kishy's 1984 Town Car

[GM_Guy]

Plastic gear on the transmission end can also cause bounce if it wears enough, the gear bounces around abit and gives you the wobble.

[gadget73]

At some point the clock changed, I think in 88 or 89. I believe they say Quartz on them. They are a twitchy-hand style instead of the steady sweep of the older models.

[DerekTheGreat]

Oh, great. I didn't know the older ones were steady. When mine worked, it was indeed twitchy. I did pull a nice cluster a few years ago, the same car which netted me the elusive CD player. Shoutout to Stidman for making me aware of that.

[kishy]

Woke this one up this evening. I had some difficulties getting it going at first, due to an annoying pair of problems which together were quite difficult to isolate because they cause the same symptoms:

• Corrosion on the battery posts and inside of the terminals
• Apparently a crap battery

The battery had been sitting in the car disconnected, but the positive post was warm to the touch when I first opened the hood, indicating an internal short and self-discharge. I put it on the charger which indicated fully charged, and my meter showed 12.7something, but when returned to the car, it wouldn't turn the starter at all, and after a couple attempts, it showed 11.9V. Battery's trash. No surprises here, I've suspected this one was weak for years now.

Anyway, fired right up without incident once the starter was able to do some starting. Electrics all working as they should be, except the antenna, which has broken. Drove about how it should.



The to-do list to return this one to service when required is as follows:

• Monkey with the exhaust hangers a bit
• Completely go through the front suspension and brakes. Parts are already on-hand to go 95-97, but I'm a little tempted to maybe do something silly and get performance-ish brakes for the stock setup. But mirroring the wagon setup would be ideal (95-97 with performance rotors and pads).
• Thorough review of brake lines since this one still has all of the originals, and flush the fluid.
• Keeping in mind the axle oil was full of glitter, maybe get to work rebuilding my K code rear end to be ready to toss it in when required.

And not a prerequisite to use it again, but a priority is the vinyl top, which I think I'd like to deal with my swapping on a full fiberglass-backed ragtop, if one turns up in decent shape.

So it's not exactly ready to go at the moment, which I'm mentioning because of what has been recently discussed in the Ranger thread:

I am giving a lot of consideration to what to replace the Ranger with. The short list of options is:

• ...
• ...
• Return the 84 Town Car to winter duty. The fact is, the 84 is a very solid, mechanically-sound vehicle but it's a little ratty and rough around the edges, and nobody anywhere will ever put the effort in to bring it back from the cliff it's approaching in terms of roughness. It may not be the worst outcome for me to reduce the fleet size by a vehicle and put this one back to work doing the task I originally bought it for, which was always supposed to be my winter beater. It's not like I'm driving it otherwise, I think it sat all this past year.
• ...

...
The other thing about running the 84 TC in the winter is that I really like driving Panthers in winter weather. The wipers parking below the hood are a serious annoyance, but other than that, they're really fun to toss around in the snow, when we get what little of it we still get.
...

On that point, 11 years ago today:


Plenty of decisions yet-to-be-made here.

[DerekTheGreat]

Good to see that Lincoln of yours on the road again. Yep, the '80-'84 nose & ass look much better than the later stuff, just not the cliff hanger bumpers. Love those parking and taillights much more than mine, as well as your hideaway headlight conversion. Very stately-looking, these Town Cars. I definitely take notice when I see one, which aside from my own, isn't very often.

Is it possible to convert to the early nose and rear without swapping the bumpers?

I also liked driving my Ford (when I had it) in the winter, very fun to toss around. Although I never got stuck, I had a few close calls. The ground clearance and 4x4 offered by my K1500 has taken the top spot for winter duties. Never a close call with that thing. Only drove my Lincoln in snow a few times, handled much like the Ford, but was a bit better due to the posi rear diff.

[kishy]

Good to see that Lincoln of yours on the road again. Yep, the '80-'84 nose & ass look much better than the later stuff, just not the cliff hanger bumpers. Love those parking and taillights much more than mine, as well as your hideaway headlight conversion. Very stately-looking, these Town Cars. I definitely take notice when I see one, which aside from my own, isn't very often.

Is it possible to convert to the early nose and rear without swapping the bumpers?

I also liked driving my Ford (when I had it) in the winter, very fun to toss around. Although I never got stuck, I had a few close calls. The ground clearance and 4x4 offered by my K1500 has taken the top spot for winter duties. Never a close call with that thing. Only drove my Lincoln in snow a few times, handled much like the Ford, but was a bit better due to the posi rear diff.

The proportions of the 80-89 Town Car are straight-up defective. What fixes them to have some sense of balance on the 80-84 is the wide bumpers. The 85-89 is helped by the sloped rear panel and tail lights, making the bumpers less necessary, but the front is still really weird looking and a wider bumper would fix it.

That being said, I am certain that you can mix-and-match those parts however you wish, and can use the narrow bumpers with the older header panel. You'd have to use the bumper fillers that match the bumper, which are attached to the header panel but are removable.

[DerekTheGreat]

Yeah, those filler panels are what concern me. Annnd it looks like the rear 1/4 panel extensions and decklid might be a bit different on the '85+ Townies. I seem to recall noticing that when yours was in my driveway. Was a bummer and until seeing these pics of your car, I had tried to put the swap out of my mind as a result.

[kishy]

Oh, the rear. I forgot about the rear differences and was only thinking about the front in my prior reply.

Yeah, I think the rear would present some challenges and I don't think there was a factory-made part that would just fit and work.

[Lutrova]

https://www.oldcarsweekly.com/news/t...own-car-delray

I ran across this article awhile back about a dealership in Florida that threw tail ends for Mark VIs onto '85+ Town Cars. Looks like they kept the narrow bumper fillers. Not sure if there was more to it than swapping the deck lid and tail light assemblies, but if it works with a Mark VI, you'd think you could do the same with the earlier Town Car parts.

[kishy]

https://www.oldcarsweekly.com/news/t...own-car-delray

I ran across this article awhile back about a dealership in Florida that threw tail ends for Mark VIs onto '85+ Town Cars. Looks like they kept the narrow bumper fillers. Not sure if there was more to it than swapping the deck lid and tail light assemblies, but if it works with a Mark VI, you'd think you could do the same with the earlier Town Car parts.

Eh, kinda sorta. The fitment issue that I'm expecting might happen is related to the fact that the 80-84 Town Car rear filler panel extends deeper from the bumper into the body of the car than the 85-89 probably does because the Town Car tail lights and reflector panel are straight vertical and closer to the back wall of the trunk than the Mark VI parts are. The 85-89 rear of the car is more similar in overall profile to the 80-83 Mark VI because of the angled tail lights.

I also don't recall exactly what a Mark VI looks like with its trunk open, in terms of how the filler attaches to the back wall of the trunk. That sheet metal is different between TC/MkVI.

I have a set of Mark VI tails for a project, if I ever get around to it, but I have no interest in using that awful trunklid. I'm thinking Town Car body and trunklid, 85-89 Town Car reflector + reverse light panel, Mark VI quarter extensions and tail lights. Some fiberglass work will likely be required on the quarter panel extensions to make it all line up properly.

Edit: illustrating the depth issue for 80-84 vs 85-89 TC:

[Lutrova]

...The fitment issue that I'm expecting might happen is related to the fact that the 80-84 Town Car rear filler panel extends deeper from the bumper into the body of the car than the 85-89 probably does because the Town Car tail lights and reflector panel are straight vertical and closer to the back wall of the trunk than the Mark VI parts are. The 85-89 rear of the car is more similar in overall profile to the 80-83 Mark VI because of the angled tail lights....

You could probably make it all work if you spliced the center of an '80-'84 bumper filler with the ends of an '85+ filler, assuming you were trying to put the earlier tail light and reflector setup over the narrow bumper. Though that still leaves the issue of where to mount reverse lights.

[gadget73]

I'd have to go the other way, Mark VI header with the later bumpers and lenses. Do not like the overhanging bumpers or pointy lights.

[DerekTheGreat]

As a roundy light Townie owner, the pointy lights are where it's at. It's the ming on the cherry. It's just the "I got punched in the lip" bumpers that I can't stand. F'n calf-catchers...

[kishy]

You realize the bumper is (maybe literally) the same length right?

That's why 85-89 cars look so stupid. Sorry, but I own one too, so I can say that lol.
The bumper sticks out like a sore lip or bad underbite but doesn't adequately cover the width of the car because it's even narrower than the car itself.

Whoever was in charge of slimming the bumpers absolutely botched that surgery.

edit: from the 88 thread

An interesting observation I made while looking at the 84 from above when it was on the ferry boat recently: the reason I think the skinny bumpers look so stupid is because the car gets wider in the middle of the passenger cabin. The body is narrowest at the header panel and rear quarter extensions. The bumpers on the 80-84 cars are actually the same width as the passenger area of the car, they just look wider because the body tapers in at both ends.

And then from this thread:

I stand by the fact that the car's proportions and shape support needing a bumper that is wider than the bodywork immediately behind it, or it looks weird.

[gadget73]

I have 1982 front fenders on my car with a 1986 bumper. It does not stick out.