The 1964 Fairlane is widely considered to be the most attractive of the first generation (1962-1965). That’s undoubtedly in part due to its losing its rear finlets, which were getting sorely out of date by 1963. But there were other attractions, especially in the power train department. The 289 V8 was now available in a lo-po 195 hp version (only the 271 hp K-Code was available in ’63), and it could be had with the much better three-speed (C4) Cruise-o-matic. It’s safe to assume that there were likely some other continued refinements in its chassis too.
Motor Trend tested a Sports Coupe with the 195 hp 289, but backed by the optional four speed manual, which made for a sweet combination. Lively performance (0-60 in 9.9 sec.) but very tractable and with quite decent fuel economy (up to 19 mpg). And the handling was also better than average; quite a bit so on some rough desert roads driven at high speeds. A pretty attractive package, all-round.
color images from the web of a similar car with the 260 V8/automatic
The engine lineup in the Fairlane was significantly improved over what was available in 1962, when it first appeared. Then only the rather weak-chested 101 hp 170 “Falcon” six and the not exactly hairy-chested 145 hp 221 V8. The latter was in the Niedermeyer’s ’62 Fairlane, and backed by the two-speed Fordomatic, it was actually slower than a Chevy II with a six and Powerglide. The arrival of the slightly perkier 164 hp 260 V8 in mid-1962 was the first step in the right direction.
The quite hairy 217 hp K-Code 289 arrived in mid-1963, but that was strictly a hi-po machine. So the addition of the larger 120 hp 200 inch six and the 195 hp two-barrel 289 were both very welcome additions. Motor Trend flat out suggested that the 170 six made the Fairlane dangerously underpowered, based on a drive they did of one the previous year.
The mildly-tuned 289 was very responsive up to 4000 rpm in fourth gear, and wound up to 5200 rpm in the lower gears without protestation. Best acceleration times were made by shifting at 4800 rpm. The 1/4 mile took 17.5 seconds with a 78 mph speed in the traps. Top speed was 105 mph. These were all quite decent numbers at the time, right on the cusp between more sedate low-priced family chariots and the true higher-performance cars.
This Sports Coupe was equipped with the larger drum brakes from the station wagon, and were pretty effective until they got hot and faded. And then it took some 15 minutes before they cooled off enough where they could be tested again.
The steering was power assisted, with a Bendix unit that assisted the linkage, not an integrated one. The 4.3 turns were a bit slow, but it was reasonably light and responsive.
M/T took the Fairlane on several runs from LA to the Colorado River via remote back roads through the desert, which provided plenty of challenges for the suspension. It acquitted itself quite well, allowing speeds on these roads of 79-85 mph, which not all the cars at the time were capable of. It took the dips and bumps without bottoming out and stability was retained. One wonders if this was the standard suspension or a heavier duty version?
The Fairlane leaned more than desirable (understeer) in curves, but it could be driven pretty hard without raising adrenalin levels in the testers.
At 3155 lbs, the Fairlane was not a lightweight, but the weight was put to good use, with excellent solidity and low vibrations and sound levels. It felt every bit as smooth and quiet as comparable cars with a separate frame.
The interior was attractive, and the bucket seats gave reasonable support.
Related CC reading:
Auto-Biography: 1962 Ford Fairlane – Sometimes It Is About The Destination
Of course the 62 Nova was faster. It weighed over 500 pounds less.
Its structure was so minimalist that it was deadly in a crash.
This model Fairlane seemed hokey to us SCCA-raised kids with the side scoops but the car itself was in retrospect exactly what the USA needed, not the boats of the full size cars and the mini-boats that were the GM intermediates.
You sat up tall and it was almost European sized.
Agreed, but the Nova wasn’t the direct competition, it was the Malibu which offered a much cleaner look. Huge rocket/jet outlet style tail lights were old fashioned by this point, small maneuvering thruster ones were in!
In that ’62 comparison, the curb weight of the Chevy II was 2670 lbs; the Fairlane: 2850 lbs, so 180 lbs difference.
More significantly, the Chevy had a 24.7 lbs/hp ratio; the Fairlane: 22.2 lbs/hp. So it should have been quicker.
The reason it wasn’t? Most likely because the 2-speed Fordomatic was clearly inferior to the Powerglide. I’ve run across numerous vintage tests that confirm that. The PG was deceptively good, given its 2 nominal speeds; the Fordomatic was simply mediocre.
I agree, Dad had a ’62 with the 221 and pokey F-O-M, it was a smooth combo but ran out of wind quickly.
The GM 2 speeds: PowerGlide and the similar but different 2 spd Jetaway/Super Turbine 300, when teamed with a V8 on a ’64 to ’69 GM intermediate or compact ‘performance was actually very satisfactory, have driven and owned many of them. and I’d wager that 95% of owners would never know or care that their car had a 2 spd under normal driving conditions. However with a GM full-size 6 or small V8 (Buick 300, Olds 330, Chev 283) car the result would have been less satisfactory.
Dad had a ’62 with the 221 and pokey F-O-M
You too? We share more in common than just Towson.
As to the PG in the big cars, yes it wasn’t always ideal, but as this test shows, a ’66 Bel Air with the six and PG was still quicker than a ’66 big Ford with the six and the 3-speed Cruise-O-Matic:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/vintage-reviews/vintage-car-life-road-test-1966-chevrolet-bel-air-six-with-powerglide-just-how-slow-was-it/
You guys don’t know how good you had it. My Dad, making one of the stranger car purchases of his life, factory-ordered this 1964 Fairlane Sports Coupe with only a couple of options: radio, heater, and whitewall tires. That’s right, this beautiful Guardsman Blue coupe looked great outside and inside (the Sports Coupe bucket seat and console interior was really nice) but underneath it all there was a 170 six and three-speed manual (if you ordered Fordomatic you at least got the 200 six). The salesman and teen-aged me tried several ways to talk him into a V8 but he was in a real economy mode at the time.
Ironically this car was traded in 67 for a lightly used and beautiful 65 Thunderbird! Good riddance to that miserably slow Fairlane, a car I learned to drive in. I sure learned how to row a three-on-the tree to keep that thing going in any kind of traffic and I could parallel park like a champ with no power steering. A true COAL as was its much more pleasing successor. Fun times.
What a waste of such a nice Sports Coupe! Ours was a stripper 4-door sedan, but my father really wanted a V8, even if it was no faster than many sixes. But yes, faster than the one your dad got. Ouch.
“Mr B” had one of these , on the “Hazel”, TV show for a while. Doubt is was a “4 speed” though.
Great post – this is the Fairlane I wish I had. My first car in 1972 was a ’64 4-door Fairlane 500 with the 260 and the Fordomatic – bought for all of $500.
Those were the days when $500 could buy you a decent car – it had no real problems. I still remember the lifeless power steering typical of this era’s Fords.
I have never been much of a Ford fan because ordering parts for them can be rather problematic. However, a 289 2bbl would make for a very nice ride. Plenty of torque will make the car plenty lively and it still runs on regular gasoline. The interior pictured is much nicer than either the Chevy II or the Chevelle in my opinion.
I have this review in a test compilation of Fairlanes, and I was surprised by the 3.25:1 axle ratio. By 1965, all 289-2V Mustangs, regardless of transmission, got the 2.80:1 ratio. A 3.25 would feel a lot more sprightly around town and would still be turning only 3000 rpm at 70 (according to the data page).
Oh to have one of those back then. Ours was a lowly 170 with 3 on the tree, heater and radio, nothing else. But it was Israel in the 60s so this was luxury. Here it is with granddad and sis. Same colour as the test car.
I have an Australian assembled ‘64 Fairlane 500 4 door (we only got 4 doors), which I’ve owned for 40 years. When I first saw it in a farmer’s shed (Aussie Barn), I just had to have it. Then I found out it was the same vintage as me!
It’s still got a 289 and the C4, but was refurbished in 2013, with a full rebuild of the car, including the drive line.
That little 289 sure loves to rev, and can embarrass a lot of today’s cars off the traffic lights. It’s a lot of fun to drive and sure gets a lot of looks.
I was age 11 in 1964. An older fellow in our country neighborhood had a new 64 Fairlane coupe. Black with red interior, 289 with 3 on the tree. Pretty car and sounded really good through the glass packs he installed. Mag wheels were almost non extant so he removed the wheel covers and the steel wheels were painted red. As I remember this was the cool set up until later in the sixties when Crager, Keystone, Mickey Thompson, Raider and others seemingly appeared out of nowhere onto the hot car scene. Good days and good memories.
I remember these when new a friend had a 260 three on the tree and it ran really good, he put in a cam and a r barreel carb oud mufflers w/dual exhaust and it was quite respectable in drag race back then. The interior was really nice compared to chevy and plymouth. The little ford was a lot of fun and relisble, now a car like this is 35000 dollars new! We have seen the enemy and it is us!
Akin to above poster Jim Brophy, my first set of wheels was also a 1964 ‘Lane sedan equipped with that faintly glorious 260 2-speed combo.
Mine was Australian-assembled via Canadian-supplied CKD kits and btw the ’64 hereabouts used an FD model code (to follow the FB & FC used in previous years). They were sometimes known as ‘Canadian’ but more commonly ‘Compact’ series Fairlanes to differentiate them from those vast 1959 ‘Tank’ Fairlanes which had locally carried through unchanged through 1962.
Even 50 years later, I still remember my FD with great affection: sensible dimensions, terrific styling, benevolent handling, just enough power for a teenage novice, even that unique ‘old Ford’ cabin scent. All in all, a very endearing unit. I paid all of $175.
At purchase it was only 9 years old and quite tidy – albeit with radial retreads on 7″ steelies and what was probably the world’s longest ‘hotdog’ muffler. Plus the essential dashtop-mounted tacho to keep close tabs on that one-shift Fordomatic.
I further desecrated it – back then the technical term was customising – by installing a single el-cheapo 4-harness seatbelt (ludicrous) to go with a set of oversize Ford Oval decals on the rear quarters, then off and away on the motoring adventure of a lifetime.
My Mom gave me her 63 1/2 Sports Coupe when I turned 16. I thought I’d died and gone to heaven. 289 originally 2 speed, fixed that problem. My first car. Wish I still had it. Year was 1969. 2 years later I learned what real power was. Bought a 69 GTO, not stock… trouble ensued. Still, loved my Fairlane!
I experienced my first 180 degree spin in the back seat of one of these in the summer of 1971. I was 12 and was tagging along with my older cousin and his friend. The Maroon Fairlane belonged to the friend’s dad, and with the 289/4 spd it was a high school kid’s dream car.
We were going about 50 when we got to a light the kid did not notice was red. Quick reflexes got him to the brake pedal, and the drum brakes and bias ply tires took it from there as we spun to a stop. Scared me nearly to death.
I remember back in 1981, when my parents were shopping for a nice, used early Mustang for my first car, we looked at a ’65 that was powered by a 271-horse 289 that was yanked out of a ’64 Fairlane. Looking back, the Fairlane with that original motor might’ve been the more desirable car. My dad eventually found a $900 ’65 Mustang coupe with a 2-barrel carb/C-4 automatic for me. Then again…we passed on the chance to get me a ’69 Shelby GT-350 fastback…for only $3500….