Talk:Lincoln Mark series

MKX vs Mark X
http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-Lincoln-Mark-X-Concept.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_MKX There appear to be two very, very, very different concept cars with the name Mark X. Will either or both actually be produced, and, if not, perhaps an explanation or somethin' about the Mark X coupe concept car would be relevant to this article. I know I'd find it fascinating. Anyone in the know? MrZaius talk  14:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, a coupe concept by Lincoln would be relevant to this article, but the Mark X you're refering to, which will carry the name MKX, is a crossover SUV which will be produced and sold for the 2007 model year and thus does not fit into this article. Thank you for your contributions. Regards,  Signature brendel  05:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


 * There were two different cars there. The first link is to a coupe concept car that the site claims would have carried the name Mark X.  If anyone can verify/validate the source and explain why Lincoln chose not to implement the design, it would be relevant to the article.  Anyone know anything about it?  MrZaius  talk  13:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, Lincoln indeed had a Mark X concept coupe, but as the crossover SUV market looked better than the coupe market, Lincoln decided to give the MKX designation to the successor of the Aviator (previously known as the Aviator concept). Regards,  Signature brendel  06:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The Mark X designation for the concept convertible was pronounced "Mark Ten". The replacement for the originally scheduled Aviator name was pronounced "Mark Ex"originally. However people immediatelystarted mispronouncing it as "Em Kay Ex" and Lincoln just decided to go with that way of pronunciation instead. Watchdevil (talk) 04:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Name
Is someone seriously saying there was a car ever called just the "Mark"? Surely this is just as we still use the term in the UK, as in the Mk 2 Jag, or Mk 4 Golf, and that sometimes gets into the official car names? So the first of these cars must have been called just the "Continental", with no "Mark" in sight... -- Hotlorp 20:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, yes- its's Lincoln Mark (look on Edmunds or ebay for a quick check) but the the car is also referred to as the Mark Series. The Mark or Mark Series was a Lincoln model where every generation had a different roman numeral attached to the name (Mark V = Fith Generation Mark). Obviously it is not appropriate to have a different article for the Mark III, Mark VI, etc... This is how Mark articles used to be organized and it was too confusing. Gerdbrendel 18:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * A bit of googling and it seems that the first of the Continental line was never called the "Mark". This is consistent with British use of the word "mark" to indicate the number in a series of generations of a car of the same name. BUT - the first of the line is only called "Mark 1" retrospectively, after the introduction of its replacement. For example, we are now on VW Golf Mark 5 (Mk. 5 for short), but the original Golf was only called "Mark 1" after its replacement came out in 1983. Regarding the Lincoln specifically, the following extract is from http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3703/3948mark.html


 * "From my first sighting of the 1946 Lincoln Continental in my hometown I began to read about the development of the Lincoln Continental. These first were not originally designated "Mark I," rather just Lincoln Continental. In fact the 1940 model carried the name Lincoln Zephyr Continental and was offered in two models, a cabriolet (see the picture at the beginning of this document) and a coupe."


 * So, what seems to have happened is that at some point Lincoln illogically dropped the "Continental" name, confusing people into thinking that the "Mark" was the basic name of the model. Since the term "Mark Series" does indeed seem to be in wide use, unless you object I'll move the "Lincoln Mark" page to "Lincoln Mark Series". Of course, each of these cars in the series needs its own page, which will solve the problem for good. -- Hotlorp 19:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

In fact, please make the page Lincoln Mark series if you change it... the "series" is not a proper noun here. Thanks. -- Hotlorp 19:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Renaming the article from Mark to Mark Series makes sense. I don't however understand the connection you have drawn between the Golf MK5 and the Lincoln Mark since Mark really was the cars name. Concerning the Continental, as you may have known, the 1956 Continental Mark was not actually not manufactured by Lincoln. At this time, Continental was its own brand (together w/ Edsel). Lincoln adopted the Mark name in 1968 and used until 1998 for its line of personal luxury coupes adding a roman numeral for each gengeration, and yes, strangly enough there never was a "Mark I," neither was there a Mark II. Lincoln somehow wanted to connected the '56 Continental Mark's ultra-luxury prestige to the Licoln Continental Mark by calling it the Continental Mark (until the Mark VII) and by starting at roman numeral "III" (Implying there was a previous generation, even though there really wasn't any!).

The Continental four-door sedan who started production in the 40s shouldn't be confused with the Continental Mark coupe; giving both cars, at least partially, the same name was a marketing move-nothing more. Thanks. Gerdbrendel 04:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Another company that started a series of large cars around this time, and one which makes a better analogy than the Golf, is Jaguar. Consider the Jaguar Mark V, Jaguar Mark VII, Jaguar Mark IX, Jaguar Mark X and others. Yes, the work "Mark" is part of the name of those cars, but is inextricably linked with the number that follows it – a series number for the saloons from that company. Also consider that the word Mark, when applied to a series number in any car model, including Jaguar, Lincoln and VW Golfs, is often written in abbreviated form: "Mk." I can't imagine this happening if this were a normal part of the name. However, I'd be interested to hear from the Lincoln enthusiast community what their current usage of the word "Mark" is – if you are a member of one of these communities, then I defer to your judgement. In case I am not clear, I would like to see this page moved to Lincoln Continental, where one would have links to the cars in the series, much like SFoskett did recently over at Bentley Continental. Regarding your last point, isn't it curious that the first of the Mark series was the Mark II, if this early Continental had truly nothing to do with the later ones? Every act of car naming is "a marketing move"! -- Hotlorp 18:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I moved the "Lincoln Mark" article to Lincoln Mark Series, because yes series is better. Since I am a Lincoln Lincoln enthusiast I can assure that the Mark Series was not part of the Continental. Yes until the VII generation it was called the Lincoln Continental Mark, but the Marks was a model in its own right. Merging those two pages would be like merging the Jaguar X-Type with the XJ just because they both have the letter "X" in them. The Mark was Lincoln's personal luxury car from 1968 to 1998. The Continental was the flagship sedan from 1946 to 1980, then mid-level from 1981 to 2002. Of course, every car name is marketing; what I was trying to explain is that Lincoln called it the Continental Mark to make poeple think of the 1956 Continental Mark (which wasn't a Lincoln!) because that car was at the time as expensive Rolls-Royce; Lincoln thought- "let's take that name so our new '68 coupe sounds like that ultra-luxury car from 1956. By generation VII Lincoln however decided that adding Continental as a suffix did help the prestige anymore, especially since the car was most often reffered to as just the mark; so they drop it. Let me also reassure you that the 1956 Continental Mark was not a Lincoln; at this time there was a Ford subsidary called Continental (1956-1958). If you any more questions let me know ;-}. Thanks, Gerdbrendel 21:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * From what I can see, all Lincolns in the '70s were badged as Continentals as well. You had the fullsize Lincoln Continental Town Car and Town Coupe, and the Lincoln Continental Mark III, IV, V. I have also seen advertising that implies Lincoln Continental was the name of the marque itself. Just a thought, what do you all think? --Sable232 23:36, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That's true in the 1970's until the arrival of the Versailles, all Lincolns were named Continental. Perhaps a remnant of the Continental brand of the late 1950s. Best Regards,  Signature brendel  00:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Mark VI design revisions
The article states that the Mk VI design revisions were minor; this is wildly inaccurate as the Mark VI was moved onto an entirely new platform, the Panther as shared with the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis and eventually Town Car. The car shed nearly a thousand pounds curb weight due to this change; that's no "minor revision". --Mfree 15:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes but the esthetical effect was minor. The Mark VII was completely new, the VI still looked like its predecessors, only a bit smaller. But if there isn't already add a mention that the vehicle was moved on to the Panther platform. Regards,  Signature brendel  18:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * This is true, stylistically the V and VI are quite similar. But to actually look up the specs you'll see that the VI is drastically downsized in the terms of the automotive world... 6" shorter wheelbase, 14" shorter overall, 500 pounds curb weight reduction (and 11 gallons less fuel, accounting for quite a bit more), etc. I will add the platform blurb, a link, and some note of dimensional shrinkage. --Mfree 15:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Alrighty that sounds good. BTW: I know they had to downsize the VI due to the then new Federal Fuel Economy Standards, the remark about minor revisions was in regards to esthetic changes only. Best Regards,  Signature brendel  17:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

POV
It seems like this page is a POV magnet. I cleaned out some stuff a few months back, but now someone is adding several paragraphs that, in addition to being unencyclopedic, look like they were copied and pasted out of some online review of some sort. I think the same thing was pasted into the Continental page as well. Other thoughts? --Sable232 22:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Mark Z, Mark X
This blog seems to suggest that Lincoln initially intended the MKZ and MKX and whatnot to be read as "Mark X" or "Mark Z", abbreviated; but were then overruled by public opinion. I think this might bear a mention in this article, though not necessarily included those models in full, but a section about how Ford intended to continue the line, but later abandonned that plan. TheHYPO (talk) 03:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

"The Forgotten Marks?"
What the heck is this? All of a sudden there's this mass of data (unreferenced, of course) added that makes absolutely no sense at all within the context of the article. You read through the Mark II, then you see III, IV, and V, and then you're reading about a Mark III again with no explanation at all of what happened. --Sable232 (talk) 02:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The article explains it fairly clearly. It was a marketing decision by Lee Iaccoca for the 1969 model year to roll back the Mark number. The 1969 Mark III was concieved as a coupe in the tradition of the Continental Mark II. However see below.

Sadowski (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Section Titles
Renaming the "Forgotten Marks" as "Continental Marks" actually adds to the confusion. To be technical the Continental Division was ended at the beginning of the 1958 model year (read the reference). All Mark IIs are thus Continental Mark IIs, all 1958-60 Marks were thus Lincoln Continental Marks. The Lincoln Continental Mark name was used in sales brochures and data books at least through the Mark VII. Thus referring to the 1958-60 Marks as the "Continental Marks" is flatly wrong since only Mark IIs were Continental Marks and most subsequent Marks have been "Lincoln Continental Marks". But they all should be mentioned by the article for obvious reasons. The "Forgotten Marks" tag makes the most sense since the Mark III, Mark IV and Mark V tags were technically recycled.

Sadowski (talk) 01:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The cars were never badged as the "Forgotten Marks"! The convention in automobile articles is to use model names and years. Thus, the section title about the 1958-60 models should be its "official" name: "Mark III-V". However, that would add even more to the confusion! Perhaps adding the production years to the other sections would help maintain the chronological order for readers, even though the automaker reverted the numbering of these models. CZmarlin (talk) 01:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, adding the production years to the other sections might be an appropriate way to handle this.

Sadowski (talk) 01:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Interior dimensions
Could someone please explain the purpose of including a detailed table of the interior dimensions to this article? As per WP guidelines, an article should be a summary of the important aspects of the subject, not a collection of details. There is very little this table of precise interior measurements contributes to a reader's understanding of history of these vehicles. These are great in a website dedicated to a discussion of trivia and details about these cars, but not in an encyclopedia article about the overall development and history of these automobiles. The table will be removed, as was previously done by other editors. Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


 * As far as the table goes, it was very poorly placed (someone forgot to use the preview feature); if it were to be re-included at all, it should have been moved out of the main lead-in text to a section towards the bottom. A place where a side-by-side comparison of dimensions (exterior and interior) would be if there were a section dedicated to the changing size of the Mark Series over the years; this could be used for a reference.  Currently, the article doesn't go into that, so removing the table was the best choice.  --SteveCof00 (talk) 23:13, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Continental Marks and Lincoln Marks
There has always been a confusion between the make Continental and the model Continental from Lincoln, especially since 1968 when Ford built them side by side at Wixom and sold them in the same dealerships. Continental was first used on a Lincoln-Zephyr (at this point still a separate make from Lincoln) in 1940, from 1941-48 it was a model under Lincoln. When the Mark II was released in october 1955 Ford had upgraded the modelname to a Make with its own Division. The Division existed between October 16 1954 and July 18 1956, it was closed down due to poor sales and the Make Continental became part of Lincoln Division. Lincoln Division produced the remaining Mark II´s until May 13 1957 and used the Make Continental on their 1958-59 Mark III and IV. From 1960 the Continental line again becomes a Lincoln model, and the 1960 Lincoln Continental Mark V is the only Lincoln Mark with Continental in the name. Since the 1958-60 models were only upgraded Lincolns and had none of the styling features of the original Continentals, they are not mentioned in later Ford publicity material over Marks, like in this 1977 Mark V catalogue: http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Lincoln/1977_Lincoln/1977_Continental_Mark_V_Brochure/1977%20Continental%20Mark%20V-02.html, hence the expression "The forgotten Marks". When Lee Iacocca revitalized the car lines of Lincoln-Mercury in the mid-late sixties he wanted to use the styling of the first Continental built for Edsel Ford and the Mark II, this was done on the platform of the 4-door Thunderbird and completed with a Rolls-Royce inspired grille. It was named Mark III since it in style was a worthy successor to the Mark II and the Make Continental was also reintroduced. This is visible in the catalogues, when the Lincoln Continental and the Continental Marks are portrayed in the same catalogues there´s always a distinction between them. And from 1976-81 they´re portrayed in separate catalogues. On the back of the cover the Make and Model is written in capital letters like all cars from Ford Motor Company these years. Continental is not an exception.

Some samples of 1979 catalogues from Ford Motor Company: http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Lincoln/1979%20Lincoln/1979_Lincoln_Continental_Brochure/dirindex.html http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Lincoln/1979%20Lincoln/1979%20Continental%20Mark%20V%20Brochure/dirindex.html http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Mercury/1979%20Mercury/1979_Mercury_Monarch_Brochure/dirindex.html http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Ford/1979_Ford/1979_Ford_LTD_Brochure/dirindex.html

1977 Continental Products Facts Book, Continental Mark V AND Lincoln Continental: http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Lincoln/1977_Lincoln/1977_Continental_Product_Facts_Book/dirindex.html

Effective with 1981 modelyear all manufacturers use a 17 character VIN-code: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_Identification_Number The first 3 digits gives the make of the car, between 1981-85 Continental has a separate code 1MR instead of Lincolns 1LN.

From Fords 1982 VIN-decoder: http://www.geting.se/viewimage/image/299326-VIN_Decode_1_1.jpg

Continental was a separate Make until 1985 modelyear, and for 1986 the two remaining models became Lincolns. The mid-size Continental Sedan became Lincoln Continental and the Continental Mark VII became Lincoln Mark VII. So pre 1986 there were no Lincoln Marks except the 1960 Continental Mark V.

Most of the facts come from these books: The Cars of Lincoln-Mercury, George H Dammann & James K Wagner, Crestline Publishings 1987. ISBN 0-912612-26-2

Iacocca: An Autobiography. Lee Iacocca with William Novak, Bantam Books 1984. ISBN 0-533-05067-2

For the moment all these Continentals are hidden on Wikipedia under different Lincoln pages, and I believe there has to be a separate page for Continental to make it comprehensible. As it is now it only adds to the confusion between the two makes. Slimbrow (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This is all true. It is reinforced by the fact that on all advertising and promotional brochures they always printed both the Make then Model. It was always "Continental Mark" not "Lincoln Continental Mark"(except for the 1960 Lincoln Continental Mark V when they were preparing the public for the single model 1961 Lincoln Continental). Lincoln did not prefix Continental Mark on the front or back of the brochures, nor in content copy. "Lincoln" always prefixed the full-sized Continental sedans and models that were not Continental Marks until 1986 when the name Continental was dropped as a make for the Mark Series and became Lincoln Mark.

You will also notice that the imported 1970s Capri which is of course a European Ford is never prefixed with Mercury Capri or Mercury Capri II. It was always simply Capri or Capri II as a stand alone named captive import sold through Lincoln-Mercury dealers. The Capri did not become a Mercury Capri until 1979 when it became a badge engineered version of the Ford Mustang from 1979-86.

Then there was the two years that the Comet was just a Comet for 1960 and did not become a Mercury until 1962. Listing the Make before the Model for vehicles had been consistant for decades when Ford Motor Company published promotional materials. These few stand alone makes or marques were all managed by Lincoln-Mercury Division. The biggest piece of evidence is the absolute consistency of the 70s full line Lincoln-Mercury brochure covers where every model that is a Lincoln or Mercury has those makes prefixed before the model name for each vehicle listed except Continental Mark (IV or V) or Capri (II). This consistency runs through all promotional literature and advertising all the way through the end of 1985 when the Continental make was dropped and replaced with Lincoln for Mark Series cars. Watchdevil (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Attempt to cut the coverage of the names resulted in error
I know that the attempt was good-faith, but the reason I had to revert it is that it took accurate coverage and made it inaccurate. More explanation if requested. — ¾-10 00:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

New Photo
Hi all, I've updated the photo for the page. Please note that it is from the same series as the Mark III's primary page photo. Please let me know your thoughts on this and if we should use a different photo. I like the professional quality of these photos, but I can clean up some of my other uploads for use either on this page or the Mark III page. Just let me know what you'd like to see and I'll work to make it pretty! GeorgeRoush5 (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)