Re: FTE 61-79 - timing

61-79-list-digest Friday, June 4 1999 Volume 03 : Number 190

=======================================================================
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 - timing
FTE 61-79 - pinion depth setting tool.
Re: FTE 61-79 - timing
FTE 61-79 - wheel bearing grease
FTE 61-79 - problems with new master cylinder
FTE 61-79 - Newest technology...
FTE 61-79 - direct injection
Re: FTE 61-79 - wheel bearing grease
RE: FTE 61-79 - engine swap
FTE 61-79 - Teflon Tape
FTE 61-79 - Won't start when hot
Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Gas Mileage
Re: FTE 61-79 - Cheap Engines
Re: FTE 61-79 - Wheel bearings :-(
FTE 61-79 - Hot Starting
FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- found '66 chrome grill
FTE 61-79 - thrust bearing
FTE 61-79 - Keyless entry question 95 Bronco...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Wheel bearings :-(
FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"
FTE 61-79 - RE:Final Dizzy Update. Timing Specs
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"
FTE 61-79 - rear disc brake kits

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 15:07:02 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - timing

>
>I am using a connection which comes straight off the passenger side of the
>carburator. If I hold my finger over it, I only feel a vacuum when I punch
>the gas.

This is ported or delayed vacuum, you don't have any vacuum at idle as it
is closed off, but when you step on it, it will give you a little.

>>idea to pull it and plug it, just to be sure that you don't get any leaks
>>or anything with it... also if you are having trouble with your truck not
>>running right, you might try switching to the manifold vacuum source ...
>
>I tried using my manifold vacuum but that pulls the ignition to about 30
>BTDC right at idle, that can't be right.
>
It will dial in some more advance at idle than it would if you timed it
with the advance disconnected, as long as it doesn't ping it should be
fine. As soon as you step on the gas (or slightly after) it should go
right back to what it would've been if you had the ported vac. That's why
this mostly affects "tip in" or just off idle ..

>Unfortunately I do not have the vacuum diagram for this engine. But frankly
>the vacuum advance does not seem to be doing a whole lot. If I look at my
>timing while cracking open the gas, it only advances after a second or so.
>Does anybody know some backyard mechanic type of tests I can do to find out
>more about this?
>
This just means you have the ported vacuum, its going to be delayed until
you hit the gas, and then it may still show some delay because of the time
it takes to affect the air in the hose and create the vacuum ...
Try switching to manifold and see what happens, you want to time it with
the advance disconnected and the hose plugged no matter which way you do it.

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: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 16:45:04 -0400
From: James Oxley
Subject: FTE 61-79 - pinion depth setting tool.

A while back someone had a link to a relatively inexpensive pinion depth
measuring tool. Anyone still have that link?

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 15:42:50 -0500
From: "Steve Schmeckpeper"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - timing

Gary said....(re; ported vs manifold vacuum source)
> If you are having tipin problems with one or
>the other setup try the other but make sure you reset the idle mixture and
>speed before testing.

Bill said..........(re; manifold vacuum source)
>> Hmmm... he will get advance at idle then because of the
>> vacuum,
I still don't totally understand this but threw caution to the wind this
morning and changed my vacuum advance from ported to manifold. (without
changing mixture or anything else) It does idle a little faster now, but not
that much, so I'll wait till this weekend to fine tune and record the
settings. What I did notice is my hesitation problem disappeared ;^)) I
didn't check how much adv I now have at idle but it is probably around 30
deg same as Gary's. Didn't notice the engine running hot or pinging either.
So............Is it ok to have this much adv at idle?? Also where did you
guys pick up this info. I'd like to get the book if there is one. (BTW I
took Norm's advice and bought the Dr's Guide to Improving Your Ignition)

Thanks Norm, Pothole, and Wish
Smeck,
79 F100

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 17:50:15 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - wheel bearing grease

>>I'm guessing yours still has content? I still have "the" can.....does that
count for anything????

Well..., you know what you ran out of? Mine is still about half full.

