Lincoln Mark 7 Lsc 302 Ho Auto Trans on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1979 Lincoln Versailles

Sometimes a car manufacturer creates a chassis design that continues to make money for decade after decade, and that's just the jackpot that the Ford Motor Company hit when it built the 1960 Ford Falcon. While that car itself stayed in production in Argentina all the way through 1991, the real payoff for Dearborn came with the many vehicles that ended up being built on modified versions of that platform. There was the original Mustang, of course (and its Mercury Cougar sibling), but also the Ford Maverick/Mercury Comet and its successors, the Ford Granada, Mercury Monarch and Lincoln Versailles. That last car is one of the rarest of all the 1960 Falcon descendants, and I've managed to find a nice example in a boneyard in Sparks, Nevada. The Lincoln Versailles wasn't the first Ford product to be named after Louis XIV's pad in France. That honor went to the mid-1950s Ford Vedette Versailles, a flathead V8-powered sibling to the Simca Vedette and Chambord. The Lincoln Versailles was built from the 1977 through 1980 model years. The idea was that it would compete with the very successful Cadillac Seville, a Chevy Nova-based luxury sedan that debuted for the 1976 model year. These cars were not big sellers, with just over 50,000 produced during their four model years. This one is the first junkyard example I've seen for at least 20 years. The Versailles came with a sturdy 9-inch rear axle assembly and was equipped with disc brakes all the way around. Since it bolts straight into a 1964-1973 Mustang (and many other related Fords), a Versailles rear is always the first thing purchased when one of these cars hits the junkyard. This one probably got yanked by the very first junkyard customer who recognized what it was. The interior is still very, very nice. The front seats appear to be the "Flight Bench" split-bucket type, done up in turqouise "Champagne Dorchester" cloth. You wouldn't see an interior this luxurious in a Granada! And I would know, since I took my first driver's test in my family's 1979 Granada. A factory AM/FM/8-track radio came as standard equipment in this car. For an extra $321 ($1,395 in 2022 dollars), you could have a factory CB radio as well. The aftermarket also provided trunk-mount CBs. A Cartier-badged mechanical-digital clock was also standard equipment. This is essentially the same clock that went into much cheaper Fords of the decade. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences.

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.

2020 Lincoln Aviator fuel economy revealed

Ford finally revealed some of the last details, such as fuel economy, for the non-hybrid 2020 Explorer. So it's no surprise that its classier corporate twin, the 2020 Lincoln Aviator, has had its own fuel economy data released by the EPA. Though, like the Explorer, we only have information for the non-hybrid versions. The 2020 Lincoln Aviator has just two engine options, a base turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 with 400 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque, and the same engine coupled to a hybrid system with 450 horsepower and 600 pound-feet of torque. That base engine is the one we have fuel economy numbers for, and it's shared with the Ford Explorer ST, though the ST's version makes an extra 15 pound-feet of torque. With all-wheel drive it gets nearly the same fuel economy as the fast Ford with 17 mpg in the city, 24 on the highway and 20 in combined driving. The Explorer ST gets one more mpg in town. Unlike the Explorer ST, the Aviator does offer rear-wheel drive with this turbocharged V6. This model gets improved fuel economy of 18 in the city, 26 on the highway and 21 in combined driving. This isn't too surprising, since all-wheel-drive vehicles often do a little worse when it comes to fuel economy. We'll be especially curious as to how the Aviator hybrid performs. We doubt it will match the Ford Explorer hybrid, since that crossover relies on a less-powerful naturally aspirated 3.3-liter V6. But it might give the all-wheel-drive four-cylinder Explorer a run for its money, since the rear-drive V6 Aviator is only 1 to 2 mpg behind it. Related Video: