dashboard)
But I must say, the cloth front seats shown above, with the armrest, where relatively comfortable and surprisingly supportive.
The LTD felt heavier than the our Fairmonts (we had two–4-cyl 4-spd, and in 87 my mom got a used 81 6-cyl auto) and absorbed bumps better.
I’d agree on the seats, the blue one had what I believe were the same as pictured and they were decent. The cream one had vinyl seats and it may have even been a front bench (?) I don’t recall it having the center console.
The problem I had with my Marquis’ seat was that the back would flex. It seemed like the catch for the recline worked on the outside but not on the inside, so that the seat back frame would twist a little towards the inside of the car. I would have to periodically get in the back seat, put my feet up high on the seat back and push hard to bend it back straight. Perhaps the former owner had been abnormally large.
The dash was a full recycle of the 1980 Thunderbird dash. The actual 83 Thunderbird dash used the basic frame and layout, but at least softened up the edges and attempt to make it look somewhat new, but the LTD used the whole thing, even the console on the LX came from the Thunderbird bucket seat option
I was going to note this. I actually liked the T-Bird-turned-LTD dash, especially the strip of warning lights atop the rest of the dash. Unfortunately the rest of the Fox LTD interior wasn’t up to the level of the ’80-’82 T-Bird shown here, with the door panels especially looking cheaper. The T-Bird seats, or something that looked almost as plush, did make it into the ’81-’82 Fox Cougar LS sedans.
Given that the basic Fairmont could accept the dash made for the Thunderbird, I’ve long wondered if this would be an easy swap into a Mustang as well (since the ’79-’86 Mustang used the same dash as the Fairmont save for the full instrumentation that was a rare option on the Fairmont starting in ’79 being standard). The T-Bird dash is all wrong for the Mustang, but that’s just the point – it would be unique.
I had a dark blue 86 Marquis as my first car. It was a Brougham with the 3.8 V6 and 3 speed automatic. I loved that car. I would love to find another one
I’m baffled that there is no mention of the LTD II in this article. If I remember correctly, wasn’t there an LTD II model that made the transition from the Crown Vic sized LTD to the downsized LTD?
No, the ’77 LTD II was actually the “1977 Gran Torino” with a new name and appeared alongside the huge LTD models. There was no LTD Crown Victoria trim name until 1980, a year after LTD II was dropped.
Some confuse this Fox unibody LTD with the Body on Frame LTD II, and call the Foxes “LTD II”.
The LTD II died in 1979. This came along some three years later. there was no direct lineage, but I agree that this car would have been appropriately called the LTDII.
Yes, my thoughts also.
I think I would have preferred “LTD Jr” just like the Whopper and Whopper Jr. Just a bit less of everything.
I guess I didn’t remember correctly.
My wife had an 1985 LTD wagon as a company car for a couple of years. It was comfortable and didn’t give her any problems. When it came off lease, we bought it for her mother’s use and it gave good service for a good long time. It was much better than the Celebrity that her company gave her to replace it.
In ’82 my parents and grandparents each purchased a new Fox Granada. After a timely collision, my parents’ Granada was replaced by an ’86 Sable wagon; my gransparents’ Granada was replaced by a ’92 Taurus sedan. I believe the Granadas had the 3.8L Essex V6; both the Taurus and Sable had the more reliable 3.0L Vulcan V6. It was hard to believe those cars were all made by Ford in a relatively small window of time. I’ve always had a fondness for the Fox Granada and wanted to build a sleeper powered by a hot 302W or 351W, but they’re so scarce now that I’ve given up on that idea.
A couple of weeks ago, I attended the Malaise Daze Car Show (put on by the Malaise Motors FB group) at the LA Automobile Driving Museum. (I’ll be posting a write up of the show and my photos soon.)
While there, I got the opportunity to photograph an LTD LX and it’s replacement, the first generation Ford Taurus, side by side. What a difference between the two.
OMG that plate on the Taurus. That’s gonna be in my head all day. “TAAUUURUUUSSSS- FOR US!”
I believe that very LX was featured in Hemmings 10 years ago, and the owner is on a few of the Mustang forums I’ve been on as well.
https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/mus/2008/03/The-Other-LX—Ford-LTD/1599738.html
But, there wasn’t just one LTD LX there. Here are two white ones parked side by side. The near one has 17″ 93 Cobra rims on it, and the far one has a lot more done to it. The owner autoX the car, has a Cobra motor in it, a lot of suspension work, 5-speed conversion, and a 5-lug conversion.
