Ford successfully orchestrated a splashy live television musical debut for its new brand Edsel in the fall of 1957. The program was a culmination of a multi-year project to establish a new division of Ford that would compete more directly with the likes of Oldsmobile, Buick, and DeSoto. Edsels promised to be notably different from the Mercury with which it shared most everything except styling.
Edsel was to be much more value-conscious than the new-for-’58 unibody Lincolns, which sought to move the brand upmarket after the almost instantaneous discontinuation of the Continental Division. After Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby ushered in the Edsel name it was time to show off the all-new models in showrooms, and introduce a supposedly excited American consumer to the lineup.
A new domestic car brand was a notable and unusual occurrence by the Fifties. As the passenger car was well-established by that time, the small brands that popped up and quickly went bankrupt in the earlier part of the century were a distant memory. Very few new American car brands were introduced between the end of WWII and Edsel’s 1958 debut.
Edsel promised futuristic styling, advanced and user-friendly features, and great build quality. All those positive characteristics were included in Edsel’s exciting seven-model debut for the 1958 model year. All of Edsel’s cars were full-size, and though Ford didn’t admit it they were tied very closely to Mercury counterparts.
Four of the company’s offerings were sedan nameplates, and three were wagons. Edsel’s model names have all been reassigned to other things in the course of history, whether that be a vehicle from Ford, GM, AMC, a bug killer, or a type of shorts. You pick your favorite.
In order of luxuriousness (price), the lower end of the sedan range was represented by Ranger, with the Pacer as a small step upward. The middle and upper-level Edsel sedans were the Corsair and Citation. All sedan-based models were offered in various body types, which we’ll address individually. The wagon enthusiast on a budget selected the Roundup in 1958 or could spend more money on a Villager or the top-tier Bermuda.
Before we have a discussion on pricing and brand positioning, it’s important to cite the context into which Edsel was launched. As mentioned in our Lincoln Mark coverage, 1958 was a disastrous year for the U.S. economy. Car sales were hit especially hard: All manufacturers saw a drastic drop, as it seemed consumers as a whole decided they did not need to replace their car so often, and certainly not with a 1958 model.
Domestic car sales fell 31 percent over 1957, which combined with a serious industrial slowdown and rising interest rates. The interest rate escalation started in 1955 and 1956 and culminated in 1957 to kick the economy in the teeth and kill the housing market too. The so-called Eisenhower Recession lasted only through May of 1958 before recovery began, but was serious enough to cost domestic car manufacturers a lot of money.
Prior to launch, Edsel marketing assured their cars had “more you ideas.” In an approach Infiniti would take to the next level about 32 years later, the Edsels were only shown in early marketing via a very blurred picture, under a sheet, or wrapped in paper like those Nineties Enterprise ads. Prior to The Edsel Show, the new and radical designs had been teased only through those methods.
Even dealer deliveries were secretive, as when the cars were shipped to showrooms they were covered. Ford required the Edsels to stay covered on lots until the brand was launched. The desire for hype trumped any thought that consumers needed to see an upcoming automobile.
But what did that matter? The Edsel’s features were supposed to wow customers who arrived in showrooms and pull them from their trusty Oldsmobiles. We’ll address styling for Edsels separately in the series, but all models shared ingenious interior features not available at other brands no matter the price.
The Edsel’s dash design was intended to pave the way for driver-focused comfort and convenience motoring, as signified by all the elegant ladies in the marketing wearing their white gloves. Gauges were located in a trapezoidal pod in front of the driver, with individual circular dials for the tachometer, fuel, a clock, as well as temperature and oil pressure. Above them all was a new feature not seen before: A speedometer within a lighted dome.
No simple circular or horizontal speedo here! The glass-encased speedometer rotated left and right horizontally, pivoting on a visible y-axis within the assembly like a spinning top. Also innovative (for the time) was a panel of warning lights to the right of the wheel and below the temperature gauges. The panel was inspired by the sort of warning lamps aircraft used and told the driver if there was a temperature issue, low oil, or if the parking brake was activated.
A very special and immediately hated feature of the ’58 Edsels was Teletouch; transmission controls located in the center of the steering wheel. We’ve covered the system extensively in our Abandoned History series on the Cruise-O-Matic transmission. Edsel’s system was interesting, as it was different from the dash-mounted Keyboard Control used in similar vintage Mercury vehicles. Edsel’s was more complicated and used electro-mechanical powered switchgear. Edsel made Teletouch standard on Corsair and Citation models, but it was an option on Ranger and Pacer, and optional on all three wagons.
Other innovations were safety-oriented, at a time when the American passenger car often smashed, impaled, or otherwise maimed a driver in crashes. Ford integrated some of the features of its Lifeguard safety package, available as an optional extra in Fords circa 1956-1957. Seat belts were still optional, but double latch doors, child door locks at the rear, and a deep dish steering wheel were standard. The wheel center was less likely to stab through the chest and kill the driver in an accident if it was deep dish! Also standard were self-adjusting brakes and a remotely operated trunk.
Unique features, unique styling, but where was Edsel supposed to be in Ford’s lineup? Edsel was a division attached to Ford rather than Lincoln-Mercury, so the natural assumption was that it would be less expensive. But that logic only held up in some circumstances, as in others the Edsel offering was priced higher than the Mercury upon which it was based. There was even a Ford sedan that was more expensive than the similar Edsel or Mercury, too. Let’s talk sedan pricing data.
At the lower end, the Edsel Ranger was priced from $2,484 ($25,735 adj.) to $2,643 ($27,382 adj.). Ranger was analogous to the Ford Fairlaine 500 at $2,410 to $3,138 ($24,968 – $32,511 adj.), and the Mercury Medalist that asked $2,547 to $2,617 ($26,388 – $27,113 adj.). In this case, the Ford could cost much more than the Edsel or the Mercury. This was the only instance where Ford had a product very similar to the Edsel and Mercury offerings.
The lower-mid level Pacer asked $2,700 to $2,993 ($27,973 – $31,009 adj.), or in Mercury Monterey guise was $2,652 to $3,081 ($27,476 – $31,920 adj.). In that segment, the Mercury was the most expensive of the two. Though the more expensive Corsair was related to various Mercury models like the Turnpike Cruiser, Mercury did not offer a direct competitor. Corsair asked from $3,311 to $3,390 ($34,303 – $35,122 adj.).
As mentioned above, the flagship sedan model at Edsel was the Citation. It was a pricy one, at $3,500 to $3,766 ($36,261 – $39,017 adj.). The Citation’s top-end price exceeded that of the equivalent Mercury Montclair, which was priced from $3,236 to $3,597 ($33,526 – $37,266 adj.). But no Edsel could touch Mercury’s top offering the Park Lane, which was priced between $4,280 and $4,405 ($44,343 – $45,638 adj.) in 1958.
Was Edsel positioned below or above Mercury? That was dependent on the model and trim in consideration, and cause buyer confusion from the get-go. And speaking of models, we’ll pick up there next time and proceed with the various Edsels that lasted only one model year.
[Images: Ford]
Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.
There are a lot of reasons the Edsel failed, but #1 on my list is Ford’s inability to differentiate it from the Mercury, which was a far better-looking car.
True Mercury was a much better looking car especially better looking in 58 when compared to not just the Edsel but the Ford Fairlane that got ugly tail lights and the front was not that great to look at either. The 1957 Ford Fairlane was much better looking and so was the 1957 Thunderbird. Come to think about it 1957 was a better year for both Ford and GM when it came to styling and 1958 was overall ugly and weird.
“Built in bigness.” With bigness underlined. Comparing the Edsel to the De Soto which was a ‘dead brand walking’ at that point. It seems like Ford marketing execs were just as unsure as the public who or what the Edsel was meant to be or where it fit in the marketplace.
In Canada it gets even more confusing. Mercury dealers sold Meteors. These were Fords with Mercury styling (chrome/bright work, instrument panel etc) at just above Ford prices. Ford dealers sold Monarchs which were Mercurys with Ford style grilles, instrument panel and bright work and sold below Mercury but just above Ford prices.
The Monarch was briefly discontinued to allow ‘room’ for the Edsel but returned when the Edsel was deemed to be a failure.
As an aside in the mid 1970’s there was a garage/used car lot/taxi dispatch office on Danforth Road near Kennedy (Scarboro the then eastern suburb of Toronto) that for many months had 3 Edsels parked on their lot. Yours truly put an offer on one which was rejected. The owner was insulted by my offer and told me that “I knew nothing about the value of these cars’. He did eventually sell them.
@Arthur–Desota was still very much alive in 57 but the Recession of 58 did not help GM, Ford, and Chrysler but did help help establish the newly formed American Motors (formed in 1954 from the merger of Nash and Hudson) with the first true American brand and made compact the Rambler American which had its origins with the 1950 Nash Rambler albeit a little smaller than the original Nash. It would take the 1960 model year to finish Desota off when Plymouths which had been the low end Chrysler product offered more premium trims at a little lower price but true the 57 Plymouth Fury started getting Plymouth noticed as more than a cheap frumpy brand. 1957 was a high point for Chrysler products and got GM and Ford scrambling for redesigns to compete. The 1958 Rambler American got GM, Ford, and Chrysler scrambling to design their own compact cars. Maybe Ford and Hyundai will get some other manufacturers scrambling to come out with their own compact pickups. One can only hope.
Edsel was a brand that should have never been made. The horse collar grill on the 58 sealed Edsels fate and gave McNamara all he needed to cut Edsel’s budget. It would have been better to expand Mercury and offer a trim that was a little closer to a Buick Roadmaster and the later Buick Electra 225. Mercury came close with the Turnpike Cruiser but it needed just a little bit more.
> “Continental’s 1956 launch was the first new American car brand since Mercury in 1939, and Edsel’s 1958 debut was the second.”
There were a few others, like Kaiser, Frazer, and (less successfully) Tucker just after WW2. There had been Chrysler Imperials for decades but they broke Imperial out into a separate brand in 1955. Little remembered is that Packard did the same thing with Clipper in 1956, which was supposed to be a lower-featured Packard-based midpriced offering that would allow the Packard brand to become luxurious and exclusive again. Dealers had to put “Clipper” signs on their buildings. That lasted a few months before irate Packard buyers made dealers put “Packard” badges on their cars.
Edsel was originally meant to slot between Ford and Mercury, with Mercury and Lincoln being pushed upscale to make room for Edsels, but I’m not sure why Ford thought they could simply move Lincoln and especially Mercury up in price and features and string buyers along, paying higher prices for what were traditionally mid-priced cars. Anyway, the final pricing was convoluted, overlapping both Ford and Mercury confusing buyers. The 1959 and 1960 models would be repositioned and marketed as low-cost economical cars, in part because the Mercury-based models were binned as were pricey gimmicks like Teletouch and the weird speedometer, but also because desperate dealers were always offering big discounts trying to clear their lots of these unpopular cars, making any attempt at hawking Edsels as aspirational mid-priced cars (like Oldsmobiles) futile.
You’re right on the brands. I’ll edit that part.
Could some small mention be made of what terrible treatment Edsel suffered
from his father?
Entire paragraph in Part I is dedicated to that.
An entire article on Edsel (the man) would be enlightening for many. Most people don’t realize that Edsel was an exceptionally talented man who, in contrast with his overbearing and crude father, was artistically gifted, cultured and very kind and sensitive. It was he, in collaboration with E.T. Gregorie, chief stylist for Ford during the 1930s and 1940s, who was responsible for Ford’s classic designs during this period, as Henry Dominguez relates in his books “Edsel: The Story of Henry Ford’s Forgotten Son” and “Edsel Ford and E.T Gregorie: The Remarkable Design Team and Their Classic Fords of the 1930s and 1940s”. Their relationship was, as Dominguez describes, like a wealthy patron and an artist but in reality it was Edsel who discussed how he envisioned the designs unfolding with Gregorie while Gregorie’s talent was interpreting Edsel’s visions into the final designs. Edsel’s story is one worth telling and it’s tragic that his name has become just a footnote and a joke for one failed, ugly car. No wonder the Ford family absolutely hated giving that monstrosity the name of the most beloved and talented of all the Fords. The greater tragedy is that old man Ford, through his decades of mean, insensitive treatment of Edsel, drove his only son to an early grave in his forties.
Also it was Edsel that was responsible for Ford manufacturing the B-24 during World War II at the Willow Run plant.
https://www.freep.com/story/money/business/2014/09/28/arsenal-democracy-edsel-ford-b-wwii/16374721/
The series on The History Channel does a great job covering some of this. The Cars That Built America is a great series that all folks interested in automotive history should watch…
I’ve read McNamara schemed to discontinue Edsel before the cars debuted. There was no need for Edsel, with Ford moving upscale with the 4 seat Thunderbird and the Fairlane 500, especially Skyliner.
True and McNamara had his own project, the Ford Falcon. McNamara was also responsible for the 4 seat Thunderbird and the 61 Lincoln Continental.
I believe the Edsel failed for these 3 key reasons:
1. The Edsel was basically a badge engineered Ford model. It was obvious to my relatives back in the day. Their comments were… Why spend more when you could just buy the same car as a full sized Ford. Heck, the greenhouse was the same and even the front clip interchanged.
2. Having dedicated Edsel dealers limited the footprint for sales exposure and volume. The Edsel should have been an upscale version of a full-sized Ford sold at Ford dealers. They already had the Thunderbird that pushed the boundaries into Mercury’s price territory. Mercury should have shared platforms and drivetrains with Lincoln to differentiate it from Ford. Mercury and Lincoln design language lacked and would have needed improvements.
3. The 1958 recession. (refer back to item 1)
A resident of mine has an Edsel. I’m not sure of the year but he invited me into his Quonset to check it out. It looked 10/10 and even had the original water pump, from what I could tell. He’d sold his Boss 429 to buy it. He obviously saw my shocked expression and said that his wife couldn’t handle the clutch on the 429. So he has a Edsel, instead. Happy Wife; Happy Life, I guess.
That said my wife thinks that my ‘fun’ ( her quotations ) car is stupid. I avoided the Edsel Solution by buying her a 4Runner so that I could keep my commuter/project/modern classic. Job done.
I didn’t mention this during my visit…
At a time when Henry was ambivalent or even hostile to the idea of supporting the war effort, Edsel took command and had Willow Run built, the largest factory in the world at the time, completed and then ramped up to mass production of B-24 bombers in record time to an incredible rate of one off the line every hour. HE kept Ford Motor Company solvent through the late 20s, 30s and early 40s as “Dad” grew increasing senile – and cruel – to his son. There is a poignant anecdote in Dominguez’s books about a frail Edsel attending a ceremony for B-24s off the line before his death from stomach cancer, induced by chronic ulcers brought on by stress dealing with “Dad”. Edsel is an unsung American industrial giant unfortunately overshadowed by his very flawed father.
The important question that Ford did not ask after its initial survey for the Edsel is not just what features you want in a car but what do you want this car to look like, how much would you pay for this car, and would you buy it. Definitely should have shown the focus groups a series of proposed designs for the Edsels because I believe the horse collar grill, the tail lights especially on the station wagons, and the push button drive on the higher trim models would have solicited more negative responses than positive responses. The timing for the release of the Edsel was bad, the initial design was ugly and polarizing, too many different models offered from the start, exclusive Edsel only dealerships, and McNamara from before the Edsel was released tried to kill it made the Edsel a failure before it was released. The stars were not aligned and by the time of the release of the 1959 Edsel which was more toned down the damage was done. Maybe if Iacocca were in charge then he could have turned the Edsel around but under Iacocca the Edsel might have been vetoed before it ever made it into production or he would have changed the design and marketed it differently. You know a new car is a flop when you have to give a pony away with a purchase of that car especially a Ford which produced the affordable Model T that replaced the horse.
That sales literature (I assumed that’s what it is) that talks about selling “prestige” seems more than a little over-the-top.
It was hardly secret that you could buy a full-size Chevrolet and option it out until it was practically a Cadillac. Not many went that far, but more than a few bought a Bel Aire with the largest available V-8 plus a few other choice options and so far as I know were pleased with what they got (and what they paid for it). That and, of course, the confusion about whether Edsel was slotted above or below Mercury (which must have made it difficult to sell that “prestige”).
Poor ol’ Edsel Ford: he had the misfortune in life to live under the shadow of his father only to die of cancer before he could assume his place as the heir-apparent. And in death to get the most famous brand-launch failure in history named after him!
TANJ
Agree Edsel in both life and death had it tough. Ford should have come out with the 59 Edsel design instead of the 58 but it should have not come out with the Edsel in the first place. I don’t think most Chevy and Plymouth buyers would have been attracted to an Edsel and there in lies the problem. Ford already had the aspiration brand in Mercury which was just below Lincoln in prestige. Mercury would have been the brand to increase marketing and better to compete against Oldsmobile, Buick, and Dodge which were the brands respectively below Cadillac and Imperial. When your mid tiered brand has to complete against Chevy and Plymouth you have missed the mark. When I look at those ads the Chevy and Plymouth are more attractive cars especially the Plymouth and the Plymouth design was only in its 2nd year and still looking good. The Plymouth despite its tail fins still looks more modern and it was the pinnacle of Virgil Exner’s designs. By 1960 Exner was losing his mojo and by 1962 he was justifiably fired for the 1962 Plymouth but for his 1957 cars he hit the target with his designs and they were game changing.
I want to correct my previous statement to say compete against Chrysler and not Dodge. Chrysler was more of an aspirational brand just below Imperial.