Cadillac Ride Quality 50's-70's

[64\/54Cadillacking]

Agreed on the springs. I think Lincoln finally gave the Town Car/Mark VI coils starting 1980.

Cadillac's decline in interior quality came more or less incrementally but I think 1966 still had a reasonably well crafted interior. The next drop came in '67 followed by a really big drop in 1969 - or at least I always thought. The driveline & engineering of the 1969/1970 was superb though.

Yes and Yes. Their drivetrains were truly amazing though, yeah by 67, Cadillac lost it's beautiful interiors.

Lincoln switch over to a 3-link rear coils in 1970 when they went to a full frame construction. My only guess for them keeping the leaf springs in the 60's is because the unit-body design would have caused too much body flexing if they went to a soft coils for the rear. They had this problem with their huge 58-60 models that were equipped with rear coil springs. The body flexed badly. The stiff leafs, keeps the body planted and doesn't allow for much suspension movement which could have caused door misalignment and other body problems as these cars needed to be ultra heavy because it had no frame.

[Jon S]

Agreed on the springs. I think Lincoln finally gave the Town Car/Mark VI coils starting 1980.

Cadillac's decline in interior quality came more or less incrementally but I think 1966 still had a reasonably well crafted interior. The next drop came in '67 followed by a really big drop in 1969 - or at least I always thought. The driveline & engineering of the 1969/1970 was superb though.

My 1973 Lincoln has coil rear springs . . . I believe coil rear springs appeared in 1970.  I remember the ride comparisons of the 1971 and 1972 Lincoln vs Cadillac and Lincoln won each time - Consumer Reports, Motor Trend, etc.  My 1973 Lincoln Coupe weighs 5013 lbs and the 460 V/8 really propels it!  Ride-wise and noise-wise it goes circles around my Cadillac!

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

I could have sworn there were leafs in the rear of a '78 TC my father had on the lot. (Maybe it was a New Yorker?) 

I stand corrected.

[Jon S]

I could have sworn there were leafs in the rear of a '78 TC my father had on the lot. (Maybe it was a New Yorker?) 

I stand corrected.

No problem.

[Maynard Krebs]

Correction:  the '58 and '59 Lincolns did have coil springs in the rear; for '60 they came with leaf springs.

[Blade]

Correction:  the '58 and '59 Lincolns did have coil springs in the rear; for '60 they came with leaf springs.

That's strange, why would they go backwards?

[64\/54Cadillacking]

That's strange, why would they go backwards?

Beats me, I really don't understand the move to leaf springs unless they were focusing on handling. Coils give a smoother, softer, more comfortable ride. The biggest drawback of leafs is that it doesn't allow for much wheel travel and the suspension is limited in it's ability to flex and adjust to different road conditions.

[Blade]

Beats me, I really don't understand the move to leaf springs unless they were focusing on handling. Coils give a smoother, softer, more comfortable ride. The biggest drawback of leafs is that it doesn't allow for much wheel travel and the suspension is limited in it's ability to flex and adjust to different road conditions.

I found this article that might explain it: "A departure from the norm in 1958, the Mark III Continental's suspension design was intended to incorporate air bags, which didn't end up making production; it was composed of short and long arms, an anti-roll bar, tubular shocks and coil springs in front and trailing arms with a tracking bar, tubular shocks, coil springs and two compression bumpers in the rear. The rear suspension was redesigned for 1960, replacing the coil springs with parallel leaf springs."

Sounds like they were intended to use air rides on their 58-59 cars which required the coil springs but it never made it to production; so with the redesigned 60 they dropped the idea and went back to the more simple and probably cheaper style.