Vintage AMS Review: 1970 Ford 26M – Ford Tries To Build A German LTD, Ends Up With A “Farmer’s Mercedes”

 

One of the problems with trying to run a car company as a truly global business is that product strategies that do well in certain markets don’t work at all in others. In 1969, Ford’s German subsidiary, Ford-Werke, tried to create a new six-cylinder flagship along the lines of the very popular Ford LTD, but the cut-price luxury formula was lost in translation. Let’s take a look at what the West German magazine auto motor und sport had to say about the 1970 Ford 26M, a car often derided as the “Farmer’s Mercedes.”

It had worked so well at home: U.S. automakers, taking advantage of an increasingly affluent market, had kept adding ever-plusher trim levels to nearly every car line, taking what had been low-priced basic family transportation well into the upper middle class in appointments and features. Ford Motor Company had led that particular charge with the 1965 Ford LTD, a highly profitable merchandising inspiration that soon spawned inspired an array of imitators, notably the Chevrolet Caprice.

 

Obviously, if it worked in the U.S., it ought to work anywhere, right? I assume that was the argument when this car was conceived, and it wouldn’t have been the first time that argument had been heard in Cologne, where Ford-Werke was headquartered along the bank of the Rhein. Under former managing director John S. Andrews, Ford-Werke had gone its own way for a while (the Cardinal-based 12M notwithstanding, but Andrews was gone now, and new American chief engineer Jack Hooven (who had led the development of the original U.S. Falcon) had been dispatched to bring Ford-Werke in line with accepted Ford-U.S. practice on styling and engineering.

 

There was also Opel to consider. Opel had had its big Kapitän/Admiral/Diplomat line for years, even offering Chevrolet V-8 engines, but the greater concern for Ford-Werke was the newer Opel Commodore, a fancier six-cylinder version of the midsize Rekord C, arch-rival of the bread-and-butter Ford 17M/20M line. Commodore prices started just a little above the Rekord and continued into the more profitable terrain of more prestigious models from Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and BMW.

 

Ford-Werke wasn’t in the best financial shape at this time, so creating an all-new flagship model was not really feasible. Instead, they dressed up the existing 17M/20M with fancier trim, more standard equipment, and a bigger engine, and called the results the Ford 26M.

This road test, like many in auto motor und sport in this era, was written by Reihard Seiffert, with photos by Julius Weitmann. It originally appeared in AMS issued 23/1969, cover-dated 8 November 1969. The headline “Prunkstück” means “Showpiece,” while the subtitle above it says “Ford 26M with automatic and stick shift.”

Pictured at the bottom of the above page are a 26M hardtop coupe (left) and a 26M sedan (right). Both cars were part of the model line known internally as Projekt-7, or P7; cars built after a 1968 facelift are sometimes called (I think unofficially) P7b. Although you’ll sometimes see people describing these cars as “Ford Taunus 26M,” Ford-Werke had actually dropped the Taunus name by the time they arrived, so the lettering on the nose and tail says “F O R D”; there’s a Ford-Werke coat of arms on the steering wheel.

 

These were considered fairly large cars by European standards, but Americans would have considered the Ford P7 a compact: It was 185.9 inches long on a 106.5-inch wheelbase and 69.1 inches wide — a few inches longer but 1.7 inches narrower than a 1969 AMC Rambler American. The 26M was no bigger than the cheaper 17M or 20M, although its additional equipment made it somewhat heavier. Like its brothers, it had MacPherson struts in front and a beam axle on semi-elliptical leaf springs in back, now with an additional set of trailing links to placate journalists complaining about Ford’s primitive cart springs. Brakes were disc/drum, and power assistance for both brakes and steering was standard.

 

The front end of these cars reminds me a lot of the 1966–1967 Lincoln Continental, and the overall sense of a mini-Continental would have been even stronger if German buyers hadn’t balked at the Continental’s rear fender hop-up, which was introduced on the P7 in 1967 and then hastily smoothed out a year later.

The bullet-pointed list in the middle of the above page summarizes key test results as follows:

Advantages

• Flexible, smooth-running engine with great power reserve
• Easy operation thanks to automatic transmission and power steering
• Extensive standard equipment

Disadvantages

• Unsatisfactory suspension comfort on poor roads
• Power steering not very precise, unsatisfactory roadholding
• Strong wind noise when driving fast

 

Seiffert began:

The lineup of every decent automobile factory today includes a flagship — a centerpiece and showpiece that buyers in the less-demanding price categories can set as their long-term goal. Ford Cologne came up with its flagship in the same way that large American-style car manufacturers get almost anything: by mixing and matching parts.

The recipe for the 26M was as follows: take the body of the 17M/20M, a skilled painter who adds a pinstripe to it, a crankshaft that increases the stroke of the 2.3-liter engine by 6.6 mm to 2.6 liters, an automatic transmission, a leatherette roof cover and every conceivable accessory. And: you pay 13,000 marks for it.

IAA spectators who thought the 26M body was larger and different were not expressly dissuaded from this error by Ford. But when questioned, they did not conceal the fact that the 26M was basically only the most expensive of all 20M variants. A completely new car as a flagship? Cologne would hardly go to such expense.

The problem was cleverly solved visually, as the thin side stripe — already familiar to Commodore owners — gives the impression of a lower and wider body. Halogen headlights and splendid decorative wheel covers do the rest: With the 26M, carnival-goers can drive to the Prunksitzung in style from November 11th. Delivery begins in November.

IAA (Internationale Automobil-Ausstellung, International Automobile Show) is the official name of the Frankfurt motor show, where the 26M debuted in September 1969. The Prunksitzung is a big carnival gala commemorating what’s sometimes called the fifth season; this season has different names in different German states, but it officially starts at 11:11 a.m. on the 11th of November, with most festivals held early in the new year.

 

With a list price of around 13,000 marks ($3,250 at the contemporary exchange rate, which was still fixed at four marks to the USD), the 26M was over 50 percent more expensive than a basic four-cylinder 17M sedan. It was also around 10 percent more than an Opel Commodore, although Ford included more standard equipment, including automatic transmission, which was still pretty rare for European cars in this class.

Bodywork: Very Showy
Accusing Ford of trimming a model for effect is a rather pointless endeavor — it’s just the way things are done in Cologne, and Ford buyers seem to like the shiny upholstery fabrics, the candy colors, and the abundance of chrome. Function is not quite so good: The seats, which appear to be shaped to suit the body, prove to be too yielding in use to offer really firm support. The rear seats force you to adopt a less-than-comfortable posture and you have to fold up like a penknife. On bad roads, their heavily sprung cushions produce an unpleasant catapult effect.

The body shape, which the 26M shares with the 20M and the 17M, is more modern on the outside thanks to the cosmetic surgery carried out in recent years, but visibility is not optimal, and when reversing, you can only guess at the considerable length of the rear overhang.

As part of the equipment upgrade, the 26M has been fitted with two storage bins. However, for some reason, each is fitted with a lid that is difficult to open and always in the way. What’s more, they are so narrow that you can’t store much in them. Wider open compartments would have been more practical.

The standard equipment also included a sunroof, whose crank was unfortunately not recessed, tinted windows, a windshield made of laminated glass, and a Blaupunkt Frankfurt radio with a second speaker. Although radios fitted as standard equipment usually work better than those fitted later, the poor station separation and the mostly distorted and interference-sensitive reproduction, even in the FM range, were unpleasantly noticeable.

The heating and ventilation system, which also includes a heated rear window, once again proved to be very good. Rapid heating and an effective blower ensure that even when the car is fully loaded, the windows are fog-free shortly after a cold start. A real plus of the 26M is the standard halogen lights, which provide wide and even illumination of the road ahead on high beam and dipped beam.

I assume what Seiffert meant by “trimmed for effect” was that Ford-Werke, like Ford Division in the U.S., was good at coming up with cars that looked flashy in the brochure or the showroom, whether or not the flash had any real substance.

 

As you can see from the photos below, the upholstery and interior trim of even a fairly well-kept 26M didn’t age gracefully, a problem even when these cars were still fairly new.

