Niedermeyer’s hate for 1971 big Fords is a tired old trope hereabouts. It started twelve years ago, when I excoriated one (tongue in cheek) back at the other site, also to be found here at CC. I’ve been hearing about it ever since, even though I came ever so close to buying a ’72 version. It would have been my redemption if I had, so I guess the issue is still an open question.
Now that I’ve found another ’71, a fine LTD coupe no less, here’s my chance to redeem myself. Have my feelings changed in twelve years? Was I unfairly harsh? My family tells me I’ve mellowed a bit with age. Does that apply to 1971 Fords?
To answer that, we have to consider where and why my juvenile loathing for these first developed. I got a job as a lot boy at Towson Ford in the fall of 1970, just as these new ’71s were arriving. I was a rebellious long-haired kid, tagged a “hippie”— as compared to a “straight” — in the highly polarized atmosphere of the times.
I was also a car freak, and deeply ingrained in the cult of imports. Yes, there were a few domestics for which I made exceptions, like the 1970 Camaro Z-28, but for the most part in my world view, most domestics were boring, dull and highly uncool.
Of course there was some relative nuance to that. A four speed 2.0 L Pinto was obviously fun to flog, but then except for its silly low and impractical body it was in essence a European Ford Cortina.
I actually found the ’69-’70 big Fords not all that objectionable, in relative terms. Their rounded contours were more appealing that the hard edged ’71s, and I rather liked the hidden headlights. I drove several ’70s that were still on the lot, and I used to “borrow” a ’70 LTD coupe service-department loaner on a number of weekends, and rather enjoyed wafting along with three neighborhood girls in the front seat next to me. That’s what big wide bench seats are for; well, among other things.
I was not a fan of the new ’71’s styling; the “Bunkie Beak” seemed affected, and of course echoed Bunkie’s beloved Pontiacs, whose beaks had run out of steam, and charisma by 1971. There was an echo of the Edsel as well. No wonder Hank gave Bunkie the boot so quickly.
I wasn’t a fan of its rear end styling either. The third red center “tail light” also struck me as affected. I thought the ’71s were retrograde, with their blocky and chiseled styling. But that’s all highly subjective.
Driving them gave me the distinct impression that they were inferior to their predecessors. They felt less of one piece; the handling and steering were softer and mushier. There was a loss of structural integrity; stiffness, in other words. And that’s a serious negative in terms of handling as well as perceived quality.
It wasn’t just my imagination: Turns out Ford really did made changes to the ’71’s frame and body that were intended to presumably increase isolation, but the at a price. The structure from the cowl forward felt flexible, a bit like a convertible with out adequate stiffening.
There was also the issue of performance. The ’71s were more sluggish, when comparing 351 equipped cars. The gross hp rating for the 351 dropped from 250 to 240, presumably because of emission regulations. The ’71s were some 200 lbs heavier than the ’70s. Whereas the ’70 with the 351 still felt adequately-powered, in the ’71s they felt decidedly weaker. No wonder the new 400 V8 found itself under the hood of so many of them. FWIW, its 260 gross hp rating was a bit less than the 390 two-barrel that it replaced. Again, with the greater weight, they too felt slower. Retrograde.
So between the sloppier handling and floppier bodies and the reduction in performance, can you blame me?
So much for the more objective parameters. I admit to having had something of a bias against LTDs, precisely because they started the whole Brougham Epoch in 1965, which represented just about everything that I was in deep rebellion against. My politics at the time were pretty radical; the LTD was as convenient a representative of the status quo as well as anything. Sure, I wasn’t above getting paid to drive LTDs, at least until the revolution came…
In the meantime, they made great weekend party-mobiles, with their big comfy two sofas…the sexual revolution already had arrived, ahead of the political one, which was presumably just around the corner. The trick was to navigate the LTD around the corner.
In February of 1971, two weeks after I turned eighteen, I packed my Boy Scout backpack and split Towson, hitchhiking west. I left the security of those soft cushy LTD interiors in Towson for standing on the side of the freeway, freezing my butt off. Life is a series of trade-offs. And I was plenty happy to hop into an LTD or its ilk when one pulled over, although that was very much the exception. LTD and brougham drivers did not pick up hitchhikers, unless one of their kids had Dad’s car.
So what’s the verdict? Yes, the ’71s were objectively inferior cars to the ones that they replaced. Stylistically, that’s debatable, but to my eyes they’re also inferior. Does that warrant my loathing?
