A compromise is a scenario in which every participant gets at least some of what they want. But it could also be a situation where no one gets what they want. An old adage in real estate, after all, goes that if both the buyer and seller were unhappy, then it was probably a good deal for both parties.
The Fox-body LTD, sold from 1983 to 1986, seems to be the embodiment of compromise, trying to span the gap between the Great Brougham Epoch that preceded it, and the aerodynamic epoch that followed it. Did anyone actually come out a winner in this compromise? Surviving examples from this generation are surprisingly scarce, so let’s take a look at this first-year Brougham model I found on eBay.
The few diehard Brougham fans that were still remaining in 1983 were probably feeling the pinch of this compromise as much as anyone. For starters, the LTD name, once affixed solely to the top rung full-size model, by 1983 had been Cutlassed across multiple vehicles. The full-size model was now called the LTD Supreme (checks notes) sorry, the LTD Crown Victoria, to better differentiate it from the “regular” LTD, which was essentially a Granada/Fairmont with a shovel nose and tail. This new LTD would be the smallest car to ever wear the LTD name, smaller even than the Torino-based LTD II of the late ‘70s. The debasement of the LTD name was now total.
Sure, there was still a vinyl roof and wire wheel covers (the latter not being present on the featured car) to appease the rapidly dwindling number of Brougham fanatics, but those hose-off vinyl door panels are a long way removed from the door cards LTD buyers got a generation earlier in the 1965 LTD.
And what exactly is the deal with that chintzy, tacked-on switchgear? Those look like the aftermarket power window and power lock conversion kits that JC Whitney sold back in the day. I had to double-check with the brochure to confirm that those are indeed factory pieces.
Further compromises were made under the hood. While every LTD of yore (including the much-maligned LTD II) came with some sort of V8 engine, no V8 was available on the new for 1983 LTD. Instead, engine choices were limited to the 2.3L Lima 4 (an engine that originally saw service in the Pinto), the even older 3.3L Falcon six, and the new-for-1982 3.8L Essex V6. The 2.3L was even available with a four-speed manual transmission – I would love to find an LTD so equipped, but I suspect I will find a three-headed goat before I find a surviving 4-cylinder, 4-speed LTD. The Falcon Six was dropped after 1983, and the four-banger only sold in the hundreds, so the vast majority of the Fox body LTDs were equipped with the 3.8L V6, as is the featured car.
In one final concession to the Brougham crowd, plastiwood was spread throughout the cabin, including, randomly, some surrounding the definitely-not-a-cupholder cubbies between the front seats.
So the Brougham contingent was left largely unfulfilled by this compromise. As a bridge to the aero era, does this LTD fare any better? While the ads for this generation of LTD certainly make a lot of hay about this LTD’s aerodynamic bona fides, my modern eyes are just not seeing it. Other than the slanted front and rear clips, it still basically looks like the box the successor Taurus came in.
1985 Ford LTD Brochure.
For its penultimate year in 1985, The Fox-body LTD had one last reinvention up its sleeve, this time (improbably) as a euro-inspired sports sedan. With the development of the Taurus well underway at this point, this change was almost certainly made to ease the public’s transition into the radical new Taurus.
The white-walled, vinyl roof Brougham model got banished to a single tiny photo in the 1985 brochure (second from the top in the image above, in case you are curious). Also sent to the trash heap were the bright wheel well trim, headlight buckets, and side moldings. Every other LTD in that year’s brochure sported a steel roof and blackwall tires.
1985 Ford LTD LX.
In LX guise (available only in 1984 and 1985), which included a sport suspension and a 5.0L V8, the LTD effectively functioned as a four-door Mustang (which it basically was, since they shared the same Fox platform bones and even the same “phone dial” alloy wheels). Never in its previous 20 years had the LTD ever been marketed as a performance car.
Predictably, the LTD LX was a slow seller, with only 3,367 finding buyers between 1984 and 1985. Good luck finding one today – even the many sleuths here at CC have yet to spot one. Ironically, those few who could overcome the cognitive dissonance of the LTD LX were probably the least disappointed by the compromises embodied by the transitional Fox-bodied LTD. By all accounts, the LTD LX was a pretty solid sports sedan for the day – not surprising given its Mustang GT running gear. The LTD LX even saw duty at Bob Bondurant’s high-performance driving school as instruction cars.
While Ford CEO Don Peterson may have found performance religion at this time, Ford’s LTD customers decidedly did not. Unfortunately, the concept of an LTD sport sedan was a bridge too far for most buyers, so for the final abridged 1986 model year the LX and its V8 engine were both out, and whitewall tires were back in.
At this point, the LTD name was just about used up. The mid-size LTD would be gone after 1986, being replaced by the far more successful Taurus (ironically a name that would also ultimately get used up, but that is a story for another day). The Panther-based LTD Crown Victoria would soldier on for a few more years, before dropping the “LTD” and just becoming the Ford Crown Victoria in 1992.
Can you think of another car that tried to appeal to as many audiences as the Fox body LTD, from the button-tufted brougham crowd to aero family sedan to sports sedan? Did anyone truly get what they wanted out of this compromised LTD?
Related Reading
CC For Sale: 1983 Ford LTD – My Kind Of LTD?
Vintage Reviews: 1983 – 1986 Ford LTD, LTD/LX, & LTD Brougham – Lethargic, Tuned or Dutiful?
Rarest would be the factory Propane-powered units, mentioned on one of those brochure reprints above. We had two of them for company cars in 1984/5.
It is interesting you would bring that up. Circa 1988 I found one at a Ford dealer in Campbell River, British Columbia. The fact that I would not have to do an LPG conversion was very attractive.
The problem was Ford decided to use the 2.3 litre Lima motor as a base for its LPG car. It wasn’t powerful to begin with and the LPG conversion probably took 10% of the horsepower figure. Suffice to say that the car was so slow it was dangerous. Because of this I gave it a pass and continued using GM B bodies.
Great article, Tom. I remember trying to like these. To my eyes, the latter-day Fairmont Futura sedan was better looking. “LTD Supreme” – spot-on with the Cutlass name comparison. I like this car for nostalgia reasons and really hope this one goes to an appreciative buyer. Otherwise, and to the premise of this essay, it would have checked few of any boxes for me as a new car.
Those must be juiceboxholders in the center console?
An LX (302 V8) would be a great fine!!
A bit rough on the road, but changing the shocks may improve things.
I believe a limited number of Canadian Mercurys were sold with the V8 as well.
Motor Week did a review:
X2 but it’ll get a 5sp conversion and the engine will not stay stock very long.
The Fox LTD seemed old even when it was new – it was obviously heavily based on the 1978 Fairmont with the same doors, with mostly shared glass as well (the wagons had identical sheetmetal from the A pillar backward and completely shared glass). The same was true of the 1981-82 Granada that the Fox LTD replaced. The Granada was actually a big more Brougham-y than the LTD, with a chromey upright grille, squared-off back, and a stiff almost-vertical C pillar with no quarter window, often with a vinyl top. The 81-82 Mercury Cougar LS was the most Broughamed-out of the Fairmont-derived sedans, with the same pillowy front seats used in top-line T-Birds and Cougar XR-7s. The LTD did get new inner door panels, as well as the dashboard from the ’80-82 Thunderbird which was nicely designed (the Granada used a slightly revised Fairmont/Mustang dash).
The LTD LX would have sold better if they offered a stick shift as in the Mustang where it was popular. Without it, it had less appeal to people who would have liked a Mustang but needed back doors and more room for a family. Also, “LX” normally designates a LuXury trim level; it should have been called the LTD GT or LTD 5.0 so people would know what it really was.
The not-cup-holders in the front seats were there due to a law that took effect in 1981 prohibiting seating areas (front or rear) without seat belts. GM also used similar cubbies in the front center positions in ’81 and later X and FWD A body cars (until the latter were fitted with center seat belts) and in the rear seats of early-production 1982 J bodies. These proved unpopular and GM later fitted all of those with center seat belts so they could provide 3-across seating. There may have been a minimum cushion width for this law to apply, as I recall several small cars (the Ford Escort to name one) that only provided two seat belts in back but had a full-width seat cushion. In ’81-82 Thunderbirds the rear seat had a large bump, almost an armrest, molded into the center of the rear seat cushion to prevent people from sitting there.
“The LTD LX would have sold better if they offered a stick shift as in the Mustang where it was popular.”
Especially because there was a significant horsepower difference between the stick and the automatic versions of the 5.0 in those years. As I recall it, they detuned the engine to stay (more or less) within the ability of the AOD transmission to handle the torque. I remember being intrigued by these at the time.
Part of me would love an 85′ Fox LTD wagon.
The 2.3L was even available with a three-speed manual transmission – I would love to find an LTD so equipped, but I suspect I will find a three-headed goat before I find a surviving 4-cylinder, 3-speed LTD.
You can count on that, because the 2.3 most certainly didn’t come with a three-speed manual; it came with the 4-speed, as it had done in all the Fox body cars. The 2.3 was never mated to the 3-speed.
Right from the brochure:
I have to imagine that was offered just so they could advertise a lower price and better fuel economy; surely Ford didn’t expect to sell many LTDs with four-bangers and manual transmissions. Maybe even fuel economy wasn’t that important, as the 2.3 four was offered with a 5-speed manual in the Mustang since late 1980.
We had Ford Fairmonts with 4 cylinder engines and 4 speed manual transmissions as fleet vehicles. Not fast off the line; you had to feather the clutch a bit. But, once up to speed, they could maintain highway speed with ease, even with the A/C on and 3 persons aboard. Being in the Deep South, that A/C was never turned off.
Our family had two of these LTDs….an ’83 and an ’84, both in the late 80s, early 90s, one a loaded model but I can’t recall a brougham badge and the other a lower budget model (my brother’s). Pretty unremarkable overall, I recall sitting very low both front and back as well as a fair amount of wallowing. Both seemed reliable enough I suppose and happiest on the freeway around 60-65mph or so. Looks-wise they were far preferable to the Fairmont which always struck me a a poverty-mobile – maybe because someone down the street owned a very basic one in poor condition with a very unkempt yard. I’m not exactly pining to relive the good old days in one of these, Tom, but thanks for the attempt! Maybe you should buy it, they are probably rarer than your Mark III by now.
I can’t recall ever seeing a vinyl top on these though, was that factory?
Lastly I found one of the last of the Brougham’s (an ’86) complete with a V8 conversion a few years back:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/junkyard/curbside-recycling-1986-ford-ltd-brougham-pony-power/
Nice attempt, but not what I was driving at the time, which handled better and made better mileage.
I rented one of these on a business trip to New York State with a bunch of colleagues, that included some brisk driving on Hudson Valley backroads. Compared to the typical rental,of the time, I found it very capable and enjoyable to drive. Until … my boss’ boss offered me a stint behind the wheel of his rental. A brand-new, just released ‘86 Taurus. It was a whole different league. Better driving dynamics and more spacious for a bunch of big guys.
I would be surprised that few of these are around. This would be a prime candidate for Cash for Clunkers. I’m sure that there were those who dug up every possible older car to turn in for money. When there is free government money there will always be all kinds of opportunists. It did, though, give Ford a needed shot in the arm for a short while. Ironic. Junk a Ford, save Ford. OTOH, it really screwed up the used car market big time to the disadvantage of those who need to look there. Personally, C for C was a feel good idea that accomplished very little in results other than rid us of these kinds of cars. Now we moan, maybe a little…
Cash for Clunkers didn’t pay out cash, it just gave a rebate when purchasing a new car. I guess one could find a clunker for cheap and resell it to someone heading to buy a new car but you couldn’t just bring in whatever heap you found and expect a check like at a junkyard.
84% of vehicles brought in were “trucks”.
It only removed about 700k vehicles in total, not really enough to move the needle despite some opinions. In 2009 there were about 255 million registered vehicles in the U.S, so it removed/replaced 1 vehicle per 364 registered vehicles. You probably wouldn’t notice for a while if one of your own 11 vehicles was gone all of a sudden, let alone one of the 364 parked closest to your home 🙂
Maybe with 24 cars but with only 11 I would notice one gone in a second.
As an exercise I went to Facebook Marketplace a few hours ago. Set parameters at Ford, 1980-90, 7K max value and hit search for my region. So the 150 hits were composed of
One 1984 Escort, auto, in original condition. Disposable econo car
One 1987 Thunderbird, auto, in original condition. Have thinned these last 8 years.
One 1988 Crown Vic in original condition. Full size right behind econo’s when life is up.
About ten Mustangs in varied condition but none original. No surprise there since most times by the third owner muscle cars have morphed and been beaten up some.
That leaves 137 Ford vehicles. All trucks. Confirms my take that despite been rode hard, dented, rusted, trucks are getting to see their senior years which earlier 50’s trucks rarely did.
Notice the Fords missing out of those 150?
There were mighty few of these still on the roads when C4C came out. The value of these plummeted after the introduction of the Taurus. RWD was seen as old-fashioned, and these were cheap used cars when they were still fairly new. Neither the 3.8 V6 (head gaskets) or the AOD transmission developed a reputation for durability, so it is not surprising that any significant repair bill (which was inevitable) totaled these cars in the minds of most of their owners.
You had to be there. If you were, you would have recognized how much more modern this car was compared to the market competition – and that wasn’t Audi. The Fox body was the first Ford CAD/CAM designed, rear drive compact vehicle. The engine bay was large enough for a 5.0 V8. It had a modern suspension. It was a very good car depending on what you optioned it with. The LTD LX was very cool. The Fox was to Ford what the K-Car was to Chrysler – a successful life saver during a hard economic downturn. Remember that Ford was #4 in sales during these years.
The Taurus made these look old when it showed up. Yet these were not old looking when they showed up in 1983. Yes – we all saw the Fairmont roots in the greenhouse and in many of the shared parts, but these weren’t priced like the Fox-body Continentals. They were reasonably priced for the market.
I had a Cougar sedan and it was an excellent car for that time. It was better than the GM brougham sedans because it was a lighter, newer and more efficient. Acceleration around the Rockies as the Cougar was my daily driver, was never a problem. It was comfortable and traditional. I would love to have one now.
I would not turn down one of these cars. While hindsight makes these cars look like a “bridge” – if you were there, it wasn’t. It was a good car that sold well and kept Ford in business when so much was headed downhill for them at that time.
Wiki says they sold 647,000 over four model years (’83-’86) including the wagon version. That doesn’t seem much of a success but perhaps explains why there aren’t many around anymore. As a point of reference, during the same sales period 610k Thunderbirds were sold as well as over a million Tempos from only ’84-86, both of which seemed far more modern, at least as far as styling is concerned.
I think VanillaDude’s point, which I agree with, is the overall success and yes, innovation, of the Fox platform which today is remembered mostly for the Mustang but was much more than that. Of the Fox lineup, these LTD’s were a small portion, but in 1978 the sensibly sized Fairmont with strut front suspension, rack and pinion steering, standard OHC engine and 4 speed manual was pretty heady stuff for a domestic car.
Ah, I read it as opining the LTD was the cat’s pajamas based on the last paragraph as opposed to the situation half a decade earlier. C’est la vie. Yes, the Fox platform in general was a big success.
> The Fox was to Ford what the K-Car was to Chrysler – a successful life saver during a hard economic downturn.
The Panther platform served that role as well. New in 1979, talk about a cash cow, it was built well into the 2010s with only one major body restyle (two for Lincolns) and several mechanical upgrades (and a new engine) along the way, but still the same basic car. Profit margins on a long-amortized 2011 Mercury Grand Marquis must have been huge.
Yes, you had to be there. External styling was NOT this car’s strong suit.
But with the V-6, and the Brougham trim level, it actually was a pretty competent automobile. It was not the “classy car” it tried so hard to pretend to be, but it was a decent car. More reliable than GM’s X-car-derived A-car intermediate (Celebrity/6000/Cutlass Ciera/Century).
The front seat were pretty comfortable. The car was pretty quiet–not like a Caprice or Crown Vic (a real LTD), but much quieter than the Fairmont. Fewer creaks and rattle.
The V6 would chirp the wheels from a standing start if floored. In 1983, that was something.
I’d still much rather have a Fairmont 4-cylinder 4-speed. It was sportier, and an honest car, and MUCH better looking–no false pretenses here. I think we need a CC or COAL on that.
And by the way, if these Fox-bodied LTD/Marquises sold 650kcopies, over four years, that’s 160k a year, that’s not too shabby for a car that is trying to be aero and brougham, classy and economical–on these counts it fails, but as a driver or a rental, it was not bad.
I totally forgot this model even existed, I never saw too many of them. Kinda just disappers into the woodwork,
The huge glass made upper makes it look somehow disproportional. To me at least.
The Bob Bondurant driving school had a fleet of LXs with manual trans, (maybe?) for their students. I would imagine that most of the old LXs were used to repair or upgrade Mustang mechanicals. I looked at a used Fox Continental once, and kinda liked it. While I like the fuel injected 5.0s, I had one in my ’97 Explorer, I prefer the later 4.6 V8s.
We were given a 1985 Marquis Brougham version of the LTD. When it ran, it ran well. But it didn’t run well very often!
My wife’s grandparents decided to buy one last car. And my father in law thought this was the perfect size/price for them. They only drove for about another year before they could no longer drive. So the car went to their daughter. She asked if they wanted to give it to us. It 18700 miles, and needed a headliner, a/c, and to be checked for a drivability problem.
At 19780, the engine began puffing smoke. Decided to take it to a professional, not the dealer. After two shops, it was decided that the engine was in bad shape. So we rebuilt it!
It was never right again and at 22,000 miles, I sold.
The man that bought it from me had it two months before he told me that it had thrown two rods.
Nice car, good size and decent price. But we found no reliability
I thought these looked their best in dark colours. This light blue, lends more of a Fairmont-like appearance. They thankfully have a bit (not much), more presence than the Fairmont.
I’m guessing the huge aftermarket support for Fox-body Mustangs helps keep these alive too, as many mechanical parts interchange, especially on that LX model.
Had one, a 1986 LTD II it was called. Owned it for 2-3 years until I traded it for a 92 Taurus in 1992. Ok car until just before trading, started to drink coolant thanks to the bad head gaskets in the pos 3.8l v6.
They look emaciated in police form. In terms of looks, they’d make a better private security company car.
I got My license on one of these and remembered the lackluster performance and underwhelming quality, Don Petersen ( Ford CEO in mid eighties) took a real risk with the Taurus in 86′ ! Originally, the Taurus/Sable was going to replace Fox AND panther platforms, however GMs downsize disaster gave Dearborn pause! The Fairmont/Granada/and LTD had been a sales flip plagued with recalls! I remember reading FORD’S 2 BILLION DOLLAR GAMBLE and wondering if the Blue oval would survive! Ford was in tough shape in the mid eighties and if Taurus had flopped, the only way to see a Ford would be in an auto museum!
They were not too “attractive”. This “blue over blue one” though; exceptionally “not attractive”.
I imagine it drove/rode “ok’.
Ah, an 86 Marquis wagon in San Jose on Craigslist. Last of the Fox bodies, folks.
Good recap of an odd model. I remember them well. I had a good friend in college who inherited his parents 83 Marquis V6(virtually identical). He beat the snot out of that car and it held up surprisingly well to the abuse. I also recall a instructor in college who drove one (circa 1997), which I had a chance to ride in on numerous occasions. My main memory is that she was a smoker and loved the wing vent window. Perfect for tapping ashes out at stoplights and generally venting smoke without having to lose all your AC.
Ford’s name shuffling confuses the image of the car. It is still the same Fairmont it was prior to 83. If they hadn’t tacked the LTD name onto it, nobody would take issue with it. It would just be the late facelifted examples of a normal 8 year product cycle.
Every time I see one of these LTDs, it puts me back in Korea as a Soldier in 1985. There was a taxicab company was authorized on and off the military bases throughout South Korea. They were required to drive American built cars. In 1985 they were driving LTDs, black with cloth grey interiors. Thought they were snazzy, upscale. Prior to that for me between 80-86, in succession there were Ford Mavericks (3 on the tree), the older round bodied Chevrolet Nova, followed by the square bodied Nova, Ford Fairmonts, X-Body Buick Skylarks, the Dodge Aires followed by the Ford LTD. The Mavericks and Novas were well nigh indestructible given the rough roads and abuse meted out back then. The Skylarks did well and were fairly comfortable, they lasted about 3 years. The Dodges lasted less than two years. The majority of the Korean cab companies drove the Hyundai Pony, so the “big” American cars were comfy given the times (Try fitting 4 Soldiers in a Pony and rushing to the Base to beat the curfew, fun times). And the on base bus shuttles were all IH. I can still hear the sounds of the buses and taxis in my mind.
My recall is that these seemed hopelessly old-fashioned when they were introduced. Front wheel drive was what everyone wanted then, and both the Chrysler K cars and the GM A body cars (like the Cutlass Ciera) were modern and sold far more briskly. These were a mid-sized car for the faithful Ford customer, and did not sell to anyone else, at least in significant numbers.
I owned an 86 Marquis wagon, and really came to like it. I bought it because it was cheap, but came to appreciate its many merits. If Ford’s engines and transmissions had been more durable, perhaps more of these may have survived, in the way that the Buick Centuries and Cutlass Cieras have.