Register now to get rid of these ads!

Projects So here we go on the 60 Comet project

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by justadream, Nov 27, 2016.

  1. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    Well the train never left as it was just a curious question, THATS ALL. I NEVER said I was going to do it as I have seen cars LIKE that and was just wondering why they did it.
     
  2. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    As for the holes...you can wait weld them up later, or you can weld them all up now, and drill out the ones you need later.

    Or just leave them all, and make new holes when you need to.
     
    justadream likes this.
  3. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 9,445

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    When I saw the front suspension cut out I thought you committed to the jacked up look.
     
  4. 38caddy
    Joined: Mar 15, 2006
    Posts: 62

    38caddy
    Member
    from RI

    It seems a lot of your questions are a result of some unasked, unanswered, really important questions and a lack of planning. Before you consider the steering or holes in the body or anything else, I strongly recommend you figure out the engine that you plan to use. If you're really think you're going to use your BBF, you need to pull it from the boat, bring it to the car and do a test fit. You can physically suspend it in place to get an idea of what challenges you might face. If you decide the SBF you have is the way to go, test fit that one. Once you do that, you can get an idea of suspension, steering, headers, etc. Once you have a basic outline of your build, you can go ahead and weld patch panels and close up body holes to your heart's content. After all, a body is just a sheet metal wrapper for the car. And if the primary issue is that the cut out holes make the body too fragile, just tack weld a couple braces in the hole and you don't have to worry any more.
     
    loudbang and squirrel like this.
  5. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    Well it seems that I cant find any help getting the motor out of the boat or a way to get i here so I will be using a SBF motor. I will hook up the spent 289 that came with the car and use that one as a mock up so I will know where everything will kinda sit and get an idea. At least I have something to go by. I should be able to get the front end in a couple weeks or so. Now I guess the dumb question would be, what to do now. Im new to a project this big and I know their is ALOT to be done but just not sure what.
     
    38caddy likes this.
  6. RmK57
    Joined: Dec 31, 2008
    Posts: 1,663

    RmK57
    Member

    How are the floors, quarters, fenders and all the rest of the sheet metal?
    57 year old car is bound to need some body work.
    You could also start sourcing a 9 or 8 inch axle and springs and get that rolling.
     
  7. 48fordnut
    Joined: Nov 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,922

    48fordnut
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    A fox body 8.8 is a good way to go. Most have a limited slip from the factory. You can change the axles out for the 5 lug, Just a afternoon job. Weld some mounts for the leaf springs.Good luck.
     
    justadream likes this.
  8. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Explorer 8.8 is better. Already 5-lug. Already LSD. Better choice of ratios. Already a popular Falcon/Comet gasser axle.
     
    loudbang and justadream like this.
  9. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    Alright, so advice taken. I hooked the motor back up to the hoist and hung it back in the car with the motor mounts back on it as well. To ME, which I guess dont mean shit, looks to be hanging back pretty damn close to where it was originally, seems to work for the fender well headers to come out the hole that I had planned. So now I have a question about motor mount........ Would it be better to mount it like it was originally with the stock style mounts or use plates as in solid mount 20170204_162201.jpg 20170204_162221.jpg 20170204_162406.jpg ing plate front and rear? Not sure of benefits of one over the other so if someone could please explain why one one be better over the other, I would really appreciate it. Im going to keep the motor hanging till I get the front end, and to keep me out of the engine compartment from working on the frame any more, lol. Whats the best way to mount the motor and the benefits? Thanks.
     
  10. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    I would use the stock mounts, if possible. Did you cut off any of the original mount parts, when you stripped off the suspension?

    Plates are fine for some modern race cars...but not really what you need or want for what you're building.
     
    justadream likes this.
  11. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    You will hate solid mounts in a street car.

    One word: vibration.
     
    loudbang and justadream like this.
  12. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The stock mounts on the body side are gone, but this is now ready to accept a universal SBF cross member, which can be had for about $60.
     
    loudbang and justadream like this.
  13. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    It occurs to me that the existing 289 will have the first generation style motor mounts on it.

    These do not work with a universal crossmember. Those use the later style mounts. Luckily, the universal crossmember can be had, as a kit, with the rubber mounts, for about $110.
     
    loudbang and justadream like this.
  14. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

  15. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    I think I mentioned to him already that the early motor won't work too well to mock up for a later SBF.

    The crossmember is a good idea, it will help tie the frame rails together, and load them more forgivingly
     
    gimpyshotrods likes this.
  16. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    20170205_190326.jpg 20170205_190354.jpg This is what I have for motor mounts at this point. Then the three bolts bolted up to the shock tower.
     
  17. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 17,903

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Those are indeed the first-generation (1960-1965) SBF mounts.

    They consist of a rubber mount on the engine, an intermediate mount bracket, and a "frame" mount.

    I am not sure that there is a universal crossmember that will pick those up. I would use the later style. You should have a crossmember there, in any case.

    All Falcons, Comets (of that generation), and Mustangs left the factory with an under engine crossmember, despite what some might tell you.
     
    justadream and loudbang like this.
  18. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    Do you know what year engine you are likely to put in the car?
     
    justadream likes this.
  19. CBurne7
    Joined: Nov 27, 2014
    Posts: 148

    CBurne7

    I say there aren't enough holes. Drill some more out!
     
  20. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    I will be using whatever I can find cheap enough so not really sure. This is a budget build not a I can spend what I want build, lol. So I guess I will have to wait now to see what I can find for a motor.
     
  21. 48fordnut
    Joined: Nov 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,922

    48fordnut
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The mounting holes on the block are the same for all Windsor motors from the 221 thru the 351. ,only the bellhousing changed in 65 from 5 bolt to 6 bolt.
     
    justadream likes this.
  22. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    really? I seem to recall having to jump through some hoops to fit a 1962 260 block into a 1964 Falcon, which had a cracked block. But that was a long time ago, and I could be wrong.

    maybe someone can find some pictures of the blocks, and compare?
     
    justadream likes this.
  23. 48fordnut
    Joined: Nov 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,922

    48fordnut
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    jim you have been around SBC too long. I have built sbf engs for 40 plus yrs and they are all the same on the block. of the 351 blocks the 69 thru the 73 are the most structual sound. Meaning the internal dimensions are nearly identical.
     
    loudbang and justadream like this.
  24. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 47,775

    squirrel
    Member

    I think one reason I like chevys so much, is that every time I work on a ford, nothing fits. First one I did when I was in high school, replaced a 351W in a car for a friend of my dads, the replacement engine was a different year, the front pulleys and water pump all were different (4 bolts instead of 3, wrong side water inlet).

    But I do recall that early 260 was a pain....nothing matched up. And when you cross to a different engine family, it's even worse. And ford had over half a dozen engine families for V8 engines.
     
    justadream and Johnny Gee like this.
  25. chopndrop
    Joined: Feb 8, 2005
    Posts: 710

    chopndrop
    Member

    Early 221/260 blocks had the mount bosses at 6" centers as opposed to the 7" which most sbf had. Also only 2 freeze plugs on each side instead of 3. And 5 bolt bellhousing as mentioned above. Doubt you will come across one of these blocks though.
     
    justadream, squirrel and loudbang like this.
  26. RmK57
    Joined: Dec 31, 2008
    Posts: 1,663

    RmK57
    Member

    The 1969 C90E 351 Windsor block has a slightly shorter deck height, 9.48 vs 9.50 for 70 and later. Also the 69 blocks had the main bearing webbing machined all the way across to the oil pan rails. I always thought Ford may have had intentions of a 4 bolt main Windsor block, that is until the Cleveland came into production.
     
    justadream and loudbang like this.
  27. Fordguy321
    Joined: Oct 16, 2009
    Posts: 422

    Fordguy321
    Member
    from Arizona

    subscribing :)
     
    justadream likes this.
  28. 48fordnut
    Joined: Nov 4, 2005
    Posts: 3,922

    48fordnut
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    69 deck ht was .023 shorter.
     
  29. steinauge
    Joined: Feb 28, 2014
    Posts: 1,507

    steinauge
    Member
    from 1960

    If you are going to use a SBF can you not fix the 289 you already have? Buying used engines is often kind of like russian roulette and IME often ends up costing more than fixing what you had.This is of course directly depends on how much of the job you can do yourself.
     
    31Vicky with a hemi likes this.
  30. justadream
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 147

    justadream
    Member
    from Vermont

    Might have to replan what I was going to use for running gear in this project because I cant find any sbf motors or trans but I can find a shit ton of sbc around here, plus im a chevy guy anyways, dont know what I was thinking, haha. So I think that is the plan right now for as far as running gear goes, just waiting on my tax return and off shopping I will go. What do you all think of going chevy for this?
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 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.