61-79-list-digest Wednesday, October 21 1998 Volume 02 : Number 494



=======================================================================
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 - '73 Springs in a '68
FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
FTE 61-79 - MPH Calibration
RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH!
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - MPH Calibration
Re: FTE 61-79 - steering probs
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - on board air again
FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"
FTE 61-79 - Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - Valve covers
Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"
Re: FTE 61-79 - Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"
FTE 61-79 - Howdy and Tranny Questions
FTE 61-79 - 292 Water Pump R&R
FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Give us your favorite web site addresses
Re: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Give us your favorite web site addresses
Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg
FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966
FTE 61-79 - Serious Steering Problems
Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966
RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg
FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - 292 Water Pump R&R
RE: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 06:54:04 -0400
From: "The Freeman Family"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - '73 Springs in a '68

Will '73 F250 springs fit in a '68 F100? I've found a set (still on the
truck) about an hour from here. I'd like to hear what you have to say
before I travel down there to measure them.
TIA


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:04:07 -0500
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - mpg

cannandale,

460, 4.10 gears, 31 inch Swampers, 13 mpg. What's wrong with this picture.
I am sure the list will correct me, but I believe that as you increase the
tire diameter, you cause your odometer to register short and your
speedometer to register slow. This means that every time you travel a mile,
you are probably only registering about 8 tenths of a mile. When your
speedo says 70, you are probably chugging along at about 77 or78. You can
check this by driving exactly 60 on a highway with mile markers and timing
how long it takes to go one mile. At 60, it should take exactly 1 minute.
If it takes less, you are going faster than 60, etc.

OTOH, maybe you are really tweaked well.


- -John

jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!!!


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:23:48 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

>460, 4.10 gears, 31 inch Swampers, 13 mpg. What's wrong with this picture.
>I am sure the list will correct me, but I believe that as you increase the
>tire diameter, you cause your odometer to register short and your
>speedometer to register slow. This means that every time you travel a mile,
>you are probably only registering about 8 tenths of a mile. When your
>speedo says 70, you are probably chugging along at about 77 or78. You can
>check this by driving exactly 60 on a highway with mile markers and timing
>how long it takes to go one mile. At 60, it should take exactly 1 minute.
>If it takes less, you are going faster than 60, etc.
>

Even if he is off 10%, which is about what I'm off with my 31's (77-70 /
70 = .10 = 10%) then he's still getting about 12 right ? (13*.1=1.3
13-1.3 = 11.7) So I'd say he's probably tuned really well. My 360 with
who knows what gear and 31's was getting 12 ... til I put the 4V on and
started playing :)


Just my 2cents

Bill

Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Trucks/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Cars/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 06:46:19 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Thanks for your message at 08:23 AM 10/20/98 -0500, William S Hart. Your
message was:
>>460, 4.10 gears, 31 inch Swampers, 13 mpg. What's wrong with this picture.
>>I am sure the list will correct me, but I believe that as you increase the
>>tire diameter, you cause your odometer to register short and your
>>speedometer to register slow. This means that every time you travel a mile,
>>you are probably only registering about 8 tenths of a mile. When your
>>speedo says 70, you are probably chugging along at about 77 or78. You can
>>check this by driving exactly 60 on a highway with mile markers and timing
>>how long it takes to go one mile. At 60, it should take exactly 1 minute.
>>If it takes less, you are going faster than 60, etc.
>>
>
>Even if he is off 10%, which is about what I'm off with my 31's (77-70 /
>70 = .10 = 10%) then he's still getting about 12 right ? (13*.1=1.3
>13-1.3 = 11.7) So I'd say he's probably tuned really well. My 360 with
>who knows what gear and 31's was getting 12 ... til I put the 4V on and
>started playing :)

With the above logic/math, wouldn't he actually be getting better mileage
than 13. If he is registering less distance on his odometer, using the
same amount of gas and he gets 13 mpg. Correct that to the real distance,
which is more and at 10%, he is getting 14.3 mpg. Not bad!




1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:10:15 -0500
From: Dayton Boyd
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

I ran along the side of somebody that was running 60 on the interstate,
then i set my speedometer to run it right, its running the correct speed...
Also had it accidently clocked one time.. :) or should I say, :(
Anyways, thats what im getting...

cannandale
'78 %f250 4x4, 460




At 09:17 AM 10/20/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>cannandale,
>
>460, 4.10 gears, 31 inch Swampers, 13 mpg. What's wrong with this picture.
>I am sure the list will correct me, but I believe that as you increase the
>tire diameter, you cause your odometer to register short and your
>speedometer to register slow. This means that every time you travel a mile,
>you are probably only registering about 8 tenths of a mile. When your
>speedo says 70, you are probably chugging along at about 77 or78. You can
>check this by driving exactly 60 on a highway with mile markers and timing
>how long it takes to go one mile. At 60, it should take exactly 1 minute.
>If it takes less, you are going faster than 60, etc.
>
>OTOH, maybe you are really tweaked well.
>
>
>-John
>
>jlagrone ford-trucks.com
>1979 F150 Custom 351M C6 (Henry)
>http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
>Dearborn iron rules!!!!!!
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:11:43 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

>>Even if he is off 10%, which is about what I'm off with my 31's (77-70 /
>>70 = .10 = 10%) then he's still getting about 12 right ? (13*.1=1.3
>>13-1.3 = 11.7) So I'd say he's probably tuned really well. My 360 with
>>who knows what gear and 31's was getting 12 ... til I put the 4V on and
>>started playing :)
>
>With the above logic/math, wouldn't he actually be getting better mileage
>than 13. If he is registering less distance on his odometer, using the
>same amount of gas and he gets 13 mpg. Correct that to the real distance,
>which is more and at 10%, he is getting 14.3 mpg. Not bad!
>
DOH! Ya caught me. I always forget to hit the + sign in my brain on that
part, after all who gets that good of mileage ?

:)

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:41:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Oh yeah! If anyone has a simpler way to convert seconds/mile to miles/hour (any
mathheads out there?) please let us know what it is.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:34:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

What size(height) tires did the late '70s F250s come with? Didn't some (most?)
of them come with 16" wheels? Wouldn't the tire height then be close to 31"?
My '79 has 16" wheels with BFG Commercial LTs (LT235-85-R16). The pervious
owner said he liked to keep things like they were. The other day I had a wheel
off and measured it, out of curiosity, and found it to be close to 31" tall.
Now, in light of the current conversation, I'm wondering if, and how far, my
speedo might be off. I've been checking my fuel mileage and have come up with
12.2mpg with a 400 2V, C6, 4.09 gears, and it's a 4X4.
BTW, if your speedo is off you can calculate your speed by timing between mile
markers and if you have a simple calculator plugging in this formula. 5280/nn
sec. X 3600 / 5280 where nn = the number of seconds it took to go a mile. For
example, if it took you 50 seconds to go a mile your speed is 72mph. You will
have to do it several time because mile markers are not spaced exactly. At
least I thing that's right. I'm sure someone will let me know if it ain't. JMTC
Doug

- -----Original Message-----

>460, 4.10 gears, 31 inch Swampers, 13 mpg. What's wrong with this picture.
>I am sure the list will correct me, but I believe that as you increase the
>tire diameter, you cause your odometer to register short and your
>speedometer to register slow.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:15:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: FTE 61-79 - MPH Calibration

Doug_Brodie oxy.com wrote:
>markers and if you have a simple calculator plugging in this formula. 5280/nn
sec. X 3600 / 5280 where nn = the number of seconds it took to go a mile. For
example, if it took you 50 seconds to go a mile your speed is 72mph. You will
have

You dont need the two 5280's in there.

MPH = 3600 x (Number miles) / (Number seconds)

If you just do one mile, MPH = 3600 / Number seconds

To be as accurate as possible, when you do this, you should keep a constant speed for the
entire time. Don't start at 0, accelerate the entire mile, and try and use this formula.
Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:11:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH!

Hey Tom H. You still there?
Have you gotten the answer to your question?
Doug.
- -----Original Message-----
They mentioned something about heating it up with
a torch and removing the drip rails, using a torch to treat the rust (???
like I said I don't trust them). I've had the truck 3 years now since the
work and there is no sign that the rust is returning.

Question for the list. Can I remove the drip rails entirely and not have a
problem with water getting into the cab?

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:29:49 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Back when I was incollege a friend and I went home for Spring break in his
truck.It was a '68 Chevy 1/2 ton with a 400 and a 5spd...
Nice truck, but it was 2 wheel drive and this was in Alaska. We had 2
mountain ranges and 360 miles to cover and hope we don't hit any snow
storms...
He didn't have speedo and we occupied many miles trying to determine how
fast we were going by time and mile markers. He did good keeping a steady
speed...
-srw

- -----Original Message-----
From:
To:
Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 7:57 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg


>Oh yeah! If anyone has a simpler way to convert seconds/mile to miles/hour
(any
>mathheads out there?) please let us know what it is.
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:42:41 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

At 09:41 AM 10/20/98 , you wrote:
>Oh yeah! If anyone has a simpler way to convert seconds/mile to
miles/hour (any
>mathheads out there?) please let us know what it is.

Whoa, we need to clear some stuff up, this is at a constant speed, don't
accelerate through it, just hold your speed constant. Don't accelerate or
you have to figure your mass in and all kinds of nifty stuff ...

Well if you look at your original equation you've got a *5280 and a /5280
... so those equal one... to find the speed take 3600 and divide by the
number of seconds ... same result ...

3600/50 = 72

A better speed is 60 ... since that's a mile a minute ...

3600/60 = 60

Just a quick chart maybe

Sec/mile mile/hr
50 72
55 65.5
58 62
59 61
60 60
61 59
62 58
65 55.4


Hope all this helps.



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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:54:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - MPH Calibration

Yeah, well, I usually find out I'm doing things the hard way. I guess that's
what this List is for. Right? Thanks Bryan.
Doug
'79 F250 Supercab 4x4 400 C6
Midland, Texas

- -----Original Message-----
MPH = 3600 x (Number miles) / (Number seconds)

If you just do one mile, MPH = 3600 / Number seconds

To be as accurate as possible, when you do this, you should keep a constant
speed for the
entire time. Don't start at 0, accelerate the entire mile, and try and use this
formula.
Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:23:29 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - steering probs

Justin Farcas wrote:

> I have some steering probs with my truck. It's a 79 F150, and it has a 7
> inch lift on it, 3 inch body, 4 inch frame. Whenever I make a harder
> turn, I hear a clunk near the front, like something metal is slipping out
> of place. I checked teh bushings, and they seem to be fine, for all I can
> see. Any other problems that could be the cause of this, I was thinking
> that the lift had something to do with it, however I'm probably wrong.
>
> --Justin Farcas
>
> "Yes, my sig file is GONE!" --

Check your body mounts?

Another place to look (If it's a 4x4) would be the ball joints on the front
end and the wheel bearings. You are running larger tires on this truck,
right?

With all that extra weight of the tires take a look at the steering box and
bolts (Loose or cracked frame).

- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon
ICQ# 19575234

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


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:20:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Well, I guess I assumed everyone would know that I was talking in terms of
constant speed. I'm no educator. I guess that's obvious. So, I guess that if
you want to know how many seconds need to pass in order to be running say 75mph
you would divide 3600sec. by 75mph which would equal 48sec/mile. So you know if
you want to go 75, which is about all you can get by with out here, you got to
shoot for 48 secs per mile. Right?

Doug
'79 F250 Supercab 4X4 400 C6
Midland, Texas
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:34:27 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Thanks for your message at 10:42 AM 10/20/98 -0500, William S Hart. Your
message was:
>At 09:41 AM 10/20/98 , you wrote:
>>Oh yeah! If anyone has a simpler way to convert seconds/mile to
>miles/hour (any
>>mathheads out there?) please let us know what it is.
>
>Whoa, we need to clear some stuff up, this is at a constant speed, don't
>accelerate through it, just hold your speed constant. Don't accelerate or
>you have to figure your mass in and all kinds of nifty stuff ...
>
>Well if you look at your original equation you've got a *5280 and a /5280
>... so those equal one... to find the speed take 3600 and divide by the
>number of seconds ... same result ...
>

This is all very mathematical and accurate, I'm sure, but who is going to
steer and do all that other driving stuff while I'm playing with my
calculator...?

Maybe my method is too simple, but it avoids the problem of having to
maintain a steady speed (not always possible). I just watch my odometer at
the start of a mileage marker. (I try to do this over ten miles for easy
head-figuring, but it's not necessary. ) If I go ten miles, I look at the
odometer and estimate the amount of difference of the number miles the
odometer shows compared to the actual ten miles. For example, if my
odometer reads 11 miles, my reading is +1 miles, or 10%. I then estimate
that my speedometer is approximately 10% fast.

Now, I realize this isn't accurate mathematically compared to the more
elaborate system offered. It's just something you can do in your head...

This system only works if the speedometer and odometer are on the same
mechanical system. I have no idea if this would work with newer digital
systems or not, but then I don't really care, either. If it's digital,
then it's computerized and has to take care of itself.

Isn't it amazing what tomfoolery a mind can come up with on long trips?



1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:41:23 -0700
From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Dayton Boyd wrote:

> I ran along the side of somebody that was running 60 on the interstate,
> then i set my speedometer to run it right, its running the correct speed...
> Also had it accidently clocked one time.. :) or should I say, :(
> Anyways, thats what im getting...
>
> cannandale
> '78 %f250 4x4, 460

"set my speedometer"???

Does that mean tweaking the speedo or adjusting the tranny drive gear?

RE: mileage calculation.

Don't use speedometer accuracy - it can be different from the odometer.

Test the odometer by using a measured 10 mile stretch.

NOTE: highway marker miles are not always even close to the exact mile -

they're more for police/fire/rescue reference points (at least here in

Arizona 8^).

I usually try to test my odometer in several 10-20 mile stretches of

highway mile markers, then average.

78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6

- --
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 http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:47:43 -0700
From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

William S Hart wrote:

> Whoa, we need to clear some stuff up, this is at a constant speed, don't
> accelerate through it, just hold your speed constant. Don't accelerate or
> you have to figure your mass in and all kinds of nifty stuff ...
>
> Well if you look at your original equation you've got a *5280 and a /5280
> ... so those equal one... to find the speed take 3600 and divide by the
> number of seconds ... same result ...
>
> 3600/50 = 72

Also keep in mind that with one mile, you have to be exact in both the
distance
and your method of timing.

It would be more accurate to do this over 5 or 10 miles, especially if you're
relying
on highway marker signs.

IE: at 60MPH, a combined distance/timing error of 1 second equals 1 mph of
error
in a one mile stretch, only .2 mph in a 5 mile stretch.

[Note: I have odometer checked difference of as much as .05 miles from
highway marker
to highway marker .]

Regards,
78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6

- --
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 http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:53:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Dennis Pearson [dpearson ctc.edu] wrote:

>> I look at the
odometer and estimate the amount of difference of the number miles the
odometer shows compared to the actual ten miles. For example, if my
odometer reads 11 miles, my reading is +1 miles, or 10%. I then estimate
that my speedometer is approximately 10% fast.


Ohhh suuurreee, you can do that, BUUUUTTTTT....
That is assuming TIME is a uniformly distributed variable. Now, for those of you with those
monster 460's running at 750+CFM's and strokes longer than the height of the average FTE
user, there obviously are some pretty fishy time/space distortion things happeing like on those
new versions of STAR TREK.....

Actually, that is a pretty good method. When I try and do that though, I usually lose forget to
watch for the 10th mile. Road signs aren't near acurate enough so I need something that is a
little more in line with my attention span.
Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:55:09 -0700
From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Dennis Pearson wrote:

> This system only works if the speedometer and odometer are on the same
> mechanical system. I have no idea if this would work with newer digital
> systems or not, but then I don't really care, either. If it's digital,
> then it's computerized and has to take care of itself.

Even if the speedo and odo are sourced from the same gears,

they can be in disagreement. I'm not an expert, by any stretch,

but I've had two vehicles over the past 20 years which, when

checked by a speedo shop, had greater than 3% difference between

the speedo and odo.

Neither of those two vehicles were Fords, so maybe an expert

here can enlighten me, but I've just taken the cautious route

and assumed that the two can be different:

MPG : use/check odometer

MPH : use/check speedometer.

Regards,

78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6

- --
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 http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:27:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

How much adjustment is there on that drive gear?

- -----Original Message-----
"set my speedometer"???

Does that mean tweaking the speedo or adjusting the tranny drive gear?

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:21:19 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Thanks for your message at 09:55 AM 10/20/98 -0700, Andrew W. Ford -
Speaking For Myself. Your message was:
>Dennis Pearson wrote:
>
>> This system only works if the speedometer and odometer are on the same
>> mechanical system. I have no idea if this would work with newer digital
>> systems or not, but then I don't really care, either. If it's digital,
>> then it's computerized and has to take care of itself.
>
>Even if the speedo and odo are sourced from the same gears,
>
>they can be in disagreement. I'm not an expert, by any stretch,
>
>but I've had two vehicles over the past 20 years which, when
>
>checked by a speedo shop, had greater than 3% difference between
>
>the speedo and odo.

Good point. I have a Rabbit (yes, it's a car, not an animal) that has a
purely functional speedometer and odometer goes .1 and stops...Now that's
German technology at it's finest.

...or I'm going nowhere fast...
1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:29:54 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - on board air again

sdelanty sonic.net wrote:

> I highly recommend an external vent if you are going to
> use your pump a lot...

Thanks for all the compressor info. Good readin!! :-). One more
question. Exactly where did you put the external vent ?


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:35:45 -0700
From: "J.S.H."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"

A 428 would be my first choice, but they are
a little expensive.Next choice would be a 390
I'm quite happy with the Melling RV cam in my FE.
My machinist recomended it saying "A lot of aftermarket cams go flat and
are junk in my book"This is my second Melling cam and I have not had a
problem.
IMHO aftermarket intake is worth while for weight
savings alone.I have some info on EFI around here somewhere,when I find
it I'll post it.
Some one on the list installed Edelbrock heads on their FE.Sounded
like a real PIA but ther should be a performance gain.
I don't think you could make a 360 a 428 but you
can easaly make it a 390.
The first thing I would do is "interview" your local
machinists and find one who knows FEs

In the past I have tried to cut corners on a engine rebuild and the end
result was not a pretty sight.
(And it happened on the first date with my now wife)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:45:45 -0700
From: "J.S.H."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Nomex underwear

"Congratulations on your 66! Of course, it goes without saying that the
66 is the best Ford Truck made
yet. And you have the 352 engine. Certainly the most reliable and
hardworking engine of all.(And those without them make cheap shots about
the push rods bending :^)"



I have a fresh shipment of Nomex underwear just back from the cleaners
if your're interested.Some are permanently soiled from MY pushrod post
tho.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:57:23 -0500
From: Bryan Kirking
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Valve covers

Are the "powered by Ford" covers considered any more "vintage" than =
regular covers. I found a pair for $15 but they will need some =
reworking....


Bryan Kirking
Research Engineer
Department of Orthopedic Surgery
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, Texas

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:30:25 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"

Thanks for your message at 11:35 AM 10/20/98 -0700, J.S.H.. Your message was:
>A 428 would be my first choice, but they are
>a little expensive.Next choice would be a 390


What are your feelings on the 410 (390 w/428 crank)? I am still toying
with the idea of getting one that my father-in-law has...in a 66 Merc for
$500.
1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:32:17 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Nomex underwear

Thanks for your message at 11:45 AM 10/20/98 -0700, J.S.H.. Your message was:
>"Congratulations on your 66! Of course, it goes without saying that the
>66 is the best Ford Truck made
>yet. And you have the 352 engine. Certainly the most reliable and
>hardworking engine of all.(And those without them make cheap shots about
>the push rods bending :^)"
>
>
>
>I have a fresh shipment of Nomex underwear just back from the cleaners
>if your're interested.Some are permanently soiled from MY pushrod post
>tho.


This 352 sounds like it may have one weak cylinder. Maybe I should just
check the pushrods...
1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:56:00 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"

In a message dated 10/20/98 12:34:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
dpearson ctc.edu writes:

>

Go for it! My dads 75 F-250 4x4 has one. 410 block, 428 CJ crank, 360 heads
(smaller ports for torque) rv cam (degreed), 4 bbl edelbrock manifold and an
autolite 480 carb. This truck makes more torque than I have ever seen out of
a street motor. We have been breakin the mounting studs for the front hubs a
bit more than usual (broke 2 last outing). Its just incredible what it can
do. I was gonna do that with my F-250 390, but now that I have my F-350
w/460, I no longer see the need. On a side note, that 410 pulls a hell of a
lot harder than my 460, but what I lack in torque I more than make up with
RPM's. The setup hes running at seems to almost drop off entirely at about
4500 rpms.

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:23:47 -0700
From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

Doug_Brodie oxy.com wrote:

> How much adjustment is there on that drive gear?
>

>From what I'm told, they come in several different sizes (this from a tranny
shop - arguably the most
honest mechanics out there! 8^) and you guess/play until you get close, then
take to a speedometer
shop. [I went from 3.08 to 4.10 &, lacking $$$$, left it at about 10% off -
until the speedo broke 8^]


Regards,

78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6

- --
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 http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:40:59 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"

>>
>
>Go for it! My dads 75 F-250 4x4 has one. 410 block, 428 CJ crank, 360 heads
>(smaller ports for torque) rv cam (degreed), 4 bbl edelbrock manifold and an
>autolite 480 carb. This truck makes more torque than I have ever seen out of
>a street motor. We have been breakin the mounting studs for the front hubs a
>bit more than usual (broke 2 last outing). Its just incredible what it can
>do. I was gonna do that with my F-250 390, but now that I have my F-350
>w/460, I no longer see the need. On a side note, that 410 pulls a hell of a
>lot harder than my 460, but what I lack in torque I more than make up with
>RPM's. The setup hes running at seems to almost drop off entirely at about
>4500 rpms.
>
I responded to you directly about this, but I forgot to say that the reason
it dies out at higher revs could be the carb not keeping up with it ...
don't know the cfm on the 480 I guess ... unless you meant it was 480 cfm
(I doubt this), but that would definately explain the lack of revs ...


Just my 2cents

Bill

Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Trucks/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Cars/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:01:45 EDT
From: MUDDYFORD aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Howdy and Tranny Questions

Howdy to everyone on the List. I've bought a Ford 289ci that came with a
Transmission, the guy I bought it from said it was a C-4 but I took it to a
transmission shop and he said it was a 2 speed auto.
There is a number on the driver side just in front of where the driveshaft
goes,(tailshaft I think). Basic 1
C3OP-7AO4O-B
There is also a number on the pass side of the main body of the trans just
above where the dipstick goes.
C2OP-7006-D

If ya'll can help it would really be appreciated

Phil

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:58:29 -0700
From: Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 292 Water Pump R&R

My waterpumpgave up the ghost this morning.
A fellow dumper notified me of the leakage.
I limped home checking temp constantly.

The leakage is from the pump itself I'm pretty sure,
as it leaks from behind the pulley. I've never
replaced ANY water pump before.

Anyway, I found a good price on a new one, $55,
from Sacramento Vintage Ford, and got hoses from
a FLAPS cheaper than SVF.

Here's what I intend to replace while I'm at it, and what
I would like from you all is any BTDT advice on easy ways
to do things, sequences, pitfalls etc, and other things I
should address while I'm there.

Replace water pump
Replace upper & lower radiator hoses
Replace small diameter hoses to and from pump,
manifold, auto trans, heater, etc.
Replace both fan belts
Obviously replace coolant.

The original '64 manual talks about draining the coolant
via the radiator (obvious petcock for that) and two places
on the block or heads. I couldn't find anything that looked
like an obvious drain. Please let me know what and where
to look for.

I'm on digest (at work, swing shift) so please pmail and cc list
if appropriate.

Thanks

Jeff
'64 F100 CrewCab 292 V8 Auto
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:21:43 -0500
From: "Nils Gore"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers

Dale wrote:

>The 3" single exhaust with a flowmaster is the same set-up that I'm going
to
>put on my '79 351M. I've seen several posts about flowmaster but no one
>mentions which one, two chamber?, three chamber?, big block? I'm ready to
>order parts and I definitely don't want the truck to be too loud so I'm
>leaning toward the three chamber. I'd like to hear about your experience
>and which particular muffler you're running.

I'm in the same boat:

I need to put a new dual exhaust system on my 64 F100 with its new 5.0L EFI
motor. I want good low frequency, rumbly sound; but not TOO loud. Nor do I
want them too quiet. My 73 has stock mufflers and it sounds anemic. I don't
like the sound of glasspacks. They're too harsh for my ear; like the muffler
case is about to split open.

My dad has driven Ford trucks forever. He said he used to put on Porter
steelpack mufflers (even on a 1930 Model A back in the 50's!). My memory is
that they sounded real good on his trucks.

I heard a guy in a D**ge Ram take off the other day; it sounded pretty good.
When I saw him again, I asked him what kind of mufflers he had. He said,
"None. Straight pipes." Surprised the socks off of me! But I don't feel
comfortable trying that...:)

I've done some searching for Porter mufflers and have had no luck.
Flowmaster has been recommended by several people, but which series? Can
anyone describe the Flowmaster sound in the terms I've used above?

Appreciate anyone's opinion,

Nils Gore

64 F100
73 F100
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:37:01 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - " build up a 390/427/428 and drop that in"

> >Go for it! My dads 75 F-250 4x4 has one. 410 block, 428 CJ crank, 360
heads
>(smaller ports for torque) rv cam (degreed), 4 bbl edelbrock manifold and an
>autolite 480 carb. This truck makes more torque than I have ever seen out of
>a street motor. We have been breakin the mounting studs for the front hubs a
>bit more than usual (broke 2 last outing). Its just incredible what it can
>do. I was gonna do that with my F-250 390, but now that I have my F-350
>w/460, I no longer see the need. On a side note, that 410 pulls a hell of a
>lot harder than my 460, but what I lack in torque I more than make up with
>RPM's. The setup hes running at seems to almost drop off entirely at about
>4500 rpms.

Interesting. The RV cam in my 351C does the same thing...drops off at
about 4500, that is.
Dennis L. Pearson
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson/popcult.html
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/lyrics.htm
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/dlp.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 21:59:03 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Give us your favorite web site addresses

FTE is planning to expand the links pages considerably.
Please send us (kpayne ford-trucks.com) your favorite
automotive and truck links or even your web site if
its auto or truck related. It does not have to be
Ford related because we have a section for non-Ford
sites.

Regards,
Ken Payne
CoAdmin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:30:51 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Give us your favorite web site addresses

Thanks for your message at 09:59 PM 10/20/98 -0400, Ken Payne. Your message
was:
>FTE is planning to expand the links pages considerably.
>Please send us (kpayne ford-trucks.com) your favorite
>automotive and truck links or even your web site if
>its auto or truck related. It does not have to be
>Ford related because we have a section for non-Ford
>sites.

Levi's Cars & Trucks

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm



1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:35:33 -0500
From: Dayton Boyd
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg

My speedometer was off by exactly 5 mph. That was a combo of the tires,
plus me replacing the needle awhile ago to and not getting it exactly, i
checked it at 60mph (with the help of my cb), and my speedo said 55. I
pulled it out, manually moved the speedo till it said 55, pulled the needle
off and set it for 60, works fine now..

cannandale
'78 F250 4x4, 460

At 12:50 PM 10/20/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Dayton Boyd wrote:
>
>> I ran along the side of somebody that was running 60 on the interstate,
>> then i set my speedometer to run it right, its running the correct speed...
>> Also had it accidently clocked one time.. :) or should I say, :(
>> Anyways, thats what im getting...
>>
>> cannandale
>> '78 %f250 4x4, 460
>
>"set my speedometer"???
>
>Does that mean tweaking the speedo or adjusting the tranny drive gear?
>
>RE: mileage calculation.
>
>Don't use speedometer accuracy - it can be different from the odometer.
>
>Test the odometer by using a measured 10 mile stretch.
>
>NOTE: highway marker miles are not always even close to the exact mile -
>
>they're more for police/fire/rescue reference points (at least here in
>
>Arizona 8^).
>
>I usually try to test my odometer in several 10-20 mile stretches of
>
>highway mile markers, then average.
>
>78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6
>
>--
>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 http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 19:43:43 -0700
From: "bertolin"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966

> Yes, it is. The owners manual is in the jockey box and it has a
> picture of the radio, otherwise I wouldn't have known it was original
equipment. I
> had to install a new antenna and attach a temporary speaker (the original
> in the padded dash is long gone, but I imagine I can find a replacement).
> It isn't Hi-Fi, but I can listen to it and just pretend it is
> 1966 again...

Does anyone know, was 1966 the year they started padding the dash? I have a
1965 that appears to have the original 2 tone paint job on a metal dash. I
have seen some mid 60's trucks with a padded dash and was wondering if this
was an option back then or an aftermarket installation ? I recently found a
replacement speaker at a local Pepboys for the original radio that fits
perfectly. I had checked with the dealer and Ford quit making them in 1988
and there were none in any of my classic truck parts catalogs.
Thanks, Roberta with 1965 custom cab


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:54:05 -0500
From: Dayton Boyd
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Serious Steering Problems

Ok, here goes, all of it..

When I start from a dead stop, the wheel is straight like it is supposed to
be. But after a little while, i have to keep turning it out of the way it
pulling (to the right), till the steering wheel is a little past straight
up & down. It does this slowly. Though if I hit a bump, i will have to
instantly move it up to that position to keep it going straight. When you
put on the brakes though, the wheel goes back where its supposed to be,
hops a little bit (kinda like warped rotors would do), then its stops
hoping (dosent pulse). stops straight, dont have to steer out of it at all.
Then it all starts over again.

I figure the brakes as being the culprit, but I jacked the front-end up,
and had mom push on the pedal while I spun the wheel, calipers never did
start sticking on either side. I have allready replaced the ball-joints,
pitman arm & gear-box. Tie rod is fine, and the wheel bearings are good.

I dont know if this helps any, and I dont know the name of it. Steering arm
I think, connects to the pitman arm, and then the bracket that bolts onto
the knuckle. I can see where it has been ramming the shock, big-ole dents
in it.

Also, when taking a right turn, I hear a loud thump in the front, I figure
maybe from the steering arm hitting the shock? But I dont think it is...

Yes I have checked tire pressure, and the frame for cracks, everthing is
fine. Checked the tow in the front, just fine. The steering has basically
no play at all..

thanks for reading all of that.. haha ;)

cannandale
'78 F250 4x4, 460


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:11:46 -0500
From: Floyd Terrell
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966

bertolin wrote:

> > Yes, it is. The owners manual is in the jockey box and it has a
> > picture of the radio, otherwise I wouldn't have known it was original
> equipment. I
> > had to install a new antenna and attach a temporary speaker (the original
> > in the padded dash is long gone, but I imagine I can find a replacement).
> > It isn't Hi-Fi, but I can listen to it and just pretend it is
> > 1966 again...
>
> Does anyone know, was 1966 the year they started padding the dash? I have a
> 1965 that appears to have the original 2 tone paint job on a metal dash. I
> have seen some mid 60's trucks with a padded dash and was wondering if this
> was an option back then or an aftermarket installation ? I recently found a
> replacement speaker at a local Pepboys for the original radio that fits
> perfectly. I had checked with the dealer and Ford quit making them in 1988
> and there were none in any of my classic truck parts catalogs.
> Thanks, Roberta with 1965 custom cab
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

I found a '66 in a junk yard with a padded dash......

Floyd

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:14:14 PDT
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg

What about with 33'' tires? Im not good at this kind of stuff(math)
I think i get about 12to 13 mpg with my 79 bronco w/ a 400M, it is a 4x4
and has 193,000 miles, what would that equal out to in gas mileage when
figured?
Thx.
Arizona eric

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 20:32:25 PDT
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads

Hey guys, I have some q's for you and would appreciate the help if at
all possible. I am building a new 400M for my 79 bronco and would like
to put some 351C - 4V heads on the block( i know this requires some
mods.) I was wondering what kinds of cars had 351C 's with 4V heads so i
can go looking around the junk yards. Thx for your time.
Arizona Eric- 79 Bronco custom 4x4, 400M/4spd/np205, 193,000 miles,
still purring =-)

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

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

Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 21:35:26 -0700
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 292 Water Pump R&R

Jeff wrote:

[I need a new water pump, I plan on:]

> Replace water pump
> Replace upper & lower radiator hoses
> Replace small diameter hoses to and from pump,
> manifold, auto trans, heater, etc.
> Replace both fan belts
> Obviously replace coolant.
>
> The original '64 manual talks about draining the coolant
> via the radiator (obvious petcock for that) and two places
> on the block or heads. I couldn't find anything that looked
> like an obvious drain. Please let me know what and where
> to look for.

These are usually pipe plugs, and on a Y-block (oh oh, I think a 292 is
a
Y-block) I suspect they would be about half way between the pan and
heads.
If they haven't been out since '64, be prepared for lots of 'stuff
behind
the plugs. Repeated poking with a stiff wire will help clear them. This
is
an excellent time to flush the block, open these up before you remove
anything else, then you can use a hose to flush. Installing a flush and
fill kit (prestone) helps out here.

As far as other things, I'll give my standard water pump answer: How
many
miles on the engine? If it has over 80k or so, it may well be due for a
new
timing chain. To check it, remove the distributor cap. Rock the engine
back
and forth with a wrench on the crank pulley. Use the timing marks to....


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.