MW 1982 Ford Thunderbird Road Test | Retro Review

[@glennleslie6127]

When this aired, the 1957 T bird was only 25 years old. Watching this in 2024 the 1982 is 42 years old... unreal how fast time flies by.

[@MrMcKane]

The 2002 (and final) Thunderbird was 22 years ago.

[@sutherlandA1]

The parting gift of ford stylist Eugene Bordinat who loved upright grills and wire wheels design. His successor Jack Telnack would usher in Ford's aero revolution

[@thetinysideoftiny7625]

I shouldn't love this car but I do. I know it's a crappy Fairmont under the skin but I love it's hard-angled stately appearance.

[@devinbiz]

Had a neighbor in the 90’s who had a Mercury Cougar XR7 of this generation. While not entirely elegant, I also an odd appreciation for this model.

[@1983jblack]

Everyone has their preferences. Personally, I never liked them

[@deancummings586]

My thoughts exactly!

[@unitedcity_mc4421]

You shouldn’t love this car? You can like what you like. Don’t listen to other’s opinions.

[@Well_hello_there_]

Man the 83 was such an improvement in styling. That 4.2L v8 was a dog too. It was actually the only v8 option in the mustang for like 1 year only around this time.

[@jimlubinski4731]

All depends on what you like. When they released the 83, I was so appalled with the styling that went to Pontiac.

[@RobertBowman-gy9hw]

I don't know why. I've always had a soft spot for the 80 - 82. I'd like to have a Silver Anniversary or Heritage edition. I had a base model '80, red with a white vinyl top. It was a pretty good car.

[@jimlubinski4731]

I have a Silver Anniversary and love it.

[@RobertBowman-gy9hw]

Wow. What is the mileage? Leather or velour? @@jimlubinski4731

[@Mario.M.71]

Im owner Silver anniversary too😊​@@jimlubinski4731

[@davidmckibbin4440]

what a dog, i had an 87 with the 302 with the 4 speed auto, it would burn the tires off.

[@anibalbabilonia1867]

55-57 T-birds where some of the best looking iconic styling from the 50s!

[@knowbodiesfull5768]

That 42-foot turning circle was wider than that year's big LTD - and the LTD's wheelbase was six inches _longer_ than the Thunderbird's (114.4 to 108.4)! How messed-up was that?!

[@deanstevenson6527]

Ford had a TRW rack and a FoMoCo rack. The rack limiters varied, the turning circle was 39 feet with the later FoMoCo rack.

[@RaymondHaley-bi8lx]

The 80-82 TBiird and cougar cute lovable cars not as powerful or as nimble as they should've been, good cars never the less.

[@Red84GT]

I owned an '81 Thunderbird back in 2009. I paid $400 for it running and driving. It was a base model with an AM radio and the only option was air conditioning.

[@joed1244]

I had a 1980 ( 1st year of this style) as my first car in 1988. It had the 302v8 . I did some mods to it like edelbrock intake and 4 bble with dual exhaust. Sportier rims and tires. It was dove gray with a maroon interior. I loves this car and it was sharp looking and different. Remember, this was the age when kids had Monte Carlos, cutlass, regals and grand prix ..not everyone had camaros,firebird and mustangs as the 80s projected image. I would get so many compliments on that's car. I would love to find another in that color. Wish there was a way to post a picture in these comments!.

[@RaymondHaley-bi8lx]

One of the cutest T birds Ford ever made still love em, the finest of the Fox fleet, based on the Fairmont and zephyr but with all the luxury I prefer, just didn't have balls back then.

[@MisterMikeTexas]

Put a Coyote in it!

[@danmccarthy4700]

I can't even imagine that blind spot where the rear side windows should be.

[@landyachtfan79]

Ah, the Fairbird/Thundermont!!!!

[@unitedcity_mc4421]

😂😂😂

[@braddietzmusic2429]

Styling summation: Ford took all the styling queues from the 1977-1979 mode which was about 25 percent bigger and 500-plus pounds heavier, and hung those details, unshrunken on the smaller car. The result is predictable-The old styling queues hung on this car like a suit that is at least two sizes too big.

[@emeyer6963]

Ahhh!The old Squarebird!

[@JJVernig]

That 54 thunderbird was only 28 year old at that moment... Go back 28 year now and 1995 isn't that far back.

[@manthony225]

I like the 90's T-birds but they're kind of sad compared to a '55

[@1983jblack]

@Tacoma98 Super Coupes were fun and for the '90s were respectable with a 7 second 0-60 and sub 15 sec 1/4 mile I think

[@rootsmanuva82]

$2,955 in 1955 is still only $34,700 in crazy inflation 2024 dollars. If Ford made a car with that level of quality and sophistication today it would easily cost over $100K (if it were even possible which it isn't).

[@arnesahlen2704]

@Robert and @Raymond - I applaud your positive replies! I had a base '80, black over silver with red interior. Terrifically comfy back-supporting seats! I loved that car, weird looking or no...

[@rickjohnson2859]

2:00 2890 lbs "rather heavy for a sports car". 😆 C8 Corvette: 3530 lbs Porsche 911: 3318 lbs Ferrari F8 Tributo: 3184 lbs

[@saxongreen78]

1982 Thunderbird: 3600 lbs!

[@weegeemike]

This thing was a bomb and I don't fully understand why...I mean it didn't live up to Thunderbird history but was very similar in style (boxy) to other Fords and most vehicles produced during this period. The only way to have it would be the 302 in my opinion, that 255 Windsor was the dog of all dogs when it came to V8s and customers knew it. 6 cylinders don't belong in T birds in my opinion and Ford's effort to make the I6 and later Essex V6 he volume engines was a mistake. A mistake they would make again when the '89 T bird came out and was only avaliable with a 6 (ewww). Thankfully Ford listened to its buyers for once and reinstated the 302 EFI into that car later in its run. Love these old Motorweeks, John was and still is the king of video-based automotive media.

[@briteidea08]

So glad I clicked on this video. That first segment of them driving the car. It was a section of road near where I grew up. Totally different now. But brought back so many memories.

[@chrismunro3624]

What area is it? I’m from Michigan and I was thinking metro Detroit but wasn’t Motorweek in Maryland?

[@briteidea08]

@@chrismunro3624It was produced in Owings Mills Maryland. With filming locations around the Baltimore Metropolitan Area. Later they filmed at the 75-80 dragway out near Frederick Maryland.

[@deanstevenson6527]

Both the 82 3.8 and 4.2 liter T bird was still quicker and faster than the 79 5.8 liter T Square. 20 second 1/4 miles were common on all the Luxo Barge's in 81-82. Next year, the 4 inch shorter wheelbase 3.8 T-Bird did a 19.5 second quarter mile due to a weight reduction from a 4 inch shorter wheelbase...slashed! 🥝✔️

[@user-ny3ol7yk6q]

That's my ting ting macho machine

[@95blahblahhaha]

Took another 20 years for that 2 seater Thunderbird to come out and it was a failure unfortunately

[@akr01364]

It looks like the car from "The Car."

[@erickort1987]

i always loved the motorweek tv show when i was younger,still love the show

[@coletrickle-km7cl]

Can you emagine this car with a coyote v-8 and 2003 cobra IRS rear axle with a 4.10 rear gear and a full maximum motorsports suspension under it? It'll be a corner carving lux-o missile.

[@KartKing4ever]

Wow, what a heap.

[@1983jblack]

Help was on the way with the 1983 Aero Birds. They literally started a design revolution and IMO was the beginning of the modern design of cars

[@624radicalham]

The Ford Sierra in Europe came first with that kind of styling. Everyone makes the same mistake thinking it was the Thunderbird that started the design trend worldwide.

[@braddietzmusic2429]

The 1982 Audi 100/5000 was the beginning of the modern design of cars that EVERYONE, including Ford (US or Europe) ultimately copied.

[@The_R-n-I_Guy]

It's hip to be square. I'm not a big fan of Fords. But the square styling is pretty good

[@realazduffman]

The prop rod for the hood says all you need to hear about how cheap Detroit made its cars then. No wonder they lost so many markets.

[@retrocompaq5212]

fords were better made back then than today, its the other that followed the trend, hidden screws and better looking dash is not quality, their drivetrains are botched and complete garbage

[@mitch4527]

My friend had an ‘80 Thunderbird. What a piece of junk. My neighbor was a Ford dealer and he drove a ‘79 midnight blue Thunderbird with the Heritage package. Absolutely stunning car.

[@MarvinHartmann452]

I had the cougar xr7 version of that car. It has a 5.0l v8. And it was a 1980.

[@glx68]

Okay it was not the fastest car of Ford's Thunderbirds. But good enough for a quiet comfy ride on high- and freeways!😊

[@saxongreen78]

A T-Bird on a Fairmont platform with a base Falcon engine? What a turkey!

[@MisterMikeTexas]

Thank Carter and CAFE for that!

[@dmer-zy3rb]

@@MisterMikeTexashey better to have weaker engines than to breath in massive amounts of smog. with a bit of research there were always decent performing cars on the market. (this thunderbird sadly wasnt one of them, but otherwise it was a decent car)

[@trudygreer2491]

​@@MisterMikeTexasCAFE was enacted by Congress in 1975, a little before President Carter's time...

[@herbienbrian2]

​@@dmer-zy3rb Weak underpowered engines working hard creat much worse pollution then a well tuned larget engine with more power. You are spreading lies.

[@ponchoman49]

We often referred to these as the tacky birds as in way too much exterior crap thrown on it to make it appear more luxurious. That rear vinyl roof was god awful and there was just too much exterior trim and ornaments that made it look really busy. If they removed most of this and put on a set of normal headlights it may have been better. 1982 also suffered from Ford dropping the 302 and instead substituting the crappy Essex 3.8 which not only lacked a balance shaft and had a throb just off idle but also ate head gaskets and had a weak bottom end because they copied the design of Buick's 3.8 with its external oil pump design. It was telling that the top engine that year, (the 4.2 255) made a mere 111 hp and the base 200 six only had 88 to move around over 3200 Lbs of weight which was 400 more than the Fairmont this was heavily based off. Talk about slow and unsafe

[@unitedcity_mc4421]

Was it really that bad?

[@TeeroyHammermill]

Has a nice upscale look perfect for evening outings. Nice interior with fancy hi-tech gadgets. Too bad it moves like a Volkswagen, Turns like a coal barge, and had a janky carburetor. Its Cougar sibling didn't look that good IMO.

[@jimlubinski4731]

It moved as well as any other cars in its segment if you opted for the 302 V-8. I know because I did exactly that.

[@johnmcmullen456]

Always thought that generation of Thunderbird would have looked better if had chrome bumpers. I considered buying one in 1980 but couldn't justify the huge price difference over the similar sized 2 door Granada I settled on, and unlike the Granada, it had no manual transmission option. The 4.2 V8 was a dud but a 302 with aftermarket intake and 4 barrel might certainly wake that T Bird up. With its fox chassis, there are many parts available to improve handling. The following generation debuting in 1983 was a major improvement and convinced me to buy a delightful new 5 speed 1984 Turbocoupe.

[@jimlubinski4731]

Just illustrates individual tastes. When the new "aero" generation debuted in 1983, I stopped buying Thunderbirds (until 1981) and started buying (automatic) Trans Ams.

[@johnmcmullen456]

@@jimlubinski4731 Sucks that both have been taken away from us.

[@jimlubinski4731]

@@johnmcmullen456 Completely agree!

[@daviddaniel387]

Wait until 2002 for a retro

[@kippaseo8027]

Oh my God I fell asleep in the first 5 minutes of this video

[@ohioyodertoter6827]

I had one did it ever use oil 🙈

[@DiRF]

The equivalent Nascar Cup racecar was nicknamed "Big Ugly" by some of its drivers, Dale Earnhardt included.

[@Dr_Reason]

I think it is as fast as the 4.3 Cutlass Clara diesel.

[@JazzzRockFuzion]

Dark, dark days for the American auto industry right there - the infamous FairZephyrBird! ::shudder::

[@jimlubinski4731]

All subjective. I loved mine so much, I bought another one a few years ago.

[@zythr9999]

Different story for the Japanese auto industry.

[@nickgee7291]

wow thats 30k in todays money for that 55 tbird

[@Dr_Reason]

I hear a rumor Ford is goin to bring back the Bird as a competitor to the Hummer EV.....

[@mattt198654321]

Go home dad, you're drunk

[@dave11686]

Boxbird!

[@joeseeking3572]

The worst gen T-bird, period. Overblown Fairmont, and it drove like one too with the 200 cubic inch 6 - my god - and the base interior was a Futura analogue with different dash. An 80 with the 302, AOD and TRX (rare!) was probably slightly better than passable for the time, but you could get a Regal Turbo and have a better driving experience. (Heck the 79 Grand Prix SJ 301 4bbl with RTS was more entertaining - we had one) Many of these were optioned to baroque excess, sending stickers far north of the less bedazzled competition. Just blech. The base 83 was nothing to write home about but the Turbo Coupe was, and that (and the later 5.0) saved the 9th generation.

[@manthony225]

The 83-88 was basically a Fairmont too but Ford did a better job of hiding it

[@unitedcity_mc4421]

Nope. The worst generation of the T-Bird is the eleventh generation. It was basically a glorified two-door version of the Lincoln LS. This one, even though it doesn’t have the exact style of the previous generations, looks way better than that. Real period.

[@brettcannon74]

Ford's dark years

[@user-wz8qc6uy2u]

20 second 1/4!!

[@pdennis93]

🎶she'll have fun fun fun till her daddy takes the Fairmont bird away🎶

[@Butchcub75]

no braking or 5.0 l v8

[@joed1244]

My 80 had the 302..I guess the fuel wars were in full force and only offered up to the 4.2L

[@Butchcub75]

@@joed1244 yeah CAFE regs..the 115 bhp V8

[@Doobie1975]

The worst era of the T-Bird's IMO, sad they dropped the 302 for the 1982 model year.

[@new2000car]

At 15,000 it was too slow and too much money. The 302 would be some consolation though.

[@mitch4527]

My friend had the 302 in his ‘80 Thunderbird. Meh.

[@paulhudson231]

We had a 1980 with the 302 and AOD. Much better performance with the 302, plus it would get 26MPG at 65 when everything was tuned right. The 255 was a dog all around. The 302 only had 132 HP but 240 LbFt, so it was good for hole shots. Would easily beat most of its contemporaries up to about 30 MPH. Sold ours when it had right at 300K miles.

[@1983jblack]

I thought it was dropped in 1981 and made the 4.2 std across the board for the LTD as well

[@nathanlopez5667]

No it got it back in 1982 and so did the Mustang

[@braddietzmusic2429]

The 1957 Thunderbird had “major restyling” from the 1956 Thunderbird? With all due respect, I don’t think so.

[@dmer-zy3rb]

not as big of a styling success as the 77 bird (where is the damn basket handle roof?!) but still a mighty fine looking coupe for the time. exept the Dodge Mirada (which ironically looked alot more like a thunderbird) there wasnt really anything better looking left in the v8 luxury coupe market. shame about Fords "worst in the industry" engines during that time though. for the money i would have propably taken a mirada or the also quite handsome Plymouth Gran Fury sedan instead though.

[@seanmcgivney7631]

" Fairmont "

[@pl5624]

Save a fortune....get a fairmont futura with v8 and add in some mustang chassis parts...

[@andrerossato5846]

Paul Kersey car

[@dmer-zy3rb]

true. saw that movie recently!

[@BogattheMoon]

Thunderbox

[@joeyconservative]

Rather have a Ford Futura with a stick

[@sneakerfreak2002]

What a hot mess that exterior is. I like the interior though. Had an 81 years ago with the small v8 (4.2?) slow as molasses

[@ljmorris6496]

The "real" T-Bird died after '71, after that it became a discount Mark IV ('72-76), then a luxury Torino ('77-79) before being a decked Fairmont ('80-87). '89-97 Were ok but wasn't a sports car like the original and the '02-06 just missed the mark by not having the Mustang's engine options at the time..

[@sweetdaddy77]

I have a 76' and it truly is the poor man's Mark. 460 ci and all. In some ways I think the 72-76 T-Birds were better looking than the Mark. Rear end styling and the dash come to mind.

[@brianhechinger6726]

Interesting looking body style from certain angles. Ugly up front when the headlight doors are open, looks unfinished. Overall crap car.

[@mattt198654321]

When the usually patriotic John Davis is willing to criticize a domestic manufacturer, you KNOW it's a turd.

[@milfordcivic6755]

Thunderbirds from 1967-1982 were some of the worst.

[@teresapflaumer5717]

Ugh! NOT a good era for the Thunderbird, or any car!

[@dave1956]

These were in my opinion the most forgettable Thunderbirds of all time.

[@wny9521]

this 1982 Bird is UGLY. THe 1983 was Amazing!!