Of the three inexplicable "Bustle Backs" that debuted in consecutive models years 1980-1982, I've always been of the opinion that Lincoln, if you divorce yourself from attempting to legitimize the design, was the one that got it sort of right. Imagine that, Lincoln doing something right or less wrong during the "Malaise Period". Amazing. Doesn't mean I'd be caught dead in one but between the 1980 Cadillac Seville, quite possibly the ugliest American made car of the last forty years, the 1981 Imperial by Chrysler, which was saved from being even worse off than the Seville only because it was a coupe, the Lincoln was the least homely of a lot of very homely automobiles. Credit that to that little spare tire hump on the back. More on that below.
Built on Ford's Fox platform, which also underpinned the 1979 Ford Mustang and 1978 Ford Fairmont amongst other very humble Ford offerings, the 1982 Lincoln Continental was everything luxury car buyers sought after in the early 1980's. Debate-ably glamorous styling inside and out, a prestige brand and the stupefying sticker price that went along with that brand. After all, what's the point of buying a luxury car if you're not going to pay through the nose for it? Let's not even begin to address the fact that there were far better ways to spend $25,000 on a luxury car in 1982 than on a Lincoln.
Not unlike the 1968 Lincoln Continental Mark III and the 1973 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, the "Bustle Backs" were meant to emulate classic car designs of the 1930's. The designs were original enough that it mattered little if you got the gist or not. Subsequently, you could dislike the designs for what they were rather than connect the dots as to what they were trying to be. I for one find it hard to believe that most of the buying public at the time would put two and two together that the Big Three were cribbing from car designs from thirty to forty years prior. Little less caring. Not unlike today; you really think people admire the current Camaro, Mustang and Challenger because they ape lines of their "classic" late '60's to early '70's forebears?
Of the three "Bustle Backs", the Lincoln was also the most conventional top to bottom. It was a rear wheel drive sedan powered by the salt of the earth, iron block and head Ford 302 V-8, albeit with a piddling 129 horsepower. Buyers could also delete the V-8 and order a 232 cubic inch V-6, remember the era that we're in - the end of the second gas crisis. In 1984 buyers could also choose a BMW sourced turbo diesel six as well; one of those would be interesting to find. I mention "conventional" since the Cadillac was front wheel drive and after 1980 was later saddled with a series of horrendous Cadillac engines. The Imperial was an over the top wedding cake on wheels that vaporized the minute it drove over the dealership curb. Chrysler sank that ship after 1983 incidentally. The Seville moped on until 1985. Our Continental lasted until 1987.
Public reaction to the 1982 Continental's "Bustle Back + Hump" was mixed - and although I believe the design has aged well, it's still a polarizing one. Same was true of the humpback 1968 Mark III's which were the first post-1956 vintage Continental Mark II Lincolns to feature what could only be described as a far flung styling detail. With regards to the '68 Mark, if it didn't have the hump, it would've just been a Thunderbird - in other words, just another car. Same was true for the '82 Continental; if baby didn't have "Bustle Back", it would've just been another car.
Which brings us all the way back to the introduction of Lincoln's new for 2017 Continental which curiously, not only doesn't have a Bustle Back, it doesn't even have a vestigial spare tire hump or bump. Personally, I think that a mistake since as polarizing as the hump (or bump) was on the 1982 Continental, it was a unique styling element that made the car a most memorable one. While Lincoln's new for 2017 Continental faces many obstacles above and beyond whether or not it has a hump on the trunk, the lack of that styling detail leaves this car looking like just another car. Albeit one that is very, very expensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment