FTE 61-79 - Colorado Legislation

61-79-list-digest Friday, May 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 303

=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo

ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE 61-79 - Colorado Legislation
Re: FTE 61-79 - Distributor problems
Re: FTE 61-79 - Distributor problems
Re: FTE 61-79 - Colorado Legislation
FTE 61-79 - cubic inches
FTE 61-79 - Banned!!!
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Whippin' Post, back around to carbs...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation
FTE 61-79 - Solid lifters
RE: FTE 61-79 - Spreadbore.
FTE 61-79 - Dist stuck in block
RE: FTE 61-79 - Spreadbore.
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dist stuck in block
Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together
RE: FTE 61-79 - getting sponsors
Re: FTE 61-79 - Solid lifters
Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Whippin' Post, back around to carbs...
FTE 61-79 - Re: California Get-Together
Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together
FTE 61-79 - vibration

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:21:21 -0400
From: am14

chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Colorado Legislation

Don g. writes: >>This might be a good time to jump in here by everybody
interested in the automotive hobby. If we could get the bill numbers and
addressed and/or email address of the local and state leaders for Colorado
and send constructive, let me repeat that "CONSTRUCTIVE" letters letting
them know that not only are the people of their state watching them but
across the nation eyes are upon them. Any letter is better than none at
all even if it
is from out of state, hey it can't hurt.

I just opened my June issue of 4 Wheeling, and I noticed a real small
article that mentioned that this legislation had already been defeated.
Don't know myself, but you might want to ask the status, before you jump in
too quickly. Seems the article mentioned that if it had passed, then any
larger tire other than what came on the vehicle would have been outlawed.
Sounds crazy to me, but then so does gun control - guns do not kill -
people kill. Learning to respect others rights is the problem there.
JMHO.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:27:46 -0400
From: "John Miller"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Distributor problems

> From: Robert Hutchinson

> Well, the distributor WOULD NOT come out, and yes, the retainer was not
> still on the base. I finally said screw it and decided to take my
chances.
>
> Any ideas on why the thing would not come out?

Robert this is a pretty common problem with Ford blocks/distributors,
basically oil becomes varnish/sludge right at the area where the dist.
housing meets the engine and becomes seized. Some become so lodged that
someone being a little too rough trying to free one up can actually break
the dist. housing off in the block. Using a good solvent, even carb cleaner
works great, soak the area, work the dist. back and forth, repeating this
process and begin working the dist up and out. Patience is a virtue here,
and you will prevail. If necessary to break the dist free to rotate you can
use a pipe wrench or better use a large adjustable on the flat areas
provided on the housing, again be gentle and careful. Hope this helps ya.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - cubic inches

Azie wrote:>> The smoothe head design was introduced in '68 I believe as
383 for Mercury and 430 for Lincoln. This may not be exact, but is close.

Before you guys jumo on me too hard that should read '58 - not '68

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:01:47 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Banned!!!

Jeff,
All I know from the article is S.B. 34 which I assume means Senate Bill 34.
I really hope these measures fail. It's bad enough that I can't modify my
exhaust or carb because of the smog nazis, but if this catches on I won't

be able to buy any decent tires either. What about air shocks? overload
springs? chrome wheels? All right, I'm shushin'.

Let us know how this turns out.

- -John

jmlagron

tenet.edu
1979 F150 Custom 351M C6
1988 Towncar 5.0 EFI AOD
Macintosh G3/233 minitower (When speed counts, count on Macintosh)
1979 MC under restoration (my son is rebellious, but he loves old cars!!!)

Dearborn iron rules!!!!!!

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:06:09 -0700
From: "Deacon"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Whippin' Post, back around to carbs...

From: Steve
> If He likes the Carter AFB, He'll like the edelbrock just as well.
> They are the same carb, right down to the Weber "W" on the side of the
> carb.
> The AFB would have been something like $6 cheaper if they had had it
in stock.
> Buy whichever one You can get cheapest, cuz dey iz de same animal!

He gives a very unbiased description of the pros and cons on 3
carbs, Holley, Edelbrock and Carter. I think it would be safe to say, he
only recommends getting informed before buying. The Carter and Edelbrock
had price, parts availability and driveable setup out of box
installation in their favor. Not that he had anything bad to say about
Holley, it just didn't match the numbers of the other two. He pointed
out that all carbs need setting up to get the best performance and
having the parts readily available is a must. As you said, if the parts
> house has one in stock but not the other, there would be no reason to
not buy the one that's available. If they have both I would check to see
what parts they carry the most for, then pick the prettiest one. :)

> They're both good carbs, designed by Weber, and Weber ain't no slouch
when
> it comes to making good carbs!

And they bake some damn good bread too! :)

Deacon
deconblu

gte.net
=============================
Nuke the unborn baby whales.
=============================
Deacon's
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home1.gte.net/deconblu/

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 13:16:28 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation

>From: "John LaGrone"
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation
>
>On page 27-28 in the June 98 Low Rider Magazine is an
>article on two proposed laws that the Colorado legislature
>is considering. The first law would ban cruising. The second
>law (S.B. 34) would ban vehicles with altered suspension
> >and prohibit changes to tire size, wheel size, body height,
>and chassis configuration.

Yo John, et al:

June 98?? Unfortunately, the lead time for print publications is such that
state legislative activities move even faster (believe it or not).

The annual Colorado state legislative session runs from Wednesday of the
first full week in January (01/07 this year) until Wednesday of the first
full week of May (05/06 this year). The legislative session has already
ended in Colorado, and any bills passed would be up to the Governor to veto
or sign. At this late stage, the only thing you could do is petition the
Governor to veto the bill, if he hadn't already signed it.

The good news: Fortunately for all automotive enthusiasts, Ford truck
lovers, and half-way sane people in the free world, the altered suspension
> bill (SB 34, Alteration of Vehicle Configurations) died quickly and
unceremoniously on the Senate floor at its second reading on February 19.
The Prohibition of Cruising bill (HB 1027) didn't even survive its first
reading in the House Local Government committee on January 21.

BTW: even though these proposed laws did not get through the legislature,
it may be worthy of note to FTE members in Colorado that HB 1027
Prohibition of Cruising was introduced by Frana Araujo Mace (D), State
Representative, District 4 (Denver), and that SB 34 Alteration of Vehicle
Configurations was introduced by Ray Powers (R), State Senator, District 10
(El Paso County).

If you want to keep tabs on what these people are up to in the future, you
can use the following official web site:

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/stateleg.html

Dave R. (M-block devotee)

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Solid lifters

Marko M. writes:>>Just remember you can only run a solid cam in that thing.

I think all the 332's of '58 and the 352's of '59 will take hydraulic cams.

As I remember it:
All the '58 and '59 332's and 352's came either way from the factory, but
all of them had adjustable rockers. Sometime in mid '59 FOMOCO went to
hydraulics totally, and went to the stamped rockers Then in '60 when the
352hp was offered, it had solid lifters with no oil passages for hydraulics
and was rated

360 Horse power (I think). In '61 it became the 390 and was
offered both ways. In '62 the 406 was introduced and it had just solids
with no oil passage holes for hydraulics. The 427 was introduced in '63 and
only came with solids until '68 and, I am told, a few were produced in that
year with oil passages for Hyd. I've never seen one. The 428 was
introduced in late '68 and all had oil passages for hyd lifters.
This is believed to be true, but I wouldn't bet my lunch on it.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 15:43:41 -0400
From: "Charles Hawkins"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Spreadbore.

On Friday, May 22, 1998 9:51 AM, am14

chrysler.com [SMTP:am14

....

To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.

Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.