61-79-list-digest Monday, July 27 1998 Volume 02 : Number 385



=======================================================================
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:

Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: Underhood heat
Re: FTE 61-79 - COMING SOON- 68-72 Body side moldings
Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity
Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 FE
FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing
RE: FTE 61-79 - Underhood heat A New direction
RE: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing
FTE 61-79 - 351C
FTE 61-79 - Changing rear main seal
FTE 61-79 - Rear main oil seal
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C
FTE 61-79 - Front end shake
FTE 61-79 - 410 balance
FTE 61-79 - Aux Transmission
FTE 61-79 - Dana 70 or 10.25" Ford
FTE 61-79 - Electric lines to garage - for working on old Ford Trucks
Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C
FTE 61-79 - Really useful lightstand for working on old Ford Trucks
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing
Re: FTE 61-79 - Electric lines to garage - for working on old Ford Trucks
Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

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

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 04:03:37 -0700
From: "Deacon"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: Underhood heat

From: John Miller
>How about a large flat(designed and cut specifically to fit in and
around
>the area below the carb) piece of stainless or better aluminum painted
>black on top and polished on the bottom, combined with a 1/4" or so
>insulating block under the carb.

I agree that a heat shield and spacer are good ideas. I have been
looking into a spacer but only because it was mentioned that there was a
large increase in power. The only under hood heat problem I have with my
truck is with the vacuum lines. My truck has the stock anti-vapor lock
fuel line and I've never had a problem. Our trucks have a lot of space
above the exhaust manifolds with no venting. I think a heat shield on
the exhaust manifolds would reduce the heat. if a person is into cutting
holes in their truck, some side vents at the rear of the hood angled to
the rear creating a vacuum would do the trick.
So how you feeling John? Hope your recovery is coming along well.
Good thing Marines don't feel pain! :) Get well soon my friend!

Deacon
deconblu gte.net http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home1.gte.net/deconblu/
==============================================
Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm
==============================================



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 07:32:19 -0500
From: "J Elliott"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - COMING SOON- 68-72 Body side moldings

you wrote:
>Here's a quick note about new reproduction body side moldings for 68-72
>F-series trucks coming soon.

That's nice, but what about the mounting blocks and clips for the molding?
Do they come with? And will you have those separately? Molding I got.....I
just want to be sure to have extra mounts in case any get roached taking
them off and back on for a repaint.

J. Elliott



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:05:25 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

Date sent: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 16:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Pajak
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

> (and a lift someday!) My dilemma was whether to get separate electrical
> service or to run a feed from the house. The expense is greater to have
> the separate service, and I'm not too keen on 2 electric bills (2
> meters!).

If your garage willl be used for business purposes then it would be prudent
to get the separate meter but otherwise it will always be cheaper to run it
from the house. I can't remember what I said but I will eventually be splitting
my meter box into a one into two arangement where the power comes into
the box, goes through the meter and the meter has two taps, one for the
house and one for the out buildings. This arangement allows for less line
loss and less interferance in the house by large equipment in the shop when
starting motors etc. and is still considered one meter and one account,
residential.

I've been arguing with them for some time now to upgrade my lines and
transformer and to get me a two tap meter socket for this but so far nothing
is getting done. When my other projects are finished I will be getting on their
case about it but right now I'm too busy to worry about it.

The other advantage to this is that you will have to put a power disconnect
adjacent to the meter box for the out buildings so that any time you need to
upgrade any part of the system including the feed to the first load center you
can turn off the power at the meter socket and actually replace the feed or
any other part of the circuit without disturbing the power company's lines or
equipment and without pulling the meter.

Lets say you set it up with 100 amps and later find you need 200 amps to
keep everything alive. You can upgrade the original feed from the meter
disconnect to the first outbuilding without interrupting service to the house or
calling the electric company.

> One thing Gary said cinched it for me to go with the feed from
> the house....the ability to back feed the house with a generator! Since I

There is a special generator load center which you can install in your house
with a plug to the outside for the generator which contains all the circuits you
normally run off the generator and which has a main which disconnects the
generator and other circuits from the house system with one lever but I don't
have this and don't think I will. What I do is turn off the main at the house
which protects any linemen who are working on the lines outside my house.
Then I turn off all circuits I don't want to provide power to with the
generator.

The circuits work like this: Power comes into the meter and then to the
house load center through a 200 amp main. The garage is fed through #2
wire from a 100 amp breaker in the house load center to a 100 amp load
center in the garage. The barn then has a 60 amp breaker in the garage load
center which feeds it through #4 wire and a 50 amp breaker in the barn.

To back feed you turn off the main in the house and leave the two mains in
the garage and barn on but turn off all circuits not used with the generator. I
have a 50 amp range outlet in the barn wired to the buss in the load center
but which is controled by the main so it is protected. It's right next to the
load center so I can turn off the main before starting the generator and turn it
off before shutting down the generator which is important for the safety of
electical appliances, especially motors. I wired a 50 amp range outlet into the
generator wiring and bolted the outlet to the top of the generator so I could
use a pigtail with two male plugs on it to connect the generator to the load
center through my welder outlet.

Something I learned the hard way is you have to have very good connections
at the generator and the load center or the plugs will melt so I used the 50
amp range pigtail. I feel this it the ideal solution and makes it very versitile
and portable. My other generator outlets are still functional as well :-)

How far is the garage load center from the house load center? Wire is rated
for 100' with no line losss (or what they call acceptable line loss). I always
put in the next size larger than specified to prevent line losses when motors
start due to a thing called LRA or locked rotor amps. My compressor has a
LRA of 218 amps! By keeping the comperssor in the garage and piping the
air out to the barn I get away with #4 wire to the barn but some day I
anticipate having to upgrade this. #4 is marginally rated for 100 amp up to
100' but for a service (which I'm actually using it for) it's only rated for 70
amps. Before I quit on this let me tell you that I pulled #4 wire through about
45 feet of 2" conduit and it pulled fairly easily. I pulled #2 wire through 2"
conduit over only about 25 feet and it took two people to get enough pull to
get it to move! Plastic conduit is cheap so if you anticipate EVER upgrading
the wire, put it in conduit but if you run #2 over 30' or so I'd go to a larger
conduit myself. I'm not looking forward to pulling #2 through that conduit
to the barn :-( BTW, getting all the kinks out of the wire first and laying it as
flat as you can helps and don't try to pull one at a time, pull all of them
together or you will be doing it over (and over and over and...)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 LIncoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:26:55 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 FE

Date sent: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 22:50:52 -0700
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 FE

> But . . . Your item of interest is with an auto, it would seem to me to be
> difficult to balance an engine externally with only a flex plate / torque

Flex plates on the 335 series have weights for this so I suspect the 428 and
410 do also?

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 LIncoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:52:34 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing

hey all

Just got back from Vaca. Bronc crapped out on the way to shore house.
Had to be flat bedded home :-(. The distr/cam gears stripped leaving 3
distr gear teeth and one cam gear tooth somewhere in the motor. I was
considering swapping the cam, but who knows where those gear teeth ended
up and 150K on the cam bearings is not all that appealling either.

So, I was considering a 460. I know I need motor mounts, headers or
truck manifold. I was wondering if manual transmission flywheel is the
same from 351M to 460? Also, what year did the balance change from
internal to external (or was it the other way around)? My choices so far
are a 69 Lincoln continental, with 460, 82K orig miles for 600$, a 78
lincoln town car, with 460, 177K mi. for 350$, or an 85, E350 van 460
with 85K mi. (motor only) for 450$.

I was also wondering what radiator is needed for 460? I have heard
that a true big block rad is actually taller than the radiator opening.
Not sure how that would help, but I've heard it exists. I have a the 3
core, larger width rad, right now.


OX


OX
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:48:43 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Underhood heat A New direction

fresh air intake will always help as long as the fresh air is cooler than
the hood air. it does bring on other problems like driving in the rain,
but they are managable.

trucks pulling a heavy load may benefit more from fresh air in the reduced
detonation tendancy than any race car, IMHO

sleddog

- ----------
From: Don Grossman[SMTP:duckdon pacific.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 1998 2:22 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Underhood heat A New direction

Lets move the topic of under hood heat to the intake shall we. Speaking of
under hood heat, isn't all this hot air going down the carb on these hot
days? Would ducting a fresh air intake be productive or is it only for
200mph
NASCAR stuff?



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:05:57 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing

too bad about that M dying. but your post brings up some questions:
why not rebuild M motor, maybe to 400?

are you going to rebuild the 460 you put in?

the 69 460 is better. better compresion. compression can be dropped by
using lower compression pistons. plus, if it has the power steering pump
on the crankshaft (no belt) the swap is easier/cleaner, but where to get
spare parts??? i have one of these engines, but i do not know what to do
if the pump ever goes bad.

parts from the 70's, and the 80's don't interchange, but not sure of the
specifics. the can motor may be the best bet though, as it should have the
exhaust manifolds and oil pan/pickup/dipstick that you will need.

sleddog



- ----------
From: luxjo thecore.com[SMTP:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 1998 10:52 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing

hey all

Just got back from Vaca. Bronc crapped out on the way to shore house.
Had to be flat bedded home :-(. The distr/cam gears stripped leaving 3
distr gear teeth and one cam gear tooth somewhere in the motor. I was
considering swapping the cam, but who knows where those gear teeth ended
up and 150K on the cam bearings is not all that appealling either.

So, I was considering a 460. I know I need motor mounts, headers or
truck manifold. I was wondering if manual transmission flywheel is the
same from 351M to 460? Also, what year did the balance change from
internal to external (or was it the other way around)? My choices so far
are a 69 Lincoln continental, with 460, 82K orig miles for 600$, a 78
lincoln town car, with 460, 177K mi. for 350$, or an 85, E350 van 460
with 85K mi. (motor only) for 450$.

I was also wondering what radiator is needed for 460? I have heard
that a true big block rad is actually taller than the radiator opening.
Not sure how that would help, but I've heard it exists. I have a the 3
core, larger width rad, right now.


OX


OX
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 08:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Lee
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351C

on Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 22:06:06 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - found a 351C
You wrote

> Hi, found a 351C with a C-6, its from a 71'
it's currently in a 76
F-100, the
owner pulled a 6 cylinder out, and knows less
than I do, he wants $300
to
remove the whole truck, what do you think? I've
been looking for a 351C
for a
while. I'm going to look at it tomorrow and
maybe just buy it for the
parts..

Mike in Seattle
I have a 72' F-100
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

--

If that's a 351C-4V and the heads are OK, then it's worth every penny
of $300.00.
The 351C-4V is a great Muscle Car Engine, not the best for a truck.
Unless you are interested in building a Street Rod. I have one in my
'53 F100 with a C6. I would love to put one in a '53 Coupe. It's a
great alternative to a C*. If it's a 2V Cleveland, don't bother unless
you want the truck for parts.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
351C-4V
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 12:50:26 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Changing rear main seal

Tom H writes: >> Have you or anyone else heard of or used
this tool? Does it work worth spit?

Secondly, instead of using a punch to push the seal out would a wooden
dowel work instead? It might pose less risk of damaging the rear main
journal.

Never used one - actually never heard of one, but sounds like a very good
idea.

Wooden dowel would work as well as metal, provided it is stable enough to
push/tap on without splintering.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 13:33:15 EDT
From: bobherring juno.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rear main oil seal

An article in one of the classic truck magazines showed this.
They used it to remove bearings without removing the crank.
They used a cotter pin with the "eye" end in the oil passage hole in the
crank. The legs were bent to follow the contour of the crank. The legs
were
just thick enough to catch the end surface of the bearing and turn it out
the
other side.
I used this on a 300-6 when I was in a bind and replaced just the
bearings.
Worked just like they said it would.
Bob
>In referencing my shop manual it descibes a tool that will fit in the
>oil passage of the rear main journal. You then rotat the crank and
>this tool is supposed to push the rope seal out. It is simply a flat
>piece of metal with a tail on it to fit into the oil passage.
>Have you or anyone else heard of or used this tool?
>Does it work worth spit?
>Regards,
>Tom H.

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:46:14 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C

Thanks for your message at 08:46 AM 7/27/98 -0700, Dan Lee. Your message was:
>
>If that's a 351C-4V and the heads are OK, then it's worth every penny
>of $300.00.
>The 351C-4V is a great Muscle Car Engine, not the best for a truck.
>Unless you are interested in building a Street Rod. I have one in my
>'53 F100 with a C6. I would love to put one in a '53 Coupe. It's a
>great alternative to a C*. If it's a 2V Cleveland, don't bother unless
>you want the truck for parts.
>

And why is that? The 2V Cleveland is a much more "streetable" engine than
the 4V. I've had two 2V 351 Cs, one in a car, the other in my '62 truck,
and would love to have another one...
1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1970 Marquis 429
1973 Mustang 302 (tired)
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
!962 Unibody short box (shell)traded to Levi--
It's gonna be a convertible!
1990 Aerostar
1981 Rabbit Convertible (How did that get in here?)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:37:15 -0700
From: "Douglas W. Hack"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front end shake

You have not mentioned at what speeds you notice the front end shake.
The "rolling" motion you described reminded me of something I
experienced recently. I borrowed Daddy's Caddy to pick up my brother at
the airport (Truck scattered all over the barn at the moment.) I was
surprised at the high-speed vibration and wondered how he could have let
the wheel balance get so bad - decided it must have thrown a weight.
But, as I was idling across the airport parking lot there was a very
noticeable rocking motion. I checked the tires really closely and by
running my hand over the tires all the way around found a huge bulge
under the tread on one tire. Some sort of ply or belt separation I
guess. I don't know if this is your problem or not, but it sure makes a
vehicle rock and roll.

Doug Hack
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 13:55:55 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 410 balance

William ballinger writes: >>Will my 390 stick flywheel work? Or will I
have to get another one?
I've always read that the 410 uses a special balancer and flywheel(from a
428).If I have to spend $300 for a flywheel I'd probably better stick with
mine and save for a rebuild.

Take the Auto flywheel off the 410 and get you a 360/390 standard shift
flywheel and take the two of them to your local machine/speed shop that
does balancing and tell them to balance the Std flywheel to the Auto
flywheel. It will work. The 410/428 has a large weight on it in one area.
I've seen them "cast" in the standard shift type and welded on the
Automatic type. I do not know if all of them are this way or not, but they
are externally balanced whereas all other FE's are internally balanced and
my suggestion above works. I've done it with absolutely no vibration
afterward.

Good luck.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:15:28 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Aux Transmission

Just for the record:

I've been looking for this auxillary transmission for about a year now, and
I finally got it. This Guy called me last week and said he had a Spicer
5831 Aux, that I had told him to call me if he ever found one. I drove
about 220 miles over in Mississippi to see it Friday afternoon, and Guess
what !!! I brought it home with me. I haven't had time to disassemble it
yet, but it is guaranteed to be complete and not broken. 3 gears.
Underdrive (cheap and dirty check says it is approx 1.75:1), direct and .8
OD. Darn thing weighs a ton, though. Thought I was going to bust a
Hemroid lifting it out of my truck. I plan to install this in my '77
F-350 4X4 181"wb motor home chassis between the main tranny and the tcase.
I ought to have enough gears, don't you think. I plan to run somewhere in
the neighborhood of 3.5 rear end.
This should get 9-10 MPG and still pull anything I want to hook to.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:15:16 -0700
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dana 70 or 10.25" Ford

I would like to know the difference in ring gear strength between a Dana
70 and a Ford 10.25". I am looking for a ratio in the 3.5 range. Also,
I know they are like hen's teeth, but what models might I look under for
a reverse cut Dana 60 front in this same ratio?

Birken
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:59:17 -0700
From: "Douglas W. Hack"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Electric lines to garage - for working on old Ford Trucks

There was a question about supplying power to the garage, wether to feed
off the house service or get a separate service. The answer to this
question needs to take several things into consideration:
How big is the current service to the house?
How much of that capacity is already being utilized?
How long is the electric wire feed to the garage going to be?
How much equipment do you want to use in the garage?

In my case I have a nice big 200 amp service to the house. Much more
than would realistically be needed normally for domestic use, except
that ours is an all-electric house, including baseboard heat. NO GAS!.
If we used the electric heat in the Winter, trying to run a decent
garage shop off this service would be a no-no. In fact we heat
exclusively with wood (20 acre wood lot - why not?) so the juice is
available.

The problem I have is that my shop is in the barn - which is 300 feet
from the house. The previous owners put in an underground line of three
conductors of #4 guage copper wire which must have cost many hundred$.
Number four seems really huge - until you do the math. I have a 60 amp
breaker in the auxilary box that feeds this line, because that is the
max that can safely be drawn over that distance through #4 without
overheating the conductors. The 60 amps seems like it ought to be
enough for my needs but the lights dim too much whenever I turn on a
substantial motor. With lighting, compressor, welding, electric fence
charger, grinders, woodshop equipment, fans, radiant heaters etc. I
really think that a separate service right at the barn would be a better
solution, particularly if my tax man says that it can be considered a
farm expense. The starting voltage drop on some of the motors is very
marginal.

These might be considerations for your application. - Doug Hack
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:28:57 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

Gary writes:

>There is a special generator load center which you can install in your house
>with a plug to the outside for the generator which contains all the
circuits you
>normally run off the generator and which has a main which disconnects the
>generator and other circuits from the house system with one lever but I don't
>have this and don't think I will. What I do is turn off the main at the house
>which protects any linemen who are working on the lines outside my house.
>Then I turn off all circuits I don't want to provide power to with the
>generator.

Back in a previous life I did installation and maintenance on standby
generator systems. The NEC requires a mechanically interlocked transfer
switch that ensures that the generator circuit can never become connected
to the utility line. Circuit breakers CAN and occasionally DO fail in
such a way that one or more poles of the breaker refuse to disconnect when
the breaker is shut off. I got myself zapped real good one time when I had
shut off a 440v 3 phase breaker to service some equipment. One pole of the
breaker didn't open, and I found out the hard way about that type of failure...
(moral of that story is *always* double check with a voltmeter before You
stick Your hands in the equipment)
Even if You never forget to turn off the main breaker before starting the
generator, You are putting the linemen at risk because failed circuit
breakers do happen...
We used to get generator safety bullitens every month and at least once
a year there was a story about some poor lineman who got electrocuted
because someone did an incorrect generator installation and accidently
fed power back in to the grid.
Please consider installing an interlocked transfer switch to Your system!

Sorry there's no FTE content, but I think this falls under the catagory
of tool safety...

Steve
Homepage: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:33:38 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C

Date sent: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:46:14 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C

> >great alternative to a C*. If it's a 2V Cleveland, don't bother unless
> >you want the truck for parts. >
>
> And why is that? The 2V Cleveland is a much more "streetable" engine
> than the 4V. I've had two 2V 351 Cs, one in a car, the other in my '62

But........if you're going ot put a 351 in something and it's going ot require
some monkeying because it's not a stock motor then the 351W would be,
hands down, the best choice of all available today, much better than any
cleveland for a truck application, much cheaper to get parts for and much
more versatility in the after market for building.........unless you actually want
the 4V version for it's muscle potential but then you better be prepared to
basically treat it like a Mustang, not a truck :-)

It's like if you already have this engine in the vehicle then another one which
will bolt right in is the best choice but if you have to make a bunch of
changes to facilitate a "different" engine why stay with something with no
"practical" potential? So I take out a 6 and want something to replace it, do I
stick in a 351M or a 351W or a 460 or, god forbid, an FE?? Well, I would
have no problem with the choice but if you use simple logic and leave
nostalgia out of it the 351W is still the best choice for most purposes with a
460 a close second if you need the most power for the least money.

OTOH, if you get a good deal on a 2v, 351C and don't have to rebuild it to
put it in then it may well be your best choice. I can put my own engines in
so I don't mind putting in a used one but not all on this list have that
capability and have to pay someone to do all the work in which case the
most easily obtained parts would determine the choice IMHO unless you
have lots of money to throw around. If you can do all the work yourself you
can afford to be as nostalgic or crazy as you like :-) I put 3 different engines
in my van for instance and didn't rebuild any of them to start with.

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 LIncoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:21:21 -0700
From: "Douglas W. Hack"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Really useful lightstand for working on old Ford Trucks

I have a really useful light stand that I bought at an auction. It was
shop-built by some mechanic who used his brain and skills to solve the
problems we all have encountered with getting light where it is needed.

This stand has one of those cantilever/spring arm desk lamps (with
funnel-shaped reflector) mounted 40" high on a pipe mast welded to a
caster base from an old office chair. The wiring runs inside the pipe
and he thoughtfully welded a duplex box on the side of the pipe to plug
a trouble light into. He even provided a couple of "L" shaped brackets
to wind the long cords onto. This is the greatest combination for
working under the hood of an old Ford Truck I've ever seen. It's been
getting a lot of use in my garage lately.

Seems like a similar idea might solve the oil-drain problem for the guy
with the lift in his garage. (I'm jealous.) A large metal bowl at the
top, fastened to one of those round pipe brackets with four flat-head
machine screws, a pipe upright of suitable length welded to a old office
chair base. Towards the bottom put a plugged "T" or "Y" connector with
short hose to collect the fluid in your desired container. Slighly less
portable, but also cleaner would be to mount the upright directly onto a
container base using pipe fittings. Could maybe use a cut-down and
rewelded old water heater tank.

Doug Hack
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 15:18:24 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351M died, 460 sources/balancing

Sleddog wrote:
>
> too bad about that M dying. but your post brings up some questions:
> why not rebuild M motor, maybe to 400?
>

It's an option. I can get an allready reground 400 crank for 100$.
Usable rods and pistons come with crank. I was hoping for a 460 that I
did not need to rebuild. I'm not that experienced when it comes to motor
building. I have done it, but I would not say I'm great at it.

> are you going to rebuild the 460 you put in?

Not planning on it. Keep in mind, I only put 5000 miles on this truck in
7 years. Even a 150K motor won't probably see 160K for ten years.

> the 69 460 is better. better compresion. compression can be dropped by
> using lower compression pistons.

I only use and will want to continue to use the cheapest no-name brand
gas I can find. High compression is not a priority. I am happy with 351M
at 160 HP or so. I will be elated with anything ove 200 HP :-).

plus, if it has the power steering pump
> on the crankshaft (no belt) the swap is easier/cleaner, but where to get
> spare parts??? i have one of these engines, but i do not know what to do
> if the pump ever goes bad.

Thats why I'm leary on 69, besdies possible too much compression.

> parts from the 70's, and the 80's don't interchange, but not sure of the
> specifics. the can motor may be the best bet though, as it should have the
> exhaust manifolds and oil pan/pickup/dipstick that you will need.
>

I'm really worried about that flywheel. Gary says balancing changed in
79 to external, which means I need a 80 up man trans flywheel. This
could mean I need a new clutch, as the old one will not be seated to the
used/reground flywheel. New clutch would be 280$ for the one I currently
have.

Also seems I could need a radiator as mine is marginal with 351M.
recent thread seems like 280-350$ is the going rate for BB rad.
It seems this could add up to a lot of money for something I don't
really need. Seems like I'm looking at a min of grand no matter what I
do.

Any thoughts on slapping a cam in my motor? I was thinking of dropping
pan and see how many parts I can find. Maybe the distr/cam teeth just
fell in the pan?? Motor still cranks well enough to move bronc and 5000
lbs of boat to the side of road without actually running :-).

Thanks for the input



OX

PS Is there anything like the archives for the classifieds. I saw a guy
with a completely built 400 out of 79 Bronc in the 79-down classified
several months ago who lived in Howell NJ. If anyone knows him, drop me
a line
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 15:30:40 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Electric lines to garage - for working on old Ford Trucks

Date sent: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 10:59:17 -0700
From: "Douglas W. Hack"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Electric lines to garage - for working on old Ford Trucks

> There was a question about supplying power to the garage, wether to feed
> off the house service or get a separate service. The answer to this
> question needs to take several things into consideration: How big is the
> current service to the house? How much of that capacity is already being
> utilized? How long is the electric wire feed to the garage going to be?
> How much equipment do you want to use in the garage?

All very good points but one more I'd like to throw in is where is the source
of the power? They may force you to get a second meter if they have to run
the wires if the power pole is between the house and barn and closer to the
barn rather than upgrade your present system but in my case I have the
option. Usually they will charge you industrial rate on the second meter so
you have to figure that into the formula BUT........

If the cost of industrial electricity is too high for it to make sense then a one
time expense of a few hundred extra dollars is very well worth the trouble,
think about it.....how long will you have to pay the higher price for electricity
before your original expense will be fully compensated and then some?

For inadequate service to the house the two tap meter socket is the answer
because the upgrade to the service is absorbed by the power company and
all you have to do is pay for installing the meter socket and running the wiring.

300' of #4 would choke on any substantial LRA motor like a compressor so
lights would certainly dim. I have a 200 amp system and adequate wire for
the applications from my meter to all my load centers but my power drops
very noticeably when the compressor starts because my service is the same
wires used on the old 60 amp fuse box I took out 25 years ago and I'm
trying to get them to upgrade it. I checked with a multimeter from my load
center all the way out to the compressor and got ZERO drop between the
two points so my drop is occuring in my service not my wiring. When you
throw 218 amps on any residential circuit there will be "some" dip for a
second or so but mine is rediculous.

I don't have the charts in front of me but for 300' and 100 amps or so with
minimal losses I would venture you would have to go to #0 copper, even #2
would be choking at that distance I should think. Now that's a substantial
investment but even if it cost $700 for the wire, how long would it take to
acrue that much in additional electrical charges at the higher rate? I would
venture to guess in my case the cost would be amortized within a few years
and then I'm running free wire to the barn. Just something to think about.

Here's what I'm doing: Get a 400 amp service to the meter and exchage the
meter socket for a two tap version. Then you add an external disconnect
box adjacent to the meter socket to connect your out buildings. Both taps
are capable of 400 amps so it doesn't matter how you distribute the load at
the socket and for now all I will do is redistribute the load at the socket and
won't be changing the load centers right away. Just this one change, all of
which is absorbed by the electic company will improve my voltage drop at
the compressor by about 400% (probably more) because the wires I have
now are only 60 amp. I"ll still have 200 amps to the house and that service
won't change at all but now I will have 200 amps available to the out
buildings to tap as I see fit. When the compressor comes on with this
system I don't expect to see much if any flicker in the house and when the
furnace and refrigerator kick on at the same time I don't expect to see ANY
flicker at all. Right now with the compressor drawing 30 amps at steady
state the lights in the house are dimmer than normal. This should not happen
on a 200 amp service, period!

An electrician told me amperage depends on ability of the wire to shed heat
so above ground wires can be smaller. So theoretically I should be able to
run a million amps through a phone wire if I pack it in dry ice right? Give me
a break........:-)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 LIncoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

- -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 15:59:29 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

From: sdelanty sonic.net
Date sent: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:28:57 -0700
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Garage Electricity

> accidently fed power back in to the grid. Please consider installing an....

---

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.