 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Thursday, October 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 495 ======================================================================= 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 - FMX Information Overload Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers RE: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 FTE 61-79 - Perf - Headers Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH! RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - MPH Calibration RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - re:RUST ARGH!!!!!!! RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH! Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers RE: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton FTE 61-79 - Good Ford Mechanic? FTE 61-79 - RE: Building up a FE Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg RE: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton FTE 61-79 - What are your feelings on the 410 (390 w/428 crank)? Re: FTE 61-79 - What are your feelings on the 410 (390 w/428 crank)? Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH! Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions FTE 61-79 - Just a thought... Re: FTE 61-79 - Just a thought... FTE 61-79 - 78 Courier FTE 61-79 - Alternate Method for calibration of velosity of vehicle. Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton FTE 61-79 - Refer - Serious Steering Problems FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg FTE 61-79 - Re: Padded dash on 1966 FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Links FTE 61-79 - MPG, Tranny swap, Intake clear coat FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:11:30 -0400 From: The Neighbors Subject: FTE 61-79 - FMX Information Overload Bill wrote: "My understanding of the FMX (limited as it is), is that it was built as a high performance tranny for the small block's. Now that I think about it I don't even know how old the tranny is, I mean when it was first put in service, our 69 Cougars both have/had them, the 70 Torino, and even the 74 Elite (parts car) has one if I remember right. As far as I know we've never had any problems with them, and our Cougar can get a second gear scratch when its left in drive. Not that this means it will last, just that it shifts pretty solid." The FMX came into being I believe between 1959 and 1961, but I don't remember exactly when. It was originally called "Dual Range Cruise-o-Matic" and the shift selector had L, D1, and D2 positions. D1 would start you out in Low and shift into 2nd, and D2 would start out in 2nd and shift into 3rd. It is a genyouwine slushbox, but it was meant to sit behind the big block engines like the FE or MEL. It later became a "true" automatic 3 speed, called simply "Cruise-o-Matic", MX and FMX, and by a few other names. It was sold by Ford to AMC and Studebaker as well, so if you crawl underneath your '64 Ambassador and see something familiar under all the crud, yoou can bet it's a Ford tranny, even though AMC called it "Flash-o-Matic"! - -- Don Neighbors '54 F250 Named Grover "Any dropped tool or part will automatically fall into the most innaccesible part of the vehicle." grover ford-trucks.com == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:54:56 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg At 10:35 PM 10/20/98 , you wrote: >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.. > If tires are what are causing you to be off on your speed, then its off by a percent, not by a set amount. So moving the needle fixed it for 60 (assuming that's a good speed that you normally drive at you're okay), but made it off by the 5 + some percentage based on how much bigger or smaller your tires are. This might not be a big deal if the cops are lenient and you just remember that things aren't exactly as they look, but if you do a lot of driving in varying places, you may want to keep in mind that your speedo may be off more than you think. Just a warning. Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:06:40 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers >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. > Well a friend of mine put Super Turbo's (Walker/Dynomax) on his 87 Mustang GT (same engine you've got sounds like), and it sounded pretty good. My 360 with the same mufflers filled them up a little more so his sounded a little shallow to me. But inside his car you could really hear it, I think that had more to do with the car inside than the mufflers he was usin. In my truck I've got a rubber mat and some sound deadener under it and the mufflers sound really tame and quiet, but I was behind it the other day while my g.f. moved it. WOW I couldn't believe how great it sounded outside. Heard a great set of 2-chambered flows on a 389 GTO, they were about the fullest, best sounding mufflers I've ever heard, just made you drool listening to it idle (only mod was a K&N!!!). Dad's 57 Olds has some original style glass paks on it, Smitty's I think ... anyway those sound okay, actually are a little quiet, but that could be the hokey exhaust system restricting too much too. Depending on your cam in your 5.0, you may not get the full sound of the old V-8's, I've noticed a lot of these hopped up 5.0's sound like ... well like hopped up 5.0's. They don't have a lot of rumble or burble to them, probably because they're fuel injected and don't have that much variation in their gas mixtures to cause it to rumble and burble as much as the carbs do. We do have a 302 Ranchero, but it had FULL mufflers on it when we got it, now I think its got straight pipes, or glass (again Dad had this done and I haven't looked under it). Its also got a pretty tall manifold, a 4V, and long tube headers. It went from a touch quiet to a tad loud. Gets a cool cackle at about 4500, but tremendous power drop there because of it, and is probably louder than you're looking for. Personally I love the Super Turbo's, but if I were doing a muscle car I'd definately try a pair of 2-chamber flow's. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:30:15 -0400 From: "Kenny Realph" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 >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 I looked In my 1957-67 Ford Pickups Book and found that in 1964 the Deluxe Camper Special was the first padded dash for ford trucks. I think that after that it was an option available to anyone. Kenny Realph 66 F100 240I == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:29:36 -0700 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 > 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 ? My padded dash is still there and in fair shape. At least I'm not ready to start ripping it out (Oh, those padded-dash-glue-on-the-dashboard blues). The pad is black with a white-on-red dash below the pad. It actually looks pretty good. Thanks for the tip on the speaker...now, if we only had a Pep boys around here... I am going to try to find the plastic inserts for the door panels. Any tips? I remember a thread on this awhile back...but who knew? They are white. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:32:13 -0500 From: John Strauss Subject: FTE 61-79 - Perf - Headers >Flowmaster has been recommended by several people, but which series? Can >anyone describe the Flowmaster sound in the terms I've used above? > I would recommend the Flowmaster 3-chamber. I have one on my F150 with 302 and it sounds, to me, just like the Mustang GT did with 302 (before they went to the 4.6L). It has a lot of rumble but no brap. For an extra dose of sound, turn down the tailpipes towards the ground. This makes the sound bounce off the pavement and you hear it better. _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 06:49:19 -0700 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers Thanks for your message at 08:06 AM 10/21/98 -0500, William S Hart. Your message was: >>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. I used to like glass packs bets, that is until I heard my 351C with rv cam and twin turbos. I could just sit and listen to it idle. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:39:13 -0500 From: John LaGrone Subject: FTE 61-79 - mpg I think that cannadale's 460 is tuned really well. Eric, To figure gas mileage, you divide the number of miles you have travelled by the number of gallons of fuel you have burned. Most of us do this by reading the odometer at each fillup and writing it in a little book we keep in the glove box. Read the gallons off of the gas pump of course. Another problem here is that you can never tell if you get the tank full the same every time. I know I don't because I don't like to slosh gasoline all over my boots. Without equipment designed for determinig gas mileage, we are all making educated guesses anyway. BTW my best guess on my last mileage was 9.9, all city driving with the air running. - -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 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 10:11:00 -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 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 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 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 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 18:04:00 -0500 From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - re:RUST ARGH!!!!!!! Howdy Jamie! Thanks for the advice! I'll take it! I have another concern though. I'm worried about the rust that's in that "seam" under the drip rail. It doesn't look like it's too bad. No holes but there is some pitting. There looks to be some sort of sealer on the top side (maybe it's a real smooth weld) but the rust is coming out from underneath and working it's way around. Will that "NAVAL JELLY" someone mentioned earlier stop that? Is there even a way to chemically treat the "under-deposit" rust? Or is mechanical removal the only real option? I'm looking for a "relatively" quick and easy way to stop it from spreading till I can afford to get it into a good body shop to get it fixed permanently along with the other stuff I want done. Anyone else got an opinion on this? Jamie, regarding your signature: Hey kkeeeewwwlllll !!! I ride an '87 KX500. - -----Original Message----- From: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com at internetoxy Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 3:28 PM To: 61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - re:RUST ARGH!!!!!!! Doug, Alot of the solution depends on how rust much there is, and what you're willing to do to take care of it. If it's just minor surface rust all you'll have to do is: 1. Sand the area down to bare metal(80 grit paper) making sure to remove all traces of rust. If the metal is pitted at all, you may want to use a wire brush attachment in a drill. 