Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Moderator: Dan Szwarc

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby RMAENV » Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:34 pm

Hi all,

Kent I measured per your pic as you did an I am out 35 3/4 from the lip of the firewall to the far lip of the tank so my motor is 1/2" forward of yours. I was able to get Anthony on the phone and he did the measurements on his 66 vert that appear to be identicle to all of yours. Since he bought the same angle gauge as I have (recommendation from the one I used for pinion angle for one of my other cars) we deciced to measure the engine pitch on both of the cars. Both engines are pitched up in the front 7 degrees measured on the passenger valve cover at the tank. We both recall the 7 degree number being factory correct (everyone chime in here!). So... This would indicate that I do not have a collapased, or disintegrated motor mount and since I have no engine movement I don't have a broken one either.

So... only 2 possibilites I see here is either the wrong mounts are in the car or it was a factory defect unless someone else has an idea. Next time the car is on the lift I guess we will inspect and wire brush the motor mounts looking for part numbers on them. Or, leave it as my car is one of the unique ones off the assembly line of the pre computer age dinosaur era since there appears to be no more ideas. It is difficult for me to believe that the motor mounts were replaced in this car with less than 50k miles as the 1st owner was in his 60's when it was purchased new and then owned by the Shriners who put 5k (per their title) on it in 20 years using it as a parade car but I guess strainger things have happened.
Rob
1966 Lincoln Convertible (White/Black)
1957 Chevy Bel Air Resto-Mod (Anthricite/Black)
2009 Challenger SRT 6.1 Hemi (Hemi Orange Pearl/Black)
2012 Expedition EL (White Titanium Tricoat/Charcoal)
User avatar
RMAENV
Addicted to Lincolns
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:16 am
Location: Yardley, PA

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby JAB » Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:47 pm

Here are power headrests on a 67 Lincoln 4 door. Was this a 67 only option? Was it rare? Also, I don't understand the seat control on the passenger side. I thought the power headrest would have a simple up/down switch, but this appears to be the 8 way seat switch. Is this possibly a bucket seat? Or can the passenger control the bench seat and headrest?

John Brewer
Attachments
power headrests 1967 Lincoln.jpg
John Brewer
Brewer Classic Lincoln
303 562-8368
JAB
Lincoln Guru
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby jsanford » Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:55 am

John,

The reclining passenger seat with power headrest was only available in '67. The passenger recline could be ordered on the twin comfort lounge seats, which feature four-way power adjustment, or on the six-way power bench seat. The car you pictured has the six-way bench. The switch pictured only has two switches, one to release the seat back latch to recline and the other to operate the headrest up and down, there is no center seat adjustment knob like on the driver side six-way switch.

Jeremy
LCOC Western Region Webmaster & Northern CA Activities Coordinator.
User avatar
jsanford
Lincoln-ally Insane
 
Posts: 3210
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby JAB » Wed Jul 13, 2011 7:35 am

Jeremy,
Thank you for the information. I will be looking at the car today, and will see if those functions work.

John Brewer
John Brewer
Brewer Classic Lincoln
303 562-8368
JAB
Lincoln Guru
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby Dan Szwarc » Wed Jul 13, 2011 11:00 am

I have an MPC order for Nick that will ship today. Sorry for the delay.
User avatar
Dan Szwarc
Site Admin
 
Posts: 28472
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2000 12:01 am
Location: Southfield, MI

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby LithiumCobalt » Wed Jul 13, 2011 1:23 pm

Dan Szwarc wrote:I have an MPC order for Nick that will ship today. Sorry for the delay.


No problem, Dan. Thanks!
Nick
Image
Current: 2007 Town Car, 2012 MKZ AWD
WANTED: 1969 sedan, 70-71 Mark III, 77 Continental Town Car w/opera window delete
User avatar
LithiumCobalt
Lincoln-ally Insane
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Fort Wayne, IN

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby KULTULZ » Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:24 am

JAB wrote:
The vinyl armrest pads on the 1966 have a crisp edge along the perimeter of the top of the pad. The 67 pad has a rounded edge around the top perimeter. The overall dimensions of the armrest pad in each year is identical. It should be noted that the part number for both pieces is identical, so it is possible that both styles ended up on 1966 or 1967. In all the cars I have looked at, the "crisp" version appears to be in the 66 and the rounded in the 67.

