(EXPANDED FROM 10/6/2021)
The 1961-63 Lincoln has been lauded as one of the most iconic car designs of the postwar era. It’s true that the exceptionally clean styling of the so-called “Kennedy Continentals” represented a radical break with the sci-fi excessiveness of the late-50s and early-60s.
Even so, the car was also heavily compromised by the Detroit groupthink of the time. The Lincoln’s design only hinted at the timeless classic it could have become.
One problem was that the car’s engineering operated at cross purposes to its styling. Although the new-for-1961 models were arguably America’s first “downsized” big cars, the Continental ended up with few of the advantages of smaller cars and most of their disadvantages.
The Lincoln’s unusually space-wasting packaging anticipated the bloated but cramped personal coupes of the 1970s.
Lincoln scrimped by not offering the usual body styles
Instead of fielding both a two- and four-door hardtop, Lincoln settled on one body style that was a compromise between the two — what today would be considered a four-door coupe.
The Continental’s greenhouse would have looked terrific as a two door, but the designers threw off the proportions by adding two extra doors without extending the C-pillar farther back toward the rear wheels.
One could also argue that the car’s design was “a little bland” and did not have much continuity with previous Lincolns (Ate Up With Motor, 2014). As discussed below, I am more agnostic on those fronts. The overarching problem was that the Continental’s styling promised more than it delivered from a functional standpoint.
The 1961-63 Lincoln wasn’t a very practical luxury car
The Lincoln may have been 15 inches shorter than its behemoth predecessor, but it weighed only 89 pounds less. That resulted in the 1961 Cadillac actually being lighter than the Continental even though it was 10 inches longer and more than an inch wider.
A Motor Trend (1961) road test found that the Continental got slightly better gas mileage than the Cadillac — 10-14 mpg rather than 8-12. However, the Lincoln’s larger engine — 430 cubic inches versus 390 — was tuned for economy rather than performance.
The Lincoln’s smaller size also didn’t translate into better maneuverability. Motor Trend concluded that the Continental’s handling was “still not the equal of the better handlers in the luxury class” (1961, p. 78). The magazine also complained that the car’s styling reduced visibility in parking-lot maneuvers.
Meanwhile, the Continental’s shorter wheelbase translated into “the most limited rear seat space available of the luxury three” (Motor Trend, 1961; p. 79).
In addition, the 1961-62 Lincoln’s trunk capacity was only 10.5 cubic feet — a substantial 6.5 cubic feet less than for the standard Cadillac (as opposed to a short-decked model introduced mid-year).
The primary problem was apparently that the Continental sedan had the same trunk design as the convertible, which took the unusual step of housing its top entirely inside the trunk (Motor Trend, 1961; p. 79). In 1963 the trunk was redesigned to increase its size (Bonsall, 1981).
Another practical problem with the 1961-63 Continental was that the base of the trunk lid was exceptionally high. This made loading luggage more difficult compared to most family cars of that era. The reason for the high lift-over was that Lincoln carried over an unfortunate design feature from the 1958-60 models — the fuel cap was placed in the center of the rear fascia.
Lincoln didn’t sell better until it was redesigned
Given all of the above-listed shortcomings, I don’t think it should be surprising that the 1961-63 Continental didn’t sell very well. Total 1961-63 production was less than 8 percent higher than for the ungainly 1958-60 Lincolns.
Also see ‘The 1964-65 Lincoln Continental was a step backward rather than forward’
Market share was even less impressive. In 1963 Lincoln inched up to 15 percent of the domestic luxury car field. That was higher than in 1960 (13.4 percent) but well below 1958 (17.7 percent).
Lincoln only began to gain traction when the Continental was reskinned in 1966. Production soared to almost 55,000 units and market share jumped to 20.6 percent — the highest since 1956.
A variety of factors may have added to Lincoln’s cachet
Thomas Bonsall suggested that although the 1961-63 models did not sell all that well, they laid the groundwork for the popularity of their successors. The Continental was such an influential car that it “formed the foundation for the unprecedented success that the marque was to enjoy during the next twenty years” (1981, p. 174).
