 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Saturday, February 20 1999 Volume 03 : Number 056 ======================================================================= 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 - Lincoln Woes. FTE 61-79 - Ford 3.03 RAT/RAN FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats... FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals FTE 61-79 - tailgate project FTE 61-79 - Please forgive us stupid lurkers FTE 61-79 - Ford Variable- Venturi Carb. Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? RE: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Re: FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals FTE 61-79 - Ford 3.03 RAT/RAN Re: FTE 61-79 - Swap Meet this next weekend.. Re: FTE 61-79 - Eastern Washington List People? Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W FTE 61-79 - 78 F-150 Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F-150 FTE 61-79 - Re: Eastern Washington List People? Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? RE: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats... Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Eastern Washington List People? RE: FTE 61-79 - Lincoln Woes. FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 35l Windsor FTE 61-79 - 65 F-100 REAR SPRINGS FTE 61-79 - 65 F-100 PS CONVERSION FTE 61-79 - 84 460 / 70 460 swap pulleys and brackets FTE 61-79 - Carb for 70 model 460 FTE 61-79 - Pennsylvania salvage; Was: FTE 80-96 - Harry's U-Pull It in Hazelton Pennsylvania FTE 61-79 - 460 Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 Re: FTE 61-79 - 84 460 / 70 460 swap pulleys and brackets Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure FTE 61-79 - test,,, Re: FTE 61-79 - test,,, FTE 61-79 - 460 thanks Re: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure Re: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure FTE 61-79 - New Guy Re: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 03:44:17 -0800 From: John Lord Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lincoln Woes. You have a Variable Venturi carb. (I feel sorry for ya,) I recommend that you throw it out for a real carb. It sounds like you might have fuel pump problems, put a pressure gauge on it and if your above 3 pounds it's fine and the thing that looks like the carb is the problem (i think it was fords biggest mistake. to use them.) In regards to the carb i have seen them and tinkered with them but i no of nobody who has ever sucessfully rebuilt one, only made them worse. MUDDYFORD aol.com wrote: > > I own a 1982 Lincoln Towncar w/fuel injected 302. It had sat for about 3 years > when I bought it. also have '81 Towncar for parts. I drained the old gas from > the tank and line, changed the fuel filter, oil and filter, and spark plugs. > It'll turn over and try to crank, and eventually it'll start and run anywhere > from a few seconds to a minute or two, and die, if you try to pump the > accelerator to keep it runnin' it dies faster like it's floodin' out or > something. It has the fuel injected carbuerator looking thing instead of a > true throttle body. I'm gonna check the ignition system this afternoon, > thought I'd ask the list for any suggestions while I was taking a lunch break. > Somebody had took the carb looking thing (I hope somebody on the list knows > the true name for this thing) apart so all I got was the pieces. Just got the > parts car from a friend about a week ago, and took the carb off of it and put > it on the car. I really need some help on fixing this car w/ minimal cost, due > to the fact that the motor in my 1976 F-250 has a rod knocking and needs a > serious rebuild but due to money it'll haft to wait. And I need a vehicle to > drive back and forth to work when I get my driver's license the end of March. > > Thanks for the help > Phil > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 06:44:29 -0600 From: "Steve Schmeckpeper" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford 3.03 RAT/RAN HELP!! Can anyone turn me on to a parts source. I need a countershaft/cluster gear and possibly reverse idler gear for a RAN A. Would prefer to buy "used/good" parts. (None available locally) Could probably buy one frm Ford, but it'll be expensive I'm sure. Smeck == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:05:46 -0600 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only > You can, however, discuss it if its for legal offroad use, such > as farm work and racing. :-) Check with your state's emissions > laws, they may allow it. The best way to disguise your information would be to include information on how you converted your truck to pull a three-bottom blow, and just incidentally gutted your converters. :-) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:59:33 -0600 From: John LaGrone Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats... as farm work and racing. :-) >> Thank you, Ken. I think I had a hand in starting this mess talking over the shorty 400 headers and Ox's unfortunate residency in NJ. I was thinking street legal, passing inspection as was Ox, but Ox is a serious 4x4 offroader, too. The advice not to admit breaking any law is sound. Ox, it is a shame that a state that favors corporations so much limits personal freedoms so severely. If I was in a position to offer you a job in Texas, you could consider it done. Back to the cats discussion. I think if you needed to have cats, the high flow low restriction model would be a good choice. I didn't know there was such a thing. When I need a replacement, I will look for such an item. .......with all this talk of cats, I'm surprised no one has jumped in with a dog comment............. - -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: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:15:13 -0600 From: John LaGrone Subject: FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals wish, You are probably right about the megawatt bulbs. I also find that a lot of the cars and trucks with the aerodynamic lenses on the headlights blind me more than the older style cars. Halogen versus sealed beam isn't the reason. It has to do with the reflector design. BTW, I have had laser surgery on my left eye. Duh....that probably has something to do with it too. - -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: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:03:15 -0600 From: John LaGrone Subject: FTE 61-79 - tailgate project I finished refinishing my tailgate last weekend. Well almost finished. I did get it back on the truck. I still need to re-letter the FORD in red. During this project I managed to destroy the rubber bumpers at the top and the rubber guides halfway up could stand to be replaced. Does anyone know if Ford still makes these parts? What is a possible source for aftermarket replacements? - -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: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:20:38 -0600 From: wiregoat juno.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Please forgive us stupid lurkers Some of us only get e-mail ( juno ). That is why we keep asking stupid questions like rear disk brakes, what booze goes with rebuilding what truck, and, what kind of freak would want a 460 ;). We can't check the FTE website, I myself have only seen it once. By the way, is there any problem with too MUCH spark. I am thinking of putting a coil-pack on my 240/6. ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:45:04 -0500 From: pdesanto cinergy.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford Variable- Venturi Carb. What you probably have is a "Variable-Venturi" carb. They were very common in the late 70's, early 80's. The symptoms you describe sound like a bad "air valve diaphragm". That's what those big black rectangular things are that are in the choke/ throttle bore area.(air valves) The diaphragm pulls these things open when you accelerate to admit more air; among other things. If it's bad, NOTHING you do will make it run. The diaphragm is still available as far as I know, and is really the only thing a "do-it yourselfer" should attempt on this contraption. Anything more complicated should be left to a technician that has the special tools to set them up right. If that carb is all apart, make SURE you have it all before even thinking of putting it back together. They are VERY temperamental. An alternative is to replace it with a real carb like a Motorcraft 2 bbl. or even a Holley replacement carb. ( these aren't cheap though) The Ford carb is a lot easier to install, and find. If I remember right there is some wiring that has to be changed. You'd have to check with a Ford dealer I think. This was a common fix for these after several trips to the shop to replace the diaphragm. These things were a real PITA. When they were set up "perfect" they did well. but they didn't stay "set" very long. Sorry there's not a cheaper answer. Good luck, Phil == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:05:51 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only At 08:05 AM 2/19/99 , you wrote: >> You can, however, discuss it if its for legal offroad use, such >> as farm work and racing. :-) Check with your state's emissions >> laws, they may allow it. > >The best way to disguise your information would be to include >information on how you converted your truck to pull a three-bottom blow, >and just incidentally gutted your converters. :-) You guys are worried about emissions, and I'm tryin to remember the last time I saw a truck that didn't have some portion of its exhaust flopping around on its hangers ... okay its not that bad here, but with all the farms (what something like 75% of the land in IA is farmed), we don't much worry about the pollution stuff ... the other thing is my truck is old enough that it doesn't matter ... when my truck was put together by the previous owner, he had to have it inspected before it could be re-licensed as a salvage ... he didn't even have the EGR stuff hooked up, it was just on there to cover the holes (there was an aluminum plate sandwiched between the valve and the baseplate) no vaccuum hoses running to it at all, and the exhaust ended at the axle which is where they told him it had to at least reach. At any rate they're not real strict in some states, so removing the cats and such, while illegal, can be claimed for off-road/ag use where they can't touch it. Also heard of several 'stang guys who managed to pass the emissions tests without cats, some of them were then required to put them back on because they weren't there, others just got by with it. I think the coolest was a couple years ago in Old Cars Weekly they reported a couple guys passed the California emissions test with a 49 Ford...not that big a feat until you consider it was BONE STOCK! No cats, no