John Brewer


Just a note-

I.D. Nos (casting- stamping-inked) identify only that one component of an assembly. It cab be used multi-year with additional differring appearing components to make an updated component for a later model run.
Not A Current LINCOLN Owner -

- Just An Admirer...

MEL DIVISION 1958-1960
User avatar
KULTULZ
TLFer for Life
 
Posts: 7946
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Between Lost And Found

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby KULTULZ » Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:43 am

RMAENV wrote:
OK guys I know this thread has been beaten to death but I just noticed one difference today. A friend of mine was working on a '67 2-door and I noticed that the front passenger side plug wire is completely exposed allowing you to change the plug with a socket and rachet. On my '66 vert the back side of the battery box covers the 1st plug on the passenger side so you need to put a socket on the plug and use an open end wrench on the socket as there is no room for the head of the rachet. Even if you could get the rachet head in there, taking the plug out would not allow you to get the ratchet head out.

So the difference is that the battery box on the 67 was moved forward about 2 inches.


The 66/68 CONV uses plates on the engine mount insulators to move the engine forward whereas the sedans do not. Do not know exact reason but must have been done for some clearance issue(s), akin to the LINC SPECIFIC C6 bell that had to clear HVAC on firewall.

My computer is down and I will post pics when back up.

EDIT/CORRECTION-

My thoughts on the engine mounting plates used on the CONV only were incorrect. Read on-

toddallen 28 DEC 2011 wrote:
I know I am butting in ....no doubt Kultulz is the engine pro, but this is a Lincoln specific question

If your engine is 1.5 inches forward, it probaby has to do with the motor mount mounting plate that are on a convertible body that are moved forward from the sedan cars by about 1.5 inches. When installing motor mounts in the earlier convertible Lincolns, the motor mounts have to have an adapter plate that moves the engine back to the original position (this is just a steel plate with 4 holes in it). This was done on convertibles only to help dampen vibration due to the fact that the covertible body is less rigid since there is no top for structural support. I imagine that your car has the convertible mounting spots (moved forward), but someone left off the motor mount plates used on a convertible (to move it back to the proper postition). Could have even been a screw up at the factory.

Look at this picture below (stolen from this board) to see the revised position of a convertible motor mount, to install the proper motor mount, one needs the flat steel adapter plates (not shown) bolted to the mount itself that will move the engine back. The actual motor mounts for a sedan and convertible are the same.

If you want a picture of the adapter plate I can go home and scan an image.

Image


Knowledgeable people here and I still find myself on a learning curve... :D
Last edited by KULTULZ on Thu Dec 29, 2011 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Not A Current LINCOLN Owner -

- Just An Admirer...

MEL DIVISION 1958-1960
User avatar
KULTULZ
TLFer for Life
 
Posts: 7946
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Between Lost And Found

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby KULTULZ » Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:58 am

Dan Szwarc wrote:
Not only did you post a picture of the outside mirror brushing for 67, but a RH mirror to boot, which to my knowledge, was not available in 1966.


Dan,

The RH mirror is not listed under Basic PN 17682. But there is a Mirror Kit (17696) in the Accessories Section (M1) that has a RH kit listed. My M1 microfiche card has a smudge there on the year(s). Can you show the MPC to ID the years the kit was released for?

My thoughts... :| ... are that a RH mirror was available as an option (towing package), possibly was also released as a Service Part but may heve been discontinued due to low sales. If one needed a service replacement, the kit had to be ordered.
Not A Current LINCOLN Owner -

- Just An Admirer...

MEL DIVISION 1958-1960
User avatar
KULTULZ
TLFer for Life
 
Posts: 7946
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Between Lost And Found

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby RMAENV » Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:03 pm

Thanks Kultulz. If that is the case the 67 I used in the pics was a sedan and mine is a convertible. Hope you get your puter up soon.
Rob
1966 Lincoln Convertible (White/Black)
1957 Chevy Bel Air Resto-Mod (Anthricite/Black)
2009 Challenger SRT 6.1 Hemi (Hemi Orange Pearl/Black)
2012 Expedition EL (White Titanium Tricoat/Charcoal)
User avatar
RMAENV
Addicted to Lincolns
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:16 am
Location: Yardley, PA

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby JAB » Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:58 am

OK, we missed one major difference with the seats.
1966- Seat stainless trim- There is a stainless steel trim piece that starts at the lower outside corner of the seat, wraps the outside edge of the seat, continuing up and over the top edge of the backrest, wrapping down the interior outside edge of the seat.
1967- stainless starts at the same spot but finishes at the upper outside edge of the seatback.

The 66 seat stainless trim detail is similar to that used in all 61-65 Lincolns.

First photo is a 67, second photo is a 66.

John Brewer
Brewer Classic Lincoln
303 562-8368
Attachments
1966%20Lincoln%20Continental%20004%20(Medium).jpg
lincoln-continental-convertible-1967_11.jpg
John Brewer
Brewer Classic Lincoln
303 562-8368
JAB
Lincoln Guru
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby TonyC » Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:57 pm

Okay, all--there is another difference between the two years that I had failed to mention...and after going through the entire thread, I'm surprised nobody else did, either. Then again, it's a difference that isn't visible.

It involves the inside latches of the front doors. They look the same, but they don't exactly operate the same. Sure, they both have to be pulled back to open the door, but the difference is when the doors are locked: In '66, the latch and lock are integrated in the tried-and-true Ford tradition used in prior years and from at least '73 to today--the locked door will automatically unlock and open when you pull the handle. In '67, that is not the case--for safety reasons (to appease Ralph Nader, no doubt), Lincoln adopted the GM method, requiring you to unlock the door first before you could open it. To my knowledge, that GM-type setup stayed on through the end of the Suicides, then Ford went back to its old setup in the '70s (not sure exactly what year, but I know for certain that it was restored to the automatic unlock setup by M-Y '73).

I remember this from my grand's '67; the front doors would not open with the inside handle if they were locked. If anyone has a '67 with front doors that will unlock themselves and open when the handle is pulled, then a prior owner had the latches swapped.

Note that this difference is only to the front doors. Obviously, all rear doors had to be unlocked first before they could be opened (always been the case with the rears).

---Tony
"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet, just because there is a picture with a quote next to it." (Abraham Lincoln, 1866)
"Question Authority!"

1966 Continental Sedan, affectionately known as "Frankenstein" until body restoration is done (to be renamed "General Sherman" on that event)
User avatar
TonyC
TLFer for Life
 
Posts: 9172
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Fort Riley, Kansas

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby Dan Szwarc » Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:07 am

I don't have a 67, but are you absolutely sure, Tony, that 67 required unlocking the doors before trying to open them? My 1969 Lincoln did not require this and my 1970 Marquis certainly does not.

Any 67 or 68 owners out there who can comment?
User avatar
Dan Szwarc
Site Admin
 
Posts: 28472
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2000 12:01 am
Location: Southfield, MI

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby NickG » Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:01 pm

My '67 front doors will not open with the handle if the door is locked. I'd prefer the other method, but I've gotten used to opening the lock before grabbing the handle. Nick
1967 Continental Convertible
User avatar
NickG
Lincoln Maniac
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2001 1:01 am
Location: St. Petersburg, FL

Re: Authenticity to the Extreme: 66 vs. 67

Postby Dan Szwarc » Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:54 pm

Thanks for the information about your 67. I learn something new every day.

Now if I could just stop forgetting something else, I'd be getting ahead.
User avatar
Dan Szwarc
Site Admin
 
Posts: 28472
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2000 12:01 am
Location: Southfield, MI

PreviousNext

Return to 1966-69 LCOC Authenticity Manual Update

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest