1976 Mercury Cougar XR7 - Cigarette Burns Included

Hard to believe that in 1967 when The Ford Motor Company's Mercury Cougar was first introduced, not only did it win Motor Trend's "Car of the Year" honors, but some automobile scribes christened it an "American Jaguar". Although that claim was rather hyperbolic and Motor Trend has given their "golden calipers" to far more scrubs than hall of famers over the years, by 1974 that "American Jag" became a bloated, soggy and slow "personal luxury car". Our triple-blue subject (blue paint, blue vinyl top and blue interior) hails from the bicentennial model year of 1976. 

How in the name of Watergate, bell bottoms, disco and pet rocks did that lithe, sexy little sports car get so fat? And in just eight model years too? 

Well, for starters, it was amazing that Ford whipped up the original Cougar that was inexplicably equal parts pony car and luxury car and oozed European elan in the first place.  Even if it was just a long wheelbase Mustang with some tasteful sheet metal and a really nice interior. Without question, however, it stole as much thunder from the new for '67 Mustang as General Motors dynamic pony car duo (Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird) did. That said, in the vaunted halls of Dearborn, many suits had the Cougar in their literal Lincoln-Mercury crosshairs. 

Since (at first) Cougar and Mustang were bolted together at the bumper, when Mustang got an update, so did the Cougar. 

Hence the longer, wider, heavier and flabbier 1969-1970 Cougar and then the abortive 1971-1973 "big" Mustang and Cougar. Although, in fairness, in a vacuum, the 1969 and 1971 Mustang and Cougar weren't all that bad. Well, looking at least. However, they were damned by comparison because of what came before them. Had the 1971 Mustang been a new "Thunderbird" and the Cougar been a Montego or "Marauder" and things might have been different. Might. Have been. Who knows. Fun to ponder, though.  

Ye olde tipping point was model year 1974. With the crash landing of the 1971-1973 Mustang, under the leadership of Lee Iacocca, who'd take credit for sunny day if he could have, seeing the rising popularity of imports and smaller cars, Ford rolled out the Mustang II on an elongated Pinto chassis. Mustang fans cried foul, not foal of course, but the Mustang II sold almost as well as the original Mustang did. The October 1973-March 1974 OPEC embargo obviously had something to do with that but don't tell Lido that. 

Since Lincoln-Mercury had also been peddling the Ford of Europe sourced Capri (since 1971), it made no sense to also offer a Pinto-based "Cougar II". So, instead, to give Mercury a Chevrolet Monte Carlo fighter, Ford product planners and marketing wonks festooned "Cougar" to the flanks of a Montego coupe. 

All but impossible to say or tell what the difference was between a Montego two-door and a Cougar was, but Cougar sales were roughly double over 1973 although roughly half of what they were in 1967. Remarkable too since model year 1974 was a dramatically down year considering the impact of the OPEC embargo. 

For 1977, Mercury dropped "Montego" from their nameplate lineup and all Mercury intermediates became "Cougar's". There was a Cougar coupe that was all but indistinguishable from a new for 1977, and very successful, downsized Ford Thunderbird. Prior to that, Thunderbird was built on the same chassis as the Lincoln Continental Mark series. 

The Mercury Cougar and Ford Thunderbird, like the Cougar and Mustang were from 1967 through 1973, were corporate cousins through 1997. From 1998 through 2002, Lincoln-Mercury sold a front-wheel-drive, Ford Contour sourced Cougar. More of death throe or spasm as the personal luxury car market was withering, the little Cougar sold well (88,000 units) at first, but sales dropped by some fifty percent each subsequent model year. 

Best or worst that can be said of 1974-1976 Mercury Cougar's, in retrospect, is that rarely had something so much more been actually so much less. Check values of these beasts compared to even the 1971-1973 cats that came before them to say nothing of the '69-'70 models and of course, the painfully cool '67 and '68's. This one's for sale in Kokomo, Indiana with an asking price of $9,850. Price includes ash trays and cigarette burnt upholstery. 

1955 Oldsmobile 88 - Button Tufted Hell

I found this 1955 Oldsmobile 88 on FB Marketplace (where else?) with an asking price of $4,500. In this day and age of hyper-inflation, that ask seems fairly reasonable. Or am I getting used to this "new normal"? 

Poster of the ad claims the engine runs and the transmission "engages". Brakes don't work. Hey, it's no fun if there's no project involved.  

This is a '55 so they hadn't standardized "PRNDL" yet. There's no "park" on these early Hydra's. You don't want your car to move when parked you apply the "parking brake". Note where "reverse" is. What could go wrong? Only 94,616 miles on this and I believe it. 

Oldsmobile was the middle brand of General Motors vaunted mid-priced three that gave the Ford Motor Company and Chrysler conniptions. Whether it was advertising, branding, styling or a combination of all three, somehow GM was able to convince buyers that an Oldsmobile was worth a premium stipend over a Pontiac but not quite as much as a Buick would warrant. Even though there's little to differ an Oldsmobile 88 from even a Chevrolet. 

Our blue bomb here is an entry level "88", two-door sedan. Not exactly my cup of tea as I'd splurge for a "Super 88 Holiday" that, in addition to a 202-horsepower engine, would also come with hard-top styling. 

Then again, if this was a "Holiday", the ask on it would be two to three times higher. 

Under her 68-year-old bonnet is an Oldsmobile "Rocket" V-8 engine. For 1954, Olds increased displacement from 1949's 303 cubic inches to a meaty 324. Something's funky, though, as the block and intake manifold are reddish-orange and not green. Interesting. Then again, who knows what this thing has been through over the decades. One thing's for certain, it is an Oldsmobile V-8. 

Seeing this is an 88, if this is the original engine or a historically correct one, it made 185 gross-rated brake horsepower. I'd peg this, being generous, at about 110 net horses. No doubt this would be buttery smooth when running but she's not fast by any means. The slightly more powerful 324 in a "Super" wouldn't be a barn burner either. Well, by today's insane standards. 

No way this interior is original to the car. No doubt someone had this done years ago. There's a certain charm to older, half-assed but well-intentioned restorations. Still, this button-tufted blue hell has to go. 

Love how much leg room is in the rear on mid-50's GM cars. Was there anything GM did wrong back then? 

When they downsized their intermediates for 1978, dimensionally those cars were quite similar to these. The big difference is these were substantially wider. These look much bigger than they actually are, and they don't suffer from "big on the outside, small on the inside" syndrome like most domestics did from the late '50's through the great downsizing epoch that began in 1977. 

From a proportional standpoint, the extra girth made all the difference in the world. The 1978-1987 GM mid-size models all look stubby. Clumsy even. I just want to smear my face all over the sheet metal of this thiiick beauty. Wait. Did I just write that? 

This is for sale down in northeast Maryland. Bonus, no rust issues to speak of although there's a fair amount of surface rust on the acres of chrome on this thing. Swap throw in power steering, add power brakes when you fix them, add a crate motor and a 700R4 and she could be a nice runner. Blue, button tufted interior and all. 

Ford's New Bronco - I Want One

A family down the block from us just got one of these new Ford Bronco's. Just like this in whatever hue of grey blue this is too. And I want one. Bad. That's saying a lot too since in general I'm not even a cross-over kind of girl let alone a "trucker". These are "trucks" seeing their based on the mid-size Ford Ranger pickup truck. 

It's interesting to note that Ford used their original Bronco of 1966-1977 fame as the inspiration for their new Bronco as there's not a shred of what those of a particular vintage refer to as, "O.J.'s Bronco" in it. Then again, "O.J.'s Bronco", like all Ford Bronco's made after 1977, are far less distinctive looking than the originals. If anything, there's a whole lot more 1984-1990 Bronco II in these new Bronco's, especially the two-door models, than "O.J. Bronco". Then again, Ford probably doesn't want buyers of these new Broncos googling "Bronco II" any more than they want them googling "O.J. Bronco". 

The design of this new Bronco is so good, Ford could have it called it "Simpson", and it would still be, arguably, the hottest new vehicle on the market today. I know people who've waited eighteen months for theirs to come in. That they call it something impossibly cool like "Bronco" only adds to the mystique, the allure if you will. Please note, Ford also sells something they call "Bronco Sport" and it's an entirely different vehicle. Frankly, it's an underwhelming looking affair.  

You can't see in pictures just how different this thing is from my new main squeeze; but it's totally different. The Bronco Sport (above) looks like a first-generation Ford Escape. In and of itself not a bad thing but why'd they go and call this "Bronco Sport"? Holy marketing confusion, Ford Motor Company. Then again, these are same people who slap "Mustang" on an all-electric cross-over and recycle "Maverick" onto a compact pickup truck. The latter marketing faux pas far less egregious than the former. Speaking of the new Maverick, the Bronco Sport shares it's underpinnings with the new Maverick which while looking like a compact pickup, it's more like a cross-over with a pickup truck-ish body seeing it shares its guts with the Ford Escape. 

Ford introduced the original Bronco in 1966 as a direct competitor to the Jeep CJ. At first offered in roadster, "half-cab" and wagon, by '68 the "roadster" (above) was gone and after 1972 all Ford Broncos were three-door wagons. Ford sold between 12,000 and 14,000 a year, one year they sold 26,000, so they were a relatively niche vehicle. I never saw one in the wild when I was growing up on Long Island in the '70's. Part of the problem was they were so small, too small for families. That didn't matter since Ford sold lots of County Squires. Offering little to no creature comforts, folks bought them for their rugged, compact utility, they were all four-wheel-drive, or they quickly came to realize they had misspent their money on a fashion statement. 

Meanwhile, as Ford was attempting to out-do Jeep, debate all you want if they succeeded or not, in 1969 General Motors rolled out their full-sized, short-wheelbase pickup truck-based Chevrolet K5 "Blazer". Too bad these rode-like trucks with square wheels - these are painfully cool and again, that's coming from a dyed-in-the-wool car guy. GMC got the same vehicle for 1970 but they called it, "Jimmy". The rest, as we say, was history. 

The Blazer\Jimmy was an immediate smash hit that in typical GM form didn't invent a market segment, just redefined and transformed it. Ford didn't come with any answer to the Blazer\Jimmy until 1978. In an age of "downsizing", Ford upsized the Bronco when they took a page out of GM's playbook shortening a Ford F100's wheelbase, dropping a back seat in the bed and bolting down a removal plastic top. No surprise, it sold very well. Cool as these are, there also sort of anonymous looking. Well, that was until the "O.J. 500". 

Five generations of the F100\F150 based Bronco later, Ford replaced it in 1997 with the four-door only, Expedition. A bastion of civility compared to the hoary Bronco; Ford continues to produce the Expedition to this day albeit one that's gone through a gaggle of refinement and four generations over the last quarter century.  

But wait, there's a chapter to this horse story that Ford probably wants to forget about. In 1984, in conjunction with the also new for 1983 Ford Ranger pickup, they foaled, (sorry) the diminutive "Bronco II". Although dimensionally quite similar to the original Bronco, if you ask me, it lacked all of its butch charm. Built through 1990, the "II" was most famous or infamous for stability problems. A top-heavy, narrow design, the "II" had a propensity to flip over. Especially in what's referred to as "J-turns"; the Ford Motor Company, naturally, blamed driver error for the roll-overs. So many "II's" flipped over injuring and killing drivers and passengers that the GEICO insurance company stopped writing policies for them. 

However, to those of us of a certain vintage, "Ford Bronco" will always mean, "O.J." although, in fairness, that infamous designation probably belongs just to the white ones. Ford said that the "O.J. 500" had no bearing on their decision to drop the Bronco name in 1997 as sales of these brutes were dropping anyway. Here's the actual Bronco involved in the infamous low-speed chase on display at the "Alcatraz East Prison Museum" in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. If you're wondering, the Ford V8 next to the Bronco was used in the filming of the 1967 film, "Bonnie and Clyde" and was shot up by local police prior to the filming of the scene. The "real" Bonnie and Clyde death car is on display in a casino in Nevada. 

Based on how many 1966-1977 Broncos were made, there were only around 225,000, and so much time has passed since the whole "O.J. 500", much like Ford's new compact "Maverick", it probably doesn't matter what Ford calls this thing or what inspired its design. It's transcendental much in the way the "new" Mini Cooper was and still is. No one cares that it apes the lines of an older vehicle. All that said, I want one. A two-door, please. The four-doors look like shoeboxes on wheels. 

Incidentally, a Bronco is a wild horse and not a particular breed or type of horse. 

1958 Edsel Ranger - Could it have Been Named Anything Else?

This big old 1958 Ford popped up on Facebook recently near our home here in the Cleveland, Ohio area with an eyebrow raising asking price of "just" $4,000. I say, "just" because if this was a GM or Chrysler product of this vintage, in what appears to be great shape, it would have an asking price three, four if not five or six times as much. In this crazy market, it might go for as much as ten times as much. Why's this so cheap? Because it's not just a Ford, it's an Edsel. 

My older son and I came across an Edsel at a car show during the summer before the start of The Pandemic and he didn't seem to notice just how unusual the front-end styling on it was. To him it was just "an old car" and not something particularly strange or even ugly. Mind you, though, he didn't care for it like he does Cadillac's of this vintage either. Could his apathy towards an Edsel indicate that Edsel's may soon have their day in the sun? 

The brainchild of Henry Ford II's "Whiz Kid" staff, the Ford Motor Company produced and sold Edsel's for 1958 and 1959 only. Technically there was a 1960 model, but production was halted not long after it began. All in, a total of 120,000 were built making them relatively rare. Not unicorn rare but compared to a 1957 Chevrolet, these are very uncommon. 

Allegedly squeezed between Ford's Mercury and Ford divisions, the Edsel was purportedly intended to help create at Ford a mid-priced three like General Motors had. Edsel Ford, the son of Henry Ford and the father of Henry Ford II, had created the Mercury division himself back in 1939 to help bridge the price gap between a Ford and a Lincoln and compete grill-to-grill with Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick. Problem with Mercury, most model years, it was nothing more than a slightly disguised Ford. In an effort to make the Edsel distinctive from any other Ford make or model, enter the "horse-collar" front end. I liken it to a toilet, urinal or even a bidet but that's just me. 

Allegedly inspired by the front-end styling of an Alfa Romeo, you see that now when it's pointed out, while the grill did get a fairly handsome reboot for 1959 that took out most of the "oh-god-what-is-that?" aspect of it, Edsel had more problems than just its styling. 

Poor workmanship and unproven yet clever technical innovations like a push-button automatic transmission selector did a number on sales. Couple that with a short but nasty recession in 1958, a massive and ultimately disappointing marketing build-up ahead of time didn't help either. Imagine the groans of disappointment from those who bought into the pre-game hype when they saw this thing. Horse-collar\American Standard front end and all. 

Then there was the name. By all accounts, Edsel Ford was a wonderful human being but his name. Yikes. And I don't think he was referred to as "Ed" by friends and family either. Legend has it the Ford family themselves at first bristled at using "Edsel" as a moniker too. At least at first. HF II had final say on using his father's name rejecting, again, legend has it, some 18,000 other suggestions.

End the end of the day, though, the name of this car was perfect. Could this be anything other than an "Edsel"?