Years ago well in 1970 we had a Maverick with a 250 c4 and this joker would hang with a stock 302 for alittle while and had gobs of torque also! I had a 200 in my 64 Falcon great motor but not nearly the torque of the 250. I know the 250 has a bigger stroke I have a 79 Fairmont with a 200 and c4 would like to get it close to the power of the stock 250 mainley the torque anyway! Any suggestions? Thanks!
dont know if you heard of cl***icinlines.com They did a 6 cylinder head for me a couple years ago and it was top notch
Your car is way off topic here, but the engine discussion would be the same. The Fairmount would accept the 250 much easier than my '62 Falcon would, so that is the route I would go. Then, shave the head about .060, do the two barrel head out of Cl***ic Inlines as suggested above. If you can tolerate them, throw some headers into the mix (Cl***ic Inlines as well), and that puppy will rock and roll. We have two Falcon threads going here "Doing Falcons Right" is our tech thread and you'll find lots of info over there. I'd just suggest keeping the talk of a '79 to your self, as that 15 years past the scope of the board here. Oh, and Claissic inlines also has a sight dedicated to these engines as well, with lots of tech for the Falcon Six.
I am going to use the motor out of the Fairmont in the Falcon why so sensitive? GEEZ! I don't have a 250 I have a 200 want the 200 to be closer to running like the 250? I will check out that website! Thanks for the info!
Gotcha! Not sensitive, just trying to save you from a world of hurt 'round these parts. Sounded to me like you were leaving the Falcon alone and building the Fairmount. The 200 that is in the Fairmount has the best intake log of all these engines, the best ignition, and as long as it's in good shape it'll be a really good base for what you want to do. it'll be a bit easier than a 250 to transplant into a Falcon as well. The main things you'll need to do is exactly what I spelled out above, get the compression up a bit, and some form of actual real carburetor instead of the make believe one barrel Ford saw fit to provide. I run a Cl***ic Inlines adaptor and a Weber DGV 32/36 on mine and it kicks ***! You also will want to recurve the distributor on that engine, as it has a very lazy smog era curve. If you want to go past all of that, a cam would be the best bet, and even better, toss that C/4 as far as you can throw it and do a five speed conversion on it and you won't believe the difference in performance.
I have 4 Falcons they are my first love other than my wife and kids and the dogs I have a 300 six I want to put in a FED i'm building but the 200 will go in the Falcon Wagon! Never fooled with the 6 mostley 302 351 stroker stuff! Thanks for the help
If your goal here is to hang with the stock 302s then put a stock 302 in Her but if I had it to do over I'd leave Her along
I wish I could agree Veach. I have had my '62 set up with all sorts of different sixes over the years, and at one point a 289 for a bit, and I just flat like the car better with a six in it. At one time it was running a 200 with a small turbo hung on it and it, ad it was a holy terror! That's the way it'll be going back together this time around too. If ya hop the six, these cars turn a bit lighter, make different noise, handle and ride a bit nicer, and for the most part get better fuel mileage. I guess after all these years I just flat prefer sixes...
Our 17 year old did the works to a 200 in a 66 mustang - OT here but the hop up is the same. That little car hauled *** The ONLY problem is finding someone who will follow the cl***ic inlines formula. We had that 200 out twice because they told me they degreed the cam and I figured out they lied. so, I can say I liked the 200 too, and wonder how the 250 would have been.
A guy while I was in high school (mid 60s) had a '61 Falcon wagon with all of Clifford Research's goodies on it (big lumpy cam, split header, three carbs) with a T10 behind it and he gave all the local hot small blocks real grief. He claimed it was the stock 144, may have been a 170 but I don't think so. Wicked sound at idle, and sounded like a maxed-out VW motor on steroids at full cry. And he still got pretty decent fuel mileage with it.
Several years ago, I helped a friend liven up his '66 Mustang 200/3 speed car. We milled the stock carb mount off and enlarged it to take a Motorcraft 2 bbl from a 289, replaced the Loadamatic distributor with a Mallory dual point, and added a Crane cam and Clifford headers. Made quite a difference. There's an Ak Miller artice from a 1967 HRM you may find interesting.
The Jalopy Journal