 

Unlike most U.S. LTDs, the 26M had bucket seats and a center console, akin to the earlier U.S. Ford Galaxie 500/XL. Until the mid-1960s, most German Ford cars had front bench seats and column shift, but this became a tough sell in the German market, so bucket seats were eventually adopted on most models.

As for the 26M engine, the so-called Cologne V-6 debuted in 1964, a six-cylinder derivative of the odd 60-degree V-4 from the smaller Ford Taunus 12M. It was initially offered only in 1,998 cc form, but from 1967 on, there was a bored-out 2,293 cc version making up either 108 or 125 PS. For the 26M, the V-6 was stroked to 2,550 cc, although it was still very oversquare in this form. Ford-Werke would later develop hotter versions of the 2.6-liter version for the Ford Capri, making up to 150 PS (and a lot more in racing tune), but the engine in the 26M was tuned for torque rather than additional power.

Engine: Lots of Torque
The 26M is not the first Ford with 125 PS: the engine of the 2.3-liter 20M RS also has the same output. But in the 26M, it is achieved at 5300 instead of 5500 rpm, the maximum torque is 20.5 [mkg; 148 lb-ft] instead of 16.7 mkg [121 lb-ft]. The larger displacement was therefore used exclusively to give the engine more torque and a flatter torque curve.

The 2.3-liter engine has already proven to be a refined power source. With the 2.6-liter, performance is even better, as the large-displacement engine is combined with a relatively lightweight car.

So it’s no wonder that the 26M impresses with its power delivery. Despite the V-arrangement, the engine runs smoothly and almost vibration-free, delivering plenty of pulling power even at low revs and increasing smoothly up to speeds of around 6000 rpm. You hear very little of it — it remains quiet even at high revs. Its ability to rev is astonishing for a pushrod engine, and you can use it without hesitation, as 66.3 mm stroke is still very short. But you don’t necessarily need to make use of it, because the motor pulls strongly at any speed.

The 26M sedan had a curb weight of 2,711 lb with automatic. The coupe was actually 22 lb heavier than the sedan, presumably due to the structural reinforcement required by its hardtop roof.

The italicized photo caption reads, “Abundant chrome, oversize wheel cover, and a painted side stripe characterize the 26M from the outside. Added to that is a rich range of standard equipment, including an automatic transmission with a center gear selector and a radio with two speakers.”

 

By contemporary German standards, the 2.6-liter V-6 was impressively smooth and very flexible. It was happy to rev, but it had enough grunt that it didn’t really need to:

This allows the 26M to effortlessly achieve excellent performance. While it’s not a typical high-speed car, its pulling power is also appealing to those who don’t want to drive fast. On highway gradients, for example, where many cars still struggle even today, the power reserve ensures that speed is maintained at a constant level, and when overtaking, it ensures short passing times and distances. It is a soothing means of power delivery — without any of the noise that comes with exploiting the power of small, high-revving engines.

Naturally, the stress-free driving style also has to do with the automatic transmission. The American Ford [C4] automatic transmission, which has been modified for European conditions and of which we had less positive memories from an earlier 17M, mates well with the 2.6 liter six. The fact that it shifts up early — in the D position — and is reluctant to kick down is hardly a problem with this high-torque engine. Shift points are hardly noticeable; the torque converter compensates for the ratio jumps of the automatic three-speed gearbox so well that there is hardly any need to intervene with the selector lever in normal operation. Even on mountain roads, the D position is easy to get along with and never lacks temperament. Only when you want to drive in a sporty and effective manner does it make sense to use drive position II, in which only the two lower gears are active. Thanks to the engine’s good revvability, you can use the middle gear up to almost 140 km/h [87 mph] and the lower gear up to over 80 km/h [50 mph], which solves every hill-climbing and overtaking problem. Downshifting to position II or I also makes sense on long downhill stretches. The braking effect of the engine is then greater and the brakes are relieved.

The comparison table is interesting, so let’s blow it up a bit:

“Beschleunigung” means acceleration, “Höchstgeschwindigkeit” means “maximum speed,” listed in km/h. Note that the 26M listed in the first column is the stick-shift version, which was both cheaper and a bit faster than the automatic version. Also note that Ford-Werke priced the 26M above the rival Opel Commodore GS, which was quicker, but had less standard equipment.

Although the automatic transmission was standard equipment on the 26M, Ford-Werke was not willing to risk alienating prospective buyers by making that the sole transmission — European drivers, especially Germans, were still not generally enthusiastic about automatic — so a four-speed manual transmission was available as a credit option:

We also drove a 26M coupé with the four-speed gearbox, which is offered for the 26M for a 733 mark price reduction. It shifts precisely and reliably, and is surprisingly light considering the high torque. The advantages of the engine also come to bear with this gearbox, but it is clearer than with the automatic that the transition when accelerating in the lower and middle speed range is not entirely flawless. The noticeable “hole” here is probably related to the fact that the 26M has a centrally arranged two-throat carburetor to feed the six cylinders, which it does not always do perfectly. However, this problem has been solved much better today than on the first 20M.

The stick shift also brings an advantage in fuel consumption. While we needed between 13 and 18 liters/100 km [between 13.1 and 18.1 mpg] with the automatic 26M, depending on route and driving style, it was about 1.5 liters less with the manual version [i.e., between 14.3 and 20.5 mpg). However, you shouldn’t expect ultra-low fuel consumption from this car anyway. Considering its displacement and driving performance, the consumption figures are still acceptable. Oil consumption was very low.

Of course, the manual gearbox version is also a little faster: it reached a top speed of exactly 180 km/h [112 mph], the automatic version just over 176 km/h [110 mph]. However, neither this nor the slight difference in acceleration is likely to be a decisive factor in the choice, as the automatic 26M is not lacking in performance either. Since it also offers optimal operating comfort, it is certainly right that Ford is bringing this affordable car onto the market with an automatic transmission as standard.

 

With the exception of the RS models and the Capri, the chassis tuning of most German Ford cars of this era favored ride over handling, in the American manner. This was a divisive point: Some buyers appreciated the superior smooth-roads ride, while others, including many magazine road testers, found it much too limiting. The AMS staff felt that the 26M’s soft suspension actually made it less comfortable on rough pavement, and that that, combined with too-light power steering and higher-than-expected wind and road noise, made it harder to take advantage of the speeds of which this car was capable on the Autobahn:

Chassis: Not all gold
The engine delivers a lot of power and does not disturb you with noise or vibrations. It must therefore be counted among the comfort features of the 26M. Despite this, noise is not negligible when driving at high speeds, which has more to do with the bodywork: wind and rolling noise drive up the noise figures. From approximately 140 km/h [87 mph], the car is no longer extremely quiet and the radio has to be turned up very high if you want to hear it at all.

Despite its high top speed, the 26M is therefore not a very comfortable touring car for high continuous speeds. In this respect, it is similar to American cars which, although also powerful, are not built for high sustained speeds. The power steering, which comes as standard in the 26M, also has a somewhat American feel. Although it has a relatively direct ratio of 14.4:1, it is not very precise. There is little contact with the road, and the higher the speed, the less you feel like you have a firm grip on the car. Although the 26M runs perfectly straight ahead even at high speeds, you then need quite large steering wheel movements to noticeably influence the direction. In city traffic and tight bends, the car is easy to handle and you can manage with small steering wheel movements. It is noticeable that the servo effect depends on the engine speed: at high engine speeds, the steering is noticeably lighter than when idling.

In principle, the chassis of the 26M was unchanged from the 20M and 17M. The additional trailing arms on the rigid rear axle are common to all larger Ford models, so that the possibilities for variation are limited to the design of the springs, shock absorbers and stabilizers. In the 26M, an attempt has clearly been made to achieve the best possible suspension comfort, as the car appears considerably softer than the 20M RS. This leads to a pleasant level of comfort on good roads. If uneven road surfaces place greater demands on the suspension system, the result is less satisfactory: the bumps are no longer fully absorbed and the car begins to bounce up and down. With a fully loaded car, it can also happen that when encountering several consecutive large bumps, rebound doesn’t occur quickly enough: The rear axle remains compressed and then bottoms out noticeably. This “bottoming out” can also occur when braking, especially on one side, especially when cornering at high speed.

