Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Lincoln Futura/Mark II connection mystery

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Farmington Hills, MI
    Posts
    5,118
    Thanked: 65

    Default Lincoln Futura/Mark II connection mystery

    I don't think there's a person extant that knows the Continental Mark II body any better than you do, Roger. When I saw the completed body shell I knew you'd be the best guy to go to, to help me solve a mystery in the Elmer Rohn collection of Mark II photos.

    When I realized the pictures were sequential they presented an extremely clear timeline of what was going on when. Ford documented just about ever aspect of the Mark II project in photos. There must be at least a thousand pictures I don't have that are digitally stored in the Ford Archives. I've asked for the rest from the highest level and I'm awaiting a response.

    Here are the sequential photos for your reference.

    http://s244.photobucket.com/user/bar...?sort=2&page=1

    In the mean time, there are some time sequenced shots that really clear things up about the retractable program, referred-to internally as X-1500R. The final Mark II modeling wasn't even done when they starting making two-dimensional mock-ups of the retractable top. In the photos you can see the design progress from 2 to 3-dimentional from the concept modeling to the test mule with cycle counter. In-between these sequential photos are 5 photos of a Mark II-like firewall attached to an almost-stock Mark II floor plan. It had footwells, which were a first for Ford, so it would fit over no other Ford chassis as you can't really have footwells with an X-frame. With an X frame the cabin has to have flat floors, a higher belt line, roofline and seating. What made the Mark II distinctive was how much lower it was than normal cars. That much is clear in the photos of the "Cobbled Cars" made on Mark II chassis side by side with the Lincoln counterparts. Those are early in the sequence photos.

    The cobbled cars had already been made by Hess & Eisenhardt out of '53 Lincoln sheetmetal and the rest fabricated in-house. Stunning cars. I was told they were sold to the public. I wonder if hey still exist. Ford had a team of engineers stationed there for this and projects like the Retractable prototype.

    The date of the 5 photos I have are March of 1954. They were in Elmer's Continental photo connection, but were taken in a Lincoln plant. Continental was just beginning to plan an assembly as all their work had taken place at the Ford Trade School and "Legion", a school where HF would groom a new generation of machinists and tool-makers. On the surface it seems like a great program. Two weeks of shop training to one week of book-learning. Some were housed and fed and they were all given a stipend. I don't know if something like that would work today, but we could use stronger vocational training.

    I digress. The timing of the 5 photos doesn't fall in line with the making of the Retractable as it's mechanism hadn't even been perfected. I know of no other Ford show car of that era that sat on a Mark II chassis and, the story about the Continental Division selling the prototype chassis for a princely $17,000 to the Lincoln Division as a base for the beautiful Lincoln Futura coupled to lead me to conclude that this is what the Futura was built on. I asked the Ford Archives if there were any photos of the Futura at Ghia and her search didn't turn up anything, so I have no firewall photos to compare it to. Someone sent me photos of the Batmobile firewall, but the pictures were pretty bad and I couldn't tell one way or the other.

    You'll notice some odd things, though, that I think I can explain. The first is the "A" pillars. I think they are shipping supports for the cowl and I think they are bolted on. What appears to be a windshield header also appears, by its construction, just for stability as it would be shipped to Ghia for it's new body. The Futura had no windshield frame, to speak of. The second thing is the heater core openings are in different places and there is a large rectangular hole in the passenger side that doesn't exist in any of the Mark II engineering drawings I have. What must be noted is the body mount stanchions across the front and the holes in the body for the body mounts along the sides, most notably the ones visible in the door sills. What other Ford or Lincoln chassis would this fit on other than one with a perimeter frame with cross-braces?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Barry Wolk
    Farmington Hills, MI

    C5681126

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Barry Wolk For This Useful Post:

    Matt Cashion (03-22-2017)

  3. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,605
    Thanked: 297

    Default

    Honestly, Barry, I just don't know what you are expecting from me. What is the question?
    Nevertheless, I will comment the 5 attached pictures. The firewall from the first picture is definitively not the production one. It may be an early development to verify some aspects of the design; the front body bolts are very similar to the ones for the Mark II. I once read that the firewall is the most complex part of a vehicle; it could be. The second picture has the typical inner rocker panels from the Mark II as well as the lower A pillars. The windshield pillars are looking like an add-on as they are not the same grey at the remaining parts. The front tunnel is not the definitive Mark II one which is flat near the firewall; however the general look is similar to the one of the Mark II. At the back from this floor, there is a large recess which may be the room needed for the retractable roof. What I also see in the trunk floor: it seems that the base of the floor is lower than the standard Mark II, which also indicate that it could be for the retractable prototype. I doubt that space utilization was a concern for the Futura but it was for the retractable.

    The other 3 pictures are from the same prototype, with a crate around it.

    If you remember, years ago in this forum, there was a Eric Stuf.... (sorry, I don't remember his last name) who did also researches about frames and the one from the Futura. He had not the pictures you are showing (and the whole set you sent some months ago); I don't remember if he came to a conclusion.

    You are writing that it's not possible to have deep footwells with an X-frame. Are you sure? You may have a look into a '57 or '58 Brougham to be convinced that it's not true. The remaining Cadillac line had also an X-frame and deep footwells! However, the Cadillac frame had no side rail which was objectionable is case of a side impact.

    I hope that I answered more or less your hidden questions; if not, come back!
    Roger

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Farmington Hills, MI
    Posts
    5,118
    Thanked: 65

    Default

    Yes, perhaps my questions were too obtuse. And, you are correct that an X frame as you describe would allow for footwells, but a conventional railed frame with an X support does not. I was generally speaking of previous Ford frames and should have said so.

    This image is dated 3/10/54

    104223-4.JPG 3:10:54.jpg

    3/16/54

    104301-00.JPG 3:16:54.jpg

    4/20/54

    104551-14.JPG 4:20:54.jpg

    8/19/54

    105381-18.JPG 8:19:54.jpg

    Considering this sequence of photos and their related dates do you think the floor pan is for the Retractable? It seems too early to be building a floor pan for a car that is barely developed. Do you agree with that?
    Barry Wolk
    Farmington Hills, MI

    C5681126

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,605
    Thanked: 297

    Default

    It would be interesting to see the floor used at the 4th picture! If you look at the frame's rear part at the wheelhouse, it is going more higher than at the Mark II. This match more or less the shape of the trunk floor at the second picture. On the Mark II, the floor is flat near the spare wheel. On this floor, there are "humps" to clear the frame. As a floor takes a long time to scratch build, it was maybe finished before the roof mechanism was ready.
    If the 2nd picture is for the Futura, why did they install the upper "A" pillars as there was none on that study? If Continental sold a Mark II frame to Lincoln, that floor picture is not for such a frame. And, who knows, they sold maybe a floor with the frame?
    You objection about the dates, early development and 6 days later a nice floor is a valid one. As I never saw the Futura nor the assembly kit which was released by Revell, I just try to find an explanation at what I see.

    About X-frames with side members: you are perfectly right: till '56 Cadillac had such a frame and the floor is more or less flat. Studebaker had a similar frame with flat floors; like you I do assume that footwells with such a frame would be a non-sense.
    Roger

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Farmington Hills, MI
    Posts
    5,118
    Thanked: 65

    Default

    I can only add that the added "A" pillars may have been added for shipping to Ghia to stabilize the firewall, but I don't see the need. In the photo of the Retractable it appears to have proper Mark II "A" pillars and a proper Mark II windshield header.

    img045_zps84wiviv7.jpg
    Barry Wolk
    Farmington Hills, MI

    C5681126

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •