90s Mustang.

I did have interest enough to vaguely remember what the 1989-1993 (and possibly the 94-5 and 96-7) Ford Thunderbird (hence Cougar 7th-gen) had, which was Canadian-market cars light up the full-beam bulbs through a resistor when driving.

So obviously, the 'wiring' is there, since it is simply the same wiring as the full-beam, albeit through more circuitry/relays.

The Thunderbird with illumination pack had an incredible set of features, including (with manual override):

Auto on headlights via a dashtop ambient light level sensor;

Auto-dipping full-beam via a sensor (LDR) behind the interior mirror;

Mechanical auto-dipping mirror (as in, a motor emulates the action of pushing on the dip lever);

'See you home' lights - headlights when in auto mode, turn off after a settable delay;

Illuminated door lock barrels - activated by lifting the exterior door handle, also lights the keyless-entry keypad and interior lights;

Interior lights - ceiling, map, sunvisor, C-pillars (rearseat) and open-door (red/white lights in the door card to illuminate the way and draw other road users' attention to the doors being open);

Cornering lamps - when headlights and direction indicators on, bumper-side mounted white lights illuminate the kerb/verge (these had not been refitted with a replacement front bumper before my ownership);

Amber front side/indicator lamps (5w/21w bulb), I added white 5w sidelight bulb/holder in the full-beam housing to comply UK regs, then fitted an A/B switch under the bonnet so that the amber US sidelights were used anyway;

Rear lights, 'inboard' reversing lights (either side of the rear numberplate);

Combined tail/brake/indicator, that took some skill to convert to UK spec - cutting the correct wire above the brake pedal, re-purposing the rear indicator/brakelight feeds to new indicator lights and using the parcel-shelf brakelight feed to power the original rear brakelights;

In the introductory year, the space between the taillights on the bootlid was filled by a red reflector with the Thunderbird logo each side of the numberplate, In 1991 these were replaced with large red LED lamps, the whole rear of the car lighting up red much like a modern BMW;

Also added third-party rear foglamp and some front ones hidden behind the radiator grill.
 
Last edited:
I had a 1983, 1985, 1986, 2 different 1987 thunderbirds and a 1988 cougar. My 87 tbirds had quite a few of those my favorite actually being the kerb lights. Its a light pointing out the side of the car just behind the front bumper to light up the area in which the front of the car is turning into.

The only issue I see in your info is that the Tbird and cougar arent the same thing. Tbird is an american ford badged car where as the cougar was mercury badged. In the 80s for certain and I'm pretty sure the early 90s they were different bodies.
The lower half of the interior interchanged. I BELIEVE the rear bumper, the doors and wings are iffy. And possibly the front bumper but not totally sure on that. The upper half of the body where glass is located is completely different.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...The only issue I see in your info is that the Tbird and cougar arent the same thing. Tbird is an american ford badged car where as the cougar was mercury badged. In the 80s for certain and I'm pretty sure the early 90s they were different bodies.
The lower half of the interior interchanged. I BELIEVE the rear bumper, the doors and wings are iffy. And possibly the front bumper but not totally sure on that. The upper half of the body where glass is located is completely different...
Sort-of correct. The 1989-1997 cars were the same thing mechanically, electrically, dimensionally and structurally.
Cosmetic differences included the hood, front bumper and headlights (they shared fenders and indicator lights, doors and interiors), the trunklid, rear bumper and taillights, but the biggest difference was of course that the Tbird body was coupe whilst the Cougar was sedan, hence the rear side panels, roof and rear glass were different. Much less so than the difference between any three-door and five-door variant of the same car model. I'd bet the complete fronts of the two cars are interchangeable but not the rears.

A very similar relationship existed between the 1983-88 Cougar and Tbird.
 
Sort-of correct. The 1989-1997 cars were the same thing mechanically, electrically, dimensionally and structurally.
Cosmetic differences included the hood, front bumper and headlights (they shared fenders and indicator lights, doors and interiors), the trunklid, rear bumper and taillights, but the biggest difference was of course that the Tbird body was coupe whilst the Cougar was sedan, hence the rear side panels, roof and rear glass were different. Much less so than the difference between any three-door and five-door variant of the same car model. I'd bet the complete fronts of the two cars are interchangeable but not the rears.

A very similar relationship existed between the 1983-88 Cougar and Tbird.
Negative. 89-97 cougar was still a coupe. A rather ginormous one. However, 2 doors make it a coupe. Sedans in the US have 4 doors.

89-97 cougar
b0e00d52ded57769e88883f4b6b01a26.jpg



90s Tbird
902e5e13236e0a0a5c42b17262f8e0ff.jpg


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

The main difference is the back half of the roof line. Even in the 80s the cougar had that straight up verticle rear glass where as the rear glass on the Tbird is more angled.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Negative. 89-97 cougar was still a coupe. A rather ginormous one. However, 2 doors make it a coupe. Sedans in the US have 4 doors.
...The main difference is the back half of the roof line. Even in the 80s the cougar had that straight up verticle rear glass where as the rear glass on the Tbird is more angled.
OK fair enough; part language, part perception.
You'll agree that from the front to the 'B'-pillar, apart from styling they are the same?
We have saloon cars over here, that have a trunk/boot lid, whether 2 doors or 4.
We also have hatchbacks with 3 or 5 doors, and longer estates like stationwagons.
Technically 8th-gen Cougar is a 3-door hatchback, but to differentiate it from mundane hatchbacks like the Escort, Focus and Mondeo/Contour we prefer to call our only (Ford) Cougar a coupe, same as its predecessors Probe 2 and Capri, and Mustang.
So 7th gen Cougar is equivalent to our saloons, though I appreciate it follows on from 1930s Ford coupe ie. Eliminator (ZZ-Top).
 
Last edited:
OK fair enough; part language, part perception.
You'll agree that from the front to th 'B'-pillar, apart from styling they are the same?
We have saloon cars over here, that have a trunk/boot lid, whether 2 doors or 4.
We also have hatchbacks with 3 or 5 doors, and longer estates like stationwagons.
Technically 8th-gen Cougar is a 3-door hatchback, but to differentiate it from mundane hatchbacks like the Escort, Focus and Mondeo/Contour we prefer to call our only (Ford) Cougar a coupe, same as its predecessors Probe 2 and Capri, and <Mustang.
So 7th gen Cougar is equivalent to our saloons, though I appreciate it follows on from 1930s Ford coupe ie.
Eliminator (ZZ-Top).
The cougar and the thunderbird all the way back to the 70's have always been really close. Similar enough some parts interchange. Kinda like I was finding between the Xtype and the cougar. They actually used alot of the same parts. Suspension, interior bits, engine bits definitely. Although they were super close I think there were enough difference that on body panels you had to use cougar with cougar and tbird with tbird. The doors may have been interchangeable. Same goes with the wings. But I think the rest of the bits were far enough off the bolts wouldnt line up directly or there were gaps in fitment.

I do agree that by looking at the two they look almost identical except for that back area where the rear occupants would be. B-Pillar to Tail lights basically.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
I just want to say that as much as I would love a Rover 827 (R17 Coupe) if and when Tiger dies - and probably would - I would love to own a late 90s Thunderbird.

And on that note, Happy New Year to one and all!
 
I'm far from expert on US cars, for me there are so many that are just slightly wrong in their shape.
Prime example being the Rover 800 coupe was gorgeous, ( It's always been on the list but I've never actually bought one )
The 90s T'bird is the same shape, but wrong. For me the lines just don't quite work.

I accept this is just my opinion and all are welcome to disagree. Maybe if my Dad had gone to USA instead of UK I would hold the opposite point of view and the Rover would be wrong.
 
I'm far from expert on US cars, for me there are so many that are just slightly wrong in their shape.
Prime example being the Rover 800 coupe was gorgeous, ( It's always been on the list but I've never actually bought one )
The 90s T'bird is the same shape, but wrong. For me the lines just don't quite work.

I accept this is just my opinion and all are welcome to disagree. Maybe if my Dad had gone to USA instead of UK I would hold the opposite point of view and the Rover would be wrong.

You're allowed to have an opinion, and I'm glad that it's not quite the same as mine.

See also: Mk8 Lincoln.
 
Thank Both, kinda proves my point.
In the link it look good, but in the main shot for ebay its just not quite there.
It's a big powerful dramatic shape. then suddenly its got all the curves and rounded edges.
I like yank tanks from the earlier years, I guess 50's to 80's after that forget it.

Hang on we rented a buick regal over there around 18 years ago. Transverse V8 and looked OK too. gutless with slush box.

Shall I get my coat ?
 
I'm far from expert on US cars, for me there are so many that are just slightly wrong in their shape.
Prime example being the Rover 800 coupe was gorgeous, ( It's always been on the list but I've never actually bought one )
The 90s T'bird is the same shape, but wrong. For me the lines just don't quite work.

I accept this is just my opinion and all are welcome to disagree. Maybe if my Dad had gone to USA instead of UK I would hold the opposite point of view and the Rover would be wrong.
Nah, your opinion would probably stay the same I like alot of the european cars better then ours. The US cars yeah we have some awesome ones. I mean the cougar we all know and love was the last of a bloodline that dates all the way back to the 60s. Ford and Chevy have had cars very similar to another of its own brand. For instance Ford had the Ford Thunderbird and its sister car was the Mercury Cougar. Chevrolet had the Chevy Camaro and the Pontiac Firebird and Trans Am. All awesome cars.
However, the build quality just isn't as good as say a Jaguar of the same era. (Ford owned Jaguars excluded) I'm talking when Jaguar was owned by an english company not an american company based out of Coventry England. The build quality was just more desireable.
A THEORY I have is because of the MOT laws and emissions laws. My car isn't required to have all this emissions crap on it where I live. Pretty much as long as my seatbelt works, my windscreen isnt busted to the point it obstructs my view, horn works, and my window tint isnt too dark, my car will probably pass.
The wife has taken our blue civic which had a severe exhaust leak a busted windscreen on the passenger side, and the check engine light blasting away and it passed with no problems. You guys if you have a bubble of rust on a non structural part of the car you might fail. I think the car companies know this and we get crappier built cars out of it because they know the quality isn't required here. Could be why Jaguar was hated while Ford owned it. They started building them to US quality instead.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Prime example being the Rover 800 coupe was gorgeous, ( It's always been on the list but I've never actually bought one )
The 90s T'bird is the same shape, but wrong. For me the lines just don't quite work.

I accept this is just my opinion and all are welcome to disagree. Maybe if my Dad had gone to USA instead of UK I would hold the opposite point of view and the Rover would be wrong.
...In the link it look good, but in the main shot for ebay its just not quite there.
It's a big powerful dramatic shape. then suddenly its got all the curves and rounded edges...
The Lincoln MK series was always over the top in styling. The MK8 which was fundamentally the Tbird/Cougar but with all the luxuries and tech that Lincoln could throw at it was obviously the 'best' of the coupes, but despite the opulence the Tbird was the one that better pleased the eye (IMO).
The thing was though, that the each car underwent one or two severe facelifts during production; retaining the same body but changing the style substantially by swapping bumpers, bonnets, grilles, bootlids/taillights and side adornments.

At introduction in 1989, there were several models all with only the V6 engine (the V8 followed in 1991), standard or supercharged, the latter having much crisper lines due to an aggressive front bumper and factory bodykit, in '91 all models got an SC-style bumper.
The more appealing of the Tbirds was the '94-'95 facelift which also happened to be the last of the Super-Coupe (3.8L V6 supercharged, uprated, full factory bodykit and 'directional' alloys).

The '96-'97 facelift, which was only available with injected V6/V8, was much less pretty.

What I'm saying is, you've got to catch the 'right' variation to satisfy, chrome embellishments or plastic, sporty or standard; it's no good just saying 'any of 7th-gen Cougar, 10th-gen Thunderbird or Lincoln MK8'.
 
Thats why I like the late 80's models better. 83-88 tbird and cougar were the foxbody platform. The mustangs of the same period were also foxbody cars. It was nice being able to take a 4cyl or v6 car and swap in say a 91 mustang 5.0L H.O. engine and have it bolt up with no real modifications to the car body. Exhaust could be modified to fit. Suspension parts bolted straight on. ECM transferred over and I dont remember my car having the stupid chip in the key.

Tossing Lincoln into the mix those things didnt sell as much because you have to be rich to buy them during that time. They cost too much for what you get.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited by a moderator: