61-79-list-digest Sunday, November 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 530



=======================================================================
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 - Re Timing chain altenative
[none]
FTE 61-79 - Re Rating of vehicle cargo.
FTE 61-79 - Re Need for 4 Wheel Disc Brakes!?
FTE 61-79 - Re: steering shafts
Re: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - Rebuild time! Got a few questions
FTE 61-79 - Re: F 250 plus
FTE 61-79 - 2wd C6 tailshaft length
FTE 61-79 - Emission Equip
FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble
FTE 61-79 - 351C for sale!!
RE: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble
Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble
FTE 61-79 - Cool running 300 6
RE: FTE 61-79 - Cool running 300 6
Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?
FTE 61-79 - Rebuild on 400M
Re: FTE 61-79 - Emission Equip
Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: steering shafts

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 21:20:52 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re Timing chain altenative


In timing sets, I really believe the double roller types are worth the
extra cost because they will "stretch" less than a conventional plate-type
chain. When the chain elongates, the cam timing becomes more retarded,
which weakens your low rpm power.


Hi everybody.

Anyone tried one of those "Gear Drives" like the ones from "Summit"? I
think I going to try one when I put the 79 Bronco back together.

Opinions?

Later,

"Paul"


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 21:29:58 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: [none]


8-) I don't want to get flamed for this-- but!!! Ok, My '78 f-250 4x4's
shaft doesn't have the rag joint, but a slip coupling at the end, however,
I know the yoke that attaches to the steering column is the same, thus that
and the universal would be the same... Maybe somebody could shed some light
on if the steering shaft end is the same as the F-150. (mine other truck
is about a 1/2 hour from here, so I can't just walk out and check) I'll
find out for sure Saturday-

Tony

Hi Tony.

The Shop Manual I have for my 79 Bronco, (Ford 79 Light Truck Service), show
that kind of shaft on the F 150 Crewcab/Supercab. Didn't show anything
special for the F 250 but it didn't show a specific listing for ANY F 250 or
F 350. I think it would follow that they were showing one example of each
different type, and they are found in the different F series.

I would be happier with that unit, as opposed to the "Rag Joint" cause they
get sloppy a lot faster, (or so I have been told).

Hope this helps.

"Paul"


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 21:33:24 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re Rating of vehicle cargo.


hat kind of tonnage rating is an F-250 with double leaf springs have? Is
it comparable to an F350 (1 ton)? It is not a burning question. I'm just
always curious about whatever I have...


Hi Dennis.

I would be more concerned with the "axle rating". Bigger springs are good,
but if ya snap an axle....

Later,

"Paul"


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 21:37:28 -0500
From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re Need for 4 Wheel Disc Brakes!?


I fully agree with you. Mudding, off-roading, racing, trailer pulling all
seem like a good reason to go four wheel disc. For an everyday driver, I
just don't see justification of the expense nor a need for the technology.


- - -John


Hi John.

First you are 100% right. Now here where I get "flamed". Sometimes you
just gotta give into that "I gotta have that big shiny thing on my truck"
syndrome. And functional is all more impressive than "chrome". Just better
hope that the wife doesn't have her class "A" mechanics license, right? ;>)

Later,

"Paul"


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 23:02:54 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: steering shafts

Mr. Paul R. Boudreault wrote:
>
>
> 8-) I don't want to get flamed for this-- but!!! Ok, My '78 f-250 4x4's
> shaft doesn't have the rag joint, but a slip coupling at the end, however,
> I know the yoke that attaches to the steering column is the same, thus that
> and the universal would be the same... Maybe somebody could shed some light
> on if the steering shaft end is the same as the F-150. (mine other truck
> is about a 1/2 hour from here, so I can't just walk out and check) I'll
> find out for sure Saturday-
>

1/2 tons all use coil spring susp, hence steer box is much farther back
than F-250's, Steering shaft on F-250 is much longer than 78-79 Bronco.
I allready checked.

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:26:18 -0600
From: "J Elliott"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - vacuum switch

Pat Brown expounded:

>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,
I gather you must have time on your hands in the evenings while waiting for
someone go give you servicable D****n parts. Either that or the excess
roughage of the granola-laden CA diet combined with the solids of smog have
altered the the dielectric content of synaptic fluid to cause misfiring ant
the nerve junctions.

On the other hand, maybe that is why drivers in the south flash their
headlights when they see a speed trap.
Jim E.




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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:34:58 PST
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rebuild time! Got a few questions

Adam,
I have a 79 bronco 4x4 w/ a 400M (great engine), not to fast
but very strong, i plan to put a 4bbl and edelbrock lung on real soon.
Talk about speed though, at school i have a friend with a 78 f-250, it
has a 460 punched 30 over, RV cam, stainless valves, edelbrock manifold,
& holly double pumper. The truck is a 4x4 and can whoop the s #*! out of
any truck on campus, and even the late model 454,s cant keep up with
it.

