61-79-list-digest Thursday, November 19 1998 Volume 02 : Number 528



=======================================================================
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 - 76 4x4 steering
FTE 61-79 - Dash lights
FTE 61-79 - 351/302 swap
FTE 61-79 - Dash lights
FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
FTE 61-79 - smoke colors
RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 76 4x4 steering
RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
Re: FTE 61-79 - mystery headlight/vacuum switch
FTE 61-79 - Late 70's 4X4
FW: Re: FTE 61-79 - re Steering shaft solution!?
Re: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
FTE 61-79 - Re: Radius Arm Bracket Modications Vs Drop Down Bracket.
FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes
FTE 61-79 - rag joint
FTE 61-79 - F-100 Power Steering
FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Radius Arm Bracket Modications Vs Drop Down Bracket.
Re: FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes
FTE 61-79 - Got to go gang :-(
FTE 61-79 - RE: 61-79- Dash Lights
FTE 61-79 - dash lights
FTE 61-79 - RE:AFB carb
FTE 61-79 - thanks
Re: FTE 61-79 - mystery headlight/vacuum switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
Re: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
FTE 61-79 - re: Dash Lights
Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - rag joint
RE: (Archive Copy) Re: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension
Re: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension
RE: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension
Re: FTE 61-79 - M block oil pump - WAS No spark
FTE 61-79 - Steering Shaft Solution- Answers and Prices
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
FTE 61-79 - new member/wiring
Re: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension
Re: FTE 61-79 - rag joint
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
RE: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
Re: FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes
Re: FTE 61-79 - new member/wiring
FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100
Re: FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100
FTE 61-79 - Interesting item on eBay web site item#43240851: 1969 FORD TRUCK Shop MANUALS- 4 vol. LIKE NEW
FTE 61-79 - Help!
FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100
RE: FTE 61-79 - Help!

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 04:40:17 PST
From: "Mark D"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 76 4x4 steering

Hello all

I am attempting to tighten my steering on a 76 F-250, it has the piston
type steering anyone have good ideas an tighten this type of steering or
replacing it with a updated type.

Thank You

Mark



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:08:55 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dash lights

Arlene Mason writes: >>I have a problem with the dash lights on my '77
F100. It seems I have tried replacing everything, the bulbs, the fuses,
etc. and still no dash lights. The only thing I got from the deal was a
broken odometer. (that's another story). Has anyone else had this problem?
How can I fix it??

You forgot the most probable cause - - - and that is the rheostat in the
headlamp switch itself. They are known to give problems.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:12:09 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351/302 swap

Bill in Texas writes: >>Anyone know if I will have any problems with the
'76 C4 fittin' up to the 70 351W?

My understanding is, it is a "bolt in". No changes necessary.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:17:08 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dash lights

Jesus Cardoso writes : >> Since we are talking about dask lights, does
anyone know what year the variable resistors were installed in the
operation of the dash lights?
I am just trying to figure out if my '63 is suppose to have one.

Yes!!! Your '63 should have one.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:25:06 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch

Jim Elliott writes: >> but cannot imagine what a vacuum switch on the
headlight switch would be for, any ideas?

For flip-up headlamps maybe!!!! Didn't the '61-'63 T-birds have hidden
(flip-up) headlamps??? Some models along there did and If I were a betting
man, I would bet that is the application for this particular switch assy.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:26:39 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

RKocsis627 aol.com wrote:
>
> Is it worth it to Change my 351M 2-V to an Edelbrock 4-V intake and carb? I'm
> lookin for a little more get up and go. Does it make that much of a difference
> or would I just be wasting my money? I appreciate any opinions, thanks.

I noticed some difference, but not as much as I thought I would. Hard
to say if it was worth the 4-500$ it costs for new parts. If you have
the stuff or are getting it used, then by all means do it, swap is super
easy. Possibly a cam/4 bbl swap would make more of a difference.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:28:28 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - smoke colors

Justin Farcas writes: >>Could someone give me a rundown of the types of
exhaust smoke, their color and such, and what they pertain to? i.e. -
bluish smoke = burning oil.

Blue = Oil
White = water
Black = excess fuel(running rich)(flooding)

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:28:10 -0800
From: Jim Pliss
Subject: RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 76 4x4 steering

Mark,
I assume you have one of the earlier 70's 4WD which had a master slave
cylinder attached to the steering arm and then to the tie rod. The best
thing to do with that is trash it. Replace with a 78 - 79 steering box
setup that uses a pitman arm attached to the box a drag link that goes from
the piman arm to the steering knuckle and a steering knucle arm to connect
the drag link. this all seems like expensive but it is not the steering box
is about 50 or so dollars in the bone yard, the rest of the parts are
readily available in your super mart parts stores. the only real problem is
the frame needs to be notched on the drivers side where you are going to
place the box. Drill the holes and bolt it in. On My 73 f250 I also bolted
a plate to the ouside of the frame for strength although I was told it was
unnecessary. It is some work but very little fabrication and the parts are
easy to come by. If I can get some light on mine I will send a picture so
you can see it and will try to get a parts list.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Mark D [SMTP:msd5256 hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 4:40 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 76 4x4 steering

Hello all

I am attempting to tighten my steering on a 76 F-250, it has the piston
type steering anyone have good ideas an tighten this type of steering or
replacing it with a updated type.

