RE: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!

61-79-list-digest Tuesday, February 9 1999 Volume 03 : Number 044

=======================================================================
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 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!
FTE 61-79 - RE: nice lookin' 390 - Edelbrock Carb
FTE 61-79 - overheating???
FTE 61-79 - Re: Mark's Web page - Q-tips
FTE 61-79 - off topic, country thunder
FTE 61-79 - Vin #'s
FTE 61-79 - Tire Jack Location for 66F100
FTE 61-79 - XLT package
FTE 61-79 - was, cars...er, trucks!,LIST SPLIT
Re: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!
FTE 61-79 - Quicktime (was Stu's movie)
FTE 61-79 - New project (Fantasy Stage)
FTE 61-79 - 9" rear disk brakes
FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios
Re: FTE 61-79 - 9" rear disk brakes
RE: FTE 61-79 -1961-1967 ?
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Mark's Web page - Q-tips
FTE 61-79 - 68-72 Armrests
Re: FTE 61-79 - was, cars...er, trucks!,LIST SPLIT
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: List split/reorg
RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
FTE 61-79 - Camper Special
RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
FTE 61-79 - Merc chassis
FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear
FTE 61-79 - For Sale
Re: FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
Re: FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear
FTE 61-79 - Adding A/C to an F-250?
Re: FTE 61-79 - Camper Special Question
FTE 61-79 - Carb
FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES
FTE 61-79 - 67 Pricing
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES
FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- 1 1/4 INCH BORE MASTER CYLINDER
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- 1 1/4 INCH BORE MASTER CYLINDER
RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot
Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot
Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot
FTE 61-79 - Re: Here We Are, Back in the Gutters Again
Re: FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios
Re: FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios
FTE 61-79 - 1978 ford f150 supercab 4x4
FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck
Re: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck
Re: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck
Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot
Re: FTE 61-79 - Merc chassis
FTE 61-79 - RE: Turn signal switch
RE: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Here We Are, Back in the Gutters Again
Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 07:28:47 -0600
From: "Spears, Alan"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!

I'm new to this list and haven't asked any questions, yet but am being
beckoned by a '64 that's been in my garage for 17 years. My opinion is
that having a list for 1961-1967 would be a good idea.

> ----------
> From: Daniel Koster[SMTP:rumpus1

yahoo.com]
> Reply To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 10:11 PM
> To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!
>
>
> In Response to my own entry...
>
> I have received a number of requests to expand the list
> I'm creating to include other years, so here's what I'll do:
>
> I think it's fair to say that 1961-1967 year ford trucks are
> going to have a lot of the same features/problems/etc.
>
> I plan on creating a list of all who respond and then
> distributing a copy to each.
>
> Thanks for helping out.
>
> Dan
>
>
> p.s. those that have responded already need not respond again.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---Daniel Koster wrote:
> >
> >
> > ---stevegoins wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been reading this list for a few weeks now and really
> > enjoy,have also
> > > learned a lot. Ihave a 63 F-100 ...
>
>
> To All:
>
> > How about a list of all the 63 owners?
> >
> > We all seem to have the same questions and maybe we could get
> > each other's emails to ask specific questions w/o tying up the
> > list.
> >
> > I would benefit greatly from the wisdom of the 'elders'.
> >
> > Here's my email to start the list off:
> >
> > Daniel Koster
> > rumpus1

pacifier.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: nice lookin' 390 - Edelbrock Carb

Tom W. wrote:
> Question . . . I have a new edelbrock 625 on my FE and when
> I get into the second set of barrels I get a lot of Carb noise
> but not a lot of kick power wise. Do I need different jets/metering rods
> or what? I'm just learning about these AFB's.

You are asking the wrong guy as I am no expert on carburetor tuning.
If it were me I would check to see if the secondaries are not
opening all the way, or that your timing is not getting enough
advance. Just uneducated guesses though.

I can tell you that my 600 was basically a bolt on. I did have a
mechanic, who had an exhaust analyser, lean the mixture to pass the
emission sniff test which it did easily. He said he went down one
step on the metering rods, same jets. I can't tell any difference
in performance.

Mine is a manual choke model which Edelbrock sets up slightly richer
than the one with an electric choke. Should have gotten the electric
choke. I've had too many times I would forget to take it off. A
friend of mine was at emissions and didn't pass. On the way home
he realized he had forgotten to take the choke off.

Mark in Southwest Washington
www.pacifier.com/~draco
- --
'74 F-100 4X4
'74 F-250 Supercab

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 07:51:47 -0600 (CST)
From: bkirking

bcm.tmc.edu
Subject: FTE 61-79 - overheating???

>>Anyone have any ideas ?

How do the wires look. Especially at the wire/rubber connector junction.
Maybe something is shorting out?

Bryan Kirking
66 Step Side
352 4 speed
Houston, Texas

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 05:54:43 -0800 (PST)
From: draco

pacifier.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Mark's Web page - Q-tips

Tim in Anchorage wrote:
> I never get results like that from my Q-tips.

This is great. Now I am going to be the Q-tip guy.

Hey, I only went through about 20 Q-tips last night on the
intake manifold. How else can I get into all those nooks
and crannies?

Like I was telling the wife, while I was washing my spark
plug wires with soap and water in the bathroom sink, it is
the little details that make all the difference.

Don't get me wrong, all this is just for the moment when I
put the motor in and I have a couple of months to show it
off. After that the truck is back to being used as a
truck.

It is starting to look a lot better, but will never look
like the pictures again.

Mark in Southwest Washington
www.pacifier.com/~draco
- --
'74 F-100 4X4
'74 F-250 Supercab

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 07:11:35 -0700
From: John & Iva McKay
Subject: FTE 61-79 - off topic, country thunder

lot of desert around. you should be able to find some 4 wheel fun.
where in AZ are you ?
- --
John L. McKay
Mesa, Arizona
'67 F-100 Custom Cab 360
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~djspaints/ford.htm
Email: djspaints

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 08:09:16 -0600
From: ballingr

ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Vin #'s

Your State Police (Highway Patrol) would have to inspect it and make a
decision on it. I've built a couple of basket-case Harleys for people
that didn't have all or their ducks in a row legally. The Highway
Patrol looked at the bike and assigned the frame to a general
description.

An exanple, one was a '76 AMF frame, with a Panhead (also of mixed
vintage) wide-glide front end and fat-bob tanks of unknown vintage. It
ended up titled as a '76 HD, but it looked like an old Duo-Glide to look
at it.

The key is to have titles and or bills of sale for the major
components.
I'm in the process of pulling the '69 390 and C-6 out of my '67 F100,
I've sold the body to someone who can put it back together or use it to
put another one together. I'll miss it. I'm going to rebuild the 390
short block for my '65, and add the '65 T-bird heads and intake I
already have salted away. The heads have new exhaust valves and
hardened seats, new valve-springs, etc. Plans for the shortblock include
a little oiling system tweaking, hyperuectic pistons and an RV cam. It
should be a sweet engine.

> THE problem will be the VIN. Both vehicles are titled and legal (as far as
> one can tell). I know where the VIN is supposed to be on the truck frame.
> There is no plate in the glove box door like there should be, though. I'm
> thinking I might have to license this as a 70 Mercury. Probably work until
> the first time I get pulled over. The other option is to build it
> completely street legal, have it inspected and re-titled...I have been
> worrying about this. I'd hate to get too far into it and find out it is
> completely outlaw....(or would I?)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 08:17:39 -0600
From: John Strauss
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Tire Jack Location for 66F100

>Hi FTE,
>Does anyone know where the tire jack goes on a 66F100?
>
On my '64, there is a little clamp behind the seat that holds it down to
the floor.
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss

inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 06:19:47 PST
From: "MARTY COLMAN"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - XLT package

Darrell,
Thank you for your response, that is just what I was looking for. Now I
know what I have ahead of me. thank you.

Marty Colman
73 F100 390

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 06:24:39 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: FTE 61-79 - was, cars...er, trucks!,LIST SPLIT

Well Ken, and all

From the sound of it all it is time too look at a list split again, no
matter how much I am against it ;-)

There is no need for Daniel to create his own list, we (Ken does
anyway) have the capability right here. Maybe Daniel could manage that
list if he wanted to to take the work off of Ken maintaining another list.
By keeping the list with FTE we keep the exposure to new people and ideas.

As far as the years are concerned that has been an ongoing debate. We
pretty much agreed with the 67 going to the later model years 67-79 because
they have the most in common. 65-66 F-100's have a lot in common
mechanically with the 67-79 but the body style is defiantly 61-66. That
bring up the question of the 57-60. Lots mechanically with the 61-64 but a
slightly different body style. Do they stay with the 60 and earlier list
or would they like to move up to the 61-66 list.

Just my inconsistent, haven't had coffee yet thoughts.
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon

pacific.net

99 Contour SE Sport
63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings.

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:00:34 -0600
From: "John R. Austin"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!

Interested in 61-67 list.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Koster
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Monday, February 08, 1999 10:36 PM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!

>
>In Response to my own entry...
>
>I have received a number of requests to expand the list
>I'm creating to include other years, so here's what I'll do:
>
>I think it's fair to say that 1961-1967 year ford trucks are
>going to have a lot of the same features/problems/etc.
>
>I plan on creating a list of all who respond and then
>distributing a copy to each.
>
>Thanks for helping out.
>
>Dan
>
>
>p.s. those that have responded already need not respond again.
>
>
>
>
>
>---Daniel Koster wrote:
>>
>>
>> ---stevegoins wrote:
>> >
>> > I have been reading this list for a few weeks now and really
>> enjoy,have also
>> > learned a lot. Ihave a 63 F-100 ...
>
>
>To All:
>
>> How about a list of all the 63 owners?
>>
>> We all seem to have the same questions and maybe we could get
>> each other's emails to ask specific questions w/o tying up the
>> list.
>>
>> I would benefit greatly from the wisdom of the 'elders'.
>>
>> Here's my email to start the list off:
>>
>> Daniel Koster
>> rumpus1

yahoo.com
>>
>>
>> Thanks to all who post.
>>
>>
>>
>> p.s. my 63 is the rusty lookin' one posted in the pictorial
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
> >
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 08:04:33 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Quicktime (was Stu's movie)

>>> What is quicktime?
My Ford Truck from stoplight to stoplight!

Hey Dennis,

I like it, I like it!!!! This is the best definition of quicktime I have seen.

- -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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:00:46 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios

Well. let's see. I would take the average of the inverses. So we have 1
divided by 4.56 = .21929824561. 1 divided by 3.50 = .28571428571. Now we
add those two impressive decimal values and get .50501253132. Divide by two
gives .25250626566. Find the inverse and you get 3.9602977668 or 3.96 for
an effective ratio. I am pretty sure this is wrong, too because it doesn't
allow for slippage properly.

Now I never did study this in detail, but for some reason when you hook
stuff up in parallel, the effective value usually involves calculations on
the inverses. In reality, this particular problem may invlove squares and
square roots of inverses. The best way to solve the problem would be to run
the vehicle and get an RPM reading off the tach, then do some calculations
based on tranny gear ratio, tire size, etc. Anybody got a treadmill big
enough for a Ford truck?

The effective gear ratio is actually unimportant. Like it has been said, on
dry pavement with everything locked up the effective ratio would be 0
because something would break. If you are in mud and everything is locked
up, then each diff would turn at its own rate. With everything unlocked on
dry pavement, the gear ratio would be equivalent to the rear axle ratio.
All the powertrain slippage would allow only one rear wheel to deliver
power to the road surface anyway. The first wheel to lose traction would
spin. If the front hubs and transfer case aren't locked, make that the
first rear wheel to lose traction spins, assuming non-locker diffs. Unless
the transfer case is locked, power is delivered only to the rear diff. I
think the original post sadi something about an NP203 transfer case. If
this is the fulltime transfer case, all of this holds true anyway. The
system is designed to deliver power to the rear wheels unless it is locked.
Other wise the front wheels would spin everytime you went thru a puddle or
around a corner. Has anyone ever smoked their FRONT tires when gunning
around a corner? I don't think so. Raw engine power isn't the problem.

- -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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:26:38 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 9" rear disk brakes

At 08:21 AM 2/9/99 , you wrote:
>>>This kit includes parking
>brakes that are actually small drum brakes inside the rotors.
>
>This sounds like a good setup. One of the biggest problems I had with every
>4-wheel disc system I ever owned was that the parking brakes didn't work
>well.

This is the same system my dad's vette had on it ... it never worked right
either ... we replaced everything inside the rotor once and it worked for
about a week, maybe a month, don't really remember, but I know he never
used it even after we worked on it.

Just my 2cents

wish

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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 07:27:59 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 -1961-1967 ?

1961-1967 seems ok, but I was just curious why not 1961-1966? It seems
there is a change from 66 to 67, but 67 and 68 seem very similar (from
experience--I've had both, as well as a 66 now).

Whatever you decide will work for me. I was just wonderin'...

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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 07:30:25 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

Thanks for your message at 05:36 AM 2/9/99 -0800, draco

pacifier.com. Your
message was:
>Tom W. wrote:
>> Question . . . I have a new edelbrock 625 on my FE and when
>> I get into the second set of barrels I get a lot of Carb noise
>> but not a lot of kick power wise. Do I need different jets/metering rods
>> or what? I'm just learning about these AFB's.
>
Sounds like you are over-carburetored...

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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 07:34:05 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Mark's Web page - Q-tips

Thanks for your message at 05:54 AM 2/9/99 -0800, draco

pacifier.com. Your
message was:

>This is great. Now I am going to be the Q-tip guy.
>
>Hey, I only went through about 20 Q-tips last night on the
>intake manifold. How else can I get into all those nooks
>and crannies?
>
>Like I was telling the wife, while I was washing my spark
>plug wires with soap and water in the bathroom sink, it is
>the little details that make all the difference.

Hey, I think this is great! So what if you are known as "Q-tip" from now
on...?
You don't happen to be a Virgo, do you?
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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:07:50 EST
From: BDIJXS

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 68-72 Armrests

I discovered that the armrests from the mid-to-late 70's vans (sorry, don't
know what years) are the same as the armrests in the 68-72 F-series trucks. I
found several vans in the local yard, so I had plenty to choose from....a heck
of a lot cheaper than the aftermarket units.....

CJ (Colorado Jeff, or as Dave R. now calls me: Cobra Jeff)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 11:17:09 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - was, cars...er, trucks!,LIST SPLIT

At 06:24 AM 2/9/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Well Ken, and all
>
> From the sound of it all it is time too look at a list split again, no
>matter how much I am against it ;-)

Amen.

> There is no need for Daniel to create his own list, we (Ken does
>anyway) have the capability right here. Maybe Daniel could manage that
>list if he wanted to to take the work off of Ken maintaining another list.
>By keeping the list with FTE we keep the exposure to new people and ideas.

I don't mind another list. We can certainly handle the bandwidth
since our last upgrade. Also, I'm putting a script in place to
automate more of my admin tasks.

Concerning the list talked about, I thought it was kind of odd to
see someone recruiting people here for a truck list. A good analogy
would be walking into Microsoft's break-room and asking employees
if they would be interested in working for Lotus on the side.

>As far as the years are concerned that has been an ongoing debate. We
>pretty much agreed with the 67 going to the later model years 67-79 because
>they have the most in common. 65-66 F-100's have a lot in common
>mechanically with the 67-79 but the body style is defiantly 61-66. That
>bring up the question of the 57-60. Lots mechanically with the 61-64 but a
>slightly different body style. Do they stay with the 60 and earlier list
>or would they like to move up to the 61-66 list.
>
>Just my inconsistent, haven't had coffee yet thoughts.

I've just put a new vote on the web site.

Ken

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 11:21:18 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: List split/reorg

Due to traffic increases on the 61-79 list, the following
vote has been added to the web site:

1. Split the 61-79 list into 61-66 and 67-79
2. Split the 61-79 list into 61-64 and 65-79
3. Reorganize the lists into 48-56, 57-64 and 65-79.
4. No, don't change 'em!
5. Don't care

Item 3 will cause me to have an enormous work load during
the transition. Keep that in mind if you're planning to
vote for item 3.

If anyone is thinking of cheating again, keep in mind that
I am now having our server track who votes and will boot
you off the lists permanently if I catch you.

Later,
Ken Payne
Admin

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:22:07 -0500
From: "John MacNamara"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

Tom: Anyone who has ever owned and AFB knows that when the secondary kicks
in their is loud sound associated with the air flow. This sound is
completely normal.

Thanks
John MacNamara

805 577 2536 wk
805 577 2768 fx
ESN 495-2536
jmacnam

nortelnetworks.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:Dennis Pearson [SMTP:dpearson

ctc.edu]
> Sent:Tuesday, February 09, 1999 7:30 AM
> To:61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject:Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
>
> Thanks for your message at 05:36 AM 2/9/99 -0800, draco

pacifier.com. Your
> message was:
> >Tom W. wrote:
> >> Question . . . I have a new edelbrock 625 on my FE and when
> >> I get into the second set of barrels I get a lot of Carb noise
> >> but not a lot of kick power wise. Do I need different jets/metering
> rods
> >> or what? I'm just learning about these AFB's.
> >
>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 08:47:54 PST
From: "Christopher Denson"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Camper Special

Steve,
I have a 67 F100 C/S that I bought from the original ownwer last year.
The title verifies this. I have the extra leafs, dual tanks, and "west
coast" mirrors. Hope this helps.

Chris in San Diego
67 F100 C/S 352/Cruis-O-Matic

>I saw a '67 F100 Camper Special in my home town the other day and I got
to thinking that it was my belief that they only made F250 and up camper
specials. Is this true? I looked at the rear springs and there was an
extra leaf there. Additionally the truck had a bed light, dual tanks,
and "west coast" mirrors. I suppose that they could have adorned the
body with incorrect trim pieces and I'm
>beginning to think this is the case.
>
>Any comments are much appreciated.
>
>Steve

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:00:45 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

Thanks for your message at 11:22 AM 2/9/99 -0500, John MacNamara. Your
message was:
>Tom: Anyone who has ever owned and AFB knows that when the secondary kicks
>in their is loud sound associated with the air flow. This sound is
>completely normal.

But his question was about the lack of response. My guess (since I don't
know the specifics of his engine) is that it is too much carb and it's
bogging down when the secondaries kick in...

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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 12:33:58 -0500
From: am14

daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Merc chassis

Dennis Pearson writes: >> Well, I'm going to start tearing the body off the
Marquis, no matter what. This should be fun.

Keep us posted on how it goes. Sounds like a very interesting project. Might
consider taking pics along the way. I wish I'd done that on some of my
projects.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 11:35:15 -0600
From: ballingr

ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear

The Versailles rear is too weak for a truck if it is doing anything but
light commuter service. They have 28 spline axles and are generally too
lightly built throughout to withstand abuse.

A 351W C-6 Mustang (not raced all the time) would be the best candidate
for this rear, a much heavier or more torque-stressed vehicle and it
probably wouldn't hold up very well.

