: Lincoln has two years to live.



Jesda
12-09-12, 08:36 PM
--Lincoln is relaunched as "Lincoln Motor Company" after the end of Lincoln-Mercury
--4 cars launched in 4 years,
--Only $1 billion in investment from Ford, less than 25% of what GM spent reviving Cadillac a decade ago


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NklipvTBf64

For that kind of money, I'm expecting a lot of rebadging and poorly executed platform sharing combined with Lincoln's bizarre new design theme. It doesn't look good.


30% chance of survival.

orconn
12-09-12, 09:01 PM
I give Lincoln a 50/50% chance of survival. Most likely Lincoln will continue to be just an "iced" up Ford.... and end up the "new" Mercury!

Stoneage_Caddy
12-09-12, 09:21 PM
Stinkin will die.
Was at the tampa show last night , I didnt know anyone over 65 was at the show untill i went to the lincolin booth ...it was complete with chairs to sit in so my arthritis didnt act up while the girl talked about the new MK 4 door thing.
The car looked great , but i knew under that was some sort of fwd based drive-train and suspension that would help my future case of hemorrhoids . it was nice because after the presentation i felt i needed to crap , so they still work well as alternative to prune juice

Koooop
12-10-12, 12:29 PM
That's to bad, all of the RWD V8 Lincolns I've owned have been outstanding. I hated the Navigator however, but it was 4WD.

dkozloski
12-10-12, 12:46 PM
I gave up on Lincolns back when they had flathead V12s. They were miserable to work on and when you were through you didn't have much to show for it.

Submariner409
12-10-12, 12:56 PM
Good ol' Lincoln Zephyr V-12 flathead. Guy up the street (old home) had one and it had custom duals and glasspacks - truly awesome sound...... but the engine itself was a mechanical nightmare of poor design.

CadillacLuke24
12-10-12, 01:35 PM
The car looks good, but I second Jesda-overglorified Ford.

Not that that is a bad thing-Ford makes rather nice vehicles. But for that kind of money you'd expect more.

I park next to a derelict '91 Town Car. Very nice car, Decent V8 for its age, and in decent condition (except for one glaring part malfunction I bet anyone can guess) :sneaky: If Ford would have updated that kind of car, maybe a big CTS kinda deal, they'd be doing better.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-10-12, 01:43 PM
The last Lincoln that excited me was the LS, and even that's 10 years old now.

dkozloski
12-10-12, 02:18 PM
Good ol' Lincoln Zephyr V-12 flathead. Guy up the street (old home) had one and it had custom duals and glasspacks - truly awesome sound...... but the engine itself was a mechanical nightmare of poor design.

There were no valve lash adjusters. To increase valve lash you had to grind some off the valve stem and to decrease lash you had to grind the valve seat deeper. All this was no easy matter because the valve spring and guide all came out of the block as an assembly. This was compounded by finarkey keepers for the guide and the requirement for special tools. A valve job wasn't just a job, it was almost a career.

cadillac kevin
12-10-12, 02:19 PM
^yup
And before that it was the early 90s MKVII LS and 90-96 towncar

orconn
12-10-12, 02:41 PM
Like Cadillac, Lincoln has produced some really great cars, unfortunately they have been too few and too far between.

The LS was a nice car but it wa no more a Lincoln than the Catera was a Cadillac.

The-Dullahan
12-10-12, 04:05 PM
While I don't see the company lasting in the long run anyhow (Because we haven't yet outlawed imports) I still feel that Lincoln is far better than a lot of other makes out there (at the present time) even if they do not make anything I would actually make a trip to the dealership to buy (Realistically, neither does Cadillac) and while possibly on it's way out, or at least dethroned of it's former point as a true Luxury car, rather than being a gussied-up Ford, it will most likely remain (if still in business) no worse than the other makes out there. (looking at you, Chrysler "Luxury" cars)

Stoneage_Caddy
12-10-12, 05:56 PM
There were no valve lash adjusters. To increase valve lash you had to grind some off the valve stem and to decrease lash you had to grind the valve seat deeper. All this was no easy matter because the valve spring and guide all came out of the block as an assembly. This was compounded by finarkey keepers for the guide and the requirement for special tools. A valve job wasn't just a job, it was almost a career.
so it wasnt based off the flathead v8?

thebigjimsho
12-10-12, 11:22 PM
My '11 Town Car is my last...

ryannel2003
12-11-12, 03:18 AM
Like Chad said, the only Lincoln to impress me within recent years was the LS. I drove an MKS a few years back and was very unimpressed with it.

truckinman
12-11-12, 04:05 AM
I drove a fully loaded 2010 MKZ recently and thought it was going to drive MUCH better than it really did. Only thing I really liked about it were the features on the GPS screen and the THX Certified surround sound. My STS, which btw is 5 years older and 70k miles wiser, has REALLY spoiled me more than I thought. But really, come to think of it, my parents Avalon Limited even drives better than that MKZ. Granted, it's just a re-badge of the fusion, I expected I better feel in the steering and suspension. My STS just feels like it glides down the rd compared to the MKZ, yet I don't even have magnaride on mine.

----------

Someone I knew use to have an LS and HATED it. Every other week it was in the shop for something new. I can't remember if it was the 6 or 8 cyl tho

DouglasJRizzo
12-11-12, 07:31 AM
While I don't see the company lasting in the long run anyhow (Because we haven't yet outlawed imports) I still feel that Lincoln is far better than a lot of other makes out there (at the present time) even if they do not make anything I would actually make a trip to the dealership to buy (Realistically, neither does Cadillac) and while possibly on it's way out, or at least dethroned of it's former point as a true Luxury car, rather than being a gussied-up Ford, it will most likely remain (if still in business) no worse than the other makes out there. (looking at you, Chrysler "Luxury" cars)

I have to agree. Lincoln is not too bad, but nothing that really gets at me, and sadly, Cadillac is currently in the same boat. Yeah, 'Vette engined sedans are great, but there's nothing that really "does it" for me. I'm really tired of BMW clones.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-11-12, 08:54 AM
I think it was Orconn that said that Lincoln has made some fantastic models, but they're spaced too far apart and aren't as consistently great as Cadillac. I agree 100%. Ford really needs to get their act together on this.... I don't wanna see them waste away just like Mercury did. Lincoln, for the most part, has always sold cars that were rebadged/rebodied Fords, often times sharing the same driveline, but it was never as transparent as it is today.

Cadillac was always a little more exclusive than Lincoln was, and I think that really helped.... Cadillac had their own line of V8's for the most part, whereas Ford always shared their engines with the lower line Fords.

Koooop
12-11-12, 09:34 AM
My '11 Town Car is my last...

You better take care of it, there's nothing out there worthy of replacing it for the purpose.

dkozloski
12-11-12, 11:01 AM
It was an early flathead Ford V8 with four more cylinders. The Ford V8 was the same deal for setting valve lash except it was possible to buy aftermarket Johnson adjustable lifters for them in later years. I never saw a V12 Lincon with anything other than the clumsy original deal.

concorso
12-11-12, 01:56 PM
I have to agree. Lincoln is not too bad, but nothing that really gets at me, and sadly, Cadillac is currently in the same boat. Yeah, 'Vette engined sedans are great, but there's nothing that really "does it" for me. I'm really tired of BMW clones.Cadillac makes a BMW clone? Do you know what the word 'clone' means? Making cars that handle well does not make them 'clones'. It does make them competetive, tho.

----------


I think it was Orconn that said that Lincoln has made some fantastic models, but they're spaced too far apart and aren't as consistently great as Cadillac. I agree 100%. Ford really needs to get their act together on this.... I don't wanna see them waste away just like Mercury did. Lincoln, for the most part, has always sold cars that were rebadged/rebodied Fords, often times sharing the same driveline, but it was never as transparent as it is today.

Cadillac was always a little more exclusive than Lincoln was, and I think that really helped.... Cadillac had their own line of V8's for the most part, whereas Ford always shared their engines with the lower line Fords.Ford has their act together with thier own models. They just dont get the luxury segment. They still dont understand that people are very willing to pay for a unique car, not a car that could actually be a higher trim level of a Ford. The Catera (which everyone at the time new was a rebadged Opel) and the 1st gen CTS are the perfect example of this. The Catera sold at most, 20k per year IIRC. The 1st gen CTS, with its cheap and spartan interior, and polarizing exterior, sold between 55 and 60k units most years.

----------




The LS was a nice car but it wa no more a Lincoln than the Catera was a Cadillac.This is true. As opposed the the MKZ, the LS did have a little going for it, tho. It wasnt based off an everyday Fuzion, it shared its platform with the Thunderbird. The Catera and the Opel it came from looked very similar. The MKZ looks very similar to the Fuzion. The Lincoln LS looked nothing like the Thunderbird or any Ford for that matter. It was also the only way to get a decent driving ,V8 , RWD luxury car from an American company. The LS could have progressed into something very special if Ford hadnt forgetten about it. Who knows, with an updated platform, you might have seen a version of the GT500 engine in it today.

Jesda
12-12-12, 05:24 AM
The current Jaguar XF is an excellent example of what Lincoln could have done with the DEW98 platform.

ben.gators
12-12-12, 07:00 AM
^
A very good point! In Hawaii, I see more Jaguar XF than new Cadillac models, let alone Lincoln!

thebigjimsho
12-12-12, 07:41 PM
You better take care of it, there's nothing out there worthy of replacing it for the purpose.

Cadillac XTS is the most likely replacement...

Koooop
12-12-12, 09:57 PM
Cadillac XTS is the most likely replacement...

Probably your only choice, but I just don't see it being reliable enough over the long term for your purpose.

77CDV
12-13-12, 03:12 AM
I went to the LA auto show a couple weeks back. Lincoln right next to Ford, and it was soooo obvious the Lincolns were barely rebadged Fords. Of course, Cadillac was right next to Chevy. Chevy was showing off the 2013 Caprice. The XTS was mere feet away. Only a blind man could have missed the glaring shared body. I left the show with a new appreciation for my now 12 year old ETC.

Guess GM hasn't learned after all.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-13-12, 03:17 AM
The XTS & Caprice are a shared platform?!?!

77CDV
12-13-12, 03:22 AM
Body shells don't lie.

Jesda
12-13-12, 03:27 AM
XTS and Caprice PPV are different platforms. Caprice PPV is related to the Holden Commodore/Pontiac G8.

XTS and the new Impala and the Lacrosse are the same platform.

truckinman
12-13-12, 03:51 AM
Body shells don't lie.

I coulda sworn the caprice was a revived G8. Interior is even the same. I don't see the XTS anywhere in the caprice.

----------

Are you sure you aren't referring to a 2014 chevy impala? Bc that car IS the same as the XTS.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-13-12, 09:43 AM
Yeah, that's what I was wondering. Did you drink too much last night, Craig? :lol:

truckinman
12-13-12, 11:07 AM
2012 caprice
http://i.pgu.me/wJq9iy9T_original.jpg

2013 XTS
http://i.pgu.me/MNctNLoH_original.jpg

2014 impala.
http://i.pgu.me/fd46X6Is_original.jpg


The last two are def the same one. The first is a rebadged Holden.

RippyPartsDept
12-13-12, 12:18 PM
i don't see a huge body resemblance between the xts and the imapla

i agree (because i know) that they're based on the same platform but i think they've done a pretty good job at disguising that fact

CadillacLuke24
12-13-12, 12:33 PM
I'll keep my K DeVille :D

truckinman
12-13-12, 12:39 PM
i don't see a huge body resemblance between the xts and the imapla

i agree (because i know) that they're based on the same platform but i think they've done a pretty good job at disguising that fact

I see it most in the space within the wheel base as strange as that sounds. Basically what gives the two their forward stance

bigm57ict
12-13-12, 12:57 PM
The only Lincoln I ever owned was an '82 Continental Mark VI.
I was very impressed with it. One example: When you opened the door, no fewer than 11 lightbulbs came on to illuminate the interior (2 under dash, 4 under front seat, 2 in doors, 2 in reading lights recessed into opera windows and 1 dome light)
The deep, velour upholstered seats were very comfy. The digital dash with trip computer and message center was pretty advanced for 1982. Of course, it had that cushy, floating ride that any good full-size luxury car should have.
I never felt like I was driving a Ford with Lincoln cross-hairs on the hood.

http://i1284.photobucket.com/albums/a579/bigm57ict/1982LincolnMarkVI.jpg

thebigjimsho
12-13-12, 07:21 PM
I went to the LA auto show a couple weeks back. Lincoln right next to Ford, and it was soooo obvious the Lincolns were barely rebadged Fords. Of course, Cadillac was right next to Chevy. Chevy was showing off the 2013 Caprice. The XTS was mere feet away. Only a blind man could have missed the glaring shared body. I left the show with a new appreciation for my now 12 year old ETC.

Guess GM hasn't learned after all.Right. Keep your ETC. Because the CTS and ATS are absolute nothings in the automotive world. Yep, GM has learned nothing. Please...

talismandave
12-13-12, 11:43 PM
The only Lincoln I ever owned was an '82 Continental Mark VI.
I was very impressed with it. One example: When you opened the door, no fewer than 11 lightbulbs came on to illuminate the interior (2 under dash, 4 under front seat, 2 in doors, 2 in reading lights recessed into opera windows and 1 dome light)
The deep, velour upholstered seats were very comfy. The digital dash with trip computer and message center was pretty advanced for 1982. Of course, it had that cushy, floating ride that any good full-size luxury car should have.
I never felt like I was driving a Ford with Lincoln cross-hairs on the hood.

http://i1284.photobucket.com/albums/a579/bigm57ict/1982LincolnMarkVI.jpg

I never liked those years of Lincolns and have no good reason!:noidea: I was selling them in 1980 at the local dealer.
They were easier to drive and park and handled better. Wonderful cars in their own right. Had the previous model never existed, I would probably have loved them. All I could think of was what had been lost.:nono:

hueterm
12-14-12, 12:50 AM
As mediocre as the XTS is, I find the criticism of the MKS to be amusing. It has what, 60 more HP and 90 more lb/ft of torque? At lower RPMs? Neither are the most gorgeous designs ever on wheels, but both are adequate.

The MKZ looks awesome, if with a smaller body and engine. It is an amazing rebadge of the Fusion.

I would call the Impala an amazing rebadge of the XTS/LaCrosse. The latter two look far too much alike, except for size...

cadillac kevin
12-14-12, 01:03 AM
As mediocre as the XTS is, I find the criticism of the MKS to be amusing. It has what, 60 more HP and 90 more lb/ft of torque? At lower RPMs? Neither are the most gorgeous designs ever on wheels, but both are adequate.

The MKZ looks awesome, if with a smaller body and engine. It is an amazing rebadge of the Fusion.

I would call the Impala an amazing rebadge of the XTS/LaCrosse. The latter two look far too much alike, except for size...

I found the xts/lacrosse based impala to be a good looking car, especially compared to the lacrosse and xts.

ben.gators
12-14-12, 02:41 AM
A little bit off the topic, but the new 2012 caprice is so boring! What a shame! This car will be the only V-8 powered 4-door, RWD, sedan that GM builds (other than CTS-V which is too expensive for many buyers), and it has such a boring and normal body design! You can easily confuse this car with an old Chevy Impala, which was a very boring car by itself!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-14-12, 03:19 AM
I don't think the Caprice is meant for civilian ownership, which is a shame.

truckinman
12-14-12, 03:58 AM
I don't think the Caprice is meant for civilian ownership, which is a shame.

Nope. At least not right now. Maybe here soon they will market them more towards the civilian base

And I really like the fact it's "boring". Makes for a GREAT sleeper car with it's 6.0 V8. GM has always been good in the sleeper department, I think. From the LT1 caprice in the mid 90s to some of their 69 Camaros that were built specifically as sleepers.

