Good morning, Autopians! It’s Friday, Friday the 13th to be precise, so in that spirit we’re looking at – you guessed it – black cats. Which one of these would you avoid, if it crossed your path? That’s what we’re here to find out.
Yesterday we went back to basics, with a couple of just plain ol’ used cars. I always read the comments before I check the poll results, just to see if I can read the room and guess what the results will be. Honestly, I thought this would be a closer match; there were a lot of Saturn fans (or apologists?) in the comments. But no; the Subaru ran away with it.
For my money, real or imaginary, it’s the Saturn Vue all the way. But that’s just because I don’t like Subaru, and have no desire to own one. I’d make an exception for an XT or a Brat, but not some run-of-the-mill wagon.
All right, I admit it: there’s no common thread between today’s cars except the fact that they’re both painted black, and both named after cats. And Ford, I suppose. What is this, rocket surgery? Let’s just look at the cars.
2017 Jaguar XE 25T – $10,500
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.0 liter dual overhead cam inline 4, eight-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Valencia, CA
Odometer reading: 98,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
I can’t imagine, if you asked a group of British car enthusiasts, that any of them would say the whole British Leyland thing was a good idea. Not only did the individual marques lose a lot of their identity being all mashed together under one corporate overlord, not only did quality suffer across the board, but after the whole thing came crashing down, the former British Leyland members that survived were sold off piecemeal, and suffered further at the hands of their new owners. Jaguar survived, but didn’t exactly thrive, under Ford’s stewardship, and still hasn’t quite gotten its mojo back under its new owner Tata. I was only peripherally aware of this car’s existence before I found it for sale.
It’s a good-looking sedan, rear-wheel-drive as a Jaguar should be, with none of that transverse Ford V6 nonsense of the X-Type that preceded it. It is a Ford engine, however, a 2.0 liter EcoBoost four, backed by a ZF eight-speed automatic. It sounds like a pretty robust drivetrain, but you have to go all the way back to 1949 to find the last Jaguar with only four cylinders; it feels like this should have an inline six. It runs and drives well, and is just shy of 100,000 miles.
This is not your Uncle Albert’s Jaguar on the inside, that’s for sure. Where once there was wood, chrome, and Connolly leather, now we find a generic cockpit full of plastic, paddle shifters, and, William Lyons protect us, a touchscreen. Worse than that, it has one of those awful rotary gear selectors. You can take Jaguar out of Ford, but apparently you can’t take all of the Ford out of Jaguar. At least it’s in good condition inside.
Depreciation is always hardest on luxury cars, and this is no exception. This car originally cost $37,500, which means it has lost seventy-two percent of its value in seven years. By contrast, the humble Toyota Camry of the same year seems to have lost around 30 percent. This car is actually a few grand cheaper than a couple of Camrys I found with more miles on them. Does that make it a bargain, though?
1978 Mercury Cougar – $8,995
Engine/drivetrain: 351 cubic inch overhead valve V8, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Eugene, OR
Odometer reading: 70,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
The Mercury Cougar didn’t quite have nine lives, but it had quite a few. This is from its “big-ass personal luxury coupe” period, in the late 1970s, with huge overhangs, gaudy trim, and a lazy cast-iron V8 with pathetic horsepower figures but gobs of torque. It was the sister model to Ford’s Thunderbird during this time, in two-door form anyway; four-door and wagon Cougars were also available, based on the Ford LTD II.
The seller doesn’t indicate which big lazy V8 is under this car’s aircraft-carrier-deck-sized hood, and the VIN decoder I found online was only mildly helpful. The engine code used by this car – H – indicates a 351 cubic inch engine, but Ford offered two engines with that displacement. Whichever one it is, it runs well, but that vacuum (or PCV?) line hanging off in space over the left-hand valve cover doesn’t inspire much confidence.
Speaking of missing information, this ad talks about the fabulous “retro” interior in this car, and then doesn’t show us any photos. With only 70,000 miles on it, it should be in good shape, but the fact that there’s no photo of it is worrisome. Are they hiding something, or just lazy?
It also appears to be suffering from “freshly-washed syndrome,” a sneaky, underhanded way of making a car look shinier than it is. I don’t think the car is in bad shape, so why the wet look? It is for sale from one of those mildly sketchy-looking dealerships. Maybe they photograph all their cars wet.
Once again, we have two cars that nobody in their right mind would cross-shop. But that’s the danger when I do these theme days; I needed two black cars named after cats, and these were the two that caught my eye. Hopefully one of them catches your eye, as well.
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
What I believe I can see of the valve cover bolt pattern suggests to me that we’re looking at a 351M or 400 in that Ford.
How about none of the above. If the Cougar was about $4000 cheaper MAYBE. It is an interesting looking piece at least.
The Jag, HELL NO!!! If I wanted one of them Id buy a late 00’s Lexus G350. They might as well be the same damn car looks wise, except the Lexus is built to last and has a pretty ballsy naturally aspirated(aka simple and doesnt break) V6 under the hood
As tempted as I am by the big, lazy “Vee Ate Mow-der” in a gigantic “personal luxury coupe”, the Jaaaaaaag still has more charisma (even with a 4-pot) and is something I’d actually consider dailying.
Normally I’d go old skool, but I’ll take the JAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG.
It’s just better and a decent deal. If the other car was a Lincoln Mark V
I would pick that
The Jag. But only if it is for sale by someone that has owned it a few years and can answer some questions and show some receipts. Now, I do really like these malaise Cougars, and you can do some things to one with a performance catalog, but there’s no way in hell I am buying one from some shithole-looking dealer when there are seriously nice one-owner cars out there available on the auction sites.
Cougar for sure! Its nearby too! That 351 with only 70k will be great.
If the cougar’s price was cut in half, than perhaps.
I could maybe do a pristine late 60s Cougar XR7, but this example’s era, no way.
I’ve only driven the Jag in diesel form, but it was a beautifully balanced car, more like a E90 than an F30 3 series.
I love that Jag and the Ford engine is actually a plus even if it’s only a 4 banger.
I know I would regret it long term, but I’d take the Jag. I like the looks and plastic or not, the interior looks like a nice place to be.
That 78 cougar is one of those platforms where I’d do a pro-touring/nascar build.
Stretch the wheelbase from the front suspension (body-on-frame using the Gran Torino chassis) build up the 351, do the suspension, manual-valve body the auto and dump it on gold-painted D-hole steelies and some fat white-letter tires.
However, The 77-79 T-bird generation was the BEST selling T-bird of any generation, and they’ve lasted. You can have your pick of them.
Jag.
Jag easily. I owned a diesel version back in the U.K. and it was a great car to drive. I have an F Type now, but I have a feeling the V6 versions of the XE would be just as good to drive as the F Type.
If the Mercury were $5k cheaper…maybe
If you like the Cougar, there’s a 78 T-bird on Seattle craigslist for only $800. Looks pretty clean, but has been in storage 10 years so it’ll need a little maintenance before driving.
They’re both overpriced in my opinion, but if forced to choose? The Cougar is the clear winner. That Jag will never be reliable, but the Cougar? I can fix the two reliability concerns with a carburetor swap and an MSD ignition box.
This was my take as well. My wife thinks we’re both crazy.
I’m a mechanic for a living, so the last thing I want to do after working on other people’s cars all day is work on mine (which is why I’ve had all of the parts to rebuild my GMC’s transmission for a year, but I just keep driving it around in 3rd so it doesn’t overheat from the slipping 2-4 band).
If it makes any difference, Lou’s cut the price of the Cougar by three grand, but there’s still only eight photos and only the first one loads for me. Also: the form text paragraph that ends the long descriptions of all the listings spells the dealership’s name as “Lou Gultz” despite the sign in the photo that contradicts it. This gives me pause and I still haven’t voted yet.
Not a fan of Landau roofs so the Jag and it’s stout mechanicals (electronic gremlins notwithstanding) for the win
Man, I like some ugly cars but that Cougar looks so bad that it’s gone right past good and back around to bad again.
Fun fact: 1978 was the Cougar’s best-selling year ever, and the wagon was a 1977-only one-year-wonder.
I already have a 70s Cougar, and I’ve always wanted a Jag, so that’s the way I’m voting today, but I wouldn’t turn either away if they just showed up on the back patio ( which is how we got our most recent cat).
The Cougar doesn’t have tint. So, it’s automatically my choice.
It’s gotta be the Jaaaaaaag. Plastic aside, I’m betting that cabin is a very nice place to be.
No way in hell am I am paying $9K for that Cougar. Not interested in 70’s Ford malaise anyway and not for the crack head price. And if you talk about some great “retro” interior, show some damn pictures. And wouldn’t “retro” just mean period correct in that case. And it’s been sitting on Craigslist for 29 days already. What a shock.
So give me the Jaguar. The price seems right and seems like a nice place to spend some drive time.