New Cougar Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Who is ford trying to compete with with hte cougar? obviously not the civic crowd, they have marketed the focus strongly enough to prove that. not the f-body/mustang crowd, they already have a good name in that area. I offer that their main competitors are the v6 accord nad the eclipse GT. All three of these are front wheel drive v6 coupes at about the same price. Why then, did for stick a frikkin 2.5 in our cars? Isnt hte obvious move to put a readily available 3.0 from the taurus in, being that all the competition has 200 hp 3.0 liters. Some may say that it would be better than a v6 mustang, but i disagree. A GT will still kick the **** out of it, so any mustang owner who cares about preformance will still be able to beat any cougar, so that is not a good enough reason. We wonder why the cougar sells comparatively few cars and there is only a small aftermarket, Its because the cougar is a lost soul, its not an economy car, but its not a full fledged FWD sports car either. It has the potential, since they offer a MTX and its much better looking than an accord or an eclipse, but Ford shot itself in the foot by not offering the Taurus engine. Im done venting now, but i was thinking about it in class today, and i got kinda angry, if anyone has any thoughts, please post.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
I don't think Ford knows what it's doing. The Probe was just as doomed as the cougar. It's a car that looks fast, but really actually isn't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
The probe mazda KL03 engine was offered in 200 HP in Japan (the KLZE) I think the probe would of competed pretty well against the mustang gt of the mid 90s with the 200 hp engine. I agree with the rumor that ford detuned it down to 160 HP so it wouldn't whup the mustang. my four banger probe kicked a v6 mustang in the ass in 94.

But I agree, the cougar is just as doomed. The no show of the S doesn't help any either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,817 Posts
Technically we were fooled, at least I was...sort of. When I went shopping for a new car in early summer '99, the GT-S and Eclipse GT was not out yet. So I started looking at Civics, Saturns, Cav's, and a few other compacts. One day I was driving down "dealer row" and I noticed a billboard for the "New Cougar", it looked SWEET! So for ****s and grins I decided to drop by the L/M dealer to see how much they were. Before that billboard I had not heard a thing about the Cougar, and NEVER even thought about ANY L/M. When I got there and saw the price on them I was floored, especially when the V6 was only a few hundred more. I was driving a '92 Eclipse DOHC at the time, so seeing 170hp really peaked my interest.

I figured that for about the same price as a Civic and a few other "econo cars" I could get more HP, more creature comforts, a better ride, and a GREAT looking car. Basically a LOT more car for the cost.

It is only now that I have been reading about the cars that came out after the Cougar, and seeing how poorly the Cougar responds to mods...something that I could not find ANY info on prior to buying the Cougar. Now I am dissapointed in the performance in my car, but...

My first impression still remains. For 16k, I got a HELL of a car. It is not one you see on every corner like most other cars, it still has styling that turns heads, it is still faster than all the other cars in the same price range, and overall it is a great car. I could have spent the same money or more on less of a car, but I am glad I got my MTX V6 Cougar.


All though I will be parting with it soon, but only because I should be able to get into my dream car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,762 Posts
You can thank fleet fuel effiecy requirements and all the *******ing *****in **** SUV's that gobble gas and everyone buys. Im fairly sure that on our platform the 3.0L Duratec would get much worse numbers then our 2.5L. It also comes down to the fact that as of yet nobody has put a 3.0l on our ATX tranny to my knowlage. I know that the output shaft of the 3.0L has to be ground down to fit. Grinding down the output shafts of 3.0L duratecs hardly seems a ford cost efective idea. There are reasons... there must be. They didnt just screw up. People at ford knew the block was compatible with that compartment. What I dont think they knew was how much our damn tranny atx tranny honked the bobo. Not only that but this is mercury we are dealing with not so much ford. They make the calls through brand managers and whatnot. Never before (at least not latly to my knowlage) has mercury had a car that did 0-60 in under 8 seconds. You all know how the dealers treated us. Mercury was the mistake here. I hate to admit it but if our beloved Cougars were Probes we would have a faster car and a nicer aftermarket... not to mention an SVT model... I wish every day that they had made our Cougar a Probe... just keep the mazda parts out of it please.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
according to an un-named source at mercury the 2.5 was chosen to make the Cougar more marketable in Europe and the cost of assembling the Cougar with 3 different engines (2.0, 2.5, 3.0) outwieght the benifits...that whole profit and loss thing sux....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,159 Posts
Keep in mind that the Eclipse GT and Accord V6 are also a lot more expensive than the Cougar. And keep in mind that the Accord V6 only comes in auto and weighs more than the Cougar. An MTX Cougar will out-accelerate it and any Cougar will out-handle it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
One of the reasons that the 2.5L is in the Cougar rather than the 3.0 from the Taurus is because the Cougar is based on the Contour/Mystique/Mondeo platform and the 3.0 was not offered in those cars. Instead of spending the extra cash to modify the assembly lines, tooling and chassis so that the 3.0L could be fitted to the Cougar they just stuck with what worked, the 2.5L. Don't forget, the Cougar was an experiment for Mercury. They were simply trying to get younger buyers into Mercury showrooms and it worked however not as well as they would have liked (i.e.: they didn't sell as many units as they wanted to). Now Mercury is trying to generate additional interest by offering the Zn and the C2. If the Cougar was a blue oval product then we would see a vehicle with more performance and there would deffinately be an SVT version. Oh well, I have to say that, personally, I am satisfied with my Cougar. Sure it could use more performance but all in all, it handles great and it has some get up and go when you want it to. If they cancel the car in the next 2 or so years, well that would suck but that would make the car in my driveway something of a collectable.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
also you guys keep one thing in mind, Ford might have simply looked at HP numbers for comparisons, not thinking about what comes out of the engine, and what does the HP number compare to? The quintesential "street vehicle" the Integra GSR. So ford said, "hey we match the HP of the GSR, good enough for sales" there was also rumors of the using a 3.0 or 3.8 in the cougars, but they werent seling like the were the first year they were released, so if wouldnt have made any business sense
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top