(first posted 6/22/2013) From the introduction of the 1969 Continental Mark III through the last 1979 Mark V, Lincoln absolutely owned the personal luxury market. Then came the 1980 Continental Mark VI. It was at that point that things went horribly wrong, and stayed that way for the next four years.
From the time Lee Iacocca decreed that a Thunderbird with a six-foot-long hood would serve as Lincoln’s flagship (Mark III CC here), the Continental Mark series went from strength to strength throughout the 1970s. Ford’s market-savvy president knew that a successful prestige car must be about more than engines, transmissions and brakes. A true luxury car should be beautiful, smooth and quiet. It should have an air of exclusivity, yet be instantly identifiable. That the Continental Mark series accomplished all that and more is undisputed .
We could say that the 1970s and the Marks were made for each other. The 70s was not a decade of innovation, but one in which style ruled over substance, at least where cars were concerned. Lincoln’s management and designers understood their mission and accomplished it with deadly efficiency: by 1978, the Imperial was gone and the Cadillac Eldorado was an also-ran. Who could have imagined this turn of events in, say, 1960?
As they say, all good things must come to an end, and Lincoln’s certainly did. By 1979, car makers no longer could sell whatever they felt customers would buy. The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rules, which took effect in 1979, ripped several pages out of Dearborn’s luxury-car playbook. Taking a baby step, Lincoln axed the old faithful 460 V8 for 1979, making the 400 the sole engine to be found behind their Rolls Royce-style grilles. Still, everyone knew that the replacements for the ’79 Continental and Mark V would have to pull much higher grades on the fuel economy exam.
For 1980, the Lincoln lineup (other than the Versailles, which sold in pitiful numbers) was entirely new–but now there was one big difference. Whereas the Mark had always been based upon the smaller Thunderbird platform, that would not be the plan for the 1980s. Instead, both the 1980 Continental and the Mark (now called Mark VI) would be based on the new Panther platform. The two door Mark VI, however, would make use of the 114-inch wheelbase of the Ford LTD and Mercury Marquis and not the 117-inch wheelbase of the Continental.
Gail Halderman, under the ever-watchful eye of Gene Bordinat, headed the team that designed the Mark VI. Bordinat had been involved with Lincoln since the 1950s, and had preached the continuation of styling themes as Lincoln’s holy grail; accordingly, the Mark VI developed as sort of a 5/8 scale Mark V. In any case, we should certainly give the team an A for effort: They managed to take 800 pounds out of the car, dramatically increasing its fuel economy, all while leaving passenger room essentially untouched–not that the Marks had all that much room to begin with.
From a nuts-and-bolts perspective, the results were quite good. Power came from the fuel-injected 5.0-liter (302) V8 and was transmitted through the new Automatic Overdrive (AOD) transmission, itself quite advanced for 1980. (A 5.8-liter (351) V8 was offered for 1980 only and then discontinued.) The car featured electronic instrumentation, keyless entry and a host of other small luxury touches that were or would soon be required for a car in this class.
There was only one thing the car lacked. Call it presence, call it style, call it what you will, but the car had lost the intangible sense of class and luxury and exclusivity that were the very hallmark of its predecessors. Sure, it had little touches–the owner’s initials on the door and the availability of genuine wire wheels–but did they do anything except make the car more of a Continental Mark caricature than it already was?
First, the lines of the Mark V simply did not translate to the new smaller dimensions. While the Mark V certainly had its weaknesses, it was nonetheless a very good-looking car, and the Mark VI completely lacked its style and proportion. It was all at once too short, too tall and too angular, and it just seemed to lack the kind of elusive, hard-to-describe quality that makes a car beautiful. My first thought: What if the Mark had used the longer wheelbase of the Continental? I guess my answer is that it probably would have been as ugly as everything else that came from Lincoln that year. The car simply did not look like a Lincoln Mark. It looked like a bad Chrysler copy of a Lincoln Mark. Sadly, the 1980 Cordoba (a blatant ripoff of the Mark V) was a much better-looking car.
Let’s expand on that point. The 1980 Cordoba hit showrooms at the same time as the Mark VI. The $7,200 Cordoba was well proportioned, sported a hardtop-style roofline, and was a reasonably elegant and attractive car. It may not look like the 1980 Cordoba was actually built on a shorter wheelbase than the Mark VI (112.7 vs. the Mark’s 114), but it was–perhaps good styling can hide a thing like that. True, the Cordoba did not sell all that well, but it came from a company that many people at the time were writing off for dead. It is interesting to ponder how things might have been different if the Mark VI and the ‘Doba could have swapped grilles and trunk lids. The Cordoba’s styling combined with the Mark’s level of interior appointments, its quiet ride and Lincoln’s luxury cred could have made the personal luxury coupe market a whole different place in the early 80s. Does that Mark VI really look like it cost twice as much as a Cordoba? I don’t think so either.
As it was, the 1981 Imperial (CC here) gave the Mark VI a run for its money–that’s sad, considering that for a decade Lincoln virtually held the deed to that market. Sure, the ’81 Imperial only sold about 7,200 cars, but how much more popular was the two-door Mark? Lincoln only sold 64,000 two-door Marks during the Mark VI’s entire four-year run. That’s fewer sales than the Mark V in its single worst year. In contrast, the 1980 Cadillac Eldorado sold over 67,000 units.
The program also resulted in one very curious car–the Mark VI four-door. Why? An excellent question. Perhaps because a four-door Mark had been so overwhelmingly popular in 1958-60? Well, then, perhaps not. If the four-door looks better proportioned, it’s because it shared the Continental’s 117-inch wheelbase. Why Lincoln needed two separate sedans in the same shrunken size is another good question. Could anyone actually tell the difference between a Mark and a Town Car from the front? Lee Iacocca had definitely left the building.
One thing, however, remained constant: Bill Blass was still trying to conjure his old magic. His navy blue-and-white Mark V had remained a classic, and he reprised the color combo for his 1980 effort. Actually, the 1980 model still offered buyers the full array of designer editions befitting such a (formerly) exclusive car, although soon Givenchy and Pucci would bail and Cartier would move up to the Town Car.
Blass, however, kept tossing concepts at the Mark: Fawn-and-navy (1981), red-and-white (1982) and finally, as seen on our subject car, Light French Vanilla and Midnight Black (with either available as the primary color–black, as in the brochure; or vanilla, as on the subject car). I say that Blass earned his fees, if for no other reason, than by eliminating the opera window in the cars that came out under his label.
When I found this one, it was the first I had seen in years. It seems funny, but cruise internet sites that feature collector cars and you’ll see early ’80s Town Cars and bustle-butt Continentals with reasonable frequency. Mark VIs, however, have all but disappeared. I suppose that’s not surprising; they never got any respect when new, and certainly have received none since. Many times when I start writing a CC piece on a car I have always found distasteful, I manage to gain a bit of respect for it before I finish. Not here. I have looked at a bazillion pictures of these cars, and it doesn’t matter the color, angle or setting – the miserable thing is just an awkward, ungainly, and badly proportioned car.
I remember the 1988 Vice Presidential debate, in which Sen. Dan Quayle mentioned that he was the same age Jack Kennedy had been when Kennedy was president. His opponent, Lloyd Bentsen, famously replied something to the effect of, “I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. You, Senator, are no Jack Kennedy.” Most people immediately saw the truth in Bentsen’s remark. I can make a similar observation about this car because I knew Lincoln Marks. For more than half of the 1970s, there had been a Lincoln Mark in my Father’s driveway. This car was no Mark. Still isn’t.
I wholeheartedly agree – the MK VI was at best a poor imitation of the truly great Marks that came before it. I think the comment “Continental caricature” hit the nail on the head…
The 302 wheezed out 129 hp and the 351 had the troublesome variable venturi carburetor.
You rarely see these at Lincoln Continental Owners Club (LCOC) meets – most have evidently been sent to the scrapper…….
When luxury cars needed to lose their size during this era, they also lost their class and elegance. This is because their style language needed size to work. What Lincoln needed to do with the Mark series would have been rejected as too much of a gamble with a successful model line like the Marks. It is natural and with a lot of common sense to have believed back then that the most popular smaller Mark would ape the styling of the larger Marks.
What was needed in the Lincoln-Ford studios when these were being designed was honesty. It seemed that everyone who saw these little ugly Marks just kept their mouths shut and hoped that future buyers would do the same. Somehow Lincoln believed that Mark owners would accept a smaller Mark that looked like a kit car of the original.
This era was filled with factory and mail order kitch that mimicked the Lincoln look. When this generation of Mark was finished, it didn’t look like a Lincoln, it looked like a Lincoln knock off for someone who couldn’t afford a Lincoln. This generation Mark looks cheap, fake and just plain bad.
It is obvious that Lincoln didn’t want to downsize the Mark. We know this because they didn’t change their style found on the larger Marks. The downsizing was forced upon them. When shoppers saw this generation Mark, they could immediately see a vehicle Lincoln didn’t want to produce.
Lincoln needed to have thrown away everything they used to tack upon the older Marks and invent new. They needed to strip away the new smaller Marks and then reexamine how elegance, class and luxury was interpreted back in the 1960s, when the Lincolns were not filled with gew-gaw and plastic chrome. I’m certain that the basic look of this Mark would have been better if it was inspired by the 1961 Continentals, not the 1974 Mark IVs.
This car could have been more successful if Lincoln stopped dragging their 1970s style language into the new decade. With this generation Mark, Lincoln made a fool of themselves, a fool of those who bought them, and a fool of those who loved the earlier generations of over-endowned Marks.
I believe these Marks were penned when Mighty King Henry II ruled the roost and Iacocca was about to leave the building. I understand (rumor?) that many in Ford’s design department would’ve liked to have had started the more ‘fluid’ T-Bird/Mark VII a lot sooner . . . . but . . . . upright, formal, chiseled styling was what they felt would “please the King. . . . ”
Not much difference in the dashpanels between these Mark VI’s and lower priced Cougars/T-Birds of the same vintage. I wonder if Ford pondered sticking the 200CID (3.3L) straight six under the hoods of these (for economy bragging rights and a cheap way to meet/exceed the CAFE for that time, much like Cadillac did in offering a bored out Buick V-6 (4.1L with four-pot carb) for 1981-83.
The VII was ready to go before the Aero T-bird but there was concern as to how the public would recieve it. So the Aero Bird went on the market first to judge public reaction.
Can you verify that? Source? I’d be curious to know.
The book Soaring Spirit Thirty-Five Years Of The Ford Thunderbird confirms that.
Sorry I can’t remember where I read it years ago.
However the T-bird/Cougar was which shares a number of parts with the VII was introduced for 83 while the VII didn’t show up until 84. The other possible factor delaying its introduction was waiting on approval of composite headlamps.
Here’s an excerpt from Soaring Spirit:
…According to Ornes(Allen, leader of the 1983 Thunderbird design team), the 1983 Thunderbird was originally expected to be “just a slightly softened evolution” of the crisp and boxy ’80-’82 car. Meanwhile, the newly downsized Lincoln Town Car and Continental Mark VI were off to a slow start in the sales wars. With the federal government threatening ever-stricter CAFE regulations, Ford’s product planners realized that the next Town Car and Mark might have to be built on the even smaller Fox platform — further reducing their sales appeal along with their size.
The designers feared that the Mark, especially, would lose what little remained of its character and personality in another round of downsizing. So Telnack’s studio (led by Ornes and John Aiken) conceived a styling theme that would still look elegant and expensive on an extended Fox platform. Abandoning the slab-sided, straight-edged forms that Ford had favored for years, they first created a clay model and then a fiberglass model using very rounded, flowing forms, with flush glass and the strong, functional character of a European touring coupe. Seeing it more as a “driver’s car” than a traditional Mark, they called it, informally, the “Aero Luxury Car”
Peterson, looking for new design directions, enthusiastically backed the Aero Luxury Car for development and supported it for production. Ultimately, it reached the public in late 1983 as the 1984 Lincoln Mark VII. First, however, Telnack’s team derived a new Thunderbird from the Aero Luxury Car, as well. As Halderman remembered:
“We wanted to give the Thunderbird a bold image and a new look, a fresh start. And that didn’t come easy. If I recall, we did several proposals and at the eleventh hour we pulled in a fiberglass car that was around. This was the Aero Luxury Car, quickly modified into a Thunderbird for a weekend customer clinic. When it was uncovered, the people applauded and we had a 1983 Thunderbird, in June of 1980.”
XR7: Thanks. What that tells me is that the basic design origins of both the Mk VII and T-Bird come form one concept, which doesn’t surprise me the least, given their similarities. But that does not in any way support Eric’s assertion that the Mark VII “was ready to go before the Aero T-Bird”. Which I find hard to believe, given the (im)practicalities of what he’s suggesting.
Cars don’t become “ready to go” and then get put in the deep freeze. Concepts are developed (or not). The text makes it clear that the T-Bird was developed first from the “Aero Luxury Car”, and then the Mk VII followed it, undoubtedly using some/much of the T-Bird’s body. It looks to me like the doors would interchange, except for the outer skin. And undoubtedly other aspects.
The Mark VII is a further development of the ’83 T-Bird, which chronologically (and otherwise) makes sense.
Oh I see. I read ready to go as in the “Aero Luxury Car” design was designed for Lincoln first, which it was, not the finalized design that became the Mark VII though. I’m not sure if the Mark VII was designed first, concurrently or after the Tbird and/or purposely delayed though. I don’t recall reading anything about those particular details, but I might have to dig a little further.
As I know it, the Aero Tbird and Mark VIII was essentially the same, but backwards, story as the 61 Continental and Bullet Bird. I suspect the story of the Thunderbird testing waters first might be a somewhat twisted interpretation of the Halderman quote, which basically states just that, but in 1980 for a customer clinic, not in 1983 for customer consumption. Personally I imagine both the Mark VII and thunderbird were developed concurrently to both be 1983s. I know the Mark’s flush composite headlights took some lobbying on Ford’s part to get legal, so that could have been cause for some delay I imagine.
Door structure is definitely the same, as well as all the structure ahead of the B pillars. The Marks use the longer 108″ wheelbase and floorpan of the 80-82 Tbirds though.
The excerpt does indicate that the VII was designed and green lighted before they considered making the T-bird aero. Otherwise the Ford designers never would have gotten away with modifying the Lincoln fiberglass styling mock up.
Why the VII was introduced a year later is certainly debatable. It could be that they were concerned whether or not it would be accepted as a Lincoln since it was a radical departure from what had come before, like I have read in the past. It could also be that they were waiting on the DOT to approve the composite headlights. On the other hand since the styling proposal was done in 80 one would think they at least had a plan for a version with sealed beams in case they didn’t win approval which they likely knew would be difficult.
According to wiki, Ford petitioned the NHTSA in 1981 for the euro headlamps and were legalized by some time in 1983. That definitely could be the cause of the late 1983 introduction IMO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight#International_headlamp_styling.2C_1983.E2.80.93present
If the Thunderbird’s aero styling weren’t the hit it was, I seriously doubt Lincoln would blockade the fully developed Mark VII from hitting showrooms after. The 1980 customer clinic would have likely been when public reaction was tested for the design, not the actual 1983 model year.
I believe this is the aero luxury car that spawned them:
As well as this:
Well they certainly could have delayed making the tooling until late 83 or early 84 to see if customers would actually buy on. Customer clinics are one thing but voting with the wallet is what matters. Sometimes what people say they like in customer clinics is not what they would actually buy.
Eric, you are one right about the late approval of the “euro” design composite headlights on the 1984 Mark VII. My Dad worked in Design Center in that era, and Ford/Lincoln design engineers were pissed off that Mercedes was already importing cars with those composite lights, yet our government was stalling on approval for the cars built here. There were a few pics back then of a few pre-production Mark VII’s with the rectangular quad style thunderbird/cougar lights. However, Ford was so irritated with the Federal Lighting Standard delay that they went into production with the composite light before they were awarded final approval; knowing and willing to pay a fine for cars produced until final approval was received.
I’ve been a Lincoln owner for years owning model years 1956 through 2006. All were great cars. However, for a daily driver my choice is the Mark VI coupe. It offers great economy, very garageable, very comfortable for two people and a great ride. Additionally, repair parts for the most part are really cheap. I loved my Mark V for its styling, but I would trade it for the VI since styling doesn’t help fill your gas tank and the extra 14 inches of the Mark V’s length won’t let me close my garage door.
Not to mention it was a much Quieter car than the V….as most of the V interior Rattles and vibrations we’re eliminated! And Ride was way Superior as it was carefully Reengineered. The engine was weak, that’s it. I love the Vi Ciupe till this day. It looked just as elegant to me in a more modern package for the 80’s
I, for one, totally disagree with your assessment of the Mark VI’s.
My first new Mark VI was a 4-door 1982. I could only afford the base model, but to this day, I am totally in love with the VI’s.
Although I have always been a conservative driver, the only thing I didn’t like about my Mark VI is the engine was really not powerful enough for that size car. If you needed that little extra power to get out of someone’s way, it just wasn’t there.
I am currently in the market for for such a classic car.
I’m hoping to find one so that I can enjoy my passed memories again.
I have a 1983 Lincoln Continental Mark VI that I inherited from my father a couple years ago. It was his baby, kept inside and covered for the past 30 years – It has 39342 original miles on it and am looking to sell as I have no place to keep it and my mother want’s here garage back. Beautiful car, black and gray. Excellent condition. crushed velvet red interior. sun roof, loaded.
Hello Angela,
Is you Mark VI a 2-door or a 4-door? Is it a Signature Series?
Angela,
Do you still have your Mark VI for sale?
Please let me know?
Thank you.
hi, interesting the history of your lincoln. Is she still for sale ?
Petrizot@gmail.com
Would you consider selling it to me in California if so 820-234-1439 is by my number
I, too, have always been quite smitten with the Mark VI. I was only ten years old when it first launched, but I had a neighbor who had two–one in triple black, and one that was green/green/white. I thought they were the most lavish things I’d ever seen (nothing like my family’s ’77 white Impala). A 1980 Signature is still on my bucket list.
Well, you can always wake that 302 up by putting some engine goodies designed for the foxbody mustang and get an extra 100 out of it easy
I wonder if I may be the last to ever read this write up as all comments are many years ago. I am just researching something I have found interesting. A gent I know says he has a 1983 and 1/2 Mark VI and is title as such..He has found only two others and asked me to look into it. It is the Pucci style, How many 1/2 s where made and titles as such I am asking to know
Great write up. Did not realize the Mark VI was on a different wheelbase than the Continental. Wonder if Lincoln will resurrect the Mark VI someday in the future like they did the Mark III since it like the 58-60 Marks are kind of the forgotten and not worthy ones for the name? The problem would be the Mark VII and VIII are worthy ones though.
A filler panel around the headlights would have been nice as the headlight doors are open so much of the time. 🙂
Yep that part of the car looks just plain unfinished, as tho someone took stuff off and never put it back. The headlight doors are only supposed to open when the lights are.on, I thought. Mine slowly open too once its been parked a lil while but from previous owner I was told that was a vacuum.hose problem..
Are the lights supposed to look like that. when they are open.
Is that how it left the factory??
It looks unfinished..All the bare Metal around the head lights.
If this was the design, it explains a lot..Details matter, when you are trying to charge a high price for a car. And these details on this car are horrendous
This is not supposed to be seen in daylight, only when the lights are on, whcich makes looking at this area difficult. Seeing them exposed is the sign of a poorly maintained car/vacuum system.
It’s a shame that the ’81-83 Imperial’s Lean-Burn computerized engine management system turned out to be such a steaming pile of crap. With the personal luxury competition of the same years being the truly less than stellar Mark VI and Eldorado, Chrysler could have really cleaned up in the market segment as the Imperial was easily the best looking of the three.
It was about this time that the personal luxury market started shifting in earnest to the German marques, and it’s not particularly difficult to understand why.
+ 1 on that,the Imperial is a beauty what a shame the injection was never sorted.There’s a contributor here who has a sorted Imperial.The best looking Lincoln since the 56 was just round the corner to save the day however
Best looking to you…….to me its a Cordoba with boxes covering it.
The Eldorado was the best looking to me.
I think Gem was referring to the VII as the one that was just around the corner.
The Cordoba just looks like what it, is a cheap knock off. The rear end is particularly bad it is as if they ran out of ideas and just ended it with a flat panel and then later realized they needed some lights back there.
That generation of Eldo was indeed a good looking car, and certainly looked like a Cadillac. It certainly came roaring back as king of the hill in 1980. My point was that it was certainly possible to do a car of roughly that size following Mark V design cues and have it come out as a decent looking car.
JPC while the box Cordoba is more attractive than the Mark VI I think only a Mopar fan would consider it a great design. It was a huge step backward from the original, just like the Mark VI was from the Mark V.
GM had the advantage of being able to spread the costs of the unique E-body across the Riviera, Toronado and Eldorado. Lincoln had to make due with the Panther, or even worse, it could have made a Mark out of the boxy 80 Fox T-Bird……
I had a lean-burn on my ’83 Dodge D-150 4×2 pickup during the day (slant six). There were a couple of boxes of these that a local (I was in Tidewater, Virginia at the time) Firestone dealer would ‘remove’ . . . . and he swore the Mopars ran “so much better.” However, being active duty USCG at the time with an imminent transfer to California made me leave mine in place. Shortly after I bought it, the Dodge dealer simply advanced the timing . . . . and it ran good with the lean-burn bolted in place. Downside – although fuel economy and drivability actually improved, it meant from then on I had to burn Super Unleaded. Oh well . . . . East Coast – AMOCO Super Gold; California – Chevron Supreme or UNOCAL HIgh Performance.
Two different animals, the Imperial had fuel injection which wasn’t the “lean burn” system. The lean burn system was a computer controlled ignition system and even Chrysler gave up on it and issued a kit that was actually the same as the DC electronic ignition conversion system with an emissions friendly advance curve. I installed more than one on Lean burn V8s.
The first time I saw a 4-door Mark (which wasn’t until years after they were produced and I was an adult) I couldn’t wrap my head around it. I was convinced that someone had swapped the trunk lid on a Mark coupe onto a Town Car and the car had some god awful aftermarket padded fake top on it.
Perhaps that is the greatest sin? That both the Mark V coupe and sedan come off looking like Town Cars that were hit with the full 70s aftermarket customization crap.
A neighbor of ours had a Town Car coupe I always thought was incredibly classy looking. I remember one day being about 7 years old at soccer practice and seeing a Mark VI drive past and thinking “Why did someone put that ugly round window and vents on a perfect looking Town Car coupe!!”
I always got the impression when riding in things like this that it was like powering an 18 wheeler with a briggs and stratton lawn mower engine. As much as I did like my town cars I do not like these.
Well, I consider myself an enternal alum on the other domain. But as a former owner of two Lincoln Mark VI rides (a sedan and a coupe), I must respectfully disagree with the choir of criticism.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/09/hammer-time-the-steenkin%E2%80%99-lincoln/
The ‘Blingin Lincoln’ that succeeded the Steenkin Lincoln received more attention at the retiree communities of West Palm Beach than any other ride I have ever owned.
Benzes? Beemers? Thpppttt!!!! No car offered more true all-American presence during the early Reagan era than the Mark VI. I will bet my old blue velour cloth interior and a solid EFI 5.0 Liter over anything else that was offered by Cadillac or Chrysler at that time.
There was one factory styling element on the Mark VI that, in my opinion, made the car look even worse.
Remember these?
Yeah WTF was that? Were those “non-hidden” headlights? Were they “driving lights” only for fog and inclement conditions? Was it an homage to the single headlight coach built cars of the 30s?
heres one for the bill blass- the red one is the signature series that might deserve its own write up someday
In response to “principaldan”:
1. A classic design feature.
2. No.
3. No.
4. Yes.
5. They were called “Touring Lamps”, and they gave the car an air of exclusivity.
5 is ironic in one way. After quad headlights came out, it was the cheaper cars which had dual 7 inch sealed beams.
OMG those lights are atrocious!
Well done JPC wouldn’t add a thing except to make the point that the Fox Mustang 3-door had a malproportioned greenhouse as well. In both cases the rear quarter windows were too damn small.
There was a notchback version of this generation Mustang which had a full glass window and no louvers.
Oh I know I had a ’79 notch with the 5.0L and TRX tire package. It was surprising that Ford, at that time, could design anything attractive. But of course the notch was just a rip off of the Mercedes SLC right down the the proportions and louvres.
I will defend these cars- I like them- I like how you could order a bunch of different interior options to personalize the car.
i.e- tu-tone leather steering wheel, digital dash, different roof option 1982+ etc
in comparison I never really get excited at seeing a Mark V- its always has the same steering wheel, interior etc.
I also like how they brought back the white striping on the bumper guards
“Many times when I start writing a CC piece on a car I have always found distasteful, I manage to gain a bit of respect for it before I finish. Not here. I have looked at a bazillion pictures of these cars, and it doesn’t matter the color, angle or setting – the miserable thing is just an awkward, ungainly, and badly proportioned car.”
Ouch! Will someone please help me remove this dagger from my heart?
At the 1983 Chicago Auto Show, the Lincoln display had an ’83 Emilio Pucci Mark VI sedan on a podium. It was $27,000. I stood there for almost a half hour, just staring…
1983 Lincoln Mark VI Emilio Pucci Edtion coupe: (wallpaper)
1981 Lincoln Mark VI Givenchy Edition:
1980 Lincoln Mark VI Signature Series sedan:
This one is for “principaldan”:
That Pucci in dark green is beautiful. I’d drive it.
Dark Green really does a lot for Broughamy models.
Hi am Lovell Petty of Las Vegas interested in the Burgundy lincoln listed in your inventory w/the “Touring round lights” built in the drop down headlights in the front of the Lincoln um please call direct to 702 583 2698 or text me direct please
Interested in driving and possibly purchasing your Burgundy Mark VI picture please text call me at 702 583 2698 and how many miles on her?
This is a 5 year old comment, so you may not get a response. I am not sure that he was selling these cars anyhow.
Would it be safe to call this a Pucci Wagon?
I agree… I think this color combo on this car is absolute perfection. I always loved the Mark VI!
Considering this…. WHY did Cadillac 3 years later then do The exact same thing to the Eldorado?
As far as the designer editions were concerned, does anyone think that Lincoln actually dragged Blass, Givenchy, Pucci, the Cartier people, etc., into the design studio every year to say, “Well, what are we going to do with your series this year?”. Or do you think it was just a license to use their respective names and logos and Lincoln just applied whatever they wanted as far as color schemes and features?
Also, how many people remember the ’84 and ’85 only Mark VII Gianni Versace Edition?
“Does that Mark VI really look like it cost twice as much as a Cordoba? I don’t think so either.”
Ahh, but when you’re driving a Cordoba, can you look down your nose and spit on poor people??? I think NOT!! Advantage: Mark VI.
I wonder that about a lot of celebrity-branded products: Is it just a matter of paying royalties, or do they get some sort of veto authority, at least? With many products, I assume they aren’t all that good if they have to put a celeb’s name on it.
For a long time, I wondered who the heck Bill Blass was. Or Eddie Bauer for that matter. Young men usually don’t get excited about couturiers.
”Lee Iacocca had definitely left the building.” – Touché!
It all depends on the celeb and the product. Some people/companies will want a very close observation over the use, style, and design of their name and/or logo on items. For example, in the same era as the Mark VI hit the dealerships, Halston licensed his name to JCPenney for clothing. He oversaw a majority of the items made available for sale.
I doubt that they actually came into the Lincoln studios but it wouldn’t surprise me if they were provided with a stack of drawings in white, sort of a coloring book, for them to do their designs. Then they sent them back with color samples and called it good.
Personally I like the VI in 2dr form. The 2dr Continental is the one who’s proportions look off on the longer wheelbase and there just shouldn’t be a 4dr Mark, just like there never should have been a 4dr T-bird. I’d take a VI over a VII in a hart beat. To me it is the VII that just hasn’t aged well and looks like an overgrown T-bird with a tacked on grille and tire hump.
The only gripe I have is the finishing around the headlights, but on the other hand it is something I’d only see when washing or replacing said headlights so I don’t think It would really bother me.
I do check for these on CL from time to time, the only problem is like the featured car the always have 1 and sometimes 2 of the parking light lenses missing. I’d prefer the Givenchy red and white complete with the oval opera window. But the blue and white Bill Blass would also do.
Of course I wouldn’t leave it stock. Drop it on an Aero Panther chassis and add a 32v 4.6 preferably from an VIII for the diamond star adorned nun’s hat. Add some lacy spoke 16″ wheels from the VII/ Aero Panther, sticky tires and some addco sway bars, cut a coil off the front spring and adjust the ride height sensor out back. The body and interior would be kept 100% stock other than window tinting. Sure I’d love a III or a VI but the fact is feeding a 460 and parking one would make me tire of it as a daily driver while the VI can be made to perform, get acceptable MPG, and is easy to deal with in today’s parking lots and streets.
I’ll meet you this far – this may be the best looking 2 door car that came out on the Panther platform. Admittedly not a high bar.
I could almost do a 4 door one of these. For the complete opposite reason – the hidden headlights look better than the exposed units on the Town Car. That’s it. A Town Car with a different front end. Then I would drive the early 80s lowest of the LoPo 302s and would immediately run away. If I’m going to get an older car, it should not be something that I have to continually say to myself “well, it doesn’t look THAT bad.” I’d sooner drive a ’61 Plymouth. If you are going to have an ugly car, go big or go home.
The hidden headlights are certainly some of the appeal of the Mark over the Conti/TC of this era for me.
As far as engines go the article Craig linked to showed that the 302 powered CV actually was quicker than the 305 powered Caprice in 1980. Though a lot of that was due to the axle ratio the stuck in the Caprice to get the MPG w/o an OD trans. At least they didn’t try and stick the 255 in them.
I have a Motor Trend comparison between a 1980 305 4 BBL Caprice and a 302 2 BBL CV that says the exact opposite. The Ford was over 12 seconds to 60 and the Caprice was a little over 10. Not surprising considering the 305 made 26 more HP than the 302 and more torque with a wider power band
I think the Town Car and Mark VI coupes just do not look that great on the panther platform…I’d say the best of the Panther coupes was the LTD Crown Victoria coupe.
I’m not in love with the VI but I think the 4 door is okay. But since my taste would run towards the ’75-79 Connie, I basically regard the B/Cs and Panthers made between 1977-1991/2 or so as the best CAFE compromise vehicle. After they lose the chrome, boxiness, and real bumpers in the early 90s, I lose interest.
As such, even though the VI is poor V initiation, I don’t hate it if only because I like it better than what has followed it ever since. I feel much the same about the 1980-89 Continental/Town Car. I think many of the target buyers did too, reasoning “okay, they shrunk it, but these are last cars we can get that kind of look like the old ones and still have a V8” The only downsize I consider to have been an improvement in appearance were the B/Cs (for my money the ’77 and ’80-89 Fleetwood Broughams were the best looking Cadillacs since the mid 1960s), but not so much because of the downsize but rather because I think the 71-76 GMmodels were kind of ugly cars, bloated rather than just big as the Lincolns were.
I can’t stand this whole idiom — particularly the interiors, with the rectilinear IPs, cheap plastics, and wood appliqué — so I don’t really grasp why anyone other than Lincoln-Mercury accountants loved the Mark III/IV/V, but I think this was really the point where Lincoln began its transition from status symbol to retiree-mobile. The one thing I can say for the Mark VI’s predecessors is that they were unapologetic; these just seem like they were tailored for older people on a fixed income.
“I think this was the point where Lincoln began its transition from status symbol to retiree-mobile”
For sure. And Cadillac too, even if their cars looked better at the time. The flagship models (Town Car, Fleetwood Brougham) were backward looking…smaller cars imitating their bigger 70s predecessors, but with slower engines, cheaper materials, and at times, less reliability.
The result? More and more, the people who wanted to buy them were the people who just wanted something that kind of reminded them of the cars they drove in the 70s, but could get 20 mpg. In short, conservative Greatest Generation buyers, like my grandfather, who wanted to keep driving big cars and weren’t willing to buy a Taurus or a Cherokee or a 300E, let alone an Accord. Perhaps if GM and Ford had aero-ed and de-broughamed their remaining RWD models c. 1985 they might have had broader appeal for somewhat longer, but by that time the rising generation wanted an E class and thought these were fuddy duddy.
I happen to be sympathetic with the older people’s point of view on this (since I’m sure if I had been alive then, I’d have liked the really big 70s models and not wanted them to be downsized or have to compromise), so I can understand why they’d have been attracted to these–Ford and GM were basically saying “look, the government is forcing us to make smaller cars, and your kids’ tastes are changing, but we’ll still keep making something that has a vinyl top and a hood ornament and kind of looks like what we used to make, because we see a profit in selling you a product that allows your generation to not feel uncomfortable in this new world increasingly populated by peppy little German and Honda cars that confer status in ways you don’t really grasp”.
That sort of marketing strategy works for a while but they milked it for about 5 years too long—Cadillac did okay until the mid-80s and then when they went FWD Lincoln played out the strategy until the 1990s with success (actually forcing Cadillac to keep making the Brougham so as not to totally lose all of its “target buyers”). You could see this in the brochures increasingly portrayed the drivers of the big cars as older, whereas in the early 80s they still pictured younger yuppie couples standing by their Cadillacs and Lincolns. Unfortunately, the “target buyer” for cars geared towards nostalgia and the past eventually retires and ceases to buy new cars regularly, as happened between 1990-1995. Then the “keep-making-downsized-throwbacks-to-appeal-to-old-folks” strategy stops working…as it did, because carried to its logical endpoint, it makes your brand into an “old people” brand.
These were bizarre cars when I was a kid. I think algebra was easier to grasp than trying to decipher a Continental from a Town Car from A Mark VI and which existed when. The 85 up town cars were even more confusing since they kind of sort of gained the sloping tail of the Mark, sans the hump of course. Luckly by the time I graduated to geometry 1 I finally knew hidden headlights fake hump = Mark, exposed headlights = Town car/Continental and the sloping rear is X. Too bad I failed geometry the first go around though, I was too busy trying to figure this out!
The Mark VI isn’t actually that appalling to me, sure there’s some awkward areas but it wasn’t awful. My bigger dislike is that it wasn’t even slightly restyled from the Mark V. Most downsized Fords suffered similarly but even the Thunderbird was at least restyled. The Mark simply seemed to have the existing Mark V body dies shrunken for the Panther platform and nothing more.
…and to continue that thought, I wonder how many body shops accidentally bought giant Mark V body parts from salvage yards to fix damaged Mark VIs that came in to the shops. If these sold in better numbers that could have been a real widespread problem!
The power lowering front vent windows of this generation TC and Mark VI appear to be unique. Can’t think of another car with that feature. The 4-door TC / Mark VI have 6 window switches on the driver armrest. The 2-door ones have four.
Well, my grandparents’ ’87 Fox Continental had it. I imagine the Mark VII may have had it too. Always thought that was a cool feature.
The vents were controlled by the same switch as the window. Holding the down button opens the vent first, then the window if you continue to hold the button.
The 6 switches you see on 4 doors are 4 for the window, one for for the door locks, and one for the window lockout.
This feature started in 1973 and was offered on LTD-Galaxie, Marquis, Continental &T-Bird up to 1976. In the Panther era, it was on Lincoln products only. Some Panthers had vent windows, but the regular swing-out type.
I am going to be in the minority here…while I dislike the downsizing of these malaise cars (I love malaise cars…not gonna lie), I still liked these. I am younger than these cars, and I can understand why they did not sell, but now, take 30 modern Malibus, Taurus’s, Accords, hell…DeVille’s/DTS’s and then throw a (nicely kept) Mark VI into the mix. That is going to be the car that turns heads. All of the “I wish it was still the 70’s” design touches like the fender gills, covered headlights, and opera windows now stand out as unique. And, I like unique. I must also say that I am a huge fan of Panthers, having owned a MGM and two TC’s, which maybe makes these a little bit more appealing to me, personally. Ok, ’nuff said 🙂
Well, I have to disagree with 90% of these opinions here. I like the Mark VI as well as I do like the Mark V. I simply love angularity. Ok, I live in Switzerland, needless to say that the Mark VI is a much better “driver” here than the big boat. I own a 77 Mark V Givenchy and an 80 Mark VI Signature top of the line. If you park it next to the Mark V you can’t really see a big difference in the length. It’s the height hat matters a lot and make the VI look a bit awkward. Have you guys ever driven a Mark VI? If not, you should do so. It’s a far better handling car than the V, it’s better built and the 80s toys in those cars are just excellent to play with. NO ONE ever believes here that these functions were available in 1980. Not talking about interior space. Far better in the VI. Fuel economy far better. The V wasn’t a rocket either even with the big 460 – and yes we do drive a lot faster here in Europe – 90 mph mostly on highways.
The Mark VI will always be remembered as the little Mark. I don’t care – the car itself was a nice running luxury car. I prefer the 4-door. If you look at the 2-door then I’d go for one without the opera window – it stretches the car.
I think the buyer’s were not prepared to pay MORE for a smaller car in 1980 than in 79 when they could still get the V.
Enough said for me – I like all Marks but the VII. Now that was a rebadged T-Bird – where as the Mark VI clearly continued the old traditional style – sadly in a smaller appearance.
I must disagree wholeheartedly with your coverage of the mark VI. I own a 1981 continental mark VI Emilio Pucci designer series. It is an all original vehicle, complete with 8 track, CB radio. Although it isn’t a mark V, it is nonetheless an extremely gorgeous machine! To me, it is exactly what a luxury car should be, long, elegant, and superior to other vehicles on the road. I also own a 1991 Cadillac sedan deville. I realize they are a decade apart, but I would rather drive my Lincoln over my caddy any day of the week! She is a definite head turner! If my phone will send it, I’m including a picture of my baby. Your subject car is in sad shape, but can be made into an elegant machine again!
To understand the MKVI better you’d have to get into the psyche of the time. Personally, I like the MK VI, especially now in the world of “everythings rounded” cars.
The CAFE requirements at the time coupled with the 20+ yr long “overnight” success of the asian imports…really put an end to Detroit’s ability to offer the same kind of car they had offered previously. Fed rules and the economics of the imports (better reliability/higher MPG/low price) found Detroit rudderless for much of the ’80’s in trying to figure out the balance of Style, MPG, Consumer desire, and meeting new punishing pollution control and crash test Regs. The results were many times…awkward at best. Big cars were now smaller and under-powered. Plastics intended to lighten the car seemed cheap (and often was). And yes, while the WWII Gen was retired and looking to stretch their $$ the Boomers were not buying American they were buying econo-boxes, or if affluent BMW’s, Volvo’s & Audi’s. This hurt American Luxo sales for sure.
The Mark VI still stands out to me as special. Its limited run and customization options in my opinion make this a collectible car going forward.
“Big cars were now smaller and under-powered.”
Big cars were “right sized” after 77-79, and still had roomy interiors. They sold well once buyers saw that they were not reall ‘too small’.
Back in the mid ’70s, Mark IV was something to look up to. It was sharp, well proportioned and nicer than other personal luxuries. Dudes drove those were view as arrived, or at least going places. Looking at Mark IVs today, it’s over-sized and lack sophistication. Our eyes are more used to something a bit smaller?
How time can change one’s perspective.
I just purchased one of Fords blunders.An 1981 Lincoln Continental Mark vi sedan. Has only 67000 original, owned by an old farmer in Alberta. Ugly but Cool. It is a very clean car, back seat never sat in, engine block still has all the Ford blue paint. A great cruiser in todays market.
I love my mark vi. Runs good. Ample power from the 5.o liter. It turns heads and for me is the perfect car. It drivers better than the older models and is OK on gas. Its like a pimpped town car. The essense of what a Lincoln should be.
This review is overly harsh. My 83 signature series mark vi continental is an excellent car. On the longer wheelbase it is elegant and well proportioned. The flip up lights are an improvement on the boring town car front end. The fenders look sporty with three shark gills. The round opera window looks and functions better than the square town car window and the tire hump adds style to the rear. This car with its throttle body injection and dual exhausts is faster than my 88 and 79 town cars and rides and handles excellently. Markeisha has many nice touches. 2 tone paint. Sunroof. Digital dash. 3 lighters and 4 ashtrays a smokers paradice. 6 power windows. Power locks. Brake release. Power seats with recliners. Cruise. Nice radio. Power trunk. Power antennae. 4 Reading lights. Cornering ligjts. 9 courtesy lights. Keyless entry. Loud horn tilt wheel. Auto dim mirror. Power mirrors. Auto dim and headlights. What more do you need or want. This car gets all kind of attention. Its beautiful and solid and reliable. It looks like the perfect car for a head of state or a mafia son. Fat tony on the Simpsons has one. When you ride in a mark vi its something special and I consider it one of the finest car ever made. And it will take a hit too. No sawed off Reagan bumpers on this like the 85s on up. You are safe in one of these. The engine is proven and strong. Better than a Cadillac. Best of the best. Gas mileage is OK. If Lincoln still made this it would be the car to have. Haters be damned. This is a fine and beautiful car and hits the mark. Its the last real mark. Far superior to the t bird like mark vii and viii and the bloated mark I’ve..it kept the gorgeous mark v styling and had a better handling smoother ride. Share the love for the undisputed queen of the panthers.
hey @83markvi, i was wondering if you purchased this car in southwest Virginia? i had a lincoln in high school that was identical to your silver one and my dad sold it while i was in basic training down in texas, ive been wondering what happened to it ever sence
Front view.
Rear
Growing up in the 80s, the Mark VI was always one of my favorite cars, and is still one of my favorite Lincolns of all time. I always liked the opera windows, hidden headlights and tire hump, and the four door, to me, represents everything that a Lincoln should be. The inside, big pillowed bench seats and digital gauges… I’m in heaven. Lincoln ruined the Mark with the VII… no oval windows or hidden headlights, it was so little and foreign looking right down to the console and floor shifter inside, yuck.
I have found over the years the best comments come from those with true
perspective earned from being there and done that. I have a 1981 Lincoln
Mark VI Cartier Coupe with 68,000 original miles. I feel honored to have it.
Everything works on it, and it can be used as a daily driver.
I’ve owned Marks from 1956, 69, 72, 74, 79 and this 81 and an 84 and 97.
I must say the most trouble free and enjoyable where the 79 and 81 or the Mark V and VI. Between these two, I would favor the Mark VI simply because it starts easily
with the fuel injection, gets better mileage and it is more garageable if there is
such a word.
As to perspective, I remember well these cars on the show room floor and thinking
how beautiful they looked. I was surprised Ford could offer so much with all the
down sizing going on, yet provide really excellent gas mileage in the middle of the
fuel crisis. Would you rather have a Chrysler K car with a 4-cylinder for $10,000
or a Mark VI with two times everything for $20,000 when both of them got the
same mileage.
How about a 1983 Cadillac Eldorado with the HT (Hook and Tow) 4100 engine
for the same money and same mileage? You got about 3/4ths of a car and an
engine guaranteed to go 70,000 miles at best in the Cadillac.
I wasn’t a good period for the economy or cars, but I think Ford did a great job
in fielding an innovative vehicle. I don’t see too many electrical or mechanical things around from the early 1980s that still work on a daily basis. My 81 Mark VI does,
and I think that is a good advertisement for Ford.
C:UsersSANDRADocumentsLincoln Window Sticker.jpg
C:UsersSANDRADocumentsLincoln Window Sticker.jpg
Please help me. Someone should know these answers.
We purchased a 1983 Lincoln M6 in Detroit at North American International Auto Show, in 1983, Had it shipped to Alaska and kept in garage for past 31 years. currently 3/2014 has 28,000 ‘Original’ miles. Shipped it to Las Vegas along with 1965 Mustang to put in Mustang 50 Anniversary Show buy Lady T-boned the Lincoln (see picture). Only damaged passenger door and rear quarter panel. Her insurance,’Hartford’ says Total Loss and value car at $4700. but will sell car as Salvage to us for $500. We do not want Salvage Title and DO want the car repaired, have found replacement parts from junk car. Our Insurance State Farm said deal with Hartford. Real issue is, look at Car Sticker, at bottom ‘Ford Motor Co Show Car’, we were told this was a 1 of a kind car, see window and roof detail, not your average Signature Series, no Oval window. Not Pucci or Blass or any known Designer Series. Also, note metal VIN tag under hood says car is ‘Specialty’ and VIN number is missing 1MRB F6, Lincoln says this is Limited Run or Pre Production Model or Prototype? They are researching it but they have said that for the past 25 years and we never get any answers back from them. Does anyone know what this all means and what we should do. We suppose we need an Appraisal, however, every Appraiser we talk to does not know what this Specialty tag means or a value for the car, as just a regular 83 M6 it is not. Any help will be much appreciated.
Its all going to be about the appraisal. My uninformed 2 cents is that the special auto show build might be worth something on a highly collectible car but isnt going to get you much on a Mark VI. I would guess its all about miles and condition. I wonder if someone in the Lincoln Continental Owners Club could steer you to an appraiser. Also, however high your appraisal is, an insurer will likely have a lower one and you will end up somewhere between.
If the repair estimate is anywhere near the appraised value, any insurance company will total the car. If the salvage title is that big of an issue (and im not sure it is on a car of this age and value if everything is well documented) you could always do repairs out of pocket and take a deduction on your taxes for a casualty loss. Regular auto insurance is not really a good fit with specialty cars, as the adjusters typically have little experience with them and spend their lives with everyone claiming that his old clunker is a classic worth a bazillion bucks.
sjblazy,
If you haven’t figured this out yet, the specialty tag denotes the type of roof you have. It is the most expensive option on your window sticker: “Roof-2 Door Specialty Coach $779.00”. This is a rare option but I think it was available on at least all 1982-1983 Mark VI’s. It deletes the oval window and gives you a narrower quarter window than standard, plus an extra side light for the roof. I’ll attempt to attach a page from the brochure I found that shows it. Hope the repairs are coming along well,
Bill
For some reason the Sticker for 1983 Lincoln M6 post did not show up. Will try again
That value seems way low. I paid 3200 for my 83 with 74000 miles which needed exhaust, front brakes, calipers, fuel pump, seat switch, mirror switch, auto lamp sensor and tires. I feel I got a good deal since I do the work my self and the body and interior and drive train was mint. I see cars like mine 5000 to 7000. Yours is way lower in miles. Seen those on line around 12000. They are way low. My friends 93 caravan which is a rusty piece of junk with 130000 on it was just totaled and nationwide gave her 2031$ for it. She paid 800 for it 2 years ago. Buy back was 300 $. And my nephew wrecked a 91 explorer with 3000000 miles and got 3200 $. His exploder was rusted out and the paint was peeling and it ran poorly. Also the ac and windows and 4 wheel drive didn’t work. This car is worth way more. I was in an accident and got cut off by a woman in a Bonneville. It was her fault. My car had a broken parking light. Loosened bumper rub strip and a couple minor scratches on the fender. The accident was her fault and progressive gave me 1300 $. They said car was not a total and advised it was worth 6300. I was able to polish out the scratches and got a lamp off a junk for 20$. I’m sorry your car got hit so badly. It is a rare and beautiful car.
5925$ Nada average retail 81 mark coupe. Does not take miles into consideration. High retail over 11000$
Great Comments guys. I will check out Lincoln Continental Owners Club for any info they might have. We have paid State Farm for Full Coverage Insurance for 30 years on this car even though it sat in garage. I was not too smart in not checking out better insurance, but that is first thing on my list for our 65 Mustang as soon as it is out of paint shop. It appears Hartford called 2 junk ‘jipo’ auto sales lots in Alaska who quoted the $4200. or $3768. salvage for vehicle, they were not given the quality or miles factor on the car, they just looked up value on NADA as if they would have average like auto to sell. The car has been licensed and titled in Alaska since new. The real question is what does this ‘Specialty’ tag mean and Lincoln is again trying to research it , although they have never given me any answers over the past years when I called them or wrote them.
83markvi
Where did you find that picture and price, I want to look it up.
Thanks
The picture is my car 83 mark vi signature series.
Nada.com was the website. Like I said it is general in nature.
Try lincolnland in Clearwater fl. They may be able to help with your ? S and help with unobtanium parts.
Your car resembles a 2 door version of mine. Is it a signature series? Not sure if SIG coupes had opera window or not.
Try website grandmarq. The have an excellent Lincoln section even though site is nominally grand marquis. Best panther body site I found.
I easily conclude that the writer of the first article on the Lincoln Mark VI is what I call a “coyote outside the camp fire circle”. He certainly lacks knowledge and experence about luxury cars. After all it does take an upper incme level to purchase and enjoyin a comfortable life style. I have served in a middle management position in the auto industry and was privy to purchase a “hand me down” one year mark driven by a large automotive corp president. I took the car from 22000 miles to 99000 miles when I then was able to buy the very last four door Thunderbirf to be produced. It was dark brown with the very lusurious brougham interior. This also was equipted with the anti lock braking system that was a rare option on these cars.
The Lincoln Mark VI allows me to enjoy modern highway travel, along with drinving a classic car and I also enjoy very good fuel economy. I have a sizeable collection of Mark VI’s. One of mine is a Canadian model with the odotemer reading kilometers rather than miles and has factory dual exaust. It does provide greater power than all my others with fuel injection and single exaust. I soeak from some 45 years of experence and from ownership of some 50 different Lincolns over the years. I also have owned some 12 CAdillacs and threee Imperials. When I consiser adding to my cleection of cars I look for a Mark VI first. I highly recomend this car as car to call a collector car and also enjoy it for weekend use and when a back up car is called for.
I’m thinking of buying an 81 Mark VI 4 door. It’s a Canadian model and the original variable venturi carb was replaced with a Motorcraft 2150. The engine was rated for 130 hp and I worry that it will be too slow to drive in today’s traffic. I’ve also read so many bad things about the early AOD transmission. How would you compare the ride of the Mark VI to a 70s Continental? How does the ride and handling compare to a 90s Town Car?
my ’80 MkVI has the 5.8 carburated engine.with factory dual exhaust. is it a rarity?
My father drove an 80 Bill Blass Mark VI for a decade. I would often catch him standing in the window staring at it. Just absolutely loved it. Lidded eyes, Kardashian butt, Gold anodized and polished snowflake legs. Snow white on white on white with navy inserts.
There was always a new Caddie parked next to it as he replaced those every two years out of habit. I swear they went un-noticed beside his Lincoln. I razzed that car as mercilessly as I did his toupee. I used to marvel though at the amount of unsung engineering went into that one year. Kevlar hood, Aluminum every where. A lot was tried that year and little was said. But for the leather seats the interior felt cheap as dirt. Neoprene tree on the firewall. Ketchup can on the inner fender. Sad.
In 1989 I bought a 1982 triple black 4dr Mark VI. Leather, Sunroof, factory wire wheels (not hubcaps) and a red pin stripe in mint condition. I was only 21 yrs old but that was the car of my dreams. I had people asking me to sell it to them. I lived in Atlanta, Ga. and on occasion you would see a grey Mark or a red Mark or the awful 2 dr. Mark but never have I seen one that was like mine. Unfortunately, I got married and needed to find a place to live so I sold it. I’ve had many cars several Mustangs including 3 Cobra Convertibles but none have got the attention that the Mark got. I continue to look for one that compares but have yet to find one. I even thought about buying one and redoing it to look like mine but parts are impossible to find, especially the Lincoln wire wheels.
Here’s my ’80 Mk VI with the rare optional 5.8 351w, factory dual exhaust, and that damned Variable Venturi 2bbl carb thats given me issues since day 3. Tho i must say when the carb is functioning it works very nicely.. the 5.8 IMO is the best engine for this car and idk why it was only an option in ’80 but i definitely feel blessed to have it, because its rare and feels perfectly matched to the size and weight of the car. Plus it’ll move that thing quick enuf. I’ve driven 302-powered Panthers from this era and the 351 in this Panther coupe is considerably more fun to hoon around town. Mine turns heads for sure.. its bagged and i definitely enjoy ppls reactions at stoplights when i play with the switches. the airbag suspension is something else. unlike most boats from this era it feels sporty. It’ll cut thru corners a lot sharper, the ride is nice and firm. you still float but feel the muted ‘kicks’ from the roadway more. Wish she were still stock some days but these do make great lowriders
I think you shred this car too severely. I have owned many older cars and had a Mark VI 2-door, not in the best shape that I bought for only $700 around 2010. I am currently thinking about buying one in much better shape. I saw a Mark VI Cartier edition here in town and, yes, the styling is – well I will say it looks better in some colors than others. Some things I did not like about the Mark VI – the same cheap looking steering wheel that all Fords shared at the time. The sound of the doors opening and closing, same sound as a Fairmont of the same vintage made. The sound of the headlamp doors closing with a solid CLANK, and the look of the front when the headlamp doors opened up after the car sat for a while. My 1970 Mercury Marquis headlight doors closed nice and quietly. But as much I have tried I don’t really like the proportions of the Mark V. I have tried to like the Mark V but I just don’t warm up to them. And nice ones cost considerably more than a VI. The picture attached is one I like!
Couldn’t agree with you more. Just looking at the ridiculous, excessive overhang of the Mark V shows a culture in love with itself and not giving a damn! The Mark VI is SO much more successful in terms of bringing every bit of Lincoln’s classicism to the table but in a more efficient and economical package. Time is on our side; just look at the growth of interest on websites and in prices–which are certainly on the upswing!
Atleast the trunks on these mini marks are big enough to hold two 22 inch subs. I did just that on a 81 mark vi coupe I inherited from my grandfather years ago. Those cars are full of very cheap plastic and rattle pretty bad when you’ve got a customized audio in them. I ended up blowing out the windows on the mark when I was in a bass decibel competition one time! I swapped my subs into a 66 Caddy convertable I got a couple years ago. not to much buzzing cause old caddys don’t got a lot of cheap plastic to rattle.
Nothing wrong with the Mark VI that a wheelbase stretch can’t fix …
Wheelbase stretch plus “V12” fender vents.
I am still surprised today, that Ford didn’t make a greater effort to improve the aesthetics of the headlight area, when they were in their on/open state. The body colour sheet metal and unfinished appearance in the detailing around the headlights looks so bad!
Even if it perhaps meant a flat black plastic headlight surround creating a cleaner appearance. That would at least downplay this area. Many owners used to drive during daylight/dusk, with their lights on. Even as a kid, I used to always notice this unflattering area in 70s and 80s Lincolns. Especially noticeable with light coloured paint.
Made them look Fairmont cheap.
I do agree that this mark is way ill proportioned. I do like the 4 door Mark a lot. other than the 1986 and 1987 Eldorado…………The Caddy was never an “also ran”.
I have to wonder whether the priority in designing this Mark was to make it look smaller. It certainly achieved that. But as to fixing it to make it look right, where do we begin?
The number one thing that offends my eye is the massive front overhang. That is ridiculous in a RWD car, and certainly impacts such considerations as weight distribution. Where were the engineers when this thing was approved for production? The front wheels need to be pushed about four inches forward, possibly more. Building this thing on the longer chassis would be a step in the right direction.
The next major problem is the greenhouse; it’s too upright and boxy. It may not be feasible to lower the roof, but adding some more rake to the front and rear screens would return some of the sleekness of the previous Mark. Especially the rear screen, and rake the rear side window to match.
And by the way – lose that vertical chrome accent on the B-pillar. Yes, chrome would look more prestigious than a bare pillar, but think. As we read from left to right rather than up and down, the eye wants to ‘read’ a design from front to back. A heavy vertical chrome accent (or a pair of thin ones) on an otherwise sleek design is a like visual barb. It catches the eye and stops the flow of ‘reading’ the design, much like a period/full stop stops the eye at the end of a sentence. Instead of seeing the car as a cohesive whole, the eye views it as two halves. Front. Back. It’s bad enough that the pillar is there on what should be Lincoln’s best and most exclusive car, let alone accenting it. If it must be there (for framed windows) the pillar should be thinner too, avoiding the sense of deeply-sunken windows.
We had one when I was growing up. I have much to say, but will limit myself. All the criticism above is valid, similar to the deserved criticism (and rare praise – but not from me) of the ‘77&’78 LeSabre based Rivieras.
We really enjoyed this car when I was 12 or 13. My dad bought a used ‘80 that was a couple of years old, purchased while this style was still in production. Ours was white, 4 doors, with a maroon velvet interior and moonroof. It came with a Ford branded cassette tape with a variety of pop song selections to enjoy the Premium Sound System. It looked sharp. We loved to blast the provided Peter Gunn theme with all windows and moonroof open….
Here’s an interesting story to go along with Daniel M.’s observations above regarding the “unfinished appearance” of the Lincoln headlight compartments when the doors were open. In late 1980, my widowed mother asked me to come down from Austin for the weekend so she could look at the 1981 Imperials at Bill Heil Chrysler in San Antonio. I distinctly recall the salesman underscoring Chrysler’s attention to detail by pointing out the beautifully finished chrome interiors of the Imperial’s headlight compartments in contrast to Lincoln’s unattractive, sloppy approach. She happily drove that Imperial until late 1989 when the new 1990 Chrysler Imperial came out.
Was never a fan of these cars during this time era and the same extends to the 1980-83 Cordoba. Too boxy and overwrought and way too much gaudy tacky exterior trim plus those weird unfinished headlights. Alway much preferred the look of the E-body Eldo/Riv and Toro during these years especially the 1979/80 models with the Olds rocket 350 engines. I do remember Ford having a lawsuit against its new AOD transmission that would stall out in traffic when the lockup torque converter would engage and the dreadful VV carb issues also noted by PM and Consumer Guide auto series for the 1980 model year putting these and the other Panther car line on the “do not recommend” list.
Ford did much better thereafter omitting the 351 and it’s VV carburetor and fixing the AOD transmission and this is the area they cleaned Cadillac’s clock from 1982 onward- reliability under the hood.
A wonderful automobile.
I totally disagree with your assessment. For one, look at what GM did during the same period. They went from Big Oldsmobiles, Buicks, Cadillacs, Pontiacs and Chevys of the 1970’s to small boxes starting around 1986. At the time, Lincolns were redesigned and were selling like hot cakes versus Cadilacs. They were even advertising Lincoln, as what a Luxury Car should be. Sure Lincoln downsized, everyone had to. The 1980 to 1983 Continental Mark VI series had more interior room than the the 1970’s models, not to mention the vast electronical inventions, some of which were ahead of Cadillac. It is just your opinion, not everyone agrees with yours. These were beautiful cars and they had a presence which spoke quiet eleqance.
Today, if you look hard and long enough, you may be able to find 1980’s Town Cars and and Continental Mark VI at very respectable collector car prices. Not to mention that Town Cars and Mark VI had the bullet prove 5.0; while Cadillac offered the wonderful, 4100 V8.
Proud former owner of a 1983 Mark VI, and two 1989 Lincoln Town Cars.
I do not dispute that they had their good points. But the 1983 and 1989 experiences you had were probably much better than the 1981-81 cars which were not without their powertrain issues.
The market spoke on these cars. Just like it would in 1985 when those awful small Cadillacs came out. Lincoln had pretty much owned this market through the 70s, but during the Mark VI’s time on earth the Eldorado ruled the segment again. Both the Mark V that preceded it and the Mark VII that followed it carried out the personal luxury mission much more effectively, both because of their mechanical attributes as well as their styling and luxury presence.
I freely admit that my dislike for these (which remains strong) is colored by much time spent around Lincolns of the 1970s. 1980s Lincolns may have seemed like great cars in the context of what everyone else was building in this segment in the 80s (and even I was softening towards Town Cars by the later 80s when the improved injection systems were installed). But these were poor substitutes for the Lincolns that had been offered in prior decades. When my father turned in his 78 Town Coupe for an 80 Town Coupe, all you could think was “the world’s resources are running out and we will just have to settle for less.” The 80 may have looked like an improvement on the spec sheets, but it was a tremendous come-down in every other way.
The “Market spoke” on these cars for one overwhelming reason: economics!
Your well-researched and professionally-written article still makes my stomach turn. It is obvious that you despise the styling efforts of the Mark VI (which, in a way, means the companion Town Car that was really only a trim variation). But at least be fair; the article–pictorially–looks as if you went out of your way to find photographs of the poorest, most derelict, flat-tired examples. Why not be fair and replace those photographs with some of the beautifully maintained or restored examples of which you may find a plethora on the 80-89 Lincoln Town Car and Continental Mark VI Facebook Website. To me (and to hundreds of others), these cars were magnificently conceived, offering a dependable and fairly economical way of enjoying the Lincoln legacy. In fact, their conception was downright revolutionary and evolutionary…and at a savings of, as you point out, over 800 pounds. Time is beginning to show that your opinion may be in the minority. However, I do commend you for the factual side of this excellent (and only well-researched) history. That you would even write it shows the importance of the Lincoln automobile to culture and preservation, and that, my colleague includes the 1980-9 Town Cars and the Mark VI!
The “Market spoke” on these cars for one overwhelming reason: economics!
Note, an un-retouched photograph of the interior of my recently acquired 1982 Mark VI accompanies this text. This car was last registered in 2009. It was not garaged during this eleven year period. It is as dry as a bone, and with a new battery and gas at engine-point it cranked right up and ran smoothly! What great cars are these and I ought to know; I have owned over 15 of the 80-89 Town Cars and Marks–many of them were used for countless thousands of miles in my business. And, now, to have an elegant and convenient sedan with all of the styling cues of the earlier Mark V Coupes; well, it’s total bliss. As a retired interior and architectural designer, I have ideas about style, harmony, balance and taste. I am the recipient of ASID national and international awards. And, as it turns out, my ideas differ greatly from yours. But that is what’s great about forums like these: it stirs the pot; it gets folks thinking…and sometimes, modifying their ideas. Really? Let’s at least get some Mark interiors without the pinetree deodorizer! Feel free to use mine.
Does anyone recognize the silver Mark IV in the car show picture? I don’t remember those chrome moldings and stripe at all. Well pimped.
The Mark VI et al would look much better if the back few inches of the C pillar and roof were faired in a bit. That would help the top-heaviness with the padded roof. I wonder how many were sold with all metal roofs–was it even possible to order it that way?