Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical 64 falcon 6 cylinder discussion

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Mr.Falcon64, Mar 22, 2019.

?
  1. 144 stroked to 170 and upgrades (this keeps it original motor)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Bolt in 200 for more HP and torque (makes me feel guilty)

    10 vote(s)
    100.0%
  1. hello everyone. My name is Jarod and I have a 1964 ford falcon 2dr sedan with a 144 i6 and 3spd column shift manual. Some of you might recognize me from other places. Just for basics I am a high school junior but love cars and have been working on em since I was 10. I love rebuilding engines (as in my opinion there the coolest part) and one day hope to be and automotive engineer. Now that’s out of the way I wanted to get your all opinions on 6 cylinders. I already have been to FordSix (amazing sight btw) and know all the differences and pros and cons. I’m talking about for me I’m trying to decide if I should hop up my 144 in my falcon or get a 200 that bolts in. My problem is (bear with I know I’m a little crazy) I feel like the engine is kinda the life of a car. My falcon was born with that 144 and I feel guilty for ripping it out and stuffing another in. So I was thinking what if I take my 144 stroke it to a 170 and do some more mods to the head and carb and ignition. Or am I being stupid and just throw in a 200. I need thi engine to be able to handle hours of highway abuse at 3,000 + RPM and the 144 has the shortest stroke of 2.5 inches but only 4 main bearing. What’s your all opinions. Thanks
     
  2. hedg12
    Joined: Feb 1, 2009
    Posts: 46

    hedg12
    Member

    If you already have the 144 in the Falcon, drive it. Make it safe and have fun with it. If it dies, then make the decision to rebuild it or replace with a 200. Way too many projects die on the vine because someone got carried away with upgrades on a runner.
     
    blowby and mcnally351 like this.
  3. 62rebel
    Joined: Sep 1, 2008
    Posts: 2,817

    62rebel
    Member

    I'm a Falcon freak from my childhood. Born into a Ford family and raised on them. That said, and respectful of your desire to maintain originality, I am all in favor of ditching the 144 in favor of a 200. Much as I love them, Falcons were never meant to eat up freeway miles at freeway speeds. You'll need those extra mains to keep it together at the revs necessary to stay at 70 for any stretch of time. You'll find the latest 200 in the '82 Fox bodies and they -should- have the dual pattern rear face on the block. Swap over the pan and oil pickup tube, you're done.
     
    loudbang and mcnally351 like this.
  4. 'Mo
    Joined: Sep 26, 2007
    Posts: 7,432

    'Mo
    Member


  5. oldiron 440
    Joined: Dec 12, 2018
    Posts: 2,111

    oldiron 440
    Member

    I know how you feel on keeping the original motor, my Fairlane is a 289 car and I felt it needed to stay that way. I spent the money on performance parts to make horse power I wanted but I spent 2 or 3k more building a 289 instead of a 347 or 362. Would I do it again, probably.
    But in the case of the little 6 over the 200, I'd go with the 200.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  6. jimmy six
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 9,000

    jimmy six
    Member

    Mustang's were available with 200's and 4 speeds. Would make a great combo for your Falcon. Add an 8" 5 lug rear and a front 5 lug spindles to the front to finish it off. You could keep the 13" wheels if you want. There is enough Mustang repo stuff you could really make the whole package look stock.
     
  7. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 4,931

    Boneyard51
    Member

    I had a similar vehile, a1960 Ecnolinre van with a 144 six. It was pertty humble. I acquired a 200 six out of a Mustang, plentiful at the time. Rebuilt it stock, found a three speed overdrive transmission, replaced the light duty rear end with a nine inch wit 4:11 gears.
    Bought the heaviest duty shocks I could fit on this van. Completely rebuilt the suspension, raising the back a little and had new radial Goodyear’s ties on GT wheels.
    I could easily cruise 80 mph with this rig. Use it to haul moto-cross bikes for years.
    As to your 144, do as I did, put in the shed out back, doesn’t seem so bad if you keep the old parts. I still have that van and 144 engine on the ranch. Loved the rig.




    Bones
     
    loudbang likes this.
  8. v8flat44
    Joined: Nov 13, 2017
    Posts: 746

    v8flat44

    I have owned both engines & agree the 200 is best. But, like others have said, run the 144 for a while and take your time looking for a 200. have fun & don't get in a hurry. mike
     
  9. tiredford
    Joined: Apr 6, 2009
    Posts: 527

    tiredford
    Member
    from Mo.

    I thought 64's had the 170 engine.
     
  10. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 9,516

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    Is the 144 in good shape? Are you happy with the performance? If so, run it stock.

    If you need more oomph or the old engine is shot, then go for the 200.

    I wouldn't waste money trying to hop up the 144. And probably not the 200, when a V8 will fit so easily.

    What is wrong with the 250 six?
     
    loudbang and Boneyard51 like this.
  11. Thanks everyone for your replies. I know that’s realistically the 200 makes the most sense. I thought about 250 swapping it but that requires new motor mounts and transmission and etc at that point I lose fuel economy of the 6 and might as well v8 swap it. I have been looking around for some decent priced 200 motors and will keep an eye out. I don’t know why it bothers me so much pulling that original engine and transmission lol. It just does. I think I’ll get over it when I feel the power difference especially with a 5spd that I eventually plan on putting in it like a T5. One last question so you all don’t think it’s the effort to stroke it to a 170. Thanks everyone. I got plent if dumb questions lol.
     
  12. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 4,931

    Boneyard51
    Member

    The 250 is a little different than the 144/170/200. It will go where the others go, but there will be some modifications needed. We put one in one of those Econline pick ups years ago. Can’t remember the problems, but there was some. The 200 will bolt in where the 144/170 was.
    But the extra 50 cubes could be worth the troubles..... may depend on what you find first! Lol




    Bones
     
    loudbang likes this.
  13. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 9,516

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    You might consider a mild hop up of the 200. If it needs a new exhaust get one made 1/2" larger in diameter than stock. This will cost very little extra. Add a progressive 2 barrel carb with an adapter. That is basically what Dodge did to create the Super Six. The finishing touch would be a slightly hotter camshaft.

    All this on an engine that has been overhauled or freshened up. If you are swapping a used engine of unknown condition don't do any hop up at all. It will last longer.
     
    loudbang and Boneyard51 like this.
  14. RmK57
    Joined: Dec 31, 2008
    Posts: 1,724

    RmK57
    Member

    Biggest handicap with the 144/170 is the intake manifold that's part of the head casting. Your stuck with a one barrel or an adapter that doesn't work very well. I have a 170 in my 66 Bronco and quite like it, all 105 hp of it.
     
    mcnally351 and Boneyard51 like this.
  15. I plan on doing a overhaul when I find a 200 to put in just to make sure it’ll last awhile. Either way I go I already plan on doing a cam, exhaust, ignition and carb upgrades to the engine. I’m not looking for a screamer here but a classic I can daily to school while still achieving 18+ mpg city which I know these can do had a friend who got almost 20 city with a 4spd 200. Plus even with a 200 my falcon only weighs 2,400 lbs so it doesn’t take much especially with a 5spd o think 0-60 in 9 seconds isn’t unreasonable still faster than my Honda. I’m looking for an 68-79 f250 that will be my go fast vehicle that I don’t care about mileage.
     
  16. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 4,931

    Boneyard51
    Member

    1BA9E3C7-4816-4FB6-9D99-3C9DEE59C09C.jpeg
    No problem putting 3 ones on the 200 six.




    Bones
     
    blowby and loudbang like this.
  17. RmK57
    Joined: Dec 31, 2008
    Posts: 1,724

    RmK57
    Member

     
    loudbang likes this.
  18. 65 and later 200 s are a seven main bearing engine compared to the four main 144 and 170 engines. They can be identified by the five freeze plugs on the side of the block, the 200s in the Econoline's and Broncos had solid lifters. I had a 65 Ranchero with the 200 and a standard transmission back in 65/66 and it had no problem maintaining 70 out on the open road with 20+MPG. They are a rugged little engine.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  19. 62rebel
    Joined: Sep 1, 2008
    Posts: 2,817

    62rebel
    Member

    250 is a wider longer and especially taller engine. Can be made to fit, but if you were going to that much trouble a 302 would be more practical. I've fought that battle before! Long before the days of instant information from the interwebs
     
    loudbang and Boneyard51 like this.
  20. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 8,860

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

    loudbang likes this.
  21. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 5,214

    sunbeam
    Member

    What ever 6 you choose get rid of the Load-o- matic distributor
     
    62rebel, loudbang and gimpyshotrods like this.
  22. blowby
    Joined: Dec 27, 2012
    Posts: 7,499

    blowby
    Member
    from Nicasio Ca

    I don't know squat about Ford 6s but I must say Jarod your knowledge and thoughtfulness are way ahead of where I was as a HS junior. Good luck and keep us posted on your progress.
     
  23. Beanscoot
    Joined: May 14, 2008
    Posts: 1,978

    Beanscoot
    Member

    If for some reason you did decide on a V8, a 260 makes a nice fit with stock parts. Or an early 289 with five bolt bellhousing, I think the six bolt bellhousing may not fit the trans tunnel.
     
  24. LWEL9226
    Joined: Jul 7, 2012
    Posts: 306

    LWEL9226
    Member
    from So. Oregon

    Jarod.... WELCOME
    Where are you located??
    Maybe someone local to you could help you locate a 200 at a good price….

    LynnW
     
    loudbang likes this.
  25. Thank you everyone for being so nice to the noon lol. And thanks blowby I appreciate it engines and cars just kind of click for meI will definitely keep you all posted. LWEL9226 Thank you for the welcome. I attend school in Phoenix but my ford is in grand junction Colorado western slope. I would be willing to pick one up within an hour or two of me if the price is right. I am on a high school budget though lol. One question for you all I feel like another important upgrade is brakes as the stock manual 9” drums all around ain’t gonna do squat trying to stop from 75+ mph
     
  26. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 9,516

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    Early Mustangs share a lot of parts with Falcon, in other words Mustang spindles may be an easy way to fit disc brakes. The Ford guys would know about this. You may find that this requires 5 bolt wheels.
     
  27. 62rebel
    Joined: Sep 1, 2008
    Posts: 2,817

    62rebel
    Member

    Find a Granada or Monarch for the disc brakes and rear axle. It's practically a bolt in for the 64. Don't use fox body parts they're completely different
     
  28. David Chandler
    Joined: Jan 27, 2007
    Posts: 1,101

    David Chandler
    Member

    If it was me, I'd get a later 200 and work on it when you can afford it. At your age I'm sure money doesn't grow in trees. I had a 200 in a Fairmont Futura and it was a very quick little thing for such a small engine. I've known people who had Falcons with the 144. Slow would be putting it kindly, especially if they had the old Ford O Matic transmission. Someone mentioned a four speed manual. You might look for one of those. I knew A guy with a Falcon Sprint Convertible, that had the six and a four speed. He loved it. I think his was a 63. My uncle had a Mustang with a 200 with an earlier block and four main bearings, not seven; and a three speed. He was getting it worked on and they told him a V8 three speed would work, and was a much more durable transmission. His was a 65. I'm not sure if it would bolt up to an older bell housing. But it would give you a syncro on first gear, that yours lacks. Handy sometimes, when second is a bit too fast.
    Good Luck..
     
  29. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 5,214

    sunbeam
    Member

    I had a 60 in college that I swaped in a 221 v8 the 9" brakes were OK it's all about weight your Falcon is less than 2500 lbs with 9x2.25 front and 9x1.5 rear brakes a Chevelle at a 1000 lbs heaver has 9.5x 2.5 front and 9.5x 2 rears
     
  30. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 18,096

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Scarebird has brakes for cheap.

    Get at "take-out" 200. They can be had for cheap, by those who upgrade to V8's.

    Ditch the Load-O-Matic distributor, for a later Duraspark II one, along with its module.

    Drive it.

    Or go nuts with it:
    23405985_1711530462213228_1390529160691706305_o (1).jpg 23509474_1711530448879896_4101970618137338765_o.jpg
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.