For all I know, the Fox-based Continental was a joy to drive. Tom Klockau certainly has fond memories of the one his grandparents owned, the story of which he told yesterday (read it here). I’m no stranger to having rose-colored glasses for a car; after all, I have fond memories of my dad’s Oleg Cassini Matador (story here). But having always looked upon these Continentals from afar, I always thought they were a major misstep – a wannabe and a pretender, nothing more than a heavily gussied-up Fairmont.
This one, of course, has the droopy rear end that became this car’s signature look by the time they were showing up on the last-chance used-car lots. I can’t remember the last time I saw one of these with its butt held high.
The empty gallon jug of Hawaiian Punch by the driver’s door adds class. It says more about the decline of my neighborhood than about the car, though. (I took these photos at the grocery store around the corner from my home.) I’m not 100% sure about this Continental’s year but it’s from no earlier than 1984 as it has the front clip from that year’s design refresh.
Its at least a 1986 due the high mounted center stop light. The aftermarket ones offered to retrofit to older cars in the 1980’s(it was an insurance premium lower in the 1980’s) were black. This one has the carpet of the parcel shelf over it.
I like these cars and though it sags and is a gussied up Fairmont it had a few things going for it. It was midsized, comfy to drive, was traditional RWD and had a fuel injected engine and it hid the Fairmont relationship well enough. By contrast GM’s caddy division downsized(except the RWD Fleetwood) to cars that looked too much like Olds and Buicks(I love Olds and Buick alot but why buy the Caddy if you can get a lot of the same stuff for cheaper??) plus it had that horrible HT4100 engine which alone causes me to pass over any 1980’s Caddy’s
I guess Lincoln had learned from the mistakes they did with the Versailles who looked too much of a modified Ford Granada.
Yes I think of these cars as Versailles done right, something to go head-to-head with Seville.
But it was also a Mark VI 4-door replacement and could be thought of as a Mark VII 4-door. I guess the Conti and Mk VII were Ford’s Seville and Eldorado.
Really confusing since Continental used to mean something else entirely. Then we have the ultramodern Taurus based Conti which went in yet another direction. Have no idea what the equivalent 2013 Lincoln would be. I view the CTS as the successor to the Seville.
Calibrick,
I would think that the equivalent 2013 Lincoln that compares to the Continental is the current MKS. Like the Taurus-based FWD Continentals, the MKS is basically a glorified Taurus.
My co-worker has a 2012 MKS. I can easily see the Taurus heritage there.
That’s very interesting about the third brake light lowering premiums! I’ve bought a couple cars from the era that had evidence of there being one mounted at some point and I’ve wondered why they bothered. Now I know.
That and some people thought it was fashionable. People would also retrofit flush lenses on cars.
True about the fashionable but for the most part it was to lower insurance. I owned a 1980 Malibu sedan that my grand dad had as a second car and he had one installed which is how I came to find out why folks retrofitted these CHMSL(Center High Mounted Stop Light) on older cars. It was a rarer one then most I have seen as it was inside attached to the parcel shelf and was adjustable for better visibility. Most I have seen of that era were mounted on the trunk lid with clips(saw a bunch of Fairmonts and cutlass supreme sedans with it mounted on the trunk.
It was bling for someone. Who cares if it was a guzzied up Fairmont if the Fairmont was a good car that was a good as any place to start. Its not like most cars today arent guzzied up versions of other cars plus shared parts of lesser cars.
My 91 Mark VII looked like that when I bought it (and that’s why I got it so cheap). I turned off the suspension and jacked up the rear to see what was wrong. The only problem was that the height sensor was unplugged. I plugged it back in, set the car down, turned the suspension back on and vola the car was level. Its held air fine since I reconnected the sensor.
Most (of not all) of the problems with the sir suspension on the Fox Continental/Mark VII have to do with either the height sensors, o-rings on the air solenoids in the air springs, or the air springs themselves. Thanks to aftermarket parts you can replace those components fairly cheaply. The problem is by the time the car gets to its 3rd or 4th owner it’s usually a struggle for them to top off the gas tank.
Sadly, drooping rear air springs are a hallmark of neglected 80s domestic luxury cars.
Apart from that and the flaking bondo on the left rear fender, this one appears to be in fairly decent shape, though it also looks like the current owner is indifferent to its condition. I especially like how the car sports two whitewall tires and two blackwalls, one apiece per side, on opposite corners to boot.
Wasn’t this supposed to be the Mark VI 4-door replacement? One of those cars that I appreciate much more now than when it was new.
I don’t think so. Both the Fox Continental and Mark VI were available side-by-side in 1982-83. I would say the Town Car Signature Series/Cartier Edition replaced the VI.
I really liked this car back then when new. Now after all these years I find out it was a gussied up Fairmont. Sighhhh…..
Well then they obviously did a good job of disguising it’s compact car roots.
I don’t get the Fox-body hate. It’s a good chassis. So what if it ws under the Fairmont? Most Audis are VWs underneeth. Many automakers luxury cars share underpinnings with its lesser offereings. Have you people who hate on it’s “Fairmont chassis” driven a Fox-body with a V8? It’s quite fun.
Same here. The Fox chassis had inherent limitations, but really so does every chassis. The Fox is one of the most versatile platforms created. It was perfectly sized, well engineered for the times, simple, lightweight and RWD. Because of all of that, every car based on it managed to look and drive uniquely to each other due to a wide array of engines, suspension setups and wheelbases. Between that and being the canvas for some of the best designs of the 80s, it’s hard not to like it IMO.
