Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

1960's Ford Falcons



  • crosley4crosley4 Posts: 295
    I own one of those too. A 4 door at that!


  • bretfrazbretfraz Posts: 2,021
    That car look awesome!

    Now all you need are American Racing 17" wheels, a little more rake, have Ernie Elliott build you a 340 stroker, pop in a Jerico Slamshifter (do they still make those?), about 500W of stereo, some flames.............

    But as it is it looks very cool.

    EDIT: This is the tranny I'm thinking of:
  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    I think I would have bought a Valiant or Lancer too, instead of a Falcon. The 225 was a strong engine and it could be modified. And the styling, whatever the purist might think of it, isn't appliance-like.
  • crosley4crosley4 Posts: 295
    The Dodge Lancer I posted the pic of is powered by a 350 chevy with a Ford rear diff. It will push your eyes back into their sockets.

    I have all 3 of the major manufacturers covered in the car........LOL
  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    Awesome! I knew there was something different about that car from the picture-those American mags, and that slight rake. Now that's a ride you won't see every day. What did you do to the front suspension-anything?
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,852 hard was it to get a Chevy 350 in that Lancer? I know Chrysler had to rework the '64 compacts, compared to the '63's, to get their own 273 in.

    What kind of tranny do you have in it?
  • bhill2bhill2 Posts: 1,330
    There was something about that engine that made it hard to fit into a bay. Chrysler had the same problem when they bought Rootes. They couldn't wedge their 273 into the engine bay of the Sunbeam Tiger in place of the Ford 260/289 that was there.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv, 2001 Jaguar XK cnv, 1985 MB 380SE (the best of the lot)

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    If it was heavier than the 260 that would have made the Tiger even worse to drive. It's a bear as it is. Best to steer with the gas pedal.


  • speedshiftspeedshift Posts: 1,598
    The 273 is a bigger engine, particularly in width--seven inches wider than the 289. It's also a bit heavier, although I can't remember by how much. The Ford is around 490 lbs., the Chevy small block 560 lbs. so it's somewhere in there.

    IIRC the 273 is the old polysphere 318 with newer heads circa 1964, which would explain the size of the block, but I may be wrong.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,852
    ...was the first of the LA engine blocks. I've heard that it's about 100 lb lighter than the old A (277/301/318/326/and some others, I'm sure) engine. Not sure how much narrower it is, but I can definitely tell the difference between a 318 wideblock and a 318 LA, like what's in my Dart or Gran Fury (or the 360 LA in my NYer).

    One of the quickest visual cues is that the old A engine had heads and valve covers that had kind of a sawtooth pattern on the outer edges, whereas the LA engine has normal rectangular valve covers.

    Just from eyeballing it though, the 273/318/360 engine looks bulkier than the Chevy smallblock, which then looks a bit bigger than the Ford smallblock.
  • crosley4crosley4 Posts: 295
    There is a fair amount of room in the Lancer.

    I installed a custom crossmember with Mustang II suspension into the Dodge.

    I used parts that I had around the house for the build up of the Lancer.

    My web site is a bit outdated but here it is:



  • carnut4carnut4 Posts: 574
    Interesting website and pictures.
    My Dad had two '48 Crosley wagons-the first he bought for $40-the second, better one for $100.
    This was in 1957-58. These both had the cast iron blocks-not the laminated ones.
    I remember helping him remove the engine from the first one-after everything was unbolted, he just stepped inside the engine bay and lifted it out!
    Interesting engine, that was used in many different applications.
    Always interesting to see different stuff!
  • crosley4crosley4 Posts: 295
    I figure I should post a photo of my Falcon.

    1962 model. Good running 170, 3 speed. I have a found a 78 200 and C-4 tranny for it.

    Little rust (6 x 9 hole) in the front floors


  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    That photo brings back memories! When I was a kid my grandmother had a black 1962 four-door sedan...her car had the wheel covers with the holes around the perimeter. The front suspension always squeaked, which, as I recall, was common with early 1960s Falcons.

    She drove it until early 1969, when she was rear-ended by a late 1960s Chrysler in a chain-reaction collision. The collision damaged the gas tank (it was leaking), so she bought a 1966 Dodge Dart 270 sedan.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,422
    I've been trying to dig up the story of the Ford Falcon teamed that raced in the Monte Carlo Rallye, It was a good effort but unfortunately the great power advantage of the Sprints was offset by the brakes on the cars and the fuel economy issues as I recall. I don't remember exactly why they failed but I do recall they were doing quite well for a while there.


  • bretfrazbretfraz Posts: 2,021

    IIRC, there was an episode of "Legends of Motorsport" describing one of the MC Rallies showcasing the Falcon effort. Gotta tape that show one day........

  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,016
    I got my license at 15 in 1965 and that's so long ago it's hard to keep track of the family vehicles back then. My father traded his '53 Buick for a Valiant in the early 60's. The Valiant threw a rod in front of a little Ford dealership on the way to the fish camp and he got a 2 door Falcon. I think it was a '63 or '64, but it didn't look near as good as the ones pictured in here.

    What I mostly remember about the Falcon (other than it was pretty gutless) was getting it stuck on the railroad track off some farm road. I managed to jack it up and push it off the jack a couple of times and got back on the blacktop 20 minutes before the Memphis freight passed. I'm not sure if anyone in the family would've minded it getting smashed.



    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • argentargent Posts: 176
    The LA-series 273 probably weighed about 525 lbs., I'd guess The similar 340 engine, introduced for '68, was quoted as 539 lbs. with a single four-barrel carburetor. The LA series 318, added in '67, was about the same, maybe a bit lighter (less beefy casting, lighter crank). The earlier A-series 318, introduced in '56 as a polyspherical head on the smaller original Hemi block, was not a thinwall casting, and weighed about 55 lbs. more. At one point around '65 or so Chrysler was planning to discontinue the 318 entirely, leaving the 273 as the economy engine and the B engines (361/383/413/426/440) as the step-ups, but I think they decided the 273 didn't have enough torque for the bigger intermediates and standards, so they upgraded the 318 instead.
  • dirt41dirt41 Posts: 1
    Hi all...looking for a repair manual for a 1966 Ford Falcon. Does anybody know where I can get one (and not on CD)?
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,852
    eBay, maybe? I'm sure that something like this would probably pop up at a large swap meet, like the events they have in Carlisle, PA. I'm sure there are plenty of on-line vendors that carry that type of stuff too.

    Maybe try going to and searching for "1966 Ford Falcon Repair Manual" or something like that? Might return some useable hits.
This discussion has been closed.