FTE 61-79 - 71 F100 retrofit 77 F150 disc brakes

61-79-list-digest Thursday, February 18 1999 Volume 03 : Number 054

=======================================================================
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 - 71 F100 retrofit 77 F150 disc brakes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Emergency Brake foot peice
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
FTE 61-79 - Re: Ebrake foot p...now BLOWBY
FTE 61-79 - steering all over
FTE 61-79 - difference on radius arms??
RE: FTE 61-79 - steering all over
Re: FTE 61-79 - 71 F100 retrofit 77 F150 disc brakes
FTE 61-79 - Springs
FTE 61-79 - HELP !! '67 F-100 360 cam replacement
Re: FTE 61-79 - steering all over - Part Numbers
FTE 61-79 - New (sorta) 300
Re: FTE 61-79 - HELP !! '67 F-100 360 cam replacement
FTE 61-79 - WTB: Alternator wiring harness
FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79 Spousal cleaning protection.
FTE 61-79 - LOOSING JUICE
Re: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79 Spousal cleaning protection.
FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals
Re: FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
[none]
FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
FTE 61-79 - Re:78 ford f100
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 -Cats o' nine tails...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
FTE 61-79 - Wish gets his 428??
FTE 61-79 - Help id Motor and other parts
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers
Re: FTE 61-79 - Springs
FTE 61-79 - 300 c.i. 6 info wanted

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 06:39:35 EST
From: Bagelx

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 71 F100 retrofit 77 F150 disc brakes

I am retrofitting a set of 1977 F150 brakes to a 1972 F100 and would like to
know if any one has had similar experience and would may be like to share the
lessons learned.
Do I need to change the Master cylinder?
Do I need to install the 1977 proportionating valve?
I moved the 77 disk brake spindles to the 72 and reused the 72 I beams (twin)
but now my front end alignment seems real bad, the right wheel is leaning into
the truck at a pretty steep angle.
Should I also install the 1977 I beams?

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 06:37:54 -0600
From: "CharlesT"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Emergency Brake foot peice

I replaced my emerg. brake foot piece two days ago(painted up a pretty one).
I had no problems getting the metal tip thru the hole on the bottom of the
foot piece. Seems to me that it had to go thru the hole when Ford installed
it.( Unless they welded the tip on the cable after going thru the hole,
which I seriously doubt.)
Mine did not have any type of gromet in that hole, but if yours does, maybe
that is holding you up.

79 F150 4x4(460 swap)
Charles

- -----Original Message-----
From: juredd - Justin Reddell
To: 'Ford list'
Date: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 10:05 PM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Emergency Brake foot peice

>I don't really know how to explain this but here goes. My foot peice for
my emergency brake is party broken so I found me another one to replace it
with. The one off the donor truck came of pretty easily but not so for my
truck. I got the acutal brake cable loose from the foot peice but now the
metel peice around the top of the cable is too large to slide down through
the hole on the bottom of the foot peice. What it amounts too is the cable
will not pull out of the foot peice. Any ideas? It was a little dark so
maybe I missed something holding it. I got the little clamp off but I can't
see anything else holding it but it's size.
>Also, I just got my 360/390 put in the truck a month of so ago. It has
quite of blow by. I know I have seen something on this list about this. It
had about 5000 miles on it when I put it in. So they said. My brother is
the machine in the family and he was a little wearied about it. He wanted
me to check the compress in it but haven't done that yet. What should the
compression be?
>
>
>Thanks a lot in advance,
>Justin Reddell
>Little Rock, AR
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:12:11 -0500
From: James Oxley
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

Deacon wrote:
>
> From: Bill Beyer
>
> >I doubt that it will have provisions for hot air intake but those kits are
> >readily available from the aftermarket and I believe that Steve Delanty
> >built/modified one for his truck. BTW where the heck is Steve?
>
> I used the stock shield by bolting it to the #1 header tube using two
> clamps. It's worked on my 302 for a couple years now without a problem.
> Where the heck is my brother hippie? It's been so long!!! Steve,,, Come
> back Steve.
>

I wasn't saying I couldn't make it work, but that probably won't be
good enough for NJ politicians. I'm being a pessimist, but NJ has not
given me any reason to be otherwise.

