OPINION: I love small blocks, but they can't handle the weight of big old iron like a 3750-4000 lb 1967 Galaxie, they just don't have the torque. They might do ok for a while, but they will work hard and wear out fast.
FACT: The 1967 Ford 289 Challenger V8 with Cruise-O-Matic C4 made 200 hp and 282 ft.lb. of torque.
OPINION: Not bad for a 2700 lb 1967 Mustang. I have a similar weight 1970 Maverick and it would be an ok setup in my car
OPINION: Big cars need 400+ torque.
These were the other, factory option, FE big block motors for a 1967 Galaxie 500 XL:
The Thunderbird 390 2bbl Cruise-O-Matic C6 made 275 hp and 405 ft.lb. of torque.
The Thunderbird 390 Special 4 bbl with Cruise-O-Matic C6 or 4-speed manual made 315 hp and 427 ft.lb. of torque.
The Thunderbird 428 with Cruise-O-Matic C6 or 4-speed manual made 345 hp and 462 ft.lb. of torque.
Then there was the developed-for-NASCAR beast developed to fight the Chrysler 426 Hemi: The 427 Cobrajet made 425 hp and a brain twisting 480 ft.lb. of torque. (Ford lied about the 425 hp due to insurance reasons like the Chrysler 426 and Chevy 427 did too about their big blocks, real numbers are probably closer to 440-450 hp and over 500 torque.)
The FE was gradually phased out by the 385 series big block engines that included the 429 and 460 in starting in1968.
What I would do:
I would clean, remove and mothball the 289 Challenger (Windsor) and C4 and save them to put back in if you ever sell it, so it could still be a numbers matching car.
Then I would find, rebuild , and install the best FE I could find and put it with a C6 and a Gearvendors overdrive ($2800).
I found a 1980 429 4bbl from an F700 (no emissions) for $1000 on craigslist this week.
A roller block 385 series 460 (88 & up) mated to a BUILT
I found a running 1988 E350 460 in a rotting 24 foot RV with 88,000 miles for $350 in my craigslist favorites right now, just in case my son's 76 Ranchero 351M pukes. A 429/460 will bolt up to his existing FMX transmission and uses the same motor mounts.
Put either one of those engines with some 3.55 or 3.80 gears and you will have an impressive performing battle cruiser that tosses around its beefy weight effortlessly.
In 1990 I had a 67 Galaxie 500 XL fastback with a stock 390 2 bbl C6 and 3.25 gears and it was not that fast with 275 hp. Its 405 torque would almost lift the front tires off the pavement, but no top end. 0 to 40 almost instantly, but it didn't like the interstate.
That same car with a 289? I think it's gonna be a dog. I think it's absurd that they even offered the small block 289 or a 240 Big 6 (the 300's daddy) in this car as the base motor.
1967 was a 1-year only body style for the Galaxie. In 1967 the designation "fastback" was not used for the car you are getting or the one I had. They used it in 1968. In 1967 it was just a Galaxie 500XL 2 door. It was the only 2 door solid roof body style that year. No traditional hard top. It was available in 2 door convertible. I called mine a fastback too. So does everybody else, but it's not listed that way in the catalogs. 66=hardtop, 68=fastback, 67=2door.
For interesting reading:
HP, torque, and vehicle weight data from Automobile Catalog: https://www.automobile-catalog.com/m...dtop/1967.html
This is an apples to apples comparison of factory ratings of stock engines.
HP numbers are all SAE gross hp at the flywheel. Not comparing gross hp to net hp.