The premium small car genre (and especially the small premium CUV genre) is more popular now than ever but back in the 1970s small cars in North America were generally bought for economy and low price, but hardly ever for luxury or snob appeal. The Mercury division though did notice how popular the Ford Pinto was and decided they might as well try adding it to their lineup as well. While they could have called it good enough with just the basic two-door runabout, they also added the wagon version, after all, Mercury did already sell the Marquis Colony Park as well as the Montego MX Villager to those for whom the Ford equivalents were just too everyday.
So why not, take the Pinto, slap a different grille and hood on it, some wood siding, gussy up the interior, and try to make some hay. 45 years later, one of those wagons has finally called it a good run and convinced its owner to let it go to that great big parking lot in the sky. But before it gets there, there’s that little waiting room where all and sundry get to admire it, the junkyard.
Here’s how she looked back then, bright, shiny, maybe even with two pretty ladies and a kid beside it. Which brings up the question, was Mercury ahead of its time and was this depicting an alternative parenting relationship? (Not that there’s anything at all wrong with that). Or perhaps it was just overtly being marketed more toward the fairer sex and those two are sisters.
The “Rosewood woodtone vinyl exterior paneling” as Mercury described it in the brochure has on this example been whitewashed to bring it at least into the 1990’s, but it’s all still there along with the trim around it. Someone seems to have gone to the trouble of removing all of the badging and then replacing it after painting the wood. The roof rack was an optional extra as was the deflector at the rear.
The front does look a bit more premium with that large chromed grille and the lettering spelled out across the hood. The little indicator lights even look just a bit Lincolnish…these days I suppose this would be a Lincoln, maybe they’d call it the “Memorial”. Or the “Nebraska”. Maybe the “Abe”, like Opel did when they called their small car the Adam a few years back. A few years ago it would have been the MKP. Of course it would have to be jacked up a bit since Lincoln doesn’t offer anything not SUV’d these days.
It is surprising though that there is no hood ornament. But Bobcat sounds sort of sporty so maybe that’s the reason. I’m not a particular fan of the Pinto, but don’t really have against it either I suppose, and the Mercury is definitely a little fancier so I’m not altogether opposed to the idea.
I will admit to not being as up on my vintage Mercurys as some are, so just now realized the genesis of the Villager name on the later Mercury/Nissan minivan joint venture.
This one does have the 2.8l V6 to motivate it, Bobcats were porkier than most little cars of the era so the extra oomph was surely appreciated. It’s pretty wedged in there, these were not very big cars.
The interior is fairly plush, those front seats have vinyl around the perimeter but the seating surface is an off-white velour with some sort of floral-looking pattern. At least the gauge panel looks halfway sporty and doesn’t channel the horrific baroqueness of the Monarch/Granada. There’s almost no ersatz wood here thankfully, and the vent placement and number approximate that of a modern car.
The seats are mounted quite low, while there is no center console there is a transmission tunnel that probably gets in the way of a proper man-spread. I’ll point out that the one here really is no smaller than the average one in many a FWD car currently, this is where FWD really helped, at least at the start. The one time in my life that I got a ride in a Pinto I was amazed at how low one sat and how high the dashboard in front loomed, a far cry from the Civics and Rabbits I was more used to in the SoCal area at the time of that ride.
Those hooded binnacles almost channel an Alfa Romeo, or might if not surrounded by a bigger binnacle, still, the black surround helps. Speed, fuel, and four warning lights, the bare minimum. At least there are no blanks, but then again this is the top of the line. That butterscotch color would seem to live on into the Ford Explorer era, but Mercedes too used and still does offer a very similar color if I am not mistaken.
Automatic transmission, air conditioning, and an AM/FM with cassette deck. Very well equipped indeed for 1976. No power windows though, perhaps they were not available.
It even has the little rotating map light up above as well as stitched visors. Premium.
I can’t determine if the rear seats really came covered in all vinyl while the fronts had the velour centers. This one does look all original so perhaps this is how it is. That back seat is the most bucket looking rear seat I’ve ever seen though, that seems difficult to get out of once your buttocks are firmly entrenched into its depths. The cushion looks mighty short too, I wasn’t about to check out how my 32″ inseam would fare back there. At least there are ashtrays for everyone and visibility for miles with those matchstick pillars.
Carpeted cargo mat and a spare distributor cap just in case. The rear seat windows pop out for ventilation and the seatback folds down to extend the cargo area too.
And under the mat is a full size spare wheel and tire, which is easy when the standard wheels and tires are smaller than the smallest space saver today. That one is a 175/80-13 with a date code of 5299, the last week of 1999, wouldn’t want to need it but would probably risk it if stuck in the boonies. Somebody went with a red, white, and blue theme for this car which is appropriate given its a 1976 model, America’s bicentennial year. This is the least faded of all of the wheels though, sorry you can’t get the full effect by looking at the whole car anymore.
The “T” in the VIN indicates this one was built in Edison (actually Metuchen), New Jersey, however these were also built in Milpitas, CA, where there now stands a large mall in the former factory building. (Or at least it was a mall when I left the area, someone can tell us if it’s still there). Milpitas is just across the freeway from the Tesla factory which is of course the former NUMMI plant. The “Z” indicates the V6, the leading “6” means 1976 and the 22 is the designation for the Bobcat wagons. The last six digits are the sequential serial number.
I cannot recall the last time I saw a Pinto of any sort, to say nothing of a Bobcat, and especially a wagon version of either. This one seems to be as loaded up as it was possible to get them back then, and while obviously somewhat worn, this one is in remarkably good condition overall.
It’s really not unappealing and if not predisposed toward the Japanese or German cars of the era I can see how this would be attractive to people, at least those that didn’t do the math on price vs poundage. Bigger isn’t always better, not sure if smaller was either at the time to many people, but perhaps the Bobcat Villager overall was just a little (or a lot) ahead of its time.
Related Reading:
CC Outtake: Thrift Store Finds No. 2 – 1975-1978 Mercury Bobcat Villager by Ed Stembridge
Ebay Find: 1978 Mercury Bobcat Wagon – Could It Be the Best Bobcat Left? by Tom Klockau
Vintage Review: 1975 Mercury Bobcat – More Like Fat House Cat by PN
Nice Mercury detail: like Colony Park, chrome trim around the wood panel instead of wood trim.
Wonder why it was scrapped?. Locals drive worst around here that still. pass inspection. This one must have been a bit of a performance mini wagon in its day as the Pinto 2lt 4 speed was peppy, this one has a V6 .as fitted in the Capri. OK its hampered by the auto box..
It probably has multiple deferred repairs. If it isn’t (or wasn’t) running, you could buy a better car in running condition for the cost to get it running again.
It isn’t comfortable, fast, safe, roomy, or economical. It’s embarrassingly ugly. Every unbroken original part on the car is 45 years old.
Totally agree that it is a terrible car. I have a December, 1974 Car and Driver with a test of a Pinto V6 automatic Squire, and both performance and fuel consumption were terrible. It returned 10 mpg city and 16 mpg highway while taking 13.9 seconds to hit 60 mph, and acceleration time appropriate for a small car that used no more than half as much fuel at the time.
All that being said, with three days of hard work and three or four hundred dollars in materials, this car could have been on one of the popular collector car sites and sold for well over two grand. How much more? I don’t know, but I do see ones that are merely presented better going for more than two grand.
Mean while the Euro Granada Ghia 2.8 auto got 19mpg city and 27 mpg high way but it’s emissions were higher and it was drinking leaded gas and was considered thirsty by UK standards. You paid a price for clean air.
In 1976 Ford brought out the Pinto Pony/Bobcat tuned for 30 MPG and GM did same with Vega/Astre… starting the return of decent MPG…
1969 Impala with 2 bbl. 396″ V8 also took 13 seconds to 60 !!!
In 1974, Car and Driver was reporting fuel consumption based on their own city and urban test loops. In 1976, EPA standardized testing was reported. The reported numbers got much better, but the real world fuel economy only improved when technology allowed. The usual tweak to suit the EPA test cycles was using an axle ratio so high that fuel consumption and performance both suffered in the vast majority of real world conditions.
It’s in the unfortunate position of not being particularly desirable to hold onto in the first place and not nice or original enough to keep for the fun of it. It’s not particularly good transportation, nor is it a particularly good enthusiast car, and even if you wanted it as a classic car, do you restore it? How much will new paint wood paneling and and upholstery cost vs value?
Something like this takes sentimental value to keep going and that may well be the only reason it wasn’t in a junkyard 20-30 years ago like most other malaise cars.
Junkyard labeling Di-Noc, as seen on this specimen, would be an interesting product. The ultimate in reverse snobbery. It would send a fashion statement: “I was totalled once, and now I’m back on the road despite twisted frame and rusted-out tie rods. Stay out of my way!”
A Pinto/Bobcat with no rust probably hasn’t existed in Michigan since 1981 – it’s too bad this one ended up in the junkyard. At the very least, someone should want it as an anti-classic; after all, people are starting to sell Chevettes and K-Cars as collector cars. Nice find, Jim!
I’d go so far as to call the Bobcat another Iacocca brougham-mobile if it weren’t for the lack of a stand-up hood ornament. It seems like anything connected to Iacocca without a sporting pretension had one. Hell, even the lowly K-car got a stand-up hood ornament in the beginning.
On top of that, seems like an Iacocca version Bobcat would have had an overstuffed vinyl roof, blanked-out quarter panels with opera windows. It sure would have been easy to create one from the existing Pinto Cruising Wagon version.
One thing I’ve always wondered, though, is why there weren’t more 302 engine-swapped Pintos to do battle with all the SBC Vegas that proliferated in the seventies. It doesn’t seem like it would have been that difficult to do, considering that it was easy enough to get the narrow, small-block Ford V8 into the Pinto-based Mustang II. Was there a major difference in the size of the Pinto’s engine bay?
On a 74 and up Pinto you can use the Mustang II mounts, oil pan and pickup to bolt a 289/302 including using a stock Pinto driveshaft. The only real problem is the exhaust if using stock manifolds in which case you use two driver side units so the dump is in the front on the passenger side. The other thing you have to do to use the MII stuff is the firewall needs to be moved back ~1/2 in a couple of spots with your favorite 5lb persuader. There were also a couple of 9″ and 8″ rears that would bolt in.
The SBC fits into cars more easily than Ford V8’s used to… existing oil pan shapes and oil pump pickup locations were an especially big problem… even Fords got a lot of SBC’s installed… and most SBF heads won’t flow over 230-250 HP… whereas stock SBC heads can go 350 – 390 HP…
I wish I still had my 1976 Bobcat , It was 3 months old when I pulled the 4 banger and 4spd and put a 351 and auto from a police detective car, also put a 9″ rear from a 1957 ford wagon , direct bolt in including the ebrake cables . Used to take it to National Speedway driving it there and back and doing the 1/4 with the A/C on as the damn thing would break loose the g60 14’s I had on it ! Lot of fun till I got greedy trying to jam a 460 and a c6 in it , then lost it in a divorce dispute !
I will confess that I always thought the Bobcat front end looked better on the high-trim wagons. This was a mighty luxe version for the time. These things had to be a godsend for L-M dealers trying to claw their way through a recession in 1974-75.
My betting is that those front seats started out like the back ones and that they suffered from Cracking Vinyl-itis as was so common with 1970s vinyl seats. The 1975 brochure shows both cloth and vinyl versions of this high trim interior and front and back seats match in both.
I saw a pristine version of one of these at the Mecum auction in Indianapolis a couple of years ago.
Agreed on the Bobcat front looking better on the wagon than the coupe. Same with the ’79-80 square front which seemed to be a lot of new tooling for what was by then a fundamentally obsolete design as the Rabbit clones were taking over the world.
The 1979 refresh was necessary to keep selling the same old sled for two years against a wave of new products.
Two women in the ad because FoMoCo and Mercury probably figured that no self respecting man would be interested in one. Too small, too slow. Still, it’s interesting that it wasn’t a woman and say two children. Single parent households were common by 1976.
This specimen has the premium separate head restraints, unlike the high-back buckets from the Pinto in the ad. Perhaps the wall-of-seat made women feel more secure, while giving them a handy excuse for poor reversing and lane changing.
The most annoying thing about my Cadillac is the monster right behind my head.
Would anyone be creeping out over the ad if it were grandpa or dad with his arm around the kid’s neck?
Having looked at brochures on these, cloth front/vinyl rear seats are not something from the factory. My guess is the front seats – whose cloth has faded, it would’ve been the same tan as the interior vinyl throughout – replaced all-vinyl originals probably after the driver’s seat was ripped.
Interiors were identical to Pinto ones, there may have been a higher take rate for the premium trim package as on the junkyard car but the brochure shows the base-model seats (with the cloth option at least).
From my limited experience, people who bought Buick-Olds over Chevy chose based on either the car or the brand image while people who bought Mercury over Ford, especially the smaller ones, did so because of the local dealer.
Interestingly, Ford has almost no presence in this market now – all the Lincolns are bigger and (relatively) pricier, and the Ford Ecosport can’t support the slightest of premium aspirations. GM has a major one, with the Buick Encore having been a breakout hit and for a time the bestselling Buick.
Ford sold 60,000 EcoSports in 2020 and Buick Encore sold 40,000.
You have to look at this car compared to its competitors in its day. GM was having trouble with the self destructing Vegas’s and trying to shift people to the Chevette, Monza et al. Chrysler had captive imports that were mostly on the east and west coast. The Omni/Horizon was still a few years away. The AMC Gremlin was a heavy and truncated Hornet. The gas crisis of 1973 was still fresh in our minds. People wanted anything small. Honda and Toyota were mostly limited to the East and west coast and the cost was high. The Ford products were just average, but that is better than the horrible alternatives. The engine bay in the Pinto/Bobcat was indeed narrow and maybe could not fit a V-8. The Mustang II was designed to be wider and accommodate a V-8.
I was in the market for my first car in 1979, used of course. Intermediates from the early 70’s used a lot of gas. The second gas crisis was in full swing. I found a 75 Celica for $3,200 and a 75 Pinto for $2,300. The Celica had more miles on it but that’s the one I wanted. I just didn’t have the extra money. That was a lot of money in those days. I ended up with the Pinto. That little car chugged along for 3 years and got me through college. Then it was hit from behind and totaled. No, it didn’t explode. I bought the first of several Honda’s, which was light years ahead in engineering. But the Pinto did its job at the time. And I am sure that the Bobcat did as well.
Let me add my comments about two things mentioned.
Mercury was successful using attractive female models in advertising. Mercury was hot with Farrah Fawcett and the Cougar’s success spread throughout the Mercury line up. Ford continued using attractive young television starlets to sell Mercury for years to come. So, it shouldn’t have been surprising to see two attractive young ladies selling this wagon – along with a child.
As to the name, again the Cougar success beckons. Mercury was the “sign of the cat”. Calling the Pinto derivative the Bobcat was logical. Remember that Bobcat wasn’t the only small cat used as a model name. Mercury named their Escort, “Lynx”. Mercury had their best years during this time. Hundreds of thousands of Torino-based Cougars were selling across the US. For a few years it seemed that everyone admired the Cougar and that caused Mercury to apply that brand to everything. It was sales magic at that time.
No hood ornament. That would have been too much, even for Iacocca.
I wouldn’t want one. These cars were not comfortable. That back seat was not to be used by adults. Those aren’t bucket seats in the rear – they are the notorious “butt-cups” that you had to back into as you went over the front seats. No thigh support. Your knees were up around your ears against the front seats. The windows saved me from claustrophobia, pinned back there sitting above the gas tank. The windows pivoted open thankfully. To get out of the back seat, I would put my feet on the ground outside the car, and then use my arms to pull myself out. Wow – what a nightmare, but still better than a Beetle or a Gremlin. These cars sit low. Too low.
Not many Bobcat abound. They really didn’t seem to have been engineered to last longer than the car payments. All the notorious quality problems common to these years could be found. Dress it up all you want, but all I see today is a cheap car with dozens upon dozens of exposed screws and sagging doors. Not fun to drive.
About that back seat. No they were not limousine quality at all but a Camaro or Firebird of that time was no better. I rode in all of them in the day. Admittedly I and my friends were all in our 20’s and didn’t care. Now I look at those back seats and my back starts to hurt. I did have a ’73 Pinto standard 2 door sedan (no carpeting! Just vinyl or whatever they used floor covering) with the 1.6 liter engine and it was a flawed design. But it was cheap to buy (I bought it used in ’78) and economical to fuel, maintain and repair. And with rack and pinion steering and a 4 speed, it was a fun car. Funny, in a family with 2 auto equipped wagons I bought my Pinto insisting on a stick. Suddenly my Pinto was the go to car for my sisters and my parents. They thought it was fun! My Pinto was a good car and I have no regrets owning it. Rust eventually ruined it.
