Personally, I've always been a bigger fan of Cadillac. But having driven both brands, as well as others, I will not deny that Lincoln has always had the smoother, quieter ride, and is still a joy to drive.
When Brezhnev visited the US in 1973, Nixon gave him a 1973 Lincoln Continental - dark blue with special black velour upholstery, a true classic. “Special Good Wishes - Greetings” was engraved on the dashboard. Nixon later wrote: He got behind the wheel and motioned me into the passenger seat. The head of my Secret Service detail went pale as I climbed in and we took off down one of the narrow roads that run around the perimeter of Camp David…. At one point there is a very steep slope with a sign at the top reading, ‘Slow, dangerous curve’…. Brezhnev was driving more than 50 miles an hour as we approached the slope. I reached over and said, ‘Slow down, slow down,’ but he paid no attention. When we reached the bottom there was a squeal of rubber as he slammed on the breaks and made the turn…. ‘You are an excellent driver,’ I replied. ‘I would never have been able to make that turn at the speed at which we were traveling.’
@@groovy1937 Nixon gave Brezhnev two cars -- a Cadillac Eldorado when he visited Moscow in 1972, and the Lincoln when Brezhnev visited the United States in 1973.
Why didn't they show the "other" luxury car? Because Lincoln tested their car with Cadillac's DeVille Series and not the Fleetwood. Why should that matter? Because both the Continental and the Fleetwood used a self-leveling rear suspension. The DeVille did not. That made it an unfair comparison. That written, the Lincolns did provide an exceptional ride. The Cadillacs offered slightly better handling though. Both cars are missed today. If you are reading this and you have never ridden in either the 1973 Continental or the 1973 Cadillac Fleetwood, you have no idea of what you missed. These cars OOZED down the road. You could easily sleep through a tankful of gasoline in either car.
Thanks for your comment and geting involved:) I would prefer the continental over the Cadillac after owning several Cadillacs and Lincolns of those years Lincoln by far had a far superior ride and steering. But I know we all have our choice it’s still down to how you the individual likes it
@@MarksofDistinction I prefer the Fleetwood over the Continental simply because it offered more rear passenger room and what I consider a better highway ride. I have driven all 3 luxury cars (1976 Cadillac; 1976 Imperial; and the 1976 Continental) to 110 MPH. The Imperial was clearly the better handling of the bunch. The Lincoln was a handful when the road was uneven or humpy. The Cadillac, I thought, was the best compromise between the three. The Lincoln was okay at lower speeds but, especially with the 1973, the front end was allowed to sink into the springs too deeply. It would hit the rubber arm bushings too frequently for my taste. Cadillac did a better job with the shock absorbers. You could drive the Fleetwood faster over humpy, irregular surfaces. I guess it is all a matter of personal taste though. :)
Wayne Johnson I would have to disagree The imperial was by far the worst and I feel the Lincoln had a better ride honestly though I prefer the Lincoln Mark series over the lincoln continentals but thanks for geting involved :). Safely don’t have anymore of these type of films
@Amplass 333 The same could be written though between the Marquis and Lincoln too. In the 1975 Consumer Guide-Cars, it was written that the Marquis was the worst handling car they ever tested. It shared most of the suspension components with the Lincoln Continental.
Some of these early 70s expensive cars like Lincoln had options nobody today would guess.... Ok how about ABS? Air Bags? Yes, the ABS was called "Anti Skid brakes" and they worked well, and Air Bags, they worked well also the same way today. These were a few of rare options that were introduced in the late 60s early 70s. The government was getting a lot of heat, auto industry for cars that were death traps, maybe the name Ralph Nader, who wrote the book "Unsafe at any Speed" so in 64 front lap belts were standard, later came options like air bags and ASB. I remember reading a story of a woman driving a 71 Pontiac if my memory serves me, could've been a Lincoln, anyway she got in a front end accident and a airbag popped out in her face, saving her life and was shocked what it was. The original owner checked "Airbag option" By about 74 these options were phased out due to not many people thought they were necessary and the government wasn't that strict then like the last 30 years. And no I didn't "Google" kiddy's but you can
I love how at @0:36 seconds in, you see a Cadillac on the right side of the screen passing the Continental. Who was the genius in the Lincoln / Continental marketing department who OKed that!!?!?
