(first posted 7/28/2012) What exactly is the American Dream? Was it easier to answer that question fifty years ago? If you were seven years old, and had just arrived from Austria at the same time the 1961 Thunderbird first appeared, the answer is definitely yes. What more was there to aspire to then this?
Seeing fifty ’61 Thunderbird convertibles in Kennedy’s Inaugural Parade only cemented the image. Only in America could one could realistically aspire to own a car that actually looked like a Dream Car in a car show, one that would glamorously jet you away from the humdrum of ordinary life, if not exactly rocket you to the moon. Yes, in the fall of 1960, Ford was building my dream. And then I was rudely awakened.
Just three years later, both the stunning 1961-1963 “Bullet Bird” and Kennedy were gone. The squared-off, fussy 1964 T-Bird confirmed my defection to the Church of St. Mark of Excellence with its holy trinity of 1963 Riviera, Grand Prix and Corvette Sting Ray. My brief childhood love affair with Ford was mostly over, especially after one too many vacation trips jammed into our black stripper ’62 Fairlane. In my dream driveway, the T-Bird was replaced by an ever changing palette of GM’s finest. The American Dream has never been a static affair.
Was 1961 Ford’s finest hour, at least for a very long time to come? In my book, yes. My feelings for Ford’s late fifties styling has been well documented, and that extended to the 1958 – 1960 “Square Bird”, regardless of how revolutionary a car it was. They impressed me on some level, the interior, mainly, but I though their front ends looked like a hideous creature from the depths of the ocean. I guess the public didn’t quite agree with me, because the Square Bird outsold the Bullet Bird, right through its last year. Everyone’s dream is different.
The highlight of my fling with the 61-63 T-Bird came when we were on vacation in NY, and I saw a red Sports Roadster in the flesh for the first time (there were none in Iowa City). Available for 1962 and 1963, the fiberglass cover over the rear seats was meant to evoke the original two-seat T-Bird. Of course it was a bit ridiculous, but don’t tell that to an eleven year-old agog, or the proud driver.
It evoked the classic roadsters of the thirties, with their long tails and no pretense of practicality. And it was about as sporty as they were, but who cared? The T-Bird had long ago ceded that role to the Corvette, while it was laughing all the way to the bank. The big Birds outsold the ‘Vette by almost ten to one. McNamara made the right call when he backed the big change to four-passenger Birds in 1958. And the T-Bird practically owned the market segment it created, for way longer than GM would have liked, despite everything they threw at it.
Has anyone thought about how the poor Mercury dealers felt during the T-Bird’s heyday? What was Ford doing selling such an upscale and exclusive car anyway, especially when it sported the optional (and popular) Landau package? Sucks to be them, then and more recently. Mercury was doomed anyway; Ford just didn’t do the multiple brand thing well, and at least they’ve finally embraced that reality now. But where’s today’s Dream Car by Ford?
(odd color artifacts due to a malfunctioning camera)
Looks like someone else is wondering what happened to the American dream.
The 1961 Thunderbird might well have looked very different than it turned out. Elwood Engel’s design proposal (above) lost out to the winning one by Alex Tremulis. Look familiar? Ford President Robert McNamara ran into it by accident, liked it, and had it turned into the 1961 Lincoln. That was convenient for production reasons too, allowing both cars to share aspects of their unibody innards.
Just as well it turned out as it did; I deeply admire the ’61 Lincoln Continental, but it somehow lacks the Dream Car quality of the ‘Bird. Maybe because it actually was a Ford? Tremulis was a brilliant and eccentric character, having designed the Tucker earlier in his career.
The most dramatic and original feature of the Bullet Bird is the sharp blade that serves as its belt line. It rises from the steeply sloping front end, that was way to un-American for Americans, lacking a big open mouth. It may well be why the Bullets sold less than both the Square birds before it and the Flair birds after it. I’m sure you’re not surprised when I reiterate that it’s by far the best of the bunch: clean, original, (mostly) lacking the clutter of group-think throwing too many styling gimmicks at it.
The blade does double duty as my favorite door handle ever. Maybe the least ergonomic ever. Don’t the doors open telepathically?
Nothing’s ever been done just quite like this, although the ’61 Conti does give it a run for the money. Gives the term “knife edge design” new meaning.
Mustn’t neglect the Bullet’s red-hot jet exhaust with after-burner nozzles.
Sadly, there was only an internal combustion engine at work under the hood. I have vivid memories of gazing into the T-Bird’s engine room as a kid hanging out in the work bays at the Ford dealership. I always felt sorry for the mechanics that had to work on them; they were the most crowded of any car back then. The giant flat air cleaner and the separate tank for the side-flow radiator were distinctive, concessions to the tight clearances around the 390 CID FE motor. Rated at 300 (gross) hp, it moved the ‘Bird well enough, but hardly with any genuine thunder. This was a porky fowl (4,000+ lbs) , several hundred pounds more than a bigger Galaxie. Their unibodies didn’t necessarily save weight, having been designed in the pre-CAD era. “Better to overbuild than not”, that was the Wixom mantra.
And no one is going to accuse these Thunderbirds of having any actual sporting qualities; any pretensions to that were fully abandoned when the format went to a four-passenger personal luxury coupe.
Their dynamic qualities were best left to the realm of dreams, or movies (these two shots are from “Palm Springs”). No, that’s not diesel soot, but an FE at full chat, in the pre-EPA era.
And watch where you drive that thing; these cars probably set an all-time low for clearance, which only got worse as the springs sagged in old age.
Who cared about such mundane matters, when you’re ensconced in that cockpit, the swing away steering wheel back where it belongs, and piloting down that glassy smooth new pavement of the just-built interstate? The Thunderbird’s interior was at least as enchanting for me as the exterior. When you’re used to being packed into our 62 Fail-lane sedan with too many siblings with whom skin contact was not exactly desirable, just the idea of of bucket seats separated by that huge expanse of console was dreamy.
Now that I really think about it, that may just have been the biggest attraction of the Thunderbird to me. It represented true freedom… from being sandwiched between a pesky big brother and a sweet but sticky little one. All my dream cars back then had bucket seats, even the lowly Falcon Futura. My brief infatuation with a neighbor’s ’58 Impala coupe ended with the front bench seat; what! no buckets? I arrived in America exactly at the right moment: the beginning of the bucket seat era. And the T-Bird played a key role in ushering it in.
All that glitters is not gold, but the Bullet’s pointy and bladed front end is gold in my book.
That hardly applies to the Landau’s padded top and ridiculous bars. Maybe the Great Brougham Epoch actually started in 1962. And take off those horrendous trim pieces slapped on the door. Have you no shame? No wonder Bullets are popular with customizers; a great shape that just needs a bit of cleaning up.
I had a fleeting thought when I saw this Bird: maybe I need to act on my childhood dream?
No; what I need is a new dream. Good night.
Paul, you’ve captured the spirit that was Detroit, early 60’s style with this story. Aside from the T Bird and Mustang of this era, it seemed that Ford would spend the rest of the decade chasing GM in engineering and design. That competition was healthy for both companies, the result being some great cars……and some not so great cars. Today I no longer see that hatred for the Ford or the Chevy or the Mopar like there was in the 1960’s. I miss that era. And I especially miss the Detroit icons of that era like Iaccoca, Henry Fort II, Arkus-Duntov, Delorean, Cole, Townsend, Teague. I often wonder where are our home grown Detroit leaders of today are……….
The Thunderbird represented where America was heading…….a supersonic, space age looking personal luxury chariot for our new superhighways into the future. Nowadays, as I look at a Korean built Chevy at the local dealership or some other vehicle built with content made in other countries I wonder where we are again heading…….and I wonder about what we once made with our own hands and willpower…….
I agree, this is the best generation T-bird. I was a bit disappointed that you didn’t mention any pricing info so we could tell just how (un)obtainable this car was for the average buyer.
I was always surprised that Mercury didn’t get it’s own version in the early days.
NADAguides.com says base price of the ’61 T-Bird was $4170 for the hardtop, $4637 for the convertible. I’m sure they were optioned up past that as a rule.
My folks wanted a new T-Bird convertible real bad in the fall of 1960, but they settled for a well-optioned black Galaxie Sunliner convertible, base $2963. It was a plenty cool car too.
I always wondered about that, now that I’ve looked it up I can see why they chose the Sunliner.
I’d take this era’s Birds over Squares or Glamours. A connie like the red one, from whatever year ditches the hash marks on the doors.
The 390 really doesn’t seem like the right motor. 5.0 EFI or EcoBoost? 🙂
Michael wrote:
“The Thunderbird represented where America was heading…….a supersonic, space age looking personal luxury chariot for our new superhighways into the future.”
I think Paul’s references to dreams are a reminder that that future was mostly a mirage. Still, I wouldn’t mind a little more airiness, both literally and metaphorically, in the styling of our modern correctmobiles.
C’mon Paul, buy it! You only live once, and you NEED this car…
I cannot believe I was so wrong. For some reason I don’t remember Ford making any Tbirds from 1961 until the mid eighties. Try as I might all I can conjure up would be too bloated and underachieving for Ford to have used that name.
Yeah, ridiculous is the word for that vinyl top and landau irons. That’s pretty strange to tack those brougham styling elements onto a T-Bird with afterburner taillights. What, a Brougham Space Ship? The two styles simply don’t mesh.
Totally agree, it’s a horse-drawn spaceship. Like Capt. Imperial I’ll have that unadorned red convertible please. So hot.
Landau irons and vinyl roofs were the gateway drugs to full Brougham addiction. First step to the seventies LTDs that damn near killed Ford again.
Why has no one Mentioned …Was this A Special “Monaco Edition” celebrating Princess Grace? in 1963?
I believe the official name was “Limited Edition Landau.” It appears there is an owner’s nameplate on the console – very cool. Not that I ever saw one of the Landaus or Sports Roadsters growing up in small town midwest. Now I get to drool over them at car shows or sometimes on the streets in LA (quite a few Roadsters around).
The first big auto show I went to with my Dad was in the fall of 1960 and both the new 61 Continentals and Thunderbirds were featured – I thought I had died and gone to heaven, though my Dad ended up buying two new 61 Falcons, one with a metal plate where the radio should have gone (gas mileage was his buzzword that year).
One of our neighbors got a new 61 T-Bird and I lived for the minute they flew down the country road past our house in it. I liked every T-Bird built from 55 through 65 but my favorites are the 61-63 and 64-65 (we had a 65 so it is my #1 – I thought the styling changes on the 66 made the car look heavier, especially the grille, and I never cared for full-width tailights.)
The bullet-nosed Birds were featured in 77 Sunset Strip and Perry Mason (Paul Drake drove one – and later a 64) and I never missed an episode. They were quintessential mid-century cool and glamour. Jim Wright’s September 62 Motor Trend road test of a 62 red Sports Roadster described the car thusly:
“Of course, when one is buying prestige, a lot of basic things can be easily overlooked. Who cares if the car has a large price tag, is grossly overweight, offers less than average performance (even with 300 hp), will consistently deliver horrible gas mileage, at times handles like a land-locked whale and suffers from an almost complete lack of usable storage space?….In spite of what we consider to be faults, we wouldn’t have the T-Bird any other way – it’s the only car around that can make even the lowest peon (like a road tester) look like a million bucks behind its steering wheel.”
Yes it is. All the rest of these had ribbed aluminum in the interior everywhere that this one has wood. Everyone should relax and get over the padded top and landau bars. This is the most awesome of this model of T-Bird ever. It’s kind of bizarre that it was out there on a lot. Oh wait it looks like it doesn’t have AC.
Yes! You’ve captured everything I love about this car, the best of all T-Birds for me. Engel’s design, too formal to be a T-Bird, is the iconic Lincoln. Brilliant, crazy Tremulis somehow transformed it into a fluid rocket ship. He took the essence of the round taillight idea and carried it throughout in a clean integrated shape.
Space Age design was American optimism and faith in the future. The Next Frontier. It was far too full of itself and turned to ashes later, but what a wonderful world for this Sputnik child.
I think we have a major milestone here. Is this the first car with an integrated and flush dashboard-console? This car’s interior is the standard form for all cars now. Square Bird had buckets and a big console, but tucked under the conventional dash. Also I love the rocketship tubular feature built into the interior’s sides.
1961 was Ford’s pinnacle, I agree. Sensible Falcon, super-sharp and elegant Ford, and this dreamboat. Too bad Robert McNamara didn’t stay in the car business.
A nit to correct here, jets are internal combustion engines too. Sadly, only pistons under this hood.
Mike, I think you might be right about that integration of dash and console. I thought perhaps the 60 Chrysler 300F was the first – it had such a beautiful interior with a front to back console that provided an integrated look – but when I looked at the pictures, the console is tucked under the dash as you describe the interior of the Square Bird.
The console not only flows into the dashboard but then onto the door panels. The instruments float in front of that under the padded dash. The 1961 Lincoln, only with squared instruments and padded dash and no console is another version of this idea.
All these many decades later and some cars integrate the console and dash, and some integrate the dash and doors, but I don’t think any other than maybe some exotic integrate everything.
The 1993 Chrysler LH sedans did integrate dash, doors and console. Others probably did too, but it was the first that occurred to mind, and came over thirty years later.
At the risk of being hit by verbal flamethrowers, I like the vinyl top and landau irons. To me, it makes for a really interesting visual, and breaks up what would be red overkill on the roof pillars. I agree though that this was the finest era of T-Birds from a styling perspective.
You’re covering all my neighboorhood cars! *snert*
It’s a beauty in person. Me and my friend Rob spent a few minutes looking at it yesterday. I really like the interior. Excellent write up, as usual.
The ’63 Chrysler Turbine Car always reminded me of the Bullet Bird to me. No surprise since Engel had defected to Chrysler and directed its styling.
It reminds me of a Bullet Bird too, but one that is going backwards.
You’re hardly the first to make that association either. When it was new, some critic referred to the Chrysler Turbine as the “Engel-bird”.
While I like the Bullet Bird well enough I actually prefer the Square Birds. Come on they have to be much faster they have 3 times more rockets…at least the 60
I have to agree with you on this one. This era T-birds is one of my favorite cars. Just epitome of style in my opinion. I too have always love the door handles but my favorite part of the car is the cockpit. I love how the dash flows in to the door panels and into the console to surround you.
There was on at the pull-a-part a while back and I had to sit in it and imagine it was 1962 and I was some business tycoon.
Never understood the Bird. Not quite a Ford, not a Lincoln or Mercury…where’s it’s home? Whose car IS it?
The original T-Bird format was, IMHO, the winner; although I have no great love for the 1955 Ford. Had they been able to carry the format forward a dozen years, a mini-Me 1966 LTD with low suspension and a hot engine option…that would have relegated the Mustang to chick-car status and indication of paycheck deficiency.
Alas, Robert McNamara arrived, with all his Puritanical obnoxiousness. The Thunderbird had to seat four or die…and here’s’ where we wound up.
On an evolutionary dead-end.
Was it more out of place than the Corvette in a Chevrolet dealership?
As for evolutionary dead-end, I dare say Ford would be happy with one that ran for another 25 or so years! Having said that I can’t imagine buying a post ’57 Thunderbird, although this era are nice to look at.
Well, McNamara’s feeling about the Thunderbird was that it should make money, which the four-seater did and the two-seater really didn’t (although it was a tremendously effective promotional tool).
I was also going to comment that the decision of taking the rejected design and making it a Lincoln was a master-stroke, combined with the move to the 4-seat T-bird surely one of the best things Ford ever did.
When I visited my grandparents in the early 80s, I used to love going through my Grandad’s National Geographic magazines from the 50s-80s. The ads therein for the T-Bird were among my favourites – even in the early 80s the cars still looked cool, very smooth, very rocket-shippy. When my grandparents decided to get rid of all the NatGeos, I snapped them up and (carefully!) removed all the car ads, which are now housed nicely in a binder – ready to take me back to the 80s and the 60s 🙂
Id love to see that!
These are my favorite Birds too, although the 63 with the creases and hash marks on the doors are my least favorite of the series. The 61 was the cleanest, no side trim other than the 4 spears on the rear flank. I also never cared for the Landau model. The 61 was chosen as the Indianapolis 500 pace car that year.
A great perspective on this car. This really was a car people drooled over. One sucked me in years later when I fell for a 61 hardtop that was much rougher then I had any business buying. The interiors of these were fabulous places to be. The aluminum trim all over the console that slowed smoothly into the dash, then onto the doors and back. And you are right – these things were LOW cars.
My only peeve with these is the way virtually everybody with a convertible has bought a repro tonneau cover to turn it into a Sports Roadster.
Even this weekend as I chase my own American dream, moving from Gallup, NM to Tohatchi, NM with my new wife to be closer to the school that I have been made principal of; I am mindful of the way cars still fit into our American dream. Moving into a district owned property (the town is on reservation land and you can’t just buy a house – as a white man like me) my parking space will be limited. I still dream of a certain ’67 Mustang but I also dream of a big old American sedan.
That Thunderbird is gorgeous and to me the 60s Thunderbirds are the best.
“But where’s today’s Dream Car by Ford?”
If a 600+ HP Shelby GT500 isn’t dreamy enough, how about a Raptor or a SHO?
But if you mean a Show Car brought to life, there’s the Flex. With the EB3.5 it’s performance nothing to sneeze at. And like the 60s T-Birds it is equally comfortable with the country club set.
To me, the drivable Dream Car evokes a sense that you’re driving the car of the future. That may be about technology, but it’s definitely about looks. None of the vehicles that you mentioned evoke that feeling to me.
The Ford Flex is not comparable to the Bullet-bird at all. The Flex may be a comfortable and efficient people-hauler (which the T-bird is not) but to look at it’s just another box on wheels. A Dream Car? Maybe to soccer-moms.
Dreams, like esthetics, are different to everyone. The Fairlane Show Car was brought mostly intact as the Flex. It’s a very clever and stylish (and polarizing) box/station wagon.
Is it swoopy and futuristic? Oh hell no! Well, the future may look more practical and boxy to some. It does have panache. Ford has kept it around not because of sales (only so-so) but because it sells well optioned and to iconoclastic affluent non Ford buyers. Not soccer moms per se.
It’s been named a future collectible along with the Viper and Solstice (and 96 Sebring convertible ?)
http://www.autosahora.com/en/la-auto-show/2009/12/14/ford-flex-and-coming-collectible
i hope the american dream never dies,its one of the only places in the world that if you have a good attitude ,work hard ,give back ..you could change your life forever and live the american dream..lovely……Arnold schwartzenneger arrived in america in 68 with 20 dollars and his gym bag as soon as he started earning thease t birds were the first car he bought as he said it was his dream car…anything is possible
Paul:
I am 62 yrs old and seeing this Tbird brought tears to my eyes. This car pictured (white) was an exact duplicate, color, body, fender skirts, landau roof and S design on roofsides rear, of my very first car.
My Tbird had a Ford blue air breather with large white block letters 390cu.in. with crossed checkered flags. The valve covers were also ford blue and had a Rochester 4 bbl carb, later replaced wth a Holley 4 bbl., had fuel feed problems, acted like it was starving for gas.
I loved that car so much. I could tear the tires off of it with no problems. The only thing I didn’t like was the weight, well over 4300 lbs. My research on the car said that this model was 315 hp 390 ci.in. There were police interceptor 390 c.i. engines back then with much more hp, but now not sure what was in mine seeing the color of your engine photo.
The police interceptors had Holley 4bbl.carb back then. Maybe someone could add light to this.
I sold the car in 72 for little to nothing, and have resented it ever since. Like most guy’s their first car will always be remembered. Mine was a sweetheart. Thank you for the flash back Paul. “Z”
Z, My pleasure. And the last time I drove by there, it was still for sale!
My son washing our newly aquired 1963 Hardtop.
That’s a beauty George! !!!!!!!!!
Paul, you captured the era perfectly. The ’61-63 Thunderbirds were by far my favorite version. It’s amazing how many great looking vehicles came into being in the early sixties: Beside the Thunderbird, the Pontiac Gran Prix and Buick Rivera, the Studebaker Avanti and Hawk GT, the Corvette Sting Ray and the Lincoln Continental. It was the last era of unbridled creativity before reality set in–Ralph Nader and safety issues, fuel economy standards, etc. I don’t think we will ever see an era like that again.
Crash safety and economy and emissions have nothing to do with any of that.
My favorite as well! Especially the ’63 Sports Roadster. I only sat in these when I was a kid dropping by car lots. Not sure there’s enough headroom for me with the top up since. I sat in a ’64 flare Bird a while back and had to stoop down since my head was brushing against the roof. If I had the money, I would definitely by one and only drive it with the top down in a warmer climate than I live in. Definitely a dream car that suggested soaring possibilities.
If the roof on the car is Rose Beige, this car is most likely a rare (1 of 2000) “Principality of Monaco” edition T-Bird. Paul, do you recall what was the selling price?
Paul, do you have any other sources that credit the Bullet Bird to Alex Tremulis? Usually, it’s associated with Joe Oros, Bill Boyer, and Jim Powers. I’ve seen Tremulis take credit/blame for the concept that evolved into the 1960 standard Ford, but not the 61 T Bird.
This one from a Hemmings profile on Temulis:
Tremulis then had a brief, but productive, tenure at Kaiser-Frazer before heading to Ford in 1952, hired by Elwood Engel. He first worked for Mercury before Engel’s whole team moved into the new Ford Design Studio, where Tremulis, the formally unschooled designer, got the brief to teach his new colleagues how to invent new cars. That led him to Ford’s new Advanced Studio, where he was given responsibility for redesigning the two-seat Thunderbird. Tremulis therefore gets the credit, or the blame, for both the 1958-’60 “Square Bird” and subsequent 1961-on “Bullet Bird.”
https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/hcc/2011/08/Alex-Tremulis/3702621.html
No doubt the three you mention worked on it too, but Tremulis undoubtedly influenced them with his rather avant-garde style. But exactly who gets the primary credit seems to depend on what you read. The truth is everyone wants to be credited with a successful car, and nobody wants credit for the flops.
The affectations of space travel rocketing you away from the humdrum aspect of everyday life was so much part of the appeal of the Tbird at the time. With manned space travel settling down into shuttle flights and stations in low orbit. The dream of the getaway turned to the outdoorsy with Jeeps and Explorers. America was again at the forfront of that, with the Europeans coming later with their M Class and SAVs.
With the CUVs and *leave only your footprint”, this is over as well. I expect the future dream inspiration will not be automotive, and certainly not emanating from Detroit. It will be from the device conceived in California and built in China that is currently glued to your hand.
I can’t believe I didn’t weigh in when this was first posted!
Yes, Paul, the Ford Thunderbirds in those years really were “Dream Cars” in every sense of the word. They had panache, style, power and presence, and class! The man (generally) who owned one definitely “arrived” to his (or her) peers and to everyone else. When one appeared on the road, you stopped to look, for sure.
It was a Thunderbird that began to light the fires of my slow-to-awaken auto enthusiasm, not a Chevy, even though dad’s Impala fanned the flames.
The “Bullet Birds” were the next best thing to George Jetson’s flying car, and I imagine when driving one of them, you felt like flying!
PN: did you post this following yesterday’s millennial back and forth? Point well made!
No. It’s a discussion that I’ve learned to just avoid. The facts are too obvious, but the opinions are entrenched and the emotions are pitched.
I was lukewarm on the Bullet Bird’s exterior at the time they came out… it seemed too simple for a kid weaned on geegaws. But the interior of any Thunderbird from the Squarebird, up remains beyond reproach. Not worrying about rear seat legroom left all this SPACE ahead of the front seat. That’s where the true luxury proclaims itself, between the steering wheel rim and the windshield. The dash pad reaches out a mile, the wheel is as deep as a laundry basket. For the driver, the statement of personal space is totally emancipating.
First- This is one of the best articles I’ve read here since stumbling across the site back in ’14. Our illustrious founder was obviously moved by this car, judging by the passionate and personal tone of the writing. Everyone’s got his or her triggers when it comes to their automotive “literature”, but for this reader it’s the feelings evoked by a particular car and the writer’s experience(s) with it. Bravo, I’m sorry I missed it the first time around.
Besides that, this is also my favorite generation of Thunderbird, and the one that was my “ah-ha moment” when I first laid eyes on one. My 4th grade teacher, who was in her last year of teaching before retirement bought a forest green 1977 Thunderbird while I was in her class, and was so smitten by it that she invited the whole class to come out and see her new purchase. To me it was not so exciting or impressive, and I never quite understood why she was so obviously agog over the fact that she had bagged herself a T-Bird. It was just a typical car of the day to my young eyes, and not even a praticularly highly optioned or flashy example. (Of course for her it was obviously a longtime dream to be enjoyed in her upcoming retirement years.) It was only when a family friend showed up at a Summer barbeque in a drop top bullet bird in beautiful shape several years later that I understood the mystique that the Thunderbird represented. It was love at first sight for me, and I poured over every detail of that car.
Growing up in the mid ’70s, to me just about all American cars of those years were shoddy, bloated, overweight, inefficient barges, built with too much fake wood and plastic. Cars like the late ’70s T-Birds were just reminders of how far we declined during the ‘malaise-era’, ushered in by recession, stagflation, OPEC, DOT, EPA and the bean-counters. I didn’t aspire to own any of them!
Instead, I dreamed about cars from the ’50s and ’60s. On television, shows like Perry Mason and The Saint were my favorites
While the early ’60s T-Birds weren’t truly sports cars or paragons of practicality, they were solidly built with quality materials, and a style that made them real dream cars!
Happy Motoring, Mark
Another literate, thoughtful, thoroughly researched & well written article by Paul.
My second (or third or fourth) cup of coffee is always more enjoyable when pursuing an article composed by this man.
When the family moved from Portland to SoCal in late 1967, the neighbor in our new apartment had a beige (thankfully without purple stripes or padded top) T bird of this generation. He kept it in beautiful condition, and even paid me to wash it and clean the interior. I would have done so for free! His very good looking blonde wife would take his son, a neighbors daughter and I up the steep hill to the elementary school, and when I got to ride up front with his bathrobe and slipper clad wife I would notice how little her foot pressed on the gas pedal as the car roared up the steep hill. Of course there were other reasons why I was staring at her legs.
The beige ’62 Monterey we got around 1970 was the same color and had the big Thunderbird 390 engine, and our car was equipped with bucket seats, console and floor shifter, with the great looking beige, brown, and chrome interior. The Mercury’s interior reminded me of the neighbors T bird, it was even in the same color. I now know the chassis was really a Galaxie in disguise, but I always was reminded of the T bird whenever we rode or I “borrowed” it for a quick blast over the still under construction 210 freeway.
I agree the banana nose was the best looking T bird of the full size back seat models. It just oozed space race, rockets, and a Disneyland/Jetsons vibe. The weakest part of the design was looking at the car head on, but the rest of the car more then made up for this.
Being probably 10 years younger than Paul, early ’60s T-Birds were scarce old cars, and probably always pretty thin on the ground in our decidedly middle class neighborhood.
I probably noticed my first Bullett Bird when one came to visit our neighbor around 1974. It was an odd looking car, and what the heck was it? My dad thought it was something special, and I was schooled on what a Ford Thunderbird was. But, a Ford? Too fancy. And, Ford was practically absent from our all GM, all the time, neighborhood. Who the heck bought a Ford that didn’t have wood grain sides?
I remained a GM guy, and even owned a ’65 Riviera at one point. But, eventually, I came around to appreciate T-Birds, but I was focused on Flair Birds.
Reading Paul’s article, and the comments here, the passion for and context of this car really come through to me. I’m sold on it in a whole new way.
I was four in 1961, and I remember a small plastic model of a ‘Bird was offered as a premium in a cereal box. I don’t remember if it was in the box, or if you had to send away for it, but it was my first model car – and it was light blue. I remember being puzzled by the word “Unique”, and had to look it up. An uncle was a big Ford fan, and he had quite a collection of Ford dealer promo models, including a T-Bird, I played with them endlessly (making sure not to break!); uncle also subscribed to the “Ford Times”, and also to the “National Geographic”, and the county library carried “Holiday”, and the last two magazines especially featured those lush photographic Thunderbird ads, which I consider some of the best of all time; the brochures are super, too. Great article, and thanks so much…!!!