EGR, no nothing, just a freshly restored car. Anyway that's enough of my soapboxing. Laters wish == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 08:20:18 -0700 From: "James Draughn" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? I bought a 79 1/2 ton Van with a 351 Winsdor in it. The engine was siezed so I went about to rebuild it. The first machine shop I called said that I can make the engine into a 400 buy putting a different crank in it. Then I went to a different machine shop to actually have the work done and he said that you can do that with the modifieds but not the Winsdors. I went ahead and got 8.9-1 pistons and a cam that he said was up a notch, that it would add some bottom end torque. He said it would be any use to really go any higher with the cam because the winsdor can't breathe good exaust wise and you can't fix it because the manifolds where already ground out pretty much as much as you can go. im in the process of putting it all back togeather, I had to send the crank back because they ground it wrong and there was to much clearance with the bearings. Im 20 years old btw. I bought the van for 350.00 and have invested approx 1200.00 into the engine so far in machine work and engine rebuild kit. My dad has a 460 in his van but it seems pretty damn weak to me. his van is a 80 ford van. When he bought the van he rebuilt the engine and its a good engine, no probs at all but it seems to be weak!. What I would like to know if I wanted to in my spare time build a all out performance engine that would pull my van like it was nothing and pratically smoke the tires (Don't need to smoke em, just want to accelerate fast and have good towing capability) What engine should I go with? What engine will fit? I thought about getting a 460 and boring it out as much as possible, do the thing with all the heads and such, but I am new to performance engines. What would you guys think would be the best engine for an all out kick ass, fast van? btw, I have a 79 parts van out back with a 351 modified in it, but its all pulled apart from when I was going to rebuild it for a different van that I was once going to get (it was sold before I could grab it). I would mostly like to know what I can do with my winsdor, it has a 2barrel carb, but I still need to get a carb. Whats the biggest I can get it in cubic Inches? Whats the horsepower I can expect from my engine after I get it togeather? And do you think it will make any difference in speed with the upgrades I got? Thanks for all your time, sorry for the longest post in history but this has been on my mind for months and I have no where else to go or no one else to ask for advise. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:30:26 -0800 (PST) From: JP Morgon Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only Just carry a chicken in a cage like Al Bundy did :) _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:53:55 -0500 From: "John MacNamara" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? james: I'm not a 351w expert but I do know it's one of the best v8 engines out there and you can stroke it to 460 + cubic engines if you have enough dinero. I found a web site that has plenty of useful information on the windsor and the various combinations of crank,rod,heads, etc. Hope it helps: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.probeindustries.com/ Eventually I want to build a 351w for my bronco. The 302 just doesn't have enough torque. Thanks John MacNamara 78 F250 4x$ Supercab 460 74 Stroppe 67GT500 > -----Original Message----- > From:James Draughn [SMTP:myph enol.com] > Sent:Thursday, February 20, 1997 7:20 AM > To:61-79-list > Subject:FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? > > I bought a 79 1/2 ton Van with a 351 Winsdor in it. The engine was siezed > so > I went about to rebuild it. The first machine shop I called said that I > can > make the engine into a 400 buy putting a different crank in it. Then I > went > to a different machine shop to actually have the work done and he said > that > you can do that with the modifieds but not the Winsdors. I went ahead and > got 8.9-1 pistons and a cam that he said was up a notch, that it would add > some bottom end torque. He said it would be any use to really go any > higher > with the cam because the winsdor can't breathe good exaust wise and you > can't fix it because the manifolds where already ground out pretty much as > much as you can go. > Well, > im in the process of putting it all back togeather, I had to send the > crank > back because they ground it wrong and there was to much clearance with the > bearings. Im 20 years old btw. I bought the van for 350.00 and have > invested approx 1200.00 into the engine so far in machine work and engine > rebuild kit. My dad has a 460 in his van but it seems pretty damn weak to > me. his van is a 80 ford van. When he bought the van he rebuilt the > engine > and its a good engine, no probs at all but it seems to be weak!. What I > would like to know if I wanted to in my spare time build a all out > performance engine that would pull my van like it was nothing and > pratically > smoke the tires (Don't need to smoke em, just want to accelerate fast and > have good towing capability) What engine should I go with? What engine > will > fit? I thought about getting a 460 and boring it out as much as possible, > do the thing with all the heads and such, but