Rare Hipo Falcon - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > General Discussion> Hotrodders' Lounge
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 08:21 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Albion, NY USA
Posts: 0
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
289 Hi-Po

Hello. Every once in a while I do a google search for 289 Hi-Po just to take a look around and see any articles, etc. That is how I stumbled upon hotrodders.com today! I own a very rare 1965 Ford Falcon. It is one of seven produced in 1965 with special engine option 271HP 289 Hi-Po engine. Seeing some of the negativity in this post, I just hope some of these folks can just put things into perspective... 289 Hi-Po's may not have been the ultimate hot rod engine back in the days, but as in my little 2-door sedan Falcon, the lightweight car with this high revving engine did ok for itself. My car back in the day, ran a best E.T. in the 1/4 mile of 12.88 at 107 mph! That was basically just how it came from the factory with the exception of open headers and narrow slicks! That's pretty damn good in my opinion. I have pictures of the front wheels lifting off the ground at launch! This 289 Hi-Po powered Ford was literally blowing away Corvettes with 283 cu. in. power plants! The 289 Hi-Po with its solid lifters has a sound that is awesome. My Falcon has a larger cam and flowmaster 40 series mufflers through 3" exhaust... and when I pull into a cruise night - all heads turn to see what is coming, and most of them are scratching their heads. LOL. Just wanted to throw in my two cents. My Hi-Po gets driven, I don't just park it on the grass at car shows! I understand everyone has their opinions and wanted to give mine too! Have a good weekend all! Bernie from NY.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 08:48 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rare_Hipo_Falcon
Seeing some of the negativity in this post, I just hope some of these folks can just put things into perspective... *snip* ran a best E.T. in the 1/4 mile of 12.88 at 107 mph! That was basically just how it came from the factory with the exception of open headers and narrow slicks!
You don't say...

If I cared a whit, I'd call shenanigans on you, but I don't. Care a whit, that is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 09:08 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Albion, NY USA
Posts: 0
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt327
You don't say...

If I cared a whit, I'd call shenanigans on you, but I don't. Care a whit, that is.
Curious what you mean? Are you not believing what I am saying? I didn't join this site for contraversy. I merely wanted to tell a little about my 289 Hi-Po. That's all. If you care to explain your comment, I'd love to read what is on your mind. My car before I owned it was owned by a guy in Hamilton, Ontario Canada two times for a total of 29 years of its life. While he owned the car, it was in a 4-page feature in Muscle Car Review magazine January 2002 issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 09:26 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rare_Hipo_Falcon
I didn't join this site for contraversy.
What is controversial to me is claiming that a stock 289 Hi-Po (w/headers sans mufflers, and w/slicks) will run 12.88 @ 107 and pull the fronts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 09:43 AM
eloc431962's Avatar
Evil Wicked Mean And Nasty
 
Last wiki edit: Pilot bearing and bushings
Last journal entry: roof repair
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: back in the garage.
Posts: 13,761
Wiki Edits: 37

Thanks: 50
Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
Its always best to introduce yourself . Before getting something going like this there are alot of opinions on everything to do with peoples rides. And when some people start saying things well it gets started. I remember a guy in high school everbody was going around telling about how his 69 chevelle could pull the wheels stock 327. I had to see this for myself. And sure enough it did but it didnt pull them he had no front shocks and was bouncing the crap out of it till they came up alittle . Post some pics of your ride so we can see your ride . I really like those old falcons. Cole
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 10:22 AM
ramzoom's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 113
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
A k-code car is another cool not often seen part of the whole musclecar era. Every time I see a 289 falcon, comet, fairlane or mustang I check the fender for the hipo badge..I dont care how fast it is/was...I like the fact that it was different and theres not as many of them..that makes them somewhat unique. I still kick myself for not buying the black on red 64 Fairlane K-code 4 speed car that was at the all Ford show at Knotts Berry Farm back in the late 80's! I wonder where that car is now??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 10:26 AM
eloc431962's Avatar
Evil Wicked Mean And Nasty
 
Last wiki edit: Pilot bearing and bushings
Last journal entry: roof repair
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: back in the garage.
Posts: 13,761
Wiki Edits: 37

Thanks: 50
Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
I have been trying to buy a 65 fastback k code 4 speed about 5 miles from my house. Its been sitting on his carport with flat tires for around 15 yrs wont sell. Cole
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 10:47 AM
powerrodsmike's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Make a fiberglass fan shroud
Last journal entry: Next.. ..Bagging the king B (barge)
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: gilroy, california
Age: 53
Posts: 4,108
Wiki Edits: 161

Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Having spent a little time back in the mid 70's with 289s and 302s in a 65 fastback, I can tell you that a stock hipo 289 isn't going to yank the fronts and hit 12 second 1/4 mile times.

The 65 belonged to my best friend, and started out with a stock 2b 289, with a c-4 then went through numerous changes to the 289 until it had a 9" locker with 5.86 gears, 10" slicks, a close ratio toploader, then the motor became a 302 with 12.5 "popups", heavily reworked 69 351 w heads, a Weiand tunnel ram with 2 660 holleys, a cam that was pretty nasty,(I don't remember the specs right now, but I can find out).headers, blah, blah the rest of the car was stripped, no interior, battery in the trunk, moroso low drag front tires, centerline wheels, subframe connectors, 90/10 shocks,lots of drag race crap.

He'd come out of the hole at about 7500 rpm , barely chirp the slicks and it would get very light in the front end, sometimes it would get air under the left front tire....If my memory serves me correctly, he was running mid 12 second to low 13s times at Fremont dragway. I can find that out as well.



Based on what I've seen and my experience, my perspective is that there ain't no way a stock 289, hipo or not, is going to do what you say.

Let's see picks of the car with the air under the tires, some timeslips and pics of the motor and rest of the car. If this car is so rare and special, there must be alot of documentation of it's performance.

Later, mikey
__________________
my signature lines...not really directed at anyone in particular..

BE different....ACT normal.

No one is completely useless..They can always be used as a bad example
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 11:02 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Albion, NY USA
Posts: 0
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
289 Hi-Po Falcon

Hello Cole. I do understand how some people can be on these type discussion boards. It just doesn't seem like a real people friendly place here, and I guess I stumbled onto this site merely by doing a google search, so I guess maybe I am trespassing. This will be my last post and I checked out a couple other threads on the site and saw similar replies, so I won't be stopping back by. I appreciate your interest in my Falcon, and if you'd like to read more about it and see some photos, there are a couple sites I have it on. You can copy and paste these links into your web browser:

http://www.supermotors.net/registry/11705

and also on Hub Garage at http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/vehicles/23518

*(you might have to register on Hub Garage, but its free, easy and its a cool place for car people of all kinds - you'd like it I guarantee).

...as far as last reply by cobalt327, I went and grabbed one of my copies of the January 2002 issue of Muscle Car Review, and a quote right from page 3 of the 4-page feature article even states what I said in my earlier reply: "campaigned with considerable success in southwestern Ontario (running a best of 12.88 at 107 mph on slicks with headers)". The only non-stock additions to this car that I am aware of are as follows: a Crane cam , an aluminum Shelby intake manifold, Holley carb, and a windage tray in the oil pan. The original 289 Hi-Po was a 271 horsepower engine at 6,000 rpm, 312 lb.ft. of torque at 3,400 rpm. My car now probably would dyno out at around 280 horsepower! Still is a 10.5:1 compression. I have photos of it pulling the front tires up - when I say pulling the front tires up, I am not talking wheel stand! But there is air between the tires and the pavement. enough said by me. Sorry for intruding here on your site. As I said, this will be my last post. Have a great weekend all! Bernie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 11:32 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 60
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rare_Hipo_Falcon
as far as last reply by cobalt327, I went and grabbed one of my copies of the January 2002 issue of Muscle Car Review, and a quote right from page 3 of the 4-page feature article even states what I said in my earlier reply: "campaigned with considerable success in southwestern Ontario (running a best of 12.88 at 107 mph on slicks with headers)". The only non-stock additions to this car that I am aware of are as follows: a Crane cam , an aluminum Shelby intake manifold, Holley carb, and a windage tray in the oil pan
Whoa, Bernie!!! YOU said, and I quote, "My car back in the day, ran a best E.T. in the 1/4 mile of 12.88 at 107 mph! That was basically just how it came from the factory with the exception of open headers and narrow slicks!"

Don't make it sound as though anyone, least of all, me- is disparaging you or your car, except to call into question the accuracy of what you claim its performance to be!!

What I see quoted above from you is actually from a car mag of some sort, that seems to have taken root into your psyche as being what YOUR car ran.

No, I do not believe your car will pull the wheels OR run 12's. But that's not to say your car isn't (probably) a nice one- if it's not as imaginary as the performance claims seem to be.

Show a photo, or three. Damn, son, what would YOU think if some dude comes into YOUR club and starts filling the air w/some pretty surprising claims? You think you'd just say, "Oh yeah, that's cool!"? Or, would you say, interesting, but I'd like some documentation?

All in all, I did not give you half as much flack as I've seen dealt to suspected BS'ers. Get the chip off your shoulder, for cripes sake, and back up your claims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 01:28 PM
eloc431962's Avatar
Evil Wicked Mean And Nasty
 
Last wiki edit: Pilot bearing and bushings
Last journal entry: roof repair
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: back in the garage.
Posts: 13,761
Wiki Edits: 37

Thanks: 50
Thanked 28 Times in 24 Posts
Bernie,this is by far about the best site out there. I mean come on anybody that loves and is into cars knows people want to see proof of what they say about thier ride. Its always been that way and always will. Thats why in high school i had to go see for myself. 9 times out of ten they are full of it you know this. This is a great site and there are alot of good people on here with alot of great info. Cole
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 04:26 PM
OLNOLAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,074
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 429
Thanked 111 Times in 92 Posts
Gt350 Hp 289

Odd that nobody mentioned the GT350 289 that had 2-4's on a low rise intake. I once met a mechanic with a '66 GT350 Mustang Fastback that had the 2-4 setup that I thought was factory setup and it was the 271hp 289. Is my old memory that foggy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 04:38 PM
ericnova72's Avatar
More for Less Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.W. Lower Michigan
Age: 47
Posts: 9,633
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 41
Thanked 540 Times in 489 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLNOLAN
Odd that nobody mentioned the GT350 289 that had 2-4's on a low rise intake. I once met a mechanic with a '66 GT350 Mustang Fastback that had the 2-4 setup that I thought was factory setup and it was the 271hp 289. Is my old memory that foggy?
Not factory, but dealer installed from the Ford Performance or Shelby catalog.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 04:47 PM
OLNOLAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,074
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 429
Thanked 111 Times in 92 Posts
Hey Eric

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericnova72
Not factory, but dealer installed from the Ford Performance or Shelby catalog.
So did the 2x4 setup make it the 306 horse mentioned earlier? Just curious, I played around with a '65 289 Fairlane many moons ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 06-05-2009, 05:18 PM
powerrodsmike's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Make a fiberglass fan shroud
Last journal entry: Next.. ..Bagging the king B (barge)
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: gilroy, california
Age: 53
Posts: 4,108
Wiki Edits: 161

Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
From what I can find out, Rare Hipo Falcon recently aquired his car, and is duly proud of it because of it's rarity and history. He has collected bits of it's history and is repeating them on various forums. A few keyword copy and pastes into google will find them all. A little reading will find various phrases regarding it's history and confirm this assumption.

This is a technical forum for engine related discussions, and any outlandish claims regarding performance are usually dispelled by those with many years of experience.

From what I could find out, the car was campaigned in Ontario, and owned by a guy named Ken Roach. It was then sold and resold.
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...roach/kenr.htm

The collection of pics as shown on the link provided by Rare Hipo Falcon look as though there have been some major changes to the suspension and quite possibly motor as well.

If you came here looking for comments regarding your aquisition of a highly collectable car, a better place to post would be in the lounge, as that is for non technical automotive discussion.

Which is where I am re titling and splitting this thread into.

Later, mikey
__________________
my signature lines...not really directed at anyone in particular..

BE different....ACT normal.

No one is completely useless..They can always be used as a bad example
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Hotrodders' Lounge posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.