early 70's Lincoln Continental - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

t walgamuth · #31 09-02-2006, 11:30 PM

before you offer 250 consider whether you really want it or not.

tom w

davestlouis · #32 09-03-2006, 12:00 AM

I figure the leather seats would pull at least $250 on ebay if it turned out to be a real POS otherwise. It would appear, online anyway, that sheetmetal parts will/would be the real problem, most of the mechanical and electrical stuff interchanges with Ford products of the same era.

RobTheMod · #33 09-03-2006, 04:25 AM

If the front fenders are really rusty, I'd worry about the rest of it. How can the car be solid if the fenders are so rusty they make you rethink the purchase?

Seriously, if you need fenders I'm sure I can find some out here in AZ where nothing rusts, but it sounds like you're going to take apart the big Conti, and I thought the point was to get another driving car...

cmac2012 · #34 09-03-2006, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

they actually shared the platform with the thunderbird at that time and had really very little room in the interior considering their vast bulk.

I can see the resemblance to the T-bird of that day in the picture I posted. Once more:

S'funny how the T-bird started off as a cute 2 seater and then gradually morphed into a behemoth. A lot of the models over the years were not too appealing.

Now it's back to a cute, retro 2 seater (I think, it's way smaller, anyway).

Jim B. · #35 09-03-2006, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GottaDiesel

Picture a giant couch. Now picture it with an engine and wheels.

Nah, imagine sitting on a couch and driving a tennis court.

They were HUUGE. But as CMAC says, a DIRECT descendent of the 1961 Continental.

Heavier and LOTS more Smog equipment, thirstier and
slower and sloppier, with the railroad tie bumpers by 1973. And who could forget the '74 models, where mileage went below 10 mpg and cars had the seatbelt interlock devices, where you couldn't start the engine unless the seatbelt was buckled before you turned the key. (Only way to defeat it was to raise your butt up in the air when you turned the ignition key!!!

I remember I had to run an errand in a '74 Ford Torino, a company car, involving moving a portable TV to a Realtor's office in Redwood City CA.

Well, never having driven the car before, I put the TV on the front seat,
buckled up and turned the key. Nothing. After 1/2 hour trying to start the car, I had to go get help. What happened was when the TV was put on the front passenger seat, the interlock device thought it was a person, and so the car couldn't be started unless the "person" (Here, the Television) had buckled its seatbelt.

The interlock met with howls of public outrage, and by 1975 it was gone, a mere foot note to American auto history in the 1970s, when cars were being designed by lawyers. And Government lawyers at that.

#36 09-03-2006, 02:49 PM

When I was little my father had a 1967 Lincoln. That was when getting a US built car to ride smooth seemd to be based on mass. I remember my dad went to rotate the tires and the jack colapsed. Obvilously somebody at Ford never thought to check to see if the 'standard' bumper jack could hold 1/4 of a 5700 pound car. Ever since I have wanted a mid-60's Lincoln convertilbe (6000 pounds

)

My first car was a 1965 Thunderbird convertibel.........man do I miss that car.

Both of these are horrible have horrilbe MPG, but they have great Class Per Gallon (CPG)

Jorn · #37 09-03-2006, 03:33 PM

I was told that the convertible top of the 60's Continental convertible had somewhere around 400 parts and two motors to open and close it

Those sixties Lincoln's must be one of the most beautiful American cars ever designed. Especially the four door in dark grey with a black vinyl top.

#38 09-03-2006, 10:28 PM

From a structural point the 60's Lincoln convertibles were something else...they were 6000 pound unit bodies and no roof for support.

I have a book written by a Ford engineer and the book centers around the unit body development of the Lincolns and T-birds of the late 50's thru late 60's. Ford found out in the late 50's that unit body cars tended to have a limit of their size with certain suspension types. Ford wanted to use coil springs for the rear suspension on the Lincolns, but the coil springs would come through the body.

So Ford went to leaf springs because you now have two points of support per spring versus one per spring with the coil.

Personally, I think a 1961-1965 Lincoln in black oozes elegance.

t walgamuth · #39 09-04-2006, 12:46 AM

i like them in about any color.

my 64 was tan. the only reason i let it go was a musty interior.

our family doctor in greencastle indiana when i was a kid was a single older lady named "doctor ann". she had a 61 2 or 3 continental sedan in brg with blackwalls. she had the whitewalls turned in so the car would look less flashy.

i remember the contis were listed on the list of best made cars maybe 2 or so. so they were pretty well made.

i always thought they were very, very classy looking.

tom w

davestlouis · #40 09-04-2006, 12:55 AM

The "Kennedy" Lincolns are gorgeous...and it's amazing how long they used the basic shape and body shell with so few changes. The 4 door T-Birds of the late 60's were slick too, but few and far between now. I have a soft spot for 77-79 Cadillac Seville's too, the small square ones, not the bustle-back beasts of the 80's. A silver Seville with vinyl top delete, base-model wheelcovers (not wires) and a dark colored interior was almost subtle and classy, must have shocked the hell out of MB at the time.

t walgamuth · #41 09-04-2006, 01:10 AM

i always liked the way they looked too.

but they were bascially a cheesy nova underneath the classy appearance.

there was an elderly lady here in lafayette that was the widow of the man who owned a nice local restaurant for many years that had a real clean one in silver with a black vinyl top that was still driving it up til about three years ago.

yeah those 69 t birds looked pretty good with the suicide back doors too.

tom w

davestlouis · #42 09-04-2006, 10:45 AM

The Seville's have a tendency to dog track just like old Nova's, I've been told that it's front subframe bushings going bad, or even the whole subframe mounts rusting apart from the unibody, but when I married wife #1, she had a 76 Nova which was starting to get pretty loose underneath, and the rear springs were just about shot too, made for an interesting ride...couldn't kill it though, straight six auto, brown with tan painted roof and tan vinyl, just kept chugging along until it rusted apart and became too takcy to be seen in.

TheDon · #43 09-04-2006, 10:59 AM

i almost bought a nova with a "three on the tree" as my dad called it.. was in great shape , no rust, strong engine , new brakes and tires..guy wanted 500$ for it. i could have used the rest of my money and put a nice high output smallblock in ... but.. i didnt like the color.. dear god i have serious problems

funny thing my dad did have a nova when he was my age, he dumped the wimpy engine and transmission for one out of a wrecked muscle car(cant rember which) but he said he had to put a ford 9" rear end and wider tires to make it go straight