 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Thursday, December 24 1998 Volume 02 : Number 570 ======================================================================= 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 - 4V intakes for FE Re: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE FTE 61-79 - Deacon's sig FTE 61-79 - Fuel tank inlet hose RE: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE FTE 61-79 - U-Joint Removal Tip FTE 61-79 - 410 rebuild [none] FTE 61-79 - RE: FTE 61-79 - Re:- U-Joint Removal Tip/U-joint search FTE 61-79 - 3X2 intakes FTE 61-79 - 2v 4v 3x2v 6packs etc FTE 61-79 - Tri Power FTE 61-79 - six pack FTE 61-79 - 360-390 FTE 61-79 - Holidays FTE 61-79 - Wishing you and your families a Very Merry Christmas! FTE 61-79 - steering column Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID Help needed FTE 61-79 - F-100 Explorer Re: FTE 61-79 - F-100 Explorer Re: FTE 61-79 - 360-390 FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? FTE 61-79 - Unibody VIN Numbers Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 rebuild Re: FTE 61-79 - 3X2 intakes FTE 61-79 - RE: 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? FTE 61-79 - Re: Tri-Power Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry?(cont) Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Fuel Inlet Hose Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Tri-Power Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry?(cont) ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 04:22:29 PST From: "Tim Neasham" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE >From: JUMPINFORD aol.com > >> > >Set up for 3 2v carbs. The most popular engine I know of that used this was the 440 six-pack from Chrysler, but I think thats how the Ford 406 Tri-Power got its name, but I dont know for sure. (Thats your cue Azie) Don't forget about the lovely Pontiac GTO 389 Tri-Power. Got one sitting in my shop as we speak. :) Tim ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:24:21 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE >this was the 440 six-pack from Chrysler, but I think thats how the Ford >406 Tri-Power got its name, but I dont know for sure. (Thats your cue >Azie) > >Don't forget about the lovely Pontiac GTO 389 Tri-Power. Got one >sitting in my shop as we speak. :) > Actually quite a few cars came with the tri-power, or whatever they cared to call it... Dad's got 2 setups for his 57 Olds He had a 68 Vette with the 427 and tri-power back in the 70's Then as we've mentioned the Chrysler's and Fords (of course) had them ... 'Bout the only car I haven't seen multiple carbs on was anything AMC made, but then finding a good original AMC product around here is like trying to find hens teeth ... the salt just ate them up ... Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:32:39 -0600 From: John Strauss Subject: FTE 61-79 - Deacon's sig >========================================== >I don't lie, cheat or steal unnecessarily. >========================================== > Deacon, did you lift that from President Clinton? :-) _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:32:41 -0600 From: John Strauss Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fuel tank inlet hose > >Colorado Jeff writes: >> >I'm working on a 78 F-250 4x4. Would like to replace the fuel inlet hose >(rear tank). Is this a Ford item? > >Yep! A FOMOCO item. Don't use radiator hose. It won't last and will >eventually start to crumble, and guess where the 'crumbles' go!!! > I just bought one of these for my '69 Ranger at NAPA. It is pretty pricey, though. They told me on the phone it was $9/foot, when I got there it was $25/foot. I should have told them to shove it but they were the only place in town that had it and I needed it. _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:08:24 -0700 From: "Miska, Richard L (Rick)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE I found one of these "factory high rise?" intakes on a t-bird with a 428. I dont even have an fe, but I knew what the intake was, and bought it to put on the shelf with all the other weird stuff I dont ever use , but might someday. Basically, an early t-bird in a junkyard is a good potential donor for this intake. Rick p.s. Anybody got a good deal on a used carter/edelbrock 600 or 625 carb with ford linkage? > ---------- > From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com[SMTP:am14 daimlerchrysler.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 1998 12:28 PM > To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: FTE 61-79 - 4V intakes for FE > > Ted writes: >>I've always been told to use a pre '65 manifold on a FE. > I've always been told they flow better than the newer ones. > > I disagree with this. I've been wrong before, so I'm not adamant about > this, but I believe the '67 thru '69 had the better flowing intakes and > I've owned bunches of these from '61 thru '69. Best pure stock one I had > came on my '69 428SCJ fastback Stang. The intake 'runners' were visably > larger and the intake stood higher. Wish I still had it. I might be > tempted to build another FE.(410 or larger) > > Azie > Ardmore, Al. > > > == 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, 23 Dec 1998 10:21:18 EST From: BDIJXS aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - U-Joint Removal Tip Hey Ox, I have used the socket/vise/big hammer method for getting those U-joints out of the axle shafts, until a buddy of mine showed me an easier way. Rather than try to push both caps at once with the small socket through to the big socket, he put the yoke on top of the vise, with the vise open enough to allow the cap fall through. Next, he tapped the "opposing" axle shaft near the U-joint, meaning that he was transferring the force through the two "horizontal" caps to just the one "vertical" cap, which easily popped out and down between the grips of the vice. Does this make sense? I've found that you don't really have to hit it very hard since you are only pushing one cap, rather than two. I have since used this method several times, and every time, I've cursed myself for all those times I tried to push both caps at once with the socket.... Colorado Jeff == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:26:07 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 410 rebuild Ted of the Freeman Family writes: >> I think I've found all the parts I need including the correct 410 piston. All I can find are .30 over though and I have a virgin block. I don't really want to take it that far over on the first rebuild, but it is an FE and should last a long time with good maintenance. Surely you mean .030". I would not hesitate to bore the 'virgin' block .030". It will most likely take upwards of .080" (I bored a 390 to 4.130", which is .080"), and still have enough metal in the cyl walls to be considered safe.. However not all 390's will bore out that far. Some models were thicker castings than others and I've forgot just what models/years are the thick castings, and I've lost all my information on the FE series (actually I think my wife destroyed it one of her cleaning/throwing away binges she gets on from time to time).I do seem to remember that all the 410's fell into the thick wall casting blocks, but my memory plays tricks on me from time to time, so it ain't completely reliable. Anyway, you will have 416cuin if you use the .030" over. Good luck. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 10:33:26 -0500 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: [none] I needed to replace the front hose on my 77 F150. Ford no longer stocks it and the parts guy told me two alternatives. The first is junk yard and the second is to check a tractor trailer dealership where they deal with larger tubing. Not sure about the rad hose. Jon E. Purut Hi Jon. You are RIGHT about the rad hose. I would advise against this also. I have the same problem for my 79 Bronco. Solution, (as advised by my favorite local Ford Parts guy), is to call a local "Marine/Boat dealer. They have had to do this before. I called and got a quote on Fuel hose, (bulk), 2 and 1/4 inch inside diameter, for about $9.00 per foot, (Canadian). NAPA wants $ 12.00 per foot apparently at a friends place in Oregon. Only draw back in my case is that the Marine dealer tells me that because of low demand he has to sell the whole 15 foot length it comes in. NAPA said the same thing and BTW they are BOTH made by "GATES". Guess ya know which I will be getting. I will be getting mine in January as there is no rush in my case. (Totally apart for rebuild purposes.) Hope this helps. "Paul" P.S. Rad hose will break down with prolonged use. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 08:46:35 -0700 From: "Miska, Richard L (Rick)" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: I could use a piece of this hose too!!! Maybe about 15 of us could all chip in and buy one length. > > I needed to replace the front hose on my 77 F150. Ford no longer stocks > it and the parts guy told me two alternatives. The first is junk yard and > the second is to check a tractor trailer dealership where they deal with > larger tubing. > > Not sure about the rad hose. > > Jon E. Purut > > > > > Hi Jon. > > You are RIGHT about the rad hose. I would advise against this also. > > I have the same problem for my 79 Bronco. Solution, (as advised by my > favorite local Ford Parts guy), is to call a local "Marine/Boat dealer. > They have had to do this before. I called and got a quote on Fuel hose, > (bulk), 2 and 1/4 inch inside diameter, for about $9.00 per foot, > (Canadian). NAPA wants $ 12.00 per foot apparently at a friends place in > Oregon. Only draw back in my case is that the Marine dealer tells me that > because of low demand he has to sell the whole 15 foot length it comes in. > NAPA said the same thing and BTW they are BOTH made by "GATES". > > Guess ya know which I will be getting. > > I will be getting mine in January as there is no rush in my case. > (Totally > apart for rebuild purposes.) > > Hope this helps. > > "Paul" > > P.S. Rad hose will break down with prolonged use. > > > == 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, 23 Dec 1998 10:53:45 -0500 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:- U-Joint Removal Tip/U-joint search BDIJXS aol.com wrote: > > Hey Ox, > > I have used the socket/vise/big hammer method for getting those U-joints out > of the axle shafts, until a buddy of mine showed me an easier way. Rather than > try to push both caps at once with the small socket through to the big socket, > he put the yoke on top of the vise, with the vise open enough to allow the cap > fall through. Next, he tapped the "opposing" axle shaft near the U-joint, > meaning that he was transferring the force through the two "horizontal" caps > to just the one "vertical" cap, which easily popped out and down between the > grips of the vice. Does this make sense? I've found that you don't really have > to hit it very hard since you are only pushing one cap, rather than two. > Yup, this will work good too and is the only way to get a U out of the weld joint on a CV. I haven't used this method (on std extractions), as my original (read; really hard ;-)) replacement was done at a shop and my U's don't last more than a couple months (or less) anymore :-) I guess if your caps are really stuck, this method would be even better as you won't bend yoke/flange (may crush it on extreme extractions) In other news, I've been looking for stronger U-joints (hell, stronger evertyhing for CV driveshafts). My ultimate would be a solid body U that is greasable through the cap on all 4 caps seperately. Haven't found that yet. I have also heard that 98 or 99 Expeditions are going to have a 1350 series CV joint setup, but spicer claims to knwo nothing about it. I have been looking at Spicer, Brute force (made by Nepco) and Alloy (sold in Summit by L + S automotive). OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:40:21 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 3X2 intakes Ted of the Freeman Family ask about 3 deuce setups for the FE: I had a '61 Starliner that came from the factory with 3X2 setup. 401hp rated. 3 on tree. I kept it until 1988, and wish I had kept it forever. I ran all kinds of FE engines in it, but I always kept the 3X2's. They finally wore the bodies out where the rod that operates the butterflies goes through, and Holley would not refurbish them, so I sold them to someone else. They had at least 300,000 miles on them and I loved them to the very last. Make sure you know where you can get the original carbs. (they are unique to FOMOCO - not ordinary 2bbl's) linkage and air cleaner before you expect much good use from them. I've heard that since I got rid of mine that Holly has a refurbishment program for them - not confirmed - just here say. Good luck. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 11:37:03 -0800 From: Al Evitts Subject: FTE 61-79 - 2v 4v 3x2v 6packs etc Deacon: Wrong, the 440 chryslers were 3 2 barrels called 6 packs. IMHO Al == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:51:58 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Tri Power You write: I think thats how the Ford 406 Tri-Power got its name, but I dont know for sure. (Thats your cue Azie) To the best of my knowledge "Tri Power" is a GM name associated with the '64 and later Pontiacs and I believe with the early 60's (maybe late 50's) Chevys and possibly the '67-'68 Olds. The 406 of '62 and the 390 of '61 did in fact offer the 3 duce setup but it was referred to in all the literature I've seen as 6V. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:00:50 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - six pack Deacon writes: >>A six pack has six singles. Deacon I disagree. MOPAR's literature refers to the 440 and the 340 with their factory offering of 3 2bbls as "six pack". Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:41:09 -0600 From: juredd - Justin Reddell Subject: FTE 61-79 - 360-390 This is going back a few weeks to the 390- 360 deal I went through. To refresh your memory. I was sold a 390 motor and it turned out to be a 360 and the seller didn't want to pay up. I have been putting this message off for a while but here goes. I finally got a hold of the guy that sold me the motor and he went round and round about how he thought it was a 390 and he bought it as a 390 from a good friend of the family. He had contacted him about the motor and he claimed that it was a 390 block (we all know 390 block or 360 block their the same) and therefore........I could go on forever. Anyway he tried to talk with me about how much he drop the price and that should cover the cost of making it a 390. I told him that, that wasn't the point. You sold me a 390 and I didn't get a 390. The bottom line, I asked him if he felt responsible and of course he said no. I got sick and tired of his excuses so I said forget it. If you don't think you need to make it right than d! on't weary about it. I have a backbone and I guess I could have made him pay me what I wanted but I don't have time to make people keep their word. If a man or woman aren't as good as their word, than what are they? I don't have time to rebuild the motor I need it running. I had to go out and buy a $700 dollar car to get to work while this problem was being resolved. So I'll do what one list member suggested. Run the beast until it blows and build what I was after in the first place. Thanks to everyone for the support and help with this problem. You requested that I give out the name of the seller so that you can watch out for them. If you disagree than I am sorry but I want you to get what you ask and pay for. Dave Chicoine Sr. and Jr. from Eastport ME. They had some more stuff out on the Classifieds of this web site so be on the look out. Thanks again for you suggestions and support. You really stuck by me. Happy Holidays, Justin Reddell == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:43:15 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Holidays I will be off the lists for the Holiday season. I will get back on the list after that time, but I don't want a jillion messages to catch up on while I am off work, so I'm signing off...... To all of you: Keep safe and a Very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Be back 01/04/99. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:47:27 -0500 From: "Mr. Paul R. Boudreault" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Wishing you and your families a Very Merry Christmas! Hi everybody. I just wanted to take a little time and wish all of you a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from my family and myself to you and yours. Merry Christmas. Your Friends "Paul", and Lynn, and little Seven == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 15:42:50 -0500 From: Michael A Knight Subject: FTE 61-79 - steering column NEED HELP-I have a 1968 F-250.It has a 360 c.i.,power steering,4 speed manual trans,2 wheel drive.The steering shaft is broken due to rusted out cab mounts.I would like to install a tilt wheel column in its place.Has anyone out there performed this swap?How difficult is the job?Does it involve major fabrication?Many thanks to anyone who can help. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:36:14 PST From: "Andy D" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID Help needed According to the information I have the 390 2V was the largest engine offered from 1968 to 1972. Andy 72 F100 70 F100 56 F600 56 F100 >The 460 in your truck is a 1971 model, lower deck height then the 78 model, >and I am not sure, but I do not believe it was offered in a truck in 1971, >so you have a car engine. Different oil pan, so probably different shaft >lengths on the oil pump. > >--Bud (son of Stoney) >1979 F-250 429 Police Interceptor, T-18 >1976 F-100 302, 3-speed (For Sale) ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:45:13 PST From: "Andy D" Subject: FTE 61-79 - F-100 Explorer I have a 1970 F-100 (Explorer ?). Did Ford offer a Explorer that year according to my information the Explorer came out in 1971 and offered car type wheel covers (long gone), chrome bumper guards, (still there), chrome side rails (still have the holes in the bed), and a Explorer badge on the glove box (still there). All the signes are there saying it's an Explorer but my book says it was not introduced then. Can anyone shed some light on this? Andy 72 F100 70 F100 (Explorer ?) 56 F600 56 F100 ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 16:07:40 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - F-100 Explorer >I have a 1970 F-100 (Explorer ?). Did Ford offer a Explorer that year >according to my information the Explorer came out in 1971 and offered >car type wheel covers (long gone), chrome bumper guards, (still there), >chrome side rails (still have the holes in the bed), and a Explorer >badge on the glove box (still there). All the signes are there saying >it's an Explorer but my book says it was not introduced then. Can >anyone shed some light on this? > You need to figure out how it was determined to be a 70 ...does the title say it? did you run the vin numbers ? I would think it would be possible that the book could be wrong, you could have a late 70 that offered it, it could have been modified by a previous owner (though that's a lot to change just for a name plate) or you could have an early 71 that had a title date of late 70 (august or so) that accidently changed it to a 70 when someone entered it ... I'd run the vin through one of the decoders that's available, if it comes back as a 70, then I'd just think i got a really late 70 and the book was probably off a little bit ... Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 15:52:34 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 360-390 Let's mail bomb 'em! Just kidding Ken! ;-) Thanks for the warning Justin. Happy Holidays! - ---------- > From: juredd - Justin Reddell > To: 'Ford List' > Subject: FTE 61-79 - 360-390 > Date: Wednesday, December 23, 1998 10:41 AM > > Thanks to everyone for the support and help with this problem. You requested > that I give out the name of the seller so that you can watch out for them. If you > disagree than I am sorry but I want you to get what you ask and pay for. Dave > Chicoine Sr. and Jr. from Eastport ME. They had some more stuff out on the > Classifieds of this web site so be on the look out. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 15:13:30 -0500 From: "Matthew Schwartz" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? I had purchased a 1978 PAW kit for a supposed 78 460. I have built the motor in total when I ran into the problem of priming the oil system.This lead me to the response below. I have a 71 460 that has a different deck height then the 1978.PAW kit I installed. Now for the gut wrenching question. Is my engine build doomed to failure? or is the oil pump my only problem. How about connecting rods and pistons specs., lifters, cam, bearings etc. Will the difference in deck height kill my project? I am using the original block, heads and valve train minus the cam and lifters. Any comments? Please! My project has stopped dead in it's tracks. Matt == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:28:31 -0500 From: "Matthew Schwartz" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? I pulled a 460 from a 78 Ford F250 SuperCab. Ordered a PAW kit for a 78 460 and built the engine. During the engine oil priming step I noticed I had a problem with the oil pump shaft length. Seems that the new PAW oil pump had a longer leg then my original pump. I posted a question on this site and got my answer quickly ( THANK YOU Stoney). I have a 71 460 ( probably out of a car) and the deck height is different (lower?) then a 78. Now my 64,000 dollar question. Is my engine build ruined due to mismatched parts? I am using the same block, heads, pushrods,valve train and intake manifold as original. Is there any concerns beyond the oil pump as it relates to the new PAW 78 kit? ie. pistons, rods,crank, cam and bearings. Thanks Matt == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:39:14 -0600 From: "Danny Boy" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Unibody VIN Numbers We have an early 60's model Unibody Ford Truck. We cannot locate the VIN number. Does anyone know where this number is suppose to be or was it the original engine serial number. Thanks, Dan Ledgerwood == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:39:48 -0500 From: "The Freeman Family" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 rebuild I kinda fat fingered that one. Oops. > >Surely you mean .030". > >I would not hesitate to bore the 'virgin' block .030". It will most likely >take upwards of .080" (I bored a 390 to 4.130", which is .080"), and still >have enough metal in the cyl walls to be considered safe.. However not all >390's will bore out that far. Some models were thicker castings than >others and I've forgot just what models/years are the thick castings, and >I've lost all my information on the FE series (actually I think my wife >destroyed it one of her cleaning/throwing away binges she gets on from time >to time).I do seem to remember that all the 410's fell into the thick wall >casting blocks, but my memory plays tricks on me from time to time, so it >ain't completely reliable. Anyway, you will have 416cuin if you use the >.030" over. > >Good luck. > >Azie >Ardmore, Al. > > >== 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, 23 Dec 1998 20:43:09 -0500 From: "The Freeman Family" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 3X2 intakes I figure I can start with the manifold and start looking for the carbs and linkage. Maybe some one at the Forge will have some this year. As far as the 410 build up, I have a 4v manifold I'm going to start with and then convert it to the 3x2 once I find all the necessary parts. Later (and Thanks), - -Ted >Ted of the Freeman Family ask about 3 deuce setups for the FE: >I had a '61 Starliner that came from the factory with 3X2 setup. 401hp >rated. 3 on tree. I kept it until 1988, and wish I had kept it forever. >I ran all kinds of FE engines in it, but I always kept the 3X2's. They >finally wore the bodies out where the rod that operates the butterflies >goes through, and Holley would not refurbish them, so I sold them to >someone else. They had at least 300,000 miles on them and I loved them to >the very last. Make sure you know where you can get the original carbs. >(they are unique to FOMOCO - not ordinary 2bbl's) linkage and air cleaner >before you expect much good use from them. I've heard that since I got rid >of mine that Holly has a refurbishment program for them - not confirmed - >just here say. > >Good luck. > >Azie >Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:24:33 -0700 From: Randy Collins Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? Now my 64,000 dollar question. Is my engine build ruined due to mismatched parts? I am using the same block, heads, pushrods,valve train and intake manifold as original. Is there any concerns beyond the oil pump as it relates to the new PAW 78 kit? ie. pistons, rods,crank, cam and bearings. Matt, Your rebuild is fine. The different deck height only refers to how far the pistons are from the top of the deck. All that means to you is variances in combustion chamber volume and compression ratio. The other factor is how the manifold matches up to the heads. I think the maximum difference is between the blocks is 0.022. That isn't much. If you don't have adjustable valve train I think you will find if you use different model heads on different blocks you probably will have to locate the correct length of push rods. I haven't heard of anyone having problems with using and early intake on a late model block and vice versa. I read your first post but I didn't understand what you were saying. I interpreted it as you had the wrong length of oil pump drive shaft. I am not aware of different lengths. Other than the differences in oil pumps bolt on and slip on sumps I think that is about it. I think somewhere around 1979 Ford 460's went to externally balance crankshafts but if you still have a matched harmonic balancer, crankshaft and flywheel you will be fine. Everyone feel free to make comments if I have missed anything. Merry Christmas to all! Randy Collins Boise, Idaho rcollins micron.net 1975 Ford F250 4WD Supercab "Muscle Truck" 460 SUPER COBRA JET == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 22:48:39 EST From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? In a message dated 12/23/98 5:00:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, mschwartz fast.net writes: How about connecting rods and pistons specs., lifters, cam, bearings etc. Will the difference in deck height kill my project? I am using the original block, heads and valve train minus the cam and lifters. >> Mat, You have no serious problems if you have a 71 block, your deck clearance is .010" greater than a 70 1/2 and earlier and .012" less than the 72 and up blocks. You are in the middle. This