61-79-list-digest Friday, October 23 1998 Volume 02 : Number 496



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions
FTE 61-79 - RE: Building up a FE
Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - Just a thought...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Alternate Method for calibration of velosity of vehicle.
FTE 61-79 - 351M/400 4bbl
Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions
FTE 61-79 - Courier question
Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions
FTE 61-79 - RE: fte61-79 - Padded dash on 1966
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads
FTE 61-79 - Steering, steering steering
[none]
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - speedo gear
[none]
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - Speedometer Workings (or not)
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - Heads...what's the difference
FTE 61-79 - '73 Springs in a '68
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
FTE 61-79 - Re: Auto / Manual swap
FTE 61-79 - Re:
FTE 61-79 - speedometer calibration
FTE 61-79 - RE: headers/exhaust
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: headers/exhaust
FTE 61-79 - Ref - to MR. Paul R.
Re: FTE 61-79 - To Dave R.

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:13:13 -0400
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions

I found that the u-bolt washers were hardened, exactly fit the bolts that
go through the hangers and were exactly the correct width to create a
hanger to washer to metal tube in the spring end bushing config. I've
driven about 1000 miles with this setup and haven't noticed any problems
... just the looks from people at my van with a 4" rear lift.

BTW, if you happen to come across a divorced NP205 transfer case and/or a
dana 44 front axle (for 5 bolt rims, either leaf spring or coil spring
perches, and a 2.73 gear ratio would be perfect) in your parts quests; I'm
looking to re-convert my van to a light duty 4wd configuration. I happen
to have a mated NP205 that bolts directly to a C6 tail housing, do you
happen to know if there is just a yoke insert or such to convert it to a
divorced style?

Good luck in your build-up, those springs sound pretty mean. I could feel
my testosterone building up just reading about 'em! Is the goal to put a
460/C6/NP205 in your project truck and (sniff) lose the 300?

John

At 04:42 PM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote:
>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!
>


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:58:08 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Building up a FE

The only weakness that the Lemans rod had was that the design of the
bolt was prone to failure. The thread to shank area area seemed to fail
alot. They are stronger than a bread and butter 390 rod (which with a
good set of bolts and prep are good to 400 hp and up to 6000 rpms) but
IMHO the Lemans is overkill for a street engine. If you get a set of
these rods (way overpriced for what they are in my opinion)throw away
the bolts and get a new set. If I were building an engine that needed
more than a stock 390 rod, I'd get a set of aftermarket steel rods, and
leave the special parts for restorations.

> 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.

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:17:26 EDT
From: ZILCH100 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads

Edelbrock has an intake so you can put 4bbl cards on a 351M/400 with on mods.
or with the same intake you can put an E. G. R. plate on to make it a 2bbl
intake
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:22:45 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Just a thought...

Thanks for your message at 05:33 PM 10/21/98 -0400, Ken Payne. Your message
was:
>At 04:05 PM 10/21/98 -0400, you wrote:
>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

And even adults need places that are concerned with something other than
that which we are exposed to 24 hours a day--a sanctuary for Ford Truck
Enthusiasts.

There are adults in church, but I would not tell a dirty joke there...
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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 06:25:38 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Alternate Method for calibration of velosity of vehicle.

Thanks for your message at 08:26 PM 10/21/98 -0400, Mr. Paul R. Boudreault.
Your message was:
>
>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

Try 5 miles and just multiply the difference between your odometer and the
mileage posts by 2. And yes, I realize this is not precise calibration.
Just somethining to do on long trips when the wife is asleep.
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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:30:22 EDT
From: ZILCH100 aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351M/400 4bbl

Edelbrock has an intake so you can put 4bbl carbs on a 351M/400 with on mods.
or with the same intake you can put an E. G. R. plate on to make it a 2bbl
intake and EPA O.K.
I don't have a part # with me but if you want the number, places to get and a
retail price e-mail me and i will get back to you
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:55:43 -0400
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions

Sorry, this was for Tony directly ...

At 08:13 AM 10/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
>I found that the u-bolt washers were hardened, exactly fit the bolts that
...

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 09:06:46 -0500
From: John Strauss
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Courier question

Well, I was scoffing at somebody asking a Courier question on this list but
my mother-in-law just called and she needs to unload an old Courier pickup
that has been at her business for a coupla years. She needs to find the
VIN number. Anybody know where to find it on this truck? I think it is a
'78 model. It is of the "newer" vintage of Courier, the one that came with
the Pinto motor in it (2.3L).
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:14:06 -0400
From: Tony Marino
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 Rear Leaf Spring Questions

Yeah, I guessed that, so I wrote back personally! 8-)


At 09:55 AM 10/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Sorry, this was for Tony directly ...
>
>At 08:13 AM 10/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>I found that the u-bolt washers were hardened, exactly fit the bolts that
>...
>
>== 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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 07:58:40 -0700
From: "Gillespie, John D."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: fte61-79 - Padded dash on 1966

Dennis, you can try Mac's antique auto parts www.macsautoparts.com
for your door parts.

While on this thread. Has any one found where you can find a replacement
dash pad. My 66 F100 is missing hers and knows it.


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?

I don't know, but not if it was not there when you bought the truck unless
the cop that stops you has a burr under his saddle.

John Gillespie


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:26:53 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

To start, the 61-66 body style is the best looking ever. Stock, it has
the look of something that was made to go really fast with some semi-low
profile tires, especially the way the rear wheels tuck under the bed.
They look horrible lowered, though. Lifted with some meaty tires (look
at my '61), they look mean. The gracefully curved windshield it a work
of art. The '66 (and also '61) grilles are the best IMO.

I have to disagree....the 56!!! is the best looking ever. No I don't own
one either...but I do own a 94 Lightning and I am much happier driving
it than any 66 I've seen...
But that doesn't really matter cause all Ford trucks are great...not
just the ones that we own individually.
Here come the flames
Chris
94 Lightning #381 of 4,007
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:29:11 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I have a '93 Lightning and a '66 F-100.
I would never want to use the '93 for serious work duty. If I had a bought a
"normal' truck of that year I would be fustrated by it's inabilty to work. I
can make an excuse because this is a performance vehicle.
the Lightning is faster and handles better, has A/C, a CD, Power Steering
and power brakes.
It is hard to compare them. 30 years means alot. back then trucks were sold
mostly for work. Now everyone has a truck. and many have never carried more
than groceries in them.
Personally I like older vehicles. that's why my Lightning is for sale. Cheap
to I might mention!
-srw
- -----Original Message-----
From: Garr&Pam
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, October 22, 1998 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear


>To start, the 61-66 body style is the best looking ever. Stock, it has
>the look of something that was made to go really fast with some semi-low
>profile tires, especially the way the rear wheels tuck under the bed.
>They look horrible lowered, though. Lifted with some meaty tires (look
>at my '61), they look mean. The gracefully curved windshield it a work
>of art. The '66 (and also '61) grilles are the best IMO.
>
>I have to disagree....the 56!!! is the best looking ever. No I don't own
>one either...but I do own a 94 Lightning and I am much happier driving
>it than any 66 I've seen...
>But that doesn't really matter cause all Ford trucks are great...not
>just the ones that we own individually.
>Here come the flames
>Chris
>94 Lightning #381 of 4,007
>== 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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:54:45 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I have a '93 Lightning and a '66 F-100.
I would never want to use the '93 for serious work duty. If I had a
bought a "normal' truck of that year I would be fustrated by it's
inabilty to work. I can make an excuse because this is a performance
vehicle. the Lightning is faster and handles better, has A/C, a CD,
Power Steering and power brakes. It is hard to compare them. 30 years
means alot. back then trucks were sold mostly for work. Now everyone has
a truck. and many have never carried more than groceries in them.
Personally I like older vehicles. that's why my Lightning is for sale.
Cheap to I might mention!

Sam I won't argue that...but I don't have a use for a "truck" My
previous truck was a Splash and now I have the Lightning...neither one
has hauled or towed anything (besides who would buy a Lightning to use
for work anyway!) and believe me my dad gives me a real hard time about
that. If I were going to get a truck to work I could not agree more on
having an older truck...but we were talking about looks! And my OPINION
is that the 56 is the best looking ever...and I would rate the Lightning
above the 66.
I can't believe your letting your lightning go so cheap...you are going
to miss it! I saw you post it on the Lightning list. Don't have any
extras laying around that you want to sell?
Chris
94 Lightning #381
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:25:52 -0500 (CDT)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Birken wrote:

The gracefully curved windshield it a work
of art. The '66 (and also '61) grilles are the best IMO.

Is the grill on your 66 a different color (like white) than the rest of the body? My truck is
dark blue but the grill and bumpers were white when I got it. I painted the grill dark blue
and think it further streamlines the looks of the truck. I have some before and after pics
if you want to see what I mean...
Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:26:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Chris,

This is the 61-79 list. So I don't have to defend against 56's, but I'll pull one of those
street scraping 56's outta the deep anytime they need it.

Lightning? Is that just plain lightning or F Lightning?
What's that show where people would go on and fight/climb/run against each other?
Ultimate Saturday Night Gladiators or something? Wasn't there a lightning on that?

1966 Step Side
V-8 352
Attitude at no extra cost


Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 10:37:23 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

>Lightning? Is that just plain lightning or F Lightning?


That was a joke right?
Actually quite a few peole don't know about them.
Only the fastest truck built...
-srw

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:01:48 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Seeing all these comments goin back and forth, I felt I had to say something.
So with Asbestos suit zipped up tight I say this. I own Fords best 2 wheel
drive. Its my 74 F-350. The ride is rough, it'll pull a house, the A/C is as
cold as a witches T**, and that 460 moves my truck faster than a lot of things
on the road. And having the Super Camper Special option, it even handles
pretty good. The 73-79 series of trucks is the best without a doubt, The only
trucks that can do a decent days work and not fall apart, but it still had the
convenience of A/C. Anything more in the direction of convenience, and I'd be
driving a car without a lid for the trunk. Lightnings are nice, but if I want
fast, I'd buy an 88 T-bird Turbo Coupe. My mom has one, and I've yet to lose
a race in that car.

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:54:47 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads

>From: "Eric Guin"
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads
>
>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.

Yo Eric:

The most likely cars to find a 351C 4V in are Torinos, Mustangs, and
Rancheros. Some 351Cs were installed in '70-'71 Customs, Galaxies, and
LTDs, and some were 4V engines. The 351C 4V engines are getting rare now,
so they're not easy to find in most places. Also, most people know what
the 351C 4V heads are worth, so you can expect to pay a premium for them.

You can identify the type of head easily by a number (or letter) cast into
the upper corner of the head (both ends), just outside the valve cover
gasket. The 4V heads have the number "4" cast into this part, 2V heads
have the number "2" cast into this part. Later M-block heads (almost
identical to the 351C 2V heads, but made after the 351C was discontinued)
have the letter "M" cast into this part.

There were three different castings of the 4V heads. The early castings
('70-'71) have a smaller combustion chamber (62.8cc) for higher
compression. The later castings ('72-'74) have a larger combustion chamber
(75.4cc) for lower compression. Extremely rare are the Boss 351 heads w/ a
66.1cc combustion chamber. If you want high performance, though, the early
heads are the best. All 351C 4V heads use the same size valves (2.19
intake, 1.71 exhaust).

Casting numbers for early 4V heads are: D0AE-H, D0AE-R
Casting numbers for later 4V heads are: D1ZE-DA ('71 351C-CJ), D1ZE-GA,
D2ZE-A ('72 351C-HO)
Casting numbers for Boss 351 heads are: D1ZE-B

As for putting 351C 4V heads on an M-block, no mods are necessary. They
are a direct bolt-on.

That said, I would NOT recommend using the 4V heads on a truck M-block.
The 4V ports are sized to work w/ a different 4V intake manifold (which is
not available for the M-block engine, though you can get adapters for a
351C manifold) and the 4V heads are designed to produce power at a much
higher rpm than you want in a truck. The M-blocks I have seen w/ 4V heads
were all pretty soggy below 2K rpm w/ fairly weak off-idle power and
sluggish low rpm throttle response. They don't really get into a good
power band until 3K rpm, which is starting to get up there for a truck
engine. I would strongly recommend against the 4V heads unless you have an
automatic w/ a high stall converter.

IMHO, the optimum M-block heads are the 351C 2V heads. They are almost
identical (slightly smaller combustion chamber) to the later production
M-block heads and they are reputed to be better quality castings.
Supposedly, the '77-'79 M-block heads had core shift problems that caused
the water jacket to be too thin in places, especially around the exhaust
ports, right where you want to grind them to improve flow. A little
porting work and combustion chamber clean-up will turn the 2V heads into
great breathers and they are still relatively cheap and abundant. An
alternative to the 351C 2V heads are the very early production ('71-'72)
M-block 400 heads. These are identical to the 351C 2V heads and a bit more
common.

Casting numbers for 351C 2V heads are: D0AE-E, D0AE-J, D0AZ-A, D0AZ-B,
D0AZ-D, D1ZE-CB, D1AE
Casting number for early M-block (400) heads is: D1AE-A

Good luck w/ your Bronco.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:12:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Justin Farcas
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Steering, steering steering

Yeah, steering probs are getting worse now. Since my last posting about
a clunk on the steering when it steers real sharp, now the steering wheel
inside the truck has a small amount of play, and a little sliping clunk
noise when it's moved. THe smooth movement of the steering on gone, and
now when I turn the wheel, it turns easy as some points, and gets harder
to turn at others. Put some steering conditioning fluid in it, to no
avail. Any suggestions?


--Justin Farcas
**1979 FORD F150 4X4*******************
**460 cubic inches of raw horsepower.**
- --



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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:12:32 -0700
From: sparky mail.island.net
Subject: [none]

Hi everyone. I have just joined this group and as with most newcomers I
have a question to post in the hopes of receiving help.
I recently acquired a 73 F250 4x4 that had "some assembly required"
stamped on the box :) My problem is with assembling the power steering
system,I am missing the power steering cylinder/ram. I checked all the
boxes that have the "extra" parts in them with no luck. I have been
visiting all the auto graveyards in the area looking for this elusive part,
again with no luck. I was wondering if anyone knew if I could replace the
power steering box with a newer one that doesnt need the power cylinder. I
want to try this replacement idea as a new cylinder is a little beyond my
budget at the moment.....over $600 Cdn with taxes, core charge, etc etc.
Also I think that the newer systems are more maintainence friendly, less
stuff to break :)
My truck has front leaf springs and a straight axle, which I beleive is a
Dana 44, huge drum brakes and fully enclosed u-joints. I am a little
inexperienced with Ford trucks having just "come over from the dark side"
of the Ch*vy world, so any help with this prob would be greatly appreciated.

Vaughn
Proud New Owner Of
73 F250 4x4
390 4spd


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:30:37 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

>driving a car without a lid for the trunk. Lightnings are nice, but if I
want
>fast, I'd buy an 88 T-bird Turbo Coupe. My mom has one, and I've yet to
lose
>a race in that car.


A Lightning is faster than a Turbo Coupe.
A Lightning will haul motorcycles and lots of camping gear.
It's a decent compromise.
-srw

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:32:24 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads

>From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads
>
>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.

Yo Paul:

The only reference I have ever found to a factory 4V carburetor on an
M-block (351M/400) engine is a California specification from about 1975 or
'76. I have never been able to confirm this, though. Otherwise, AFAIK,
Ford never produced a M-block engine w/ a 4V carb. All the early 400s I
have seen used Autolite 2150 2V carbs.

>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.

The 400 was available from 1971 to 1979 in cars. The 351M was available
from 1975 to 1979 in cars (it replaced the 351C, which was discontinued
after the 1974 model year). Both M-blocks were available in trucks (and
Broncos) from 1977 to 1982. M-block engines never used a 4V-type head.

All 335 series (351C/351M/400) engine cylinder heads will physically
interchange w/ no modifications. Depending on the block/head (and piston)
combination, you may not be satisfied w/ the results, though.

>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.

Boss 351 engine castings are extremely rare and pricey, and the Boss heads
are not as good for performance as the earlier 351C 4V heads, unless you're
running a Boss 351C engine. The Boss heads have a larger combustion
chamber designed to work w/ special pop-up pistons w/ a huge dome to
achieve a high compression ratio (11.7:1 factory!). W/ normal pistons, the
Boss heads would produce a lower compression ratio than early ('70-'71)
351C 4V heads that have a smaller combustion chamber.

Early production 1971 cars have the higher compression 351C 4V heads.
During the 1971 model year, Ford switched to the 351C "Cobra Jet" heads,
which actually have bigger combustion chambers and a lower compression
ratio. The Cobra Jet heads were the first of the lower compression 351C 4V
heads that were produced from 1971 until the 351C was phased out in 1974.

>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!

You are exactly right about this!

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:28:30 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

At 01:30 PM 10/22/98 , you wrote:
>>driving a car without a lid for the trunk. Lightnings are nice, but if I
>want
>>fast, I'd buy an 88 T-bird Turbo Coupe. My mom has one, and I've yet to
>lose
>>a race in that car.
>
>
>A Lightning is faster than a Turbo Coupe.
>A Lightning will haul motorcycles and lots of camping gear.
>It's a decent compromise.


If you have yet to lose in a Turbo Coupe, count yourself lucky. Those
turbo's make good power, but they don't have the torque to haul a 3800lb
car around very quick. You're either an incredible driver or there aren't
many 5.0's around you.


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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:05:18 -0500
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - speedo gear

To adjust the speedometer calibration, you have to replace the output gear
in the transmission or transfer case with one that has a different number
of teeth. The list had a good discussion several weeks (months?) ago.

BTW, a lot of the late model cars use a signal generator in the tranny
(often a transaxle) with a receiver on the back of the dash unit. There is
no mechanically turning cable, only a wire. This is true of cars with
needles as well as LCD digital readouts.


- -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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Canuel
Subject: [none]

Hi. I was thinking about swapping out my C-6 with a manual tranny.
What would I have to do? It's a 71 F100 2WD with a 360.
Joe




_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:24:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I was with a buddy the other day in his souped up 67 Ch*vy PU - 454 TH400 4.11
rear - and we got spanked by a Lightning. We pulled him off the line and stayed
ahead for about 2 1/2 blocks, then, ZOOOMM!!!! he went by us like we'd hit the
brakes. I couldn't tell if it was stock or not but it looked just like all the
others around here and wasn't real noisy. It was COOOOLLLLL!!!

- -----Original Message-----
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 17:24:00 -0500
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I was with a buddy the other day in his souped up 67 Ch*vy PU - 454 TH400 4.11
rear - and we got spanked by a Lightning. We pulled him off the line and stayed
ahead for about 2 1/2 blocks, then, ZOOOMM!!!! he went by us like we'd hit the
brakes. I couldn't tell if it was stock or not but it looked just like all the
others around here and wasn't real noisy. It was COOOOLLLLL!!!

- -----Original Message-----
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:52:44 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Seeing all these comments goin back and forth, I felt I had to say
something. So with Asbestos suit zipped up tight I say this. I own
Fords best 2 wheel drive. Its my 74 F-350. The ride is rough, it'll
pull a house, the A/C is as cold as a witches T**, and that 460 moves my
truck faster than a lot of things on the road. And having the Super
Camper Special option, it even handles pretty good. The 73-79 series of
trucks is the best without a doubt, The only trucks that can do a decent
days work and not fall apart, but it still had the convenience of A/C.
Anything more in the direction of convenience, and I'd be driving a car
without a lid for the trunk. Lightnings are nice, but if I want fast,
I'd buy an 88 T-bird Turbo Coupe. My mom has one, and I've yet to lose
a race in that car.

You haven't raced a Lightning! Want to? HEHE I have nothing against any
year truck...someone mentioned LOOKS and in my opinion the lightning and
the 56 Ford look better than any 66 I have seen! Now if we are talking
about work then that is completely different the Lightnings payload is
only 745 LBS but can still tow 5,000...lets see that turbo coupe do
that! The only thing that my trucks huals is A**! a 74 F350 460 has work
written all over it...pull my truck its payload and then some.
FORDS ARE FORDS NO MATTER WHAT YEAR...some just look better than others
Chris
94 Lightning

I think I am going to need some of those underwear if you have any
extras!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:57:48 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

sam weatherby wrote:
>
> >Lightning? Is that just plain lightning or F Lightning?
>
> That was a joke right?
> Actually quite a few peole don't know about them.
> Only the fastest truck built...
> -srw

See you getting a little defensive now Sam. Better watch it you'll end
up keeping yours! Hey sam I got a wager for you...you drive your 66 I'll
drive your Lightning and we'll race...if I win you keep your truck...you
will thank me later!
Chris
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:02:20 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

This is the 61-79 list. So I don't have to defend against 56's, but
I'll pull one of those street scraping 56's outta the deep anytime they
need it.

Don't have to...or just plain shouldn't!

Lightning? Is that just plain lightning or F Lightning?
What's that show where people would go on and fight/climb/run against
each other?
Ultimate Saturday Night Gladiators or something? Wasn't there a
lightning on that?

I see someone is getting a little testy. Why don't you try going to the
track or just maybe show up to Lightning shootout and race your
truck...or go to a truck show with some 56s in the crowd...see if you
can win at either event!
NOT!!!!!!
Chris
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:04:18 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I was with a buddy the other day in his souped up 67 Ch*vy PU - 454
TH400 4.11 rear - and we got spanked by a Lightning. We pulled him off
the line and stayed ahead for about 2 1/2 blocks, then, ZOOOMM!!!! he
went by us like we'd hit the brakes. I couldn't tell if it was stock or
not but it looked just like all the others around here and wasn't real
noisy. It was COOOOLLLLL!!!

Get beat by any 66 Fords?
Just curious
Chris
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:20:46 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Interesting...
My friend has a '68 Chevy C-10 SB.
400 Small block. Projection and a 5 spd trany.
Also 4.10 gears. He can run low 15's.
And gets 14mpg highway. Gotta love OD.
But he still can't handle like my Lightning.

I think for a street truck I'd take a '53 to '56 or a '61 to '66.
If I was gonna go off roading i'd take a 73 to '79 any day.
If didn't have a sick disease that makes me drive vehicles that are old and
need work I'd stick with my Lighting.

Even on my '70 mustang that works just fine I have been replacing pefectly
good parts with better ones...
-srw

- -----Original Message-----
From: Doug_Brodie oxy.com
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, October 22, 1998 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear


>I was with a buddy the other day in his souped up 67 Ch*vy PU - 454 TH400
4.11
>rear - and we got spanked by a Lightning. We pulled him off the line and
stayed
>ahead for about 2 1/2 blocks, then, ZOOOMM!!!! he went by us like we'd hit
the
>brakes. I couldn't tell if it was stock or not but it looked just like all
the
>others around here and wasn't real noisy. It was COOOOLLLLL!!!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear
>== 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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:20:51 -0700
From: Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Speedometer Workings (or not)

Odometers work off direct connection to something.
Off the transmission, front wheel, whatever serves
the purpose of turning a flexible shaft that in turn
rotates gears. Pretty simple. Adjust the gear diameters
to change the shaft rotation relationship to the road,
and the odometer changes.

The speedometer is a lot bit different.
The end of the rotating shaft ends with round magnet.
The speedometer needle is attached to a spring
loaded cup that surrounds the magnet.
As the magnet spins it attracts the metal cup and
attempts to spin it in the same direction.

The spring resists this rotation and results in
the needle pointing to various spots on the
speedometer depending on speed of rotation
of the shaft which is in relation to the road.

There's no a direct mechanical connection between
the odometer and speedometer, so they are
separate systems. Adjusting the needle return
spring adjusts the speedometer response.

Don't do this until AFTER the odometer is
properly adjusted, since that adjustment may
alter the rotation speed, thus the speedometer too.


My speedometer needle is bent and rubs against
the glass providing much amusement to be
actually doing 50 and showing 10 or coming to
a stop after doing 60 and still showing 60!

Just got a speedo at a wrecker for $10 yesterday,
so things should improve when I get it installed!
But less amusing.

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:22:32 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Someday I may get another one. But my desire for a house where I can work on
stuff is greater.
Not to mention I am hoping to have a little one or two soon.
My kids will no fractions before regular numnbers...
or at least the comon wrench sizes!
-srw

- -----Original Message-----
From: Garr&Pam
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, October 22, 1998 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear


>sam weatherby wrote:
>>
>> >Lightning? Is that just plain lightning or F Lightning?
>>
>> That was a joke right?
>> Actually quite a few peole don't know about them.
>> Only the fastest truck built...
>> -srw
>
>See you getting a little defensive now Sam. Better watch it you'll end
>up keeping yours! Hey sam I got a wager for you...you drive your 66 I'll
>drive your Lightning and we'll race...if I win you keep your truck...you
>will thank me later!
>Chris
>== 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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:22:07 -0700
From: Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R

I found a '64 F100 longbed at a wrecker
yesterday (snagged the speedo). I want
to go back and get the leaf springs front
and rear to replace the flat (or less) ones
that I have now.

Any advice on how to get those bolts apart,
tools I should take with me, etc? I'm lucky
in that the rear end has already been removed,
so I don't have to deal with that chunk of metal.

I measured the bolts/nuts on my truck so I
know I need 5/8, 3/4, 13/16, & 7/8. Is there
any other size I should be prepared for?

I plan on buying 6 point box/open wrenches
of these sizes for this job, actually a pair of
each size.


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:43:59 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Someday I may get another one. But my desire for a house where I can
work on stuff is greater.
Not to mention I am hoping to have a little one or two soon.
My kids will no fractions before regular numnbers...
or at least the comon wrench sizes!

Well good luck sam! You will still be on the lists right(66)? Probably
not the Lightning list though huh?
Chris
More importantly his first words...FORD TRUCKS!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 19:45:15 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

In a message dated 10/22/98 12:36:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
wish iastate.edu writes:


many 5.0's around you. >>

I'm in Vegas, so there are plenty. But that doesn't matter anyways. 5.0's
aren't that fast, I used to race em in my old 68 Galaxie Ranch Wagon. Kinda
fun seein there jaws drop when an old rusted out wagon just wasted 'em.

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:53:32 -0700
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

I will be here for a while...
I just got the parts to put disc's on the '66.
-srw

- -----Original Message-----
From: Garr&Pam
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, October 22, 1998 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear


>Someday I may get another one. But my desire for a house where I can
>work on stuff is greater.
>Not to mention I am hoping to have a little one or two soon.
>My kids will no fractions before regular numnbers...
>or at least the comon wrench sizes!
>
>Well good luck sam! You will still be on the lists right(66)? Probably
>not the Lightning list though huh?
>Chris
>More importantly his first words...FORD TRUCKS!
>== 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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:18:02 -0400
From: "The Freeman Family"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Heads...what's the difference

Hi Gang,

Some one has offered to sell me his 390GT heads for what sounds like a
reasonable price. I currently have the stock 360 heads on my 360. What is
the difference between the heads other than the exhaust header bolt pattern.
I'm assuming flow... TIA for any input.

- -Ted


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:22:39 -0400
From: "The Freeman Family"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - '73 Springs in a '68

Hi All,


Will '73 F250 springs fit in a '68 F100? I've found a set (still on the
truck) about an hour from where I live. I'd believe they are the same
length, but am not sure. Has anyone done this swap?
TIA




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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:22:07 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

Thanks for your message at 07:45 PM 10/22/98 EDT, JUMPINFORD aol.com. Your
message was:
>In a message dated 10/22/98 12:36:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>wish iastate.edu writes:
>
>
> many 5.0's around you. >>
>
>I'm in Vegas, so there are plenty. But that doesn't matter anyways. 5.0's
>aren't that fast, I used to race em in my old 68 Galaxie Ranch Wagon. Kinda
>fun seein there jaws drop when an old rusted out wagon just wasted 'em.


Do any of these folks know they're racing?


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: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:33:57 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear

In a message dated 10/22/98 6:25:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dpearson ctc.edu
writes:

>

OK flame suit badly scorched. I get the point. Actually they usually
initiated the "horseplay" My old wagon had a dual glasspack exhaust that
sounded really mean. They would hear the rumble, look over and see the wagon
and get a lil chuckle. So we'd play the creeping the light game, but when the
light turned green, I was gone and they were shocked. Got a lot of
compliments about that motor.

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

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 01:59:23 -0700
From: Pat Brown
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Auto / Manual swap

Joe Canuel wrote:
>
> Hi. I was thinking about swapping out my C-6 with a manual tranny.
> What would I have to do? It's a 71 F100 2WD with a 360.

Joe Canuel wrote:
>
> Hi. I was thinking about swapping out my C-6 with a manual tranny.
> What would I have to do? It's a 71 F100 2WD with a 360.

Hi Joe,
Find a donor truck first. Any truck (100/250/350), 67-72, possibly
73-76 with an FE (360/390) engine. The FE bellhousing bolt pattern
is unique, so the bellhousing must come off an FE. You'll need:

Tranny (T-18's are common, 3 speed + granny low), Bellhousing, Clutch,
Clutch pedal, Brake pedal (Narrower), clutch linkage (rod, bell crank,
adjuster link), throwout fork, throwout bearing, flywheel, tranny
mount.

On the T-18, the shift linkage is built into the trans, but you
may want to get the correct steering column, without the auto tranny
shift stuff on it. The column assemblies are different lengths for
power or manual steering, make sure you get the same. The three speed
manual tranny shift is on the column, but you probably don't want one
of those (probabaly not what you had in mind, right?).

Oh yea, the tranny (hump) cover may need to be changed (different height
for auto/std), or at least a hole cut in yours for a shifter. If the std
cover is higher, your carpet wont fit anymore.

You may need the rear crossmember/support, and will definately need a
driveshaft. Can't think of anything else, off hand. Anyone else?

Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:18:44 EDT
From: ZILCH100 aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:

You can order that part from A1 Cardone most auto parts stores will have an A1
power steering book and the cyl's are in the back.
A1 is in Pa. if your close.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 20:07:41 PDT
From: "Don Jones"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - speedometer calibration

If you can get your hands on a handheld GPS (global positioning system)
most will show speed within 1/10th of a mph. Just be sure to maintian a
steady speed on a long straight road to take a reading(speed cannot be
measured instantaneously and corners skew the distance the gps
measures).
i found my '70 f-250 to be going 64.5 mph at an indicate 60 mph.

Don Jones
Northern Ont. Canada

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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:18:46 -0500
From: Brett McCoy
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: headers/exhaust

>>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.

I have a custom setup on my 79 F-250 Crew Cab with a 460 and C-6. I run 2.25"
off the stock exhaust manifolds, then go into a Flowmaster y-pipe to get to 3".
After the y-pipe I run into a hi-perf 3" cat and then into a Flowmaster (just
a plain 3 chamber) muffler. Finally exit out at stock location behind rear
wheel on pass side. It sounds great! Not to loud and not tinny at all. It
looks basically stock but sounds and flows much better. I highly recommend it.
I got my parts from Summit and then had some custom finishing touches done at
local pipe shop.

>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...:)

Most of the new D**ge and Ch*vy trucks on the road with the loud (obnoxious)
duals on them just cut off the old system behind the cat and run 2" pipe to the
back. Then they put a 3" chrome tip on it, who they trying to fool!

>Flowmaster has been recommended by several people, but which series? Can
>anyone describe the Flowmaster sound in the terms I've used above?

Go for the Flowmaster, I don't think you will be disappointed at all.

- -B


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:01:45 -0700
From: "James A. Doty"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: headers/exhaust

Hi there:

I'm running a 351W with an Edelbrock 600cmf 4 barrel carb,
and dual plane manafold. I'm also using Dynomax exhaust
headers and a Flowmaster Muffler with no catalitic (sp?)
converter. On it's last inspection in July my van passed
on the third try with the original cat. still in it. I
didn't know until later that the cat. was completely rotted
out and wasn't doing anything.

BTW, my van failed inspection on the first two attempts
because my locking gas caps wouldn't hold enough pressure
(they leaked from the key holes). I ended up buying a pair
of non-locking caps to pass the test.

Anyway I believe my Flowmaster muffler is three chambers.
It's got a pair of 2.5" input pipes and one 3" output pipe.
I went this route because I didn't feel I had room with the
drop floor of my '78 E-150 and the auxiliry gas tank to run
duel pipes.

The three inch pipe from my muffler makes one 90 degree
bend and exits just in front of the right rear tire.

The exhaust headers are ceramic coated and although I
know it's really too early to tell (They've been installed
for only a couple of months.) they still look real good.

After installing the headers and muffler I noticed my 0 to
55 MPH time dropped by five seconds.

The sounds is very deep and throaty and from inside the van
is easy to listen to. Although during hard acceleration
it is a bit loud. I'm pretty sure that will change when
I finally re-carpet the middle section of the van. We
removed the carpet when we cut the floor out from behind
the front seats to just in front of the rear wheel wells,
then replaced the cut out section with a 4" dropped floor
we had fabricated at a local sheet metal shop.

Overall I'm extremely pleased with how my exhaust system....


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.