Not a lot for what it was. Reconditioned the cylinder heads at about 100,000 miles. Replaced one water pump and alternator. Car rusted out badly on all four doors and trunk lid.
This was a 1970 and a half Falcon, which I believe was similar to the Torino and Fairlane of the same era.
It was a very basic low end model - no power steering or brakes. Parallel parking was a chore to say the least. Plain black vinyl interior (seats, floor, dash etc) made it almost impossible to sit in in the summer heat.
It did what it was meant to do - get you from point A to B. Didn't handle great, and brakes were non power, so stopping left something to be desired. The 6 cylinder engine had adequate power and delivered reasonable mileage (mid 20's highway).
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know
Review Date: 2nd July, 2011
1969 Ford Falcon 5.0 4bbl.
14 mpg at 120 mph
Clutch went out after installing 4-barrel carberator.
Brakes bleed dry when parked for 3 months or longer.
The car had sat for 14 years when I bought it. We put in gas and a battery and it fired right up.
Acceleration comes on slow due to 2.79 gears, and three speed. Power is great between 45-120 mph.
Rolls heavily into turns. Cornering is quite good, despite body roll.
Is very comfortable for trips less than six hours, with bench seat.
Better performance than my 429 Thunderbird.
Gas millage with two barrel was 32/highway,
17/city if I took it easy. 21/highway, 10/city with foot to the floor.
Gas mileage with four barrel (600 Holley) is 16 mpg, city-highway, foot to the floor.
Car is the ugliest Falcon ever built, but it's still prettier than all new cars.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 19th June, 2003
8th Sep 2005, 00:27
32 miles per gallon highway - yeah, right!
I think this review belongs in the "fiction" section.
8th Sep 2005, 17:37
It's not fiction at all.
The absolute fact of the matter is that overall fuel economy in vehicles has gone DOWN over the last 30 years.
Case in point:
My 1980, 267ci, V8 Malibu got 28 mpg.
My 1992, 181ci, V6 Spirit got 28 mpg.
A 69 Falcon getting 32 mpg on the highway with a 2-barrel carb? I believe it.
9th Sep 2005, 09:06
Hey, when in doubt, check the internet:
The Falcon was most often offered with a couple of V6 options that obtained 30-32 mpg.
So, yes, it appears that values of 32 MPG are quite plausible. As I said, vehicle fuel economy has not changed that drastically in 30 years - it's fluctuated drastically, but has actually marginally gone down over time (the all time high was the 1987-88 model year).
Either the internal combustion engine is not capable of greater efficiency, or nobody cares enough to put the research into it.
18th Sep 2005, 05:40
Maybe when he says "32 mpg highway", he means the engine was idling in Park on the back of a flatbed trailer.
19th Jul 2008, 18:21
I own a 1969 Ford Falcon, 200 Ci straight six. I keep it pretty well tuned up and maintained, and I get 22-26 mpg highway. The stock 289 V8, I don't care what anyone says, did not ever, ever get 32 mpg highway. I think it would be very possible with some modifications.
12th Oct 2008, 11:58
This was my review from years ago I'd forgotten I'd made... the 32 mpg was true... on the old highway... 300 miles... two stop signs, 67 mph at 2600 rpm (peak torque) and no heavy acceleration. I was babying it to get the best mileage, and I got it. The brakes didn't leak fluid... but did apparently leak air. Motor is now in the middle of a rebuild. Still the best car I've ever owned.
Average review marks: 8.3 / 10, based on 2 reviews