1978 Lincoln Continental Base from North America - Comments

27th Feb 2013, 08:42

I look at them as an average vehicle They work, you can commute far to work, and they don't cost a lot. However there are those that can afford and like nicer cars. Even Toyota and Honda make their higher end lines.

I would hate to make any long trip in my son's stock 2004 Honda Civic EX. Even with the 15" tires, it is very uncomfortable. It's the only car he has had, and there is no one he compares to.

We have had dozens of cars; most new. No issue with paying a bit more for a nice one. Actually, buying my son an EX model for a first car might give you a clue on that. It's still a rough ride. He is now in college, driving it still. It's true on trucks by the way. For over 30 years, the best selling vehicle in America has been a full size truck. My older son owns a new F-150 as one of his vehicles. It's very smooth and car like. More like a very nice SUV. With street tires it's very nice, quiet and has a great ride. You need to take a spin in one to see this. I was amazed at how nice it is and how good it looks.

27th Feb 2013, 09:02

Haha, twisting words again. He said larger family (3+ kids). Especially if you travel, a smaller car isn't going to work too well. Now there really aren't too many full-size cars left, so an SUV would be more logical.

27th Feb 2013, 09:04

Yes, a Ford Pinto being held together by plywood is a great car for poor people to roll in, but if you make substantially more a year, most people would opt for something better, like a new car.

27th Feb 2013, 09:35

Oh no! Another heated debate! I don't own a big 1970s Lincoln, but I have to say I respect the guy who bought it, or indeed any classic car owner. I have seen a couple on the roads here where I live - they are uncommon vehicles - and they are unforgettable and stunning cars to look at - not bad at all for something originally designed in the late-'70s.

Big luxury cars of this nature are not especially practical or easy to drive for most, but that perhaps is not the purpose of them. They are clearly low performance cruisers that are designed to look outrageous and memorable, and of course to appeal to the wealthy Americans of the past. Life would be a bit dull without these cars around.

If simple transport were the issue, everyone, lottery winners and Rockefellers included, would just take the easy route and buy a 'normal' car, such as a Honda Civic or whatever.

The Honda can do whatever the Lincoln can do in the area of basics and is far more practical. They're cheaper to run and easier to park for newer drivers, but that is not their point.

The Lincoln (and any full-sized 1970s land yacht) is a piece of art on wheels, a statement, as is any luxury car. Nearly all have practical shortfalls - but so what?.

I hope the owner of the 1978 Lincoln Continental enjoys his car as much as possible. Not a bad deal at all for the price he paid, and I have no idea why small-car owners are even commenting on this review. A Toyota/Honda and a 1970s full-sized car don't even compete; the closest competition would be a modern Mercedes or other upper scale luxury vehicle.

27th Feb 2013, 09:48

Try taking a teen daughter and a wife on a long trip. We are happy with a Crossover. Not a big SUV or some cramped up car. My daughter and wife are tall as well. We have a Ford Edge; it's the perfect size and gets 21 MPG average on the digital readout. If you have a family and want to make unplanned trips with all in the car, it works great. Loaded with groceries etc.

We also owned new Mercury Grand Marquis as a nice family vehicles. We didn't ride with boards and crap for windows. Most families have 2 breadwinners today. Even small kids with 2 car seats and strollers etc is not the perfect picture you paint. The little added gas is cheaper than causing family discord and the divorce court.

27th Feb 2013, 11:20

No... Not really twisting words, as the average American family has "1.5 kids" or something like that, so in other words, 2. So for the average family, a smaller car is perfectly fine.

I don't see a problem with buying nicer cars either. It adds to the national economy and puts money into the pockets of the workers making the cars.

But then again, most Americans lack sufficient retirement funds, and probably a lot of that comes from having the feeling that they 'need' that nicer whatever thing. I drive crappy old cars. Then again, I have a lot of retirement savings and cash, and also paid down most of my house.

27th Feb 2013, 15:11

I don't know what constitutes a "small econobox" anymore, but most cars built today are adequate for four passengers, or five if three are kids. I see some commenters implying that wealthy people will automatically choose monster-sized cars, and that a family of five can't travel in anything smaller than a school bus. I suppose if a person is very claustrophobic that might be a consideration.

My late brother was a self-made millionaire. He could have driven any car he chose. He was, however, very practical, and the largest car he ever owned was a Ford Taurus. It accommodated his family of five very well, and they often took long road trips . He never owned an SUV or felt any need to. Cars to him were transportation. They didn't have to have a sign on the side that said "Look at me! I'm rich!".

And I totally agree with the commenter whose family owned a Camry. A car the size of a Camry is ideal for most families. When the first very ugly and boxy Camry was introduced back in the 80's it was called "The Family Camry" in Toyota ads. I've travelled in Camrys, Accords and many other cars. The Camry, though very blah, is really a very comfortable road car. And one of the most comfortable cars I've ever taken on a long trip was the rather smallish Pontiac Grand Am. It was smooth, quiet and luxurious for a smaller vehicle.

In being honest, I will admit that my wife does drive a large truck-based SUV. But interior room has nothing to do with it. Crash test studies show that large SUV's are three times safer than cars. I want my wife to be safe. If the government would wise up and outlaw vehicles weighing over 3000 pounds, I'd gladly let her drive a more sensible vehicle.

27th Feb 2013, 17:59

That is fine for a family of 5 if they want to ride around in a cramped sedan, however if a family has 4+ kids, which many American families still do, then can you explain to me how a sedan, which now all only seat 5, regardless of size, will work??

And to the commenter that suggests driving a sub-compact Pinto with 5 children, well all I can say is don't get pulled over. The police don't look kindly on driving around with the kiddies crawling around in the back any more. Plus, I just remembered the gas tanks in the rear end exploding; a great recipe with 5 kids cramped back there.

Frankly I am single and have no children, but I drive a full-size Buick Enclave that seats 7. I would prefer a more economical full-size sedan, but they don't make them any more, so that is what I bought. I really don't care about fuel economy (I live 5 minutes from work). I want a large, comfortable car that has some distinguished, attractive styling. I will always drive large vehicles as long as they make them; I can't see paying hard earned money for a soulless compact car that looks so much like everybody else's that you can't find it in a parking lot. Call me old fashioned, but those just aren't cars in my opinion.