Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

1966 Mercury Monterey S-55 Low Reserve on 2040-cars

Year:1966 Mileage:100000
Location:

Brecksville, Ohio, United States

Brecksville, Ohio, United States
Advertising:

1966 Mercury Monterey S-55  428 Super Marauder project car. Frame and body are solid with the exception of rear quarter panels and some rapairable spotting on the floors. Only 2,916 of these vehicle were produced for the 1966 model year. Hood has a cut out for scoop that atually looks like the car had a blower on it at one time and was raced with tow attachements in the front. Car is very restorable. The frame was proefessionally inspected and is solid. Left rear quarted and rear deck need solid bodywork but there only surface rust on the car except the bottom of the quarters and some pitting in the floors. Easily repairable. Car comes with a c-6 transmission. Not sure what condition it is in internallt. /came with the car when I purchased it a couple of years ago. The car did not come with an engine when I bought it. There is no engine with the car. I do have several 390 and 428 engines I have collected for this and a couple other builds I was planning. Bare block, short block and complete for a sperate purchase.

For 1966, Mercury re-introduced the S-55 as separate model on its own with a 2-door Hardtop and a 2-door Convertible. While the S-55 in its previous years had been an upgraded interior and trim package, the 1966 S-55 was now all about performance. It was based on the Monterey trim level and came with the new for the year Super Marauder 428 V-8 engine that was rated at 345-hp. Dual exhaust for reduced engine back-pressure complete the power package. Ready at hand, a console mounted 4-speed manual transmission or a special Multi-Drive Merc-O-Matic automatic transmission (buyer's choice: optional at extra cost). The interior featured bucket seats and a console with floor shifter similar to what you could find in Ford's luxury/performance full-size car, the 7-Litre. Styling accents include unique body side-striping, deluxe wheel covers and the distinctive S-55 emblem on rear quarter panel and 428 V-8 emblem on the front fender sides. The 1966 Mercury featured "Torque Box" construction—frames individually tuned to minimize noise and harshness. Styling was square and clean "in the Lincoln Continental tradition," as the ads put it. Few S-55's were sold, although Mercury generally had a successful big-car year in 1966.

Auto Services in Ohio

Wired Right ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Alarms & Security Systems, Automobile Accessories
Address: 22350 Lorain Rd, Strongsville
Phone: (440) 734-3838

Wheel Medic Inc ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Wheels, Automobile Accessories
Address: 2971 Silver Dr, Groveport
Phone: (614) 299-9866

Wheatley Auto Service Center ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 2195 N Cleve-Mass Rd, Bath
Phone: (330) 659-2022

Walt`s Auto Inc ★★★★★

Automobile Parts & Supplies, Used & Rebuilt Auto Parts, Automobile Salvage
Address: Mount-Healthy
Phone: (800) 325-7564

Walton Hills Auto Service ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Gas Stations, Convenience Stores
Address: 17975 Alexander Rd, Shaker-Heights
Phone: (440) 232-9728

Tuffy Auto Service Centers ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Brake Repair
Address: 649 Leona St, Amherst
Phone: (440) 324-7484

Auto blog

The 1965 Ford Mustang could have looked a lot different

Fri, May 8 2020

The 1965 Ford Mustang is unquestionably an automotive design icon, and nearly every generation of Mustang has some connection to that original car. Because it's such a universally-known vehicle, we were amazed to see all the different designs that were being considered. Head of Ford's archives Ted Ryan recently shared photos of design proposals for the original Mustang on Twitter that he and Jamie Myler found, and we reached out to them to find out more. As Ryan initially noted, the photos were taken on August 19, 1962, and they are proposals for the Ford Mustang. Apparently Ford had committed to doing a Falcon-based youth-oriented car at this point, and it did have plans to launch the car in 1964 for the 1965 model year. But after having little success with early design proposals, the company asked all of its design studios — the Advanced Studio, Lincoln-Mercury Studio and Ford Studio — to submit proposals. With only about two years before the planned launch, Ford was understandably short on time, and it's believed that the studios only had a month to create and present these designs. Lincoln-Mercury design proposal View 8 Photos The majority of the designs, a total of five, came from the Advanced Studio, and part of this was because they already had a couple of concept designs in reserve it could present. Two other models representing three design possibilities came from Lincoln-Mercury, and just one model with two options came from Ford. The Advanced Studio proposals are shown in the gallery at the very top of this article, and the Lincoln-Mercury and Ford proposals are in the gallery directly above this paragraph. The Advanced Studio's most radical design is the one that was clearly related to the Mustang I concept that would be shown later that year with huge wraparound rear glass, turbine-inspired bumpers and enormous side scoops. The other proposals from the studio were more conservative, featuring simple lines, grilles reminiscent of the Falcon, and one even borrowing the jet-thruster-style taillights made famous on the Thunderbird. Lincoln-Mercury had some impressively bold designs, particularly its fastback that had buttresses to extend the shape all the way to the tail. This car had two different side trim possibilities. The other Lincoln-Mercury design was toned down a bit, but had two interesting possibilities for side detailing, as well as some crisp, low-profile tail fins.

Ford recalling 450,000 Fusion, Mercury Milan sedans

Tue, Nov 24 2015

Ford has announced a pair of recalls, and both are critical safety issues. The exponentially larger of the two recall campaigns affects over 450,000 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan sedans manufactured at the Hermosillo plant between July 21, 2008, and March 4, 2011. The canister purge valve in the fuel tank could malfunction and could cause the top of the tank to crack and leak fuel. That could cause a fire, although Ford "is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires" resulting from the issue. Affected vehicles will have their ECU software updated and their fuel tanks inspected for potential replacement. The company estimates there are 411,205 affected units in the United States (and its federalized territories), plus another 33,605 in Canada, and 7,055 in Mexico. The second recall affects 13 F-650 trucks. The column shifter's park position mechanism may fracture and let the truck roll away unexpectedly. Those 2016 models built in Ohio between July 29 and September 3, 2015 are all located in the US. Fixing the problem will require replacing the steering column and reconfiguring the instrument panel. FORD ISSUES TWO SAFETY RECALLS IN NORTH AMERICA DEARBORN, Mich., Nov. 23, 2015 – Ford Motor Company is issuing two safety recalls in North America. Ford is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires related to these conditions. Details are as follows: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles in North America for potential fuel tank issue Ford Motor Company is issuing a safety recall for approximately 450,000 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles for a potential issue with the fuel tank. Some of these vehicles might have a canister purge valve that does not work properly, causing internal pressure changes inside the fuel tank. Repeated pressure changes inside the tank could result in a crack on the top of the tank, possibly allowing fuel to leak. A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source can lead to a fire. Ford is not aware of any accidents, injuries or fires related to this condition. Affected vehicles include certain 2010-2011 Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan vehicles built at Hermosillo Assembly Plant from July 21, 2008 through March 4, 2011. There are a total of approximately 451,865 vehicles that might be affected in North America, including 411,205 vehicles in the United States and federalized territories, 33,605 in Canada and 7,055 in Mexico.

Junkyard Gem: 1996 Nissan Quest XE with 338,549 miles

Sun, Jul 9 2023

When I hit the junkyard, I always look for vehicles with impressive final figures showing on their odometers. I find so many Hondas and Toyotas with better than 300,000 miles that I don't consider them especially noteworthy (the exception being super-low-spec cheap models, such as a Tercel or Civic VX), and it goes without saying that the bar is quite high for Mercedes-Benzes as well. It has been surprisingly difficult to find discarded Nissans that made it past the 300k mark; today's Junkyard Gem is just the fourth I've documented. The highest-mile junked Nissan I'd found prior to today's minivan is a 1994 Maxima with 364,238 miles, followed by a 1987 Maxima with 341,176 miles and a 1986 200SX with 309,222 miles. Keep in mind that Nissan didn't go to six-digit odometers on most of its US-market cars until the early 1980s, and then went to tough-to-read-in-the-junkyard electronic odometers in the early 2000s; this means the pool of potential high-mile Nissans is limited to about the 1983-2000 range of model years. Ford has just as much right to claim credit to this van's impressive mile total as does Nissan, since the Quest was a collaboration between Ford and Nissan that also produced the Mercury Villager; this van was built by Ford at the Ohio Assembly plant. The Quest/Villager platform was derived from the Maxima's, and the engine is pure Nissan: a 3.0-liter VG30 V6 rated at 151 horsepower. The only transmission available in the first-generation (1993-1999) Quest/Villager was a four-speed automatic. This one appears to have been sold new at Landrum Nissan in Pueblo. The rear glass has been painted flat black, possibly to keep prying eyes from seeing valuable cargo. The rear seats are long gone, so this van probably hauled cargo for much of its long life. The front interior seems to be in good shape. Why is this van here? There's body damage on the left rear and right front, suggesting a crash that may have bent the suspension past the worth-fixing threshold. Perhaps the crinkled metal just made this van too unsightly, or maybe some powertrain problem was the culprit. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's time to expect more from a minivan. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's all fun and games until the toddler takes the wheel.