 

The shaded box in the lower left, under the “Resultate” headline, contains various overall driving impressions:

Results

• Body: Externally upgraded body with large exterior dimensions, taken over from the 17M. Sufficient visibility to the front and sides, unsatisfactory to the rear. Rear access impaired by small door opening angle and sloping roof pillars Satisfactory build quality.
• Equipment: Very extensive standard equipment with crank roof, halogen light, laminated glass windshield, heated rear window and dual-speaker radio. Good heating and ventilation.
• Operation: Sufficiently clear switches and instruments, unfavorably arranged handbrake. Storage compartments too narrow and with impractical lid.
• Transmission: Standard three-speed automatic gearbox with center selector lever, three forward gears, illuminated selector lever display, satisfactory gear ratios, but sluggish kickdown response. Optional four-speed gearbox with handy and precise center shift.
• Engine: Resilient, low-vibration engine with high torque even at low engine speeds. Good revving capacity, engine noise not bothersome even at high engine speeds, response when accelerating not entirely flawless in the low and medium engine speed range.
• Driving performance: Good acceleration even in the upper speed range, top speed over 175 km/h [110 mph], Coupé with manual transmission over 180 km/h [112 mph].
• Fuel consumption: When using the driving performance, consumption values between 14 and 18 liters/100 km [13.1 and 16.8 mpg], with manual transmission approx. 1.5 liters less [14.3 to 18.8 mpg]. Minimum values approx. 13 and 11.5 liters/100 km [18.1 and 20.5 mpg].
• Driving characteristics: Unproblematic cornering behavior, easily controllable oversteer tendency in the grip range, lateral buckling during turns due to soft shock absorption, but satisfactory directional stability, sufficient grip on poor road surfaces.
• Ride comfort: Suspension comfort satisfactory on good roads, too soft suspension and damping on poor roads. Tendency to oscillate, and also to bottom out under full load. Ride comfort at high speeds impaired by strong wind noise.
• Steering: Standard power steering provides little contact with the road surface, steering precision not satisfactory. Required effort varies slightly depending on engine speed.
• Brakes: Braking effect sufficient, but decreasing effect and increasing pedal effort under heavy loads.

 

Surprisingly, Seiffert was more annoyed by the ride quality on rough surfaces than with the soft suspension’s impact on handling:

The 20M RS, with suspension and damping that Ford considers to be more “sporty,” undoubtedly offers better ride comfort on poor roads.

The soft set-up has hardly any negative effect on the handling characteristics. The grip of the wheels is good by solid axle standards, the cornering behavior is good-natured and unproblematic. Like the other models in this series, the 26M oversteers slightly at the cornering limit, but remains easy to control. It withstands rapid changes of direction without the driver getting into difficulties. The standard 175SR14 Michelin ZX tires seem to be a good choice for this car.

Although the 26M has the same enlarged front disc brakes as the 125 PS 20M RS, fade was evident under high loads, which — despite the brake booster — required quite a lot of pedal effort if good braking performance was still to be achieved. A relic from the distant past is the cane-type handbrake, which is so inconveniently positioned that you cannot reach it with your seat belt fastened.

It was to be expected from the outset that Ford’s new flagship model would have some positive details and some demanding criticism. After all, this isn’t a new car, but rather a new combination. The best feature of this combination is undoubtedly the 2.6-liter engine, which can easily compete with the engines of other renowned “upper mid-range” cars in terms of power and smoothness.

With this engine and automatic transmission, the 26M is an effortless and comfortable vehicle — provided you don’t subject it to bad roads. Despite all the detailed improvements, it remains unmistakable that the 26M is based on an inexpensive mass-produced car, the 17M. But otherwise, a 2.6-liter car with such complete equipment would inevitably have been quite a bit more expensive. •

Below are some highlights of the performance figures in the data panel. You’ll notice that even with the torquey 2.6-liter engine, performance took a big hit with automatic. Acceleration was still good by class standards, but the 1.5-second penalty in 0 to 62 mph acceleration and the 1.5 liter/100 km increase in fuel consumption illustrates why even European buyers who could afford automatic transmission remained reticent about it.

1970 Ford 26M Automatic vs. Manual

Performance	Automatic	4-Speed
0–100 km/h [0–62 mph]	12.6 secs.	11.1 sec.
0–160 km/h [0–100 mph]	43.0 sec.	35.8 sec.
400 m with standing start [1/4 mile]	18.3 sec.	17.4 sec.
1 km with standing start [5/8 mile]	33.7 sec.	32.4 sec.
Top speed	176 km/h [110 mph]	180 km/h [112 mph]
Test fuel consumption	16.7 L/100 km [14.1 mpg]	13.9 L/100 km [16.9 mph]

 

Despite his complaints about the chassis, Seiffert took it pretty easy on the 26M in this test. Three issues later, however, AMS ran a big two-part comparison test pitting the automatic 26M sedan against some comparably priced rivals — the Mercedes-Benz 200 (the W114 /8 generation), the Audi 100, the Alfa Romeo 1750, the Opel Commodore, and BMW 2000 sedan. The comparison quickly revealed the limitations of Ford’s strategy: The 26M was the most expensive car of the six, listing for over 300 marks more than the Mercedes and BMW and almost 3,000 marks (about $750) more than the Audi, but its smooth, powerful engine and generous equipment didn’t make up for unimpressive showings in other areas. The Ford didn’t completely embarrass itself, but it managed only fourth place overall.

 

The problem, of course, was that being priced over 50 percent higher than a basic four-cylinder 17M didn’t really disguise the fact that the 26M was still a cheap family car with a bigger engine and a few thousand marks’ worth of extra toys and tinsel. In Germany, the 26M soon earned the unflattering nickname “Bauern-Mercedes” (“Farmer’s Mercedes”), with the obvious implication that it was like a bumpkin with a wad of cash trying to elbow his way into polite society. The Ford brand just didn’t stretch that far.

AMS actually ranked the 26M slightly ahead of the Commodore 2500, but buyers felt differently. While Opel was selling more than 30,000 Commodores a year in West Germany, 26M production totaled only 8,991 cars in two model years. Since there hadn’t been much interest in the 26M when it was new, residual values were terrible, something the poor quality of the interior fittings didn’t help. By the 1980s, many of these cars had ended up in junkyards, having deteriorated too much to be worth fixing. The photo below illustrates one common problem: The varnish would peel off the wood trim on the dashboard, which would then crack and splinter.

 

The 26M was succeeded in early 1972 by the Ford Consul/Granada, which was much more successful all around.

 

I find the 26M fascinating because it’s a car that would have made perfect sense in the U.S. If the price were right, Ford could probably have sold a lot of them here in the 1970s, especially after the OPEC embargo. However, the formula didn’t really translate in Europe, and many German buyers weren’t very keen on the American-ness of the whole package

 

Today, nice 26M survivors are popular with fans of older European Fords precisely because the 26M is so obviously American, with its soft ride, automatic transmission, and lazy torque. As the saying goes, the grass is always greener, whichever side of the fence (or the Atlantic) you may be on.

Related Reading

Automotive History: A Brief Guide To Early German Fords, Part 1 (by me)
Automotive History: A Brief Guide To Early German Fords, Part 2 – The Last Decade Of German Independence (by me)
Automotive History: The Real Story of How the American Ford FWD Cardinal Became the German Ford Taunus 12M – From Dearborn With Love (by Paul N)
CC History: 1968 German Ford 15M RS (P6) – The Successor To Dearborn’s FWD Cardinal Dons Its Track Suit, But Prefers To Walk (by me)
Automotive History: 1961 Ford Taunus 17M P3 – The Birth Of Ford Of Germany’s “Bathtub Taunus” (With Vintage SCI Photos) (by me)