impdb.org

IGCD

[ Login ]

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

Hellbender; Fellow Travelers; New Horizons: Australia and New Zealand; A Cure for Impatience; Jedini izlaz; Jeff Panacloc: A la poursuite de Jean-Marc; Marie Brand; パーフェクトデイズ; Four Brothers; আমার অন্তরে তুমি; The Goat; Sukces; La Sangre del Camaleón; 飛越校園; Fractured; (more...)

1972 Ford Cortina L MkIII

1972 Ford Cortina MkIII in The Motorway File, Short Movie, 1975

Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin:

1972 Ford Cortina L MkIII

00:04:40 Vehicle used a lot by a main character or for a long time

Comments about this vehicle

Author	Message
dsl ◊ 2017-07-01 02:04	LLX 513K = London April-July 72. This film is packed with Cortinas, but I suppose Britain was as well in 1975, so it's accurate. There's at least 5 in this pic and here's some more (all 1), mixed versions
cl82 ◊ 2017-07-01 20:57	Wasn't it the best-selling car in Britain for most of the time it was available? Inexplicable as Chrysler UK had such a great range of products to offer at the same time.
Gamer ◊ 2017-07-01 21:04	I can't find the pic now, but they made an ad for the Chrysler 180, and all the people in the shot were looking at something across the lake in the background. Must've been too solitary for them...
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2017-07-01 23:56	cl82 wrote Wasn't it the best-selling car in Britain for most of the time it was available? Inexplicable as Chrysler UK had such a great range of products to offer at the same time. You must be joking again. Take any year from the 1962 introduction of the Cortina Mk1, and make direct comparison with the medium sized car Rootes/Chrysler/Talbot had on offer. The Cortina was always cheaper, better, sexier and more saleable. The only time the Coventry offer got close was '66 to '70, when the Arrow Cortina clone looked so like the Cortina Mk2. The Audax cars were a creakingly ancient design compared with the Mk1 Cortina, and the coke bottle styling of the Mk3 took it away from the Arrow. By the time the Cortina had reached Mk5 in 1979 its only real competitor from Chrysler was the totally inadequate 180. I speak from experience, having owned/driven as a company hack, a Cortina Mk1 1500 deluxe, four Hillman Hunter Estates, and a Cortina 2 litre GL Estate Mk5, an excellent conventional car which was tough as old boots and went like the clappers. During the period I also had two 1600cc Ford Capris, H and M registered, and an R registered Granada estate. I was also nominated driver for my parents' Chrysler 2 Litre. No idea about the Avenger, never had one, I had suffered enough, and as far as the Simca designed Alpine things were concerned, they depreciated almost as fast as they rusted away, and were too expensive on introduction for what they offered. There was also little competition from BL, or from Vauxhall until the front drive Cavalier, so the Cortina had all the advantages. -- Last edit: 2017-07-02 08:47:49
dsl ◊ 2017-07-02 00:53	Can't argue very far against jfs comments. There's a nice story about the Mk1 Cortina design team in about 1960 - Walter Hayes put an Audax Minx in the middle of the studio floor and told the team "Build me a better Minx". And to be honest - they did. Mk2 Cortina and Hunter were both Oct 66 launches so they reached similar conclusions about design directions simultaneously. And the Arrow was a good design as well, undermined later by a string of factors, but our various late 60s to early 70s Hunters/Sceptres were good cars. Mk3 Cortina sold well but was flabby and lost direction - Ford UK were too determined to make it different from the Taunus TC1 template so lost the plot a bit. Mk4/5 Cortinas were basically German designs and much better as a result. Avenger was a good design, aimed as much at the Escort as the Cortina, but Chrysler failed to continue its initial momentum and it became cheap and tatty. The French-designed stuff wasn't really worth getting out of bed for, although we had several which did OK for what they were so affectionate parts of our family history. An honourable mention a decade later for the UK-designed Peugeot 309 - an excellent car underneath its ugly duckling coat. Cortina topped the UK sales charts most of its life - I think Mini might have had brief moments in mid-60s - but Mk3 dipped a few times below 1100/1300 and later even the Marina for a few months.
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2017-07-02 15:22	The problem with the Arrow saloons was not the cars, they were perhaps a little stodgy, but reliable enough for high mileages. It was the fact that they should have gone by 1972 at the latest, and there they were, still plugging on in 1977 like pensioners at a disco. On the Cortina front, Ford got the marketing right, every Cortina in the range had good reasons for someone to want it, from the newest rep's base model through to the sales director's 2.3 Ghia. Rootes (and worse at BMC) were too hung up on the badge engineering thing, diluting the effect of the sales effort such that prospective buyers were left in two minds. With the Escort below it in size, Ford's also had a good introductory route to the medium sized car. The less said about the bigger cars from any of the British marques at that time, the better.
cl82 ◊ 2017-07-04 17:14	@JfS: Surely I was joking, but the first sentence was actually meant seriously. And I have to emphasise that I'm really thankful for your answers regarding the Cortina because so far I did not know it was that far ahead of its competitors in Britain because in contrast, its German siblings were always regarded as pretty low-tech. Despite selling quite impressively most of the time, their most substantial argument against the competition was the much lower purchase price.
dsl ◊ 2017-07-04 17:40	The Cortina was bog-standard, totally conventional and simple because Dagenham wanted to stick 2 fingers up at Ford Detroit and Cologne who were jointly hatching the front-wheel-drive V4 12M as a potential world car project until Detroit backed out, and Dagenham was very pissed off at being left out. Plus Ford UK were laughing themselves silly at BMC's struggles to get complicated Mini/ADO16 etc to work properly. Throw in Britain's newly expanding motorway network which meant cars needed to be able to run steadily at 60-70mph for long periods and that motorways started the business sales rep segment with a bootful of stuff (the Cortina Mk1 deliberately had a big boot for this purpose and to highlight that Minis and 1100s had very small boots). So a simple lightweight car designed to be economical, understressed at speed, easy to drive (women were becoming target markets for the new idea of 2-car families which had been opening up with the rapid growth of Hire Purchase schemes), and cheap to produce (so good value) hit all the buttons at the right time. Stodgy stuff from everyone else (Victors, Minxes, Cambridge/Oxfords, Minors etc) suddenly looked very old-fashioned.
cl82 ◊ 2017-07-05 22:10	Once again thanks a lot for this great, detailed piece of information, Dsl! A lot of it was completely new to me. I knew for instance that the Mini had its flaws and BMC was losing money on it most of the time, but I never would have thought of it as being complicated. Same applies to the ADO16. At least Ford of Britain and Ford-Werke/Cologne got another chance to work together by and large successfully. By the way, that leads us to another, final question I would like to ask you if you don't mind: The foundation/creation of Ford of Europe by merging the British and the German branches: Was it a prudent decision or just a typical shortsighted capitalist measure?
dsl ◊ 2017-07-06 00:50	The BMC stuff - Minis, 1100s, 1800 landcrabs was complicated for its time - front wheel drive, transverse engines, and later addition of hydrolastic suspension all in the same package - took a long time to work through the teething problems - early Minis had radiator and oil problems which took BMC a couple of years to get right. In some respects, it was the Fiat 128 which was the first successful front wheel drive/transverse engine design, followed by the 127 as the first sorted supermini - they were the breakthrough models which everyone else followed. As for Ford Europe, it was probably inevitable. Common Market was a big influence in diluting national car characteristics, so there was no longer much advantage in having parallel separate ranges - one design would now work across Europe. As I understand it - which may or may not be fully accurate - Dagenham had the better designers (and possibly the better grasp of marketing and motorsport expertise), Koln the better production facilities (factory, co-operative workforce), plus Genk needing to be fed models to produce. So merging together an obvious strategic step so that everybody's strengths could be spread across the system. Whether Ford did it to best effect or bulldozed it through is a question I can't really answer, but given how self-destructive UK motor industry became in the 1970s, it was probably a wise move. Vauxhall/Opel unification is probably another example of why the old identities were becoming outdated.
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2017-07-06 09:44	In respect of "complication" of car design, can I say that the cars of all kinds from the 60s and70s could be maintained by Joe Public, even as far as engine rebuilds, in the backyard or shed at home. Just try it now! I even rebuilt the engine of my second Lancia Fulvia 2C, with the exception of the cylinder block being sent somewhere to be rebored. The BMC front drive cars were a bit of a trial to work on, the Landcrab engine clutch transmission assembly was a big heavy lump to handle, we made a gantry to hang the block and tackle from when changing clutches. IIRC you were supposed to be able to do the clutch with the engine in situ, but it was much easier with the power unit on the floor. On the three Landcrabs and one Maxi the family owned we never had any suspension troubles, no engine problems and relatively little body rot, but the two earlier cars, a Mk 1 Austin and a Wolseley 18/85S both had driveshafts replaced and the Wolseley power assisted steering was a source of difficulty, both on Dad's car and one my father in law had. The Mk 3 Morris never caused any major problems, they must have sorted the production engineering by then. By comparison, my Granada estate was bought cheaply because it had a worn engine. I bought a second Granada with a good engine and Dad and I did the double exchange in one day, the second car, with noisy engine, went to the auctions, and I made a profit! On the subject of profit, I do have to tell you that for forty odd years my wages were paid by "short sighted capitalism", and that my pension is now being paid for by the same means. I accept fully that you are entitled to view things your way, but big industry paid my wages, bought my house and raised my family. I do what I can to defend it. -- Last edit: 2017-07-06 13:21:36
cl82 ◊ 2017-07-06 22:19	@dsl/jfs: Again, thanks a lot for your informative replies. Unfortunately, it's too late tonight to offer my opinion on short sighted capitalism, but we might probably come to that later. Besides, earlier this day I've found a great article that demonstrates that capitalism is not always blinded by greed; more than often, it is spurred by great visions: http://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/history/project-vinland/

Add a comment

Advertising

Watch or buy this title - Powered by JustWatch

Advertising