Um, maybe in 1971, but who gives a damn anymore? The differences between the ’71s and its predecessors would be night-near impossible to discern after all these decades.
This one seems to be in reasonably good original condition, and its owner still drives it regularly. She was just leaving as I stopped, and was amenable to my grabbing a few shots including the interior before she headed out. Looks like it’s got a big tach, although I would be hard-pressed to know what actual use it has.
Before I forget, the ’71’s dash material felt cheaper to me than the ’69-’70, but my bias might have been working a bit overtime.
I love finding CCs like this, genuine survivors still being used as daily drivers. How could I possibly have any negative feelings?
And I saved its best angle for last. In this color, it’s a fairly handsome car, for its time, although it’s pretty obvious Bunkie told the stylists to think of the 1967 Eldorado when they came up with this. Of course it’s way too big, heavy and thirsty for a coupe, but that’s some folks still hankered after, instead of a BMW 2002 or Datsun 510. To each their own.
I’m not seventeen any more; that was 51 years ago. Of course I’m still the same person, and the logic of this big coupe that was lost on me then is just as questionable as some of the motoring choices I see folks making today. To each their own. And it’s nice to see that there’s some still loving the ’71 LTD today as others were in 1971. This owner may well have fallen in love with it back then. She was a bit too distracted with her phone for me to ask. Some things have changed; others not.
Related reading:
CC 1971 Ford Galaxie 500 – Domino’s Delivers Even If Ford Didn’t
Auto-Biography: Getting Paid To Break (In) New 1971 Fords
Auto-Biography: Thanks For All You Car Buying Advice, But I Bought This 1972 LTD Instead
CC 1971 Ford LTD Convertible: The Name On The Title Starts With The Letter N Jason Shafer
I could never get over the combo of hard plastic and a traditional padded dash. Tiny glove compartments and the gauge package lacking (no surprise). And just where the hell had the vacuumed lights gone? This car appears to have tilt column, with factory air which cannot be common in the n/w. As also it’s daily driving duties. Thank God it’s not a Marquis – Paul’s commentary would not be so measured by the passage of time.
Hmm… I’m not 100% in love with the Bunkie Beak in most of it’s appearances, but the front of the 1971-72 Ford has grown on me in recent years. I must say that I’m a fan of the rear treatment of the 1971 LTD, though. Being that the center panel actually illuminates, it has a reason to be there… even if only to connect the span between the two outer tail lamps at night.
The tachometer reminds me of this elderly lady who lived in the old folks home behind me when I was a little kid. She was extremely hard of hearing, and would rev the piss out of her 1974 Galaxie immediately after the engine fired… this would carry on for 30 seconds to a minute or more before she would ease off and back out of her parking spot. It pained my six year old ears to hear that strangled V8 hissing through its single tailpipe, blasting the pavement below with soot and rust chips. It even made an unusual smell as she unknowingly thrashed it. I of course asked her why she did this to her car (six year old mind), and she told me that she just wanted to be sure that the engine didn’t stall… and of course it never did while it was running at 4000rpm! It’s one of those instances where a tachometer could’ve been warranted on a girthy old Ford sedan.
Wow. Brings back a memory of the same type. Doing electrical work for my dads company in 1985 at a an apartment complex. Getting gear out of the truck on a cold morning and I heard …what ? A turbine ? Some elderly woman had just started her fuselage mopar (that’s as exact as I can get from nearly 40 years ago although although I do remember it being a faded red) and apparently she just put that pedal to the floor and held it. I don’t know what RPM it was that but I have never heard a car sound like that. My best is 7000 rpmMore like a leaf blower. Then she drove off. Lots of fun to conjecture what was happening in the long term affects. May be a lot of where on the cylinder boards with the cold start and the potential choke conditions? Engine could be pretty beat but for a little old lady driving around town might not of mattered that much.The car was at least 15 years old at that time and I I’m sure that wasn’t the first time that when it was done and it was still running. Anyway thanks for bringing up that memory.
Keeping the engine running when cold was a common issue with ’73-4 cars because of the exhaust gas recirculation. The catalytic converter was a godsend in ’75.
My great-grandfather was sufficiently hard of hearing, even with the hearing aids of the time, that we’d have to shout when talking to him. When he traded in his ’65 Rambler for a new ’79 Malibu, he killed the new 200 six within a year because he couldn’t hear how fast it was revving while he was warming it up on cold mornings. Apparently, he’d never had this trouble with the Rambler because even at 14 years old it would idle from a cold start, unlike the brand new Chevy. Fortunately, he took the event as an indication it was time to give up the keys at age 85.
