61-79-list-digest Wednesday, May 12 1999 Volume 03 : Number 161



=======================================================================
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 - ADMIN: Off to Pigeon Forge
FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Question
FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Questions
Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!
FTE 61-79 - C6 valve body replacement
FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing
FTE 61-79 - 66 voltage/amps
Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!
FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing
FTE 61-79 - NP 205 Rebuild - locking pins
FTE 61-79 - FEar this
Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing
Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar this
Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing
Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!
FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust
Re: FTE 61-79 - NP 205 Rebuild - locking pins
Re: FTE 61-79 - Diff in 4V & 2V pistons
Re: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Questions
RE: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust
FTE 61-79 - ever tried?
FTE 61-79 - Trademark this . . .
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust
Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?
FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines
Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?
FTE 61-79 - Good trip
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust
FTE 61-79 - valve body replacement C6
FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks
Re: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines
FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6
Re: FTE 61-79 - Trademark this . . .
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6
Re: FTE 61-79 - '66 voltages/amps
Re: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks
Re: FTE 61-79 - Diff in 4V & 2V pistons
FTE 61-79 - Re: '78 F250 internal hubs
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: FTE at the Supernationals
Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing
Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?
FTE 61-79 - Correction: ADMIN: FTE at the Supernationals
FTE 61-79 - nice looking drivetrain paint

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 06:45:22 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Off to Pigeon Forge

We're off to the 21st Annual F100 Supernationals in Pigeon
Forge, Tennessee. List make will be retrieved daily (bringing
the laptop) but questions to the admin or requests will not
be answered until Monday, May 17th unless its an emergency.

In addition to meeting many of the FTE's we're making this
a vacation for the wife and myself (grandmother is coming over
to watch the kids) so if anyone who shows up is willing to
watch the table for an hour or so it would really be appreciated.

We're bringing FTE t-shirts and window stickers with us in
case you want one. Also, if you've driven your Ford truck to
the show, please see us at the FTE / Georgia LoRider area --
we're giving away a free static window sticker to all FTEs
who drive their truck. Trucks with an FTE static sticker will
be judged for a "Best of Show" trophy that we're bringing
(its a nice trophy!). Any year/model is acceptable for
judging. Additionally, we're giving out free tickets to
FTE members -- there will be a "door prize" of a t-shirt,
window sticker, FTE email address and web space (email address
and web space will be for one year).

Lastly, we've been pretty slack with getting the prize packs
(a free t-shirt and email address for one year) to those who
submitted a design last fall. If you're one of the people
who submitted a design, please see us at the show or email
us your address (I know, I know... we asked for this before
but we lost the information).

See ya there, we're leaving now.....

Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com




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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 06:49:57 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Question

>
> Ouch, that's kinda scarey. Dunno what my compression ratio is going to be,
> but hopefully I won't have that problem ... really don't want it in my 390.
>
> >It won't tolerate manifold vacuam advance at all.
> Do you have manifold vacuum with that cam ? or is it so lumpy that it
> throws the advance around ?

It idles smooth (or it did before the latest problem)and really makes
good low end. It just doesn't bleed off enough compression down low.
To be more proper, it needs more overlap.

>
>
> >Upon restart, it wouldn't idle, and the starter still drags. Maybe a
> >coincedence, trashy gas, causing the bad idle, and a sick starter?
>
> Might doublecheck the timing, be sure you're not off a tooth or something
> with the distributor, just to be sure.

It's running at 7d initial right now. And it ran perfectly, up until it
died. Brad thinks it's just the carb, and a sick starter. I'm
suspicious of the ignition box, and especially the advance/retard
feature.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:28:01 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Questions

>
> It shows the white wire to the module as being the start retard.
> Further, I recall there being a special module for 460's that
> had additional retard built in (different color grommet?). Steve
> was interested in trying to set this up as an in-cab advance
> control, alas, he found through tickling the module with a
> signal generator and watching on a scope that the retard
> feature is a fixed TIME delay, so the actual timing retard
> is dependant on the RPM.

If I were reading the waveform at the white wire during cranking, it
would be a sine wave, right? It should be full battery voltage, that
stops flowing when the starter disengages, corrrect? If the voltage
were to continue to flow after the key is released, would this indicate
either a bad ignition switch, shorted ballast, or an internal short in
the box?

Questions:

1. What is the low voltage threshold where the system will begin to
malfunction? The battery is strong, so if we have low voltage we
obviously have a leak somewhere.

2. The ignition switch goes to a ballast with a start bypass. What is
the normal function/action of the bypass?

3. What kind of wave should I expect at the red wire during start and
during run, are they different? I'm just guessing, but the start would
likely be a longer wave if the box were retarding, right?

I'm wondering if the sloppy ignition switch could be shorting, causing
the voltage to drop to the starter and to the ballast during start,
causing the hard cranking and mis-sending some start voltage during run,
just enough to continue the voltage drop to the ignition, putting it
below it's low-voltage threshold, causing the poor running. I'm no
electronics expert, so please correct me if I'm on the wrong track
here.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 08:02:24 -0500
From: "Darryl Wright"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!

