I am pretty sure most of you saw this when it come out in 2009, but it is good information on how far the automotive industry as advanced in regard to auto safety. Larry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U
Printable View
I am pretty sure most of you saw this when it come out in 2009, but it is good information on how far the automotive industry as advanced in regard to auto safety. Larry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U
I've seen this before, and it's scary to think I'm driving a Falcon with a solid steering shaft, no side impact protection, etc.
You know what though? I used to drive a motorcycle, now I have four wheels and some metal in front and behind me. :-)
You know what else? Cars are smarter and people are "stupider" these days, so we've likely made no progress, one step forwards, two steps backwards. Or zeroed out.
I don't know how old you are, but I grew up in the 60's and 70's (but I'm only 21 years old), and NEVER EVER did we see anyone driving while typing out a letter on a typewriter.
I imagine if I cop back then saw the absurdity of somebody typewriting while driving they would have just executed the culprit on the spot.
Today, it seems everybody is "typewriting" while driving and the keyboard is a fraction of the size of the a typewriter's keyboard, and this driving while typing kills nearly 4000 Americans every year according to the Center for Disease Control.
A few months ago in the parking lot of a Value Village, I saw a black car speeding through the parking lot, the driver did not have her hands on the steering wheel at all when I looked inside the car, both hands on a tech device, her head was facing DOWN looking at the screen. Unbelievable, but true story.
Cars are smarter, drivers are "stupider".
I knew an old long haul trucker, he told me that he knew other truckers who traveled over one million miles with zero accidents during their careers.
I drive my Falcon like it was a motorcycle, meaning I'm extremely vulnerable in the Falcon and I drive appropriately. I keep my safe zones, following distances, I drive within the limits of the car, I pay attention to what's a thousand feet ahead of me, I pay attention to everything, as if my life depends on it, because it does.
I will upgrade the Falcon one day, a roll cage with side impact protection, a non explosive gas tank, a jointed steering shaft, shoulder harness, and then maybe I'll be safer.
The bottom line regarding safety, though, boils down to the driver of the vehicle. They will never be able to pack enough "smart" into a car to counter the incredible "stupid" I see on our roads. As the old saying goes, if you manufacture something to be fool proof, they'll just build a better fool! (Insert laughing emoticon here :-) )
Despite all these safer cars, we are killing over 40,000 Americans on our roadways every year, nearly 4000 die from texting while driving, or tech use and driving.
10,000 die yearly in America from drinking and driving, nearly 1100 of those killed are children, every year, yes, 1100 children slaughtered on our roadways every year because somebody(s) decided to drive while sloshed.
Be safe out there, and as we said in the army, "stay alert, stay alive." Amen.
Oh, one more anecdote, story. Remember the bad winter storm five or so years ago? I recall seeing this late model vehicle, computers, airbags, crush zones, seat belts, four wheel drive, anti-lock brakes, the works, it sat at the bottom of a very steep ice covered hill, crashed. The driver tried to go down an extremely steep ICE COVERED road on that hill. It is the hill that goes up from Lake City Way, up 115th Street for those who know it.
There were many OTHER cars that attempted to drive down that ice covered road on that hill. There ain't enough tech and engineering in the world for people like that.
The good news... cars are safer. Now we need to work on safer people. :-)
All excellent points Wilbur. We all see the drivers that do everything but drive in their cars. Just last night my wife and I followed a lady who was putting her makeup on while attempting to drive. She was all over the road, both hands off the wheel. You see them every day on every road. And, you are correct about the drunk drivers. Thanks for the input. Larry
Pretty much agree Wilbur. I think traffic is much worse now too.
I drive (have driven and will again drive) (the falcon) with the same attitude, plus assume my brakes may not work! Hopefully that gets a step better. I only plan to add lap belts + I am completely redoing the brake system and switching to a double master. Add to that...I won't put a lot of miles on it. All that said, somehow nobody ever died in my falcon after all these years and it was driven pretty hard a few of those years. On the other hand...it doesn't go that fast either.
I do understand why insurance rates go down when you pass 25yrs of age however...so:
The one area I cringe a bit on....when I see that a 16yr old (especially male) has a falcon as a "daily driver"...especially if it has some hp. Looking back at my HS days...I was a pretty aggressive and oblivious driver back then and pretty much thought I was invincible and a great driver (regardless of the 1+ ticket per year and year after year trips to "comedy club defensive driving class" to get the tickets removed.) I can remember time after time that I would see how fast I could get the car to go before my wife would look up and ask "uh...how fast are you going?" (about 125 before she would ask. West Texas and Southern New Mexico have some wide open roads.:3g::3g::3g::3g:) (That was in the later 70's and early 80's.) Now today for a teenager, add probably driving more miles, the wet roads up here, cell phones, more traffic, etc...it's a lot. Then there's "the other guy" you have to worry about talking on their cell phone while smoking pot, on drugs, drinking, on smapchat, etc....:eek::eek: For their daily driver at least...I'd rather have my own teenager in a modern car. My 2c!
As beautiful and fun to drive as our Falcons are, they have some glaring problems that get illuminated when we drive them in todays traffic issues.
When I bought the Falcon that I am driving for my son more than 20 years ago, the traffic and driving issues were no near what they are today.
He didn't drive fast, he drove it everyday, and is a safe driver.
