 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Thursday, November 5 1998 Volume 02 : Number 511 ======================================================================= 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 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm goi [none] [none] FTE 61-79 - Re: 9" vs dana 60 FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing Re: FTE 61-79 - The He-Man Header Haters Club FTE 61-79 - Header Haters FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - NP435 install, 78 bronco FTE 61-79 - pickup FTE 61-79 - Rear Sump Oil Pans Re: FTE 61-79 - Start Me Up... FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... FTE 61-79 - brake lines Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Bent Starter Forks Re: FTE 61-79 - Start Me Up... FTE 61-79 - Re: (guge shunt) FTE 61-79 - Re:Baby, what a lovely grille you got.... Re: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing FTE 61-79 - Re: (guge shunt) Re: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing FTE 61-79 - harmonic balancer seal Re: FTE 61-79 - Checking fire at plug Re: FTE 61-79 - brake lines FTE 61-79 - My #$%%$#$# brakes Re: FTE 61-79 - Tires FTE 61-79 - Double Jinx!!! Now my starter's screwed. Re: FTE 61-79 - Double Jinx!!! Now my starter's screwed. FTE 61-79 - Re: harmonic balancer seal Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm goi Re: FTE 61-79 - Gears sticking FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size Fw: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size Re: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size FTE 61-79 - Nominate Ford Truck Enthusiasts? Re: FTE 61-79 - Solutions FTE 61-79 - steering column Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 9" vs dana 60 FTE 61-79 - AMP GAUGE - SHUNT WIRE FIX Re: FTE 61-79 - Double Jinx!!! Now my starter's screwed. ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 07:19:35 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm goi Date sent: Tue, 03 Nov 1998 14:54:23 -0700 From: "Andrew W. Ford - Speaking For Myself" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm goi > > .0001 ampers can kill. Voltage dosent mean a thing, I got hit by a > > capacitor that was rated over a million volts, felt like an electric > > fence.. > > Uh, not to pick nits, but .001 ampers (1mA) is the threshold of sensation. > 20-75mA is usually gosh-dern-unfriendly! but rarely life-threatening. > 75-100mA can be fatal 100-200mA, if through the heart, is almost always > fatal. As you progress above 200mA, burns and severe post-shock spasms can > be fatal. Don't know how many volts it takes to jump 6-8" but an old town mr fix it did a demo at school one day with one of those cool electrode dohickys that has the long spark and when the spark didn't jump he reached up and attempted to bend one of the electrodes...........he lived but he lost a day in his memory. This same guy did heating and plumbing and cut his hand on some sheet metal one day........like a 2" gash well below the skin........and took out his sewing kit he always kept with him for such emergencies and.........sewed it back up!! BTW, you are probably right on all your points but the human body has a very high resistance so it takes a lot of voltage to get the amperage but it also takes a source with low enough impedance to allow that much flow "to" your body too which is why auto plug wires don't typically kill people but 110 house current does. The spark plug voltage is also intermittant but house current is continuous. AC also has a more detrimental "shock" effect on your body due to the cycles etc. I've been told where DC tends to just heat things up and burn which is why you usually feel AC before you do DC, voltage wise. Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 08:50:25 -0500 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: [none] If I was going to modify the shunt on the stock gauge, I'd probably wrap the shunt wire around something to make a nice compact coil out of it and mount it on the firewall in the engine compartment to keep it out from under the dash. Then I would extend the wires on the gauge so they could connect to the shunt in the engine compartment. That keeps the high current stuff out from under the dash. Hi Steve. Correct me if I am wrong, (and I am sure someone will!) But isn't that called a resistor? (Unless you wrap it around a piece of steel then you call it an Electro-magnet. ;>) Later, "Paul" (Remember, there is at least one smart a** in every crowd. This list probably has way more!) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 08:57:25 -0500 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: [none] a nine inch built correctly is as strong as a Dana 60, use a "N" case, Daytona pinion support, Detroit locker and 31 spline axles. and install a trak lok in the front. this is the set up I'm running in my pulling truck (78 f150) all the competitors in my class are pulling f250's and 3/4 ton Chevy's. I normally finish 1st or 2nd and I'm about the only one that has never broke a driveline part, maybe I've just been lucky. of course the Dana 60 front and rear would be nice. I'm just cheap Jeff grant Hi Jeff. I will look for/get the "N" case for the carrier. How hard are these to find? And ("gulp") how much? Sounds like the rear is going to be Detroit locker. As for the front you recommend a Trak lok? What about the "PowerTrax"? (They are new and I wondered if you have an opinion.) Later, "Paul" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 09:19:27 -0500 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 9" vs dana 60 Mr. Paul R. Boudreault wrote: > > > a nine inch built correctly is as strong as a Dana 60, use a "N" case, > Daytona > pinion support, Detroit locker and 31 spline axles. and install a trak lok > in > the front. Problem is dana 60's are way to cheap (60$) in my area. Most come with 4.10 gears and are in good shape (don't even need new bearings). Drop in a detroit and you have one serious axle for 530$ (plus a diff bearing swap if you don't have a press). This includes the locker. That N case and big bearing stuff is very pricey and your still left with a non-full foating axle. Even ground clearance is virutally the same between them. Biggest draw backs are weight (not that it matters much on 5-6K lbs trucks) and you need 8 lug wheels, but most older trucks can be upgraded to 8 lug front stuff without too much hassle. If you have big bucks invested in 5 lug wheel/tire combos, then the 9 inch build up may be the way to go. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:25:55 -0500 From: am14 chrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing Gary writes: >>Anyone have an opinion or experience with a pilot bearing as opposed to a bushing? The 335 series has both but the bearing isn't really a bearing in the normal sense in that there is no cage and the needles are not free to rotate about the axis of the shaft but only about their own axis which seems a tad silly to me but I opted for the bearing because it has an "O" ring seal and the bushing does not. Come on Gary.Really - Does anyone have an opinion .. we all have opinions.. some wrong some right some indifferent. Seriously. The pilot shaft and the crank shaft turn at the same rpm's in high gear, which is where the majority of the miles on any vehicle are put on. The only time the two are turning at different speeds is when in the lower gears, so why do we need a bearing. A bushing will outlast both you and I. It's sole purpose is to keep the input shaft in true alignment with the crankshaft anyway. (prevent wobble). You chose the bearing. I have no clue as to the difference in cost, but I would have opted for the bushing - My opinion - reasons above. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 08:29:57 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - The He-Man Header Haters Club >I just got done reading Ballinger's dissertation on headers and it just >doesn't give me hope. > >I had finally decided that the headers have to go (390), now I'm not sure. >My problems are with leaks and drive shaft clearance. > >All of the headers that I have seen are the full length. Does anyone make a >shorty header for the FE series? Would a shorty header offer a compromise >between performance and fitment? > >Should I spend the $ for custom header? Should I go stock? What to do? What >to do? > >-- >Don Grossman >duckdon pacific.net >http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon >ICQ# 19575234 > Good question, I've asked it a couple of times and no one seems to know if shorties are out there ... if you find some PLEASE let me know .. also if you find someone to build shortie's for you, maybe they'll give a discount if we order a bunch of them ? Anyone else interested ? Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:35:23 EST From: BDIJXS aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Header Haters Thanks for all the input (especially Bill!) on whether or not to replace the headers. I was encouraged by Eric's note about his experience of replacing them and not noticing much difference. As Bill mentioned about gearing, mine are 3:50's, so I hardly really rev that high.....I too am tired of the noise, leaks, clearance trouble (no starter problems, even after about 18 years with them, mine are Cyclones)....still taking it under advisement... Thanks again, Colorado Jeff == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:41:06 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: FTE Perf - NP435 install, 78 bronco From: "Dave Resch" Date sent: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 15:11:42 -0700 Subject: Re: FTE Perf - NP435 install, 78 bronco > Maybe the previous owner lost some bell housing to engine block bolts, > too. When I did the clutch last year on my 351M/NP435 truck, seems like > there were 6 bolts holding it together. The C-6 has an integral bell housing and is very strong, the NP435 has 4 bolts holding the bell housing on the tranny, 7/16" is all they are and no dowel pins either. The bell housing to the engine is the same as the C-6 and all bolts were in place and tight but all 4 of the tranny to bell housing bolts were loose which may explain some of the vibration :-) Here's what I found in this project: Pilot bushing totally toast, like 1/8" clearance Input and output shafts bearings toast, really rough third gear syncro shot (why I took it out) all 4 bolts holding the tranny to bell housing loose, very loose Throw out bearing appeared to still be satisfactory Clutch had been chattering a lot but looked fairly good except for discoloration. Slight wavyness to flywheel surface but smooth, not scored and disk looked like it still had some life left in it but it was glazed. Here's what I replaced: Pilot bushing with bearing throwout bearing transmission resurfaced flywheel new pressure plate new disk Second gear syncros in new tranny are toast but third is good and fourth as well so I'm a little dissapointed but was planning to rebuild it before putting it in so I guess I'm still Ok, I got what I paid for so Rick's off the hook :-) Should last till summer, just can't do Hollywood stops anymore :-( Bearings are nice and smooth and input shaft is in much better shape than the old one. With the xfer case out I could get a handle on the shape of the gears and bearings in it, feels pretty good, better than my spare for sure :-) I don't like the clutch. It's smooth and does the job but the transition range is way shorter than before and full grab happens half way out. I like a fast or early grab, right off the floor. I'll miss too many shifts with this stupid half way house thing going on. Seems a little less strong than the old one too, I was hoping for "stronger" :-( While it wasn't a total success I found out a lot about the truck and now see what my work is in the floor and got a lot of fasteners anti-seized in the process. I had a modicum of success with the brakes too, I'll post that separately :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:58:05 -0500 From: am14 chrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - pickup Chris writes: >>>I've replaced several pickups that cured the problem you describe. - - ->Azie - - ->Ardmore, Al. You replace the whole truck! WOW! Do you at least keep the Radiator cap? Chris 79 Bronco You got me again, Chris. Azie == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 08:06:37 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lee Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rear Sump Oil Pans I have a '53 F100 with a '71 351C-4V. I am planning to install a MustangII suspension w/ rack&pinion steering. I have to convert from a front sump oil pan to a rear sump. Will a 'M' block oil pan fit the Cleveland? If so what Year&Model 'M' block has a rear sump? Dan Lee '53 F100 351C-4V danlee_58 yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 11:24:23 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Start Me Up... Date sent: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 02:00:09 -0600 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Start Me Up... > starter as some six-cylinder applications. It might be that a six > application may have a lighter duty fork. All the ford starter from that era were the same internally but there were 3 different starter bodies which were not interchangeable: Hi volume or 4.5", positive engagement starter had different nose casting to suit each application but from there back were all the same. Low volume 4.5 with selenoid or what I refer to as the "4 pole" used the same basic body parts, coils and armature but had a slighly differnt frame and 4 solid pole pieces. It also uses a differnt type of bendix engagement linkage. 4" has the same design as the Hi volume 4.5" but different parts and size so fork could be lighter on that one. I'm not too familair with it since it was run on a differnt line but wouldn't be surprised to find out it uses the same lever. I'm too rusty on it now but it seems we did have a separate lever die for that one. Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 11:12:19 -0600 From: "Smith, Brian" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... Dear list, I'm trying to get the stuff to reassemble this '83 351W in my '67 but I've run into a problem. My parts guy says that there are 2 listings for 351W's in 1983, a pre 7/83 and a post 7/83 engines. since all the tags and sticker are gone I have no idea when it was made or what this engine is out of (car, truck, van, airplane, boat, M1 tank?). So do any of you know what the difference is? Also, on a side note, can I reuse the head bolts? Thanks, Brian H. Smith 1959 TR3 1972 Spitfire IV 1977 TR7 Lake Charles, LA 1967 F-100 SWB == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 12:12:20 -0500 From: "J. Doss Halsey" Subject: FTE 61-79 - brake lines Hey, guys While we are on the subject of brake lines, I put together some for my '68 F-250 and I fear I may not have done a complete job. In getting out of the master cylinder, I had to use adapters as well as re-flare some bought components with new ends on them. I used a flare tool from the auto parts store. I had to heat the end of the tubing red with a propane torch, then let it cool, to get it soft enough to flare without splitting. Also, I used a single flare. Am I an accident waiting to happen? Please enlighten me as to single/double flare. How does one make a double flare? What does it look like? Who sells already made up brake lines for my truck with the original (master cyl.) ends on them? Stopping is important to me. Thanks, Doss Halsey '68 F-250 Camper Special, Ranger Trim == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 13:41:03 +0000 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... I'm trying to get the stuff to reassemble this '83 351W in my '67 but I've run into a problem. My parts guy says that there are 2 listings for 351W's in 1983, a pre 7/83 and a post 7/83 engines. since all the tags and sticker are gone I have no idea when it was made or what this engine is out of (car, truck, van, airplane, boat, M1 tank?). So do any of you know what the difference is? Also, on a side note, can I reuse the head bolts? Thanks, I can't tell you the difference in the 351s...I will look in my book tonight to see if it goes back that far! As far as the head bolts are concerned, its a good idea to replace them, it is said that the bolts become distorted, but I have reused head bolts before with no problems(fingers crossed) but I would recommend going ahead and changing them, If I were going t odo mine again I would! The cost is very minimal considering the fac that you may have to tear it back down again just because the bolt was messed up! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 12:31:43 -0500 From: Dayton Boyd Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm yer right, just looked it up again (been a few years since i learned it), oh well.. :) cannandale '78 F250 4x4, 460 At 05:03 PM 11/3/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Dayton Boyd wrote: > >> .0001 ampers can kill. Voltage dosent mean a thing, I got hit by a >> capacitor that was rated over a million volts, felt like an electric fence.. > >Uh, not to pick nits, but .001 ampers (1mA) is the threshold of sensation. >20-75mA is usually gosh-dern-unfriendly! but rarely life-threatening. >75-100mA can be fatal >100-200mA, if through the heart, is almost always fatal. >As you progress above 200mA, burns and severe post-shock spasms can be fatal. > >I don't offhand remember what the range is, but you're better off from >200 - 250 or 300? mA than between 100 & 200.At 12:36 PM 11/3/98 -0500, you wrote: > >> Someone wrote: >> >One thing to remember with high voltage, is that it isn't the voltage >> >that will kill you, it's the amperage. Amperage can vary pretty widely >> >according to atmospheric conditions, the amperage capacity of the >> >circuit (huge in a secondary ignition) and the ground condition you find >> >yourself in. Standing on damp ground in leather shoes makes you fine > >Speaking both theoritcally AND from experience! The rubber tires (assuming >she's sitting on the tires) are a pretty good insulator. > >The most common point of ground is the metal on the truck. UNFORTUNATELY >I once happened to find a cracked spark-plug wire while the only part of my >body on the truck was just below my belt. $#!$# !$#! $ $#! $# $# !$ PAINFUL! > >Note: that I survived this does not make it safe - there's definitely enough >power >in the ignition system to put 100-200mA through your body. > >The most dangerous position would be one hand on the wire and the other resting >on a firm, metal ground - this put's the path of the current through your heart. > >> >conductor (let's see like a #000000000 gauge wire) and will allow >> >amperage to build enough to blow your socks off. >> > >> >Get a set of pliers made for pulling plug wires, wear rubber soles, and >> >be on a dry surface, this will make it reasonably safe. You can still >> >get a shock, but you wont be as good a conductor as before. > >And DON'T lean against any part of the truck vaugely resembling metal! > >> >> Never seen a person speaks so natural about putting his finger in a high >> >> voltage output....... either you don't know what you are up to, or you >> >> belong to those who can withstand a lot of voltage.... I am afraid I >> >> suspect the later to be true. > >I DO NOT recommend this to ANYONE. But.... There have been a couple >of situations were I've deliberately (a)worn rubber shoes, (b) made sure the >vehicle was on its tires, and (c) placed an elbow [palm facing up and situated >to remain clear of any moving parts!] on a solid ground, and (d) touched the >wire with the back of my hand [fingers clench AWAY from the wire]. >It is one H*ll of a shock - one tends to dance and hop around even with one >pulse. > >Keep in mind that this is inductive current through the rubber of the wire, NOT >direct contact with the metal end. > >> >> The coil voltage won't hurt you unless you have a weak heart. But NEVER do >> >> this in a high energy output. > >This is absolutely right, but absolutely wrong. The voltage won't do squat, the >amperage can kill you, no matter what your heart condition. It simply requres >the >correct impedance to allow 100 - 200 mA through your heart. > > >Regards, >78 F150 Ranger 4x4 Supercab / 351M C6 > >-- >Andrew Ford (602)581-4499 > forda agcs.com Si vis pacem, parabellum. > Above is *my* opinion, for theirs see below... > AG Communication Systems - Expand the power of your network. > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.agcs.com > > > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:35:15 -0800 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... >difference is? Also, on a side note, can I reuse the head bolts? >Thanks, > >Brian H. Smith I know a guy who went out to the shop one morning after installing new heads the previous night. A bolt was missing... Actually it had broken and was found on the other side of the shop. -srw == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:00:29 -0800 From: sdelanty sonic.net Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Bent Starter Forks >> Now that I know what those things look like in there, I'll definately >> be pulling the nose off all new or rebuilt Ford starters I install so >> I can fix that problem before it happens... > >Steve, You wanna draw up a quick sketch and use your new scanner to post it to your home >page so that we can get a better idea of what the problem is? It's something I'll be >looking at the next time the starter is off. > >-Marv- Hmmm, yeah, I might do that when I get a chance... I changed a starter on a 351W for a friend a year or so ago that had the same symptoms (spins, but wouldn't engage flywheel). I didn't pull that one apart to see what was up, since he already had a rebuilt one all ready to got in. I'll bet it had the same failure. I'll see what I can draw up. Steve http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- F. P. Jones == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:00:31 -0800 From: sdelanty sonic.net Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Start Me Up... William wrote: >Steve likely knows all of this, but I'm going to share my experience >with Ford starters. > >>From looking at a Mitchell Interchange manual, the FE can use the same >starter as some six-cylinder applications. It might be that a six >application may have a lighter duty fork. If it's a rebuilt, once the >core gets to a rebuilder, who knows what you have, or what they >replaced. Or what the starter(or components) application was that it >keyed to. Hmmm, didn't know that... very interesting. What six cyl application is the same? 240/300 ?? That might be handy to know some day. >I don't know what kind you have, original, new, or rebuilt. From my >experience, replacement starters "new" or rebuilt have been trouble. It was a *brand new* not rebuilt motorcraft starter. It was installed about 2-1/2 years/43,000 miles ago. When I pulled it apart it was still in nearly perfect shape... except for the bent forks. The fork itself looks plenty heavy duty enough to do the job, if the spot welds would have been nearer the end to prevent it from spreading. I lubed up the bushings and all the sliding/pivoting parts and did the fork fix and now I'll bet it gives no further trouble. >If >you can salvage your original before it's totally worn out and renew >it(and by renew I mean replace all of the worn stuff that can destroy it >down the road) IMHO you're better off. Yes, I agree. It seems like it's real hard to get a decent rebuilt starter these days. If you've got a good one, it probably pays to pull it apart every few years and inspect it, lube up the bushings, and put a fresh set of brushes in it. If you just let it go until it doesn't work anymore, it can really trash them. With a little "scheduled maintenance" a good starter should last for a *very* long time. >Your weld-repair sounds like just >what the doctor ordered. I hope so. Time will tell... Steve http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- F. P. Jones == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:00:33 -0800 From: sdelanty sonic.net Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: (guge shunt) >>If I was going to modify the shunt on the stock gauge, I'd probably >> wrap the shunt wire around something to make a nice compact coil out >> of it and mount it on the firewall in the engine compartment to keep >> it out from under the dash. Then I would extend the wires on the gauge >> so they could connect to the shunt in the engine compartment. That >> keeps the high current stuff out from under the dash. >> >Hi Steve. > >Correct me if I am wrong, (and I am sure someone will!) But isn't that >called a resistor? (Unless you wrap it around a piece of steel then you >call it an Electro-magnet. ;>) > >Later, > >"Paul" Yep, it's a resistor. But it's pretty hard to go out and buy a 0.00515 ohm resistor, so you make one out of a chunk of wire. You can buy some nice comercially made shunts that are made for this purpose, but they can be expensive and a little hard to find unless You've got a good electronics surplus house near you. (I've got some nice ones I found cheap :-) If you want to look for a nice shunt for the Ford gauge, look for one that drops 250mV 50 Amps. (or what ever amperage you want to be "full scale" on your gauge.) Steve http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- F. P. Jones == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:07:48 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:Baby, what a lovely grille you got.... Bill, smiling a lot, wrote: > The first thing I do when working on my truck is put on some clothes, I > highly reccommend it. It's Ok to love your truck, but some things > require a little bit of tempering... :-) > > > The most common point of ground is the metal on the truck. UNFORTUNATELY > > I once happened to find a cracked spark-plug wire while the only part of my > > body on the truck was just below my belt. $#!$# !$#! $ $#! $# $# !$ > > PAINFUL! > -- But Hey! Belt buckles and zippers can easily scratch that fender! Now we return to our normally scheduled FTE content :-) Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:08:38 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing From: am14 chrysler.com Date sent: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 09:25:55 -0500 Subject: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing > with the crankshaft anyway. (prevent wobble). You chose the bearing. I > have no clue as to the difference in cost, but I would have opted for the > bushing - My opinion - reasons above. Hate to say it but I had similar thoughts when I was holding both in my greasy hands. I put the bearing in but that may turn out to be a mistake. Sure hope not. I liked it because of the "o" ring seal and the fact that I could pack some grease in there and it would stay for a while. May have packed it too tight though, hope not :-( Leaking rear main will essentially sling off the back side but grease in the pilot bearing goes directly to jail (clutch) :-( Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:27:11 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: (guge shunt) Steve wrote: > >>If I was going to modify the shunt on the stock gauge, I'd probably > >> wrap the shunt wire around something to make a nice compact coil out [snipped] > >Correct me if I am wrong, (and I am sure someone will!) But isn't that > >called a resistor? (Unless you wrap it around a piece of steel then you > >"Paul" > > Yep, it's a resistor. But it's pretty hard to go out and buy > a 0.00515 ohm resistor, so you make one out of a chunk of wire. > You can buy some nice comercially made shunts that are made for > this purpose, but they can be expensive and a little hard to > find unless You've got a good electronics surplus house near you. > (I've got some nice ones I found cheap :-) > If you want to look for a nice shunt for the Ford gauge, look for > one that drops 250mV 50 Amps. (or what ever amperage you want to > be "full scale" on your gauge.) > And, don't forget that your connections are going to have some resistance, which will add to your shunt. It's a lot easier to lower the overall resistance of a piece of wire than a manufactured resistor, so that you can 'trim' the response of your ammeter. Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 10:30:27 -0800 From: sdelanty sonic.net Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Pilot shaft bearing Azie wrote: >Seriously. The pilot shaft and the crank shaft turn at the same rpm's in >high gear, which is where the majority of the miles on any vehicle are put >on. The only time the two are turning at different speeds is when in the >lower gears, so why do we need a bearing. A bushing will outlast both you >and I. Hmmmm, the last time I checked, the pilot shaft and crank turn at the same RPM in *any* gear. They can only turn at different speeds when the clutch is disengaged... A bushing should last a very long time! Steve http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- F. P. Jones == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 13:32:05 -0500 (EST) From: STHIBODE spf.fairchildsemi.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - harmonic balancer seal Hi, I need to replace the harmonic damper seal on my timing cover on my 351W. Looking for some ideas from others who have done this without removing the timing chain cover. I've heard of people cracking the cast cover while trying to remove the seal, any tricks to make this easier. Ford has some kind of special puller to do this without removing the timing cover. The puller clamps around the metal collar of the seal and you pull it from the cover by winding in on some bolts that pull the seal evenly. I'm sure that tool is readily available...haha.. any tricks anyone... thanks, Steve Thibodeau == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:39:09 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Checking fire at plug From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Checking fire at plug Date sent: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 12:27:07 -0800 > Just curious...how exactly did he lose his hand? He was a farmer, corn picker rollers. Not a pretty sight :-( He'd already chopped off parts of severl fingers and shot one off and damaged his wrist punching cows (literally) so that it was almost immobile so he said it wasn't such a great loss :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:55:35 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - brake lines Date sent: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 12:12:20 -0500 From: "J. Doss Halsey" Subject: FTE 61-79 - brake lines > master cylinder, I had to use adapters as well as re-flare some bought > components with new ends on them. I used a flare tool from the auto parts > store. I had to heat the end of the tubing red with a propane torch, then > let it cool, to get it soft enough to flare without splitting. Also, I > used a single flare. Am I an accident waiting to happen? Please enlight Get the double flare tool ($20), extend the tube about 1/32" past where the book says to do it, lube the flare dies with grease, smash the reverse flare all the way down but only take the finish flare down till the softness goes away and you won't split them. You don't want a full flare when finished, you want a stubby looking flare on the outside and a small, smooth "V" shape with considerable wall in the inside when done. This is very important for proper fit and to avoid leaking under pressure. Bushings are fine and really the only way you can do it since the proper, Odd size nuts are not generally available but try to bend the lines smoothly with no kinks, use as long a section as you can to avoid joints, don't run them anywhere near heat and don't allow them to lay in a cradle that will collect dirt, mud and water etc.. I use anti-seize on the threads of the nuts and flare nut wrenches to avoid rounding off the nuts but vise grips work very well if you do round one off. Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 14:10:38 +0000 From: "Gary, 78 BBB" Subject: FTE 61-79 - My #$%%$#$# brakes Well I highly recommed you keep the stock porportioning valve. I've played with several configurations so far and it appears that the front disk retention valve is pretty important to good pedal feel. It stops pretty well now and the pedal is ever so slightly better but it's still too spongy to suit me. I may still have a tad of air in it somewhere but it is firmer than befor with the stock valve back in place. The racing valve did what it was supposed to do apparently but without the retention valve the pistons can move back into the calipers too far and take up most of the pedal movement before it gets hard and in a panick it almost went to the floor before but now it feels more normal, sitll not up to my standards but better. Bottom line, keep it stock and if you put on rear disks, get the right proporting valve :-) BTW, the stock one is available for $106 brand new :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 13:33:17 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Tires Wow, seems like all I do is ask about tires, just posted about Auto-X tires for my Mustang on a another site, though if anyone has any opinions on them here, I'm welcome to them through private email (wouldn't want non Truck content on here :) But on the Truck side of things, My front tires are shot (due partially to poor alignment, and partially to the age). Currently I've got Uniroyal A/T 's 31x10.5 's all the way around. I've also got 3.50's for gears (pretty sure anyway). Suddenly I'm not doing any part time farm work (funny how a full time job seems to take 40hrs a week isn't it ? :), so I don't really need that much off road traction, BUT (isn't there always a but? or a butt?) as you might notice from the iastate.edu extension, I'm in the middle of Iowa, lots of really cool weather conditions, snow (dry, wet, slushy, mixed, you name it), sleet, hail, rain, dry, heat, cold, humidity, dry.... and of course lots of salt for good measure. So whaddya'll recommend ? My sister has some LT's (I think) that actually surprised me this winter. I'm thinking of going back to the stock size, just to get some more low end torque (building a 410 hopefully this winter) for now. Anyway what suggestions do you have, and why ? No not an essay test, though that would help the decision :) Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://ranger3.cc.iastate.edu/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:48:05 -0600 From: sjacobi fd9ns01.okladot.state.ok.us Subject: FTE 61-79 - Double Jinx!!! Now my starter's screwed. All this talk about starters now has mine acting up. I've got a 460 w/ headers, turned the key yesterday and all I got was the starter spinning and "grabbing air". Replaced the solenoid, same thing. Removed the starter (w/o having to take off the headers), teeth look good, flywheel teeth looked good, took it to autozone and hooked it up and it appears to work perfectly. What gives??? Help. Steve Jacobi == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 12:30:39 -0800 From: sdelanty sonic.net Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Double Jinx!!! Now my starter's screwed. Steve Jacobi wrote: >All this talk about starters now has mine acting up. I've got a 460 w/ >headers, turned the key yesterday and all I got was >the starter spinning and "grabbing air". Replaced the solenoid, same >thing. Removed the starter (w/o having to take off >the headers), teeth look good, flywheel teeth looked good, took it to >autozone and hooked it up and it appears to work >perfectly. What gives??? Help. Uh huh. That's the way mine did... Pull the nose off the starter and see if the 2 tabs on the round collar that slides the bendix in and out are still engaged in the little forks at the end of the lever. If not, look at the lever and see if it is spread out. If it is, bend them back together until it fits right, and get someone to weld a short bead between the 2 lever halves where they curve outwards. I'll try and get a web page up in the next few days with a drawing of the parts and where it needs to be welded, but if you've actually got one apart in front of you it's pretty obvious what needs to be done... Steve http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. -- F. P. Jones == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 13:41:05 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: harmonic balancer seal Hi Steve, I've pulled these with a single jaw puller on a slide hammer (well, not this particular engine, but . . .). One thing to check while the pulley is off is the shaft surface. If the shaft has a grove worn in it where the seal rides, the new seal WILL leak. You don't, however, need to replace the damper to fix it! You can place a sleeve over the existing shaft, ask for one at your auto parts store / machine shop. I just had a one installed on a crankshaft (Nissan 280ZX rear main seal, one piece seal). These are very thin, polished sleeves, I believe my machinist called it a "speedy sleeve". > Hi, > > I need to replace the harmonic damper seal on my timing cover on my 351W. > Looking for some ideas from others who have done this without removing > the timing chain cover. I've heard of people cracking the cast cover > while trying to remove the seal, any tricks to make this easier. Ford > has some kind of special puller to do this without removing the timing cover. Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 23:23:45 +0100 From: "Bill Brox" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351W questions... Hi Brian, You should look at the right cylinder bank, just in front of the head. You shall find a piece of the casting, on a 302 the face is leveled with the block surface, on the 351W an inch or so lower. Remove the paint there, and you will find the engine build date. It could be let t say 6G + some other figures. 6 would mean 1976, and G would mean July. I hope this goes for the 1983 351W too..... I wish I had a scanner and could send you picture of the place to look for, but sorry I have no scanner. You also have trouble finding where the engine comes from, car, truck and so... but you don't mention the space shuttle....... LOL. Bill Brox == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 16:32:06 -0800 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - I got a plug wire in hand, and I'm goi Thanks for your message at 07:19 AM 11/4/98 +0000, Gary, 78 BBB. Your message was: > you usually feel AC before you do DC, When I start feeling AC and DC, I'll just move to California... (Flame retardant suit is on)... 1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C 1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed 1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood) I shortened this to only FT's == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 19:52:58 EST From: Dugnla aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Gears sticking I have the same set up in my '67, basically you just have to learn to live with it. Or you could do like i did and find something comparable and modify it to suit your needs. I took my shifter out of the floor and put it back on the column, couldnt find the linkage much less the bushings. I used the linkage out of a (i think it was) '66 w/3 speed and cut the rubber and brass parts down to suit my truck. It shifts fine unless I dont hold the shifter to the outside, then it hangs up and wont shift at all. doug == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 20:13:18 EST From: Dugnla aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size anybody know the correct/stock tire size for '67 ranger? i know everyone just finished discussing the speedo thing about last week, that only made me ask questions about my own truck. I tried the thing with being on a road with mile markers and at 60 mph for one minute i went 9/10's of a mile, and it took just 50 seconds to go from one mile marker to the next, atleast according to my incorrect speedo. Also riding side by side with a buddy his speedo is at 60 while mine is at 70. The speedo rest at 0 mph when stopped, doesnt jump or anything, all the movement is nice and smooth. Could the problem be the 15 inch tires? Im going to buy tires next payday and want to know if i should get a diff size tire. tia doug == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 20:53:25 -0500 From: "The Freeman Family" Subject: Fw: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size - -----Original Message----- From: The Freeman Family To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Wednesday, November 04, 1998 8:47 PM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size >Doug, > >My Owners Manual for my '68 says that all F-100 2wd & 4wd came with 8.15x15 >passenger tires. F-250 2wd came with 8.00x16.5 and 4wd came with either >8.00x16.5 or 8.75x16.5. I don't know what the conversion is into metric. >Hope this helps. > >-Ted >-----Original Message----- >From: Dugnla aol.com >To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com >Date: Wednesday, November 04, 1998 8:16 PM >Subject: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size > > >>anybody know the correct/stock tire size for '67 ranger? i know everyone >just >>finished discussing the speedo thing about last week, that only made me ask >>questions about my own truck. I tried the thing with being on a road with >>mile markers and at 60 mph for one minute i went 9/10's of a mile, and it >took >>just 50 seconds to go from one mile marker to the next, atleast according >to >>my incorrect speedo. Also riding side by side with a buddy his speedo is >at >>60 while mine is at 70. The speedo rest at 0 mph when stopped, doesnt jump >or >>anything, all the movement is nice and smooth. Could the problem be the 15 >>inch tires? Im going to buy tires next payday and want to know if i should >>get a diff size tire. >> >>tia >>doug >>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html >> > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 20:47:28 -0500 From: "The Freeman Family" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size Doug, My Owners Manual for my '68 says that all F-100 2wd & 4wd came with 8.15x15 passenger tires. F-250 2wd came with 8.00x16.5 and 4wd came with either 8.00x16.5 or 8.75x16.5. I don't know what the conversion is into metric. Hope this helps. - -Ted - -----Original Message----- From: Dugnla aol.com To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Wednesday, November 04, 1998 8:16 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - speedo and tire size >anybody know the correct/stock tire size for '67 ranger? i know everyone just >finished discussing the speedo thing about last week, that only made me ask >questions about my own truck. I tried the thing with being on a road with >mile markers and at 60 mph for one minute i went 9/10's of a mile, and it took >just 50 seconds to go from one mile marker to the next, atleast according to >my incorrect speedo. Also riding side by side with a buddy his speedo is at >60 while mine is at 70. The speedo rest at 0 mph when stopped, doesnt jump or >anything, all the movement is nice and smooth. Could the problem be the 15 >inch tires? Im going to buy tires next payday and want to know if i should >get a diff size tire. > >tia >doug >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 21:53:23 -0500 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE 61-79 - Nominate Ford Truck Enthusiasts? Car Lounge is taking nominations for the #1 automotive site for Winter 98. Due to the support from list members in the Spring, Ford Truck Enthusiasts won 1st place for the Summer 98 award and 10th place for Autumn 98 award. If you would like to nominate Ford Truck Enthusiasts, please visit: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://carlounge.com/nominate.htm Thanks, Ken Payne CoAdmin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 22:32:22 -0500 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Solutions >My mechanic here is both competent and honest (and reasonable!), but the >key to everything was having my list of ideas and info that I got over the >last year from this list. Summarized -- thanks, Ken, thanks fellas. > >Gene Gardner, Texican Teacher >Hermosillo, Mexico (by way of West Texas) > You're welcome. Heck, I've gotten a lot of help too. And learned more than I possibly could have otherwise. Ken == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 21:45:46 +0000 From: "Jay Fleming" Subject: FTE 61-79 - steering column As I slowly work through my '72 F100 (automatic trans and power steering), I have discovered that my steering column is beyond repair. The front cab mounts had gone south, and now the lower part of the shaft is eaten halfway through. Evidently this is a pretty common problem, as almost every 67-72 truck I see in the salvage yards around here are missing their steering columns. So, what have you done with your columns if you've had trouble with them? Is there any particular column from another sort of vehicle that's an easy bolt-in? Thanks for any help you can give. Jay == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 23:27:53 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 9" vs dana 60 i normaly get at least 250.00 for a dana 60 no matter what gear, they go pretty quick. in a 4x4 60 is probably the best way to go, but i also drag race, and 9" gear swaps can be done in about an hour laying on your back jeff == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 00:51:14 -0500 From: "Jerry" .... 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. 
|