I’ve long suspected that the nicest surviving collector cars are not the rare specialty models, but rather the humdrum, no-nonsense transportation modules that your Uncle Virgil or Aunt Alice just happened to keep in pristine condition in their one-car garage. Such is likely the case with this 1975 Mercury Comet, which is being offered for sale on Bring a Trailer in San Luis Obispo, California, but be prepared for a surprisingly underwhelming engine, even for the mid-1970s.
Let’s start with the basics on the door tag, which the seller has kindly posted.
The VIN:
- 5: 1975 model year
- K: Kansas City Assembly
- 31: Comet two-door
- L: 250-cubic-inch engine
Along the bottom of the data tag is the following information:
- 62B: Comet two-door sedan
- 9DGW: White exterior color with a white “Full Odense” vinyl top
- KB: Blue interior
- W: C4 automatic transmission
- 6: 3.00:1 rear axle ratio
- 52: Los Angeles District Sales Office
These facts suggest that this is an original California car that looks exactly as it did when it came off the Kansas City line in July of 1975.
The Comet was starting to get a little stale in 1975, and when combined with the introduction of the popular Granada/Monarch duo, it’s no surprise that sales plummeted from 125,695 in 1974 to just 53,848. Things got worse from there, and by 1977, barely 20,000 Comets left Mercury stores.
This very nice example has the “Custom” option, which includes these body-color wheel covers shared with the Maverick LDO, bodyside trim with “Odense grain vinyl inserts,” and the aforementioned “Odense grain vinyl roof.” Setting the bumpers aside, I think the Comet is a nice-looking compact, and if you’re going to drive a 1970s car, why not drive one with all the vinyl you can get?
Being from California, this Comet had the larger 250-cubic-inch six-cylinder as standard equipment, but hold your hat: the 250 produced a pathetic 70 horsepower in 1975. Even the basic 49-state 200 had 75. Paul N. explored the 1975 Ford 250 at length here, and if you buy this Comet, prepared to be somewhat disappointed by its performance.
Nothing is said about it in the sales writeup, but I’d imagine that the car has been repainted at some point; there’s a touch of orange peel on the fenders, and the paint looks far nicer than 51 years would indicate. In contrast, the engine compartment looks all original, and there are few options to take up space. The Comet does have power steering, but braking is handled by four-wheel drums with no power assist. In 1975.
The Custom interior had a few luxury touches over the base model, such as nicer carpeting and better sound deadening, but the Comet wasn’t posh by any means. The carpeting is certainly original, and the dash pad has one crack that is covered with blue tape. The odometer reads “69,013” miles, but the title reads that it exceeds mechanical limits. I’d be shocked, however, if this is a 169,000-mile car.
The C4 was rebuilt very recently, so between that and the tough 8-inch rear end, this Comet should still be running until the gas runs out. Then again, you could probably modify it to run on cologne, bug spray, or Boone’s Farm…with 70 horsepower, almost anything flammable would be on the table.
The undercarriage is solid enough to make me envious; I don’t own anything that looks quite this good underneath. The seller has added new anti-sway bars (it didn’t have one in the rear from the factory), installed new shock absorbers, changed some suspension bushings, and flushed the brakes.
The documents for the transmission rebuild have been posted, too. You’ll be happy to know that a shift kit was added for increased performance.
CC readers know that this isn’t a high-dollar machine, but we should all be happy when we see something that probably shouldn’t have survived the 1980s come out on the other side in such nice condition, and this 1975 Comet is a historical artifact from a time when cars weren’t at their best, but they were what we had. I think the all-white color combination is very sharp, and if I were shopping for a Maverick/Comet, this would absolutely be bookmarked on my desktop. Even with only 70 horsepower.
Related Reading
What Were The Last U.S.-Market Cars With Four-Wheel Drum Brakes? (by Aaron Severson)
1975 Ford Maverick LDO: The Luxury Maverick – Let’s Drive Opulently (by JP Cavanaugh)
No rust in San Luis Obispo, CA is normal on a well cared-for car.
NOT “just light rust” or “only a little bit.” NONE. In central California, only right on the coast where there is salt spray and air is rust an issue.
True, if you live your life in the Outer Richmond or Outer Sunset, in San Francisco, you are going to see lots of constant salty fog air and I have seen what that can do to a car left outside it’s entire life. Starts from top down. A girlfriend, in the 80’s, lived out on 24th Avenue since the 70’s. Her Datsun pickup started rusting in the A pillar and worked it’s way down to the cowl pretty much taking it out. Cab roof seems not much better. She got rid of it when I bought my 86 Mazda 626 and she bought one to.
The car is wearing Paso Robles plate frames, 30 miles north of San Luis Obispo and considerably further inland and drier.
This is the car I would dread to have to drive up the Cuesta Grade from SLO to Paso in today’s world. It. Would. Take. Forever… Better to come down the hill instead and just call it good and stay there.
A second reason for poor sales may be how much it looks like the Ford Maverick of the same era.
The original (later Mercury) Comet was admittedly an upscale sibling of the Ford Falcon. But at least it looked better.
The Maverick had a reputation as a sub-Mustang line of econo cars for the lowest paying customers. If any car was expected to be seen with no options, the Maverick was it. It doesn’t have the Pinto-like tail lights, or the same grille as the Maverick, but there isn’t much added to it to make the higher Mercury price appeal. The whole idea of retrimming Fords as Mercurys may be a big part of why there is no Mercury marque today. It certainly didn’t do much to make customers think they needed a new Comet in that gas crisis and emissions system handicapped car era.
I’m betting this was sold as an “end of year special”. Upmarket compacts and subcompacts sat on mid-level dealers’ lots until the end of the year, when they sold for less than their counterparts on the low-priced brands’ lots.
My sister bought an end-of-year Pontiac T-1000 for less than the Chevy dealer wanted for a Chevette.
Evan, the data tag on the door jamb indicates this car was built in July of 1975, so it absolutely was an end-of-year car. Someone may have the production line dates for the final model year 1975s, but this would have to be very near the end.
Picture this, Mike… It’s July of 1975, and some mid-level bean counter is looking at parts inventories. He rushes to his manager and says, “Oh crap! We have too many Comet-specific parts left over. We ought pump out a bunch of Comets and dump them on unsuspecting L-M dealers!”
Ford actually shut down the Maverick/Comet assembly line at several points during the 1975 model year, usually for a couple weeks at a time.
Could be, or this could be part of the normal 1975 model year production run. There were two more carryover model years remaining for Comet (1976 and 1977) in which to use up parts inventory.
More likely was a desire to show an increase in production for the model year. Production figures were more commonly announced than sales at the time, and Mercury’s 1975 full-line production was 673 units more than in 1974.
(data from Automobile-catalog.com)
It really didn’t work like that.
It wasn’t, and they didn’t. Comet production was way down because Mercury had the Monarch on the high end and the Bobcat on the low end, and demand for compacts dipped lower by than Ford originally expected. They responded by turning production of the Maverick/Comet line in Kansas City off and on, so their monthly production totals were all over the place.
That would especially be the case for an optioned-up Comet in ’75 since the Granada/Monarch was such a hot item.
The interior (especially the carpet) had me thinking this was most likely a 169,000 mile car, Aaron. But the “exceeds mech limits” title means the California DMV has confirmed that this car’s odometer has turned over at least once, so it is not a 69,000 mile vehicle.
This is exactly the kind of car I like to see saved. If I were a rich man, ya ba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dibba dum, I’d have a one-bedroom house with a 30-car garage and collect them.
The earlier 250 six was a good engine. My ’70,Mustang’s 250 was rated at 155 hp. with 240 ft.lbs. of torque, only a little down from the old 289 two barrel V8’s. I guess that most of the loss was due to Ford’s efforts at lowering exhaust emissions. I had no complaint with the performance of my Mustang, acceleration was strong and it topped out over 90 mph.(GPS verified) but fuel economy was pretty low at a bit over 15 mpg. at best. I realize that the power rating was changed in the coming years, but a drop to 70 HP had to reflect an actual reduction in power.
Ford didn’t issue net ratings until 1972, but the 1970 was probably something like 105 hp, falling to 95 hp by 1972, the first year Ford published net output figures. (The 1972 engine had about a half-point lower compression than in 1970 and some other emissions-related changes.)
Being a “Maverick”, rebadged, the lack of power comes as no surprise. I’d forgotten “FOMOCO” had a “250, cid, 6”.
Always think of the venerable, “GM”, one.
Yes, by 1972, the 250 was the biggest six-cylinder you could get. In 1970, a 170 six was standard, with the 200 optional. As the anti-smog gear stole more power from the engines, displacement was increased, to compensate for the power drops. The 170 was dropped and the 200 was the base engine, the 250 six and the 302 V8 were the optional engine choices starting in 1972. The V8 cars also got front disk brakes in place of the drum brakes up front, IIRC.
The three (3) Ford sixes (170, 200, 250) used in passenger cars all had a strange quirk, in that the intake manifold was cast as part of the cylinder head! The truck versions (260, 300) used conventional bolt-on intake manifolds! Upgrades to the intake are possible, but it involves machine shop work on the cylinder heads, and is not a simple bolt-on operation.
These have become quite popular as restomod candidates, particularly in two-door form, as first generation Mustangs are getting much too expensive for young drivers to buy and modify. A popular swap is to drop in a 302/5.0L V8 and upgrade the brakes from drums to front disk brakes, as both were available as options from the factory. I like the taillights on the Comet better than the ones on its plainer Ford Maverick sibling, but the front grille and hood looks a bit “busy” compared to a Maverick. At least by 1975, the cheesy “package shelf” was gone, and these got a proper glove box up front! The only way this one could be better would be if it had the V8, disk brakes and Luxury Decor Option (LDO), which included bucket seats and a floor shifter, LOL! GLWTS in any case!
Removing that catalytic converter would free up a few horsepower. Of course doing so in the State of California would get you hanged, drawn and quartered.
Appropriately so.
Do you have a clue to what it costs to simply register a car in the People’s Republic of California? My 99 Windstar was $178 for the reg and $100 for the smog check.
And we have the highest gas taxes and the worst roads. So, taking the cat off of one old Comet wont hurt anybody.
I’m sitting here with four CA regs, in my hand, two this week and two in October out of 11 cars. Range from $155 to $185 so imagine what all eleven run. No complaints from me. Since I drive freeways the ones I drive have no issues.
Sure Comrade but if you’ve lived in your CA house for a long time, your property taxes have been pretty much frozen since Prop 13 passed 40 years ago. Plenty of people sitting on million dollar+ properties with taxes in the very low four digits that don’t reset until they move. Be careful what you wish for, half the reason the properties are worth money is because the air quality is far better than it used to be not that many decades ago.
Jim, you have energy, and I genuinely salute it.
(I don’t have the bladder force to piss windward any more, but you keep it up for me. Dampening as it may be, it matters that SOMEONE does it. Truly!)
Bam! That one is always over looked. Now just compare what it would be in a state like New Jersey. Yikes!
It’s not overlooked, it just doesn’t fit the narrative being presented. Which is weakened anyway when you’re a resident of the state, nothing stopping anyone from moving away to those supposedly “freer” pastures to the east or north. Also not fitting the narrative of course is that you’re not forced to replace the car nearly as often due to rust, ’99 Windstars simply don’t exist any longer in at least half of the other states of the union, never mind the number of pre- and early-emission-device vehicles still happily running around in CA as daily drivers all year long, not pure “hobby” vehicles as in most other places. Compare the $178 reg fee for that Windstar (is that with a commercial plate surcharge?) to what it costs to pay sales taxes and registration on multiple replacement newer vehicles in the same time frame, publish that, and then we can have a discussion about the “oppression”. Gimme a break.
They’ll hang draw and quarter you for retrofitting a superior modern cleaner higher flowing one too if it doesn’t match factory specs too, appropriately so!
Wrong. 1975 models do not require smog inspections.
That’s what I thought. Really, throwing out all the primitive smog equipment and doing a few mild modifications to wake the engine up is the sensible thing to do (unless your kind of nostalgia involves driving slow and awful malaise era cars). The few old cars running without catalytic convertors are hardly going to bring back 60s smog.
Sure, bring back real leaded fuel too. Whatever you want to run in your own garage with the door closed won’t concern anyone in California so go right ahead. But keep it out of my nehghborhood.
Let’s be real, there is nothing you can do to a Ford 250 that’ll make it run any better or more powerfully than whatever is under the hood of a new Nissan Versa. Or probably even an old one. I can’t believe people are suddenly nostalgic for this turd of an engine and discussing how best to “wake it up”. Its highest and best use is in nautical recreation. Attached to an anchor chain. Or perhaps not attached when thrown overboard.
So I take it you’re not a fan of right to repair either. It’s just so woefully pedantic to piss and moan about removing an emissions device from a 1975 model year car and being perfectly ok with the the 1974s that don’t have them..,
…Unless you simply want to ban or restrict old cars from the road, because why bother anyway because teslas are soooo much better 🙄
@XR7Matt – Well, that’s three complete assumptions on your part – I think you need to stop reading into stuff that isn’t there. Not everyone is out to get you. Enjoy your life but perhaps consider there’s more to enjoying life than just cars…Good luck to you.
I can draw some conclusions to your opinions pretty easily from your posts/comments, just as you just did with me just now, however I stop short of saying “I don’t care if someone asphyxiates themselves in their garage with a gross polluter as long as it doesn’t drive through my neighborhood” …which am I wrong in that paraphrasing of your first paragraph? If so, my apologies, as I don’t know any other way to read that???
Without having to make assumptions, are your opinions contrary to what I said? Or do you just not like that I filled in the blanks based on that and previous comments? Why else object so bluntly to T.Turtle’s comment?
Thanks for the well wishes though 🥰
Well, let’s see, now you’re changing your inferences and for some odd reason I’m in your head.
“Pissing and moaning” – you and anyone else can do whatever you want to harm yourself but I take offense to people making decisions or giving advice that harm me and others due to their own selfishness. Again, yeah, if you want to kill yourself with the increased pollutants from your modifications, go ahead and get that over with, it is your right to do what you want on your own property, just don’t project the results onto everyone else. You’re too young to have experienced and have never lived in the parts of California that were significantly impacted by vehicular pollution such as the San Fernando Valley and the SouthEast San Francisco Bay Area, both of which specifically along with many other areas have improved to an unimaginable degree due to the progress of emission control devices and advances in technology. And today due to continued progress, vehicles across the country run better, are less polluting, are more reliable, and last longer with less maintenance than at any other time in history. Enjoy an older car? My opinion is: Great, just please maintain it to not be significantly worse in any regard than it was when designed.
“1975 vs 1974”: We (I and the other commenters) were talking about a 1975 vehicle, I didn’t start to bring older vehicles into it, that’s all you. Progress starts somewhere.
“Right to repair” – More inference. If you own something, you should be able to repair it however you see fit but repair is not the same as modify. If you do repair it or attempt to repair or modify it and make it worse for whatever reason, then that’s on you and a manufacturer should not have to fix your mistake on their dime. I’m pretty sure that doesn’t mean I am opposed to right to repair and not sure where that inference of yours comes from. If you don’t agree with a manufacturer’s policy, you of course have the right and option not to purchase their product. Just like don’t move under an existing airport flight path and then start complaining about the noise…Did I actually bring up right to repair?
“Ban and restrict” – I’m struggling to see where I said that or are you again projecting something onto me?
“Tesla” – Where’d this come from? They have their place, they are impressive pieces of technology, they certainly aren’t perfect, and I don’t believe I ever claimed they were, and I certainly didn’t mention anything about them in this post/thread but apparently you are fixated on them. There are a number of ways I’d prefer their products to be different than they are. We do happen to own one which I will truthfully say has been stone reliable, we also own another brand of domestic EV (also stone reliable to date) and we also (to your likely surprise but really none of your business) own four other vehicles that are not EVs or even hybrids, one of which we purchased before the EVs and three in the time since our first EV; I don’t think that makes me the Tesla evangelist or anti-gasoline zealot you seem to infer I am. Buy whatever the fuck you want. But don’t purposely modity it to produce more pollution than the manufacturer intended it to produce.
The one inference that you could have drawn that would be accurate is that I don’t believe a 1975 Mercury Comet with the 250 is in any way a desirable vehicle or that one thus equipped can be made to be an objectively “good” vehiclem either with or without any emissions equipment on it. But again, that is all of course my opinion, and why I will not be owning one. There are many better choices out there (another opinion of mine). Other people may feel different, great, it’s a big tent. If you yourself want one though, go right ahead and get one, in fact this one appears to still be available. I’m sorry if I apparently offended your or the car’s honor with my opinion about this car. The seller should have taken the $8000 high bid and laughed all the way to the bank. Dude, seriously though, move on.
Move on? I’ve made exactly 3 comments to your 6 in this topic, coming up on 4 for this one. You’re not in my head any more than your comments in this thread have consistently been grating to me.
So to point 1 “Pissing and moaning”: You seem to take a stance that alterations to vehicles is always for the selfish and for the worse environmentally. I am sorry if you disagree but you can make cars run better and cleaner than this turd of a Comet, I’m not going to dispute your last point on your feelings in the car itself as I don’t really like it either…. To an extent…. but you seem to come at it with a presumption of any deviation from spec is for the worse even though, believe it or not, gearheads have learned a thing or two since the 1970s as well.
Point two: “ 1975 vs 1974” I brought 1974 vehicles into it because the whole flashpoint of this conversation chain is CA emissions law, and 74 and the featured 75 Comets are effectively the same car(for better and mostly worse), you can legally get away with anything you wish with the 74 but for completely arbitrary legal reasons not a 75. I paid some attention to the “Leno’s law” debacle and have some knowledge of how it works from a few carb certified inspectors I know, so perhaps I’m projecting my frustrations somewhat but they aren’t directed at you, personally, well at least until the Don’t dare bring that sort of car to my neighborhood diatribe. I can think of a whole lot worse things being in my neighborhood than a crappy old Comet passing through.
Point three “right to repair”: and what of when the parts aren’t able to be repaired, what if a modification/retrofit is needed to be used in lieu of the certified component? Following the letter of the law it’s either A. Seek out part barring all expense regardless of its effectiveness at actually helping the environment (which is pretty dubious on quite a few 70s era emissions systems) or B. get rid of the car and find something else….. which may well just be a few years older to dodge the restrictions. True I made a generalized assumption on your opinion on this matter, but to me they’re hand and hand.
Point four: ban and restrict, this is part of the previous; if the car cannot be maintained to manufacture specifications what is the recourse? Can’t pass emissions inspection? No registration. (That by the way is wholly different from emissions *test* where the actual output of the exhaust is measured which even if that latter passes in flying colors, is negated by a failure in the former)
Point five: “Tesla” Tesla et al, I know you own a Tesla, so yeah I dug in a little, but it really is all encompassing. Nobody denys modern cars are great at certain parameters, be it EV or ICE, but the constant reminder of “well did you know it or a versa or a Amazon delivery truck would blow the doors off a modified Comet” is just such a tired cliche . People like the cars they like, i don’t begrudge anyone even if it’s not something I would be it a Tesla or a badly engineered emissions strangled Comet, but at the same time I really don’t care if you modified your Tesla any more than the Comet. I could regurgitate your garage asphyxiation dig and say add a few uncertified lithium battery packs to burn it down, your choice. People who modify cars are peons to the environment.
And finally to the last point I didn’t make that inference because I don’t disagree with it, I don’t want it either, but for all I care whoever buys it is free to do what they want with it as far as I’m concerned. Keep it stock, strip the emissions to 1969 spec, throw a coyote in it, convert it to an EV, make it into a monster truck car thing, whatever. There’s bigger things to worry about in the world than what some goofball with mechanical aptitude does do a car.
Anyway goodnight! I’m out!
Let’s be real, there is nothing you can do to a Ford 250 that’ll make it run any better or more powerfully than whatever is under the hood of a new Nissan Versa. Or probably even an old one.
Actually the Falcon six (in all sizes) is very amenable to increases in its performance to whatever level one desires, all the way to 350+ hp. It has a strong following with many hi-po parts available including aftermarket aluminum heads that will drastically wake up even a naturally aspirated version. Keep in mind that the Falcon six is what has powered every Australian Falcon all the way to the end when it was sporting the Barra DOHC six heads making 261 hp naturally aspirated and 436 hp turbocharged. The Falcon six is something of the SBC in the six cylinder world.
The Australian version of the 250 pushrod six (in the XY Falcon from 1970) came in a higher output versions that made 170 hp (from Wikipedia):As a performance option for the XY Falcon and subsequent XA Falcon, Ford developed the 2V (two-venturi) variant of the 250 cu in. engine. This featured a cylinder head with a removable aluminum intake fitted with a Bendix-Stromberg WW two-barrel carburettor, and was further equipped with a set of extractors in place of the standard exhaust manifold, resulting in a better breathing engine that was less restricted at higher rpm.[15] Its output was rated at 170 hp (127 kW), and road tests noted a reduction in 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) acceleration time from 14 to 10.7 seconds over a standard Falcon equipped with the single-barrel 250 cu in. engine.
It would take very little to double the output of this utterly strangled 70 hp version, which was a one-year only “mistake” because Ford bungled the emission control systems. And that’s keeping it with a cat; a cat does not inherently have to decrease performance. if you go to the right forums you’ll see a surprising number of Mustang sixes (hundreds of thousands were built) with moderate to more radically modified 200s and 250s. 150 real hp comes very easily; 200 hp is readily available without going radical. And being an inline six, they do run very smoothly and have a great exhaust sound, even with a cat and on unleaded gas.
https://fordsix.com/forums/144-250-small-block-six-performance.1/
And let’s please stop this embarrassing pissing match which started on a false assumption.
I live in Odense: “Home of the Grain”.
Does anyone know where Odense is?
A quick search says Denmark! Greetings from the USA. 🙂
Would that be the greenest city of Denmark?
No. The grainest!
Right!
I often wondered who came up with the name. Many years ago I wrote Car and Driver, Franz Kafka’s Garage, Nov. 2008 and asked. They spoke to Ford, but no one could remember.
‘Packaging’ wasn’t a highly discussed concept in the mid-70’s but even at the time the Maverick/Comet lines seemed pretty ridiculous in that department.
It’s nice to see such a well preserved example however, and I’ll admit to loving…..the tinted glass.
In 1988 I bought my wife a 74 Comet coupe with the 250, AC, PS, PB, reclining bucket seats with floor shift. I bought a $15 muffler from Sears and had a twin outlet put on it. It was a nice little rig around town. Not fast but plenty peppy for our needs.
A few years later I needed a cheap commuter car so I bought a 73 sedan, fully loaded, with 302 auto ($600). I put a nice set turbo mufflers on it with a Edelbrock intake and small Holley 4V. I ran that back and forth to work for almost 5 years.
They were rattled as they got older but they were dependable as hell. I liked both my Comets as well as my first car, a 75 302 Maverick Grabber.
Ugh, I see those bumpers, the awful wheelcovers and can almost imagine the performance of the wheezy 6 cyinder engine. So sad how things had become with automobiles by the mid-seventies.
Yes, the Maverick certainly overstayed its welcome by then.
People still liked them. For those who could, they were somewhat easy to maintain. Usually, ran “reliably, well”.
There was a CC a while back about the Comet using the Maverick bumper which does not follow the hood line. Ever since, I cannot look at a 5mph Comet without seeing that straight bumper.
Your comment was exactly what I was thinking, word for word. Since that CC was posted, I can’t unsee that.
A buddy of mine in high school had one of these as his first car, a light brown ‘74, and I really didn’t notice that bumper that way back then.
Nup.
A not-bad-looking 1971 model of this body was ok, and the falcon chassis can be made to do alright.
But this? Bumpers to protect it from offshore invaders? 70 bhp? And auto-bloody-matic, at that? Certain cars are like bad wine – time does nothing.
If this was how Haley’s Comet worked, we’d ALL have seen it. Often. (You know, “Wow! There it is! Wow! it’s takin’ it’s own sweet time. Yeah, actually, I need to go to bed”).
No power, baroque additions for Posh, a silly nameplate for a Maverick, god only knows why some poor bastard preserved it. I hope they didn’t suffer in those 50-odd years.
A guy in my town has a white 4dr. I see him at the Burger King and a convenience store. (It’s in decent shape, not as nice as the featured car).
He’s always chattin it up with folks everywhere he goes (it seems). definitely a rare sight for most (younger) folks.
I see this one is up to 3500 on BaT. Curious to see what it goes for.. if it goes.
The Comet had the very worst of the 5mph bumpers. I suspect at the time of development Ford’s plan was still for the Granada and Monarch to replace the Maverick/Comet so rather than giving the Comet its’ own crash bumper shaped for its’ Bunkie beak or restyling its’ front to eliminate the beak, they just put the bumper shaped for the Maverick on it even further out from the body.
It was a GM-like move to save a few pennies on a car that wasn’t all that great of a seller in the first place. Instead of a brand-new, form-contoured bumper, all that was needed was a much cheaper flexible filler piece.
I’m sure they used a Pinto bumper on the Bobcat, as well, but it wouldn’t have been as noticeable since the little Mercury’s grille didn’t stick out as much (if at all).
For that matter, the Bobcat didn’t exist in its’ definitive form until the ’75 model year (not counting the ’74 which was Canada-only and used what would become the ’76 Pinto grille insert) so it was styled around using the existing big bumper rather than the other way around.
I wonder if they considered de-beaking the Comet, using the Maverick’s hood with a different grille insert. Maybe something vertically-oriented with an extra chrome trim piece across the leading edge of the hood to tie it in visually with the rest of the mid-70s Mercury line rather than the 1971 holdover it looked like to the end.
I’m not feeling it. Ford knew there would be an upscale version of the higher profit Granada in the 1975 Mercury Monarch and they’ve always been super-sensitive in guarding against inter-model cannabalization since the Falcon/Mustang days.
That, and then the Fairmont (and Mercury version Zephyr) was on the horizon for 1978 so I doubt there was any serious thought to ‘de-beaking’ the Comet. They just slapped the Maverick bumper onto the Comet for something Mercury dealers could continue to sell relatively cheaply above the Bobcat and called it a day.
“Amen”. Recall an orange/beige, color combo one on our “Merc”, lot. Was quite eye catching. Would a been a “74-5ish”. Do not recall if it had the body, color, wheel covers.
Sorry to piss on anyone’s parade but this is the single most undesirable version/example of the Maverick family ever. Talk about tarting up a turd. I’m happy to know that there’s others out there that can show it some love. It deserves to be preserved as an example of the low point in American car design and engineering.And I love how this has had a shift kit and rear sway bar added. Yes!
BTW, that 70 hp power peak occurred at 2800 rpm. Seriously.
If the top bidder remains the same then this car will be bought by someone who will flip the car. The top bidder has already won 73 vehicles off Bring A Trailer. Sometimes four all in 24 hours. Will it show up in another auction with a reserve? Will it show up on some dealer web site at twice the price paid? He isn’t keeping it that is for sure.
Reserve not met at $8,000(!).
H’mm.
“Considering the $7k in current receipts we may not be at reserve yet, but who knows.”
H’mm is right. Some sellers expect 100% return on what they spent regardless of what the car is truly worth. I see Grade 1 values at 15.5K and this isn’t a 1 or a 2. Grade 3 at $7000. I suspect the gap is on the large side.
Old cars are old cars. Thankfully after the malaise period, technology advanced and cars improved. You have to accept these cars as they were, for what they were. Today they are artifacts. Older cars from the 50’s, 40’s and ’30’s are of course, even more primitive. They are historical, no one is telling you to abandon your modern car and buy an old one. I’m attracted to old machines and appreciate and enjoy them, but I’m not blind to progress. Last week I took a 1,000 mile trip with my Son in his fully self driving Tesla. All I can say is that it is amazing! That car did not miss a cue, and I never felt that it made a wrong move. This is a boon for disabled and older drivers, and it can improve their freedom and really improve their life.
It has the LDO exterior, but plain Jane interior. Straight six which is anemic as possible. Appreciate rebuild transmission & added sway bars.
However, if it had the 302 V8, full LDO package, and replacement A/C compressor, might be interesting.
As equipped, Pass!!
Wow ;
As mentioned another plain jane survivor, I’m shocked it didn’t sell for $8K but greed is what it is .
The rest of the comments are interesting .
I remember these cars well, “malaise” is what they were called and it’s true .
However, making it run a bit better and not making it a gross polluter is not difficult for those who actually care and would like to use this as a local commuter or hobby car .
The emissions / bad air thing was real, I was here in the Los Angeles basin from 1970 > and it really was bad , the local mountains were only 12 miles away and you simply couldn’t see them more days than you could plus the air was awful, it made one wheeze and choke .
-Nate