OK Tony, I hope you are reading this. It sounds like you did everything
correctly, but you didn't mention and I have to ask, you did use wheel
bearing grease and not chassis grease, right? I knew you did, but the
youngsters might not realize you can't pack your bearings with a couple of
squirts from the old zerk fitting gun.

- -- John
jlagrone

ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 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: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 19:10:54 -0400
From: tony
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - wheel bearing grease

Hahahaha-- A very valid question John--- and the only reason I know better is
from a buddy telling me what an idiot he was putting the wrong grease in when he
did his! 8-)

Actually, I read the tube container of the NAPA dirt -- 'er um grease, that I put
in my hubs before they fried-- the tube said on it "does not meet FORD #??????
wheel bearing grease standards".... Well, duh. Although chebbies are the same
hub assy's it goes to show you that Ford's specs must hold a slightly higher
standard than the other manufacturers on what qualities their grease has to
meet. I have to say though, I can't be too harsh on my truck for eating bearings
for lunch-- I run a ridiculously offset 10 in wide rims on all of them, and the
smallest tires I own are 33x12.5's, so the stress placed on the outer bearing
from moving the centerpoint of weight to the outside of the outer bearing has to
be harsh on them to begin with... not to mention the way I drive can't help all
that much. But also, the way I see it, runnin' 'em hard and puttin' 'em away
wet just means you learn what works and what doesn't out of parts in a hurry.
(and flattens the wallet considerably!!) The first set of bearings I fried were
these Polish raced, Chinese inners, for about $12 bucks a piece, then I went and
got Federal Moguls that lasted a bit longer, and the ones I currently have in
there are Timkens. I'll miss my Kendal, but we'll see how this Mobile 1 synth
holds up. Oh-- and my favorite tool when doing bearings is one of my Mom's old
kitchen spatulas, you can really goop that crap in there with it! (grin)

Tony
tony

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

John LaGrone wrote:

> >>I'm guessing yours still has content? I still have "the" can.....does that
> count for anything????
>
> Well..., you know what you ran out of? Mine is still about half full.
>
> OK Tony, I hope you are reading this. It sounds like you did everything
> correctly, but you didn't mention and I have to ask, you did use wheel
> bearing grease and not chassis grease, right? I knew you did, but the
> youngsters might not realize you can't pack your bearings with a couple of
> squirts from the old zerk fitting gun.
>
> -- John
> jlagrone

ford-trucks.com
> 1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
> http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
> Dearborn iron rules!!!!
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 02:19:01 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - engine swap

But the 400 and 351M are the exact same blocks. If only the crank is
different, why would the 400 be a big block and the 351M small?
Only the 351W is (slightly) smaller.

> nope, it's a small block trying to be a big block 400
> > Does anybody know, is the 351M considered a big block?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 18:35:01 -0700
From: Marv Miller
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Teflon Tape

Somebody wrote:

> BTW, I used "gasoline" teflon tape, not plumbing tape.

I think you meant "gas line" teflon tape. There is a different type
of teflon sealing tape used when plumbing natural gas. This is
different than that used for water pipes. Gas line is different than
gasoline. ;-)

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 22:05:05 -0700
From: "O'Connor"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Won't start when hot

Hi,
About a week ago, someone wrote in and told us that they had the same
problem. After many replacements, they found that it was simply the ground
of the starter to the block. After cleaning the surfaces, the problem went
away.
I had the same experience on three different vehicles that ultimately let
to their trip to the bone yard. About a year later, I stumpled on to two
veteran mechanics who both gave me the following explanation. They both
claimed that when a head gasket leaks it can transfer anitfreeze into the
piston and rings. This buildup will cause the rings to tighten when hot
make the engine turn over slowly. When cold, it will turn over fast enough
to start. I too had replaced everything with now results. Except for the
ground explanation above, I've never heard of a real fix that worked.
There is a solvent that one of the major suppliers of antifreeze sells that
is supposed to disolve the buildup without pulling the pistons. If there
are any other explanations out there, lets here them. I'd like to
personnally put this thing to rest!

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

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

Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 22:28:06 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Gas Mileage

Jacobs Ultra team is an ignition system. comes with a "brain" HO coil,
wires, and an anit theft. Neat System.

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 22:35:06 -0500
From: cannandale

netpointe.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Cheap Engines

a little more info on jasper for anybody wondering.. I work in a garage,
and we USED to put jaspers in, but now we will not. we have had to replace
over 6 jaspers weve put in in diffrent vehicles. Last 3 we put in had
severe probs. A 300 in a '90 something E250, put it in, 2 weeks later, a
piston blew. a chrys*er, 318, started burning oil at about a quart every
500 miles, called jasper, they said that was acceptable.. ???? called
chrys*er, and that said it was ok every 250 miles, NO JOKE!! ok thats a
little off subject but i had to put that in.. :)

last one, a 302, a guy came in the shop with it, and he works at jasper,
got it built real nice, big cam, Gt40 heads. we put it in his 4wd '85
F150, he came back about a week later and it had also blew a piston!
screwed up the had a little bit, well they would only warranty the short
block, and not the heads because he bought them seperate. took them to the
machine shop and they needed 4 new exhaust valves, and ALL the guides, not
from the piston blowing, because jasper dosent replace the guides believe
it or not! look at their engine layout advertisment, dosent say anything
about guides!

i do have to say that do a good job (or so ive seen) on tranny's, we still
use them, but not the engines. Plus the factory and town of jasper is
about 30 miles west of me. so its pretty quick here.... but still.......

cannandale
'78 F250 4x4 460

At 02:25 AM 6/3/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
> I called jasper for the price on a reman
>>460, and it was $1300, i got it re-done for about $1000, with all the
>>accessories on it...
>>
>>cannandale
>>'78 F250 4x4, 460
>>
>>At 04:31 AM 6/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>
>
>Had to add my 2 cents when I saw "Jasper". My workhorse, an '83 F-250,
>460, C6, bit the dust about six months ago. That 460 I had built over six
>months and it lasted for 400,000 miles pulling trailers with 6,000 to
>12,000 pound loads from Kentucky to Texas and back, 70 to 75 mph with ac
>wide open and never a major problem. Then about 5 miles from the house, I
>spun a bearing and trashed the whole thing in about a minute and a half.
>Last bebuild was bored at 60 over, so I was going to have start from
>scratch to replace it.
>My thinking? Jasper factory in Indiana, about 75 miles away from home in
>northern Kentucky, they could deliver overnight. "Jasper" reputation, I've
>always heard good things. Authorized dealer locally could do the swap and
>have me running again in 3 days. 6 month, 36,000 mile warranty. Made sense
>to me.
>Result? Truck in the shop over a month initially, first engine would make
>no oil pressure, sent it back, second engine, oil pressure at idle, would
>drop to 10 pounds when given throttle. Third engine seemed to be okay. 2
>weeks later, back in shop, overheating (under no load) radiator rodded,
>still overheating, new radiator. Seemed to be okay. 3 weeks later,
>overheated suddenly when dropped a valve. Dealer fed up. Put truck on roll
>back, took to Jasper factory and told them to call me when it was fixed
>right. Truck at factory for 5 weeks. rep called me and said they had
>started over and remanned new engine, balanced and blue-printed since I had
>so many problems with it. Picked it up, purred like a kitten. That was 2
>months(?) and about 3000 miles ago and guess where it is today? In the
>shop. Jumped time or something, don't know, didn't look, just had tow truck
>driver take it in. Thoroughly disgusted, won't trust this truck outside of
>city limits for a while.
>But there is always hope. Sitting on engine stand now is 385 block, been
>hot tanked, magnafluxed, and bore checked, will take a .30 over rebore.
>Tomorrow I start chasing all threads and bolt holes. Maybe in a few months
>I will be able to trust this truck again.
>Sorry for the length, mentioning Jasper set me off and guess venting this
>way is better than loading this truck with TNT and driving it (or more
>likely towing it) to the factory.
>
>Stoney
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 22:38:14 -0500
From: cannandale

netpointe.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Wheel bearings :-(

just dont ever put it on exhaust manifolds, somebody brought a car in the
shop that they done that, this is no joke, stunk so bad that one mechanic
threw up, the others just waited outside, and they closed off the office..