Thank You

Mark



______________________________________________________
== 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, 18 Nov 1998 08:34:27 -0800
From: Jim Pliss
Subject: RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

I had a 73 ford galaxie 500 with the 400M and tried this with a 4 barrel
intake and carb worked OK but was kind of expensive and did not run as well
as it sould for the money and wasted alot of fuel. ended up going back to
the 2 barrel the major problem with these motors are the heads flow about
as well as a porous brick. Head work would have made a lot of difference if
you want to spend the money. Of course a 460 would be better.

- -----Original Message-----
From: RKocsis627 aol.com [SMTP:RKocsis627 aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 8:12 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

Is it worth it to Change my 351M 2-V to an Edelbrock 4-V intake and carb?
I'm
lookin for a little more get up and go. Does it make that much of a
difference
or would I just be wasting my money? I appreciate any opinions, thanks.
== 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, 18 Nov 1998 07:25:34 -0600
From: "James Elliott"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mystery headlight/vacuum switch

William Hart replied:

Ever seen the switch on a 69 Cougar ... lots of vacuum there for the
headlight covers! Several other years had them too, but since you said 69
and we have one it was the first to pop into my head. Are you sure you got
a switch for a truck ? I've never seen one with (factory) headlight covers
... maybe its a new option ;)


My first thought was also headlight covers, but also know of no truck that
had them. However, the knob is a exact match for all the others, so I am
sure it came out as a set with the others. Perhaps they sold a universal
replacement switch assembly that included the vacuum valve?, Let's see, that
year I think not only Cougars, but T-birds, and perhaps some various
versions of the XL, Torino GT, and Cyclone had headlight doors?

Jim E.



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:43:36 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Late 70's 4X4

Michael smart writes: >>I'm looking for a '78 - '79 F250 4x4, preferably a
Super Cab Camper Special or a Highboy, but will consider any with decent
body/bed and in good running condition. Manual or automatic transmission,
400 cid or larger engine, and 4:10 gears. Yea, I know I'm dreaming, but
some one out there must have one for sale or know of someone who does.
Please send an E-mail to pmmcs sweetwater.net or mrsmart fiw.net.

Aren't we all looking for one of these???????? Or an F-350????

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:46:41 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: FW: Re: FTE 61-79 - re Steering shaft solution!?

- -----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 8:40 AM
To: Bigbroncos-Digest (E-mail)
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - re Steering shaft solution!?

Hi Bill.

Reference: wrong ULR - Oops!

Sorry - sometimes it is hard to type with "sausage fingers". ;>)

Later.

"Paul"



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:55:33 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

Jim Pliss wrote:
>
> I had a 73 ford galaxie 500 with the 400M and tried this with a 4 barrel
> intake and carb worked OK but was kind of expensive and did not run as well
> as it sould for the money and wasted alot of fuel. ended up going back to
> the 2 barrel the major problem with these motors are the heads flow about
> as well as a porous brick. Head work would have made a lot of difference if
> you want to spend the money. Of course a 460 would be better.
>

I don't know if I agre with that, especially after reading Hot rods
article on their 400 buildup. They gasket matched heads and had a valve
job done, but that is about it. I think the major issues to be addressed
with the 351M/400 are the cam (and cam timing) and compression.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:05:57 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Radius Arm Bracket Modications Vs Drop Down Bracket.


I plan on ditching the drop downs and having my stock drops modified
with cirluar wedges welded on either side of radius arm hole. I will
also have to add a wedge in front of lower spring pads. I want to do
this to get radius arms up out of the way and help pinion angle. They
hang too low IMO.

OX



Got pictures/ more info on this? And about the "angle of the Springs (We
are talking about the front coils right?)" - Do you think wedges/
Shims/whatever is the answer?

Since I have lots of time and want this to be done right.

You thinking along the lines of extending the arms, modifying the brackets
so they are back further, etc...?

Let me know what this looks like and how difficult.

Later,

"Paul"


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:09:27 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes

What kind of emergency brake system do the Ford 4 wheel disc brake sytems
use? I mean besides step on the little pedal or pull the lever. I always
had a hard time getting my 77 Eldo to pass safety inspection because they
said the emergency brake didn't hold. It also had an automatic release when
you put it in gear. They would try to hold it with their foot while the car
was in gear then rev the engine. Duh! I would always get underneath and
tighten up the cables before I went, then readjust them to specs when I got
home. My brother's 81 Eldo was worse. It had some kind of screw actuator
that would always stick. For a road car or truck, I never saw any big
advantage to 4 wheel discs. Front discs rear drums, now there is a
functional combo.

- -John

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:14:22 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - rag joint

I am going to ask a dumb question. What is a rag joint? I always thought
y'all (that's a legal word in Texas) were talking about the section where
the pieces of tire are.


- -John

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:17:57 -0600
From: Sean Williams
Subject: FTE 61-79 - F-100 Power Steering

I am soon to be the proud owner of a '72 F-100 short box, and I was
wondering if anyone could give me the rundown on adding power steering
to this truck. Also, the truck has what I believe is the factory
3-speed manual on the floor. What tranny is this? and will it bolt up
to a newer ('91-'92) 302 out of an F-150?



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:26:06 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch

Jim,

I haven't read all of the list yet, but the vacuum switch operates the
headlight doors on LTDs, Marquis, Towncars, Cougars, etc. Either someone
replaced the switch from one of those cars or it was just easier and
cheaper for FoMoCo to put the same switch in everything.


- -John

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:49:46 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Radius Arm Bracket Modications Vs Drop Down Bracket.

Mr. Paul R. Boudreault wrote:
>
>
> I plan on ditching the drop downs and having my stock drops modified
> with cirluar wedges welded on either side of radius arm hole. I will
> also have to add a wedge in front of lower spring pads. I want to do
> this to get radius arms up out of the way and help pinion angle. They
> hang too low IMO.
>
> OX
>
>
> Got pictures/ more info on this? And about the "angle of the Springs (We
> are talking about the front coils right?)" - Do you think wedges/
> Shims/whatever is the answer?
>

No pictures. Which problem are we talking. I have allready fixed the
problem of the stock lower spring pad bending downward on the outside
edges. Since these pads rest more on the inner edge, the outer edge is
more prone to bending when the pads are abused or rusting from age.

I got a set of fairly decent used pads and cut a round 1/8 inch plate
to weld on the bottom of spring pad. I bent the plate in the middle,
just a hair farther than the factory bend that is allready there (side
to side). I then welded the plates in with the inner end of plate
resting against bottom of pad, but the outer part of plate having a gap
between it and pad. This would be front drivers side view.



Frame side Tire
side

Spring
() ()
() ()
Spring () bolt holes ()
Pad () __( )___________ ()
()___-------__( )____ ------_______()
Welded plate ------ ---____ Gap here
Radius ----______
arm
here



I filled in this gap with weld (about 1/8 inch). This is trial and error
as I had to weld additional thin plating on outer edge of the plate I
allready had welded to get the springs perfectectly straight up and
down. This also gave me the full lift I was supposed to have with my
front springs, over an inch more than when springs were bowing (Sp???).

> Since I have lots of time and want this to be done right.
>
> You thinking along the lines of extending the arms, modifying the brackets
> so they are back further, etc...?

No I think they are long enough on 78-79 bronc's, I just need pinion
angle help and would like to get them up out of the way.

> Let me know what this looks like and how difficult.

You'll be the first to know if/when I get to it. Just finished up
welding my traction bar together last night. It's a 3/4 inch rod end
screwed into rod coupling which is welded to single 2.5 inch sqaure tube
that runs from crossmemeber I installed, right below CV joint, down
along DS. It runs down next to driveshaft (drivers side), then splits
off (right before spline section) with 4 smaller 1.5 inch suqare tubes,
two on each side. One set runs on either side of pumpkin, mounting to
axle tubes with 5/8 U-bolts. I tried extreme susp angles last night with
front left and right rear tires hanging and it does seem to bind
somewhat, but my truck is a mud runner and it's more suspension travel
then I can usually get with the flat terrain around here. I just hope I
have this DS/pinion angle spring wrap thing licked once and for all. If
you follow the Bronco list, you have heard my tails of DS breakage,
spring wrap, and how I spit my 4 inch lift blocks clean out of the
truck 2 weeks ago.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:56:34 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes

John LaGrone wrote:
>
> What kind of emergency brake system do the Ford 4 wheel disc brake sytems
> use? I mean besides step on the little pedal or pull the lever.

Mustangs T-birds used the same ratchet type setup that GM used.

I always
> had a hard time getting my 77 Eldo to pass safety inspection because they
> said the emergency brake didn't hold.

Mine works awsome, but my emerg brake light is out, so I keep leaving it
on. The truck seems real sluggish and I realize DUH!!!, I'm driving
around with it on. I allready fried my first set of pads in less than a
1000 miles. Maybe I'll wire an aftermarket oil pressure light right in
my face for the emerg nrake ;-)

. For a road car or truck, I never saw any big
> advantage to 4 wheel discs. Front discs rear drums, now there is a
> functional combo.

True , but I hate doing drum brakes, especially when the insides are
completley full of mud ;-) I was eating up rear shoes every time I went
wheelin.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 10:02:49 -0500
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Got to go gang :-(

Well the computers are set up and I have to get our data base set up with
record locking etc. so I have to turn off my mail for a while. See y'all
whenever I can get back :-)

Michigan Pot Hole Jumpin Bronco lover, -- Gary --
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:03:33 -0800
From: "Gillespie, John D."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 61-79- Dash Lights

My 66F100 has the variable resistor built into the headlight switch and is
currently bypassed due to the resistor wire on the insulator broken off
(previous owner). The replacement headlight switch w/dimmer is available at
you local parts house providing the parts chimps know what they are looking
far. Also when you are talking to them make sure that you have the switch
and the knob and shaft with you because it matters which model you get
(don't ask :-)). Also you have to fish under the dash to find the release
button on the switch assembly to remove the shaft. Just be sure that the
battery is disconnected because Primary power goes through the light switch
before it gets to the ignition switch and the dash. And that HURTS!!!
(Mutter mutter cuss cuss!!!!!)
John

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 11:12:15 EST
From: Phazelag aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - dash lights

I have had a problem with my dash lights and it was the rear panel that holds
the light bulbs in didnt hold them tight enough to the wiring card. in some
cases only one loose light bulb will break the connection for all of the dash
lights. I tried tape, glue for a quick fix but then I went the junk yard and
found one in great condition no problem now. I think you can get those new
from Obsolete Ford Parts, inc 405-634-6815
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:01:10 -0800
From: "Wiltzius, Tom"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE:AFB carb

Steve,
Thanks for the info on the Carter AFB
I think I'll start with the upper port and see how that works
and go from there.

Thanks again
Tom
Reno,NV
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:02:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Justin Farcas
Subject: FTE 61-79 - thanks

Thanks to everyone who replied to my message on smoke types. I know now,
that it might be bad valve stem guides, but no sure. The exhaust doesn't
smell like oil all the time, but once in a while, after I haven't
accelerated much at all, or i it's been idling for a while, I can tap the
gas a little, and smell something that smells like burnt out come out of
the exhaust pipe on the driver's side. Any comments/solutions?

Thanks again,
-Justin Farcas
79 Ford F150 4x4 460 bbl --



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 11:20:44 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - mystery headlight/vacuum switch

>Ever seen the switch on a 69 Cougar ... lots of vacuum there for the
>headlight covers! Several other years had them too, but since you said 69
>and we have one it was the first to pop into my head. Are you sure you got
>a switch for a truck ? I've never seen one with (factory) headlight covers
>... maybe its a new option ;)
>
>
>My first thought was also headlight covers, but also know of no truck that
>had them. However, the knob is a exact match for all the others, so I am
>sure it came out as a set with the others. Perhaps they sold a universal
>replacement switch assembly that included the vacuum valve?, Let's see, that
>year I think not only Cougars, but T-birds, and perhaps some various
>versions of the XL, Torino GT, and Cyclone had headlight doors?
>
The switches are similar in all these cars as far as I know, maybe not
exact (sizing), but i would be surprised if Ford didn't duplicate most of
them ...

As for which of those had covers, the XL did, don't think the
Torino/Ranchero did for 69 (70 did) and the Cyclone was definately a 70/71
only thing since there were only a handful of the 69 Cyclone's if I
remember right ... really rare, they're Mercury's version of the Talledega
... I think I've seen one (69 Cyclone that is) in my life ...


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, 18 Nov 1998 10:29:13 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd

>From: Shawn Donkin
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
>
>will the manifolds from my old 351c
>fit on the 351m? I think i heard that the heads are
>the same on 2V 351c's and 351m's.Is this true?

Yo Shawn:

Yes, the 351C 2V cylinder heads and the 351M cylinder heads are the same
design. Any exhaust manifold (or header) that bolts to one will bolt to
the other.

Don't know if the 351C manifolds will give you any better clearance in your
truck, though, since the 351M is a wider engine. Good luck.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:32:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch

Azie wrote:

> Jim Elliott writes: >> but cannot imagine what a vacuum switch on the
> headlight switch would be for, any ideas?
>
> For flip-up headlamps maybe!!!! Didn't the '61-'63 T-birds have hidden
> (flip-up) headlamps??? Some models along there did and If I were a betting
> man, I would bet that is the application for this particular switch assy.

You guys have this all wrong, It's a California smog thing. They
found that smog increases on friday and saturday nights, when all
thoses trucks were out cruising main st. So, the vacuum advance
got plumbed through the light switch, disconnecting it when the
lights were on. NOX was reduced, the EPA was happy, and it took
over twenty years for us to figure it out.

- --
Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California Where cruising is prohibited in many cities

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:06:02 -0600
From: Shawn Donkin
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd

well, i just got out from under my truck trying to see if the exhast pipes will
fit with the 351m manifolds and they really dont look like they will fit. the
ones on the 351c look like they are pointed away from the transmission(which is
where the 351m manifold are just about straight down from the engine) and
that's what seems to be the problem, the pipes are hitting the tranny
bellhousing. I'm hoping moving my engine mount perches wont change this after i
install the 351c manifolds. Should i be using a c6 with a long tailshaft in
this swap? It might be tight getting the driveshaft and yoke hooked together
but it just might work. Any thoughts?

Shawn Donkin
'68 F100 2wd 351m/c6(soon?)

Dave Resch wrote:

> >From: Shawn Donkin
> >Subject: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
> >
> >will the manifolds from my old 351c
> >fit on the 351m? I think i heard that the heads are
> >the same on 2V 351c's and 351m's.Is this true?
>
> Yo Shawn:
>
> Yes, the 351C 2V cylinder heads and the 351M cylinder heads are the same
> design. Any exhaust manifold (or header) that bolts to one will bolt to
> the other.
>
> Don't know if the 351C manifolds will give you any better clearance in your
> truck, though, since the 351M is a wider engine. Good luck.
>
> Dave R. (M-block devotee)
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 14:42:50 -0500
From: pickup65 juno.com (Jon E Purut)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - re: Dash Lights

My 64 F500 has it

Jon E. Purut
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.xoom.com/Chelley
one 64 F500, one 77 F150 and a pair of 65 F100's

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:09:18 -0600
From: Shawn Donkin
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd

P.S. I want to say a very sincere thank you to you and all that are helping me
through
my first engine swap. Next time i will plan ahead so i can have transportation
while i'm doing it :^) Thank you again,

Shawn Donkin

Dave Resch wrote:

> >From: Shawn Donkin
> >Subject: FTE 61-79 - 79 bronco 4wd 351m exhaust manifolds in a 68 F100 2wd
> >
> >will the manifolds from my old 351c
> >fit on the 351m? I think i heard that the heads are
> >the same on 2V 351c's and 351m's.Is this true?
>
> Yo Shawn:
>
> Yes, the 351C 2V cylinder heads and the 351M cylinder heads are the same
> design. Any exhaust manifold (or header) that bolts to one will bolt to
> the other.
>
> Don't know if the 351C manifolds will give you any better clearance in your
> truck, though, since the 351M is a wider engine. Good luck.
>
> Dave R. (M-block devotee)
>
> == 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, 18 Nov 1998 15:18:18 -0800
From: Jim Pliss
Subject: RE: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - rag joint

the rag joint is the connection between the steering column shaft and the
seering box shaft. This unit is located under the hood usually under the
brake master cylinder. I consists of two T looking ends tha are connected
to gether with some bolts and what looks like a flat donut looking piece of
rubber cloth. The rag joint. Funny how they put your life in the hands of a
little piece of cloth covered with rubber?

- -----Original Message-----
From: John LaGrone [SMTP:jlagrone ford-trucks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 6:14 AM
To: Ford Trucks 61-79
Subject: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - rag joint

I am going to ask a dumb question. What is a rag joint? I always thought
y'all (that's a legal word in Texas) were talking about the section where
the pieces of tire are.


- -John

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


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


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 15:20:58 -0800
From: Jim Pliss
Subject: RE: (Archive Copy) Re: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

You are exactly right but all this does affect the flow bench
characteristics. Larger valves port matching all requires time which is
money. Even after all the work these heads are not as efficient as other
engine designs

- -----Original Message-----
From: luxjo thecore.com [SMTP:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 5:56 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: (Archive Copy) Re: (Archive Copy) FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

Jim Pliss wrote:
>
> I had a 73 ford galaxie 500 with the 400M and tried this with a 4 barrel
> intake and carb worked OK but was kind of expensive and did not run as
well
> as it sould for the money and wasted alot of fuel. ended up going back to
> the 2 barrel the major problem with these motors are the heads flow about
> as well as a porous brick. Head work would have made a lot of difference
if
> you want to spend the money. Of course a 460 would be better.
>

I don't know if I agre with that, especially after reading Hot rods
article on their 400 buildup. They gasket matched heads and had a valve
job done, but that is about it. I think the major issues to be addressed
with the 351M/400 are the cam (and cam timing) and compression.

OX
== 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, 18 Nov 1998 15:49:22 -0500
From: forza4 juno.com (Patrick Kimbril)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension

A friend of ours has a '66 Ford pickup with 351ci, automatic tranny, and
I-beam suspension. Hes been told this combination is rare, like only 90
ever made. So is this a really rare vehicle or what?

Patrick

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:25:18 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension

At 03:49 PM 11/18/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>A friend of ours has a '66 Ford pickup with 351ci, automatic tranny, and
>I-beam suspension. Hes been told this combination is rare, like only 90
>ever made. So is this a really rare vehicle or what?
>
>Patrick

All 65+ Ford trucks came standard with I-beam suspension.

Ken

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:36:43 -0800
From: "Southerland, Rich"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension

And the 351 was not offered in that truck. Maybe it's a 352?
Rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Payne
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 1:25 PM
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension
>
> At 03:49 PM 11/18/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >A friend of ours has a '66 Ford pickup with 351ci, automatic tranny, and
> >I-beam suspension. Hes been told this combination is rare, like only 90
> >ever made. So is this a really rare vehicle or what?
> >
> >Patrick
>
> All 65+ Ford trucks came standard with I-beam suspension.
>
> Ken
>
> == 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, 18 Nov 1998 15:30:05 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - M block oil pump - WAS No spark

>From: Pat Brown
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - M block oil pump - WAS No spark
>
>'M' block devotees can jump in here anytime
>now, but this appears to be a very common
>problem with these engines. It comes up on this
>list enough that even my old brain remembers
>it:-). I also remember one of our active list
>members just went through this, I just can't figure
>out who.

Yo Pat, et al:

I wouldn't characterize oil pump failures as a "very common" problem in
M-blocks. I have heard of a few M-block oil pump failures, but I don't
think M-blocks experience this any more frequently than any other engine,
IMHO. The only oil pump failures I have personal experience w/ were in a
351C and a 460, and in both cases, a Melling high volume oil pump failed.
As I recall, Ox had a similar problem back in July this year (i.e., rapid
failure of a high volume oil pump). That's probably what you remember from
the list.

That said, I would not recommend a high volume oil pump for a non-race
application. I have been told by hi-po engine builders that the main
purpose of a high volume oil pump is to provide enough oil volume for
"loose" bearings (or race bearings w/ extra oil feed grooves). In an
engine w/ standard bearing clearances, a high volume pump will produce
higher than normal pressures (more volume forced into the same size hole =
more pressure) and require more power to operate (which would actually
reduce the engine's effective power output). If the relief valve does not
function properly, the weak link in the oil pump drive system may give out,
either the cam/distributor gear interface or the pump drive shaft. If the
proper hardened pump drive shaft is used, the cam and distributor gears
will give out, shutting down the engine before a catastrophic main bearing
failure. If the pump shaft gives out, the engine will continue to run and
you'd better hope you notice the pressure loss before you toast the engine.

>Gary seems to want to blame it on deposits
>coming off the pickup tube, but nobody has
>mentioned that it is sealer from the factory.

As for pipe sealants clogging and seizing the oil pump, that type of
failure could happen in any engine. Every engine rebuilding book I have
ever read cautions against using pipe sealant on both oil pickup tubes and
on the oil pump-to-block gasket. Along with damaging the pump, loose
chunks of sealant could block the pressure relief valve or be pushed up
into the oil galleys and block a critical passage. Personally, I doubt
that using a sealant was ever a factory practice. Sounds to me like
something done by an inexperienced (or superstitious) mechanic.

As for oil-borne residues... well, sh!t happens, but again, it could happen
to any engine. That's one of the reasons that I am very picky about what I
put in my crankcase. I have personally seen some pretty nasty putty-like
sludge deposits left by popular oil treatment chemicals.

>I've become so aware of it that I bought a new
>pickup tube for my daughter's N*ss*n 280n ZX,
>I'm in the middle of a total rebuild of

IMHO, when rebuilding an engine, a new oil pump, pickup tube, and pump
drive shaft are small investments in engine longevity. Even if the old
pump tests good and the pickup tube looks immaculate, I would always
replace the pump drive shaft. Of course, I would recommend testing any
critical component even when purchased new. A free replacement for a
defective oil pump is minor consolation when you have to change it out.
Warranty limitations on consequential damages (like toasted crank bearings
and journals) are even less gratifying when it's your engine that died.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:26:00 -0500
From: Tony Marino
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Steering Shaft Solution- Answers and Prices

Hey all!

I hope I don't make this too long winded for ya! All of this talk about
the rag joints, shafts, and universals got me thinkin' about my '78 F-150
4x4 and how sloppy the steering was in it. Recently I blew a rear U-joint
in the driveshaft and was going to run down to Sam Winer Motors here in
Akron, Ohio who do all of my Dana/Spicer/Rockwell/Eaton part needs. I
brought along my extra steering shaft assy. with me to ask them about a new
universal for it since mine was dangerously shot. When I brought it up to
the counter (they recognise me there) the guy at the counter said "that's a
nice lawnmower part you got there!" and smiled. I guess they aren't
allowed for insurance reasons to fix steering shafts because of some safety
issue. But we laughed a little bit and he told me that if we keep it in
"reference" as a "lawn mower part" he could sell me the pieces I need to
fix up the U-joint. (BTW- these people DO NOT sell lawnmower stuff for
those of you who might need parts! (grin)) Anyway, he comes back with these
parts-

SP 10-4-431-SX Yoke, Fitting $18.58
SP 10-4-13 Yoke, Fitting $10.92
SP 5-170X Universal Kit $7.61

That's a new yoke for the steering shaft (with splines), new yoke for the
DD shaft, and a greasable universal for the yokes.

Not bad for under $40 bucks. -- I just got done installing them- took about
1.5 hours - here's what I had to do- Just removed the old shaft and took
it to a chop saw and cut the old yoke off of the end of the shaft. The new
yokes are longer, so the distance you lose doing this, you'll gain back
with the yokes. (plenty of shaft still left to slide (unless you have a
body lift)) The new yoke slid right over the shaft (can be welded for
safety reasons) but has a bolt hole in the side so I stuck a worm gear in
it to fasten it to the shaft and hold it tight. The universals press in
just like any normal one (only retaining clips are on inside rather than
outside) and then the new assy. was ready to put in. The splines on the
steering column yoke lined up, and everything bolted together perfect. Not
as nice as the shafts I was looking at on flaming rivers home page, but a
heck of a lot cheaper!!!

I have no affiliation with Sam Winer Motors, just good people who can help
you out with darn near anything drivetrain wise (and sell stuff made in
USA) so if you call to order these parts, don't say what they are for!
(wink) Their phone number is (330)628-4881, ask for parts. If you call
them, don't tell them what it's for, they may not like me the next time I
go in! 8-)

Hope the time to type this helped somebody out!

Tony
tony pscico.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/~tony

At 11:31 PM 11/16/98 -0500, you wrote:
>any body familiar with ford steering? the shaft that connects the
>steering sector with the colum shaft, it has a bad u-joint. the ford
>dealer only sells the whole shaft, and it's priced outrageously.
>anybody have a better idea. any info would be helpful. thanks
>bill clark
>
>
>Hi Bill.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:42:28 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

>From: RKocsis627 aol.com
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
>
>Is it worth it to Change my 351M 2-V to an Edelbrock
>4-V intake and carb? I'm lookin for a little more
>get up and go. Does it make that much of a
>difference or would I just be wasting my money? I
>appreciate any opinions, thanks.

Yo RKocsis627:

It depends.... You need to give more details of what you have now and what
you want.

What type and year is your truck? How many miles on the engine? Have you
done anything else to modify the engine? What kind of exhaust system do
you have? Do you have a catalytic converter? Do you have to pass
emissions tests? What kind of driving do you do? What kind of specific
improvements are you looking for?

In general, a well tuned 4V carb (and corresponding manifold) alone on a
fresh 351M will provide an improvement, especially at higher revs (over 3K
rpm). If you accompany the carb change w/ headers or a decent exhaust
system, the improvement is more profound. If your engine is worn out and
tired, a 4V carb won't be worthwhile.

OTOH, there are several other improvements you can make for the same amount
of money and they might produce as much (or more) improvement as a 4V carb
on a stock engine. For example, changing the cam and getting a free
flowing exhaust system will make a substantial improvement in performance,
even w/ a stock carb. Just changing a worn out timing chain will improve
the performance noticeably on an engine w/ a lot of miles.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:20:50 PST
From: "Joe Swinko"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - new member/wiring

Hello all. I am a new member and I own a 1966 custom cab F-100. The
previous owner installed a 351W/FMX combo.I needed to get a steering
column from a 74 or so Ford, to go with the auto trans. Anyways, my
truck needs rewired. I was wondering what was the best aftermarket fuse
block or harness would be the best choice for my truck. Please keep in
mind I plan to make some improvements over the next few years (bigger
engine ;^) power windows, sound system). Also, I need a wiring diagram
for a 66 and/or the 1972 351W/FMX. Any help would certainly be
appreciated.

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:30:02 -0800
From: Steve & Rockette Leitch
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rareity of '66 w/ I-beam suspension

At 16:25 18/11/98 -0500, you wrote:
>At 03:49 PM 11/18/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>>A friend of ours has a '66 Ford pickup with 351ci, automatic tranny, and
>>I-beam suspension. Hes been told this combination is rare, like only 90
>>ever made. So is this a really rare vehicle or what?
>>
>>Patrick
>
>All 65+ Ford trucks came standard with I-beam suspension.
>
>Ken

And it's a 352, not a 351.

Steve & the Rockette



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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:51:08 -0800
From: "jeffd"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - rag joint

If you are serious
Rag Joint: follow your steering column from the firewall to the steering
gear. The outer tube of the column will end with the center section
continuing to a circular flange. This flange will have 2 cutouts 180
degrees from each other and either 2 stud or 2 nuts. There will be a
circular part that connects to this flange and to the shaft that comes up
to meet it from the steering gear. This part is called the rag joint. If
you examine it you will see a flexible material. It is used to dampen
vibration in your steering system.

- ----------
> From: John LaGrone
> To: Ford Trucks 61-79
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - rag joint
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 6:14 AM
>
> I am going to ask a dumb question. What is a rag joint? I always thought
> y'all (that's a legal word in Texas) were talking about the section where
> the pieces of tire are.
>
>
> -John
>
> jlagrone ford-trucks.com
> 1979 F150 Custom 351M C6 (Henry)
> http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
> Dearborn iron rules!!!!!!
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 22:33:36 EST
From: RKocsis627 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

Hey Dave, thanks. I have a '77 2WD F150 Custom. It's got 76,000 miles on it,
and what I'm really looking for is an improvement in the low-mid range. The
truck's a daily driver, so that's its primary use. I don't have to pass an
emissions test, and currently the truck is still bone stock and has no cats. I
plan on putting a dual exhaust on, so what do you think should happen from
there? Thanks again.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 20:47:08 -0800
From: "pat green"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

also try adding a set of 351c 2v heads that will take care of any flow
problems

pat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Dave Resch
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 3:42 PM
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
>
>
> >From: RKocsis627 aol.com
> >Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
> >
> >Is it worth it to Change my 351M 2-V to an Edelbrock
> >4-V intake and carb? I'm lookin for a little more
> >get up and go. Does it make that much of a
> >difference or would I just be wasting my money? I
> >appreciate any opinions, thanks.
>
> Yo RKocsis627:
>
> It depends.... You need to give more details of what you have
> now and what
> you want.
>
> What type and year is your truck? How many miles on the engine? Have you
> done anything else to modify the engine? What kind of exhaust system do
> you have? Do you have a catalytic converter? Do you have to pass
> emissions tests? What kind of driving do you do? What kind of specific
> improvements are you looking for?
>
> In general, a well tuned 4V carb (and corresponding manifold) alone on a
> fresh 351M will provide an improvement, especially at higher revs (over 3K
> rpm). If you accompany the carb change w/ headers or a decent exhaust
> system, the improvement is more profound. If your engine is worn out and
> tired, a 4V carb won't be worthwhile.
>
> OTOH, there are several other improvements you can make for the
> same amount
> of money and they might produce as much (or more) improvement as a 4V carb
> on a stock engine. For example, changing the cam and getting a free
> flowing exhaust system will make a substantial improvement in performance,
> even w/ a stock carb. Just changing a worn out timing chain will improve
> the performance noticeably on an engine w/ a lot of miles.
>
> Dave R. (M-block devotee)
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 05:43:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Arlene Mason
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4 wheel disc brakes

My emergency brakes on the truck work GREAT, if you have it on you
aren't going anywhere! Never mind the light. Now, on my '66 Mustang it
E-brake has never worked as long as I have owned the car (nearly 11
years) it passes the inspection once in awhile, but only if the
inspector is in a REAL good mood.

- ---luxjo thecore.com wrote:
>
> John LaGrone wrote:

> > had a hard time getting my 77 Eldo to pass safety inspection
because they
> > said the emergency brake didn't hold.
>
> Mine works awsome, but my emerg brake light is out, so I keep
leaving it
> on. The truck seems real sluggish and I realize DUH!!!, I'm driving
> around with it on. I allready fried my first set of pads in less
than a
> 1000 miles. Maybe I'll wire an aftermarket oil pressure light right in
> my face for the emerg nrake ;-)
>

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 06:38:10 -0800 (PST)
From: TheFORDMAN webtv.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - new member/wiring

joe,
depending on what your after you can go to the library in the auto
motive section
and copy one there or you can go after market ( painless wiring through
summit racing or direct to the manufacturer) its
your choice
ERIC
p/s when i meant copy i meant copy
of wiring diagram

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 09:47:47 -0600
From: juredd - Justin Reddell
Subject: FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100

Needing to talk to someone about restoring a 69 model F-100. I have no idea of where to start. I am replacing the inner finders (that is if I can find some good ones), door and window seals, and putting a little less rusty bed back on. Other than that I don't know how to continue. Is there someone out there brave enough to give me a phone # that I could give you a yell and ask some questions? If not please give me some more ideas.

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:35:09 -0800 (PST)
From: TheFORDMAN webtv.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100

hey justin
my name is eric aka the fordman
feel free to call me any time you
want ive been working on fords
for roughly 20years and have come
across many ford problems so if you
need some advice just call me at
(503) 848-8186
Forever Fords
Eric

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:27:15 -0500 (EST)
From: otjohnson worldnet.att.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Interesting item on eBay web site item#43240851: 1969 FORD TRUCK Shop MANUALS- 4 vol. LIKE NEW

These 1969 Ford Truck Shop Manuals are for sale on EBay along with several other sets for various years. I have a set of these for my 71, and they are great. If anyone on the list in interested, go to www.ebay.com and run a search in misc. for "ford truck".

Title of item: 1969 FORD TRUCK Shop MANUALS- 4 vol. LIKE NEW
Seller: antiques56 aol.com
Starts: 11/18/98 23:06:07 PST
Ends: 11/25/98 23:06:07 PST
Price: Currently $10.50
To bid the item, go to: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=43240851


Item Description:
A 4 volume unused set of 1969 FORD TRUCK SHOP MANUALS... Printed by Ford Motor Company. These books contain diagrams and complete maintenance and repair information on all ford truck models (Bronco, club wagon, econoline, b-series, c-series, f-series, n-series,p-series, t-series, and w-series). Contains complete troubleshooting, maintenance, and repair for all aspects of the Ford Trucks of that year. VOLUME ONE covers vehicle identification, brakes, suspension, steering, wheels, tires, rear axle, drive shaft, clutch, manual transmissions, automatic transmissions. VOLUME TWO covers the engine, ignition system, fuel system, cooling system, exhaust system, and starting system. VOLUME THREE covers charging system, lights, instruments, convenience devices, ventilating, heating, accessories, body, doors, windows, trim, and seats. VOLUME FOUR covers maintenance. ALL FOUR VOLUMES FOR ONE BID... If you have a 69' ford truck -- you must have these books!!!As with all my sales there is NO RESERVE and SATISFACTION IS GUARANTEED!!! Buyer will pay $5.00 shipping. Thanks

Visit eBay, the world's largest Personal Trading Community at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ebay.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:09:39 -0600
From: "Oscar Johnson"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Help!

Driving home last night (71 F250 Ranger XLT CS 360 2V C6) my dash lights
went out and the headlights were flickering accompanied by electrical relay
sounding clicks/noises from the right side of my dash. The truck has the AC
unit under the dash on right side. Since I have had the truck, I have
noticed that I get a click from that location when I turn the headlights on.
Any ideas?

O.T. Johnson otjohnson worldnet.att.net
Prattville, AL


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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:18:16 -0600 (CST)
From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: FTE 61-79 - restoring a 69 F-100

juredd - Justin Reddell [juredd acxiom.com] wrote:
>Needing to talk to someone about restoring a 69 model F-100. I have no idea
>of where to start. I am replacing the inner finders (that is if I can find some
>good ones), door and window seals, and putting a little less rusty bed back
>on. Other than that I don't know how to continue. Is there someone out there
>brave enough to give me a phone # that I could give you a yell and ask some
>questions? If not please give me some more ideas.

Justin,
Congratulations on your new project. I want to encourage you not to use the
phone, but this list, as often as possible for several reasons.....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.