I was listening to this video without watching it. I heard "Nationwide Consumer Testing Institute put 100 owners of that other luxury car to the test. Blindfolded, they tested a Lincoln Continental against their make of sedan." I live in Los Angeles, and I swear many drivers are blind. Maybe not. They're just blindfolded. ;)
The mark of American excess. What an unnecessarily huge, lumbering inefficient behemoth. Probably gets 7 & 11/16th's galloons to the acre-foot (those are American units) The American car industry didn't see the oil crisis coming and they never really figured out how to build an efficient smaller car.
Both my parents telling me stories about the oil embargo back in the 70s said when you were in big cities there were always lines for fuel and there was no fuel available at times but when you went 50 to 100 miles outside of big cities you had none of that there was never any lines and fuel was always available It’s one of those things where or when people look back it’s only the people in the big cities that always complain
I much preferred these Lincolns over the Cadillac or lessor Imperial. However, the nearly identical 1972 Lincoln didn't carry the extra weight of the larger, fat-lip, mandated front and rear bumpers--so the 72's look a bit better, though the 73 Lincoln's did carry the beefy bumpers better than most cars. But those beefy bumpers had a advantage. You could hit something--even up to 5 mph, and often not do any damage. These Lincolns and the well received Mark 3 and 4 helped Lincoln prosper in the battle with Cadillac while Imperial failed. However, the real threat was going to come from overseas. By the mid 70's Mercedes and BMW were making big inroads in California for the high end, luxury sedan market. That trend would gradually unfold elsewhere. The energy crisis played a role too.
If I had the money to choose, it would be an old Lincoln, Cadillac, Mercury, and an Imperial over any car made today. Back then, they were made like tanks and had the cool looks and ride. All of them.
I hated those "steel whales on wheels" back then, still do today. To my mind they were over-built hunks of steel that were never attractive, and always seemed to be owned/driven by certain nouveau riche people who wanted to rub their wealth and status in your face. One local businessman I was acquainted with drove one of those whales, with the attached vanity plate that said, "ALL MINE." I wanted to puke every time I saw him roll up in that thing.
It is so obvious that "other luxury car" is Cadillac. They can't mention the name but at 37 seconds you can see a Sedan DeVille passing the Continental...hmm
Hard to understand people's preferences. Why they salivated over this vs. today's crossovers. I have so many questions. Why vinyl roof? Vinyl seats? Super long hood and overall car length made it difficult to park and maneuver? Why is weak, heavy, and bad in turns fun?
This comment is to Wayne Johnson Cadillac might have had soft leveling suspension but it knows years Lincoln did not Lincoln did not have the airbag suspension until 1984 when the Mark 7 came out
Also you have to remember that the time this commercial was being shown gas prices were hovering in the high 20's to low 30's for a gallon of gas. So... For a 22.5 (specs on a '73 Continental) gal. gas tank to fill up the tank was approx $7.00.
I think 1976 was the best year for land yachts. It was the last year GM offered its huge full-size sedans and I think the styling was best at FoMoCo from 75-78. Those cars had WAY more presence than modern sedans.
@@tyler2610 A luxury car should have some horsepower too. The very early 1970s were the last years American V8s made any decent numbers for a while. (1971 really) The later smog engines were just awful.
Loving it. "That other car" -- which obviously has no name. The car makers were running these blind rides out of a couple of hotels situated on Sundet Blvd at the I-405 freeway. Since the late 1960s until the late 1990s / early 2000s. I worked at a number of these comparison drives there in the 1970 and 1980s myself.
Did they really drive that smoothly, or did they just drive heavily? Seems like the sheer weight of these cars is what made them ride neutral, rather than the fairly basic and archaic suspension.
We had a 73 growing up. I think it was a combination between the spring rates and the weight. Not to mention the car was designed to disconnect the driver from the road in regard to the suspension and steering.
You are right, the weight did make a huge difference. My grandfather had one and as a teenager he let me borrow it several times. One night I decided to try the lap and separate shoulder belts and was surprised at how much better the car seemed to drive and handle with the belts holding me firmly in the driver's seat. I think that really helped out with that soft suspension and that's what got me in the habit of wearing seat belts back then.
