1966 Ford Falcon Futura 408w Stroker, C4, 383 8.8 Rear, on 2040-cars
Tucson, Arizona, United States
351w stroked to 408w, rebuilt c4 with shift kit, 3.73 gears in a 8.8, forged crank and rods, aluminum heads 2.02/1.60, edlebrock perfomer intake, Holley 750 double pumper, Hooker long tube 3" header, 4 wheel disc brakes, 4 core radiator, interior almost done needs headliner and dash pad, have receipts and never been on the track. Having another baby got let go of some of the toys. Wheels and tire are good just not pretty. Clean title. I can email video of running and starting the car. I spent four years building this car and sorry to sell it but gotta do it. The car runs great and has lots of torque.
|
Ford Falcon for Sale
- '64 falcon, fresh engine, new paint, new interior, 2dr, auto sound stereo(US $7,000.00)
- 1960-65 ford falcon station wagon, unique- 3 door station wagon!
- 1970 1/2 ford falcon not fairlane torino new 429 engine 9 inch rearend(US $5,500.00)
- 1965 ford falcon stroker(US $16,500.00)
- Drag race truck(US $25,000.00)
- 1963 ford falcon futura.
Auto Services in Arizona
Vindictive Motorsports Inc. ★★★★★
Valley Express Auto Repair ★★★★★
Top Shop ★★★★★
TintAZ.com Mobile Window Tinting ★★★★★
Thunderbird Auto Repair ★★★★★
Super Discount Transmissions ★★★★★
Auto blog
Chris Harris pits Fiesta ST against Mercedes G63 AMG in 0-60 battle... sort of
Thu, 01 Aug 2013Vehicle performance tests are serious business, with reputations made or broken by things like braking distance, top speed, and lateral g-forces. King of the metrics, though, is the 0-60 run, which for unknown reasons has become the benchmark for what truly makes a car a performance machine.
Now, Chris Harris from Drive has turned the whole idea behind the sprint to 60 on its ear. Taking a new Ford Fiesta ST, Harris asks a simple question: would the ST be quicker to 60 on its own, or on a trailer being towed by a Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG?
It's a fair question, really. The Fiesta Harris tested hit 60 in 7.2 seconds on a slightly uphill section of runway. It should be noted that Harris quotes his ST at 182 horsepower, which is about 15 ponies less than what we're getting in the US, so these numbers might not hold up all that well against an American model. The G63 AMG, meanwhile, is a 536-horsepower monster, powered by a twin-turbo V8 that, able to propel the big SUV to 60 mph in just 5.2 seconds without towing a Fiesta.
Ford's Farley apologizes for saying Blue Oval tracks customers with GPS
Fri, 10 Jan 2014Ford marketing head honcho Jim Farley made waves at CES this week by telling show attendees, "We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it." according to a report by Business Insider. Farley continued by saying, "We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing. By the way, we don't supply that data to anyone."
Farley has since amended his statement, saying that Ford dose not, in fact, track its customers in their cars "without their approval or consent."
Apparently carried away with a hypothetical notion, Farley was attempting to describe how Ford might be able to employee aggregated user data for things like accurate traffic reporting and pattern spotting. A Ford spokesperson confirmed with Business Insider that its GPS units are not sharing the whereabouts of drivers, though there are a few on-board services that might do so. After opting in to the services (and presumably being made aware of any/all tracking and data collection), Ford's Sync Services Directions and Crew Chief software do, in fact, allow data collection as a means of improving both systems. Farley added that the opt-in data is not shared, even when being tracked.
After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality
Fri, Jan 3 2014Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.