2014 Ford F250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1971 Mercury Comet 2-Door Sedan

When Ford introduced the original Maverick for the 1970 model year, Dearborn tradition required that a Mercury-badged version be created. That car ended up being the Comet, built from the 1971 through 1977 model years. Here's one of those first-year Comets in rough but recognizable condition, found in a Denver self-service yard not long ago. The Comet name had spent the 1960s affixed to the flanks of Mercurized Ford Falcons (1960-1965) and Fairlanes (1966-1969). Since the Maverick was the successor of the Falcon — sales of which went into an irrecoverable downward spiral once its sportier Mustang first cousin hit the streets — it made sense to move the Comet name over to the Mercury version. Nearly every American Mercury model ever sold was a U.S.-market Ford model with a different name and some gingerbread slapped on. Notable exceptions to this tradition include the 1999-2002 Mercury Cougar (mechanically based on the Contour but with a unique body) and the 1991-1994 Mercury Capri (an Australian-built mashup of Mazda components borrowed from the Ford Laser). The Comet was by far the cheapest Mercury model available in 1971, though it was considered more prestigious than its Maverick counterpart. The price tag on the '71 Comet two-door sedan started at $2,217 (about $16,505 in 2022 dollars), while the '71 Maverick two-door sedan cost $2,175 ($16,193 today). Meanwhile, AMC would sell you a new Hornet two-door sedan for one dollar less than a Maverick, Chevrolet had the Nova coupe for a dollar more than the Maverick, and Plymouth offered the Valiant Duster for $2,313 ($17,220 now). Toyota had a Maverick competitor as well that year, with the Corona at $2,150 for the sedan and $2,310 for the coupe. Having driven every one of the aforementioned models, I'd take the Duster if I went back in time and had to choose one (as a 1969 Corona owner, I'm not a fan of the 1971 facelift, though the Corona's build quality beats the Duster's). The build sticker on this car tells us that it was built at the Kansas City Assembly Plant (where Transits and F-150s are made today) and sold through the Los Angeles district sales office (there was a DSO in Denver, so it's a near-certainty that this car didn't start out in Colorado). The paint started out as Bright Blue Metallic (it's neither bright nor metallic 51 years down the road) and the interior was done up in Medium Blue Cloth & Vinyl.

Shelby GT500 and Roush Stage 3 go head to head at the drag strip

The Ford Mustang is a brilliantly affordable source of horsepower, with a base 300-plus-horsepower version available for well under $30,000. Jumping up to about $35,000 will get you a solid 420 horsepower from a high-revving V8, while those with some extra disposable income can get a pair of 600-plus-horsepower monsters. Both the Roush Stage 3 with its Phase 3 package and Ford's factory Shelby GT500 even crest the 650-horsepower mark, with 675 and 662 ponies, respectively.
Naturally, someone needed to find out which of these hi-po Mustangs was the quickest. And while this video is quite obviously a dealership commercial, at least there's some solid drag racing between two of the most powerful performance machines available for under $100,000.
With two NHRA drag racers at the wheel, the Stage 3 and GT500 go head to head for three races. Scroll down below to see the results in the full video.

Ford could make as much as $13k profit for every F-150

The Ford F-Series is a perennial member of the US bestseller list with the title in its brawny grasp for over 30 years, and the truck ranks as the top-selling model over $50,000 in the country. It shouldn't come as a shock then that the model is a major buttress of Ford's bottom line. Have you ever wondered just how vital the trucks are to the Blue Oval's health, though? Some math based on recent figures suggests they might be even more important than you think. Automotive News recently did the calculation and came up with that each F-150 sold contributed about $13,333 to the company's profits. That number was based on a statement from Ford CFO Bob Shanks that the automaker could have made another $1 billion in North America for the first quarter with a repeat of last year's sales of the F-150 and Edge, with 60,000 more trucks and 15,000 additional crossovers. If those 75,000 missing vehicles cost the company $1 billion, then they averaged $13,333 each. Also, the F-150 makes up 80 percent of the lost sales, so you might even conclude that each pickup brings even more money into Ford. Automotive News also extrapolates further. Based on a forecast of 800,000 F-Series sales this year, that's about $10.7 billion going into Ford's coffers. Obviously, these figures are far from exact since they are based on a single statement from the automaker's CFO. Autoblog reached out to Ford to see if the numbers were accurate, but the Blue Oval wouldn't comment on vehicle profitability. However, AutoPacific analyst Dave Sullivan suggests these figures could be on the right track, if a bit high. "The rough guess has been $10,000. Obviously that is a little different for a $60k truck vs a regular cab 4x2 work truck, but $10,000 is the ball park that is used," he said to Autoblog. If you ever wonder why Ford might be loathe to bring the smaller Ranger back to the US when it's available elsewhere, these huge profits are likely part of the answer. The Blue Oval has little reason to cut into the sales of a model that makes the brand billions. Related Video: