(first posted 6/14/2012) It was going to happen eventually; the odds were simply too good, and now it has come to pass. I needed a user name for use on a certain website (where it would eventually become a byline). For no particular reason, I appropriated the name of a TV actor whose character drove a series of big Mercurys during his show’s 12-year run–and now I’ve actually stumbled upon one in the real world. Well, at least it isn’t black.
When this car made its debut, during the heyday of black Mercurys careening around islands in the Pacific, the idea of Mercury going the way of Packard and Studebaker seemed unlikely if not unimaginable.
Mercury spent most of its existence in search of a niche, and it never did definitively answer the persistent question of whether it was a puffed up Ford or a deflated Lincoln. In truth, the answer changed from generation to generation. In terms of achieving autonomy, Mercurys of the generation that produced this 1971 Monterey probably came as close as any before or since.
For example, consider the styling. Study the picture on top and you’ll detect a relationship to the contemporary big Ford in front, as well as a respectful nod to Lincoln in the body lines. Keep looking (doing so without corrective lenses is helpful) and you can also see a resemblance to Mercurys dating back to, say, 1965 (including the ’68 model pictured below). Neither Ford nor Lincoln created such a strong sense of styling continuity; indeed, Mercury styling consistently reflected a lineage that would continue for a few more model years.
The Monterey’s standard engine was a 240 hp, 351 cube V8 with a two-barrel carburetor. Optional engines, all V8s, included a 400 cu.in. mill with 260 hp, and 320, 360 and 370 hp versions of the 429. In addition, Montereys were the only full size Mercurys to come with a manual transmission as standard equipment.
In 1971, the Monterey played second fiddle to the upscale Marquis. Weighing in at a svelte (by 1971 standards) 4029 pounds, our feature car is one of 22,744 Monterey four-door sedans built that year.
While that sounds good versus the 12,411 Monterey Customs and 16,030 Marquis sedans produced in 1971, that year’s most popular four door Mercury was the Marquis Brougham sedan, of which 25,790 were built; apparently, during the Great Brougham Epoch all that extra chrome, hidden headlights and fender skirts counted for quite a lot. Four door hardtops were still available, but their pillared siblings outsold them handily.
By 1971 the Monterey’s days were numbered. The Marquis lineup had greater prestige and bigger sales numbers, and 1974 would be the final year for a model name that first appeared in 1950.
Styling might bring folks to the dealership, but it’s the ride and drive that seals the deal. As illustrated by this video, Mercury tried hard to seal the deal on ride in 1971.
A first-hand account of driving new, comparable ’71 Fords can be found here.
I found this car (along with the ’68 Galaxie parked in front of it…stay tuned!) while driving through a town about 60 miles south of where I live. Although the license plates on both cars show current registration, the gentleman with me said they’d been sitting in front of this house for years. I find it curious that this base Monterey sports optional, Marquis-style fender skirts–an odd juxtaposition of cheapness and luxury, wouldn’t you say?
While researching Mercurys of this vintage I learned something interesting: The 1969-1978 full-size Ford/Mercury chassis is Ford’s second-best selling car chassis of all-time, right behind that of the Model T. Ford built 7,850,000 full size Fords and Mercurys during that period, so it sounds like the ride really did seal the deal for many, many people.
I thought this was the last good-looking full sized Mercury they built. If Mercury had put hidden headlights on the Monterey header instead of the Marquis header, there’d be at least one of these in my driveway.
Make mine a black 2-door hardtop with the Marquis center taillght/brakelight. I usually don’t like black but I think it’d be nice on this car.
Allstate Insurance destroyed a number of these cars that were equipped with airbags. I remember seeing magazine ads where they jumped these off ramps, ran them into barriers, etc. Evidently some were sold to the general public because one ad had a picture of a Monterey that had rear-ended a parked car @68 mph. The ad stated that the driver walked away from the crash with a sore shoulder or something like that.
These were company cars for Allstate executives.
I thought Ford used the same full size chassis from 1965 to 1978.
The 65-68 Ford was on a 119 inch wb, while the 69 went to 121. I suspect that there were some other design changes too, because the later cars were not plagued by the frame-rust issues that dogged the 65-68 cars.
They just did a rust-propensity transplant…from the frame to the body.
I guess I had just never considered your explanation, which is really quite simple: that Ford started using the bodies as sacrificial anodes for the frames. 🙂
I was tempted by one of these on Craigslist a few years ago. Brown, of course (as I think 95% of these were) and a real low-mile survivor. But that one was a Marquis.
I always liked the 71-72 big Mercury. The Marquis of the 1970s was one of the few times that Mercury successfully built a brand. Everybody knew what a Mercury Marquis was, and the styling was completely unique to Mercury.
I never saw as many Montereys. I do recall seeing these both with and without the fender skirts. The skirts completely transformed the car. I never cared for these without skirts. Under the skin, of course, it was pure Ford LTD (on a slightly longer wheelbase). And in the upper midwest, they were really rusters. And the 71-72s particularly were not paragons of structural rigidity. Still, I love luxoboats and a nice one of these could tempt me.
That “Blind Test” ad is a hoot. We’ve been seeing SNL-type spoofs of old TV for so long, we forget that commercials ever were that earnest. Love the cross-section of jobs done by all those respectable gentlemen.
I’m contractually obligated to note that the “$16,000 LIMOUSINE” is a 70 or 71 Imp.
Ford really was a leader in engineering a soft, quiet ride in that era. They were the first to widely take advantages of the benefits of radial tires. These ads were pretty effective in getting the word out that the Mercury Marquis was an uncommonly smooth and quiet riding car.
Actually, my favorite of these ads was where the highly skilled craftsman cuts the diamond in the back seat of the Marquis as it drives on a cobblestone street. “Perfect!”
I was just looking for that ad on YouTube and couldn’t find it. That ad is memorable in part because of the SNL spoof in which a foreskin was being cut instead of a diamond. “Poifect!”
Here’s the SNL version: http://www.hulu.com/watch/2323#s-p58-sr-i4
Maybe that ad was the inspiration for the other Mercury in the above picture: the Mercury Topaz. OK…… I’m reaching a bit here.
I’d take ads like this over pretty much anything we see today. Seems like the consumer manipulation of advertisement was just a lot more subtle in those days.
In reference to the article, manual transmission Mercury Monterey? Bet that’s a rare duck.
On another note, it would appear that at least 2 of those guys preferred the Imperial over the Roller. ’70 adverts crack me up.
Love these, I’ve got a thing for “near luxury”.
This does seem to be the era when Ford almost seemed to have Mercury “figured out”. What happened? These Mercurys seemed to be more Junior Lincolns than Senior Fords and the Junior Lincoln models were much more successful.
The 1979 Panther happened. The distinction was lost. Same wheelbase as a Ford for starters, and very similar styling.
That’s why I’ve advocated that Ford should have put the Crown Vic on a 114 in wheelbase (as happened in real life), Grand Marquis on 117in wheelbase (like standard Town Cars), and Town Cars on a 122 in wheelbase like the Town Car Ls are. More real world leg room would have been a compeling reason to buy one.
It depends where the extra wheelbase goes, though. A lot of longer-wheelbase cars put the extra length either ahead of the firewall or just ahead of the axle, which saves the expense of tooling longer doors, but does nothing much for interior space.
On a trip to Chicago a few years ago, I noticed several Crown Vic taxis that were plainly on a long wheelbase and had lengthened rear doors. All of that stretch was put into the rear passenger compartment, where those cars needed it most, particularly for taxi duty. I never understood why that did not become the civillian MGM.
The long wheelbase Vics have been fairly plentiful in NYC as well where the extra inches come in very handy because of the bulky barrier that all NYC cabs have. Some of these must have made their way into the private market, but I haven’t seen one.
LIke the longer-wheelbase full-sized Pontiacs of the 60s and early 70s. During that time, the top-line Grand Ville/Bonneville and mid-line Star Chief/Executive had a 2-3 inch longer wheelbase than the lower-priced Catalina with most of the extra length going into the trunk. The Bonnevilles had no more interior space or smoother ride than the Catalinas – and in fact the Bonneville Safari wagon rode the same shorter wheelbase as the less expensive Catalina Safari. At other GM divisions, the longer wheelbase approach did translated to a bigger trunk and more interior space in the top-line Oldsmobile 98s and Buick Electras over the bread-and-butter Delta 88s and LeSabres – as the flagship cars used the larger C-body shared with Cadillac while the standard models used the B-body found on all full-sized Chevrolets and Pontiacs.
@mark potter: the 60s and early 70s Bonnevilles, Grand Villes, etc had “C body” interior dimensions, not the same as Catalinas. (The same is true of 65–68 Buick Wildcats.) They typically had both three extra inches of rear seat leg room and several inches of extra trunk (exc station wagons, which used the standard B body wagon shell). The 71-73 Grand Ville used the same C body roof as Electra and Ninety Eight.
You said it. Roy Abernethy, over at Rambler, created the new incarnation of the Ambassador for 1965 by giving it a wheelbase several inches longer than that of the Classic – but its extra length all went in front of the firewall. Not one nanometer went to making the interior any more roomy.
I should know, I was a gawky teenager already nearing six foot tall at fourteen years old in 1968. We already had a 1965 Ambassador 990 4DR sedan for a family car, and in 1968 Dad bought himself a used ’65 Classic 550 4DR with the 232 six-banger with 3spd plus overdrive for company use. Outside appearances aside, in the back seat there was no difference. I actually came to like that Classic better; it just struck me as more the type of car Rambler was founded to build, rather than going upscale to duke it out with the big boys on their turf. It was every bit the tank that a Volvo or Mercedes was, too. Rock-solid, never a squeak or a rattle.
I think the ford version is very similar in styling to this mercury, right? Except the central “beak” is a bit raised compared to the rest of the grille.
My parents had, for a few years, a ’71 Monterey 2-door, bought used from the local Merc dealer, in metallic blue with vinyl top and the 400 V-8. Oh, and the fender skirts. Absolutely loved that thing; very classy to drive around in and I actually preferred the styling (slightly more swoopy) over the top line-Marquis. One of my top two all-time favorites from the family collection, along with their white ’67 Pontiac Catalina fastback. Dang, I wish I had photos of both of them.
Can’t remember why they got rid of the Merc, but I have a vague recollection that it succumbed to rust issues. It was replaced by a Colony Park wagon of roughly the same vintage, which oddly enough I loathed, considering it was built on the same platform.
In 1971 I could have had a Marquis? I doubt it, for at that time there wasn’t a new Ford or Mercury anything I would touch with a ten-foot pole!
The ONLY thing I would have considered at the time was either a Chevy Nova or Chevelle – most likely the Chevelle. Chrysler-anything in those days? Nope.
I had my avatar – what else could I need?
The subject at hand was typical of the serious bloat that occurred in the domestic auto industry those years. That’s how Toyota and Honda and Datsun got in the door, while VW continued pumping out its outdated air-cooled technology and cars.
The base Monterey with fender skits shows the ‘buffet style’ of car trims and options of the big car glory days. Could get car equipped virtually millions of ways. Even some Chevy Impalas had fender skirts.
Eventually, having different names for different trim levels faded away. By 1983, just the top level Grand Marquis with vinyl roof was the standard big Mercury until 1992.
One car I miss dearly is my dad’s brown with brown vinyl interior ’72 Impala sedan, 350-2V. The only options it had were AM radio, rear speaker, misc. moldings, full wheelcovers, A/C, white vinyl top, and fender skirts. Weird.
The ala-carte vehicle ordering made me the 70’s & 80’s domestic car lover that I am.
Yes! I do remember the ad-hoc, smorgasboard of options and accessories available through to the early 70’s. I remember seeing a ’73 Bel Air sedan, metallic green, black vinyl top with full wheel covers a-la Impala; looked like a budget Caprice. I also remember seeing a 1968 Chevy accesories catalog with a ’68 Biscayne 2-door sedan dressed up with every dealer and factory accessory sans vinyl top (wire wheel covers; dual mirrors – spotlights – door shade moldings . . . bumper guards . . . . ). That Biscayne in the catalog, dressed up still had the little ‘standalone’ front marker light, which in ’68 meant it was a six!!
I loved the 68 Biscaynes with 427 and 4 speed on the floor from Yenko.
But, I do vividly remember so many color/trim combinations of full sizers. Caprices with no vinyl tops, or Impalas with 454s.
Two that stick out in my head are both Chevies. One was sitting in a Tuscaloosa, AL parking lot — it was a brown ’72 Chevy Impala sedan, with brown vinyl interior. It was a factory 454 car and it also had Comfortron A/C. No power windows, locks, tilt, cruise or anything else to note. I wanted that car so bad.
The other was a gold ’69 Bel Air sitting in an AL scrapyard. it was a 327-2bbl car with Powerglide but it had factory cruise control — you seldom see that on any ’69 model car, much less an almost-bottom-of-the-barrel model.
OMG! It’s an Australian Ford Galaxy Series XXXXLST-FU!!! What’s that doing in Missouri?
Nurse Ratched? Yes, come quickly, another relapse in the Isolation Ward.
🙂
The current Missouri license plates are weird-looking things with that apparently random assortment of four letters and two numbers. I imagine you can get some funny-looking plate numbers if both of the numeric characters are 0’s.
My own favorite Mercurys were the 1953’s and 1955’s. The 53’s because they were so similar to Fords that the 2-door hardtops and convertibles could be had with leather seats as a way of setting them apart. The 55’s because I just really liked their looks. In fact, I liked them so much that I owned a Custom 2-door sedan with a 3-speed, a Montclair 2-door hardtop with overdrive, and a Monterey 2-door hardtop with Merc-o-matic.
As long as I can remember, when I’d visit relatives in the Show-Me State, they always had a curious license plate numbering system. A letter number letter, number, number, number. As a kid, I’d come back to California with a suitcase full of discarded Missouri license plates as my relatives and everyone else would “throw them away.” To this day, I have old Mo. plates dating back to the ’60s. Missouri went from dual plates (’56-’61) to singles back to dual plates beginning for the 1972 issue. I have a bunch of them. Ohio, too!
Ohio is a story. Back in the 1950s and ’60s they would start out with AA-123 and work their way through to the end – which by the 1960s, came relatively fast, what with the burgeoning auto population. Plates were issued annually every April…not stickers, entire new plates. The whole thing was a patronage-job racket.
Anyway…after they got to ZZ-999 they would go with AA-1234. But that didn’t give enough plates out, either…so at that point they’d just go with seeming random combinations…A 1234 B or some such. Those off-the-wall combos seemed to be in DMV offices by the end of the season…the last issues. And as it happened, there was a reserve-series program that could keep you with the same plate numbering each year…so some of those odd combos got institutionalized.
In 1976 they went with multiyear plates but didn’t rationalize the series types. Which meant there were REALLY odd combinations out there by the time the plate series expired in 1980.
That time around, they went with three letters, three numbers: ABC123. And stuck with it. Any plates other than personalized or initial plates, could not be reserved. From then till when they went with the Bicentennial Series in 2003, they were with three letters and three, later four numbers.
Can’t speak about today, since I haven’t lived there in a decade.
As for Missouri plates…never lived there; but when I was in Denver there were a fair number of Show-Me types about…and the plates of the time seemed rational; three letters/three numbers.
Guess that was too simple for their bureaucrats. You have got to show them.
I thought that I remembered that the first two letters were tied to county. My mother’s relatives all lived in Paulding County, and all of the plates there started with ZU. But I didn’t live there, so I may not have understood the system properly.
No, that’s just what came off the truck, out of the state prison.
The plates would be shipped in batches like that, with certain letter combinations all going to one area…but it meant nothing.
In New York, by contrast, letter combinations WERE assigned, and at least with the 1972-86 blue-on-yellow plates, the combinations started out having some reference.
The system went to hell there as residents moved about and kept their plates in their new counties; as the state exhausted its 123-AAA series possibilities and went to 1234-AAA; and with myriad other changes over fourteen years.
The first one or two digits of Alabama tags signify the county. The combinations have changed slightly over the years but the county codes remained constant. Birmingham (Jefferson County) cars got “1”. Montomery tags started with “2” I think & Mobile tags start with “3”. The remainder of the county codes were assigned alphabetically.
For example, Cullman County is ’25’; Fayette County is “43”; Tuscaloosa County is “63”; Walker County is “64”; Winston is “67”, etc. Pretty cool.
Not Ohoho.
In 1983, a bill passed, requiring the county name be attached to the bottom of the plate, via a sticker. It was sold as a “crime prevention” measure; what it really was, was a way to save the county sheriffs some embarrassment with their speed traps, to avoid stopping locals.
With computerization now, it scarcely matters. The county ID sticker went away…a lot of people hated it; made us look like hicks; and large metro areas often had three or more counties anyway When I left the area, there was a corner sticker with a number; the number, 1 to 88, signified the county by alphabetical order.
A little more suave; but with computers and laser-plate-readers, the one group NOT needing it, are cops.
But no, the numbers are just by coincidence and convenience.
The 1971 Caprice/Impala was so much nicer, and drove so much better than these bloated Fords and Mercurys. Looking at this Mercury reminds me why GM dominated the market in these years.
Sorry, not a fan of the GM 71-76 full sizers. They handled a bit better than these big FoMoCo barges, but the Fords were so much smoother and quieter. Also, because we did not know about the rusting issues, the bodies seemed so much better built. The 71 GM big cars felt horribly cheap, which was a first for a big GM car. Evidence of cost cutting was everywhere, from the universal black steering wheel to the molded plastic door panels. The Fords felt substantial – the doors sounded better and they were by far more luxuriously trimmed inside.
Hindsight says that the GM cars were better all around cars over the long haul, but for the first 3 or 4 years (these cars’ usual lifespan with the new buyer) I would have taken the Mercury any day.
I begrudgingly have to agree with you. I’m a huge ’71-’76 GM car fan & have lots of Pontiacs, a boattail, & two Deltas but the Ford/Mercury vehicles seem to be so much more solid vehicles.
My ex-’73 Bonneville 2-door had 29K on it…that car was immaculate — but both doors had to be shut hard to latch completely. I thought it was a fluke but my 2nd and 3rd ’73 Bonneville 2-doors (59K & 101K respectively) are just as bad.
Things got better eventually as my step-grandmother’s ’76 Bonneville Brougham 2-door drove & felt a lot more solid than my ’73 heaps…the doors shut like Fords too, lol. Maybe the ‘colonnade’ roof revisions of ’75/’76 made the side structures rigid enough, who knows.
Common sense dictates that I should have a yardful of Fords but the GMs of these years just do it for me.
True GM had cheapened its ’71 full-sizede cars, but the black steering wheel and column was only found on Chevrolets – Pontiacs, Oldsmobiles, Buicks and Cadillacs continued with color-keyed wheels and columns, In 1973, Chevy went back to color keyed wheels and columns on Caprice and Monte Carlo followed by Impala and Chevelle in 1974 and Nova in 1975 – Vega would follow in 1977.
I’ll agree on the Impalas/Caprices of those eras driving much nicer. Smooth, but with more control. As a high schooler, my Grandmother had a ’74 Country Squire, 400 2V. Decent power, but over the backroads of Northeastern Missouri/Western Illinois, that car really had a tendency to ‘wander’ on the crowned roads. Did OK on the flat highways and interstates. A girlfriend right out of high school would drive occasionally her Father’s ’77 Grand Marquis (he was a San Francisco Ad executive who handled the Mercury account). I drove that car and it was like piloting the QE-II. Ponderous, very floatly. You “telegraphed” commands for steering, braking and acceleration, it seemed – just like a ship!! At the time, my Dad had a ’71 Olds Custom Cruiser, a slightly BIGGER vehicle, and it felt like an MGB compared to the girlfriend’s ’77 Mercury Grand Marquis. On the plus side, it DID ride very smooth and quiet (“ride engineered by Lincoln-Mercury” proudly claimed by a plaque on the glovebox); as long as you didn’t hit a series of road undulations, a dip, or have to negotiate any curver over 30 mph, you were riding on a very quiet magic carpet.
I’m being polite here . . . that ’77 Grand Marquis was a real pig.
I wonder what the price difference was between the base Monterey and the base Marquis. The hidden headlights bring out the elegance of the car. Just like the 72 Polara/Monaco line.
Yeah, but after my Dad’s divorce, he dated a lady who drove a ’73 Dodge Monaco. Even though it looked like a “budget Imperial”, the doors clunked shut just like a stripper dart and I remember the trim pieces didn’t line up and there were runs in the metallic grey paint. This was when the car was maybe a year old. (This would’ve been late 1974/early 1975). From what I remember at the time, the big GM and Ford cars (Mercuries especially) had far superior build quality than the ‘tinny’ Mopars of the early-mid seventies.
I remember the Illinois Tollway police/admins had 71-72 Montereys, but after that was 74-77 Dodge Monaco ‘Bluesmobiles’. Since the plant that made the big Mopars was in IL and needed to sell some cars, many Northern IL/Chicago area towns bought them, and they ended up in the “BB” movie!
I always thought Jack Lord should have been driving a Monterey on Hawaii Five-0. OTOH, I guess Ford wanted the most expensive cars to be shown, so he got Parklanes and Marquis’.
Dan-O, Chin Ho Kelly and Kono were relegated to lesser Galaxies and Custom 500s.
HPD in those years were a hodgepodge of Chevies and Fords; went Mopar for marked cars in the 80’s . . . and have been Ford to this day, although Honolulu Police Department (HPD) are experimenting with some Toyota Camry Hybrid cop cars.
Looks a lot like the 1976-78 Australian Fairlanes. They more often than no have a vinyl roof, and there was a Marquis variant with extra stuff.
That vinyl roof is needed when removed the flexing cracks the paint in the joints
Our neighbor had a white 1971 Monterey 2-dr. with no vinyl top and blue cloth interior. He had that car for what it seemed like an eternity as a kid – I think he replaced it with a 79 Impala and then a mid-eighties Chevy Celebrity. I rode in it a few times and always remember it being a very quiet and solid car.
Dad drove a ’70 and ’71 Marquis as a company car. He got a new one every year. This may be the subject of an upcoming CC.
Anyway, I always liked the ’69 to ’71 Marquis. Looked down on the Montereys as inferior product. I also remember that Dad’s ’70 Marquis was one of the last California black license plate cars, letters were ZYT. They ended the series at ZYW, if I remember correctly. Strange things your mind remembers, isn’t it?
Through 1970 there were some Cal black plates issued. The story I learned was DMV inventories issuing back to Sacramento inventories of what black plates remained and these were mailed out to residents in an effort to use them up (late 1969/early 1970). I grew up in Marin and remember seeing blue plates “A” letters showing up around October of 1969 on new cars/new issues.
Also, Cal. Black Plates were issued for commerical vehicle use through 1970
00 000 K. Beginning with ‘L’s’ at the very end of 1971, they went to blue and yellow.
I had one of these gems for a vehicle when I was first licensed. Had the 400 motor and towed a 6×12 trailer from South Lousy-anna to El Paso at 70 almost all the way. Had a problem with the tailpipe rusted over the top of the wheel and the exhaust overheated the trunk and melted a taillight. I shudder at the thought of where the gas was in the same vehicle….. the exhaust pipe was cheap and the taillight found in a boneyard…. It was a great car, but with gas at the unheard of price of $1.49 in 1981 I was not totally unhappy to see her go.
I spotted a vintage promo of the Canadian counterpart of the Monterey, the Meteor
http://www.flickr.com/photos/autohistorian/5744507308/
I cannot believe you totally ignored the Mercury Topaz!
In June 1971 I drove a nearly new dark green Monterey coupe. I remember being disappointed in the cheapness of this clumsy, fat-looking car. And, what an ugly, generic-looking front end! By comparison, the 1971 Impala Custom Coupe drove beautifully and seemed way more sophisticated, with its Cadillac-like styling. The 71 Ford LTD coupe was also a far better looking, more luxurious car for about the same money as the Monterey. It was a bad year for the Cougar too. First one I saw in the fall of 1970 was a lime-green coupe with blackwalls and poverty caps — truly a shocking sight.
My genteel South Carolina grandparents had a brand new 1970 Maaaa(w)-KEY Brawm. The perfect black/black vinyl with burgundy cloth car for my grandmother’s frequent trips to the country club. Parked next to my aunt’s Continental, this car was never out of place and was quite beautiful. I wish I could find a black one in great shape. I’d buy it in a heartbeat
!
I LOVE the 70’s full size Mercury’s. I will never get rid of my 76 Grand Marquis. I’d like to have a dozen of ’em!
So much angst over Mercury’s identity, they were Fords for the creamed-corn set.
Creamed corn makes a darned good chowder.
Ewwwww, looks like dog vomit. 😀
Dad had a 1972 Marquis Brougham “pillared hardtop” for several years. It was a fine, well-built, and reliable car. Interestingly enough, the Monterey for 1971-72 had a dash largely based on the large Ford.
The ’71-’72 Marquis, on the other hand, had its own dash.
There are two Marquis that I see frequently around these parts. They are both green.
Monterey….suspect they are long gone. One is a 2 door…it still looks pretty good, I suspect that it is a very rare car indeed .I always see the two door on the toll way so there no chance of a picture, the guy driving it looks happy.
I always loved the 71 Monterey far more than the Marquis. It looked cleaner and the grille just spoke to me as well as the grille gates on the fenders.
Ford and Mercury with their quiet ride campaigns [Ford with “Quieter Than A Rolls Royce] starting in 65 and the 66 Mercury Montclair my parents owned cemented smooth and quiet ride as a requirement in any car I’d buy [exceptions: 99 Cavalier and 95 Saturn SL].
My current car, while very quiet, may soon be treated to a Dyna Mat style installation. Moar in this instance is even better.
It even has a bit of “float” at speed just like that old Mercury did
The GOOD GUYS on Hawaii 5 0 usually drove the older Mercs and the BAD GUYS drove the newer styles because the new “lard ass” models cornered so poorly. – billchrest
My father’s ’71; since I see the above (2012) discussion about Ohio plates, I’ll note that the “FM” prefix indicates that it’s a FoMoCo company (lease) car.
Me, I was a testosterone-poisoned high school senior with a steady girlfriend who got to take the car out for date nights. I’ll testify to how huge the front bench was–no need to crawl into the back…
I never knew you could get fender skirts on the Monterey like you could on the Marquis, I’ve always felt the Monterey should’ve been a better seller than what they were during their final years of the market.
My mom’s first husband was a “Mercury Man”, from when he came back from WWII until he died. As he got older, the Monterey’s got fancier and famncier, they were about as loaded as they could get. All but the last one were white, most of the ones I saw had dark vinyl tops, with darker colored interiors. And just like McGarrett’s cars, the tires were constantly squealing. As he went into his 80’s, he said, constantly, “Well, soon I’ll be buying my last car, this one’s going to be a Grand Marquis!”. I always pronounced it like “MarkKEEEEEE!”, which always amused me. When he was 88, he finally pulled the trigger and got his Grand MarkKEEEE, “Mocha over mocha!”. As I put it, yuck over yuck. He drove it until he was 92, when his spine basically collapsed while working out at a local gym. From that point on, he deteriorated pretty quickly, and just before he died, he gave the car to his brother’s grandson as a wedding present. It only had like 12,000 miles on it, and it still looked new.
1971 was where Mercury lost me. My mom had a ’70, which to my eye, was a lot cleaner:
Are you talking about the both of the 1971 Mercury full sizer’s or just the Monterey?
I’ve always had a thing for any make’s mid-level trim models…the 1950s Ford Custom 300s; Chevy Del Rays and Biscaynes; Plymouth Fury I (I loathe Plymouth prior to 1965, sorry – Virgil Exner and Elwood Engel had to have been dropping acid back then!); y’all get the idea. The Monterrey was a car looking for a mission but I liked it. Truth be told, though, I prefer the Marauder models over the Monties or the Park Lanes/Marquis. Something about a triple-black full-sized sedan with a big block under the hood, and hopefully a 4spd to go with it. With a minimum of trim, they are the ultimate sleepers. 🙂
My Dad had a ’71 MM Brougham with high back buckets otherwise the same as the ad in the article. Among my Dad’s luxury cars that included a Lincoln Continental (430 MEL), T-Birds (428 and 460) and Cadillac’s (472); common consent with my brothers was the Merc with the short stroke 10.1 compression premium fuel 429 was the quickest.
My family actually has one that got parked due to a messed up head job. I’m planning g to restore it in the future, a gorgeous car like this needs the love. It actually looks worse in the picture than it actually is. The paint is mostly intact and there aren’t any trees growing in the engine compartment. I’m cutting them down and having the car hauled out of the field to somewhere a bit better for it.
Hi would you sale any parts off Mercury Monterey ?
Interesting to note while Mercury dropped the Monterey for the 1975 model year, in Canada, the Meteor keep soldering a couple more years despite the Marquis. http://oldcarbrochures.org/Canada/Ford-Canada/Mercury/1975-Mercury-Meteor-Brochure/index.html
The Canadian 1975 Meteor could have been the 1975 Monterey had Mercury had let the Monterey nameplate surviving a couple of additional years but on the other hand, I wonder if Monterey would have been a better monicker than Monarch when they introduced their Granada counterpart?
Buick and Olds did somewhat better with differing their entry and luxury full size models. LeSabre and 88 stuck around longer then Monterey.
The plain Marquis took Monterey’s spot, then was downsized to Fox body. So then the Grand Marquis GS was the ‘Monterey’ of 80s/90s/00s/