Lincoln’s triumphs and woes are well-trodden fare for argument among the vehicular-minded, and that is outside the scope of this writing. For those who haven’t heard, the new Continental is based on Fusion architecture, but offers a 400-horsepower twin-turbo engine, all-wheel drive, and an extended wheelbase for a more balanced silhouette. Whether Lincoln has turned the corner or not remains to be seen, but for now, allow me to direct your attention to the belt line and door handles.
The production Continental’s door handles are attached all the way up, right below the side windows. This feature reminds me of a couple of vehicles, both old.
The first is the Volvo Amazon, which is a car I’ve been drooling over for some time now. The car pictured above recently sold on eBay for $4500, which seems like a deal for a rust free runner. Notice how the high belt line and door handles seem to have inspired the Continental. Ford DID once own Volvo; did they take any inspiration from the old 122?
The other car that immediately comes to mind is this ’51 Packard (compliments of a Jason Shafer article right here), which was nicknamed “highpockets” by some designers. This Packard is certainly a take-it-or-leave-it proposition among Packard fans, but one can’t help noticing the high bodysides and door handles positioned right below the glass. Is Lincoln channeling an idea from an old competitor?
Finally, it’s hard not to notice the banal sameness that runs rampant in the auto industry today (although one could argue that all 1938 models looked about the same, too). This is the new Cadillac CT6. It’s a nice enough looking car, with a more conventional door handle layout than the Continental’s, but the layman (or woman) would certainly have a hard time telling it apart from a CTS (or even, perhaps, a Continental, for that matter). Compare the C-Pillar to that of the Continental.
Admittedly, the CT6 does look more imposing than its fellow Cadillacs out on the road, but one can argue that it’s not much of a great leap forward. Whether Fusions that look like Sonatas that look like Malibus that look like Camrys is a result of a “me-too” mentality or safety regulations or aerodynamics is beyond me, but I certainly understand why guys of a certain generation say “Time was when I could tell the difference between a Ford and a Chevy from a mile away. Now all cars look the same.”
Digressions aside, what do you think of the new Continental? Derivative? Smacking of plagiarism? Or is it just right? How about the CT6? Did Cadillac go far enough with its new “top of the line?”
“(although one could argue that all 1938 models looked about the same, too).”
Indeed.
That is a really cool picture. It is interesting that style-leader GM offered the only cars with headlights separate from the fenders (save the Hupp Skylark that was a warmed-over Cord.)
It is interesting to me watching the various manufacturers wrestling with what a modern front end should look like, and how the prow should be incorporated into it.
Interesting that the Willys is captioned as an Overland. That’s an old name. Surprising the Pontiac wasn’t called an Oakland!
But they way they alphabetized the cars (with Buick back left and moving down/forward) the “Overland” is where “Willys” should be. But I found that odd too. They certainly lacked the space for “Willys-Overland” but I have never heard these called “Overland”. Maybe it was a real old-timer doing the captions. 🙂
This poster was why I included that line (about ’38 models, although the poster is of ’39s…oops!); the Gilmore Museum has a copy of it. Good stuff!
You see that in some European new-car publications that put out a translation for each language based on the largest national market within the EU; the English version has Vauxhall alphabetized where Opel would go.
And if you look at it closely, there are only three cars that stick out and are completely recognizable in this lineup: The Hupp, Overland (Willys) and the Graham.
All three were absolute failures and dragged their already badly weaken companies over the edge of oblivion. OK, Willys got dragged back into solvency by producing a Bantam design during the war.
Maybe there’s a good reason why car manufacturers copy each other. After all, their job is to make a profit, not please grumpy car enthusiasts.
+1
I’ve seen a similar illustration of the 1940 models; Graham and Willys were the only holdouts with non-sealed-beam headlights, and the Crosley was stylized to appear only slightly smaller than a Ford, Chevy or Plymouth; in real life they’re golf-cart tiny.
I think Lincoln’s finally starting to find its way home. After the mid-’90s, when they tried to make Continental into a front-drive Town Car and the early 2000s when they decided they were going to be BMW, Lincoln’s been lost. Now it seems they’ve finally remembered what Lincoln did best: Comfortable, elegantly-styled, opulent luxury. No one would ever accuse the most famous Continentals of being good handlers. Hell, no one accused the Mark VIII of being a great handler. And that’s ok. There’s a place in the market for cars that ride well and look good and pamper their occupants.
I will also point out that, while the Continental’s architecture is derived from the Fusion’s, my understanding (from what I read in the papers, since I’ve been gone from Ford for five years now and never worked in product development) is that quite a lot of modification took place. At any rate, I think it fair to say that this is not just a Fusion in a tux as the MKZ was for the first two generations.