Hey, Y'all;
Yesterday started off pretty well - then the Ford Truck content; changed
the oil in said beast ('76 F-250 4x2 460, C-6). As I was removing the oil
pan plug, it felt rather "rough" in its removal process. Did the change
thing, put the plug back in (had a hard time starting the plug into the
threaded part of the pan and yes, I was careful not to cross-thread it).
Long story short - the threads are stripped - at a nominal 10ft# of torque.
I had to rotate one more time and stopped at 5ft-#. My question is, which
material is harder in Fords, the plug or the tapped portion of the pan ?
Buying a new plug is not a problem, but the real issue is if the pan is
stripped, what do most folks do? I have plenty of experience with my torches
(welding M-151 jeeps back together) (They were made by Ford, by the way) if
the necessary fix is welding a new nut into the pan. Can the oil pan be
dropped with out jacking the mill or not?
Sorry to admit my experience is with one of those other brands of trucks,
but I finally saw the light at least.
Your input will be greatly appreciated and PPUW will like having her truck
back in more reliable condition.
Darryl Wright
Denton, TX


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 08:05:09 -0500
From: John Strauss
Subject: FTE 61-79 - C6 valve body replacement

>Anyone have a good guess as to how long would it take to replace
>the valve body in a C6 transmission? I was going to do it this
>weekend, but if it does not take that long I can do it one evening
>after work.
>
I did mine in about 2 hours in the driveway. It's not too bad.

>Are there any parts I need besides a pan gasket, the valve body
>and a case of fluid?
>
That's about it. You need a pretty big drainpan because it drains from a
large area and also drains for a long time.

>Are there any potential pitfalls I should know about?
>
Be sure to line up the manual valve with the manual lever before you
tighten the valve body down or you will bend the manual lever. Disconnect
the lever from the shift arm so you can move it easily.
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:50:34 -0500
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing

Ok, Bill. How about:

FEar nothing
100% MotorcraFT

This also works for folks like Dave and I with M-blocks and the I6 crowd.
Hmmm. This sounds so good I might have to get a shirt made with a picture
of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a copyrighted trademark.

- -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, 12 May 1999 07:39:14 -0500
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 66 voltage/amps

>>One of the Kendricks replied:

> I used to have that problem. I tried several alternators and voltage
> regulators. Nothing worked. Finally solved the problem by putting on a
> [G-word snipped for sensitivity reasons] internaly regulated alternator.

Oh-Oh. Here comes Marko, and Stu, again. Hang on, Kendricks :-)

Unfortunately, a lot of externally regulated alternators suffer from low
output at idle. This is primarily a result of the design of the mechanical
regulator. Remember that these systems are the first generation after
generator type setups. Forget the idea of setting the regulator up enough
to charge fully at idle. You will boil the water out of your battery in
short order. Can you say "new battery." Been there, done that. The only
possible solution I can think of is to change the pulley size so that the
alternator turns faster at idle. I forget whether you go bigger or smaller.
But it seems that this might create other problems like wearing out your
alternator brushes faster and probably others.

- -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, 12 May 1999 08:16:29 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!

>I had to rotate one more time and stopped at 5ft-#. My question is, which
>material is harder in Fords, the plug or the tapped portion of the pan ?

Probably the one with the threads still on it is harder :) Sorry I don't
really know. What I would recommend is just an "oversized" plug, they are
even available magnetic to help out pickin up metal shavings. Your local
autoparts store will carry them.

The problem with welding a nut on the inside is that then you have a lip
that the oil has to pass over before it can come out. Not that you'll ever
get ALL the oil out, but that's just more that's left in there ...


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 06:33:20 -0700
From: "Bryan Kirking"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing

>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a >copyrighted trademark.

How about FEar No - thing?
or for us Texans,

FEar Nada!

BTW, would that picture of your truck include you sweating without your AC? :-)




- -----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:09:09 EDT
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - NP 205 Rebuild - locking pins

Does anyone who has gone through a 205 have a couple of spare "locking" pins
for those funny-shaped thrust washers? These are the little pins (about 1/4"
long) that fit into both the input and output shafts to keep the thrust
washers from rotating.....I'm considering using some roll pins, but it just
doesn't seem right.....looks like the originals (one was sheared off, the
other pretty well rounded) were hardened....

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:13:32 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FEar this

> FEar nothing
>100% MotorcraFT
>
>This also works for folks like Dave and I with M-blocks and the I6 crowd.
>Hmmm. This sounds so good I might have to get a shirt made with a picture
>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a copyrighted trademark.
>
Fear Nothing is copyrighted ? I've seen Fear This and No Fear, even Some
Fear (love that shirt), but never Fear Nothing ... doesn't mean its not
there, just haven't seen it yet.


On the FE side of things, I'm workin on finally gettin everything on that
390 ready to go together and had some questions for you guys.
1st. What size is the hole for the dipstick on the block that I have to
plug ? Can I just get a freeze plug, or do I need something else ?

2nd. finally got my pics from the first half of things ... now just gotta
get them scanned so I can post them for whoever wants to see them. A great
one of the mirrored 105 on the block.

3rd. Lower cover for my tranny ... do I need one specifically for an FE,
or will any for a C6 work ? Anyone got one they want to get rid of ?

Hmmm...had lots on the drive in this morning, now I've got like none. Oh
well guess its time to really do work then huh ? :) If anyone has any
hints/suggestions the intake will be on tonight, along with the rocker arms
and probably valve covers, finishing touches pretty much...kinda scarey :)
But very exciting, I can't wait to get this thing back on the road!!!


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:28:57 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing

Thanks for your message at 06:33 AM 5/12/99 -0700, Bryan Kirking. Your
message was:
>>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a >copyrighted trademark.
>
>How about FEar No - thing?
>or for us Texans,
>
> FEar Nada!
FEar Clevelands!
Dennis L. Pearson

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson.index.html
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson/popcult.html
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/lyrics.htm
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/dlp.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:27:41 -0700
From: "Terry Pendergrass"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar this


- --

On Wed, 12 May 1999 09:13:32 William S Hart wrote:
>> FEar nothing
>>100% MotorcraFT
>>
>>This also works for folks like Dave and I with M-blocks and the I6 crowd.
>>Hmmm. This sounds so good I might have to get a shirt made with a picture
>>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a copyrighted trademark.
>>
>Fear Nothing is copyrighted ? I've seen Fear This and No Fear, even Some
>Fear (love that shirt), but never Fear Nothing ... doesn't mean its not
>there, just haven't seen it yet.

It is a trademark

Word Mark FEAR NOTHING
Owner Name (APPLICANT) Beneventi, James G.
Irvine CALIFORNIA 92715 INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES
Attorney of Record
Morland C. Fischer
Serial Number
75-014641
Filing Date
11/03/1995
Section 1(B) indicator
SECTION 1 (B)
Mark Drawing Code
(1) TYPED DRAWING
Register
PRINCIPAL
Other Registration Info.
1680791
Published for Opposition
06/18/1996
Type of Mark
TRADEMARK


International Class
025
Goods and Services
clothing, namely shirts, pants, shorts, jackets, hats, swim suits, sweat pants and sweat shirts


Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere!
ZDNet Mail - http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.zdnetmail.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:30:11 -0700
From: "Terry Pendergrass"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing


- --

On Wed, 12 May 1999 07:28:57 Dennis Pearson wrote:
>Thanks for your message at 06:33 AM 5/12/99 -0700, Bryan Kirking. Your
>message was:
>>>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a >copyrighted trademark.
>>
>>How about FEar No - thing?
>>or for us Texans,
>>
>> FEar Nada!
This is also a trademark

1.
1680791 -- FEAR NADA
2.
75-110514 -- FEAR NOTHING MUSIC GEAR
3.
75-014641 -- FEAR NOTHING

I got this info from http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.uspto.gov/tmdb/index.html

Terry





> FEar Clevelands!
>Dennis L. Pearson
>
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson.index.html
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ctc.edu/~dpearson/popcult.html
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/lyrics.htm
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/dlp.htm
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere!
ZDNet Mail - http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.zdnetmail.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:08:25 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Another Texas Truck emerges!

In a message dated 5/12/99 9:21:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, wish iastate.edu
writes:

>
> The problem with welding a nut on the inside is that then you have a lip
> that the oil has to pass over before it can come out. Not that you'll ever
> get ALL the oil out, but that's just more that's left in there ...
>
Yes, but if you remove the part that was spot-welded in and contained the old
threads and mill the nut down some....the lip is minimal. This fix sure
beats the expense of a new pan. If your pan isn't that great to begin with
then use it as a flower pot on the deck and buy a new replacement (or used
one). Incidentally, the flower pot trick is excellent method to disguise
FE/Truck Parts from SWMBO :-)

Stock Man
(a/k/a Thom B.)
1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/tbeeee/page/index.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:07:16 -0400
From: "George W. Selby, III"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust

I have a 78 F-150 with a 400M and true duals with turbo mufflers and the
pipes coming out ahead of the rear tires. I don't like it for several
reasons. One is you smog out people sitting next to you at a stoplight (My
truck sits so high the pipe is right next to a car's window). Also it just
don't sound right at normal speeds (When you are on it at above 3.5K rpms,
it sounds awesome, but not like a V8, more like a screaming banshee wailing
at top volume, its wicked) Plus it just LOUD. I attribute some of this to
the odd firing pattern of the 400M, but some is due to hearing the one
right behind your ear a lot more than than than the other side. I do agree
with the guy who says its the coolest to see two steam trails somig out the
sides of the vehicle. When I switch my outputs and stick on some
Flowmasters, I am going to have the exhaust coming out the back behind the
wheels at whatever angle I can manage.

George

78 F-150 40, 4 on floor, 4x4

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:36:26 -0600
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - NP 205 Rebuild - locking pins

At 10:09 AM 12/05/99 EDT, you wrote:
>Does anyone who has gone through a 205 have a couple of spare "locking" pins
>for those funny-shaped thrust washers? These are the little pins (about 1/4"
>long) that fit into both the input and output shafts to keep the thrust
>washers from rotating.....I'm considering using some roll pins, but it just
>doesn't seem right.....looks like the originals (one was sheared off, the
>other pretty well rounded) were hardened....
>
>CJ

Hey CJ,

Yes, they were hardened.

You can buy these from D*dge. Look up a W-2*0 (ugh!) and the parts will
all be available, including those pins. If you have any trouble look up the
Transmission Exchange on the internet (they're in Portland, OR) and they
can set you up with some.

When I rebuilt my 205 I found the shift forks were worn a good 3/16". New
forks tighten things up considerably, but they ain't cheap.


marko




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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:28:21 -0600
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Diff in 4V & 2V pistons

At 12:09 PM 11/05/99 -0700, you wrote:
>If you're putting 2V heads on it it shouldn't make any difference. It
>doesn't make much sense to put a factory manifold designed for 4V heads on a
>2V but if it's an aftermarket 4V (Edelbrock, Weiand, etc.) designed for 2V
>heads then it should work fine. The only real issues you have to worry about
>with the pistons are comp. ratio and piston to valve clearance. Stock 2V
>heads have a comb. chamber volume of approx. 76 cc so when you look for
>pistons check out the comp ratio with that particular volume in mind.


You're lucky to have a Cleveland. Actually, the Cleveland 2v heads
(according to Ford Performance author Pat Ganahl) are better for all-around
use than the 4v heads which are, by all his accounts, over-ported except
for sustained high-rpm use. The 2v heads breathe quite well and you won't
have the emissions problems of quench heads.

I would recommend going with a relatively stock application 2v piston,
which shud make adequate but not outrageous compression (read: detonation).
Try for about 9 or 9.5:1 for optimum driveability.

As far as the 4v manifold/2v manifold issue is concerned, the Cleveland
heads breathe SO well that they can eat up any 4v manifold you can throw at
them.

Enjoy your motor, it is rare and one of the best performance motors made by
Ford.

marko

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark Questions

Bill asks:

[Schematic of DSII at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://web.p3.net/~shoman/duraspark.htm]

> > It shows the white wire to the module as being the start retard.
> > Further, I recall there being a special module for 460's that
> > had additional retard built in (different color grommet?). Steve
> > was interested in trying to set this up as an in-cab advance
> > control, alas, he found through tickling the module with a
> > signal generator and watching on a scope that the retard
> > feature is a fixed TIME delay, so the actual timing retard
> > is dependant on the RPM.
>
> If I were reading the waveform at the white wire during cranking, it
> would be a sine wave, right?

No sine, just a straight 12 volts while cranking.

> It should be full battery voltage, that
> stops flowing when the starter disengages, corrrect?

Yes. When the ignition switch is released, the "S" term on
the switch will drop to zero volts.

> If the voltage
> were to continue to flow after the key is released, would this indicate
> either a bad ignition switch, shorted ballast, or an internal short in
> the box?

If the "S" voltage remains at 12, then the starter continues to run.
This is (most likely) the same terminal that runs the starter solenoid.
I don't have any full diagrams here at work, but assuming the white
wire and the "S" solenoid term are connected, as soon as the ignition
switch is released the low resistance of the solenoid "S" terminal
should bring everything to zero volts.

> Questions:
>
> 1. What is the low voltage threshold where the system will begin to
> malfunction? The battery is strong, so if we have low voltage we
> obviously have a leak somewhere.

I guess by the "system" you mean the DSII module. I don't have any
vehicles with this system, but I'm sure it will work down to the
point where your starter won't.

> 2. The ignition switch goes to a ballast with a start bypass. What is
> the normal function/action of the bypass?

Normally, the ballast reduces the max current through the coil by about
half. This provides long life for the coil (less temp rise), and the
switch involved, be it points, or in the DS case, a transistor. While
cranking, the ballast resistor is bypassed (shorted out), allowing the
full battery voltage, thus a higher current, to flow through the coil.
This gives a much hotter spark for starting conditions.

> 3. What kind of wave should I expect at the red wire during start and
> during run, are they different? I'm just guessing, but the start would
> likely be a longer wave if the box were retarding, right?

The red wire should always be 12 volts unless the ignition is turned
off. This wire provides power for the amplifier inside the module.

> I'm wondering if the sloppy ignition switch could be shorting,

I think that the start/run contacts on an ignition switch are of the
make-without-break variety. That meaning the contacts normally short
together while in the "Start" position. If they didn't, there would
be a short period of time while releasing the key that no ignition
would be provided.

> causing the voltage to drop to the starter

Starter voltage is really unrelated to DS, since the DS draws very
little current. As long as the solenoid is closing, you should be
getting full battery voltage to the starter, assuming good cables
and clean connections, of course.

> and to the ballast during start,

A sick starter, drawing too much current, can cause a low-voltage
condition for the ignition system. This would be low coil voltage(s)
and weak spark, unrelated to what DS is doing.

> causing the hard cranking and mis-sending some start voltage
> during run, just enough to continue the voltage drop to the
> ignition,

Remember, "Start voltage during run" would also cause the starter
to run, making a bunch of bad noises :-)

> putting it
> below it's low-voltage threshold, causing the poor running. I'm no

The "guts" of a DS consist of an amplifier and a switch. The amplifier
takes the milli-volt level signal of the sensor, and boosts it up to
a level sufficient to drive the switch. From the time frame DS is from,
I'd guess the switch itself is a darlington coupled transistor pair,
which only needs about 1.5 volts to drive. Again, I would guess that a
DS module will work well below the 9 to 10 volts where the starter quits.
- --
Pat Brown
Sunny and Warm Sebastopol, California
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:37:16 -0700
From: "Brandt, Chris"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust

> I have a dual 2.5 inlet single 3 inch outlet on my 78 F250 4x4. I got
> tired of duals rusting out from not having enough heat to burn the
> condensation out in cold weather. The muffler shop did a beautiful job at
> keeping everything tucked above the frame rails beside the T-case. The
> only tricky part is that I fabricated a chambered muffler with the
> configuration I wanted..... Flowmaster makes a dual 2.5 in single 3 out
> now but they didn't then... This is by far the best sounding best
> performing setup I have ever seen or heard. The 3 inch single handles the
> cooler outflow from the 2.5 inch inputs with no problem. The velocity is
> higher and the temperature is higher..... It sounds like NOTHING I have
> ever heard before, very very deep rumble with a mellow midrange. The exit
> is angled behind the rear tire on the passenger side. The muffler shop
> thought I was nuts when I had it welded up but since then two of the guys
> have put similar systems on their own trucks (Flowmaster instead of
> fabricated..) mine still has a deeper tone but the flowmaster based system
> does sound good.
>
Chris Brandt

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:46:34 -0500
From: "Corey Johnson"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?

Has anyone ever switched from their stock 2barrel carb/intake to a
4barrel?
I am especially interested with it having to do with a '66 F100 352.

Also, anyone know what it the best way to get higher speeds?, ie
changing transmission, gears(if so how), or both?



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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:52:55 -0500
From: "Darryl Wright"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Trademark this . . .

Okay, than howsebout:

FErocious!

I *like* it!

Nancy Wright
Denton, Texas
and "Tillie" the 1976 F-250 SuperCab Ranger XLT, 460, C-6
3 Arabian mares, 1 patient husband, 1 Pembroke Welsh corgi E;-P

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 12:31:11 -0700
From: "James A. Doty"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust

Hi there:

I have a '78 E-150 w/351w Edelbrock intake manifold and 600 cfm 4bll carb.,
Dynomax tuned headers and the Flowmaster dual 2.5" in single 3.0" out
muffler.

Except for an exhaust leak on the output of the driver's side header it sounds
great. It rumbles deeply at idle and sounds great during hard acceleration.
At freeway speeds it's still quiet enough to talk over, listen to the stereo,
or talk on the 2 meter radio.

I do have it exiting in front of the passenger side rear tire though, and it's
a bit loud if the sliding door is left open.

I've had no complaints from others about the noise, and a few people
have said that it sounds pretty cool.

> > I have a dual 2.5 inlet single 3 inch outlet on my 78 F250 4x4. I got
> > tired of duals rusting out from not having enough heat to burn the
> > condensation out in cold weather. The muffler shop did a beautiful job at
> > keeping everything tucked above the frame rails beside the T-case. The
> > now but they didn't then... This is by far the best sounding best
> > performing setup I have ever seen or heard. The 3 inch single handles the
> > cooler outflow from the 2.5 inch inputs with no problem. The velocity is
> > higher and the temperature is higher..... It sounds like NOTHING I have
> > ever heard before, very very deep rumble with a mellow midrange. The exit
> > is angled behind the rear tire on the passenger side. The muffler shop

James A. Doty
jamesd1 ptld.uswest.net

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 12:35:55 -0700
From: "James A. Doty"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?

Hi Corey:

I bought a '78 E-150 with 351w a few years ago. It was completely
stock at the time. Gas mileage was about 8mpg.

I switched to an Edelbrock dual plain intake manifold and 4 barrel
600 CFM carb.

My van performs and runs like it's got a brand new engine in it.

Top speed has gone up above the 85MPH mark on the speedo,
acceleration has improved dramatically, and gas mileage has improved
by 3mpg.

Although we'd (My girlfriend's dad did most of the work.) never done
an intake manifold or carb swap before we managed to do so in one
day. And it started on the first try. I'm very happy with my new setup.

Hopes this helps.

Corey Johnson wrote:

> Has anyone ever switched from their stock 2barrel carb/intake to a
> 4barrel?
> I am especially interested with it having to do with a '66 F100 352.
>
> Also, anyone know what it the best way to get higher speeds?, ie
> changing transmission, gears(if so how), or both?
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


James A. Doty
jamesd1 ptld.uswest.net

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:27:12 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines

M Block Devotee writes: >>Add to this why FoMoCo stopped production on the 300
I6 (and 460 as well, I understand).

I don't look at the later models, so I was unaware of this. That 300 I6 was(is)
one of the most maintenance free and dependable engines ever built. Not my
preference, but I have one in a '68 F600 that has been treated with NO respect
ever since it was new, and the only thing that has ever been done to it is
replaced the timing gears. Also has a NP435 behind it that has never been
opened up. Probably has 200,000 miles on it, and lots of them were in the field
Loaded with grain during harvest season and with fertilizers and seeds during
planting seasons. Best investment I ever made. I gave $2100.00 for it new for
C&C. Put a flatbed dump on it for another $1800.00 or so and it will crank and
run right now, and it hasn't been started this spring.(I retired from farming 4
years ago)

Off to PF today after work.

Azie
Admore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:40:17 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?

At 01:46 PM 5/12/99 , you wrote:
>Has anyone ever switched from their stock 2barrel carb/intake to a
>4barrel?
>I am especially interested with it having to do with a '66 F100 352.
>
Yup, did this on a 360 (same motor essentially). Whaddya need to know ?
I've got an egr manifold (4V) but no plate for it :( if anyone wants/can
use it lemme know ...

