1975 Chrysler Cordoba Commercial vs Monte Carlo & Mercury Cougar
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ก.ค. 2019
- Personally, I'd take the Cordoba over everything here only because Chrysler was higher on the food chain in relation to Luxury Cars than Chevy......and in my opinion Mercury. Please remember folks, that the Cordoba was a seriously important car for Chrysler Financially. 1974 was a terrible year for the auto industry in general with the Chrysler Brand losing a big chunk of sales in the market place the Cordoba was the first small Chrysler and it sold 150,000 units in it's first year. by 76, another 120,000 units and then a big increase in sales for 77 up to 183,000 units. All making money Chrysler Corp badly needed.
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
![[ไฮไลต์] ฟุตบอลชาย ญี่ปุ่น vs ปารากวัย รอบแบ่งกลุ่ม | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X_BeGaAv1oM/mqdefault.jpg)
My second car was a 1976 Córdoba. It was 6 years old when I got it. Best riding car I ever owned. Never felt any bumps, RR tracks, or pot holes. Ride was amazing. She had a 400 V8 and moved out great. What a car!!!
I love all 3! Wouldn't mind having any one of them for a daily driver!
I bought a 75 Doba in 83. Still have it.
Of those three, I thought the Cougar looked the most elegant. When the Monte got the stacked front headlights in '76, almost everyone bought one. They were everywhere.
What! No "crushed velour" or "rich Corinthian leather?"
And where was Ricardo Montalban?
@ces4399, @nonelost1, this is what I would call a "comparison film," designed for use by dealers.
I think they were all pretty good cars , but I bought a car about this time and I did not but any of these, bought a used Riviera, it was a very nice car in those days
Love how they spin that the Córdoba manual sun roof is so much better then the electric sunroofs in the other two cars!
And cranking it open is so safe and easy while driving!
But you save $54 dollars by cranking the roof open yourself. 😁😁
At least it won't get stuck open in the rain when the motor fails.
I remember as a kid back then, buying a car with a center arm rest was VERY important as many cars didn't even have one!!
I remember as well - it was a definite prestige item :)
@@joeseeking3572 Yes, I remember my father and uncle BOTH bragged when showing their cars that they had an ARMREST!!!
@@TheSpritz0 Very prestigious for sure. I now have them also on my bicycle.
Great observation about what the armrest "represented" at the time. Leather interiors; center armrests... these were among the items that were not expected until you moved up to the 'premium' or the 'luxury' segment: as a traditional member of the 'premium, 'near-luxury' segment Chrysler's offered a prestige the others lacked. We forget: yes, Chevrolet's Monte Carlo dominated the 'personal luxury' game by offering a stylish package, but that's an example of how it was clear that it was still an offering from one of the low-priced three.
Herb Tarlek would approve.
Joe Pesci preferred the Monte Carlo when meeting someone in the desert.
Absolutely beautiful. My kind of cars.
I never drove a Cordoba but I always wanted one mainly because I thought the front-end was the best looking of the comparable personal luxury cars. My dad had a 77 Monte Carlo which was okay, but it felt too narrow relative to its length. When you went around turns, it felt unwieldy swinging that long hood around a corner.
The rectangular headlights that GM & Chrysler fitted in 1976 ruined the appearance of these beautiful cars. The rectangular headlights in the latter year Mercury were fine. We need the Rricardo Montalban advertisement to put this into context!
They are all nice good-looking Vehicles compared to the jellybean cars of today
Imagine these personal luxury coupes were perhaps 20% of the market in the 1970's, with dozens of color combinations. Now nothing but endless boring SUV'S in your choice of silver, grey or black with a black interior. They were hardly great cars but I wish there were at least one modern coupe still available.
Intermediate sized cars pre 1974 had only in total 30% of the market, sedans, wagons and coupe, Full Sized Cars were at 50% of the Market in 1973, the remaining 20% was compacts. That all shifted around in 1974. 20% for personal luxury cars seems high for 1975, i"m thinking it was more like 10% of the market at most.
I agree! I miss these cars, and the times they represent 😔
Good news - there IS a modern personal luxury coupe still available for sale! It's called a Dodge Challenger. What, you say? That's NOT a personal luxury car? As someone who owns a late-model Challenger (R/T) and also a personal luxury car from the past (1977 Cutlass Supreme), I would say that these two cars have many of the same attributes. I don't consider the Challenger a 'pony car' like Mustang and Camaro, because it's so much larger (thankfully) and is more of a grand-touring car than sports car. The Challenger IS big - it has a 116-inch wheelbase. Compare that to a mid-70s personal luxury coupe and you'll find it's about the same (Monte Carlos were on a 116" wheelbase and Cutlass 2-doors on a 112" wheelbase.) My Challenger is equipped for comfort, with power windows/seat/locks/trunk lid, tilt, cruise, power sun roof, leather buckets and console - just like a '70s personal luxury coupe. I consider my Challenger a modern-day personal luxury coupe. If I COULD buy a brand new '70s personal luxury coupe though, I'd sure love it! :-)
@@allhart18 I saw a challenger for the first time in my country and it was a lot small than I expected, to me it looked smaller than the current mustang.
@@allhart18 I totally agree, I own one and I think all the time how it's very much like what a personal luxury car of the 70's was. When folks complain "I wish they made cars like this again"....they do!!!!! I own one to prove it!
You still see old Monte Carlos but these two other junkyards have been melted a long time ago and made into new ones😜
I think it's where you live, I see Cordobas still at car shows and cruise nights, Monte Carlos too, I never see Grand Prix cars at all. they rotted pretty bad quickly
What about production numbers? Chevy is a cheaper brand than Chrysler, A more fair comparo would be Buick Regal.
The Cougar looks the best.
th-cam.com/video/RBix4k80uHQ/w-d-xo.html I can confirm that😂
Agree. I owned a 1978 Cougar and it was way more elegant than the 1978 Cordoba. It closely resembled the 78 Lincoln Mark V Series with all the options and ride of the Lincoln Mark V.
Without question the Cougar has best ride.
I almost don’t believe that the 75’ Monte Carlo equipped with automatic transmission on base model was an option
It's true. The brochure says so. '75 was the last year for a theoretical standard 3-on-the-tree. I used to think none were ever ordered that way, but I remember an ad in Hemmings over 20 years for a '72 so equipped.
roger628
I think that would be fun to drive
Depends on how you define the ride, the Chrysler has a very different ride than the Monte Carlo or Mercury, but I like that ride better, more firm and more control, not a couch on wheels. If you like that, yes, the Cougar was the better ride, but that's not a style of ride I like
OsbornTramain
I remember the T-Bird over railroad tracks and bumps and hands down the better ride.
Incidentally I choose the Grand Prix in a 73’ year model
I like all of them. I had a 74 Monte Carlo, loved it.
Me too!
The Chrysler Cordoba was the hottest sharp on the road. We called in Personal Luxury.
Although the other 2 rank, especially the Cougar, along with the '62-'68 Ford Thunderbirds.
Fine Corinthian leather !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! guess that was first offered in 1976 or 77.
The Cordoba has the best looks by far
I agree
But with Cougar, you can get some "Miaaou" in your life.
I have a 76’ Chrysler Córdoba ,what year was this video shot ?
at 0:36 to 0:47 looks like my mother, Ironic as the Monte Carlo was HER car. I'm a GM guy myself, but having driven all three "platforms" here. The MoPar wins on handling,BAR NONE. And here's the weird part: The Mopar platform was the OLDEST of the lot. The GM offerings were a 1973 debut, the FoMoCo was new for '72...The platform that Cordoba was on? The "full size" Plymouth platform from 1962!!! Yep. YEARS ahead of it's time!
The only problem with the
Chrysler was that holley carb.
That ended up putting them
Out of business in a few years.
They were so stupid to not go
Right back to Carter Carbs...
holleys SUCK...
Chrysler kept on building these big land yachts at the peak of the '73 gas crunch just as the imports where making inroads advertising as the best small cars for fuel mileage alot higher than what the Big 3 continued to pump out gas pigs. Caddy was guilty of cranking out its land yachts while sucking fuel at the same time.
Yeah but they are cool looking, comfortable land yachts!
The Cordoba was actually the first Chrysler-branded midsize car. All through the '60s and up to the gas crunch they boasted of "no jr. editions!" Anything less than a C-body was a Plymouth or Dodge. The Cordoba was actually advertised as "the small Chrysler" in print ads and 30-second spots. Of course, they didn't mean it was a small *car*, just more compact than the Chrysler marque had offered in recent years.
you know, it takes about 3 years to get a car into production. When the oil embargo hit, that meant anything that was being introduced in 1974 was already in the process three years earlier. Cadillac and Chrysler (brand) didn't offer any small cars, only full sized, they weren't like mercury or buick or Oldsmobiles that had smaller ranges of Cars. So of course they were going to be hit harder by the Embargo and the changes in tastes of people. Seville came out in 75, pretty quick and Cordoba (which was originally designed as a Plymouth Sebring in 1975). They couldn't react any faster than that.
Cadillacs of this era still sold well despite the fuel crisis. Rich people probably were not to concerned about fuel economy.
@@barnabyjones6995 no, they suffered sales declines too, maybe not as much as Chrysler, but they did suffer as well,
Is this just a teaser? Part 2? Or maybe the first part was not in good shape?
Either way thanks for the upload love these old comparisons!
Keep an eye on our channel for some great content coming soon!
Cheers
How about the Auto commercial that had Hugh Downs advertising a I think an LTD that had a diamond cutter on a bumpy road cutting the diamond,then he said PERFECT,because the ride was so smooth
That was the 1972 Mercury and no, Hugh Downs wasn't in it, I do have a play list titled "in the back seat of a mercury" which has many of the Mercury commercials with people doing various things in the back to show the smooth ride th-cam.com/video/IjTl9MY503Q/w-d-xo.html
Wow, a one year warranty was a big deal in those days!?
And lemons abound!
I never realized that I would have to buy the Cordoba. :) Cougar would be the second choice.
Who's messing with the EQ?
4:36...Now there's a bumper to bumper warranty, but with the car propped up on four jacks sans wheels. I believe 1975 was the only year they offered that 1 year unlimited mileage warranty (except tires).
What warranty length was it otherwise? 30 days?
I'm a true GM fan and have always loved the Grand Prix's, Cutlass's and Monte's..... The Cordoba is sweet too..... but DANG that Cougar looks good.
The 1978 Grand Prix is my favorite of them all, so long as it's the LJ with bucket leather seats and all the power goodies, as well as the premium Pontiac rims. They drove so beautifully, and were so nimble. To hear the transmission shift during acceleration was absolutely beautiful.
The drive train in that Cougar was pretty tough. A C4 automatic and a 9 inch rear are hard to beat in the reliability department. All of these cars were good, though.
Very nice cars of the best era
You could order a 7.4 L 454CID V-8 in a Monte Carlo in 1975, but the largest Cordoba/Charger motor was the 6.6L 400CID V-8.
Jeffrey Kein They conveniently left that out, didn't they?
We had the 75 454 Monte. It was a beautiful and fast car. Driving it at 16 years old, I flirted with death on more than one occasion. I remember the bucket seats swiveled out to make exiting the drivers seat easier!
In the mercury cougar you could get a 460v8
@@gened7756 Yes, you could, rated @ 216 net horsepower.
George Pepperman My Dad had a pretty dark green one about 77’ model with those swivel buckets! Talk about Koollll!! 🤩😎Somehow he found a pretty cool Cutless which might have been the green car bcoz the Monte Carlo was pretty shiny silver/blue with a half white leather top & front was the matching blue with blue interior I think was fabric? We always took pictures but somehow didn’t get many of these two? I’m a child of the 60’s & my Parents thought the “boat” of a Ford LTD was good! It was a nice Family car but scary for a young 16yr old who didn’t actually like to drive!!
Monte Carlo was great. I had a 74/75 hybrid. It was a 74 with 75 bumpers. Anyway, great looking car and it was my favorite car I ever had
The Monte Carlos seemed to be on the road long after the others were sent for scrap.
I had a 75 Monte Carlo with swivel buckets.
I want the one with rich Corinthian leather.
For an apparent better car I've never heard of it. Am a Monte fan, though this was not one of my favorite Montes.
The tires in all the close-ups looked rather low.🤔
I miss my 1975 Chrysler Cordoba which was my first car
My dad has a 77 cougar lol
Roof noises?
Shack rattles
monte carlo i had a 73 the motor ran forever they dont make them like that anymore i think the motor is in a buddys chevell
I'd rather the rear coils.
Other than that id choose the Chrysler Cordoba and I'm a Ford man
I believe in the very late 70s the Chrysler Cordoba was introduced by It actor by the name of Ricardo Montalban who spoke highly of the car and especially with its Rich deep luxurious Corinthian leather.
I can still recall Ricardo saying CORDOVA
actually Richard Basehart Did the first Cordoba Commercials, Recardo came along after him or at the same time.....Recard lasted, Basehart didn't
it was also early 70's, September 1974
That 12 month warranty though...
Guess how many of all 3 went to demolition derby
Cuando chrsysler hacia buenos autos mi padre tuvo los buick skirlack y riviera eran lujosos despues tuvo el forf ltd landau otro carro lujoso y despues los cadillac de ville ,seville y dos cadillac el dorado 91 y 95 la cuspide del lujo
In the USA, The Ford LTD would not have been considered a Luxury Car. It was a low priced car. The Buick Skylark wouldn't have been considered a Luxury Car in the USA either. The Cadillac, and Riviera would have been considered luxury cars. Generally speaking, the determination of LUxury in the USA is based on Price. An LTD would and Skylark wouldn't have been in the Luxury price range, but low price and middle price categories.
And in the modern world all of those options are pretty much pointless, so the only thing that leaves to matter anymore are the looks, and my choice was the Cougar and still is
I always thought of Chrysler as a premium brand in the U.S. I know how and why the Cordoba was needed but wouldn't comparing a Chrysler branded car with a Chevrolet and Mercury dilute the Chrysler brand?
Mercury was a premium brand and Chevy did offer the Caprice and Monte Carlo which crossed over the price line into the middle price field. chrysler was middle to upper, Imperial was upper like Caddy and Lincoln.......so it's a fair comparison in my mind. They were targeting a specific market and buyer
@@OsbornTramain I would have compared Cordoba to the Cougar and either Cutlass or Regal
@@1983jblack
The 1976-'77 Buick Regal would have just eradicated any comparisons ALL around.
ESPECIALLY on looks... Hands down.
Didn't know 75 Monte Carlo had a manual transmission option. Seals gimmick at it's best.
Lol. Show me a mid 70's Monte with a manual trans. I'll take it.
Show me a 2 barrel 318 that can outrun a 2 barrel 351 Windsor or "M" Ford engine or a 2 barrel 350 Chevy even during the smog era like the video says.
Monte Carlo and Cordoba are practically look alike cousins.
Lobster Train??? LOL Lobster Trail?? LOl
Lobster Trap.. was a famous restaurant in Los Angeles and surrounding areas.
Looks like the now-abandoned Lobster Trap at the end of Peninsula Rd., Channel Islands Harbor in Oxnard, CA
When specialty models were the Happening Thing!
This either has to be a 1975 comparison, or Chrysler is comparing their 76 model to a 75 model monte carlo.
Lean Burn was introduced in the 1976 Model Year. So I would imagine that this possibly is a 75 Monte Carlo, there is no mention of Lean Burn which wouldn't have happened until 1976. I"m going to change the title to 1975. Thanks for picking this up. I've got the film in raw form, not the actual plastic cartridge it would have had.
@@OsbornTramain Also, the '76 Monte had the 4 square stacked headlamps. I had a '77 Dodge Monaco with Lean Burn. It ran better after it was disconnected. And after the catalytic converter was replaced with regular exhaust pipe. Nice car, though. I had this car in the mid 90's, and the air conditioning still blew cold.
Personal lURUXY Back then
FWIU the identical Dodge Charger SE was cheaper than a Cordoba, and not by a small amount. Shows what the right name and image-building ad campaign would do, especially for cars like these that were all about image in the first place (otherwise, why look past the Dart/Valiant?)
But the Charger wasn't identical in interior appointments or options. The Charger was sportier, but yes very similar The Charger was 4 grand, the Cordoba 5 grand, but the Cordoba had a lot of standard equipment the Charger didn't have, you had to pay extra for it.
@@OsbornTramain Good point. There was some overlap but the famous Corinthian leather was Chrysler-exclusive and there was something similar in vinyl that was standard and only available in Dodges, at least in '75.
@@OsbornTramain True. Which is why it would have been a better comparison for them to have used a Cutlass, rather than a Monte Carlo, in this comparison.
nlpnt My “little” brother was just remembering this past week how in the Summer heat you would get in those hot vinyl/leather seats & if you had shorts you were moving around until the AC kicked in... he restores cars but has not been picky.. he has done the work himself to provide vehicles for his 3 children when they needed a car for high school... now they are grown & gone he bought them Fords bcoz they were less expensive & easier to fix for kids.. now he is restoring Dodge Charger (newer model) for himself... 🤩
@@seed_drill7135 I think because Monte Carlo was cheaper and didn't have a lot of the Cordoba's extras- so it made them look better ;)
I prefer the 1978&1979 Cordova's!
Cuando chris
The only good thing about Cordoba was its "Soft Corinthian Leather." Per Ricardo Montalban.
That's NOT an electronic digital clock........................THAT is a "rolling number" analog clock with a motor in it!
That was digital before VFD came out in 1976 I believe in cars
Technically it is digital as it reads out in digits. That's their workaround for that. They put true electronic digital clocks and stereos in Chryslers starting in 1978.
2.45 axle ratio....drag strip gear.
Loll
1 minute quarter mile
The Cordoba was a much needed non-basic transportation hit for Chrysler as well, up to that point the Dart/Valiant had been their strongest entry in the marketplace. Much the same position that would happen a decade later when the minivans came on strong with no upper limit to the options people bought after years of the K car and Omnirizon keeping the lights on.
Yes, people don't remember what a sales success this car was for Chrysler. It kept them out of bankruptcy in the mid 70's....they woule be in trouble down the road again, but the Cordoba saved their asses in 1976
The twighlight zone the 1974 Chevrolet Monte Carlo clunker the touchscreen wireless internet phone amazing the Roman Catholic crucifex to heal with double amazing
Chevy much better car. Crazy to say this
Actually, the Cougar was the best made It was also the most expensive of the three but the GM A-bodies had horrible rust issues in the mid-70s and the door handles would break off inside and out and the bumpers would rust thru because of opposing metals.. From 1972 on back the GM cars were great but they turned to shit from 1973 on and didn't get good again until the late 80s.
@Gary true Caprice a NYc taxi favorite car
@Gary The late 70s GM were not good because the downsizing was done too fast. Ford bodies and trim pieces held up much better and they didn't have the rust issue GM had. Part of GMs problem was the two different metals they used on the bumpers and mounting. Then you had the internal parts of the door coming off, the outer door handles and the dash would crack after a few years. GM never had those problems in the 50s and 60s. Ford had issues in the late 60s but when they got sued, they got their act together. chrysler also had issues but the other big issue GM had was the paint. Laquer gave a nice shine but it would break down after a few years. Ford used baked on enamel with a clearcoat. Anyway, all 3 companies build great products today.
@Gary The X body was another one. I live in Saginaw Michigan where we built the engines and trannies for those cars and Flint is 30 miles from is where they built the Buick cars and the Chevy Trucks. We saw these problems first hand and management was told about it but they said the cars would last long enough until the customer traded them in. Even the turn signal switches on GM cars felt like they were going to break off. Ford always had a nice smooth turn signal lever and switch. Now. GM did have very good steering and power steering and tilt wheel assembly but part of that was because they were making them for other manufacturers like Rolls Royce and AMC and many other companies. I had a 75 Monte Carlo and that car felt really well made but after a few years parts started breaking like the door handles and the HVAC switch would quit because the cable would freeze up. Right up to 1972, the GM midsize cars were top grade cars. The 442 and the Lemans were great cars.
>> I owned all 3 in the seventies, the Cougar was the best IMHO.
🤣😂🤣😂🤣
?
This must have been created for idiots wherein they’re not comparing apples with apples. How did the Monte Carlo end up in the same league as the Cordoba? If a fair comparison were to be made then it would be more fitting for the Cougar, Córdoba and Gran Prix.
Monte Carlo was a target for every car maker, mostly because it was the most affordable.
Cordoba was garbage. Check the sales. You'll find people preferred the Monte Carlo.
I had a 1977 Cordoba. My friend had a 1976 Monte. The Cordoba was clearly the better car except for that damned lean burn 318V8
The 318 wasn't available with a Lean Burn until 1978, if you had 318 in 1977, you didn't have Lean Burn. It was only on the 400 and 440 in 1977 and not available in California or High Altitude areas.
For the guy who's 39 but thinks he's 19 😉
And none of these cars had catalytic converters...leaded gas...the good old days when cars needed points and condensers, seat belts were cut off and 4 door cars were scarce.
Chrysler had electronic ignition in '73. No more points.
Wrong; starting 1975, all of these vehicles used unleaded fuel ⛽ only.
@@frothe42 not exactly, for the most part, 1975 is the year that Auto Companies started using Catalytic Converters, but in AMC's and Chrysler's case, not all of their cars were equipped that way, some of them still could use leaded gas and didn't have a Cat. Now specifically to the Cordoba, I don't know, but I do know that there were some cars by Chrysler Corp in 75 that didn't use Cats yet. By 1976, yes all cars had them.
@@OsbornTramain
Didn't the" Lean Burn " system eliminate the need for a catalytic converter on the 400-4bbl ?!
My 1978 Chrysler Cordoba my old school Cleveland Ohio pt.1 Click link
th-cam.com/video/NShvEJNqyic/w-d-xo.html
I love all 3! Wouldn't mind having any one of them for a daily driver!