When we hear “NASA” we think of astronauts and space shuttles and satellites and the like. We don’t usually think of the ground-based equipment that supports those missions. We present to you here a machine that is likely one of those ground vehicles, a 1969 Ford Galaxie coupe, having supposedly been used on Langley AFB but listed here on craigslist in South Carolina. Read on to see more and decide for yourself if it’s legit….
Ford’s “Galaxie” line started as a concept car, the “La Galaxie” in 1958 and was so well-received that Ford gave it the green light right away, offering it as full-side sedan, couple, or wagon models to the public from 1959 to 1974. Around the same time, NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) was created in order to counter the fact that Soviet Russia had beaten America to the punch by successfully launching Sputnik the year before. This space race and the idea of interstellar travels and exploration were capitalized by many consumer products at the time. While the Galaxie has faded into the pages of automotive history, NASA and its mission live on, and private-sector industry and investment has taken on a large part of the research and development which NASA pioneered.
All that aside, we see a white car with black hood and amber/red caution lights, a roll bar peeking out through the windows,white wagon-wheel rims, a 429 tag and a very solid-looking body. We’re told that it has 53,000 original miles and was used on Langley AFB, which is one of the oldest American airfields and housed a major Research And Development center for NASA. Unfortunately, we’re not given any other information nor pictures in this current listing…but….
I did some homework to see if I could put more of this car’s story together, and I found these threes pictures from a previous craigslist ad below…
…and this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/nasa/comments/14etxz8/need_some_help_on_identifying_car_that_was_owned/ on social-media platform Reddit, seemingly posted by the current owner, which provided me some more info and pictures and lend quite a bit more credence to the claim that it is indeed the NASA car from Langley.
Credit:Reddit picture by owner
In it, comments suggest that this car was specially prepared for research about runway surfaces by gutting the interior, deleting the VIN and adding race equipment and special electro-mechanical equipment, a bit like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency did with a 1970 Plymouth Superbird to follow aircraft and collect exhaust samples.
Credit:Reddit picture by owner
It is my opinion that this car is indeed the very vehicle used by NASA for research purposes and therefore it is an extremely unique piece of machinery. Obviously, I’d want more provenance like a Marti report or some government paperwork but would you take a gamble on it? Let me know in the comments!
Interesting piece. But if the VIN was scrubbed, can the car be titled?
Is the roof gum ball light operational?
Does it come equipped with a siren?
First thing I’d do when I got it home is take the gum ball light off and add it to the other stuff on the garage memorabilia shelf. When you’re jawing with your buddies, the story goes something like this; “Yeah… I would’ve gotten the police radio out too, but they started to come out of the donut shop”.
What is that above the gas door?
Think they are visual markers for the U2 to use when laying it’s wing on the car when landing.
Ah, c’mon Thunder, everyone knows that the Dragon Lady had little wheels out at each wingtip, I think those are electrically operated portholes to let the tire smoke out when it fills the cabin to the point where you can’t see where you’re going.. hee hee
Interesting choice, I wonder if it was bought off the lot. I’d expect a Custom 300 4-door sedan for the Feds, even if it is a high-powered interceptor.
Galaxie / NASA, like peanut butter and jelly
429 with A/C & pretty solid car I like it! Maybe 3500 is realistic but what the heck!
Look at this ridiculousness.. a two door fastback Galaxie with a 429 under $5k STILL isn’t good enough for the cheapskates here, you just HAVE to devalue everything.
If you need more evidence that the majority of the commenters here are not serious people, let alone actual car guys, I don’t know what to tell you.
It would be nice if “real” enthusiast gave up on bashing commentators who post comments he doesn’t like or agree with. A real enthusiast would focus on the cars being presented here on Barnfinds rather than the comments that offend him.
Here you go again, slamming the good people that visit this site. If you were such a brilliant car guy you would have noticed the repeated referral to this one as a Galaxie XL, something that never existed and certainly not in 1969. There were Galaxie 500 XL’s up until 1966. From 1967 through 1970, there was a Ford XL, a standalone model.
And you have the nerve to represent yourself as a serious person / car guy.
@FordGuy1972
If other people would learn to appreciate the cars posted here instead of trying to pick them apart and say every damn one is overpriced, I wouldn’t have to set the record straight here. If you don’t see something wrong with someone saying a Galaxie fastback with a 429 is overpriced at $4,700, I don’t know what to tell you. Good luck finding ANY running and driving ‘69 Galaxie two door for that, let alone a fastback 429 with history. It simply won’t happen.
Who put you in charge of “setting the record straight?” Talk about hubris.
Good thing Howard A. skipped this one.
It’s true. This was one of the first test vehicles to measure runway conditions. They are still in use today at most large airports to calculate braking effectiveness on runways.
If it were me, I’d remove all the NASA crap off the vehicle and restore it back to OEM because it looks like a very solid starting point, but that’s me and probably the majority would think that’s messing with a “historical” piece. How’s that for a run-on sentence? Anyway, while I’m definitely mindful of NASA’s historical significance regarding this vehicle, I just can’t look at the car with the add-on doodads all over it.
Even if it can’t be titled and registered, it would make an excellent base for a vintage drag racer. The local strip would be like a car show every weekend for this old horse. This price is nice for what you’re getting, even if you can’t prove the NASA link.
Absolutely pretty much what I was saying. It’s a great price unless they fubarred it so badly with all the NASA crap that it would be impossible to put it back together correctly once you remove all the “aftermarket” stuff.
Well said, Mike! But I’d be willing to bet that this car is not confused about what it is, inside the engine bay beats the heart of a monster, it’s all muscle car and it darn well knows it! It will never pretend it’s a tuner, or a luxury car, or a trailer queen. No, this one knows exactly what it was made to do, creep slowly out of its own copious cloud of white smoke and storm down the tarmac with a beastly roar, leaving nobody watching confused about what it is either. In an era where you can call yourself a big mac when everyone can see that you’re a whopper, this car is old school as it gets, and will proudly sport that 429 badge as it rolls around, looking for more ashfelt to devour… I wouldn’t change a thing, except maybe add a seat for my lovely wife and remove that bubble gum machine from the roof, I wouldn’t want anyone to think I was pretending to be something I ain’t…
The car is a FASTBACK NOT a Coupe. Marketing material from that era would support my statement. As one who has read automotive material for decades it concerns me that todays journalist seemingly have little regard for accuracy even down to the small things automotive.
I hate to disagree, but both descriptions are incorrect. The body style was known as a Sportsroof. While it has the same “sails” as a fastback, the rear window is not flush with those sails. Marketing material from the era will support that description. I have the 1969 full sized Ford brochure, and several other books that support this.
‘65+ Mustang fastbacks were called “hardtops” by Ford as well, but every human being on the planet calls them fastbacks. Stop your ignorant tirade. It’s a fastback, made during the era when every “cool” car was a fastback.
1961 Impala “bubble tops” weren’t called bubble tops by Chevrolet. Likewise for the other GM marques that offered the same roof.
Likewise again for the various GM “flat tops” they made around the same time. But that’s what EVERYONE knows them as. Shall I go on?
Fastback is absolutely the correct term for that car. And many fastbacks were called “Sportsroof” or something similar by their manufacturers. You’d probably be surprised how many manufacturers DON’T use the word “fastback” to describe their fastbacks. Do you know what brand differentiation is? Call it something cooler or more exciting or unique and seems better somehow. It’s still a fastback. Just like this Galaxie.
Fastback is a general term to describe a body style. “sportsroof” is a specific marketing word used by the manufacturer to try to differentiate their fastback from other fastbacks. Learn the difference.
@AREALenthusiast … there is ignorance, which is excusable, and wilful ignorance, which is not. You continue to describe a Sportsroof as a fastback, despite me having educated you on the difference. Additionally, you continue to refer to this vehicle as a Galaxie, when you are (or certainly should be) aware that it is not.
If you want to piddle over the difference between a fastback and a sportsroof, fill your boots. Ford was very clear on what this particular bodystyle was called. If you want to try to pass off a 1969 Ford XL as a Galaxie, you really need to back down. Anyway, you’re probably not in the market for one, so what do you really know?
Nice, reasonable price considering its 2023. Interesting research on BF part.
I remember this car being on Ebay, about 10 years ago it sold for a fairly high number at the time (cannot recall). The story was slightly different, but if remember correctly eluded to the same usage, looks like time has taken a minor toll on it. Be a very cool car to own.
excellent!
Seems legit to me.
Space ship it is
…at least a ride down the runway when it was young would give such a sensation with that beast under the hood – probably has a stiff differential so no telling how fast it’d go
In todays market the price is dirt cheap. I would buy it today if it was anywhere near me. The transport cost would double the purchase price almost
Interesting for sure
The can openers didn’t come on anything until the late 70’s. I hated them and still do. I think Ford trucks had them stock for a bit.
“Can openers”?
Do you people ever get tired of politics?
Dude isn’t trans, probably doesn’t know anybody trans, yet the idea of it scares him enough to include it in a comment about a Ford XL. As Mr. T said, “I pity the fool.”
somebody liked it well enough to buy it–ad deleted by author!!
OMG…I thought this car was long gone and crushed! I worked at Langley and we had at least two of these cars when I was there. I even drove them a bit for some speed tests on an adjacent runway that split the Air Force base and NASA properties. The fellow in one of the pictures was Tom Yeager, and he was very into runway friction studies for airplane tires and the future space shuttle tire testing. There was air sample research from air planes but I was not part of those experiments but I do remember seeing them being done. These car were pretty fun to drive around the doing speed testing and the likes. In the trunk you find some brackets that held in some data collection systems we had in there too, and maybe some under the rear seat area. these were pretty cool cars back in the day!
Thank you for some true insight Jeffrey. Cool history.
Thank you. Your comment wraps this up tidily. Seriously interesting piece, but what to do with it? Wear it out, part it out, or put it on a pedestal? Pretty neat car, full stop.
I would buy it!!! It is such a cool car for someone like me. It brings back suck memories and I would love to have it. But I guess you had to have been associated with the car to appreciate it.
That was supposed to be such not suck memories…LOL
I bought the car and would love to hear more about it. I intend on giving it a fresh tune up and driving it. Definitely not parting it out or changing one thing.
Congrats, John!
Cool-enjoy the ride. You did not overpay that’s for sure.
The car is a monster. Heavy duty reinforced everywhere with taxpayer money.All kinds of electrical harnesses,switches and a wierd. fuse looking speedometer on top of the speedometer! Small NASA stamped hardware boxes with calibration dates. It probably should be in a museum.
Does it actually have VINs and a title? Or did they actually remove the VINs for some reason?
No vins just a number on the door that says this number cant be used for registration or title.
@John
Very strange. I wonder they would just remove the VINs like that. What reason would they have to do that?
I found the vin under the weather stripping by the trunk. A friend of mine had a few good places to look.The 4 link is going to be difficult to drive down everyday roads. Not much clearance… Clarence