+3. You know, the Mustang was “just a Fox body” too. And the Thunderbird…and the Mark VII LSC. They weren’t ALL Fairmonts…
I don’t get the hate either, the platform lasted long enough so something must’ve been good about it. Ford certainly got their use out of it. I think it’s an attractive car for it’s era. I never noticed before but it’s interesting that it’s another car that copied the Seville’s styling. And for the disdain the Seville got, it sure inspired a few copies. I’m a GM guy but I think this is one of Ford’s better looking cars for the period. It’s a pity this one might be a beater, it’s been well kept. Kind of surprises me a car this old is still getting into beater use.
The Continental was a copy of the Seville just as the Versailles was before. However, unlike what is commonly thought, the 81-83 Imperial was NOT a copy of the Seville. What became the Imperial was done on paper by January 1977 and in clay by the beginning of 1979. The car was originally slated to be introduced in 1980, but due to Chrysler’s fiscal woes and Iacocca’s decision to upgrade it to Imperial status delayed it a year.
As for me, I like the 82-87 Contis much better than any of the FWD models. They look classically Lincoln.
What was it intended to be originally? An all new model or a LeBaron or Cordoba replacement?
According to allpar.com, when the design was originally penned it was intended to be the next-generation Cordoba, or to possibly wear a all-new model name: Chrysler LaScala.
Having owned an ’84 (w/o air suspension problems), I feel sad when I see one of these droopy guys. It just seems so neglected. I’ve even seen an old ’84 Valentino (like mine) in this state in downtown Chicago. When I cruise ebay/Auto Trader/Hemmings I always look for this vintage Continental just to see them in their glory.
Oddly I like these Continentals much better than the Seville, despite them being fairly blatant copies. The bustle is more restrained and the vertical taillights fill the deck area better than the Seville or Imperial’s low horizontal tails in my opinion. Though I’m not as big of the fan 84-86 aero noses as I am the blunt nose ones. To me the 82 is pure elegance, the 84s look a bit odd in comparison(although they’ve grown on me).
The “bustle” was supposed to evoke the look that was prevalent in the 30s and early 40s when trunks were first integrated into the bodies of cars. The Seville specifically was thought to have been additionally inspired by Hooper coach builder in the UK:
http://www.rrab.com/feb08.htm
I think the Imperial acquired a bustle as a secondary means due to the character line present that was carried into the lower quarter panel from the C pillar in effect separating the trunk area.
The “bustle” was supposed to evoke the look that was prevalent in the 30s and early 40s when trunks were first integrated into the bodies of cars. The Seville specifically was thought to have been additionally inspired by Hooper coach builder in the UK:
http://www.rrab.com/feb08.htm
I think the Imperial acquired a bustle as a secondary means due to the character line present that was carried into the lower quarter panel from the C pillar in effect separating the trunk area.
http://moparmax.com/features/2007/ii_4-bollinger-6.html
The Imperial was supposed to be the Chrysler LaScala, who knows if it was a Cordoba direct replacement, but was in the works before Iacocca came on board. Iacocca turned it into an Imperial and gave it the bling that it became.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZAEAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA38&dq=chrysler+lascala&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7Y7BUbi5L6L0yQGdrIHACA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=chrysler%20lascala&f=false
Perhaps along with the Taurus derived FWD models, a low point in Lincoln history; both in terms of design and build quality. The bustle back Seville was one of Bill Mitchell’s few styling miscues and Ford’s blatant copying was a doubly bad mistake; it was ugly and it added to the image of Lincoln’s lack of styling innovation, merely copying Cadillac’s lead.
As least it’s not as bad off as this one.
Also, I remember Robert Duval deep sixed one of these in The Apostle, in an attempt to disappear after killing somebody.
At first I thought that was mostly an overseas thing (where in many 3rd world countries such things are less funny and more “necessity is the mother of invention” … But apparently not as this pic was clearly from North America.
Aside from the logistics of getting the thing in the window, power would be the biggest problem. The Lincoln above it toting a generator but some of those a/c units draw a lot of 120/240.
Actually, an interesting CC would be a discussion of the old car coolers that used to be mounted on the windows of cars from the 30s to the late 50s. I remember my father speaking of them.
Jim — Considering the neighborhood, I’m pretty sure that was NOT Hawaiian Punch!
Yeaahhhhhh, probably vodka.
My Mom often used to say, “if your friends jumped off a bridge, would you do that too?” That’s how I feel about Ford copying the 2nd generation Seville. I don’t know if I ever told her that I absolutely would have jumped off a bridge after my friends had demonstrated the survivability of doing so, but I don’t recall the steamer trunk Seville’s reception looking like a good time.
I can see your point Jim, but the stance of this particular Connie speaks more to a lazy/cheapskate owner than any flaws in the car itself. I bet Eric Van Buren could fix this Connie’s ride height in no time!
One of the strange things about the Fox Continental is that it took a platform originally noted for roomy sedan interiors (in the Fairmont) and somehow made it cramped, especially in back.
I think if Ford had waited a year, bypassed the Granada based Versailles altogether and introduced this in ’78 at the same time as the Fairmont/Zephyr, they would have done much better.