The near one looks like it is sporting the rims from a ’94 T-Bird. At least my ’94 had rims like that, anyway.
Those would be 1993 SVT Cobra wheels, which are identical to the Tbird wheels except they are 17″ and 4 lug
Yeah, I’m an idiot. Having had those Fox-Birds (and a Futura, too), and then a couple of MN12(s), I should’ve known…
4 lugs for the Foxes. 5 lugs for the MN12(s).
On my ’94 T-Bird, they were 15″ diameter rims, but 5 lugs.
So the Cobra was 17″ and 4 lugs. Seems kinda backwards, don’t ya think? :o)
The MN12 has a weird bolt pattern too, 5×108, like the Taurus, rather than the usual 5×114.3 most other 5 lug Fords had. I never got why they didn’t go with 5 lug on 5.0 models for 87-93, Lincolns used it, and the SVO used it, so the correct pieces were available.
Was the Taurus there as a show car? If anything, the Taurus was the car that ended the Malaise Era.
And kudos to that Taurus owner for keeping it in such good shape.
oh yeah, and there was a third one parked a little bit a way from it. Given the color of this thing, it would have been great had it been parked next to the Taurus. This one was the closest to stock, with the exeption of the Mustang phone-dial rims.
Speaking of T-Bird wheels, THOSE look like they’re from an ’85 Anniversary Bird.
The “10 hole” was used on just about every Ford branded fox in the mid to late 80s, Thunderbirds, Mustangs, LTD. Wasn’t specific to the 25th anniversary.
That’s true, Matt. I just remember its use on that car, as it really sets it off…
Similarly the “8 Hole” that was used on the ’83 Turbo Coupes was later used on the ’88 LX 5.0L T-Bird like the one I had (similar car pictured below). Ford did a lot of this. I think even that Fila T-Bird had a painted version of the 8 holers, IIRC.
They put ’em on Cougars, too. Very hard to find the center caps with the Cougar head logo.
I’ll confess, the Fairmont Mark III is of my favorite cars of the 80’s, and it’s exhilarating to see CC finally give them their long awaited due! It would be really nice to see some vintage reviews to get a period perspective on these cars. (Calling GN….)
You wouldn’t expect a rather humdrum family sedan to incite such emotion, and to be fair the cars were decidedly average, though they did have their merits. I think one of the reasons I and others wax nostalgic for these erstwhile appliances is that they were just about the last mainstream family sedans available with RWD, which by 1983, had already become an anachronistic layout for this type of car and its intended purpose. Being a Fox, the LTD/Marquis duo were not entirely obsolescent, with their unibody construction, tidy handling, and rack and pinion steering. Still, these cars arguably embody the last remaining link between the present and the past.
And they definitely weren’t bad for their times. The exterior nip and tuck centered around the Fairmont’s doors worked wonders for the looks. They still have a clean and fresh, if not contemporary appearance. The interior appointments, minus the antiquated dash, were really rather nice. Most were equipped with the ‘Twin Comfort Lounge Seats’, which was Ford nomenclature for a 50/50 bench with tiny consolettes between the seats. Whatever you choose to call them, they were reasonably comfy and supportive, and typically upholstered in a nicely textured cloth. The seats were a marked improvement over the flat slabs that GM put in their competing A and G-bodies. If six-passenger seating was desired, a full-width ‘Flight Bench,’ a holdover from the Fairmont, was a no-cost option. Our featured LTD appears to be so equipped.
Mechanically most were equipped with the 3.8/C5-combo. The 3.8 received throttle-body injection in 1984 and was rated at 120 hp. Performance, hardly earth-shattering, was at least adequate for the times. I was always rather intrigued by the 302-powered LTD LX, but they were always rare beasts, and I only recall seeing a handful even when these cars were still in their prime.
In 1997 I finally took the plunge and bought a Fox, a 1988 Ford Thunderbird Sport with 65,000 miles. That car ignited a lifelong obsession with simplistic RWD machinery. It was very much the two-door equivalent of an LTD LX, a car I still aspire to own.
But I never did get the chance to own a 4-door Fox. By the time I began earnestly looking in 2010, I was already fifteen years too late. So what did I do? I wound up buying the European equivalent, a 1994 Volvo 940, instead.
Ever heard of the LTD LX’s Canadian brother, the Marquis LTS? Only 134 were built and it’s guesstimated that only 10 or so still exist. I’ve got a very rough one I’m hoping to put back on the road someday. Probably the only one in the States.
I learned to drive in one of these in high school driver’s ed in 1984. And a 4-cylinder at that. Always thought the non-Brougham versions were nice looking cars. Don’t remember a thing about how it drove except that it was slow.
My Dad had one of these in the Mercury form with the Essex V6. The interesting thing about it was that despite being “only” 120 hp it was rated at 205 ft-lb of torque. I remember an ad comparing that favourably to a contemporary 200 ft-lb Ferrari. It did have pretty good acceleration, as I recall. It started life as a daily rental which didn’t bode well for the transmission or the differential, but I don’t recall any problems the head gaskets.
Some car modders have added a Mustang face to these LTD’s making a Stang Sedan. Can add tons of aftermarket items to a Fox chassis 4 door or wagon, making it far from “boring”.
The LTD may have been a more refined Fox, but I think the Fairmont had 10x more character!
The Fairmont was an ‘honest’ car. It could carry 5 people economically (with the 4-cyl) or briskly (in 78-79 with the 140 hp 302 V8). It was not pretentious, and a better car than what most Americans had come to accept for that price and size.
The LTD was Ford’s not bad attempt to cater to the Brougham crowd. But, as a Brougham-type, it tried to convey luxury on the cheap.
Even with GM’s poorer quality in 1985, I would have preferred a Pontiac 6000 V6, or even another another A-car with the 2.8 V6 and without the Brougham treatment.
I was impressed that a 3.8 V6 LTD had enough torque to chirp the wheels–in 1985, for me, that stood out, a few weeks after the car caught my attention when a couple of these, probably rentals going from JFK to LaGuardia, blew by us doing at least 85 on the Cross Island Parkway in Queens.
But when asked by my dad, “what do you think?”, knowing that him getting this car, or any new car meant that I would inherit a car that I liked for free, I could only say “great car–and it’s pretty fast too, without a thirsty V8!”
Best of both with this mod, Tom:
Thanks, but respectfully, I like the original boxy Fairmont.
The Fairmont looks balanced. The LTD side profile worked, the rear end worked, but the front end….no. Not for me at least. Nor would an 83 T-Bird front end have worked.
The first guess is usually the best guess. The ‘2nd place’ designs are usually the “new and improved” follow ons.
True of the Fairmont. True of the 2nd gen F-car from GM (Firebird/Camaro) and the A-Car (6000/Celebrity), and GM’s 1977 full-sized cars, and GM’s 1978 mid-sized cars. All of these got uglier with each iteration. IMO.
I agree, but I do like them both. Currently own a ’78 Fairmont 2 door sedan with a factory 302, a 3.8 powered ’84 LTD Brougham, and my unicorn, an ’85 Marquis LTS.
Agree the LTD name was misplaced, but by the 70’s, after Galaxie was dropped, LTD came to mean simply ‘Ford family sedan’, until Taurus.
Exactly. LTD got kicked down the model name heirchy just like the rest of them, to the point it was nothing at all special on the Panther platform. Landau and Crown Victoria took the thrones LTD trim once represented, and LTD became the taxi spec stripper, it even had a dowdy two headlight front end.
Funny how US model names like LTD and Bel Air have a long history of going down to cheaper cars over time and disappearing, while Japanese model names like Civic and Corolla both last for decades and slowly move upmarket, with new models like Fit and Yaris appearing below.
Civic and Corolla always applied to an entire line of cars with the same bodyshell (or bodyshells in years multiple body styles were offered), they moved upmarket as that body grew with each redesign.
LTD, Bel Air et al were traditionally applied to *only one trim level* which got pushed a notch downwards every few years as something new came in above it.
My parents traded a V8 Zephyr for an 84 or 85 Mercury Marquis, a “twin” to the sky blue LTD pictured here. I asked my father what he had paid for the V6 Marquis, and thanks to inflation it was a few thousand dollars MORE than the V8 Zephyr. They liked both cars, but my father decided he needed his own car and so bought a Corsica.
A Co worker bought a LTD brand new in 1985. He brought it to work and parked it. Come quitting time, he was going crazy trying to get going. He had set the parking brake and couldn’t figure out how to release it. He asked me if I knew. I couldn’t find a release handle so I looked in the owners manual. The brake released automatically when the car was put in reverse.
