Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
They got 0-60 in 20 seconds. At first, I was thinking something like a full-sized Ford, Chevy or Plymouth with a 6-cyl might be the worst, but then I remember old Consumer Reports tests where they still often managed to get them from 0-60 in around 16-17 seconds. Maybe a 4-cyl Chevy II, or a Falcon or Dart with the smallest 6-cyl? But would any of them take 20 seconds?
Something else that seems odd, is that the quarter mile time was 21.5 seconds, at 58 mph. So, how did it get from 0-60 in 20 seconds, if it took 21.5 seconds to get to 58?
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I seem to recall an old road test of an early Comet with the 144-6cy and 2-speed automatic, and I think its 0-60 time was around 26 seconds! I think the slowest car I ever owned was my 1980 Malibu with its 229 V6. I've never actually seen a road test of one equipped that way, but from tests of somewhat comparable cars, I would guess 0-60 in around 15 seconds? It's funny how it didn't seem so slow back when I had it...heck I was grateful to just have a car, and many of my friends had cars that were much worse...either slower cars, crappier cars, or both! But I imagine if I had to drive it now, I'd hate it.
I’d place my bet on a 4 cyl. Chevy II, LOL.
My dad was a thrifty guy. I remember him looking at a new ‘70 Nova. When he saw it was a four, even he lost interest, LOL.
One thing that surprises me though, is that the Falcon is actually a bit heavier than the Comet, at 2500 lb versus 2475. Now the Comet was a 2-door sedan, versus the Falcon's 4-doors. And the Falcon had an automatic transmission, compared to a manual for the Comet. But still, the Comet had 4" of wheelbase and about 14" overall length on the Falcon!
Only rated around 400 lbs more than the car!
Out of curiosity, I looked up the tires that Coker sells, that are the stock size for my DeSoto...8.50-14. They're rated at 1740 lb apiece. Or 6940 lb for all four. So considering the car itself weighs roughly two tons I'm guessing, using this CR metric, that would be about a 2960 lb tire carrying capacity? Dunno if I'd be comfortable loading the car up like that, though...that sounds like it would be in the range of 3/4 ton pickups!
Coker has a 6.00-13 tire available that has a load rating of 1010 lb...or 4040 lb total. So that sounds a lot more reasonable!
I always heard the early Lark flathead six was slow, but yeesh! It was the only one of those cars available with a V8. The OHV six came out for ‘61, upping hp from 90 to 112.
I’m not sure I ever saw a 4-cyl. Chevy II in person besides the green ‘70 with Dad. I do remember getting a brochure in the mail in ‘69 or ‘70 that said “Nova 4 Sale.”
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
Those early Falcons must have been really cheap - and not in a good way, that tire thing is funny. I still remember about 30 years ago when my dad got the 68 Fairlane, my grandpa saw it and said something like "oh good, I thought you said you found a Falcon, those are junk" or something similar.
I wish CR would publish a collection of car tests, say by decade.
I may have told this story before (harumph) but when I was about 4 years old, someone rear-ended the family’s ‘59 Ford sedan when it was parked out front of our house. That was exciting enough, but then, a day or two later I was excited when Dad arrived home with a shiny new Falcon as a rental. I don’t believe I ever saw one in person previously. That evening we had to go somewhere so I piled into the back seat while Mom and Dad got into the front. She took a look around and before I could say anything she said “This thing is tinny”. That was that.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
As for this 1960 compact test, a website devoted to classic Mercurys had posted it. Here's the link to the entire article... https://www.mercomatic.com/?page_id=3053
On the subject of the Falcon, one of my friends told me about an older relative of his who had a Falcon. I think it might have been a later 60's Falcon. They were stopped at a traffic light, and a fuselage Chrysler was behind them. A box truck rear-ended the Chrysler, and pushed it into the Falcon. The Falcon still got hit hard enough to breach the fuel tank. There was no fire or anything, and I don't think anybody even got hurt, although the Falcon was totaled. But, the times being what they were, nobody really got ruffled about it. It was just like eh, so the gas tank leaked, no big deal, fuggedaboudit!
I remember them testing a '64 Studebaker after the U.S. shutdown. The U.S. shutdown was a big turnoff to them (as well as to most people). I remember them saying that a new U.S. versus new Canadian Studebaker were indistinguishable from each other when shopping. Even then, I remember thinking that the window sticker showed assembly point, and of course later learned Canadian cars serial nos. started with "C" at Studebaker and also that Canadian cars had all-white steering wheels. They didn't attempt very hard, to figure out how a consumer could tell the differences by sight.
My Dad bought a '62 Fairlane in '64, after looking at a used Falcon. I was six and my sister was 13, but somehow even we knew that Falcons seemed cheap, LOL. We lobbied for the Fairlane. My Dad bit on the Fairlane, at the time saying because it had seat belts--which apparently had been added at some point.
When I think back on that Fairlane, I think it looked dumpy. It still had fins, and as with most smaller cars then, looked underwheeled/tired to me. It also still had a manual choke, which I believe was unusual in '62.
Ironically, I like the last compact Falcons--through '69 or early '70. Taut styling, no fat, long-hood/ short-deck styling, large rear wheel openings, cute quarter window on the two-doors. I'd take one all day long over a Maverick.
An old college friend of mine, whom I was surprised to get a Christmas card from just the other day, bought a new Peugeot some time in the mid'80's I'm thinking.
I remember him telling me he heard a big 'boom' in his house and he went out and his battery had exploded (the car was fairly new). It did do some damage to the hood but I don't remember how much.
In the '70s, a neighbor had one of the last gen Falcon Sports Coupes, red with a black vinyl roof like many of them, that I always admired. I see one in identical colors around here locally in the summer, nicely restored. I wonder if it is the same car, since my recollection is that back in the day it seldom left their driveway.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Other cars in that category I recall riding in are the Vega and a Chevy II that another
graduate student at MU had. He was very proud of it, understandably, but I heard
rattles and thin.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Regarding the 60s compact test, the Valiant and Rambler blew the others in the weeds in the acceleration tests. The two speed automatics of the others really hampered the performance going up hill, though the Comet benefitted there by having a manual transmission.It was interesting to note the Valiant used a qt of oil every 1200 miles yet that engine probably outlasted the others. The Corvair liked sipping on oil as well. Just noticed the Lark was a manual but even so, painfully slow. It really needed a more modern 6 or V8.
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
For 1970 proper, the Falcon was down to around 15,000 units, while the 1970.5 moved around 67,000.
Curiously, for 1971, the Maverick took a dive, with 159K base 2-doors, 39K Grabbers, and 73K 4-doors sold. I'm sure Mopar's Duster and Demon were putting the pressure on it by then, but even in Ford's own showroom, the Pinto probably took a lot of sales from the 2-door.
Still, the Maverick sold pretty well, through 1974. Even in its final year, 1977, it managed around 98,000 units. When the Fairmont came out for '78 though, I thought it was more of a "proper" successor to the Falcon. Sure, the Fairmont was cheap, in its own way, but just didn't seem quite *as* cheap, to me.
I used to see a later Falcon in one of the parking lots at work fairly regularly. It was a white 2-door, and the lower rear quarters had been cut off because of rust. Other than that, I don't remember it being too beat-up. I work from home now, but for all I know, it could still be around. I'm pretty sure I've seen it within the last five years. I probably took a pic of it at some point, even. That car seemed like the last holdout of a bygone era, the last really old car I used to see at work, that seemed like it was still being used as daily transportation, rather than something that was being preserved and only used as a fair weather car.
A quick online search pulled this up on 'Concept Carz' (a site I have probably made fun of before, LOL):
"A Mobilgas Economy Run winner, the 1960 Lark V8 averaged 22 miles per gallon in the widely promoted contest."
If the Comet was twice as fast as any other compact, those taillights would still make me not buy one, LOL.
One of those "Why?" questions is, I seem to remember reading that Falcon and Fairlane wagons were the same wheelbase in the mid-and-late sixties; just that the doghouse (front clip) was different. Why bother?
Which reminds me of "The Wonder Years" episode where they were looking for a new car, and Dad eventually bought a leftover '69 Ford Custom 500. The wife and kids were all spellbound by the Mustang in the showroom; then practical, grumpy Dad says to the salesman, "Got any Falcon wagons?". The family was crestfallen, LOL.
I know people who love the '66 and '67, but there is not one single styling thing of those that I like. You couldn't give me one.
When the '68 came out, I liked it--it was smooth and seemed like about 85% of the two-door Chevelle, except that it was only a pillared sedan offering. I saw way too many '68-72's in my life but given the choice of a nice original car, I'd take a '68. Among some small other things, I like that it was the last one that had "Chevy II" written on it.
Also kind of curious that they dropped the hardtop coupe for '64 initially. Oh...wait, maybe it was because of the Chevelle? Perhaps they figured a hardtop/convertible would be more popular in the midsized lineup than the compact, and they didn't want to dilute sales by offering those styles in both lines? Plus, Chevy also had the Corvair, which could fill the need for a small convertible (and small hardtop starting in '65).
As for the Falcon and Fairlane wagons? Only rationale I can think of is that in 1966, there was more of a market for compact wagons, as the Chevy II, Dart, and Valiant still offered them. So perhaps Ford felt the Falcon needed a wagon? But then, the Dart/Valiant dropped their wagon for '67, and the Nova dropped its wagon for '68. But maybe it was established enough, they decided to just let the Falcon wagon keep going?
It certainly made for a wide lineup, though. In 1968, there were five wagons...Falcon, Falcon Futura, Fairlane, Fairlane 500, and Torino Squire.
I really like the '64 Chevelle two-door wagon. There was a navy blue 4-speed authentic one for sale a few years back. It went for about $30K IIRC. I may not though.
Friends of my parents had a six-cylinder '64 Chevelle two-door wagon and '60 Lark VIII four-door sedan. In probably '68 or so I kidded the Dad about the Lark. I remember clearly him saying, "That Lark will run rings around that Chevy".
I thought the '68-up Chevy II design was nicely done, but man, they were really plain and awful inside if you didn't spend to option them up. Sitting in a base model would make you run to anything else.
I thought Dodge made a big mistake in not offering a Dart wagon in '67 and beyond. Given the general popularity of wagons back then, I think they would have sold a lot of them.
Our family bought a '74 Maverick new, and it was an awful car and a horrible ownership experience. I wish the Falcon had been updated instead. They just seemed more substantial in their later generation than the Maverick, where every component seemed one use away from breaking.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Still, despite that, I think the '65 Chevy II is one of the better looking domestic compacts that year. At least, I prefer its style to the Falcon, Valiant, Dart, or Rambler American. I'd say sexiest compact of the year would have to go to the Corvair for '65, though. I wouldn't call the Studebaker "sexy", but I'd say it's certainly handsome. And, 1965 is the one year that I actually like the Comet a lot. Although I wonder if the reason there is that, with its stacked headlights and the central placement of that vertical grille ornament, at a quick glance it looks a bit like a Pontiac to me?
With the first-gen, I think the '62 is actually my favorite, style-wise at least. There's just something about that grille texture I find pleasing to the eye, although I don't mind the '63-64. The Chevy II that really turns me on though, is the '66-67 model. Of the two, the '67 is the one I like the best, and again it's just the detail of the grille I find more eye pleasing.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/vintage-reviews/vintage-review-commentary-1972-pontiac-luxury-lemans-motowns-mid-size-rebel-gets-broughamed/
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
I remember rarely seeing any of the GM mid-size four-door hardtops from '68-72.
The Luxury LeMans seems a bit 'under the radar' and I always appreciate that!
Nice interior for sure. And, it's a model Chevy didn't offer an equivalent to--not since the Concours four-door hardtop which was last offered in '69.
I posted another separate thread about this some years back, as I was beginning to doubt my own memory of seeing the one green one I recalled in our town, but Chevy made '68 Chevelle Concours coupes for a time. They're not in any brochure or other piece of literature I'd ever seen. Some of the heresay about them I did find on sites was almost comical. Ended up, by a Chevrolet sales letter to dealers a friend was given and forwarded to me, the plant that made Malibu interiors went on strike, which made Chevy only offer a black vinyl interior on Malibu models during that time. Apparently, just to offer something else, they started making the Concours coupe option, which gave you the Buick Skylark Custom seat and door panel trim, or the Cutlass Supreme interior trim, depending on assembly plant. Both were also available only in black vinyl. You got some exterior niceties too, like wheel opening moldings which Malibus didn't come with. I'd still enjoy one, although like most Chevelles of the period, finding an original or authentic one seems to have come and gone.
I remember just ever seeing the one in person.
I don’t mind skirts that are part of the car’s styling, like that Pontiac. I dislike any that look like an afterthought, like ones where the fender doesn’t match the skirt contours.
When I was in high school, one of the administrators, a vice principal or something, drove a LeMans, and I think it was a 4-door hardtop. Can't remember if it was a Luxury LeMans or not, but I'm definitely remembering a '71-72. He used to pass by my school bus stop, so that would've placed it around 1985-86 (I started driving to school myself in January 1987). I recall it being a light cream/beige color, with a white vinyl top, but it's been so long now, my mind might be making some of the finer details up
4-door hardtops never really caught on in the midsized ranks. While GM offered them from 1964-72, Ford only dabbled in that field with the '70-71 Torino/Montego. Now Mopar did offer them on the shrunken '62-64 models, but they wanted you to think those were full-sized cars.
I have a friend in DC, and there used to be a Cutlass 4 door hardtop out on the street in his neighborhood. It was pretty rough, though. Here's a shot I took of it...
At one point, I remember seeing a for sale sign on the dash. In this pic, you can see something on the dash, but I just zoomed in on it, and it's just the car's front license plate. I remember the asking price of $5,000, something that seemed just a wee bit optimistic. And this was back in 2013!
One thing that surprises me about that '72 Luxury LeMans, is the specs. I always hear about how porked up the Colonades were in comparison, but this car is no shrinking violet, itself. It's 207.2" long. My '76 is 208" long; however it's a coupe on the shorter wheelbase. The 4-door was 212" long. So, only 4.8" longer, despite having those protruding 5-mph bumpers.
3793 lb sounds chunky too, unless that's the tested weight, with the driver on board and any instruments they might have attached to the car? Although, my auto encyclopedia does list the base weight of a '72 Luxury LeMans 4-door hardtop at 3638 lb. For comparison, the base weight of my '76 Grand LeMans coupe is 3834 lb, and the 4-door sedan is 3948 lb.
As a young teen, like a comment or two under the article state, I used to scratch my head about the "LML" emblem on those cars.
I eventually took that vehicle to Tulane in my sophomore year and it was basically mine till after I graduated and traded on my 1976 Izuzu Opel in 1977. A truly awful vehicle but that's another whole story! Still have a soft spot in my heart for the Oldsmobile Cutlass of those early years. It eventually got painted navy blue & lastly, a light brown which was the perfect color for it. I did get hubcaps from a 1962 Starfire that really completed that retro look I was going after. Found them at a junkyard near our house buried under hundreds of other hubcaps and was lucky enough to find all four of the set, still in like new condition. Guessing the car G-d's were looking down on me that day!
2023 Hyundai Kona Limited AWD (wife) / 2015 Golf TSI (me) / 2019 Chevrolet Cruze Premier RS (daughter #1) / 2020 Hyundai Accent SE (daughter #2) / 2023 Subaru Impreza Base (son)
I don't know if they used it anywhere on the sedans or wagons.
On local highway (I295) yesterday an old import. 30s I think, maybe 40s, small 4 door. Maybe a Citroen. Possible British. Moving along but definitely slow lane.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Watched an episode of CHiPs, there was a car chase involving a Mazda Cosmo - something I like, incredibly rare now, I recall only seeing one in my life, and it had rust to the point of likely being beyond redemption:
As it was on that show, of course it ended up like this, as this happens in every 35 mph car chase in reality (notice another now-desirable car):
That might show how quickly those cars depreciated, as it wasn't too old, but mechanical risks no doubt had them unwanted in trade-in.
Then watched Gremlins, and for the first time noticed The Futtermans (the guy with the "Kentucky Harvester" truck who distrusts anything foreign, kind of reminds me of some people I've met over the years ) have another car parked at the house, and imcdb also shows it:
The father in that movie, who is an inventor who makes quirky products, drives this (movie takes place in present day/1984):
Also for the first time noticed that Gremlins was filmed on the "Colonial Street" (Burbs) backlot, and the downtown scenes are on the Back to the Future lot.
One final Christmas movie car that I noticed some never spot, in Christmas Vacation, one set of grandparents apparently drives a very pretty 63 Continental, a random thing to be street parked in 1989:
Saw one of these, today. Once every ten years, I'd say.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive