(first posted 3/22/2012) Let’s make our trip to the bustle-back era complete. We started out with the 1981 Imperial, had a lengthy and controversial visit with the 1980 Seville, so let’s finish it off with a quick look at the last to join this flash-in-the-pan. The Continental arrived in 1982; like most fashion fads, the bustle-back spread faster than the latest flu. But as the last on board, the Coninental had perhaps the most tasteful; in fact it barely qualifies as a genuine bustle-back. Lincoln focus groups showed that the bustle-back was not really very popular, so they toned it down. TheProfessor47 posted this 1986 Continental at the Cohort, so let’s give it the once over.
The Fox-bodied Conti arrived in 1982, as a thankful relief to the pained Versailles that it replaced. Compared to that pimped-out Granada, this was pretty tastefully done, if this whole (dead-end) styling direction is your thing, baby. It would have been even better if they’d ditched the long-outdated fake spare tire hump; that they even put it on the Mark VIII shows how hard it can be to let go of an icon.
The fact that this was built on the Fox platform showed what creativity and a bit of engineering elbow grease can do. Who would have thunk the lowly Fairmont would morph into this? Well, the Fairmont was a bit more honest, but the Connie still did the trick. And with the endless possibilities to upgrade its drive train and suspension, the Continental certainly makes for a much more appealing car to consider actually owning and driving today. Right, Mr. Tactful?
Just as unappealing as the seville to me. And for the same reasons.
Weird car. I drove a heavily used one in the mid-nineties, and it went like a bat out of hell. It was comfy, and floaty and fast (at the time). Surprised the heck out of me.
My father bought a 1 year old 83 or 84 version of this car, in two town silver and charcoal. By the time he got it, I was driving either a 77 New Yorker with HD suspension or an 85 GTI. The Continental had air suspension and I found its handling to be not just bad, but scary-bad. But Dad loved it.
I do recall that it seemed to be built very well and had a very solid feel to it, so it was not hard to think of as a proper small Lincoln. But I was never so much a fan of the style. By 1984 or so, the look came across as dated to me, no longer a fresh (though controversial) look as in 1980-81.
Between this, the Imperial and the Seville, this would probably have been the best daily driver, as the drivetrain was better sorted out.
It’s certainly right! There is all sorts of shit to fall off and fix on a 302-powered Lincoln, but the car will take you to the parts store quite reliably in the mean time.
“And with the endless possibilities to upgrade its drive train and suspension, the Continental certainly makes for a much more appealing car to consider actually owning and driving today.”
^this is why I can’t walk, drive, or internet browse past a Fox body sedan, coupe, or wagon. Too much potential. Mustang suspension upgrades, would you like 5.0 or 4.6 power, manual or automatic transmission, want to keep the air suspension? The posibilities are endless. The Fox is almost like Ford’s version of the W-body. They made it everything to everybody depending on the brand and the price point.
Slightly better looking than the Seville, but rather stubby, which negates any advantage.
Continental hump. Hmm. I have mixed feelings. It certainly was outdated by that time, but it worked much better on the Mark VII, partly because of the shape and partly because the lack of lettering around the edge. It seemed to be more integrated with the rest of the car, unlike the Continental. Perhaps I’m biased, since I owned a 1988 LSC for 14 years. The Mark VIII had more of a swoop than a hump, they should have axed it then.
Given a choice, I’d take the Continental, but I would worry about the air suspension going wrong. How often have we seen one of these or a Mark VII sitting all the way down on its suspension, front end, rear end, or both.
(I meant given the choice between the Seville, Continental and Imperial bustle-backs)
With the ‘Continental’ letters removed, it looks a lot more like a Mark VII from the back.
What an improvement! Deleting those letters even appears to alter the shape of the hump.
I found a photo of a Mark II, which has a halo of script much closer to the center emblem. That would look good on this car, I think. Give it a little more character.
Heaven help me, but I rather like this car. When it was new, I wouldn’t have given it a second glance. But with the passage of time, it can grow on you. Of course, so can moss.
We came very close to buying a Valentino edition off a used car lot, on Van Nuys Bl.
But, we were spooked away by the failing air -suspension system that seemed to have stuck off in the down position.
Rebounding off this, we bought the 88 Celebrity without even Power windows.
My grandparents had an ’83 Continental in silver over gray tue-tone (the same colors as my ’88 T-bird) when I was a kid. I remember that the car was comfortable and felt pretty solid to a 5 year old.
The 86-87 version of the cars is the best to get if you want to modify them. The came with the lopo SEFI 5.0. It’s really easy to swap to MAF and a HO 5.0, which would make the car much more fun.
Every one of these that’s still remaining and not in a junkyard has the bustleback rear just hanging off the rear tires. The air suspensions in these must have been notoriously bad.
In other news, the styling of this car just plain sucks. I think it was regarded as a pretty decent cruiser for its day, I could just never get over the disjointed styling exercises. It tries to look luxurious, classic and aerodynamic all at the same time.
They were and are bad. I remember when I worked at Sesi’s car lot in Ypsilanti I carried many of those bladder/struts across the parking lot to the dumpster. Those buggers were heavy!
Arguably, the Lincoln is the nicer looking between it and the Caddy, the Imperial was the best effort from a strictly design point of view.
The mechanics? Well…that’s another story, Caddy was probably better, but I was driving K-Cars and other assorted Chrysler Corp. products back then, so what did I know?
Is what you’re saying is the Imperial was the best looking of the three?
If so, I would agree heartily.
I wish they would have been a better designed/engineered/assembled car in general. What’s so annoying, it’s not like Chrysler didn’t have the potential to do so. But I guess they only had so many resources to deal with so many issues at once.
Remember when Chrysler was thought of as an “Engineering Company”? Torque-flite, torsion bars, unit body construction… I would love to see those days again.
I would love to see a return to the Mopar of the 80’s. Innovative ideas, and the ability to execute them. To use a hackneyed phrase, thinking out of the box. While selling thousands of them.
Maybe because it was a time of my life that resonates with me now, but I was exposed to plenty of those cars at the time they were new. I found many of them to have a different vibe, compared to the other domestics and the foreign competition.
I could see the new Chrysler-Fiat led by the Chrysler engineering team taking back that low to mid price arena, with innovative ideas like the ones proposed in the 80’s. I’m very interested to see how the new Dart is received and what further ideas may be coming down the pike. My hope is that Sergio really DOES know what he’s doing.
I’d hate to see Chrysler die a death by a million cuts. Rather they burn out like a super nova, than crash with a whimper…
St. Sergio is going to sacrifice everything (Chrysler, Jeep, Ram) to resuscitate Alfa Romeo.
I feel like this is FoMoCo’s proper answer to the 1975 Seville. These cars, at least the 1987 model we had were extremely reliable, and if the air suspension developed issues you could switch it over to coil springs with all the Fox commonality. The interior is the best part of these cars with all the toys that FoMoCo could stuff in a car, it had real wood trim except the ’87 full digital dash with trip computer and some nice front bucket seats.
It’s disappointing that neither Cadillac with the 1st gen Seville nor Lincoln with the Fox Conti never put together a “touring package” with tuned suspension and sway bars, hotter engine (5.0 HO on the Conti, 403 with the Bendix/Bosch setup on the Cad), and maybe a manual gearbox to have a genuine response to the import sport sedans.
I’m sure somebody in Ford product planning thought the BMW-Steyer Turbodiesel WAS the hot engine! Haha.
Its at least as awful as the sevile but with genuine Lido fakery. Sorry but I much prefer the Aussie Fords of this era for styling.
Of course Lido was long gone by the time this one was under development, but I suppose plenty of his acolytes still were in positions of influence at Car Product Development.
I’m with you on the Aussie Fords. I think I’ve mentioned that my colleagues and I would take a stroll through the executive garage at Ford World Headquarters on rainy or cold days and often would encounter an Aussie or Euro Ford. We always would marvel at the designs and wonder why Ford was foisting the same old crap on the North American market.
I don’t know if I or someone else is misunderstanding this; I’m not “safe as milk.”
Oops; sorry. I’ve already forgotten why I thought that this morning – already seems like a long time ago. Will fix!
What I always liked about these over the Seville and Imperial, besides the bustleback being very subtle, was the vertical taillight treatment. That alone has me sold on these. Plus I like the interior, ride, handling, ect. better than the Seville too.
See though this is what I mean, the Seville is slammed, this is a blatant knock off the Seville, based on a cheap car, (75-79 Seville Deadly Sin anyone?) same 100 and something wheezy V8, and host of other issues(ever seen one crawling along the floor with a dead air suspension?) Any yet the article almost compliments the car. I doubt it would recieve the same treatment if it was a GM car.
Chill out Carmine. This is a CC Capsule; I/we don’t really editorialize in Capsules; no GM DS Capsules either. A few quick facts and observations, period. And I think I make it quite clear that this thing is hardly my thing. It would not be fait to do a DS Capsule, since that takes a substantial amount of information and research. Capsules are mostly meant to generate comments. Go ahead and call it a DS as much as you like. I might well join you in it: I didn’t like these then, or now. Is that good enough? Probably not.
Still, if I had to chose between the two, it would be this one, with steel springs and a few other readily available goodies.
The Seville also cost 10% more than the continental, which is about $5000 in today’s dollars. The ‘Conti gets a slight nod for still being RWD……
Let me add a couple of more points, which I didn’t have time for earlier. The Seville earned a DS for three main things: Styling (subjective) Three of the worst engines ever built (fact), and it sold 40-50% less than its predecessor (fact).
The Continental’s styling does nothing for me, but it’s relatively less bad than the Seville’s, inasmuch as its tail is not as extreme, and is better integrated with the rest of the body design/shape (subjective). The Continental had the bulletproof 5.0 and the very fine BMW 2.4 turbo-diesel optional (fact) Its air bags were prone to eventual leakage, which was fairly easy and cheap to fix. (fact). And the continental sold well enough, in any case much better than its Versailles predecessor. (fact). The Continental was built on the very versitile and adaptable Fox platform, making upgrades and improvements of all sorts easy and cheap. (fact)
The scorecard strongly favors the Continental, subjective styling aside.
I remember that it didn’t take long at all for the air springs on these to start dying. Those of us who worked for Ford at the time didn’t know whether to cringe or laugh when we saw another Conti with a sagging butt.
If anyone wanted to do a Ford’s Deadly Sins series, this one definitely belongs on the list.
What always makes me cringe is when I see any of the bagged FoMoCo cars for sale where they tout how it’s had it’s air suspension converted to coils. At leas 50% of the time all they need is a few dollars for a set of O-rings and they only take a few minutes to install. The air struts used do seem to tear sometimes and they aren’t cheap but it still doesn’t cost more tor to fix them properly than convert them to the worse riding worse handling coils. Around here there is a guy that often advertises on Craigslist that he will convert a Panther to rear coils for $600 and for that much money you can replace the bags and compressor even though under a $100 usually does it and even there is a torn bag that’s only $300 out the door.
I’ve only driven one of these ever, it was a super low mile 1985 Continental I took in on trade for a brand new 1996 Buick Riviera, it was low miles, something like 13K on the clock, light and dark blue metallic, with blue velour guts, It seemed so boaty and small at the same time, plus, like most Lincolns, the interior is filled with the same cheap Ford hardware that was in an LTD or a Tempo, right down to the upside down U steering wheel that every for car at the time had, with the horn on the turn signal stalk(WHY?) and those curious Ford power seat controls mounted inbetween the seats, so you couldn’t have a middle passenger.
I think the wood inside was real, so thats a bonus, and the passenger side of the dash had a cool illuminated “Continental” nameplate when the lights were on, similar to some Buicks from the era. It drove like it weighed 8000 pounds, every input, throttle, brake or steering was like a delayed response.
While it’s by no means my favorite design of the 1980s, this Continental pulls off the “bustle-back” look much better than the Seville. This is for a few reasons, in my opinion. The bustle is more subtle, and the taillights balance the trunk vertically. On the Seville, the taillights are horizontal and mounted low, making the top of the trunk look unfinished or chopped off. Also, the front of the Seville is very squared off, whereas the Conti’s front end is curved.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll always have a soft spot for these. My grandfather’s last car was a brand-new 1987 Continental, special ordered in rose quartz with dark taupe leather, moonroof and the spoked aluminum wheels. He traded in a midnight blue 1977 Mark V for it, and I remember going with my dad to the dealership to pick it up. I rode in it many times, and it always felt like a substantial vehicle. Carmine, you reminded me of the illuminated Continental script on the instrument panel; always thought that was a cool touch. When my grandmother passed away in 1995, that Continental was still perfect and ran like a top. It never had any issues with the air suspension. If I ever get a second ‘fun’ car, an ’87 Continental, ’79 Bonneville like my dad’s or a ’91 Volvo 940SE would be at the top of my list.
What were we smoking (collectively) back in the 80’s? Who thought it was a good idea to make a ‘luxury’ car look like a tiny, British saloon? I never understood the appeal of bustleback cars, no matter who built them. To view them from the outside was a certain kind of weirdness.
I’ve mentioned this before, but I came from a family of Ford owners. I worked at a Ford dealer in the early 1980’s, too. Upon release of the Seville, I was less than impressed, as the styling didn’t appeal to me. Of course, I was in my late teens, not the target market for the car. But one needs something to aspire to. Then the Imperial was released which I thought had the superior styling of the three. By the time the little Connie was released, I thought all of the Detroit stylists were all sharing ideas over breakfast. And none of them were any good. Oddly enough, many of the same styling cues on the Connie looked great on the LSC.
I know it’s silly to base your opinions on the looks of a car. I guess maybe I just associate these cars with a particularly bad time (for domestic auto makers) and would just rather they disappear. Of course, that all of them had serious problems upon release, this only reinforced the idea that the domestics were putting out crap and marketing it to a very important demographic.
To this day, I don’t feel a particular need to display my wealth (ya, right, how many graphic designers do you know are wealthy?) with anyone’s higher end model. I do like many of the recent Cadillacs, for reasons not related to my wishing to project my status in life. But Chrysler stopped being a prestige marque with the demise of the 80’s Imperial, and Lincoln is floundering more and more by the minute. Lexus and most of the Germans have an image that I don’t want to project.
I think that eventually I will be happy to own a really nice Chevy or Buick. Of course, I’m not the class of people who needs to display my wealth (ha!), but with the way cars are equipped today, the cheap-o Kia Rio has more equipment than those bustleback cars could ever dream of.
Why bother with a really expensive car?
The styling is better executed than the Seville, yet it creates no excitement at all. The Seville had real potential to be a nice looking car. You can’t resiist describing all the styling faults of the Seville because if they were fixed, you’d have something quite nice. The Lincoln we see here doesn’t have the potential to be better looking. It’s inoffensive enough, but meh. I’d rather have a Seville.
We had one of these when I was a kid. Must have been a late model because it had the digital dash and the face-lifted front end. We got rid of it when the back suspension went out, somewhere past 200K miles. I don’t think that suspension made the car a lemon, per se – it just had a more complicated suspension design that was less forgiving of neglected maintenance. The real issue is that no mechanics knew how to/wanted to work on that system, and in the pre-internet era, we didn’t know about the coil spring conversion option. Otherwise that car was mechanically quite reliable, and the low output 5.0 was cheap to fix. I think it would also pull about 28mpg on the highway with a responsible adult driving.
The wood in that car was not real, and not at all convincing. It rode like a cloud and was never fast, but had adequate power. I recall in particular that it was quite small inside, given its external girth. I think my first generation VW Golf had a more comfortable back seat.
It also had every option imaginable, including a proper glass sliding sunroof, trip computer, motorized front door vent windows (which I’ve never seen before or since), automatic highbeam dimmers (which would freak out when they encountered a reflective road sign), an electromechanical rear view mirror dimmer, and, my personal favorite, the motorized trunk latch. I never understood why Lincoln (or Cadillac) figured that little old ladies would be able to reach overhead and pull the trunk down, but wouldn’t be able to close it that last inch without assistance.
@ I never understood why Lincoln (or Cadillac) figured that little old ladies would be able to reach overhead and pull the trunk down, but wouldn’t be able to close it that last inch without assistance.