This is a reasonable argument. The Continental’s styling had such a strong impact that both the Imperial and Cadillac adopted major elements of its brougham look with their respective redesigns in 1964 and 1965.
Also see ‘Defective 1977-79 Continental Mark V showed how Lincoln lost its way’
That said, I suspect that two other factors unrelated to styling also helped to build Lincoln’s cachet: The Continental’s higher price relative to the Cadillac DeVille gave it an aura of exclusivity. In addition, an aggressive effort to improve Lincoln’s manufacturing quality may have helped to erase the bad taste of the 1958 models’ problem-plagued launch (Bonsall, 1981).
Lincoln’s design compromises were understandable
The 1961-63 Lincoln’s greatest significance may be that it kept alive the brand during a period of cost-cutting at the Ford Motor Company (Severson, 2009). Jim and Cheryl Farrell (2023) reported that Ford executive Robert McNamara had called for discontinuing the Lincoln. In retrospect, this was understandable in the wake of Ford’s financially disastrous late-50s attempt to invade the premium- and luxury-car markets.
Also see ‘1958-60 Lincoln: Failing to beat GM at its own game’
When McNamara’s proposal faced heavy pushback, he reluctantly agreed to one more production cycle but with a big caveat: The brand would only offer four-door models based upon the Thunderbird’s platform.
In light of Lincoln’s brush with death, we might forgive the awkward proportions of the Continental’s greenhouse that resulted from cost cutting. We might also look past the car’s excessive weight because it carried over major components from the previous generation.
In addition, I would cut Lincoln designers some slack for the rather austere styling of the 1961 models. Although it represented an unusually dramatic break from the sci-fi zaniness of that era, the Kennedy Continentals did evoke the relatively clean styling of the 1939-41 Continental and 1955-57 Continental Mark II.
The styling was both something old and something new
For example, the V-shaped fascia offered a clever contemporary interpretation of the first Continental. Meanwhile, the Mark II can be seen in the side and rear styling, such as the broughamesque C-pillar and wrap-around taillights.
What made the 1961 Continental a particularly interesting design was that it avoided going full retro. This included eschewing the iconic outboard spare tire hump on the 1956-57 Continental Mark II in favor of an ovoid rear-end treatment that hinted at the 1958-59 models.
Were the Kennedy Continentals too plain?
I go back and forth on this question. The uncreased side sheetmetal reminds me of a refrigerator, particularly in light colors that accentuate the car’s door openings.
One could argue that the 1966 reskinning was an improvement because it added a horizontal character line a few inches below the beltline. In addition, the longer and V-shaped rear end gave the Continental a less bulky appearance. That said, the overall look was less striking.
Also see ‘1964 Imperial could have been a better Lincoln Continental’
One could also point to the 1964 Imperial as better articulating key elements of the emerging brougham look that the US automakers embraced in the late-60s and early-70s. The Imperial was a cleaner design than its sci-fi predecessor but trafficked in gimmicks such as a fake spare tire on its rear deck.
What if the 1961 Lincoln had more body styles?
I have attempted to argue that for all of the accolades given to the 1961-63 Continental, it was still a heavily compromised design. And while we can appreciate the car’s exceptionally clean styling, it was also an opportunity missed.
The sleek and modern body design all but begged for a two-door hardtop, particularly if the wheelbase had been reduced a few inches behind the B-pillar for better proportions. Meanwhile, the four-door sedan’s greenhouse should have been pushed farther back, resulting in easier ingress and more rear-seat room. Below you can see how those body styles might have looked compared to the production four-door sedan.
And while we’re at it, how about a convertible design that did not compromise the trunk space of other body styles?
Instead, Ford minimized costs with a pair of four-door models. The sedan’s coupe-like greenhouse would prove to be a prescient idea but the market was clearly not ready for it. The sedan’s unnecessarily cramped accommodations helped to give downsizing a bad name.
Could a lighter car have been done on the cheap?
The above scenario of an expanded range of body styles could have plausibly helped Lincoln generate more sales in 1961-63. However, I think it would have been equally important to reduce the car’s excessive weight.
Also see ‘1963 Cadillac: The car that mainstreamed the brougham look’
The Ford Motor Company might have been able to afford a lighter Lincoln if it had been more closely based on the Thunderbird. Even though the two cars would begin to share a platform in 1961, the T-Bird was almost 1,000 pounds lighter than the Continental.
Why couldn’t the Lincoln could have been trimmed a bit more so it was closer to the T-Bird in width, wheelbase, length and weight?
Along the way, the unduly heavy 430 cubic-inch engine could have been relegated to an option — or even discontinued. The resulting Lincoln’s more “continental” specifications could have improved fuel consumption, performance and maneuverability.
Alas, bigger, glitzier and more powerful cars often prevailed at Ford even when the iconoclastic Robert McNamara was a dominant force.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted Oct. 6, 2021 and expanded on June 9, 2023 — with the most notable change being the addition of fake designs. Production figures and product specifications were from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006) and Gunnell (2002).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Ate Up With Motor; 2014. Commentator in “Classic Curbside Classic: 1962 Series 62 town Sedan — Don Draper’s Dream.” Curbside Classic. Posted 11:36 a.m., June 9.
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Bonsall, Thomas E.; 1981. The Lincoln Motorcar: Sixty Years of Excellence. Bookman Dan!, Baltimore, MD.
- Consumer Reports; 1963. “High-Priced Cars.” April issue: p. 184.
- Farrell, Jim and Cheryl; 2023. “Design of the 1961 Lincoln, Part I.” Dean’s Garage. Posted June 2.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Motor Trend; 1961. “Testing the luxury cars.” April issue: pp. 74-83. Posted at imperialclub.com.
- Severson, Aaron; 2009. “In the Continental Style: The 1961-1963 Lincoln Continental.” Ate Up With Motor. Posted March 1.
ADVERTISEMENTS & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Ford Thunderbird (1958, 1961); Lincoln (1959, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1966)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Cadillac (1961); Imperial (1964); Lincoln (1961, 1963)
Truly, the later coupe had better proportions. Could someome do a photochop out there to show a sedan with the passenger compartment stretched a few inches?
Agreed. A key factor is that Lincoln splurged by offering a distinctive greenhouse shape for the 1966 two-door hardtop.
I’d like to make a fake 1961-63 two-door Continental. Alas, my old Photoshop software no longer works and I can’t justify the high cost of the subscription-based newest version. However, a number of other folks have taken a crack at this idea.
My favorite is casey/artandcolour’s fake 1961 model (go here). If you haven’t been to his website before it’s a real treat. Casey has terrific illustration skills and has imagined some of the most intriguing counterfactuals on the Internet.
Artandcolour has not had much new content lately (go here for front page), but perhaps Casey would be inspired if more folks spent time at his website.
Thanks, Steve. That black one is perfect.
Frankly, this is somewhat unfair. Despite the sales disaster that wa the Edsel and the “BIG M”. for did expand production capacity in time to produce 400,000 Falcons in 1959-1960. Yes, as a now public company, Ford had to tighten their belts a bit and base the big Fords and Mercurys on the same underbody shell aft of the cowl. If one looks at the clay models for the 1961 Thunderbird, there was of black mockup coupe that McNamara allegedly chose to be the Lincoln, and allegedly the 1961 Rocket-bird was modified off that clay, too. Anything was better than the 1958-1960 Lincolns and Continentials. What is interesting is that there is no mention of the wheelbase expansion of 1964 and 1965, which increased the rear-seat leg room. Frankly, the 1961 through 1968 Lincolns were among the finest styled automobiles to ever leave Detroit (Wixom, MI, I believe). And, of course, the 1964-1966 Imperials were good, as they were a refinement of the 1961 Lincoln Continental by the same stylist, Elwood Engle.
The basic challenge with writing is that one must inevitably decide what to prune and what to leave out altogether. This story was about the 1961-63 Continental. I had already briefly discussed the 1964-65 models here and wanted to avoid being too repetitive — particularly since it didn’t really add to my basic argument.
I don’t particularly like the 1964-65 models. The flat side glass makes the cars look entirely too boxy (and why ditch curved glass just when the rest of the industry was switching to it?). I also prefer the 1961-63’s dashboard.
The 61-63 Continental had a slightly different “flavor” than the revamped 64-65 models.The original was more in tune with the upscale Thunderbird concept that it was going to be initially. My Dad had a ’63 Lincoln sedan, powder blue with the same delightful blue metallic leather as pictured in the article.
I was able to drive the car quite a bit, on long trips as well as around town. I loved the car, it had the aura of a close coupled sporty luxury sedan, think Facel Vega. The front seat had separate curved seatbacks divided by a pull down arm rest, similar to GM’s Astro Bench (one of my favorites!) It looked a bucket seat car from the outside. The back seat, nestled into the contoured package tray with the Lincoln emblem was like the coved seat of the Thunderbird, a fabulous detail. The rear seat leg room wasn’t overly generous but with the “coach door” it was very easy to enter and exit the rear compartment.
The curved side glass and the coupe-like formal roof, gave the feeling of a personal car, not a sedan. The very clean styling has to be seen in context, as in the photo comparing the ’63 sedan and ’61 Cadillac. The Lincoln was clean, modern and oh so classy. It should be called the Jacqueline Kennedy Lincoln, because it seemed so elegant and right for the new age of American history. These were special cars, and they made their drivers feel quite special. It’s a pity that Lincoln could never rise to these heights again.
Jose, I get what you mean. When I was around six years old I got to ride in a Continental and still vividly remember the experience. That car WAS special. And I still find the 1961-63 models more interesting than the Mark II even though they were more “mass market.” Nevertheless, my design eye is still bugged by the roofline’s proportions. And I’m disappointed that the car’s engineering didn’t live up to the potential of a smaller luxury car, both in terms of weight and roadworthiness. Yet this was the high-water mark for Lincoln — and, in key respects, for American luxury car design. Sigh.
Steve, I appreciate the observations about the 1961-1963 Lincolns. (I call them the Perry Mason Lincolns.) Compared to the 1961-1964 massive-look Cadillacs with their diminishing fins and fender skegs, and the over-wrought Imperials (until the ’64 restyle), the 1961-1963 Lincolns in my opinion set the styling template for the iconic American luxury car. Elwood Engle took his concept and applied it to the Imperial, and the clean, slab-sided Cadillacs of 1965-1968 had to be inspired by the 1961 Lincoln’s timeless look. Interestingly, I find the side profile of the 1961-1963 Lincolns slightly more appealing than the 1961-1963 Thunderbirds’ more rounded sides, although if one studies the blue 1961 T-bird coupe in the last photo, it appears that the front fender is thicker in profile than the Lincoln.
One observation about the 1961-1963 Lincoln and Thunderbird convertibles: I believe that the technology and engineering designs for the proposed Continental Mark II retractable hardtop that was adapted for the 1957-1959 Skyliners was modified and used for the convertible mechanism. (My uncle owned both a 1961 T-bird convertible and a 1962 Lincoln convertible. When the back-hinged decklid went vertical, there was almost always an audience. While the convertible top folded unlike the retractable, it still was nowhere near as conventional as that of a neighbor’s ’61 Ford Galaxie 500 Sunliner convertible process. I do not know when and if Ford changed the convertible top mechanicals after 1963, but the era of big full-size convertibles was beginning to draw to a close. After two flirtations with Cadillacs, a few Ford Galaxies and a Skyliner retractable, I remember the Raymond Burr Perry Mason best driving the cream-color 1961-1963 Lincoln convertibles in the original TV series.