I made good money in my life as an accountant.  My very best lifetime memories, however, are with these magnificent Falcons and Mustangs.  They have been mysterious, rewarding and have provided so many challenges important in any life.  They have introduced me to many really great people at my shop and here online
To all you fantastic friends, thanks for putting up with my mistakes, corny jokes, gentle sarcasm, and over long winded posts.
Signing off.
Best,
Larry Hackney
Aka Al Newman

I was wrong on all counts.  Got an appointment for cataract removal soon.  Gonna go curl up in my fetal position and sulk until 5:00 pm when happy hour begins in mi casa.
Thought I was better, butt.....
Al

Sal,
Been a while since I was able to work on cars, but, if memory serves, that mount is broken and most likely cannot be properly repaired. 
Better,
Al

Cannot verify, but was told long ago that the cover had something to do with minimizing radio interference.  Actually, it seems to me that GM once did somethingv like that to eliminate radio interference, also.   On Corvettes.
Better
Al

Just keep this in mind.  Regardless of your choice, you will still quietly wonder what it would have been like with the various other ratios.  I run 289, close to stock 260 hp, 3.25 single track with 92 model T-5.  Hits hard and gets mid 20's highway mileage.  You gonna race, then 3.40-3.80.  All out racing, 3.90-4.11.  The larger the ratio, the more unnecessary the first gear or two in the tranny.  Lotsa choices.
Best
Al

JeffK wrote:

Al Newman wrote:

No real tuning issues on the Autolites other than accessing air/fuel screws on front and middle carbs. Finally solved that problem. Once in tune, no readjustments for several years. Middle carb is 1.02 and outboard carbs are 1.08. The Edelbrock carb is much more manageable than the Holleys. In my experience, they do tend to drain down after a few days of sitting, and they take a bit of cranking to refuel. They also tend to stutter on hard cornering under power. As for gas mileage, nobody I have ever known has installed tri power to improve mileage. It is an unintended consequence of the middle carb being so small (240cfm) and keeping your foot out of the other carbs (280cfm each). If I were to replace the setup, my choice also would be the small Edelbrock.

Oh I think my carbs are a bit bigger than that, especially the center one. CFM is supposed to be about 850 or 950 total. How do you tell what size they are, mine don't have numbers on them.

 
You have to reference the Holley four digit list number on the air horn to determine the cfm.  Autolites have a venturi size cast onto the carb body that can be translated into cfm.  Holley carb bodies look the same but may have several cfm ratings.

No real tuning issues on the Autolites other than accessing air/fuel screws on front and middle carbs.  Finally solved that problem.  Once in tune, no readjustments for several years. Middle carb is 1.02 and outboard carbs are 1.08.  The Edelbrock carb is much more manageable than the Holleys.  In my experience, they do tend to drain down after a few days of sitting, and they take a bit of cranking to refuel.   They also tend to stutter on hard cornering under power.   As for gas mileage, nobody I have ever known has installed tri power to improve mileage.  It is an unintended consequence of the middle carb being so small (240cfm) and keeping your foot out of the other carbs (280cfm each).  If I were to replace the setup, my choice also would be the small Edelbrock.

Hate to be a contrarian, here, but the Pony Carbs 3x2 set using the old Autolite carbs is not only eye candy to the max, the performance is quite noticeably better than any 4V setup I have ever run.  No hesitation, hits really hard, starts easily, gets really great mileage (24-28 mpg w/5spd thru 3.25 rear gears), been on the car for 20 years.  If you can locate one of the Pony setups, you will not be disappointed.  Now, the Holley setups I have messed with are another story.  I personally would not slow down if I saw a Holley setup lying in the road.  Just my personal observation.
Best,
Al

Lots of advice above.  For what it is worth, Ford Motor Company, in one of the early Tecnical Service Bulletins, called the cold engine lifter noise, "morning sickness" and said "no worries" or something to that effect.  These old small blocks will run a long time at less than perfect condition.  Us old gearheads all too often spend hundreds of dollars on ten dollar problems.  May be best to wait for more symptoms before dropping a big dime on the " morning sickness".
Best,
Al

Friction modifier is not necessary for single track rear end.
Ford friction modifier ONLY for a limited slip unit.

Probably too late to help.
1.  No stock Falcon came with 9" rear ends
2.  Rear ends that work
     64-65 Falcon
     65-66 Mustang
     Mid to late 80 Granada, Fairmont
3.  Do NOT use any 64 Falcon front steering components.  Spindles, idler, pitman, center link, tie rods all
     different and EXPENSIVE.  Center link guarrantees bump steer.
4.  Do NOT use 65-66 Mustang center link.  They are too long.  All other Mustang front susp is OKAY.
5.  HIPO exhausts at one time were available for the Falcons.  They look identical to Mustang but will
     clearance the shock towers.
6.  Until recently, there was no such thing as a Falcon export brace.  Maybe now, though.
7.  Plan to remove column shifting, as it interferes with exhausts.  Floor shift is okay.

Before you get into all of the rear end changeout you may get lucky by simply taking out some pinion backlash that may be causing your noise.  Or maybe a worn U-joint needs replacing. 
Best
Al

What I found troubling was when they pulled and serviced both heads because of a single valve stem failure.  The heads were nearly new with very few miles on them.  The plugs had been pulled and no problem was detected from reading them.  Sure seemed like a $3,000.00 fix to a $50.00 problem.  The taillight problem disappeared later in the segment.  Glad to see the headlights replaced, also.
Best,
Al