The concerns I see have nothing to do with how well I drive my car. It has to do with how badly the rest of society is driving their cars.
Go online and look up crashes and you will see 90 percent have to do with a driver that either isn't paying attention, is going to fast for the conditions, or driving impaired.
I have drag raced, circle raced, street raced, you name it. But nothing prepares you for what is happening on the streets of today.
The points being made are all good. If you drive from the aspect that everyone else is trying to kill you then you will probably make it out and back. But their are accidents that none of us can prevent.
I would rather my wife was driving a newer car with air bags all over the place, collapsing steering wheel, side impact protection, shoulder harnesses, collapsing frame and body components, anti-skid brakes, and any other safety improvement I can get in her car.
She was hit broadside by a guy going way to fast, ran a stop sign after other cars had already gone out from my wife's lane. There was nothing she could have done. If that would have been in my 64 Falcon she would have suffered massive injuries. In her Honda she got a bump on her knee.
Don't get me wrong. The Falcons were and are great cars. But, they can't compare in safety aspects of today. Larry
Yep...it's the other guy I worry about most. My wife and one son and I were on a hockey trip in Vancouver, BC. We had to do a lot of driving in poor conditions and challenging traffic in those days. Someone ran a light and turned right in front of us and boom...nothing I could do. We were in a late model Volvo XC90. The air bags exploded, the pyrotechnic seat belts exploded, and all the crunch zone stuff did its thing. $35,000 in damage to our car. Not a scratch on any of us. It was amazing. The others were in an old minivan and didn't fare so well. I don't think they were wearing any seat belts...so as you can imagine after I got the ambulance there they spent some time in the hospital but fortunately were all eventually ok. There is something to be said for the safety of today's cars. The next generation of cars might see that car coming and put on the brakes for me, and have no damage.
I think the key point Wilbur was making is the smarter things get, the stupider people get. And to some degree that is true. I think most get lured into a false sense of security.
I've commuted more in the past few years than ever. About 60 miles a day on certain days. I tried the freeway a first. Tried early, tried late trips. Ended up finding a back-roads route. People are simply growing more and more aggressive and offensive drivers. When you are tailed less than one car length at 60 miles an our - and you speed up to get away and they close the gap. Or you see a group of cars pass you on the freeway all tailgating at 70... you wonder why more are not dead.
I used to see people give older cars a wide berth, but not anymore. They'll ride you just the same. Makes me think when it's nice outside... Kia or Falcon? Kia wins more often than not.
:rain:
I googled "the most unsafe car" and found: "The 2011 Kia Rio had the highest rate of death, with 149 fatalities expected per million registrations." See: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/29/s...ad-2011-study/
New cars are safer, but then I read stories like this where a man died because he could not open his electrically-operated door:
See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...tery-dies.html
Then there was the Takata air bag problem: "He should have walked away from the fender-bender. Instead, the 35-year-old married man was killed when a defective airbag exploded and sent a large piece of metal shrapnel into his neck."
And the Chevy Cobalt ignition switch problem: "The number of deaths tied to faulty General Motors ignition switches is up to 49 as a compensation deadline looms for people hurt ..."
The Falcon has a lot of features that were considered safety advances at the time that we just take for granted now.
Model-T Fords had a single hand-operated windshield wiper. Falcons had two self-powered wipers to allow the driver to keep both hands on the steering wheel.
1940 Fords came standard with just one brake light. Falcons had two brake and tail lights for redundancy.
Falcons also had turn signals rather than the driver having to rely on hand signals (a problem at night and during rain).
Falcons had safety glass all around.
Falcons had flow-through ventilation and a hot water heater core. Model A's and Volkswagen Bugs took heat off the exhaust manifold.
Falcons had energy-absorbing Life Guard steering wheels with collapsible spokes.
Attachment 5330
I am not sure, but the Model-A may have only had rear brakes. The Falcon had hydraulics to apply even force to brakes on all four wheels.
Henry Ford did not trust hydraulic brakes because they could leak and preferred reliable steel rods to activate the brakes. I think that his arguments have merit: "Henry Ford famously refused to equip his cars with hydraulic brakes up until the bitter end, which in Ford's case was the 1939 model year. Instead, he insisted on "the safety of steel, from pedal to wheel," as the ad copywriters said." That sounds good to me.
A Falcon is by no means as safe as a new car, but at least driving a Falcon is (in my opinion) vastly safer than riding a motorcycle.
Additional windshield wiper trivia: "Following a collision one rainy night in 1917 between a National Roadster and bicyclist in Buffalo, New York, J.R. Oishei, the car's shaken driver, sought a way to keep windshields clear. He found a retired electrical engineer, John W. Jepson, who had invented a hand-operated squeegee known as "Rain Rubber". Put away in the car's tool box during fair weather, a driver took it out for foul weather, sticking its handle through the opening between the upper and lower sections of the two-part windshield. As the driver pushed the handle back and forth, the blade cleared the windshield. Oishei patented the device and in 1920 Tri-Continental Corporation (later known as Trico) was incorporated to manufacture it."
Dennis, have you seen this one?
http://youtu.be/ShBoZt71pbs
Ford Falcon vs Chevrolet Corvair "no contest" video. You'll enjoy it.
