 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Saturday, October 24 1998 Volume 02 : Number 497 ======================================================================= 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 - leaf spring removal FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351M 4V heads!? [none] Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads FTE 61-79 - Lightning...What's That? FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges FTE 61-79 - steel wheels FTE 61-79 - FW: LMC cataloge FTE 61-79 - Aussie Heads? FTE 61-79 - Calling Dr Grossman....Dr Grossman Needed in Surgery FTE 61-79 - Rads, what type is better? Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Rads, what type is better? Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear FTE 61-79 - Disc brake conversion. FTE 61-79 - Power Steering Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges Re: FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges Re: FTE 61-79 - Disc brake conversion. Re: FTE 61-79 - Lightning...What's That? FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R Re: 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 - Lightning...What's That? Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Re: FTE 61-79 - Calling Dr Grossman....Dr Grossman Needed in Surgery FTE 61-79 - To 289 or 302 that is the ? FTE 61-79 - 4 speed conversion FTE 61-79 - nomex/Uniboby FTE 61-79 - instrument gauges FTE 61-79 - AUTO C-6 TO MANUAL SWAP Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads Re: FTE 61-79 - Aussie Heads? RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote RE: FTE 61-79 - FW: LMC cataloge Re: FTE 61-79 - To 289 or 302 that is the ? FTE 61-79 - headers/exhaust FTE 61-79 - list splitting Re: FTE 61-79 - list splitting FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Voting Re: FTE 61-79 - AUTO C-6 TO MANUAL SWAP FTE 61-79 - Exhaust manifold question?? FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list-digest V2 #496 FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 05:24:24 PDT From: "eldon eversull" Subject: FTE 61-79 - leaf spring removal 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 - --snip-- 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? Jeff '64 F100 CrewCab Jeff, I replaced my rear springs on a 64 F100 swb in January. I got all the nuts off with a wrench, but had 2 problems. The bolts holding the front of the springs were hard to get at inside the frame. I later bought a set of shorty wrenches to see if that would help, but didn't look at it again. I had to take the shackles in the back to a spring shop to get the bushings pressed out and put the new ones in. The guy there said I was lucky as usually the bolts are stuck in those bushings also. The new springs raised the box up a couple of inches and you can now see the tops of the tires. Oddly, it still leans to the right in the rear. ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:32:51 -0500 (CDT) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R >Any advice on how to get those bolts apart, >tools I should take with me, etc? I've never removed springs, but for just about any other job I find a 1/2" socket drive with a 12" piece of pipe to fit around the handle (ala cheater bar) indispensible. Bryan Kirking 1966 Step Side 352 V -8 3+1 Manual Tranny Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:55:45 -0500 (CDT) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Garr&Pam [garrpam netgsi.com] wrote: >the Lightnings payload is >only 745 LBS but can still tow 5,000... Does this make it a 3/8ths ton truck? :-) >The only thing that my trucks huals is A**! I don't doubt that the lightning and probably a large number of other trucks are faster than my 66. I've always wondered, how much truck speed is enough? At some point it seems that no matter how fast a truck is, its going to lose out to cars which have lower center of gravities and are engineered for speed, not utility. Guess I'm getting old. When I was younger, I wanted speed speed speed... One other thing about old trucks......Wooden bed. Gotta love em. Bryan Kirking 1966 Step Side 352 V -8 3+1 Manual Tranny Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:42:40 -0400 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear JUMPINFORD aol.com wrote: > > 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. Have to agree on the 73-79 trucks. Last of the tough one's, with just enough of the good stuff in the later years. Disc brakes, AC ect... > 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 race against what? T-coupe's are nice, but............ OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:06:41 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351M 4V heads!? Hi Dave R. It has been awhile since I dug through all the specs on 351 heads. The last time I looked into that subject was back in 1979 when I was thinking about building up a Cleveland block to race in a 1970 "Stang" on the drag strip. I decided to stick to my 1969 Cougars with 428 CJ's, (had three, one was a convertible). The pub that I used to get the engine production info was an old "Mustang" "Hot Rod Magazine" number 2. It would not be the first time it was wrong. I was not sure if there actually was special/different heads for 4BB apps in Modifies, and your additional info pretty much confirmed what I thought. As for my block, I have a 1975 block, with the 400 heads you mentioned. Kept the original block, (1979) in the garage incase I ever need it. (Back to original, that sort of thing.) ;>) I run the Edlebrock Manifold, "Ford 351M/400 V8, Performer 400 Non-Egr", (Part number 2171), & "Edlebrock 4BB Carb #1406". The part number for the "Performer 400 EGR" is 3771. These are Edlebrock part numbers. Thanks for the info. Hope that this info and Dave's helps those who want to know. Later, "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:12:28 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: [none] "Thanks for all of the great help you gave me. If 2V heads make better torque I may just get a 4bbl and a good 2 plane manifold (how are the weiand stealth manifolds?) Thanks again! Eric 79' Bronco custom 4X4, 400M Just blew a brake hose =-[" I like weiand manifolds as a rule for torque, but have no experience with these on Modifies. Comments anyone else? Later, "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:12:57 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Date sent: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:55:45 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear > One other thing about old trucks......Wooden bed. Gotta love em. Mine's a 78 and it has a wooden bed..........plywood to cover the rust holes :- ) Well it was a wooden bed, now its a rotten wood bed with holes of it's own. You'd think a guy could at least keep a decent piece of plywood in the bed wouldn't you? :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:14:51 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Date sent: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:32:51 -0500 (CDT) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R > >Any advice on how to get those bolts apart, > >tools I should take with me, etc? > > I've never removed springs, but for just about any other job > I find a 1/2" socket drive with a 12" piece of pipe to fit around the > handle Works good as long as you don't care how many bolts you break off. I've found impact wrenches and penetrating oil do a nice job :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:45:59 -0400 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ref - 351/400M 351C 4V heads Dave Resch wrote: > > > 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. Where can I get a copy of this spec. I may need it in the future to prove to NJ that the 351M did come with a 4 bbl carb, at least on paper anyway. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:14:55 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lightning...What's That? There's a guy who has one, and runs it at our local 1/8th mile strip. It is mighty quick. Actually, about the quickest truck I've seen (I'm almost sure it was stock) was a SWB F100 that had a 429 4bbl and C-6 in it. I think it was a '70 but I'm not sure. It would really haul, and probably win about any burnout contest you'd put it in. He had a set of Mickey Thompson 50's on the back that could lay down a pair of nasty 12 inch wide patches and put up a smoke screen that was in the smoke grenade category. I think it came with a locker, because it would chirp the inside tire and clunk when you turned a corner. If I ever see another one like it, I'll have to buy it. Of course I doubt that the handling and brakes were as good as the Lightning. And the Lightning is getting alot more traction, but man that 429 sure impressed me! > That was a joke right? > Actually quite a few peole don't know about them. > Only the fastest truck built... - -- 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:17:34 -0700 From: dan & Cheryl Ledford Subject: FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges I have a '70 f100 and the instrument gauges are giving me fits. They only read half way on the scale i.e., half full tank of gas, half way on the temp gauge, middle of the oil pressure (when it registers; sometimes it's zero) I have tested the instrument voltage regulator - it's OK; I tested each gauge with high and low resistors - they check OK. The ground wire is firmly attached to the chassis. Anybody have any ideas what to do next? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:24:25 -0400 (EDT) From: STHIBODE spf.fairchildsemi.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - steel wheels Is there a difference in offset between the steel wheels offered on earlier 3/4 ton trucks, late 70's and 80's, and the ones found on trucks up to 1996? any info appreciated... thanks Steve == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:28:41 -0500 From: "Smith, Brian" Subject: FTE 61-79 - FW: LMC cataloge - ---------- From: Smith, Brian[SMTP:brian_s deq.state.la.us] Sent: Friday, October 23, 1998 8:13 AM To: ford trucks list; > Subject: LMC cataloge For those of you who haven't ordered the LMC Ford Pickup cataloge..do so. First off it's FREE!! Secondly, it has pictures and exploded diagrams. I have been a long time customer of their alter ego (ie Victoria British) and have always had good service from them. BTW, I have no finacial intrest in VB or LMC except being a satisfied coustomer. Brian H. Smith 1959 TR3 1972 Spitfire IV 1977 TR7 Lake Charles, LA And a 1967 F-100 SWB == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:30:24 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Aussie Heads? I had a '70 GT Ranchero with a 2bbl Cleveland in it back in '78. I had to pull the heads on it and found that it had "quench" style closed chambers like a 351C 4V. The car had a "Premium Fuel Only" sticker on it. I've been told that those heads didn't come out on a domestic passenger car, but I saw it with my own two eyes. These had to be the only year that the "Aussie" head was available in production. Maybe it was a Canadian car, who knows? Has anyone ever seen a pair? I wish I had them now to build a Windsor-Cleveland hybrid, wouldn't that be something? > 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. - -- 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:34:15 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Calling Dr Grossman....Dr Grossman Needed in Surgery Don Grossman on this list is one of our resident experts on this subject. Are you listening Don? > 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 :) - -- 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:38:30 -0400 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rads, what type is better? Hi everyone. Pulled the rad out yesterday as part of the vehicle strip down, and noticed that it is in poor shape. It will at least need to be recored or replaced. I run a large rad, (3-inch wide core), and was wondering if anyone had an opinion on aluminum vs. regular, and/or multiple brass rod flow channels vs. single large flow channels? Any input would be appreciated. Thanks, "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:10:05 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear In a message dated 10/23/98 6:10:14 AM Pacific Daylight Time, luxjo thecore.com writes: > Just last week I wasted a beautiful 69 Road Runner 383, but in his defense, his car reeked of Varnished gas, still wasted him though. Really T'd him off. He had spent most of the night braggin about his car, and doggin "those pathetic 4 cyl". It was a hole lotta fun. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:17:11 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Well the Lightning also outhandles quite a few cars. Most a Camaros and Mustangs. - -----Original Message----- From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com; Date: Friday, October 23, 1998 6:00 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear >Garr&Pam [garrpam netgsi.com] wrote: > >>the Lightnings payload is >>only 745 LBS but can still tow 5,000... > >Does this make it a 3/8ths ton truck? :-) > >>The only thing that my trucks huals is A**! > >I don't doubt that the lightning and probably a large number of other >trucks are faster than my 66. I've always wondered, how much truck >speed is enough? At some point it seems that no matter how fast a >truck is, its going to lose out to cars which have lower center of >gravities and are engineered for speed, not utility. > >Guess I'm getting old. When I was younger, I wanted speed speed >speed... > >One other thing about old trucks......Wooden bed. Gotta love em. > >Bryan Kirking >1966 Step Side >352 V -8 >3+1 Manual Tranny >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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:26:31 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rads, what type is better? From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rads, what type is better? Date sent: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:38:30 -0400 > anyone had an opinion on aluminum vs. regular, and/or multiple brass rod > flow channels vs. single large flow channels? We discussed this at length on the bronco list a while back and it turns out that copper has a heat sinking coefficient much greater than aluminum, roughly twice as good so copper radiators are better in every way including corrosion resistance. Aluminum is attacked by virtually all chemicals known to man and has a very delicate PH range it can safely tolerate in either direction from neutral (7). Most copper radiators are cheaper than after market al radiators as well. 78 and 79 ford trucks has an excellent one available called the "super cool" or extra cooling which measures 26.375 x 24 x 4" and is a 4 tube, HD radiator. My last one cost about $250 from Murray's. The main reason race cars use al is weight, not efficiency. Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:32:02 -0700 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear Thanks for your message at 08:17 AM 10/23/98 -0700, sam weatherby. Your message was: >Well the Lightning also outhandles quite a few cars. >Most a Camaros and Mustangs. > All this email about Lightnings is driving me crazy. I want one so bad I could taste it, but priorities dictate otherwise: kids in college, kids in sports, kids in jail (joke)...I've even wondered how hard it would be to turn my 62 Unibody into a Lightning, or at least a pseudo-Lightning. I could use the Cleveland and...? What kind of frame setup do the Lightnings have? It seems one of their strongest points is handling. If only my 62 could handle... 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:43:09 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear You can have mine... But if anyone chooses to have mine they have to not inform me. (That was a joke) -srw - -----Original Message----- From: Dennis Pearson To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Friday, October 23, 1998 8:38 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear >Thanks for your message at 08:17 AM 10/23/98 -0700, sam weatherby. Your >message was: >>Well the Lightning also outhandles quite a few cars. >>Most a Camaros and Mustangs. >> > All this email about Lightnings is driving me crazy. I want one so bad I >could taste it, but priorities dictate otherwise: kids in college, kids in >sports, kids in jail (joke)...I've even wondered how hard it would be to >turn my 62 Unibody into a Lightning, or at least a pseudo-Lightning. I >could use the Cleveland and...? What kind of frame setup do the Lightnings >have? It seems one of their strongest points is handling. If only my 62 >could handle... >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 > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:44:55 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Disc brake conversion. This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0282_01BDFE61.68438460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have the parts now to do the disc conversion on my '66. I will try to take pictures to add to the tech articles. -srw - ------=_NextPart_000_0282_01BDFE61.68438460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http-equiv=3DContent-Type> I have the parts now to do the disc = conversion=20 on my '66. I will try to take pictures to add = to the tech=20 articles. size=3D2> &nbs= p; = ;=20 - -srw - ------=_NextPart_000_0282_01BDFE61.68438460-- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:46:25 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Power Steering This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_028A_01BDFE61.9E003B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does anyone out there have any thoughts on a power steering swap for a = '66 F100? What years can I get a steering column from? ( I done need a different = one right?) Steering boxes? -srw - ------=_NextPart_000_028A_01BDFE61.9E003B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http-equiv=3DContent-Type> Does anyone out there have any = thoughts on a=20 power steering swap for a '66 F100? What years can I get a steering = column from? ( I=20 done need a different one right?) Steering boxes? size=3D2> &nbs= p; =20 - -srw - ------=_NextPart_000_028A_01BDFE61.9E003B20-- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:50:26 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear At 10:17 AM 10/23/98 , you wrote: >Well the Lightning also outhandles quite a few cars. >Most a Camaros and Mustangs. I know a lot of Mustang and Camaro guys who would dispute this, but just to add my little bit to the thread, there is a guy who shows up to autocross his Lightning at a go-kart track here in central Iowa. Everyone laughed when he showed up the first time (no tailgate and remnants of a load of dirt still in the bed), till he made his first lap. He beat almost all the four cylinders and faired pretty well among the V8's. No one laughs any more ... 'cept the rice boys, and they are usually shut up pretty quick when the tires break loose in the corner and he smokes them in 2nd .... Anyway we're comparing apples and oranges with the lightning and the 56/66/76 's ... everyone is entitled to their own stupid opinion. Laters Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 11:27:12 -0500 (CDT) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges dan & Cheryl Ledford [ledford AZstarnet.com] wrote: I have a '70 f100 and the instrument gauges are giving me fits. They only read half way on the scale i.e., half full tank of gas, half way on the temp gauge, middle of the oil pressure (when it registers; sometimes it's zero) I have tested the instrument voltage regulator - it's OK; I tested each gauge with high and low resistors - they check OK. The ground wire is firmly attached to the chassis. Anybody have any ideas what to do next? If you have are sure about power and ground and the gauges check ok, then your senders (or wires to them or their grounds) would have to be bad. It seems unlikely that would be true all at once but... I would go next to the fuel gauge (cause I have more experience with it) and check to see if the ground on it is good. try putting an ohm meter across it and move the float ( or just do this when empty and full) and see if you get reasonable values. How exactly did you test the gauges with resistors? What resistances did you use? Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:40:06 -0700 From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Instrument gauges dan & Cheryl Ledford wrote: > I have a '70 f100 and the instrument gauges are giving me fits. They > only read half way on the scale i.e., half full tank of gas, half way on > the temp gauge, middle of the oil pressure (when it registers; sometimes > it's zero) I have tested the instrument voltage regulator - it's OK; I > tested each gauge with high and low resistors - they check OK. The > ground wire is firmly attached to the chassis. Anybody have any ideas > what to do next? Sounds like a semi-busted wire, either in the power or ground to the instrument panel. With the battery disconnected, use an ohmmeter (digital multi-meter) to measure impedance from the ground side of the guage to the battery ground cable - if not 0 ohms, start from before the instrument panel plug and measure backwards in steps until you find the faulty section. If that works, re-connect the battery and measure voltages in the same manner. With all the instruments not working, it's probably ground. Good Luck, 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:14:40 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Disc brake conversion. - --=====================_97485957==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:44 AM 10/23/98 -0700, you wrote: > > I have the parts now to do the disc conversion on my '66. > I will try to take pictures to add to the tech articles. > -srw That would be very cool. When I add them, I'll post your name as the photographer. Ken Payne - --=====================_97485957==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" At 08:44 AM 10/23/98 -0700, you wrote: I have the parts now to do the disc conversion on my '66. I will try to take pictures to add to the tech articles. - -srw That would be very cool. When I add them, I'll post your name as the photographer. Ken Payne - --=====================_97485957==_.ALT-- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 10:17:47 -0700 From: Jason Eaton Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lightning...What's That? Funny, my dad and I put together a 65 short bed with a 429 C6 combo. Fun stuff, but not quite as fast as the truck you quote below. I have managed to get the high flow heads. The truck can carry 1 ton of rock as fast as you wanna go up any hill. ( I know I tried :) Cheers. William L Ballinger wrote: > > There's a guy who has one, and runs it at our local 1/8th mile strip. > It is mighty quick. > > Actually, about the quickest truck I've seen (I'm almost sure it was > stock) was a SWB F100 that had a 429 4bbl and C-6 in it. I think it was > a '70 but I'm not sure. It would really haul, and probably win about > any burnout contest you'd put it in. He had a set of Mickey Thompson > 50's on the back that could lay down a pair of nasty 12 inch wide > patches and put up a smoke screen that was in the smoke grenade > category. I think it came with a locker, because it would chirp the > inside tire and clunk when you turned a corner. If I ever see another > one like it, I'll have to buy it. Of course I doubt that the handling > and brakes were as good as the Lightning. And the Lightning is getting > alot more traction, but man that 429 sure impressed me! > > That was a joke right? > > Actually quite a few peole don't know about them. > > Only the fastest truck built... > -- > 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 - -- Jason Eaton CyberSource Corporation Phone: (408)260-6044 Senior Software Engineer jeaton cybersource.com http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.cybersource.com == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:45:49 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote Two new votes have been added to the web site voting center. 1. Split the 61-79 list into two lists to reduce traffic. 2. Add pre48 list. Voting expires in 14 days. Here we grow again! If the new lists get approved, we will ask for volunteers to administer them. Ken Payne CoAdmin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:48:07 -0500 (CDT) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote Ken, What would be the split, or two new lists? Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:13:56 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote At 02:48 PM 10/23/98 -0500, you wrote: >Ken, > What would be the split, or two new lists? >Bryan Kirking >66 Step Side >352 4 speed >Houston, Texas > It would split into 2 lists. It would split one of the following two ways (to be voted on if the split vote is yes): a. 61-66 and 67-79 lists or b. 61-72 and 73-79 lists Ken == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:25:48 -0500 From: Mike Masse Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R CARVER, JEFFREY D wrote: > > 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. Getting the nut off is usually no big deal, but getting the bolt out is a completely different ball game. The rubber bushings usually fuse to the bolt and to the spring itself so that it's impossible to remove the bolt. Since it's rubber it absorbs any sort of shock from an impact wrench. You might want to take a propane torch with you to burn the rubber bushings out in case they are fused. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:43:52 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaf Spring Removal F&R >wrench. You might want to take a propane torch with you to burn the >rubber bushings out in case they are fused. I have done that before. I always look forward to an oportuniy to use fire for fun, I mean work. Oh nevermind. -srw == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:10:20 +0000 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear 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. They are plenty fast enough to waste a Trubo Coupe....remember alot has to do with driver...so people get kicks out watching you think you beat them...put a wager on the race and see if its no a better race! Its alot more fun in a Lightning...see there faces at the light looking at you like I am going to waste this guy...then boom light turns green and all he sees is tailights...and then won't even pull up next to you at the next light!(Alot of them trying to show off with the girl in the car....then its the time demoralize their feelings) Chris == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:24:56 +0000 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear the Lightnings payload is only 745 LBS but can still tow 5,000... Does this make it a 3/8ths ton truck? :-) Thats a good one! The only thing that my trucks huals is A**! I don't doubt that the lightning and probably a large number of other trucks are faster than my 66. I've always wondered, how much truck speed is enough? At some point it seems that no matter how fast a truck is, its going to lose out to cars which have lower center of gravities and are engineered for speed, not utility. You ahven't experience the Lightning yet then Hey Sam...aren't there two guys running 9's on the list....didn't one of them get into the 8's recently!There are numerous Lightning owners running 12's and 13's not too many of us want to go faster than 12 because you have to install a roll cage! That a hard customization to reverse if you no want I mean! Chris == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:37:31 +0000 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lightning...What's That? Funny, my dad and I put together a 65 short bed with a 429 C6 combo. Fun stuff, but not quite as fast as the truck you quote below. I have managed to get the high flow heads. The truck can carry 1 ton of rock as fast as you wanna go up any hill. ( I know I tried :) Probably handled like a U haul truck compared to Lightnings! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 14:35:52 -0700 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear I think the most impressive is Mike Wesley. Sure he's only running 11's. Sure he only has ~750 HP. Sure he only gets 18MPG highway. And he drives it everday, and it still handles good. John Lingenfelter (the 'Vette guy) has a 605 inch 454SS and isn't that fast. You could easily build a hot 351 (EFI!) and stick it in a '66... I like my Lightning, it has lots of potential, but anything 35 years or more (will change to 25 in '00) can be registered differently, using a plate from the era of the car and it is a one time deal and no IM is required. (I am in Washington state BTW.) I do like the idea of a built small block. No reason to carry around more weight than you need to. But a 600 inch BB would be fun too... - -----Original Message----- From: Garr&Pam To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Friday, October 23, 1998 2:21 PM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear >the Lightnings payload is >only 745 LBS but can still tow 5,000... > >Does this make it a 3/8ths ton truck? :-) > >Thats a good one! > >The only thing that my trucks huals is A**! > >I don't doubt that the lightning and probably a large number of other >trucks are faster than my 66. I've always wondered, how much truck >speed is enough? At some point it seems that no matter how fast a >truck is, its going to lose out to cars which have lower center of >gravities and are engineered for speed, not utility. > >You ahven't experience the Lightning yet then > >Hey Sam...aren't there two guys running 9's on the list....didn't one of >them get into the 8's recently!There are numerous Lightning owners >running 12's and 13's not too many of us want to go faster than 12 >because you have to install a roll cage! That a hard customization to >reverse if you no want I mean! >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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:48:01 +0000 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Nomex underwear All this email about Lightnings is driving me crazy. I want one so bad I could taste it, but priorities dictate otherwise: kids in college, kids in sports, kids in jail (joke)...I've even wondered how hard it would be to turn my 62 Unibody into a Lightning, or at least a pseudo-Lightning. I could use the Cleveland and...? What kind of frame setup do the Lightnings have? It seems one of their strongest points is handling. If only my 62 could handle... Mos tof the work is in the suspension...lowered an inch in the front and 2 1/2 and the rear...thicker sway bars, firmer shocks, reinforced frame above the rear axle, and different alignment specs! They just never run out of grip in the corners....You name it I have beat it throught the turns...granted I have never got a viper or porsche 911turbo...but I haven't seen a porsche around here and the very few viper owners are afraid of breaking them == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:23:31 -0800 From: Don Grossman Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Calling Dr Grossman....Dr Grossman Needed in Surgery William L Ballinger wrote: > Don Grossman on this list is one of our resident experts on this > subject. Are you listening Don? > > > 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 :) > Thanks William ;-) I over looked the first message that your quote was attached too. Is it 4 or 2 wheel drive? And, what year was that truck again? Dun caught me at the nurses station again ;} - -- Don Grossman duckdon pacific.net http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon ICQ# 19575234 63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:49:01 -0800 From: Don Grossman Subject: FTE 61-79 - To 289 or 302 that is the ? A Ford motor question for you all. I am looking at a Jeep ( it's a toy and the price is right) and it was set up with a 289. The engine is gone but the bell housing is still there. If I were to pick up this jeep should I stick with the 289 to go up to a 302? What would be the best (cheap, make that double on the cheap) way to make torque out of the small block? Fire away! Wait a minute..... forget I said that last part... - -- Don Grossman duckdon pacific.net http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon ICQ# 19575234 63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:41:54 -0700 From: "J.S.H." Subject: FTE 61-79 - 4 speed conversion > "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:etc etc > Can't think of anything else, off hand. Anyone else? >Pat Brown Pretty well sums it up Pat. I did this conversion on my 76 awhile back.I had to change the driveshaft yokes too,but mine is a 4x4.I didn't change my column took the shift tube out and changed the collar to the manual one. Still have the shifter ear sticking from the bottom of the column tho. A guy could get a " body rough $800" truck with a 4spd and switch all the componets between the the two trucks and then resale the beater for what he paid for it. Just a thought. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:51:42 -0700 From: "J.S.H." Subject: FTE 61-79 - nomex/Uniboby I was thinking of getting a 61-66 to compliment the beauty of my 76f-250 4x4 but certanly not to replace it. (BTW looking for straight 61-66 2wd s/b in Reno area) Anybody have the story on Big Back Window Unibodies? I have only seen one in my lifetime so I assume they are quite rare. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 16:05:59 -0700 From: dan & Cheryl Ledford Subject: FTE 61-79 - instrument gauges thanks for the tips on checking ohms and voltages. I'll give it a try. Someone - forget who - asked what resistors I used to check the gauges. I used a 10 ohm, 5 watt resistor for the high test, and a 75 ohm, 1 watt for the low test. Followed the procedures in the '70 maintenance manual. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:41:45 -0400 From: "Jerry" Subject: FTE 61-79 - AUTO C-6 TO 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. As you probably already know, You'll need: Bellhousing, Clutch, > Clutch pedal, Brake pedal (Narrower), clutch linkage (rod, bell crank, > adjuster link), throwout fork, throwout bearing, flywheel, tranny > mount, etc., etc. I just finished going the other way....manual to auto. 69 F350 T-18. AND................have been assembling a *changeover kit * for someone just like you who wants to do it the other way. I have EVERY nut, bolt, fork, etc, etc. for the swap. The pressure plate and disc are even good. Interested in some parts ? ? ? Contact list or privately. On the subject of the rear crossmember/support, all I had to do was drill 2 new holes and move it forward about an inch. I could also reuse the tranny mount on the AOD I put in. (C-6 w/OD) Jerry 1969 F350 Dually reefer 351W AOD PS PB PW AC 1970 F100 (ret) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:40:41 EDT From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 Cleveland heads i may be a little late on this, but the 351 c 4v heads are getting harder to find, the closed chamber is my choice,but you have to run expensive fuel, for your engine i would suggest a set of 70-72 351 cleveland 2 barrel heads, these have good size valves and combustion chambers, a little porting on these exhaust helps with a cam,intake and carb. the 4v heads are simply too big,they won't make much torque around town. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 19:58:09 EDT From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Aussie Heads? back just a few years ago you could still buy the aussie heads. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:04:55 -0700 From: "pat green" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote I like the 61-79 list the way it is. I vote for no separation > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com > [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Ken Payne > Sent: Friday, October 23, 1998 11:46 AM > To: pre61-list ford-trucks.com; 61-79-list ford-trucks.com; > 80-96-list ford-trucks.com; 97up-list ford-trucks.com; > small-list ford-trucks.com; perf-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: 61-79 list split vote > > > Two new votes have been added to the web site voting > center. > > 1. Split the 61-79 list into two lists to reduce > traffic. > 2. Add pre48 list. > > Voting expires in 14 days. > > Here we grow again! If the new lists get approved, we > will ask for volunteers to administer them. > > Ken Payne > CoAdmin, > Ford Truck Enthusiasts > > == 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:08:22 -0700 From: "pat green" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FW: LMC cataloge Hey Brian do they have an email address or could you post the phone number. thanks pat > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com > [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Smith, Brian > Sent: Friday, October 23, 1998 7:29 AM > To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: FTE 61-79 - FW: LMC cataloge > > > > > ---------- > From: Smith, Brian[SMTP:brian_s deq.state.la.us] > > Sent: Friday, October 23, 1998 8:13 AM > To: ford trucks list; > > Subject: LMC cataloge > > For those of you who haven't ordered the LMC Ford Pickup cataloge..do so. > First off it's FREE!! Secondly, it has pictures and exploded diagrams. I > have been a long time customer of their alter ego (ie Victoria > British) and > have always had good service from them. BTW, I have no finacial > intrest in > VB or LMC except being a satisfied coustomer. > Brian H. Smith > 1959 TR3 > 1972 Spitfire IV > 1977 TR7 > Lake Charles, LA > And a 1967 F-100 SWB > == 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:02:06 EDT From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - To 289 or 302 that is the ? if you want torque go with a 351 windsor, most people can't tell the diiference between a 302 and 351w they look almost identical, the 351 is a little wider and taller. i have the parts to bulid a nice windsor and they could be yours. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 20:16:50 -0500 From: "Dale and Donna Carmine" Subject: FTE 61-79 - headers/exhaust >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. Brett, thanks for the info. I ordered my parts yesterday, (same set-up without the cat) and I'll let you know how I like it after it's done. later, dale c '79 351M == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 18:53:02 -0700 From: dan & Cheryl Ledford Subject: FTE 61-79 - list splitting Seems like we could split the list based on common characteritics; maybe a) pre-electronic ignition, or b) pre catalytic converter or c) some other criteria? I agree the amount of message trafic is almost unmanagable. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:10:23 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - list splitting If the list is to be split, Which I don't really like, I think the best split would be the 61-66, 67-79 split. Because as far as I know, and I could be wrong, the 67-79 models used basically the same frame. I do know that my 73 F-600 still uses the earlier dash. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:02:27 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Voting Don't send your votes for the list split to either the lists or to me. Go to the web site and use the voting center. Thanks, 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: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:55:50 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AUTO C-6 TO MANUAL SWAP One more side note to the tranny swap. When we switched our 73 F-350 pumper truck from a C-6 to a T-18 we came across one problem. The auto sits on a different cross member in the rear. The cross member itself is the same, but the brackets that it bolts to are different. The difference in the brackets was that the automatic had the lower of the two. We couldn't figure out why the clutch linkage felt tight till we put to side by side. Dad noticed the different bracket. (one has 3 rivets per bracket, the other only has 2, I don't remember which) and upon closer inspection there is about 1/2-3/4 of an inch of difference in the respective heights. We just did a flip flop of the brackets, because the one we were comparing it to was originally a 4 speed, but had been switched to Auto, and his linkage was real stiff. A whole lot of grinding and cussing followed, as those rivets were intended to NEVER come out. But all in all After we were done, everything felt real kosher again. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" If you need, I can crawl under my truck and see if I have the brackets with 2 or 3 rivets. Just lemme know. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 23:12:57 -0500 From: Joe & Jen DeLaurentis Subject: FTE 61-79 - Exhaust manifold question?? ANybody know if an FE 390 motor uses differnt ex. manifolds on a 4x2 truck then a 4x4 truck????Or is the pipes just bent differently?? joe == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ .... To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are 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. 
|