Ford cougar?

Mrbrianmolko

Rather than the COugar, why not go for a 00+ Celica?

Max_Damage

E92 wrote: »

It just goes to show how much the car industry has improved over time, where a 4 cylinder turbo diesel hatchback can outperform V8 supercars from 30 years ago.

That's a bit of an inaccurate statement as the 'supercars' they bought were absolutely knackered and on their last legs. If the engines and suspensions were in good condition, I'm sure they would have bet the Astra hands down.

E92

JHMEG wrote: »

Comparing the NSX to auld farts of Italian poseur cars using tractor technology is not relevant.

Yes and no. They didn't use "tractor technology", ok Ferruciao Lamborghini
made tractors, but that is no link really, the point being that car design like computers and most other things has improved tremendously with the passage of time.

JHMEG wrote: »

7.56 is the time clocked by a variation of the 1997 revision.

This implies it was not the same as the road going version. So it's not fair to use it as a comparison. Anyway, I agree that the NSX was very advanced for the time, had it not worn a Honda badge it would have been so much more successful. I'm sure when the new Honda NSX comes out it will do better than the 7:56 lap time too. In any event, a comparison of a rear wheel drive front engined family hatchback with a rear wheel drive mid engined supercar around a race track is going to have one winner and it can only be the supercar.

E92

Max_Damage wrote: »

That's a bit of an inaccurate statement as the 'supercars' they bought were absolutely knackered and on their last legs. If the engines and suspensions were in good condition, I'm sure they would have bet the Astra hands down.

I know that but even if they were like they were fresh out of the factory, they would only have had 180-200 bhp IIRC, a diesel Astra can be had with 150 bhp, so that is hardly a big advantage when you consider that modern supercars have more than 500 bhp usually.

On the plus side, if we wait another 30 years, family hatchbacks will have 400 bhp as the norm:D!

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

They didn't use "tractor technology",

Ok, I haven't looked but I'm sure there's tractor technology in there, from live rear axle to leaf springs, etc.

E92 wrote: »

This implies it was not the same as the road going version.

I meant the NSX-R is a variation of the 1997 NSX, like the Focus Ghia is of the Focus (or whatever comparison you want to draw). The NSX-R had the exact same engine, but the trim level was different.

Teh Russ

It was actually the other way around - the Cougar was designed here in Europe. It was envisaged as the Ford Puma's big brother, and was designed in Germany, using many of Ford's "New Edge" European design cues. When production time came around, Mercury (Ford's semi-luxury division in the US) needed to update its Cougar coupe, and decided to bring over the new European design, giving it the Cougar name, that was then used worldwide.

The Cougar *is* a European Mondeo with a coupe body, as it is in the US (the Mondeo was sold there for a few years, in saloon form only, as the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique). The US version didn't sell too well, as Americans tend not to like hatchbacks, plus the old Cougar was available with a V8, and the new one wasn't - it was bad enough that the largest engine on offer was a 2.5-litre V6, but it seemed like sacrilege to offer it with a 4-cylinder!

I like them - I've driven quite a few of them, and they're smooth and comfortable, as opposed to sporty, but they do handle pretty well - as well as a Mk2 Mondeo, anyway. See if you can track down the 2-litre, 4-cylinder version, as that'll be a lot easier on VRT and insurance.

Cyrus

eh this thread is over two years old, im happy to say i never bought a cougar at that time i bought a golf gti (but thats a few cars ago now :rolleyes:;))