Like he said CAAMMM IT, DAMN IT!
be sure to choose the right manifold and carb for the cam, keep it
happy. =-) Im sure roller rockers wouldnt hurt either.
KICK SOME A#% !

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:37:52 -0800
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: F 250 plus

On Thu, 19 Nov 1998, Dennis Pearson wrote:
>
> When I was crawling under my recently acquired '66 F250, checking wires and
> realizing I didn't have the second gas tank--just the cap and gooseneck
> into space, I suddenly noticed the suspension. It looks like my wife's
> grandfather (May he RIP) installed double rear leaf springs. I could
> tell it was a fairly recent modification, since the U-bolts were pretty
> clean and new looking.
>
> What kind of tonnage rating is an F-250 with double leaf springs have? Is
> it comparable to an F350 (1 ton)? It is not a burning question. I'm just
> always curious about whatever I have...

I have a '66 F-250 with some extra leaves too. We have thrown about 2
ton on it, no problems. This one has a dump bed inside the regular one
and a second channel iron frame under the dump bed so the frame is
pretty well beefed. I'd worry most about the axle, it's only a Dana 60,
which is genearally rated as a 3/4 ton axle. The 70 would make me feel
more comfortable.

It sure rides way nicer after you get about 1500 pounds on it, though.

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:45:27 -0800
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 2wd C6 tailshaft length

I have a 2wd C6 I am building to go behind a 429 in my '61 F-100 4wd. I
was wondering if it would be possible to find a shorter tailshaft while
I have got the thing apart. It is too long now to fit in front of the
divorce mount transfer case w/o either putting a bit of a rake on the
motor or moving the bellhousing to motor location a bit forward to keep
that little driveshaft's angles correct. Either are viable options but
I'd like to make it more "normal" so I can hang lots of doodads on the
front of the motor and use a modern style t-case later. Any ideas?

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 10:21:44 -0700
From: "Syber"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Emission Equip

Hoping someone here can give me a hand. I bought my '79 Bronco with no
emissions equipment on it.. last year I passed the test by putting cats and
a fuel restrictor on it. This year, they tell me that I'm supposed to have
a smog pump as well. No idea as to why I got by last year, but not this
year... Anyways.. I need everything.. from the pump and pulleys to the
hose and bracket. I can buy a pump new for cheap enough, but can't find any
brackets or pulleys around here to save my life. I have the extra pulley on
my crankshaft already...
So, if anyone has any of this laying around, and/or know of a bone yard near
you that may have them, I'll be willing to buy them off you.

Thanks In Adance,
Paul Fogle


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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 17:17:23 -0400
From: David Wadson
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble

Well, I wasn't expecting to be posting a problem so soon after getting my
truck registered and on the road...2 days. Anyways, after 2 years of
work rebuilding a 78 F100 (I like to consider it an F125 as it has 75% of
the suspension from some F150's) I had the thrill of overheating my brand
new rad at 3:00am. The rad is not the stock replacement for a 302 and
automatic tranny - I went with a bigger size 3-core rad but not as big as
if the truck had air conditioning. Anyways, I only had one jug of
antifreeze in there and was less than 24 hours away from taking it in for a
rad flush and fill with the proper -45 degree Celsius mix. The temperature
dipped to probably about -10 degrees Celsius and between midnight and 3am I
think I had my coolant freeze up on me. While driving home a started to
smell antifreeze, pulled over and nearly cried like a baby when I got out
and saw fluid coming off the bottom of the rad. Turns out the overflow hose
was aimed down there and I hadn't cracked the rad (thank god). I managed to
limp home and what I'm pretty sure is the confirmation that I froze it is
that while sitting at the side of the road for the third time letting the
truck cool down, I heard a good clunking sound and then water flowing.
Hmmm, now that I think about that I should check my oil... :-(

I took it in this afternoon for a rad flush and we had a heck of a time.
The coolant wasn't flowing and pressure would build up in the system to the
point of making horrible clunking noises as the pressure released. But
whereas the lower rad hose was stone cold the night before, it was hot this
time. I doubt the thermostat went - just seems too unlikely and if it did,
don't they generally stick open? After about an hour and a half I suspected
that maybe I had a good airlock in the block and we drained the rad and
filled it back up while running the engine. We let it boil over and capped
it but the lower rad was running cold. We left it and went to the garage
next door to consult with their mechanic. He figured the thermostat was the
culprit, not an air lock.

So I went back to it, and decided to run it for a while and see what would
happen. It started behaving again and after running it for about 15-20
minutes, my temperature gauge wouldn't go over 200 degrees Fahrenheit and
stayed between 180 and 200, as it usually did. However, the lower rad hose
stayed cool to the touch - all other hoses are hot. I had them flush the
rad at this point, depsite their doubts about whether coolant was flowing
through my rad. Regardless, I now have a good 65/35 mix that won't freeze
up. Even after driving around for an hour, the lower rad hose stays cool,
interior heater has moderate to lukewarm heat (not the toasty hot I
expected from the new heater core), and the temperature gauge stays between
180 and 200.

I'm inclined to dispel the idea of the bad thermostat - it's pretty much
brand new and seems unlikely to have gone within 3 hours and now be
functioning again. A friend figures my rad is too big for the truck or my
water pump isn't working but it's brand new and an unlikely candidate. I'm
thinking the rad size might be a good possibility.

Anyone have any ideas or possible solutions and if the rad is too big, what
can I do short of getting a different rad, that will give me more interior
heat when the temperature plummets to -30 degrees.


David Wadson (wadsond air.on.ca)


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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 17:31:07 -0500
From: "Kenny Realph"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351C for sale!!

Hey everybody,
I have a friend with a 351C in his back yard it was in good condition about
3or 4 years ago but now frozen. I don't know if it has all accessories but
he was going to take it to scrap yard. told him to wait and I would see if
any one was interested on the mailing list. I know they are becoming rare to
find and I wouldn't like to know that another was lost forever without
trying to find a home for it. I live in Columbus OH.

Kenny Realph
krealph hotmail.com

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 15:36:25 -0700
From: "Miska, Richard L (Rick)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble

Change the thermostat. Its easy to do, and you should know right away. If
it is running cool, change to a 195 thermostat. Buy it from Napa or Big A,
no checker/autozone etc. Let me know how it turned out. Rick

> ----------
> From: David Wadson[SMTP:wadsond air.on.ca]
> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 2:17 PM
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble
>
> Well, I wasn't expecting to be posting a problem so soon after getting my
> truck registered and on the road...2 days. Anyways, after 2 years
> of
> work rebuilding a 78 F100 (I like to consider it an F125 as it has 75% of
> the suspension from some F150's) I had the thrill of overheating my brand
> new rad at 3:00am. The rad is not the stock replacement for a 302 and
> automatic tranny - I went with a bigger size 3-core rad but not as big as
> if the truck had air conditioning. Anyways, I only had one jug of
> antifreeze in there and was less than 24 hours away from taking it in for
> a
> rad flush and fill with the proper -45 degree Celsius mix. The temperature
> dipped to probably about -10 degrees Celsius and between midnight and 3am
> I
> think I had my coolant freeze up on me. While driving home a started to
> smell antifreeze, pulled over and nearly cried like a baby when I got out
> and saw fluid coming off the bottom of the rad. Turns out the overflow
> hose
> was aimed down there and I hadn't cracked the rad (thank god). I managed
> to
> limp home and what I'm pretty sure is the confirmation that I froze it is
> that while sitting at the side of the road for the third time letting the
> truck cool down, I heard a good clunking sound and then water flowing.
> Hmmm, now that I think about that I should check my oil... :-(
>
> I took it in this afternoon for a rad flush and we had a heck of a time.
> The coolant wasn't flowing and pressure would build up in the system to
> the
> point of making horrible clunking noises as the pressure released. But
> whereas the lower rad hose was stone cold the night before, it was hot
> this
> time. I doubt the thermostat went - just seems too unlikely and if it did,
> don't they generally stick open? After about an hour and a half I
> suspected
> that maybe I had a good airlock in the block and we drained the rad and
> filled it back up while running the engine. We let it boil over and capped
> it but the lower rad was running cold. We left it and went to the garage
> next door to consult with their mechanic. He figured the thermostat was
> the
> culprit, not an air lock.
>
> So I went back to it, and decided to run it for a while and see what would
> happen. It started behaving again and after running it for about 15-20
> minutes, my temperature gauge wouldn't go over 200 degrees Fahrenheit and
> stayed between 180 and 200, as it usually did. However, the lower rad hose
> stayed cool to the touch - all other hoses are hot. I had them flush the
> rad at this point, depsite their doubts about whether coolant was flowing
> through my rad. Regardless, I now have a good 65/35 mix that won't freeze
> up. Even after driving around for an hour, the lower rad hose stays cool,
> interior heater has moderate to lukewarm heat (not the toasty hot I
> expected from the new heater core), and the temperature gauge stays
> between
> 180 and 200.
>
> I'm inclined to dispel the idea of the bad thermostat - it's pretty much
> brand new and seems unlikely to have gone within 3 hours and now be
> functioning again. A friend figures my rad is too big for the truck or my
> water pump isn't working but it's brand new and an unlikely candidate. I'm
> thinking the rad size might be a good possibility.
>
> Anyone have any ideas or possible solutions and if the rad is too big,
> what
> can I do short of getting a different rad, that will give me more interior
> heat when the temperature plummets to -30 degrees.
>
>
> David Wadson (wadsond air.on.ca)
>
>
> == 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: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 15:16:31 -0800
From: Steve & Rockette Leitch
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble

At 17:17 21/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Well, I wasn't expecting to be posting a problem so soon after getting my
>truck registered and on the road...2 days. Anyways, after 2 years of
>work rebuilding a 78 F100 (I like to consider it an F125 as it has 75% of
>the suspension from some F150's) I had the thrill of overheating my brand
>new rad at 3:00am. The rad is not the stock replacement for a 302 and
>automatic tranny - I went with a bigger size 3-core rad but not as big as
>if the truck had air conditioning.

One question, did you put a new water pump on the motor??
If you did, is the pump impeller designed to run backwards?
The serpentine belt systems on late model 5L run the water
pump backwards, they'll work somewhat running in the regular
direction, but will have a tendancy to overheat......don't ask.......

Steve & the Rockette

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 18:04:40 -0600
From: Neal DePape
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Cool running 300 6

I have a truck with Ford 300 6 cylinder, that has headers and an
aluminum intake manifold. This truck never quite warms up and is always
on the low end of the temperature gauge.

Living in Minnesota and driving to Canada often, I would like to get the
engine producing more heat. I had thought of removing the fan for the
winter, perhaps replacing it with an electronic fan on a thermostat.

Is there a good junkyard source for an electric fan that I could put in
my truck? Or should I just remove the fan and run without one at all?

Neal

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 17:33:01 -0700
From: "Miska, Richard L (Rick)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Cool running 300 6

Maybe your thermostat is stuck open, that happened on my truck.

> ----------
> From: Neal DePape[SMTP:nealdp mn.mediaone.net]
> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 5:04 PM
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - Cool running 300 6
>
> I have a truck with Ford 300 6 cylinder, that has headers and an
> aluminum intake manifold. This truck never quite warms up and is always
> on the low end of the temperature gauge.
>
> Living in Minnesota and driving to Canada often, I would like to get the
> engine producing more heat. I had thought of removing the fan for the
> winter, perhaps replacing it with an electronic fan on a thermostat.
>
> Is there a good junkyard source for an electric fan that I could put in
> my truck? Or should I just remove the fan and run without one at all?
>
> Neal
>
> == 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: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 21:31:28 EST
From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351 2-V to 4-V?

the pre 72 351 c 2v heads should flow a little better and give a little more
compression.

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 20:19:11 PST
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rebuild on 400M

I just bought a complete 400M from a friend so i can have as little down
time replacing the tired 400M in my bronco.( 195,000 miles)
to get to the point i have a few q's i would like some help with.
does any one know about what it costs to have a set of rods shot peened
and heat treated? Where can i get brand name flat top pistons from? and
What kind of manifold/carb/cam selection works best with 400M's, keeping
in mind i use this truck for off roading and highway purposes. i would
appreciate any help with these questions.
Thanks in advance!
AZ Eric
'79 Bronco, 400M, 194,000 miles.(hearing some piston slap. =^[ )

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 20:37:08 PST
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Emission Equip

Hey syber, my truck has all of that too. (soon to be replaced w/ a fresh
good-ol 400M with a non egr manifold.) I have a friend with a 79
ranchero sitting around that has a 400M, maybe i can buy the equiptment
off him, i would sell it to you at cost. I will write back and let you
know how much he wants. dont worry i will make sure it is identical to
the bronco setup. I have a 79 too. You do have a 351 or 400M, right?
AZ Eric
'79 Bronco custom, 400M, 195,000 miles(starting to hear some piston slap
=^[ )

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

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

Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 21:33:07 PST
From: "Eric Guin"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F100 w/ 302 - Cooling Trouble

Did you install a serpentine belt conversion? may need a reverse
rotation water pump. maybe your water pump is just bad.
just a thought.
AZ Eric
'79 Bronco custom 4x4, 400M

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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 01:03:11 -0500
From: Tony Marino
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: steering shafts

Oops! I think my message came across wrong! I was just wanting to make
sure the diameter of the slip shaft on the F-250 was the same as the
diameter of the slipshaft for the F-150, not length- For Mr. Colorado Jeff,
so the lower yoke would fit on his F-250. 8-)

Tony

At 11:02 PM 11/20/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Mr. Paul R. Boudreault wrote:
>>
>>
>> 8-) I don't want to get flamed for this-- but!!! Ok, My '78 f-250 4x4's
>> shaft doesn't have the rag joint, but a slip coupling at the end, however,
>> I know the yoke that attaches to the steering column is the same, thus that....


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.