Every car manufacturer has a platform they just milk for all it’s worth. They put it on everything and anything that makes its way to the shop floor. The best current example is Volkswagen’s MQB platform, which is now the basis of everything from the small Audi A3 to the full-size Volkswagen Passat, covering everything from sports cars(Audi TT) to crossovers (Volkswagen Tiguan).
In the storied halls of overused underpinnings you can find some of the most influential names in history. The Chrysler K-Platform saved Chrysler from the brink and allowed us to currently have such things as the Challenger Hellcat. The GM B-Body led the way to a GM that was actually competitive for a while. The Ford Panther platform literally needs no introduction. And then, there was the Fox Body…
The Fox Body was Ford’s MQB during the ‘80s. When one thinks of it now, it might well be visions of a Mustang in CHP livery hunting down rogue yuppies in 420SL’s or laying rubber while performing a wheelie on the dragstrip. Those less inclined toward hooliganism may think of the Mark VII or the Thunderbird, thus leaving tons of Zephyrs and Fairmonts ignored into irrelevance. But unlike MQB, The Fox body had a bit of a problem trying to move upmarket at first.
Like the first Fox Thunderbird, the Cougar looks like a two-door Fairmont that fell off the Brougham tree and hit every single branch on the way down. Admittedly, that’s kinda what happened, but it’s no excuse.
The upright Rolls-ish grille and optional opera windows did no favors to the slimmer shape; neither did the fact that the base engine for the coupe was a 4.2L V8 making a simply staggering 119 hp. The sedans had it even worse, with an 88 hp, 2.3L four wheezing them away.
Yes, that’s right. I said sedans.
I would by lying if I told you that these had been the first Cougar sedans and wagons to hit F-L-M dealerships. With the previous generation, however, it all somehow felt right on cars that size– they could still carry the Cougar badge without it seeming like a transparent exercise to cash in on a name with pizzazz. But when they returned for second helpings, the only word that could accurately describe them was “unworthy”.
They would’ve been perfectly adequate with any other name, as adequate as any other Ford-in-a-hat that Mercury sold until its demise. But now they carried neither the presence nor the glamor that the badge demanded. This is especially true for the 1982 wagon, which lost all the charm of those large station wagons of yore.
Oldsmobile obviously thought that this was a good idea. They showed as much when, a couple of years later after the T-Bird/Cougar launched, they decided that most every car in their lineup would carry the celebrated Cutlass name. Everything from the small A-Body Cutlass Ciera/Cruiser to the older G-Body 2-doors and the N-Body Cutlass Calais. A veritable compilation of Cutlasses that did nothing to stop the fall from grace of Oldsmobile and the Cutlass name itself until its shameful last outing as a lightly fluffed Chevrolet Malibu.
Happily, the Cougar had a different sort of life. Ford listened to the complaints of the people and gave the Fox platform a thorough makeover. They also put the sedan and wagon neatly in the bin. The 1983 Cougar and Thunderbird hold the distinction of being the first Fords to carry the new Aero image for the company, a style that would pay off for them two years later with the Taurus/Sable twins.
Personally, I think these Cougars betray themselves by wanting to be formal and sporty at the same time. That upright roofline and slanted rear window clash with the rest of the exterior, like a guy in a T-shirt and jeans that is for some reason also sporting a top hat and monocle. It still had that 2.3L four, but because it was now fitted with a turbo it actually produced some horsepower–145 of them, actually. And the Windsor V8 was there to carry the folks that preferred their Personal Luxury Coupe comfortable more than fun-to-drive.
The interior had all of the standard Fox body bin parts present and correct. Dig that fake wood appliqué. All in all, the Cougar did pretty well for itself, selling an average of 112,000 cars per year since its 1983 redesign vs. 147,500 Thunderbirds over the same period. Not a bad return for Ford’s trouble, and enough to guarantee the survival of the Cougar–and for everyone to forget about those awkward teenage years when it was forced to wear braces and a silly vinyl hat.
Related reading:
Re the 1st picture, I hate that aluminum B-pillar trim Ford liked ca. 1980; they ruined the Escort hatchback’s lines with it too, the Euro Escort looked way better. At the time I suspected they were copying the contemporary Toyota Celica.
The standard Fox Cougar in this era was actually less excrable than the XR-7 version. But, for a theoretically upscale car, it’s 11/10ths K-car styling is the ultimate in boring mobile in the box era. Granted, this car was theoretically going to go up against the Aeroback Cutlass and Regal, but GM wised up with those cars and came up with decent looking sedans (as well as wagons) for the early ’80s that sold very well.
It makes one wonder if anyone at Ford actually parked an ’80 Cougar sedan next to an ’80 Cutlass sedan and said “that will compete” with a straight face.
IMO Ford should’ve spent the money that went to giving the aero Cougar its’ own roofline on a Thunderbird sedan instead (sans landau irons!).
Olds Cutlass is an interesting, but not direct, comparison – Mercury never offered multiple Cougar models on different platforms and Oldsmobile had offered a Cutlass wagon since 1967.
” … hunting down rouge yuppies … “ Were they wearing too much makeup, or sunburned tourists? I assume you mean rogue? LOL /SpellingNag
I always liked the 1st gen stretched-mustang Cougars, so I was always a little mystified at the tarted-up-T-bird versions. (Don’t even ask my opinion of the sedan/wagon.) I had a (woefully under-powered) 87 Fox Mustang, and always thought that the bubble-backed Mercury version should have been a Cougar, not a Capri. In fact, I may well have bought one instead if that had been the case.
Still, vertical window or not, there’s no denying that these are worlds better than their immediate predecessor.
Unlike the subject of the article, the error has been corrected.
I really like the aero-Cougar, and that one is loaded to the gills: power seats, auto climate, Ford premium sound JBLs (Delco/Bose shammers) from when you got real metal tweeters with quality mids, auto lamps, etc. Much better than the Mark VI, in my opinion.
I really like that 1983 model except I don’t remember the front end looking like that. Maybe I’m remembering the facelift? Really needs flush headlamps. GM did square headlights the best. Someone here (XR7Matt?) has a really nice one of these.
If I recall correctly, they were intended to get flush headlamps from 83, but the govt waffled on the approval. Thank G-d the Mark VII got the flush lights in time, DOT quads would have been undignified.
I’ve never heard or seen anything suggesting that the Thundercougar was supposed to get composite lights from the get go. The Mark VII was and it was actually designed and approved for production first. The lesser cars were then derived from that Mark and they were put in the market first to see how the greater public would accept the aero styling. They didn’t have much to loose with them since their immediate predecessors were a sales flop. Meanwhile Ford lobbied hard to get the composite headlights approved for the Mark and when the lesser cars were an instant hit they went forward with the Mark and they managed to get approval in time to avoid having to stick the sealed beams on the Mark.
Forgive me, there was so much scuttlebutted speculation and hearsay about those silly headlights, and I wasn’t even of driving age. Our Dads couldn’t talk about anything else, we were finally rid of sealed beams. And before there were those grey market or converted Euro lamp Benzes and BMWs that got people’s attention, Pagoda SLs, 3.0 C’s, 6.3, & 6.9 SELs were noticed when equipped.
Yes, you are correct about DOT procrastinating on the composite headlamps due to three reasons: bulb types, issues of ultraviolet damage, and issues of mechanically aiming techniques.
Ford was able to assuage the fear about the bulb types by using the transverse filaments as in sealed beam headlamps. DOT wanted to mandate the protective coating from ultraviolet but was overruled when Ford invoked the 1972 federal law on cost benefit analysis of mandatory safety equipment. For a few years, Ford included the special pads in every Lincoln Mark VII that the technicians could use to line up the headlamp aiming equipment correctly. Eventually, the aiming nipples were replaced by the centre dot on the headlamp lens.
Ford wasn’t even sure whether DOT would approve the composite headlamps in time for 1984 model year when Lincoln Mark VII was introduced in August 1983. Thus, Ford gambled by spending two million dollars on engineering and building two versions: one with quad sealed beam headlamps and other with composite headlamps. In nick of time, DOT approval came through. I have seen one Mark VII with quad sealed beam headlamps in one of TV serials in 1983.
Ford Thunderbird and Mercury Cougar were introduced in 1983 as well and refreshened in 1987 with composite headlamps.
I appreciate sealed-beams, which being commodity parts, are cheaper to maintain than those cool Euro headlights I used to lust after, plus they’re harder to scratch & don’t yellow in sunlight either. Note that fleet-spec trucks often have sealed beams.
Some cars are reverting back to round headlights. It’s like women’s clothes, more a matter of fashion trends than optics.
One of the reasons that the sealed beams were mandated in the first place was so that they were a commodity making them easy and cheap to replace when needed. It was also so that any breach of the capsule would stop the light from working and you’d replace it with a nice new unit with a fresh untarnished reflector. Now that some of those original composite headlamps are 20 or more years old the DOT’s fears are fully realized. You see headlights that look like a fishbowl ensuring the reflective surface is worthless and a deteriorated outer surface that ensures what little light is reflected doesn’t make it too far. Because they are vehicle specific replacing the headlight when it really needs it is often not done since some times a new original set can be more than the car is worth.
Actually, DOT wanted to mandate the polycarbonate headlamps coated or mixed in with ultraviolet protection as the US military does for its fighter canopies. However, Ford screamed that it would add roughly two dollars per unit and invoked the 1972 federal law on cost benefit analysis, claiming it wasn’t cost effective measurement.
European Union was very reluctant in allowing the polycarbonate lens for a very good reason until it had enough evidence that ultraviolet protection coating was effective.
Mine’s an MN12, but thanks anyway 🙂
The 83 and 84s had a different grille with vertical bars more in line with the previous XR7 grilles. The 85/86 like the one pictured got sort of a mini Mercedes style grille, otherwise they’re basically the same.
As for the aero Cougar, with that roofline you either got it and liked it, or you didn’t. A friend bought one new in 84. At that time, I was a T-Bird all day/every day guy, and the Cougar just never excited me. I still have the same reaction. Actually, of all of the Cougars offered in the 80s, the standard sedan or wagon of 1980-82 may be my favorite. Actually, it surprised me how badly that car did, considering the success of almost everything else on that platform.
I always used to joke that the rear quarter window stamping on these was the same as the Thunderbirds turned upside down, looking at the picture, I think that I was right.
It looks like a poor attempt to achieve a hardtop look. The B pillars are blacked out, yet still have some chrome trim. Why?…
79-85 Eldorado really did a convincing hardtop look well, the B pillar was so slick and invisible. One would look for power window switches in the rear seat area, only to find ashtrays with individual lighters.
You are correct. If you happen to find one of these Cougars take a look at that quarter window and you’ll find the part # certification printing upside down in the top corner rather than right side up in the bottom corner as found on the T-bird.
Ha!
Crazy theory’s: 1
Different part numbers, so your theory is a bust.
Tell Eric then.
+1 here’s the p#s
Tbird E3SZ-6329711-A
Cougar E3WY-6629711-A
Somebody needs an eye exam; these two rear windows are not the same shape, by a substantial degree. Turn your device 180 while looking at the Cougar window; it’s much more asymmetrical than the T-Bird’s.
It was stated as a joke originally. Though they are pretty close, the Thunderbird has a little more curve to it, but it does look like almost the same window flipped over, I wouldn’t have doubted it considering how cheap Ford can be sometimes.
Nah, that’s the kind of cost-cutting AMC would pull! 🙂
The ’67 Ford LTD Coupe and Merc Marquis used the convertible quarter window to get the wide C-pillar effect.
Being formal and sporty at the same time is exactly how I’d describe the vaunted 67 Cougar. Given the worldly divides in car styling at the time I think the 83 Cougar was a pretty convincing way of blending what we knew as “American” and “Euro” styling at the time. The basic profile of the car is almost lays out like a scaled down ’79 Riviera, yet it’s stands out all on it’s own very well with it’s blended styling. Does it betray itself that way? Maybe. But then again the least popular(by value) of most of the classic pony cars today are the classic Cougars as well, their luxury detailing puts them under the radar of a lot of Muscle Car collectors I think.
As JPC said, you either get it and like it, or you don’t. I like it better than the Tbird, my favorite part of them in particular is the way the side bodyline kicks up around the “flipped” quarter windows, giving the car a pseudo coke bottle profile. I like the details better as well, the grille and taillights in particular, the 85s got Trans Am style blackouts which I really liked.
The problem with the styling of the aero Cougar is that it obviously was adapted from another car. i.e., you can so easily tell the Cougar was made from a Thunderbird, rather than the Thunderbird being made from a Cougar; or both cars being adapted from a shared schematic design. The T-bird reads “whole”; the Cougar does not.
True, but the Cougar’s rear roofline fits right in with the Eldorado/Riviera/Toronado sort of thing. It sorta says “I’m with them.”
T-Birds sold better on the Eastern Seaboard and West Coast, the Cougar was more popular in the Mid-West.
On the prairies, back in the day, I also recall many people liking the Cougar but not the T-Bird.
My BIL had an ’81 Cougar 4 dr when it was about 10 yrs old. This is what he bought after totaling his ’81 Fairmont sedan- so I can make a direct comparison between the two having ridden in both. The Cougar was exactly what it pretended to be – a more luxurious, upscale Broughamed version of the lesser Fairmont. I remember they both rode pretty well, but the Cougar had ritzier seats and a higher level of finish inside and seemed nicer at first glance. The Cougar had the gutless 255 V8 while the Fairmont has the 200 straight six. The Fairmont seemed peppier, but it was pulling less weight too since the Cougar was well-optioned. But both cars suffered from Ford’s early ’80s “meh, that’s good enough” quality control. Lots of panel gaps and cheap interior trim. The nicer upholstery and thick carpeting in the Cougar didn’t disguise that.
That first Fox body Cougar is a disgrace to the nameplate. Thank God I never had the unfortunate privilege to ever see one in person. Maybe because by 1980 the Bay Area was a mecca for Hondas and Bimmers.
I was never a fan of the aero Cougars – I thought them too GM-derivative with the formal roofline, but I appreciated that they brought incremental customers into the dealerships. These designs really were polarizing at the time. People who didn’t like the Bird generally liked the Cougar, and people who didn’t like the Cougar generally liked the Bird. This (along with MN12) was the last Mercury that was more than a Ford with a different grille and taillights, and had Ford kept up this level of differentiation Mercury might have survived.
I always preferred the Thunderbird of this era, and I still do–it does simply look more cohesive. However I don’t dislike the Cougar, I just don’t think it wears the formal roofline quite as well as the T-bird’s more standard shape. The reverse-curve quarter window is immediately recognizeable though.
I also really don’t like that “mini-Mercedes” grille. It somehow ends up looking too small for the car. The vertical bar grille that they had for the other two years of this generation is much better to my eye.
I always loved this style Cougar. I think it had a cooler, classier look than the T-Bird. I had found a loaded one lke the second picture in 1986, I think it was a 1984. It had every option known to man and I wanted it so bad. My parents were totally against it saying it was “too much car” for a 19 year old college student!
The aero T-Birds and Cougars were a huge step in the right direction, especially after the lackluster 1980-82 models and to a lesser extent the porky fussy looking 1977-1979 models. If only the 3.8 didn’t suffer so many head gasket issues and the interior was a bit sportier. I remember looking at these at the young age of 12 when they first came out and being puzzled why virtually none had bucket seats and floor shifter/console. The shifter always seemed to be on the column which seemed more old fashioned and older folks oriented. The G-body cars in contrast had a far greater number of bucker seat floor shifter models with the Grand Prix SJ, and Grand Am of 1978-80 vintage and later the 1984-87 LE, the Cutlass Calais and later Salon, 442 and W-30’s, Buick Turbo coupes and T-Types and of course the Monte SS cars. Theses cars were more sporty and fun in my eye but the new areo T-Bird and Cougar seemed to be a little more advanced with fuel injected 3.8’s in 1984 and overdrive automatics available on both V6 and V8 engines the same year. In contrast the General was still using carburetors (except on turbo 3.8’s in 1984-1987) and (1985-1988 Monte 4.3 V6 cars) and 4 speed overdrive transmissions were only seen on the Hurst Olds, T-Types and GN’s and 1984 on up Monte SS cars and it took until 1985/86 for this transmission to start showing up on the garden variety G-bodies.