2. Prime the area with a good rust preventive primer. Make sure it is meant for bare metal. Eastwood carries a few in spray cans, it's expensive($8.00) but well worth it. Use a fairly heavy coat. 3. Sand the area again this time with 220 grit paper. If the primer didn't fill the pits, use a glazing putty(3M makes a few great ones). 4. Sand the area with 220 grit again using a sanding block. Sand in diagonal directions and make sure to use even pressure. 5. The area should be ready to paint. Plasti-kote makes a line of spray paints designed to math the existing color of your vehicle.(assuming your truck is still it's original color or you know what the paint code is for the vehicle) If the rust has eaten a hole through the metal I'd recommend you take it to a REPUTABLE body shop. Avoid Maco I've seen quite a few bad situations made worse by these shade tree apes. If any of this is confusing, most libraries carry a few books on autobody/restoration. Good luck! Jamie '70 F-100 short bed '78 Yamaha RD400 ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:48:00 -0500 From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers Hey Bill How much will the diameter of the entire exhaust system affect the sound quality? I know that the smaller diameter systems will have higher restriction and it seems like the ones I've heard have always popped a lot more. I'll be interested in changing my system soon also. I have a 400. What do you recommend for headers? I would prefer some thing not too low(long?) thus not too visible. Thanks Doug == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:48:00 -0500 From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers Hey Bill How much will the diameter of the entire exhaust system affect the sound quality? I know that the smaller diameter systems will have higher restriction and it seems like the ones I've heard have always popped a lot more. I'll be interested in changing my system soon also. I have a 400. What do you recommend for headers? I would prefer some thing not too low(long?) thus not too visible. Thanks Doug == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:45:07 -0400 From: adam.hicks ppctx.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton People keep mentioning that my truck's 460 is probably an after-market. I know that it's the original engine because I know the history behind the truck (bought it from father-in-law who got it in a will) Is a '77 F-150 long bed 460 that unusual? I noticed that the Sticker inside the door lists an engine code that wasn't in my Chilton's or Haynes. It was either L or J... Don't remember which. Also, It still has the original wheels with triangular dome-like ugly-as-sin wheel covers. I'd like to ditch them and put some decent looking Ford take-offs on it. Anyone know if the bolt patters remained the same for a while? Up to what year Ford take-offs can I use? I like the alloys with the holes and red center-caps found on a lot of early 90's models. Thanks in advance! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 08:50:16 -0700 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH! Doug wrote: Hey Tom H. You still there? Have you gotten the answer to your question? Doug. - - -----Original Message----- Question for the list. Can I remove the drip rails entirely and not have a problem with water getting into the cab? Tom H. - --------end original message---- Doug, No I haven't heard anything yet. I'm going to have to tear into the truck again soon :0(. Found some rust between the cab and the bed. =:^0 It will have to wait till after my transfer. While I'm at it I'm hoping on a few other mods, New color -- the right way inside and out, passenger side tool box, and possibly remove the drip rails for a cleaner appearance. I was hoping to hear from someone on the list who may have tried this mod to find out if it causes rain to leak into the cab. Anyone? Tom H BTW Mentioning the transfer reminds me, my home is still for sale. If anyone in the silicone valley is looking for a home let me know. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:27:00 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton From: adam.hicks ppctx.com Date sent: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:45:07 -0400 Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton > looking Ford take-offs on it. Anyone know if the bolt patters > remained the same for a while? Up to what year Ford take-offs can I > use? I like the alloys with the holes and red center-caps found on a > lot of early 90's models. >From early 60's to 96 for full sized ford trucks AFAIK. In 97 they went to a metric bolt circle which is just enough different that you cannot use them on older trucks, less than 1/16" difference if my eye is any good :-( Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:41:56 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - Headers >Hey Bill >How much will the diameter of the entire exhaust system affect the sound >quality? I know that the smaller diameter systems will have higher restriction >and it seems like the ones I've heard have always popped a lot more. I'll be >interested in changing my system soon also. I have a 400. What do you >recommend for headers? I would prefer some thing not too low(long?) thus not >too visible. Thanks > Not sure if this was meant for me (isn't there another Bill on the list?) but generally a bigger diameter will be a lower tone, with less cackle and pop. Traditionally around here the Fords are running the bigger diameter stuff so they dont' cackle or sound the same as the Chevy's. Some engines you'll have to watch that you don't get the headers and stuff too big or you'll lose torque. When you say low, you apparently mean clearance, I don't have a lot of experience with headers and their height, though the long tube cyclone's I had hung down way to far, If you are just looking to open things up and not concerned with maximum performance, maybe you'll find someone with "shortie" headers. That is they replace the stock manifolds, and I think use the same, or at least similar mounting points. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:47:32 -0400 From: "Kenny Realph" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton >Is a '77 F-150 long bed 460 that unusual? I noticed that the Sticker >inside the door lists an engine code that wasn't in my Chilton's or >Haynes. It was either L or J... Don't remember which. Adam, My Chilton's says that for 1977 460 the engine code is A. Kenny Realph 66F100 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:04:10 -0400 From: adam.hicks ppctx.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Good Ford Mechanic? I'm probably going to be needing a good Ford Mechanic that's familiar with the 72-79 F-x50's before long. I live in Ft. Worth, TX, but would be willing to drive up to 100 miles for a really GOOD mechanic. Anybody fit the bill or know of anyone who does? I might needs the heads rebuilt, or a new carb installed and tuned, and I'm probably not to that level of proficiency with these things yet. I know a Ch*vy guy, who does some pretty amazing stuff (He has a 98 Suburban with a blown 502, and a 92 S-10 Blazer with an LT1 that are both street legal and look perfectly stock (except for the shortened axles and wider tires/rims)) Anyways, he doesn't work much on Fords, so I don't want him working on mine! So there. Thanks! Adam Hicks Adam.Hicks ppctx.com '77 F-150 460 Longbed '85 J**p CJ-7 with all the fixins' (on it's way) '97 Ch*vy 4x4 blazer '97 Ch*vy C1500 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:14:52 -0700 From: Jason Topor Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Building up a FE Here are some ideal that helped my dad and I build up 3 390s and a 428 CJ. 1. Cams: All of our FEs use the 428CJ cam, which can still be bought from Ford (last time I checked). The cam is a bit expensive, but you have a great cam. This cam can handle just about any carb combo from a single 4bl to dual quads. The cam is in our F250 and carried a 8 foot cab over camper with no problems. I prefer this cam over a RV cam for the 428CJ cam give you plenty of torque and power for towing and passing. If you go with an after market cam, make sure it can go on a 427. 427 didn't have oil grooves in the bearings like the rest of the FEs, they had them in the cam. By using a 427 cam, you will have grooves on both the bearing and the cam (more oil = better lubrication = longer life) 2. Carbs: I am a sucker for Carter. All our 390s have 600 cfm series Carter carbs. Virtually no maintenance and are easily to replace the jets and rods. 3. Heads: If you decide to use different heads, the 427 low rise head will allow you get some extra air and gas and will drop you compression ration by one. (i.e. 10.5:1 will become about 9.5:1) Lowering of the compression will reduce knock and pinging. The gas of today is nothing like the gas of yesterday. If you happen to come across a pair of 428 CJ heads, these are 427 low rise heads with a modifies exhaust ports and a casting number "C8AE-N" (I think). Thus they are refereed to as "N" heads. DON'T use 427 medium or high rise heads on a 390. You will have to notch the block so severely that you will most likely blow our the cylinder walls. 4. Connecting Rods: If you happen to come across a set of "LeMans" rods pick them up. The connecting bolts were a lot stronger. The nuts were a little longer and the heads of the bolts were shaped differently. I think they called them "Cap screw heads". Beware of using 427 rods. The nuts and bolts were longer and usually ended up hitting the sides of the cylinders. Remember 427s had enormous bores which allowed for bigger valves and connecting rods bolts. 5. Intakes: I have used both 427 low rise single quad and dual quad intakes on my 390s and I love them both. The old 427 used a oil filler tub (sometimes in the from and sometime located in the back (as mentioned earlier in some posting) The can be plugged by using a freeze plugs. (The older FEs didn't have oil filler caps on the valve covers, I have an old set of FE cover of a T'Bird to prove it". 