Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT 1966 Comet Caliente Convertible

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HWooldridge
    replied
    I owned a '65 Comet with the 200 six for several years. Got great mileage but took awhile to get up to speed. Was a great little car - wish I still had it. I also had a '68 Galaxy with a 390 - now that was a smoking ride...the speedo went to 140 and they were not joking...(ooops)
    Last edited by HWooldridge; 12-28-2011, 08:22 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • herbet999
    replied
    Try http://www.jalopyjournal.com

    It's for 1964 and earlier.. and they mean it. But there is a lot of good information.

    I'm working on a 66 merc convertible myself.. but it's a full size monterey

    My interest in machining is simply an extension of my car interest

    Leave a comment:


  • sasquatch
    replied
    Just a silly remembrance of a friends 289 in a 64 Fairlane.

    This was a real problem but finally figured out.

    When revved over 5000 RPM the fan belt-("V" Belt) would turn over inside out,, not come off , it was tight to the recommended 1/2 inch push on it between pulleys thing.

    The weirdest thing, would have loved to see that in slow motion!!

    It ended up being a pulley alignment problem.

    (so, keep her under 5 grand !!)

    Leave a comment:


  • sasquatch
    replied
    AND.................................

    4in bore, 2.87 stroke, [email protected] rpm, 9.3 compression ratio, comp test should be around 150 +or-20, 282 ft lbs of torque, idle speed with automatic-475-500 rpm, engine oil refill 4.25 quarts not liters, normal hot oil pressure 35-55, plug gap 32-36, 6BTDC, carb model 9510, fuel pump pressure 4-6, 160 thermostat,(summer,) rad cap pressure 12-15, cooling capacity 12.5 quarts.

    There. helpfull site!!??

    Leave a comment:


  • Willy
    replied
    Originally posted by DougA
    I haven't figured out yet if it has points or not.
    It has points. I worked on a lot of these.
    If memory serves me well the point gap gap is .017, dwell 26-31°, basic timing at idle with the vac. advance disconnected, was 6° BTC with an automatic.

    Leave a comment:


  • DougA
    replied
    Originally posted by chriskat
    Very nice, the pics make it look nearly new (at least the body and interior). Has any of it been re-done?
    The body has been done. I can see where some patch panels have been put in.
    I am pretty sure new rockers will be need as a minimum.

    Leave a comment:


  • DougA
    replied
    Originally posted by sasquatch
    Looks good Doug!!

    Those 289's were a narrow block, so left room to get at the plugs etc.

    I remember when a few guys "Shoehorned" the 427 block into these cars!!

    They were a "Honkin" car !
    That 289 2 barrel should be decent on fuel, they were a pretty decent engine.
    Your'e shock towers look very good, has this still got point ignition?
    I haven't figured out yet if it has points or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • DougA
    replied
    Originally posted by DFMiller
    Nice wheels Doug,
    The real question is how bad is the body?
    Can you get panels?
    I look forward to your progress.
    I grew up in Southern Ontario, My second car was a 65 Corvair Monza. I got pretty good with a torch. If I remember the convertibles sometimes had issues with body sag. One of my friends fixed up several of them.
    From the pictures its looks not bad.

    Good luck
    Dave
    Not sure about panels. I think Crosscanada may be able to help me out. Body sag doesn't seem to be a problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • tdkkart
    replied
    General car guy forum with alot of traffic and alot of knowledge
    http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/

    Wanna in adequate about your shop??
    http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/index.php

    Leave a comment:


  • chriskat
    replied
    Very nice, the pics make it look nearly new (at least the body and interior). Has any of it been re-done?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dr Stan
    Guest replied
    Nice find and in much better shape than my '68 Stang.

    Leave a comment:


  • Willy
    replied
    Nice car Doug, looks to be pretty nice shape and very complete.
    I'm sure after a couple of years of TLC by yourself we won't recognize it.

    While not as popular as the Camaro or Mustang there is still a ton of info and parts available for the Comet/Fairlane.
    Personally I think the 66 model was the best looking one.

    Here's a few links in no particular order that I scooped up in a quick 5 min search:

    http://www.convertibletopguys.com/co...liente-Cyclone

    http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...-history.shtml

    http://macsautoparts.com/1960-1970-f...id/FAL/ca/154/

    http://www.mercurystuff.com/1966-models/index.html

    http://www.dearbornclassics.com/comet.html

    Like I said there's a lot more.
    Have fun with the "new" car. Always fun driving something unique.

    Leave a comment:


  • sasquatch
    replied
    Looks good Doug!!

    Those 289's were a narrow block, so left room to get at the plugs etc.

    I remember when a few guys "Shoehorned" the 427 block into these cars!!

    They were a "Honkin" car !
    That 289 2 barrel should be decent on fuel, they were a pretty decent engine.
    Your'e shock towers look very good, has this still got point ignition?

    Leave a comment:


  • DFMiller
    replied
    Nice wheels Doug,
    The real question is how bad is the body?
    Can you get panels?
    I look forward to your progress.
    I grew up in Southern Ontario, My second car was a 65 Corvair Monza. I got pretty good with a torch. If I remember the convertibles sometimes had issues with body sag. One of my friends fixed up several of them.
    From the pictures its looks not bad.

    Good luck
    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • DougA
    replied
    Here's a shot under the hood.


    And here is a picture of the interior.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X