> I wouldn't waste time with Lincoln rear ends, parts are not cheap and
> the rear ends are very heavy. Ford Motorsport does sell a very nice
> rear disk conversion that fits both the 9" and truck 8.8 rear. The
> part number is: M-2300-G and the list price is $379.95. You can do
> better on the price by getting it through any of the Motorsport dealers
> that advertise in the Mustang magazines. This kit includes parking
> brakes that are actually small drum brakes inside the rotors. Street
> rod vendors also sell lots of different rear disk brake kits for the
> 9" rear end.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:41:03 -0800 (PST)
From: JP Morgon
Subject: FTE 61-79 - For Sale

For sale 1969 F100 2wd LWB body work started, got sick cant finish,
strong 302 w/new 4bbl 4spd. Email JT at KellyMotorsports2

yahoo.com
(Denver CO area)

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 11:42:44 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear

At 11:35 AM 2/9/99 , you wrote:
>The Versailles rear is too weak for a truck if it is doing anything but
>light commuter service. They have 28 spline axles and are generally too
>lightly built throughout to withstand abuse.
>
>A 351W C-6 Mustang (not raced all the time) would be the best candidate
>for this rear, a much heavier or more torque-stressed vehicle and it
>probably wouldn't hold up very well.
>
Except that these don't have Disk brakes, which was the whole point ...

Just my 2cents

wish

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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:46:02 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

Possibly "under cammed"?

- -----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Pearson
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:12 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

>
>But his question was about the lack of response. My guess (since I don't
>know the specifics of his engine) is that it is too much carb and it's
>bogging down when the secondaries kick in...
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:30:52 -0800
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Versailles Rear

>>
>>A 351W C-6 Mustang (not raced all the time) would be the best candidate
>>for this rear, a much heavier or more torque-stressed vehicle and it
>>probably wouldn't hold up very well.
>>
>Except that these don't have Disk brakes, which was the whole point ...
>

He was suggesting use for the LS rear, not a source of a rear...

I would say chekc out you Ford Motorsport Catalog anfd find out the
particulars of there conversion kit.
I think it is for 8.8 and big car/truck 9".
-srw

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 13:48:11 -0500
From: "Sean R. Kerns"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Adding A/C to an F-250?

Hi guys,

I have a '79 F-250 4x4 with a transplanted '68 429 in it and
a C6 auto/NP205.
It's a great truck, but it's also black, and in July and
August, those two make a nasty combo.
Anyway, this truck has the standard heater, no dash vents,
and no A/C.
I have always wanted to add A/C to this thing, but didn't
know where to start. Has anyone added A/C to this vintage
truck? If so, were there specific donor vehicles whose parts
worked best?
I have looked at some of the aftermarket places, and found
an underdash kit for ~$900US, but I'd much rather transplant
something in from, say, an LTD, and have it look stock.

Thanks,

Sean

- --
Sean R. Kerns (aka Snake)
e-mail: music

bloodspoint.com
Bloodspoint Studio - Home of Stalking Horse
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.bloodspoint.com
"You're in a band... That's like a business class ticket to
cool, with complimentary mojo after takeoff..."

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:48:26 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Camper Special Question

>From: sjacobi

fd9ns01.okladot.state.ok.us
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Camper Special Question
>
>I saw a '67 F100 Camper Special in my home
>town the other day and I got to thinking that it
>was my belief that they only made F250 and
>up camper specials.

Yo Steve:

My neighbor across the street just recently sold his 1966 F100 Camper
Special. It was equipped w/ huge leaf springs in the rear and a Dana 60-2
semi-floater rear axle.

I would have thought the same thing about Camper Specials, too. I guess
the Ford works in mysterious ways.

Dave R (M-block devotee)

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 10:49:03 -0800
From: "J.S.H."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Carb

"Question . . . I have a new edelbrock 625 on my FE and when
I get into the second set of barrels I get a lot of Carb noise
but not a lot of kick power wise. Do I need different jets/metering rods
or what? I'm just learning about these AFB's."

If you had a Holley 4 bbl. on it before you will notice a difference
I had a Holley on my FE and switched to a Carter.The Carter has
counterwieghted secondaries that are slowly pulled open by vacum.
The best comparison I can think of is a Holley secondary is like
hitting a switch and a Carter's is like opening a valve.You should
be able to tell if the secondaries are working by watching the gas
gauge:}
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:02:04 EST
From: M351STANG

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES

I GOT A CALL FROM A FRIEND THAT WORKS AT A GM DEALER. HE HAD A FORD DISK
BRAKE REAR END FOR MY 65 F100. I ASKED HIM WHAT IT CAME OUT OF, BUT HE WAS NOT
SUR IF IT WAS A 97 OR 98 FULL SIZE BRONCO.
I HAVE ONLY SEEN THE REAR END 1 TIME. IT IS SITTING AT HIS HOUSE.
IT IS A 8.8 OR A DIANA 60. IT HAS A 3.73 GEAR, POSI, 13 INCH ROTORS, WITH A 5
ON 5 1/2 BOLT PATTERN. I WILL HAVE TO CUT IT TO FIT, BUT IF THAT IS WHAT IT
TAKES, OK.
ANY PROS OR CONS ABOUT THIS, I WOULD LOVE TO HERE THEM.
THANK YOU ALL, FOR THE ADVICE. CONCORD CALIFORNIA.

CRAIG J
65 F100 FE 427
64 1/2 MUSTANG 351 AOD

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:08:54 -0800
From: "sam weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES

It's a good thing your friend works at a GM dealer...
Bronco's were last produced in 1996.
You may be able to fit that disc setup to your existing axle.
-srw

Sam Weatherby http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://insert.com/sammy
SWeatherby

UsWest.Net A-SamWe

Microsoft.com
'70 Grabber Sportsroof Mustang
'93 F-150 XLT Lightning
'98 HD FXD Super Glide
'65 F100

- -----Original Message-----
From: M351STANG

aol.com
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 11:05 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES

> I GOT A CALL FROM A FRIEND THAT WORKS AT A GM DEALER. HE HAD A FORD DISK
>BRAKE REAR END FOR MY 65 F100. I ASKED HIM WHAT IT CAME OUT OF, BUT HE WAS
NOT
>SUR IF IT WAS A 97 OR 98 FULL SIZE BRONCO.
> I HAVE ONLY SEEN THE REAR END 1 TIME. IT IS SITTING AT HIS HOUSE.
>IT IS A 8.8 OR A DIANA 60. IT HAS A 3.73 GEAR, POSI, 13 INCH ROTORS, WITH A
5
>ON 5 1/2 BOLT PATTERN. I WILL HAVE TO CUT IT TO FIT, BUT IF THAT IS WHAT IT
>TAKES, OK.
> ANY PROS OR CONS ABOUT THIS, I WOULD LOVE TO HERE THEM.
> THANK YOU ALL, FOR THE ADVICE. CONCORD CALIFORNIA.
>
> CRAIG J
> 65 F100 FE 427
> 64 1/2 MUSTANG 351 AOD
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 13:22:28 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 67 Pricing

Seems like someone was asking for base price of a 67 Ford F250 ? Anyway I
found my book, its called Ford Pickup Red Book
F-series, Econoline, and Ranchero Puckup trucks, Courier Sedan Delivery,
Courier Mini Pickup, and Bronco, 1946-1977

Its by Peter C. Sessler

ISBN 0-87938-789-0

It lists for 67 :
Well lots of different prices, what body style ? Flare side ? Style side ?
6.5ft or 8ft?

Doesn't list option prices, just base for the truck. Does list which
options were available then ..

Anyway the base prices are from 2072 for a bare F-100 chassis-cab
to 2606 for an F350 stake or platform truck ...

Email me directly if you want something specifically ...

Bill
wish

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:46:31 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES

First, stop typing in all caps please! 2nd, Broncos were last produced in
1996. 3rd, rear discs on a Bronco? 4th, "Cutting" a rear end to fit is best
left to professionals, preferably reputable ones. The cutting is easy but
reassembling correctly is the difficult part. JMNSHO.

- -----Original Message-----
From: M351STANG

aol.com
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 11:07 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- REAR DISK BRAKES

> I GOT A CALL FROM A FRIEND THAT WORKS AT A GM DEALER. HE HAD A FORD DISK
>BRAKE REAR END FOR MY 65 F100. I ASKED HIM WHAT IT CAME OUT OF, BUT HE WAS
NOT
>SUR IF IT WAS A 97 OR 98 FULL SIZE BRONCO.

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 15:01:35 EST
From: M351STANG

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- 1 1/4 INCH BORE MASTER CYLINDER

I HAVE FOND THAT MY 65 F100 AND MY 64.5 MUSTANG HAD THE SAME MASTER CYLINDER.
SO WHEN I PUT THE 4 WHEEL DISKS ON THE STANG I LOOKED TO SEE IF IT WOULD WORK.
I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BECAUSE I HAVE A 67 MUSTANG MASTER CYLINDER IN THE
PICKUP NOW, AND IT IS WORKING GREAT. GOOD THING!
THE 1 1/4 BORE FIT IN MY STANG REAL NICE, BUT I HAVE NOT USED IT YET, IT IS ON
STANDS FOR WINTER.
THE 1 1/4 INCH BORE IS TO GIVE IT A LARGE AMOUNT OF BRAKE FLUID TO THE 4 WHEEL
DISKS.
THE PART NUMBER FROM RAYBESTOS IS (MC 36408), AND THE BENDEX NUMBER IS
(1179).
I HOPE THIS HELPS ANY THAT WERE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
SORRY ABOUT THE SPELLING OR GRAMMAR MY MAIL.

CRAIG J
M351STANG

AOL.COM
65 F100 FE 427
64.5 MUSTANG 351 AOD
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 12:16:45 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 61-79-list- 1 1/4 INCH BORE MASTER CYLINDER

Thanks for your message at 03:01 PM 2/9/99 EST, M351STANG

aol.com. Your
message was:
> >I HOPE THIS HELPS ANY THAT WERE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
>SORRY ABOUT THE SPELLING OR GRAMMAR MY MAIL.
>
>I can handle the grammar and spelling (and I am an English teacher), but
the shouting has to go...

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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:56:54 -0600
From: "John MacNamara"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb

Yes, I didn't comment on the lack of response because I'm not real good with
carbs and especially the AFB. I had one on my 1st 460 and ran well right
out of the box. Never had it aparts so don't know the internals.

Thanks
John MacNamara

805 577 2536 wk
805 577 2768 fx
ESN 495-2536
jmacnam

nortelnetworks.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:Dennis Pearson [SMTP:dpearson

ctc.edu]
> Sent:Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:01 AM
> To:61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject:RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: - Edelbrock Carb
>
> Thanks for your message at 11:22 AM 2/9/99 -0500, John MacNamara. Your
> message was:
> >Tom: Anyone who has ever owned and AFB knows that when the secondary
> kicks
> >in their is loud sound associated with the air flow. This sound is
> >completely normal.
>
> But his question was about the lack of response. My guess (since I don't
> know the specifics of his engine) is that it is too much carb and it's
> bogging down when the secondaries kick in...
>
>
> 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
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 15:25:51 -0600
From: "John R. Austin"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

New question: 1967 F100 with 300 engine, Single Bbl Carb. Starts
wonderfully, runs like a champ. Drive it for two or 3 miles. Shut it off for
10-15 minutes. Does not want to start. Crank and crank and crank - it
sputters then chugs for a while then it will settle down and run. It will
then completely stop two or three times as you drive away and will restart
itself.
I've had the carb rebuilt, new points, plugs, distributor, coil, timing,
dwell. What next?
Thanks,
John

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 15:28:48 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

>I've had the carb rebuilt, new points, plugs, distributor, coil, timing,
>dwell. What next?

Have you adjusted everything on the carb since you've put it back on ? The
choke and mixture and all that ... in that 10-15 minutes you let it sit,
its going to warm up compared with what it was when you shut it off, it
could be so rich its flooding out or the choke not opening all the way?

Sounds like you've got everything else covered ... might check for vacuum
leaks, though I doubt it

Good luck
wish

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 15:50:47 -0600
From: "John R. Austin"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

Hey, thanks for the input. It's a manual choke so that isn't the problem.
I've had a mechanic looking at it. He says the carb body stays dry which
should rule out flooding. He checked the fuel pump which seemed another
possibility but he says that's strong. He did say that #1 cylinder was not
firing as smooth as the rest which is another mystery.
Anyway, thanks for the help.

- -----Original Message-----
From: William S Hart
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 3:45 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

>>I've had the carb rebuilt, new points, plugs, distributor, coil, timing,
>>dwell. What next?
>
>Have you adjusted everything on the carb since you've put it back on ? The
>choke and mixture and all that ... in that 10-15 minutes you let it sit,
>its going to warm up compared with what it was when you shut it off, it
>could be so rich its flooding out or the choke not opening all the way?
>
>Sounds like you've got everything else covered ... might check for vacuum
>leaks, though I doubt it
>
>Good luck
>wish
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 14:15:03 -0800
From: Marv Miller
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Here We Are, Back in the Gutters Again

Don, up there at Stanford, wrote:

> I recently replaced the caulk in my gutters ('66 F250). I used 3-M
> tan body caulk. The old caulk came out easily (it was petrified), I
> then masked the outer rain gutter with duct tape and also masked the
> roof adjacent to the gutter with duct tape. I then scraped out the old
> caulk with a sharpened screwdriver, then wire brushed the bare metal.
> I removed the duct tape and re-taped with masking tape, primed the metal
> and painted it with some Krylon off white spray paint (matched the
> original wimbledon white perfectly!). Came out very nice and the cab
> no longer leaks during rainstorms. (Of course, your mileage may vary!)

OK, a great description of the whole process, but at what point above
did you actually put the new caulk back on? ;-)

BTW, I assume the SLAC is a reference to a Linear Accelerator that
beats the snot out of 'dem Chebbies!

- -Marv-
(today's wise

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:39:45 -0600
From: Jim Henjum
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios

John LaGrone wrote:
I think the original post sadi something about an NP203 transfer case. If
this is the fulltime transfer case, all of this holds true anyway. The
system is designed to deliver power to the rear wheels unless it is locked.

> Other wise the front wheels would spin everytime you went thru a puddle or
> around a corner. Has anyone ever smoked their FRONT tires when gunning
> around a corner? I don't think so. Raw engine power isn't the problem.
>

Actually, with a NP203 in the unlocked position any wheel with the least
traction would spin, front or rear. My '75 used to have a NP203 and if i
canned it on gravel, straight line, the front end would spin. When unlocked,
this transfer case works exactly like an open differential, sending power to
front and/or rear. The only way to get rear wheel drive is to take out the
front driveshaft and lock the transfer case. Same goes for low range (low and
low-lock).

Ross Henjum

'75 F250 4x4 460 NP435 "married" NP205

>
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:45:40 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - different Differential ratios

>front and/or rear. The only way to get rear wheel drive is to take out the
>front driveshaft and lock the transfer case. Same goes for low range (low and
>low-lock).
>
Hmmm...I found putting hubs on the front wheels was much more efficient
when I needed 4 back ... :)

Just my 2cents

wish

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: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 18:15:03 EST
From: DR11AGON

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 1978 ford f150 supercab 4x4

I got a 1978 ford f150 supercab 4x4. It's got a 3/4 ton suspension, which
means four wheel leaf springs. Has anyone ever put the coil spring suspension
from a 1/2 ton onto this frame? Does it just bolt up after you remove the 3/4
ton suspension. I want to convert this truck from a 4x4 to a 4x2. Also, when
i take the transfer case off of this truck, can i just swap the tailshaft from
a 4x2 supercab, and the driveshaft, will it bolt right up? I am also planning
a 460 conversion from the 351M, which i have heard is very straight forward,
but, does anyone know of any big problems? Also, has anyone lowered a truck
like this, and if they have any information or pictures, I would be very
interested in them.
Thanx
Derek

1978 ford f150 supercab 4x4
1989 ford thunderbird

P.S.- Before i do any of this, is there anyone interested in buying the truck
as--is? It is stripped inside, could use a new cab, has a very solid bed,
which needs a new side panel, 351M with crane cam, holley 600 cfm, edelbrock
intake. Live in Pennsylvania, if interested "dr11agon

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 18:40:23 EST
From: Boon40

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck

Dear Friends,
I have a problem with L& L Products. I don't want to see anyone else lose
$450. Email me if you want details.
Thanks,
Boon
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 16:00:35 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck

Why don't you just post it on the list?

- -----Original Message-----
From: Boon40

aol.com
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 3:50 PM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck

>Dear Friends,
> I have a problem with L& L Products. I don't want to see anyone else
lose
>$450. Email me if you want details.

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 19:00:50 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - L&L Headers Suck

At 06:40 PM 2/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Dear Friends,
> I have a problem with L& L Products. I don't want to see anyone else lose
>$450. Email me if you want details.
> Thanks,
> Boon

Don't be afraid to lay out the facts of your experience here.
Part of our charter states:
"Our goal is to allow all those who use our discussion groups
to exchange information in an environment free from outside
influence."

Vendors do not, and will not, have editorial influence on
our lists.

- -Ken Payne
Admin

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

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

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:01:27 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Some don't like it hot

Thanks for your message at 03:50 PM 2/9/99 -0600, John R. Austin. Your
message was:
>Hey, thanks for the input. It's a manual choke so that isn't the problem.
>I've had a mechanic looking at it. He says the carb body stays dry which
>should rule out flooding. He checked the fuel pump which seemed another
>possibility but he says that's strong. He did say that #1 cylinder was not
>firing as smooth as the rest which is another mystery.
>Anyway, thanks for the help.
>
Did your mechanic check the compression? I've had engines that behaved
like yours when the valves were getting burnt. Enough compression when
cold, but warmed up they acted just like yours...

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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:04:03 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Merc chassis

Thanks for your message at 12:33 PM 2/9/99 -0500, am14

daimlerchrysler.com.
Your message was:
>Dennis Pearson writes: >> Well, I'm going to start tearing the body off the
>Marquis, no matter what. This should be fun.
>
>Keep us posted on how it goes. Sounds like a very interesting project. Might
>consider taking pics along the way. I wish I'd done that on some of my
>projects.

I guess I better get a snapshot of that beast Marquis before I take her
down to the frame...
Thanks for the encouragement. I know I'll do a better job if someone else
is paying attention to it.

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: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:31:53 -0800
From: sparky

mail.island.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Turn signal switch

Just a quick hint for anyone who is removing/installing wires. Before you
remove the old ones tie a piece of string to one end, tape it securely with
a small piece of electrical tape, and pull the wires through from the other
end. This way you can tie your new wires to the string add a piece of
electrical tape, to give them a tapered end, and haul them back through
using the string. Saves hours of trying to feed stubborn wires through
tight areas. It also helps to tie the loose end of the string to something
real tight, this way the string wont follow the wires through by accident,
also ensure you use a string that is quite a bit longer than you need.

Sparky
'73 F250 4x4
390FE

>ITom: I just replace the turn signal switch in my 74 Bronco and it's kind
>of a pain, took me most of the morning. Biggest hassle is feeding the wire
>through the column.
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 9 Feb 99 20:20:40 EST
From: "Bishop"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!

Hi,
I am also new to the list. I have a 66 F100 without
engine/trans combo. But I do have a 86 F150 with
a bad body. I keep thinking of combining the two.
I also would like to be on the 61 - 67 list.
.............................................................................
From: "Spears, Alan"
To: "'61-79-list

ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Calling all cars...er, trucks!
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 07:28:47 -0600
Reply-To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm new to this list and haven't asked any questions, yet but am being
beckoned by a '64 that's been in my garage for 17 years.My opinion is
that having a list for 1961-1967 would be a good idea.

> ----------
> From: Daniel Koster[SMTP:rumpus1

yahoo.com]
> Reply To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 10:11 PM
> To: 61-79-list

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.