61-79-list-digest Monday, June 15 1998 Volume 02 : Number 342



=======================================================================
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 - D2VE Heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage
Re: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage
Re: FTE 61-79 -
FTE 61-79 - fuel guage
Re: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79- 400 to 460 conversion
FTE 61-79 - High Preformance Chip
Re: FTE 61-79 - High Preformance Chip
RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads
FTE 61-79 - Question on Fe's
Re: FTE 61-79 - "64 F100 (I think).
FTE 61-79 - looking for an article
FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79 fuel gauge
FTE 61-79 - Brakes locked
RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - Brakes locked
Re: FTE 61-79 - Question on FE Dampers
FTE 61-79 - for MC
FTE 61-79 - O'haul kit NP-205
FTE 61-79 - ???? Speed
FTE 61-79 - More 2150 carb talk
FTE 61-79 - Re:fuel gauge
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re:fuel gauge
FTE 61-79 - Gage adjustment
Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC
FTE 61-79 - Endura!
Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC
FTE 61-79 - removing decals
Re: FTE 61-79 - removing decals
FTE 61-79 - Smog test time: Ignition Voltage
FTE 61-79 - Yellow top coil
Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC
Re: FTE 61-79 - Smog test time: Ignition Voltage
Re: FTE 61-79 - Yellow top coil
RE: FTE 61-79 - Rear End
FTE 61-79 - H*lp! New to the list

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:17:23 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads

> From: Sleddog
> Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads
> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:57:27 -0400

> turbo 429! wild!

I wonder, since it's already a pretty torquey engine, if it will have
lag like the 2300 turbos in cougars etc.?? The lag in my cougar was
very frustrating to me and it hunted at cruise. Since the turbo is
directly controlled by the throttle (think about this before you
respond :-)) you have to have a VERY STEADY FOOT!

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!

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 05:35:46 PDT
From: "Jay Branscome"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage

My 65 used to do the same thing while the rest of the guages were fine.
Pulled the dash panel plate off looking for a bad wire and found that
Ford had put 2 resisters there in the gauge instead of just one. Pull
one off that looked bad and havent had a problem since. The resister was
located cented of the backside of the dash panel.

>From: POLING4 aol.com
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:07:50 EDT
>To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage
>Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>
>Hey, Me 72 F-100 does the same thing, right after I fill it all the way
up the
>fuel gauge reads 3/4. Please send help on this situation.
>
>Thanxs for the hepl....
>
>
>POLING4 aol.com
>== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:35:49 EDT
From: GMPACHECO aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage

When I got my 72 it read 3/4 when it was really full, then about a month later
one day I filled it up again and it read full, its worked right every since...
Don't know why ?


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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 05:39:14 PDT
From: "Jay Branscome"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 -

The axle answer is correct. 65 was the first year for the twin I beam.

>From: "Dave & Debby Anderson"
>To:
>Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - "64 F100 (I think).
>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:41:37 -0700
>Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>
>Your vin would seem to fit what you know of the truck:
>
>F10 - 2 wd F100
>C - 292 2v
>D - Dallas assembly plant
>554020 - consec. unit #, assembled in 6/64
>
>I think '64 was the last year for the straight front axle and all '65's
were
>twin I beam; I'm sure someone on the list will know for sure.
>
>Dave
>
>
>== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:00:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: FTE 61-79 - fuel guage

The fuel gauge is a variable resistor. It will produce 0 resistance (ohms)
when full and about 100 ohms (based on my 66) when empty, with a
linear range in between (1/4 tank = 25 ohms, 1/2 tank = 50, 3/4 = 75...).

Your problem could be incorrecty power supply, incorrect resistances from
your sender, mal adjusted float arm (already suggested), extra resistances
in the line connecting the sender and gauge (already suggested), or
incorrectly calibrated gauge (perhaps the needle is just bent?).

I would start by checking for 12V power, then remove the sender
and measure the resistance with the float at both the stops. Then remove
the gauge wires, hookup the sender and repeat the measurement. This
will tell you if there is a problem in the line between (such as the extra
resistor). If things are good (0 ohms empty, 100 full) after that, I would
check the gauge, perhaps you could bend the needle slightly to compensate.

Remember, the gauge is just a good relative measurement. As far as I am
concerned I don't care how accurate full is, as long as I know where
empty is and can get a feel for how long I can go until I run out.

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:25:52 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79- 400 to 460 conversion

> From: A64F100 aol.com
> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 16:34:39 EDT
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79- 400 to 460 conversion

> but once again, what needs to be done to adapt the 460 motor mounts
> to the 400 mounts? Do any mounts need to be moved? Can I just buy
> the 460 mounts and bolt them to the mounts I custom made? The mounts

If you used stock engine mounts and adapted them to the frame with a
home made stanchion or bracket then the L&L mounts should work but if
you butchered the mounts there won't be any correlation so they may
not work in that case.

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!

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 06:43:10 PDT
From: "Jay Branscome"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - High Preformance Chip

Hey,
I know this is not TRUCK related but it is FORD related and I have a
FORD TRUCK so I'm going to ask anyhow. I have a friend who has a 1991
Ford Probe with a 2.2 non turbo engine who is looking for a High
Performance chip to put in it. He has gone to several sites looking and
no can or will help him. I don't have time to do a search for him so I'm
putting the question out to you folks for some assistance. Can someone
please give me a site to go to or someone to call to get some
information on this chip?. Thanks in advance.
"Keep on Ford Truckin"
Jay B. 1965 F-100 Custom Cab Long Bed

JBMAN100 Hotmail.com

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/nashville/4134
______________________________________________________
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:05:42 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - High Preformance Chip

Hey, I know this is not TRUCK related but it is FORD related and I have
a FORD TRUCK so I'm going to ask anyhow. I have a friend who has a 1991
Ford Probe with a 2.2 non turbo engine who is looking for a High
Performance chip to put in it. He has gone to several sites looking and
no can or will help him. I don't have time to do a search for him so I'm
putting the question out to you folks for some assistance. Can someone
please give me a site to go to or someone to call to get some
information on this chip?. Thanks in advance.

Try here http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.cwci.com/isup/fordspec.shtml Theses guys should have
anything you need
Chris
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:31:43 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads

i would think not, as with a big cube motor the turbo would just be along
for the ride, not actually making boost under cruise conditions. a gauge
would show vacuum at cruise. i had a small (2.2) turbo that at cruise
wouldn't boost until about 65mph, a ford probe that hit boost at closer to
100 mph cruise (and boy did that car cruise!) and a conquest was very much
like the probe (with a 2 extra cyl and a lot more tire).

in a truck with poor airodynamics, it would take more throttle to push the
vehicle, but a 429 is a torque engine by default (no substitute for cubes!)
and would move a truck with little throttle under cruise conditions. the
turbo's wouldn't even be spooling up for lazy town driving depending on the
size/shape/style etc. turbo's used. and a turbo naturally softens the
throttle's effect, sorta like an automatic does.

i always felt that if done right a twin turbo big block would be a wild
motor! right up there with 11,000rpm small blocks and 9,000rpm big blocks.

sure, most people don't need that kind of motor, but i do.

if a little is good, and more is better, then too much is almost enough!

sleddog

- ----------
From: Gary, 78 BBB[SMTP:gpeters3 ford.com]
Sent: Monday, June 15, 1998 4:17 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads

> From: Sleddog
> Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads
> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 10:57:27 -0400

> turbo 429! wild!

I wonder, since it's already a pretty torquey engine, if it will have
lag like the 2300 turbos in cougars etc.?? The lag in my cougar was
very frustrating to me and it hunted at cruise. Since the turbo is
directly controlled by the throttle (think about this before you
respond :-)) you have to have a VERY STEADY FOOT!

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!

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




== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:00:45 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Question on Fe's

The 390 is zero balanced and doesn't care which you use. That said, I'd
get the damper too. It never hurts to keep a working combination
together.

> I just purchased a 67 390 and it was hooked to a C-6 auto
> My question is do I need to switch the harmonic dampner since
> my 4 speed flywheel is heavier then the flex plate for the auto and
> the dampners look differnt from my stick motor and the auto motor


- --
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: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:14:25 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - "64 F100 (I think).

Nils Gore wrote:

> I just bought a 1964 F100. The title (a Mississippi replacement title dated
> 1996) says 1964, but the grill on the truck and the headliner inside
> correspond more to 1965 or 66. This may seem like a silly question, but is
> there a way to definitively tell the model from the truck itself?
>
> The grill could be a later replacement; the headliner looks original. I've
> searched the truck over, but can't find anything besides the VIN on the
> door plate: #F10CD554020. I suppose it's possible that this door could have
> come from off of another truck as well, although the old paint showing
> through looks the same as the remainder of the truck.
>
> Can anyone advise me somewhere else to look on the truck for date
> information?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nils

You can look for another vin on the passenger side frame rail inside the
engine compartment to compare the vin#s. With a truck that late in the
production run and so close to the next model year some of the parts might
have been for the 65. Some of the bigger features would be if the truck has a
solid front axle or the TTB coil sping set up. Does the cab have a step just
inside the doors? Are the rear cab mounts inside the frame rails or outside?
Is the engine really a 292? or do you have something else.

- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon

63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings.


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: jniolon uss.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - looking for an article


does anyone have a december 1994 issue of Custom and Classic Truck who
can make a copy of an article for me ???

john
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:31:54 -0700
From: MC
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79 fuel gauge

>Hey, Me 72 F-100 does the same thing, right after I fill it all the way
up the
>fuel gauge reads 3/4. Please send help on this situation.
>
>Thanxs for the hepl....
>
>
>POLING4 aol.com

I thought all old ford trucks were like that! I don't personally know
anybody that owns an old ford truck with an accurate fuel gauge. I
tried to fix mine once. I pulled the sending unit out and moved the
float by hand and the gauge worked acurately with the float, but when I
put it back, it still said a full tank was only 3/4. I even bent the
float rod trying to get it to read full when it was in the tank, but no
luck. I am starting to get used to it now.

Matt Cozad
1970 F100 4x4
360 or 390...not sure
Edelbrock 750
tranny....dunno, 4 speed with granny low
transfer case.....dunno that either. No hi or lo, just 2wd & 4wd

1969 F100 4x4
Almost identical setup as the 1970
Coming soon to a garage near me!

- --
Draygo
Insert something cool here....


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:43:08 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Brakes locked

George Schott writes: >> went out the next
morning everything was fine got about 5 miles down the road and the
front end started vibrating rpms went up and again brakes were locked up
any ideas? TIA for the help

I'm way behind, so if you've already got it corrected, ignore this.

HEAT!!!!!

Master Cylinder is becoming pressureized somehow. There's a small round
rod about 6" long between the master cyl and the pwr booster(if it has
power brakes) that has an adjustable end on it. One (1) round makes a lot
of difference in the pressure the master cyl is getting from the pedal.
Can you mash the pedal when this happens????? Are you sure you have the
correct fluid in it??? If all else checks out OK, then I would say a new
master cyl is in order.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:45:07 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads

> From: Sleddog
> Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - D2VE Heads
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:31:43 -0400

> conditions. a gauge would show vacuum at cruise. i had a small
> (2.2) turbo that at cruise wouldn't boost until about 65mph, a ford
> probe that hit boost at closer to 100 mph cruise (and boy did that
> car cruise!) and a conquest was very much like the probe (with a 2
> extra cyl and a lot more tire).

Don't know why or what it was doing since I didn't have a vac gauge
or boost gauge on it, just knew I couldn't comfortably hold 60 mph no
matter how I tried with that stupid car. It left a very bad taste in
my mouth where turbos are concerned. If I do ANYTHING I will get a
871 or 971 or 1071 blower............:-)

For now a stock 460 has enough poop to make me happy on the highway,
just need to make it run well and get the revs I need for passing
traffic at 100 mph when the "victim" challenges my right to pass him
that is :-) I'm a bone head and I know it but no one is going to
tell me I can't pass him and make it stick if I choose to pass after
considering my needs, the law and the safety issues which I always do
before I pass anyone. When I wind up going 100 mph it's his fault
for interfering with my legal right to pass and my fault for being
such a bone head :-) As I get older I tend to get into these
situations less often but it still happens a few times a year and
having the poop to get it done quickly only adds to my safety factor
and generally supresses his ambitions so we both win, I get on my way
and he doen't tick me off so I ram him or run him off the road :-)

BTW, did you know they now have a traffic violation on the books
called "road rage"? Saw it in the paper the other day, a ticket was
issued for "road rage".



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!

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:58:58 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Brakes locked

> From: am14 chrysler.com
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:43:08 -0400
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - Brakes locked

> George Schott writes: >> went out the next
> morning everything was fine got about 5 miles down the road and the
> front end started vibrating rpms went up and again brakes were
> locked up any ideas? TIA for the help
>
> Master Cylinder is becoming pressureized somehow. There's a small
> round rod about 6" long between the master cyl and the pwr
> booster(if it has power brakes) that has an adjustable end on it.

Didn't understand your point at first Azie but if you mean he has it
adjusted to push the pistons past the bleeder hole so it can't
release then I agree with you?

If it came on suddenly without anyone working on the brakes then it
could have loosened and done the same thing over time I suppose.

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!

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:10:58 -0700
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Question on FE Dampers

At 11:00 AM 15/06/98 -0500, you wrote:
>The 390 is zero balanced and doesn't care which you use. That said, I'd
>get the damper too. It never hurts to keep a working combination
>together.
>
>> I just purchased a 67 390 and it was hooked to a C-6 auto
>> My question is do I need to switch the harmonic dampner since
>> my 4 speed flywheel is heavier then the flex plate for the auto and
>> the dampners look differnt from my stick motor and the auto motor

The dampers are different, mainly cuz the truck one used a dual-pulley
setup. The auto damper will have a single "pulley" built into it. The
truck damper will be heavier and will have a separate dual pulley setup
bolted onto it with 3 bolts. I pulled one of the latter style off a 69
truck with 360/c6 so you shudn't have a problem using it. Yes, they are
all zero balanced. Even the 410 front pulley was zero balanced, only the
428 wasn't....

marko in vancouver
marko dsm.ca

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:15:07 -0700
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: FTE 61-79 - for MC

Hey Matt:

>Matt Cozad
>1970 F100 4x4
> 360 or 390...not sure
probably 360

> Edelbrock 750
> tranny....dunno, 4 speed with granny low
If reverse goes UP, it's a T-18 Warner
If reverse goes DOWN, its a New Process 435

> transfer case.....dunno that either. No hi or lo, just 2wd & 4wd
That's a New Process 203

>
>1969 F100 4x4
> Almost identical setup as the 1970
> Coming soon to a garage near me!
>
>--
>Draygo
>Insert something cool here....
>
>
>== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:01:36 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - O'haul kit NP-205

Colorado Jeff writes: >>Does anyone know of a good parts house that would
carry a "complete" overhaul kit for the NP-205 that includes all of the
seals, gaskets, and bearings? I'm not even sure if such a kit exists..... I
know Marko had to go to a few different dealerships to find some of these
parts...

If you can't purchase it from FOMOCO, then I'd recommend trying Wayne :

Performance Gear
Lumberton, Ms.
Ph (601) 796-2026

I found him very helpful on several of my projects. Not affilliated with
him in anyway. Just a satisfied customer.


He may even have a website.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.



== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:13:45 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ???? Speed

Dennis K Austin writes: >>One ol' guy down at the Firestone store relates
the following;

Back in the days before we had the highway system daily vehicles didn't run
70-80
or higher.

That "OLD" guy never was around Ardmore, Al if he never saw vehicles faster
than 70-80 MPH before the
Interstate system!!! I've been over 100 on dirt/gravel roads. I'm not
advocating it, nor am I
bragging about it, but I grew up here and everyone that drove - drove the
H--- out of their
vehicles.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:38:55 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - More 2150 carb talk

Yo Gang:

In the eternal pursuit of more P&E (power and economy), I have been
preparing to switch the carb on my 1980 F250 4x4. The engine is a mostly
stock 351M, w/ the original factory cast iron intake manifold and factory
exhaust manifolds.

I have been cleaning up and preparing a Motorcraft 2150 2V carburetor from
a 1982 Mustang GT (E2ZE-BAA) to replace the original Motorcraft 2V carb
(E0TE-BSA) on my truck. Meanwhile, I have been tuning up and adjusting the
engine w/ its existing carb to get a baseline performance measurement
before I switch over the carb. I want to have a good idea of exactly what
this new carb does to the truck's performance.

Last weekend, one of the last things I did to the truck in preparation for
switching over the carb was install the 5/8" phenolic spacer that came w/
the Mustang carb. I installed it right below the carb, above the 1/4"
fiberboard spacer that comes w/ the rebuild kit, which sits on top of the
EGR spacer (nearly an inch thick itself). I couldn't find carb studs long
enough (3.25") at any local parts shops, so I made my own from stainless
all-thread. Thanks to Colorado Jeff on that idea. (BTW, Gary, I agonized
over whether to use Loc-tite or anti-seize on the end screwed into the
manifold. Any thoughts?)

Anyway, I took Ol' Betsy out for a quick test drive after I got her all
buttoned back up and made sure there was enough room between the firewall
and the air cleaner housing, and bent the throttle cable bracket to adjust
to the new carb height, and un-bent the choke heat riser tube from the
manifold to get it connected (fortunately, it was S-shaped so there was
length to spare), and... Holy Moly!! Just installing that 5/8" spacer made
a significant difference in power w/ my weenie factory intake manifold and
original factory 2V carb.

Throttle response seemed better from idle all the way up, and boy does that
old M-block like to rev now! Seemed like it was much more willing to rev
up 500-800 rpm higher than before, and that's where I chickened out. (I'm
just not used to pushing this old 170K motor that hard, and I don't know
how soon I'll be able to talk SWMBO into letting me build the next one.)
The funny thing is, I didn't expect any noticeable change in performance
with this part, so I wasn't even looking for it (unlike that fervent desire
you have to feel more kick in the pants just after coughing up $150 for one
of those fancy-schmancy ignition systems or air cleaner doo-dads).

I think I remember Sleddog talking about how a carb spacer increases the
plenum volume and makes a real difference at higher revs, but I am really
pleased with the improvement I felt in the ol' seat o' the pants
dynamometer throughout the rev range.

As for the spacer part number, all I remember now is E0AZ-something, so
apparently it was designed for full-sized cars. I'd bet you could find one
under the carb on a 1980 Crown Vic, or maybe one of those down-sized LTDs
w/ a Motorcraft 2150 carb.

Dave R. (smilin' M-block devotee :-)


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:43:35 EDT
From: RDbanesjr aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:fuel gauge

Guess I'm just lucky with my truck, the fuel gauge works fine. Pretty sure
its all orig. cause everything is the same dirty pumking orange in inside.
Only prob. I have with it is the first half of tank seems to last forever
while the second half of the tank seems to only last a few miles, but I have
seen that in other vehicles I have driven.

Dug in Louisiana
'67 swb
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:02:23 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re:fuel gauge

At 02:43 PM 6/15/98 EDT, you wrote:
>Guess I'm just lucky with my truck, the fuel gauge works fine. Pretty sure
>its all orig. cause everything is the same dirty pumking orange in inside.
>Only prob. I have with it is the first half of tank seems to last forever
>while the second half of the tank seems to only last a few miles, but I have
>seen that in other vehicles I have driven.
>
>Dug in Louisiana
>'67 swb

Normally the junkyards pull sending units out of
in cab trucks because they go bad and they sell
new for $65. 5 minutes of work and they have a
$30 item thats in demain. The junkyard I've been
visiting has two 67-72 F100s with the sending
unit, if anyone is looking for one.

Ken Payne


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:25:18 -0400
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Gage adjustment

Wade Keller writes: >>If it can't be replaced, can it be adjusted. The
gage works because you can see it deflect slightly to the discharge side
when you first crank the engine, but doesn't move after that


Take it out of the cluster and "ever so gently" with your fingernail or
something like a toothpick, bend the needle until it is where you want it.
Make sure you don't get it angled inward to the face of the dial too much
so that it "drags", nor slantet too far outward. It can be done, but it is
very fragile/weak.

Azie
Aedmore, Al.


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:47:18 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC

Maybe a Dana 24?

- ----------
> From: Marko Maryniak
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - for MC
> Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 10:15 AM
>
> > transfer case.....dunno that either. No hi or lo, just 2wd & 4wd
> That's a New Process 203
>

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:52:26 -0700
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Endura!

Hey group,

My axles and suspension parts have been blasted and painted with Endura,
finally.

This paint is phenomenal. It's quite thick coming out of the gun, but
covers really well and melts into itself really well (you put the second
coat on when the first one is still wet). With all the thickness it's a
bit tricky to keep it fron running, but an experienced painter shud not
have much problem.

The paint takes 24 hours just to get decently hard, and 30 days before it's
ready for sun and water. Endura semi-gloss black is EXACTLY right for
frames/axles. I found a pretty close smoke-silver for my "cast iron gray"
parts.

I am very happy with this paint. It builds tremendously and does not run
off sharp edges. I would recommend it to anybody doing a restoration of
their truck.


marko in vancouver
marko dsm.ca

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:53:37 -0700
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC

At 12:47 PM 15/06/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Maybe a Dana 24?

Ow! Ya got me!


marko in vancouver
marko dsm.ca

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:03:11 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: FTE 61-79 - removing decals

i couldn't find any of that spray mentioned by another list member, but i
starting removing the stickers (comp cams, taylor wires, etc) off of the
aluminum panels and weight box, by using very warm white vinegar soaked rag
held against the decal for a minute or two.

the edge peeled up nicely, and once a full edge was up, the whole thing
came off nicely. the residual glue left over cam off with solvent.

i thought this might be helpful to anyone else who may need to remove
stickers.

sleddog

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:25:20 -0700
From: Charles Morley
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - removing decals

Sleddog wrote:
>
> i couldn't find any of that spray mentioned by another list member, but i
> starting removing the stickers (comp cams, taylor wires, etc) off of the
> aluminum panels and weight box, by using very warm white vinegar soaked rag
> held against the decal for a minute or two.
>
Those of us that run race cars generally use a hair dryer/heat gun. But
I *will* remember the white vinegar trick.

Charles
Phelan Ca
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:00:09 -0700
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Smog test time: Ignition Voltage

Well, it's that time of year again. I've come under the scrutiny of the
smog nazis here in CA. Went back and forth to the inspection station 3
times before it would pass. It finally did though.
The mechanic said that cylinders 3 and 5 were running weak and were
making my hydrocarbon emmissions too high. He showed me a Snap-on volt
meter that clamps to the ignition wire with an inductive pickup to read
the spark voltage in the high tension wires. Cylinders 3 and 5 showed
about 3000 volts less than the rest of them. 3 and 5 were at 7Kv and
the rest were running around 10 Kv if I remember correctly. He said it
could be the rings, valves or even the plug gap.
This got me to thinking. If I could get one of those meters I could
play around with the gap and see if that fixes the problem.
Anyone know of a source or the price for these meters? I think some
shops use an ocilloscope to measure the same thing. Secondly can anyone
explain what this test is all about? It seems that higher voltage is
better, why? What makes a bad cylinder lose voltage?

TIA
Tom H.
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:06:07 -0700
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Yellow top coil

Just got my free Auto Krafters Inc catalog. This looks like a really good
source!! One thing that they list is the yellow top ignition coil. I've
seen this referred to in other locations and wondered what it was. Well,
what is it? Is it a factory high output coil? If so what is its voltage
output?
Thanks
Tom H.
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:49:27 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - for MC

Marko Maryniak wrote:

> Hey Matt:
>
>
>
> > transfer case.....dunno that either. No hi or lo, just 2wd & 4wd
> That's a New Process 203

Ok Guys lets review out T-caseology.

the Spicer 24 is a gear drive unit with a cast iron case. This case has
4 positions 2 Hi, 4Hi, N, and 4 Lo.

The NP 205 was the Spicer 24 replacement. Once again a gear drive unit
with a cast iron case, 2 Hi, 4Hi, N, and 4Lo.

The 203 came along as a full time transfer case. Once again a cast iron
case but has a chain driven. In this unit we have 4Hi, 4Hi lock( the
center differential in the transfer case is fully locked to get 50/50
power distribution front to rear) N, 4Lo and 4Lo lock.

With the early Bronco Ford went witht the Dana 20 transfer case. This is
a smaller unit with shift positions similar to the 205 but the low range
gearing was a bit lower ( 2.68 or something arround there). The Dana 20
is smaller in size than the 205.

Ford figured that the F100 crowd wouldn't be carrying heavy loads in 4
wheel drive and didn't really need the extra low range gearing. So in
walks in the Dana 21. This unit basicly only engages the front axle.
2Hi, N, and 4Hi. There is no option of low gears in this unit.


- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon

63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings.


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:41:14 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Smog test time: Ignition Voltage


>The mechanic said that cylinders 3 and 5 were running weak and were
>making my hydrocarbon emmissions too high. He showed me a Snap-on volt
>meter that clamps to the ignition wire with an inductive pickup to read
>the spark voltage in the high tension wires. Cylinders 3 and 5 showed
>about 3000 volts less than the rest of them. 3 and 5 were at 7Kv and
>the rest were running around 10 Kv if I remember correctly. He said it
>could be the rings, valves or even the plug gap.
>This got me to thinking. If I could get one of those meters I could
>play around with the gap and see if that fixes the problem.
>Anyone know of a source or the price for these meters? I think some
>shops use an ocilloscope to measure the same thing. Secondly can anyone
>explain what this test is all about? It seems that higher voltage is
>better, why? What makes a bad cylinder lose voltage?

Low firing voltages *may* indicate low cylinder compression.
When the points open, the magnetic field in the coil collapses and the
voltage across the plug increases until it gets high enough to jump
the plug gap. Once an arc is started across the plug gap, the gases become
ionized and it takes a much lower voltage to maintain the arc. You can see
it on a scope as a rapid increase in voltage to a high peak, then a sudden
decrease in voltage which is then maintained until the coils energy is
exhausted, then it drops back to zero.
The amount of voltage it takes to jump the gap is dependent on a bunch of
things, including the size of the gap, temperature, and pressure of the gases
in the cylinder.
If the cylinder pressure is low it will take less voltage to fire the
plug than if the pressure is high. A low plug voltage reading on one or
more cylinders could be caused by low compression, small plug gap,
dirty plugs, or bad plug wires...

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

Opportunity may knock only once, but temptation
leans on the doorbell.

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:41:16 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Yellow top coil

>Just got my free Auto Krafters Inc catalog. This looks like a really good
>source!! One thing that they list is the yellow top ignition coil. I've
>seen this referred to in other locations and wondered what it was. Well,
>what is it? Is it a factory high output coil? If so what is its voltage
>output?

The Yellow top coil is what Ford used for lots of years. It's a black coil
body with a mustard yellow top. There's nothing special about it from a
performance aspect, altho they are good quality long lasting coils.
The thing that makes them special is that they look/are origional stuff
so they look correct if You're restoring to stock condition.


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

Opportunity may knock only once, but temptation
leans on the doorbell.

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:37:35 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Rear End

Forwarded for: "Bear"

So from what I understand limited slip is a "one wheel wonder". What do I
need so that when I take off I get both tires turn and I can leave two black
marks instead of one ("a two wheel wonder")? :)

Yep,
If it's a Ford, it's limited slip. If it's GM, its posi. They
both do the same thing, just named different. Just like harmonic
balancer and vibration dampener.

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html....


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.