Money people and planners love formulas. ‘Planning’ gets a lot easier when a trend is established, and it mostly turns into giving the public more of what they already crave. Financiers feel much better when investment feels secure, and satisfying a known need is as safe as it gets. Creative types and reviewers, on the other hand, despise formulas (unless it is a quirky one of their preference). They find the predictability of it all, without surprises or novelties, just plain dull. Even cynical. Creatives and reviewers are also usually aware of all the variety under the rainbow. Why should the public settle for Vanilla when there’s Green Tea Tapioca Fudge to try?
The buying public, for the most part, also loves formulas. That is, until they don’t.
Back in ’65, the first chapter of the LTD found much love from pundits and the buying public. Released as the Galaxie LTD, the car delivered a product with upscale pretenses that felt like no other Ford before. The company had placed great effort into improving the underpinnings of their new full-sizers; chassis design had made early use of computer technology to soften noise and isolate vibrations, and suspension had been greatly upgraded. On the LTD, upgraded trim and interior materials completed the package, offering more luxury than any other entry-level brand before. By ’66, success had been so that the LTD had become a stand-alone model. The Great Brougham epoch had started.
All competitors caught on to the idea, of course. And Ford had to up the ante. With that, a fully revised model arrived for ’69, delivering more of the attributes that had made it a success. However, on this occasion, the new model didn’t get much love from pundits.
If you love the ’69 LTD, you may want to skip this road test. Car Life absolutely loathed the car. The featured 429 V8-equipped LTD was part of a comparison of ‘Powercars,’ a segment CL defined as full-sizers that carried the largest available factory engine. In that June 1969 issue, the new LTD was measured against Chevrolet’s Caprice, Dodge’s Monaco, and Plymouth’s Fury III. Of the four, the LTD placed last in CL’s evaluations, with particular dislike aimed at the car’s ergonomics and handling.
But let’s start with the positives. The known quietness of the LTD was the best of its class, “engine noise simply doesn’t exist… heater and air-conditioner are almost silent and the AM/FM stereo has no competition…” Ford’s power disc brakes were also extremely good. The LTD’s traction got good marks as well, with the BF Goodrich radials providing great adhesion.
Considering the publication’s enthusiast-oriented focus, performance and handling were the areas where the LTD faltered. The model suffered from the usual Ford handling characteristics of the era; “heavy front, large camber change in the curves, and lots of lean.” Despite good traction, it “took nerve to take this car into the curve much faster…”
Ultimately, reviewers felt the big engine and the car’s character didn’t match; “with the big engine, big output option, one could only assume that the LTD is being sold for its performance potential. On that basis, our test car was severely old-maidish. It had none of the available handling options.”
The reviewer’s real ire was directed toward the LTD’s cockpit. Ford was clearly trying to upstage everyone with its approach to the LTD’s cabin. Called the Front Room by marketing, it seemed to be a ‘new’ idea to luxury riding, and a sign that Ford was overthinking and trying too hard to be unique.
There were a lot of ideas being squeezed into the Front Room concept. To keep the open bench seating, all controls surrounded a Flight-Cockpit instrument panel, with a few even being located under the dash (ignition and lights). On the other hand, the front passenger’s area was devoid of any instruments. A “room to relax,” in the words of Ford marketing.
The concept was short-lived, and by ’71 the LTD had reverted to a more conventional arrangement. Considering LTD sales figures, the idea wasn’t a dealbreaker to many buyers. However, its short existence is likely the result of user dissatisfaction.
As time went on the Brougham formula proved to be an incredible influence, eventually turning into a poor example to follow. As marketers and planners found ways to reduce the formula’s substance while delivering similar flashiness, it became ever more cynical. The idea of ‘luxury’ was reduced to predictable ploys, ever cheaper and more accessible, leaving an opening for a different approach to ‘upscale.’ An opening taken by European makes -mainly the Germans- by offering high engineering and an understated approach to luxury.
But that was way into the future. For ’69 the LTD delivered on its promise. Pundits may have disliked the model’s progression, but the market loved it. LTD sales for ’68 had been around 139K. In ’69, they exploded to 288K, not counting the new station wagon version (an additional 129K). Numbers would only climb from there. Meanwhile, sales of CL’s preferred Supercar of 1969, the Chevrolet Caprice, paled in comparison (about 167K). For the time being, the marketers and the planners were right. In the long run, those who had tried different automotive experiences would also prove to have a good deal of reason.
Further reading:
Car Show Classic: 1969 Ford LTD – My Fathers Day Present
Car Show Classic: 1969 Ford LTD – How My Dad (Temporarily) Turned My Grandpa Into A Ford Man
Wow. I just don’t understand. I’ve owned two 1970 models, one sedan and one coupe. One of the things that I love the most about the car is the cockpit dash. I LIKE the fact that the passenger can’t fool around with the radio! I’ll bet a lot of other drivers did too. Plus the passenger has loads of leg room. Both of mine had 390-2 barrels. Very quick and powerful. These have been my most favorite cars over the years of all the cars I have owned. Anyway, my two cents. Thanks to Rich for posting this…I had never seen this article before.
Dad got a new light green ’69 Galaxie 500 4 dr hardtop as a company car, trading in a ’67 Fury III 4 dr hardtop I’d convinced him to pick, that Fury being the first car I sometimes was allowed to drive as a brand new driver that year. My Driver’s Ed car at Towson High was a ’67 Belair 4 dr with 283/Powerglide and the Fury was a better car in most ways, it’s new LA 318 and TorqueFlite being a considerably more sprightly combination, albeit a bit less refined, having that typical TF whine, and the torsion bar front end contributing to superior handling (for a large car).
I loved that Fury and when he got the ’69 Galaxie I was very disappointed it’s mushy suspension, however it did have a super soft ride, great for bad pavement on suburban streets, and the 390/4v would lay rubber from it’s Goodyear Super Cushions like nobody’s business and the a/c worked great. As bad as it’s road manners were, I had yet to experience a further fall from grace evidenced by his next company wheels: a ’72 Galaxie 500 4 dr hardtop 400/2v, a wallowing, flopping pig of a car. In retrospect the ’69 wasn’t so bad, and it was a handsome car, but today I’d still take the Fury in a heartbeat. He nver had another Mopar sadly, but I made up for it.
I was too young to drive at the time, but you could have been talking about my Dad, except for the years. My Dad got a ’68 Fury III as a company car, then traded it in for a 1970 Galaxie 500 when the time came to replace the Mopar product. I think my Dad got his cars with the larger engines, though. The Plymouth came with an LA block 360, and the Ford with a 351, although I don’t remember if the 351 was a Cleveland or a Windsor.
Having had quite a bit of seat time in both ’69-’70s and ’71-’72s when I worked for Towson Ford, my impressions match yours. It went from soft to floppy mush.
I did my driver’s ed at Towson in the summer of 1970, and the car was now an Impala 4 door sedan with the 350/350 drive train. That was my first experience with that combination, and it was something of a revelation. What a huge jump from the 283/PG in the ’67 you drove. And it handled pleasantly enough, although I wasn’t exactly allowed to test its limits on my drive around Loch Raven reservoir. 🙂
If you were a Ford guy in 1969, it’s perfect.
Our family had a’69 Ltd 4 door hardtop. 390. Mom loved the “front room” passenger area and Dad loved the radio location on the far left of the dash, so no one else could fiddle with it. Soft and squishy, but also quiet and trouble free for 150,000 miles. Even the hidden headlight doors worked perfectly for 11 years. Ford discovered decontenting, as the standard LTD interior was Galaxie 500 level. To get an interior equal to previous years standards one had to order the optional Brougham package.
Actually, there were 4 available trims starting around January of 1969. The standard interior became, as noted, Galaxie 500 level. The former standard interior
was now the “Luxury Trim” option. The Brougham option was the penultimate
choice, with top dog being the Brougham with the Twin Comfort Lounge seat, Ford parlance for a 50-50 split with dual armrests.
Those are some very attractive cars! I like the maroon one best and then that first green pic car. I sure with cars were still more popular and made today.
You’d probably like my Uncle’s car…he bought it new in ’69, weeks before he was to graduate from college, because his ’51 Chrysler Windsor blew a head gasket and he didn’t want to bother with getting it fixed. His was a Maroon 4 door hardtop LTD, with the 302, panty cloth black interior, and drum brakes. The dealer in his town ignored him as a buyer so much he ended up buying in a nearby town, the exact place my Dad later in the year bought his new ’69 Country Squire (so effectively they lost 2 sales). We never lived closer than 4 hours from where my parents grew up so he bought it while on a visit. His squire had the 351 /2 bbl and front disc brakes, but otherwise didn’t have much on it….though it did have an AM radio..It was Dad’s first full sized wagon (he previously had a ’56 Plymouth Plaza, don’t know what size you’d call that, but back then they only came in 1 size).
I never drove the ’69, because he traded it in on a new ’73 Ranch Wagon the year before I got my license, so I have no comment on how it drove. The Ranch Wagon was big and lumbering, my Mom called it “the boat” because of it’s bulk, it had the 400 2bbl and drank gas pretty fast…bought right before the 1st gas crisis, Dad wanted Mom to be able to driv his (smaller) car when he wasn’t working to save the cost of gas.
I think ’69 might have been the peak of the full sized car. I might have prefered a Chevrolet with the 350 and turbohydromatic that year, but Dad went the other way, traded in his ’65 Oldsmobile F85 wagon for the Ford. I think it was our last car with bias-ply tires (the ’73 had Firestone 500 radials, but they were problematic with cord separation in (about 500 miles or less)). Early radials could be pretty bad…hard to recall, now that you can’t buy anything but radial tires…fortunately found by an observant mechanic when the car was in for servicing for something other than tires (it was still pretty much a new car with 500 miles on it).
Radial tires were the elusive vaporware of the 1967-70 period at Ford. While mentioned in brochures, I never knew or heard of a factory installation in my area. The car in the magazine test obviously has them, but with a press car anything is possible, as evidenced
by this test.
The tires are obviously radial, but if you freeze frame at 3:33 you’ll see a rear sway bar, something not available at from the factory at any price, with the possible exception of police packages. Yes, we all know about muscle car ringers such as Royal Pontiacs, but an LTD? If you wanted a rear bar on these, your were getting it at the parts counter.
A rear anti-sway bar on an LTD? Now that’s a unicorn. And yes, I never saw one of these with radials from the factory either.
I think that Ford’s trick of adding extra sound insulation to the LTD and other top-end models (this was also common with their European Ghia trim level a few years later) is an underrated aspect of their success in this area. It didn’t seem to make much impression on road testers, but it seems like showroom buyers were another matter, since it was something that could easily be demonstrated in a test-drive and made the car feel perceptibly nicer than cheaper models, in ride as well as noise level. (Even if the ride quality is the same in terms of firmness and frequency, reducing road noise will make the ride seem more comfortable because there’s less audible clunk-and-bang.)
Agreed. It made them feel like a genuine luxury car. Ford nailed the formula and made the most of it with their “Quieter than a Rolls-Royce” ads. Chevy just couldn’t properly compete.
I do agree with the reviewers that the cockpit dash and related switches and such was bad ergonomically. A short-lived fad.
Didn’t Ford decontent the “base” LTD and introduce a new LTD Brougham top series around this time, while the Caprice remained Chevy’s top dog not even offered as a post sedan (only 2-and 4-door hardtops, no Caprice post sedan until ’71 or ’72)? That could explain a lot of the sales jump, along with counting the Country Squire as an LTD while Chevy wagons were a separate series for another year or two.
That on top of Ford’s traditional dominance of high-profit, high-spec full size models like convertibles and wagons which had been their “consolation prize” to losing big-car sales to the Falcon at the start of the decade – those people were buying Custom 300s before anyway, grumbling the whole time about wanting a modern Model A.
The 2:80 axle in this car certainly didn’t do the performance of this example any favors, but probably helped to eke out a little extra fuel mileage on the highway.
I think the 69 LTD may have been peak LTD, at least as a new car. It was really attractive for the time, the interior was very nicely done (at least before the midyear decontenting) – just look at the inside of a 69 Cadillac. And it did smooth and quiet like nobody else anywhere near the price.
A Plymouth VIP (or whatever Plymouth called its luxury version that year) would have been a much better driver, but Ford nailed the stuff that middle-age adults wanted in a luxurious car. It is a pity that these aged so poorly, at least in the rust belt. And the 1971 model was let down by its floppy structure.
That ignition key was probably where it was with an eye to the column-mounted ignition in the works for 1970. Ford kept it low and out of the way to minimize dash changes. Also, there was room near the passenger for either the HVAC control or the radio, and I think they chose correctly there. That may not have been the best cockpit-style dash ever done, but it seems to have influenced the entire industry for awhile.
I remember the 1970 model had a little round bright metal plug where the ignition switch was, in the same binnacle.
A little, but not enough. Car Life included both a Monaco (with a 440) and a Fury III (with a 383) and remarked:
“Handling, Chrysler family virtue for years, wasn’t up to our expectations. The Dodge and Plymouth both performed well, but neither big car was as impressive in class as the Mopar intermediates and compacts are. … The Monaco and the Fury both understeered strongly. Both felt stressed around the test curve, although both made it through without drama. On the open road, the Dodge steering was quite sensitive, and the car [which had conventional bias-plies rather than bias-belted Polyglas tires] reacted to sudden motions at the wheel with sudden dips of the outside front fender. The testers ranked both cars inferior to the Caprice, but better than the LTD. Let’s hope Dart and Barracuda never grow up.”
I’ll practically never say no to hidden headlights, but from the side profile especially, the ’69 LTD looks bloated compared to the sleek Caprice. Chevrolet really should have made hidden headlights standard — they look fantastic.
Chevrolet either sent a ringer to Road Test or maybe the magazine requested the Caprice with the F-41 suspension. It certainly wasn’t well known at the time and likely very few came so equipped. I could not find it mentioned in the long list of options in the 1969 Chevrolet full-size brochure. The Ford brochure mentions a “competition suspension” that’s part of a GT performance group, but who knows if that was even available on the LTD.
Yes, the LTD easily outsold the Caprice in 1969, but I think that was partially because the Impala was so entrenched as the default full-size car, with 777,000 sold in 1969. The Impala absolutely clobbered its equivalent Ford, the Galaxie 500, and at 373,000 Galaxies sold, it’s clear that the LTD was already shoving the Galaxie aside, something the Caprice wouldn’t do to the Impala until 1977.
The Caprice test in the same issue (June 1969) explains they did not request it and initially thought it was a ringer. Sayeth the text:
I agree that it was probably not often ordered, however, except perhaps by police fleets.
I never thought that big-block, full-size sedans were attempting to be “performance cars”.
Some people bought them for bragging rights.
Some people bought them to tow trailers.
I bet the Highway Patrols loved them.
(I’m not sure when NASCAR switched to intermediates, but…) for some years, they were NASCAR Homologation cars.
I owned (and COAL’d) the polar opposite of this car, a 1969 Ford Custom with a 302. I thought the “cockpit” dash was just plain ridiculous. There’s no way you’re gonna get a “cockpit feel” in a car that’s the size of your living room. I agree with Paul that it was an ergonomic nightmare as well… I was forever reaching around/behind the steering wheel to manipulate the controls.
Good writeup! Old road tests are most interesting when they either love the car or loath it. It makes sense an enthusiast magazine would hate the LTD. Ford would have been smart to send out cars to magazines with all the chassis upgrades possible, at least it would have stood a shot a positive review.
My grandparents had a 69 LTD, which they replaced when I was about 6, so I don’t remember much about it. I’m sure it didn’t have a 429, though.
I have some experience with these cars, but it was a long time ago. While stationed at Ft. Sill I rented a ’69 coupe for a weekend. I didn’t think it drove much different than my hated ’64 Galaxie waiting for me back in Indiana. A month later I rented a new ’71 four door LTD to haul me and 4 other guys to the Oklahoma City airport to fly to our homes. That was when the soft suspension really showed itself. With all of us aboard and our gear stowed in the trunk it looked like the back bumper was dragging.
As to the automotive press, I have always thought that most of them had kind of an elitist attitude and always seemed to automatically look down their noses at anything built in the US.