~2,800 Mile 1964 Lincoln Continental

[bd94s10]

This '64 Lincoln Continental has ~2,800 miles. Pretty cool story behind it. It was also the '64 in the Lincoln commercial last summer!

https://youtu.be/4zfyj2hFcTA?si=vtJe_DIMuA2QiMa2

I made a shorter clip of it which you can watch here: https://www.instagram.com/p/CxwOcU7pBOh/

If you watch the full video (first link) the current owner Tim talks about why it has so low of miles. It has less than 2,000 when he purchased it.

Jason The Lincoln Addict

[LithiumCobalt]

Thank you for sharing the video. There is a thread here on the forum from long ago when Tim found this car and did the freshening on it. A very interesting read.

[TonyC]

I don't agree with the flat glass looking better. The curved glass was better...and the designers managed to make the right mods to return curved glass to '66 and beyond without sacrificing any head-room increases '64 had with the flat panes. The curved glass was the lasting design legacy of Virgil Exner...whom, by the way, Elwood Engel admired. I think, from what I had read over the years and inferred from the reading, the switch to flat glass was an attempt by Eugene Bordinat to take revenge on Engel (who already had gone to Chrysler to replace Exner), by doing something to sully the design without looking like he was doing something to sully the design. He used excuses to dictate the change to flat glass–i.e., cheaper, makes for more head room, doesn't alter the look of the car (the last of which Robert Thomas strongly disagreed with, by the way). He had previously submitted a '61 proposal to Ford–an evolution of the '58 design–and got approval to go to production. Then Engel's T-Bird concept came out of the basement and dazzled McNamara, resulting in Bordinat's approved design to be discarded in favor of Lincolnizing Engel's new design. Does that sound petty? Yes...but people can be petty, and I don't hold it beyond Bordinat any more than I'd hold it beyond Old Henry Ford himself. Luckily for us, flat glass was already on its way out of car designing, so '65 was the farthest that dictate could stretch. In fact, Ford was already behind the power curve in '65, when GM brought out its cars (Cadillac in particular) with curved side glass.

But one thing I really liked about this video was that not once was that over-clichéd phrase "suicide doors" uttered. Quite impressive, too, that it never rolled much more than 1,000 miles...though lack of use can be just as damaging as overuse or abuse. But, very nice restoration.

---Tony

[Lee]

I agree with you Tony, on the curved glass. It ruins the “tumblehome”. And there are plenty of panels on these cars that may appear flat at first glance, but all have graceful curves. The glass should be no exception, IMO. And that sharp kink at the sail panel just appears odd to my eye, in such close proximity to the smooth curve of where the “haunches” begin just below it.

Another original element that was lost forever (I think) in ‘64, was the way the windshield changed its curve at the top to more gracefully flow into the roof. It’s a sort of compound curve that must have been a production nightmare for LOF.

That’s all pretty nitpicky stuff, and I still think they were some of the best looking cars on the road for most of the 60’s. But it happens to all automobile lines…the first year design is the most cohesive, and subsequent model year changes can usually only detract from that*. Case in point: 1942 Lincoln Continental. How they managed to take that graceful design and turn it into a barge in just one year must have taken some serious effort.

*I absolve the third-year ‘65 Buick Riviera. That was the year they got sexy!

[TonyC]

Yes, I will admit to a tinge of nit-picking where the different years of clap-doors are concerned. They were true industry changers, no matter the year.

True about the '42, though. From what I read, massive-looking fronts were a styling fad at that time, kind of like fins in the following decade, and never really served a practical purpose. But that wasn't the only thing to plague the '42s, from what I read. The overly-bored 306 variant of the Zephyr V-12 proved itself to be too compromised to last, cylinder walls having become too thin to withstand regular use. Then, there was the LiquaMatic transmission option, which performed so poorly that cars fitted with it were refitted with the standard manual.

I will agree about the fine-tweaking of the third-year Riv. That wasn't the only time, either, that Buick got better with its facelifts: The '79 Electra was a major improvement over the '77 in the looks department, with its taillight treatment, its grillwork, and the Electra emblem given a jewel-case refinement. In fact, for that year, I'd choose an Electra over a Lincoln in the looks department; if memory serves, I did, when my grand was looking for another used car to supplement and eventually replace the ones we had. Yet, any literature on the first full-size downsizing of GM cars will focus most of its attention on the '77, like one article in Collectible Automobile did 4 years ago; it barely touched on the facelifts of '78 and '79, even showing no more than one picture of a '79, which really ground my gears. I should've given CA a piece of my mind on that.

One more side note, directed to the owner of the car showcased here: If he happens to be in need of a starboard-side muffler for his car, I have a perfectly-good spare '64 muffler. I got it several years ago for Frankenstein only to realize it was too short to use, but it's in excellent shape and ready to use on any '64 or '65 Lincoln that may be in need of one. I just couldn't discard it if it could be useful to someone else.

---Tony

[Dan Szwarc]

I have pictures of this 64 Lincoln when it had 1000 miles.

[TonyC]

That should be cool to see!

---Tony

[Dan Szwarc]

1019 Mile 1964 Continental

And the article Tim Wilson wrote in 2006:
https://www.thelincolnforum.net/phpbb3/ ... 37#p117337

[Mike]

I watched that YouTube video the other day.
I agree the flat windows are like taking a step back.
It probably is the best example of a suicide door one. A great example to look over if anyone is restoring one.

[frasern]

I thought he was referring to the squared corner rather than the curvature, however either way I prefer the earlier design. Clearly though, '62 was the finest year of the series!
Thanks for the video Jason, I love the survivors.

[Lee]

Fraser, I can't argue with that! But I still like the grille of the '61 best. And I often wish for the additional rear seat room in a 63 (but they should have left the antenna where it was).

I've sometimes wondered why such a big redesign for the grille in '62, and I don't recall ever reading a definitive answer. My own theory was that it was too similar to the Thunderbird, and some group thought Lincoln needed it's own readily identifiable "face".

[Mike]

I've read the grille change was because of the Thunderbird similarity.

I prefer the 61 or 63 grille better then 62 but never did like the 63 trunk lid too much. And could go either way on the antenna.

At least 63 gas a proper 4bbl carburetor

[TonyC]

A 1991 article on the development history of the early clap-door Lincoln stated that the reason for the change was to appease the engineers; they complained about the high-bar bumper style because it required too much metal behind the grille to keep it held up. It should be interesting for somebody with access to a '61 and a '62 to remove the bumpers from both cars and compare the mounting setups, to see whether that statement holds some truth to it.

If true, one would then argue why that was retained on the Thunderbirds for three years. My guess on that is because the Thunderbird was a significantly smaller car; and despite its status above other Ford-Division products, it still was a Ford-Division product and not the prestige Lincoln label (again despite the shared factory and basic construction between the two cars). Ergo, any construction problems would then be dressed up or outright overlooked. Just a guess...but, an educated one, I think.

Side note, I do concur with Mike about the '63's rear-end detailing. I could not understand why the stylists decided to make a pattern totally dissimilar to the pattern of the front grille, when the original theme was to have the same pattern on both ends.

---Tony

[bd94s10]

1019 Mile 1964 Continental

And the article Tim Wilson wrote in 2006:
https://www.thelincolnforum.net/phpbb3/ ... 37#p117337

Thanks Dan!!!!