That was an F&F Tool and Dieworks cereal box car – they came in the box. These go back to the mid-50’s. I had big sets of all of them, including 55, 59, and 61 Thunderbirds, other Fords, even a 1960 Plymouth. As an only child (and my parents did not eat cereal) I had to eat a lot of Post cereals to collect all of them!
This model came in the mail after sending in the coupon that – IIRC – came from an annual catalog of all Ford models you received after buying a new Ford product.
A fantastic writeup on a milestone car and its representation of the American dream. I was of course not around when these were new–my parents are a little older than PN–but from the first time that I saw a bullet ‘Bird, I knew they were special. I recently came across a book of photos that I took with the family 110 camera at a car show in the mid 80’s, and a ’63 T-bird appears as one of the 24 frames to carefully use among the hundreds of cars present. (Remember when you couldn’t take photos of everything? Seems so foreign now…) I’d say the interior of the ’64-’66 may be just *slightly* superior to these, just by a bit, but exterior-wise it’s no question. The ’61 is the best of breed easily for me, above even the iconic ’57.
When I was a kid, my family lived in Baltimore. Right up the street from Memorial Stadium where the Orioles and the Colts played before they built special stadiums. The TBird was a black bullet-bird coupe. I think it had a red interior, I don’t know what engine it had (I was 7 years old). The owner kept money in banks all across the country. If the Russians invaded, he wanted to have money no matter were he went. We lived in Baltimore from 1963-1967.
All 61-63 Birds used the 4 bbl 390 “Thunderbird Special” V8. The 428 was not available until 66 (or maybe 65?). What is strange is that the 58-60 offered the Lincoln 430 as an option, but dropped it for 61.
Don’t forget about the M-code 340 hp 390 with 3-2bbl carbs offered from 1962-63. Mind you this was a very rare option. I believe the reason that the 430 was dropped that it would no longer fit in the engine bay. The 1958-60 Birds used a SLA front suspension with the spring mounted on the lower arm. In 1961, they switched to a SLA suspension with the spring mounted on the upper arm. This resulted in spring towers in the engine bay making the engine compartment much more crowded as a result.
Learned about the rigid unibody frame and high quality construction from the excellent posts at CC and that has made me like this T-Bird even more. A negative came recently from sitting in one at a car show where the seat seemed really small and I didn’t have enough room to sit comfortably.
Older classic cars from the 50s and earlier have declining interest as folks pass on but what about these, anyone know? How are the prices?
I would think any generation would want. Is there an issue keeping up in traffic or feeling secure while driving?
I like all Thunderbirds from ’55 to about ’67, and ’83 to ’93 or so. Even though the sportiness was toned down after ’57, the ’58’s and through to the Flair Birds, there was still an element of sportiness in the styling and overall aesthetics…….kind of like the Thunderbird positioned itself as the car for guys that didn’t totally resign themselves to fully “growing up” and wanted to still have an element of edginess and vitality. Or in other words, guys that didn’t just hand their balls completely over to the wife. “Yeah, honey, it only has two doors and its not practical for a family, but it’s a big car, it’s got a big trunk, it’s very stylish, and it’s comfortable to ride in”.
Somewhere along the lines, something got lost in the translation, and though many will disagree upon what era that it happened in, most of us could at least agree that it happened somewhere between ’55 and the end of the Flair Birds. I don’t know if it was just the demographic that aged with the car, or whether the Mustang really forced Ford to have to draw a line in the sand with the Mustang’s own growing audience that would need to decide if they wanted to age with new iterations of the Mustang. In some ways, during the 70’s, I kind of wonder why they didn’t just nuke the T-Bird altogether……surely it cut into Lincoln’s Mark sales, and also Ford’s LTD sales, while really establishing itself as neither, in a no man’s land.
I really miss the T-Bird. I was too young to really notice these when they were new, but later learned them. Being born in 1960, I became “car aware” sometime around when the Flair Birds were being built (One day I’ll figure out what all these nicknames for the T-Bird generations are… Bullet Bird is somewhat self explanatory looking at a profile of the featured car).
As a teenage kid growing up during the Malaise Era, I never understood how the T-Bird got so big in the early to mid seventies, but from 1977 to 1979, the size made sense… a personal luxury car designed around the driver. I couldn’t afford one yet, but someday, I’d have a Thunderbird. In 1979, as a 19 year old kid, I went for a Fairmont Futura, as it had the same basket handle roof as the much more expensive T-Bird.
In 1983, it was time to replace the aging Fairmont, and I started to shop another unusual looking (for the time) car… The Aero-Bird (ok, I get that nickname too ;o). In early 1984, I got a sweet deal on a leftover 1983, and got my first T-Bird. WOW! Ford always had good ergonomics, but this was a car designed around the driver! Perfect for a single guy in his early 20’s.
This would be the first in a long line of T-Birds I would have from 1983 thru the last T-Bird in 1997. Every one of them comfortable, reasonably powerful, and just plain nice 4 passenger coupes.
Now the only way to satisfy my desire for a Ford, RWD, sporty coupe with 4 seats that is designed around the driver, is to purchase a Mustang. Don’t get me wrong, I love my 2007 Mustang, and my Dad’s 2014 Mustang is really nice too (I get my love of personal coupes honestly), but the T-Bird… yeah, that was the car for me. I was sad to see it go.
CC needs to define a list of T-Bird names. Square, Bullet, Flair, and Aero are the ones I’m clear on. I’m not sure all generations have a nickname.
While maligned by many now, the ’72 -’76 Big Birds, or whatever you want to call them, were actually pretty successful by typical sales figures for Thunderbird. They moved almost 90,000 units in 1973, approaching a record year for the nameplate in the era when it was priced more like a Toronado, Riviera, Eldorado competitor. Prior to 1977, the Thunderbird was not expected to sell as a very high volume car, and it likely produced some serious unit profit for Ford in the Big Bird years.
I remain disappointed that “Cigar Bird” never caught on for the 1961-63 that everyone calls Bullet Bird now. But a good suggestion – I see a QOTD to see if we can definitively name each generation of TBird. Square, Bullet and Flair seem pretty set, but the rest look open to persuasion. 🙂
I like that “Cigar Birds” – I’m thinking Torpedo or Robusto looking at that profile, JP. ;o)
How’s about Fox-Box Birds for the 1980-82 Thunderbirds? Or were they not on the Fox platform until the 1983-88’s? – which were Fox and I learned that by coming here! – and I owned 3 of them! AND the aforementioned Futura! Until I discovered this site and learned about platforms and such, I thought the only Fox bodies were Mustangs. I had no idea that I actually had owned 4 Fox platform cars, and not one of them was a Mustang.
You all have taught me well.
?
Oooohh, you give me the idea of Box Birds for 80-82.
1955-57: Ur-Bird (with apologies to Audi)
1958-60: Square Bird
1961-63: Bullet Bird
1964-66: Flair Bird
1967-69: Brougham Bird
1970-71: Bunkie Bird (I’ll also accept Beak Bird)
1972-76: Big Bird
1977-79: Basket Bird
1980-82: Box Bird (thanks to JPC and Retro-Stang Rick)
1983-88: Aero Bird
1989-97: Sleek Bird
2000-05: Retro Bird
I’m conflicted on the ’67-’69 name–most of those cars were Broughamified to the hilt, but it doesn’t seem to respect that slightly menacing jet intake grille. Also the ’89-97…I like them but I couldn’t think of anything more creative than “sleek”.
Great idea. In school we used to refer to these as the “Banana Birds” as that was before bullets and cigars had entered our lexicon.
Yes, the generations all deserve a nickname. CC could write its own name in T-Bird history!
I think I get “Square Bird”, Dave… the roof looks kinda square on those.
As to maligning the 72-76’s… not really. It just didn’t make sense to my not yet driver’s age eyes. My Dad bought a 1973 LTD (his first and one of only two Fords he’s ever owned, the other being his current 2014 Mustang). When we were at the dealer, they had a brand new 1973 T-Bird in the showroom with the LTD(s). I was into the whole Brougham scene back then (yeah, I got sucked in), so that “Big Bird” impressed me as a nearly 13 year old kid. What confused me was I recall thinking, ‘How is it that a T-Bird is bigger than an LTD? Aren’t LTD(s) full size and T-Birds mid sized?’ I now understand they were doing Ford’s equivalent of the Lincoln Mark IV is to Eldorado as T-Bird is to Toranado/Riviera thing, but wow were they big.
Interestingly, Al Packer Ford sent my Dad a 1974 Thunderbird Brochure in the mail trying to entice him to trade the LTD in the following year. He didn’t, and it became my first car. I still have that brochure somewhere.
I didn’t think you were maligning the Bid Birds, but there are a few suspects around CC that just might.
Personally, I thought that they were a little too close to badge engineering from the Mark IV. But, they could be impressive. Being former MN12 owners, and my wife a fan of the modern Retro Bird, we’ve joked about a T-Bird garage in retirement featuring a Retro convertible and possibly a Big Bird for me – something different.
I have my own LTD / Big Bird connection. When my dad finished a test drive of his new ’76 LTD, we pulled up to the showroom and parked next to the biggest, reddest, baddest coupe on the lot with a wonderful full width taillight. It looked a lot like this, and I wished we were taking it home instead…….
Yeah, that’s how I felt about it at the time. I tried to talk my dad in to a dark blue Landau similar to the red one in that picture, having the white trim and all. It was too much money for him at the time, but my Dad loves a coupe, so even the LTD he came home with that day was a hardtop (God I miss them) in ‘That 70’s Gold’… it looked a lot like this car. Same color vinyl top, too!
When I see these early sixties T Birds I’m reminded of the red, metal Thunderbird I had with the retractable metal roof (sans Landau bars). One of the my favorite toy cars back in early elementary school days.
That little car would be worth a chunk of change now.
I thought I’d share a photo that I used years ago to illustrate one of my Musclecar Culture columns for Musclecar Enthusiast. I’m the tall one in the photo, about nine years old I recall, standing in front of my mom’s 1961 Thunderbird, circa 1964. I think that it was the car that kindled my obsession with cars.
Colonial White! Oh how I loved looking at my own white 61.
The color combo suggests this is not just a Landau, but a Special Landau.
http://automotivemileposts.com/tbird1963limitededitionlandau.html
“The squared-off, fussy 1964 T-Bird confirmed my defection”…I have always admired the 64 Bird, until this moment. You are so right. My decades of perspective has been changed forever.
I basically like all the 58-66 Tbirds all in their own ways, I have a hard time picking my favorite but I liked the Bulletbirds the longest without any asterisks to justify it. Squarebirds I learned to appreciate later for their pioneering qualities(unibody, buckets/console, it’s timeless dash) and flare birds I like for essentially being a best of both worlds cross between the squarebirds and bulletbirds. I tend to fall into not being super fond of the front end of these, if I had any specific dislikes, but the afterburner rear end more than makes up for it,
Don’t forget, The first car with the “Glued on” rear view mirror.
When my dad bought his, I actually liked it. I wasn’t crazy about the color, that sort of misty blue which we kids called “Weak ass blue”, yeah, we didn’t like it or the similar green (Seafoam?). My dad soured on the ‘Bird soon enough when it overheated the first hot day after he bought it. The overheating was a huge problem and soon it blew a head gasket. I knew at that point he had enough and it would soon be gone. When it blew the passenger side gasket for the second time, it was bye-bye Birdie. And soon, it would be bye-bye Ford forever. The last Ford product he bought was a ’69 Lincoln MKIII, in the awful Avacodo green that for some reason my parents bought several cars in. He hated it so much it was traded to his brother for his ’69 Caddy Sedan De Ville, in almost the exact same awful color. He had that car until the end of his driving in 1973 when he passed out and wrecked it in a spectacular wreck that he was somehow barely was injured in. The car was so bad, we wondered how he was even still alive. I don’t know if the dud Fords he had when I was a kid that made me hate Ford so much, but at 66, I don’t see myself ever driving a Ford product. I don’t hate them near as much as I did back in the 70’s and 80’s though.
Ford did sort-of rehash the chrome trim strip as door handle thing with the last Lincoln Continentals, albeit in a somewhat different way. The GIF below shows the handle in use as well as the way-cool hidden true keyless entry touch-sensitive pushbuttons that light up in red when in use and disappear when not. The pushbutton entry remains the best reason to buy a Ford or Lincoln IMO; I get irked when I see remote key fobs described as “keyless entry”; if you have to carry something around to get in your car, it’s not keyless. I like not having my keys in my bag every time I’m at the beach making my car easy to steal, and modern electronic keys don’t take well to salt water if I keep them in a zippered pocket. The Ford system allows me to not bother with a key, get in my locked car using a code, and use the key hidden somewhere in the interior to start the car.
https://www.carscoops.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/1a1c6de2-lincoln-continental-4.gif
^^^ THIS ^^^ – After having many T-Birds over the years, all but one having this feature, I was quite bummed when my 2007 Mustang did not come with it.
For every reason you state, this was the best keyless entry system ever.
Sure, is my 2016 Honda Civic’s system more sophisticated? Yes… but having that combination lock on the door was the BEST!
DREAM
This is a DREAM car, because seeing it invokes an imaginary pleasant response. The design of this generation of TBird takes the familiar shapes we associate with rocketry and flight, but then gives it to us in an accessible form – as an automobile. We know that cars cannot fly, but this generation of TBird evokes an image that it has the ability to do so. That confliction generates a powerful dream response – a flying rocket car, that is exciting and pleasant to imagine.
Thirty years earlier, after we became familiar with modern airplanes and their shapes, the dream of flying was brought into the auto world. To justify this logically, designers showed that the airplane shapes weren’t just a dream – but were practical too. For the next generation of designers, slip-streaming auto designs such as the Tatra, the Airflow, and other modern auto designs, incorporated the airplane. Ford named one of their cars, the Zepplin – Studebaker named one the Terraplane.
After WWII, the jet age pushed this further. By 1959, we see peak airplane designs in automobiles. Delta wings on Buicks, “rear stabilizers” on Chrysler products, “bat wings” on Chevrolets and numerous cars sporting “pods”, “bullets” and “Dagmars”.
By 1957, the “Space Race” dominates our imaginary dreams. Space travel appears to become realistic. Alex Tremulis, our Science Fiction car designer – shapes this generation of TBird as a rocket ship. A space-age dream car arrives. We see by this time a number of designs based upon rockets, jet propulsion and space travel.
This generation TBird evokes a dream image for those excitied by the possibility of space travel and flying to the planets. From the enormous rocket afterburner tail lights, to the sharp rocket shape – this car tapers from over the front wheel openings down to the afterburner tail lights – which is the opposite of what other airplane-inspired late 1950s are shaped, is unique and gives this land rocket it’s visual “thrust”.
The interior is a dream as well. This is a rocket ship offering a singular driving experience. You don’t share a seat – you have your own. You don’t share the instrument panel – you are in a cockpit. This dream car offers YOU a chance to experience your space dream.
There are many other ways that car styling can evoke a dream. This is one of the best!
“Thunderbird, Unique in all the World.” That’s what Ford said, and they did have a head start on the other personal luxury cars that came along in the 1960’s. The Squarebird of 1858 set the template, and it was successful for a long time. The smaller luxury car, not exactly the sportier luxury car. What a contrast the ’58 T Bird was to the ’58 Lincoln. GM wouldn’t have anything comparable until the ’63 Riviera. Like the Country Squire, the T Bird was acceptable to the more affluent buyer. Chrysler didn’t even try to produce anything for this market until the 1970’s with the Cordoba.
While I’ve always liked the big luxury cars, I have found these smaller cars make much more sense, the gas mileage isn’t much different but at least they are easier to park.
In 1984 we bought a Mercury Cougar, my Wife preferred the formal roof and those commercials with “I’ll be seeing you” made them seem kind of special. I wanted the T Bird, but I was fine with the Cougar which was almost the same car. It was a very comfortable road car which was I was looking for.
Whether it has to do with the American Dream or not, I miss these kinds of cars.
Gorgeous on the outside, lovely on the inside. Space-Age all around. I got a ride in one in ’65; swing-away steering wheel and AIR CONDITIONING. I’d never seen automotive air conditioning before. And it was COLD, not like more-modern a/c. I was impressed even at that young age.
…and then someone opens the hood and destroys all the magic.
Ford and their springs on the upper control arms. What were they thinking? Gee, guys–wouldn’t it be great to destroy the engine access with wasteful suspension packaging, just like we did on the crappy ol’ Falcon?
Bad enough on the bottom-feeder Falcon, which was designed with the idea of a lame-ass upright six-popper infesting the engine compartment. You can still access the spark plugs, and see the oil pan from fenderside. But on a “Premium” car you’re only going to equip with a “big block” V8 engine? God bless torsion bars.
Ford deserved to go bankrupt. Still does.