This 1963 Ford Econoline Is Completely Impractical And Perfectly Bitchin’!


This 1963 Ford Econoline Is Completely Impractical And Perfectly Bitchin’!

I’m willing to go under fire for this opinion: some vehicles don’t do anything well. Take this 1963 Ford Econoline: it would be a cool truck, except that there is no useful bed left. Part of it is filled with Chevrolet big-block, and the rest is filled with tube frame and rear tires. So, no, it’s not a truck. It’s not exactly a sports car either, two seats be damned. So what is the “x-factor” with this flat-nosed Ford that has us twitching? Is it the slammed-low stance? Is it the mid-engined 454 Chevy and the TH400 offering up the promise of severe hoon antics? What is it about this nearly-finished monster that is begging for a solid romp on a desert road with nobody looking? Can you answer that one for us?

eBay Link: 1963 Ford Econoline


  • Share This
  • Pinterest
  • 0

11 thoughts on “This 1963 Ford Econoline Is Completely Impractical And Perfectly Bitchin’!

  1. ram50boosted

    “will need minor adjustments” first thing to do. YANK Goofy Mechanics engine and trans, Install FOMOCO engine and trans.

    Reply
    1. Blu67RS

      He very obviously had a choice of any brand power plant during the build. He wanted to go fast with consistent, proven reliability. Not just once in a while……

      Reply
  2. keezling

    Ugly, badly designed, unstable. All fair words to use from the day they showed up. Yet somehow I was always attracted to these trucks. They were so unique.

    Reply
  3. shoominati23

    Needs a Cobra jet-headed 460 and AOD. man you could make some usable space in the back if you put some thought into it. Make a neat engine cover, put lightly curved cover panels over the slicks and sheet the rest in. You could put toolboxes on either side of the engine. Or just leave it open and have enough space for two dirtbikes. One thing I can\’t understand is why they made that ugly-ass cut in the rear of the cab. Probably so the tailshaft they had would fit, though that is a long-ass transmission, the AOD (with is basically 70% FMX is at least 2 feet shorter. It, ( the setback in the rear of the cab) really detracts from the looks, especially from the rear.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *