I’ve given the original 1965 Ford LTD credit for launching the Great Brougham Epoch. It was the first in the low price field to offer the overt signals of luxury, including its legendary “panty cloth” upholstery. Over time, the LTD came to define the affordable big “luxurious” sedan, but I put that in quotation marks, as all too soon, the LTD suffered from name debasement as within thirteen years every big Ford, even taxis, would carry that enigmatic acronym.
Chevrolet’s quick answer to the LTD, the Caprice, was launched six months after the LTD’s arrival. It’s interesting to note that although the Caprice got off to a strong start, outselling the LTD in its first full year (1966), it never achieved the relative success and stature of the LTD. Part of that may have been that Chevrolet didn’t debase the name as quickly as Ford did, but in looking at the sales stats, it’s quite apparent that the LTD’s trajectory was much steeper. Let’s let the charts speak for themselves:
(1970 Caprice sales were likely impacted by a prolonged strike)
Here’s the sales stats of the two from their first year through 1973. There are no production figures available for the 1965 Caprice, as it was an option package, and became available mid-year. The surprise for me was just how strong Caprice sales were in their first full year, 1966. I had started to tally up the numbers for the Plymouth VIP, but since they never got out of the teens, they were essentially irrelevant. Folks were more likely to buy a Chrysler Newport, if they were Chrysler loyalists.
That strong showing in 1966 for the Caprice may well be in substantial part to the exclusive new roof that the coupe had that year (the ’65 Caprice package was only available on the four door hardtop).
By doing so, Chevrolet differentiated the Caprice much more effectively than Ford, where the LTD coupe was virtually indistinguishable from the sporty semi-fastback Galaxy 500/XL/7 Litre (shown) coupes.
Ford rectified that for 1967, although only partly so, inasmuch as all they did was to add a filler panel in the C pillar of the semi-fastback coupes, unlike the Caprice’s roof, which was all-new. But then in these early years, the coupes clearly were not the LTD’s forte.
The ’68 LTD finally got its unique coupe roof, for better or for worse (count me in with the latter). I consider the ’68 Ford to have the weakest styling of the ’60s Fords. The ’65 – ’68 LTD coupes were generally outsold by the four doors by a very healthy margin. But it didn’t seem to matter much, as soon enough LTD sales, coupes and four-doors, really perked up.
1969 was the year the LTD really come into its own, with sales almost doubling. Unlike previous years, where the LTD was something of an afterthought, a tarted-up Galaxie, now the ’69 Fords clearly were designed to be LTD’s first and foremost.
While the lesser Fords all looked like poverty-mobiles in comparison. The LTD’s front end and hood were exclusive to it, and the increasingly marginalized XL.
The results speak for themselves, as in this chart that shows their respective share of full size Fords and Chevrolets. And the LTD’s trajectory quickly headed to 100%, as 1974 was the last year for the Galaxie and 1977 the last for the stripper Custom 500.
From 1978 on, every big Ford was at an LTD, even police cruisers and taxi cabs. The LTD’s saturation was complete. As was its name debasement.
No wonder only two years later the Crown Victoria appeared. And eventually the LTD name would be tossed overboard, as the Galaxie and Custom had been.
Meanwhile, back at Chevrolet, the Caprice had only a 52% share of big Chevys in 1978. Of course the Impala would also eventually disappear, its last year being 1985. But by the mid ’80s, these big RWD cars were the last of their breed, clinging on to a combined 5% of the total market. Having multiple name plates/models certainly wasn’t warranted.
So let’s take a closer look at this LTD. The youngish owner came out and told me that he’s acquired it fairly recently. And that it came with the original wheels and wheel covers in the trunk (yea!). He also told me he was thinking of painting it, black.
I understand that impulse. On the other hand, it’s acquired its patina honestly and wears it proudly. How many original ’67 LTD four door hardtops are left in the world? I gently encouraged him to not rush into a decision, and consider leaving it as is.
That was reinforced when I saw its interior, which is also totally original, right down to the “panty cloth” upholstery. Admittedly, this shot through the window on a bright summer day did not do it justice. What exactly is this stuff?
Here’s a better shot, from a decidedly non-stock ’66 LTD, except for its upholstery. It has a strong sheen, is slippery, and is obviously woven from some of the wonderful new space-age synthetics of the time. It had very distinctive feel, and although I’m not sure who originated the “panty cloth” moniker, it really does suit it. Or it did back in the day; panties have changed too over the decades, to the extent they even still exist.
The brochures aren’t much help either; the best one is from the 1965. Let’s just say it was quite different and new, especially on a big old Ford.
The front seats were covered, but according to the owner, the upholstery up there is in fine fettle too.
My one disappointment was the lack of a vinyl roof. These LTDs just cry out for one, and in my mind’s eye, that’s all I see when I think of one. But no such luck. And the ’65 coupe I found some years back was a slick top too.
It’s got a 390, but I forgot to ask which version: the 270 gross hp two-barrel or the 315 gross hp four barrel. It probably doesn’t matter much anymore, as this car is intended for easy cruising with the kids in the back and the missus in the front. If you were a speed freak, you could still get a wild and wooly 427, in either 410 or 425 hp guise, for the last time. There undoubtedly were a handful of buyers who did, along with the obligatory four speed stick.
The optional mild 428 was of course the better alternative to those seeking the ultimate LTD experience that included a bit of a shove into that panty-cloth upholstery.
Related reading at CC:
CC: 1965 Ford LTD – It Launched the Great Brougham Epoch
CC: 1965 Chevrolet Caprice – The LTD Reaction
CC: 1966 LTD – “Remarkable, I Do Believe Your Ford Is Quieter”
CC: 1967 LTD – The Forgotten Ford
“(the ’65 Caprice package was only available on the four door sedan).”
It was available only on the four door hardtop.
“It’s interesting to note that although the Caprice got off to a strong start, outselling the LTD in its first full year (1966), it never achieved the relative success and stature of the LTD. Part of that may have been that Chevrolet didn’t debase the name as quickly as Ford did,”
Absolutely, the Caprice remained simply the top line Chevrolet through 1985 when the Impala was cancelled. In the late 1960s the LTD name was applied to a growing number of Ford trim lines, and in 1975 it became the sole name of all full-size consumer Fords from base through top trim – LTD, LTD Brougham, LTD Landau.
Apples to apples on top line trim, the 1975 Caprice pounded the LTD Landau 112, 239 to 59,425. Given the actual alignment of trim and standard features, arguably the highline Fords, including both Brougham and Landau, beat the Caprice 157,307 to 112, 239. The marketing strategies differed somewhat, so it gets a bit grey.
By 1971, the Caprice used, at least on the sections that do not have a Brocade look, a material that was much like the LTD panty cloth. One of the mothers in my junior high car pool drove a 1972 Caprice coupe and I remember that smooth, almost slick, cloth well.
I rode in the back seat of an early LTD circa 1976, and the upholstery really did look and feel like sheer nylon panty/hosiery material, and felt only slightly more durable. The other thing I remember was a radio that was very integrated into the instrument cluster area, such that only the buttons and knobs poked through the same clear piece of plastic that covered the speedometer. I doubt any other radio would fit the opening.
I have no recollection of the Custom 500 being available as late as 1977. Was this a fleet-only model? The marketing materials after 1974 seemed to ignore everything but the LTD (the 1977 brochure I just looked at has a brief mention of a Custom 500 trim level, then it’s not mentioned again until the specs page, noting that “Custom 500 2-and 4-Door Pillared Hardtops and Wagon models available but not illustrated.”
“I have no recollection of the Custom 500 being available as late as 1977. Was this a fleet-only model?”
In The U.S., the Custom 500 was a fleet-only model in at least 1976-77, possibly 1975 as well.
In Canada, incidentally, the Custom 500 continued to be sold to the general public during this period, and actually stuck around for a couple of years longer after this.
I was wondering about this, since Chevy’s Bel Air was available in Canada through 1981, as was a low-end Pontiac Laurentian that had no U.S. equivalent. Apparently the Custom 500 also ran through 1981, although I can find no online reference to it other than Wikipedia. I’d love to see photos of a Panther Custom 500, inside and out.
My parents had a 66 LTD with that “panty cloth” interior that they bought lightly used. When we got it that car looked like someone had spilled something on the seats. We were never able to find a product that would clean that upholstery.
And in somewhat of a coincidence, that 66 would be traded for a 69 equipped very similarly to the pictured car. Same color, same engine, but it had a vinyl roof. And that car was THE cold-bloodedest car my parents owned. There were mornings it took nearly 10 minutes of starting and running before it could be backed out of the garage.
I believe that “panty cloth” was actually Nylon Tricot, or possibly Polyester Tricot.
Yes, I think it was nylon tricot — some Lincolns came standard with tricot upholstery around that time as well. This fabric was sort of the rage of the age, appearing in men’s & women’s shirts, the liners of shoes, women’s slips, swimwear, and probably countless other things. I think that with these cars’ upholstery, the tricot was knitted somehow to give it more of a patterned texture.
Great charts here — particularly the LTD vs. Caprice sales comparison… I never realized the sales contrast between the two was so stark.
I grew up in a 1967 Galaxie 500 and the sedan I remember didn’t have the character line squaring-off the roof, that this LTD has. Dad’s car was the same color and also didn’t have the vinyl roof. Same engine. Very nice vinyl seats. It was a richer looking vehicle than it actually was. Already I was aware of the quality interiors of Ford products back then. There wasn’t a folding rear armrest in the 500, like this LTD – but the door trims were the same.
Then I remember a 1968. It lost all the interesting trim inside and out. The dash was a giant piece of plastic, there was little trim on the exterior, and it had a very mellow grille. Not ugly – but very simplistic. It rusted like nothing I ever had before. The entire trunk and rear floor was completely gone within seven years. Shocking.
I pretty much lost interest in the big Fords between 1967 and 1979. I ended up with a couple, but they weren’t very enjoyable. I was never a fan of those isolation chambers, never ending hoods and limited visibility. You could hit a deer in one of those big Fords and not realize it.
My best friend’s family had a 1966 LTD hardtop sedan in the early 1970s. It was maroon with a white vinyl top and black interior.
The upholstery material did seem quite luxurious to my young eyes (and fingers), particularly compared to the upholstery in our 1965 Chevrolet Bel Air wagon. As for the longevity of the “panty cloth” upholstery, it held up much better than the upholstery in our Chevrolet.
Perhaps one reason that the Caprice didn’t garner the same percentage of the brand’s total full-size sales as the LTD did is that the Impala itself was virtually an institution in the early and mid-1960s. (That was probably another reason why Chevrolet was slower to debase the Caprice name.)
Chevrolet’s total full-size sales pulled away from the Ford competition after 1959. The LTD was an attempt to “hit Chevrolet where it ain’t” instead of trying to meet – and beat – the Impala head-on.
This “Panty Cloth” may be soft to the touch, but it is surprisingly durable.
Lincoln started using it around the same time, and I’ve seen lots of period Mark III’s with this cloth, and it almost always still looks like new.
My father was an insurance salesman for almost 40 years. The constant joke among insurance agents was that the Ford LTD stood for long term disability!
Long Term Durability, if the discussion of this “Panty Cloth” interior fabric is any indication.
My family’s (eventually mine) ‘73 LTD had the leather like vinyl thing going on, and it was pretty durable too.
I wish the actual leather in the cars I’ve had since held up that well.
The LTD and Caprice were the choice of white collar people such as insurance salesmen, bookkeepers, small-town lawyers, township and village officials, etc: upscale luxury without being too pretentious. After all, they were still Fords or Chevys.
The Mercury dealers must have been displeased to see the LTD added to the Ford line. Suddenly, another ‘luxury’ model to distract those who sought such away from their Montclairs and Park Lanes. The prices were within a hundred dollars or so. This had to be the catalyst for the demands for yet another model beyond Park Lane, enter Marquis.
L-M dealers should have been used to it, Ford had begun seriously fielding upscale series ever since the ’55 Crown Victoria arrived. The days of the old work-a-day Fords and Chevys were past.
Each of the traditional low-price three nameplates occupied a distinct place in their corporations’ pecking order plainly illustrated by the ’65 LTD and its’ competitors.
Ford was the “name-on-the-door” division. Particularly for the full-size before the ’70s, Ford (the company) was Ford (the car) and vice-versa, everything else was a sideline and there was basically unlimited scope to step all over Mercury’s turf.
Chevrolet’s innovations were limited by the need to save space for B-O-P but their number-one sales ranking was important enough to the Fourteenth Floor to give them a free hand in matching Ford model-for-model.
Plymouth was the least and the last, caught between sharing all showrooms with Chrysler division (meaning the Fury VIP was crimped by an inevitable upsell to the Chrysler Newport) while when they did have a breakout hit the powerful Dodge dealers would immediately lobby for a rebadged version (Duster-Demon being a ready example).
Both Mercury and Plymouth were setting ducks in the corporate pecking order when either the Ford or Dodge division saw potential volume they decided was rightfully their own to take. GM was much more scrupulous in defending the Sloan ladder when another division interloped on another. Chevrolet was given more altitude since it always had to match Ford.
When the Mercury was being developed, initially the prototypes were labeled “Ford-Mercury” as if it were to be simply an upscale version of the Ford, such were the internal politics then.
Much the same was at the 1928 Chrysler-Plymouth in its first year, becoming a make in its own right for 1929. DeSoto, on the other hand, was superfluous the minute the ink dried on the Dodge purchase contract.
Dad had a 67 Galaxie 4-door sedan. It’s roof shape was quite different than the more formal LTD hardtop roof. The car had great durability, didn’t rust during his 5 years of ownership, and had a great balance of performance and fuel economy from it 390. The A/C blew so cold that frost would form on the open ash tray. It was replaced by a 1972 LTD Brougham… another great car…. as Dad couldn’t resist the buying opportunity afforded by the repeal of the excise tax.
Actually 1967 was the only year of a unique LTD Coupe roofline. The 1968 Galaxie 500 coupe shared it’s notch roof with the LTD, as an alternate choice to the fastback.
1967 LTDs, particularly the coupes, are an interesting compendium of firsts, lasts and only’s . It the was the last to have an automatic transmission standard, the ’68 was downgraded to 3-on-the tree. It was the last to have a standard upscale interior with
a rear armrest, cut-pile carpet and courtesy lights in the doors, including the rear doors (65-67). In ’68 it was necessary to order the Brougham interior to come close to the standard ’67 setup. Courtesy lights in the rear doors were gone forever, however. 1967 was the only year for a standard vinyl roof on coupes, made necessary by the insertion of triangular panels to shorten the Galaxie’s quarter window. This roof was, incidentally, shared with 1967-68 Marquis and 1968 Meteor LeMoyne and Montcalm. This style shared it’s quarter glass with concurrent convertibles.
It was the only year for standard “Comfort-Stream” ventilation, basically forced air with 2 AC-like registers (but not the same part as the AC units!) in the middle of the dash. The outlet grills for this system are visible in the front door panels of the feature car. It was also the only year for completely unique wheel covers. The ’65 had an applied center on the Galaxie part to give a 3D effect, the ’66 had a Galaxie unit
with a unique center. After ’67, they were all shared across the line.
All 1967 LTD coupes ordered with AM radios also had a standard rear speaker
in the middle of the shelf. (ours had the 4-speaker tape unit).
It was the first year to offer a split front seat with twin armrests, an FoMoCo-Lincoln-Mercury hallmark for years to come.
In conclusion, the 1967 LTD, particularly the coupe, is the most unique LTD.
As an interesting aside, the ’67-only XL was available with a “Luxury Trim” option with the same door panels, rear armrest, seat embroidery and vent setup as the LTD.
This was tantamount to a bucket seat LTD coupe or convertible. They are extremely rare. An example of the latter got quite a bit of screen time in the Paul Newman movie, “Winning”.
One more thing-Anyone interested in owning one of these had better find one with the upholstery in good nick like this one is. It would be easier to get the seats redone in frog fur.
Properly colored and equipped, a ’68 Galaxie could come quite close in appearance to an LTD, at least from the side. The front grill tells the truth, however.
You’re right on about the decontenting. I had a friend whose parents had a ‘65 LTD and it was as plush as a Lincoln, with all the goodies you mention. When my father said we were getting a new ‘69 LTD I was all excited, recalling the luxurious, high content car of my friend. What a disappointment though when it arrived. It was basically just a Galaxie with hidden headlights. Cheap vinyl seats, no center armrests, ugly steering wheel. It didn’t even have a clock.
Your dads car had the “Standard option”, which seems like a contradiction in terms. It was introduced mid-year and slotted below the formerly standard
& much nicer (but not Brougham) level interior. That gave the ’69 LTD 3 levels of trim, 4 if you count the split seat option on the Brougham.
The first one of these standard versions I saw was as an 8 year old in the local dealer showroom. It also happened to have the a 351, it too a mid-year option. It had an automatic and power steering. No radio, no clock, no nothing.
How fun that the first 4 door 67 LTD written up since my inaugural post here is the exact same color.
Also funny is how the profile view is starting to look awkward to me, after years of exposure to the thicker modern shapes. I always considered these really attractive. I still do, but have to look past a wart or two here or there now.
The LTD of these years really was nicer than the Galaxie 500. It is hard to figure why Chevy’s Caprice growth slowed. I spent a day detailing the 68 Caprice 4 door hardtop owned by a friend of my mother. I remember being surprised at the level of luxury inside the car – it was really nicely fitted out.
The 1966 is my least favorite of the full-size Chevys. With that said, the formal roof of the Caprice 2-door hardtop really looks good (especially with the vinyl roof and that color combination) and it would be my choice for that year.
All that drag-racing gear in the interior of that ’66 LTD is interesting. Wouldn’t it be funny if the powerplant was a box-stock 352-2V?
I remember the “Panty Hose” fabric in a 1970 Lincoln Mark III. So slippery you could not stay in place. Very Hot when in sun and so over stuffed that you sank deep into seat. The shapless seat was terrible on a long trip. Hurray for modern seats!
Black and probably flat black! Ugh! Keep talking to him in order to point him in the right direction. Now the lack of a vinyl roof, in rainy Oregon, might be a blessing in disguise as far as hidden rust is concerned.
Someone I know has a 66 428 LTD with a vinyl interior which I think looks more luxurious than the smooth brocade. My 67 Park Lane, Mercury’s version of the LTD, has the brocade fabric which was covered by clear plastic so common back in the 60s. Covered from 1967 to 2004 till I removed it.
I believe the Impala remained strong thru the 1979 model year. To these eyes, the 1980 was the first one to look cheap, as if to drop down into the BelAir/Biscayne’s old slot in the Chevy lineup.
Whereas noted elsewhere, the Galaxie began to look poverty-spec all the way back in 1968-69.
THAT may explain the higher take rate on the LTD.
I actually bought the exact 67 ltd that is pictured. After my purchase I went online and did image search of 67 ltd’s for reference and came across this and I noticed not only did it have a similar patina, it was the exact same patina. So far I haven’t changed a thing but I was considering painting it black as well.