LINC400

If you mention Henry Ford Museum and Diamond Jubilee to anyone that owns or is interested in Lincolns, I doubt any of them are going to think Duryea. The same as if you start talking about your Hornet to a Hudson owner, they are not going to think AMC. Since the Diamond Jubilee Editions from Ford were in 1978, and I attended the Centennial in 2003, I simply asked about it. It seemed odd that 1896 was when Henry built his quadricycle and they celebrated a DJ in 1971, and then did it again in 1978. There was absolutely no need for the nasty comment about the world did not begin with Ford in 1903. I would have been satisfied with the original Duryea explantion. It is unfortunate that after all the recent talk about posts being pulled, that some people still cannot be civil.

Absolutely no reason to be nasty. He said he got it at the Henry Ford Museum for the Diamond Jubilee. That would lead people to believe it had something to do with Ford. I suppose it is possible, but I am unaware of any other company that produced Diamond Jubilee Editions. Not everyone was old enough to attend auto shows in 1971.

How was 1971 the Diamond Jubilee when 1978 is when the 75th anniversary was, and the Mark V and T-bird Diamond Jubilee Editions were made? And 2003 was the Centennial?

I used to avoid any station with gas that contained ethanol. Initially it was places like Quickiemart or Speedway. However, many years ago even Mobil, Shell and even Citgo added ethanol. There has not been a single place in Chicago or the suburbs where you can buy gas without ethanol for many years. It doesn't seem to bother the '94 Buick much, but the '70's Lincolns ran worse and got worse mileage. I take that back, the '94 Buick just had to have a rather expensive fuel system cleaning not long ago. It only gets name brand gas and is floored frequently, so there should have been no carbon or other build up.

I'm sure the 2-way radios in airplanes are used to discuss important matters like "What are you doing this weekend?" "Do you think my boyfriend is cheating on me because I thought I'd surprise him with tickets to the ballet, and now he says he has to work?" "What brand and flavor ice cream was I supposed to get?" Much more important than safety while driving. We should legalize shoplifting and drunk driving too. Because even though it is against the law, people still do it.

I agree. There are plenty of officers sitting with their radar guns on people going to and from work during rush hour. However, if there are traffic lights out, and there should be an officer directing traffic, they are nowhere to be seen. When our apartment was broken into, it took them 2 hours to show up and tell us they couldn't do anything. We lived 10 minutes from the station. When my car was rear-ended, it was on the border of 2 towns. Neither one could claim responsibilty for the intersection. They told me to call the state police. The state police told me I should go to the station to fill out a report because they couldn't be bothered to show up at the scene on a dry sunny day. My friend had an overnight delivery job. He was constantly harrassed for doing nothing wrong, simply because the officers were bored and he was one of the only cars on the street at that time. I used to occassionally fill in for an overnight shift at a job I had and was harrassed in the same manner. If they were ticketing for cell phone use, they might actually be doing something useful by preventing accidents.

1969 and 1970 Palmer Mustangs are selling for $20-$30 on Ebay. I would imagine a 1967 would sell for about the same unless they are much more rare than the 1969 and 1970.

Thanks, That is how it comes off on the Regal. An actual project without unforseen headaches. Can't remember the last time I had one of those. Console is all better now.

Agreed. I was the first to reply last time with 2 email addresses and never received a reply. Interestingly enough, I have a 1976 Lincoln.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: joe_padavano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rocketraider</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We need another law to protect us from ourselves?</div></div> No, but when you hit people in the wallet for doing what common sense should tell them not to do, it gets their attention. Yupp- should be a FEDERAL law prohibiting cell phone use while driving, hand held or hands-free, makes no difference. Cell phone is a distraction and has no place in a driver's space if the vehicle is moving.</div></div> I've got a few problems with that, Glenn. First, driving laws are state laws. The last federal driving law that comes to mind was the 55 MPH national speed limit. How'd that work out for you. Second, every state already has distracted driving laws on the books. Let's try enforcing those. Third, if the problem is the conversation (as opposed to the phone - otherwise why else would hands-free devices need to be banned) then why stop there? Let's ban all passengers - particularly screaming children in the back of minivans. Also all smoking in cars (ever been in the car when the driver dropped a lighted cigarette in his/her lap?), and eating in cars. Once again, it is unfortunately impossible to outlaw stupidity. </div></div> As I have said, 85% of the drivers here doing stupid things, sitting at a green light, driving through a red, merging into another car, driving on the shoulder, etc. are on the phone. Being on a cell phone causes you to concentrate on that. Plus sometimes it causes you to look for files, notes, etc. causing more distractions. Everybody thinks that they can talk and drive with no problem. Just like a drunk thinks he can drive with no problem. However, studies have shown people cannot react anywhere near as quickly to driving conditions when they are on the phone. Conversing with passengers in the car does not have the same effect. Plus passengers can alert you to emergency situations if you get distracted. Cell phones do not. Anything else, eating, changing radio stations, etc. causes momentary distractions. Cell phone conversations can last a few minutes or few hours. Yes, there have been accidents and stupid drivers long before cell phones. But they do not need more ammunition to cause more accidents. I remeber many years ago Princess Diana was pulled over and ticketed for talking on a cell and driving. Apparently that didn't help her final ride, but it amazes me that she has been gone for how long now, and still there is no such law here.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rocketraider</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We need another law to protect us from ourselves?</div></div> No, but when you hit people in the wallet for doing what common sense should tell them not to do, it gets their attention. Yupp- should be a FEDERAL law prohibiting cell phone use while driving, hand held or hands-free, makes no difference. Cell phone is a distraction and has no place in a driver's space if the vehicle is moving. 'Course most states' solution is to prohibit their use by drivers under age 18, which is stupid. But this is from the perspective of one who has been cut off three times by the same Realtor making a left turn across traffic while her cell phone was glued to her ear, and who almost got t-boned when a Mercedes ran a stop sign at 50 mph at a country intersection. Again, by a driver with a cell phone in his ear. What was that I said in another thread about staying stressed having to watch for mobile idiots? </div></div> I agree. It is illegal to talk on a hand held cell phone while driving in Chicago. It is not in the suburbs. Whenever I see someone driving like an idiot, I have to look and see if they are on a cell phone. 85% of the time they are. The only difference is they use their hand held phone to drive like an idiot in the suburbs, and a headset to drive like an idiot in the city.

It continues. Went to a cruise night last night that I had never been to before. On the way home a saw a tow truck carrying a 1964 Malibu convertible, rear ended and totaled. Not too many rear end accidents are the driver's fault, but I suppose the possibility exists.

No email recieved You can also try Linc400@webtv.net

Chicago_linc@yahoo.com Apparently the forum will be down.

Very sad. Unfortunately I seem to keep hearing about more and more antique cars being destroyed by careless drivers of other vehicles.

If everyone thought the 1955 X was the best car ever made with no differences of opinion, posts here would be very boring. People should be allowed to express different opinions as long as it is kept civil. However, this is a forum about cars, and as such, cars are what should discussed, not religion, dogs, or especially politics. Some topics, such as GM and Chrysler bailouts, and cash for clunkers, obviously have politics as part of the topics, and so politics cannot be left out entirely, but it should not be a place to bash Bush or Obama, or Democrats or Republicans. Other forums sometimes have a place for off-topic discussions. But really, if you want to discuss politics, or religion or dogs, why not just go to a forum with that focus. There you can rant or post all you want about those subjects. And you can come back here when you want to discuss cars. I belong to other forums and don't discuss antique cars there, and I don't discuss the other topics here. It works out just fine.

Ok, PM me here.

Barry can probably answer this better, but I believe H&E built 3, Derham built one, and several were done in the 1960's and 1970's by owners with varying degrees of success. The Motor Trend article or ad was an idea that never happened.

It always annoys me immensely when someone has a car that I can't afford, yet have no clue what it is. Calling them Lincoln Mark II's, Ford Edsels, Chrysler DeSotos etc. Even Jay Leno calls his 1967 Imperial a Chrysler Imperial. You'd think at least he would know better.

Thanks, I think I can feel this U shaped retainer. I'll have to check this out. It sounds simple enough, but the car is a daily driver, so I will wait until it isn't needed for a while just in case it turns out to be one of those projects that balloon into more.

There are 2 Custom Clouds I see driving around here. However, I have never heard of any Rat Pack involvement with them. That seems to be a myth that comes up with any unusual car. Sometimes it's true. Usually not.

I think the problem with Pontiac, Olds, and Buick was that before they used to only slightly overlap each other in price. Recently they were all overlapping and only a couple hundred or thousand apart. So instead of competing against other cars in their price range, they ended up competing against each other. Buicks in the 1940's and 50's did not sell to college kids either. But they were not hurting for sales.

OK, now I don't feel so bad. I guess nobody else knows how to remove the shift knob either.

People that are unemployed or afraid of losing their jobs are not going to run out and buy new cars, regardless of what their trade in brings. Once the economy gets back in order, people will buy cars. Until then, they won't. The problem with this or any clunker bill is that they are ineffective at best. Our environment is not pollution free now due to previous clunker bills. And at worst they destroy restorable or parts cars, and drive up the price of used cars for people on a budget that need them. This bill seems a little less of a threat to our hobby with its 1984 cut-off date and one year ownership required. However, I hardly think sales of 250,000 cars or even one million is going to pull Chrysler or GM out of bankruptcy. Escpecially if the credit can be used to buy a Honda or Toyota. It also isn't very fair to those that recently bought a new car and got zip for their trade in. I think they should just forget the whole idea. Yet some politician that knows nothing about cars always thinks this is the greatest idea in politics.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Wolk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The sky is falling!" </div></div> Nice that you can make fun of others that have a hard time finding parts for their cars as long as it doesn't concern yours, and are worried that this might make it harder.