Vintage M/T Review: 1970 Cadillac Eldorado Vs. Lincoln Continental Mark III – “Take Me To Beverly Hills”

From 1968 through about 1979, the Cadillac Eldorado and Lincoln Continental Mark were at the top of the heap of American prestige cars. In July 1970, Motor Trend began what for a time became an annual tradition: comparing these premier personal luxury coupes to ask which one was truly “King of the Hill.” Let’s take a look at the cars, and see which one came out on top.

Both the FWD Cadillac Eldorado and the Lincoln Continental Mark III have been covered extensively at CC before (if you’re looking for histories of these models, check out the links in “Related Reading” at the bottom of this article), but a brief recap may be in order:

The E-body Cadillac Eldorado was introduced for 1967, a sharp-edged personal luxury car sharing its front-wheel-drive platform (though not its engine) with the Oldsmobile Toronado.

 

The Eldorado’s archrival Continental Mark III (not to be confused with the 1958 car of that name) arrived in the spring of 1968 as an early 1969 model. Mechanically, the Mark III was a long-wheelbase Ford Thunderbird with Ford’s biggest engine, but its real appeal was its neoclassical styling, complete with ersatz Rolls-Royce grille.

 

For about 85 percent of Americans of driving age, these cars were it, the last word in image and luxury. Lincoln-Mercury marketing claimed that the Mark III appealed to “the trend-setters — the pace-setters — the advance guard of fashion and flair in a dynamic world of success.” Both cars were also popular with celebrities, including Dean Martin, Elvis Presley, and Sid Caesar, among others. As Motor Trend editor Bill Sanders put it:

In the good ol’ U.S.A, two cars still live that retain an image of opulence and luxury that even their detractors must admit command a degree of attention not found very often. Two cars that still maintain an image of mystique that can’t be matched on the Dow Jones affluence meter.

If you’ve got the American Dream, if you’ve made a pilgrimage to the Grand Canyon, Disneyland, Mt. Rushmore, or the Okefenokee Swamp, if your goal is to move all the way up from your Biscayne station wagon, then the Lincoln Continental Mark III and the Cadillac Eldorado are the end of status street. Top of the the heap. King of the Hill. But, which one? Is there a “King”? To settle this burning controversy that injects its indelicate presence into every social event and intimate tet-a-tete [sic], Motor Trend has taken the reins and compared and tested both cars.

In comparing the relative merits of these cars, Sanders felt obliged to include some qualifiers:

Just what is this opulent mystique that makes restaurant car jockeys ramble and doctors feel that they no longer have to make house calls now that they own one? Surely it’s not a quarter mile e.t. that would make a Mickey Thompson shudder. Definitely it’s not such cornering prowess that a Mark Donohue would sigh in ecstasy. No, it’s something much more intrinsic. Other cars may ride nearly as well and you can order most of the options for other cars that these two have. So, it’s something more. They aren’t limousines, but they have every attribute of comfort, ride, quietness, and smooth operation. They aren’t sporty cars, but they impart an air of owner individuality that sets you apart if you have one.

Obviously, in 1970, many Motor Trend readers were still preoccupied with muscle cars, and the buff books (particularly Car and Driver) had already embarked on their love affair with high-end European cars. By those standards, the Eldo and Mark III didn’t rate. However, the four-on-the-floor crowd couldn’t afford these cars anyway, and unlike the European exotics, a new Eldorado or Continental Mark was a status symbol you never had to explain, whether in Beverly Hills, Palm Beach, Las Vegas, or the wilds of middle America. Even people who disdained cars like these understood exactly what they were and what they represented.

 

Part of what they represented was comfort, both in ride and seating. Sanders observed:

Comfort is always tied up with ride characteristics, but seating comfort alone is a big factor in these cars. After long trips, our fatigue factor seemed to be increased in the Eldorado. The seating configuration just wasn’t as comfortable as that of the Mark III. Sliding behind the wheel each time, too, we noticed the leather seemed to be of a better grade in the Mark III. Both cars have fold-down center armrests that are part of the lounge-type seats, and these add to easy, comfortable highway driving. Rear seats in both cars have limited leg room, which seems to be in vogue today in all U.S. cars.

This wasn’t the first time M/T editors had expressed dissatisfaction with Eldorado’s six-way power seat. Back in their first January 1967 road test, they’d complained that the seat “offered every arrangement but that which seemed entirely right to three of our testers. … They gave excellent back support, but are just a bit too firm. The center part … is somewhat raised and too hard to be used for any length of time.”

 

Stylistically, the Mark III interior wasn’t to every taste — personally, I find the ersatz Edwardian men’s club atmosphere it cultivates (especially in darker colors) way too kitschy — but it did make the Cadillac seem a trifle bland by comparison.

Convenience, too, is somewhat a matter of personal taste, but we think the Eldorado has the most conveniently organized and driver-oriented switches, buttons, knobs, and other operative devices. Items such as the windshield washer-wiper controls are more convenient for the driver in the Eldorado, and the headlight sentinel that automatically turns on and off the headlights are little luxury touches that can be appreciated. Although the Mark III has full dash instrumentation, which the Eldo doesn’t, they are laid out in square pods across the dash so it’s difficult to check them all easily. Also, the Lincoln men have stuck their Cartier electric clock in the best location on the dash, directly ahead of the steering wheel. So, you know what time it is and the clock is by Cartier, but it’s tough to find out if you have any oil pressure.

Cadillac’s automatic headline system was actually two separate options (both of which the test car had): Twilight Sentinel, which automatically turned the headlights on or off depending on ambient light (and had a timer to let you leave the lights on for brief periods, such as walking from the car to your door), and Guide-Matic, which automatically dimmed the high beams for oncoming traffic.

 

The Mark III offered a similar auto-dimming feature (a $51.20 option), but the M/T test car apparently didn’t have it. A novel Mark III standard feature the Cadillac didn’t offer was hydraulically operated windshield wipers, which offered infinitely variable speed control.

With weight factors somewhere just below a Union Pacific domeliner coach, both cars have quite similar ride characteristics because any harshness, noise, or road feel is cushioned out before it ever gets to the seat of your pants.

Regarding the “weight factors,” you should bear in mind that the weights in the spec panel on the following page are base curb weights, presumably taken from the AMA specifications (which I happen to have). The test Eldorado had roughly 230 lb worth of optional equipment on top of its 4,721 lb base weight, while the Mark III options added at least 154 lb to the 4,866 lb factory curb weight. (Lincoln-Mercury didn’t list the weight of the power sunroof in the AMA specs, but it would have added at least 20 lb.) So, both cars were about 5,000 lb as equipped, with the Mark III the heavier of the two by something like 70 to 80 lb.

 

As for handling:

Steering presents a different act. GM is hip to variable ratio, while Ford is still using straight power steering. The result is 2.7 wheel turns from lock-to lock and a correspondingly lower overall gear ratio with the Eldorado compared to 4.03 wheel turns on the Mark III. Now, any clown who wants to take one of these cars to a road course and see what kind of violent under or oversteer he can force out of these immense, overly dampened, mushily sprung dinosaurs must be a little dingaling. Handling is what you’d expect . . . some roll steer and dip from the soft, soft suspensions. Steering plays a significant role though, even on something as straight as an interstate highway across Nebraska. And, the Eldorado has steering response that overshadows its rival.

Variable-rate power steering was a genuine advantage for big GM cars of this period. You couldn’t really say it had steering feel in the sporty-car sense (and I suspect Cadillac chassis engineers would have been insulted if you did), but it made a big Cadillac a lot less cumbersome to maneuver. For this era, the Mark’s slow 21.9:1 steering ratio seems old-fashioned, and it made the Mark’s curb-to-curb turning diameter 2 feet bigger than the Eldorado’s despite its shorter wheelbase.

The text continues:

Also, the Mark III can be equipped with Michelin radial tires, which our car also had. The Eldo had regular bias belted tires. It’s hard to tell how much added gripping power or stability the radials contributed because of the weight and suspensions, but after 30,000 miles or so the wear factor will probably come into play. Besides that, radials seem to give the Mark III a bit sportier handling, if that is possible.

The 1970 Eldorado didn’t offer radials, but it did have better tires than the original 1967 edition: L78-15 bias-ply compared to 9.00-15, with whitewalls the only option.

 

Curiously, the AMA specs indicate that 225R15 radials were standard on the 1970 Mark III, but that you could still order 9.15-15 bias-ply tires, perhaps to placate buyers who feared radials would make the ride harsher. If you weren’t worried about that, you could also order heavy-duty shocks on the 1970 Mark III, as part of a $17.10 “Cross-Country Ride Package.”

An engine seems to be incidental to these cars, as it should. They will cruise at 100 plus mph, but when they are idling you can’t tell if the motor is running or not. They both have giant displacements; in fact, the Eldorado at 500 cubic inches (8.2 liters and don’t forget it) has the biggest production auto engine going. But these engines are tuned to handle all the electric and vacuum power options and great weight of the cars. Acceleration is smooth and acceptable, nothing spectacular. The Mark III is rated at 365 hp and the Eldorado at 400, so even in that area they are close and acceleration times show it.

The Cadillac 500 (whose exact metric displacement, if you’re wondering, was 8,194 cc) was essentially a longer-stroke version of the 472 cu. in. (7,734 cc) Cadillac V-8 introduced in 1968, which was still standard on non-Eldorado models. Its gross ratings were 400 hp and 550 lb-ft of torque. The Mark III had the Ford 460 (whose metric displacement was 7,536 cc), a longer-stroke version of the 429 cu. in. (7,027 cc) V-8 used in lesser Fords, with gross ratings of 365 hp and 500 lb-ft of torque. Both were recently designed modern engines developed with emissions control in mind. The Lincoln had air injection for 1970 while the Cadillac didn’t until 1971, but both had provision for it. (The “Smog control” option listed in the spec panel options list was actually the charge for the evaporative emission control system. In 1970, this was only available in California, where it was mandatory; the system would be required for all U.S. cars for 1971.)

 

It’s clear from the performance figures that neither engine had an as-installed net output approaching the impressive advertised gross figures. The 1971 SAE net ratings were 224 hp for the Mark and 235 hp for the redesigned Eldorado, but the ’71 engines had lower compression ratios than the 1970 editions, and the Cadillac added air injection, so those figures aren’t directly comparable with the high-compression 1970 engines. I’ve never found factory net ratings for the 1969–1970 versions of these engines, but my guess would be around 270 hp for both cars.

In any case, the performance figures are so close (taking into account the Mark’s slightly greater weight and taller gearing) that I suspect their net power output was about the same, gross ratings not withstanding. Here are the comparative M/T test results:

Cadillac Eldorado and Lincoln Continental Mark III Performance

Acceleration (2 aboard)	Cadillac Eldorado	Lincoln Continental Mark III
0–30 mph	3.5 secs.	3.5 secs.
0–45 mph	5.9 secs.	5.9 secs.
0–60 mph	8.8 secs.	9.2 secs.
0–75 mph	13.1 secs.	13.6 secs.
Passing, 40–60 mph	4.8 secs.	4.7 secs.
Passing, 50–70 mph	5.2 secs.	5.6 secs.
Standing start ¼ mile	16.37 secs. at 85.87 mph	16.50 secs. at 85.63 mph

 

(Motor Trend generally didn’t measure actual top speed in this era; the 3rd gear figures in the spec panel are just the maximum test speeds, limited by the length of whatever track Motor Trend used for acceleration runs.)

Brakes on both cars appear to be adequate. Stopping distances weren’t bad, but we noticed some fade after hard use. And from the smell of things, the brakes weren’t too happy about the whole thing either. Both cars also have front disc brakes as standard.

Both cars stopped from 60 mph in the 140-foot range, the Eldo in 144.8 feet, the Mark III in 141.7 feet. Something the article curiously doesn’t mention at all is anti-lock brakes: The Kelsey-Hayes Sure-Track electronic rear-wheel anti-lock system was standard equipment on the Mark III for 1970. Late in the 1970 model year, Cadillac added the Track Master Anti-Skid Control system, a similar rear anti-lock system developed by AC Electronics, as a $210.50 option; the test car presumably didn’t have it. Neither system really helped stopping distances — and they did nothing for fade resistance, which became a problem for both cars in heavy use — but the antiskid systems did provide better control in panic stops. This was particularly useful for the Eldorado, whose FWD powertrain made it so nose-heavy that the lightly loaded rear drums would easily lock up if you slammed on the brakes.

Fuel economy, or the lack of it, is another attribute both cars share. Gas consumption averaged out just about the same for both cars. In round figures, each car got between 10 and 12 mpg on both the highway and around town.

This gas mileage range is horrifying by any standard (and I’m sure you could push the mileage of both cars well into single digits in aggressive city driving), but the fact that the gigantic Cadillac engine could eek out 0.8 mpg more than the Lincoln despite its extra 40 cubic inches of displacement and shorter gearing is sort of miraculous. Obviously, very few people who could afford these cars had any economic reason to be concerned about fuel economy, but Cadillac owners had once taken pride in getting surprisingly good gas mileage — part of Cadillac’s appeal was that if you could afford the price of entry, running costs really weren’t that high. For most Eldorado and Mark III owners, I assume the only real concern the poor mileage presented was that maximum range was limited, even with 24-gallon fuel tanks.

 

The text notes that the Mark III test car had a power sunroof, a $459.10 option (almost as pricey as air conditioning). While the test Eldorado doesn’t have one, Cadillac did add a power sunroof option during the 1970 model year, with a roof made by the American Sunroof Corporation. It listed for $626 (which I don’t think included the vinyl roof that had to be ordered with it), and I believe it was quite rare until the mid-’70s.

Overall, there wasn’t much to choose between these cars in quantifiable performance terms, so it came down to styling and interior comfort. For exterior styling, I personally favor the Eldorado (although I think it lost something with the switch to exposed headlights for 1969, leaving the nose looking a bit unfinished), but the Mark’s neoclassical kitsch obviously had — and still has — many ardent fans, including Henry Ford II.

 

As for the interiors, Motor Trend found the Eldorado a bit too stark, calling the dashboard “austere looking.” Sanders remarked:

The Eldorado has a lot of seemingly more advanced technical conveniences, but from a strictly plush, posh, luxury standpoint, the Mark III has the intimacy a car like this should offer.

How did the public vote? In this generation, the Eldorado came out ahead, but only by a nose, and the two cars were neck-and-neck most of the way:

Cadillac Eldorado and Lincoln Continental Mark III Production, 1967–1971

Model Year	Cadillac Eldorado	Lincoln Continental Mark III
1967	17,390	(not offered)
1968	24,528	7,770*
1969	23,333	23,088*
1970	23,842	21,432
1971	(redesigned)	27,091
Total	89,093	79,381

* Lincoln-Mercury considered the early-build Mark III a 1969 model, so official production figures list the combined total (30,858), but there are enough minor differences to distinguish between the “1968” cars and ones built during the 1969 model year.

 

Sanders concluded:

One thing, for a car you drive yourself, these two are about the ultimate today in computerized, programmed driving. Recently Mort Sahl and Sid Caesar were standing near Sid Caesar’s Mark III discussing cars and driving. Mr. Sahl suggested Mr. Caesar get something a little more sporty, but Mr. Caesar felt that his Mark III did just about everything he wanted. Whereupon he opened the door and intoned in a deep voice to the steering wheel, “Take me to Beverly Hills.” That’s about as easy as it can be.

Related Reading

Curbside Classic: 1967 Cadillac Eldorado – On The Dark Side (by Phoenix)
Vintage Reviews And Commentary: 1967-1968 Cadillac Eldorado – The King Of Cadillac From When Cadillac Was King
Vintage Car And Driver Comparison: 1967 Ford Thunderbird And Cadillac Eldorado – A New Contender Enters The Personal Luxury Car Wars (by Rich Baron)
Curbside Classic: 1968 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado – Steak Knife (by Joseph Dennis)
Curbside Classics: 1969 and 1970 Cadillac Eldorados – The Best Of All Possible Worlds (by Aaron65)
Curbside Classic: 1968-1971 Lincoln Continental Mark III – Right On!…The Mark (by Paul N)
Curbside Classic / Cars of my Father: 1970 Lincoln Continental Mark III – Lemon Yellow (by J P Cavanaugh)