Indie Auto reader WM stopped by to offer his reaction on our article, “1961-63 Lincoln Continental was not as iconic as often described.”
Well of all the articles written about the 1960s Lincoln, this is the most negative of them all. I think the 60s “slab” sided Lincolns were simple, stately and beautiful all at the same time. I never thought they didn’t sell to well because out here in LA, those cars were everywhere. Very popular with Bev Hills crowd and the movie stars.
With that said, the 1965-66 Imperials were gorgeous. They did resemble the Lincolns, since they were designed by the same man. But they also captured the Chrysler look of the early-60s. The Imperials have a more unique style, and had Engel stayed at the Ford Motor Company, it’s safe to say the Lincolns would have evolved to the Imperial look.
Also see ‘1964 Imperial could have been a better Lincoln Continental’
The mid-60s Imperials and Continentals were perfect for the times. By 1965, the Cadillacs had become very stylish, they no longer looked gaudy — which they had looked since 1959 — but I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Cadillacs appealed to the more flashy buyers, which I am not.
But that’s why we need different styles that cater to all tastes. I love the Lincolns and Imperials, and I do like the 1965 through 1973s. After that they were just big and boring, but that’s just me.
— WM
ADVERTISEMENTS & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Lincoln (1962)
Indie Auto invites your comments (see below) or letters to the editor (go here). Letters may be lightly edited for style and clarity.
I am in agreement with you, when it comes to the general “looks” of American luxury cars in the 1961-63 period, Lincoln had it all over it’s competition. I’ve owned a 1963 Lincoln sedan, as well as the 4-door convertibles, one for each year 1964-67.
I’ve also owned several Imperials of the time, including a 1963 Crown Coupe, a 1964 Convertible, a 1965 Ghia limousine [#9 of 10], and a 1966 convertible.
I’ve had a few early ’60s Cadillacs too, but I just didn’t like them as much as the other 2 makes. I had a 61, 63, and 65, all were Fleetwood 75 limousines.
I prefer the later Lincoln cars after ’63, for several reasons: 4″ additional wheelbase and interior room, Vastly improved convertible top systems, and the troublesome engine oil pump redesign. My favorite was a 1966 convertible, black with wine leather interior, and all options, a 100% original car that was a LCOC national meet winner in the early 1980s. The only negative consideration was the horrible fuel use.
There was a brief time in the early 1990s when I had an unusual selection of 1965 cars: Lincoln Lehmann-Peterson limo, Cadillac 75 limo, and a Ghia limo [my favorite of the 3] The Lincoln always had electrical problems, the Cadillac ran hot and the A/C never worked well, but the Imperial was trouble free [but it should have been, as it had done only 5,700 miles when I found it!]
Perhaps the “flaw” in the 1961-1963 Lincoln’s were the relatively (compared to Imperial and Cadillac) was the 123-inch wheelbase. Frankly, the “short” wheelbase was likely a product of the button-down-mind of Robert McNamara, whose philosophy, especially after the Edsel, the 1958 Ford, the Francis-Reith “Super” Mercury and the 1958-1960 Lincolns, became “Less is more”! Still, for me the 1961-1963 Lincolns were very special cars.
I always thought that the profile of the Continental was ugly and Ill proportioned
MS stopped by to say, “Well somebody must like them. I just (sic) a 1961 sell for $240,000.”
That may well be true. As we discuss further here, Indie Auto isn’t a car collector’s site, but rather one that explores why the U.S. auto industry experienced one of the biggest industrial collapses of the last century.