(first posted 3/7/2013) Despite a massive snowstorm on Tuesday, last week was most excellent for me. Long story short, I had been out of work for approximately a month, but through a mutual friend I was able to interview for a full-time accounting position at a local company. Last Thursday morning I arrived in my one-and-only suit, and a few hours later they called and offered me the job. I was very happy, to say the least! Just after I left a message accepting the job, I started the car and prepared to drive away from the mall, where I’d been browsing at a bookstore–and what did I see? This rather clean mid-size 1970 Ford, parked at a restaurant–in February, in the Midwest! Highly unlikely. But is this really a Torino?
Despite the lack of Falcon scripts on the rear quarters, I believe it to be a 1970½ Falcon, of which 30,445 sedans were built. To my surprise, the Falcon sedan actually outsold the mid-line Fairlane 500, which sold 25,780 copies, as well as the Torino sedan, which sold 30,117.
The ’70½ was a bargain-basement Torino whose function was filling the gap left when the 1966-70 Falcon ended production on January 1, 1970. As noted in the recent Maverick post, Federal regulations requiring a steering column-mounted ignition switch were taking effect, and so the compact 1970 Falcon, with its dash-mounted switch, had to be discontinued after December 31, 1969.
The Torino-based unit was ushered in to finish out the year but did not return for ’71. So, why do I think it’s a Falcon? For starters, it appears that the next-lowest variant, the Fairlane 500 sedan, got chrome-trimmed door frames that are conspicuously absent from our red example.
Also, please note that in the brochure shot further up that while the Falcon had no grille ornament, the 500 wore a red, black and chrome Ford shield. Unfortunately, our CC is missing its grille; I’m wondering if it’s in the trunk, as it appears the owner might have removed it in order to block off the radiator with cardboard.
Whoever ordered this one must have wanted a sharp ride on a budget, as the red paint, black vinyl top and Ford’s ultra-cool dog-dish hubcaps all make for an attractive four-door. I really thought this was a Torino the first time I saw it.
As a U.S. example, this one has “FORD MOTOR COMPANY” emblazoned on its hubcaps, unlike the “FORD FORD FORD” on our recent Brazilian Maverick GT. Also note the lack of wheel-opening moldings, standard on the Fairlane 500.
Furthermore, the basic black interior looks like a match to the ‘70.5 brochure picture. Unfortunately, the sole interior picture I took was slightly out of focus, so I can’t read the series badge above the glove box. Curses!
If that isn’t enough for you, here is a Fairlane 500 I spotted at a car show last year. As you can see, the upholstery is much nicer, and the Fairlane 500 plaques on this blue one are absent from our featured vehicle.
The 500 also got two chrome accents on each front fender. It is easier for me to believe that someone removed all the Falcon badges from this car (probably during a repaint) than wonder why, if it was indeed a Fairlane 500, someone would put in a taxicab interior and remove the Fairlane 500 scripts from the doors?
So, my educated guess is that this is a Falcon. While I can imagine many Falcon two-doors being saved over the years, I can also imagine that most sedans were unceremoniously driven into the ground (also true of 1968-72 Novas), which makes this find all the more remarkable. A new job, a good old-fashioned Midwestern snowstorm and a rare CC. What a week!
“He caught a lot of grief about an economy car…”
This is why Falcon name died in the USA market. [and many others]
So that’s all it was, the dash-mounted ignition, that killed the old-style Falcon? Interesting. I had always thought it had something to do with side impact protection standards that went into effect for 1970, and that the ’66 era Falcon would not have been able to pass them?
No, the dash-mount ignition didn’t kill the Falcon; see below.
Side impact protection standards: that’s Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard № 214, which took effect for the 1973 model year. Prior to that, there were no side-impact standards. Plenty of 1973 models were substantially the same as their 1972 counterparts, but with guard beams in the doors.
The Maverick killed the Falcon, but the dash mounted ignition switch set the day of its death.
The Maverick was a bit of a departure from the Falcon and initially only available in the 2dr body style. For whatever reason the 4dr was not going to debut until the 1971 model year.
Ford apparently didn’t want to loose buyers looking for a 4dr compact or who thought the Maverick was too racy, so they soldered on the Falcon to have something in that segment.
At the time the laws were written to follow the calendar year so Ford was free to call it a 1970 and build them until 12/31/69. Had the regulations been model year based as they are now Ford still could have built them as is until 12/31/69 but they would have to be sold as 1969s.
Daniel is correct that the law doesn’t stipulate how the standards are achieved but the practicality of the matter is if you want to lock the steering wheel while preventing the steering wheel from locking unless the car is in park and lock the column mounted automatic transmission shifter the logical, cost effective solution is to locate the lock cylinder in the steering column.
While the steering column ignition lock is the most cost effective way to meet the regulations it doesn’t mean that it would be without a cost. Since the Falcon wasn’t going to see 1971 Ford obviously deemed the investment in the unique pieces needed for a Falcon variant of the locking steering column too great.
As too the 70 1/2 Falcon I wonder how much of it is that they had a ton of Falcon badges lying around with no where to put them, or if they were afraid of loosing someone who was dead set to replace their old Falcon with a new one.
There isn’t (and never was) any federal regulation requiring the ignition switch to be on the steering column. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard № 114 (Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention), which took effect for passenger cars built on or after 1-1-70, required:
• a starting system which, whenever its key is removed, prevents normal activation of the vehicle’s engine or motor and steering and/or forward self-mobility of the vehicle (when and only when the transmission is in Park, if the vehicle is equipped with a transmission with a Park position); and
• an audible warning activated whenever the key is in the starting system and the driver’s door is opened; and
• the starting system must prevent key removal unless the transmission is locked in Park (or becomes locked in Park as the direct result of key removal); and
• The vehicle must be designed such that the transmission or gear selection control cannot move from the Park position, unless the key is in the starting system.
None of that requires a column-mounted ignition switch, it just so happens that putting it there cheapens and eases meeting those requirements. Ford could have kept the dash-mount ignition switch if they’d really wanted to, or simply gone to a column-mount ignition switch.
Thanks for this explanation!! I was confused as the 1970s European cars I remember all had dashboard mounted ignition tumblers.
You’re right, but practically speaking, it was the new requirement that killed the Falcon, as it would have been expensive either way to meet it.
How come swapping in an appropriately-configured version of the lock-equipped steering column they would’ve swapped into all other ’70 models would’ve been especially costly on the Falcon? What am I missing?
The fixed cost wouldn’t be necessarily any more costly than the unique pieces needed for the other applications but Ford wasn’t planing on making 1971 Falcons and they were for all the rest of their 1970 cars. They would need two unique sets of unique parts, one for the AT and one for the MT. Those parts would buy them an additional 8 months of production. But Ford’s money was on (in) the Maverick and I’m betting they were predicting that Falcon demand was going to fall rapidly.
Either way the Falcon lines needed to close sooner rather than later, as Kansas City needed to be tooled for those Mavericks and New Jersey for the Pinto.
As I said above the dash mounted switch didn’t kill the Falcon but it did set the date of death.
The 1970 Falcon was just a way to take advantage of the way the regulations were at the time and bang out a few more units and $$ on that tooling since they could.
Thanks—that reckons.
To put a bit more perspective to that: falcon sales were in free fall. 1969 MY sales were down to 95k. And the part year “real” 1970 Falcon sales were a mere 16k, but that may have been because they shut down the plants early. Either way, the Falcon’s death was highly imminent.
PS: The Mustang killed the Falcon. And the Maverick resurrected much of the early Mustang’s sales, at least for the first year.
@Paul and I bet that 16k number was some what goosed by Ford telling their dealers that the Falcon was the only 4dr compact choice for 1970 and the order books closed on XX/XX/1969.
I’d say the Mustang mortally wounded the Falcon and the Maverick put it out of it’s misery.
I’ve never known about this car until now. Thanks. It makes sense that the 4-door Maverick replaced it – that first photo shows how many styling cues were shared with the Mav, including the fender bulges and the awkward C-pillar.
I had a Maverick, and I remember it having very similar upholstery to your interior shot – smooth vinyl at the front of the seat, with a woven pattern a few inches back. A misapplied knee at the juncture of those two textures while leaning on the seat will rip it right through – I learned that the hard way. . .
I have mine, but it’s been neglected for awhile now. I go back and forth whether to sell it. Have had it since 1984.
Wow, what a great find-I’ve seen only one 701/2 in my life-when I was stationed at Davis Monthan AFB early in 1970 I saw one-a 2dr painted a pale yellow. Tom, I would guess this car has been repainted and I wonder if the vinyl roof was a later add on.
I really don’t buy the story that federal regulations requiring a steering column-mounted ignition switch taking effect caused the compact 1970 Falcon, with its dash-mounted switch, to be discontinued after December 31, 1969. With the Falcon sharing so many parts with the mid-sized Fairlane and Torino it should have been fairly easy to use the same steering-column-mounted ignition switch that was used on the Fairlane and Torino for a full model year.
It was also very strange that Ford would go to all the trouble of bringing out a unique bodystyle, the 2-Door pillared coupe for only half a model year (although it certainly did share a lot of its sheet metal and tooling with the 2-door hardtop Fairlane and Torino models. It was just weird.
Yes there is a lot of commonality with the Torino but if you’ve been in a 70-71 Torino and a 69 Falcon you would see that the seating and dash are very different and it would be unlikely that they could use the Torino column as is.
Yes they could have made a few unique pieces to use the corporate column in the Falcon, as well as a new dash harness or adapter/extensions.
But the Falcon was dead to Ford. It had been dying for years and the replacement was already in production. So Ford wasn’t going to spend a penny on it.
But hey the regulations say we call sell it as a 1970’s, make them until 12/31/69 as is. We don’t really need a full year to retool the plants so might as well wring a little more money out of the poor bird.
To this day it is strange to promote price leader 70.5 Falcon, and then drop completely 6 months later.
Maybe new sales manager came in and wanted cleaned up model lineup for ’71?
Went from Falcon, Fairlane, Torino to just Torino in base, 500 and Brougham.
Then for ’72, Gran Torino made another nameplate shuffle.
I had an Australian 74 XB two door Falcon visually the same as Eric Banner’s except I didn’t spend $600,000 on mine and so it was not quite the same…dunno why but it had a Fairmont interior and a 351 with a 4 barrel carby…hear that baby suck air…loved that car but as I lived near the beach and it started to rust I sold it so it might be saved…wish I still had it, they are now worth a freekin fortune.
Here is a vid of Banner’s car, it kills me to see it, looks ID to mine back then in this video…I really did love that car…..
My Dad bought a 70 1/2 Falcon as a beater to drive to work about 1980–it was a 2 door post car. It had a 302 and automatic–I do remember it had rubber floor, no carpets. The top of the fenders were rotting away.