Think I will trade my 65 f-100 for a 65 Falcon Wagon all org but it has a 1995 5.0 GT Mustang engine in it with a C4

I need more seat room...ny son is 15 and had 2 friends over Sunday and the 4 of us wanted to go to Pigeon Forge

Would have been nice/cool to take the classic ole truck but we couldn't

With the Falcon we all could have went in a Classic Car!

The Falcon runs great he is driving it in from 200 miles away..still has all 4 of the org hubcaps etc

But i will tint the windows and paint it John Deere Blitz Black

 

Keep the truck...2 reasons..A...it will look good next to the old Falcon wagon... and B, if you were to cut it loose...what ya gonna use to haul a frig in ??? Cant do that in a wagon...thus ive got all bases covered...full size truck(my 65 CS) little truck daily econobox driver(91 Ranger approaching its 20th birthday on the 25th of this month and nearly 280K later, and my 91 Crown Vic CS wagon...which turns 21 on June 14th..kudos to Ford Customer Services Division which is where you can get these cool lil tidbits of info from.
But keep the truck...get the Falcon...for your sons 1st car...get a newer yet old Ford...late 60s/70s...nothing makes me cringe more then seeing a young person trying to smoke the tires on the grocery getter...or hot rodding it and beating the tar out of it...just my 2 cents.


- cs65

 

Don, a teen kid is going to do that with anything he/she drives. and the classic wagons are becoming very popular now a days!

i would do it if they were equal value.

 

I like the roof rack!

 

 

We had a white one for a while when I was kid, I can remember going to the drive-in movies and loading the back with blankets for floor padding. Personally, I would do it if it was like quality of the truck, but then I have a fleet of vehicles. A 65 Falcon wagon with a Fox body 5.0 and C4, that dude would be BA, forget about the kids driving it. Blacked out, squat it down, some front disks with Torq-Thrusts....
--Mike

 

Its been changed over to carb and Petronix and Alum Radiator

 

nice ride! but in my opinion, not losing the truck to get it. If you can't do both, keep the truck

 

1. Keep the truck and install a removable bench seat and belts in bed.
2. That doesn't strike me as a 95 5.0, pretty sure they came with serp belt system and with all the comp fuel inj stuff swapped out it's basically just a roller 302 at this point.

 

I'd keep both if it was possible....man, that Falcon is sweet. I can picture my 9'5"
Long-board strapped to the roof heading to the coast. Surf's Up!

 

He said all that been changed over to vbelt and pulley

and that he had to put a diff flywheel and i think balancer to get the c4 trans to work...not sure what he was talking about but he STATES IT WAS DONE 100 % RIGHT!

 

Wow

My father bought one of those in 68 used, same color and all. I can still see the headlights, flying glass and the BIG HONKIN' Cornbinder cabover grill hitting us from behind in a snow storm on the mile hill outside of McAdoo Pa. ,as i was sitting in the back rear facing seats with my older bro.

We lived through it the car did not.

Garbz

 

RED FLAG RED FLAG

 

Also, didn't the 95 5.0 have roller rockers which required the taller valve covers? These appear to be the old 289 valve covers which I don't think would clear the later model roller rockers. I could be wrong about that but I'm just throwing it out there as something else to check.....

 

I'm not sure that there are red flags here.

First: The later model 5.0s are roller bearing engines. I have one in my 54 Ford.

Second: The late model 5.0s came with fairly low profile valve covers. They actually don't have accomodations for a PCV valve. They ventilated the crankshaft through the late model intake manifold that they have. So if you're going to ditch all the late model intake bits and go with a carburetor, you have to get valve covers from an earlier 302 that does have the PCV fitting. These can be very early 302 valve covers....as in....late 60s.

Third: The harmonic balancer and flywheel are weighted identically and are designed to mirror each other. The late model (post 1988 I think) engines have a 50 oz counterweight and the earlier engines have a 28 oz. counterweight.

Fourth: You can strip off the tensioner belt and switch it over to an old-fashioned v-belt system. It's not that hard to do. Again, I did it to mine. It requires new water pump and crank pulleys, but it is certainly do-able. I ended up using an early Mustang water pump pulley to match the junkyard crank pulley that I found. Oh yeah....and this swap also requires a new alternator pulley. However, since I was installing an entirely new one-wire alternator on my set-up, I simply ordered the alternator with the v-belt pulley already installed.

Finally: You certainly can take one of the bulletproof late-model 5.0/302s and strip off all or most of the electronic ignition bits and other associated things and convert them to a basic, carbureted version of their old self. My setup has a Edelbrock Performer Intake and an Edelbrock 4 bbl carburetor, among other things.

Here's a photo of it. It's not the best shot of just the engine, but it gives a general idea. I decided to slightly disguise the late model 302 with 1954 colors. I also hated to lose the cool look of the oil-bath air cleaner, so I gutted it, changed the flange to fit a 4 bbl carburetor and it now takes modern paper filters.