1960-1966 cars/trucks?

Somehow (and for some reason)I've become very interested in these. I looked at an old '62 Dodge Friday and I'm following a few '61-'63 Falcons. Not sure why, but does anyone have insights, do's/don'ts's, caveats, possible vehicles for purchase or other information to pass along?

Ex: I'm sure you would want to swap out the pre-68 steering so as not to get speared in the event of a crash, so what are your alternatives? Or is a specific site the best place to ask depending on the vehicle in question?

thanks.

Just drive and don't worry about it.

Chevy trucks of those years have a lot of interchangeable parts with later ones(rear suspension up to 72, front suspension to 87), so greatly improving the handling and braking wouldn't be hard at all. They are never going to be as safe as a newer car, but better brakes and tires will do a lot to help avoid hitting anything in the first place.

Most of these era American cars had drum brakes all 'round, single pot master cylinder, lap belts (or no belts), and questionable handling. Upgrading these issues makes for a much more livable car on a daily basis, which translates into safer, but it also makes them much more fun. I daily drove a '64 Dart convertible for awhile, all stock, and the brakes alone would put the fear of God into an atheist.

I'm working on a '66 Newport (Town and Country) right now, and all of the above-mentioned areas will be addressed.

Depends on the car, and what your plans are for the car. Will it be used only on Sundays to drive to the ice cream parlor, or will you use it for a daily driver on the freeway in rush hour traffic?

I've been fooling around with old cars for 40 years, and while some things (adding seat belts, brake upgrades, etc.) are pretty common I've never heard of anyone replacing the steering column.

It really does depend on your goals and plans.

I daily drive a 63 Falcon and even after rebuilding the entire stock braking system wound up taking it off the road until I had upgraded everything.

The most neglected 10 year old econobox can out brake a 60's american car 5-1. I wound up in the center median more times than I was comfortable with so I parked it and started collecting parts.

It also wasn't until about 65-66 that US manufacturers decided to care about things like bump steer, and until the 80's that the idea of a proper camber curve came in to play so they do have some definite quirks.

I've got a '66 Dodge D200 truck with drums all the way around, and I think it stops respectably. I certainly leave more room than I would with a modern car, but it still stops fine. Granted being manual brakes means you kind of stand on the pedal, but you get used to that quickly. Left foot braking helps too.

As far as DD comfort goes, the truck would be downright miserable. I wear earplugs when driving it for any longer distance because the air/wind noise is so high. Mine has no heat, but the vent windows do OK to keep you cool on warm days. It sucks in the rain because the defrost doesn't work and everything leaks. I only DD it when my regular ride is down for service. It makes a great motivator.

Ditchdigger wrote: It also wasn't until about 65-66 that US manufacturers decided to care about things like bump steer, and until the 80's that the idea of a proper camber curve came in to play so they do have some definite quirks.

Mopars seem to do a bit better at the suspension geometry than Fords and Chevies from the same era. My '66 Dart's stock drums seemed, well, adequate, although I didn't make too many repeated, hard stops. It's now using 11.75" front discs off a late '70s Dodge St. Regis, which combined with 10" rear drums do a pretty good job of hauling it down from a stop. Which brings up another thing to keep in mind on the cars - many of them are close enough to later muscle cars that you can adapt aftermarket parts from later muscle cars or brakes intended to stop much heavier '60s land yachts.

Some big things to keep in mind:

1. A lot of them are less popular with the resto crowd than later muscle cars. Getting one with all the chrome in place and intact will avoid a lot of heartache. Same goes for the interior parts.

2. There's not much aftermarket body panels, either. Look out for rust.

3. Broken drivetrain parts are much easier to replace than cosmetic parts.

I have a thing for early 60s Lincoln Continentals (not the convertibles) craigslist indicates I can get a decent one for 5-12k

your best bet is my 66 rambler

seriously though, with good tires it goes down the road nice, rides pretty smooth, steers well, and the power drums are plenty of stopping power.

more seriously though, you want my rambler.

If a car's drum brakes are in good condition and adjusted properly, and if the car also has modern tires in good condition, it should stop pretty well under normal conditions. However, if you're doing several hard panic stops in a row and/or driving down a mountain they're going to fade.

My Dad's wisdom: buy one with a really solid body. Engines and transmissions are a lot easier to swap than bodies and frames.

Avoid rust

Don't get sucked into trying to update everything, it will never be safe by modern standards, if you can't handle that, don't buy one. Dual circuit master cylinder, maybe some lap belts, drive it.

The steering column thing isn't that big of a concern, by then most of those cars had deep dish steering wheels to offset the issue of you running into it, it running into you isn't a big issue excluding front steer cars(box ahead of axle). Though if you get in a wreck that bad, the lack of crumple zones will have likely killed you anyhow.

Mongo just a pawn in game of life

The best pickup truck I ever drove was a '63 Chevy 10. It handled great, better than some cars from the early 80's. The brakes were fantastic, I had no trouble towing hay wagons. It seemed like the more weight you had the better it stopped.

It was upgraded with a 200 straight 6 and a floor shifter transmission with granny gear. It had a 4 coil suspension with a live axle in the rear. If I could buy one in drivable condition I would replace my 2001 Dodge ram with it.

Kenny_McCormic wrote: Avoid rust Don't get sucked into trying to update everything, it will never be safe by modern standards, if you can't handle that, don't buy one. Dual circuit master cylinder, maybe some lap belts, drive it.

^ perfect.

I daily drove my 1966 Impala for about 3-years (have a Honda I DD now)

Once I got cut off by an inattentive driver turning left across my lanes. She was full broadside and came to a stop when she realized I was barreling down right for her. My old beast has 4-wheel drums with all-seasons (not my fault) on stock rims.

35mph to 0 with all four tires wailing for mercy in about a car length and maybe a half.

When the lady popped her eyes back in her head she zipped straight through the gas station she was pulling into and out the other sided.

So drum brakes? Good to go

I have a 66 Bonneville that is getting every upgrade. Bought it in 1996, still in primer today, no engine or trans, and I already have 15k in it.

Fix what's wrong, upgrade brakes, shoulder belts, and bushings/ball joints. Drive it forever.

I'll use Falcons as an illustration of the point I'm trying to make. I think it transfers over to many other cars of the era as well.

Everyone loves early Falcons. Even Jay Leno has one. They are cute, very light, and donated much of their parts bins to Mustangs so are cheap and easy to keep on the road. The problem with first (and second) gen Falcons is they were designed in the 1950s, and thus drive like 1950s cars. Which is to say, they kind of suck. Mustangs share the same issues with flexible chassis, lots of bump steer, etc.

In 1966, the Falcon was changed and used much of the newly introduced Fairlane platform. These cars drive like 1960s cars on their way to the 70s. Every single Falcon guy I've spoken to who has owned/owns both early and late versions tells me that, when it's time for a longer road trip, they always take the 3rd gen car because it's so much more pleasant to drive.

This is to illustrate that you can't just lump "1960s" cars into a category. Early 60s cars will be notably different from late 60s cars, though with some exceptions (I think AMC used the same Rambler chassis until the mid 70s). Though they all suck by modern standards, some suck notably less than others.

Thanks guys.

Maybe I should have posted this on the Classic forum, but all good thoughts and ideas.

Rust is everyone's enemy and why I've been cruising the CL lists from the south and west. I can fix most mechanical issues, but bodywork is a different animal. Looking at the time it takes to swap out a head gasket compared to fixing a couple of rusty quarter panels is crazy to me.

While I'm not looking for a DD, I'd like the ability to drive it to work occasionally just to remind everyone I am the office car-nut. I tend to drive a car like it's a motorcycle. I expect the worst in drivers I see.

If/when I find something cool -or not cool- I'll find the best forum and start the learning curve. Learning about a new car is great fun for me, but coming here to get the group's initial viewpoint is the best.

Now. What about this Rambler I keep hearing about...

ddavidv- the category is early-mid 60s cars, but you are absolutely correct about the differences between an early 60s car as opposed to a late 60s car. One reason I tended to look at '68 Mustangs rather than '67s. The few safety upgrades in just a MY made it just a bit more appealing.

...and yesterday I looked at a 1951 Willys pickup...

So I'm all over the place, but I know the Hive-mind can handle it.

Steering columns are frequently swapped in classics, but it is generally for the purpose of having a tilt wheel, and less about a collapsible shaft.

One of the big name brands is "Flaming River".

A complete install of a FR steering column would include a slip/ collapsible shaft:

Flaming River collapsible shaft

I've just never heard of a Hot Rodder doing it for the purpose of safety.

There are plenty of other things that can kill you in a classic.

I have added disk brakes, improved suspension, and harnesses to my '60 Elky (pics in my profile). I makes me feel better, but there is still this unnerving sense when driving a 4008 lb. battering ram down the street.

my rambler. i love it but it is always for sale. i really enjoy how it drives, but i've always preferred older cars to newer. maybe that is because my first car had all original 1954 suspension and steering, or maybe because my daily drivers for the longest time were luminas. it turns heads everywhere, because rambler. a couple fridays ago we went to a big cruise night to get dinner, and there was actually another rambler there. very strange that there were 2 in the same lot, the other was a 1962 660.

strangely though, i prefer to drive newer trucks. i hated driving my 68 chevy. maybe it was the manual brakes, steering, and transmission all at the same time, but that thing was a bear.

Way-cool Elky! I'm liking those bubble top cars more and more and saw some great ones at the Good Guys show in Columbus a couple of weekends ago -but none of them El Caminos.

Also saw some 220s that made me walk funny...

In reply to stan:

Thanks.

The biggest problem with my Elky is the darned X-frame. It's like spaghetti.

As others have noted, later models got "better". Safer, stronger, better handling, etc.

But not necessarily better looking, or cooler!

Hard to compare a boxy '64+ Chevelle-based later Elky to the '59-'60's (with fins), from a purely aesthetic perspective.

Well, you already know body condition trumps mechanical when buying.