Today Indie Auto received a comment that critiqued how we have distinguished between different types of four-door body styles. I had referred to the 1961 Lincoln Continental as a four-door hardtop sedan, but Bostwick9 insisted that I was wrong (you can read the comment here).
I strive to be transparent about my editorial choices, so let me explain my methodology — and the rationale for it. During the post-war period, American automakers arguably built three major variants of the four-door body style:
- The dominant variant was commonly called a sedan. It had a center post in the “B-pillar” between the front and rear doors, and fixed metal frames around the windows.
- The second most common variant was commonly called a hardtop. This body style had no center pillar and frameless door glass like on convertibles.
- A less common variant — and the focus of our debate — was a hybrid of the above two. This body style had a center pillar but frameless door glass.
I have called this third variant a hardtop sedan or a pillared hardtop. Bostwick9 pointed out that Lincoln consistently referred to this body style as a sedan. That’s true.
Should we deviate from an automaker’s nomenclature?
This raises the question: Should I always refer to body styles by the exact terminology used by the manufacturer? The challenge with doing so is that even an individual automaker can be inconsistent, both over time and between different cars in their lineups.
For example, in 1973 the Ford Motor Company offered on its big and mid-sized cars a four-door body style that had a center post and frameless door glass. As usual, the Lincoln Continental was referred to as a sedan. However, the Mercury Marquis and Ford LTD were called pillared hardtops. So were the Ford Torino and Mercury Montego.
Ford wasn’t the only automaker that played word games. General Motors’ 1973 mid-sized, four-door models also had a center post and frameless door glass. That body style was referred to as a “colonnade hardtop sedan” by Buick, Chevrolet and Oldsmobile; Pontiac simply called it a “colonnade hardtop.”
In 1974-75 the divisions diverged, with Buick shifting to “hardtop sedan,” Chevrolet and Oldsmobile choosing “sedan” and Pontiac using “colonnade hardtop sedan.”
Bostwick9 argues that the terminology we use shouldn’t “muddy the waters.” I agree. That’s why it strikes me as best to use a consistent methodology even if it diverges from an automaker’s nomenclature.
I think that the most descriptive term for our beloved hybrid four-door body style — that is, with a center pillar and frameless door glass — is a four-door pillared hardtop. So going forward I will use that term rather than hardtop sedan, whose meaning is vague.
I would imagine that this may not be a satisfying answer to Bostwick9 and perhaps others. Alas, to publish a blog is to make editorial choices — which everyone won’t be happy with.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcarbrochures.org: Lincoln Continental (1973); Mercury Marquis (1973); Oldsmobile Cutlass (1975); Pontiac LeMans (1975)
Those 2 words describe the body style, but it’s not entirely accurate.
1. It does have a center pillar.
2. It does NOT have a fixed metal frame around the door glass.
But how does one differentiate this from a 2-door sedan where the door glass is not held in place by a window frame? For example; Fox-body Mustang II coupe. This is why you need a 3rd word: Sedan or coupe.
That Lincoln is a pillared hardtop sedan. The Mustang is a pillared hardtop coupe.
Think of it in this manner: If the reader is blind and reading your writing using braille, they cannot see a photo to determine if that “pillared hardtop” is a 2 or 4 door.
If you are referring to my approach, I would place “four-door” in front of “pillared hardtop” — as in “four-door pillared hardtop.” I just made that more explicit in the article.
I steered clear of talking about two-door body styles because that opened up a whole different can of worms, e.g., is it a sedan, coupe, hardtop or landau? A fastback or notchback? And if there is a hatchback, do you call it a three-door or a two-door?
You mention the “Fox-body Mustang II coupe.” If you are talking about the 1974-78 generation, both the hatchback and the notchback had frameless door glass and a B-pillar post. If you are talking about the first-generation Fox-platform Mustang built between 1979-93, the above-mentioned body styles had framed door glass and a B-pillar post. Would that mean that the Mustang II was a two-door coupe and its successor was a two-door sedan?
I’m brainstorming here, but I think not. By the late-70s the U.S. auto industry was shifting away from frameless door glass, so distinguishing between it and framed door glass was becoming less relevant. More relevant for the Mustang was whether a model was a notchback or a hatchback. And since the Mustang was a sporty car, I wouldn’t think of calling it a sedan, but rather a coupe, e.g., “two-door notchback coupe.”
Of course, this barely scratches the surface of nomenclature issues with two-door models, which deserve their own article.
So – a 4 door sedan ’36 Chevy or ’61 Rambler American would be termed a “hardtop” of some kind if they just had frameless windows? Hmmm. l’m against it. And Lincoln was apparently against it.
As almost all of us know, the designation “hardtop” is a contraction of “hardtop convertible” because that higher-fashion, higher-price body was concocted by replacing a “rag top” (soft) with a steel top (hard), still retaining the windows of the convertible and thereby still leaving out the “B” pillar. Almost all traditional hardtops retain the inner/under re-inforced structure of a convertible because of the lack of support from a “missing” pillar. To call a car a sedan with just frameless windows a “hardtop” would not likely sit right within an engineering community that has a sense of history (and most do, l think).
Just as some companies are calling their new sporty, slinky-styled 4 doors a “coupe” (talk about muddying the waters!), l’m sorry, l don’t see why the proposed terminology change would be of benefit. Just call the Lincoln a frameless-window sedan. That’s what it is.
It has already pointed out elsewhere in print – if your daughter was abducted by someone in a fancy new 4 door BMW “Coupe”, what term would you use to tell the police about the abductor’s car? Coupe? l don’t think so!
The above Lincoln and all the Colonnade GMs were and are sedans that should NOT be termed “hardtops”. They DO have a B pillar and they DON’T have the inner structure of a convertible or traditional hardtop. They look a little more sporty only because they have frameless windows so just call them what they are – which is a frameless-window sedan. Please.
This is always a problem, especially here where we concentrate broadly on cars from the late 20s to the early 70s. For example way back when a two door fixed top vehicle could come as a two door sedan, coupe, or business coupe. Convertible top could come in the luxurious convertible coupe or bare bones roadster flavors. Oh yes, the 2 row two door phaeton, again a bare bones vehicle. I think “Pillared hardtop sedan” adequately covers the vehicle. Four door is not needed as in that era sedan meant exclusively four door.
The presence of a B pillar makes the vehicle a sedan whether or not the the door glass is encased by a frame.
Does that make the Frazer sedans and convertibles with the fix-glass pillars six-window sedans, four-door hardtops (I cannot say I have ever seen a two-door Frazer sedan or coupe other than the Tremulius concept.) and four-door convertibles (or six-window convertibles)? Perhaps phaeton ?
Hi James – K-F did not make any 2 door sedans until the 1951 model year, which is after the Fraser was dropped, hence your lack of ever seeing any.
The non-roll-down “glass pillars” (they had chrome frames, as did the roll-down side windows) on these expensive convertible and “hardtop” Frazers were fixed in place, and not removable. as you pointed out. If you have a copy of Richard Langworth’s book “The Last Onslaught of Detroit”, turn to the story starting the last 1/3rd of page 102. The “hardtop” was originally planned to be called a “Hard Top” (see phot caption, page 101) because it had framed windows. It DID have the convertible’s frame and body reinforcements.
I’m with Stu and Gary.
When I was looking for my first car, in 1979, even my mom knew what a hardtop was. She probably couldn’t explain it, but she darn well knew one when she saw one.
If it has a B pillar, it’s not a hardtop.
By the way, I ended up with a 1972 Chevrolet Impala 4 door hardtop. It was junk. 🙂
Thanks for addressing that, Steve. That’s a fair explanation of your editorial policy.
I have to agree with the others here, though: frameless door glass and a “B” pillar don’t make a hardtop even though the marketing people try to promote them that way.
“Hardtop” is the exception. I’ve owned three and one for 40 years now. The essence of them is to mimic a convertible with the top up.
Not you, but many modern writers get tied up in knots when describing hardtops. I think they either are, or are not.
Not: Ford’s “pillared” sedans and Mustang II coupe. The MINI Hardtop. GM’s Colonnade offerings. It’s not the first time manufacturers tried to muck around with designations. Chevrolet called it’s notchback Citation a “Club Coupe”. Who knows why?
Referring to sedans or coupes as a “post” is another peeve of mine. I have no idea when this started but not even the manufacturers described their body styles in that manner.
As mentioned: the “hardtop” is the exception.
How about Ford calling their station wagons Country Sedans?? 🤪😛😂