61-79-list-digest Saturday, August 1 1998 Volume 02 : Number 391



=======================================================================
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 - '63 292 Engine Color
Re: FTE 61-79 - Front springs
FTE 61-79 - oil pan off/cam recommendations
Re: FTE 61-79 - web address, contributions \ tune up
Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp
Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals
Re: FTE 61-79 - oil pan off/cam recommendations
FTE 61-79 - old style tire sizes vs tire dia
FTE 61-79 - Door and fender
FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader
Re: FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader
FTE 61-79 - RE:Crank Journals
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE:Crank Journals
[none]
FTE 61-79 - Knuckles and Gears
FTE 61-79 - RE:Deacon's Post
FTE 61-79 - Website Help
FTE 61-79 - Driveline length
FTE 61-79 - platinum plugs
FTE 61-79 - Swap questions...
FTE 61-79 - Re:Garage Power
FTE 61-79 - Front Discs
FTE 61-79 - '70 F100 wiring problem
FTE 61-79 - FE/FT ID
FTE 61-79 - CARB CHANGEOVER 2V to 4V
FTE 61-79 - ELECTRIC CHOKE QUESTIONS
Re: FTE 61-79 - Front Discs
Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp
Re: FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader
Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals
Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp
Re: FTE 61-79 - Front springs
Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 05:28:24 PDT
From: "David Thornton"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - '63 292 Engine Color

I'm cleaning up my 1963 F-100 under the hood. Can anyone tell me what
the original color was for a 292 V-8? Are valve cover colors different
from the block & intake color? Thanks for any help.

Dave T.

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 08:29:17 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Front springs

From: "Kerry Walker"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front springs
Date sent: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 19:59:27 -0400

> set is under $20 I can't afford them. I have the front end off an E-350
> laying around and was thinking of using the springs from it. I think those
> springs are a bit longer than the 1/2 ton springs. Have any of you done
> anything like this?

Van springs are different from pickup springs, both in the length, spring rates
and bottom configuration or is that between 4x4 and I beam, Ok I think "I"
beams take the same shape but the lengths are definitely different. I tried to
use some once and they weren't even close as I recall.

If they are longer (and I can't remember which were now) You should start
with equal length to original or just a tad more like an inch or so. You'd be
surprised at how little springs really sag with age unless they've been really
abused. I believe the van springs will be slightly stronger so will make your
ride height a bit higher with the same length but leave them long to start just in
case :-)

BTW, put the truck on a level surface and measure the original height so you
have referance. You can just stick them in place and let the jacks down on
them long enough to get a measurement without bolting it all back up if
you're carefull but don't get your face or body parts near the springs in that
condition :-( Bottom line is don't guess at what you're accomplishing, get
some data so you know :-)


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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 09:16:24 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - oil pan off/cam recommendations

Howdy

I pulled oil pan off last night. Found a bunch of chunks from
cam/distr gears in bottom of pan. Lower end of motor seems fine. There
did seem to be a little water in bottom of pan, but it was not
antifreeze colored. There was no oil in antifreeze.

Anyway, I opened up oil pump and can find no foreign matter in it. It
is definately seized. I banged as hard as I could on open end of oil
pickup tube to try and get some crap out of it. Absolutely nothing came
out of it. I am going to replace it anyway, and get a stock oil pump.

Any recommendations for a cam for a 78, 351M with headers, duals, edlb
perf man and 625 carter. I was thinking of Crane powermax.

Adv dur dur .050 gross lift RPM range

272/284 216/228 .524/.519 2000-5000


Thanks

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 06:39:43 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - web address, contributions \ tune up

Thanks for your message at 08:00 AM 7/31/98 +0000, Gary, 78 BBB. Your
message was:
>From: "Deacon"
>Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - web address, contributions \ tune up
>Date sent: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 03:09:45 -0700
>
>> I just tuned up my '73 F100 302. I used Accel Extreme 9000 spark
>> plug wires. Their 8mm wires with a heat reflective coating that protects
>> them from the heat coming off the headers and I used a set of Autolite
>> platinums. Plus I replaced the cap and rotor. This being the most
>> expensive ignition tune up I've done to my truck, all I can say is I'm not
>> impressed.
>
>I used the SVO 9mm wires and except for the fact that nobody makes looms
>for 9mm (which really ticks me off) I really like them. I immediately got
>better starts and smoother idle but my wires were old and original as I
recall
>so that was to be expected. Haven't tried platinum yet, maybe soon on the
>bronco. Don't know that they run any better but they're supposed to resist
>erosion so last longer with no loss in performance. That's my understanding
>anyway.


Did the wires, did the plugs plus the gold contact dist. cap. I think it
helped. I know the inside of the cap was sure purdy.
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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:06:07 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp

Date sent: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 22:21:54 -0700
From: Tim Sherva
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp

> I'm looking at a 4sp top loader a guy has for sale
> cast iron case
> coarse spline input shaft ( badly in need of front bearing )
> my question is, If I looking for a 4sp is this
> the real deal or is this really a dog in disguise

You guys talking about the predecessor to the T-5 or the T-18 and Np435?
Sounds like you might be talking about the hot rod, car 4 speed of the 60's?

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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:12:32 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals

Date sent: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:50:04 -0700
From: Blaine Strong
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals

> Standard procedure is to dress the wheel .0005" to .001" from size,
> regardless of how much was ground off.

I grind for a living, what exactly are you saying? I've never run a crank
grinder and I know they have some automatic truing setup to maintain size on
some of them but we generally take measurements as we go and do it in
steps, the last few passes being very light for a good finish, and to avoid
going under size etc.. The only crank grinder I have looked at appeard to
strictly plunge grind with no traverse so condition of the wheel including
width and corner radiuses is extremely important in that case since finish,
flatness, width and radius relationships are built into the wheel.

Can you elaborate?

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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:24:28 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - oil pan off/cam recommendations

From: luxjo thecore.com
Date sent: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 09:16:24 -0400
Subject: FTE 61-79 - oil pan off/cam recommendations

> Any recommendations for a cam for a 78, 351M with headers, duals, edlb
> perf man and 625 carter. I was thinking of Crane powermax.
>
> Adv dur dur .050 gross lift RPM range
>
> 272/284 216/228 .524/.519 2000-5000

Those numbers look real similar to the RV cam I have in the 460. Works
very well up to about 80 mph which apparently is about 2700 rpm. I'm
reasonabley sure there are other factors since it used to be good to about 90
before I put the headers on which would be 3035. I'm thinking that the
duration on mine isn't that high though but I don't have the specs anymore so
can't say for sure.

Ooops! Just remembered that's in second gear so rpm is slightly higher than
what I said. Somebody have the second gear ratio of the wide ratio C-6
handy? I can figure out the rpm with that value :-)


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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:43:03 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - old style tire sizes vs tire dia

Hi all

I just found out that 2 weeks ago new lift laws were written into the
administrative code covering lifted trucks and tire sizes in NJ. The
rules read you can have 6 inches bigger (dia) than the largest stock
tire that came on your truck. The original factory brochure from a 78
Bronco says the tires were either an L78-15B or optional 7.00 X 15D.
Anyone know what this tire size equates to in diameter?

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 11:16:27 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Door and fender

I found a door and fender in a local bone yard for $140, they pull them
off. Now all I need is the money from the insurance company, the paint,
etc., and several weekends. Life is good.


- -John

jmlagron tenet.edu
1979 F150 Custom 351M C6, bashed in left side
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!!!!!!


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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:24:24 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader

tim writes: >>I'm looking at a 4sp top loader a guy has for sale
cast iron case coarse spline input shaft ( badly in need of front bearing )
my question is, If I looking for a 4sp is this
the real deal or is this really a dog in disguise

The FOMOCO top loader is as tough as they come. It held up to the 427.
Need I say more.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 09:37:10 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader

Thanks for your message at 12:24 PM 7/31/98 -0400, am14 chrysler.com. Your
message was:
>tim writes: >>I'm looking at a 4sp top loader a guy has for sale
>cast iron case coarse spline input shaft ( badly in need of front bearing )
>my question is, If I looking for a 4sp is this
>the real deal or is this really a dog in disguise
>
>The FOMOCO top loader is as tough as they come. It held up to the 427.
>Need I say more.
>
Isn't anyone going to ask, "How much should you pay for 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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:23:50 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE:Crank Journals

> > Man, I wouldn't put a crank in that was more than 0.010/0.010.
> > >
> > > Does anyone feel that there would be a problem with a newly-ground
> > crankshaft
> > > that is 0.040" under (main) and 0.020" under (rod)?...
>
> Strength wise no but if the radiuses aren't right and the width of the journal
> wasn't maintained it could cause premature bearing failure. When you install
> it check side clearances very carefully where the bearing touches the radius in
> the journals. If the radius is too large or allowed to creep inward the bearing
> will interfere with it. There should be a slight amount of side play in all the
> bearings on rods and mains without touching the radius. I don't know the
> spec off hand but there is a spec on this which grinders are supposed to use.
>
> The other factor is that with that much grinding the operator has to dress the
> wheels more often so the posibility of non-cylindrical journals is increased
> with that much grind, either out of parallel or non-straight surfaces like a
> hump in the middle etc.

The fillet radius is the most important issue for strength, and the side
clearance must be maintained. Gary is correct here, that if the proper
radius and clearance is maintained the strength won't be compromised.
Ford iron cranks are plenty strong in every way, and can be ground more
than about any other and still retain their integrity.
As Sleddog points out, Ford cranks are commonly offset ground to 1/4"
longer stroke. That's 1/8" off of one side of the crank, nuff said.

The only thing that I can think of, and it's part speculation, is the
instability that may be caused by the use of thicker bearing shells.
They would hold more heat and kinetic energy rather than passing it
through to the main supports of the block, or the end caps on the rods.
They would be more prone to cause trouble by curling up if exposed to
detonation, even though they're thicker, there's more distance between
the hard crank and the hard main support or rod cap. When you pound out
the middle of the bearing the thicker one will curl inward and spin
quicker than a thin one that pasees most of the impact and heat through
to the hard surface.

If the engine isn't going to be worked hard (exposed to detonation) a
ground crank shouldn't hurt anything.
- --
Come on over to my Back Porch
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ldd.net/scribers/ballingr
Ballinger
ballingr ldd.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:37:29 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE:Crank Journals

Date sent: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:23:50 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE:Crank Journals

> the hard main support or rod cap. When you pound out the middle of the
> bearing the thicker one will curl inward and spin quicker than a thin one
> that pasees most of the impact and heat through to the hard surface.

Aren't most stroked engines run hard? Wouldn't they have the same
problems? What would be really cool would be to get the SVO block with
the 2.75 mains (OTOH, maybe the 3" mains would be stronger and thus
better?) and after market rods or other OEM rods with the right bore
diameter to use standard bearings if in fact these things happen to be
available for the application. I guess that's what Hot Rod magazine is all
about, finding the right combinations.

Wouln't it be cool if someone wrote a book on all the possible combinations
like this?

Greed is the Creed of the Breed
who did away with the Steed...

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

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

Date: 31 Jul 1998 12:42:02 -0500
From: "Betz, Pat"
Subject: [none]

I have a 1974 Ford 250 camper special. I want to make a dually out of it.
I understand that a 1 ton rear end will not work because it is 8 inches
narrow than a "dually" rear end. Is this true, and if so are the parts
interchangeable between a dually and a 1 ton. I am talking about hubs,
brakes etc. Any help is appreciated.

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:46:12 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Knuckles and Gears

> What is "recirculating ball steering"....
>
> I have the 76 F-250 4x4 HD (external locking hubs) stuff on my F-100 and it
> has the dual-piston disc brakes.....
>
> I was surprised to see that someone had a 75' axle with closed knuckles, if
> I'm understanding the term correctly. Isn't closed knuckles the type where if
> you look at it, the axle U-joint is all "enclosed" with the metal "ball"....If
> this is correct, then I know as early as 74, the F-100 4x4's had open
> knuckles.....
>
> Colorado Jeff

Recirculating ball steering gears were used on the '65 up 2wd, and the
4X's at varying years. I think the F100's got it in '73 and the F250's
in '77. Very similar and probably actually were Saginaw steering gears,
that everything uses today. All Ford trucks before '65 used the
Gemmer-Ross worm and roller gear. It can be distinguished by the output
shaft going through to the outside of the frame, with a pitman arm that
points down and pivots front to rear. It's mounted to the rear of the
front wheels. It wears out sooner, due to the cruder relationship of
the gears involved, and is more prone to sudden failure due to tooth
breakage. It also requires that any power assist be the linkage type.

On the knuckles, I think that the F100's and F150's had open knuckles
from '73 and the F250's got them in '77 when the chassis was lowered. I
could be wrong about this and would appreciate being corrected if I am.
- --
Come on over to my Back Porch
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ldd.net/scribers/ballingr
Ballinger
ballingr ldd.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:05:36 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE:Deacon's Post

>
> Any way I can help Bro, just let me know. I've been learning how to
> drive a 4000 gal. KW water truck. It's hard work, long hours and I'm
> away from home a lot but it's good money. Staying in motels sucks so I'm
> going to start taking my laptop with me. This way in the evenings I'll
> have something better to do than sit in a coffee shop. :) I wanted to
> work with computers but I can't sit behind a desk very long. Like the
> song says

The KW makes for a nice office, does it have the 10-speed? They shift
really nice and have about the tightest cab of any truck we run. ( 35,
mostly Binders and Freightliners but we have two KW's ) I sometimes want
to get out of my office (I book and dispatch runs, and track statistics)
and start driving. Getting past the CDL test is really tough here. I
guess I'll just keep doing a little hostling to remember how to shift.

- --
Come on over to my Back Porch
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ldd.net/scribers/ballingr
Ballinger
ballingr ldd.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:17:21 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Website Help

> >Ken is the invioce going to be all we need to send the money? Who gets
> to
> >help all us neophytes with our web page? :-) Gosh, here I am an old
> man
> >and learning yet a new trick :-)

I'd be glad to help anyway I can, with help from Ken and Deacon I built
my site, and got myself hooked on publishing. Once you see something
you wrote yourself in a text editor show up as a webpage with graphics
and animations, you really get to liking it. If you have any questions,
ask away, and I'll do my best to get an answer. If you go to my site
and click on the HTML link and go the Beginners Guide to HTML link,
you'll find a lot of info right there, and the NCSA has a lot more where
that came from.
- --
Come on over to my Back Porch
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ldd.net/scribers/ballingr
Ballinger
ballingr ldd.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:59:16 -0700
From: "Douglas W. Hack"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Driveline length

If you happen to have a two-wheel drive '78 F250 Supercab with 6.5 foot
bed, T18, and Dana 61, available, (or something pretty similar) could
you please measure the length of the driveshaft for me? I'm swapping a
T18 in and a C6 out and will either need to have mine remade, or
(hopefully) get lucky at pick and pull. Since driveshafts are often
thrown in the bed (or the cab) I would like to know what length I'm
looking for. If I can't find one, I will need the length to have one
made.

Please measure from center of U-joint bearing to the center of the
carrier bearing front section and rear section. (Or if you know a better
way?) Also measure the amount of visible slip shaft showing in the
center.