There was one Camaro from 69, I can't remember if it was even badged as a SS or Z-28 or not at all even. But this thing had not a lick of chrome other than the bumpers. The wheels were painted to match the car. No spoilers. NOTHING to make anybody think it was anything more than an "old lady" car. Yet it had I believe a 427 in it. It was a BEAST of a car.

The caprice, Both of today and the 90s, and the Camaro are just a couple of the sleepers produced by GM over the years.

That's one thing I liked about my Lexus GS400. It had a 300 hp V8, was considered THE fastest sedan in 1998, yet had the body trim and wheels of the cheaper, slower V6 GS300. No spoiler along with the plain gray alloys, it caught a few older mustang 5.0s and Camaro Iroc's off guard.

ben.gators
12-14-12, 04:36 AM
I don't think the Caprice is meant for civilian ownership, which is a shame.

I can remember that somewhere I was reading that at some point they may start to sell a civilian version as well, but I can be mistaken!

ryannel2003
12-14-12, 04:48 AM
Chevrolet is releasing an SS Performance Sedan based off the G8/Caprice platform next year that will surely look more interesting than the current Caprice does.

bigm57ict
12-14-12, 09:39 AM
I never liked those years of Lincolns and have no good reason!:noidea: I was selling them in 1980 at the local dealer.
They were easier to drive and park and handled better. Wonderful cars in their own right. Had the previous model never existed, I would probably have loved them. All I could think of was what had been lost.:nono:

I know exactly what you are talking about. As much as I enjoyed the Mark VI, I was always pining for a Mark V. However, it was really hard to find one in good condition at a decent price. The interiors on those just didn't seem to hold up as well.

----------

At least the Mark VI did maintain that lincoln style - hidden headlights, opera window, etc. They lost that later when they decided the Mark series needed to become a sports car.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-14-12, 10:32 AM
I guess I always kind of forgot about the Mark VI Lincoln.....never as big or as powerful as it's older brothers, but still the last "classic" Mark Series. What's funny is that the VI is so much smaller than the IV and V, but in fact it was the exact same length (216 inches) as the classic Mark III.

cadillac kevin
12-14-12, 11:52 AM
Personally, I really like the "sports car" Mark VII from a styling standpoint. Its like a sportier, sleeker 2 door early 90s town car. It would have to be an LSC though.
That being said, I'd take a Mark IV over a Mark VII any day of the week.
The great thing is old lincolns are a great value (much like many old caddys). You can buy a great example for 5k or less.

thebigjimsho
12-14-12, 01:05 PM
As mediocre as the XTS is, I find the criticism of the MKS to be amusing. It has what, 60 more HP and 90 more lb/ft of torque? At lower RPMs? Neither are the most gorgeous designs ever on wheels, but both are adequate.

The MKZ looks awesome, if with a smaller body and engine. It is an amazing rebadge of the Fusion.

I would call the Impala an amazing rebadge of the XTS/LaCrosse. The latter two look far too much alike, except for size...

The XTS is more attractive. It's MUCH more comfortable. And its not far off in power considering a base MKS engine wheezes in comparison. I'm sorry, but if I want to sit up high, like in an SUV, I'll buy an SUV.

I'm close to the SHO community. I've driven Gen IV SHOs. I've ridden in them. I've driven them hard at Brainerd's road course. Performance-wise, they're good. But for how huge they are, they're packaged horribly.

The MKS has been out for awhile and a few guys use them for livery. I've never entertained that for a second. But the XTS? It's the #1 choice for replacement right now(besides an Equus). Even though it is a bit smaller, the packaging and overall appearance, feel and quality all trump the MKS.

And I'll only buy what makes the most sense for my clients and job. If I was going to be a blind Cadillac fan, I would've had DTSs all these years instead of Town Car Ls...

----------


A little bit off the topic, but the new 2012 caprice is so boring! What a shame! This car will be the only V-8 powered 4-door, RWD, sedan that GM builds (other than CTS-V which is too expensive for many buyers), and it has such a boring and normal body design! You can easily confuse this car with an old Chevy Impala, which was a very boring car by itself!

The Caprice is fleet only. Don't speed past boring looking cars, then.

The SS will look much like the beloved G8. Don't think that's quite so boring...

CadillacLuke24
12-14-12, 01:31 PM
http://i1268.photobucket.com/albums/jj575/CadillacDeadman24/2013MAAAAAAAX_zps81338555.jpg

http://i1268.photobucket.com/albums/jj575/CadillacDeadman24/2013HUNGEEEER_zps911c3535.jpg

NASCAR's rendition, in Jeff Gordon trim :D, of what Chevrolet's 2014 SS sedan will look like. This year, NASCAR allowed the manufactuers far more freedom in designing their respective cars (i.e., styling cues, body lines are manufactuer specific), so what you see here is very close to what you will be able to buy.

Reports have it the SS will have a similar 6.2 L V8 to the CTS-V. Given it's a Chevy, and we have the ZL1, My guess would be that the SS will slot in between the Camaro SS and the CTS-V/ZL1 powerwise.

Translation: One SWEET car. I think it looks tough. I like it :D

thebigjimsho
12-14-12, 01:34 PM
It never looks tough in Jeffey Gordon fatigues...

CadillacLuke24
12-14-12, 04:17 PM
It never looks tough in Jeffey Gordon fatigues...

Wutevs. MY driver can actually win a title. :tease:

thebigjimsho
12-14-12, 06:47 PM
Wutevs. MY driver can actually win a title. :tease:

You mean could, right?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-15-12, 12:43 AM
Damn, Jeff must be getting old....the AARP is a sponsor now!


Getting back to Lincolns, the Mark Series has consistently been one of my favorite models of car, from it's inception in 1956 all the way up to the end in 1998, I've liked every generation. There aren't many cars I can say that about.

Jesda
12-15-12, 08:36 AM
The XTS is more attractive. It's MUCH more comfortable. And its not far off in power considering a base MKS engine wheezes in comparison. I'm sorry, but if I want to sit up high, like in an SUV, I'll buy an SUV.

I'm close to the SHO community. I've driven Gen IV SHOs. I've ridden in them. I've driven them hard at Brainerd's road course. Performance-wise, they're good. But for how huge they are, they're packaged horribly.

Who cares? Real SHO has been dead for at least a decade.

The XTS is bland sh*t for the mass-market Lexus crowd. If that wins over new Cadillac owners, so be it. I guess that's money in GM's pockets.

Maybe some of these soulless morons who adore the XTS (all gay Coldplay fans) with more money than taste will migrate to the upsized CTS. Maybe.

thebigjimsho
12-16-12, 12:03 AM
Too bad for you, Cadillac has much more than two years to live...

hueterm
12-16-12, 12:17 AM
Definitely looking forward to seeing the SS....I wonder if it will be at NAIAS....?

Jesda
12-16-12, 12:30 AM
Too bad for you, Cadillac has much more than two years to live...

Why is that "too bad" for me?

If Lincoln had anything on the design, engineering, and prestige level of the ATS, CTS, or Escalade they easily could justify a turd like the MKS, but they don't. The Mercedes-Benz empire is responsible for junk like Smart car, the A-class, and the B-class. However, the S-class, SL, SLS, AMG cars, and the brand's more consistent history make it possible to go downmarket without tarnishing the tri-star's global reputation.

To put it briefly: Cadillac is good enough to get away with V6 reskins. Lexus is too. Lincoln is not.

----------


Damn, Jeff must be getting old....the AARP is a sponsor now!


Getting back to Lincolns, the Mark Series has consistently been one of my favorite models of car, from it's inception in 1956 all the way up to the end in 1998, I've liked every generation. There aren't many cars I can say that about.


Here's a Mark IX concept from 2001:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk/TEDvzrWYQ1I/AAAAAAADFdM/tdYiVpWCtH8/s1600/2001-Lincoln-MK9-Concept-4.JPG

orconn
12-16-12, 01:04 AM
Lincoln's understanding of the luxury class" market has come in fits and spurts and none of these luxury car insights have had any lasting effect on the Lincoln or Continental marque. Edsel Ford lead Lincoln out of its' custom coachwork phase of the twenties and thirties with the first Continental. The Mark II was a brilliant offering and a excellent attempt to one up the European competition (Rolls-Royces and Mercedes 300 series cars had become all too common of 5th Avenue and Sunset Strip!). The first generation Continentals of the sixties showed the real luxury market that Ford knew what it was talking about when it came to the top echelon cars. Unfortunately as the decade rolled on Continentals just became Lincolns again, the Mark III a pale rendition of the Mark II (I know my aunt and uncle had both cars and the Mark III was weak sauce compared to very special Mark II). The Mark IV and V were just cheaply done (although upgraded) Thunderbirds. The eighties were really sorry frosted Fords, in no way competition to the Devilles and Fleetwoods of the decade. The nineties brought us reskinned Thunderbirds once again, a trend that has been unremitting to this day.

If Lincoln can't take a chance on a "real" luxury model, the marque should just be put out to pasture with the other badge engineered cars that were gussied up mediocrities (the Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue in its various horrendous getups springs to mind!).

thebigjimsho
12-16-12, 08:15 AM
Why is that "too bad" for me?



With you being a working stiff, you seem to be more susceptible to being on the rag...

Jesda
12-16-12, 08:38 AM
With you being a working stiff, you seem to be more susceptible to being on the rag...

I'll stiff you!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-16-12, 09:21 AM
To agree with what Jesda just said, Lincoln has been swimming in mediocrity for at least 10 years, whereas Cadillac had recognized their issue and went through a full renaissance & recovery.

talismandave
12-16-12, 11:31 AM
....The first generation Continentals of the sixties showed the real luxury market that Ford knew what it was talking about when it came to the top echelon cars. Unfortunately as the decade rolled on Continentals just became Lincolns again, the Mark III a pale rendition of the Mark II. The Mark IV and V were just cheaply done (although upgraded) Thunderbirds. The eighties were really sorry frosted Fords, in no way competition to the Devilles and Fleetwoods of the decade. The nineties brought us reskinned Thunderbirds once again, a trend that has been unremitting to this day.

