I felt really stupid on another forum, as I didn’t realize there were no Cougar convertibles made until '69. I had always figured Cougars, like Mustangs, had convertibles from day 1. Now I am wondering why they didn’t make convertibles until so late, anyone know or have some guesses?
It’s not a stupid question at all. It really came down to money. The tooling for a convertible for the 1967-1968 model Cougar was going to cost around $7,000,000. The powers to be did not know what the sales would be like when the Cougar was designed so it was not a risk worth taking. The Cougar was a success in sales and it’s design for 1967 earning it Motor Trends Car of The Year Award. A couple of people have made 67/68 convertibles and I am in the process of making one right now. You can follow my convertible conversion project “Top Cat” here. Here is a link to Bill (Catvert68) Convertible Conversions website where he highlights where some projects have been done.
Steven
Mike I did a lot of research on this for Legendary Cougar Magazine. A very big part of the decision was that they wanted to insure the cars were very well built from job one on. Keeping it to a single body style went a long way toward making that happen.
I interviewed John Eilertsen. the father of the XR-7, and he confirmed it as well.
Very interesting, thanks for all the insights guys, but I wonder if they had to do it over again they would put out convertibles. The sleeker, more “Lincolnesque” style of the Cougar lends itself very well to a convertible, IMO. The Mustang looks better as a fastback than the Cougar would, but the Cougar convertibles are very nice looking, especially those conversions of the early car that started with Kevin’s.
I quite agree.
See, I disagree. Though the 2 I have seen on this forum are VERY well done; I don’t like the look. I think they look a bit goofy? Maybe it’s just because they didn’t make them, and I hadn’t seen one, or just got used to the coupe, but I don’t like the look? The 70 body style looks just fine in a convertible, just the 67 and 68? Not a fan of a convertible…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The '69 and '70 are regarded as two of the very finest looking convertibles ever created. The reason is that they have a very low stack height. What that means is that when the top is folded down, in side view, it becomes essentially invisible.
Compare the Cougar with the Jaguar XK8
or the epitome of bad the VW Cabrio
Yeah, there’s just something about the body lines on the 67-68 that doesn’t fit well for me as a convertible.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Mercury did make 2 1967 Cougar convertibles. They were made as styling exercises and test cars.
Randy Goodling
CCOA #95
^^^ I’ve never heard that before Randy, but that makes since.
Do any old factory photos exist?
- Phillip
Personally, I think it has to do with the fact that conversions, like mine, use mustang top frames which means losing the more formal shape of the Cougar roofline. That kind of stuff bugs me when I look at it sitting in the garage, but is quickly forgotten once the top is down and I’m cruising a twisty country road on a sunny fall day.
I never heard that before. I’d would be great to see photos if they exist. I always love styling/prototype cars and seeing their photos.
Steven
If one could get a hold of the convertible frame and rear seat designs from concept car you could put together a kit.
Never heard that before either - got any pictures?
The frames are the same between Mustang and Cougar I believe. The convertible top itself is the same, just a different staple line on the bottom (one for Cougar, one for Mustang, maybe 1/2" difference). Having said that, the 69/70 convertible roof line is indeed somewhat different and not as stylish as the HT roof (IMO). The 'vert roof is a little less swept back, as evidenced by the width of the panel in front of the trunk lid. This situation is not unique to the Cougar HT vs. 'vert, I have noticed the same thing on some other car models.
Agreed on forgetting all about this once driving! 
For me, it isn’t when the top is up that I am not a fan. It obviously looks different when the top is up, but it’s when the top is down that I think it looks goofy? <–for lack of better word. I’m not real sure what it is about it. That’s why I said maybe it’s just that I’ve never seen one, or just aren’t used to seeing them? Went through the post that someone linked up top and all of the cars are VERY well done, nice cars. I doubt I could pull of a conversion that looked that professional, just ?? Just, a 67-68 Cougar convertible won’t be in my stable any time soon. Lol.
Props to those who have done the conversions and made them look factory…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
IMO, no convertible looks good with the top up, and the removable hard top roadsters are not any better. A convertible is only nice with the top down, that is what it is made for. I have a friend with a '67 Mustang convertible that has had it since new and he claims the top has never been up. I ask him what he does in bad weather, he says he just leaves it in the garage.
I’ve seen lots of pics of prototypes including a couple of mustang station wagons but never a 67/8 cougar vert.
Love to see those pics, Randy!
Phil Parcells and I had a number of conversations about this during the CatVert project. Phil was never able to confirm the rumor of the 2 prototypes and our conversation with John Aiken, who led the 1967 Cougar design team, indicated that the convertible option was taken off the table pretty much right from the beginning.
If you look at my informal convertible conversion page, the car labeled as owned by Keith Meredith is the one that fueled the prototype rumor. However, when it came up for sale a few years ago, Phil was able to determine that it was an early conversion and not a factory prototype.
It would be really interesting to see a factory prototype, though, if one was actually done before the hardtop-only decision was taken. I think it would show that the original approach taken by Kevin Marti is exactly what the factory would have done. It’s basically what they did in '69.
With CatVert, we wanted to keep that distinctive Cougar look so the roofline is more swept back than the Mustang (although we used a Mustang frame) and the filler panel is narrower, closer to the actual panel size on the hardtop. It also doesn’t have any more of a stacked look with the top down than the Mustang or most other convertibles of that era had. But different tastes are the reason we have so many brands and models to choose from and that’s a good thing.
Well said Bill. That’s the reason I think resto-mods are so much fun. Everyone has different tastes. I like the convertible conversions even if they are not “one off’s” anymore they are cool in my book. I am a little biased if the truth be told. 
Steven