1965 Lincoln: The Last Great American Luxury Car

[akirby]

If there is no traffic, there are very few sales. And just where do people go to buy a Lincoln, Starbucks?

 

The whole point of using styling to get interest in the car is to have a potential customer see one (in person, in print, online, on TV, whatever) and get interested in looking further, be it online, at a dealer, etc. If the styling is totally forgetable or if it just blends into the background, why would anyone want to look further. Unless you are buying cars for the undercover unit.

 

The MB E-class is at the top of the sales heap in its market. Does it have radical styling?

The Caddy SRX is also a top seller - is it radical? What about the Lexus RX? Radical?

 

What you THINK sells cars is a far cry from what actually sells cars.

[Edstock]

Google "flame surfacing bmw" and "flame surfacing Hyundai"' then tell me if you see those exaggerated creases over the fenders of the MKC and the concave/convex surfaces.

 

Flame surfacing on the MKC? You need to get your eyes checked for astigmatism, you have squashed eyeballs.

[TBirdStangSkyliner]

I never stated that Lincoln styling should be radical. That wasn't my word or thought, but someone else's highschool debate tactic. Radical is a term loaded with different connotations to different people and probably not fitting of a luxury car.

[akirby]

I never stated that Lincoln styling should be radical. That wasn't my word or thought, but someone else's highschool debate tactic. Radical is a term loaded with different connotations to different people and probably not fitting of a luxury car.

 

That was directed at lfeg, not you.

[silvrsvt]

With the '96 Taurus, you were in a whole other realm. The motive there was to be distinctive, and look what that brought about.

 

I think the problem with the 96 Taurus is that they took the circle idea and went too far with it, just because. It didn't help that they went up market with the car at the time too...and that the Camry and Accord were coming into their own at the same time.

 

One thing that stuck me the past couple days....in random converison with people I met while working up at PSU...two different people where complaining about how all cars look the same...I'm sure they do to a untrained eye...but at the same time, is styling on cars (and the differences between them) much like people speaking about fine art?

 

My SHO seems to be popular...couple people were asking me about it and they haven't seen any around here :D

[TBirdStangSkyliner]

That was directed at lfeg, not you.

 

It was used earlier in the thread in reference to my post

[RichardJensen]

I never stated that Lincoln styling should be radical. That wasn't my word or thought, but someone else's highschool debate tactic. Radical is a term loaded with different connotations to different people and probably not fitting of a luxury car.

 

Radical may be a loaded word, but it also is, at least in my opinion, a fair characterization of the '61 Continental.

 

Therefore, a call for styling that is as big a departure from the conventions of the segment as the '61 Continental, or a wish for styling as 'distinctive' as the '61 Conti is, in essence, a call for radical styling.

[lfeg]

The MB E-class is at the top of the sales heap in its market. Does it have radical styling?

The Caddy SRX is also a top seller - is it radical? What about the Lexus RX? Radical?

 

What you THINK sells cars is a far cry from what actually sells cars.

Where did I say that styling has to be radical? All it needs to be is pleasing to the eye of a significant number of potential customers. Styling is only ONE thing that sells a car. If you are trying to establish a brand image it can be a powerful tool. Notice the "a", not the only tool, but one of them. Car buying is an emotional exercise for very many people. It validates their image in many cases. The examples quoted above more reflect the desire to maintain an image than cold hard financial considerations. I am voicing my opinions, not the gospel of how things must be.

[lfeg]

I never stated that Lincoln styling should be radical. That wasn't my word or thought, but someone else's highschool debate tactic. Radical is a term loaded with different connotations to different people and probably not fitting of a luxury car.

 

Correct, you did not. Neither did I ("You do not need radical styling"). Different or distinctive styling need not be radical, in fact in an enviornment of excessive overstyling (late 50's as an example) plain can be distinctive.

[akirby]

Ok, so the only thing we seem to disagree on is whether the MKC styling is good enough to stand out and get people to notice it and actually want to buy one. I say it absolutely does that (based on the concept) and apparently you two disagree. Whatever.

[Mark B. Morrow]

The T-Birds of that era were vastly different from the rest of the Ford lineup, especially in NVH. You cannot tell the difference by looking at the cars or the specs. But driving them you could tell. It was the opposite of what is now - the T-Bird (for a while anyway) was a Ford on a Lincoln platform.

The T-Birds of that era were built at Wixom right alongside the Lincolns. The T-Bird was in many ways more Lincoln than Ford since it shared very little with the Ford cars of the time.

[RichardJensen]

Right, however, having that lower priced Ford model made the whole undertaking profitable. Take that volume away, and.......

[ehaase]

This could have been the 1981 Versailles - http://www.lincolnversailles.com/ca2002.htm

[Edstock]

For the time, really nice.

[RichardJensen]

The "Lancelot" proposal's grille reminds me of the Stutz revival grille.

 

Also shows just how bankrupt the faux-retro look was by the early 80s. American consumers were ready and waiting for the Taurus when it came out.

[TBirdStangSkyliner]

My thoughts on why an approach based on unique body, more features and better NVH would work better at Buick pricing than at Lincoln's.

 

What potential buyers can you conquer with this approach? The first group I can see is those in the FWD Lexus and Acuras. This leaves mostly Lexus customers since Acura hasn't been selling all that well, either (haven't googled the numbers but that seems to have been the trend for a few years). Can Lincoln really out NVH and out-content Lexus enough to grab the beyond satisfied Toyota/Lexus punch drinkers? That seems like a tall mountain to climb. Grabbing Audi, Benz, BMW drivers with this approach seems like an even taller order since Lincoln wouldn't really be in the same segment with this lower risk, lower investment strategy.

 

This leaves group number two, aspirational domestic customers. Most of these are likely already in Fords, with some scattered about in Chevys and Mopars. Buick is the GM competition for this type of buyer, with this type of car. There is only a little overlap with Caddy and Buick, if any, as the Caddy models are mostly on platforms which are a cut above in performance and price.

 

I'm willing to concede that Lincoln could be a bit more of a luxury car than Buick under the "Richard" strategy, but it would be in ways hard to market and explain to consumers (most mid-level and higher sedans and CUV's are getting to be good in NVH). Of course, if your car looks a lot better, than some of that need goes away. To my eyes, the MKZ does look a lot better, maybe it can carve out some volume while it is fresh. Ford is being successful with a pricing point higher than Chevy, maybe these types of Lincoln's can sell for a little higher than Buicks, but not much greater if building volume is important.

 

 

[RichardJensen]

Wee Willie Keeler: "I hit 'em where they ain't."

 

If you benchmark Lexus with the goal of building a better Lexus, you are not going to succeed.

 

If you benchmark BMW with the goal of building a better BMW you are not going to succeed.

 

However, if you benchmark Lexus and have your creative talent, your designers, engineers, etc., look carefully at Lexus products and Lexus customers and say, "What do Lexus customers want that Lexus is not giving them?" Do the same thing with BMW, and you have a path toward a distinct identity. One that you already know will resonate with certain buyers:

 

"I like how quiet my Lexus is, but its ride is too soft." or "I like the how solid my Lexus feels, but I don't like the fuel economy." "I like my BMW's handling, but I don't like how hard the ride is." "I like my BMW's styling, but it costs a fortune to fix it."

 

Finally: Buick pricing is Ford pricing. Ford = Buick + Chevrolet.

Edited April 26, 2013 by RichardJensen

[Project-Fairmont]

And the Lincoln version of the Falcon was indeed the Versailles... The Falcon platform was reworked to supply Fairlanes, Mustangs, Mavericks, Granadas and all their Mercury counterparts.

 

Falcon design lent certain key aspects to the Fairlaine, however it was much sturdier and technically the defacto Ford unibody from '67 on to the last leaf sprung Granada in 1980. These Granada's were indeed well made IMO compared to the thin and lightweight Farimont that replaced it. Although the lightweight Fairmont and its suspension was a huge improvement over shock towers (and a junked car when they got rusty), antiquited steering systems and cart sprung third members for performance applications and good enough for Henry through 2004.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Project-Fairmont

[ehaase]

I am sure many here have already seen this excellent article on the Falcon platform - http://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-fords-falcon-platform-from-falcon-to-versailles-in-18-different-wheelbase-lengthtrack-width-variations/