As a package, probably the best Fox sedan/wagon. Living where I do, these were very common for a time. While handsome to a degree, up close the exterior was a bit awkward. The doors were Fairmont carry over, and were mismatched to the quarters that were restyled beyond the wheels. The side trim made an odd transition between the wheels and was used to fill in the Fairmont’s side character line. Add the “transition” chrome bumpers that were integrated in sort of like vinyl bumpers, and you had a design compromised by budget and hesitation to go with body color bumpers.
The Fox LTD never looked right to me; whenever I see a side view of one of these I always imagine a triangle floating above it to complete the look, much as with the logo for the band Asia whose peak popularity happened to coincide with Fox LTD production, and whose shape resembles the LTD’s. Facelifting an old boxy car with new rounded fenders whilst retaining the squared-off doors never works – see also the ’87 Bonneville or late-’90s Rover 800 that didn’t make it across the pond.
And as noted in the writeup, it was trying to be too many things to too many people, yet never felt like a proper LTD. I’m curious why Ford didn’t drop the clumsy LTD Crown Victoria moniker for the Panther after 1986 when it was no longer necessary, and after the ’92 redesign dropped “LTD” completely. Likewise why Mercury kept using Grand Marquis long after there was a not-Grand model it needed to be distinguished from. (Grand Caravan, I’m looking at you too.)
I remember these from an 80s childhood as well. Their sales numbers surprise me as I never would have known these sold so well: I saw very few of them even when they were new cars (my car memories go back to about 1985-6 or so). By the 90s, I only recall seeing a few of the wagons. I do remember being surprised and confused by the Marquis sedan and wondering why Ford would make one when there was a much nicer Grand Marquis out there. Admittedly, I was a little bit biased as I was already a confirmed “Brougham Bro” by virtue of the 1983, 1986, and 1988 Grand Marquis LS models my grandfather owned in the 80s.
In hindsight they seem like perfectly serviceable mid-sized sedans that might have been accepted as adequate replacements for the Panthers if the fuel crisis had continued, but there’s no denying the Taurus was a far more dynamic and appealing design, and these, if remembered, should be for getting the public used to what would become the “new normal” for the mid-size “full-size sedan” that (for now, anyway) continues today.
I also think these are what the H-Body was a response to, which is why it looked so less cutting-edge next to the Taurus.
I never thought of the K car as a shrunken LTD. Interesting viewpoint, I can see the merits.
Ugh, the mere mention of the Merkur XR4T1 or whatever it was called brings me vivid memories of why I hated those cars. Mostly because of the way they were driven, cutting people off, tailgating on the highway, etc. All in-neighbourly driving, including the one that a friend of mine owned. He had to be one of the worst. Actually now I remember, he had the Scorpio. Just as bad.
You mentioned the 83 LTD Crown Vic. I knew someone who had one, I always thought it a nice car. They told me they could not drive it and use the AC at the same time, or it would not start after shutdown. True enough I saw it with my own eyes, the car driven, air being used, then next start up it would not fire. Strange. They got out of that car pretty soon after and into a Chevy.
Awful terrible car. Fairmont was a better car and the second generation Granada was beautiful. This car was terrible with it’s ugly styling and horrible 3.8. they shod have kept the Granada instead. The seats in the baby LTD was the worst I ever say in. I hate baby LTD.
Great story, just so readable. A superb reverse-take on aero from a crucial moment in automotive styling.
One of the local taxi companies here used them almost to the turn of the millennium. It must’ve burned them that the Fox platform went on another seven years after these, as two-door coupes only…
Something I didn’t realize until recently is that the rear area of the Fox LTD sedans is lifted straight from the Fairmont Futura basket-handle coupe and the taillights will interchange.
I can state through personal experience that those dorky wheel covers came from a base model ’95 Dodge Caravan.
These Fox bodied 6 window cars felt like the closes the US got to the Australian Falcon/Fairmont/LTD , especially the V8 engined LX. I don’t know how much that helped sales and I was certainly never in the market since my 80s performance ideal was a Volvo turbo station wagon
“The Fox-Granada’s rather gruesome re-style…”
Gee, that’s kind of harsh. I factory ordered this one and thought it was rather handsome at the time, at least a better integrated styling than that of this faux-LTD successor. I fluffed mine up a bit with optional bucket seats, a floor shift automatic, and a heavy duty suspension that made it a more enjoyable ride. The 200 in six was underpowered but reliable, unlike the 3.8 that I avoided. The sacrifices we made following two major fuel crises and a period of constant gasoline price increases…
I will also come out as one who prefers the basic shape of the 80-82 Granada to the 83-86 LTD. The earlier model could certainly have been improved with some aero updates. I have always wondered if the thought process went something like “Well we sold a lot of Fairmonts but we can’t sell these Granadas, so lets make the new one look more like a Fairmont.”
When I was growing up, one of our neighbors had one of these. It was gold, which given the selection of pictures above, may not have been a common color. At the time, I liked the angular yet aerodynamic styling and I still like them today. And even then (late 80’s – early 90’s) I also noticed that these weren’t exactly common cars which struck me as kind of odd as it seemed like the kind of car that would be popular. Undoubtedly their relatively short run played into this. Sadly I never got to ride in it.
My neighbors were the type to keep a car forever, and this LTD was no exception. At some point it looked like it was no longer a driver, but it stayed around for a while longer as a driveway/lawn ornament until finally it disappeared. Only to reappear again later as they apparently just moved it into the garage, which is filled floor to ceiling with stuff with some vehicles also buried underneath. I don’t know if they eventually got rid of it or if they still have it for that matter.
The extra size added to these really makes the LTD look like it is wearing its father’s coat in the side-on views. The Fairmont wheelbase to overall length ratio was bad enough as it was, and the small tyres/wheels don’t help either.
It is an interesting car though, especially the LX version, and really I don’t know what more Ford could have asked for as a stop-gap before the Taurus. I wonder if the name change to LTD helped, or if they would have been just as well to stay with Fairmont?
I remember the ballyhoo and commercials when this car came out as if it was some all new car. Then looking at the engine lineup and seeing one in person at our local Ford dealership in late 1982 it was so obviously last year’s Granada which was also a Fairmont. Even the engines were carryover with 2.3 1BBL L4, 200 six and 2BBL 3.8. Why Ford didn’t put TBI on this engine for the introduction of this car is baffling and would have gone a long way towards trying to impress the public.
Dad test drove a 1983 dark blue LTD with the ancient by then 200 six and boy was it slow with all 3 of us in tow. This car weighted some 300 LBS more than his former 1979 Fairmont which was handed down to me unfortunately later on. For some reason 2.3’s and 3.8’s were initially not readily available, at least at this dealer, so it was 200 six in all it’s 91 HP glory.
My dad’s brother had one of these. It was a 1984 3.8 wagon with the 3 speed C4 transmission. Initially it was okay but after a few years the problems started cropping up. Overheating, shaking on the highway despite numerous tire changes and balance jobs, the transmission went south around 60K followed a year later by the rear end and the 3.8 needed it’s top half rebuilt due to failed head gasket which in turn cracked one of the heads. Surprisingly the A/C never quit working and the Ford power steering fiasco that plagued most other Fords of the era didn’t happen on his car. Perhaps his Ford dealer replaced it when he motor got it’s engine work done. It was this car that turned him away from Fords and his next car was a Volvo GLE wagon which didn’t fare all that much better after the miles started piling up.
This is my first posting on this site, ‘longtime reader, first-time caller’. This car was supposed to be mine when I turned 16, It was my grandmother’s car, who developed Alzheimers and died at 76 years old. I remember it had 46k miles, and was 14 years old. The last time the car was in our possession was around 1998, It was a fully maroon 1984 Ford LTD, with the 3.8 liter. Im going completely from memory, because I was about 14 or 15, but I remember my uncle, who was only about 10 years older than I, driving it around like it was a stolen cop car, minus the reckless zeal that may have been afforded by the 5.0. It was leant to my mothers best friend, a single mother in need, who wrecked it several months later, before i could initiate my 1st car romance (or should i say broughamance). I’m a GM ideologue at heart, but i want to say this subjectively: the LTD, much like the Taurus, has a symetrical proportionality that was just missing from a comparable a/g-body of the time; what the ’78 Grand Am or Malibu could’ve become, (pre-formality), had they that intangible essence. Anyway, what a respectable blend of foreign sensibility, universal symetry, and american practicality. This is an opinion completely devoid of any fact or historicism, im just projecting an ideal… and appreciating a design likely under appreciated. What a neat evolution! My hat off to fomoco.. it makes the ’85 n-body that much more underwhelming, if possible