My grandfather was not too impressed by the fact that I had used the lap and separate shoulder belts as I never could get the shoulder belt back up on the headliner like it came from the factory and that really annoyed him. Not only was that a problem to get back on the headliner, but the separate lap and shoulder belts where a bit tricky to hook together and the buckle up in one motion. Pop's never used the shoulder belt and I'm willing to bet he never used the lap belt either. LOL, he would have found the belts to be too much of a hassle or have been too confining. 😂
Cadillac was more flashy, had better advertising and that's why it had more buyers. I still like Continental more than a Cadillac but there are some Cadillacs that I do like better than Lincoln.
RADIUM CLOCK I suspect the target demographic was closer to 60 than 40. OTOH, an oldster’s opinion would probably carry a lot of weight with one of his peers.
@@FrankGutowski-ls8jt I would say a lot of wealthy 40-45 year olds at the time bought these. These big cars were very popular with that generation and they were a symbol of success for decades. Their children...not so much
They were getting duped anyway. The Mark III was nothing more than a dressed up Thunderbird. Continental was nothing more than a bigger dressed up Galaxie with a 460.
They were pieces of crap, poor build quality, got bad gas mileage, handled like a couch and more proof of how Detroit exploited the stupidity of the American car buyer,
I loved my 78 Town Car. Triple Black,, when you stop driving it because of the "at least twice a week fill up" all the love started to fade and finally was gone..
His data comes from this rigged up commercial, drive a bunch of smelly old already dead people around so they can fart up the interior of a Lincoln for once, but they all kept buying Caddys! This continued on to today, when simply NO ONE buys a new Lincoln, unless they like spending way too much for a tarted up Taurus!
+Marks of Distinction Lincolns are dead. the new continental is beautiful, but it's a fusion. Cadillacs are switching to rear wheel drive platforms. Lincolns are doing just the opposite as they are pretty much front wheel drive minus the Navigator
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I am 36 and I would take this Continental over any car made in the last 10 years. To me modern sedans are hideous yet anonymously bland at the same time. They look like turtles with their high rooflines, wheels pushed to the outermost edges of the car, a stubby hood and next to no trunk decklid. The Lincoln from this commercial has so much more presence and comfort than any modern car. It wound not be very practical from a fuel consumption stand point and they weren't known for their build quality or reliability but man what I would give to still be able to buy real cars like this before Asia and Europe ruined the American car market!
@@tyler2610 I'm will be crying the day Ford announces the new Thunderbird Crossover. How I miss 2 Dr hardtops, convertibles, V-8's from the 1960's, 4 speed manual transmissions (that you could special order for station wagons). I'm a dinosaur and my era has moved on...
@@spiff8862 At least you got to experience them! I wasn't born until 1984 so by the time I was old enough to earn enough money to buy a nice car, the traditional sedans were pretty much gone. I have briefly driven some of the big 70's landyachts and owned a 1990 Buick Estate Wagon for a year, but most of my experience with these cars comes from watching episodes of Charlies Angels, Cannon, Branaby Jones, CHiPs, etc and books. I did get a loaded 2005 Park Avenue with 16K in 2008 after graduating from college that filled the bill pretty well but I would have loved to have been able to order one new. I currently drive a 2020 Yukon that I special ordered with the standard 18 inch rims because it rides a lot smoother than with the bigger (more attractive 20+ inch ones). I think it is about as close as I can come to the classic land yachts in a modern vehicle but I really would rather drive a big car. A lot of people like to sit up high in an SUV but I like the visibility from a sedan better. The Yukon is like a tank, without the cameras you just can't see out of it even with all the windows! I guess modern sedans probably suffer from the same issue. One of the many things the older sedans did much better than modern vehicles, you could clearly see every corner of the car. I won't even go into the comfort or styling!
While these cars were quiet, looked the part and had very cushy rides on only the smoothest of pavements, these land yachts handled terribly, had extremely poor performance, were awfully built, had substandard quality and even worse reliability. The good ol’ days, huh.
Easily one of the best looking cars of the 1970's. Also one of the thirstiest at 7mpg (consumer guide).
Gas mileage wasn't that bad, no worse than any other big car with a big motor, just keep your foot out of the firewall
In baby blue it is awesome!!
@Mike Cipperley LOL....so you're comparing a car you never owned, drove or paid gas for almost 50 years ago? LOLOLOLOLOOLOLOL
@Mike Cipperley thanks uncle Mike. But gas can be expensive now because cars get better gas milage. But when you drive an old car like me it sucks ass
Gas was cheap back then
Oh man those were premium! Nothing rode better than the 70's barges.
Personally, I've always been a bigger fan of Cadillac. But having driven both brands, as well as others, I will not deny that Lincoln has always had the smoother, quieter ride, and is still a joy to drive.
Lets not forget there was no backup camera. The driver needed skill to park these cars in tight spaces.
Back in the day these were called land yachts.
The problem with this test was the other 36 people died while trying to drive blind folded. Another senseless waste of life! Beautiful car though!
+Gary Taylor They didn't drive the car. they were driven as it shows in the video...
@@MrTheMiguelox Hi Captain Obvious!
"It is a very good year."
So are the tires you might need for your 73 Continental. Goodyears. Get it?
"Continental was smoother in taking bumps.."
So are the tires you might need for your 73 Continental. Continentals. Get it?
-sorry.
When Brezhnev visited the US in 1973, Nixon gave him a 1973 Lincoln Continental - dark blue with special black velour upholstery, a true classic. “Special Good Wishes - Greetings” was engraved on the dashboard. Nixon later wrote: He got behind the wheel and motioned me into the passenger seat. The head of my Secret Service detail went pale as I climbed in and we took off down one of the narrow roads that run around the perimeter of Camp David….
At one point there is a very steep slope with a sign at the top reading, ‘Slow, dangerous curve’….
Brezhnev was driving more than 50 miles an hour as we approached the slope. I reached over and said, ‘Slow down, slow down,’ but he paid no attention. When we reached the bottom there was a squeal of rubber as he slammed on the breaks and made the turn….
‘You are an excellent driver,’ I replied. ‘I would never have been able to make that turn at the speed at which we were traveling.’
Nixon gave him a Cadillac not a Lincoln, I was alive then I remember well.
@@groovy1937 Nixon gave Brezhnev two cars -- a Cadillac Eldorado when he visited Moscow in 1972, and the Lincoln when Brezhnev visited the United States in 1973.
Brezhnev slammed on the BRAKES, not the "breaks."
@@Ctrl-XYZ Thanks, I stand corrected! I only remembered the 1972 Cadillac.
Why didn't they show the "other" luxury car? Because Lincoln tested their car with Cadillac's DeVille Series and not the Fleetwood. Why should that matter? Because both the Continental and the Fleetwood used a self-leveling rear suspension. The DeVille did not. That made it an unfair comparison. That written, the Lincolns did provide an exceptional ride. The Cadillacs offered slightly better handling though. Both cars are missed today. If you are reading this and you have never ridden in either the 1973 Continental or the 1973 Cadillac Fleetwood, you have no idea of what you missed. These cars OOZED down the road. You could easily sleep through a tankful of gasoline in either car.
Thanks for your comment and geting involved:) I would prefer the continental over the Cadillac after owning several Cadillacs and Lincolns of those years Lincoln by far had a far superior ride and steering. But I know we all have our choice it’s still down to how you the individual likes it
@@MarksofDistinction I prefer the Fleetwood over the Continental simply because it offered more rear passenger room and what I consider a better highway ride. I have driven all 3 luxury cars (1976 Cadillac; 1976 Imperial; and the 1976 Continental) to 110 MPH. The Imperial was clearly the better handling of the bunch. The Lincoln was a handful when the road was uneven or humpy. The Cadillac, I thought, was the best compromise between the three. The Lincoln was okay at lower speeds but, especially with the 1973, the front end was allowed to sink into the springs too deeply. It would hit the rubber arm bushings too frequently for my taste. Cadillac did a better job with the shock absorbers. You could drive the Fleetwood faster over humpy, irregular surfaces. I guess it is all a matter of personal taste though. :)
Wayne Johnson I would have to disagree The imperial was by far the worst and I feel the Lincoln had a better ride honestly though I prefer the Lincoln Mark series over the lincoln continentals but thanks for geting involved :). Safely don’t have anymore of these type of films
@@MarksofDistinction To each, their own. :)
@Amplass 333 The same could be written though between the Marquis and Lincoln too. In the 1975 Consumer Guide-Cars, it was written that the Marquis was the worst handling car they ever tested. It shared most of the suspension components with the Lincoln Continental.
Some of these early 70s expensive cars like Lincoln had options nobody today would guess.... Ok how about ABS? Air Bags? Yes, the ABS was called "Anti Skid brakes" and they worked well, and Air Bags, they worked well also the same way today. These were a few of rare options that were introduced in the late 60s early 70s. The government was getting a lot of heat, auto industry for cars that were death traps, maybe the name Ralph Nader, who wrote the book "Unsafe at any Speed" so in 64 front lap belts were standard, later came options like air bags and ASB. I remember reading a story of a woman driving a 71 Pontiac if my memory serves me, could've been a Lincoln, anyway she got in a front end accident and a airbag popped out in her face, saving her life and was shocked what it was. The original owner checked "Airbag option" By about 74 these options were phased out due to not many people thought they were necessary and the government wasn't that strict then like the last 30 years. And no I didn't "Google" kiddy's but you can
I love how at @0:36 seconds in, you see a Cadillac on the right side of the screen passing the Continental. Who was the genius in the Lincoln / Continental marketing department who OKed that!!?!?
Good catch. I’m sure Henry II approved this. I wonder if he noticed.
You'll also see at about 0:15 that there is a 1968 ('69?) Continental passing by on the right of the screen.
I had a 75 Towncar, 77 Cady fleetwood, then a 79 Towncar liked lincolns the best
Did you need to have a Ship Captains license to drive one?
I was listening to this video without watching it. I heard "Nationwide Consumer Testing Institute put 100 owners of that other luxury car to the test. Blindfolded, they tested a Lincoln Continental against their make of sedan." I live in Los Angeles, and I swear many drivers are blind. Maybe not. They're just blindfolded. ;)
Just in time for the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973: a car that gets less than ten miles per gallon.
damn, I want that Lincoln soo bad
This car was so smooth a Rabbi could circumcise a baby riding down the road
Hahahaaa dam Huffman n my favorite car is the '70 mark lll.
@@marcomoreno8188 8 gallons to the mile but nothing else like them!
You're confusing it with the Royal Deluxe II. HAHAHA
I thought they performed that butchery on 13 year olds. But who am I to judge? How would I know, I was fortunate enough to remain as designed.
eww
The mark of American excess. What an unnecessarily huge, lumbering inefficient behemoth. Probably gets 7 & 11/16th's galloons to the acre-foot (those are American units) The American car industry didn't see the oil crisis coming and they never really figured out how to build an efficient smaller car.
Both my parents telling me stories about the oil embargo back in the 70s said when you were in big cities there were always lines for fuel and there was no fuel available at times but when you went 50 to 100 miles outside of big cities you had none of that there was never any lines and fuel was always available It’s one of those things where or when people look back it’s only the people in the big cities that always complain
Gorgeous truly luxury vehicle
I much preferred these Lincolns over the Cadillac or lessor Imperial. However, the nearly identical 1972 Lincoln didn't carry the extra weight of the larger, fat-lip, mandated front and rear bumpers--so the 72's look a bit better, though the 73 Lincoln's did carry the beefy bumpers better than most cars. But those beefy bumpers had a advantage. You could hit something--even up to 5 mph, and often not do any damage. These Lincolns and the well received Mark 3 and 4 helped Lincoln prosper in the battle with Cadillac while Imperial failed. However, the real threat was going to come from overseas. By the mid 70's Mercedes and BMW were making big inroads in California for the high end, luxury sedan market. That trend would gradually unfold elsewhere. The energy crisis played a role too.
If I had the money to choose, it would be an old Lincoln, Cadillac, Mercury, and an Imperial over any car made today. Back then, they were made like tanks and had the cool looks and ride. All of them.
I hated those "steel whales on wheels" back then, still do today. To my mind they were over-built hunks of steel that were never attractive, and always seemed to be owned/driven by certain nouveau riche people who wanted to rub their wealth and status in your face. One local businessman I was acquainted with drove one of those whales, with the attached vanity plate that said, "ALL MINE." I wanted to puke every time I saw him roll up in that thing.
It is so obvious that "other luxury car" is Cadillac. They can't mention the name but at 37 seconds you can see a Sedan DeVille passing the Continental...hmm
Hard to understand people's preferences. Why they salivated over this vs. today's crossovers.
I have so many questions.
Why vinyl roof? Vinyl seats?
Super long hood and overall car length made it difficult to park and maneuver?
Why is weak, heavy, and bad in turns fun?
Hello I thank you for showing this back at a time they made car's, not the Ten-Cans of trash they're making now 👽🙂🌈👍🙃
This comment is to Wayne Johnson Cadillac might have had soft leveling suspension but it knows years Lincoln did not Lincoln did not have the airbag suspension until 1984 when the Mark 7 came out
Also you have to remember that the time this commercial was being shown gas prices were hovering in the high 20's to low 30's for a gallon of gas. So...
For a 22.5 (specs on a '73 Continental) gal. gas tank to fill up the tank was approx $7.00.
I wish my continental had the 73' taillights.
69-73 imperials were nice as well.
That's too funny they were blindfolded and went test driving
That Mark IV at the end was beautiful.
1973 was the last good year for a really long time as far as I'm concerned.
76 mark IV was the last year👍
I think 1976 was the best year for land yachts. It was the last year GM offered its huge full-size sedans and I think the styling was best at FoMoCo from 75-78. Those cars had WAY more presence than modern sedans.
@@tyler2610 A luxury car should have some horsepower too. The very early 1970s were the last years American V8s made any decent numbers for a while. (1971 really) The later smog engines were just awful.
my dream car this car i rate better than any rolls royce
I remember those commercials like it was yesterday.
Loving it. "That other car" -- which obviously has no name. The car makers were running these blind rides out of a couple of hotels situated on Sundet Blvd at the I-405 freeway. Since the late 1960s until the late 1990s / early 2000s. I worked at a number of these comparison drives there in the 1970 and 1980s myself.
That’s totally awesome
Did they really drive that smoothly, or did they just drive heavily? Seems like the sheer weight of these cars is what made them ride neutral, rather than the fairly basic and archaic suspension.
We had a 73 growing up. I think it was a combination between the spring rates and the weight. Not to mention the car was designed to disconnect the driver from the road in regard to the suspension and steering.
You are right, the weight did make a huge difference. My grandfather had one and as a teenager he let me borrow it several times. One night I decided to try the lap and separate shoulder belts and was surprised at how much better the car seemed to drive and handle with the belts holding me firmly in the driver's seat. I think that really helped out with that soft suspension and that's what got me in the habit of wearing seat belts back then.
My grandfather was not too impressed by the fact that I had used the lap and separate shoulder belts as I never could get the shoulder belt back up on the headliner like it came from the factory and that really annoyed him. Not only was that a problem to get back on the headliner, but the separate lap and shoulder belts where a bit tricky to hook together and the buckle up in one motion. Pop's never used the shoulder belt and I'm willing to bet he never used the lap belt either. LOL, he would have found the belts to be too much of a hassle or have been too confining. 😂
Cadillac was more flashy, had better advertising and that's why it had more buyers. I still like Continental more than a Cadillac but there are some Cadillacs that I do like better than Lincoln.
Early 70s Eldorado?
The Lincolns were superior in every way
@@feez357 1968-1970
Great video but posted in the wrong aspect ratio. 16:9 but should be 4:3, which is why everything looks stretched out sideways.
Yeah but still kool
That other luxury car is CADILLAC.
Damn right lol
A doddering 90 year old’s opinion...sure to appeal to affluent, younger buyers!
This car was marketed to the 40+ buyer. Younger buyers didn't care for it. A Mark IV was for any age though.
RADIUM CLOCK
I suspect the target demographic was closer to 60 than 40. OTOH, an oldster’s opinion would probably carry a lot of weight with one of his peers.
@@FrankGutowski-ls8jt I would say a lot of wealthy 40-45 year olds at the time bought these. These big cars were very popular with that generation and they were a symbol of success for decades. Their children...not so much
I remember this ad
They didn't want to say they are comparing to Padilla bit they got a caddy on the commercial lol
Nice of them to sell Mazda back in 2015. I like the type of premium Mazda is doing now.
Continental Mark III is my pick!
Yes I always preferred the Mark III to the Mark IV....
Absolutely the "BEST" design of the Mark series!
Totally agree it's a shame but as Americans were getting duped in many ways anymore
They were getting duped anyway. The Mark III was nothing more than a dressed up Thunderbird. Continental was nothing more than a bigger dressed up Galaxie with a 460.
