Classic 1969 Mercury Cougar 351w/ 5.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1971 Mercury Comet 2-Door Sedan

When Ford introduced the original Maverick for the 1970 model year, Dearborn tradition required that a Mercury-badged version be created. That car ended up being the Comet, built from the 1971 through 1977 model years. Here's one of those first-year Comets in rough but recognizable condition, found in a Denver self-service yard not long ago. The Comet name had spent the 1960s affixed to the flanks of Mercurized Ford Falcons (1960-1965) and Fairlanes (1966-1969). Since the Maverick was the successor of the Falcon — sales of which went into an irrecoverable downward spiral once its sportier Mustang first cousin hit the streets — it made sense to move the Comet name over to the Mercury version. Nearly every American Mercury model ever sold was a U.S.-market Ford model with a different name and some gingerbread slapped on. Notable exceptions to this tradition include the 1999-2002 Mercury Cougar (mechanically based on the Contour but with a unique body) and the 1991-1994 Mercury Capri (an Australian-built mashup of Mazda components borrowed from the Ford Laser). The Comet was by far the cheapest Mercury model available in 1971, though it was considered more prestigious than its Maverick counterpart. The price tag on the '71 Comet two-door sedan started at $2,217 (about $16,505 in 2022 dollars), while the '71 Maverick two-door sedan cost $2,175 ($16,193 today). Meanwhile, AMC would sell you a new Hornet two-door sedan for one dollar less than a Maverick, Chevrolet had the Nova coupe for a dollar more than the Maverick, and Plymouth offered the Valiant Duster for $2,313 ($17,220 now). Toyota had a Maverick competitor as well that year, with the Corona at $2,150 for the sedan and $2,310 for the coupe. Having driven every one of the aforementioned models, I'd take the Duster if I went back in time and had to choose one (as a 1969 Corona owner, I'm not a fan of the 1971 facelift, though the Corona's build quality beats the Duster's). The build sticker on this car tells us that it was built at the Kansas City Assembly Plant (where Transits and F-150s are made today) and sold through the Los Angeles district sales office (there was a DSO in Denver, so it's a near-certainty that this car didn't start out in Colorado). The paint started out as Bright Blue Metallic (it's neither bright nor metallic 51 years down the road) and the interior was done up in Medium Blue Cloth & Vinyl.

Junkyard Gem: 1970 Mercury Cougar

The plot of the Mercury Cougar story took a lot of strange twists and turns during its 35 or so years, from ponycar to immense luxobarge to family sedan to station wagon to Integra competitor. Examples of the first Cougar generation are nearly extinct in American wrecking yards, so I was excited to spot this one in Denver. Lest you shed any tears over this car going to the crusher, know that it was suffering from the ravenous teeth of the Rust Monster long before it got here. The 1967-1970 Cougar was based on the Mustang platform of the same era, and so it was a sleeker and quicker cat than its successors. Still, the longer wheelbase, extra equipment and all the cool-looking bodywork added some heft; the 1970 Mustang hardtop with V8 scaled in at 2,923 pounds, while the 1970 Cougar weighed 3,307 pounds. The current Ford Focus would fit just between those two weights. There was also a mid-cycle refresh in that era, with the '67-'68 and '69-'70 having different exterior styling and interiors. The '69 and '70 had different front end styling as well, with the latter re-adopting the vertical grille slats featured on the earlier model years. The '69 has horizontal slats. The drivetrain and just about everything else of value has been shorn from this car, perhaps before it arrived in this yard. In 1970, a bewildering assortment of V8 engines was available in the Cougar, including a Boss 302, two completely different 351s, and a 335-horse Cobra Jet 428. The base engine was a 351 Windsor making 250 gross horsepower. Since car rooftops mostly don't rust, why would someone cut out this one? Sheet metal needed for patching a leaky shed roof, perhaps? This 2005-2006 Denver Nuggets window sticker indicates that the car was on the street (probably) as recently as 11 years ago. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's savage. It's cool. It's primitive. It's sleek. It's wild. It's elegant. Password for action in the 70s! Featured Gallery Junked 1970 Mercury Cougar View 18 Photos Auto News Mercury

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.