I was thinking of starting a web site related to what states are best
for the auto/truck/offroad/bike enthusiast. If I ever lose my job, I'm
outa this regulatory jungle.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:49:37 -0500
From: William King
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Ebrake foot p...now BLOWBY

Justin,
Sadly, the last list discussion about blowby involved my expiring 360.
*sniff. RIP little FE buddy* Compression test your engine pronto.
I recall "normal" compression should be around 140 psi (I could be
wrong), but what's important is that none of the cylinders differs from
another cylinder by more than 20 (or so) PSI. Ideally, all 8 cylinders
should be close (in compression) to each other.
I don't know how bad your blowby is, but I've heard it can push the
oil dipstick out of the tube, and I've seen it blow oil out through the
breather at a rate of a quart every 25 miles. Messy.
If you're engine is sick, there are plenty of us on the list who have
been in your shoes and are willing to help. Keep us posted on your engine.
****
>Also, I just got my 360/390 put in the truck a month of so ago. It has
quite >of blow by. I know I have seen something on this list about this.
It had >about 5000 miles on it when I put it in. So they said. My brother
is the >machine in the family and he was a little wearied about it. He
wanted me to >check the compress in it but haven't done that yet. What
should the >compression be?
****
Ohio Bill
1968 Torino GT (429 4V 4speed)
1968 F100 (360 4V 4speed)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:23:48 EST
From: BDIJXS

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - steering all over

Hi Brian,

Just did this in a 78 F-250 4x4. One of the Great List Heros, Tony Marino,
found a set of Spicer parts to replace the U-joint. I have the list at home,
and if you send me a message, I will e-mail it to you in the next day or
so....if Tony hasn't done so already...

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:23:40 EST
From: BDIJXS

aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - difference on radius arms??

Hey Joe,

I think they are interchangeable. I put a set from a 77 F-150 4x4 on to my 69
F-100 4x4, no problem.....one thing that might be slightly different is the
lower spring mounts, the hole spacing may be slightly off. I noticed that some
of the newer spring mounts are a little beefier than the older ones......also,
you can use the arms from the 78-79 Broncos....you may even consider looking
for a setup with the "quad shock" option...

One thing to check also is the location of the lower shock mounts. Since I
changed everything in my 69 to the 77 setup (including the spring towers and
separate upper shock mounts), I remember having to move the lower mounts back
about an inch or so. If you don't change the upper mounts, you may not have to
do this....

Hope this helps...

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:36:48 -0500
From: "John MacNamara"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - steering all over

> -----Original Message-----
> From:Stu Varner [SMTP:varners

usit.net]
> Sent:Tuesday, February 16, 1999 3:30 PM
> To:61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject:RE: FTE 61-79 - steering all over
>
> At 01:06 PM 2/16/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >Brian: There was a complete discussion of this problem a month or so ago
> on
> >the list and the fix was fairly inexpensive compared to the ford part. I
> >believe tony marino is the
>
Brian: I found the email from Tony with all the good info on fixing
the steering shaft. here goes:

Hey all!

I hope I don't make this too long winded for ya! All of this talk about
the rag joints, shafts, and universals got me thinkin' about my '78 F-150
4x4 and how sloppy the steering was in it. Recently I blew a rear U-joint
in the driveshaft and was going to run down to Sam Winer Motors here in
Akron, Ohio who do all of my Dana/Spicer/Rockwell/Eaton part needs. I
brought along my extra steering shaft assy. with me to ask them about a new
universal for it since mine was dangerously shot. When I brought it up to
the counter (they recognise me there) the guy at the counter said "that's a
nice lawnmower part you got there!" and smiled. I guess they aren't
allowed for insurance reasons to fix steering shafts because of some safety
issue. But we laughed a little bit and he told me that if we keep it in
"reference" as a "lawn mower part" he could sell me the pieces I need to
fix up the U-joint. (BTW- these people DO NOT sell lawnmower stuff for
those of you who might need parts! (grin)) Anyway, he comes back with these
parts-

SP 10-4-431-SX Yoke, Fitting $18.58
SP 10-4-13 Yoke, Fitting $10.92
SP 5-170X Universal Kit $7.61

That's a new yoke for the steering shaft (with splines), new yoke for the
DD shaft, and a greasable universal for the yokes.

Not bad for under $40 bucks. -- I just got done installing them- took about
1.5 hours - here's what I had to do- Just removed the old shaft and took
it to a chop saw and cut the old yoke off of the end of the shaft. The new
yokes are longer, so the distance you lose doing this, you'll gain back
with the yokes. (plenty of shaft still left to slide (unless you have a
body lift)) The new yoke slid right over the shaft (can be welded for
safety reasons) but has a bolt hole in the side so I stuck a worm gear in
it to fasten it to the shaft and hold it tight. The universals press in
just like any normal one (only retaining clips are on inside rather than
outside) and then the new assy. was ready to put in. The splines on the
steering column yoke lined up, and everything bolted together perfect. Not
as nice as the shafts I was looking at on flaming rivers home page, but a
heck of a lot cheaper!!!

I have no affiliation with Sam Winer Motors, just good people who can help
you out with darn near anything drivetrain wise (and sell stuff made in
USA) so if you call to order these parts, don't say what they are for!
(wink) Their phone number is (330)628-4881, ask for parts. If you call
them, don't tell them what it's for, they may not like me the next time I
go in! 8-)

Hope the time to type this helped somebody out!

Tony
tony

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

At 11:31 PM 11/16/98 -0500, you wrote:
>any body familiar with ford steering? the shaft that connects the
>steering sector with the colum shaft, it has a bad u-joint. the ford
>dealer only sells the whole shaft, and it's priced outrageously.
>anybody have a better idea. any info would be helpful. thanks
>bill clark
>
>
>Hi Bill.

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

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:44:21 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 71 F100 retrofit 77 F150 disc brakes

At 06:39 AM 2/17/99 -0500, you wrote:
>I am retrofitting a set of 1977 F150 brakes to a 1972 F100 and would like to
>know if any one has had similar experience and would may be like to share the
>lessons learned.
>Do I need to change the Master cylinder?
>Do I need to install the 1977 proportionating valve?
>I moved the 77 disk brake spindles to the 72 and reused the 72 I beams (twin)
>but now my front end alignment seems real bad, the right wheel is leaning into
>the truck at a pretty steep angle.
>Should I also install the 1977 I beams?
>
>This is living!

Read the disc brake conversion guide in the technical
article section of the web site.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:46:48 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Springs

Some of you may (or may not) remember that I had new springs ordered to try
and get the front levelled with the rear so it didn't look so jacked up in
the back. They came in last night, and being the ambitious (bored?) fellow
that I am I decided to give it a shot. It was probably quite entertaining
to watch, since I didn't want the truck falling on me. I hooked the engine
hoist to the front frame rails, and used a jack under the cab frame to
control the frame height. Then I used a floor jack to work the axle up and
down. I was able to remove the wheel and the shock (lower bolts only) and
let the floor jack down enough that the spring unloaded itself. One of the
top spring retainers twisted a bolt off, so I have to put that back on, but
overall it went well.

The result ? 2 1/2" higher than before. I figure its probably 2" overall
since they hadn't seated yet when I measured the first time. But its so
nice to look out over a fairly level hood ...

Now my question for you guys, how far do new springs "settle out" ?? or is
that a thing of the past ? The springs are Perfect Circle brand
progressive rate, just stock replacements (I wanted to park in the garage
still)...

Thanks to everyone for helpin me out with this. I'll have pics of it up in
a week or so.

Thanks,
wish
73ish F-1?? 4x4 360-->390
96 Mustang GT

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:07:04 -0700
From: John & Iva McKay
Subject: FTE 61-79 - HELP !! '67 F-100 360 cam replacement

I've determined I need to replace my cam in the rebuilt 360
I just installed. It was my fault. Didn't listen to you guys.
Mechanic wants about $600 to do the job. Is this something
I can handle ? I promise to do it right this time. Is there
anything the book doesn't tell me that I should know ?
Any gotcha's ?
- --
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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:16:49 -0500
From: Tony Marino
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - steering all over - Part Numbers

Hey Brian- Yeah, I had to run home to get the part numbers-

here's what you need:

Spicer-
#10-4-13 3/4" RD, 3/16" KW.Input Yoke
#10-44-431SXOuput Yoke
#5-170XGreasable Universal

The pats all together cost under $45 bucks and are a snap to install- you
should be able to pick them up anywhere that can get spicer parts. I
personally did it to my 1/2 ton 4x4 '78 and Colorado Jeff did it to his 3/4
ton- so you may want to e-mail him also if you have questions. You'll
understand what to do as soon as you get the parts- it's pretty self
explanatory! 8-) Just cut the old one off at the base on the steering
shaft itself, slip the new one on, either weld it or put a worm screw in it
to hold it and the other yoke slides right on the steering shaft. Works
great.. (I should make these things and sell them!)

>>the list and the fix was fairly inexpensive compared to the ford part. I
>>believe tony marino is the gentleman

>Geez!!! I am sorry but I MUST protest!!! Gentleman is way too far!!!!!

You're right Stu-- I think Redneck, Yahoo, Geek, Nerd, or Wop is much more
appropriate!!! I'm CERTAINLY not a gentleman!!!

>Nope, you're right, it was Tony Marino. email address is tony

pscico.com
>He's a recent college grad, lazy, blah blah blah- the whole 9 yards!!

AND LOVING IT!!!!! There's only one problem-- In all 5 years of college, I
still haven't figured out how to be lazy and still make money to supply my
addiction to trucks.. Any body who has figured this out is welcome to
e-mail me personally!

>A
>typical "kid"! He has all the time in
>the world to play on the computer or with his trucks so he will be ready to
>give a quick reply!! 8^)

Me thinks I'll give you one big swift reply in the $#)(*

)%!!!!!!!!!!!! 8-)

later Old Man!!! (directed towards Stu, not Brian)

Tony
NUKE STU VARNER!!!
tony

pscico.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/~tony
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:25:39 -0700
From: "Richard Currit"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - New (sorta) 300

Well, the truck has a "new" (actually remanufactured) 300 I6 in it!!!! =
Only 60 miles on it so far, but man what a difference. Compared to my =
totally worn out 240 this thing makes tons of torque. I am pleased. It =
was remaned by a company called "Auto Dynamic Engine Remanufacturers" out =
of Casper Wyoming. These folks have a fairly good reputation. I'll keep =
you informed as to the reliability and quality of the reman as time goes =
on. Just had to let ya'll know. A question tho. Where are the markings =
on the block to determine what year this block was originally made? How =
is it coded?

High Plains Richard -Cheyenne, WY
72 F-100

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:02:47 -0800 (PST)
From: JP Morgon
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - HELP !! '67 F-100 360 cam replacement

If you do it your self use plenty of assembly lube on the Cam, also if
you can prime the engine. I'm not sure on the 360 but on my 302 I use
a long 1/4 socket 1/4 drive with a modified extension ,slip it on the
oil pumpdrive (the distributor is out) and use my Makita to prime the
oil system, do that just before you start the engine. Also make sure
you get the distributor back in correct I had mine 45 degrees of and
didn't know it and started backfiring through the carb. Most
important follow the book step by step that way you should catch
everything, even people that do it all the time could miss something
and screw it all up. Don't do it whan your in a rush either.

JT

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:12:02 -0600
From: "Richard Cherico"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - WTB: Alternator wiring harness

My '68 F100's alternator actually caught on fire a while back, burning
through the harness. I was able to patch it together, but now it's burned
through again (too small of a patch wire). Any way, now I want to put a
complete, uncut harness in it so I don't get stranded again. So, if you've
got a wiring harness (or know somebody who does) for a '68 (or one that
fits), please email me. It's got the 38 amp alternator (but I think the
harness is the same) and a 360 engine. It's the harness that goes
alternator-starter solenoid-regulator. Thanks for any help.

bigric

mail.utexas.edu
'68 F100 Custom Cab Stepside 360 4bbl

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:47:46 EST
From: Bobby D Herring
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79 Spousal cleaning protection.

>Ahem. I speak from experience that using the dishwasher as a parts
washer is
>not usually looked upon with high favor. This is just one more reason I
have
>chosen to remain without the legal restriction of wedlock.
>
>Jim E.
Using the clothes washer to clean up grease rags is not looked upon
highly, either.
Took a while to get the smell out of the washer, after that.

Bobby Herring
'64 F100 short-wide, 292 Y-block/3speed, motor in pieces, make me an
offer
'72 F100 400/C6 in progress
'93 Ranger V6/Auto/Super cab, 103k
'97 Explorer XLT 4.0 Auto

___________________________________________________________________
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, 17 Feb 1999 12:02:16 -0500
From: Shawn Flaugher
Subject: FTE 61-79 - LOOSING JUICE

Well, I figured that if I had the hood open, I might as well replace the

rocker arms on my "trouble piston", so after replacing the solenoid and
negative ground, I did just that.
Ran it and tweaked it a bit "positive stop" and after the 3rd test
drive, I was so
excited about the regained power (cylinder wasn't firing) i forgot about
the
starting problem. It ran for about 30 min and I shut it of. Cranked her
again
and -week starter, slow
labored sound.--- I took the starter back to where I got it (Advance, go
figure)
and they gave me my replacement.-- threw it in and SHAZAM!
So I got a kind of 2 for 1 yesterday, starts every time, and runs like a
dream.
(Next I tackle the valve seals)
- -Shawn

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:03:55 EST
From: JUMPINFORD

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79 Spousal cleaning protection.

In a message dated 2/17/99 8:57:13 AM Pacific Standard Time,
bobherring

juno.com writes:

highly, either.
Took a while to get the smell out of the washer, after that. >>

Theres actually a way around this. Only wash on medium load, so the grime is
kept low in the washer. Wash the rags over and over till the smell is gone.
Then while they are in the dryer, run an empty load with 2 cups of bleach.
Works wonders for washin my coveralls.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:04:31 -0600
From: John LaGrone
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

>> AIR tubes where AIR tubes were used on the OEM exhaust manifold.
>>
>
> Does it have the provision for the hot air intake. If not, it would
>affect cold start emissions. On top of that, I imagine NJ taking the
>absolute extreme side of everything, would require a CARB EO number for
>anything to do with the engine.

>I doubt that it will have provisions for hot air intake but those kits are
>readily available from the aftermarket and I believe that Steve Delanty
>built/modified one for his truck. BTW where the heck is Steve?

Maybe I am missing something in this thread. Are you going to be putting
these headers on a catalyst system? Were there 400s in F250s or F350s that
didn't have catalysts? The point is, what difference does the CARB number
make if you are taking the cats off or rearranging them, you are totally
illegal anyway. If you are feeding really nice headers into a single cat,
what's the point? Don't get me wrong, I would love to have headers, but I
can never register my truck for street use again if I put headers and true
duals on.

- -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, 17 Feb 1999 11:20:53 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals

>On a side note, I know the amber rear turn signals give a European look,
>but personally I hate them. They blind me much more than red. Now if you
>could figure out a way to make them show red, that really trips my trigger.
>I like the idea of having the brake lights all on at the same time as the
>turn signal. I've been rear-ended more than once over the years.
>
I think the blinding comes from the 5billion candlepower bulb they use ...
the 86-87 Tempo's have such a small amber bulb that it doesn't blind you
... unfortunately it doesn't attract much attention either since its less
than a quarter the size of the brake lights. I think you should be able to
pick up red interior lights that may work in the backup light socket to let
you get your red flash through the clear backup lights ... add a blue dot
and get a neat purple turn signal ?? :)

Have blue dots in my taillights ...been there for 5 years and no one's
stopped me for it yet.

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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:23:07 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

- -----Original Message-----
From: John LaGrone
To: Ford Trucks 61-79
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 9:10 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

>
>Maybe I am missing something in this thread. Are you going to be putting
>these headers on a catalyst system? Were there 400s in F250s or F350s that
>didn't have catalysts? The point is, what difference does the CARB number
>make if you are taking the cats off or rearranging them, you are totally
>illegal anyway. If you are feeding really nice headers into a single cat,
>what's the point? Don't get me wrong, I would love to have headers, but I
>can never register my truck for street use again if I put headers and true
>duals on.

I don't profess to be a smog expert...up here in WA we don't even need the
smog stuff as long as it passes the sniffer every 2 years nobody really
cares. My 79 F250 hasn't had cats for years. However, I do know that high
performance/flow cats can be purchased on the aftermarket and there are
plenty of hi-po single pipe systems out there so in cases where you need to
keep a more stock appearance it can be done.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:25:45 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

From: James Oxley
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
>
>> Since the M-block engines (and 351C) were never equipped w/ an oxygen
>> sensor in the exhaust manifolds and all their Thermactor AIR plumbing
was
>> internal to the intake manifold and cylinder heads, the exhaust
manifolds
>> or replacement headers would not affect the engine's emissions.
>
> Does it have the provision for the hot air intake. If not, it would
>affect cold start emissions.

Yo Ox:

The OEM cast iron manifolds don't have a provision for hot air intake. The
hot air "provision" is just a piece of sheet metal that shrouds the
manifold and attaches under the exhaust manifold bolts. You would have to
modify that piece or possibly fabricate a replacement if you changed the
exhaust manifold.

>On top of that, I imagine NJ taking the
>absolute extreme side of everything, would require a CARB EO
>number for anything to do with the engine.

So they don't allow chrome valve covers? What, doesn't having a Republican
guv'ner do anything for you guys? Maybe it could be worse??

Dave R. (M-block devotee)

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:29:49 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

Thanks for your message at 10:23 AM 2/17/99 -0800, Bill Beyer. Your message
was:
>
>I don't profess to be a smog expert...up here in WA we don't even need the
>smog stuff as long as it passes the sniffer every 2 years nobody really
>cares. My 79 F250 hasn't had cats for years. However, I do know that high
>performance/flow cats can be purchased on the aftermarket and there are
>plenty of hi-po single pipe systems out there so in cases where you need to
>keep a more stock appearance it can be done.
>
That's interesting. I was warned (here in WA) that if I didn't put my cat
back on, I would be slapped with a $2500 fine. And I live in a county that
doesn't even have inspections...

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, 17 Feb 1999 12:52:22 -0700
From: Steve Tymchyshyn
Subject: [none]

I am new to this system, and need to make some new contacts.

I have a 1977 F-100 with a straight six in it with low kilometers. Its a
good reliable engine, however, I want to turn the truck into something with
some real power.

On a recent "junking" trip I was able to purchase a 79 F-150 with a 6.6L
(400cid) mated with a rebuilt C6, and loads of extras I am going to strip
and sell.

When I purchased the truck I didn't look close enough and thought it was a
351, and had a pretty good idea of how I was going to maximize my ponies.

However, I've heard that the 400 is a low compression engine and may have
difficulty getting the power I want (325hp - 350hp).

I am looking for suggestions, before I open it up for machining.

steve.tymchyshyn

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:29:32 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

Yikes! I bought mine sans cats and no one ever mentioned that to me. It
passed the sniffer with flying colors so I don't have too many concerns but
who told you 'bout the fine?

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

ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

>That's interesting. I was warned (here in WA) that if I didn't put my cat
>back on, I would be slapped with a $2500 fine. And I live in a county that
>doesn't even have inspections...

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:35:48 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

Thanks for your message at 12:29 PM 2/17/99 -0800, Bill Beyer. Your message
was:
>Yikes! I bought mine sans cats and no one ever mentioned that to me. It
>passed the sniffer with flying colors so I don't have too many concerns but
>who told you 'bout the fine?

An off-duty city cop. Think he was just jerkin' my chain? I believed him
at the time...

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, 17 Feb 1999 12:47:20 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

No clue. I'll do a little research on the Wa state law page and post the
results if I find anything.

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

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: Dennis Pearson
To: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

>Thanks for your message at 12:29 PM 2/17/99 -0800, Bill Beyer. Your message
>was:
>>Yikes! I bought mine sans cats and no one ever mentioned that to me. It
>>passed the sniffer with flying colors so I don't have too many concerns
but
>>who told you 'bout the fine?
>
>An off-duty city cop. Think he was just jerkin' my chain? I believed him
>at the time...
>
>
>
>
>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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:00:35 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

>An off-duty city cop. Think he was just jerkin' my chain? I believed him
>at the time...
>
There are signs posted in your local muffler shop ... ask them, they'll
know the fines for tinkerin with cats and such ... Seems like its 2500 for
the individual and 6000 if a shop does it around here, don't remember for
sure, but i know its a LOT of money ... fortunately no one checks, after
all the tractor in the field next to the road is putting out more than we
are ... ain't Iowa great ???

ps I still have the cats on my car, but my truck has never had them.

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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:21:11 EST
From: JUMPINFORD

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

Anybody ever think about gutting your cats? My dads 88 E-350 was runnin pretty
poor, we found out that the cats had gotten plugged, so he went nuts with a
long bar and beat all the porcelain out of em. Now there are just empty cases
in the system. When we go to smog he sees the cats, just doesnt know they are
hollow.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:29:45 -0500
From: "f Saur"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:78 ford f100

Hay has anyone got any info on where I can get some body panels for my
truck in southwestern Ontario Can.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:45:25 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

It's actually worse...

RCW 70.94.430 Penalties. (1) Any person who knowingly
violates any of the provisions of chapter 70.94 or 70.120 RCW, or
any ordinance, resolution, or regulation in force pursuant thereto
shall be guilty of a crime and upon conviction thereof shall be
punished by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars, or by
imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by
both for each separate violation.

70.120 RCW is the Motor Vehicle Emissions which requires all emissions
equipment originally installed by the manufacturer or a "suitable
replacement" to be " in place and functioning correctly."

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

ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

>
>An off-duty city cop. Think he was just jerkin' my chain? I believed him
>at the time...
>

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:37:34 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 -Cats o' nine tails...

Thanks for your message at 01:45 PM 2/17/99 -0800, Bill Beyer. Your message
was:
>It's actually worse...
>
>RCW 70.94.430 Penalties. (1) Any person who knowingly
>violates any of the provisions of chapter 70.94 or 70.120 RCW, or
>any ordinance, resolution, or regulation in force pursuant thereto
>shall be guilty of a crime and upon conviction thereof shall be
>punished by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars, or by
>imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by
>both for each separate violation.
>
>70.120 RCW is the Motor Vehicle Emissions which requires all emissions
>equipment originally installed by the manufacturer or a "suitable
>replacement" to be " in place and functioning correctly."
>
HOLY SMOKES!!! $10,000?

WA used to be such a great place to live...just not to drive...I'm cutting
this, pasting it into a separate page, put it in large fonts and bold print
and hang it up wherever I might consider again removing a catalyctic
converter from a vehicle...

This law works...and it keeps me forever driving old non-cat vehicles...

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, 17 Feb 1999 15:49:29 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

>Anybody ever think about gutting your cats? My dads 88 E-350 was runnin pretty
>poor, we found out that the cats had gotten plugged, so he went nuts with a
>long bar and beat all the porcelain out of em. Now there are just empty cases
>in the system. When we go to smog he sees the cats, just doesnt know they are
>hollow.
>
I've always wondered about this, the hollowed cat though would act like a
resonater ... good or bad I don' t know ... I've been wonderin if it really
is as good as it seems, or if you'd be ahead to throw a pipe through the
middle instead of leaving it as an open chamber ... anyone have any
experience with this ??

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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 18:50:04 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

William S Hart wrote:
>
> >Anybody ever think about gutting your cats? My dads 88 E-350 was runnin pretty
> >poor, we found out that the cats had gotten plugged, so he went nuts with a
> >long bar and beat all the porcelain out of em. Now there are just empty cases
> >in the system. When we go to smog he sees the cats, just doesnt know they are
> >hollow.
> >
> I've always wondered about this, the hollowed cat though would act like a
> resonater ... good or bad I don' t know ... I've been wonderin if it really
> is as good as it seems, or if you'd be ahead to throw a pipe through the
> middle instead of leaving it as an open chamber ... anyone have any
> experience with this ??
>
> 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

I done this once on a Escort GT...didn't really notice a difference in
power and it kinda sounded weird! It still passed emissions and of
course they can't tell if the cat works or not all they do is look to
see if it is in place!
Chris
94 Lightning #381
NLOC #238
P.S. Anyone have a 400 crank for sale..how about a 351 W block
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 18:42:12 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Wish gets his 428??

Hey all, just wanted to say hi.

Colorado Jeff is actually in Iowa ... weird huh ? He's seen the 390 in the
shop now, and is trying to convince me to get a 428. Keep tryin Jeff...

We just thought we'd say hi to everyone.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 16:55:19 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Help id Motor and other parts

Hey all

I just picked up a 360 with rods through block but I wanted the
heads and exhaust mans. The owner only wanted the adjustable rockers
:( I also picked up a ( as I am told) a 390 with a C6 still attached.
As any good enthusiast would do I picked up some of my material
(HTRBBFE, by Steve Christ) to check out the numbers. The heads check
out as standard 360,390, 428 heads D2TE AA. Now when I check the front
of the block I see an inverse 501 which would be FT block. The oil
adapter is the side mounted one. What it looks like so far is a FT with
regular heads instead of FT heads.

Next is the transmission. there is a 5/ on the top of the housing.
I have not seen one like this. Does anyone have any visuals of C6's
that they are willing to share? I have lots of information on FE/FT's
but seem to be lacking in the Automatic tranny department.

One last thing. Does anyone have a listing for the different
intakes that were made. So far I have a total of 3 different 4v
intakes. The one in my truck now the one on the 360 and the one on the
FT. All 3 look similar on the outside but what makes them different?

I Might be away for a week so please forgive the slow response

TIA
- --
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: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:50:36 -0500
From: luxjo

thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

John LaGrone wrote:
>
> >> AIR tubes where AIR tubes were used on the OEM exhaust manifold.
> >>
> >
> > Does it have the provision for the hot air intake. If not, it would
> >affect cold start emissions. On top of that, I imagine NJ taking the
> >absolute extreme side of everything, would require a CARB EO number for
> >anything to do with the engine.
>
> >I doubt that it will have provisions for hot air intake but those kits are
> >readily available from the aftermarket and I believe that Steve Delanty
> >built/modified one for his truck. BTW where the heck is Steve?
>
> Maybe I am missing something in this thread. Are you going to be putting
> these headers on a catalyst system?

No

> Were there 400s in F250s or F350s that didn't have catalysts?

I imagine, nothing had cats in 78. 78 broncos had no cats with a 400.

The point is, what difference does the CARB number
> make if you are taking the cats off or rearranging them, you are totally
> illegal anyway. If you are feeding really nice headers into a single cat,
> what's the point? Don't get me wrong, I would love to have headers, but I
> can never register my truck for street use again if I put headers and true
> duals on.

My 78 came stock with no cats or air pump. If I have to, I will go
back to single exh. If I could get shorty headers that were CARB
approved and a stock routed 3" exh, that might be at least close to my
full headers and 2-1/4 duals I have now, and it would at least look
sorta legal with single exh.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:58:16 -0500
From: luxjo

thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers

Dave Resch wrote:
>
> From: James Oxley
> Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 shorty headers
> >
> >> Since the M-block engines (and 351C) were never equipped w/ an oxygen
> >> sensor in the exhaust manifolds and all their Thermactor AIR plumbing
> was
> >> internal to the intake manifold and cylinder heads, the exhaust
> manifolds
> >> or replacement headers would not affect the engine's emissions.
> >
> > Does it have the provision for the hot air intake. If not, it would
> >affect cold start emissions.
>
> Yo Ox:
>
> The OEM cast iron manifolds don't have a provision for hot air intake. The
> hot air "provision" is just a piece of sheet metal that shrouds the
> manifold and attaches under the exhaust manifold bolts. You would have to
> modify that piece or possibly fabricate a replacement if you changed the
> exhaust manifold.
>
> >On top of that, I imagine NJ taking the
> >absolute extreme side of everything, would require a CARB EO
> >number for anything to do with the engine.
>
> So they don't allow chrome valve covers? What, doesn't having a Republican
> guv'ner do anything for you guys? Maybe it could be worse??
>

It's much worse than you think. We have a little known law, on the
books since 82 that says you can not modify anything on any vehicle
unless expressidly allowed by the DMV. Some town cops have gotten a hold
of this law recently and are giving really stupid tickets for bug
sheilds, grill guards, ect... This law could easily be applied to
anything. It is so discustingly vague, it is pathetic. It should be able
to be beaten in court, but the one's who have gotten tickets so far
don't want to do anything.

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 20:25:48 -0500
From: luxjo

thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats...was: 400 shorty headers

William S Hart wrote:
>
> >Anybody ever think about gutting your cats? My dads 88 E-350 was runnin pretty
> >poor, we found out that the cats had gotten plugged, so he went nuts with a
> >long bar and beat all the porcelain out of em. Now there are just empty cases
> >in the system. When we go to smog he sees the cats, just doesnt know they are
> >hollow.
> >
> I've always wondered about this, the hollowed cat though would act like a
> resonater ... good or bad I don' t know ... I've been wonderin if it really
> is as good as it seems, or if you'd be ahead to throw a pipe through the....

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.