+Justa Hondafan Sometimes, I read comments like yours and I wonder what exactly would constitute a different car in your mind.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THE AMERICAN BRANDS CHANGED THE STYLE OR SIMPLY DISAPPEAR IT AS THE LINCOLN TOWN CAR IS A TRUE AMERICAN SYMBOL
cause they don't know what they are doing
They were pieces of crap, poor build quality, got bad gas mileage, handled like a couch and more proof of how Detroit exploited the stupidity of the American car buyer,
FOR YOUR POSITION THAT YOU HANDLE A SUBARU FORESTER, THE LINCOLN TOWN CAR ITS THE BEST BIG CAR NEVER MADE IN AMERICA
I loved my 78 Town Car. Triple Black,, when you stop driving it because of the "at least twice a week fill up" all the love started to fade and finally was gone..
Any commercials for the 1974 model?
Big Car for Mr.B.
Epic
Nixon era lincoln. Still I prefer a Fleetwood Brougham or talisman over anything Lincoln had to offer back then
Nothing came close to Lincoln in the 70s.
all those farts that chose the Lincoln continental were aarp turds anyway. so Cadillac was too classy for such a cheesy Comercial
Regardless more people preferred Lincoln.
Really? Where's your data?????
His data comes from this rigged up commercial, drive a bunch of smelly old already dead people around so they can fart up the interior of a Lincoln for once, but they all kept buying Caddys! This continued on to today, when simply NO ONE buys a new Lincoln, unless they like spending way too much for a tarted up Taurus!
same goes for the over priced cadillacs just buy fords and buicks
+Marks of Distinction Lincolns are dead. the new continental is beautiful, but it's a fusion. Cadillacs are switching to rear wheel drive platforms. Lincolns are doing just the opposite as they are pretty much front wheel drive minus the Navigator
Wow they would never dare to aim at that demographic nowadays !!!!! Ugly, heavy, and cheesy car !
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I am 36 and I would take this Continental over any car made in the last 10 years. To me modern sedans are hideous yet anonymously bland at the same time. They look like turtles with their high rooflines, wheels pushed to the outermost edges of the car, a stubby hood and next to no trunk decklid. The Lincoln from this commercial has so much more presence and comfort than any modern car. It wound not be very practical from a fuel consumption stand point and they weren't known for their build quality or reliability but man what I would give to still be able to buy real cars like this before Asia and Europe ruined the American car market!
@@tyler2610
I'm will be crying the day Ford announces the new Thunderbird Crossover.
How I miss 2 Dr hardtops, convertibles, V-8's from the 1960's, 4 speed manual transmissions (that you could special order for station wagons).
I'm a dinosaur and my era has moved on...
@@spiff8862 At least you got to experience them! I wasn't born until 1984 so by the time I was old enough to earn enough money to buy a nice car, the traditional sedans were pretty much gone. I have briefly driven some of the big 70's landyachts and owned a 1990 Buick Estate Wagon for a year, but most of my experience with these cars comes from watching episodes of Charlies Angels, Cannon, Branaby Jones, CHiPs, etc and books. I did get a loaded 2005 Park Avenue with 16K in 2008 after graduating from college that filled the bill pretty well but I would have loved to have been able to order one new. I currently drive a 2020 Yukon that I special ordered with the standard 18 inch rims because it rides a lot smoother than with the bigger (more attractive 20+ inch ones). I think it is about as close as I can come to the classic land yachts in a modern vehicle but I really would rather drive a big car. A lot of people like to sit up high in an SUV but I like the visibility from a sedan better. The Yukon is like a tank, without the cameras you just can't see out of it even with all the windows! I guess modern sedans probably suffer from the same issue. One of the many things the older sedans did much better than modern vehicles, you could clearly see every corner of the car. I won't even go into the comfort or styling!
@@tyler2610
Novacaine power steering on a 2.5 ton barge. Now that was a FUN experience!
While these cars were quiet, looked the part and had very cushy rides on only the smoothest of pavements, these land yachts handled terribly, had extremely poor performance, were awfully built, had substandard quality and even worse reliability.
The good ol’ days, huh.
They should never have let these people drive blindfolded brah 🤨
I know but it was the 70s they did a lot of weird stuff back than lol
@@MarksofDistinction
Weird times brah 😐