6. Exhaust: If you plan on building up an FE or any engine with more power then it had before, remember your exhaust system might need to be changed. If you upgrades heads, cam, carbs and intake, and you still have a little exhaust system, much back pressure may be created and you may lose power and torque. 7. Oil: The FEs were noted for not having the best oiling system. I have restricters which limit the oil going to the rockers arm assymbly (the weakest part of an FE). Please don't do anythink like this unless you know exactly what you are doing. You can really mess up you valves and rocker arm assy. When you replace your oil pump, got for a high volume rather then a high pressure pump. The high volume pump is designed to move more oil through the gallies. 8. Cranks: 360 -> 390 (just pop in a 390 crank) the 360 and 390 have the same bore. 360/390 + 428 crank = 410. 390 and 427 cranks had the same stroke but the 427 cams had oil groves on the journals. Never done this, but a 428 CJ crank is hard to find and expensive, that I didn't think it was worth it. 428 + 427 crank = .... pink slip eater. I knew a guy who had this combo in a J*ep. He never drove it...... Thoughts.... just some thoughts. The above info was mainly from personal knowledge and a few days at the library. HP books are outstanding for giving technical info in words that everyone can understand. I hope the above info helps anyone out in rebuilding an FE. Jason jtopor csulb.edu == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:14:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Pat Brown Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 Someone asked: > >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 Kenny wrote: > > I looked In my 1957-67 Ford Pickups Book and found that in 1964 the Deluxe > Camper Special was the first padded dash for ford trucks. I think that after > that it was an option available to anyone. Padded 'Safety' dashboards became standard equipment in all trucks in 1966. It's the Law! Pat Brown Sebastopol, California If I take it off, will they arrest me? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:38:04 -0400 From: "John F. Bauer III" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions Hey Tony, I recently did something similar on my '77 van. I went from the nasty custom 3" springs it had to 2.5" '77 E100 springs. Since the custom spring hangers were already on the frame (and the previous owner welded instead of bolted), I just used them plus a washer (hardened, from the rear u-bolt washer collection I have) to take up the bolt to hanger slack on each side. There is no movement left/right and the springs sit in the hangers in the right place (axle, visual, etc.) The springs are hung lower than stock, but I like the extra lift in my van. It gives a bit of a rear spoiler effect on the highway, helping to keep the rear on the road and not swaying in the breeze. On the other hand, a local tool supply house should carry American Drill drill bits ($28 a paice) that have carbide grooves that will make short work of drilling new hold in the frame. Or, like my previous van's owner, just weld them in. Good luck, John At 01:30 AM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote: >Hey fellow FTE's! > >I've got my '78 F-250 4x4 down to the rolling chassis phase right now, >and am in the process of changing the factory 3 inch wide rear leaf >springs to a set of 2 inch wide rear leafs off of a '68 F-250 4x4 parts >truck. The '68 springs are much beafier and in superb condition, so I >really want to use them. I have the leaf spring hangers for the '68 >stack as well as the ones for the '78 currently on the frame. I was >going to just grind the rivets off of the '78 and bolt up the '68's but >the style and bolt pattern of the '78's hangers is different. It has a >wider-splayed pattern and the hanger drops approx. 2 inches lower than >the ones on the '68. This is my problem- I know '78 was the first year >the 3 inch wide leafs were used, and that's the year my ford shop >manuals are- I'd REALLY don't want to drill new holes in the frame for >the 68's hangers so from 73-77 did they make a 2 inch wide leaf hangers >for the 4x4's that would bolt to the '78's hanger bolt pattern? Could >somebody give me a part #? Any help greatly appreciated!!! > >Tony Marino >tony pscico.com >www.pscico.com/~tony >== 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:49:05 -0700 From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg Dayton Boyd wrote: > 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.. Then your odomoter is probably off, as well as you speedo at speeds other than 60MPH. If you had someone ride beside you at 55MPH, then you've only set your speedo to the accuracy of his speedo (typically within 3mph below actual speed at 60MPH it's not +/- because manufacturers do NOT want you getting a speeding ticket when the speedometer on your brand new car said 65.) The speedo/odo works (in the vehicles I'm aware of) from a gear in the transmission. The number of teeth in this gear are set for a given gear ratio and tire size. The size of this gear translates the rpm of the drive shaft into an rpm which correctly relates speed/distance to the instruments. The basis of the translation is the distance covered by one rotation of the drive shaft. If you change the tire diameter or the gear ratio, then the drive gear to the speedo/odo must be adjusted in order to keep both accurate. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:32:40 -0400 From: "Kenny Realph" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Padded dash on 1966 Someone asked: > >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 Kenny wrote: > > I looked In my 1957-67 Ford Pickups Book and found that in 1964 the Deluxe > Camper Special was the first padded dash for ford trucks. I think that after > that it was an option available to anyone. Pat wrote: >Padded 'Safety' dashboards became standard equipment in all trucks in >1966. It's the Law! Now I write: Your right Pat. Looking further in my book I see that in 66 it was standard. I just never thought about it since my 66 is not padded and I never saw a padded on in the Junk Yard. Thanks Kenny Realph 66 F100 240I == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:06:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Farcas Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton I have a 79 F-150 long bed 460, and I just recently looked at another one the other day, I don't think that they're that uncommon... > > > > >Is a '77 F-150 long bed 460 that unusual? I noticed that the Sticker > >inside the door lists an engine code that wasn't in my Chilton's or > >Haynes. It was either L or J... Don't remember which. > > Adam, My Chilton's says that for 1977 460 the engine code is A. > > > Kenny Realph > 66F100 > > == 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:13:23 -0700 From: "J.S.H." Subject: FTE 61-79 - What are your feelings on the 410 (390 w/428 crank)? ...a 390 with bad crank,428 with cracked block, both real cheap .. sounds like a plan to me. Which rods do you use? BTW 428 crank+427 block= 454+ci. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 14:39:44 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What are your feelings on the 410 (390 w/428 crank)? At 02:13 PM 10/21/98 , you wrote: >...a 390 with bad crank,428 with cracked block, both real cheap .. >sounds like a plan to me. Which rods do you use? > BTW 428 crank+427 block= 454+ci. Uhm, my math shows this to be 447 ... that's stock of course ... 4.23*4.23*Pi/4*3.98=447.2222 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:19:17 EDT From: A4T1RAT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: RUST!?!?!?!?!? AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH! You can remove drip rails..... I have done this to many cars/trucks ( I build alot of street rods & customs ) it takes alot of work to remove them and then weld up the seams, then the body work after.. Lead works best for filler. the only prob you will have is they tend to crack where you weld them up because of flexing so it all depends on how hard on the truck you are... if you are going to go to all the trouble of removing the drip rails it is not that big a deal to fix what ever rust you have.. just cut out the old and weld in a new piece..you can make one or cut out what you need from a truck in a salavage yard and piece it together just take your time fitting the pieces back together. could be worse it has taken me 8 cars to put together a perfect rust free 56 Nomad..... Rat == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:42:49 -0400 From: Tony Marino Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions Thanks- Yeah, my buddy who has the torches ran out of fuel so that's why I said grinding- He also works at a machine shop and can get free tooling (big grin). I was wondering if that would be safe as far as putting the 2" springs in the 3" hangers and making spacers for them. I couldn't see how the stress would be any different on the hanger by design, so I was going to do that if I couldn't get the proper hangers. They aren't in the greatest of shape, and I do like the thought of having that extra little bit of lift, but if you saw this leaf stack you'd understand why that isn't necessary- they have 11 leaves about 3/8 inch thick each (a little over 4" tall at center!). Thanks for the feedback! Tony tony pscico.com www.pscico.com/~tony At 01:38 PM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote: >Hey Tony, > >I recently did something similar on my '77 van. I went from the nasty >custom 3" springs it had to 2.5" '77 E100 springs. Since the custom spring >hangers were already on the frame (and the previous owner welded instead of >bolted), I just used them plus a washer (hardened, from the rear u-bolt >washer collection I have) to take up the bolt to hanger slack on each side. > There is no movement left/right and the springs sit in the hangers in the >right place (axle, visual, etc.) The springs are hung lower than stock, >but I like the extra lift in my van. It gives a bit of a rear spoiler >effect on the highway, helping to keep the rear on the road and not swaying >in the breeze. > >On the other hand, a local tool supply house should carry American Drill >drill bits ($28 a paice) that have carbide grooves that will make short >work of drilling new hold in the frame. Or, like my previous van's owner, >just weld them in. > >Good luck, >John > >At 01:30 AM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote: >>Hey fellow FTE's! >> >>I've got my '78 F-250 4x4 down to the rolling chassis phase right now, >>and am in the process of changing the factory 3 inch wide rear leaf >>springs to a set of 2 inch wide rear leafs off of a '68 F-250 4x4 parts >>truck. The '68 springs are much beafier and in superb condition, so I >>really want to use them. I have the leaf spring hangers for the '68 >>stack as well as the ones for the '78 currently on the frame. I was >>going to just grind the rivets off of the '78 and bolt up the '68's but >>the style and bolt pattern of the '78's hangers is different. It has a >>wider-splayed pattern and the hanger drops approx. 