Features Falcons done right?

I noticed a small area on one of the weights that had a small area machined out. I don't know how I feel about the hack job on the skirts, personally I don't like the aesthetic look of it and it would have to be an engine combo that I would really want to use/have to do that. And if I did I would have made it look more presentable. Going to have a conversation about this with my Dad when given the chance. To me it looks like a hack job. Anyway I got plans to yank the motor out. That 351W I have is still staring at me lol.

-Mark

 

I don't think the 351w fit due to a taller deck height. The exhaust manifolds hit the shock towers from what I understand

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

The towers will need to be cut.

 

I've seen it done with stock logs with minimal cutting, but it think you'd have to get some custom headers if you wanted to go anything more then that.

Personally, I think it would be really cool to keep the 260 in there

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

I think so, as well.

If not, there is room on the other side of the towers to shift the offending area out.

 

Is there? I know some guys in Australia make a coil over kit and they notch the shock towers pretty heavily, and they can fit coyote motors in there iirc. Might be able to do something similar. My concern would be the structure going to the upper a arm, as those Australian guys set theirs up without it, just the shock and lower a arm (mcpherson?).

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

There is also a company in the USA that sells a very similar set up. https://gatewayperformancesuspension.com/vintage-ford-front-suspension-kits
I have their front suspension under my Cyclone. I am using factory lower control arms and stock ‘65 Comet style manual steering. The shock towers can be cut, you only need the upper spring mount area for this conversion. I have about 1,000 miles on it now, it rides fine and seems to work like the stock set up.
I sectioned the shock towers so they do not look like they have been cut. I have much more clearance for the engine now.
Jim

 

Great, something else I'm gonna want to do down the line lol. How does the chassis handle the 351? That's allot of torque compaired to a 302, even when dead stock.

Seperate note, would it be worth it to build up a 366 with an aftermarket block rather than ge that? I know that would have more power potential, but I've heard of people making tons of hp with a 8.2 deck block. Also, does it handle any better than if you where to make the stock race ready?

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

I’m not sure if your question about the 351 was directed to me or not. Being that the picture I posted was prior to your question I will answer it as if it was directed to me.
The photo shows a mock up of the engine in my Cyclone, (avatar) it is not a 351, it is a ‘70 Boss 302. The block, crank, and rods, are stock Boss, everything else on the engine is aftermarket. (Aluminum heads, etc,) I also was not sure if the beefed up engine would trust the unibody chassis so I fabricated sub frame connectors that are tied into the torque boxes. There is no flex in the car now.
One a separate note, you may wonder why the upper shock mounts are in place. They are actually there to make the system look stock, they are unused because of the strut system.
Jim

 

Yeah, I thought it was a 351. What was the goal going to that set up, I've heard the stock set up can get tuned and perform pretty well, and people typically only go with the different front suspension to fit a bigger engine like a 351 or a big block

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Just saw your message and it makes sense. I have no experience with Cleveland anything but I've heard they're a fair bit wider than the Windsors. Also, speaking of steering, is anyone else's terrible as well? I put in 65 components in my 60 bc of the 302 swap, and it hardly turns at full lock. I think my mom's 4dr truck has a better turning radius! I'm young and this car is old, so maybe there's an old trick that people have done to help with it, but I'm coming up with nothing for searches.

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Did you put in every single thing from 1965?

There are no interchangeable parts between those years, meaning you cannot have a mixture of parts between those years.

Also, you have to make sure you do not have a Mustang center link. It will fit, but it is wider, and will cause problems.

 

I'd have to check receipts, but I got the 65 Falcon v8 spindle and upper a arms, and I'm 90% sure that I got the 65 lower as well. The steering is all 65 Falcon from what I can remember, but that's be what I'd have to double check the receipts bc I got it a while back and am just now starting to drive it. When I get home I'll have to send a picture of the turning angle.

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

The control arms are the same specs from half-way through 1961 to 1966. These interchange with the 1965 to 1966 Mustang.

Early than that they have the same dimensions, but smaller ball joints.

 

Here is a good link to part differences: https://www.falconparts.com/ford-falcon-auto-parts/pc/6-Cylinder-to-V8-Steering-Conversion-d19.htm

The early versus later geometry changes: https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?t=75218

Also, check your steering stops. They bolt down on top of the strut rods.

V8 and 6-cylinder ones are different, and in both cases, have a left and a right.

If swapped, they might limit steering.

 

I think that might be the issue tbh, I believe I have 65 struts, they have the bend at the tip of them to stop the knuckle.

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Didn't let me attach the pictures before. I know the uppers are the 65 with larger ball joints because the spindles are V8 ones for the front disk swap.

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

I can turn my '60 around on two-lane city street. You are hitting the steering stops way too soon.

Which spindles are on the car?

 

From what I remember they are v8 spindles from either a mustang or Falcon. I did a 5 lug disk conversion and the spindles came on the car with some big drums that where not set up right. I believe we went off the Falcon enterprises suggested set up and bought new steering and suspension for a 65 Falcon. The upper a arms where used and came in the trunk, but the ball joints, lower a arms, and all the steering is new stuff. The old strut rods where bent and so we ended up buying 65 ones that had the tip at the end they used as a stopper. I still have the old bent metal pieces that they originally used as a stopper on hand, and I'm thinking those probably where allot more inboard allowing for more angle.

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

All of your parts are good. Your problem is in the stops, and it will be easy to fix.

V8 spindles up to 1966 work from a Falcon or a Mustang., but those are all drum brake.

Discs were not available on a Mustang until 1967, and those spindles are different.

Can you take a picture of the back side of the spindle, just above the bottom ball joint?

 

This is a Granada spindle in black, next to a full Falcon/Mustang setup on the right.

Note the number of bolts holding the brakes on. On the Falcon/Mustang it is 4. On the Granada, it is 3.



If you do not have Granada spindles, you will likely need to cut off the built-in stop on the current radius rods, and run the original steering stops.

Those might require trimming, too, but that will be minor.

 

This is a 1965 V8, on the steering stop. Check out the angle of the backing plate, versus where your wheels stop:


Note the different dimensions of the V8 versus 6-cylinder stops. The V8 ones appear to be shorter on the "business end". The V8 ones tail end is even with the bend in the stamping of the lower control arm (looks off because of the viewing angle). The 6-cylinder ones are longer, but can be cut down.

 

I got a conversion for the drum to disk from csrp, and it is not a Granada spindle for sure. I was able to look at my order history and I have the 63 strut rods, not 65 like I thought (sorry for the confusion). I think that I will probably do just that and cut off the built in and use the bolt on ones. Thanks you guys! It will probably be a little bit before I do it, my grandpa is the one with all the tools and the car is about 40 miles away at my house. The 4.11 gears don't like the highway lol

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Oh wow, I'll have to make sure I have the right ones before I do it. I have a guy that parts Falcons out kinda close to me, so I'll have to give him a call if mine aren't the right ones!

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Always easiest to have the correct stops. The stops on the current radius arms can be cut off with a regular cutoff wheel on a grinder. Just go slowly, and let the tool do the work.

 

Sorry Gimpy, you missed this one...

Discs were available on the Mustang starting with the '65 models, then Ford added them to the Cougar, Fairlane and Comet option list in '67. These used the V8 drum brake spindles and featured non-floating 4 piston calipers. Ford had issues with wheel bearing runout (mostly from lack of proper maintenance/adjustment) causing pulsing pedals and discontinued them after '67, switching to a single-piston floating design in '68 that used a dedicated disc-only spindle. These first versions used 'spring' caliper returns and developed a reputation for uneven/angled pad wear, so Ford switched to a 'sliding' design (with another new spindle design) around '73 to fix that. The 4-piston discs were arguably better brakes if the wheel bearings were kept up, but there came a time when you couldn't get any replacement parts for them (had a '67 Cougar that I had to have the rotors turned to less than minimum spec because I couldn't find any). Stainless Steel Brakes got their start by reproducing these starting in the '80s for the Mustang restorers, and these could be retrofitted to most any '60s/early '70s Ford intermediate with V8-style drum brake spindles. Rather expensive though, so many opted for junkyard single piston conversions, using the Granada/Maverick brakes as these used the 'better' sliding calipers but still had the early '60s spindle architecture.

 

These are some of the pictures I've got saved

Sent from my SM-G981V using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

In my 51-years, I have never seen a regular production 65-66 Mustang with factory disc brakes. Not once, ever, and I have seen thousands, and worked on hundreds. Not one single one seen. I have been told that they exist, but have no concrete proof.

And no, Shelbys don't count. Once Carrol's boys took hold of the car, all bets were off.