The car was a compromise, that 1.6 liter Kent engine was really quite good. We later got that in our 1st Ford Fiestas and I think they were the engine used in Formula Fords a while back.
Speaking of attractive women selling cars this was the USA I grew up in and wish it was still here:
“premium” often doesn’t mean better, just that they charge more for marketing devices
e.g., historically the premium in “premium” beer was for shipping and advertising, not better ingredients
like most Mercurys over the decades, the Bobcat thing was a gaudier Ford
I remember the Pinto mostly because it was so dire and the passengers almost seemed to sit on the floor
The velour sections of the front seats do not look original. Looks like a cheap reupholstery job, although it’s a bit odd. Seat covers would have been easier.
Thank you for giving this Mercury a moment in the spotlight, Jim Klein. I figure this would have been planned during prime Arab Oil Embargo time (and Mustang II was a new thing), so plenty of market for these smaller cars.
My 1980 Pinto wagon was less dressy, but I remember the interior—especially that same color–well. Yes, one sat very low in the car, but I got used to it. Several cross-country trips, and one could pack a surprising amount of stuff within. Oh, and the engine would start always, even at 30 below….
It’s a fun story about the Mercury Bobcat nameplate starting up in Canada a year before taken up in the U.S.—with the goofy little cartoon character, which seems oh-so-Canadian to me:
I always found the formal stand up grille on the Bobcat comically cheesy on the standard coupe bodystyle, but on the wagon bodystyle it actually works decently, it doesn’t clash as much.
Our neighbors bought a brand-new Bobcat hatchback in 1975 or 1976, painted a pale, metallic green. As you note, the mixture of formal grille on an otherwise stock Pinto front clip didn’t quite work on the hatchback.
Given that this was also the era of the Datsun B-210, and AMC Gremlin and Pacer, the Bobcat didn’t seem too offensively ugly at the time.
As for the former Ford factory in Milpitas, CA, yes, it’s still there, called the Great Mall of the Bay Area. There is a glass case display of the shopping mall’s former history as a vehicle assembly plant. I think it built old Fairlanes of the late 1950s, and more famously, Mustangs.
Here’s the 1975 advertising—gives a sense of the selling points and competition. Mine had the 4-speed, too, and I always remember getting at least 30mpg on the highway unless fully loaded or headwinds:
I didn’t think the Pinto/Bobcat MPG increased until 1976… my rare ’77 Pontiac Astre Formula Safari Station Wagon (looks about like a Vega GT Kammback) was rated 28 MPG City and 34 MPG Hiway… great for 70’s… by then it has the John Delorean ultra dependable Iron Duke engine… no timing belts or chains to break/wear out… 5 speed manual… posi… A/C… things under the hood had already been moved ( heater/A/C hoses, crossmember, steering, firewall) and strengthened to accomodate a V6/V8 as found in other cousin H-bodies…
I thought it looked better than Pinto/Bobcat wagons because only 2 side windows, not 3…
Amazingly the black cloth with vinyl strips seats still look brand new… despite spending its life outdoors…
I wonder how long it sat unused before being scrapped .
I remember these and didn’t much like them as all Pinto derivatives were too cramped for my 6’1″ & 32″ inseam the rear seat comments are spot on .
What I remember about Pintos & Bobcats was : for the average user they were cheap and dead nuts reliable .
In retrospect they don’t look nearly as FUGLY as many others did then .
-Nate
“The one time in my life that I got a ride in a Pinto I was amazed at how low one sat and how high the dashboard in front loomed”
This must have been a Ford small-car thing at the time. A friend in college had a ’72 Pinto- had that same feeling. When I sat in either the front or (especially) the back of my grandparents’ ’76 Comet as a kid, it felt like my butt was only inches from the pavement.
The Pinto was only 50″ tall, making it the lowest mass production “sedan/wagon” ever. That’s one whole inch taller than a Miata, and 0.8″ lower than a Toyota GT86. That explains the seating position. It unfortunately had sports car proportions. That explains the tall center tunnel and the abysmal rear seats. It was really a GT 2+2, and if it was a ’71-’72 2.0 with 4 speed, it drove and handled like one too. Not so much the later ones, which got heavier, softer, slower, ill-handling, and duller.
The big 3 were concerned that small cars were seen as cheap and flimsy. They went with high belt lines and deep I/P’s to make the car look “substantial” and safer. Safety was becoming a concern then too.
Triumph Spitfires/MG Midgets you wore around your hips… now you wear cars around your ears…
Actually, sitting on the floor in Fords started with the ’55 TBird !!!
The Ford Milpitas factory was about 10 miles north of the Tesla factory, at the current site of the Great Mall.
That instrument panel and dash is pure Pinto. On my 74 Pinto coupe, the ersatz wood is where the shag carpet currently resides. The best thing about the trans tunnel is that it’s wide and flat. Mine was a 4 speed but I could fit my cone shaped coffee mug with the narrow diameter opening perfectly between the parking brake and gear shift without spillage, at least on the newly paved portion of I5 south of seattle in 1985. Please note the distinct dearth of cupholders. BTW, those doors were so long and heavy, the even at 8 y.o. when I bought mine, you had to lift the door by the armrest just to get it to shut. Eventually, I lifted the armrest right off of the door.
I forgot about those “spill resistant” coffee mugs that were all over the place in the ‘80s! Mine even had a spongy pad glued to the bottom, so it wouldn’t slide on the carpet.
I guess that cupholders and Yetis (and Yeti knockoffs) made them obsolete.
I like it. Strip off the power robbing emissions controls, and tune her up. Port and polish the heads, a set of headers, and a free flowing exhaust. Hook her up to a T-5. Inside, install the rare “Rallye ” gauges. Oh yeah, some suspension tuning to get her ready for a run through the canyons. Righteous.
Mean while the Euro Granada Ghia 2.8 auto got 19mpg city and 27 mpg high way but it’s emissions were higher and it was drinking leaded gas and was considered thirsty by UK standards. You paid a price for clean air.
@Jonathan ;
Just so and more than a few did just that .
Looking at the crumbled dashboard forces one to realize this car could have been FREE and rust free and still isn’t worth saving, more’s the pity .
-Nate
That swivel map light was only available with the Light/Convenience Group and included interval windshield wipers! My late dearly missed 76 Pinto wagon had that as well…and the owner had dealer installed cruise control added too! I miss that car sooo bad. A wiring fire did it in. Here’s a pic. Owned it from 98 to 06. Paid $600 with less than 100K miles.
Would be worth the work if you on a Capri V6 auto but not a Pinto and how legal is it to remove smog gear from older cars?.
Some states stop testing after a certain number of years, others don’t test at all.
Here in Ohio it’s just a couple cities that do emissions testing…
Pennsylvania is horrible on poorer people… can’t have a rust spot or cracked window…
The Capri V6 of this year is the same as the Pinto and Mustang II V-6. Earlier Capris did have the 2.6 instead of the 2.8.
It is not legal to remove or render emissions components in effective. However as noted there aren’t too many states that test cars this old so people certainly do it and get away with it. So far the EPA isn’t showing up a car shows and taking action on older cars like this. They are having too much fun with the aftermarket for newer diesels.
That does not mean that you can’t improve the performance significantly 100% legally in some jurisdictions. CA has some of the toughest emissions laws but they do have a procedure that allows engine swaps under strict guidelines. The jist of it is that you can put an engine from a newer and the same or cleaner emissions class as long as all the emissions equipment from that newer car is retained. You go to the state authorized referee who determines if it meets the rules and they give you a certificate that says the vehicle should be tested as if it was the donor vehicle.
The vega and various h bodies had brief and exciting second lives as drag cars, but the pinto and its various derivatives don’t seem to have ended up that way. Why not?
@xr7matt, I completely agree with you. It’s not worth anything to a collector/enthusiast because it’s not rare or interesting; it’s not a particularly attractive car, nor is it so distinctive like a pacer to be mildly collectible or interesting; it’s not in great condition to be museum or dealer worthy, and it’s not nice enough as a vehicle with performance and handling like a Camaro or broughamtastic comfort like an Ltd to be enjoyable as transportation. But. . . It lived at least 35 years past the time most of its brethren had been junked and apparently provided pretty solid service for a lot of them. It doesn’t have, from the pictures, the signs of long term storage and disuse.
My birth year is 1976. What an awful era for cars. By even 1981 cars had improved dramatically with the k car which was far roomier, lighter, more comfortable, better built, and more efficient and they got so much better from then on. This is really plush for 1976 with automatic and air and map light and v6 and probably power steering and brakes and I’m sure past priced very close to a comparably equipped granada or torino. These were decent cars for the time but look at that back seat. Nothing today is nearly as awful. Given the competition in 1976, this was the best of some bad choices. Imagine going shopping for a new car and picking THIS and being excited.
“I will admit to not being as up on my vintage Mercurys as some are, so just now realized the genesis of the Villager name on the later Mercury/Nissan minivan joint venture.”
Mercury used the Villager name for many years on station wagons in a series of compact and intermediate models. I think the use of the name on the later minivan was a reference to its previous use on station wagons in general, not to its use on the Bobcat wagon in particular.
According to Wikipedia, Mercury used the Villager name on station wagons between 1962 and 1984, typically on top-of-the-line, wood-trimmed models, kind of an equivalent to Ford’s use of the model name “Squire”. At various times, the Villager name was used on Comet, Montego, Bobcat, Cougar, Zephyr and Lynx wagons.
“The “T” in the VIN indicates this one was built in Edison (actually Metuchen), New Jersey”
I was curious what the story was with this, and became even more intrigued when I learned that the plant was originally known as “Metuchen Assembly” before having its name changed to “Edison Assembly” in 1980. Here’s some background that I found:
–Metuchen (technically, the Borough of Metuchen), which has a land area of about three square miles, is completely surrounded by Edison (technically, Edison Township), which has a land area of about 30 square miles.
–Historically, Metuchen was a densely-populated, built-up community, while what is now Edison Township was more spread out and semi-rural. Over time, however, Edison has come to be highly developed, and it is now one of the most populous municipalities in New Jersey, with a population of about 100,000.
–Edison did not exist under that name until the 1950s. The township was known as Raritan Township until changing its name to Edison in 1954. There was no post office called Edison until 1955.
–The plant, which opened in 1948, was always located in Raritan Township/Edison Township. Despite originally being called Metuchen Assembly, it was always located outside the municipal limits of the Borough of Metuchen.
I did not find an explanation of why the plant was originally called “Metuchen Assembly” even though it wasn’t actually located in Metuchen, or why the name was later changed to “Edison Assembly”. Putting everything above together, though, my guess is this:
–When the plant opened in 1948, Ford probably built it outside the municipal limits of Metuchen for reasons related to taxes, zoning, or the availability of developable land. At the time, Edison didn’t exist under that name, and Raritan Township likely didn’t have a very strong community identity. As such, the plant was associated with nearby Metuchen (its mailing address may very well have originally been Metuchen), and Ford called it “Metuchen Assembly”.
–Over time, as the formerly semi-rural township surrounding the Borough of Metuchen became more developed, took on the name “Edison”, and got a post office called “Edison”, it developed a stronger community identity (if the plant’s mailing address was originally Metuchen, it was changed to Edison at some point). It eventually came to seem incongruous that the plant was called “Metuchen Assembly” even though it was in Edison Township – the municipal government of Edison Township may have even complained about this to Ford – so Ford eventually changed its name to “Edison Assembly”.
“I will admit to not being as up on my vintage Mercurys as some are, so just now realized the genesis of the Villager name on the later Mercury/Nissan minivan joint venture.”
Before the simulated wood-paneled Mercury Comet Villager station wagon, there was the steel-sided Edsel Villager station wagon.
And just three years later, I’d be buying my first car. One that dads hand selected:1973 Mercury Montevideo MX Villager, baby blue with color keyed wheel covers and “yacht planking” sides. Oh brother. The original owner pulled a large airstream trailer, and did no maintenance at all. It ticked, the front crossmember was pushed back, and all this luxury, including a clock and AM radio, for $875!!!! It had a 351
I do not miss this car!!!