Technical 1963 Ford Galaxy Fast Back...Saved from the crusher

don't cut corners with steering parts on a 2 1/2 ton Galaxie.... please. ANYTHING letting loose at highway speed will be a disaster.

 

Galaxie control valve I built for a fella a few years ago:


Notice bottom right the two cups and spring to hold tension on the ball stud. When I get home I can take apart the borgeson part, it has much the same in it. (I'm offshore right now, where I spend most of my time, or I'd take it apart right now).

 

You might find a center link for a manual steer car and swap it in. I'm not familiar with the Galaxie steering, but it looks just like the later Mustang/Maverick design. If it is, you'll also need the pittman arm, the center link attaches from the top on one, from the bottom on the other. I changed a Maverick from power to manual steering, and I used the manual box as well, it has a different, slightly slower ratio that the power box. Again, I don't know on the Galaxie, but it looks to be the same design.

 

On a 63-64 Galaxie, same steering boxes between manual and power. Center link, inner tie rods, and outter tie rods are different. In truth, current value for those parts is far more than the Manual adapter he posted above. Not to mention manual center links have the ballstud captive and are hard to rebuild. You can't even buy one knew without a core.

 

I never did find a new one for the Maverick, bought a rusted out parts car with manual steering and swapped it all out. If they are that hard to find for the Galaxie, I'd go with the adapter, too. Steering is nowhere to take shortcuts.

 

If the manual steering ball stud is captive, then where does the "Shock Absorption" come from? I hate to be a PIA, but it kills me when a company like Borgeson can take a very simple part and sell it for big bucks. The drag link I pictured is from a 1948 F-1 and it has the internal screw that holds the spring against the cap and the cap against the ball. Same product. As for safety yes if it drops all hell will break loose.

 

YES PLEASE! That FE sounds amazing!

 

Back again! With another problem. The camshaft has excessive endplay, it slops back and forth at least 1/8" I read .005 is good. I pulled it apart and the there is no washers behind the retaining plate. There should be I think?

 

Do you need wheel covers? I just saw these. They are not mine https://columbiamo.craigslist.org/pts/5675514006.html

 

Got it figured out. The guy who installed the timing set left the original washer on the camshaft. The new timing gear has the washer built in. Endplay is .004 much better than .2

 

I have to replace my brake front drums. Is there a trick to pressing them off the hubs?

 

Sorry, was offshore..... Yeah the new timing gear issue is common. like many things with FE's there is older vs later differences.
Front hubs aren't like the rear:
1-Remove the dust cap
2-remove the cotter pin
3-unscrew the bearing retainer nut
4-now pull the drum and hub assy. off the spindle.

If original drums, they are swaged to the studs. To get the drum off without pulling the hub you need to remove the wheel studs. This can all be changed easily if you so desire, but figure I'd give ya the skinny on the original parts. I'm a lil foggy on some of it as I changed them out for disc brakes forever ago.

handy FE link:
http://www.fordfe.info/Forum/FAQ-Style-index3.html

 

The studs almost look like they have a clip or something holding the drum to them.(Pretty Rusty) I can knock the studs out but there doesn't seam to be a separation line around the hub. I know they are supposed to come apart, but how I am not sure. .

 

Hello, back in post #58 of this thread you have a picture of the intake manifold and most of the OE parts to the PCV system. The bracket the PCV valve screws into would mount to the rear of the intake where the throttle bell crank for the transmission bolts on. There should be a two piece spacer (one part steel the other aluminum) that goes between the intake and the carb. It's into this spacer that the PCV line is plumbed. I'd think that if your using a later carb with a built in PCV port you could rout the line to it.

Looks like you will have a fine driver there when you get done.
-Dave
EDIT: If you find the aluminum half of the spacer with the port in it, but not the steel half and run it (or try to) have a fire extinguisher handy.

 

I have the OE aluminum spacer with the PCV port. I just cleaned it up. I will try to get a pict, but raining cats and dogs and I'm not going the garage until it slows down. The steel spacer must be pretty thin, because I wont have enough stud left to bolt the carb on.

 

I've never seen a 'steel half' of one of the carb spacers (and I've had my hand on a few new ones 'back in the day'). The aluminum spacer is it. And I'll note that Ford abandoned the PVC location in the intake in '64 as they found that it led to excessive oil use as well as not pulling condensation out of the heads/valve covers.

 

When removing those studs you may want to back up the inside of the drum with a piece of tubing or a socket so as not to put too much stress on the face of the drum.

 

This is what I got. Looks like I will need a special shaped gasket from spacer to the manifold to accommodate the PCV port. The Spacer to Carb gasket look pretty standard. So am I missing a "Steel" spacer or am I good?

 

Well, I learn something every day. So your aluminum spacer is also water heated, or am I looking at the photo wrong?
My experience is with FE powered '64 Galaxies, but the '63 should be the same or close to it.
The open side of your spacer goes down, but where the PCV port is located without the (yes it is thin) steel spacer there will be a vacuum leak there. At least on the '64 intake. My 352 had both pieces and ran fine, but I'd never seen such sludged up valve covers. My friend rebuilt the carb on his 390, but only used the aluminum piece. This engine had several small fires and one big one. Your experience may be different.
I've got both pieces somewhere I'll see if I can find them and post a picture.
-Dave

 

Yes, you'll need the correct gasket. You don't need a 'steel spacer' as your intake has the matching flange for the PVC spacer.

 

So your saying the '64 4bbl intake is different than the '63 4bbl intake? All I know is what I've observed on two different '64 cars. Actually my '64 was a November '63 built car and the engine had several carry over parts, like "earlier" cylinder heads. Don't have any way to reference the casting numbers on the intake since the car has been gone a long time.
-Dave

 

Best idea would be to loose the cast iron boat anchor of an intake and run anything aluminum. It will feel like you bolted on 100 hp. Then just run the PVC from a valve cover to the carb.
-Dave

 

Got to see it run, then we can discuss more HP

 

All the '63-up intakes I ever saw were set up for a PVC system using an aluminum spacer (except multi-carb). If you go back to post 58, the OP shows a picture of the manifold carb flange and you can see the 'extension' meant to cover the PVC 'intake' on the spacer. All he needs is the right gasket. I suspect you had an earlier manifold if it lacked this.

Your 'sludged' valve covers were a result of the early PVC design, and is one reason why Ford changed the design on the later cars.

 

Maybe the steel plate adapted a the aluminum flange to an intake that did not have the raised area to seal up the PCV port.

 

It takes a standard carb gasket on both sides, the pcv pulls from the holes in the center under the throttle plates.

I've had an fe that was sludged up like that, the old man never ran a thermostat and never drove far so it never got hot and that sludge was everywhere.

Sent from my SM-G900V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Update! the engine is in... sortof. I found out that FE engine mounts changed over the years. I removed the original mounts from the seized engine knowing that they had 3 holes and my rebuilt engine only had 2. I new I had a set of 2 hole mounts that came off one of my truck engines...guess what? They don't fit. The 1963 car engine I have has smaller distance between the holes. Then I ran into a problem with the transmission mount. The C6 was original to the seized motor (I will refer to it as the 1966). The tranny mount is a bit a cobbled up mess but is functional. The problem is that the 1963 motor has the road draft tube port on the back of the manifold the 1966 did not. This allowed for the engine to sit back closer to the firewall. I created a set of motor mounts that clear the firewall and lets the tranny sit where it is, but when I go to install the intake the road draft tube hits the fire wall. I have ordered the correct set of mounts and I will slide the tranny ahead. I hope the drive shaft is long enough and doesn't fall out. Seams to be one thing after another.

 

Yeah, engine mounts changed in 65.
Proper mounts for an early FE in a 63 Galaxie
are Anchor part # 2222 and #2223

$20 for the both of them at Summit racing. They are pretty stout.

 

Ohh and for the c6, either fab up some 1/4inch plate for each side to use the original transmission crossmember, or just make a new crossmember.

 

Engine mounts arrived FedEx today. I got them in and the engine sits correctly and clears the firewall. Very Happy!! Now as I presumed Driveshaft is too short. I thought I was going to be OK since it only slid ahead about 1 inch. But the slip joint is not fully splined and I don't think its going to catch the spline. I was digging around the shop and I found another slip joint and it is fully splined and fits the shaft, But it is too big in diameter.(See Pict) I happen to have a lathe and could easily mill it down to the correct diameter. I know its not the correct fix, but it should work fine. I think that the slip yoke may have came off one of my t-18 4 speeds. But not sure. I will also have to make sure the U-joint will work. Are there any 31 fully splined yokes in the smaller diameter?