LINC400

I thought it sort of looked GM-ish too, and also thought 1958 Mercury could be a possibility, but the hood ornament does not match and it does not have the recession and chrome strips by the cowl. Over 150 people looked at this and it hasn't been identified yet, so now I don't feel so bad. I guess we are assuming it is a correct factory restoration when the mirrors and hood ornament could be aftermarket or just incorrect too

I posted the entire video because the car is shown multiple times. Always the same view, but maybe one of the other times might provide a clue to help identify it

If I could see more of this car, I am sure I could identify it. I am thinking 1958, but can't come up with anything that matches the hood ornament

Unlike Cadillac and Packard, Lincoln did not offer a commercial chassis for coachbuilders. After Cadillac discontinued its commercial chassis in 1984, regular sedans had to be purchased and converted. So there was no longer any advantage to using a Cadillac, and Lincolns began being used more regularly.

I think he means using the trunk lid from a 1980-83 Mark VI 4 door. It is basically the same body, but the trunk lid from the Mark VI goes all the way down to the bumper while the Town Car trunk lid stops above the large reflector that runs the width of the rear. So major modifications would probably be needed to remove metal behind the reflector panel to install the Mark VI trunk lid. The Mark VI trunk lid probably has more of an angle to it also.

I am just the opposite. Why would I want to pay to show my car after I have to drive it there and detail it, if I can just walk in for free to look at the other cars as a spectator?

Yes, I totally agree with the 1980's cars being called Malaise Era, it is the 1970's with their wide array of body styles, sizes, colors, interiors, etc. that will never be seen again that I object to being called Malaise Era

I spent over $1000 taking a car in to try to get it to pass. Each time it was closer, but ran worse. Leaning it out until it passed, and then changing it back cost zero and got it passed.

A mechanic at a gas station I worked at would lean out the fuel mixture so much in his Charger that the car would barely run. It would pass emissions, and then he would immediately change it back. He often did that right in front of the inspector. That part might not be advisable, but I did the same thing a few times with cars of my own. Just because it passes doesn't mean it is going to run better.

Nope, I think the 1967 Impala rear end is way better than the 1968-70 with the taillights in the bumper and valance thing below. The Japanese stuff was pretty bad in the 1950's and 1960's. It wasn't until they came over here and toured American factories and tried to make their cars more American-like that they caught on. While instead the domestics made some halfway attempts to make their products seem more foreign inspired which did not work. (Eurosport editions come to mind)

What surprised me when I looked at what was available in some areas is the number of 2015-2017 cars, Mustangs, Mercedes, etc. for $300 - $500 a day. If you want something like that, I would think it would be cheaper to just rent a new one from a regular car rental agency.

I might be tempted to rent something if the price is not ridiculous. But I certainly would not be renting out my car. I don't need to get it back trashed.

As I said, the 5ph bumpers are a personal preference. I always thought the late '60's - early '70's cars with a body color painted metal panel below the bumper looked ridiculous. Why should the body of the car extend below the bumper and rocker panels? It was even better after a few years when those panels were loose and precariously hanging or swinging. Japanese manufacturers capitalized on the ridiculous mindset of the general public that all American cars are no good, and all foreign cars are wonderful. Plus the American carmakers refused to update the larger luxury cars with features that could be found in midsize foreign sedans. However, they really don't offer anything more exclusive than the domestics. Even the Maybach looks like a 2 tone S Class at first glance despite costing 2-3 times as much. And I don't think they are doing too well.

While Oldsmobile engines were used in Cadillacs, I can find no reference for lawsuits on that. The lawsuits were for Chevrolet engines in Oldsmobiles. Your preference for a 1966 Fleetwood is a personal opinion. I have never heard anyone else refer to it as the best Cadillac interior. 5 mph bumpers are also a personal opinion. 1976 Cadillacs are the most popular collectible Cadillacs of the 1970's, and they all have them. Car companies are in business to make money. Most companies that chose exclusivity over volume are out of business. Even Mercedes sells taxis and police cars in Europe. Rolls Royce has had to be bailed out multiple times. I am not surprised the owner of a Mustang II Cobra felt the need to "retaliate". Sounds like he was very proud of his car, and was not thrilled with being told how Australian Cobras are better than his Pinto based Mustang

It was Chevrolet engines in Oldsmobiles. The 1966 Fleetwood interior is just a personal preference. To be honest, I was expecting to see something more impressive for the 1966 Fleetwood interior. Lincolns and Imperials had much the same wood and leather in the 1960's and changed to plastic in the 1970's and 1980's. A 1976 Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman has a far more visually impressive interior even if the wood is plastic. And since the Fleetwood made up less than 7% of Cadillac's sales even in 1966, apparently not many Cadillac buyers were impressed enough to pay extra for it. Cadillac's downfall was not the loss of the 1966 Fleetwood interior, but the grandpa image it obtained in the 1980's and '90's. Cadillac engines used to be used in hot rods and performance cars in the '50's and '60's. But the dinky '80's and '90's FWD offerings eventually failed to even impress grandpas.