Its a fairly straight forward swap, at least mine was ...


>Also, anyone know what it the best way to get higher speeds?, ie
>changing transmission, gears(if so how), or both?
>
If you don't mind sacraficing some off the line performance then a "taller"
rear (lower numerically) will accomplish this, depending on what you're
running and 4x4 or 4x2 ... probably 3.73's or 3.54's if you're looking for
a cruising speed around 60 (55-65), also depends on your tire sizes and
lots of other stuff ...


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:45:03 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Good trip

Ohio Bill writes: >> I was nervous
about the trip, but everything went well. The truck ran flawlessly
for the entire 1500 mile round-trip. I knocked down ~11 mpgs while
pulling about 6,000 lbs, and never had to downshift out of 4th gear

Great. Glad everything went so well.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:45:37 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dual Exhaust

>I have a '78 E-150 w/351w Edelbrock intake manifold and 600 cfm 4bll carb.,
>Dynomax tuned headers and the Flowmaster dual 2.5" in single 3.0" out
>muffler.
>
>> > I have a dual 2.5 inlet single 3 inch outlet on my 78 F250 4x4. I got
>> > tired of duals rusting out from not having enough heat to burn the
>> > condensation out in cold weather. The muffler shop did a beautiful job at
>> > keeping everything tucked above the frame rails beside the T-case. The

Sure everyone's goin to this it seems like.

Anyone tried a cat back system from a newer truck on their old one ? I've
been kinda eyein the side exit ones, there's one in Jegs that shows a huge
square exit on the right side of the truck just in front of the wheel, its
2 2.5's? in and 1 3" out ... can't remember who makes it, Borla maybe ?
Anyway those have been pretty tempting. D*dge runs a fairly similar
exhaust system in their full size trucks, so maybe that's the way to go,
just get a cat back from one of those, then all you have to worry about is
the pre cat stuff ... I don't have cats, but I figure the less I have to
figure out for the muffler shop the better off I'll be ...

Anyway if anyone's tried any of the cat back systems on an older truck
lemme know what you found, it just seems to me that the wheel arches (to
get over the axle) and some of that stuff should be close if not the same
specs, really the tailpipe is the hardest piece, everything else can be
taken up as pre cat configuration I would think ... just think how cool it
would be to hook up a 'stang cat back and get the twin chrome/stainless
pipes poking out the back like the old 5.0 LX's had ...


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:52:43 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - valve body replacement C6

Mark in SW Wash writes: >>Are there any parts I need besides a pan gasket, the
valve body
and a case of fluid?

I haven't been in one recently and may have this mixed up with another tranny,
but I think there is a small seal around the shifter shaft that I would replace
while I was in there(provided it is accesable with the tranny still in vehicle -
I can't remember). I would suspect it to take only a couple of hours, even if
you are new at it, and unless you drain the TC, I would think 8 qts would be
sufficient. Heck, I've forgotten just how much a dry C6 holds, but there are at
least 2 different depths of pans, so it varies with the depth of the pan I know.

Sorry for not being any more help. Guess I should've just kept silent.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 16:03:16 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks

Tim in Ankorage writes: >>Yep, I thought about it but after seeing Azie's
mention that he'd bored into the water jackets
on a couple of blocks, I decided not to risk a
perfectly good 390.

Tim. There is a couple of blocks that are thicker castings than the rest, but I
can't remember how to ID them. (and of course I have no idea where the article
is that defined them). I do remember that they were primarily Merc & Tbird FE's
of certain years and there was one FT series that fell in this catagory. The
article said they would safely bore to 4.13" though, and even to 4.23"(427) on
some, with enough metal left not to cause "Hot Spots". Maybe, just maybe, there
is someone reading this post that remembers how to ID those blocks, and would
share it with us.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

.


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:14:03 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks

>Tim. There is a couple of blocks that are thicker castings than the rest,
>but I
>can't remember how to ID them. (and of course I have no idea where the
article
>is that defined them). I do remember that they were primarily Merc & Tbird
>FE's
>of certain years and there was one FT series that fell in this catagory. The
>article said they would safely bore to 4.13" though, and even to 4.23"(427) on
>some, with enough metal left not to cause "Hot Spots".

The blocks that some of us refer to as 105 blocks have all the main webbing
of the CJ motors, and are from the big truck line, (FT's) but appeared in
the small trucks. Whether these have enough metal or not I don't know for
sure, but this may be an indication. How much does it cost to get a block
checked for that ? Or is it cheaper to just try it and see what happens ?
I've got a 360 that is a 105 block that isn't doing anything now, but I
need to get the 390 done first ...

Anyone know if all the 105's are good enough to bore, or if its just
certain ones ?


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:28:01 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines

Azie wrote:
>M Block Devotee writes: >>Add to this why
>FoMoCo stopped production on the 300
>I6 (and 460 as well, I understand).

Yo Azie:

Actually, you mis-attributed that comment to me. It was posted by David
Henderson . Other than both being Ford truck enthusiasts and
both being named David and both being Texas Aggies, I'm not sure what else we
have in common.

Believe me, had I mentioned that the 300 I6 and 460 V8 were discontinued, I
would have at least got a dig in for my beloved M-block, which is actually "THE"
ideal truck engine, followed ever-so-closely (say a hair's width or so) by the
handsome and charming FE 410. Remember, the 400 was the last pushrod V8 Ford
ever designed and it was the ultimate development of the 335 series, which of
course began w/ the glorious and notorious 351 Cleveland.

Say "hi" to everybody at the Forge for me.

Dave R (the real M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 16:28:08 EDT
From: monkey352 juno.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6

Your motor block could be clogged, so you might want to take your hoses
off and check your block...Also try some liquid soap in the water..(The
only problem with soap though, is that it isn't the best thing for your
water pump)

Jonathan
'62 f100 223 straight six stepside
South Carolina

___________________________________________________________________
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, 12 May 1999 13:35:52 -0700
From: "Terry Pendergrass"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Trademark this . . .

FErocious might just work. I also did some other reading and it appears that Stu (I think it was Stu) could still use 'FEar Nothing'. There are two different companies that have the "Fear This" Trademarks. One does clothes and one does decals and Stickers. I have no idea how close you can get to that line.

Might be something worth doing, Stu

Terry

- --

On Wed, 12 May 1999 13:52:55 Darryl Wright wrote:
>Okay, than howsebout:
>
>FErocious!
>
>I *like* it!
>
>Nancy Wright
>Denton, Texas
>and "Tillie" the 1976 F-250 SuperCab Ranger XLT, 460, C-6
>3 Arabian mares, 1 patient husband, 1 Pembroke Welsh corgi E;-P
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


Free web-based email, anytime, anywhere!
ZDNet Mail - http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.zdnetmail.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 16:57:49 -0400
From: Tony Marino
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6

Just a little add-on here---

When I hopped up my 300 I had the original size 2 core, small, radiator in
it. The block was PERFECTLY clean (new motor) and the radiator was brand
new. I also was running a 180 deg therm. in it.. I drive like a maniac
anyway, and on the expressway in 70+ degree weather tachin' upwards of 2500
rpm, I could watch the temp guage gradually climb. The fact is, there just
wasn't enough flow to keep the motor cool, this is 300 cubic inches we are
talking about. It happened all summer, and kept me from driving over 70mph
for an extended period of time (which probably saved me in speeding
tickets!) but I got tired of it and went out and bought a 400M 3 core,
fullsize radiator for my truck.

The 400M radiator fits perfectly, and solved the overheating problem.
Since I have never overheated running about 3,200 rpm for 10-15 minutes at
80+ The only thing I had to do was get the inlet/outlet ports to work.
This was a little bit tricky, but in the end is so simple I would suggest
it to anybody! I went the cheapo route for the uppper radiator hose
(opposite side than V-8) which cost about $15 bucks, and the lower original
Inline-6 hose was rotated about 25-30 degrees to run parallel with the
front cross brace (this is a '78 4x4 f-150) and I cut a piece of 2 inch
exhaust tubing about 3 inches long and knurled the edges, and used two hose
clamps and attached an upper radiator hose from a '72 360 to the end (thus
making a union) of the original lower 300 hose. The 360 turned out portion
lined up with the hole on the lower radiator on the opposite side
perfectly. I've had it this way for about a year and a half without a
single problem. I'll take pictures if anybody is interested in doing this
swap. The best part was-- A new 2 core small 300 radiator is about $160,
and the 400M lifetime guarantee 3 core enormous one was $118.... 8-)

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

At 04:28 PM 5/12/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Your motor block could be clogged, so you might want to take your hoses
>off and check your block...Also try some liquid soap in the water..(The
>only problem with soap though, is that it isn't the best thing for your
>water pump)
>
>Jonathan
>'62 f100 223 straight six stepside
>South Carolina

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 16:08:04 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Overheating I-6

>When I hopped up my 300 I had the original size 2 core, small, radiator in
>it. The block was PERFECTLY clean (new motor) and the radiator was brand
>new. I also was running a 180 deg therm. in it.. I drive like a maniac
>anyway, and on the expressway in 70+ degree weather tachin' upwards of 2500
>rpm, I could watch the temp guage gradually climb. The fact is, there just
>wasn't enough flow to keep the motor cool, this is 300 cubic inches we are
>talking about.

I never understood why a 300 had a smaller radiator than a 302 .. they're
essentially the same size after all ...



>front cross brace (this is a '78 4x4 f-150) and I cut a piece of 2 inch
>exhaust tubing about 3 inches long and knurled the edges, and used two hose
>clamps and attached an upper radiator hose from a '72 360 to the end (thus
>making a union) of the original lower 300 hose.

Your truck is gettin to be made of almost as many pieces as mine! I was
rollin the whole time tryin to picture your face when you saw the way the
hose lined up ....

hahahahaha ..... sorry thanks for another good laugh!

Hope you can keep the tickets down to afford the gas now.


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - '66 voltages/amps

> Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 11:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Pat Brown
> Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - '66 voltages/amps
>
> > Corey Johnson wrote:
> > >
> > > Does anyone have any problems with their electrical systems as far as
> > > not apparently pushing out enough voltage/amperage?
> > >
> > > Why I ask is because while driving and especially at a stop if I say,
> > > turn on my turn signal or wipers, it severely takes amperage (shown on
> > > my dash amm meter). I have replaced the battery ans altenator.. Anything
> > > else I should check or is this just normal?
>
> Corey, some alternators just don't put out enough at low RPM's
> to make up for heavy loads. You could probably go over everything
> with a fine tooth comb, but todays solid-state regulators aren't
> normally adjustable. My truck (well, with its barely-moving ammeter)
> will show a discharge at idle when the lights are on, I've never
> worried about it. Jim Elliot was fretting over this recently, he
> suspected a wierd just-right stackup of washers on all the
> connections can affect idle voltages (and currents).

After thinking about this, I realized that Jim was actually complaining
about boiling his battery. Jim isn't listening, otherwise he'd be
telling me that my California granola-laden diet was affecting my
ageing brain, again:-). Anyway, since Jim and Corey have opposite
(electrical) problems, they should just swap regulators. :-)
- --
Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California. The Granola Capital of Sonoma County.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:21:25 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines

Heh, heh...You go boy!

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets"

- -----Original Message-----
From: Dave Resch
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Deceased engines



>Believe me, had I mentioned that the 300 I6 and 460 V8 were discontinued, I
>would have at least got a dig in for my beloved M-block, which is actually
"THE"
>ideal truck engine, followed ever-so-closely (say a hair's width or so) by
the
>handsome and charming FE 410. Remember, the 400 was the last pushrod V8
Ford
>ever designed and it was the ultimate development of the 335 series, which
of
>course began w/ the glorious and notorious 351 Cleveland.



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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 17:41:29 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 from 390 blocks

In a message dated 5/12/99 4:13:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
am14 daimlerchrysler.com writes:

> Maybe, just maybe, there is someone reading this post that remembers how
to ID
> those blocks, and would share it with us.


When a variation of this issue came up here a few weeks ago I took the
liberty of posting it to the Fomoco Tech Page Fomoco Obsolete. The
consensus there was don't waste a good 390 block: Here is one response:

"Contrary to popular belief, 428CJ's are still available. Yes, they cost
$500-$700, but you can get them. I just purchased a standard bore CJ with a
.010-.010 crank for $1,000. Shop around, and you can probably get a bored
(.030 over) block alone for about $500. Just make sure whoever you buy it
from will guarantee it's buildable in writing. I really think this beats
spending $$$ sonic checking 390 after 390 to find one you can overbore .080".

I would be interested in seeing that article. I presume you would
have already posted the details if you could recall??

Stock Man
(a/k/a Thom B.)
1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/tbeeee/page/index.htm

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:40:53 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Diff in 4V & 2V pistons

Thanks for your message at 11:28 AM 5/12/99 -0600, Marko Maryniak. Your
message was:

>
>Enjoy your motor, it is rare and one of the best performance motors made by
>Ford.

Amen!


Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 18:42:11 EDT
From: Brazzadog aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: '78 F250 internal hubs

Thanks. You just saved me the cost of new hubs. It's also good to know that
something about the F-250 D44 front axle is beefier than that of the 1/2 tons.

Ben Williams
'78 F-250

James wrote:

>Brazzadog aol.com wrote:
>>
>> Can anybody tell me if the internal hubs on the Dana 44 under the front of
my
>> '78 F-250 are the same as the 1/2 tons and Bronco's? They look the same
size
>> on the outside.
>>
>
> The locking mechanism (guts) and hub end cover (with twisitng
>actuator) are the same. The actual hub is different. The outer bearing
>may be the same (they look close), the inner bearing is bigger on the
>F250. The spindles are different also.

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

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 07:17:09 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: FTE at the Supernationals

Hi gang! Just wanted anyone who's attending the Supernationals
to know that we're at the Days Inn, room 208 (you'll see an
FTE window sticker on the hotel room window). Stop by for your
free door prize ticket and a window sticker for your truck (if
you brought it to the show).

Ken Payne
FTE Admin

PS - Keith and Deacon, wish you were here!!

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

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

Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 18:24:16 -0600
From: Stu Varner
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FEar nothing

At 07:28 AM 5/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Thanks for your message at 06:33 AM 5/12/99 -0700, Bryan Kirking. Your
>message was:
>>>of MY truck on it. Oops, I think Fear Nothing is a >copyrighted trademark.
>>
>>How about FEar No - thing?
>>or for us Texans,
>>
>> FEar Nada!
> FEar Clevelands!

Dennis, I have been to Cleveland and I fear *it* very much!!!! 8^)

stu
Nuke GM!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/stu

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 18:25:07 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - ever tried?

Corey Johnson asked...


> Has anyone ever switched from their stock 2barrel carb/intake to a
> 4barrel?
> I am especially interested with it having to do with a '66 F100 352.
...........

I began what was supposed to be a simple 2bbl to 4bbl conversion (I
already
had carb, intake, and gaskets) on my red 69 F250 with a 360, and now I'm in
the middle of a rebuild.... Doh~!

It all started when...
I decided to hot tank and paint the 4 bbl first. It looked so good when
I was finished I thought maybe I'll just pull the motor and paint it also. I
already had a complete gasket set, and the thought of no more oil leaks was
nice. I was quite surprised to see all the timing chain teeth and some of
the valve stem seals in the oilpan, and slipping the old timing chain off of
the gears while they were in place was a first (so was the rope rear main
seal). I think it was when I was carefully removing the chunks of debris off
the oil pump screen when the thought of hot tanking the entire engine first....


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.