Globe and Mail article on a guy and his all-original 1976 Mercury Grand Marquis 2-door:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-dri...article2331310/
Enjoy!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-dri...article2331310/
Enjoy!
Neat article on a 1970's 'big boat'....
- Thread starter addyguy
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Rand
thats not a big boat.. Thats a freakin LAND YACHT.. SOUND THE AIR HORN!!!
thats not a big boat.. Thats a freakin LAND YACHT.. SOUND THE AIR HORN!!!
I remember how Jack Lord's Steve McGarrett character drove a 1974 Marquis Brougham (earlier version of the car in the article). He drove it from late '74 until the end of the show (replacing the '68 Park Lane Brougham).
I love the big cars of the 70's. So much class. But, i'm happy to drive it's great-great-great grandchild ,lol
Now that's what a real American car is all about, not these lawn mowers with seats posing as cars.
my dad had a 1977 Chrysler new yorker 440. he had a front tag that said BIGFOOT, i still have the plate. it WAS a land yacht.
Originally Posted By: morris
my dad had a 1977 Chrysler new yorker 440. he had a front tag that said BIGFOOT, i still have the plate. it WAS a land yacht.
My grandmother had a similar Chrysler, and my dad said "I could park my 1971 Toyota Corolla on the hood of your car."
I think he meant it as a joke, but it is a tribute to how huge American luxury cars were built, and how small some of the compact cars were during the '70s.
my dad had a 1977 Chrysler new yorker 440. he had a front tag that said BIGFOOT, i still have the plate. it WAS a land yacht.
My grandmother had a similar Chrysler, and my dad said "I could park my 1971 Toyota Corolla on the hood of your car."
I think he meant it as a joke, but it is a tribute to how huge American luxury cars were built, and how small some of the compact cars were during the '70s.
My list of ultimate land-yachts goes something like this, and in no particular order:
73-77 Chrysler New Yorker (440 power)
76 and 77 Lincoln Town Car (460 power)
72-76 Cadillac DeVille (coupe and sedan) (472 or 500 power)
And the heaviest of them all:
64-66 Imperial (the last body-on-frame Chrysler) 413 power
Honorable mention to the 68-71 "Fuselage body" full-size Chryslers, 383 and 440 powered.
73-77 Chrysler New Yorker (440 power)
76 and 77 Lincoln Town Car (460 power)
72-76 Cadillac DeVille (coupe and sedan) (472 or 500 power)
And the heaviest of them all:
64-66 Imperial (the last body-on-frame Chrysler) 413 power
Honorable mention to the 68-71 "Fuselage body" full-size Chryslers, 383 and 440 powered.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: morris
my dad had a 1977 Chrysler new yorker 440. he had a front tag that said BIGFOOT, i still have the plate. it WAS a land yacht.
our last family wagon was a '77 T&C. HUGE wagon, last year for them. 9 pass, and could hold a 4X8 sheet FLAT between the wheelwells. towed a 28ft travel trailer and got 9-11 mpg doing it.
my dad had a 1977 Chrysler new yorker 440. he had a front tag that said BIGFOOT, i still have the plate. it WAS a land yacht.
our last family wagon was a '77 T&C. HUGE wagon, last year for them. 9 pass, and could hold a 4X8 sheet FLAT between the wheelwells. towed a 28ft travel trailer and got 9-11 mpg doing it.
Interesting article, but not that well written.
Quote:
A big chunk of that is made up of the cast iron in the block and heads of the optional 460-cubic-inch V-8 under its landing-strip-length hood that made 360 hp.
Really, the hood made 360 hp? I remember being taught not to make this error in grade school!
Quote:
...it also developed massive amounts of torque, which was applied to the rear wheels through a three-speed automatic transmission to provide a smooth flow of acceleration, sort of like water being forced through a pipe of ever diminishing diameter.
In what way, exactly?
But enough of my nit-picking. Cool article! I was born late enough that I don't know if I've ever seen a classic 50's/60's land yacht in person.
Quote:
A big chunk of that is made up of the cast iron in the block and heads of the optional 460-cubic-inch V-8 under its landing-strip-length hood that made 360 hp.
Really, the hood made 360 hp? I remember being taught not to make this error in grade school!
Quote:
...it also developed massive amounts of torque, which was applied to the rear wheels through a three-speed automatic transmission to provide a smooth flow of acceleration, sort of like water being forced through a pipe of ever diminishing diameter.
In what way, exactly?
But enough of my nit-picking. Cool article! I was born late enough that I don't know if I've ever seen a classic 50's/60's land yacht in person.
I can't imagine why anyone would have ever wanted to drive one of these monsters. These boats are longer than most extended cab trucks.
the 1976 new yorker is the Imperial that never was. my dad had tw 1977 new yorkers, a 2 door aka "big foot" i still have the plate, a 4 door. that lean burn system took tons of fuel. dad found out that it would not advance the timming till it ran 10 min. so out it came in went the reg ignition. the factory service manual saved my tail. the trick is that they made two boxs one with 5 pins ( must use 4 pin bailest) and one 4 pin use 2 pin bailest. note on that system ALL WAYS carry spars bailests in the glove box. that the first no start, just swap it straight off.
man o man. " towed a 28ft travel trailer and got 9-11 mpg doing it." that cant be beat. to: jason C if you had one you would wount say that.
Originally Posted By: morris
to: jason C if you had one you would wount say that.
I drove many a car of that vintage and that size, and I agree with Jason. It's easy to look back with rose colored glasses, but they often didn't last more than 100,000 miles, they rusted out if you mentioned the word salt anywhere near them, they required a lot of maintenance, and they returned pathetic fuel mileage.
While they were ok for their time, their time has long since past. I'll take a more modern car any day.
to: jason C if you had one you would wount say that.
I drove many a car of that vintage and that size, and I agree with Jason. It's easy to look back with rose colored glasses, but they often didn't last more than 100,000 miles, they rusted out if you mentioned the word salt anywhere near them, they required a lot of maintenance, and they returned pathetic fuel mileage.
While they were ok for their time, their time has long since past. I'll take a more modern car any day.
I would take my grandmother's 1971 T&C over ANY modern car for a long road trip. Huge, comfortable, cold A/C, perfectly happy to cruise all day at 85MPH (440 TNT power, even had factory dual exhaust). About 12-15MPG on a highway trip, and could take a bad RR crossing at 40MPH and barely feel it.
Sold long ago with 170,000 miles...the buyer fixed the rusty floorboard, painted it (it was laquer-checked), and still tows his Airstream with it.
Sold long ago with 170,000 miles...the buyer fixed the rusty floorboard, painted it (it was laquer-checked), and still tows his Airstream with it.
TO: Pop_Rivit well you do have a point. but i think that happened cause the government MADE them meet ext specs that just could not be done with the technology in that day. i know i TRIED to get them to run. wish i had a $1.00 for each idle tube i drilled out.
No offense, but those living in the past need to get out more.
There is no comparison between the land yachts of old and new cars today. You can still get a HUGE sled that will blow away every single comparison you can make. More of everything, even durability. Styling is the only nitpick available.
The old cars are a memory that is always hard to beat. I loved mine like children, but I don't fool myself that they were better cars.
There is no comparison between the land yachts of old and new cars today. You can still get a HUGE sled that will blow away every single comparison you can make. More of everything, even durability. Styling is the only nitpick available.
The old cars are a memory that is always hard to beat. I loved mine like children, but I don't fool myself that they were better cars.
- Status
Similar threads
