Brackets for one wire gen. to alternator conversion

[Wilbur]

I've searched this forum for instructions and suggestions on converting a generator equipped Falcon to an alternator equipped Falcon, I've found some great tips, thanks guys!!

What I cannot find is whether I can buy brackets that are manufactured and sold for any particular conversion. I have both a 6 cylinder Falcon, 200 ci, and an 8 cylinder Falcon, 260 ci, both 1964 Falcons.

The most important for me to find are the alternator brackets for the 8 cylinder Falcon.

The 6 cylinder has already been converted to an alternator using a Ford alternator and the current wiring harness but it is not working right, it is possibly overcharging the battery, definitely causing the "wet" battery to bubble over at times.

I've tried to fix it many times, no luck, and the easiest fix seems to be to just toss the whole mess switch to a one wire alternator for this car, but I may need different brackets for that, and would like to know where to find them.

So, can I buy ready made brackets for the conversions to one wire alternator on both of these cars? I intend to use a 70's to 80's GM one wire alternator as that seems to be the most frequently recommended and most highly recommended conversion.

Thank you!

Quick update: I've just finished doing more research on the internet and found that some people are using a FORD "one wire" alternator for this conversion, but no further information was provided. Has anybody done this conversion with a FORD one wire alternator and is it just as straightforward and simple as the GM conversion?

[redfalken]

It's been a really long time since I've done my conversion. Someone may produce new ones but 10 years ago you had to get them off a donor car. I think I needed the timing cover too. I think anything post-`65 like a Mustang, Maverick, Fairmont, Monarch, etc. had an alternator.

[pbrown]

I run a Ford style 100A one wire alternator on a V8. The alternator is made by Powermaster.

http://www.powermastermotorsports.com/

[Luva65wagon]

I've done a couple Ford style 1-wire conversions. Google "Ford 3G alternator conversion" for help. I've got pictures on a few of my threads for both the 6 and 8 conversions I've done. I'll track down specific threads if you need me to. We're about to do the same conversion to Gene's Ranchero (Smithkid) too, so you will probably see pictures related to that here soon as well.

Powermaster and Chevrolay or others all do the same thing. Money and bling-factor are typically the only difference. The Ford 3G alternator is normally a serpentine system, but you can put a v-pulley on them. And they put out a lot of juice when/if needed (both of mine are 140 amp versions) - but I've not had a problem overcharging. Usually if you have overcharging, it's traced to an older style regulator (mechanical) and that can be remedied using a solid-state regulator. But sometimes it's a bad connector and the regulator isn't sensing the correct voltage of the battery and thinks it needs more. And sometimes it is a gremlin. And not the AMC kind. A one-wire system will require a large one-wire to the battery though a large fuse (about 10% larger than the max current capacity of the alternator), so it is a pretty simple install.

Good luck!

My Ranchero with a 200 six and the fuse block I added.

http://www.rainierfalcons.com/forums...&postcount=298

My update to a V8 with the one-wire 3G.

http://www.rainierfalcons.com/forums...&postcount=521

The picture attachment is the Ranchero motor before it had a V8.

[Wilbur]

Redfalken, PBrown, Luva65wagon, thanks for all the advice, it will certainly help. Also I have since found brackets for sale new at FalconParts located in California, they have brackets for both the V8 and the inline 6.

I'm a fan of lightweight cars, so I'll probably use the smallest alternator possible, my goal "was" to get my I-6 Falcon down below 2000 pounds, and after removing bench seats, sound insulation, and other items, I then ADDED back all that weight by upgrading to V8 everything but the motor. 8" rear, toploader trans, Granada disk brakes, etc. but using an inline 6 cylinder motor.

I would guess that going from the generator with it's massive brackets to a small Ford alternator of 65 amps saved hopefully 5 pounds at least, if not 10.

So with the alternator on the I-6 which is overcharging, if I cannot fix that using your recommendations, Luva65, I'll switch over to a one wire alternator.

The V8 Falcon still runs the generator, which works fine for my purposes, but I want the lower weight and size of the alternator, the car only runs a 260 ci motor and is dragging around way too much weight!

Thanks again for all the advice guys!!

[Luva65wagon]

...the car only runs a 260 ci motor and is dragging around way too much weight!

Sounds to me you should'a looked for a Sunbeam Tiger instead of a Falcon.



I really can't think of enough you could remove from a Falcon to make it much lighter than it came - other than some of the fiberglass parts you could get for the Rally Falcons. That might be worth investigating.

Though it's not clear the concern you have for weight - whether you are wanting to race them or simply lower the HP-to-weight ratio for the sake of doing it, rather than worrying too much about a few ounces or pounds here or there I'd make sure it is painted and waxed. Aerodynamic drag has far more effect on daily driving than weight does - unless you're doing a lot of acceleration or hill climbing. Wind load increasing exponentially with speed, so wind is your greatest enemy to using up the power you have. Once accelerated, weight doesn't do much to slow you down unless you're climbing a hill.

Just food for thought, but also to see what you're actually trying to accomplish with the weight loss.

[Wilbur]

Luva65, I wish you could have driven my 1968 Falcon 289 two barrel/C4 two door after I removed: Rear bench seat, passenger bucket seat, carpet, sound insulation, power steering, spare tire, jack, rear window cranks & regulators...

I recall I weighed everything and if I recall correctly I removed about 400 pounds from that car. I wish you could have driven the car before and after, me, I was grinning like an idiot and laughing my *** off as soon as I hit the gas!!!!!!!

Holy Toledo what a difference! I was in heaven!! That '68 Falcon woke up, it was shocking what a difference 400 pounds made in acceleration, handling, braking. I've been hooked ever since and have lightened all my performance oriented cars, the difference, assuming you've removed enough weight, has always been dramatic and well worth the effort. Lighter cars just become much more fun to drive in every way, it handles like a go-kart, it stops faster, accelerates faster, corners better, oh, one important one, I had to push my Falcon about a mile down a road once, thankfully it was a lightweight Falcon and not a Cadillac! :-)

I should add this, though, my lightweight Falcon? It weighs just what a stock Falcon weighs. Though I removed much weight, I added it all back in the form of V8 rear, trans, radiator, front suspension, disk brakes while using a 200 ci inline six cylinder motor. Now the car should last a few lifetimes.

I have plexiglass/lexan windows for one of my Falcons but have not installed them yet, I intend to use fiberglass bumpers, hood, trunk, doors for one car, but not certain whether that will be for the V8 or the I6.

I will also add weight in the form of a basic roll cage, I saw one Falcon that was T-boned, it was awful, I need a bit more crash protection what with all the people using their typewriters while driving these days (texting).

Sunbeam Tigers, yes, I had the chance to buy one in '86 for $3500 but I already had an MGB GT V8 that hammered along with a Chevy small block, the car was so fast I used to win bets that I could terrify a passenger just going up our short driveway. A guy in a Tiger chased me down one day, I stopped, we talked, and he offered to sell me his Tiger, and if I had the cash, I would have bought it.

Now that Tiger is worth at least $20,000 in that driver condition, and my MG is long gone and I miss it, and prefer it over a Tiger. Tigers, while awesome, simply do not hold that place in my heart that an MGB or MGC holds, my first car was an MGC GT, the C designation was for the factory inline 6 cylinder motor. If I had the cash I would be building the ultimate MG V8, check out youtube for some hot MGB V8's, they're awesome, my other dream car was a 60's Jaguar XKE FHC in British Racing Green, maybe I'd take that over the MG V8.

Luva65, if I were to have only one car? Well, I've had some 20 to 30 cars, at least 10 Falcons, so... that one car would be a 1964 Ford Falcon two door post.

Dare I say you could not trade me a new Ferrari for my '64 Ford Falcon? Maybe a 50's Ferrari Barchetta, maybe, but otherwise I will be a '64 Ford Falcon two door post sedan man for life, and it's been nearly for life, I've been driving Falcons for nearly 30 years, I like 'em and I like 'em crude, primitive, and capable.

I should also add that all my Falcons that I've altered came from either junkyards or were chopped up beaters to begin with, I have never molested an unmolested Falcon. I had a showroom one owner Falcon once upon a time, I sold it, couldn't do anything to alter it and I had no garage, it was vandalized several times. I did not have the heart to watch it be destroyed by scumbags, the weather, rain, sun, hit and runs, that car was a magnet for bad... so I sold it to a guy who put it in his private museum while it was still very nice. It was one class act...

The beauty of going from a 1968 Falcon to a 1964 was an automatic weight reduction of some 200 to 400 pounds just because it was a smaller car. Unfortunately my '64 V8 Falcon is only a 260 ci car but it can get up and go, just not like my 289 Falcon, and I don't have the heart to molest it by removing the original 260 motor, but it's no slouch. I may reversibly molest that car by adding headers, a four barrel carb, fiberglass bumper, hood, trunk lid (which was damaged by a tap and run driver), maybe fiberglass doors, and remove rear bench seats, all bolt on or bolt off affairs, so it won't really be permanently altered.

With a slightly warmed up 260 ci motor and what I estimate to be a 2,400 pound car, or maybe I'll go farther to reach the 1964 Monte Carlo Rally Falcon weight of 2,156 pounds, regardless, it should be plenty fast.

I like me my lightweight Falcons!!!

[Luva65wagon]

Well... there you go. Pretty cool.

You may be interested in an article I just read in Modified Fords and Mustangs. 1963 hardtop Falcon with 800+ HP. And he wanted to lighten it up too.

http://www.mustangandfords.com/featu...wer-to-weight/

[Wilbur]

Thanks for the article Luva65! That was a great article on an awesome car, even with all the extras it was under 3000 pounds yet with 845 rear wheel horsepower!!

We estimated my MGB V8 with the 283 ci Chevy small block to be pumping out a mild 200 to 250 hp and yet with that moderate level of power, the world outside the windshield truly did turn into a blur when you punched the gas. The car also had 3.91 gearing or some such, and a T-5 five speed trans, it was an outrageous car, and nowadays, compared to even an ordinary factory hi-po car, that MG would be a slug.

Myself, I've aged with "some grace" and I no longer need all the power in the world, I'm happy with an all around good performing car with enough power to keep me smiling, at least I tell myself that!

My 200 ci Falcon, the rated power is 120 hp, if a set of headers and a four barrel, with a few other mods (the port divider for example) will bring it up to 140-160 hp I'm sure I'll be happy considering the car weighs 2430 pounds, as checked on two certified scales. I will attempt to strip another 100 pounds from it, though.

The V8 Falcon, if I get 200 hp out of it with a weight of 2200 to 2500 pounds, I hope it'll keep me happy.

The third Falcon, well, that '64 may just get a 351 Windsor punched out to 427 ci and with aluminum heads, but that's real money that I don't have so I'll just dream about it for now!

[Wilbur]

Sounds to me you should'a looked for a Sunbeam Tiger instead of a Falcon.

Out of curiosity I looked up the "Kerb weight" of a Sunbeam Tiger, 1163 Kg or 2558 pounds, about 150 pounds more than my six cylinder Falcon with V8 drive train and suspension but with a 200 inline six motor.

I wonder what my 260 V8 Falcon weighs...

The Monte Carlo Falcons weighed 2150 pounds with full race gear, if I wanted to go that crazy I could duplicate that or drop another 100 pounds I'm sure given modern tech. and no rally gear nor rally seats.

[ew1usnr]

Out of curiosity I looked up the "Kerb weight" of a Sunbeam Tiger, 1163 Kg or 2558 pounds ..., I wonder what my 260 V8 Falcon weighs.

I really enjoyed reading this series of posts. Decreasing weight gives you the same effect as increasing horsepower, so it is always something to consider. I have kept the following notes on various weights. I need to weigh my spare tire and jack. Replacing them with a can of fix-a-flat would drop maybe forty pounds (not an endorsement, just an idea). My 1963 car had an alternator when I bought it, but I switched it back to a generator because I wanted to get the car back to what it originally was. My 260 is running really nice now. It idles very smoothly and quietly and takes off with no hesitation. That car is so much fun to drive.

Engine weights: 144 (85 hp) = 345 lbs. 170 (101 hp) = 352 lbs. 260 (164 hp) = 482 lbs.
For 1963 the 2-door Futura weighed 2,425 lb.
The 170 convertible weighed 2,765 lbs.
The base Hardtop weighed 2,565 lbs
The Hardtop with a bench seat and 260 V-8 weighed 2,880 lbs.
The 260 V-8 Convertible weighed 3,046 lbs (166 lbs heavier than the hardtop).
Bucket seats weighed 35 lbs more than the bench seat.
The Ford-O-Matic aluminum-case two-speed automatic transmission weighs 108 lbs without the 7.5-qts fluid or torque converter.
The front fenders weigh 21 lbs each. Standing on end, they are almost five feet tall.
The hood weighs 42 lbs.
The Airtex 6838 fuel pump weighs 2.1 lbs.
The 1967 Mustang brake master cylinder weighs 5.2 lbs.
The generator weighs 20 lbs.
The original-equipment 260 cast iron intake manifold weighs 40 pounds as indicated on a bathroom scale. The Edelbrock Performer aluminum intake manifold weighed 15 pounds (25 lbs less).
The mass backed carpet weighed 34.8 lbs in the box, and the trunk underlayment weighs 8 lbs.
The set of four simulated wire wheel covers weighs 9 lbs.

7/06/14 update:
The standard 22F battery weighs 31 lbs and the heavy-duty 24F weighs 42 lbs (11 lbs heavier).
Gasoline weighs 6 lbs per gallon.
The spare tire weighs 31 lbs. The bumper jack and tire iron weigh 8 lbs.

[Wilbur]

I had another Falcon V8 I used to drive that was a lightweight, I remember weighing the spare tire and jack at a little over 50 pounds, maybe more. I drove without them for a while, just a can of fixaflat. I then found a tiny modern space saver "donut" in the streets of New York and it had the correct bolt patter, it fit, so I began driving with that in the trunk. I'm thinking a scissors jack for a Hyundai or something would save much weight.

I kinda' figured the fenders would weigh next to nothing. I'm surprised the hood is so light, but maybe the 64 hood is heavier, and glad to read there is a big weight savings with alloy intake manifold.

There is not only a "horsepower gain" by reducing weight but everything improves, the car handles better, it's lighter on it's feet, quicker reflexes, the braking improved DRAMATICALLY in my other Falcon after it dropped over 400 pounds. My current Falcon which I am putting on a diet must not be hacked though, I hacked my other Falcon but it was a dog to begin with so no harm done. This Falcon is stock, unmolested, and other than bolting on/bolt off, it must remain that way. I should stick a 289 in it, but I have no place to store the low mile 260.

Thanks for all those specifications, I too did the exact same thing over 20 years ago, weighed everything, seat belts, padding, even the tar I scraped out, everything. Thanks again! :-)

I really enjoyed reading this series of posts. Decreasing weight gives you the same effect as increasing horsepower, so it is always something to consider. I have kept the following notes on various weights. I need to weigh my spare tire and jack. Replacing them with a can of fix-a-flat would drop maybe forty pounds (not an endorsement, just an idea). My 1963 car had an alternator when I bought it, but I switched it back to a generator because I wanted to get the car back to what it originally was. My 260 is running really nice now. It idles very smoothly and quietly and takes off with no hesitation. That car is so much fun to drive.

Engine weights: 144 (85 hp) = 345 lbs. 170 (101 hp) = 352 lbs. 260 (164 hp) = 482 lbs.
For 1963 the 2-door Futura weighed 2,425 lb.
The 170 convertible weighed 2,765 lbs.
The base Hardtop weighed 2,565 lbs
The Hardtop with a bench seat and 260 V-8 weighed 2,880 lbs.
The 260 V-8 Convertible weighed 3,046 lbs (166 lbs heavier than the hardtop).
Bucket seats weighed 35 lbs more than the bench seat.
The Ford-O-Matic aluminum-case two-speed automatic transmission weighs 108 lbs without the 7.5-qts fluid or torque converter.
The front fenders weigh 21 lbs each. Standing on end, they are almost five feet tall.
The hood weighs 42 lbs.
The Airtex 6838 fuel pump weighs 2.1 lbs.
The 1967 Mustang brake master cylinder weighs 5.2 lbs.
The generator weighs 20 lbs.
The original-equipment 260 cast iron intake manifold weighs 40 pounds as indicated on a bathroom scale. The Edelbrock Performer aluminum intake manifold weighed 15 pounds (25 lbs less).
The mass backed carpet weighed 34.8 lbs in the box, and the trunk underlayment weighs 8 lbs.
The set of four simulated wire wheel covers weighs 9 lbs.

[Wilbur]

ew1usnr, a little earlier tonight I had just finished removing the rear bench seat, seat belts, bolts, mounts from my 1964 Falcon. Last night I weighed the bench seat, a pound or two shy of 45 pounds. Today, I put all seat belts, bolts, and assorted crap laying around in the car that I will not put back, like jumper cables, some clothes for cold weather, and weigh that bag, somebody guessed and said over 25 pounds maybe 30, my guess is 20 pounds. So perhaps I've removed 65 pounds.

I then took the car for a drive, did I notice any difference? Of course I like to think I did, but whether there is a difference is really hard to tell. Nevertheless this is ONLY the beginning. I intend to find a light alloy wheel or donut for a spare, a scissors jack for a Hyundai or some such, and reduce the weight by another 20 to 30 pounds.

I also did some research online after browsing the local O'Reilly's parts store and seeing a "Lawn & Garden" battery. The person working the counter tells me her boyfriend runs a Nissan with a lawn and garden battery, and my research online showed that this is popular.

Wanna hear something crazy? I read one guy is using a battery pack to run his Japanese something or other hot rod with a battery pack from an airsoft toy bb gun and he provided the photos to prove it. Whether it was a hoax or not I don't know.

Myself, after I further confirm I can get away with it, I will buy a lawn and garden battery for my Falcon!!! It's got to lop off an easy 20 possibly 30 pounds.

My eventual goal is to use a fiberglass front bumper on the car, alloy intake manifold, lightweight alternator vs. generator, lighten the front bench seat, possibly remove cranks for rear windows and glue them in place (done it before), the lightweight spare tire, fiberglass hood, maybe create some light repros for some interior parts like that heavy glove box door. How about an aluminum steering column...

Right now I believe the most important thing is to get that weight off the front wheels, the alloy intake, battery relocated to trunk, and alternator should work some magic there, and when I can afford it, fiberglass hood.

I figure a fiberglass front bumper and brackets, relocating the battery, and alternator conversion alone should remove about 55 to 70 pounds from the front, assuming the battery weighs 35 pounds which is what I recall this sized battery weighed when I measure a similar one 13 years ago. I assume the bumper will save 25 pounds, and the alternator saves 5 to 10 pounds, or if I get lucky, even more.

I've been told there are modern radiators that are very light, but then I'm begin to bump up against a problem I have, I'm a VINTAGE FREAK, I don't want to lose the period flavor so I don't know that I would put a modern radiator in the car. I may even refrain from using my Edelbrock Performer intake and try to find a vintage 1960's alloy intake.

Anyway, those are my plans. Tonight, after driving the car with about 65 less pounds in it, I believe there was some difference, I cannot be sure, but one thing is certain, removing 65 pounds certainly did NOT HURT!! :-)

I will also remove my two gallon spare gas container and buy a smaller single gallon spare gas container. I believe a pound of gasoline is about 5 pounds. Okay, I just checked, it's 6 pounds.

[ew1usnr]

Hello, Wilbur.

I checked my notes and found some weight vs. performance numbers that I got from old magazine articles in a book called "Falcon Performance Portfolio". There is some variation in transmissions and differential ratios, but for two cars with the same 170 motor the sedan is 346 lbs lighter than the convertible. That 346 lbs difference makes the sedan 5.3 seconds quicker from 0 - 60 mpg with a standard transmission and 6.4 seconds quicker with a Ford-O-Matic. That 346 lb weight difference (which isn't really that much) has a surprisingly huge impact on performance.

1961 - 170 Six Cylinder Sedan, 2,408 lb.
3-speed: 0 – 60 mph in 14.3 seconds with a 3.20:1 differential
Ford-O-Matic: 0 – 60 mph in 15.2 seconds with a 3.50:1 differential

1963 - 170 Six Cylinder Convertible, 2,754 lbs
4-speed: 0 – 60 mph in 19.6 seconds with a 3.50:1 differential.
Ford-O-Matic: 0 – 60 mph in 21.6 seconds with a 3.20:1 differential.

Also, the standard 22F battery weighs 31 lbs and the heavy-duty 24F battery weighs 42 lbs (11 lbs heavier). I saw this note in an internet discussion: "Keep in mind the battery is all the way towards the front and you will benefit (if only slightly) in handling with a smaller (lighter) battery."