As for the Caddy, I saw it at NAIAS. It really surprised me to see such a direction shift from Cadillac. CT6 looks like Cadillac is now trying to go off in the same direction as Lincoln-comfortable American luxury. The Art and Sciences design language is very very toned down, and the car has an almost rounded-off appearance in person. The interior looked quite opulent, and the spokesmodel was much more keen to talk about the 34-speaker audio system than 0-60 times or how well it handled the Nurburgring.
To the bigger question, Do all cars look alike? No. Today’s market has the most diverse range of styles I’ve ever seen. You wanna talk about cars that all look alike? Let’s talk about the 1950s then. The only 1950s car I can tell what it is without several seconds to look at it is the Edsel Corsair. Even the Fords of that era take me a second to look at it and confirm that, hey, that’s a Ford!
Ford/J Walter Thompson did a brand piece in 1999, the central theme of which was that cars had become soulless, bland, indistinguishable from each other; and that we were all poorer for it. The end of it drew the conclusion that, perhaps, we were starting to see the spark of life in design again and that, perhaps, we could make cars with soul again. That piece sticks in my mind both as commentary on the 20 years preceding it and as prescient prediction of the market we have now. No one can seriously tell me a Nissan looks like a Ford, or that the Ford looks like a Honda. Not now.
Lincoln’s problems can be traced back to the PAG nonsense. It suffered under years of neglect while Jaguar and Land Rover were given all the attention as Ford’s luxury brands.
I’d argue it started before PAG, actually, with the 1995 Continental. Lincoln was rocking in the early 1990s. The 1990 Town Car won awards as well as critical acclaim. The styling was still classy, but was fresh and modern enough to look the part. The Mark VIII was the same-a modern update of the Mark VII that kept the soul of the car and of Lincoln intact.
The 1995 Continental, while certainly a Lincoln, didn’t have an identity. It at least appeared to grow in size from the 1988-1994 version. The interior was very similar to the contemporary Town Car, and after 1998 the exterior was just “baby Town Car.”
Then there was the hideous 1998 Town Car, a car that really showed that FoMoCo was designing the Ford first, then following with the Mercury and the Lincoln. The Town Car was, to my eye, more in keeping with Ford’s New Edge design than was the Crown Victoria. It didn’t look classy. It just looked like an alternate Ford.
Then there was the Lincoln LS (properly the Lincoln LS V6 and Lincoln LS V8 because Toyota/Lexus threatened to sue if they tried to use just LS). Besides having a stupid non-name, Lincoln did the same thing with LS that Oldsmobile had done 13 years earlier-told their base clientele to fuck off. Mediocre reliability (as with the last Continental) hurt dramatically, but LS also dropped a big duke in the punch bowl of Lincoln brand identity.
Consider: In the early 2000s, Huffy, purveyors of children’s and cheap cruiser bikes available at major retailers nationwide, designed and built a high-quality, nearly Tour de France spec bike. Retail on it was $5,000. And effectively zero people bought them. Huffy had a reputation of making basic cheap department store spec bikes. Why would anyone wanting a high-spec road bike pass on Trek or Specialized or Cannondale or Litespeed and instead go for the Huffy? Oh wait, they wouldn’t.
And the same holds true for Lincoln and the LS. Why would anyone looking for sport luxury pass on BMW and go to Lincoln, purveyors of comfortable American luxury, instead? And as it turns out, only a few did, and too many of them got shit cars besides.
In my view, by the time they created PAG in 1999, much of Lincoln’s damage had been done. The PAG fiasco ensured there’d be no quick recovery, despite the fact Mercury and Lincoln moved back to Dearborn within a couple of years. By then, though, Lincoln was well and truly lost.
And don’t forget Saturn had a contemporaneous LS too…..
I heard tell that the cars were to be called LS6 and LS8. Ford backed off because Toyota thought the names were too close to their Lexus line. At the same time Toyota called their truck the Tundra because their planned name of T-150 was too close to F-150.
The 1995 Continental amounted to little more than a FWD Grand Marquis, especially after the mid-cycle refresh where they gave it the Nasser Era cheapening.
Cycling enthusiasts love the 7-11 team Huffy’s. First off, it wasn’t built by Huffy, it was built by a custom bike builder under contract with Huffy. Secondly, I don’t believe it was ever sold on the market like a Schwinn Paramount. It was made for the team, and every frame I’ve ever seen for sale has a team provenience to it.
They were badged Huffy’s because the Huffman company was a sponsor of the team, and everything else two wheeled badged a Huffy was Walmart level junk. I’ve often wondered what the company expected to get out of the sponsorship. They certainly never capitalized on it by bringing out a line of bike-shop quality, moderately priced, road bikes.
+Infinity. Every company now has a very distinctive look.
+Infinity. Every company now has a very distinctive grill.
Fixed that for you.
Ahem, the first infiniti was distinctive looking, and had no grill
Just sayin’
And headlights, and taillights, and mirrors, and wheels…
If you think the bulbous curves of an Infiniti Q70 look like the crisp lines of a Cadillac CTS or the razor edges of a Lexus IS… Well, I don’t know what to say.
That Lincoln… hmmmm, haven’t I seen you somewhere before? Like here:
And here:
I was thinking that the Continental looked pretty derivative. My first thought was Chrysler 300 with Dodge taillights. You’ve nailed the taillight shape more closely, though that it looks like the center part of the Hyundai taillights is just a reflector and doesn’t light up.
IMO, they should’ve stuck with the previous gen MKZ’s styling, particularly the swan wing grille after they finally got it right in that application. Looked great, and fit the rest of the body style perfectly in that application.
That’s a first, someone deriving styling from Hyundai LOL
Both the Continental and the CT6 are too derivative. The Lincoln show car they did several years ago that borrowed heavily from ’61 – ’69 Lincoln cues was a LOT more interesting. My thoughts good and bad…..
Lincoln: Great name and Compliments the Navigator nameplate. Styling moves Lincoln ahead at least slightly. Maybe a bit of Jaguar in it? FWD and V-6 is a total miss for a flagship sedan. If Hyundai can produce a RWD V-8 flagship, why the hell can’t Ford?
Cadillac: Making a new mish mash of an alpha numeric naming convention. Yeah, that’s exciting. Yet another version of the same basic Cadillac styling we’ve seen for a dozen years. Lincoln could reprise their confusing valet parking commercial from the ’80s making fun of GM look alike cars. “Sir, that’s my XTS!” “No! That’s my CT6!” “Quite right old boy, so sorry!”
What a Lincoln luxury car should be…………
Or how about this….
Or even this……
I must say Dave B: your visual suggestions are absolutely out of this world!!!!! Now THOSE are car designs that turn my 48-year old head. Something truly different, unique, and Special. Not just another Sculptured Blob of clay. What would I like to see Lincoln do with the Continental revival? THIS:
(Note: it is a 1982-1986 Continental with the upright classic grill). Complete with hood ornament, Coach Lamps, white wall tires, spoke wheels, and two-tone paint. (and bring back the “Designer Editions” such as Valentino and Gucci, etc.) So there!
Yesterday at the Houston Auto Show I spent a little time checking out the Lincoln Black Label types…pretty interesting packages…
Marky Mark, I’m about the same age, which puts us in the sweet spot of Lincoln’s desired demographics.
And, Lincoln isn’t speaking to us, and apparently few others based on their sales.
I wandered the auto show the other day and found myself admiring the Infiniti Q70L. And, I’m about as guilty of the “Buy American” mindset as anybody. Lincoln is clearly missing its target.
I don’t understand the decision for FWD, but as for the V6, that’s down to corporate mandate. I read somewhere that Ford was committed to using the Ecoboost engine as much as possible, and ignoring the V8 for the foreseeable future. When I heard the Ford SVT Raptor was getting it, I knew that the company was serious. Never mind that I have my own doubts about the Ecoboost’s reliability for the long term when these cars inevitably depreciate and are on the second hand market, never mind the prestige image. I feel sorry for the poor bastard that picks one up and finds the turbo charger’s and other electric aids that power the engine are finicky and expensive.
The ’02 Continental Show Car was what SHOULD’VE been launched . . at least, with the ’17, Ford should’ve used suicide doors.
I like the first one, am indifferent towards the second one, and don’t care for the last one a bit.
That last one is quite retro disco era, but ya gotta admit people wouldn’t mistake it for a Mercedesbmwlexusinfinitijaguaraudihyndai.
Needless to say, this Lincoln’s styling is a huge disappointment, as is Cadillac’s. Both designs are followers, not leaders–the exact opposite of what is required for them to break through.
Here’s another way to judge the effectiveness of the styling impact of these flagship sedans: the valet test! At a high end restaurant, where the valets line up the cool cars out front to show off, would either this Lincoln or Cadillac make the cut? Well, not if anyone else arrived in a Mercedes S-Class or CLS, BMW 7 Series or 6 GT, any Range Rover, Porsche Panamera, Audi A7, Tesla Model S, Maserati Quattroporte or Ghibli… the list goes on and on. I think even an SRT Jeep or Ford F-150 Limited would trounce either of these sedans.
An F150 King Ranch definitely would trounce the Fusion-ental.
I think the new Continental is a nice-looking car, and I really like the horizontal emphasis and high beltline. It’s different than what they had been doing, and I think that’s a good thing. The MKS was attractive initially, but never seemed to have that “Lincolnness” if there is such a thing, and it had grown quite stale. This Continental seems a much more natural fit for flagship of the line. And yes, there’s a lot of fretting over the FWD layout, but I’m guessing that A)many will be equipped with AWD and B)This car is not aimed at BMW. It doesn’t need to be RWD. Its proportions do not scream FWD, which is good, as that is one of the quibbles with the MKZ, which I find otherwise to be an attractive car. The “face” does borrow a lot from Jaguar, and I’m unsure as to whether that will prove to be the new corporate image for Lincoln, but the “split wing” grille had run its course I think.
The CT6 is definitely a Cadillac. That’s undeniable. Whether that’s brand identity taken too far or not is a matter for the marketing folks; I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the ATS, CTS, and CT6 share design themes and the CT6 does seem to have more presence by dint of its dimensions. It’s not adventurous but maybe it doesn’t need to be. It’s a big improvement over the XTS, which suffered from a bad case of cab-forward that always sat just a bit uneasily in the art & science design language. And the legitimately long wheelbase (8 inches longer than the CTS) can only be seen as a good thing.
As to which I’d rather have? Tough choice. I’d happily drive either, but the Continental is speaking more to me right now.
I think the New Continental is beautiful, it looks well put together and tailored and looks much more worthy of the name “Continental” than any car to carry the name since the Fox Continental.
The CT6 on the other hand seems to have turned the classic Cadillac taillights into hockey sticks. Oh and Cadillac put the fuel door on the wrong dang side of the car!
It’s unbelievable to me how Cadillac (especially, out of these two cars) completely squandered a major opportunity. Here we have a new, large, RWD car – the car that’s supposed to (sort of) go up against the high end Germans. While it’s nice looking enough, like the new CTS, it’s so watered down that it’s just missing the distinction and wow factor that they desperately need. My only assumption is that this is what they think they need for the Chinese market, because it just makes no sense to me. Cadillac always had the most distinctive rear ends, and now this one is as bland as the current CTS.
There’s really nothing Cadillac can do to make something better than its competitors (I’m not saying it’s inherently worse or GM can’t do it; it’s just that everyone now makes a pretty darn good car, with all the same stuff), so IMO, the only thing they can really do is stand out with styling, and value for money wouldn’t be bad either. Here’s a company that’s got a vehicle like the Escalade, which is almost identical to its cheaper mates, with just some minor styling tweaks that make it really stand out (for better or worse), and sells really well, and at high prices. How do they not see this? I just don’t get it. How many attempts can they make?
The Escalade is classic GM Cadillac. Take a corporate platform as the base, mix in marque specific body styling, motor and interior and collect the money from enthusiastic buyers. I think the Art and Science look did set Cadillacs apart from other GM cars and most other cars in the marketplace. It may be getting a little long in tooth and I don’t know what they can replace it with. The Lincoln Continental? Quite a bit of a let down from the prototypes and pre release sketches. The front end looks like a weak imitation of the Jaguar line. Jag has taken the big mouth grille as the styling constant across their whole line up. The tail end design of the smaller Jag sedans are kind of weak, very generic looking. The large XJ has a more distinctive look , so nice that the new Cadillac has kind of copied it.
I don’t know what Lincoln can do. They always ran a distant second to Cadillac and this new Continental isn’t going to change this. I always cringe when I see those TV commercials with Matthew McConaughey, I just don’t believe that he would actually own and drive one of those god awful dolled up minivans.
Will we ever see a car that doesn’t look like a Camry? It seems as if the car companies wait for the next generation of Camry to come out, then copy it with minor changes to the front and rear of the car.
Certainly.
Citroen builds a better Camry! 🙂
If you think all cars look like Camry’s, you might be a bit blind. I saw a new MX-5 recently, didn’t look too Camry-ish to me. The FR-S doesn’t look like Camry and that car is literally designed by the same company that makes the Camry.
The “all new cars look the same” thing makes me laugh, because it is peddled by people with either incredibly short memory or people wearing nostalgia goggles the size of a telescope. Modern car designs are certainly way more diverse looking to me than car designs from the 80s or 90s, when almost every sports car just looked like a bland wedge with pop-up headlights.
Yeah, a lot of modern cars look similar. The new Lincoln MKZ is clearly similar to a Jaguar. However, every era of automobile design has a few styles that are repeated by several different manufacturers. The pop-up wedge sports cars of the 80s, for example. Or the 30s-40s, where most sedans had the same basic shape, whether they were being made by FIAT or Ford. I have to wonder, if every era also had people complaining about how “everything nowadays looks the same.”
+1. This! You are spot on! Comment of the week. People are either very forgetful or they are such fans of cars from a particular era and don’t follow/have any interest in modern cars, that they peddle that same tired old line. The only time they have a point is when they say “Citroens and Chevrolets look much the same”, for example, and that’s only relatively speaking because 50 years ago, they would have looked dramatically different.
I would put money on every era having people complain about how “everything nowadays looks the same”
+Infinity
I’ll give this much to Lincoln: This Continental is the first Lincoln branded vehicle since the early ’90’s Town car that I actually feel drawn to.
My take on the high mounted door handles is that they’re trying to evoke a sense of the slab-sided ’62 Continental. The low chrome line along the bottoms of the doors, coupled with the high “shoulders” and the “are they suicide doors?” stealthy location of the door pulls all conspire to give the impression of that classic Lincoln silhouette. The front end treatment, on the other hand, leaves me a little cold. I’m loving Dave B.’s silver rendition above. Now that face on the new body would really have been impressive.
FWIW, I love the CT6, simply for the fact that to me it represents a return to “What a Cadillac is supposed to be”. It’s elegant, it’s technologically advanced, it’s big, comfortable and powerful, and frankly it’s got more class than “bling”. Call me a purist, but I’m loving the fact that these two new flagships are actual luxury cars, and not rebadge, blinged out Suburbans or Expeditions.
It’s been too many years since “American Luxury Car” meant anything more than “The biggest most ostentatious thing we can slather in chrome and slap a wreath and crest on”.
The Lincoln is a rebadged, ultimate Fusion (itself a good car).
Say what you will about GM and Cadillac (and I could say lots…), at least Cadillacs are unique cars. The may share engines with the more plebian GM offering, but they are not warmed over Fords.
The problem is that those Cadillacs riding on a unique platform have not met their sales projections. I read somewhere that, even with the Chevrolet Camaro placed on this platform, the total sales of the three cars (ATS, CTS, Camaro) will still be one-half of GM’s original projected sales for just the Cadillac ATS and CTS.
GM replaced one car – the old CTS – with two cars that haven’t sold as well as the CTS. That isn’t exactly a recipe for long-term financial success. The Escalade and SRX – both based on platforms shared with more plebian GM offerings – have been paying the bills for Cadillac.
GM’s management says that it is committed to Cadillac’s success, and will stick with its ambitious product overhaul for the long haul. The next few years will definitely show us whether GM is ready to put its money where its mouth is – particularly if the CT6 doesn’t sell as well as planned.
“Meh” to both designs.
The Cadillac’s ‘Suddenly it’s 2002!’ Bangle-butt is unforgivable in 2016. The Bentley-aping Lincoln is an unfortunate return to past attempts to sell the Versailles as a cut-price 450 SEL. Good pick-up on the door handles though.
Both the CTS and ATS have the so called Bangle butt. I think both the Lincoln and Cadillac look OK, while the BMW 7-series was somewhat awkward.
Looks like the Lincoln Zephyr from 10 years ago. Color me not impressed, nor surprised.
.
Neither is really all that interesting but both have there place in these times.
I am however getting tired of the me too chrome trim at the door bottoms that has been cribbed from Lexus, Mercedes and most any other foreign make. It gives today’s sedans a too tall thick waste ungainly look and leave the doors unprotected. Both cars would look better IMO with that chrome trim piece moved up closer to the middle of the door as god intended and has been the case for so many years prior to the new Millennium cars. Better yet a body color trim piece with a hint of chrome accent.
Next those Lincoln door handles. They just look out of place and silly. And further make the side of the vehicle even more plain tall and ungainly. The fact they are electronically operated would give me great pause as far as purchasing, especially after the fiasco CR had with it’s Tesla S. The other problem I have with this car is it’s obvious cribbing of Bently/300 and Hyundai Azera in the styling department. Worse it’s yet another FWD based V6 sedan cribbed from the Ford parts bin. At least the Caddy’s chassis are there own unique design and are RWD based as it should be.
I do however like the Lincoln’s optional interiors, especially the Rhapsody blue as seen on the show car. That was one stunning interior and those seats look all day comfortable.
You single out the C pillar as the lack of distinction. I think the “art & science” styling has aged well for Cadillac. The argument becomes just different lengths of different sausages which has been extremely successful for BMW, Audi and Mercedes. When BMW strayed from that philosophy with the Chris Bangle inspired 7 series they were chastised…Now all BMW look very similar….again…I have trouble distinguishing between a 3 series and a 5 series now.
The Lincoln appears to be a new vocabulary for them…Lets see how it does and whether Lincoln stays with it it. Their last attempt at continuity resulted in a grille that looked like a baleen whale.
Neither car on show is helped by being cloaked in Refrigerator White. Contrast it with the paint on the Buick Avista show car. Rear quarter isn’t the CT6’s best angle either, as it hides the RWD proportions. I also wish Cadillac hadn’t gone for XJ tailights and found somethign truer to their brand.
And the photography isn’t helping. I saw both of these in person at NAIAS, and they’re both much better looking than these photos suggest. Photos make the Continental took tall and misshapen, a look it does not have in real life. Photos here are definitely not giving a good perspective of the Caddy’s profile, either.
Not to take things too personally, but a public show as busy as Detroit is not conducive to taking award winning pictures. I’ll agree that the CT6 looks better in person than in photos, but the Continental was, to me, equally underwhelming in person.
I think the styling on both cars is OK. Innocuous but neither distinctive nor innovative. Best thing about the Lincoln is the name. From my perspective, both brands are hugely diluted from their past glory days. Lincoln should have a three model lineup: Continental as a full size luxury sedan; Navigator, as, well, a Navigator (true SUV or crossover doesn’t matter, just big); and a Mark-something (not MK) as a sportier, slightly smaller version of the Continental. Same with Caddy: Fleetwood, Escalade, and Seville. And don’t touch those names again.
Best thing about the Lincoln is the name
+1
I know the alpha numeric argument is supposed to be because the Chinese and emerging car markets can’t relate to “Fleetwood” and “Continental”.
I call BS, they can relate to Coca-Cola, Polo, McDonald’s and Brooks Brothers, and they haven’t been renamed C2, PLR, B2, and MCDZ
Well said!
The Lincoln is a recognisable Fusion/Mondeo retrim I suppose thats good, they finally lost the fake bumper turd from the back thats good, they put the door handles where your your hand falls naturally and you can see them thats good and it may actually have Peugeot type ride and comfort combined with some roadholding wow the learning curve is steep these days but again inherited from the Mondeo,
The Cadillac is just more of the same just a mildly different size that been served up for many years, I dont like it but you knew that.
The CT6 is a new platform design, but the styling is mostly carried over from the ATS/CTS design.
I like the CT6, I don’t like the Continental. I just am not a fan of the Continental’s design, the big sticking point for me, is the grille. I’ll be honest, I’m a grille snob, it’s one of those things that can either make or break the look of a car. I don’t know what it is, but the majority of modern luxury cars have grilles that just look really gaudy and stupid. The Continental is no exception, not helped by the size that makes it too big for the car and causes it to resemble a giant whale, because apparently nobody thought of putting the badge on the hood anymore.
As for the CT6, I like it but I don’t see it becoming a leader. Because there’s a big, gaudy, ostentatious, chintzy stablemate it has that’ll inevitably overshadow it. But, I do want the CT6 to succeed.
The Lincoln looks like a 300 crossed with the very highly forgettable Sonata from around 06(?). I just cannot see people getting excited about this.
It’s really a shame because Lincoln and Cadillac are about the only companies to have strong heritage to draw upon, well, I suppose Jaguar, but there are certainly a few years that Mercedes and BMW would rather forget, and BMW built econoboxes until well into the ’70’s. Capable econoboxes, but econoboxes nevertheless. Lexus and Infiniti don’t have any heritage.
I haven’t seen either car in person, but they don’t seem to me like they will attract new, if any buyers. The last Lincoln that really impressed me was the Mark 8, that was slick, and then I personally liked the Art Deco style 08 Town Car. The LS had too much Jaguar in it to be reliable. I also liked the bustle back Continental.
The last Cadillac that was really attractive was the ’92 Seville/Eldorado.
It will take some groundbreaking designs to pull Cadillac and Lincoln out of their doldrums. Cadillac thinks it’s a BMW fighter, but no one else has really gotten that memo, and Lincoln is still doddering along with plushy, and EXPENSIVE, Fords.
I’m glad someone else saw a ’51-’54 Packard in the new Continental – that was my immediate first thought upon seeing the show car, those door handles right up against the windows. It also borrows heavily from current Jaguars (grille) and Bentleys (side view), but is nonetheless attractive. The rear loses me though – it’s generic, could just as easily be the new Hyundai Azera or something. One other thing available in the new Lincoln that thrills me – a fully color-keyed interior, and I don’t mean grey, black, or beige.
The CT6 is the best-looking modern Cadillac in recent years, and even has a view subtle references of ’70s/’80s big Caddys, like how the creases on the hood above the edges of the grille widen to meet the beltline. Again though, the rear view is a snooze and too generic for a Cadillac.
The Packard like door handles were one of my first impressions of the Continental too. I’ve been in those old Packards and the height of the door handles is a luxurious touch. It just feels more natural opening the doors at that height.
Lincoln passed up a great opportunity to make a V8 powered, rear wheel drive luxury car.
It looks too much like a Camry/Accord and has too much Ford Fusion in it to entice the Big Bucks Buyer.
Not even close, so no cigar. Sad how these once luxury makers have wasted their reputation and images on designs based upon existing technology. Probably not a bad thing in r the reality of today`s world, but, back in the day if you owned a Lincoln or a Cadillac, you were ahead of the pack. Your car had an identity that separated it from lesser models, but there is absolutely no identity whatsoever in this duo. Camry like cars that just fade into the background, and nondescriptness.
Seriously, who is going to be impressed when you pull up in one of these? There was a time a new Cadillac pulling up to a porte cochere would turn heads. Imagine placing the classy ad characters from the 50s and 60s Cadillac ads in the same clothes and props with these two piggybanks. It would look ridiculous.
Shucks, even if you think the 1980 Seville was ugly it’s at least unforgettable. I haven’t looked at the CT6 since I started typing this comment and I’ve already somewhat forgotten what the whole car looks like. Contrast the ’61 inspired Continental concept. Imagine pulling up to the country club–or the club–in that.
Both of these cars, in photos, are underwhelming for me. I’ve yet to see either in person, so I will save my final judgements until then. That said, the front of the Lincoln looks very familiar to me; Maserati’s signature grill with inset trident logo comes right to mind.
The high mounted door handles were also found on some Cadillacs too (the photo below is a ’56). I like it as a nice classical styling reference. As for the high beltline, well that has been a styling trend for the past ten plus years. I actually applaud the Continental for not going too far in that direction (Camaro, Chrysler 300 up till a couple years ago).
I saw a comment saying that the CT6 looks more rounded in person. I’ll withhold judgment till I see one, then. In photos, it looks like equal parts XTS, CTS and the last STS.
At the risk of ridicule, I think the problem with Lincoln and this Continental is they keep trying to chase that understated luxury thing the critics love but nobody actually wants. As much has been waxed poetic about the 61 it was brief and it’s coolest features and details can never be duplicated in the constraints of modern car design and regulation. This goes far beyond FWD and V6s, what’s now necessary today like swept back windshields, plastic headlights, soft fender edges, conventional opening rear doors utterly flies in the face of what made the 61 interesting, and suffice to say the compromised pursuit by Ford and the desire by enthusiasts for a 61 is as futile as chasing a rainbow.
Lincoln’s real success came once they affixed a RR style grille to the front and a fake tire hump to the trunk. That detail was equally as distinctive to Lincoln as fins were to Cadillac, and the hoffmeister kink on BMWs. Luxury’s supposed to have a gimmick, and as long as Lincoln tries to forget the Mark III and remember the 61, that division will never again flourish. The Germans and later Japanese picked up the understated luxury look where the Lincoln left off and utterly saturated the market with it, I suspect even if this was a perfect design I doubt it would do well.
Agreed. Ford has the Titanium-trim Fords for people who want understatement – they’re very plush and nothing’s more understated and “Euro” than a fully-dressed out mass market car with a strong whiff of Cologne.
I don’t think they should resurrect the specific styling cues of the Mark III, though; remembering and channeling its’ spirit is enough, and the Bentley-esque grille seen here is a stab in that direction.
Another point is that a lot of the non-aero addons aren’t doable not because of economy or safety standards but because they would make for a level of wind noise that would be unacceptable to present-day buyers of a comfort-oriented luxury car.
I do think that as long as they’re sticking with FWD they should have the courage to go with a flat front floor, slim (ish…) horizontal-themed dash and a half-console that doesn’t extend forward of the leading edge of the front seats.
“…door handles are attached all the way up…?
How about 1961-63 Bullet Birds…..”
That’s exactly what I saw!
Stupidly, I thought Lincoln might give us something like the Continental show car from a few years back. XR7 is correct, looks like a ringer for the oh-so-successful Zephyr from 10 years ago. Jeez, it’s not even vaguely interesting. What a disappointment. Those taillights have been thrashed heavily with the ugly stick.
I have not expected much from Cadillac in some time, so I was not as disappointed.
Neither of these really has any presence or appeal. They look like generic mid-size sedans. The Lincoln reminds me of a Taurus. I don’t even know what the Cadillac reminds me of other than not looking like a Cadillac.
Man. Maaan. I’m bummed.
It must be remembered that much of both of these cars market will be in China. It must have been foremost in the design process. No wonder they also look so much like the new Buick Lacrosse. A car these days at the high end would not be greenlighted just for the USA.
Indeed, welcome to the new world order.
If Ford can extend the Fusion platform, why cant they extend that of the Mustang? Then Continental would have the requisite RWD to be taken seriously in the lux market.
And while they’re at it, how about a Mustang derived 4 door T-Bird? They’ed sell a ton at smokin’ profits. Not like there isn’t a stretched Bird precedent (1967-71)
It’s a lot easier to stretch a FWD platform.
How’s that? Structurally the requirements for it are the same – longer floorpan, and rockers, only addition on top of that is the driveshaft… in which case does this Fusion/Mondeo platform not have one of those too?(AWD?).
I can only imagine the CT6 will have a lot of presence on the street. It’s very easy to criticise photographs without seeing the real deal. The CT6’s rear could be a little bolder, yes, and the front doesn’t have the dramatic impact of the current CTS but overall I’m a fan. Looks aside, the CT6 is interesting for other reasons: it debuts the new Omega platform that will soon spawn other Caddys; a base CT6 weighs something like 600 pounds less than an S-Class and even weighs less than a CTS; and it is priced very keenly given the size. Cadillac experimented with pricing lineball with the Germans and it seems de Nysschen thinks that was the wrong strategy. Instead, it will be a return to the strategy of the first Art & Science cars: 7-Series size for a 5-Series price. I imagine this strategy will filter down to the ATS & CTS successors. Also, worth mentioning the CT6 will NOT be the flagship sedan as there is apparently a CT7/CT8 in development.
I don’t understand what Cadillac critics want. They complain Cadillac is chasing the Germans, even when Cadillac develops cars that are regarded as matching or beating the Germans in dynamics. Then, they offer a capacious full-size luxury sedan that, from initial reports, rides and handles superbly (something Cadillacs of decades ago could NOT do) and they complain that it isn’t visually dramatic enough. I think the latest Cadillacs are superb automobiles, they are already facing an uphill battle in perception because of GM’s glaring missteps in the 1980s, and what makes it worse are these supposed Cadillac enthusiasts think Cadillac should just be building big boats even though the market has made clear that is not what is in vogue.
I am extremely impressed with the CT6 and I hope it succeeds. Now, Cadillac just needs to increase the number of crossovers in its lineup, something buyers are clamouring for.
I could not agree with you more. The CT6 is a very technically advanced as evidenced by it’s weight I also like the way it looks. I would take one over the Continental any day of the week. I also agree that Cadillac needs to solve their crossover problem sooner rather than later. I do not completely get it but it seems to be what the market wants at this point in time.
I like them both, but won’t be buying either one. The high door handles are a definite plus, and had better always be chrome.
OMG, the “new” Lincoln already looking old and outdated before it even hit the showroom.
I really won’t consider Lincoln unless Ford get serious about the brand, by that I meant to start new dealership network, Lexus/Benz/Bimmer class dealership standard. The thought of buy and servicing in Ford dealerships ought to drive enough potential customers away, like myself.
The problem with the Cadillac CT6 is that it so closely follows the overall styling of the ATS and CTS that it doesn’t look “new.” I have to look twice to tell an ATS from a CTS, and this car will only compound the confusion. Cadillac would have been better served if it had used the styling of its stunning show cars for the CT6.
In the 60’s the series 62 and de Ville’s looked similar or later on the Calais and de Ville looked the same. I think that they have very similar styling is not a bad thing. Concept cars are usually not designed to be a production model.
In the 1960s, most people didn’t view the lower-level Cadillacs as entirely separate models. Plus, Cadillac was seen as a styling leader in those days. If a car looked like a Cadillac – regardless of price – people saw that as a “plus.”
That’s not the case today.
There are differences between the ATS, CTS and CT6. Do you want the ATS to look like a Cimarron?
I want the CT6 to not look like a super-sized ATS.
I have not seen one, so can comment on that, but my CTS does not look like an upsized ATS to me at least, and I did own an ATS first.
The CT6 has three side windows, while the third side window in both the ATS and CTS are in the rear door, the CT6’s is behind the rear door. This changes the side look so that it should not look like an over grown ATS.
Bland. Blander than a bowl of cold oatmeal. I was expecting more. They (Lincoln) didn’t even use the suicide doors from the show car…The CT6 is an XTS with a few extra inches of hood. Even the flagship of Hyundai’s new Genesis line in uninspiring and derivative.