Overall I agree with you on this. Except on the Mark III, Mark IV, and Mark V. Working in dealerships through most of the 80's allowed me to drive a lot of different cars by many manufactures. I always felt the Thunderbirds were more rebadged Lincolns in the III, IV, and V editions. Having driven many T birds of that vintage I never felt like I was driving anything that was similar to any other Ford offering of the time.
In those years I really think that ford was offering the Thunderbird as a way of deferring some of the cost of what would have been a low production vehicle by offering a ford model. Not as exclusive as the Mark II, but still not just a "Ford".

orconn
12-16-12, 04:02 PM
The problem with the Mark IV and Mark V was that the quality just wasn't there. I ordered a new Mark V right after they came out. Dark blue with a Tobac leather (seat facings)interior vinyl top delete,. Fortunately there was a strike on at Ford which delayed delivery for over three months. The dealership let me use a Mark IV to keep me interested. After driving the Mark Iv for awhile and looking at the Mark V brochure daily I lost interest in actually getting the Mark V. I went and looked at the Seville and not only did it handle much better, but the materials and build quality were much higher than either Continental.

The Mark Iv Continental was a bid seller for Lincoln; they were ubiquitous in some parts of town, but truth be told they never lured anyone away from a Mercedes 450 SE or even a Jaguar XJ6. The notch back Seville of the later half of the seventies did slow the the trend among the upper and upper middle class (on both coasts)toward European luxury cars.

I will admit that the two versions of the Continentals were present in great numbers in the spectator parking at Santa Anita and Hollywood Park race tracks!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-16-12, 06:25 PM
I've driven various Mark V's (all 1979's) and sat in a Mark IV and found their build quality to be better than the full sized Cadillacs of the same era. The pre '77 Cadillacs didn't last as well as the later ones did. Comparing a '77 Eldorado to a '77 Mark V, the Lincoln had better build quality and felt more exclusive inside. It was just the Sevilles that were built so well, and they should have been considering they were the most expensive Cadillac when new.

Jesda
12-16-12, 06:43 PM
I thought the Mark VIII wasn't quite as well made overall as the 92-02 Eldorado which had tighter panel gaps and a slightly more refined interior, but the Lincoln sure as heck was more dependable.

orconn
12-16-12, 06:59 PM
Well, the Continental Marks of the seventies were the most expensive cars in the Lincoln line up that decade (that only compounds the problem). I agree that the pre-1977 Cadillacs were a shoddy mess, with the exception of Sevilles, the new "smaller Cadillacs of the latter half of the decade went a long way toward correcting the quality deficit. But neither Lincoln or Cadillac (much less Chrysler Imperial) came close to making the quality cars that new "luxury" class buyer, on either coast, had come to expect. This was especially true when you consider that well put together and relatively good performing Mercedes 450 SE and SELs, not to mention Jaguar XJ6s were selling for sticker prices within a thousand dollars of even mid range Cadillacs and Lincolns. In 1978 you could get a V-12 Jag XJ12 for the same money as a fully loaded Mark V Special Edition ($24,500). So is it any wonder that those who could afford it opted for the European prestige cars over their shoddy domestic competition. I for one had started the decade out choosing a Jaguar XJ6 over an equivalent Mercedes or BMW, and with exception of my much loved notch back Seville, didn't put another Detroit car in my garage until the late 1990's.

talismandave
12-17-12, 12:05 AM
From 1979 - 1989 I put over 100,000 miles on 1974-76 Cadillacs. While I will be the first to admit the american auto makers had their problems with build quality, none of the ones I owned were a "shoddy mess".
I can't imagine there were many buyers cross shopping between a full size Cadillac or Lincoln and the smaller European makes. Other than price they had nothing in common. That is after all why the Seville and Versailles came to be.

77CDV
12-17-12, 01:38 AM
Ugh, the Versailles! Lincoln's Cimarron. :vomit:

Aron9000
12-17-12, 03:33 AM
Considering how we've been talking about 1970's Lincolns for the past two pages, it shows you how irrelevant the newer models have become.

77CDV
12-17-12, 02:03 PM
Considering how we've been talking about 1970's Lincolns for the past two pages, it shows you how irrelevant the newer models have become.

They really are automotive nonentities, aren't they?

Koooop
12-18-12, 01:13 AM
Ugh, the Versailles! Lincoln's Cimarron. :vomit:

Please! The Cimarron was a POS that was unmatched. At least the Versailles had a V8.

----------

I really liked several Lincoln's, the Mark III is an icon in my mind. The design, the quality, 360HP 500lbs TQ. In the day a Mark III would outrun my L48 Vette, a Jensen Interceptor, most Camaro's. Nice wood, great optional leather bucket/bench. And storage for multiple bodies in the cavernous trunk. The Mk IV was no where near the same league.

orconn
12-18-12, 01:19 AM
Yeah, the Mark III was a step down from the Mark II and with the Mark IV the Continental was back among the plebeians!

Aron9000
12-18-12, 01:45 AM
Yeah, the Mark III was a step down from the Mark II and with the Mark IV the Continental was back among the plebeians!

The Mark II was competing in an entirely different stratosphere in terms of price and exclusivity vs the later Mark III, IV, and V. If you were to compare the old cars to luxury cars currently on sale, the Mark II would be like a Bentley Brooklands or a Rolls Royce Phantom, the III, IV, and V are more like a BMW 650i, Audi S5, CTS-V coupe, or CL Benz.

Jesda
12-18-12, 07:01 AM
Tonight I took a 1987 Town Car for a drive. It was quite inferior in terms of handling, quality, and performance to the 1977 Coupe Deville sitting at the car lot.

The Town Car had nice paint but the handling was worse, the interior wasn't as nice, and the acceleration and brakes were noticeably inferior. There's a 10 year gap between those two cars and Cadillac STILL did it better.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-18-12, 08:23 AM
I always was a fan of the 1986-89 Town Cars, after Ford added multi port fuel injection and did away with the throttle body fuel injection that was used on the 1980-85 Town Cars, but they do not have the power of the older 425's in the Cadillacs. However, if you were to compare that '87 Town Car to an '87 Cadillac Brougham, the Town Car would be the better performer.

hueterm
12-18-12, 11:32 AM
True, but how would an '87 Brougham compare in performance to the '77? The interior is basically the same, but the engine is BLECH...

cadillac kevin
12-18-12, 11:51 AM
True, but how would an '87 Brougham compare in performance to the '77? The interior is basically the same, but the engine is BLECH...

Depends if it had the vin y or vin 9 307. Vin y was snoresville (13 second 0-60...really?) while vin 9 added a much needed additional 40 hp (that should have been standard).

orconn
12-18-12, 01:56 PM
The Mark II was competing in an entirely different stratosphere in terms of price and exclusivity vs the later Mark III, IV, and V. If you were to compare the old cars to luxury cars currently on sale, the Mark II would be like a Bentley Brooklands or a Rolls Royce Phantom, the III, IV, and V are more like a BMW 650i, Audi S5, CTS-V coupe, or CL Benz.

You are right, you fox! Which was the point of my original post.

Koooop
12-18-12, 03:03 PM
Tonight I took a 1987 Town Car for a drive. It was quite inferior in terms of handling, quality, and performance to the 1977 Coupe Deville sitting at the car lot.

The Town Car had nice paint but the handling was worse, the interior wasn't as nice, and the acceleration and brakes were noticeably inferior. There's a 10 year gap between those two cars and Cadillac STILL did it better.

I'd have to guess the Town Car you drove had worn suspension, tired brakes and shitty tires. In my memory the '87 Town Car did everything better than a '77 De Ville.

That being said, I only owned one Town Car from that model line it was a 1987 Town Car Executive, the '87 had the right 5.0 so I could mod the car easily, it had the optional sway bars. But I've owned at least 2 1977, 2 1978, 1 1979 and 1 1980 De Ville(s). The TC was superior in so many ways but it couldn't lure me back like the big De Villes did and still do. The 1987 TC just has no personality.

Jesda
12-18-12, 09:53 PM
I always was a fan of the 1986-89 Town Cars, after Ford added multi port fuel injection and did away with the throttle body fuel injection that was used on the 1980-85 Town Cars, but they do not have the power of the older 425's in the Cadillacs. However, if you were to compare that '87 Town Car to an '87 Cadillac Brougham, the Town Car would be the better performer.

I think I agree. I have to give the 5.0L EFI some credit for delivering a good amount of torque.

----------

Almost bought (through the dealership, for resale) another Deville today, this one a 1978 Brougham sedan. It was burnt orange with burnt orange leather and a brown vinyl top with only 45,000 miles. It was a local car (very local, registered right here in Chesterfield MO) that was purchased at the now-closed Lindburg Cadillac in Crestwood MO which has become a cosmetology school. It even had an original leather key fob that said Lindburg Cadillac on it. Lindburg was, until GM revoked their franchise during the carpocalypse, the oldest Cadillac dealer west of the Mississippi River, a sales and service operation founded and run by well-reputed people in the car business.

Ian put in a bid but didn't win. The transmission and engine (also a 425) did not feel anywhere near as smooth and refined as the one in the 77 coupe which I still need to do a proper review on. Kevin also needs to get his butt out to the lot and take it for a drive before I sell it.


=====================


Anyway, sorry to get off topic but I think Lincoln is as good as dead. The early reviews on the new MKZ are not good:

"Lincoln's future is on the line, and this redesigned 2013 Lincoln MKZ won't be enough to reverse its downward spiral."

http://www.edmunds.com/lincoln/mkz/2013/road-test.html

Koooop
12-18-12, 11:42 PM
The Red 77 SDV I sold a couple of years ago is review worthy. That car is tits.

Lincoln should've made a high output LS.

thebigjimsho
12-19-12, 07:10 AM
The MKZ is eye catching in person, though...

Jesda
12-19-12, 07:37 AM
The MKZ is eye catching in person, though...

The rear quarter view is stunning.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-19-12, 08:56 AM
From memory, having driven my friends late '80s Broughams and late '80s Town Cars, the Town Cars definitely have better power, the seats in the Town Car Signature Series are to die for, way better than anything offered in a Brougham. However, the interior design of the Cadillac was better and the Cadillac was a more handsome car, overall. The Lincoln may have been more pleasant to drive, but it didn't leave me wanting like the Cadillac did.

Aron9000
12-20-12, 03:51 AM
I drove a "cream puff" 1989 Town Car with really low miles, original everything. I think it was a Cartier, it had the real deep, pillow seats with burgandy velour that was to die for. I must say the 5.0 v8 was great, smooth, lots of torque, moved it around town nicely and had "enough" power to pass on the interstate at 80+mph. It also rode real nice, but the steering/handling was WAY inferior to my old 91 Brougham. No feel at all, but this one did track nice and straight. My main beef with the Lincoln is that it didn't "feel" special like my Cadillac. The interior plastics weren't as nice, it had the same radio as a Mustang, overall it just felt like a Crown Vic with some fancy fake wood and kick ass seats.

Anyways, the car overheated on my test drive. I think the water pump went out, I noticed a belt squeal for a few seconds when I first pulled out.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-20-12, 08:52 AM
Here's a Signature Series, these seats are to die for. When you sit in them, you sink into the center of the seats and they wrap around you. They were used from 1985-94 only in the Signature Series. I've ridden in a lot of luxury cars and these are the best I've ever sat in.
http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2011/12/10/18/39/1989_lincoln_town_car-pic-319024025130266725.jpeg

DouglasJRizzo
12-20-12, 12:38 PM
[QUOTE=concorso;3164097]Cadillac makes a BMW clone? Do you know what the word 'clone' means? Making cars that handle well does not make them 'clones'. It does make them competetive, tho.[COLOR="Silver"]

They're "clones" because they ape a BMW just a little too much. Same spartan, teutonic trim, same essential shape and style. Sure they handle well and go fast. But they are just a little too much with the "me too".

orconn
12-20-12, 12:59 PM
Here's a Signature Series, these seats are to die for. When you sit in them, you sink into the center of the seats and they wrap around you. They were used from 1985-94 only in the Signature Series. I've ridden in a lot of luxury cars and these are the best I've ever sat in.
http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2011/12/10/18/39/1989_lincoln_town_car-pic-319024025130266725.jpeg

I thought the phrase "to die for" was only used by women from certain New York suburbs and of certain ethnic backgrounds. Guess the phrase has now transgendered and become common in the Great Heartland!

Also, still don't think those seats can compare with those in a good Volvo! More visually comfortable than "sit in them for hours on the interstate."

Koooop
12-20-12, 03:25 PM
A loaded up Signature was the car to get, (with the optional tow pack and dual exhaust). The Cartier was a mush bucket, the Executive was a stripped down Rent A Wreck. I had a loaded to the nuts 1991 Signature, Black over Cream with a Roof, 4 wheel disk brakes. Swapped out the shocks, beefed up the sway bar, good set of tires and the beast handled better than anyone ever expected it could. To bad I couldn't mod that 4.6, it didn't have the same computer as a Mustang dammit so no one bothered to crack the security so no performance mods on that one. Signatures were exceptionally comfortable, but that top speed limit of 104MPH (on the 4.6) sure was annoying on road trips.

Nothing like waking from a nice snooze to see your wife WFO, speedo buried, hauling ass through central Washington in a car so quiet I didn't even know it.

hueterm
12-20-12, 09:12 PM
The MKZ is eye catching in person, though...

A lot of people will overlook the specs for the look...

thebigjimsho
12-20-12, 09:19 PM
Here's a Signature Series, these seats are to die for. When you sit in them, you sink into the center of the seats and they wrap around you. They were used from 1985-94 only in the Signature Series. I've ridden in a lot of luxury cars and these are the best I've ever sat in.
http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2011/12/10/18/39/1989_lincoln_town_car-pic-319024025130266725.jpegAnd after 3 hours, the lack of support starts eating at you. My hard Recaros, on the other hand, support amazingly and are good for 30 hour stints...

Koooop
12-21-12, 01:44 AM
And after 3 hours, the lack of support starts eating at you. My hard Recaros, on the other hand, support amazingly and are good for 30 hour stints...

The optional inflatable lumbar in the 90+ signature cured that.

thebigjimsho
12-21-12, 02:27 AM
Cured what?

Koooop
12-21-12, 02:31 AM
Cured what?

Sore back on a long trip. The seats were nice and firm with that option. Tell me the inflatable lumbar is available in the L?

Aron9000
12-21-12, 03:06 AM
The 89 I drove was a Signiture series then, it had those same seats except in burgandy velour.

BTW, those seats remind me of another thing that perpetually annoys me about Town Cars, those stupid center arm rests. Cadillac had it figured out by 1990 when they put in that armrest that opened up for storage with a cupholder. I think Lincoln FINALLY caught on to that idea when they revised the Town Car in 2003. My 91 Buick Regal with the bench seat had that same style armrest, love how you can store change, sunglasses, phone chargers, folded papers, all kinds of stuff that you can get to without reaching over to the glove box while you are driving.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-21-12, 09:26 AM
No, after about 1991, Lincoln put in dual storage armrests on the Signature & Cartier Town Cars.

thebigjimsho
12-21-12, 10:51 AM
Sore back on a long trip. The seats were nice and firm with that option. Tell me the inflatable lumbar is available in the L?

They've had inflatable lumbar as long as I can remember. I will say, until the '09 V, the '92 SHO had the best seats ever. Inflatable lumbar, power adjustable side bolsters, headrests that went wherever you wanted and were uber-comfortable...

Again, much better than the older Town Cars. The newer TCs are much better but still don't give great support. It takes a very long day for my back to feel any fatigue, though...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-21-12, 12:23 PM
All those performance Fords in the '90s had the adjustable bolsters..... SHO's, LSC Mark VII's, Lightnings....

Jesda
12-21-12, 10:08 PM
Mercury Villagers had them too.

cadillac kevin
12-21-12, 10:50 PM
mercury villagers had them too.

smh :(

orconn
12-21-12, 11:11 PM
Let's not forget Thunderbird Turbos of the eighties!

Koooop
12-21-12, 11:39 PM
Both of my LSC's had them. But I'm pretty sure the inflatable lumbar standard on a Cartier, but optional equipment on a Signature or Executive. Just a power passenger seat was an option on an Executive.