Poll: Which Lincoln...
 
Notifications
Clear all
Poll results: '57 or '58 Lincoln?
Voter(s): 23
Poll is closed Jan 13, 2024
'57 Lincoln  -  votes: 10 / 43.5%
10
43.5%
'58 Lincoln  -  votes: 12 / 52.2%
12
52.2%
Tie  -  votes: 1 / 4.3%
1
4.3%
Sorry, no interest in this selection.  -  votes: 0 / 0%
0
0%

Poll: Which Lincoln? (12/30/2023)

14 Posts
12 Users
65 Reactions
1,420 Views
(@sizedoesmatter)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 29 years ago
Posts: 9678
Topic starter  

'57 or '58 Lincoln?

Be sure to make your selection.

Of course, please “Reply” to share your comments.

If selection is greater than 2 rank them.

 

Click on the picture to enlarge the image.

1957 Lincoln Premiere Convertible 15
1958 Continental Mark III Convertible 19

 

 


John Bono
North Jersey


   
David Green, Tony Perrone, Steve Jacobs and 5 people reacted
Quote
Topic Tags
Ed Glorius
(@ed-glorius)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 2613
 

I'm not a fan of either, but I'm unable to forgive Lincoln for the unfortunate (I'm being polite) 1957 facelift of the 1956, which was perfect.  So it's the baroque 1958 for me.


Retired in Dunedin, Florida.


   
Tony Perrone, Pete Rovero, Steve Jacobs and 3 people reacted
ReplyQuote
(@bob-jackman)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 29 years ago
Posts: 15255
 

@ed-glorius Ed, I agree with you 100%.



   
Pete Rovero, Steve Jacobs, John Napoli and 3 people reacted
ReplyQuote
John Kuvakas
(@jkuvakas)
Illustrious Member Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 9653
 

For me, it's the '58!


John Kuvakas
Warrenton, VA


   
Tony Perrone, Steve Jacobs, John Napoli and 2 people reacted
ReplyQuote
(@moe-parr)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 2345
 
Posted by: @ed-glorius

I'm not a fan of either, but I'm unable to forgive Lincoln for the unfortunate (I'm being polite) 1957 facelift of the 1956, which was perfect.  So it's the baroque 1958 for me.

I agree that the '57 was a step backward from the '56, but to my eye the '58 was even worse!


Barry Levittan
Long Island, NY


   
Tony Perrone, Steve Jacobs, John Kuvakas and 2 people reacted
ReplyQuote
John Merritt
(@jcarnutz)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 29 years ago
Posts: 5496
 

I have to agree as well. While the '57 is always a welcomed treat to see, it can't compare to the gorgeous '56. As for this comparison, that '58 is so outrageous, it would be the car that I would want to be seen in, so most definitely the '58. 


John Merritt
South Lyon, Michigan - USA


   
Tony Perrone, Pete Rovero, Steve Jacobs and 3 people reacted
ReplyQuote
Ed Glorius
(@ed-glorius)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 2613
 
Posted by: @moe-parr

I agree that the '57 was a step backward from the '56, but to my eye the '58 was even worse!

Both ain't no oil paintings, are they?


Retired in Dunedin, Florida.


   
Tony Perrone, Steve Jacobs, John Kuvakas and 1 people reacted
ReplyQuote
George Schire
(@georgeschire)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 7281
 

Well, I concur with the comments above from others regarding both cars.  The '56 gets mentioned because it was PERFECT, and then in '57 some monkey at the drawing table saw fit to put those horrific tall fins on it.  It ruined what was otherwise a beautiful style.  So this said, though the '58 was obviously the result of a drug trip gone bad, I will vote for it over the '57 simply because the '58 will forever exemplify the outrageous absurdity of that model year in all cars from the Big Three.  


George Schire
Oakdale, Minnesota


   
ReplyQuote
(@jack-dodds)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 21408
 

I'm not a fan of either car.  The '57 is to my eyes a spoiled '56 and the '58 just doesn't grab me at all....never did.  So by default the '57 gets my vote.



   
ReplyQuote
(@100ford2003)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 7914
 

I'm voting for the '58 because it helps make me look slimmer.... 😁👍



   
Christopher Moroni, John Bono, Ed Glorius and 4 people reacted
ReplyQuote
(@perrone1)
Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 18810
 

I went with the '57 merely because it is the closest looking one to the '56. The '58 is also gorgeous when you remove the earlier cars from the competition but too extravagant when put up against the '56 or '57.



   
ReplyQuote
(@sizedoesmatter)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 29 years ago
Posts: 9678
Topic starter  

Agree, the '57 is a disappointment after the stunning '56. I was 14 years old when the '58 was introduced and I loved its beautiful and radical styling. All these years later I still have the same feelings for it.


John Bono
North Jersey


   
ReplyQuote
David Green
(@david-green)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 9795
 

Both are far too large but styling wise, I do prefer the 1957.



   
ReplyQuote
(@chris)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 29 years ago
Posts: 10496
 
Posted by: @georgeschire

and then in '57 some monkey at the drawing table saw fit to put those horrific tall fins on it. 

"...monkey..." LoL   

It's clear most collectors agree that the '57s were terrible.  It's not that the rear wheel openings or fins are all that bad, but they COMPLETELY do NOT match the front (the entire clip ) of the car.

The mis-matched F&R wheel openings have zero symmetry. The odd-ball front end is a combination of numerous curves, vertical & horizontal lines and "too many lights"  that's, frankly, disturbing to look at.

I love the 1958 but went with the '57 only because I can't deal with that reverse hood. 🙄 😔 ☹ 

 



   
ReplyQuote
Share: