Moebius '65 Mercury Comet Cyclone news

[RancheroSteve]

Are sure about the above Art? I don't know about '64 and '65, I'm going to have to do a little research on that. But, I do know that the '60 - '63 Comet wagons shared the same wheelbase with all Falcon and Ranchero models. That was 109.5". The other Comet models, the sedans, hardtops and convertibles rode on a 114" wheelbase.

Okay, I quickly went and pulled out my copy of the Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. It indicates that all of the '64 and '65 Comets and Falcons rode on the same wheelbase as they had in the previous 4 years. No change.

I believe you are correct here, Scott, including the '64 and '65 models. (I had to look this stuff up myself, but I think I've got it now.) Seems a little counter intuitive maybe to think that Comet wagons had shorter wheelbases that the sedans, but it seems to be the fact. I'm leaving out any reference to the '66 cars because they're a pretty different animal in my book, based on overall parts interchangeability.

Also, here's a very extensive article about "The Falcon Platform" and its many variations. Notice it groups the '60-'65 Falcons and '60-'65 Comets together:

http://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-fords-falcon-platform-from-falcon-to-versailles-in-18-different-wheelbase-lengthtrack-width-variations/

A small quote: "Unibodies are assembled from many stampings, and as such lend themselves quite readily to stretching. A slightly longer piece here, a slightly wider one there…cut and paste." For example, I'm told that the Ranchero shares a lot of the same stampings with the 2 door wagon, which accounts for the void under the bed behind the cab - often a common area for rust due to its propensity to trap debris and water.

[Reeves Racing]

Are sure about the above Art? I don't know about '64 and '65, I'm going to have to do a little research on that. But, I do know that the '60 - '63 Comet wagons shared the same wheelbase with all Falcon and Ranchero models. That was 109.5". The other Comet models, the sedans, hardtops and convertibles rode on a 114" wheelbase.

Okay, I quickly went and pulled out my copy of the Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. It indicates that all of the '64 and '65 Comets and Falcons rode on the same wheelbase as they had in the previous 4 years. No change. 1966 with the new bodies, Falcon coupes and sedans moved up to a 110.9" wheelbase. Falcon wagons, 113". Comet which now shared the Fairlane body for '66, moved up a 116" wheelbase which it shared with Fairlane, on all models except the Fairlane and Comet wagons. Which then rode on the same 113" wheelbase as the Falcon wagons.

Your information is correct. In fact the complete door assembly was interchangeable between 64/5 Falcons and Comets.

[Luc Janssens]

Your information is correct. In fact the complete door assembly was interchangeable between 64/5 Falcons and Comets.

Okay...if my diagonal reading cached all info written down in the previous postings a '64-65 Falcon could be a sibling from the Comet tool?!

Interesting....and a way to forget the Trumpeter release from a few years ago.....

Edited December 6, 2015 by Luc Janssens

[unclescott58]

I believe you are correct here, Scott, including the '64 and '65 models. (I had to look this stuff up myself, but I think I've got it now.) Seems a little counter intuitive maybe to think that Comet wagons had shorter wheelbases that the sedans, but it seems to be the fact. I'm leaving out any reference to the '66 cars because they're a pretty different animal in my book, based on overall parts interchangeability.

Also, here's a very extensive article about "The Falcon Platform" and its many variations. Notice it groups the '60-'65 Falcons and '60-'65 Comets together:

http://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-fords-falcon-platform-from-falcon-to-versailles-in-18-different-wheelbase-lengthtrack-width-variations/

A small quote: "Unibodies are assembled from many stampings, and as such lend themselves quite readily to stretching. A slightly longer piece here, a slightly wider one there…cut and paste." For example, I'm told that the Ranchero shares a lot of the same stampings with the 2 door wagon, which accounts for the void under the bed behind the cab - often a common area for rust due to its propensity to trap debris and water.

The link you've included above is quite good. Other than I don't agree with his personal opinions on the '71 - '73 Mustangs and Cougars. The correct facts are all there. When you see what they did with Falcon platform, it puts Falcon in a whole new light. And let's not forget the Austailan Falcon variations. Falcon really was a remarkable design.

[RancheroSteve]

Interesting....and a way to forget the Trumpeter release from a few years ago...

Best forgotten regardless.

[MrObsessive]

I'd REALLY like to see a '64-'65 Falcon Sprint come out from this tool! Trumpeter's version simply left me cold as there were so many things wrong with it, I couldn't list 'em all. I've given up on as far as them ever coming out with anything that's worth my while.

On the other hand, I can see Moebius considering doing a Falcon. They were quite popular with the Rally Racers in the '60's, and you could do a couple versions of this car. Coupe, convertible, rally racer...............;)

[Rob Hall]

Are sure about the above Art? I don't know about '64 and '65, I'm going to have to do a little research on that. But, I do know that the '60 - '63 Comet wagons shared the same wheelbase with all Falcon and Ranchero models. That was 109.5". The other Comet models, the sedans, hardtops and convertibles rode on a 114" wheelbase.

Okay, I quickly went and pulled out my copy of the Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. It indicates that all of the '64 and '65 Comets and Falcons rode on the same wheelbase as they had in the previous 4 years. No change. 1966 with the new bodies, Falcon coupes and sedans moved up to a 110.9" wheelbase. Falcon wagons, 113". Comet which now shared the Fairlane body for '66, moved up a 116" wheelbase which it shared with Fairlane, on all models except the Fairlane and Comet wagons. Which then rode on the same 113" wheelbase as the Falcon wagons.

IIRC that 113" wheelbase for wagons lasted through '71 for the midsizers. If you look at pics of the '70-71 Torino and Montego wagon in profile and from behind, the rear and greenhouse are very similar to the '66 wagons.  Ford definitely knew how to reuse their unibody platforms..

Edited December 6, 2015 by Rob Hall

[Luc Janssens]

I'd REALLY like to see a '64-'65 Falcon Sprint come out from this tool! Trumpeter's version simply left me cold as there were so many things wrong with it, I couldn't list 'em all. I've given up on as far as them ever coming out with anything that's worth my while.

On the other hand, I can see Moebius considering doing a Falcon. They were quite popular with the Rally Racers in the '60's, and you could do a couple versions of this car. Coupe, convertible, rally racer...............;)

Bill, a decade ago I saw they were still racing them, together with 1st gen Mustangs, Camaro's and Cortina's when visiting the vintage races at Spa-Francorchamps.

[Dave Van]

Thanks for that Falcon platform site......kinda confirmed things I knew from years of working on Mustangs, Falcons and Comets. Nice to know my observations were correct!! It is a great platform for sure......have a number in the garage now!!! Also my '73 Javelin has the same platform but for a few changes....but layout is so similar!! 

 

Also interesting how this thread has brought to light some other things. Never crossed my my that a 73 Cougar and Javelin shared style queues. 

 

Never owning that gen Cougar....never crossed my mind......but I see it in these pics.......

 

Interesting stuff guys....THANKS!!!

Edited December 6, 2015 by Dave Van

[MrObsessive]

Also my '73 Javelin has the same platform but for a few changes....but layout is so similar!! Also interesting how this thread has brought to light some other things. Never crossed my my that a 73 Cougar and Javelin shared style queues.

Dave it's interesting that you noticed this too...........I am seriously thinking of using AMT's '67 Mustang/Shelby platform for the underpinnings on my AMX build which I'll start sometime next year. The similarities are so apparent, it makes me wonder if someone that worked at Ford, had a hand in designing the layout for the Javelin/AMX during the development time of 1965-67.

Of course, shortening of the floor would be needed for the AMX (not much) but other than that, even the floor stampings are quite close. Even the front suspension is quite close even though the AMC's used a trunion setup through '69.

[unclescott58]

???? AMC's Javelin on the same platform? I think not. They may look simular, but are not the same. Pull a Hollanders parts exchange manual. You'll find the Javelin shares little to nothing with the Falcon or her sisters. Now note. I sail "little to nothing". AMC was known to buy some components from other car companies. Things like Chrysler transmissions and GM steering racks, etc. But, the big parts of the car. The overall structure. Chassis, engine and body are pure AMC.

[Rob Hall]

I've read that the Javelin was on the 3rd Rambler American platform, which dated to 1963-4. It wouldn't surprise me if the architecture was similar to the Falcon, as they were competitors. Not unlike the Falcon and Fairlane, the American and midsize Classic had a lot in common.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Rob Hall

[MrObsessive]

???? AMC's Javelin on the same platform? I think not. They may look simular, but are not the same. Pull a Hollanders parts exchange manual. You'll find the Javelin shares little to nothing with the Falcon or her sisters. Now note. I sail "little to nothing". AMC was known to buy some components from other car companies. Things like Chrysler transmissions and GM steering racks, etc. But, the big parts of the car. The overall structure. Chassis, engine and body are pure AMC.

I wasn't saying that they share the same tooling, like Rob said they would have been similar due to them being developed pretty much around the same time. Engineers back then either quit or were fired just like they are today-----------I work with engineers all day long and this happens in my industry constantly.

They'll take their ideas with them to another competitor sometimes to spite their former company...........happens all the time.

[Luc Janssens]

I wasn't saying that they share the same tooling, like Rob said they would have been similar due to them being developed pretty much around the same time. Engineers back then either quit or were fired just like they are today-----------I work with engineers all day long and this happens in my industry constantly.

They'll take their ideas with them to another competitor sometimes to spite their former company...........happens all the time.

Not only that, cuz if you go down in the "secret garages" of car company x, y or z, you'd see models of competing companies, being dissected or even body sections of several different models puzzled together to get styling ideas....

Edited December 6, 2015 by Luc Janssens

[Dave Van]

I don't think anyone said Javelin  and Falcon SHARED chassis......but design queues I can say 100%......I own both 66 and 68 Mustangs and 73 Javelin....have rebuilt all three.....it's easy to see a 'family resemblance' even though there should not be one. And I agree about even stampings looking alike. 

Model wise......take a Mustang chassis....flip the front suspension 180 degrees and adjust WB and you have a good AMC Javelin chassis 70-74.  

[Rob Hall]

That should be design 'cues' by the way, 'queues' are people standing in line or part of a software messaging system...

[unclescott58]

Sure there are similarities. Then who copied who? Look at the front suspension of an early Rambler. Then look at Falcon again. It looks to me that the Ford product may be a copy of American Motors car, if your going to look at it that way. Close in looks they may be. But, Rambler and Javelin do not share parts with Falcon. We're Comet, Fairlane, Mustang, Cougar, Maverick, Granada, Monarch, and Versailles do. I can see people not fully understanding that the chassis components look simular between Falcon and Javalin, and turning that into "that they do share chassis components." I've heard people claim weirder things than that at car shows. Just because they misunderstood a simple, but somewhat related comment.

It should be noted that Nash was one of pioneers of the unibody in the US. And used it on their Rambler before Ford used it on the Facon. Again, who is copying who here?

[Rob Hall]

I think it was just a case of both companies building similar architectures that were typical of the day...  unibody construction, coil over front shocks, leaf spring rear suspension...that was the norm for compact car construction circa in the 60s....GM did some different things w/ their initial compacts, though the Chevy II was very conventional. Chrysler went their own way w/ torsion bar suspension and slant 6s..   

Edited December 6, 2015 by Rob Hall

[drodg]

Yes, it takes time to make sure a kit is as correct as possible, and sometimes that means multiple delays.   Just as was the case with the '61 Ventura, I expect any delays will be well worth it once the final product arrives (sharing just my own point of view here)....TIM

Well put Tim.  I would rather wait a few months and have the quality that we are used to having with Moebius.    I am 58 and have been waiting a long time for a 65 Cyclone kit.  I guess I will have to wait a few more months!

[High octane]

While I have a few projects started, and plenty of un built kits in my "stash," I wait for NO kit to be released. Sure I intend on getting the new Comet kit, but it doesn't matter to me if it comes out next December. I really don't understand how guys with hundreds of model kits are just "chompin' at the bit" for this kit or that kit and or re-issue to be realeased???

[Reeves Racing]

While I have a few projects started, and plenty of un built kits in my "stash," I wait for NO kit to be released. Sure I intend on getting the new Comet kit, but it doesn't matter to me if it comes out next December. I really don't understand how guys with hundreds of model kits are just "chompin' at the bit" for this kit or that kit and or re-issue to be realeased???

Because I want to build a model of my race car and this is the first time a kit has become available...

 

 

[High octane]

Mitch, MCW has offered the '65 Comet kit for awhile now, and just discontinued it due to the upcoming Moebius kit.

[Reeves Racing]

Mitch, MCW has offered the '65 Comet kit for awhile now, and just discontinued it due to the upcoming Moebius kit.

I bought one of those about 4 years ago, and it must of been cast at the end of the molds life because it was awful

Wheel openings were misshapen it was twisted and the details were very worn away. I tried to use it but it wasn't up to the quality I wanted for the amount of effort I am going to put into this build. I'm not skilled enough to work with fixing a resin casting.

So I eagerly wait on Moebius and have been for over a year...

 

.

 

[High octane]

I bought one of those about 4 years ago, and it must of been cast at the end of the molds life because it was awful

Wheel openings were misshapen it was twisted and the details were very worn away. I tried to use it but it wasn't up to the quality I wanted for the amount of effort I am going to put into this build. I'm not skilled enough to work with fixing a resin casting.

So I eagerly wait on Moebius and have been for over a year...

 

.

 

I don't blame you for not wanting to work with a poor quality resin casting, and now see why you're anxious for the upcoming Moebius Comet kit.

[Nova-ss]

Just can't wait for this kit..it would be smokin to have a Javelin to build from Moebius..but with thethis one and the Pontiac. ..going to be fun.I'm enjoy the 65 Plymouth now..very thankful for Moebius...Chris