I didn't realize all the safety features in the falcon!
So thankful my Kia is after they retooled and started making safe cars. ;)
I'll have to see what a 014 Soul does.
This is growing into a thread of unsafe proportions. It may in and of itself crash!
:ROTFLMAO:
Car accident stats are always interesting because different cars attract different age groups and people with different attitudes. Not calling you old Roger, but.........:ROTFLMAO:
Are you calling Roger unsafe at any speed? :)
I was driving my Falcon a couple of weeks ago when I saw a woman driving a black, late model Corvair convertible with the top down, It really was a sharp looking car. I waved at her and she waved back.
That being said, I simply do not see Corvairs very often. I look for them at car shows and they just are not there. The public liked Falcons better at the time and Falcons outsold Corvairs by a wide margin. Falcons probably also proved to be longer lasting and more durable than Corvairs over time. I remember my father saying that all Corvairs did was leak oil. Corvairs wound up having a reputation as being unsafe and their re-sale value probably went really low. It would have been like owning a Chevy Cobalt now after all the hoopla about their bad ignition switches. Or like Ford Pintos after a few of them exploded.
Thanks, Don for posting the link for the Ford film strip where they compare the Falcon to the Corvair. Maybe I am biased, but to me the Falcon looks like a more practical and better car for less money.
It does seem to be a hazardous combination to put the gas tank and a gasoline-burning heater furnace next to one another under the hood on the Corvair. The gas tank would rupture if the car ran into anything. People worry about the Falcon gas tanks and what would happen during a hard rear-end collision, but it would be more likely for the car to be to sustain damage to the front in a wreck because cars typically are moving forward.
The old cars have so many endearing qualities linked to our youth and the love of how they were built, their beauty, their uniqueness and all the other traits that keep us driving and restoring them. What one of us sees as a reason to keep one would not be the reason another of us would own a particular car.
The newer cars have the advantage of many years of learning and improving. Let's not forget that the difference from driving a 2016 car and the 1960 Falcon is 56 years. Go back to the 1960 and relive the cars 56 years prior to that and you are driving a 1904 Ford. Quite a bit of improvements there also.
I just remember my 1957 Chevy that I drove in high school. It was only 7 years old when I bought it, but still seemed old and needed so many repairs all the time.
Now Carol drives a 2000 Honda Civic that has never needed repairs, still feels new, drives like a charm and is hopefully going to provide us with many more years of use.
My 2004 Chevy Silverado after 108,000 miles still hasn't had a tune up, replaced the plugs, anything and it still gets 17 MPG. It is 12 years old.
It isn't fair to compare a 1960 Falcon to a 2016 car in regards to safety anymore than it would be fair to compare the 1904 ford to the 1960 Falcon.
I know one thing. Driving my Falcon is fantastic. But so was driving a brand new Corvette with 670 HP. NO comparison, but both have their own experiences.
IF we keep the rubber side down, drive at the speed acceptable for the location, pay attention to our surroundings and like always assume some jerk is trying to kill us, we will continue to keep driving them for years to come. Drive safe, have fun, don't drink and drive and no texting.
That being said, I can't wait to get my car on the drag strip and rip through the gears going as fast as my little yellow car can go. Larry:shift:
Why is everyone always pick'n on me?
;:)
For the record - yes, I drive like a grandpa. I admit I do follow the speed-limits. Wave at the officers holding radar guns. The last accident [I may have had anything to do with] was in the late 70's. Have been hit three times since. Was hit while driving down I-5 by a late 90's Mustang. He exited the express lanes at Northgate and went three lanes over and hit the rear-end of my panel tuck. I saw it, but barely felt it. I pulled over and waited for WSP to arrive. The Mustang had about a 3' deep cavern formed in the right front. Totaled. Mine had a very minor bend in the bumper. The WSP said I could go after taking a report, but I never heard anything afterward. Once was in my wagon when I wasn't even in the car and once was in my 07 Escape as I was stopped, signalling a left, and someone decides to ignore I'm there and hits me in the rear.
But what was said about accident numbers being based upon the car and the type of purchaser probably has some value. A Kia Rio for instance is an entry-level Kia and more a youth car. Ironic that the Soul was advertised as a youthful car, but I see very few youngsters in them - as opposed to something like a Scion XB.
I still think if you put a new car up against old, the new better be thankful it's got all of that safety stuff when it hits real steel.
I drive like a grandpa too, and I've avoided many accidents are a result. I don't own a cell phone, so I never take calls when I drive, and I won't even drive with drivers who use "hands free" devices because I was recently in a car with one such driver while they blew a stop sign and nearly killed a bicyclist who very deftly avoided being creamed by this person's car.
Sorry, I'm done with idiots who insist on driving while distracted. I won't even TALK to some friends while they drive because some people just cannot drive and talk.
It's dangerous out there, like somebody stated, you have to drive like other people want to kill you. It really is that bad. I usually ride a bicycle, ON THE SIDEWALK, and I still dodge cars daily. Even on sidewalks you have people speeding in and out of McDonald's parking lots or any parking lot, blasting right onto the sidewalk, or people driving right into you when you cross a crosswalk.
For the record, I have been hit FIVE TIMES or more while WALKING across crosswalks in Seattle with the light being GREEN TO WALK, well, white to walk. True story, now I cross crosswalks with my head spinning in circles to view ALL traffic from all direction and I shout at the top of my lungs at cars that continue driving toward me while I cross.
It really is as dangerous as if they were trying to kill you. Last summer I saw a woman lying in the street, Lake City Way around 125th, in that MAJOR crosswalk lit up like the fourth of July, some clown just hit her and hit her so hard her body and head were imprinted in the shattered windshield and paramedics worked on her as she lay in the street.
The summer before only half a block down, the road that leads from DICK'S onto Lake City Way, I saw a woman laying UNDER A CAR in the crosswalk as paramedics worked to save her.
It really is becoming sick, many drivers are truly beyond belief seriously ****ed up in the head and it's only getting worse. You can find the stat online, this year we are going to EXCEED 40,000 Americans dying on our roadways.
Let that number sink in...
The number of Americans seriously injured every year are in the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.
Let that number sink in...
It's dangerous out there and sooner or later, as a nation we're gonna have to address this.
Speech over.
Badbird, I know the pleasure of ripping through gears, I used to own a 1969 MGB with a Chevy small block V8 for a motor. How I miss those days! My bone stock little V8 Falcon, a '64 with 260 cubes and factory stock, while it puts a smile on my face, is nothing compared to a truly potent car.
I guess if I had the cash I'd buy something new, with gobs of power, on the other hand, if I had that kind of money, I'd want something like a 1950's Ferrari Barchetta, or an Aston Martin DB5, or a 30's Bentley, and on the other hand I'd buy the new car because any vintage car I want will cost hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars. So a new Turbo Porsche will be cheap by comparison.
I would like to buy myself a 50's Allard J2, I believe the model is, a 2000 pound cycle fendered car with well over 300 hp from its 331 ci Cadillac motor, it was a demon back in the day and could probably still give 90 percent of modern cars a good run for their money with that power to weight ratio.
Dennis, the charm of your utterly untouched, unmodified car is also very appealing, especially as described by you. I occasionally look for a '63 Falcon V8 convertible and I would like the car to be exactly as you have yours, unmodified, exactly as original.
As you've seen me write before, my own "bone stock" unmolested '64 Falcon V8 sedan is a constant struggle because I would like to modify it but I hate to touch it.
Currently the ONLY mods are a bolt in 1 inch anti-sway bar up front, and that dang ugly aluminum radiator I have in it. One day I'll list an ad for a trade on here, trade my nearly new alloy radiator for an OEM nearly new Falcon radiator.
I may even return the original air cleaner to the engine bay, I forgot about that mod, I have a chrome air cleaner housing on it and it's ugly.
Aside from these things, my Falcon is original, unmolested, a bare bones basic '64 Falcon V8 with manual: brakes, steering, and transmission, no frills, no chrome other than the bumpers and a single strip down the center of the sides of the body, and the windshield surround.
It's a very basic wonderful car, I will not add disk brakes, and the only mods from here may be bolt on/bolt off stuff like a fiberglass front bumper, fiberglass hood, and frankly I don't even think I want to add the alloy intake I bought for it.
I considered headers but I may avoid even those, I want me a "Dennis-mobile" now, you've dang near got me convinced that I want an utterly bone stock time capsule that drives exactly as the factory intended it to.
Hopefully, one day, I'll get to see your car in person! If your car were a convertible I'd be plying you with cash! That's the type of condition I hope to find my convertible in! For now, due to my not having a garage, no nice cars. My beaters are fine without a garage but would benefit from one.
My unmolested '64 Falcon, I really wish I had a garage for that. I'm working on it! I can't wait to see this car painted and looking good!
Good speech Wilbur. Larry
I have always used my turn signal as a courtesy when making lane changes while in city traffic, but I will have to remember to stop doing that.
What happens now is that when I indicate my intent to move over, the driver behind me in that lane sees that signal and instantly floors it to close the gap. This seems to be the routine response from other drivers now.
While driving to work a couple of days ago, there was an opening and I tried moving from the center to the left lane. I was already halfway over as the guy that was behind me shot forward and just kept coming. I looked down and his fender was maybe one foot from my car door. I swerved back into the center lane and that "character" gained about one car length distance ahead of me.
Dennis. This reminds me of an incident I was in about 35 years ago - right after I moved to Washington. I was car-less at the time and getting rides from a coworker who behaved exactly as you describe. If someone signaled, he'd floor it. God forbid another car would be in front of him to slow him down. One day he did this and the car in front of him hit us. I sided with the person we hit. I didn't get to ride with him anymore.
I felt so much better about it.
:D
Dennis, the same issue is across the nation concerning the signal before changing lanes. It is noticeable when I drive our cars but if you want to see it really go crazy you should be with us when driving our motorhome and pulling the car trailer.
To pull over that 65 feet of moving mass, you need quite a bit of room to pull into. When we are in traffic, I will have to drive quite a distance with our signal on before getting that much room. When some very nice person does give us that space, we invariably get an idiot who will go around them and pull into the empty space.
Now, I am learning to do it the way the truck drivers handle that. I just keep pulling over and squeeze the idiot over. I get a few horn honks, but it's the only way to handle some jerks.
Most of the time, I find that the large majority of people on the road are trying to be helpful and courteous. Just so happens that the minority as in all cases get to screw up everything for the majority.