fact will not make much difference one way or the other. But, what year are your heads, and which pistons (stock for what year or are they special such as flat top). The reason I ask is these two items primarily set the compression ratio making either a runable engine or one that needs to run on Aviation Gas. If your heads are the same year as the block and PAW gave you the newer pistons with a 25 to 30 cc dish you are in good shape, you will have a compression ratio just over 9:1. That would be the best combo as this higher compression will run on pump gas and give you around a 50 HP boost over the new 460s. If your heads are 74 or newer and the pistons are from the same era your compression ratio will be about 8.5:1 and very runable on regular gas. If PAW gave you flat tops and you have 74 and up heads then you will have a compression ratio of about 9.7:1 would probably give you big problems on regular gas. With the timing retarded slightly it should run on 92 octane. However, the killer is having flat tops with 73 or earlier heads because your compression ratio will be in the11's or 12's and not practical for driving. If you have a question about the pistons use an eye dropper and determine the volume of the their dish. That said, the other differences are easy, the oil pump for the truck with the rear pick up is different, it has a bolt on pick up tube and must use a special main bearing bolt to support the pick up tube. Becareful the stock numbers on these pumps are the same as the ones used for the front sump applications with the exception of the addition of a D following the number. This fools old pro's in the parts departments from time to time. For rear sump pickup pumps the Melling part number is M-84D. M-84 is the standard pump. As for getting the oil pan, pickup tube, and special main bolt Ford can supply these, but the pan is expensive. Your best bet is to call the local wrecking yards and do not forget to get the dip stick and tube that attaches to the pan, you will need it even if you get the pan from Ford. If you want good insurance from oil pump failure I would recommend a new pickup tube. Something I have learned from this FTE List. Just FYI the parts books show the rear sump pump for 71 460 truck engines. They were not on F series puckups, I do not know where they used them, maybe the parts makers realized there was no other differences and listed these pumps with all 429/460 blocks. I think you will be very happy with your project. Chances are PAW gave you the newer pistons and you have a usable combination for compression ratio. If you should have the killer combo go for the newer pistons rather than changing the heads. Glad to answer any other questions. Good Luck Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 20:18:25 -0800 From: Marv Miller Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Tri-Power > The Deekster wrote, in part: > I think that's how the Ford 406 Tri-Power got its name, but I don't know for sure. First Ford engines that I remember having that manifold were the 401 horsepower 390's in the 1962 Galaxy 500's. Awesome motors. I remember one four-speed that almost beat a friend's 426 Stage III w/Torqueflite. I think the fact that the Galaxy was about a thousand pounds heavier had a lot to do with the outcome. THAT'S a 390 that could sure make torque. - -Marv- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:33:49 EST From: A64F100 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? from my months of 460 research, I have learned many things == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:34:14 EST From: A64F100 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:38:05 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 ID...Is it time to get sick? the rear sump pans were used on e350 vans w/460. pan,pick up and tube were about 150.00 from ford. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:38:51 EST From: A64F100 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ford ID...Is it time to cry?(cont) whoops. cut myself short there.... Anyways, as I was saying, I have learned that the oil pump rod is different, and the cam sprocket is different. 68-71 is somehow different from 72-87. I have found that PAW doesnt make a 71- earlier double roller, but Edelbrock does, for around 50 bucks. You should be able to just change the pump rod and cam sprocket, and be ok. Am I forgetting anything else?(directed to other 460 guys) I think thats about it. Good luck with the engine. Later, Scott L == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 21:44:02 -0800 From: Tim Bowman Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Fuel Inlet Hose Rather than replace a long section of what appears to be expensive hose, why not purchase two very short pieces and put a piece of exhaust tubing between them? Just a thought, I'm not sure that it is a factory-authorized replacement technique. Tim Bowman '71 F100 "Remember the Reason for the Season" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:45:00 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Tri-Power the 390 fairlanes were pretty quick too, one around here used to blow away all the fat motor chevy's and some 440 mopars back in the late 60's. also i had two buddies with two identical trucks, but one had a .060 over 390 and one had a 428, very similar modifications, the 390 outran the 428.... 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. 
|