(first posted 3/31/2014) When it comes to the domestic manufacturers, the products of Ford Motor Co taken as a whole rank low on my list of desired models. However, that’s not something any open-minded, well-informed enthusiast can apply across the board, given the multitude of different models, developed at different times, and when considering the automotive landscape of the 1990s, a lot of Dearborn’s cars shot past their domestic competitors. An excellent example is the now forgotten Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique. Nearly twenty years after their launch, they remain some of my favorite sedans of the ’90s, and I’ll try to do them justice.
Coinciding with then-CEO Alexander Trotman’s “Ford 2000” Project, the Contour and Mystique’s CDW27 platform, shared with the Mondeo, was the first to truly use the company’s European product-development network to bring a new compact car to market. When development of the new “World Car” began in 1986, the most recent Honda Accord was chosen as the car’s benchmark but as it was quickly eclipsed by newer rivals, the 1990 Nissan Primera (Infiniti G20 to North American readers) replaced it as Ford’s bogey.
It was an ambitious project, replacing both the Tempo/Topaz in the US and the Sierra in Europe, and one which necessitated new engines, transmissions, and production facilities, all totaling about $6 billion dollars, about $9.5 billion today (and over a billion more than Saturn’s start-up costs). A good $2 billion went into developing and producing the new CD4E automatic transmission (the same unit which spectacularly failed in the 1993-2002 Mazda 626). Other costly developments, the twin-cam Zetec four cylinders and Duratec sixes, found their way into other Ford products.
But what of the Contour and Mystique themselves? They replaced two cars which often sold for less than their smaller, cheaper Escort/Tracer stablemates and were meant to both satisfy the same buyers who made their forebears so popular and to steal customers away from import showrooms. While they were less than successful on both fronts, it had little do with the qualities of the cars themselves, with a few exceptions.
A major initial complaint was price. Many of the cars came to dealerships fully loaded, surprising the customers who would ordinarily be expected to look at a Ford or Mercury compact. As this well-equipped beige example shows–its finish still reflecting the high quality paint Ford used in those years, the main goal in its design and dimensions was wooing import buyers away from the Accord, firstly, and other imports, more generally. In this sense, it wasn’t necessarily overpriced, since it cost slightly less than the Japanese sedans it sought to compete with.
The interiors were certainly a pleasant place to be, with generous use of upholstered surfaces in places where many competitors had abandoned cloth for vinyl (such as on the bottoms of door panels) and unexpected touches like footwell lighting and illuminated interior door handle recesses. The firm, well bolstered seats, too, reflected the cars’ international origins, as did the thick-rimmed, small diameter steering wheel. For even the most cynical, import buying fanatic, this airy interior made a good impression, at least where front seat passengers were concerned.
Rear seat space was another matter. People like to speculate that its lack was the reason for the car’s failure in the US. While that argument makes sense, when considering the cars Ford benchmarked, and how well they sold in the US (the Accord) and in Europe (the Primera), we can see that Dearborn hoped that such generous attention to their new cars’ other qualities would more than make up for the problem. From the looks of things, that didn’t happen, and Ford made changes to the interior of the Contour and Mystique almost yearly, first making functional improvements by scooping out the backs of the front seats, and less pleasantly, lowering the rear seat cushion, thereby trading thigh support for the head and leg room created by putting rear passengers into a knees-up position (an old, dirty packaging trick). But by the end of the production run in 2000, decontenting lead the rest of the changes, with an ugly new center console, Mercury’s loss of its unique dash panel and the deletion of many of the illuminated cubbies and upholstered surfaces.
What never changed were the car’s chassis dynamics, with a firm but well damped ride complementing hefty, slack-free control inputs. The same magic evident in the Sierra, the Fiesta, the Ka and the 1999 Focus was on full display in the Contour and Mystique, a hallmark of Richard Parry-Jones’ and Jackie Stewart’s involvement in the car’s development. This was easily the car’s greatest asset and a reason the Contour and Mystique are two of my favorite American cars, period. None of their rivals came close to handling and riding as well and comparisons to a front-drive BMW are entirely apt, though the effect was more comparable to that of a Peugeot 405 with some of the softness and throttle adjustability removed.
As spoiled by powerful new cars as we are in 2014, it’s hard to remember how (mostly) satisfying the new Mystique’s engines were up the car’s release twenty years ago. Despite Mazda’s similar solutions to powering a car of this size–a two-liter, twin-cam four and a 2.5 liter quad-cam V6–Ford decided to push ahead with the development of its own new engines. On one hand, its European front-drive compacts desperately needed new powertrains, regardless of this new model range, and on the other, the Taurus’s Vulcan V6 was becoming hoary and the Yamaha unit in the SHO was only a limited-production proposition.
Compared to the pushrod-operated droners which it replaced, the new four-cylinder was a model of civility, and even compared to some of the throbbier large Japanese fours, was smooth and happy to rev. The problem was, however, that by this time, most competitors were fielding more powerful base engines. At 125 horspower and 130 lb/ft torque, it had its work cut out for it pushing 3,000 air-conditioned pounds, often latched to an automatic transmission. Compared to the torquier 2.2-2.4 liter engines fielded by rivals, this was not enough. At about nine seconds to sixty with a seventeen second quarter mile at 81 mph (Car and Driver, October 1994), a five-speed Mystique GS offered performance more on par with cars like the Civic, and don’t even mention the Neon.
A large capacity four, Chrysler’s solution for its JA-sedans, would have been a better option. Mazda needed one, so it would’ve made sense for Ford to co-develop such a unit with Hiroshima for use in their new sedans and, possibly, the next Taurus, but like VW, Ford of Europe tends to shun such units. That’s a shame, too, because large fours have served the perennially popular Japanese sedans quite well and in any case, Ford ended up using Mazda’s 2.3 it as its next generation four-cylinder in the Fusion and Focus. Live and learn (unless you’re VW, whose solutions for the mainstream US market now consists of complex, small capacity turbo fours).
The high-strung 2.5 liter V6 was an altogether more impressive power plant, and sold in surprisingly large numbers, with a substantial proportion were mated to five-speed transmissions, underscoring the cars’ most notable qualities. So equipped, a Contour SE did the sixty and quarter mile benchmarks in 7.4 seconds and 15.9 seconds at 87 mph, respectively (Car and Driver, September 1994). In testing, it scored three mpg less than its four cylinder counterpart.
When tied to an automatic, it didn’t give Camry or Maxima level performance, but in its own price class, it was good enough. Even better, it was an uncommonly smooth and quiet unit, one which could be punched out to 3.0 for duty in larger cars, making for easy swaps into the Contour/Mystique today. At the time, Ford claims its unique “Cosworth” casting process made it the lightest, most compact V6 of its displacement in the world. Oddly enough, Mazda’s K-series V6 was touted for the same reasons. If any readers have extensive experience with both these units, please share your thoughts as to how they compare.
The V6 and the excellent chassis reached their fullest potential in the 1998-2000 Contour SVT, helping the increasingly de-contented car go out with dignity. Unlike most of Detroit’s contemporary efforts at making a hotted-up sedan (think Spirit R/T or Grad Prix GTP), the little Ford was more than just a big engine. With 200 naturally-aspirated horsepower from its 2.5 liters, its beefed up chassis had power to back up its large amount of grip, and at one point, Car and Driver called it the best handling car under $30k, which meant that it knocked the previous winner of that title, the Prelude SH, off its perch (though the final Mercury Cougar, which shared a dumbed-down version of the Contour and Mystique platform, couldn’t hold a candle to Honda’s coupe).
Blaming the Contour and Mystique’s failure in the US market on its rear seat space and pricing fails to account for some of its bigger problems; namely, a lame base engine, indifferent styling and, compared to imports, a lagging reputation for quality. The cars the Mondeo, Contour and Mystique replaced were known for their breakthrough styling when released and if such factors limited their initial appeal, they also allowed for continued their popularity through a very long production life. The new cars, however, seemed very much like products designed with a huge reliance on consumer focus groups and, as a result came across as very generic (in the Contour’s case, even slightly formless). The Mystique, despite being the most obscure model, got the nicest set of duds, with full-width taillights and a smoothly integrated grille.
More disappointing, however, was poor crash test performance in the US, where the twins earned IIHS’s lowest rating, “poor,” in a 1995 test. This despite pretensioners, and a very solid feel over the road. Finally, the cars were not nearly as reliable as Japanese competitors. The Contour and Mystique weren’t necessarily quality disasters, as material quality and fit and finish were impressive, but compared to the likes of Camry or Accord, they weren’t trouble free and when things did go wrong, they weren’t as cheap to fix as they were in the Escorts and Tempos people traded in to buy them. Think mid ’90s VW and you won’t be far off.
All this is simply to explain why Ford’s attempt to sell sophistication over sheer capacity or sex appeal was a bit of a failure. As a car buff, if given the choice between a reliable, dynamically mediocre car and a shoddily built, sophisticated corner carver, I would choose the latter. Unfortunately, most mainstream shoppers don’t necessarily feel the same. As Ford’s first honest effort at a true world-car, it wasn’t a complete waste of money when considering how much of its power train engineering was shared with other cars, and what an immense success the Mondeo was in Europe. Its up-to-date engineering also allowed it to be stretched, re-bodied and sold through 2007 in second generation form.
In the US, Ford let high-trim Focus sedans take the Contour’s place before eventually swallowing their pride and using Mazda’s new engines for the Focus’s facelift and along with their new midsize platform for the vastly more successful Fusion. The man responsible for bringing the Contour to the US, Alex Trotman, is also infamous for telling Ford designers that their proposals for the 1996 Taurus weren’t “scary enough,” and forcing an over-reliance on SUVs. He tapped Jacques Nasser as his successor and left the company to tail spin into another near-death experience. Ford’s latest recovery, ironically, can best appreciated in the excellent new world cars we see in the latest Fiesta, Focus and Fusion, developed with the same continental sophistication evident in the Contour.
Related reading: Ford’s Déjà Vu Moment, Ford Tempo – A Car I Love To Hate and Merkur XR4ti
In High School, my family had a 96 Contour SE– we inherited the car when an elderly relative had passed away. It was only about a year old at the time.
In my teenage life I had only ever driven 3 other cars: A Prelude, an Accord, and a Voyager minivan.
Of all these, I found the V6 Contour by FAR the most fun to drive, especially on backroads. It was the car I always asked to borrow, which was frequently met with a “No” and the keys to my Mom’s minivan instead.
The car had about 25k miles on it. I do remember it making numerous trips to the dealership, which my dad seemed annoyed with. I can’t remember exactly what the problem was, but after 2 years it was replaced with another Honda.
These seemed to be everywhere for quite a while… Now I can’t even remember the last time I saw one, let alone a V6 model.
It was a nice little car, certainly much more pleasant than the Tempo/Topaz, and much more exciting than my latest company car- ’12 Fusion, 4-cyl.
The Mystique is at least one of my favorite Ford products from the Nineties. I liked its pre-facelift styling the best. After that it looked too bug-eyed. But I would hardly call its styling boring. It fit in nicely with the 1992-1995 Taurus/Sable.
All the reasons you gave combined are good reasons for the Contour/Mystique’s lack of immense success. More simply put, however, I feel that there just wasn’t room in Ford and Mercury’s lineup. Sandwiched between the Escort/Tracer and Taurus/Sable, it was just too small to be an Accord/Camry competitor (that was the Taurus and Sable’s job), with too large a price tag to be a small step up from the economy Escort and Tracer.
Bingo.
Driving dynamics, engine smoothness at high rpm, and overall fit and finish are elements many of us reading this site find important in a vehicle. However, there are those (likely a vastly higher number) that view cars like buying ground beef – the 70% lean is $1.99/lb whereas the 80% lean is $2.49/lb. It’s all the same anyway and I’m only concerned about the bottom line cost. Shopping for a Tempo in comparison to a Contour might make many of us nauseated, but the Tempo was a much better buy for the ground beef crowd. Why pay more for the same thing?
I purchased a new Thunderbird in ’96, special ordered from a very small Ford dealer in Charleston, MO. When I picked it up, I walked through the service area with the service manager / head salesman. Sitting off to the side was a Contour with its engine dangling from a hoist. I asked him what the matter was with it; he said it needed a new starter and those cars were a bitch to work on.
Few of these are around and likely for a reason. I also see darn few Accords or Camry’s of this era, where I am still seeing Tempo’s and Escorts.
Jason – where do you live? My observations about your last sentences are the exact opposite of yours. (I live near Providence, RI.) 1992-1996 Camrys and 1994-1997 Accords are EVERYWHERE around here – they seem to repel the tin worm quite well. (The same can’t be said about their predecessors.) Tempos are very rare these days, as are Contours/Mystiques. There are still a fair number of 1991+ Escorts/Tracers around, but the vast majority are 1997+.
I live only about 45 minutes NW (Plymouth county, MA) of you MT, and can pretty much say the same thing, only that even 1994-1997 Accords are becoming pretty rare, especially non-heavily rusted examples. Most Ford and Mercury sedans from the mid-’90s are hardly common sights. Quite scary considering the Taurus was te best selling car in America for many of those years.
Jefferson City, Missouri; rust is likely less of a factor here than it is in Rhode Island. I would imagine my last statement is quite regional, but that era of Accord and Camry are simply infrequent. I did see a Camry of this vintage about an hour ago (the first in a long while), and it was pretty crispy in the wheelwells.
Yes, out here in Indiana, Accords of that vintage are EVERYWHERE. They rust significantly less after the ’96 facelift and even before then, the only rust is on the rear quarter panel. Nothing catastrophic at all. You just end up with a car that lasts forever with a watery trunk and dropping fascia, perfect for people with little cash. Contours and Mystiques, on the other hand, are quite rare, as are Neons and the Cirrus/Stratus/Breeze.
I agree with the sense there wasn’t enough room in the line-up, but the other problem was that the Escort was made according to Ford’s old formula of offering the least amount of sophistication they could get away with, making the Escort particularly cheap, while the Taurus was steadily decontented in its final years, making it also inexpensive.
I bought one of the last 2000 Contours new (SE Sport, V6, auto), a year past it’s sell by date. I sold it (more like gave it away) for $300 11 years later. The engine and tranny were still working fine but the rest of the car was shot, rust being the biggest but certainly not only problem. When it was new it was an absolute joy to drive, but that didn’t last long before issues started to show up.
Great point that this car was too “in between” for real success. Not cheap enough nor roomy enough to hit the volume sweet spots in the U.S. market. That said, I had extended time in a Contour (rental from Enterprise when my car was in the body shop thanks to a careless driver who slammed into me at a stoplight) and I really enjoyed it. The handling was impressive, and the general feel quite European. I like to think of the Fusion (which I like a lot and always try to find when on the lot at National) as a modern day successor, having kept the dynamic qualities and Euro feel, while improving on the overall packaging and positioning. Ford has now (finally) gotten it right in delivering a genuine “mid-size” entry, but I still see the Contour/Mystique was a critical first step on this journey.
Separately, I basically never see Contours or Mystiques on the road anymore in metro Chicago. I do stumble across Accords and Camrys of the same vintage, as well as a surprising number of Chryco “cloud cars” along with clapped-out Aleros and Grand Ams. Not sure why, but not good for these FoMoCo cars in general if they can’t even survive as rust-belt beaters.
Good point about how the first examples shipped to dealers were loaded up, sending customers into sticker shock. Ford made that mistake with the Edsel, but perhaps the best recent example is the Alfa-based Dodge Dart. Two years ago when we were in the market to replace my girlfriend’s old Forester, we spent a vulture-free Sunday walking around the local dealerships. Out of the dozen or so Darts on the ground at our local full-line Chrysler store that day, only one didn’t have a leather interior, nav system, etc.
My one experience with the Contour/Mystique was a rental Mystique in Las Vegas circa 1997. Not a bad car at all. Today they’re all but extinct around here.
Just throwing this out there: What if the U.S. variant of this car was sold exclusively as a Lincoln? Any thoughts?
I never realized the styling elements shared by the 1995 Mystique and Continental.
The Topaz Borrowed heavily from the 88-93 Continental as well
I think if it were sold as a Lincoln we’d be talking about how this car killed Lincoln today
I doubt it would have sold much better (i.e. Infiniti G20), but it would have definitely been more profitable for Ford.
I think you underestimate the impact of the lack of space in this car. Every single review I ever saw mentioned it. This was back when most people who wanted sporty cars didn’t buy 4-door sedans. A sedan still needed to function as a sedan and this didn’t.
+1
I had to endure a short ride in the back seat of one of these, and it’s a penalty box. And I’m only 5’6″ (168cm) tall. I can only imagine what ingress/egress and comfort would be like for anyone much taller (or wider).
I agree, I had a 2000 Contour, and with my 6’2″ frame in the drivers seat, adjusted for me, there was almost no room behind me to sit anyone with legs. With two 6 footers on board it was a 4 door, two seater car. There was about an inch or two of legroom in the back seat.
I had a ’95 and a ’96 Contour, both blue. The most comfortable seat for this six foot tall guy was the drivers seat. I even found the front passenger seat small and uncomfortable. But I loved the fit and finish of the interior, and they handled like a dream. I bought the ’95 used with 14,000 miles in 1996. It was a base model with a stick and a/c and cruise. I drove that car from Wisconsin to Seattle and back. Then I bought the ’96 with 17,000 miles in 1997, that one had an automatic and power everything. I took great pride in their appearance, and I especially felt the ’96 was a sharp car. Both had the four cylinder, and while a dog at the light they would cruise all day at 90 and you wouldn’t notice. I kept the ’96 for five years, but the motor blew at 122,000 miles, and after being nickle and dimed for the previous two years, I was done. It was still a sharp car, and I had somehow managed the keep it free from rust, but enough was enough. So I downgraded to a brand new ’02 Cavalier, and I just sold that one after 12 years and 200,000 miles of problem-free, dependable service. I found the face-lifted ’98 Contours ugly, and it was a shame how discontented the interiors had become compared to the early models. As a side note, my father-in-law had a ’95 base Mystique a couple of years ago. A real grandma car, pristine with 75,000 miles. A deer glanced off the front fender and the hood, leaving a dent in each, which wasn’t too noticeable. Air bags did not pop. Insurance company totaled it. He bought it from the insurance company and kept driving it without a problem.
Phil, I completely agree. At the time, I was asked to do an analysis to explain the Contour/Mystique struggles vis a vie the Chrysler JA triplets. The analysis was simple… the JAs had much better package space and were much easier on the eyes. Speaking of Zeus’s, Alex Trotman had a blind spot… willing to trade-off package space for style (as he also did with the DN101 Taurus/Sable)… and Ford’s stylists were serving up a definition of “style” that could only be translated as “different”… not necessarily better style (are you listening Akio?).
I had a couple of Mystiques. They were comfortable and fun to drive. But apologies were offered to my infrequent rear seat occupants. I experienced no quality or durability issues.
A few years ago while hunting for an older used car, these things were consistently the cheapest wheels on the list of craig. The reputation seems to be frequent breakage, and expensive to fix. The combo of Alex Trotman’s ambitious overreaching followed by Jacque Nasser’s ruthless cost cutting was a 1-2 punch that Ford is still recovering from.
My statistical sample size is limited (ie. 1) but my evidence is behind the “price and interior space” theory of failure.
We had a 5-speed Topaz which wasn’t sophisticated but got the job done. My FIL the Ford sales guy had us look at a slightly used Contour but we couldn’t get our heads around paying way more money for a car that was smaller inside, and stuck with the Topaz.
A few years later we bought the Focus (bought a 2001 in 2003) which we still have, it’s a great car. So the traditional theory was true for us, although by the time we got the Focus our financial situation was a bit better so maybe we were less likely to balk at price.
As an aside, the paint may have been high quality but the colors were terrible. Most Contour/Mystique were either beige, or silver beige, or pinkish beige. Yuck.
I have long experience with a base model ’96 Contour (2.0, five speed, A/C, AM/FM/cassette, cruise, power door locks and nothing else – an only the A/C was extra cost), first as my sister-in-law’s car, and then as my own for about a year before I sold it. It was one hell of an enjoyable drive, handled well, good gas mileage, engine was nothing to complain about. My idea of a real nice and comfortable econobox.
Tight back seat? Didn’t matter, I wasn’t hauling people in the back seat. I could quibble about a slightly sloppy shifter, but that’s about the end of the complaints. A very nice car, pity it didn’t wasn’t more successful.
Incredibly well done, Perry. When the photo of this Mystique showed up in my feed reader this morning, I felt a little professional jealousy, as one very much like this parked around the corner in my neighborhood for a couple months late last year and I always meant to photograph it and write it up. I never got around to either. No matter; I couldn’t have given it anywhere near the treatment you did.
AKA the Ford Mondeo in the UK,more often seen as a hatchback than a sedan.1st generation Mondeos are a rare sight as most have been passed down the food chain and are near the end of life by now.They were just run into the ground,a popular model here though I see a very nicely preserved ST 220 tyre burner version in metallic red at my local tyre and exhaust fitters
I bought one of these CPO – weird green silver that drove the price down, 4cyl SE 5spd. Air only option. Loved how it handled, but the 4cyl was more coarse than the zillions of honyodas I grew up with. Rust started eating it, kept it til way past 120k miles and traded for scrap. Kinda would love to find a clean 6cyl 5 spd….
My father bought a 4cyl 5spd Contour brand new in 1996. For us it did replace a Ford Tempo. The Contour suspension was very sporty and while the engine was probably more decent than amazing it was miles ahead of the Tempo lump. He didn’t keep it long enough for us to judge the long term durability but I have quite fond memories of it. I’ve heard the V6 versions are nightmares to work on and the automatic transmissions aren’t very durable.
I remember looking under the hood of a 4-cylinder version and was very surprised how tight & unserviceable everything appeared to be — one would think there would be room under the hood but nope. That memory will prevent me from ever messing with one of these.
The V6 version must be a real treat to work on.
During the late ’90s, I certainly was no car expert…even though I did know what I liked (just like now). The Contour/Mystique were cars that I just didn’t like at all…and by this time, I was very well aware of their poor reputation. A prime example of how poorly regarded these cars were, especially where I lived is that I remember during December 1999 a neighbor’s (who has since moved away a long time ago) girlfriend had a 1998 Contour she was trying to sell. By then, she was already the 3rd owner of her vehicle, and had the hardest time trying to sell it.
Another excellent article by Perry!
What you wrote resonates with my experience. We bought an abused 2000 Contour 4Cyl as my wife’s car. She has a short commute and does local errands. I use it for occasional out of town trips. It has been the best and cheapest vehicle for this purpose.
But it is a sinner: the engine is extremely rough on acceleration. I added insulation under the hood to make it bearable. The whole dash board gets the shakes when idling in gear. The dash board cover is about to make the monkey lip: it is folding up. A bolt that holds the timing belt pulley broke. The seat is wobbling on the rails. On the other hand it is holding up remarkably well against the tin worm. Only the rocker panels are affected.
The handling is absolutely astonishing. I would take this car to an auto cross if it weren’t my wife’s. I sit in it and everything feels just right. It feels like a glove. Thus it deserves the O.J. Simpson defense: if the glove fits you must acquit!
While many talk about the Malaise Era Broughamified offerings as the most uninspired of decades, I actually thought this era of the 90s was worse. Every single car seemed to have been designed by placing a bag of jelly beans near a heat source for several hours.
A friend bought one of these Contours new in 1997 and had continual problems with it. It seems that every time I would talk to him he had a new and expensive story involving the Contour. Eventually he traded it in disgust and despair.
Fun as it may have been to drive, this was a colossal Deadly Sin, from the era when Ford was famous for squandering (and then losing) billions on new cars, like the MN12 platform of the time. What was Ford thinking? Everything was so wrong about this car, in terms of its positioning in the US market. Could it not see far enough ahead that the Camcord class was inevitably getting bigger? As well as the Civrolla class below it? Ford was chasing cars like the contemporary Accord when it first started thinking about this car, not how to be ahead of the class by the time it actually came out.
GM made the same colossal blunder with its J Cars, in targeting them against the original Honda Accord. Of course by the time the Cavalier came out, Honda was already working on the third generation Accord.
Both Ford and GM ruined their small car business this way: overly ambitious attempts to take down the reigning champ, while not realizing that it was a moving target, as well as not considering their cars’ actual place in their own line-up as well as the market.
There was no good business proposition for the Contour/Mystique in the US, in terms of squeezing in an overly-expensive to build sedan between the Taurus and Escort. What Ford should have done is focus in making the 1996 Taurus stay space efficient and not so large on the outside (as well as ugly), keeping it as the true Accord competitor, instead of trying to outgrow the class.
The only way the Contour might have worked was to give it a wheelbase stretch for more rear seat room, and a more de-contented interior to start with. But why bother; they could have easily just built even more low-end Tauruses at lower cost, and have saved themselves many billions.
My MIL has Contour from near the end of its production, bought very cheaply for her by us and her other daughter as Ford was really trying to unload them at the time. I didn’t approve at the time, as the Escort would have been a better fit. But she loves it. She won’t tell me if she’s had to spend much on it, but let’s just say it doesn’t get much use except to go to the grocery store. I’m preparing myself for the day when something expensive craps out on it.
Interesting point on how GM and Ford made the same blunder. The only difference was in the method of execution. GM designed the car cheaply and it came out crude and simple. Ford threw money at the car at an amazing rate and it came out quite the tossable sportster (with the right powertrain). Neither was a credible CamCord competitor. However, the cheap and stupid J cars continue to soldier on as fairly reliable cheap wheels for folks without a lot of money, while the Ford cars have devolped that dreaded reputation of cheap to buy, expensive to keep, which results in their fast disappearance over the last 5 years.
+1. See my above comment. I wanted to keep the Contour, but after many repairs in its final two years, the straw that broke the camel’s back was when the motor blew at 122,000 miles. I really liked the car, but I couldn’t fathom dropping any more money into it. So I bought a crude but new 2002 Cavalier. I didn’t really care for it, and it most definitely was a step down, but I needed reliable transportation and I didn’t want a Chevy Metro. That Cavalier with the craptastic interior is still going strong today in the hands of its new owner, with over 200,000 miles. It never left me stranded, and to this day I will have to think twice about buying another Ford (even though I find the new Focus quite sharp).
Well, to be fair to Ford, they moved the target to the Primera, which must’ve been big enough for Europeans, unless Ford really were being as dumb as you say.
And the Accord and Taurus only accidentally ended up being competitors; they started life out in very different size classes, with very different power plants. The Taurus was meant to be a class above, but Ford’s insistence on letter it rot on the vine turned it into a $0.75 per pound car, as described above, hardly allowing it to be the same breakthrough as the 1986 car (which competed in a much simpler landscape).
What makes the most sense to me–IF there HAD to be three FWD sedans–would’ve been for Ford to build the Contour just a LITTLE bit bigger, with rear seat passengers in mind, and to market the Taurus as more upmarket, with suitably upright styling to keep it space efficient, allowing more room inside and less weight overall.
But this really drives the point home–there really wasn’t enough space. It just pains me to look at this situation that way because the Taurus was somewhat overrated and the high quality, but overweight and unsophisticated 1996 was deservedly unsuccessful, while the Contour really was a notch above its American competitors in terms of its interior design, fit and finish and better than all the US market competition when it came to handling. It had the sort of finesse which made the Japanese famous (but without the reliability).
The ultimate solution? Maybe to have refined the Mondeo platform for US use, making it larger and safer, and marketing it as the new Taurus, with a large capacity four cylinder as the base engine, and to have kept the Escort competitive with the Civic and Neon. The would have negated the need for billions to be spent on a new model.
I just checked something, and it even surprised me: The Contour/Mondeo/Mystique actually had a longer wheelbase than the ’86-’95 Taurus (106.5″ vs. 106″), and it was only 4″ shorter overall. Yet the Taurus had a vastly bigger rear seat.
And the ’96 Taurus’ wheelbase was only 2″ longer than the Contour’s, at 108.5″. This just confirms what a mistake it was to try to shoehorn another class of car between the Escort and Taurus. As well as what poor space utilization the Contour had.
Another fun piece of trivia, while Aussies and Kiwis bemoan the loss of the big Ford from OZ the Falcon, the Mondeo/Fusion is actually wider and roomier DOH!
I was following a neighbour home the other day. She was in her Mondeo, and I was amazed how big the thing is. The styling seems to do a good job of hiding its size.
According to Ford’s specs the current Mondeo is only larger for front legroom (by 2″), the Falcon is bigger in all the other dimensions. In particular, hip/shoulder room is 3″ wider in front, just under 4″ wider in rear. The new Fusion (next Mondeo) is a little better for internal width even though it is an inch narrower on the outside.
Yes; even the Accord, with its famously bulky rear suspension managed better than Ford did. It’s perplexing.
Paul, the 1990s reflect a time in Ford’s history when Ford caught a disease… package inefficiency. Today, Ford products are very nice, but are still package inefficient and weight inefficient. Ford is offsetting some of the weight problem with aluminum materials, but then that creates a cost inefficiency. I say… fix the package inefficiency, then the weight/cost problem will be less.
These cars represent sort of an object lesson on how world cars often sound like a better idea than they are. My impression has always been that the Mk1 Mondeo sold quite well in Europe — albeit more as fleet or company cars rather than private buys, with a consequent effect on resale values. Conversely, the CB Accord (the 1990–93) was a big hit in the States, but did poorly at home.
I leased a Mystique new in 1995, having just returned from a stint in Germany where I had been driving a new ’94 Mondeo 4cyl 5-spd prior. I preferred the Mystique’s more sophisticated appearance over the blobby Contour, so I special ordered a top-line LS version in Champagne (same as the pictured car…a popular color then) with the V6 and a 5-speed manual. It also had tan leather and a moonroof. I found it to be incredibly fun to drive, peppy, and mine was fairly trouble-free for it’s 2 year lease. A good car few remember.
We have had many of these in the shop over the years, I would have to say that other than poor build quality and lack of dependability these weren’t bad cars (the dash pad that rolled up and blocked the windshield had to be my favorite) . Then again I did see a blog the other day that made Neons seem better than they actually were. I guess we all try to remember the good times overlooking the bad.
Even here in the UK the rear seat on the Mondeo seemed shockingly cramped, it was supposed to be a “large family car”.
A friend had one, and it had far less space in the back than the Fiat Tipo we had at the time, and that was an Escort competitor.
I’m the wrong person to explain the unpopularity of these. I bought three of them (if you count the Cougar, which shared the platform and the engines).
To start, when I was in college, my Mom drove a Merkur XR4Ti (the stateside version of the turbo-four Sierra). It was probably an ’85 model, and despite being equipped with an automatic, it accelerated smartly for cars of that era and handled very well. I loved driving that car, but Mom did not love it’s lack of reliability.
A decade later, I bought a ’95 Mystique, with the V6 and a 5-speed. It was no hot rod, but it was as good a handler as the Merkur/Sierra was, despite being front drive. Back seat accommodations were tight, but I didn’t ride back there, so that didn’t matter to me. In three years of driving I had no reliability issues. Then I liked it so much, I traded it in for a ’98 SVT Contour when they hit the market.
I’m a cheapskate, so it’s not like me to trade in a perfectly-good 3-year-old car. But I found the SVT version irresistible. It was everything the Mystique was, except turned up to 11. It wasn’t a torque-steer monster, like many souped-up front drivers are. It just was a very livable car that was fun to drive fast, especially on twisty roads. Like the Mystique, it never gave me reliability problems.
I unwisely loaned the SVT Contour to a (now former) friend who totaled the car in 2001. I would have happily replaced it with another, but I wanted a new car, and the sedan versions were no longer for sale. So I bought a Cougar, which was a smaller, lower package wrapped around the same basic chassis and engine. I got 12 years of trouble–free service and over 240,000 miles out of that one. My nephew is driving it now.
What are these cars’ successors? Well, the Focus has grown to be a very similar package (some complain about back seat room in that model, too), and that’s what I’m driving now. I miss the torque of the V6, and the electrically-boosted steering is lighter than I’d like, but all in all it’s another more-fun-to-drive-than-average affordable and reliable car (20,000 miles on the odo without a trip to the dealer). And I’m averaging 31 mpg overall, which is 4-5 mpg better than its V6 predecessors. That appeals to my cheapskate side.
The CC effect strikes again. I saw a remarkably clean greenish-bluish Contour in the supermarket parking lot last night. And by “remarkably clean” I mean that the parts of the steel wheels that were visible under the plastic wheel covers were shiny and clean. The car wasn’t quite show-prepared but was well on the way. I really have to start bringing the camera with me in the car….
We always buy the 75% ground beef – it makes better-tasting hamburgers or meatloaf than the 80% variety.
My family rented one of these back in the day, and I didn’t find the rear seat too bad…for my five-year-old self.
I had a 2000 Contour for a year. Bought used with 80,000 miles on it, sold it a year later with 95,000 miles on it. Base 4 cylinder, automatic, power windows and locks, AM/FM Cassette, AC and cruise control in Navy Blue.
Powertrain was good, I was pleasantly surprised by the Zetec 4 though saddled with the automatic it was not a joy to drive in traffic, due to the dimwitted nature of the transmission control logic (slow to respond to throttle inputs) On a winding road it was a blast, even in base form on skinny 14″ wheels and tires.
It looked good, and drove good and had the beans to hit its 107mph speed limiter easily.
What I didn’t like about it, was the vast amounts of ROAD NOISE, the unsupportive seats, the oddball flipper armrest that the passengers used more than I did, the super fragile third brake light (bulb burned out, went to replace it and had it crumble in my hands) and the cheap warping dash pad.
I updated mine to the tach cluster, added pulse wipers to it, had to replace the schrader valves in the A/C fittings, put a timing belt on it, replaced a vacuum line under the manifold, serviced it, and drove the fool out of it for a year. I also cleaned all the cigarette ash out of it, and since it had sat for two years prior it smelled pretty rank, shampooed the upholstery to get the stale smell out.
It got slightly better mileage in town than my 95 Explorer for the work commute (18 vs 22) and when it got the computer learned on a road trip, it could return outstanding 40mpg fuel economy after three fill ups. The first two on a long road trip always netted it 25mpg. Short road trips it was more economical and comfortable to take the Explorer!
It did have one major quirk that only showed up on long trips, and only on the return leg, of stalling out, wait a bit and it would start right back up like nothing happened, and it would only do it once.
This was the first car I bought for $250 bucks and sold for $2500 to a service writer at the Ford dealer I took it to get smog/safety inspection.
I’d get another one, but with the 4 cylinder and 5 speed, I got another vehicle for my power/speed addiction and hauling people.
A coworker had a Contour or Mystique and I asked him about it one day. He wasn’t pleased with the repair bills, mostly alternators. He said it ate them with alarming regularity. He said the alternator is low on the engine, in-line with one of the front wheels, and has no splash shield in front of it. In the winter, it is constantly bombarded with slush.
In 2005 I rented a new Mondeo turbodiesel with 5-speed stick for a week in Germany. I thought it was a great car. Then I spent a week driving the comparable Opel model (Vectra?), again with turbodiesel and 5-speed stick. Night and day difference. I hated the Opel.
Did you just say that you thought a Ford was a great car?? 🙂
Yes, bizarre isn’t it? It was a rental though, so I didn’t have to live with it long-term. I’m sure that the car would’ve been unreliable or tried to kill me somehow if I drove it long enough. 🙂
I made a good living off Detours and Mystaques… probably the #2 car after the ungodly unreliable ’88-’94 Continental for warranty issues. If it weren’t for Panthers my Ford loyalty might have not survived the Nineties.
I got jumped off the line last week by a Contour. I was on my bike – a 650 VTwin, not a Superbike but still quick compared to most cars, and the Contour was hard to catch once I realized he wasn’t backing off. But I got close enough to see the SVT logo. Around here there aren’t many Contours and fewer Mystiques. But not many Tempo/Topaz twins either, compared to Camcords of similar vintage.
I had a ’96 Mystique, 6, for ten years. Not a lot of trouble with it, although the second owner had to replace the transmission. I still miss it for the very pleasant driving experience it provided: seating postion, ride comfort, quietness. With Koni adjustable shocks and high performance tires, its cornering ability seemed to be without limits.
Two thoughts:
1) Spent a week with a rented 4-cyl Mystique in ’98: backseat and trunk too small for a family of 3. Performance was forgettable–just another generic fleet queen rental.
2) I owned a 2001 Mazda MPV with the same 2.5 Duratec V6 used in these sedans.
That engine, while perhaps somewhat zippy at high rpms, was certainly torque deficient. Mazda must have had its corporate arm twisted by Dearborn to put that lump in the minivan. The engine was correctly called “weedy” by a period reviewer! I can only assume Ford needed to amortize its development costs—or perhaps deplete inventory from overproduction ahead of the intro of the 3.0L version in 2002.
My father had a Mystique SE V6 in the same color as the one pictured – almost a dead ringer, equipped with everything on it. Had pretty good zip and handling but yeah, the back seat was a little tight. Was passed on to my sister who drove it for a few years until the cooling system or something major conked out. Fairly decent car overall.
I’d think that the issue with the Contour/Mystique in N. America was that it was positioned in between the Escort and the Taurus – larger and more pricey than the former, and smaller (in terms of interior space) than the latter, and not really satisfying the niche all that well as it seemed to be cross-shopped with the Accord and Camry.
The drum beat of “too cramped” was unmerciful over the entire run for these cars. The styling isn’t exactly standout as well.
It sometimes felt like Ford was trying to sell these cars because “they are good for you.” But, that only works if the car delivers on its intended mission. Sub-compact interior space in a compact car isn’t going to work.
As I recall, the Chrysler “cloud cars” came out the same time as these, and were substantially larger inside. They sold quite well, as I recall. They hit an interesting medium between GM’s stupid simple design and Ford’s overly ambitious one.
I test drove a Cirrus before I bought my Mystique, and it it was not in the same class. Perhaps a bit roomier in the back (I don’t remember), but the Mitsubishi V6 was wheezy, the interior was outdated, and there was a huge distortion in the windshield that had made it past Quality Assurance in the plant. Not my cup of tea.
I liked the “clouds” enough that I went into a Chrysler dealer in ’95 to check one out. It was decent enough for space, but I was quickly drawn to the Concorde which was quite roomy. I eventually bought a ’95 Concorde.
A co-worker at the time really liked his Cirrus. At some point I had a Stratus as a rental and it was decently roomy, especially up front. I had a long drive into the Dakotas – where air travel wasn’t practical, so I gave the car a very solid 4 day test drive.
The “clouds” did well for Chrysler, but it was a classic Chrysler success: Something fairly awful or seriously dated was replaced by something that was a reasonable contender in it’s class. Full-size in ’65, the Cordoba in ’75, LH in ’93 and plenty more. No where to go but up.
Ive driven some of these when looking for a replacement for my dead 406 Peugeot they dont hold a candle to the Pug in ride comfort and roadholding but are competent enough for most people I guess, I particularly wanted a diesel but those engines are shared with the UK Escort and are known to grenade spectacularly at low mileages(as dealership maintained company cars) so that was another nail in the Ford coffin to me, the later models share a lot with the Mazda 6 and are much better cars they also share diesel powertrains with Peugeot/Citroen cars so that end of things is a vast improvement on reliability and performance I’d quite happily buy a late Mondeo diesel but the early one not on your life.
Wow, this article was like ghosts of ex girlfriend past. 3rd ‘pair pic’ down, with the powder blue contour is the spitting image of an ex g/f’s car. Some here remember these things fondly, and that’s nothing short of baffling to me.
Hers was a ’97 and we met in ’99 so the car was 2-3 years old depending on build date. What a sad dumpy blob of automotive fail. The interior creeked like the hold of a ship. The 2.0 and slushbox trans combo translated to a driving experience that only a 20 year old girl who only knows ‘pretty color’ could possibly endure. Sure, puttering around town it was plenty. But the few times we took that turd on a roadtrip, it wheezed and strained on the long grades through southern Oregon. The only good thing I can say is it was good on gas, much more so than my ’95 Wrangler I had at the time. That Conturd started to self destruct at around 60K miles. Come to find out, that she had financed the car with no credit at all…her APR was something like 27%, since she went thru some local fly by nite finance company. She figured that on a 5 year loan she would have ended up paying about $28K for this hunk of crap if she followed thru. As it started dying a slow death, she decided to let it get repo’d….Good riddance!
I think one of the issues affecting the direction of these cars was the encroachment of the German premium brands on the European D-segment (the Germans having already picked their teeth with the bigger E-segment). Ford recognized that in Europe, a decently equipped Mondeo was going to end up being price-competitive with the cheaper four-cylinder BMW 3-Series, Audi A3/A4, and C-Class Mercedes. Essentially, for the price, you could have a nicely equipped Mondeo or a 318i with wind-up windows and wheelcovers. The latter was rapidly coming to have better resale value and thus made more financial sense for private buyers. (The depreciation on non-premium D-segment cars by the late ’90s, even ones that would be surefire, gold-star used cars here, was just terrifying.)
That situation presented (and still presents) “non-premium” brands like Ford with a choice: Retreat permanently to cheap-‘n-cheerful “value” models like the U.S. Tempo/Topaz twins (at least until the Germans decide they won’t be satisfied till they conquer the fleet car market too) or try to come up with products that someone could conceivably cross-shop against a four-cylinder 3-Series with a straight face and hope that a combination of good driving dynamics, higher content, and lower prices will overcome badge prejudice. The real trick with the latter strategy is that you also have to do all that without making your cheaper base models expensive enough to scare away fleet buyers, without whom your sales figures start looking awfully depressing.
I think that was basically what Ford tried to do with the Mondeo, with mixed results. The problem was that in the U.S., the tightrope the Mondeo was trying to walk in Europe didn’t really exist. There was and remains a sizable price gap between most family cars and the premium Germans and the residuals of the more popular non-premium family cars weren’t in any danger; unless you wrapped it around a tree or there was something seriously wrong with it, you wouldn’t have any trouble unloading a three-year-old Accord for a sizable fraction of what you paid for it. The U.S. would probably have been happier with an updated Tempo on a stretched Escort/Protege platform.
I agree, the ‘Tour came out just when subcompact Escort grew inside to compact, and the Taurus got loads of rebates, was squeezed out of the market. Same thing happened with 2nd Gen Altima.
What about a stretched Mondeo serving as the Taurus?
And what about shoulder width measurements? I am by no means a “wide body,” but the Contours I rented and test drove seemed very narrow in that regard-one of the few cars at the time in which I had to reach across with my right hand to unlock the driver’s door, as I could not successfully turn sideways to do so with my left. All else was as others have described-very controlled ride and handlng, somewhat sluggish 4-cylinder/automatic drivetrains, nicely designed and attractive interiors (at least when new), comfortable seats, though the back ones were clearly cramped for legroom. I always wondered, if I barely fit in them, how did anyone else?
For those that might remember, my very first contribution here at CC was that of my former 1995 Mystique.
At this point in the thread there isn’t much more I could add, so I will just say that, after having owned two Contours and the Mystique, I found them positively addicting to drive, though they were indeed mechanical nightmares to own. Looking back, I suppose it would be equivalent to owning the average older Euro car.
Yes, the back seat was not very roomy, but my passengers never complained as I’m a bit short so I kept the front seat slid up rather far. Now the trunk space was wonderful, very nicely shaped.
Every once in a while I learn of a fairly clean one of these and I find myself tempted, but I keep reminding myself that I need a “reliable” car for a daily driver. But I sure did love the silly things, warts and all…
For those that might be wondering, my best friends step son has the Mystique now, though it’s on it’s last legs now 🙁
I had two of these, a ’97 4 cyl and a ’00 V6.
The 97 handled swifter, and seats were confortable to sit in all day. The ’00 was faster, but seats were flat as boards and gave me a backache. Had to retro-fit bolsters to match the 97 seat.
The V6 car was like a sleeper, a base car with big motor, not seen these days. Ford needed to use up parts, so many rentals go V6’s the final model year.
I miss the 97’s handling, it took Lower Wacker Drive like a slot car. The double naught had good punch, but not as precise cornering.
I bought a 1996 Ford Contour SE with the Duratec V6 and 5 speed slightly used (9k on the odo) in 1997. I sold it this month with 208k on the clock for $1200.
The basic engineering was sound, but cost-cutting made itself apparent in the details. The engine accessories like the starter, alternator, and especially the water pump (replaced 3-4 times) were prone to failure. But as an early-build car, mine dodged the rampant, desperation cost-cutting that brought the biodegradable dashboard in later models mentioned by others above. I believe later models also had wiring harness issues. The automatic transmission was known for early failures. A lot of owners probably junked the car at that point.
As others noted above, the tight packaging of the V6 in that little engine bay made it near impossible to work on for the DIYer. There was barely an inch or so clearance between the serpentine belt and the wheel well. Most engine work had to be done with the car up on a lift.
The engine was terrific, and was still running strong and smooth when I sold it. It was leaking oil like a sieve and had sprung a coolant leak out of the head gasket, so I just topped things up when needed. It was throwing a catalytic efficiency code and the AC no longer blew cold, but it still looked great and was fun to drive.
I didn’t get Camry-like reliability with the car, but I believe the trade off in performance and handling was worth it
Mercury Mistake.
Perry, I have to ask….
Looking in the background, I’m seeing a Mercury Tracer and a mid-80s K-car based LeBaron.
Was the Contour the only car in which you took pictures?
No, I have a set of the Tracer. I didn’t photo the LeBaron, though, because I’d just gotten finished writing about a LeBaron Turbo wagon and it was already hard enough to find much to say about it other than “it’s a K car loaded to the gills.”
Makes sense.
…but I’ll write up the Tracer eventually. I guess I can use my pics of it to tackle both it and the ’85 (’86?)-’89 323.
My first experience with one was a 95 rented for a massive roadtrip (~6000 miles) on my relocation from Japan to the States. The only problem was it started overheating driving up the west slope of the Sierras on a 100+ day, so I had to turn off the a/c til we reached the crest.
Then I had a 96 and a 98 Mystique as Ford management lease cars (both V6/5 spd manuals). Like always it was a one-year deal, so didn’t get to experience any reliability problems. Loved the handling and acceleration (at least for the time – any modern mid-size V6 would leave them in the dust). I pretty much never carried anyone in the back seat, so that wasn’t an issue. The engine was smooth and quiet, so much so that I hit the rev limiter in first gear one evening leaving work when I had to make a quick getaway to go from stop to merge onto a freeway service drive.
I hated the interior of the 98 after the Great Decontenting. The GD was due to the fact that the car was expensive to assemble but drew transaction prices that were substantially below Camcord levels, so variable profit (price-to-the-dealer net of incentives, less materials and labor) was virtually nil. At some point in the 97 model year the Contour/Mystique were made unavailable for A-plan (employee) sales, because the dealer commission paid on these sales made the variable profit negative, and Ford wasn’t used to losing money on employee sales.
So, I’ll call these failures, but a good try at building an American mid-size sports sedan, and a bridge between the Trotman years (car guys in charge) and the Nasser years (starving cars to send the money to SUVs and to misbegotten acquisitions that had to be written off not long after).
I owned a ’96 (4cyl/auto) from new to far past 100K, and Perry’s making me kind of homesick…maybe I should go look for a clean used one? (I see plenty of these in college towns, among other places).
Handling: fondly remembered.
Power: not plentiful (and not a silky idle), but I never regretted not getting the six.
Comfort: yes, that “fits like a glove” driving feel many have recalled. Seemed light years ahead in refinement from my long-ago Tempo.
Back Seat: yeah, a downside, but I rarely had passengers. In case it wasn’t mentioned above: IIRC, Ford changed the rear-window shape at one point and was able to move the rear seat backward a bit???
Reliability: 100%, even in Rust Belt, except for the broken timing belt “right on schedule” around 100K. A few O2 sensors needed replacing, but otherwise it was the typical wear parts, and front struts getting flabby around its 10th birthday.
Highway: Though about a foot shorter than a Taurus, it always seemed plenty big on the Interstate, and happily trotted at 80-85 mph for hours on end. I *always* wanted to find a place to see how fast it could go…
Cost: A FoMoCo acquaintance vouched for the “it cost almost as much as a Taurus to build, but we couldn’t charge a near-Taurus price for it” analysis.
******************
So now I’m horribly nostalgic–I guess it’s a car I didn’t expect to see on CC for another half-dozen years.
Here’s a ’98 Mystique, 6cyl/Auto, 70K. The $4K seems a little steep, but then owner has done all the maintenance you’d want done around 100K, so maybe not a bad deal:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mercury-Mystique-LS-Sedan-4-Door-1998-Mercury-Mystique-LS-Sedan-4-Door-2-5L-/201063347125?forcerrptr=true&hash=item2ed04f33b5&item=201063347125&pt=US_Cars_Trucks
My mom has a Contour SE 4cyl/auto in the same color as the featured car and I’ve driven it and worked on it enough to have a pretty solid opinion on these.
If I’ve got several miles of empty and twisty roads ahead of me, there are perhaps only three or four FWD cars I’d rather be driving than a Contour. This is the only one I’ve ever driven, and I’ve been told (on here) that the SE suspension is either the same or very similar to the SVT setup, so maybe the regular ones aren’t as great, but it’s tough to overstate just how good they are in this respect. I’ve driven Integra GS-Rs and 405Mi16s and I think the Contour is right up there with them – maybe even better because it feels somewhat lighter and more neutral than either of those. The Zetec engine I had originally considered a turd, but it turned out the timing was off a few degrees and once that was fixed it really woke up. Nothing exciting, but competent. Certainly sounds good when you push it and I’d imagine it’s much better with a 5-speed behind it.
But in every other way, it’s immediately apparent why these cars aren’t often remembered fondly. Horrible automatic transmission, horrible vibration/plastic rattling at idle, horrible rattles coming from the interior in general, the rockers disintegrated over this past winter (granted, the car lived in Vermont most of its life), the interior also may look nice, but every piece of it feels like it can be broken off with one finger. Oh, and electrical problems! Was there ever a Contour/Mystique without nagging electrical problems? Doesn’t seem that way. This one likes to engage and disengage the factory alarm at random while driving down the road, sometimes in the middle of the night too. All of the interior lighting only works intermittently, the gauges only work half of the time, the radio will play through only one set of speakers at a time – flip flopping back and forth, the trunk leaks, the sunroof leaks… probably lots of other stuff I’m forgetting.
I think the whole idea was to get people who appreciate a refined chassis and driving experience on the hook through leasing, but get them out of the car before any problems popped up – and dump all those issues off on the people who were dumb enough to buy Tempos for the previous decade. If Ford hadn’t sold tons of Tempos/Topazes, I don’t believe the Contour ever would have existed. The mechanicals are basically sound, but everything around them is total junk. And I still see lots of Contours and Mystiques too – most in fairly terrible condition but still out there on the grind.
So basically, what it boils down to is that a Ford Contour is an American Alfa-Romeo done without any attempt at style or sexiness whatsoever.
All of that said, I would gladly be willing to put up with all of their crap to own one. There aren’t really any “boring” daily driver-type vehicles I’ve enjoyed driving more and I’m with Perry on this being one of favorite Fords from the 90s.
I bought a 1995 Contour SE 5-speed in 2000. Had 50k and paid $7,000. The list price on this car was $19,270! But it was loaded with every option (except leather seats) — power everything, traction control ( rare for a domestic at the time ), anti-lock brakes, premium sound, moonroof, keyless entry, and more. This of course was before the decontenting, and it showed. One of the design features I liked the best was the chrome strip on the bumpers which was a 95 only feature. For whatever reason, the car reminded me of a 50 Ford sedan with those chrome strips.
For a 95 car, this car handled nicely, and could be hustled on back roads easily, with just a little understeer if pushed to hard. I took mine to the drag strip, and pulled a 15.7 quarter mile, not bad for a mid-sized 90’s sedan.
I’m not ashamed to say that this was the nicest car I had owned to that point in time. The combination of features, performance, front seat comfort, and size ( single guy, not too concerned with back seat space ) really sold me on it. And it was rather trouble free for the 50k I put on it — had to replace the water pump ( had a plastic impeller, replaced with a metal one ), and one of the windows came off the track. That was all, not bad.
I would have kept it a lot longer, but it got totaled by a drunk driver who t-boned me on New Year’s Eve. Replaced it with a Mazda6 6-cyl 5-speed, which was a great car as well.
Almost forgot, here’s a pic:
Just lovely. And better for not having leather.
I think I already enthralled you with the story of my at the time teenaged sister, her boyfriend, and doing my older-brother duty on a back road in Nelsonville while they were in the back seat, so I’ll save it. Suffice it to say, the Contour has much of my respect and admiration, and if a decent example showed up, 4 or 6 cylinder, while I have the cash to throw down, I would snap it up in a heartbeat. R.I.P., Connie, I miss ya still.
We bought a 1995 SE in 1995. It is still our only car, now with ~145,000 miles on it. It is the same Midnight Red as MJ’s, and equipped similarly except we have the leather seats and no moonroof. It was hard to find a manual transmission, but we persevered.
It’s a very fun car to drive. Very fun. I did install Koni struts, and a reinforced rear subframe, the SVT exhaust (not the manifold or cat, though), and the SVT airbox. I was running Pirelli summer tires on it for a while, which was really fun.
The traction control died about 6 years ago, and some front end suspension parts have been replaced, and it leaks oil now, and the AC blows hot air, but we still love it. It’s only hot in Atlanta 4-5 months of the year, so we survive.
Our mechanic really likes to drive it, but he only gets to play with it when something breaks.. hey, wait a minute.
I love these cars. Here’s my take. As a high school teenager, my mother bought a white 1997 Contour GL in 2000. It had 53,000 miles on it. We grew up mostly with 80s GM cars, and the Contour replaced an 88 Cavalier that was on its last leg, the worst car we ever had. I’ll never forget the day I got off the school bus and saw it in the yard. I thought it was a Plymouth Breeze at first glance. I was a car freak in school and was so excited I almost pissed on myself, my mom said I know you like Ford’s Taurus but this is all I could afford since the used Tauri were still above her budget at the time. She got a 3 year old Contour with 53,000 miles for about $7k iirc. I remember that “smell” when I first opened the door to it. It looked and smelled BRAND NEW, a smell we were only accustomed to in rental cars we used for road trips. And it had ac! It was a zetec automatic. It had a pep package, not sure which one, but it had ac, keyless entry/alarm, power windows locks rear defroster, Ford’s chiclet am/fm cassette with premium sound, and a power antenna. I was wowed. Needless to say we lived on a long rural dirt road, and I personally would hand wash that car up to 4 times week to keep it looking like new, and I was aware of plastic head lamp assemblies’ tendency to yellow from the sun so i made sure everyone knew to park it nose first in the shade under the pecan tree and to never park it under the pine trees BC of sap. The one thing none of could stand about the car was its violent shaking at idle in gear with the ac on. But we got used to it, we’d either throw off the ac momentarily or put it in neutral. And folks I’ll tell u that ac was THE shit! As far as the backseat goes, we did not have a problem with it. It was definitely more airy than the cavalier, and more comfortable. We treated that car like it was a Lexus I kid u not. It was the cleanest Contour in south Georgia. I loved the plastic wheel well liners Ford used in that era. I would wash it by hand with rain x wax soap. It had gold little beads suspended in it. I would wash the inner wheel wells and struts and underbody with it and let me tell u it looked armor called after the wash, and after driving it slowly thru the mud u could hose off the chassis and the clay mud would slide right off like melted butter. Now that car was my mother’s most reliable and last car she’d ever had. It had 157000 on the odometer when we got rid of it. We put over 100000 miles on that car in four years. The only maintenance we did to it was have the oil & filter changed religiously at the Ford dealer every 3000 miles, put one new battery on it , plugs and wires, front rotors and pads and one new set of tires. That’s it. We had zero mechanical issues. None. No squeaks or rattles from the bodywork. But near the end the dirt road did cause the front sway bar links to chatter. Not unusual for country folks tho, we’d see Mercedes, Lexus, camcords and every damm thing else rattle worse going down our road. My brother was skeptical at first BC he’s a Chevy guy, and was impressed with the Contours reliability record. He insisted our car was built on a Monday and that every other contour he’s seen was built on a Friday BC they all looked like crap and they did. I have come to the conclusion a long time ago that most ppl that owned these cars did not take good care of them in our region. These r sophisticated cars engineered for a European market but dumbrd down for Americans used to driving simple cheaper cars. If u take care of your vehicle it will take care of u. And btw I saw that car on a buy here pay here lot a year after we got rid of it and the head lights were still clear. A week later I saw it in the student parking lot at the high school as I was picking up my transcript. It was then some teenage girls first car. Good luck Bestsy!
Lol at Jeffreyk, who managed to live in Atlanta in a contour with no ac and claims it’s only hot 4-5 months out of the year. If you aren’t from Atlanta, let me tell you, last year it hit 95 in April and kept on going until October. I’ve turned on the air in the house at Christmas. Plus a short commute in Atlanta is anything under an hour each way so. . . Try spending two hours a day minimum in a car with no air from April- October.
As mentioned the price and size were big hurdles, plus Ford badly wanted to keep the Taurus as number 1 seller in America so squashed these (and the sable) in favour of the Taurus. Who wanted a tiny somewhat foreign car when a Taurus cost about the same and everyone knew what a taurus was? People who wanted a sporty looking sedan picked the grand am, people who wanted a compact and inexpensive family sedan picked the cloud cars, or a Hyundai. I suppose Ford decided that at some point gm had the a car, j car, and n car all very similarly sized but with very different missions and identities and thought they could pull it off as well. Nope. I still really dislike the melted bar of soap styling and the way the car almost looks like the front and the rear are the same. The doors are too similar.
Well, we had a ’96 Mystique GS with pretty much all the options, including traction control and a spoiler. V6, AT, power drivers seat, power antenna, ABS, etc. A great car to drive and lots of good memories for the 9 years we had it. Both our kids had their first car rides in the Mystique, coming back from the hospital when they were born. Also got us through the blizzard of ’96 and anyone who was in southwest BC for that event will remember how hard it was to get around. We were going from Victoria back to the interior and got caught at Mission.
The car had it’s issues, to the tune of over $5,000 in warranty work, on a car that stickered just under $25,000 CDN in 1996. Funny, off warranty it was actually really good with only the stereo and water pump failing. Got amazing fuel economy at a bit over 40 MPG imperial on the 110 KMH Coq highway.
Overall we were very happy with it but as the kids got older and bigger we needed something with more room and “sold” the Mystique to my dad who gave it to my sister. She drove it hard with minimal maintenance and it was still going when she got a Corolla a few years ago. Of the vehicles I have owned, this and the ’69 510 are the once I miss the most.
My brother’s been running a high mileage ’96 Mystique in that same color in base Zetec/5spd GS trim for several years now as his daily driver, a customer sold it to him for $500 when absolutely no one on craigslist wanted to touch a beige stick shift Mystique with 240k miles, even though it was absolutely fanatically cared for by its single owner. It’s needed a bit of suspension work, the rusted rear subframe replaced (mercifully cheap and easy to replace), an oil pan gasket and the original clutch, but I won’t fault the car for that. It’s rolled past 250k miles, runs strong, and is a blast to drive. Truly feels like a poor man’s FWD BMW on twisty rural back roads.
I liked the Contour and Mystique when they debuted, but in retrospect, they became Exhibit A as to why GM and Ford have been reluctant to bring their European offerings to the North American market without many changes. (That is no longer a concern for GM at this point.)
They spent two billion dollars developing THAT auto transmission?
Anyhow, I used to occasionally borrow a ’96 Contour from a friend. It had the 4 cyl, which seemed underpowered compared to my Corsica with the 3.1 V6, but the wonderful handling left a lasting impression on me.
I also liked the interior, and generally like the swoopy Ford dashboards of the nineties, especially compared to the cheap blandness that followed in the early 2000s.
These Mystiques was the best Mercury ever made. They were fast handeled incredible and are drop dead gorgeous. The interiors are awesome and look better then any thing made today. yeah that was the golden age for sure .
The Zetec 4 is a fun and underrated motor. I’m sure it is overmatched in the Contour but it’s great fun in a Focus.