Continental Kit or Bump

[tluke]

Perusing the WTB Parts forum a while back, Vic and Clay/Lexi were looking for 54-56 continental kits. Owning a Continental myself, I took interest. Most all continental kits on 50's Cadillacs I find absolutely hideous. (1959s were the worst) Warren mentioned in a reply that Cadillac discouraged the kits because of the rear end drag. Even Continental when, in 1956, they finally built the Mark II follow-on to the original 40's Continental threw out the continental kit. Instead they invented the Continental "Bump"


My '57 Continental Mark II

Reading that post I thought it would be cool to modify the 50's Cads with such a bump. Just take the trunk lid to a custom shop and have them add it. So much better than the monstrosities with their extended and protruding bumpers (and rear end drag). Besides, Lincoln originally added the kit because of limited trunk space. Cads in the 50's didn't have that problem. Anyway, here's a very rough rendering of what such a bump would look like on my '55 75 Series.



What do you think?

[Lexi]

Terry I like it, but it is not as nice looking as the Lincoln unit you posted. That "bump" sits lower on the Ford and seems to rise out of the bumper line, where it looks like it may conceal a spare tire. It is very classy and looks like it belongs there. Kudos to Ford for that! The Caddy "bump" is just sitting there with awkward symetry, with no space below to accomodate any notion of a spare, real or otherwise. Still very nice, but that fake wheel well should project lower to "blend in" & finish the look. Perhaps those 6 vertical trunk valence bars influenced the design? Or perhaps when the licence plate is mounted in between the bumper ends, the look is greatly improved as the "lower" area of where the fake spare bump would continue would then be hidden from view? Is this really now part of your car or a CGI fantasy?

The main bad thing about our Limos is that they had a short deck which gave them a "stubby", less than proportionate look in the back end, in my opinion. GM needed that trunk space to enlarge the rear seating area to make room for that row of auxilliary, fold out seating. In addition to that, they still had to stretch the chassis. The half round rear bumper center portion style of continental kit does look good, ('57 Caddy type). I agree that the "Porch" style, where the entire rear bumper is projected outwards, is not particularly attractive on most cars, especially those that already have an elongated rear design. It throws the symetry off. As our Limos are shortened back there, I contend that depending on the type of continental kit, the appearance of our Limos might be enhanced with the addition of some continental kits.

I still would like to find one that only replaces the rear center bumper section. In the case of our Limos I think it would better balance out the look of the car. Just my .02 cents worth. Thanks for posting.

Clay/Lexi

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

If you are going to have a "Continental Kit", have one that works.

The problem with most I have seen is that access to the trunk for heavy/bulky stuff is very difficult.

Plus, putting a spare inside the trunk, behind the "Bulge" would make it impossible.

Bruce.

[Roger Zimmermann]

As I was deeply involved with the Continental Mark II during the construction of the 1:12 model, I agree with Bruce that having a spare tire in that location is not at all practical. On the other side, the Mark II was an expensive car; I doubt that owners had concerns about this futile aspect...

[tluke]

Clay, no, my Caddy does not have the bump, I just photoshopped it.
re: "but that fake wheel well should project lower to "blend in" & finish the look"
I agree, but remember, the 55-56 Caddies all sat on top of the frame as opposed to the Mark II which has a "ladder" style frame so that the floor pans etc. sit down inside the "rungs" making the whole car sit much lower. The trunk lid, therefore comes all the way down to the bumper. Plus, I didn't put a lot of thought into my "design", just enough to get a reaction from forum members.

Roger,
re: "I agree with Bruce that having a spare tire in that location is not at all practical"
Bruce: "Plus, putting a spare inside the trunk, behind the "Bulge" would make it impossible."
I somewhat agree. Reaching over the spare tire, which is behind the Mark II's bump, to remove luggage and cargo is a real pain. My Mark II also has radial tires now that are considerably wider than the original bias-ply so it's difficult getting it to sit all the way in the wheel well so that the trunk can close. I guess that could also be a problem with all cars of that era.
Here's the "somewhat". The summer I graduated from high school (a few years ago), 5 of my friends and I drove up from Salt Lake City to Yellowstone Park to camp out on Lake Hebgen near the cabin where 6 of our lady friends were staying. On the way up I blew a recapped tire. We had to empty out most of the trunk just to get the spare tire and jack out. It sure would have been nice to have that spare tire right there. (Interestingly, as we were emptying out the trunk, a car came up behind us, following my hubcap as it rolled slowly down the road).

Bruce
re: "bulge".
May I remind you, it's not a "bulge", it's the Continental Bump.

Terry

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

So, there is a tyre behind that bump on the Lincoln?   That would really make trunk loading and unloading very difficult.

Bruce.

[Roger Zimmermann]

So, there is a tyre behind that bump on the Lincoln?  That would really make trunk loading and unloading very difficult.
 

Yes Bruce. I'm attaching a rendering of the situation, using a picture of the scale model. Fro your info, the car is not a lincoln, but a Continental. For a few years, Continental was a distict brand, even if most mechanical elements were pure Lincoln!

[Big Fins]

Just like Imperial was a distinct brand. The unknowing still call them Chrysler Imperial.

[tluke]

And you can see from Roger's pic, it really made the trunk hard to use. At least in 56-57 the tire was located there. Lincoln took back the Continental in 1958 and the bump became purely cosmetic. It lasted until the Mark series was discontinued in 1998 and by then the bump was just an ever-so-subtle curve in the trunk lid. The Mark II's were said to be the most expensive car built in America. By 1958,, not only was the Mark III the most god-awful looking car, but the Cadillac Eldorado Brougham with its shot glasses in the glove box took over the title of most expensive American car  - and it was gorgeous!

[Lexi]

Clay, no, my Caddy does not have the bump, I just photoshopped it.
re: "but that fake wheel well should project lower to "blend in" & finish the look"
I agree, but remember, the 55-56 Caddies all sat on top of the frame as opposed to the Mark II which has a "ladder" style frame so that the floor pans etc. sit down inside the "rungs" making the whole car sit much lower. The trunk lid, therefore comes all the way down to the bumper. Plus, I didn't put a lot of thought into my "design", just enough to get a reaction from forum members.

Terry

It still looks very good. When I looked at it closer I could tell it was a fabbed pic. I had no idea those '56 Continentals actually had a spare under the bump! Clay/Lexi

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Personally, I never cared for the decklid even on the Continental which was an attempt to "force" a styling element of decades past onto a modern car. Exner did a similar thing with freestanding headlights on the 1961-1963 Imperial but it proved unpopular as well as impractical. Trying to be all things at once rarely works. When asked what makes for good styling, retired GM designer Dennis Little said in effect- "simplicity" and "less is more".

As to the 1950 to 1958 Series 75s, they could easily have used the longer rear quarters and decklid from a coupe instead of the Series 62 Sedan but perhaps it was done to keep the model within more manageable exterior dimensions. In 1959, the Series 75 got longer rear quarters which greatly helped to balance its proportions.

While I realize some people love Continental kits but personally, I'm not a fan.

[Lexi]

Yes, good points, in that they are definitely not for every car, with some even ruining the appearance of the vehicle, just like those free standing headlights you noted. The 1957 Cadillac "Auxilliary Wheel Carrier" as it was called, was a pleasant surprise and looked like it belonged on the car. Although some 70 years later, we do not necessarily subscribe to the "less is more" theory, as we welcome ostentatious 1950s chrome and trim. Like, how many people cut the tail fins off of a '59 Caddy to name one example? I think Cadillac "God" Roger Z., did own a '59 with fins removed, but that is a rare exception. The fins more than anything make that car. As for most 1950s Limos, the shortened deck gave those cars a stubby, out of proportionate look. I agree, perhaps that was done as you said to keep the cars within "manageable exterior dimensions". Some of those models would benefit in appearance with a Continental kit. I suspect that generally, most users of those cars would also have less of a reason to access the trunk. That said, the Series 75 cars still continued to grow in size. Clay/Lexi

[tluke]

As for most 1950s Limos, the shortened deck gave those cars a stubby, out of proportionate look. I agree, perhaps that was done as you said to keep the cars within "manageable exterior dimensions"

Here ya go Clay. Do you think the 75 Series looks better like this? I never thought mine looked "stubby and "out of proportion" until you and Eric ruined it for me. Now I can't unsee it.   Just try to find a parking spot or garage to park this one in!

[Lexi]

Here ya go Clay. Do you think the 75 Series looks better like this? I never thought mine looked "stubby and "out of proportion" until you and Eric ruined it for me. Now I can't unsee it.   Just try to find a parking spot or garage to park this one in!

LMAO! Terry I love your car stretched or not, but it sure looks cool with a longer trunk as mine also would look. Funny you should maniplate that 2nd image as I did the same with mine once a while back. But you are right regarding finding a parking garage! Attached is my shot, but I just stretched the whole picture and it still looks out of proportion. You did a better job. Mine just looks like a scene from the Godfather. You know, "Leave the gun, take the canoli". Just don't see Pauli expired in the front seat! Clay/Lexi

[tluke]

They do look better somewhat streamlined like that. Like mine, I really like the look of them stretched. Yours kinda looks like the ads they made when Cadillac would use illustrations of the cars rather than photos and purposely make them look a little more streamlined (subtly stretched - but with round wheels). It seems like Cadillac knew people wanted them a little sleeker. The Series 75, CDV and 60S pics below certainly have that look.

[Lexi]

They do look better somewhat streamlined like that. Like mine, I really like the look of them stretched. Yours kinda looks like the ads they made when Cadillac would use illustrations of the cars rather than photos and purposely make them look a little more streamlined (subtly stretched - but with round wheels). It seems like Cadillac knew people wanted them a little sleeker. The Series 75, CDV and 60S pics below certainly have that look.

Yes, very well put. Some of those old ads were a bit misleading. Cars made to look longer than they really were. Clay/Lexi

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Here ya go Clay. Do you think the 75 Series looks better like this? I never thought mine looked "stubby and "out of proportion" until you and Eric ruined it for me. Now I can't unsee it.   Just try to find a parking spot or garage to park this one in!

Well done. Now that's the S75 that should've been. Can you do it for a '58?

On a side note, S75s of the '50s  (exc '59) were barely any longer than a 1976 Brougham. And the FWD S75 of the mid '80s was no longer than a '77 DeVille.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Although some 70 years later, we do not necessarily subscribe to the "less is more" theory, as we welcome ostentatious 1950s chrome and trim. Like, how many people cut the tail fins off of a '59 Caddy to name one example? 

From the side view, '59 styling was actually greatly simplified from that of its immediate predecessors. Only at the ends is where you got the complexity, otherwise all the little chrome bits here and there were gone with a smoother, more flowing body and roofline- especially in the Coupes. 

Continental kits look more out of place on '59 & later than on the earlier '50s, IMHO.

[Lexi]

From the side view, '59 styling was actually greatly simplified from that of its immediate predecessors. Only at the ends is where you got the complexity, otherwise all the little chrome bits here and there were gone with a smoother, more flowing body and roofline- especially in the Coupes. 

Continental kits look more out of place on '59 & later than on the earlier '50s, IMHO.

Yes, I agree that continental kits do look more out of place on a '59 than earlier'50s models. I often thought why? I think your comments on "smoother, flowing" body lines for the '59 hint at the reason. Lots of more straight, even some hard edges in places with later cars; though continental kits are more curvy. That, plus putting them on the back end of a car that already had a huge rear deck just spoils the symetry. That said, regarding chrome bits & the '59s. The '55 Cadillac 60 Special has a far more subdued side profile than the 1959 60 Special which is laden with flashy trim down it's flanks. So it can vary depending on the model. Both bumpers are also massive and I would also rather disassemble, repair and restore a mid '50's front bumper clip then that of a '59.

While my '56 Limo is freakish in size, as you pointed out it is not really that much longer than lesser Cadillac models by the 1970s or the ones I have owned and driven from the 60s/70s. After 1956 that hulking, bulbus, more rounded outer body shell began to morph into a more stretched, lower profile look. Yes, the chrome was still there and arguably more so at times, model dependant, (1958 Caddy as an example). 1960 seems to have been the year when things began to evolve into a far more minimalist, understated look, but the overall length and engine size of vehicles continued to grow.

When parked at a car show, my Limo has a more gargantuan appearance when compared to other vehicles from that era or earlier. I have noticed for years that many of these other cars, while massive and heavy in design, are actually rather short & narrow in outer dimensions. I finally concluded that while my Limo is indeed huge, it is also the rounded, high body shell that adds much to it's size and appearance. These '50s Cadillacs seek attention with their gaudiness and various design elements which are often over stated by stressing the vanity of display and oppulence. The Steven Spielberg school of "Bigger is better" is at play here. That is why Cadillacs stood out back in the day. Most everyone knew a Cadillac when they saw one. It was a statement. That is partly why at least many of us like these vintage models. We can't say the same about today's cars as much of that indivduality has been lost, for various reasons.

The massive "rounded" quality of pre-1957 Cadies does suit the continental kit more so in some cases. Also, the smaller the trunk, usually the better they suit the car. Just my opinion as well. The nicer kits where those that formed out of the rear bumper center, replacing it with the carrier section with the rounded spare wheel and/or rounded painted wheel cover. All shapely chrome and steel. More suited to the earlier vehicles due to their more rounded body shell designs. Years ago, my 7 year old daughter even commented on it, and referred to this design element as "bubbly". LOL. Clay/Lexi

[Lexi]

Couldn't find the photos I was looking for, but this one of my '56 Limo shows it parked next to what I think is a 1966 Buick. Can't see a lot of the Buick, but the straight hard lines are in stark contrast to the smoothed out rounded edges of the Cadillac which is just 10 years older. Another shot shows the Limo towering over a 1959 Chev, which although chrome laden itself, its more streamlined appearance has taken away much of that "hulking" appearance that Chevys even just a few short years had earlier. This '59 Chevy in my opinion would not suit a continental kit. Besides, why cover up that gull wing finned back end? Clay/Lexi