UPDATED FROM 7/9/2021)
The 1967-73 Mercury Cougar is a tragic story of a classic design going to hell. The first-generation models, which were produced from 1967-68, were among the best-looking pony cars of the late-60s. Indeed, one could argue that these are the most iconic Mercurys of all time.
Few designs have fallen from grace with such speed. By 1971 the Cougar had become one of the ugliest cars of that era. Let’s take a closer look. We will focus mostly on the Cougar’s front-end styling.
1967-68 Cougar: A paint-by-numbers classic
The original Cougar’s styling was exceptionally well done but also rather derivative. The car shared a kinship with the 1968-70 Dodge Charger, whose classic look also had a paint-by-numbers quality (go here for further discussion).
Like most other personal coupes in 1967, the Cougar had hidden headlights and full-width taillights. Meanwhile, its side styling was strikingly similar to the 1966 AMX and AMX II show cars. Both had chunky wheel cutouts and rounded side sheetmetal contours; the AMX II had a V-shaped front fender (Strohl, 2015).
The main design feature that made the Cougar distinctive was the front end. The pointed fender edges contrasted with an upright grille.
Designer salvaged a ‘nightmare’ assignment
Retired Ford designer Richard Schierloh told Collectible Automobile that the production Cougar was the result of Ford management deciding to mash together two different designs. Schierloh was given the job of integrating them. The hardest part was the front end.
“It was a nightmare for me trying to put that squared architectural over-and-under design together with the pointy nose of the ’67 Cougar. I always thought it was terrible. There was a big hole in the corner and I didn’t know what to stuff in it.” (Farrell, 2019, p. 82)
I would beg to differ with Schierloh. The tension between the vertical grille and the pointed sheetmetal corners gives the Cougar added visual interest. The contrast partly works because a gap between the top of the razor-like vertical grille echoes the corner holes. The grille looks like it is floating.
The Cougar’s animalistic nose plays a key role in integrating these elements. The way the sheetmetal tapers down to the base of the grille was exceptionally well done.
1969 Cougar begins descent into hell
The 1969 model is arguably the second best-looking Cougar. It retained the general look of the previous generation but was cleaned up a bit. For example, the “holes” in the corners of the grille were removed by using a wrap-around grille. The result was clean but lacked the complex tension of the 1967-68 models.
Designers toned down the nose too much. One mistake was to make the grille full width. This reduced the visual prominence of the nose. Another mistake was to adopt an inset horizontal grille. These two choices worked together to erase the Cougar’s animalistic face. The car’s front now looked more like an electric shaver.
The Cougar’s rear was pleasantly evolutionary but the side styling was odd. Why would you give a Mercury — and a pony car — a Buick-like sweepsphere?
1970 Cougar: One step forward, one step backward
Cougar designers apparently decided that the 1969 models stepped too far away from the original look. Thus, the 1970 Cougar shifted back to a waterfall grille and a nose made of sheetmetal. However, the pointed fender corners were shaved off, thereby ditching the grille’s corner holes. It sort-of works.
The thin-lined grille pattern on each side of the nose evoked the first generation while offering a fresh and appealing look. The same couldn’t be said of the nose’s grille, which was too wide, tall and squared off. The nose worked best on the Eliminator model, which had a hood stripe that wrapped into the top of the grille. Otherwise, it looked like a waffle iron.
1971 Cougar goes all the way to hell
In 1971 Cougar designers came up with one of the ugliest front ends of that era. An oddly-shaped radiator grille evoked the Edsel. I assume this reflected the taste of Ford President Semon “Bunkie” Knudsen. He reportedly pressed designers to use big-nosed front ends.
Fortunately, the Cougar did not look as outrageous as the 1970-71 Ford Thunderbird or the Mercury Cyclone (go here for further discussion).
Also see ‘1970 Mercury El Gato Cougar raises intriguing questions’
Even without the weird nose, the Cougar’s front was too tall and boxy. This was partly because the bumpers were mounted low, like on a family car. The 1971-72 Cougar was the only pony car that did not use thin, high-mounted bumpers prior to the onset of federal standards in 1973-74.
We could spend a lot of time talking about how ugly the rest of the car looked. For example, the Cougar had one of the tallest, most squared-off decks of any U.S. car from that era. Richard M. Langworth described it as “large enough to land a helicopter” (1987, p. 290).
Was the goal to visually suggest that the Cougar’s trunk was roomier than the tiny ones in other pony cars? If so, designers went too far.
1973 Cougar attempts half-hearted escape from hell
The Cougar returned to older styling cues in 1973. In the front, designers shifted back to an all-vertical grille that had a richer look. Well, a more broughamy look, with lots of chrome.
Perhaps most importantly, the Cougar’s front received a hefty new bumper that met new crash-worthiness standards. This may have been the only U.S. car that looked better after it had been “federalized.” Although the bumper made the car’s front look even more massive, it also shrunk the nose.
Rear styling was slightly improved by ditching the horizontal taillights. Designers replaced them with nicely shaped lights with a vertical pattern. This gave the rear a slightly less massive look. Bonus points for better evoking the original Cougar.
Also see ‘Ford did better than Chrysler in differentiating its 1970s mid-sized coupes’
In 1974 the Cougar became a mid-sized car, where it competed against the likes of Chevrolet’s Monte Carlo. Designers went full brougham. Sales soared, but it wasn’t really a Cougar anymore.
I was going to suggest that death with dignity would have been a better choice. However, the Cougar’s dignity had already been stripped away. Congratulations, Ford management, for sending one of your biggest classics to hell in a remarkably short amount of time.
NOTES:
This is an expanded version of a story originally posted July 3, 2020 and expanded on July 9, 2021.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Farrell, Jim; 2019. “Richard Schierloh: The Art of Car Design.” Collectible Automobile. December, pp. 76-84.
- Langworth, Richard M. and the auto editors of Consumer Guide; 1987. The Complete History of Ford Motor Company. Beekman House, NY.
- Strohl, Daniel; 2015. “From A to X – all the different cars that could have, and did, become the AMX.” Hemmings. Posted June 23.
ADVERTISEMENTS & BROCHURES:
- wildaboutcarsonline.com (Automotive History Preservation Society): Mercury Cougar (1970)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Mercury Cougar (1969, 1973); Mercury Cyclone (1970)
There is something missing about the evolution of the 1969-1970 Cougar front sheet metal: The pressure of the federal government and insurance companies to eliminate protruding front fenders ends of vehicles. as in the Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Toronado in 1968-1968-1970. Protruding front fenders far outreaching the bumpers began to retreat. Frankly, the 1967-1969 Cougar was a styling success, in my opinion. Then Ford ruined it as they did with the Mustang after 1969.
Well, that partly explains what happened to the ’68 Toronado, thank you James. Still think GM could have done way better with it, however, I’m here to jump into the Cougar den and declare that I actually like the 71-73 models. They weren’t pony cars, but rather ‘small’ personal luxury cars, especially in XR-7 trim (check this 1972 XR-7 ad out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYJMLNosW5w).
I think they were appropriately styled for that mission, certainly no worse than Ford excesses like the 1972 Lincoln Continental MK IV. Unfortunately, they were too small for the times and I’m sure that back in the day, no one cross-shopped a Cougar with a Monte Carlo or Grand Prix. The Montego-based 74 XR-7 was, no surprise, a big sales success because it was glitzier and adhered to Detroit’s longer, lower, wider theory of better car design.
Small + Luxury did not compute in the early 70s with most of Detroit, although Ford was an early proponent of it with its late 1972 LDO versions of the Maverick. I personally prefer the 71-73 Cougar to all others and am grateful it didn’t get the same nose treatment as the 70-71 T-Bird and Montego.
That’s an interesting point. You got me wondering how much the 1971-73’s size was responsible for its mediocre sales vis a vis the car’s rather blocky styling. Whatever else one can say about the Montego-based Cougar, the rear end didn’t look like an aircraft carrier.
It’s restylings like this that leave you wondering at the aesthetic sense (or lack of same) of some design studio heads. With the Cougar, Ford styling seemed unable to recognize a design classic when they created one, and unable to field appropriate successors.
The ’67-68 was quite distinctive. It had a lightness, almost a delicacy about it, helped in no small part by the contours of the side panels, the combination of convex and concave, while surely being a nightmare for panelbeaters, giving a sense of fleetness and motion, ideal for a pony car. Plus it looked nothing like the Mustang it derived from. A+.
The ’69-70 lost that sense of lightness. I remember at the time (though only a teenager) being disappointed with the ’69; it seemed so much more static and heavy. As you say, that sweepspear side pressing shouted Buick; while an attractive design feature on a Buick, it really looked out of place on anything else. It did lighten up those boringly-contoured side panels and impart a sense of motion, but at the expense of confusing brand identity. Maybe a B-.
Wonder what Buick stylists thought? Did people seeing a ’69 Cougar for the first time think they were seeing new small Buick? I probably would have.
The ’71-73 are pure essence of ‘meh’. Boring, forgettable. Like someone in management wasn’t into sporty cars thought the previous Cougars weren’t upmarket enough. They didn’t look like ponycars at all. I wouldn’t say they were ugly so much as generic, almost anonymous, like a car in an insurance company ad. Maybe the Cougar nameplate should have been discontinued at this point, and these cars called something else. As a Cougar, it rates an F from me.
Interesting perspectives. For me the ’67 has excellent details but the body comes off a bit flat, conventional and boring. Wonder what it would have looked like with the fastback roof.
The ’69/70’s body has more visual interest but I think it would have benefitted from skirts that continued the body crease over the rear wheels. I agree with Steve about the front’s horizontal theme being deficient (“electric shaver”… good one!). Also agree that the ’70 was better. Not belonging was the center vertical trim piece covering the opening for air cooling. Perhaps a cougar shape such as in either the ’74 or ’77 hood ornament, enlarged, would have looked distinctive while not competing with the vertical elements covering the headlights.
The ’71-3’s biggest problems, to my eye, were two-fold. The sail panels on the coupe, which looked similar to the ’61 Dodge Flight-Wing concept, looked heavy and distracted from the rest of the design. And the exposed headlights, while cat-like, might have looked better concealed with Lincoln Mark IV-like covers (I think the ’72 Montego should have had this too). My mod would start with the ’71 Cougar convertible, which doesn’t have the sail panel extensions alongside the decklid, conceal the headlights and swap the top for one that is of rich looking canvas.
I am in agreement with the author. The first generation Cougar has very distinctive sheet metal and later generations simply look bloated. It was a much nicer look than the Mustang. Ford did a much better job restyling the Mustang, the pictured 71 has very refined lines without looking bloated. Then of course came the disastrous looking Mustang II. I hate it when a good looking product gets a make-worse do-over. Cadillac did it with the Seville. I could go on …
A million units over four years for the deuce. Not bad for a disaster!!! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
I was a young child when the first Cougar was introduced, it immediately made an impression on me. From then on, I not only could recognize a Cougar on the street, I also had a collection of scale Cougars, from Hot Wheels, Matchbox, Corgi and others. I really believe that the first-gen Cougar is a classic Ford vehicle, ranking up there with other luminaries as the 1932 Ford, the 1955-1957 Thunderbird and the 1964 Mustang.
The later versions after the move to the bigger body in 1971 were OK looking but by the mid 1970’s the Cougar was just another combatant in the PLC wars of that era. Not that I would kick any one of them out of my garage, but they looked a little too close to the Torino/Montego that they were spawned from. In addition, I really liked the 1977 re-boot, but in the end, it still looked like a fancy Ford.
As much as I was enamored with the original Cougar, as an adult I never tried to buy one. I have owned and driven other Ford products of that era, some were great, many were meh. By the time I was able to buy my first new car, the Cougar was an 80’s PLC and really didn’t hold my interest. I instead went for the then-current V8 powered Fox body Capri in an attempt to create the Cougar from the 1960’s that no longer existed. At least it had the stylized Cougar-head motif on the road wheels and the steering wheel. I liked to think it carried a little of the original Cougar attitude with it wherever I went.
I’ve long heard you should never meet your heroes and I think subconsciously I’ve applied that attitude to the first-gen Cougars. I’m afraid that with over 50 years of expectations, the reality may not live up to them.