2 inches lower than >>the ones on the '68. This is my problem- I know '78 was the first year >>the 3 inch wide leafs were used, and that's the year my ford shop >>manuals are- I'd REALLY don't want to drill new holes in the frame for >>the 68's hangers so from 73-77 did they make a 2 inch wide leaf hangers >>for the 4x4's that would bolt to the '78's hanger bolt pattern? Could >>somebody give me a part #? Any help greatly appreciated!!! >> >>Tony Marino >>tony pscico.com >>www.pscico.com/~tony >>== 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 > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:05:33 -0400 From: adam.hicks ppctx.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Just a thought... I've been seeing people post about the jokes, and how they're not appropriate for children... I guess my question is: How many 9 year olds spend their spare time restoring their 76 F-250? Are they really reading these posts? I mostly played basketball and rode my bike when I was a kid. I'll bet it's pretty safe to say we're all adults here! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:33:56 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Just a thought... At 04:05 PM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote: > > I've been seeing people post about the jokes, and how they're not > appropriate for children... I guess my question is: How many 9 year > olds spend their spare time restoring their 76 F-250? Are they really > reading these posts? I mostly played basketball and rode my bike when > I was a kid. I'll bet it's pretty safe to say we're all adults here! Not everyone on the lists are adults. We have several people here around the age of 15. I know of at least 2 who are 14. Besides, it doesn't matter who is here, its who may be here. When we rated our site with RSAC (www.rsac.org) we rated it as appropriate for all audiences. We want to continue to have such a rating. RSAC helps parents to filter out content they don't want their children to view. Ken Payne Admin == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:57:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Jay Mazzetta Subject: FTE 61-79 - 78 Courier Hello, Can someone tell me how many digits the oedometer on the 78 courier has???? I think it only has 5 plus the tenths, but others have told me it can register 100000. Thanks. James jamesmaz yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:26:00 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Alternate Method for calibration of velosity of vehicle. 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 accurate 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 If you can afford it and you have one local, how about your favorite quarter mile drag strip. The clock is usually laser, or radar, and the distance is pretty accurate. Might be going too far. ;>) "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 17:50:48 -0700 From: Steve & Rockette Leitch Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 1/2 ton At 10:45 21/10/98 -0400, you wrote: > > People keep mentioning that my truck's 460 is probably an > after-market. I know that it's the original engine because I know the > history behind the truck (bought it from father-in-law who got it in a > will) > > Is a '77 F-150 long bed 460 that unusual? > Probably a Trailer Special, whats the rear end gearing? And yes, they are rare....... Steve & The Rockette == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 20:55:18 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Refer - Serious Steering Problems Yes I have checked tire pressure, and the frame for cracks, everything is fine. Checked the tow in the front, just fine. The steering has basically no play at all.. Just though you guys might like to know an easy way to check for hairline cracks in metal or other parts. When I was in the Canada Armed forces, (no cheap shots please, it bad enough the government here is cheap, ;>) ), we used "LPI" to check for cracks in hi stress areas of aircraft. This involves a liquid penetrant (excuse the spelling I am pretty tired and the spell checker doesn't have a clue half the time. ;>)), inspection. You use a florescent penetrant and a black or ultra violet light to hi light cracks. They show up as a glowing line. Perfect for metal fatigue problems. (Cracked heads, etc.) Magnetic Particle Check would be my second choice as it involves an expensive piece of equipment to induce a magnetic field with metal files on a part. They line up along fault line rather well. Great for "buried" cracks. (Those which are not on the surface of a part. Example - water passage on a head.) Use to work in non destructive testing for a short while before getting out. x-rays can be real fun for cracks, but I can't really justify telling someone to spend a hundred grand to check an engine or a shock mount. ;>) Ultra sound is also good, so the next time your at the hospital with the wife and she is have the baby checked (in the womb), just slip a set of head on the bed when the tech isn't looking! ;>) Anyway LPI is a pretty good cheap way of check parts. Especially engine parts but it could be use in other suspect areas for damage. IMHO "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 21:21:06 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads I am not 100% on this but I am sure other here might be able to help with this. Back in 1973 I remember my dad bought a new Ford Grand Marquis Station Wagon with a 400M (?) I think it may have had a 4BB. (Maybe 4BB heads?) Also the Tbird the year had a 400M, (I think), and it would have had 4BB on it as they were no too worried about mileage. Had a friend with 75 "elite", and think he had a 400M with 4BB. According to an old source book I have lying around the 400M was available from 1971 to 1980 in cars anyway. I sure that it came with a 4BB in some of these years and maybe with specific 4BB heads too. It might be worth a look into a set of these heads if they will bolt up without mods. Otherwise, I would probably tried and get the 1971 Boss 351 heads. They really cooked at the drag strip. ;>) Also 1970 production muscle cars and a decent set of 351C 4BB heads available. (Cougars, Mustangs, Torinos, Cyclones, (preferably GT's), etc. Something you might want to think about is that everything I have found out is that 4BB head on this engine are better for HP and high Revs. 2BB heads are better for torque - what trucks live for! Unless you want a high rev engine, you might want to rethink this. I run a 4BB 351M and kept the 2V head because of this reason myself! I am definitely not afraid of modifying an engine. It just made more sense in this case. (4X4 79 Bronco.) Hope this helps a little. "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:03:46 -0500 From: Dayton Boyd Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mpg On my truck, since its a 4x4, it runs off a drive gear in the transfer case. I dont know how to adjust it, or if it even can be.. :) cannandale '78 F250 4x4, 460 At 02:00 PM 10/21/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Dayton Boyd wrote: > >> 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.. > >Then your odomoter is probably off, as well as you speedo > >at speeds other than 60MPH. If you had someone ride beside > >you at 55MPH, then you've only set your speedo to the accuracy > >of his speedo (typically within 3mph below actual speed at > >60MPH it's not +/- because manufacturers do NOT want you > >getting a speeding ticket when the speedometer on your brand > >new car said 65.) > >The speedo/odo works (in the vehicles I'm aware of) from a gear > >in the transmission. The number of teeth in this gear are set > >for a given gear ratio and tire size. > >The size of this gear translates the rpm of the drive shaft into > >an rpm which correctly relates speed/distance to the instruments. > >The basis of the translation is the distance covered by one > >rotation of the drive shaft. If you change the tire diameter or > >the gear ratio, then the drive gear to the speedo/odo must be > >adjusted in order to keep both accurate. > >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 > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 21:19:19 -0400 From: pickup65 Juno.com (Jon E Purut) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Padded dash on 1966 1966 was the first year Ford installed a padded dash on the F Series. Jon E. Purut http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.xoom.com/Chelley one 64 F500, one 77 F150 and a pair of 65 F100's ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:36:44 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Links Thanks to all the people who sent in links (so far). I'm sorry that I can't respond to each on personally but I received nearly 30 emails with links. I'll post a listing of all these links when they go up in the next couple of weeks. 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: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:28:50 -0600 From: mark heims Subject: FTE 61-79 - MPG, Tranny swap, Intake clear coat Hey guys, this site has several calculators for figuring gear ratios and corrected speedometer readings. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.off -road.  com /tools/gearcalc.html I'm getting ready to swap trannies in my 78 F150 4x4, it's a NP435, any tips or tricks to make this job eaiser? I got a 76 F150 4x4 cheap, so I'm going to swap mine with its grinding 3rd gear syncros for the good one in it. I bead blasted my aluminum intake and valve covers in 1994, then I sprayed them with VHT clear and it has held up very well. It is easy to keep clean, I just hose it off and go. It does have a satin kind of.... 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 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. 
|