Ford did some weird things with Mercury engines in the late 50s. This wagon has a four-barrel 383ci V8, but thankfully not the ubiquitous Chevy stroker. Nope, this particular 383 is from the MEL family with a claimed 300-330hp and 400-something lb-ft of torque. Those figures are impressive, it’s been said those early power numbers came more from the marketing department than the R&D group. Still, in proper tune that lump has the low-end grunt to haul this beast around just fine. Beyond the drivetrain and the sweet paintjob, this one’s got a squeaky clean interior and enough power convenience features (brakes, steering) to cruise in comfort…provided it’s not too warm out.
Personally, I’ve been intrigued by the idea of slapping any of the recent crop of TBI carb-replacement EFI systems on an ancient, thirsty motor just to see what happens. Back that up by a C6 with an overdrive unit, and you’ve got a remarkably versatile cruiser/hauler. I was about to go into a “you don’t surf” rant about classic wagons always having a board on the roof, but this guy actually uses it to go to the beach, so I’ll leave off for now.
Anyway, it’s $7500 on SF Bay Craigslist. Please buy it so I can stop thinking about it.
Charlie don’t surf.
(Yes, I
do love the smell of Napalm in the morningam a fan of Robert Duvall.)There are a lot of similarities between the two years, but the grille and “over the top” wraparound windshield both lead me to believe this is a ’59, as the seller claims, and not a ’58.
As a percentage, I’m not that far off.
TWSS.
I’ll show myself out.
I don’t surf but even I could maintain my balance on that plank.
Also, that price seems VERY reasonable. If I lived in the Bay Area, drove a vintage FoMoCo vehicle daily and hadn’t had a neat old wagon with a bigger V8 for a couple of years I would totally buy it.
Your logic is sound.
Ford’s late 50’s engines were usually over-rated for HP as their lack of success in stock drag race classes showed. That said, that is one beautiful car! Could be a ’59? I’m not sure either.
Was there no government or association watchdog to correct wrong numbers?
At the time the SAE standards were calculated on a bare engine that wasn’t driving accessories or with an exhaust system. It also allowed the engine to be optimized so the timing may have been advanced from the engine’s tune up specs. In the 50’s and early 60’s the norm was often to overrate the power. By the end of the 60’s it became common to underrate the power with the pressure from insurance companies and the govt. It wasn’t until 1972 that the norm became the Net ratings with all
adjustments made to the advertized specs and with all normal accessories
and exhaust installed.
I’m not sure what it says about me that my first thought was, “Huh, the black and tan are upside down.” Pretty cool look regardless, though.
http://digitaldeconstruction.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Black-And-Tan.jpg
I was in the same boat actually.