The best question of the day. I never understood this either. I had this feature on my 63 Fleetwood as well as on my 89 Brougham. Any convenience in trunk closing was offset by having to tell anyone else who went to shut the lid “Don’t Slam the Trunk Lid.” Trust me, that came up a lot.
My 1988 Buick Electra had the electric pull-down trunk latch as well. I figured that it would be one of the first things to break; it never did! And that car was 21 years old with 221K miles on the clock when I finally sold it (to a Craigslist curbstoner who put it right back on CL for 3x what he paid for it but he probably ended up only getting 2x, a month later).
“Don’t slam the trunk lid” did come up a lot. I always assumed that something would break, but now I’m wondering what would actually happen if it was slammed shut.
I wouldn’t have been willing to risk finding out.
I knew a few people growing up that had late 80s Brougham’s and some of the last RWD fully loaded Oldsmobile 98 with load leveling suspensions and trunk closing mechanisms. If one got accidentally slammed usually it just bounced off the mechanism and went flying back up, making you feel sheepish. You would blush and slowly close the trunk.
When I was a teen my parents had an ’88 Dodge Dynasty LE (say what you want but I loved that car, it was nice) and it had the pull down mechanism. We had a few passengers that would need to get into the trunk and without fail I would try to yell “Don’t slam the trunk!” but it was always too late. Wham! Thankfully it never quit working while we had the car. I have seen a few Town Cars and Park Avenues with broken mechanisms, it always looked like the trunk wasn’t closed all the way.
I never did understand how these came to seem so cramped inside, especially in back. The Fairmont, as cheap looking as it was, was a decently roomy car.
Overstuffed seats? Actually The Conti had an extra four inches of wheelbase over the Fairmont too. I think it was largely expectations: it was a luxury car four door, and folks just assumed that meant luxurious space too. I bet the Conti had as much or more rear leg room as the Fairmont.
I rode in the back of my grandparents’ ’87, and it didn’t seem tight on space. Granted, I’m 5’10” so you might think otherwise!
Along with the Cadillac, I think this is great. Especially this immaculate example here. I’m sure there are very few Fox Lincolns as nice as this one left.
I have to disagree with the people that claim that these air struts were cheap or easy to fix.
In 1988, when your 1984 Lincoln was practicing it’s downward facing dog yoga squat you had little choice but to see your L-M dealer and pay their you can only get it here pricing for parts.
It’s easy to say today that these are easy and cheap to repair but it’s only because of the explosion in aftermarket support in the early to mid 90s.
I wasn’t a fan of these Contis until recently. They may be the only Fox you can easily find that’s totally unmolested!
They may be the only Fox you can easily find that’s totally unmolested!
So you can molest it, right?
I’ve always wanted a Hot Rod Lincoln! 😀
No air struts on the Fox bodies, standard bags all the way around. The air struts didn’t show up until the following Taurus based Conti’s (all 4 corners) and the Mark VIII front only. The O ring kit from Ford which is the most common problem was only about $8 per corner back in the day. The bags yes were $150 or so each back but as long as you didn’t drive it and drive it and drive it with them fully deflated it was very rare for them to need replacement that early in their life. Unfortunately not many people outside of the Ford dealership had a clue on how to properly diagnose and repair the systems. Heck my 92 CV is still sporting all of it’s OE RAS components.
I thought the Mark VIII had air springs on all four corners?
A little late response but yes the VIII has 4 corner air suspension but the fronts are air-over shocks while the rear is the common air bag.
After mentioning the Fairmont/Fox origins, nobody mentioned the 84/85 LTD LX 5.0 HO! That was a pretty neat 4 door with some decent power for that era.
There’s a small town between me and Iowa that has an 84 Squad that’s been upgraded to 351 power for sale. The Fox LTDs were tidy machines.
Yeah those LX or police Fox LTDs are sweet little gems of the 80s, they’re just hard to find in unbattered condition, if at all. Interesting part about the LX was that it was marketed at the faux euro-sedan market like the Eurosport Celebrity and Pontiac 6000STE. The difference being the LX actually was rooted with genuine performance aspirations due to the likes of Bob Bondurant.
My father had one of these things.
It was an amazingly comfortable vehicle on the open road. Blue velour ingterior. White exterior. The only issues were the airbags (three times!)and the a/c system (once). Then again, my father commuted to NYC five days a week and took long trips to bridge games during the weekends.
The engine and transmission were likely the least stressed powertrain components in the entire Northeast. He never went over 60 mph. Never more than 2,000 rpm’s. Always came to a full stop from reverse before shifting into gear. If the airbags and A/C were more robust the car may have ended up outlasting him.
He traded it in on a 1991 Lincoln Mark VII that he drove for 10 years. Perfect car. No faults. Then a 2001 Lexus ES300 that I told him not to lease… that he ended up buying out after the fact. The Lexus I just financed to a fellow who seems interested in keeping it right. I still wish I had the other two vehicles.
I had an 84 Continental with the factory option BMW engine. The engine was far superior to the body but I love the styling of the car.
Others have mentioned the Cadillac Seville in this article. My parent’s had a 1979 Seville back in the day, which was equally undependable. It was a shame because I thought both cars were handsome.
I quite like these…always have…though I like the Seville even more from a styling perspective. The original (’82 to ’84) upright nose styling of the Continental didn’t live up to the drama of the semi-bustleback tail–when they went to this “aero look” nose styling for ’85 it really worked better. In my humble opinion, anyway. Plus, as has been mentioned, you have an entire aftermarket’s worth of Fox suspension and 302 engine goodies if you want to make it drive as good as it looks.
The air suspension components had a limited life span, true, but I think they’re unfairly maligned. Maybe the parts availability used to be a problem but now, in the Age Of The Internet, there are aftermarket suppliers (Arnott in particular) that produce good-quality replacement parts for quite reasonable prices. And while the ride on these may have been biased way too far towards comfort, you can achieve decent to good handling with still remarkably comfortable ride with the air suspensions. One trip in a Mark VII LSC or VIII should be proof of that.
In a way, these were the last gasp of the Exner influence, which shows how much clout his design philosophy had, even at a point in time that it was generally disdained. The idea of applying classic-era inspired roof lines, faux separated trunks and radiator-shaped grilles to envelope bodies died a hard death.
As these cars go, this one is nicely detailed.
Some cars look fine with the “bustle back” look, while others just look awful. The Cadillac Seville looked good with the “bustle back” tail, but this generation Lincoln Continental simply looked tacky.
I really dislike these Continentals. Up front, I can’t get past the exposed windshield wipers that scream ’79 Fairmont to me. Out back, the barely a bustle seems wishy washy. If you’re looking to rip off a classic era Rolls, just go for it with gusto like the Imperial and Seville. That sad little character line dribbling off the c-pillar looks like an apology from the design department after the marketing guys told them the focus group hated the concept. The tail lights are offensive. The front half doesn’t match the back half. The whole affair is stubby and fat. The fake spare tire hump looks like Iacocca made them glue it on. When you see one under power, it looks like it’s waddling. They were offensively expensive, considering it was a rebodied Fairmont. Damn, I haven’t seen or thought about this era Continental in years. Thanks for reposting Paul, I enjoyed hating on it. 🙂
The two-tone paint. I forgot to bitch about the two-tone paint. Awful.
I think Lincoln lost an opportunity to modernize their signature Continental spare tire hump by not combining it with the mid 80’s required 3rd brake light. These two features combined could have been stunning. They could still be. Nowadays with led’s this could be a real stand out styling feature. For all the hate about the Continental spare, Noone complains about it on the back of a Jeep or a Rav 4. Love it or hate it when you saw that hump in front of you you always knew it was a Lincoln. I’ll bet Lincoln would like to have the sales numbers today that they had when they had such “tacky” styling features as that hump. The split grille thing has run it’s course and it never caught on. Go back to the late 70’s grille or the 74 or the 63. Most people old enough to remember when Lincoln had split grilles the 30’s and 40’s are either dead or they don’t remember their own names.
I think Lincoln’s big problem as a brand today is that it’s trying to forget the stand up grille/faux tire hump era at all costs. If you went by the “Lincoln Motor Company” heritage ads you’d think Lincoln’s entire timeline was the model K, then the original Continental, then the Mark II,then the 61 Continental, and now the MKS.
They could harken their current styling back to……..the ’58 models……that would be really unique!
Interesting idea. But it seems that designers have not successfully integrated the third brake light on many cars, even after all these years. It reminds me of how slow designers were to integrate reverse lights—which became a requirement when, in the late 60s? But well into the 80s and probably early 90s, they often were treated as a separate element or add-on, as if they had forgotten about them until just before the drawings went out the door.
I always liked these, not as much as the Mk. VI or Town Car, but I thought they pulled it off well. I think the Continental hump, the two tone paint, the bustle back, etc. all combine to make a nice little Broughamtastic cruiser.
I hope they put some sort of nod towards the Continental hump on the new generation Continentals…
When I was young and foolish, I thought the spare tire actually was underneath the hump on these cars.
Please tell me I’m not the only one…
By the time these came around I knew better but on the earlier cars with this styling feature I was disappointed when I found out that the spare was not in that hump.
It actually was in the ’56-’57 Mark II’s, standing upright in a well underneath the hump. Kind of impeded access to the trunk, though.
The most common question about this photo is if the spare tire hides underneath.
Look at it this way: Many SUVs? continue to hang their spares out back, to free up interior space; they just don’t gift-wrap? it with a Conti kit.
I’d take one of these in a heartbeat if it was in good condition. Of course I couldn’t leave it alone. Preferably it would get the power train from a Mark VIII along with the air suspension computer so that it would lower itself at speed. Aftermarket sway bars and bushings and rear control arms of course. Then to top it all off a set of 03 up Town car 17″ wheels with the required spacers to compensate for the offset wrapped in some Max performance or UHP summer rubber. Still a cushy ride by today’s standards but the ability to embarrass sporty cars in a straight line or the corners.
That car went under my radar, this is the first time I see one. I don’t think they were ever imported to Israel (you got a top spec Fairmont I think if you wanted something like this) or Austria. This is the beauty of CC, you learn something new every time you visit the site!
It is too bad these went to the Taurus platform in the next generation. The Fox platform was getting a lot more sophisticated from suspension work being done on the Tbird turbo coupe. Imagine These replaced in 1988 with a new Fox body that had a line of diesel and gas BMW inline sixes with a high output 5.0 at the top. Volvo like seats, perhaps from the Euro Scorpio, that both traditional and young buyers can agree are great. Better than the lousy Taurus Continental with it’s crappy motor and a style that both traditional and modern buyers agreed bland.
The sophistication that Lincoln prices allowed development of irs for future that would be passed gradually down to Mustang and Tbird protecting and enhancing their lines and avoiding the MN-12 platform fiasco. Ford could have spent less money and had a better product
And why was the MN12 platform a fiasco? Yeah, it came in somewhat overweight, but that aside the MN12 T-bird/Cougar were pretty universally agreed to be good cars if you avoided the troublesome 3.8 V6.
A platform too expensive to make, too big for Mustang, too reliant on style of the 76 630csi, or was it the 65 Corvair, an engine compartment in intial form designed for nothing but the 3.8. If half the money allocated to it were allocated to Fox development, what I described above could have happened. Ford salvaged something and made the MN12 good driving with V8, but for the money spent they should have been so much more.
At the end of the day, though, the coupe market was withering on the vine by the mid-1990s, and ultimately took the MN-12 platform cars (along with the Cadillac Eldorado and Buick Riviera) with it. So I’m not sure that a lighter, more cost-effective platform would have made much difference, unless it had been passed down to the Mustang, as you’ve said.
Even then, might not have mattered. There was absolutely no reason they could not have built a new coupe on the DEW98 platform that underpinned the Lincoln LS and Ford Thunderbird. (or for that matter made a 2-door LS.) The fact that they didn’t speaks volumes about the coupe market at the time.
Perhaps it could be argued that, if the MN12/FN10 had been lighter and more versaitle, there wouldn’t have been need for the DEW98 at all. But it doesn’t matter either way, the market at the time had no room for coupes.
I don’t know if you’ve ever looked closely at the DEW98 but there’s quite a bit of MN12 DNA in it. In fact MN12s were used as mules by Ford during development.
Remember the underlying friendly argument was that the Continental stay on the fox has it updated. If that happened, with the flagship of the platform so expensive and here to stay development could have been more lavish than what actually happened with fox just Mustang. The DEW98, if necessary, could have been so much better had there been no gap. There would have been a team working for years, who knew just what to do on a new platform.
A more continental Continental on fox could have attracted more young buyers than the Taurus one, which competed with Town Car too directly. The fun part for me is thinking what else could then happen, like securing Tbird/Cougar/Mustang/Mark/ early CUV?
It was Fiasco from corporate perspective, not a consumer perspective. All of John’s points are what made it so(except I think the E24 like styling was an asset, not a liability). The MN12 didn’t meet many key targets laid out for the program, and the platform itself never became anything more like the Fox did because of the cost per unit, size and weight. The MN12 isn’t big and heavy by today’s standards so that probably softens the disparity in the lineup in 1989, but those cars in fully loaded SC form could tip the scales at 3800lbs that year, whereas Mustang 5.0s were still 3000lbs wet. There wasn’t a lot of places it could go at the time that wouldn’t have puffed up the would be models based on it, except maybe as a Panther replacement(which was rumored at the time in addition to being the Fox platform replacement for the Mustang).
I disagree with the notion of continued redevelopment of the Fox though, it had some significant inherent limitations and quirks that were never truly solved even in the SN95 era, even the IRS used in the Cobras didn’t help matters much. The MN12 was a far more rigid, refined and composed chassis, it really just should have been less bespoke to the models based on it.
Jaguar and Rolls Royce both had notable models that incorporated bustleback styling, as well as other less makes (the Triumph Mayflower comes to mind). Most of the British “originals” had fender skirts of some type….we should be thankful none of the “Big 3” examples included this “feature”.
I’m in the minority here, I thought the bustle back cars made the automotive landscape a little more interesting, and that the Seville was the best of the bunch with its frameless door glass and generally cohesive look.
The Imperial and the Continental both had some nice elements, but things like bumper integration, trim integration, tail light integration, and on the Imperial rear license integration were weak points. On the Continental, the Fairmont style window wipers on the cowl and the exposed roof seam at the top of the sail panel were especially egregious for an American luxury car of this era.
I still maintain that the styling trends of the 1980s might have been very different if the Seville had been a paragon of quality and reliability. The ’80 Seville was the original poster child for Cadillac’s quality woes of the 1980’s (first GM car with standard diesel!), which certainly does nothing to help it being remembered fondly. The fact that all three bustle backs are associated with specific quality issues (Engine-Seville, Fuel Management- Imperial, Suspension-Continental) also doesn’t help matters.
The subject car sports a few added and incorrect badges. However, the Continental badge on the sail panel actually works for me.
Here’s the one I owned years ago…traded a set of Snap On box wrenches and Snap On screwdrivers for it…needed a heater core, and the seller got the dash apart but couldn’t get it back together. Nice, reliable little car. On REALLY cold mornings the air ride would deflate then it would take a minute or two for it to go back up.
I’ve always liked these cars, and the Sevilles too. They were different and for that reason it made them stand out.
Not bad cars but not particularly memorable either. Fun fact- the 1982 first year of this car actually had an available Essex 3.8 V6, the same engine that also appeared in the T-Bird/XR7 and Granada/Cougar with 112 horses and 175 torque at a very low RPM. A 132 HP carbureted 302 was the main engine. The 3.8 was wisely dropped for 1983 and the 302 got TBI and 130 HP. 1984-85 302’s got 140 horses and in 1986 it was treated to port injection and 150 HP and much better throttle response and overall performance.
If having to choose between this, the Seville and the Imperial I would go with the Chrysler with fuel injection delete and a good old 4BBL carb and rear end ratio upgrade in nice original condition.
“…Like most fashion fads, the bustle-back spread faster than the latest flu.”
That carries new weight now, because I wouldn’t say it was THAT popular!
many of Ford’s Foxes always looked like they had baby wheels – this Continental suffers from that and it never looked to me anything other than, well, goofy
Inferior to the first generation Versailles in every way imaginable.
One thought: didn’t the modern bustle back revival in American cars actually start with the 1974 Riviera?