61-79-list-digest Friday, September 4 1998 Volume 02 : Number 432



=======================================================================
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 - Silly electric/charging problem solved!
FTE 61-79 - Re: train track
FTE 61-79 - Re: '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes
FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
Re: FTE 61-79 - Body Side Molding (NOS only) needed
Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Clarification on the spammer
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: train track
Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
Re: FTE 61-79 - Diesel swap
RE: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
FTE 61-79 - Kudos for Ken et al. on website
Re: FTE 61-79 - 1978 question
FTE 61-79 - Power steering and Power brakes
FTE 61-79 - door molding
FTE 61-79 - 460 and pricing
FTE 61-79 - Oil drips
FTE 61-79 - Re: Jacobs Omni-Pak
FTE 61-79 - Steering Input Shaft Seal
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil drips
FTE 61-79 - 67-72 parts for sale
FTE 61-79 - New Heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Jacobs Omni-Pak
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question
Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak
Re: FTE 61-79 - New Heads
RE: FTE 61-79 - '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 08:16:04 -0400
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Silly electric/charging problem solved!

Well, thanks to tips for the list (expecially Steve and Andrew) and the
1980 Ford Body/Electric service manual (which has a nice testing procedure
breakdown on which wires go where and what they do), I was able to
determine the A lead at the regulator was not providing battery voltage to
the regulator. Basically, it just wasn't doing anything. Now I just have
to determine where in the harness it goes and see what happened to it.

Thanks group,
John


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 07:54:49 -0500
From: "J Elliott"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: train track

John wrote (down the path in exchanges):

>Sorry, Ken, I guess I wasn't very clear. I mean REAL train track as in
>Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe etc. That little six inch piece weighs about 15
>lbs or so.

>Lay the track over on its side, lay the yoke across it and it supports both
>the main shaft and the end of the yoke where the u-joint resides. Viola! no
>broken yokes. I also use a socket to drive the cups in and out.

I have been watching this thread in nodding agreement. I have a piece of RR
track my father gave me years ago that I use for many things. Anvil, weight
for holding or clamping (for woodwork too), BIG dolly, etc. Mine is about
14-15 inches long, so weighs quite a bit. It has been cut like below:
____________________________________________________
|
|
|____________________________________________________ |
\ __
|
| (__)

___________ _/_______________________________________|_

'---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ----------'
Having the web removed at the end makes it possible to slip things over the
top, or reposition a three-dimensional piece different ways, and the hole is
useful for bending things. It has been a great tool, especially since it is
portable and indestructible.

Jim



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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 08:23:16 -0500
From: "J Elliott"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes

Mike wrote:

Are the [power] steering boxes
from the '73-'79 trucks compatible? Would I have to use the newer
truck's steering column, or is it possible to use my current column
and shorten/lengthen it? I have the same question about the power
brake booster (I have drums all around). I haven't found any
'67-'72 truck in the yards around here, but one yard I pick through
has 5 '73-'79s in it, most in fair shape. Just wondering if anyone
had tried this and if it works.

Mike, I am in the process of doing a disc-brake conversion using the booster
from a '75 going onto a '69 now, and hope to have it done this coming
weekend. I will be happy to tell you, and the rest of the FTE, how it works
out. Re Doug's post about the clevis pin and link, that is my only real
question about the conversion. Actually, they will all bolt up, but there is
a difference in length, so I have to see what the final pedal position is
going to be to tell if I have to modify it.
As far as the power-steering, I picked up the ps box from the '75. I
have ps on the '69, and they are exactly the same. I gather tho that some of
the '73-'79 were NOT the same style. I will send the casting numbers to you
if you wish. If you want, e-mail me and I can tell you what I have scoped
out on these.

Jim E.



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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 09:19:33 -0400
From: William King
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

Hi all,
First, please hold your flames. This is an open admission that I did
something really stupid to my poor truck. Here goes...
To make a long story short, I was putting along on
the interstate on a 240 mile trip and the engine started to make
noise. Mind you, this wasn't the tightest 360 around. It produced
more blowby than was acceptable (enough to blow oil out thru the
breathers). Anyway, it sounded like an exhaust leak (not a leak that sounds
loud and nasty, but the quieter type that ticks and goes *pffffttt*.
Know what I mean?). I *knew* it couldn't be the valves or lifters
b/c I had 22 psi oil pressure and was only pulling 2,000 rpm (plus, the
engine was running nice and cool). Anyway, I've been waiting for the
exhaust to start leaking anyway, so it was expected. Well, after 10 miles
I decided
to make sure it wasn't my oil pressure. I threw the truck into neutral,
and lo and behold, the oil pressure dropped to ZERO! I pulled over and
added oil (I only had 4 qts w/ me, which I added. That seemed to get it up
to the level). Needless to say, that was about the end of the old 360
[somewhere Dave R, Sleddog, and the 300 guys all smirk in glee, while the
FE lovers try
to convince themselves that a 360 isn't a 'real' FE].

My question is, howcome my gauge (a mechanical oil pressure gague)
showed 22 psi when the engine was spinning, but dropped to zero at idle?
I'm frankly distraught that my 'trusty' gauge didn't warn me that I was
dangerously low on oil. I had always assumed that, when running on one
quart of oil, the pump would cativate so much that the gauge would read
zero. Is it possible that the oil pump pushed enough air (??) to make
the gauge read 22 psi? Or was the false reading due to excessive
blowby (which pressurized the crank case and the oil pressure line enough
to make the gauge record 22 psi)? Have any of you ever seen/heard of this
(that you're willing to admit)? If it isn't blowby, how can others avoid
this calamity in the future? Any thoughts?
Ohio Bill
1968 Torino GT (429 4V 4speed)
1968 F100 (360 4V 4speed)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 08:44:12 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

>First, please hold your flames. This is an open admission that I did
>something really stupid to my poor truck. Here goes...
>To make a long story short, I was putting along on
>the interstate on a 240 mile trip and the engine started to make
>noise. Mind you, this wasn't the tightest 360 around. It produced
>more blowby than was acceptable (enough to blow oil out thru the
>breathers).

Wow, one of my friends just called me last night saying they were having
blow-by on a Jeep that was bad enough to come out the breathers, I'd never
heard of it and since the mechanic was talking to his mom I thought they
were pullin her leg. Now I know...


>My question is, howcome my gauge (a mechanical oil pressure gague)
>showed 22 psi when the engine was spinning, but dropped to zero at idle?
>I'm frankly distraught that my 'trusty' gauge didn't warn me that I was
>dangerously low on oil. I had always assumed that, when running on one
>quart of oil, the pump would cativate so much that the gauge would read
>zero. Is it possible that the oil pump pushed enough air (??) to make
>the gauge read 22 psi? Or was the false reading due to excessive
>blowby (which pressurized the crank case and the oil pressure line enough
>to make the gauge record 22 psi)? Have any of you ever seen/heard of this
>(that you're willing to admit)? If it isn't blowby, how can others avoid
>this calamity in the future? Any thoughts?

I don't know if anyone remembers, but I posted a while back where one of my
friends went to Chicago and back (6hr round trip) with a 300 and when he
got back he only had a quart of oil. That engine never died or showed any
signs of it, I imagine he kept his oil pressure up even though it was only
a quart.

My 360 I have now is running near 0 when I sit at stoplights (electric
factory gauge....I know I know....) but as soon as it spins up there's
pressure again.

I guess I dont' know how to explain it either now that I think about it, I
always figured that more revs meant you were moving more oil, but that's
based on the time factor not on the actual pump displacement since they're
positive displacement pumps, not centrifugal ... hmmmm ....I guess I'd
still have to say that its because the motor is turning faster the pump is
better able to keep up with the needs of the engine, then at a stop the oil
is running out faster than the pump can put it in ... *shrug* maybe
someone else has something better....
Just my 2cents

Bill

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html
for truck make it ..../Trucks/truck.html
for car make it ..../Cars/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 10:00:04 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Body Side Molding (NOS only) needed

At 10:01 PM 9/2/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Ok guys I need some help. Since my truck was damaged due to a careless
>person I must now replace the drivers door and the side molding. I can
>find a door pretty easy however, the molding is something else. I
>purchased the complete body side molding at the Supernats for $450.00.
>I now only need the door molding. If anyone knows were I can find it
>please let me know. I would like to be able to get it within the next
>few weeks. If anyone has seen pieces at shows you been to try to
>remember the name of the vendor so I can research and find it.
>Thanks for any assistance anyone can provide. If needed email me at
>garrya bellsouth.net
>Garry Bowling 1967 F100 Longbed (Christine) Damaged goods.

Gary,

Don't have any info on this, I was just wondering if you
can make it to the truck show on the 12th at the Atlanta
Motor Speedway. Just like to chat.

Ken Payne


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 10:08:05 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak

From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Date sent: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 00:20:32 EDT
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak

> Just read a article regarding the Omni Pak, anybody out there use it ?
> Does it increase the power as much as they say ? Just looking for a ez
> way to gain more power before the replacement of my engine. Article was in

You can gain top end power that wasn't there before with electronic ignition
kits but is won't help the bottom end at all. Spark is spark is spark is spark.
Once the fire is lit the spark isn't needed but you have to get it there in the
first place. Most of these kits will give you a hotter spark at high rpms which
is where the power gain comes from. If you are only running below 4k rpm
chances are you won't notice a bit of difference between the various types
unless you currently have single point ignition in which case you will gain lean
burn capability due to spark "duration" which electronic systems can deliver
which will make it idle better and run smoother with a lean burn engine.

Stock electronic systems start to puke at about 4k rpm so after market
systems may improve on that area of performnace as well. Be carefull how
you interpret advertised data, HP is a function of speed and if you can't get
the rpm due to poor spark you will see an "over all" improvement in "max"
HP due to achieving more rpm and thus more HP. Look for specs that
improve the torque curve and peak numbers at lower rpm's and you will have
a winner IMHO :-)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's "The Ex-Black Hole"
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's "The Black Hole"
78 LIncoln Continental, 460, C-6, 19.5' long! "The Future.." :-)
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 10:14:13 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Clarification on the spammer

There seems to be some misunderstanding about the spammer.
Several list members have emailed me and basically said
they're afraid of posting because of this. It appears that
somehow they thought that the spammer got email addresses
from the mailing lists.

****** This is completely incorrect!!! ******

The subscriber lists are on a protected directory on our
server. That cannot be retrieved by anyone but myself and
Keith Srb (performance list admin).

The spammer took email addresses from the pictorial of the
web site, not the lists. If you don't have a truck on the
pictorial, you didn't get the spam.

Measures are being put in place this weekend to make it
alot harder for spammers to retrieve addresses from the
web pictorials.

With the exception of my admin email addresses, all email
addresses on the web site will have *spamremove* inserted
in them. This will make yourname address.com appear as
yourname*spamremove* address.com. Addresses formated like
this will bounce back to the spammer unless they remove
this spam blocker from every single address.

To date, we have had no cases of automated harvesting from
the lists. The reason is because its too slow and not
cost effective for the spammers.

The lists are my babies, and the performance list is Keiths.
I assure you that both of us would never make it easy for
spammers.

Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 10:59:14 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: train track

From: "J Elliott"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: train track
Date sent: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 07:54:49 -0500

> -- ----------' Having the web removed at the end makes it possible to slip
> things over the top, or reposition a three-dimensional piece different
> ways, and the hole is useful for bending things. It has been a great tool,
> especially since it is portable and indestructible.

I have a real anvil, about 150# with several holes in it and a pointed "horn"
and it sits on a real elm stump just like the old days and.........boy is it
handy....but.......boy does it take up a lot of room! :-)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's "The Ex-Black Hole"
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's "The Black Hole"
78 LIncoln Continental, 460, C-6, 19.5' long! "The Future.." :-)
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:09:08 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

No thoughts as to why your gauge read that way, but the old 360 in my dads
truck did the same thing. The blowby would empty the engine of oil, And we
would just wait for the lifters to make noise and throw in 4 quarts. I know,
I know, "why didn't I just keep checkin the oil?" Well, the blowby was so bad
that it would push the stick out about an inch, then proceed to blow oil all
over the place. So we put the dipstick on the fenderwell (gotta love the old
fords for under the hood shelving) and plugged the dipstick tube. Well,
during a wheeling trip, we lost the dipstick and just started to depend on
lifter noise as an acceptable indicator. And we used it quite often. # times
by myself, I don't know how many times it happened to dad. That motor is
still good, and awaiting rebuild. The heads and other bits and pieces were
used in the build of his 410.

So don't worry about running low. That old 360 will run forever.

JUMPINFORD AOL.com
73 F-250 RangerXLT Camper Special
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:15:01 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

Date sent: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 08:44:12 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

> >My question is, howcome my gauge (a mechanical oil pressure gague)
> >showed 22 psi when the engine was spinning, but dropped to zero at idle?
> > I'm frankly distraught that my 'trusty' gauge didn't warn me that I was
> >dangerously low on oil.

The two are not related, pressure is a matter of engine tightness and if
enough oil is available to the pickup tube it will keep the pressure up. When
the pump cavitates it takes a few seconds for the pressure to drop in the
gauge because of the size of the tubing and other factors so if the pump
cavitates every 10 seconds for 1/2 sec or some such thing as that you won't
see a drop because as soon as it has oil again it brings the gallery pressure
back up before the gauge pressure can drop significantly.

It has well been said that when you see the gauge go down while driving the
damage is already done. This is the reason. Once the oil level is so low that
you see a pressure change the engine has been cavitating the bearings for
quite some time on an intermittant basis. I blew a 351W due to blow by and
a broken oil sender extension. DO NOT USE THE ALUMINUM
EXTENDERS! They crack and leak very suddenly without warning and it
takes about 30 seconds at speed to completely drain the crank case :-(

BTW, you can hear bearing cavitation when the metal actually touches. If
you ever hear it you will know it and know what it was, it's like instinct or
something. I'd never, ever heard it before but when it happened I knew
instantly it was an oil problem before the light even came on. It's what I
describe as a "Sad" sound :-(

Here's a tip on the FE's, when you hear the lifters clatter, add two quarts of
oil......:-) Had two of 'em and both did the same thing when down 2 qts.

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's "The Ex-Black Hole"
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's "The Black Hole"
78 LIncoln Continental, 460, C-6, 19.5' long! "The Future.." :-)
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:38:47 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Diesel swap

From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Diesel swap
Date sent: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:19:27 -0700

> engineered swaps that I have seen in years! The diesel at least on the
> outside was the same as the one that Dodge uses in its Ram trucks. They
> had to modify the stock motor mounts but they used them (towers). There
> were no mods. required to the frame except that they had to notch the
> right front corner to clear the AC compressor, without AC no notch. The
> Trans was the NV-4500 and it was connected to the stock T/Case. There was

Too bad he couldn't use a ford diesel :-( The NV04500 is a hard one
though, since ford doen't have a comprarable tranny. Wish they would start
using them instead of the ZF's :-(

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's "The Ex-Black Hole"
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's "The Black Hole"
78 LIncoln Continental, 460, C-6, 19.5' long! "The Future.." :-)
9000#, in ground vehicle lift, Woooo Hoooo!

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:02:41 -0500
From: "Bob Brothers"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

>JUMPINFORD aol.com
> So don't worry about running low. That old 360 will run forever.Okay,

I've gotta throw in my 360 experiences too.

Bought a '70 F100 (360/C6) in '85 with 125K on it. Figured
I'd have to pull the engine soon afterwards for a rebuild.

Started using oil after passing 200K, wasn't burning, just leaking
out the rear. Changed rear main and noticed how much play all
the rods had. Okay won't be long before the rebuild. All this time
oil pressure was barely reading (never reading anything at idle)!

Well after the 300K mark my wife (the primary driver) began complaining
about having to add 3 quarts of oil before taking the truck out
each time. (I drove it to work a couple of times ~65mi one way, and
had to stop halfway to add another 3 quarts). Okay, I'll pull the
engine and rebuild it.

I knew cyl # 7 had bad compression (
the 130 range. Pulled the head and found the cause of the #7
compression problem; the intake valve looked sorta "hear shaped"
with a hole extending from the outside edge nearly to the shaft.
I'm surprised it had ANY compression.

Well unfortunately, the next thing I saw were the numbers 060
stamped on top of the pistons.

Anybody, know what I should do with a 60 over block that, other
than the bore appears to be in fine shape?

BTW: I bought a "360" from a wrecking yard that came with a 390
cam and a Holley model 4160 carb. Heard it run, so I'm going to
stick it in the truck for now. Don't know how long IT will last.

Regards
Bob Brothers

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 12:04:29 -0400
From: "Harvey, Blaine"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Kudos for Ken et al. on website

Website update looks tres cool and the new contributions are great.
Represents a lot of work.

-- Now if Ken can just pursuade Azie to scribble something.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 09:46:43 -0700 (MST)
From: Andrew Ford -- Speaking for Myself
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 1978 question

On Sep 2, 2:15, FTE 61-79 - 1978 question Josh Duggan wrote:
> I need to know if the 1978 ford trucks had a smog pump and catalytics. I am
> looking in to buying a 73-78 f-250. any suggestions would be appreciated.
> I want it 4 wheel drive and loaded. I know the 1979 has a smog pump and I
> am trying to avoid this right now. I have a 84 that has a smog pump, cats,
> and a computer and thats what I don't want. So any suggestions would be
> appreciated.
>

I just went through emissions 2 months ago. Starting with 78, all trucks
under 7500GVW (most 1/2 tons) got catalytic converters (CA is obviously
another story). Bessie is an F150 factory ordered with 3/4 ton suspension
to get around the catalytic cr**. I've got chrome valve covers [passenger
side had a bent plate which heated and cracked 1 head - needed new and these
were on $25] but I have the original valve cover/emissions spec hanging in
the washroom for its annual trip to emmisions testing, just in case I meet some
yahoo who thinks it should have cataly., fuel tank restrictor, etc.

[Bessie is a brown & white 78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab, 4" lift, 351M/C6 with
12.5 x 33 tires {and a little rub on the sway bars at full turn 8^(} and
4.11 rear end: she's colored like a cow and when in 4-low, moves about as
slow - but she'll go anywhere!]

- --
Andrew Ford (602)581-4499
forda agcs.com Si vis pacem, parabellum.
Above is *my* opinion, for theirs see below...
AG Communication Systems - Expand the power of your network.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.agcs.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 14:09:55 EDT
From: MUDDYFORD aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Power steering and Power brakes

Mike,
I had the same problem with my '72 F-100 w/ drums all around, I
pulled a booster from a 78 and had no trouble with it. You need to get the
mounting bracket with it. I did experience the really light pedal touch
that'll throw you on the dash if your not careful (ask my mom). I also opted
for the pedal out the 78.
Hope that'll help
Phil


1972 F-100 2wd 302/C-6
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 15:24:25 -0500
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - door molding

Garry,

Would you post a description of the molding you are looking for? If all 67s
were the same, it doesn't matter, but the 79's had at least three different
styles depending on the trim package. Also, the trim style on Henry
overlaps with several other years (but not to 67). Sorry I don't know that
much about 67 options. Also, what is your price range? I'll be glad to look
for you.

- -John

jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom 351M C6, bashed in left door, new left front fender
1988 Towncar 5.0 EFI E4OD
Macintosh G3/233 minitower (The software box said Windows95 or better, so I
bought a Mac.)
1979 MC under restoration (my son loves old cars, too!!!)

Dearborn iron rules!!!!!!


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 16:43:48 -0500
From: "JAMES MERLO"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 and pricing

Over the past several weeks, I have been locating the parts needed to put a
460 into my 62 f350. I ran across the following - does this sound like
reasonable prices?
75 460 from a pickup less than $400 (final price negotiation when I pick it
up)
bellhousing from 351M, throwout fork, bearing, pressure plate, etc.,
flywheel and T19/T18/NP435 trans $300

The yard guy says the 460 ran good before they yanked it out of a pickup.
The yard deals in large trucks and the people seems to knowledgeable - I am
dealing with 3rd generation of owners.

Does this seem like reasonable pricing numbers?

How do I tell if the transmission is OK when it is laying there?

I will be getting a flywheel from a FE for the internally balanced 460.
Does anybody know what the identifying marks for this are?

I need to do a little closer looking at the 460, but is it possible that it
still has points in 75? I had a 75 GM that had electronic. Did this stuff
wait on trucks because the emissions were less stringent? Did they put
hardened valve seats in at this time on these?

I still need an alternator mounting bracket - any ideas of different motors
that may use the same? OR is it a fabricate job?

The 62 F350 has front mounting for the 292. Has anybody used the
crossmember style mounts from TransDapt and what was their experience -
good or bad? L&L doesn't offer anything for this vintage.

I am also going to have to fabricate some type of clutch linkage to the
clutch fork. I have read how to do it in some books, but I have never done
it. Any tips? is it a good idea to start with the existing cross shaft and
modify from there or????

The 460 comes with a C6 attached - it is going to the guy who is going to
help me.


Jim






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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 18:01:26 -0500
From: Jim McCarty
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Oil drips

I just inherited my dad's '73 F100 with 390. I did my first oil change
and the drain plug is well over the center crossmember. My question to
all you experienced guys is - What is a trick I can use to keep the oil
off the crossmember?

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 19:24:58 EDT
From: BlueOval77 aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Jacobs Omni-Pak

I put one on a '90 Bronco I used ta have. I didn't notice any power or
mileage increase, but I never had a problem with it either. I think ignitions
are all pretty much the same - ie, go with yer favorite brand. Sorry not much
help, just my 2 cents. ;)

John (BlueOval77)
'91 Mustang GT
'77 F-150 Ranger 4x4
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 19:31:23 -0400
From: "Ted C. Freeman"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Steering Input Shaft Seal

My power steering gear assembly is leaking like seive. The seal around the
power steering input shaft appears to be the culprit. Has anyone changed
one of these before? Any special tools needed? Where can you get the
replacement parts? I think it is a Bendix unit, the only markings I can
find on it is a molded in "B" on the top of the unit. Any help would be
appreciated.

Thanks,

- -Ted



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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 18:31:06 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil drips

>I just inherited my dad's '73 F100 with 390. I did my first oil change
>and the drain plug is well over the center crossmember. My question to
>all you experienced guys is - What is a trick I can use to keep the oil
>off the crossmember?

On my '71, I take a piece of cardboard maybe 8" x 10" and fold a "V" in
it lengthwise. I slip the "V" between the oil pan and the crossmember
so it angles downward into my drain pan. Kind of a funnel. Works good.
I usually change my air filter when I change the oil, so I slice a piece
of cardboard out of the air filter box for the job...


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

All that I needed to know in life, I learned by
killing smart people and eating their brains.


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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 21:41:13 -0400
From: Joe & Jen DeLaurentis
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 67-72 parts for sale

I have the following for sale

1967 Speedo/gauge cluster(4 gauges) MINT $65
1967-1972 Black dash Pad.Mint no cracks or rips in speaker grille Mint
condition $125
1969 Chrome Grille(1 dent) $75 (no pitting of chrome)
Misc 67-72 parts..email me with needs
prices do not include UPS shipping

Also I have a pair of 1990 302 mustang heads(40,000 miles) complete
with rockers UPS shippable $75 pair

WANTED:
1967-72 Spare tire carrier(under truck in frame) Need all pieces
looking for rust free parts...

joe
68 4x4
68 4x2
70 4x4
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 21:46:41 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - New Heads

I picked up my heads ('65 FE) from the machine shop today. Man, I can't
wait to put them on!

They are the C4AE-6090G heads that have the squared off chambers and
bigger ports than the later ones. I reused my intake valves, but
replaced the exhausts and had hardened seats installed. The guides only
needed a little knurling, and used Fel-Pro umbrella seals. They also
have all new springs (with new dampers and pads) and keepers. He took a
little off of the decks, and left a knurled finish on them. They should
keep those gaskets in place now.

All told they cost $322.14. I was a little bit surprised, but I haven't
had a set of heads done in a while. I never begrudge a man his fair
pay, especially when I know that the job has been done right. I'm just
glad that the guides were OK.

Now, if I can squeeze out a little wrench time....... :-)
- --
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: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 23:00:53 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Jacobs Omni-Pak

Thanks, some info is better than none at all.


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 23:04:45 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes

I would also would be very interested in getting as much info as possible, I
have all the goods in the garage and may try to change over this weekend.


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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 23:07:40 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Embarrassing question

Bill:
Sorry to hear about your truck, time for a new engine !!


Mike in Seattle
Also finished my interior for now, its leather and looks great.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 23:10:07 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak

Gary:
Thanks for all the advise, sounds like you know exactly what RPM power I need.

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 20:34:47 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - New Heads

>I picked up my heads ('65 FE) from the machine shop today. Man, I can't
>wait to put them on!
>
>They are the C4AE-6090G heads that have the squared off chambers and
>bigger ports than the later ones. I reused my intake valves, but
>replaced the exhausts and had hardened seats installed. The guides only
>needed a little knurling, and used Fel-Pro umbrella seals. They also
>have all new springs (with new dampers and pads) and keepers. He took a
>little off of the decks, and left a knurled finish on them. They should
>keep those gaskets in place now.
>
>All told they cost $322.14. I was a little bit surprised, but I haven't
>had a set of heads done in a while. I never begrudge a man his fair
>pay, especially when I know that the job has been done right. I'm just
>glad that the guides were OK.

$322.14 isn't too bad if You had them done at a shop You trust.
About 3 years ago, I spent $385 to have the heads done on my FE390.
Silicone-bronze guides, hard exhaust seats, all new valves, springs,
retainers, keepers, 3-angle, clean up the head gasket and intake surfaces,
and helicoil 2 exhaust bolt holes that had munged-up threads.
I got a nice deal for $385.

$322 isn't at all out of line for the stuff You got.

Hope You find some wrenching time soon... (-:


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

All that I needed to know in life, I learned by
killing smart people and eating their brains.


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

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

Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 00:06:52 EDT
From: CATLN7 aol.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - '67-'72 Power Steering, Power Brakes

On Wed, 02 Sep 1998 12:03:46 -0400 Mike and Colleen wrote:

>Fellow Enthusiasts,
>I've been searching around for a power steering box and pump for my
>'70 F-100 2wd and haven't had much luck. Are the steering boxes
>from the '73-'79 trucks compatible? Would I have to use the newer
>truck's steering column, or is it possible to use my current column
>and shorten/lengthen it? I have the same question about the power
>brake booster (I have drums all around). I haven't found any
>'67-'72 truck in the yards around here, but one yard I pick through
>has 5 '73-'79s in it, most in fair shape. Just wondering if anyone
>had tried this and if it works.
>Thanks,
>Mike


You are converting from manual to power, right?
I used a steering box from a 77 on my 67 F100. Bolts right on.
You must use the pitman that is on the power box. The power steering
pump must be compatible with your engine (i.e. same style, can be a car pump
from similar engine family with same accessories you have)
As far as the steering column, it's probably best to stick with the 67-72
column.
Power steering column is shorter. Other members may have done this
differently.

I went from manual drums to power disks. I used a 74 booster and master
cylinder.
I did have to change the pedal support bracket. It was out of a 70 w/auto
trans.
As far as the rest of the conversion see the FTE web sites tech articles on
drum
to disk conversion.

Chris Thompson
67 F100 302/C4 finally!!!
68 Cougar DGS 302/C4
82 Merc LN7 1.6L/4sp
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 22:56:57 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Jacobs Omni Pak

>> Just read a article regarding the Omni Pak, anybody out there use it ?
>> Does it increase the power as much as they say ? Just looking for a ez
>> way to gain more power before the replacement of my engine. Article was in

>You can gain top end power that wasn't there before with electronic ignition
>kits but is won't help the bottom end at all. Spark is spark is spark is
spark.
>Once the fire is lit the spark isn't needed but you have to get it there in
the
>first place. Most of these kits will give you a hotter spark at high rpms
which
>is where the power gain comes from. If you are only running below 4k rpm
>chances are you won't notice a bit of difference between the various types
>unless you currently have single point ignition in which case you will gain
lean
>burn capability due to spark "duration" which electronic systems can deliver
>which will make it idle better and run smoother with a lean burn engine.
>
- ---

I've installed a couple "high zoot" ignition systems, including an MSD6AL
and a Crane high fire something (I done remember the model) in 2 friends
"non-Ford" cars, and a MSD6A in my '71 F100 / FE390.
It doesn't seem like any of them made any noticable difference difference
in mid-high rpm power, but all seemed to improve low RPM/light throttle
response and smoothness.
The most noticable improvements with the MSD6 on my truck was an increased
"smoothness" in light throttle low RPM cruise (30 MPH, 1200RPM top gear
thru town), improved throttle response/ less hesitation when stomping it
wide open at 1000 RPM, (especially if it's a little cold still), easier
cold starting, and easier hot starting after a good hot soak.
My buddy Scott's comment about the Crane installation on his pontiac was,
"It's much easier to start now when it's real hot and it idles better
when it's cold." He didn't think it made the pontiac any faster (ir was
always plenty fast...) it just made it smoother.
I think that on most of our street engines that the biggest benefit of
a good high energy, multi-spark ign unit is going to be at low rpm
operation when combustion chamber temps and pressures are low, mixture
turbulance in the cylinder is lazy, and when fuel atomization may be
relatively poor and the fuel/air mix is just generally much harder to
get lit. Also, the intake tract may be confused by long duration cams
at low RPM's and the mixture may not only be crappy/poorly atomized, but
may have a bunch of exhaust gas in it, making the mix that much harder
to light at low RPM.
At high RPM/WOT the fuel air mix is usually well atomized, it's under
much higher pressure and temperature and has much more turbulance, and it's
just aching for a chance to go off... it doesn't take as much spark energy
to get it going as it does at low RPM light load.
Many of the ign systems on the market are multi-spark, and at low RPM the
unit may fire 5-6 or more sparks in a few degrees of crank rotation, so
the chances of firing a cold lazy, poorly atomized mixture are greatly
improved. You get to fire several times in a row as the mixture swirls
past the sparkplug... Eliminating misfire is the big thing there.
A good high energy system also lets You run a wider spark plug gap and
exposes a bigger volume of fuel air mix to the spark than a small gap
does.

I think that a good high-energy ignition system is a must for any motor.
Almost any magnetic-pickup electronic setup is a big improvement over....

---

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.