For those who love anachronisms, this is a dream car. Not only does it feature a bustleback trunklid, but as a 1987 model, it is the last example of this brief and curious styling fad. Even aside from the trunk design, the Continental was somewhat out of place when it was new… the notion of compact, rear-drive traditional luxury had passed out of fashion by the time the car reached production. This Continental was the last of its breed; in fact it was a mix of several rare breeds – a bustleback, a RWD compact luxury car, a premium car developed with a fuel crisis/recession in mind. There was never a car quite like this Continental, and never will be again.
The 1982-87 Continental is most remembered for That Trunk. Few styling trends evoke as much passionate love-it-or-hate-it sentiment as the bustleback, of which Continental was one of three examples in the early-1980s American luxury market. But while folks disagree about the virtues of Continental’s bustleback, there is one thing that most people agree upon: The Continental was a big improvement over its predecessor, the hapless Versailles.
Versailles was introduced with much fanfare as Lincoln’s 1977 entry in the compact luxury field. Intended to battle Cadillac’s Seville, Versailles was endowed (as was Seville) with a compact size, squarish styling and a European name. However, it was also burdened with DNA that was that 95% Granada, which turned out to be a poor selling point for Ford Motor Company’s costliest car. Lincoln never had high expectations for the Versailles, but even its modest 20,000 sales-per-year estimate proved overly optimistic. An average of 12,500 Versailles were produced annually between 1977 and 1980, when the little Lincoln was put out of its misery.
That left Lincoln with only full-sized cars (albeit themselves downsized from the 1970s) at a brutal period for domestic luxury car sales. Between the energy crisis and recession, Lincoln sales took a beating – production fell by 63% between 1979 and ’81. Many industry experts predicted the demise of full-sized cars, even in upper price segments, a gloomy outlook that appeared all too real because while both Lincoln and Cadillac sales plummeted, compact European premium brands increased their market shares handsomely. Furthermore, the average age of Lincoln and Cadillac buyers was significantly older than that of the imports. Lincoln needed a compact offering, judging by early-1980s industry trends.
By 1981, Lincoln’s product line looked unmistakably dated. With only the Town Car and Mark VI to pull in customers, sales fell to the lowest point in ten years. Short-term hopes seemed to rest squarely on the upcoming Versailles replacement: To be called a Continental, it would be the smallest Lincoln ever made, and Ford executives assured Lincoln-Mercury dealers that this wouldn’t be another hasty rebadging job.
Introduced for 1982, this new Continental was based on Ford’s unibody Fox Platform, which had spawned the Fairmont, Mustang and Thunderbird, among others. The Fox Continental shared Thunderbird’s 108.5” wheelbase, as well as other components. Importantly, not wanting to repeat the Versailles debacle, Lincoln created a clear visual identity for its new car.
Hence the Continental’s most memorable attribute: The bustleback, a design feature that ranks among the 1980s’ most polarizing trends. But at least its profile wouldn’t be confused for any other product in Ford’s lineup.
The design feature itself was modeled after British luxury cars of the 1930s through early ’50s. Continental’s adaptation of this theme wasn’t exactly unique in 1982, since the 1980 Cadillac Seville and Chrysler’s 1981 Imperial debuted with a similar design throwback. Unsurprisingly, neither Ford nor Chrysler admitted to copying Cadillac’s plans, as if we are to believe that the rebirth of a 50-year-old design trend happened spontaneously at each of the Big Three’s studios. Jack Telnack, Ford’s Vice President of Design, would only say that the Seville, Imperial and Continental shared “obvious classic cues, and that is the sort of thing that pops up on these [luxury] cars.” To bolster his contention that Ford developed its bustleback independently, he noted that Continental’s trunk was inspired by Rolls-Royce, while Seville’s looked more like a Daimler.
Regardless, this was a curious direction in which to take a compact luxury car in the 1980s. Though premium imports – with prices far greater than those of Lincolns or Cadillacs – gained popularity every year, it wasn’t just a smaller size that distinguished them from their American competition. Those imports’ driving dynamics and clean, unfussy designs pointed quite clearly towards future trends, but the 1982 Continental was an odd combination of a compact size mated to a very traditional ambiance.
Lincoln saw the prototypical Continental customer as being traditional yet avant-garde – wealthy folks who expected to be coddled by luxury, but who possessed somewhat of a daring streak. Marketing materials from Continental’s introductory year echoed this strategy, featuring artistic displays of the car’s shape, sometimes accompanied by neon lettering and (creepy-looking) chromed mannequins – not quite the standard baroque Lincoln ad fare.
As for the car itself, Ford’s Fox platform was considerably modified for Continental duty – strengthened in both underbody and roof rails. Early Continentals featured an improved version of the Thunderbird’s suspension, with Tokico gas-pressurized shocks, beefier lower control arms, greater wheel travel, and other enhancements. Variable-rate power steering and 4-wheel disc brakes helped provide Continental with road manners that, while certainly not European, were improved over previous Lincolns. Therefore, Continental exhibited slightly less sponginess and wallowing then other Lincolns, though body roll was still copious.
Being a product of the fuel crisis era, Lincoln had planned to sell Continental with a standard V-6. However, an improving economy triggered a last-minute change, since size and thirsty engines once again became socially acceptable among the moneyed set. Hence, a 5.0L V-8 became standard and Ford’s brand new 3.8L V-6 a no-cost option. The vast majority of buyers chose the V-8, and the V-6 disappeared the following year, although in one last gasp of fuel-crisis frugality, a BMW-sourced diesel became a (rarely selected) option, offered only for 1984.
Early buyers complained that even the V-8 was insufficient for Continental’s 3,560-lb. curb weight, so over the following years, Lincoln tweaked the engine (adding, for example, multi-port fuel injection). Horsepower edged up from the ’82 model’s paltry 130 to a healthier 150 by 1986. Torque increased by a similar proportion, and more importantly peak torque (270 lb-ft) in the later cars was reached at only 2,000 rpm, making these later examples feel more like proper Lincolns.
Source of production data: Standard Catalog of Ford, 1903-1998.
Continental sales were good, but not great. While more popular than the Versailles, it was clear from the outset that Continental would not set the world on fire. First-year sales hit about 24,000 – and though subsequent annual totals swung both higher and lower, that was about average for this car’s six model years.
Seeing these sales in context with our featured generation’s forerunner and predecessor suggests that shoppers wanted more than a reskinned Ford, but what the mid-size luxury segment really demanded was a more modern overall identity… something that the 1988-94 front-drive model came closer to providing. Most 1980s consumers who would be impressed by formal styling, opera lamps and plush interiors would spring for a full-sized car instead. Indeed, Lincoln’s Town Car, the very type of luxobarge given up for dead in the early 1980s, outsold the compact Continental by nearly four times.
Some other elements undoubtedly contributed to Continental’s lackluster sales as well. While Lincoln strove to distinguish this new car from its more pedestrian brethren, designers seemed to have forgotten about the front end styling – which bore a telltale likeness to the Granada/Cougar twins.
This was rectified for 1984 by a facelift that Lincoln billed as “sleek,” but was really a modest softening of the upright front clip, introducing a slightly sloping grille, and setting the headlights into deep chromed sockets, flanked by cornering lamps. Though subtle, these changes resonated with buyers; sales nearly doubled from the pre-facelift ’83 model.
The bigger news in Lincoln showrooms that year was the arrival of the Mark VII coupe, sharing Continental’s wheelbase and drivetrain (though Continental never got a high-output V-8 like the Mark VII LSC). Given this model lineup, an impartial observer would think that the geriatric Town Car would be nearing the end of its evolutionary cycle. However, Town Car sales increased by 75% for 1984, and another 28% for ’85, soon accounting for three-quarters of Lincoln sales. This sealed the Fox Continental’s fate, as Lincoln realized there was no longer much demand for a mid-sized traditional luxury car.
Meanwhile, the Continental continued on a path to nowhere. But at least it was an interesting path to nowhere, as it (and the Mark VII) received received an air suspension for 1984, becoming the first modern cars to offer this feature. The electronically-controlled suspension included neoprene air springs that kept the car level via computer-controlled spring rates. It was quite a novel suspension setup, though Ford’s initial claim that air suspensions would eventually become commonplace and would reduce suspension repair costs was wildly off base.
Other notable improvements included multi-port fuel injection and standard anti-lock brakes for 1986. Continental even offered an optional mobile phone in 1985, though the option was discontinued the following year. Otherwise, Continentals remained virtually identical from 1984 through 1987.
Our featured car hails from the Fox Continental’s last year of 1987, by which point production had dipped to 17,597. This car was the last of its breed – the bustleback breed that is, since the Seville and Imperial expired years before. As a base model (rather than the Givenchy Designer Series), this particular car would have been at the lower end of the Continental range, but since all Continentals came with an impressive standard equipment list, there was no such thing as a stripped-down model.
Standard equipment included full power accessories, automatic climate control, power seats, six-speaker stereo, 12 courtesy lights and other indulgences considered posh at the time. As had become Lincoln’s tradition, each year’s lineup included a designer series (Givenchy or Valentino), and individual Continentals could be ordered with options such as leather interior, power moonroof, two-tone paint, and a bevy of other niceties.
As seen here, Continental’s interior was different from other domestic luxury cars. No bench seat was offered, Lincoln opting instead for “twin comfort lounge seats.” The area between the seats contained what Lincoln referred to as “consolettes” – housing power seat controls, individual armrests, and some storage. From this angle we can see the blacked-out electronic instrument panel, though the most interesting design feature might be the prominent center stack, housing a trip computer with 12 (!) buttons, the stereo, climate controls and warning light cluster. Framed in walnut applique, this gave the appearance of a high-end home stereo stack. Front passengers were treated to comfort and ample room.
In back, space was tight for a Lincoln – certainly this was no Town Car, as shown by this picture of a similar car. From 1984 onward, however, rear passengers were treated to their own HVAC vents, which compensated somewhat for the close quarters. Front or rear, this car was quiet. Lincoln boasted that the Continental contained 108 lbs. of sound-deadening material, and that weight didn’t count the thick, 38-oz. carpet.
When introduced for 1982, Continental carried a base price of $21,302 – a hefty price for a recessionary year. However, both Lincoln and Cadillac positioned their mid-size offerings at the top of their respective model ranges. As such, Continental cost about 30% more than an equivalently-equipped full-size Lincoln, yet it still undercut its chief rival Cadillac Seville by about 10%. Incidentally, Versailles had been positioned at a similar proportion higher than the full-size Lincoln and a similar proportion less than the Seville.
By 1987, Continental prices ranged from $25,484 upwards to the low $30,000s. This represented a good value for a luxury car, but the market for vehicles such as this was rapidly shrinking.
Ford got the message, and the next generation Continental, introduced for 1988, was much worldlier in orientation – on a modified FWD Taurus platform. Soaking up more positive reviews and favorable consumer sentiment than the Fox Continental ever received, sales more than doubled.
The 1982-87 Continental isn’t quite the most memorable Lincoln. Made for just six years with sluggish sales, this car was eclipsed in popularity by the Town Car, in passion by the Mark VII, and its most memorable characteristic of a bustleback trunk quickly faded out of fashion. More importantly, the overall concept of a traditional, yet compact, RWD luxury car, never rose to prominence again. All of which combines to make this not only a rare breed, but the last of its breed at that.
Photographed in June 2018 in Wall, South Dakota.
Related Reading:
1986 Lincoln Continental: The Rose Quartz-Colored Linchpin Of My Formative Years Tom Klockau
Not my favorite Lincoln. I saw a pre-production version of this car in a Gainesville, Florida Pizza Hut parking lot in late 1979. There were no ID marks on the car but the spare tire hump made for a pretty strong clue. I learned that the car was to be called “Continental” when I saw an Autoweek spy shot abut a year later. Lincoln should have put flush headlights on the Continental in ’85 or ’86. It would have made the front end much less busy-looking.
Great post. Thanks. I had sort of forgotten about these.
First, despite US Ford trying to be relevant, compare this to a contemporary BMW 5 or 7 series. The BMW’s seem like earlier versions of modern cars and the Continental seems like something from some ancient baroque period. For their size the Lincolns probably cost way less than the BMW’s and were cheaper to maintain and had way better AC, but still…
Second, BMW later fell prey to having a trunk that clearly referred to 1930’s era trunks, which were a streamlined version of actually strapping an actual trunk at the back of a car that was a descendant of a carriage. Only the BMW’s, until restyled and later generations were really awful.
Well it seems you can’t include more than one photo. Here’s a contemporary BMW:
Bad example.
According to Wikipedia the 5 Series was totally redesigned for 1981 and got a new chassis code (E28), but the differences between it and the 1972 E12 add up to a facelift with considerable new tooling that they utterly failed to make count (example- going from a clamshell to a flat hood with NO other front styling changes!)
It would’ve been mocked for its’ 1963 Rambler American-level frumpiness, if it didn’t cost so much money.
Contemporary BMW 7 series interior. Clearly Lincoln and other US brands should have just copied this instead of coming up with baroque versions. Or gone back to their own mid century modern roots.
That interior is from the E32, which came out as this Continental was entering its swan song year. A better comparison would be this one.
Lincoln’s own heritage they could have referenced and maybe actually beaten the Germans.
Lincoln tried to resurrect that interior design language twenty years later with the Aviator, second and third-generation Navigators, and the Zephyr/MKZ… to mixed results.
And also when they chase the Germans, they get mixed results.
I think what hurt that interior language resurrection for Lincoln is exactly what they put it in: Navigator buyers didn’t care, they just wanted a gigantic status symbol, Aviator wasn’t as brash as a Navigator and few wanted it, and the Zephyr’s clear resemblance in every other facet to a Fusion/Milan was what turned off buyers, the dash was the best part(my dad looked at one new over a Fusion just for that). Plus the mid 2000s was the low point in interiors for Ford IMO, they had cool designs like in those Lincoln’s or the retro Mustangs but they were made completely out of hard plastic with knobby unconvincing textures.
The funny thing is, to me, the rear isn’t the worst part of the car’s styling. The front is uninspired and putting it next to the Granada and Cougar really shows how similar it was in appearance. Then the facelift, while slightly smoother and more aerodynamic, doesn’t actually look much newer… Instead, it looks more like a ’78 LeBaron that melted a bit.
Ford had the foresight not to bother with a Taurus coupe, and to introduce aerodynamic styling on the Thunderbird, and yet they missed an opportunity with the Continental to do an LSC sedan à la the Mark VII LSC. All the mechanicals were there, and Ford had done an LTD LX so they knew how to make a more athletic Fox sedan. A missed opportunity… It would have been a more “international” offering.
You have to give Ford credit for how much new sheetmetal went into this body. Even the rear doors are unique, with that downward sloping beltline that was shared with nothing else. The Versailles this was not.
I really enjoyed reading this. You made a car I have no interest in interesting, which is the sign of a talented writer. I like the bustleback look, actually. I don’t know why. It just works for me on that type of car.
Thanks very much!
I like the bustleback look as well, though I suspect that part of that is because it is (and was, at the time) unique. If the trend had caught on and been emulated by every other car on the road, I probably would have gotten sick of looking at it.
Excellent article. To me, this is perhaps the best, or the least-bad, of the bustle- back designs. The BMW engine connection was a detail I hadn’t heard before, and I wonder what this car could’ve been if Ford had taken the collaboration further. A Lincoln with BMW handling in the 80s would’ve been very interesting. Perhaps impossible, given industry realities, but intriguing to think about.
I don’t know how many diesel Continentals were built, but probably way under 1,000. CC’s VinceC found what has to be one of the only ones still existing at Carlisle earlier this year. Picture (w/ hood up) is about 1/3 of the way down this post:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/car-show-classic/car-show-classics-2018-carlisle-ford-nationals-part-two-lincoln-mercury-and-edsel/
A friend of my dad’s, had one of these bustle Lincs with the Diesel engine. He got it dirt cheap, and I remember it being DOG slow (as bad as the diesel Chevette another neighbor had about the same time, although a lot more comfortable to ride in) He ended up junking it because he was having trouble with it and the local ford dealer wouldn’t touch it (the same fate as the diesel Olds Ciera my dad had about the same era)
The BMW diesel was also available in the Mark VII. BMW offers diesels in nearly every model it sells, yet interestingly, they have never offered it in their large sporting coupes….the 6 or 8 series, yet.
‘Yet’ you say…..? I have a feeling you’ll not see too many new German diesels any time soon.
I don’t know if the Continental was the best of a bad breed. I’d pick the Imperial, myself.
Thing with the Imperial is it would look the same overall with or without the “bustle crease” down the side. They actually look like pronto-Mark VIIs in profile, ironically. The taillights and license plate location ruin the Imperial for me though.
Best(and only other) bustleback coupe was the first
Good call on the Buick. When they were still around I never really thought about them being a bustleback. The high mount brakelights were all the talk back then.
My friend has the Frank Sinatra addition.
I feel that in the early 89,s lost its tiuch with luxury cars. They didnt have the flair or styling of the mid 70’s
These will always have a place in my heart as I had longed for the 1984 Valentino edition since I was younger. See the first pic of the new front-end treatment, that’s the ’84 Valentino edition.
In 1988, I found one with only 24,000 miles and got it.
Unfortunately, after a few years, it developed a few fluid leaks and it was time to move on.
But I still consider the 1984 Continental Valentino edition to be one of the most beautiful Lincolns ever.
To add to the list of “lasts”, was this the last Ford to follow GM’s lead in styling?
For that matter, it makes me wonder if the Continental’s less-radical bustle than the Seville originated in the styling department, or if it was a compromise needed for adequate trunk space with the Fox platform’s fairly high load floor.
I actually like these cars, to the point where I dream of a garage filled with this and a Versailles, and a Mark VII LSC. However, when you place this car next to other Fox-body sedans of the same time period, the similarities are too strong. That photo of the interior looks way too similar to the interior of my folks 85 Mercury (non Grand) Marquis.
Yet, is the idea of a premium compact car dead in the mid 80s or are the available offerings from the domestic manufacturers just uninspired?
BTW, I had no idea that this and the Thunderbird shared the same wheelbase, though the rear doors do look a bit too short.
Please note that the Continental shared it’s wheelbase with the 1980-82 Thunderbird. The aero-bird had a shrunken-down 104.2 inches.
The Mark VII coupe shares the same 108.5″ wheelbase too, I always wondered the rationale behind shortening it for the 83 Tbirds and Cougars, I can’t think of any other reason but to make the Lincoln seem more different since the overall lengths are the basically the same
I always liked these bustle backs and thought they looked very elegant and otherworldly, even when I was a kid. I used to pass by one on my daily walk to elementary school in the NY suburbs as a kid. It looked so different and unique compared to everything else, especially with that hump covered in snow. I’m also a fan of the Seville bustle even though it’s received its share of scorn here on other pages.
In 1997 I had an 87 continental. I liked that car very much, but I couldn’t afford to fix the air front suspension. Over night the front end would sink. In the morning I would start the car up and bounce the front end to get it to come back up. I was a junior in hischool working for minimum wage in the weekend I couldn’t afford the repairs so I sold it to a dealer for a small profit.
I want to get of these Continentals and drop an 03-04 cobra drivetrain in it …
Have a 1976 mark 4, Cartier edition. For sale. Garage kept
These are definitely my favorite of the three ’80s bustlebacks, with the Imperial second and the Cadillac a very distant third.
I read somewhere awhile ago that the Continental’s bustleback got a last-minute muting thanks to the then-new Seville. Apparently the Ford crew realized the bustleback wasn’t the way to go, had a bit of a panic, and tried to blunt it somewhat. That led to the pinstripe and the two-tone color schemes-the tooling was locked in, but the color schemes helped draw the eye away from it.
I always thought these were a bit awkward, like a scrawny teenager borrowing his dad’s suit. I never noticed the bustleback so much (unlike the hideous Seville), but I can certainly understand why these were never popular.
Pretentious clueless schlock. A baroque Fairmont. I’m sure it was very successful in bringing in younger, affluent BMW and Mercedes buyers. Who in their right mind thought that younger buyers who were lusting after BMW and Mercedes would go for a bustleback Granada?
I’ll bet the average age of those that did buy it was every bit as geriatric as the rest of the Lincoln line, MkVII excepted.
This is a Lincoln Deadly Sin; another coffin nail in a brand that’s barely on life support. First the Germans beat it up badly. Now Tesla outsells the whole Lincoln brand 15:1 in California, and is outselling it nationally by over 2:1.
“This is a Lincoln Deadly Sin; another coffin nail in a brand that’s barely on life support”
I am inclined to give FoMoCo at least a little bit of a pass on this if only because they were on the verge of broke in 1980-81 and had essentially two viable platforms for larger cars – the Panther and the Fox. The Town Car and Mark were both on the Panther and they had to do what they could with what they had. I have driven one of these and will say that Ford succeeded in giving this car a subjective feel that was way, way different from the thin and cheap-feeling Fairmont.
I always thought that, instead of bringing out the very troublesome 1988 Continental that was based on the Taurus platform, Ford should have completely restyled this car and given it an upgrade similar to the one performed on the Mustang for 1994. Over the long haul, the 1988-94 Continental did more damage to Lincoln than this car did.
It’s not the platform; it’s the styling, exterior and interior. In key parts of the country, this was seen as a frumpy grandpamobile from the day it was announced.
Now if they had done something like a four-door MkVII, it would have been a different ball game. This car was the last to come out of that horrible era, before the new aero cars came out a year later. They should have held off and redone it completely for ’83, in that new look. It might have been a minor hit, given the success of the aero-Bird and MkVII.
I don’t know, these always seemed sort the sort of “transitional aero” the 79 Mustangs, 81 Escort and 82 LTD were, before the fenders got rounded and windshields raked back for the 83 Tempo and Tbird. They are less knife edged than the Seville and Imperial executions and significantly more substantial than Ford’s other 80-81 offerings like the Granada/Tbird/Cougars despite the initial front end resemblance. The bustleback is inherently sleeker but there’s something more to it that makes it look more like a mid 80s product to my eyes than a 1980 product.
Is it the styling or is it the name? Were Californians seeing Lincoln Continentals as something other than a grandpamobile prior to these? I don’t fault Lincoln for them, these were far better executed than the Versailles and 1980 downsized Continental. Lincoln clearly was looking for a direction to take the brand and I firmly believe that this was a necessary step for the Mark VII to become the brand’s flagship. I’m not even sure a 4 door variant of it would have looked much different if they used the same 108.5″ wheelbase, not without severely sacrificing rear headroom anyway.
It just now occurs to me that this car was essentially Lincoln finally emulating what Cadillac did several years earlier with the Seville. The Seville began with a Nova skeleton but by the time the car was done there was no visible Nova left anywhere the customer could see. Where the Versailles screamed GRANADA from every angle inside or out, this car had body surfaces and interior features (most notably the dash) that were unique to the Continental. Whats more, anyone who ever drove both a Fairmont (or even an 80 Thunderbird) and one of these would have to acknowledge that the tactile experiences were wildly different.
If the Continental had taken a different styling direction (one that held up in later years like the original Seville’s did) the modern opinion of this car would be quite high. If Ford had put the kind of money and effort that this car got into the Versailles, it would likely have done quite well in the late 70s.
I agree with Paul and always wondered why Lincoln didn’t capitalize on the positive image of the Mark VII to make a sporty 4-door sedan version. With sport styling, a H.O. 5.0L engine, a taught suspension, maybe Lincoln could have had some appeal outside the 50+ crowd. I guess it was easier to stick with traditional customers for the short term gains.
Ford/Lincoln would have been smart to put in the 351 and make it an exclusive motor for the Lincoln. They would have picked up quite a few sales and not had the complaints about power, which were really about low-end torque. Luxury cars are about torque, not horsepower.
Totally agree. The 351 should have been Lincoln’s “InTech V8” for the 80s. I’m sure CAFE was the key factor but with SEFI like the 302s got they should have done ok in economy with it.
When these Contis were more common used cars when I was a kid I found them really interesting. The interiors were nice for what they were, the vertical taillights looked cool going up the sloped trunklid and they even had ribbing like a period Mercedes. With 2 tone especially these were the only bustleback cars that ever really pulled off the look properly in my eyes. The compact proportions flatter it really well, the result is it’s more upright in stature like the 30s-40s cars it emulated, the Seville by contrast looked like a long/low/wide 1980 Deville with the trunk diagonally lopped off, with a swath of flat metal and blocky boring taillights to fill the hole. I never really liked the revised “aero” front end as much as the original though, but seeing it with the Granada really puts the resemblance into perspective and explains why it was done.
he FWD continentals that came after were dull as dishwater. What philistines new car shoppers were that thought those were better than these beauties! (The 3.8 would have the last laugh though)
Nice story, These cars are a perfect Curbside Classic, an unusual and delightful car, a little different than anything else offered in the 80’s. There’s lots to admire and appreciate here. These were well done, well engineered cars and did a fine job of walking a fine line between appealing to the core Lincoln buyers while marketing a smaller, more efficient traditional luxury car.
I’ve driven plenty of Fox-body cars and I driven two Continentals of this generation extensively. It’s hard to believe they’re the same chassis. Ford did a first class job at overhauling the Fox body as the Lincoln rides and drives in a quiet, comfortable manner with respectable handling. They had plenty of advanced features and nice attention to detail, inside and out. In my experience they had more quality and substance than the Town Cars or the Cadillac Broughams of the era.
As for the appearance…. they have lovely flowing lines, nicely done trims and a fairly unique shape. The 2-tone paint schemes were a well done complement to the classic look.
It’s a shame this concept wasn’t developed further. The handling and performance pieces of the Mk VII could have been grafted on, to make an LSC (LSS?) Continental.
Agreed. I owned 2 ’87s and enjoyed the thoroughly. I had a Town Car with the same engine and it was quite nice to have the performance (if you can call it that) in the small package. It would run rings around the Town Car. I liked the way it handled and the front split seats with the controls on on the mini console. I also like the power recline that it had on both seats. It is too easy for some to look at them with the lens of today instead of the ’80s. Yes, we finally have more horsepower but a lot less style. They are just now starting to look at style but… I agree, the Marks LSC’s drivetrain would have been a nice option. I drove the all new ’88 Continental and it lacked a lot. Sure, bigger inside but they forgot the power. As time went on I found many on car lots with bunch of problems. The interiors didn’t hold up either as the previous model did well. I love them. But then again, I love the Mark VI coupe as well. Not the 4 door though.
My father bought a used 1984 model some time in 1985. His was two-tone silver/gray with light gray leather inside. I was surprised at how tight and solid it felt, and considered the execution of the car far better than that of his 1980 Town Coupe – a car I simply despised.
There was one problem – Dad asked me to drive it. I think that I was in the first months of owning my 85 VW GTI. Dad was bragging up the air suspension, but I found the handling of the car simply scary. It wallowed and pitched and leaned on uneven pavement to the point where I felt like coming to a stop and starting over.
Today I would probably take one of these for an inexpensive fun old car. These turned out to be much better cars than almost anything in a Cadillac showroom of those days. I wonder how the world might have been different if Ford had continued to develop this platform for the Connie. Better styling and a little more length mated to the kinds of hardware FoMoCo had on the shelf then could have been a better long-term strategy than that awful FWD Continental that we all got.
The grille treatment on the later ones looks like a combo of the Mark VII and contemporary T-Bird.
“Pretentious clueless schlock. A baroque Fairmont.” +1.
The customer profile was just what one would expect, geriatric for the most part. The one bustle-back Continental around my small town was owned by the wife an affluent, successful construction contractor who was a loyal Lincoln owner to the end, One of her sons now runs his own successful contracting business, his luxury vehicles of choice? Lexus and Porsche, as well as loaded four door Ford F-150 pick-ups.
About the air suspension: here in the Norhteast as these suffered the rigors of winters, it became common to see one end or the other down on its deflated air bags. Repair cost quickly exceeded the used value so many were consigned the junk when the suspension failure appeared even when the rest of the car was good. At a used car auction a few years ago, a survivor in fine overall condition except for a rear displaying rear air suspension problems was offered, they could get no bids in spite of repeated tries.
People’s reaction to the air suspension issue annoys me. It’s a terrific system, and is very reliable. I have those Ford air springs on 2 of my cars, and always serves up impressive ride and handling, regardless of the load on board.
They work better than the Cadillac system of the day, soft steel springs and air shocks.
It’s reliable and easy to service. Yes, the air springs eventually need replacement, but its an easy job,and takes about 20 minutes per wheel. These days, new units are affordable.
I have a 3rd air -spring car where the previous owner “upgraded” to conventional coils, a common conversion, because people were afraid of servicing the air springs. This is not an improvement. The air springs are superior, and I’ll convert that car back when I have time.
Judging by the weight of this ugly turd the BMW diesel would have been the pick of the engine options, Mercedes cars of this era were quite handsome did Ford really think sighted people would choose this bustle back creation over a Benz or for that matter a large BMW? Cadillac went the bustle back route and while I dont actually like them the is a white one in a nearby town, very clean looking and the pristine white hides the styling well Ive seen it cruising at night and it looks ok.
Good article! The Continental’s 84 facelift could perhaps go down as the most transformed front end look for the least amount of actual change ever achieved by a grill/headlamp revision. Huge improvement to my eyes!
“By 1981, Lincoln’s product line looked unmistakably dated. With only the Town Car and Mark VI to pull in customers, sales fell to the lowest point in ten years.”
Lincoln was selling huge numbers of Town Cars and Mark V’s in 77-79, I don’t know if I’d attribute their sharp early 80’s decline to lack of models, or even very much to dated product. I would put more weight on the overall economy, gas crisis and the lack of appeal in their new full size models. They managed to make their mechanically modern cars look dated by extremely conservative, unoriginal styling, and it wasn’t the conservative cues that killed the design so much as they were laid onto a fundamentally ungainly shape. Ford’s early Panthers defied the longer, lower wider convention that had prevailed for 25 or 30 years by looking shorter, taller and narrower. GM reduced the dimensions of their full sizers without violating that so much. Even downsized, their cars looked sleeker. Luxury buyers wanted a good looking car. Tasted didn’t change so much in 1-2 years, the Lincolns did. They released unattractive cars in a bad economy. Deadly combo!
The bustleback Seville was also a slow seller compared to the blockbuster 75-79. Lincoln could have used something that sold like the early Seville. Cadillac didn’t even have that by the early 80’s. As others pointed out above, they certainly could have used a legitimate competitor to the European sports sedans, but no American company really cracked that code. Lincoln’s Mark VII came the closest, it’s a shame they couldn’t make a four door version of that.
Lincoln’s Mark VII came the closest, it’s a shame they couldn’t make a four door version of that.
The “Washington” in the old Grand Theft Auto games was basically that, a longer Mark VII with 4 doors. I used to keep one of these in my mansion garage
Tom and Fran were the elderly couple across the street and down a few houses where I grew up in Suburban Denver. Tom was f’om li’l ol’ V’ginia, and sounded like it. They bought one of these when they stopped regularly using their ’72 “Pawnyack” Bonneville 455, blue except for the dark-rusted hood (why does this happen?). The Continental was 2-tone silver, an ’85 or ’86 model, and by and by it developed a problem that had it running super-rich until the engine warmed up. Fran didn’t know. If Tom did, he didn’t care; he’d start it up and drive off, billowing clouds of black smoke behind him. By the time he got back from his errand, no more black smoke. Denver’s annual emission tests were rather strict at that time, but the car stayed like that for several years—I guess it ran OK by the time he got to the test station, though I’d think the spark plugs would be fouled all to hell and the catalytic converter would probably take a gradual beating.
One thing that confuses me: this article mentions ‘other notable improvements included fuel injection for 1985’, which surely means the EEC-IV PFI system. Just what were they using before? I am pretty sure it was the EEC-III TBI system—same as my folk’s ’80 Stinkoln Clown Car had on its 302—but RockAuto’s no help this time: they list carburetors and parts and throttle body fuel injectors and such for ’82-’84 302 Continentals.
Only the ’82’s ran a 2bbl carb. 83-85’s had the CFI setup. The 86-87’s had port fuel injection and EEC-IV.
Got the dates mixed up… I corrected the text so no one else is confused. Thanks for the clarification.
H’m. I was under the impression the TBI (okeh, “CFI” in Fordspeak) EEC-III system’s last year of use was ’84 on the 302, in any model, and that EEC-IV with PFI was used on all 302s starting from ’85. No?
(And, was the ’82 2bbl Ford’s in/famous VV unit?)
84 and 85 had EEC-IV with CFI and 86 and 87 had EEC-IV with port injection.
Ah, that explains it; I didn’t realise the “CFI” with EEC-IV was a thing.
I love these Continentals, especially the Valentino with black and silver two-tone trim, red velour interior and red Allure carpeting. I do prefer the pre-facelift, more vertical front clip, but I am clearly in the minority in that regard. People marvel at the costs for these, but, adjusted, they’re right in line with a 2018 Continental Black Label. Ford always denied these were a “Versailles replacement,” though they certainly seem to have been.
Great write-up as always Eric! I always enjoy the time and effort you put into writing about what can appear to many as uninteresting cars. I can’t say that I was ever a fan of these, or pretty much any American luxury car from this era. That said, I didn’t have any first hand experience with these. We had numerous fox Fords in our family, with a mixed bag of some good and some bad. Ours were all the lower end cars or Mustangs though.
Although these cars were definitely not trendy at the time, I agree with JPC’s assessment above where he said it was better than the stuff Cadillac was putting out at the time. Cadillac was so bad at this time, I have no doubt that much of Lincoln’s sales resurgence were what would have been traditional Cadillac buyers.
Thanks very much Vince, I do enjoy diving in the history of cars that tend to be overlooked… and I’m always glad when folks enjoy reading it!
The fox cougar was a beautiful design. A hump trunk, fender gills and a mark vi like front on a cougar would have been so much nicer. And some opera windows.
The busssle back Seville and imperial looked way nicer, but the Continental was better mechanically. Exception being the suspension. A way better car than the super topaz continental.
Apologies for reading this so late, but excellently-written article as usual Eric!
This Continental is a car that raises so many more questions than answers. Unlike the bustle-back Seville, which was otherwise conservative and traditional Cadillac, the Continental tried to be avant garde while traditional at the same time. I don’t think it really succeed in either direction. But nonetheless a car that gets more interesting with age!
My uncle (and godfather) drove one of these for the longest time…I can’t remember exactly when he got it or sold it, although he did have it all through the 90’s. It was silver over gray, it seems like a lot of these Continentals were painted in that color. Although my uncle has had a few cars since then (and I am of an age to not really remember what he had before), a Continental of this particular generation is the one car I will always associate with him.