I think the rear section I have is the right length, but the front is
way too short. Is there a problem mixing used parts on the slip
splines? How does one inspect/evaluate the slip splines and carrier
bearing for excessive wear? (I can't afford to just replace
everything.) All of the U-joints on both trucks showed wear (from their
previous owners, I'm sure.) so I'm starting fresh. Repeat after me: "I
will lubricate my truck on schedule from now on."
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:45:47 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - platinum plugs

I put platinum plugs in the Towncar and the son's Ch %y the last time I
changed each. Both have run well over 20,000 miles and there has been no
deterioration in performance, but I haven't pulled one out to examine it.
When the weather gets cooler.... maybe November. I used Autolite (of
course) in the Towncar and Champion (I think) in the MC. The truck is due
sometime next year and it too will get platinum.

25 days in a row 100+, 48 this year, no relief in sight.

Like the guy said, "If I owned Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent
out Texas!!!!"


- -John

jmlagron tenet.edu
1979 F150 Custom 351M C6, bashed in left side
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!!!!!!


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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:46:27 -0500
From: Bill Tucker
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Swap questions...

Any HELP?

I've got an 85' F150 with 302 and AOD. Of course, with only 150k mi,
it's just getting broke in...(yeah, right)

What I'd like to do is SWAP in a 70' model 302 I have built and hook it
to the AOD.

Seems most CARS have throttle controlled AOD's, but I don't see that
here... The difference in the balance weights of the two motors should
be overcome if I use original flywheel (C4) and balancer from 70'
motor... Have heard some talk of different number of block to
bellhousing bolts, but I think that's only EARLY 289's...My 70' 302 has
been fitted with DuraSpark, so I won't need late computer distributor...
85' does not have serpentine belt, so accessories should be easy...

What am I missing here? Has someone gone through this before and what
problems have you encountered?

All help will be appreciated...

Thanks, Bill

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 16:57:11 -0700
From: tom
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:Garage Power

Gary Wrote:










As one of them electric utility types, I need to say a few things here.
First, opening a plain old magnetic main breaker IS NOT adequate protection for a lineman.
My company requires a break before make transfer switch or a VISIBLE DISCONNECT to make
connections between a generator and a house that is served from the grid.
In some places this is the law. Please refer to the NEC before building this electrical system.
Secondly, if something is done intentionally that does not meet code and someone gets hurt
the homeowner is in DEEP DOO DOO. Make sure that $1,000,000 liability rider on your homeowners
policy is payed up! :-(

Tom
Reno,NV

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 18:03:54 -0700
From: "J.Scott Harkema"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front Discs

One of Ford's "better ideas"was to equip F-250 4x4s with two
different drivetrains.If you wanted a automatic you got a full
time married transfer case and a open knukle 44 front axle W/discs.
If you wanted a 4 speed you got a part time divorced case and a
closed knukle 44 w/drum brakes(Must have been the same "genius"
that designed the P/S system that came up with the idea).I know
that 75&76 were this way but unsure what other years.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 18:13:00 -0700
From: Ed
Subject: FTE 61-79 - '70 F100 wiring problem

Hi,
I have a 1970 F100 (302). Over the past couple of months I have been
having sporadic difficulty starting the vehicle. During this course my
instrument panel has gone out. Over the past week the truck will just not
start at all.
What I've determined is that the wiring from the ignition switch (a bundle
of four wires) to the condenser, oil pressure sending unit, etc. is fried.
The wiring seems to be resistor type wiring (from what the local parts
store has conveyed) and needs to be replaced.
Of course the F dealer does not carry this wiring bundle. Does anyone
know of a source for this wiring? I've also thought about installing a
ballast unit and replacing the resistor-type wiring with 14 gauge copper.
Has anyone done this? Thanks.

- ----------------------
Ed and Wendie Davila
Sacramento, CA

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 20:28:17 -0500
From: lordjanusz juno.com (Paul M Radecki)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE/FT ID

The engine in my '73 F100 is not original. It is supposed to be a
360, and definately (well, 99% certain) has FE manifolds and heads.
HOWEVER, in "How to Rebuild Big Block Ford Engines" by Steve Christ it
says that FE blocks have "352" cast into them while FT blocks have a
mirror-image "105". Guess what is cast into mine... yep, "105". Is it
an FT? If yes, is this good, bad, or indifferent? The only other
casting number (or ID of any kind) I could find on this extremely crusty
engine was "D4TE" (no suffix) which I believe indicates reinforcement
webs but applies to both FE and FT blocks of various displacements. I
expect I'll have to take it apart to be sure; it needs a rebuild anyway
but I'd sure like to know what I'm getting into... lordjanusz

'94 F150 (300ci) '73 F100 (???) '97 Saturn (SWMBO's)

_____________________________________________________________________
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: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 22:49:25 -0400
From: "Jerry"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - CARB CHANGEOVER 2V to 4V

Hey Guys -
I just acquired a 4V carb & manifold, almost by accident while in a
machine shop snooping around yesterday.
The carb is a Fred Jones (everybody knows him, right ?)
Holley D5TE-EA. I bought a OH kit for it and the chart for adjustments in
the kit says this carb only came on 74-76
390 FE's in Ford Trucks.
Question: since I have a 77 351W, what might I have to do to this carb to
make it usable and safe and properly jetted and etc., etc.
Jerry
1969 F350 Dually reefer 351W AOD PS PB PW
1970 F100 (ret)

Jerry
1969 F350 Dually reefer 351W AOD PS PB PW
1970 F100 (ret)

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 22:59:47 -0400
From: "Jerry"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ELECTRIC CHOKE QUESTIONS

Hi Guys -
Having just acquired an electric choke coil & cover, I realized I don't
know anything about them as far as wiring them up.
This one has two terminals, 1 male & 1 female marked
*S* and *A*. There is a 3rd contact with no terminal marked
with *T*.
Several schematics I have only show 1 wire going to power this
thing.....so what is the other one for and why is a non-terminal marked
with a *T* ? ?? ? ? Carb it was on was for 74-76 Ford F-series.
Also, does it stop drawing current after a spell ? ? ? Not sure how these
things work.

Jerry
1969 F350 Dually reefer 351W AOD PS PB PW
1970 F100 (ret)

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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 22:10:57 -0500
From: Jim Henjum
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Front Discs

Actually, my '75 F250 4x4 had an auto and divorced full-time, along with
front drums and closed knuckles- until I redid it this year. All F250
4x4 up to mid-77 has closed knuckles and drums (unless Dana 60's were
different, never seen them). Late '77 and up were married transfer
cases, open knuckles, discs, and better power steering.

Ross Henjum

'75 F250 4x4 460 NP435 NP205

J.Scott Harkema wrote:

> One of Ford's "better ideas"was to equip F-250 4x4s with two
> different drivetrains.If you wanted a automatic you got a full
> time married transfer case and a open knukle 44 front axle W/discs.
> If you wanted a 4 speed you got a part time divorced case and a
> closed knukle 44 w/drum brakes(Must have been the same "genius"
> that designed the P/S system that came up with the idea).I know
> that 75&76 were this way but unsure what other years.
> == 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: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 00:15:32 EDT
From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp

all the toploader 4 speeds were cast iron,and if it was in a van it is
probably a granny fo speed or a three speed w/overdrive which looks very
similar to a tl fo speed.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 00:23:34 EDT
From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4sp toploader

you can find em as cheap as 200.00 (if you're lucky) to 600.00 for a basic
tranny only, and as high as 1500.00 for a big input 428 cj mustang trans. best
bet is to shop around, the one for 1500.00 will only sell to someone restoring
a mustang
and don't want to spend the time to look around.
mine can be bought for 750.00 with the shifter,sb bell housing and
flywheel
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 21:32:03 -0700
From: Blaine Strong
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals

Gary, 78 BBB wrote:
>
> Date sent: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:50:04 -0700
> From: Blaine Strong
> Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - crank journals
>
> > Standard procedure is to dress the wheel .0005" to .001" from size,
> > regardless of how much was ground off.
>
> I grind for a living, what exactly are you saying? I've never run a crank
> grinder and I know they have some automatic truing setup to maintain size on
> some of them but we generally take measurements as we go and do it in
> steps, the last few passes being very light for a good finish, and to avoid
> going under size etc.. The only crank grinder I have looked at appeard to
> strictly plunge grind with no traverse so condition of the wheel including
> width and corner radiuses is extremely important in that case since finish,
> flatness, width and radius relationships are built into the wheel.
>
> Can you elaborate?
>
> 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


Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't profess to know how
to run a crank grinder. All I've run is a straight O.D. grinder. I run
mostly prototype work and have never used an Arnold or Marposs gage
while grinding, although I have seen them used. My contention is that
the wheel needs to have a fresh dress for the last .001 or so otherwise
you MAY have trouble with taper and or out-of-round.

Maybe I'm being too anal, its just that sometimes I have to hold a
tolerance of +-.00005", yes thats fifty millionths of an inch.

Hope this clarifies the situation

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

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

Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 00:37:00 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Top Loader 4sp

My tranny supposedly came out of a Cyclone, don't understand it either, it
seems everyone has a different answer for these trannies.. the shop said it
was a 4 speed toploader possibly out of a van. The speed shop said it was a
3+1 Toploader.. but I don't have a granny, I did notice that between 2nd and
3rd there is quite a difference, seems like in order to use it correctly I
have to be in a race mode.. then to change to 4th I have to be going at least
70 and it'll be taching about 2k.. rear end is 3.25

Mike in Seattle
I guess this is a good problem, my mileage went up quite a bit since it was
changed from 3 on the tree.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 08:54:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: metalheaddude webtv.net (Paul Drozdowski)
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Front springs

- --WebTV-Mail-1063796477-384
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

a friend of mine has a 86 E-250 an one rear spring broke an i had one
from a 79 F-250 4x4 (rear)an it was the same









- --WebTV-Mail-1063796477-384
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Received: from mailsorter-102.bryant.webtv.net (mailsorter-102.iap.bryant.webtv.net
[207.79.35.92]) by postoffice-142.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.5/po.gso.24Feb98)
with ESMTP id FAA25979; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 05:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [192.41.63.203]) by
mailsorter-102.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.5/ms.graham.14Aug97) with
ESMTP id FAA16589; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 05:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id IAA27956; Fri,
31 Jul 1998 08:29:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfw1.ford.com (mailfw1.ford.com [136.1.1.26]) by
ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id IAA27936; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 08:29:44
-0400 (EDT)
Received: by mailfw1.ford.com id IAA25600 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for
61-79-list ford-trucks.com); Fri, 31 Jul 1998 08:29:43 -0400
Message-Id:
Received: by mailfw1.ford.com (Internal Mail Agent-1); Fri, 31 Jul 1998
08:29:43 -0400
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 08:29:17 +0000
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Front springs
In-Reply-To:
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v3.01b)
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com

From: "Kerry Walker"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front springs
Date sent: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 19:59:27 -0400

> set is under $20 I can't afford them. I have the front end off an E-350
> laying around and was thinking of using the springs from it. I think those
> springs are a bit longer than the 1/2 ton springs. Have any of you done
> anything like this?

Van springs are different from pickup springs, both in the length, spring rates
and bottom configuration or is that between 4x4 and I beam, Ok I think "I"
beams take the same shape but the lengths are definitely different. I tried to
use some once and they weren't even close as I recall.

If they are longer (and I can't remember which were now) You should start
with equal length to original or just a tad more like an inch or so. You'd be
surprised at how little springs really sag with age unless they've been really
abused. I believe the van springs will be slightly stronger so will make your
ride height a bit higher with the same length but leave them long to start just in
case :-)

BTW, put the truck on a level surface and measure the original height so you
have referance. You can just stick them in place and let the jacks down on
them long enough to get a measurement without bolting it all back up if
you're carefull but don't get your face or body parts near the springs in that
condition :-( Bottom line is don't guess at what you're accomplishing, get
some data so you know :-)


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!....


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.