cannandale
'78 F250 4x4, 460

At 12:53 PM 6/3/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>At 11:24 AM 6/3/99 , you wrote:
>>Please. will anyone tell me what JB Weld is ?
>>
>its kind of like an epoxy ... two pieces mix together, a hardener and ???,
>it forms a metal like substance that you push and smear across stuff , then
>grind it down how you want it to look. I've used it for sealing a gastank
>and fixing a couple trim bolts that had stripped on one side in a 'stang.
>Dad's seen 'em use it in the head when there was a crack on the outside,
>just fill it with jbweld and grind it off flush ... that was a reputable
>machine shop too ...
>
>There was some discussion of the stuff a while ago, but I can't get the
>archives to find anything on it ...
>
>
>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
>

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 22:49:30 -0700
From: "O'Connor"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Hot Starting

Good,
Someone else reported in that vaporizing gas can cause hot starting
problems. The other possibilities are a bad ground and antifreeze buildup
in the ring grooves. Thats good. If anyone else had a solution that you
know had positive results, please pass them on. If we look at the
suggestions above, I think we can sepatate them into two catagories.

Hot starting- slow turn over Hot starting- normal turn over
antifreeze buildup Vaporizing fuel
Bad ground at starter??? Bad ground at starter???

If the guy that experienced the ground problem would report in and let me
know if it turned over slow or normal, I can put it in the proper column.

Thanks
Tim 66F100 w/SWB, stock P/S and O/D
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 20:26:18 -0500
From: "S.C.N. Bradley"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- found '66 chrome grill

Hey Marty,

I'll offer to buy them but have no idea of the value of such and I would
have to have them shipped. If you can get me a price, I'll see what my wife
thinks. LOL.

Scott
Portland Or.
66 F-100 Shortbox 351C

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

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 00:34:51 EDT
From: bill comstock
Subject: FTE 61-79 - thrust bearing

hi all,

while on the subject of kingpins and front suspensions, is there any place
where one could aquire the thrust bearings alone? It seems the only place i
can find them is in a new kit, is this the only option? they appear to be
the same as some i've seen on vertical electric water pumps used in lift
stations, if the dimensions were the same wouldn't they work? anyone know
the load exerted on these kingpin bearings? they don't appear to be all
that heavy-duty.

thanks in advance

Bill Comstock
ICQ# 31312855

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 21:56:29 -0700
From: "Matt Tobin"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Keyless entry question 95 Bronco...

Does anyone have the bulletin on how to setup a new Ford keyless transmitter
on a 95 Bronco? I did it for my Taurus, and it was really easy, involving
only jumpering a connector, switching ignition on/off and pushing a button
on the transmitter. I need to know the proper order of things and WHERE the
connector is located. Any help out there?
Thanks,

Matt

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

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

Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 01:10:27 EDT
From: SHill48337

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Wheel bearings :-(

In a message dated 6/3/99 9:28:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bill

online.no
writes:

Bill
>>
JB-Weld (Brand Name) is a two part epoxy steel that adheres tightly to steel.
It can be machined, filed or shaped with metal abrasive cloth. Will handle
a fair amount of heat and is very cheap.
Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F250 4x4 460
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 00:48:09 -0500
From: Johannes Fluetter
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"

Hey. I'm new to the list, so I'm a bit "unknowledgeable". I bought a '72 F250
(2wd) with a 390 2bbl in October and have been slowly nursing her back to
health, have a few questions for you guys.

1. First of all, the transmission code says this is truck has a Dana 60. When
a friend (and fellow Ford pickup owner) heard this, he visibly drooled on
himself. What is he trying to tell me?

2. Can I get any FE series cast iron 4bbl intake and throw it on here? Any
suggestions?

3. Anybody have a mint condition grill and inserts laying around that they want
to sell?

Thanks!

John Fluetter
johanf

ionet.net

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

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 00:58:54 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"

>
> 2. Can I get any FE series cast iron 4bbl intake and throw it on here? Any
> suggestions?

Try to use a '66 or later intake manifold-earlier manifolds used taller
ports. Other than that, any regular FE intake will work.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 01:21:50 -0500
From: Johannes Fluetter
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"

Do these taller ports affect performance?

John

Jason & Kathy Kendrick wrote:

> >
> > 2. Can I get any FE series cast iron 4bbl intake and throw it on here? Any
> > suggestions?
>
> Try to use a '66 or later intake manifold-earlier manifolds used taller
> ports. Other than that, any regular FE intake will work.
> == 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: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 02:32:31 -0400
From: "George W. Selby, III"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE:Final Dizzy Update. Timing Specs

Actually, I don't know the actual timing, because the marks are worn off my
harmonic balancer. I placed a dot on the balancer with liquid paper at
TDC, and use that to estimate (and guage changes). The truck idles best
with the timing set in a certain place, if you switch from ported to
manifold, you have to rotate the distributor about 1/8th turn to keep the
idle at the specified 550 rpm, and the timing at the sweet spot When
hooked up to manifold, it advances at idle (at high vacuum), and backs off
the vacuum advance once idle conditions are left and the accelerator pedal
is pressed. I think this is how vacuum advance is supposed to work. I
tune it by ear, advancing till it knocks, then back off what I estimate to
be 5-6 degrees.

BTW I just looked at my stock emissions diagram for my 82 360 Jeep (which
uses a Motorcraft 4350 carb) and the advance is clearly hooked up the the
output labeled (M) for manifold on the diagram.

George Selby
78 F-150 400M, 4 on floor, 4x4
IsuzuG

prodigy.net

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

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 01:39:20 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"

Johannes Fluetter wrote:
>
> Do these taller ports affect performance?
>
> John

There was a big discussion on this last week! The smaller (after '66)
ports are better for stock and mild built engines because they have less
volume and more velocity. This is good for low to midrange horsepower
and torque. The taller ports (pre '66) have more volume, and with the
right cam and compression, more velocity-good for horsepower and torque
in the mid to upper range. It all depends on how you build it. As long
as you stay with the same size ports between the heads and intake,
you'll be alright.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 02:05:47 -0500
From: Johannes Fluetter
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 60/questions from the "new guy"

Thanks. Sounds like you know exactly what I'm looking to do with this thing
right now.

John

Jason & Kathy Kendrick wrote:

> Johannes Fluetter wrote:
> >
> > Do these taller ports affect performance?
> >
> > John
>
> There was a big discussion on this last week! The smaller (after '66)
> ports are better for stock and mild built engines because they have less
> volume and more velocity. This is good for low to midrange horsepower
> and torque. The taller ports (pre '66) have more volume, and with the
> right cam and compression, more velocity-good for horsepower and torque
> in the mid to upper range. It all depends on how you build it. As long
> as you stay with the same size ports between the heads and intake,
> you'll be alright.
> == 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: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 00:22:59 PDT
From: steve potratz
Subject: FTE 61-79 - rear disc brake kits

Steve Jacobi wrote:

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 14:37:00 -0500
From: sjacobi

fd9ns01.okladot.state.ok.us
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rear Disc Brakes

I have been reading with quite a bit of interest of late all of the
information
regarding brakes, lines, ABS, etc. I am planning on doing the front disc
brake
conversion on my '67 2WD F100 as time permits this summer. I have seen the
posts about mid '70s Lincolns and others with rear disc brakes on a 9" rear
end.
Just this morning I was thumbing through my latest ('95) Ford Motorsport
catalog
and I found what they call a "5-lug low cost rear brake kit" which fits late
Ford 9" rear ends. My question is, has anybody out there tried this? Will
it
fit a 9" from 1967? Problems? They list it at $350 which has some amount
of
appeal if I'm going to tear up my brake system in the first place. TIA for
any
responses.

Steve Jacobi

Steve: If this is the kit I checked into, the axel bolt pattern is the
smaller one used on cars. So you will need to have lug adaptors. I didn't
like the idea of an adaptor on a truck. The only ones that I found that
were a direct bolt on for trucks were from Currie Enterprises and one from
Warn Industries. The Warn kit is cool though as it converts the 9" axel to
full floating. The way they do it is bolting on a bearing support similar
in construction to the front yoke assembly on the DANA 44 4wd front axel.....

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.