Once Again: Paul and I agree on a car.
#GMTA !
Looks like they stole the dash out of the ’69-70 Cadillac, too. Was the aversion to light on the instruments a Nader issue, or did they just think it was cool (it wasn’t)?
I got part of a ride home from college with 2 girls in one of these (or a ’72), the first leg was in a Pacer. The mixup in the meeting place in Richmond is what sticks in my mind, Boulevard not Broad exit; the LTD was just dark, particularly after the giant Pacer windows.
If the evolution of the automobile had ground to a halt in 1976, and never resumed, I could almost see myself owning one of these LTDs at some point in my life. I have owned a 2009 Crown Victoria and have driven several 60s and 70s Fords, but in the face of where cars are today, or even were 25 years ago, I think this is a car that if I owned one it would rarely see road use. If nothing else, I would rather own a full-sized Ford convertible of the same year.
Still, it’s a gorgeous car. I love 2 door sedans and hardtops.
Fun fact: for years the Nebraska Driver’s Manual used a drawing of the back of what was obviously the ’71 Ford to illustrate a driver using hand and turn signals.
Paul’s observations on this car are totally fair, and with his close proximity to it; authoritative at that.
I’m a lot softer on this car, probably like its suspension. I was 7, these were EVERYWHERE, probably the number two car in the country, selling the better part of a million units every year. They seemed a bit more cohesive to me than the ’68 – ’70 Fords that lost the crisp goodness that I loved in the ’65 – ’67 Fords. And, I found these WAY better than what came in 1973 – a big box with flat ends with Ford styling cues drawn on.
Not an improvement…..
I have to agree. Those ’73 Fords were ungainly in their handling. They looked to be a thousand pounds heavier than their predecessors.
As for the ’71s, I don’t like the way-too-enclosed front end that unnecessarily blocks side view, and looks like it would act as a suction device for oncoming rainwater, air, or birds. I never understood the middle rear taillight. Was it a reflector? Did it function for braking? What the hell was it anyway?
I think the ’66 Fords that they used in some tv shows of the time was the best design of that era for the LTD.
All that said, it’s excellent to see a classic with its owner going out on a weathery day for some driving duty. It looks to be in outstanding shape. The dash looks like it’s possibly original and still intact.
I do hope this Ford stays around. Just don’t take it down Paul’s street.
I’m 86.278% sure the rear middle tail light lens was lit. Kind of a simple variation on a near full width tail light. These did stand out as instantly recognizable in my youth, so for that reason alone I’m actually kind of fond of it. It may be the first car I recognized as a Ford.
The middle section lights up. In the article Paul liked to, I wrote up a ’71 LTD convertible. One of the pictures shows the middle bar lit.
However, I am pretty certain this light bar did not exist on the lower trimmed full-sized Fords that year. It was a chrome or some other type of panel.
Yup.
Funny how times change; I look at this and think “So much chrome!”, but there’s a fancier one…..
Correct – the LTD had the lighted middle panel, while the Galaxie 500 and below had an unlighted trim panel that I believe was some combination of black and aluminum. So in 1971 it was the rear end that advertised that the owner had spent money on “the good one” while in 1968-70 it had been the front end with hidden headlights on high-end models.
The rear of the 72 was awful by comparison.
Long time since I’ve seen these. Wasn’t the center area between the tail lights just body color with no trim panel on the Custom 500’s?
Correct, the custom 500 was plain, I actually think it looks nicer than the Galaxy with the trim piece
I think someone has added those two horizontal chrome pieces to the black Custom 500 in XR7Matt’s pic. Here’s what I think the factory stock look, on a Custom 500 featured in a past CC article. Very plain yes, but I kinda like it.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-outtakes/cc-outtake-1971-ford-custom-500-the-plain-tail-light-ford/
These cars were everywhere when I was growing up – and a high percentage of them were either Country Sedans or Country Squires. The two-door hardtops were not very common. By 1971, domestic full-size cars worked better as four-doors and wagons. The hardtop coupes seemed pointless.
Interesting comment about the body becoming more willowy for 1971, as the same thing happened with GM’s new 1971 B- and C-bodies. My parents had a 1976 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale hardtop sedan, and it wasn’t uncommon to see the fenders and hood “dancing” on country roads. And that car was not a junker at the time. It’s my understanding that Ford did tighten up the body for 1973, but the handling remained as nautical as ever.
Big coupes were still big in ’71. Over 28% of full-size sales were the hardtop coupe with 264,338 sold. 103,896 in this exact trim alone. In the LTD line, only the Country Squire outsold it with 130,644 units.
Statistics being what they are, you can make this out to be a bestseller. 117K in Galaxie 500 trim vs. the next best four door sedan at 98K. However, combine four door sedan and hardtops (145K), you have this in second place.
Thank you for the production figures. I don’t remember many full-size Ford coupes of this vintage on the road…buyers of full-size Fords where I lived preferred the four doors and wagons.
My fondness for these and other seventies barges is, I think generational. When I was in
my teens and early twenties in the late eighties through the nineties, cars of this ilk were
cheap and fairly frequently owned by friends as beaters/hobby cars.
Then there was the nostalgia aspect, as my age group grew up in these.
But as a functional object they do leave much to be desired and I would not want one
now.
Thank you for writing the auto equivalent of the scene in “Hollywood Boulevard”, where Norma Desmond is spotted for the first time and described by the narrator that she eventually murders.
I hated big cars for the reasons we see here. I am hard put to find anything about the entire line of full size Fords from 1968-1979 that appeals to me. What changed my mind was the Panther. Not the first years, but after Ford began adding improvements and value to them. Not that GM or Chrysler did big cars better – they didn’t. I learned to drive in a 1970 New Yorker, a 1973 Dodge Royal Monaco wagon, and numerous Ford LTDs that my brothers, cousins and I used to call “Streets of San Francisco” cars. It didn’t matter if I was plowing the roads in an Oldsmobile, (Chicagoland’s favorite car), Chevrolet, or Pontiac – US big cruisers were horrible, but profitably sold by the millions.
So I couldn’t wait to get out of these vehicles. Even in nostalgia, I get nauseous looking at them. I think that is one of the reasons I despised GM’s ginormous 1991 Caprice, 98 and Roadmaster – they reminded me of pre-downsized road barges.
Paul, it isn’t you – it is the car.
Good reference to Sunset Boulevard!
Oh, I’m going to steal “Streets of San Francisco Cars”, if you you don’t object, Mr Dude.
See, we got small handfuls of US big cars, and these particular Fords did come to Australia, in RHD, but they were rare, and the very last factory full-size US ones that did get sold. To my kid-eyes, the other maker’s biggies looked indistinguishable, and really all I knew of other gigantic and slippy-slidey US iron came from watching that very show as a little kid, with my grannie, on her boomy old green and white whatever TV it was. Presumably, old Zoe was there for the plots: I was glued-on for the car chase scenes, because I LOVED the fact that these gigantors slid so very much, and fishtailed, and bounced up and down even when they’d stopped. It looked cool! Even as a littlie, I somewhere knew that this amount of barely-controlled cavorting meant bad, sea-sicky cars, but it was the entertainment they gave that I wanted more of.
Local road tests, read much later on, were either politely focused upon the smooth-road ride, or the better (impolite, accurate) ones all said that any Big Three variation on these Bigmobiles were all dynamically atrocious. Interesting to hear an insider’s view that they were just that. (By “insider”, I mean a US consumer, for whom these all were just cars and not the exotica they were in far-off here).
So, no, it’s not just Paul. Unlike him, I really rather fancy the gloopy, Edsel-ish looks, for reasons I can’t justify – though it is true that an Isotta-Fraschini, they are not!
But they ARE forever made to roar over the hump of San Fran hill, and bounce undamped all the way down it, and then turn sideways at the bottom in a glorious screech, even if their real pursuit was the ratings, and even if their real-world goodness was about as desirable as that of the overflowing ashtrays in every other scene.
I used to wonder at all those bouncy, floppy cars on TV. Cars I saw on the street didn’t behave like that, except old Austin Cambridges. But then, Hollywood. Maybe they changed out the shockers for old worn-out ones, to get more dramatic camera footage?
This generation of Ford products reminds me of Henry Ford II during this same time – rich, bloated, wasteful, lazy and sloppy.
Not just an aftermarket tach but an aftermarket gauge cluster too. I do miss oil pressure and voltmeter gauges on most new cars, though admittedly they’re not as crucial nowadays.
When I was growing up, two of my neighbors whose driveways were adjacent had a ’71 Ford and a ’70 Pontiac, both usually parked with their parked with their nose facing out, so I could compare these two Edsel-adjacent grilles directly. Pontiac’s was much better (with those odd small round grilles on either side – what are those called?), though still a bit odd.
This is one of those cars that used to be so common and then one day they all vanished without you knowing it. I look at that tailllight design and I say, “Oh, yeah–I forgot about those!”
This LTD is a long way from the idea of a Ford being a smaller, simple, upright, firm-riding, boxy car that still had a little of Old Henry’s DNA in it. I would say that persisted thru the ’50s, but the early ’60s Fords were still excellent, well-made cars compared to this thing. They got worse from here: 5 MPH bumpers, ill-conceived solutions to emission regulations, more plastic and fake wood, more bloat–do you see why they called it the “Malaise Era”? But people still bought ’em by the trainload!
I suppose if you wanted “smaller and simple” in 1971, the salesman would direct you to a Maverick or a Pinto, but those were even more insufferable, with equally dismal survival rates.
Still, there is that little touch of nostalgia. These Fords live on in Dirty Harry movies, but do Dirty Harry movies live on? They used to be on TV quite often, but I haven’t seen one broadcast in a long time.
Dirty Harry movies can still be found, every now and then AMC seems to run them on a weekend and the various free smart TV apps has usually them available
I’d say they live on the most in the James Bond movie Diamonds are Forever since it’s a currently running franchise and people may go back to discover the old movies(I know that’s what I did), it’s a shameless smorgasbord of 1971 Ford product placement, every car chasing him is a 71 big Ford’s.
Less remembered but excellent 71 Ford thrashing is White Lightning and Freebie and the Bean.
From a exterior styling standpoint I never found the 71s that bad, but I have an admitted fondness for the heavier fuselageish styling cues of the early 70s across the board. Full size American cars after about 1965 or 66 aren’t very appealing to me to begin with but these, the fuselage Chrysler’s, and yes even the 71 B bodies were a little blip of appealing until they fully succumbed to full dull conservative boxy broughamitis by the mid 70s. That however is just from a cosmetic standpoint, build quality, and performance I understand the vitriol these cars deserve.
I have been sort of opposite from PN over all these years. I loved these when they came out – they were real luxury to my 11 year old eyes in the fall of 1970. But as both the cars and I got older I discovered how cheapened they had been. PN did not imagine how big Fords went from taught-but-soft cars to floppy-and-soft cars. The interior materials (like the dash) got noticeably cheaper. I maintained a flame for the 65-70 Fords, but not these.
I will say that I like the looks of these better now than I did a decade or so ago. Compared to the 73-78 versions, these had a taut quality (at least in looks) that went completely away with the Blob Look of 1973. Today: the car is a mixed bag in my eyes, but I am glad this one is here still providing transportation.
I’m a Ford Loyalist who can’t see these objectively; for me the question is whether I’m happier with the “beak” on the full-size Ford, or on the Thunderbird where it appeared a year earlier (IIRC). As something intended to be distinctive, I guess I’ll say it seemed more appropriate for the personal luxury car:
And I share with JPC fondness for the 1965-70 big Fords; I’d love owning one in 2021!
In the mid-70s I worked as a tech at a big exhaust OEM that was working a deal to make systems for the then-new Rabbit. Five VW engineers flew out from Germany to test the prototypes for fit and performance, staying for about two weeks. We picked them up at the airport in a ’74 LTD which they looked at in disdain, but after the first several nights of dinner and fairly heavy drinking, I think they grew to admire the LTD as all five of them could fit in the LTD and and still have room for a company employee driver who didn’t drink to drive them back to their hotel.
We have Shepherd Air Force Base here in Wichita Falls. Last joint NATO training base left. Back in the 80’s the first thing all the European trainees did was buy a big American barge and “customize” it. It was so different from what they had at home.
When my son left for grad school in 2010 I gave him my ’91 Crown Vic (which was in excellent condition).
He made many German friends while there, and several of them offered to pay him as much as $5k for the car. He couldn’t understand why the guys (who loved riding in it) wanted to buy it, they coming from the land of MB, Porsche, VW, Audi, etc.
Their answer: a chic magnet in Germany.
He kept the car as $5k wouldn’t buy him much in the way of a reliable used car.
Definitely a fan of the Ford sleds…first was the family ’70 wagon, 351W, didn’t survive the first year of driving. Next was a ’69 LTD wagon with a 429, the college daily driver for 5 yrs. Was a Florida car, so great in ’81 in IL where most were rusted & gone. Did a 400 engine swap along with a C6 rebuild, 1 trip to CA , FL, hauled grain wagons & anhydrous tanks for the farm, engines & engine hoist for the odd jobs. Loved the vacuum delay wipers, power bench, 3 way tailgate. Once was rear ended in TX, the Nova was totaled, I got $250, replaced a tail light. Repleat with others, 3 ’69 convertibles, a ’69 Galaxie, a couple of 2Dr fastbacks. Gave away a ’69 4DR LTD from AR, no title. Alas, none made it past the late 90’s, although I caught up to a 2 Dr fastback in FL at a show a few yrs ago, only one I have seen with a 429 & 4 speed…nice !!
Well all I can say is the 71 LTD is my favorite full size Ford of the whole decade. I personally love the styling. I think they’re beautiful, even in Custom 500 trim. I stupidly passed up an opportunity twice to own 71 LTD coupes because at $1500 and $950 in 01 I thought they were overpriced, seeing as I had bought a clean 78 2 Dr LTD Landau for $600!. And sadly now I’m just as cheap meaning I’ll never be able to own one. But I’d love too.
Unlike many here, I don’t have strong feelings about the 71 Ford. However, I’m loving that this one soldiers on as a DD and still in pretty darned good shape. As a 71 model myself, I can really appreciate that!
My guess is this car had an exceptionally easy life for a good chunk of its life and at some point got pressed back into service as a low mile survivor. The front seems to be riding quite low, I dont recall that as a common problem.
Thinking about it a bit more, I realized that I like the 71 Ford only in the sense that I like big barges of the era generally. If you were to offer me a free mint copy of any 71 fullsizer, all things being otherwise equal, the Ford would be at the absolute bottom of the list. Even the Mercury would be ahead of it. Not that I hate it, I just would prefer any GM, Chrysler, AMC or Lincoln/Merc. That would probsbly hold true for midsize 71 models, too.
First, I like that the owner drives it regularly and clearly likes it. It’s a fantastic example, and I think its minor rough edges (rust bubbles under the vinyl roof notwithstanding) add to its charm and likeability.
That frontal styling, though. I’ve been watching reruns of “Police Woman” lately (with the smoking hot Angie Dickinson) which are chock full of these cars – all of them looking like they’re sucking lemons or puckering up.
How does a ’71 Ford get a free pass where people still talk about the hideousness of the early Edsels? I just don’t understand.
I give it a pass because but I don’t understand what’s so bad about Edsels!
Ok I kind of do. But where I think Edsel failed in its horseshoe center grille (anatomical jokes aside) was a big standup center grille was very out of place with where American car design was going by the late 50s. The 71 Ford’s bunkie beak may not have been that attractive but it was definitely of its time, where all sorts of cars were sprouting neoclassical central grilles, the LTD may not have been the greatest execution of it but I don’t think it was the worst. Actually the company Bunkie came from did it much worse to my eye, a year earlier!
Whatever it’s merits, these were sure popular back in 1971. For all its flaws, these were extremely quiet, smooth riding cars, and that’s what the demographic for these cars cared about. Far more of these were seen than the full-size Impalas/Caprices. Ford bested Chevy in the sales race in 1971, and the big Ford was a big reason.
Chevy bloated the full size cars in ’71 also. Ford an GM where highly competitive with the all-new ’65’s that lasted to ’70. I remember seeing those ’71-on Fords when they got old with the whole front structure basically collapsed and not from rust.
I love 70s Ford fullsized cars. They drive so nice and are very reliable and easy to fix and they don’t rust like gm B bodies did. I personally like how they steer and ride. The 73 was a little bland but the 75 ltd Landau package fixed all that. I like these 71 and 72 cars very much as well. Ford should bring them back instead of the awful junk they build now. Full sized Ford, Lincoln or Mercury are my favorite cars.
Late to the party here, but you all know how I feel about these.
The ’71(s) and ’72(s) were my favorites styling wise of this generation, although a ’78 Landau in the color of the subject car (Midnight Blue, I believe) would be a favorite as well.
But one always looks back fondly at their first car….
I had a 69 Galaxy 500 convertible. Midnight blue metallic, medium blue interior, white top. Damn that car was beautiful. First car, wish I still had it.
My grandfather purchased a brand new misty blue ’69 LTD 4 door sedan. When he passed away in the fall of ’71, my father inherited it. It was the most comfortable car that we ever had. I absolutely loved it and was trying to work my dad into saving it for me but we only had it for maybe a year when someone t-boned it. My dad was okay but the car was totalled. My dad owned a lot of cars over the years but that was one of his favorites.