I have seen one guy do 225's on the front of a late sixties Falcon, and that fits ok, and the 235's fit early mustangs, I will just have to measure carefully. It seems not that many people outside of Australia modify the later ones extensively.
I have seen one guy do 225's on the front of a late sixties Falcon, and that fits ok, and the 235's fit early mustangs, I will just have to measure carefully. It seems not that many people outside of Australia modify the later ones extensively.
True - that's why here they are called "the forgotten Falcon."
Good news is that you have way more room to work with (in most places) than those of us with the 60-65 models.
Roger Moore
63 "Flarechero"
powered by: 347ci stroker | Tremec T5 | 8" 3:45 TracLoc rear
I have a '65 as well, yes, HUGE difference. I previously had an FE in the '67, 28x10.5 ET streets on 15x8 4" bs fit with a small trim at the leading edge, and everywhere else they cleared with room to spare. I wouldn't even try to fit those on the '65 without some serious work.
well, there wasn't much doubt in my mind, but it looks like 235 45 17's will fit on the front of a '66-'69 falcon with a bit of room left over.
http://blog.macsautoparts.com/1967-5...-4-door-sedan/
and no, I have no intention of putting a mustang wing on mine.
Bookmarks