When I worked for Boeing I was manager for Quality Assurance at several factories and while driving back and forth from Everett to Renton or Seattle my riders called me grandpa because I kept to the speed limits.
That being said, I still get a lead foot when driving my Falcon as some of you that have ridden with me can attest. But, not in traffic, and not in areas where I could hurt someone. Being a great grandparent 6 times doesn't keep me from wanting to go back to my days when I was 16-18. My mother on her death bed told me she still felt like she was 18, just her body didn't believe her mind. I understand now what she meant.
Much easier though back in Wichita area when I was young to find open roads.
Larry
This thread has definitely got us all thinking. Sadly I doubt there will ever be a good solution until they take all driving rights away from us and make the cars operate on conveyors of some sort. I know laws will not change people. How many still see cell phone glued to peoples' heads? A dozen or more a day for me.
I know for a fact that Metro buses will signal and pull out no matter what. I've been along side at least 3 buses in the past few years (the long bendy ones) and out of nowhere their front end swerves away from the curb and forces me to slam on my brakes. There was no indication coming up upon any of them they were about to pull out. I suspect it is the only way they would get back into traffic using just their signal. But when you are already alongside them, you can't tell anything. They just go.
I'd like to think that most people are trying to be courteous, but I think the trend is towards less of that.
Other things I notice more now than ever are when you know a lane is about to run out. Rather than merging over and zippering in early everyone rushes to the very end as the cones are forcing them over and this causes a hazard merge instead of smooth one. Actually causes the line to go slower than if they just all merged earlier. The two places I see this a lot at is getting off the express lanes going south and getting onto the express lanes going north. Same place - going different direction depending on the time of day. I have seen some incredible maneuvers to get over just in at the last second.
What I'd like to hear are what people think are solutions to these things. Will people go kicking and screaming "x amendment rights" if cars were automated? What if these things we've all lamented about here, was a ticket-able offence? What if we all had to take drivers tests every 10 years? It's one thing to rant about issues, it's quite another to come up with or suggest solutions. Almost any solution to any problem involves penalizing those to whom it doesn't apply.
Oh my gosh Roger, what great comments. The argument about personal rights versus safety come to the forefront every time a new law is passed to help safety issues.
Trouble is, I get caught between the two issues. I agree that helmets prevent injuries, but don't agree that I shouldn't be able to make that decision.
I agree with seat belts completely, agree with child safety seats, even agree that red light cameras help to prevent accidents, agree that our new technological improvements can help.
But, I also feel threatened by a Government that starts telling us everything we can and cannot do. Like no smoking (which I never have). Like don't eat candy (which I always do). Like don't use incandescent lights (like kiss my what?). Shame on me.
Good Lord has this innocuous post become a Frankenstein moment or what.
I say let's go back to 1960, not read 1984 and start over. Larry
The amazing thing...imho we have (relatively) the nicest, most considerate drivers in the country up here in the northwest.
In Texas where I'm from...no comparison! If you're not aggressive enough you will be cutoff every minute...especially if it's a pickup truck or Mercedes (profiling I know)
In Detroit where I go to work sometimes...worse than Texas! But all types of vehicles.
Then there's south China where I have been going for 12 years...it's a different world. You have a system of intimidation there that is more important than any laws or lights. Red light? Doesn't matter...go or get run over. Drive down the wrong side of the road? Sure, why not. Mix that with thousands of new drivers who are actually the opposite and don't "get" the system.
Well...my plane is taking off...(to visit family for the holidays) and no texting and flying allowed. Happy holidays and Merry Christmas to all of you. Next update...my solutions...
Is this an aluminum manifold for a 260 with a two barrel carburetor? Or does an intake for a four barrel also work with a two barrel?
My Falcon had an Edebrock aluminum intake manifold and four-barrel carburetor when I got it. I bought a two barrel carburetor, throttle linkage, cast iron intake manifold, and air cleaner cover off e-bay to put it back to original.
The original-equipment cast iron intake manifold weighs 40 pounds as indicated on a bathroom scale. The Edelbrock Performer aluminum intake manifold weighed 15 pounds (25 lbs less).
Attachment 5346
Only with an adapter...
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/mrg-1933/overview/
Hello, Roger.
That is interesting. If I ever have to remove my stock intake manifold for some reason, I will give some serious thought to re-installing the Edelbrock aluminum intake. Changing things, though, can lead to complications.
My car had this Edelbrock Performer #1404, 500 CFM, four barrel carburetor with manual choke on it when I bought it:
Attachment 5347
Attachment 5348
The background as to why I removed the "high performance" items and went back to stock was that the previous owner had changed the throttle linkage in order to make the four-barrel carburetor fit. This photo is with the two-barrel carburetor installed but with the modified throttle linkage still in place. It is just a rod connected directly to the pedal crank:
Attachment 5349
Having a correct throttle linkage is (in my opinion) very important. You can't just stick something in there and expect it to work properly. The arc of the pedal range has to match carburetor throttle range. The spring tensions have to be correct to make the pedal comfortable to use while still providing a positive return. The original equipment throttle linkage for a V-8 engine and a Ford-O-Matic transmission is a complicated, engineered mechanism that incorporates swing arms, two springs, and transmission kick-down rod:
Attachment 5351
I had to watch e-bay for a long time to find the right parts, but I eventually found them and everything went together nicely:
Attachment 5350
You're absolutely correct, once somebody messes with the creations of the Ford engineers, they open a Pandora's box of of bodge jobs. One of my Falcons, another blue one like the one in my photos but a different one, he installed a four barrel carb and almost NOTHING worked right. There was no kick down for the automatic C4 transmission, and one day I figured out that the gas pedal was not opening the secondaries on the carb.
Another Falcon of mine, similar situation, somebody bodged it, and the car would never kick down to a lower gear, it was also a C4 equipped Falcon. Yes, it's best to leave the car alone and leave it stock, UNLESS you're prepared to follow a project through to the end.
Speaking of which, today I "almost" finished installing an air cleaner housing on my black Futura Falcon. Simple sounding isn't it? Buy air cleaner housing, bolt onto car, right? WRONG.
Single barrel carb for my inline six, I buy the very same air cleaner housing I bought for my other Falcon, but this time the opening is ever so slightly too small. So I spent twenty minutes with a file widening the opening of the lower housing so it would fit onto the carb.
Then I had to manufacture my own bolt so I could install a wing nut onto it to hold the housing to the carb. This became a huge project, I had to use a hacksaw for the threaded rod, I had no vise, it's not easy without a vise. Then I screwed up and the rod was too long, and when I closed the hood it rammed the rod through the threaded part that it was threaded to, stripping the threads and making that part of the carb USELESS.
Thankfully I had a junk carb laying around and I took that part from it. Then I created my own "vise" from a wood block, drilled a hole, stuck the threaded rod into it to hold it in place, and cut it with a hacksaw again, this time much easier than the last.
Both times I had to file and work on the threads after sawing because sawing damaged the threads.
Tomorrow I have to buy two nuts so I can lock the threaded rod into place so it won't turn while I twist the wing nut onto it.
This has been a two day project with about three hours total spent, just to install an aftermarket carb housing.
I have to use an aftermarket housing because I installed a Monte-Carlo bar and that prevents use of the stock factory air cleaner housing.
Yes, it's a domino effect when you begin to change what the engineers created long ago. In my case, I believe it's worth it, all the changes I've made to my cars provided me with a lot of enjoyment.
I did remain stock on one part this week, precisely to save me the problems you've mentioned Dennis. I had a seventy six Ford Granada anti-sway bar laying around, and rather than schlepp to Bellevue the long way around to avoid the toll on my car which has no toll equipment, to buy an anti-sway bar, why not use the Granada bar?
I still needed mounts and end links, and the process of finding high performance polyurethane mounts and end links because a tortuous nightmare so I said screw it and checked for factory BONE STOCK parts, and not only were they easy to find, they were right there in the store at O'Reilly Parts.
It was a done deal! So now the bar is mounted, that too became a project for reasons I won't waste words on, but much trouble was saved by using stock mounts and parts needed to install the Granada bar, and best of all? I'm using an authentic vintage FoMoco part that was MADE IN AMERICA. No mystery meat here.
NOBODY HAS A PLUCKING CLUE where their parts are made these days, not CJ Pony, not Falconparts, not NAPA, NOBODY (except for Cobraautomotive) but I know where my seventy six Ford Granada bar was made, in the US of A. I should add that I recently bought about $400 of parts from Falconparts a few weeks ago, and though there is no indication of where the parts are made, they look like very high quality parts and I have no complaints and will continue to do biz with Falconparts out of California.
Anyway, yeah, I agree Dennis, unless you have a very burning desire for a specific goal, it's best to leave the car alone, leave it stock, I've owned plenty of hacked, molested, bodged, bloodied, screwed up cars that were worked on by hatchet murderers.
Leave cars be, keep it stock, unless you really really really want to reach a specific goal and it makes you happy enough, just leave the car alone and enjoy it!
In every story their are always at least two sides. Don't misunderstand, I am all for either side. The folks who love the Falcons for their originality are adamant that they should stay that way. There are those in the Falcon family who are just as adamant about changing things.
Sometimes the changes are for the better, sometimes they aren't. If we all stayed with stock and nothing else, there wouldn't be Hot Rods, Drag Races, Paint styles beyond belief and even down to the Rat Rods.
There are things about the 60's Falcons that absolutely were not good engineering, even for that era. But, to keep costs where the average American family could afford them, they were fantastic cars.
I would tell anyone to change certain things about their Falcons due to safety issues. Other than that, can't think of a thing that needs to change from the original.
That said, I left my (non-stock) Falcon stock on the outside, interior is stock less a stereo added in the glove box with two additional speakers on the package shelf and a tachometer on the Ididit steering column with new steering wheel.
I drove the car with the original 260 V8 when we bought it for our son Dallas. It got you from A to B, but? It also had horrible brakes that he built to original specs and still were only acceptable. But they would get you stopped at B if it was quite a distance to B.
As most owners know, the single bowl brake cylinder is perfect if nothing goes wrong. But, as some of you know, stuff happens and the dual bowl is better.
We need to not get locked into our way or my way is better, they are all good, even the Rat Rods which I admit doesn't fit in my psyche. But it fits in those guys minds so have fun.
I like the stock Falcons. I like the Falcons with blowers and 15" wide tires on the back. I love mine and I am sure you love yours. That is all that matters.
Larry
I am glad that you guys persuaded me to upgrade my car to the 1967 Mustang dual master cylinder and talked me through the conversion process. That was a huge improvement.
Attachment 5364
The original manual drum brakes are adequate for a car in its stock configuration if they do not get wet, if you don't tail gate the car in front of you, and if you do not drive too fast. Making an emergency stop with drum brakes anywhere above 55 mph is an exciting experience.
The original 90, 101, and 164 horsepower engines were not very powerful and that in itself helped keep the speed within the design capacity of the original brakes. If you drop a bigger, heavier, higher-powered engine in the car, the original brakes will not be sufficient.
The six-cylinder Falcons had 9-inch drums and the 260 V-8 Falcons had 10-inch drums that were also used in the mid-sized V-8 Fairlanes. That is interesting because if the 10-inch brakes are barely marginal by today's standards in a Falcon, they would be even worse in the heavier Fairlane.
One thing that I do like about my drum brakes is the "squuuueeak" sound that they sometimes make when stopping at a red light. That squeak reminds me of elementary school and the sound that the school buses made when they stopped.
I'm with all you guys. Definitely one change leads to another. I definitely like the original falcons, but I really like and appreciate all the resto mods too and even the crazy stuff is now a form of art to me. I can also appreciate how mods give us another way to keep enjoying the hobby too.
Most of all,I really like our clubs attitude on all of it. It's a very accepting club.
I'm comfortable now that I can have a basically original falcon and not worry at all that I have upgraded brakes and added seat belts or a couple other things which will simply allow me to enjoy the car more or not spend crazy money to get something exactly original.
Dennis, maybe the others that know more will chime in, and maybe you tried this already, but I don't think your brakes need to squeak. My memory (I used to work at my Dad's RV dealership) says it's probably related either to brake dust or rubbing of the shoes against the back plate, or worn out. I think yours are probably not worn out? Also, if you got new shoes when you had yours done, if they don't fit up just right sometimes it causes some vibration which means squeaks. If you got new shoes, I would go back and tell them they squeak too much, if you didn't, I would remove the drums, clean everything up really good with brake cleaner, put a dab of anti squeak grease on the back plate where the shoes rub (not on the braking surface), reassemble, and squeaks might be gone...good luck.
Hello, Don.
The brakes were one of my first "big ticket" repair items.
I bought the car in July 2012, and it looked like it had been sitting somewhere for ten years. The tires were not worn, but they were ten years old and dry rotted. In August 2012, I had a new set of tires installed. I looked at the brakes while they were changing the tires. They looked OK, but .... I noticed that the self adjuster on the right front brakes was backwards:
Attachment 5365
I added that to my "to do list" and kept driving the car. Then I noticed that I was frequently adding brake fluid to the reservoir. In December 2012 I took it to Meineke and told them about the self-adjusters and losing fluid and asked them to check the brakes. Well, ... They called back and said that my wheel cylinders were leaking and the rear drums were grooved and could not be turned.
The bill turned out to be: He had repacked the front wheel bearings, added two front brake wheel seals (parts $14.78), two front wheel cylinders ($40.72), two rear wheel cylinders ($36.24), a left rear self-adjuster cable ($19.85), rear brake shoes ($36.85), two rear brake drums ($137.36), and rear brake hardware ($18.40). Total = $348.10 parts/shop supplies + $254.70 labor + tax = $690.15. Wow! It was better than the alternative, though, of running out of brake fluid and crashing into something.
And yes, I could have done it myself. I hate working on brakes, though. It is a messy pain to bleed the brakes and it is a royal pain to cock those springs into position without the correct brake tools. Plus, the springs will wreck everything if they are not in correctly and pop out of place. I preferred to pay the labor and let them do it.
That was about 12,000 miles ago and they had just replaced the rear drums and shoes. How long do a set of brake shoes typically last?
The squeaky brakes are not a critical item, but I will save your description of what to check and have the guys at Meineke take a look at them whenever I am there next. I am due for an oil change in about 300 miles. I could let them change the oil and clean up the brakes at the same time.
Here is a completely unrelated photo that I like. A trio of hotrodders from 1924. The expressions on their faces are great.
Attachment 5372
Note to Larry:
Send this link to your brother with the Fairlane. Here is an incredible 1964 Thunderbolt tribute: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj29Zf2Uua0
Wow! That car is cool. It remotely pertains to the topic of "Old car safety" because he says at the end that "cars like this will never be built again" because the new cars are safer.
Oh, geeze, though, I would love to take that jazzed up Fairlane for a spin.
I wish you could ride with my brother in his Fairlane. We will find out if his car or mine is faster this year if the Lord is willing. I just have to install my new rear end, line lock and shift light.
His car has a 460 at over 400 HP, turns in the mid 12's at 107mph. He just changed the rear end to a 4.56 to get better times, we'll see how that works out.
I can tell you, that I absolutely love opening the e-cutouts on my Falcon and stomping the gas. There isn't much to compare to the feeling.
My brother Jerry and I saw a bunch of the 64 Thunderbolts when they first came out when we lived in New Jersey and raced at ATCO dragway in the 60's. I can still see them in my mind. They behaved differently than all the other cars. When they came off the line, they raised up at all four wheels. There were no other cars that could beat them in 64. I have heard that there were a few Falcons and Comets that had the 427, but never saw one.
There are a lot of interesting takes on safety advancements.
The article in the link below includes some (right or wrong...not sure) I never thought of like...
radial tires (one more reason not to spend the extra money on the Coker's)
safety glass
Unleaded fuel
http://jalopnik.com/the-ten-most-imp...tiv-1462200446
I was at the Arlington (Washington) drag strip (actually the airport) as a spectator back in the day, and often saw 427 Comets and 289 Cobras run there. As I recall, one Comet was from Yankee Mercury. The Comets had a similar suspension that lifted the entire car while under power. I thought it was neat to see them bounce during the gear change. I figured that lifting motion helped the traction. I marveled at the cars at the time, and I guess I still do in my memory!
Don, that is some great information. All those safety advancements can be seen throughout the racing industry refinements.
If you go back and look at the NASCAR, Drag Racing, or all racing for that matter you can see them changing the cars.
If you look at crash records of NASCAR going back to the 50's you will see crashes that killed the drivers where as today they wouldn't have got a bump.
For those of us that drove the cars back in the 60's we can see all the technology improvements and see what they have accomplished. The padded dash saved lives, seat belts improved on that, three points belts improved on that, air bags went further.
I can remember trying to stop my 57 chevy in a hard stop and remember the improvements of the anti lock brakes. There is no comparison and thousands if not more have survived by just that improvement.
I can verify the improvement of the collapsible steering column. I was driving a mountain buggy (old 52 Plymouth) dual rear wheels, made into the buggy, no doors, just for hunting. Hit ice in the mountains going way to fast of course and slammed into a tree of the side of a cliff. Broke the car in half, I went through the windshield, broke off the steering wheel, caved in the dash, woke up laying 50 feet below the car. 7 broken ribs, glass cuts all over, but the steering column did the most damage along with the two radio knob posts.
Then we have the tires, the suspension changes, the side impact air bags, major changes to the structures to improve side impacts and collapse like accordions from front impacts, side air bags, the list goes on and on and on.
The improvements are being made every year and I read an article where Volvo believes that in the very near future they will have a car that is fatality free. Not sure if that is possible but more power to them.
Thank God we have the old cars, but there cannot be a discussion concerning safety related to old versus new. The engineering is getting updated daily.
1910 versus 1960 saw a few improvements in safety, but actually, not that many. Look at the difference in the next 50 years. Amazing. What will the future years entail. Probably make us stop driving and ride the stupid *&%* busses or trains or ??? Larry
I drive The Wonder Falcon to and from work everyday at around 45 mph and do not have a lot of experience at making sudden stops with it at higher speeds. I was provided an opportunity to try that out while driving north on I-75 yesterday afternoon.
There were orange barrels along the edge of the highway and a state trooper was parked on the shoulder of the road with his lights flashing to indicate that this was a construction zone. There had not been an accident, no one had been pulled over, and nothing was blocking the road, but people saw the flashing lights, hit their brakes, and traffic came to a complete halt. I had been buzzing along at 75 mph when I suddenly saw a mass of brake lights ahead and applied my brakes, and had to press harder, and then harder. The distance between me and the car ahead was diminishing rapidly and my wheels were just beginning to lock (bump bump bump bump) when the Falcon finally stopped.
Whew! It takes a lot of room for the drum brakes to get that car stopped from 75 mph, especially in comparison to what you would expect from a newer car with power anti-lock four-wheel disc brakes.
Post-script:
I just looked up some figures and was surprised.
A Motor Trend road test for a then new 1963 six cylinder Falcon convertible reported that the brakes "performed exceptionally well" and "60-mph panic stops were accomplished in 126.5 feet".
A recent Motor Trend road test for a 2016 Mustang GT reported "BRAKING, 60-0 MPH, 109 ft".
See at bottom of article: http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-...t-test-review/
The 2016 Mustang GT with four 13-inch disc brakes stopped only 14% shorter than the 1963 Falcon. Huh. That makes the Falcon look impressive.
Maybe an accumulation of brake dust has made my brakes less grippy. I will have them inspected and cleaned this month when I have the oil changed.
I came across this picture of a 1961 Ranchero.
Attachment 5448
It is interesting in that while the front end was completely destroyed, the car appears to have maintained its structural integrity from the firewall back and passenger space is intact. The windshield is not even cracked.
The Ranchero protected its driver and he is now selling parts from the car on e-bay.
Very interesting the stuff you can and can't see. A power brake booster? A 5.0 roller motor. No clue about the seat belts or if he collapsed the steering wheel.
Do you know him? What the heck did he hit?
Hello, Roger.
The e-bay seller is in Hornbrook, California. I do not know him. I just read the following in an e-bay ad: "I totaled my national award winning 61 ranchero daily driver (3rd at the San Ramon Nationals) so I don’t need these parts from it any more. I’m not going to build another Ranchero so all my extra parts must go."
See: http://www.ebay.com/itm/1960-1961-19...pWnsHv&vxp=mtr
Before:
Attachment 5449
After:
Attachment 5450
This photo of a 1962 Falcon shows the importance of seat belts. You can see where the driver's and passenger's heads hit the windshield.
Attachment 5451