(first posted 5/5/2015) There’s no doubt about it, I can spot the long forgotten and unloved with ease, no matter where I seem to be. This time, it was on the usual drive home down the Trans Canada Highway, and the first glimpse of the grille and headlights of this old Ford Falcon-based sedan had me pulling off for a closer look.
While the enthusiast in me hoped for a very-rare-to-find two door sedan, this still shimmering Granada four-door sedan was still impressive. Absolutely not a spot of rust anywhere, immaculate interior, this is one of those cars that has obviously spent it’s days in the hands of a loving owner, most likely now passed down to the next generation, but still amazingly well-kept for its age.
Of course, it’s no Mercedes-Benz, and for those old enough to remember, Ford thought you wouldn’t know the difference anyway. That was the sales pitch of the day in the mid-to-late 70s: why waste your money on a Mercedes when you could buy a Granada for way less and no one will know you did. I don’t think many people were fooled, of course.
The Granada found a place with the car shopping public though, and sold in good numbers to keep well away from the ‘failure bin’ where you’d find, oh I don’t know, the Lincoln Versailles… which just happened to be another “who’ll know” moment for Ford. Of course, everyone figured out really quickly that the Versailles was just a tarted up Granada and sales of the variant were pitiful as a result.
This line of two and four door sedans appeared on the domestic scene for the 1975 model year, paired with near identical Mercury Monarch. The two were initially intended to replace the Ford Maverick & Mercury Comet compacts that had arrived riding the same Ford Falcon platform at the beginning of the decade. The gas crisis of 1973 had car manufacturers scrambling for more fuel-efficient options and a surge in demand for the Maverick/Comet due to their sizing and efficiency meant that they would stick around for a few more years, giving the Granada/Monarch twins a place as an ‘upscale’ compact option and it worked well, with sales reaching over 2 million units during its 1975-1980 production run.
Engine choices were familiar for the platform: 200 & 250 cid inline-six engines on the bottom end with the 302 & 351 Windsor V8s providing the top end punch, though nothing was ‘punchy’ about any of these engine choices. The Granada/Monarch are textbook examples of a ‘malaise era’ car and while the 351, offered in 1975-76, would have been the best way to get these car moving at a reasonable pace, the two are remembered more for their lack of get up and go, rather than mind-blowing acceleration. Ford whittled down the engine offerings to just the 250 and 302 for 1978-onward, ensuring the Granada/Monarch was completely immersed in Malaise-y goodness.
This particular example has truly defied the test of time and living its life out on the mild Canadian west coast is likely the biggest factor at play in its longevity. While I can recall seeing many Granadas and Monarchs on the street growing up in the 1980s, they often carted around a fair amount of body rust. I expect that many ended up in the junkyard not for failed drivetrain components, but incurable rusting.
The Granada will always have a special spot for me, given my grandmother owned a 351-equipped 1976 four door sedan in bright baby blue for over 34 years. That said, her car would ultimately fall to the same ‘rust from the inside out’ condition that took down so many of its brethren, though she managed to keep it at bay for much longer than most through the most diligent of maintenance practices. Always the same shop and the same mechanic and the same routine maintenance twice a year. I suspect the subject car has received much of the same.
Of course, by 1980, I would expect that rust proofing procedures were a little more advanced, perhaps giving this subject ride a bit of an edge. It doesn’t even display the smallest of hints that its sheet metal isn’t 100% rigid. Quite the opposite. The only real blemishes I can find are in the chrome trim, which this car carries with pride. You won’t find a thing out-of-place in that interior, the vinyl seats are pristine along with the immaculate floor carpeting, even the dash is nice and straight, obviously being spared from the sun’s destructive rays for most of its 35 years on the road. Power windows are a featured top end option here, too, going along with the 8-track stereo, cruise control and delay wipers.
The continuing shift of the car buying public to safer, smaller and more efficient choices saw the arrival of the Fox-body platform and the 1978 Ford Fairmont & Mercury Zephyr compacts which finally ended the Maverick & Comet’s successful run on the now-antiquated Ford Falcon platform dating back to 1960, leaving the Granada and Monarch (and Versailles) to carry forward as the final spin offs until the end of the 1980 model year. The Granada would become the upscale variant of the Fairmont for 1981 and the Monarch nameplate would retire completely, with the now Fox-body produced Cougar name extending to the Mercury offering of the upscale sedan and wagon. The Granada nameplate officially retired in the US market after the 1982 model year.
Staying true to its Falcon roots, this Granada is powered by the venerable 250 cid inline-six, which also made its final appearance in 1980. Ford would carry on with the smaller 200 cid ‘Falcon six’ in the various Fox body offerings until it was discontinued as an engine option after 1984. Ford would lop off a couple cylinders, crown it with a new cylinder head, and continue to produce this engine as the 2.3L HSC that powered the Tempo/Topaz for a decade more.
It certainly is a rather dated looking car even in it’s absolutely amazing condition and by the time it hit the streets in 1980, I am sure many people thought the same. After all, the revolutionary GM X-bodies were just hitting the streets with fanfare, the Fairmont & Zephyr proved to be an enormous recent success, Chrysler was making strides in the subcompact market with the Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon and the K-cars were just around the corner. It certainly looks the descendant of the hit 1960 Ford Falcon and for Lee Iacocca, it was another of his many smart plays of taking what worked well, and making it work well some more.
I must say, the condition of this vehicle, even in active service, is absolutely remarkable. This is what showroom condition is all about, it looks as crisp today as it did at the dealership 35 years ago. I would expect that the number of Granadas that exist this preserved out there are few. It’s absolutely these types of classic that make summer car shows worthwhile as those that were once so ordinary and unremarkable have a way of taking us back down memory lane. I know, for me at least, the Granada does just that.
What I remember about these cars and this one does not have was their gas filler “doors” that came loose within a year or two of purchase and caused the door to droop or just fall off.
Actually, I like these cars (preferring the Monarch, though) and came close to buying a 76 Granada back when it was a new “leftover”.
I was going to say that with all of the author’s talk about the condition of the car, the fact that the gas filler door is there and straight is the most amazing thing.
My father (in addition to several Chevies,a Dodge and an Olds) had a ’63 Falcon, 67 Fairlane, ’72? Maverick and finally a ’77 Granada. I don’t know if he was aware that the kept going back to his Falcon or just that Ford so successfuly adapted the platform. While the Panther had a longer run, It’s hard to find a platform that filled as many roles. The Fox (and MOPAR’s B &K) come close but I don’t think either included a pickup a van and a UTE! While not considered exiting cars at the 1960 start or at the 1980 end, Falcon had one hell of a flight!
The whole Nova/Seville, Granada/Versailles, Cavalier/Cimarron thing is interesting. GM’s first effort came off rather well, but I’m sure it was a pricey gambit since the original Seville’s sheetmetal certainly was different enough from the Nova.
Then Ford tried the same thing with the Versailles with decidedly less successful results. The Versailles was all-too-obviously a Granada with a Lincoln front end and trunk lid hump. Still, at least the Granada/Monarch were somewhat upscale cars to begin with. It wasn’t like Ford was making a Lincoln out of a Maverick.
But that still didn’t deter GM from giving it another go with the Cimarron. You’d have thought they’d have paid more attention to the failure of the Versailles but I guess that was just usual GM arrogance rearing its ugly head.
Very strange option choices here, appears to be loaded but with no AC.
Another thing besides rust that sent these to the junkyard before their time was incredibly weak suspension components, front AND rear. The front ends were usually completely shot before 80,000 miles, and the rear spring leaves were known for cracking apart, especially in salty areas.
If it has spent it’s whole life in coastal British Columbia there would be little need to order AC. A week or two of 80+ temps in the summer wouldn’t have justified the option cost back then. I didn’t have a car with AC until 2007, when it became almost impossible to avoid on anything over subcompact size.
Disagree. A/C is used for defrost in the damp, fall, winter, and spring months to quickly clear condensed moisture from the insides of the windows.
I’ve never had to use it for that, but then I park in a garage.
Ditto,; much as I dislike the MPG hit from running the compressor continually in winter, defrost is much more efficient with it on, which is the default in many cars.
y’all are too young. AC was a high cost option! You need to clear off the windows in the rain? Turn the defroster fan on high, crank up the heat, and then open them vent-windows a crack on each side. Wisks that fog right off the front.
Who needs to see out the sides or rear?
I know your next question, what’s a vent window…..
Vent windows largely disappeared by the time I was in the market. They were a weak spot for car thieves, & became redundant as more & more cars were ordered with A/C, or nowadays, have it standard.
How about ashtrays? Unfortunately, many people still smoke, so they keep their windows open to use the road as their ashtray, sharing the scent with other drivers whether they like it or not.
Ten years ago my elderly neighbor lady kept her ’76 Granada two-door in the garage. She was too old to drive it, but she started it and let it run for a while once a week. She bought it brand new and it was pristine. I divorced and moved away but found out she died last winter, aged 96. Dear old lady. I hope someone got her car who will appreciate it. Not that the Granada was truly something special, but hers had to be one of the last of its kind in that condition.
Good reliable drivetrain, proper servicing, garage kept and the end of the line so most of the bugs were worked out. The result, with luck, I car that will run forever. Lucky Ford, or anyone else, didn’t make many with this combination. The company needs to sell you a new one occasionally, to you know, stay in business.
What a great time capsule, by 1980, no silly fake Mercedes, just a proud end to a long line. Thanks for finding this car, it made my day.
The Mercury Monarch version was sold in the UK but there were few takers as it cost a fair bit more than a European Granada.The only one I recall seeing was a metallic gold 4 door sedan in Fleetwood(the one near Blackpool) around 1982
Well, when they can’t even be bothered to relocate the master window switch to the other side, you know they are just phoning it in. Also, the cluster is the same as the NA version, which puts the radio (deleted in this photo) in the wrong place.
Shades of the ’69 Galaxie!
The wipers are also still in LHD configuration, too.
Looks like you couldn’t get air conditioning. Don’t see it listed in the ad.
No a/c available as an option! .RHD is besides the object in a US car in the Uk any way.waiting to see how well the RHD new Mustang does.
Great find! I think the Grenada was one of the better looking sedans of its day. To me, the Maverick looked gimmicky, and the Fairmont too plain, but the Grenada had a good mix of traditional looks and design embellishments to make it seem interesting.
As a 12-year-old in the mid 1980s, my parents rented a Grenada from Rent-a-Wreck (yes, really) during one of the many times their Subaru was broken down. To me, as a kid accustomed to a Subaru, it really did seem like Mercedes — it was big, plush, and the doors were heavy, and it had lots of power accessories. As odd as it sounds, I really enjoyed my week of being driven around in an old Grenada.
It’s that word “embellishments” that is where most of the problem lies. The Fairmont was a pretty honest car. Ditto the Taurus. Neither had any embellishments because they didn’t need them. But the Granada wore a costume.
I always thought those comparisons to Mercedes just made the more mundane cars look even worse. Not to mention that that’s free advertising for the competition, isn’t it? Check out this shameless copy
The nadir (or should that be Nader?) of automotive advertising?
And this:
When I owned a Reliant many years ago, I had parked it near a 190 and couldn’t help noticing what a pathetic copy the front end was. Notice the trademark blown head gasket?
I hate to admit it, I agree with you. Looking at the Plymouth Reliant K, it looked plain, and basic when compared to Mercedes-Benz. If anyone’s going to build a car to compete against the likes of Mercedes-Benz, or BMW, they’re going to need to build something of similar, or better quality than Mercedes-Benz. Unfortunately, none of the cars meant to compete against Mercedes-Benz either looked like Mercedes-Benz, nor were of the same quality. The Lincoln Versailles, for example, while a good looking car, was nothing like the Mercedes-Benz. Neither was Granada. Why Ford ever advertised either cars to compete against Mercedes-Benz is beyond my comprehension.
Ford wasn’t advertising the Granada as a direct competitor to the Mercedes-Benz. Nor was Ford expecting people to cross-shop a Granada with a Mercedes-Benz. The huge price differential alone discouraged anyone from doing that.
The point of the advertising campaign was that the Granada LOOKED like a Mercedes-Benz, even though it cost a lot less. But I seriously doubt that anyone at Ford expected a stampede of Mercedes-Benz owners to Ford dealerships. Nor did Ford expect to discourage anyone from buying a Mercedes-Benz.
The Granada was designed to capture two groups of buyers.
The first group was people moving out of their full-size cars because of concerns over fuel mileage. Many people were also complaining that the typical domestic full-size car had become too cumbersome for daily driving.
The second group was people shopping for an American compact. The competition in those days consisted of the AMC Hornet, GM’s NOVA compacts and the Dodge Dart/Plymouth Valiant.
In the early 1970s, compacts were still considered “downscale” by the domestic automakers and a fair number of buyers. There was no prestige in buying a domestic compact, as most of them carried relatively plain levels of trim.
Ford’s Luxury Décor Option (LDO) for the Maverick and Mercury Comet proved to be more popular than expected, so Ford (or, more accurately, Lee Iacocca) decided that a luxuriously trimmed compact would sell well. The Granada proved that Iacocca was correct. The car was a big sales success.
The Mercedes-Benz gathered steam as the most “chic” upscale vehicle in America during the early 1970s. Making a compact look like a Mercedes-Benz was one way to eliminate the perception that people who bought a domestic compact were somehow failures or unglamorous tightwads.
Ford’s goal in making the Granada look like a Mercedes-Benz, and hyping the connection in the ads, was to take some of the sting out of buying a domestic compact, not drive Mercedes-Benz back into the Atlantic.
I don’t fault Ford for imitating Benz’s roofline & aura; car stylists have done this all the time, it’s the sincerest form of flattery. What I do fault them for is making a point of the resemblance, for it came across as pathetic as that Britcom character Hyancith Bucket, a social-climbing wannabe who fools no one.
So call it good Machiavellian marketing if you like, I thought it cynical & insulting, then and now. If you’re going to ape your betters, at least keep your mouth shut.
In a way, Ford redeemed themselves with the Fairmont, a much less pretentious car with more substance underneath.
Building a car that looked like the most chic car on the market, selling it at a much lower price, and then trumpeting the resemblance in the ads, was simply good business. The Granada was a big success, and carried the company in the compact sector until the debut of the Fairmont in the fall of 1977.
Was it pretentious? Sure, but that only meant that the Granada fit right in with Cordobas supposedly fitted with a special type of leather and Chevrolet Monte Carlos designed to look like cut-rate Eldorados.
They did the best they could.Speaking of Hyacinth Bucket she reminds Us Australians of Angela Bishop’s mother to a degree.YOU CAN’T BUY A FAKE MERC IN THE SAME WAY YOU CAN’T HAVE A PRETEND SNOB.
Popular Science did a face-off test between a MB [W114?] 280 & 302 Granada. I wish I had it on hand. They seemed completely serious, though they could’ve had a field day mocking Ford’s shamelessness in such marketing. But all they concluded was, roughly, “With a Mercedes, you’re getting something special.” No kidding.
That Ford believed customers would be swayed by this nonsense revealed what they really thought of them. “Hey idiot, impress your friends with this counterfeit Mercedes!”
Either they or Popular Mechanics tested a Granada Ghia against a more direct competitor, the Chevy Nova LN/Concours, They found the Chevy a much better package with a stronger engine and better handling.
Ah yes, I think it was Pop Sci who did that too.
Today, Ford has changed their approach to, “hey idiot, impress your friends with this counterfeit Aston Martin!”
At least Ford OWNED Aston Martin and saved it.
At Automobilecatologue.com I looked to see a little what cars were like in 1980, it was sobering.
Model Weight disp. 0-60 top speed mpg
Granada 3291 250 17.0 92 15.3
Granada(GER) 2756 103 21.2 87 22.0
Citation 2520 151 14.8 99 21.6
Aspen 3263 225 17.8 94 17.1
Concord 3108 258 13.4 104 15.7
Accord 2240 107 16.3 94 24.7
240D 3130 146 24.0 86 27.2
510 2304 119 13.9 101 22.6
All are base engine 1980 automatics except the Concord with inline 6 to make it more comparable and the German Granada which is a 1978, I could find no numbers for 1980. I think the Citation and the 510 show the efficiency coming in the 80s. Mercedes did not seem to sell a 230E in the US in 80 so the 240D must stand in from a much higher price class. The Accord/510 was probably a similar price out the door but far smaller, 26+ inches shorter. The small displacement really seemed to kill performance with the auto compared to the 5sp on the Accord, even though it was the new 3sp auto.
My old Granada had the big engine and would do a tad over 100MPH if I remember correctly. Full throttle acceleration would give a second gear “scratch”, too. I do not remember it getting less than 14ish MPG
The 250 was down to 90hp in 1980 according to automobilecatalog.com. I think it was 96 before. It may be higher in Canada with no catalyst?
When I say “big engine” I’m talking about an 8 cylinder, not a 6. I disagree with the much of criticisms of the Granada here on this thread. Mine was an excellent vehicle.
I had a ’75 Granada, 4 door, 250 6 The build quality was just awful, and I am a Ford guy. Just amazes me how a powerhouse car company can go from mostly dominating all forms of motorsports, to 5 years later, building cars that can’t pull the skin off a rotten banana. It was Hank the Duce. Spent the farm on racing, not to mention his love for booze and 22 year old call girls. There was simply no money left for R&D by 1970ish, when the FoMoCo racing party was over, and everybody had to sober up and get back to work. Except Hank. And his harem.
Yeah, but what a glorious time it was. Consider that Ford’s ‘Total Performance’ during the sixties might not have existed without Hank the Deuce’s commitment to it. It might have helped the company’s bottom line, but no Shelbys, GT40 LeMans victories, or NASCAR involvement would have made for a very boring domestic automotive world.
Plus, Hank’s Ace-in-the-hole that allowed him his spending excesses was always Iacocca, someone who Ford actually once publicly introduced as “My little Italian friend”. Iacocca’s marketing magic certainly kept the company going through a lot.
But the Granada is a classic case of Iacocca’s patented “same old cake, but MAN look at the frosting!”
Internationally speaking, Ford ended up spending an awful lot on product development in the ’70s. The Fiesta project cost them a billion dollars, unadjusted, The Erika Escort was also very pricey — I don’t recall a dollar figure, but it was a lot because it also included significant retooling and the more or less separate U.S. versions. Add to that the cost of the Fox and Panther platforms and the moving targets that were contemporary U.S. safety and emissions regs and we’re not talking about small change by any means. I’m not implying that Ford’s decisions and priorities were above criticism, but it’s not like they weren’t spending money on the product.
The Erika Escort was also very pricey — I don’t recall a dollar figure, but it was a lot because it also included significant retooling and the more or less separate U.S. versions.
So they spent a buttload of extra money to make a uniquely more mediocre version of the Escort for the US. Smart move.
Not knowing their motivations, I can only guess that the Dearborn Dunces thought US buyers would be put off by overly European design & trim, hence the large dash & tacky B-pillar aluminum trim per Toyota Celica. Or else it just pure NIH, can’t let those Europeans have the last word. Corporate synergy is often a myth fed to shareholders.
Ford should’ve already noticed how VW committed the same mistake with the Westmoreland “Malibuized” Rabbit.
NIH was the reason for sure, and then Escort took off and outsold X, J and Chevettes.
1975 was possibly the absolute nadir for performance in terms of Clean Air regs.
And I personally think the good outweighs the bad in regards to Hank II. He certainly doesn’t deserve the blame for the gutless engines of the mid to late 70s (Unless you’re saying he should have used his political influence more effectively to lobby against the regs, which is a supportable argument).
I’d take Hank The Deuce over Alan “one ford” Mulally any day.
I had a 78 Granada ESS Coupe when I was in college, 250 I6 and a Toploader 4-Speed. Since it was the ESS it had the bucket seats and console with a leather wrap steering wheel. Burgundy/burgundy combo, it was nice.
Thing was a tank and surprisingly fun to drive, I wish I still had it.
Only real problem was a reluctance to start first thing in the morning on cold, damp days.
It doesn’t surprise me that this example is loaded but (perhaps) lacks A/C. My folks bought a Zephyr in 1979 with nearly every option but a vinyl roof. YET, even though it had A/C, someone along the way had neglected to specify TINTED WINDOWS. Yeah, Ford made tinted glass a separate option even when a customer specified A/C.
Sitting in the front seat of a Granada in September of 1976, I can understand why these cars sold so well. They presented themselves quite well. Occasional lapses came by way of colors used and workmanship that sometimes fell short of “perfect”. Yet, I’m sure no one knew it was just “a tarted-up” Falcon….or maybe if they knew, they didn’t care.
No perhaps about it. There are no center vents above the ash tray.
Back in the summer of 75 my friend and I during a road trip in California went for a Saturday drive in his aunt and uncle’s mid-sixties Plymouth or Dodge. I don’t recall what model it was, but the car had minimal options although equipped with A/C.
I thought it odd however none of the windows were tinted. I suppose the windshield might have been. I assume manufacturers got wise sometime after and buyers had to have full tinted glass with air conditioning.
I could never understand the wrath assigned to the Versailles. True, it was badge-engineered, but as another poster said, it’s not as if it was based on the Maverick! The Granada/Monarchs were premium compacts. Years later, Ford did it again with the MkZ/Zephyr/Whatever. Now THAT one was only thinly disguised, didn’t look like a Lincoln, and was based on a rental car! Current model MkZ/Whatever has corrected those faults with unique sheetmetal and a Lincoln face. The Versailles was the ultimate Falcon platform and introduced halogen headlamps and Clear Coat to the American industry.
In someways the Versailles was the “ULTIMATE FALCON” – (discounting the big block Mustangs of the late 60s). Someone in Gallup had a Versailles that had custom dual exhausts and certainly sounded like it wasn’t stock. What I loved was that everything else was “old lady” about the car down to the whitewall tires and hubcaps.
>>I could never understand the wrath assigned to the Versailles. <<
Unlike the Seville, the Versailles shared its profile w/ the Granarch twins. While the Seville looked swank, the Versailles looked like JCWhitney went wild.
Plus the Versailles was priced like the Seville, over its larger stablemates, which it really REALLY didn't justify.
Some wag before remarked that the Versailles’s main virtue turned out to be as a supply of rear axles (including disc brakes) for old Mustangs.
…and positraction.
Its fun to take pot shots at the original Granada/Monarch. But lets not forget the numbers. Over 2.39M units sold from ’75 thru ’80. Most car companies would kill for similar numbers from a single model in todays environment. http://www.gmv-registry.com/21869.html
Also, if Lee would have played with the suspension a little more (stronger sway bar in front plus a default sway bar in the rear), and added the rear disc brakes from the Versailles; the complements would have out numbered the faults.
Too bad Lee stopped at the body and failed to carry thru with the under carriage.
Definitely prefer the early round headlight style. It seems that most were loaded down with trim, cladding, vinyl roofs and heavy insulation inside. My Uncle had one when they first came out and I was impressed how smooth and quiet it was. It didn’t age well though, rust and loose trim bits made it look old and tacky pretty quick.
During my last year in high school my buddy had a 1980 reddish orange Granada just like this car but in base trim with flat vinyl bench seat, 250 six, no A/C and radio block out. It was a nicely kept low mileage elderly owned one owner car so was in tip top shape when he took delivery. It was fairly reliable but slow as molasses. The orange colored vinyl seats would get so hot during the Summer months you could fry eggs on them but they were far better than my 1979 Fairmont. I remember that this car always leaked oil due to the valve cover bolts vibrating loose which also caused the carburetor bolts to loosen up prompting the use of lock tight. That cars trunk also leaked like a sieve despite new trunk seals and lots of silicone. He never figured that issue out. Otherwise it was a decent high school student’s second car (his first was a rusted out 1974 Valiant that fell apart after one year of use) but not particularly memorable or roomy inside.
Although rare, these could be had with 3-on-the tree. (it’s possible that there was a 4-on-the-floor also, don’t recall.)
A buddy in college had a totally stripped version. Three-on-the-tree, manual everything, no A/C. I think the one “luxury” option it did have was AM radio! It was the first time I’d ridden in a column-shift car, and I was hooked. I bought a 3-on-the-tree Chevy half-ton not long after.
The Ford Maverick may have been replaced by the Ford Fairmont here in North America for 1978, but that same Ford Maverick with the same pre-1973 small front and rear bumpers continued on in Brazil through 1979. and here is the photo of their 1978-79 Ford Maverick
Nice! I love seeing cars like this that lived on a little longer in other countries!
I think the early small bumper Maverick Coupes were extremely nice cars, especially with the Grabber Tape Stripes and Mag Wheels.
Light enough cars so with any decently tuned Windsor Block they would fly.
I saw this last month in a marshalls parking lot.
Mom and Dad test drove a 1978 Granada in the spring of ’78. It was dark green with a light green vinyl interior and was very tinny and cheap compared to our old ’69 Galaxie. The ride was ok but it seemed to bang and bounce over every little bump. Needless to say, they didn’t buy it.
I always liked the Versailles version better. Never rode or drove one, but from everything I’ve read it was a considerable improvement over the Granda/Monarch. Lincoln paid more attention to sound deadening and there were additional body reinforcements to stiffen things up a lot. Yet the cost-cutting was evident even here as Lincoln used the same down-market steering wheel as the cheaper cars! You would have thought Versailles could have had its own unique steering wheel.
Actually, this Granada has the good looking, woodgrained luxury steering wheel which you got when you ordered cruise control on Fords and Mercurys. This was the standard wheel on Lincolns so to a Granada customer it would truly be an upgrade. This particular Granada, to me, is somewhat rare as most of the Granadas in Rhode Island were never ordered with cruise control. Most had the base Ford steering wheel with a black plastic surround that really looked CHEAP. (I know because my ’77 Mustang II had that cheap base ugly steering wheel) Not to mention, this Granada even has power windows and the upgraded interior – another rarity, at least in my neck of the woods.
Having owned a 1980 Mercury Monarch Ghia 2 door so equipped and driving a 1978 Ford Granada Ghia 4 door that belonged to my Godmother so equipped, I’m pretty sure this Granada also has the optional tilt steering wheel – another option not seen that often on these cars.
Mr. Bill
Lincoln did that with ALL models in the ’70s, Weirdest place to save money, Right in the driver’s face! And thanx to my damn phone This is in the wrong spot….
I thought the Versailles got a leather wheel like the Mercury Grand Monarch?…..nice upgrade for the 1970s compared to what was offered at the other big two
My Drivers Ed car from 1987!
POS cars, no fond memories.
I’ve never heard of the Granada being available with “3 on the tree”…I guess there were a few. As for the floor mounted, manual transmission shifter cars…..these had 3 AND/OR 4 speeds available, though the 4 speed was a tall overdriven gear.
My guess is that cars with automatics far outnumbered those with manuals and the column versus floor shifter ratio was 55 versus 45.
They were column shifted in 75 and 76. In 77 the 3+od became standard with floor shift. In fact that was when the 200 became standard even in the Ghia with a surprisingly low 3.40 rear gear ratio. Couldn’t get AC with the 200, but could shockingly get the 4 wheel disc brakes with it, if my dealer book is correct.
Yeah, rare, but out there. My father bought one, one of the “price leaders” that lots used to advertise a really low price, as they had to have one in stock to legally advertise it. As a model year end unit, they were happy to have my Dad decide to take it off them. And it was red, red vinyl interior, no a/c, radio and heater only, and this was in central Florida. Not exactly his best choice, but I recall it was taken as a trade in and was given about what he originally paid for it.
I wonder if that car hasn’t recently changed hands, as it has very newly-issued British Columbia license plates.
Wasn’t there a later campaign for the Granada that compared it’s looks to a Rolls?
Or am I mis-remembering. Or was that the Monarch advertising campaign?
And I think I disagree with some of the folks here — I remember Ford’s TV ads definitely wanted you to think that a Granada was a Ford version of a Mercedes. Not just ‘looked like’ one. Perhaps this was just to make all their awful qualities even more laughable.
“Yes! We definitely can compare our softly-sprung, wallowing car (the Ford), to the taught, tight, and completely driveable Mercedes. It’s in the same class! Just keep feeling good about not having spent all that money!”
I agree that Ford was pushing ‘luxury looks for less’, not trying to get MB owners. Never said “it’s the same class”, just the style. Getting buyers wanting to unload old big car, but still thought compact Fords were like the plain Falcons of 1960.
Chevy tried to sell the last Colonnade 76-77 Chevelles as “mid size for less then their compact” at $3885, but that price level was plainer then wax paper. No A/C, etc.
There are a couple of two-door Granadas for sale in my area. One is a little more upscale than the other. The one I looked at was a very solid one owner car with only 50,000 miles on the odometer. Both are 1977 models. I also saw a one-owner four-door Granada on sale in a rural area north of here. It looked well optioned, although not a Ghia. While the other cars had V8 engines, the Monarch had the six.
The silver sedan featured would be very welcome in my driveway. But I’m game for any Granada or Monarch. I remember them as very well built with workmanship much better than their Falcon/Comet ancestors. They rode very well and were very comfortable to ride in. If I sell the Grand Marquis this summer, this type of car is on my radar.
I had a (used) ’75, 3/tree, and the six (250?). Previous owner had pulled/plugged all the vacuum/pollution hoses, and installed a manual choke. Rust became problematic before its tenth year, but plusses were the big boxy trunk (for its size) and very respectable mileage. I’d enjoy finding a survivor and “keeping it nice for the next guy.”
My first car was a 1980 Granada. Oh, how I hated it! In fact, I just realized the story of that car (and the others I wanted) might make a good COAL article here. Anyway, here I am with it at about age 17.
I remember riding in the back seat of my step-grandmother’s red ’76 Granada Ghia coupe in the summer of ’77. Although I was a staunch Chevy fan — still am — I thought Nana’s Granada was a handsome car. It had replaced her ’66 Comet, and Nana drove a stick. The Granada had a floor shift, which I assume was a 4-speed. She was 55 at the time, and my grandfather was 67. Grandpa died in 1984 after a horrible bout with cancer, and I still miss that lovely man more than 30 years later. Nana died just last month a few weeks shy of her 93rd birthday. The Granada was replaced by a 1980 Fairmont Futura sedan (her first car with an automatic) that was later totaled. Her last car was an ’89 Plymouth Reliant.
Without a doubt, the ultimate Falcon.
As I recall reading and hearing from owners, the 302 V8 engine in these Granada got nearly as good city gas mileage as the 250 six cylinder; but didn’t have the crumbling valve guide issues the six did, and were MUCH more peppy.
Small block Fords, small block Chevys, small block Mopars all appear to have been the best overall engine compromise for longevity, power and gas mileage for 30 years (or more).
While it’s hard to see any resemblence between Maverick and Granada, it does line up with the last US Falcons, 1966-69.
At a local car cruise night, someone had a mint ’78 Granada. With its hood up, I could see the 1960 Falcon/’65 Mustang strut towers.
I grew up in Los Angeles in the 1970s and Mercedes Benz was my favorite car. As a young child hearing Cal Worthington (for those of you that knew his commercials) saying no one can tell the difference between a Ford Granada and a Mercedes Benz always confused me and I really thought myself stupid for not seeing the similarities. Well I guess I wasn’t stupid at all because clearly they did not bear any.
My 80′ Monarch Ghia 2 door was an unusual one because of its equipment – power windows, power deluxe all vinyl bench seat, air conditioning, cruise, tilt wheel, am/fm quadrasonic digital electronic radio with 8 track (yes, the radio seen in Lincolns), cornering lights, aluminum wheels (beautiful), half vinyl top, luggage rack, lighted vanity visors, bumper group, etc – all powered by whatever was the biggest six cylinder engine one could get in these things. My car was “lipstick red” and I don’t think that was a regular Monarch paint color. Add the white half vinyl top, luggage rack, aluminum, lacy spoke wheels, it was quite striking.
Because of this, I felt it was a special order. I purchased it in late 1981 from the used car lot of Lumberton Ford in Lumberton, NC. At the time, I didn’t realize it might have been anything out of the ordinary – I wish I had the information necessary now to try and find out its order history.
My Godmother bought a used 1978 Granada Ghia with every factory option except for a moonroof and V8. Her car had very rich looking vinyl and corduroy seats. The car never seemed quite right, didn’t drive very well, noisier than it should have been, leaked, etc., so we always felt it had suffered some collision damage and that is possibly why it was back on the lot in early 1979.
Mr. Bill
A loaded Granada Ghia would be quite the ride now. The car you described would have been very striking a the time. People can mock the Granada/Monarch, but nicely equipped they were good looking, well put together and great value for the money. The six cylinder might have been a weak link especially if burdened by pulling a car loaded with options.
I had a loaded ghia with a V8 motor. Mine had very unusual brakes. 4 wheel disk brakes an no vacuum booster. these brakes were hydraulically boosted off the power steering pump.
My neighbor has a silver Granada coupe with a 4speed. I told him if he ever needs money to sell me that car.
I just found this article while doing research for my 1980 Granada. Either it came with the same color in the same trim from the same dealership, or it’s my car pictured in this article.
The paint is a little rougher and it’s since been given aftermarket fog lights, but it’s still kicking after all these years.
The Pontiac Grand Prix, Mark V, Monte Carlo and Continental showed Detroit that the muscle car look was dead. The Granada showed Detroit that this personal luxury coupe style could work on a compact sedan. The Granada coupe had all the styling cues of the personal luxury cars, but that same style was available as a four door sedan. The compact size meant that driving the new formal look was more affordable too. The Granada coupe sold well, but the kicker was the sedan. There was no Monte Carlo or Grand Prix sedan.
Selling it as an alternative for a Mercedes generated attention by both admirers and detractors, making the Granada the focus of the model year. Everyone had an opinion and Ford used that attention to sell hundreds of thousands. The Granada didn’t need a refreshing until rectangular headlights showed up.
The gas crisis threw more attention Granada’s way. If you had a full sized BOF full size sedan in 1974 as a trade-in, the Granada was a vehicle that delivered the looks at a fraction of the cost of another 7 MPG full sizer.
Being on a Falcon frame dating from 1959 wasn’t optimal, however Granada buyers weren’t trading in sports sedans. The Granada buyer was trading in a 1970 Galaxie or another big full size floater. Looking back, the Granada looks ridiculous, but not in 1974.
Meanwhile, in Australia…..
Same year, different continent.
Henry Ford II was quoted (by Iacocca, I believe) as saying that “mini cars mean mini profits!” This car, and the Mustang II, appeared to be Iacocca’s attempts to rebut this axiom. I wonder what McNamara thought about his simple, cheap, rational uber alles car dressed up in gowns and makeup like this, if McNamara ever thought about it again.
Iacocca certainly hit the marketing niche nail on the head with this car, didn’t he? Everyone thought that people wanted cheap and simple in a compact car, like the Chevy II, but Iacocca had the guts to push for a more expensive, luxurious compact, and it worked. GM never really bothered to come up with a serious alternative; the deluxe X bodies never seemed as deluxe as the Granada. The Nova may have been a better compact than the Maverick/Granada, but the Granada was undoubtedly more profitable and sold very, very well. I don’t think even most of the Colonnades had power windows; even GM’s LeSabres and 88s didn’t often have them, so for a compact to get a high profit item was a real marketing stroke of genius.
The most common criticism leveled at Iacocca during the 70s was “if he’s so great, why isn’t our market share increasing?” Well, we know what happened once he was fired and the second gas crisis came round and Ford nearly went bankrupt in 1981. . . and also perhaps market share didn’t increase, but Ford was making vast profits on what they were selling and invented or fully developed new market niches.
The Granada/Mercedes campaign was a stroke of absolute brilliance. Why do you think we remember it 40 some years later after nearly every Granada has been made into a Huawei refrigerator? Ok, so Consumer Reports is going to go out and buy a Nova, an Aspen, and a Granada, and diligently compare 0-60 times and trunk space and rear seat leg room and come up with a rational comparison of which car is worth a $67 premium over the others. But this is advertising, and we can reach for the stars, no matter how ludicrous the comparison may be. And for a LOT of people, they never really notice how a car drives, but they do notice how it LOOKS, and especially . . . how does it look to their NEIGHBOURS. So the Granada shines now in the reflected light of the Mercedes and somewhere in yon consumer’s mind, the comparison is made and the Granada is elevated beyond the Aspen and Nova.
I drove one once in ’79. The steering was horrible. Scary to drive at speed on a two lane road. That was after driving a ’56 Olds with a lot of steering play for several years.