I am new to performance > engines. What would you guys think would be the best engine for an all > out > kick ass, fast van? btw, I have a 79 parts van out back with a 351 > modified > in it, but its all pulled apart from when I was going to rebuild it for a > different van that I was once going to get (it was sold before I could > grab > it). I would mostly like to know what I can do with my winsdor, it has a > 2barrel carb, but I still need to get a carb. Whats the biggest I can get > it in cubic Inches? Whats the horsepower I can expect from my engine > after > I get it togeather? And do you think it will make any difference in speed > with the upgrades I got? Thanks for all your time, sorry for the longest > post in history but this has been on my mind for months and I have no > where > else to go or no one else to ask for advise. > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:03:03 -0500 From: "John MacNamara" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W The Ford High Performance magazine from Hot Rod shows how to modify the 351C 2barrell head to fit on the windsor. Adds about 50 hp to the motor. If anyone is interested I could scan it and send it to you. Thanks John MacNamara 805 577 2536 wk 805 577 2768 fx 805 526 3464 hm ESN 495-2536 jmacnam nortelnetworks.com > -----Original Message----- > From:JJJJJGRANT aol.com [SMTP:JJJJJGRANT aol.com] > Sent:Thursday, February 18, 1999 8:57 PM > To:61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject:Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W > > the nascar engines shortblock is based on the 351 w, but they run > cleveland > type heads, in my opinion the windsor has a stouter bottom end, the > cleveland > has a better design head. you can install a 400 crank in a 351w and have a > 400+ cubic inch small block. with the cleveland heads you could make some > serious power. > > jeff grant > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:21:13 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? At 09:53 AM 2/19/99 , you wrote: >james: I'm not a 351w expert but I do know it's one of the best v8 engines >out there and you can stroke it to 460 + cubic engines if you have enough >dinero. I found a web site that has plenty of useful information on the >windsor and the various combinations of crank,rod,heads, etc. Hope it >helps: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.probeindustries.com/ > >Eventually I want to build a 351w for my bronco. The 302 just doesn't have >enough torque. > Does anyone else who's also on the 80-96 list find this humerous ? They just had a huge discussion about how a 302-351 upgrade wasn't worth it for performance, and that you could get more parts for a 302 than a 351(w) so that meant the 302 was a better engine ... anyway I don't want to get started on it again, but I just thought it was pretty darned ironic. Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:23:53 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Amber rear turn signals >You are probably right about the megawatt bulbs. I also find that a lot of >the cars and trucks with the aerodynamic lenses on the headlights blind me >more than the older style cars. Halogen versus sealed beam isn't the >reason. It has to do with the reflector design. Yeah, the really bad ones are the projector beam bulbs ... I think Lexus and Infinity started that deal, but they have to be about the worst for "piercing" into your brain. Call me crazy but I like the yellowed light that you get from old bulbs, its easier on the eyes, and actually I think it allows you to see farther because your eyes aren't as straighned adjusting from bright white to the near black that appears outside of it. The big differences can be seen on a clear night with a full moon. If you have an older vehicle you can see forever, with the newer ones the transition to the darkness is so dramatic it seems like you are just as limited as always ... at least from my point of view.... BTW, I have had laser >surgery on my left eye. Duh....that probably has something to do with it >too. maybe a little ... one of my friends has had this done too, he loves it so far. Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:34:47 -0600 From: "Steve Schmeckpeper" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford 3.03 RAT/RAN HELP!! Can anyone turn me on to a parts source. I need a countershaft/cluster gear and possibly reverse idler gear for a RAN A. Would prefer to buy "used/good" parts. (None available locally) Could probably buy one frm Ford, but it'll be expensive I'm sure. Smeck P.S Sorry if anyone received this twice. My first attempt bounced and Ken sent me a post yesterday to help me change my mail settings to plain text. Tried at the house this morning and didn't make ALL the necessary changes........Am noodling with the work machine now and this message should go OK. Hope I got it right this time Ken :^) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:47:01 -0800 From: Tim Bowman Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Swap Meet this next weekend.. Re: the Puyallup (for all of you non-Washingtonians it's pronounced pugh al up !) meet, it's a good one. Been there, done it previously. I was at the Corv**** High Performance one there last weekend and it wasn't bad (there were even FOMOCO's there. I'll be there. Tim == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:55:15 -0800 From: Tim Bowman Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Eastern Washington List People? I'm in Seattle but I bought my 71 F100 from my sister in law who lives in Colfax (20 miles from Pullman). My daughter is a senior at WSU. We'll be there for graduation and a few other events this spring. Tim Bowman Seattle == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:30:47 -0500 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W JJJJJGRANT aol.com wrote: > > i am a cleveland fan, to me it makes a better all out performance engine, and > it looks impressive, kind of has that big block look. but for a daily driver > and mild performance > the windsor is a durable engine. > i have some parts for both that are for sale. i have a cleveland 4 bolt > main block, quench chamber four barrel heads, and misc parts. for the windsor > i have a complete 69 model engine that runs good, but i would rebuild it > anyway, it has about 90,000 > miles on it. i also have enough parts to build a nice windsor for mild > performance use > if anyone is interested let me know. > > jeff grant > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html Let me know what you have for the Windsor, what do you want for the motor itslef...basically I am just looking for a block! Thanks Chris == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:36:04 -0500 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W JJJJJGRANT aol.com wrote: > > the nascar engines shortblock is based on the 351 w, but they run cleveland > type heads, in my opinion the windsor has a stouter bottom end, the cleveland > has a better design head. you can install a 400 crank in a 351w and have a > 400+ cubic inch small block. with the cleveland heads you could make some > serious power. > > jeff grant > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html Do doubt that the cleveland heads are better...but I have yet to see a set of heads designed for the 351...most are designed for the 302...even the GT40 heads on my Lightning are designed for a 302 and not that they are not a good head but they weren't designed for the 351. The best thing in the word for 351 heads are a nice port job and three angle valve job! I plan on building that engine you are talking about but with some good aftermarket heads. With the availability out there now it seems a little too much work to make cleveland heads work on a 351W now! Hot Rod did a 351W stroker just like the one were talking about with Twisted wedge heads and made over 400hp and 400 lb ft of torque...on regular gas. Chris 94 Lightning #381 NLOC #238 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:25:25 EST From: Doulos79 aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 78 F-150 i have a 78 F-150 with a straight six 300 and a three-speed tranny. it has 203,000 miles on it and has a whine through first and second gear and shakes pretty bad when you take off in first. what could this be? is the shaking possibly a motor mount or something like that? any ideas would help. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:40:49 -0500 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? The 400 crank will fit right into your windsor and give you a huge amount of torque on a very wide band! This is the way to go I believe and i plan on doing this myself Chris 94 Lightning #381 NLOC #238 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:43:35 -0500 From: Garr&Pam Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? > >Eventually I want to build a 351w for my bronco. The 302 just doesn't have > >enough torque. > > > > Does anyone else who's also on the 80-96 list find this humerous ? > > They just had a huge discussion about how a 302-351 upgrade wasn't worth it > for performance, and that you could get more parts for a 302 than a 351(w) > so that meant the 302 was a better engine ... anyway I don't want to get > started on it again, but I just thought it was pretty darned ironic. Yep its funny and I like it! Lets send them a copy(JUST KIDDING) Chris 94 Lightning#381 NLOC #238 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:50:14 -0600 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 78 F-150 define shaking. May be the clutch slipping. At 12:25 PM 2/19/99 EST, you wrote: >i have a 78 F-150 with a straight six 300 and a three-speed tranny. it has >203,000 miles on it and has a whine through first and second gear and shakes >pretty bad when you take off in first. what could this be? is the shaking >possibly a motor mount or something like that? any ideas would help. > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:06:39 EST From: Brazzadog aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Eastern Washington List People? I can't make it either. I have to work. Besides, I'd be embarrassed for anyone to see my ugly truck. Ben Williams '78 F-250 4wd In a message dated 2/18/99 9:47:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, BDIJXS aol.com writes: > > headed there this weekend for a few days....I'll buy breakfast, but your >truck > has to be running! How far is this from the Kennewick men? > >> >Thanks for the invite, would like to show. But, will be in Seattle this >weekend. I have gathered there are several people from this area on the list. >I have only met one of them, we should probably work on that. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:17:02 EST From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Im just curious, If you put the 400 crank into a 351w. What rod and piston combo do you use? I figure that'd make for a serious small block to wedge into a pinto or sumthin. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:15:25 -0600 From: "John MacNamara" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? Well, if I really tried I could probably find enough people who have done the upgrade and are glad they did. The windsor has longer rods and consequently develops torque down low where you need it. I'm converting my bronco from 4:11 gears to 3:50 and obviously the 302 won't cut the mustard for those gears. The windsor will. I also had a 351w in a F150 truck back in the early 80's and used to tow with it and it did great. i was impressed with the motor then. Thanks John MacNamara 805 577 2536 wk 805 577 2768 fx 805 526 3464 hm ESN 495-2536 jmacnam nortelnetworks.com > -----Original Message----- > From:Garr&Pam [SMTP:garrpam netgsi.com] > Sent:Friday, February 19, 1999 9:44 AM > To:61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject:Re: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? > > > >Eventually I want to build a 351w for my bronco. The 302 just doesn't > have > > >enough torque. > > > > > > > Does anyone else who's also on the 80-96 list find this humerous ? > > > > They just had a huge discussion about how a 302-351 upgrade wasn't worth > it > > for performance, and that you could get more parts for a 302 than a > 351(w) > > so that meant the 302 was a better engine ... anyway I don't want to get > > started on it again, but I just thought it was pretty darned ironic. > > Yep its funny and I like it! Lets send them a copy(JUST KIDDING) > Chris > 94 Lightning#381 > NLOC #238 > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:34:29 -0800 (PST) From: JP Morgon Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Whats the best I can do with a Winsdor? I have to disagree to a point. A 351W and 302W with identical heads, compression, cam, intake, and carb the 302 produced 283 HP 310 LBS of torque the 351W made 310hp and 400lbs of torque. JT _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:41:05 -0600 From: "John MacNamara" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 351W > JJJJJGRANT aol.com wrote: > > > > the nascar engines shortblock is based on the 351 w, but they run > cleveland > > type heads, in my opinion the windsor has a stouter bottom end, the > cleveland > > has a better design head. you can install a 400 crank in a 351w and have > a > > 400+ cubic inch small block. with the cleveland heads you could make > some > > serious power. > For me serious power is less important that torque off idle. Since torque is what turns the wheels I would be looking at the 2 barrel cleveland heads for their small oval intake runners. This design aids in low end torque. > > > > jeff grant == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:49:35 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only Hey this is a family list! Let's keep it clean! ;-) - -----Original Message----- From: William L. Ballinger To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 6:07 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Agricultural Use Only > >The best way to disguise your information would be to include >information on how you converted your truck to pull a three-bottom blow, >and just incidentally gutted your converters. :-) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:55:13 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats... Dynomax offers both 2 way and 3 way hi po convertors in 2.25, 2.5 & 3 in. dia. Less than $140 from Jegs. Says they're good up to 455 c.i. - -----Original Message----- From: John LaGrone To: Ford Trucks 61-79 Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 6:19 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lack o' cats... > >Back to the cats discussion. I think if you needed to have cats, the high >flow low restriction model would be a good choice. I didn't know there was >such a thing. When I need a replacement, I will look for such an item. >.......with all this talk of cats, I'm surprised no one has jumped in with >a dog comment............. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 10:56:39 -0800 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Eastern Washington List People? Thanks for your message at 01:06 PM 2/19/99 EST, Brazzadog aol.com. Your message was: >I can't make it either. I have to work. Besides, I'd be embarrassed for >anyone to see my ugly truck. > >Ben Williams >'78 F-250 4wd Are you in Kennewick, Ben? (rhymes with men) Who else on here is in the Tri-Cities? >In a message dated 2/18/99 9:47:25 AM Pacific Standard Time, BDIJXS aol.com >writes: > >> >> headed there this weekend for a few days....I'll buy breakfast, but your >>truck >> has to be running! How far is this from the Kennewick men? Good thing there are no women in Kennewick... 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: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:23:10 -0600 From: "Rick Russell" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Lincoln Woes. Not necessarily so. Ford also had a CFI offered on these vehicles, basically a throttle body FI, and it resembles a 2 barrel carb. The thermostat housing is most likely the cause of your troubles (looks like a choke, mounted on the side of the CFI)and is adjustable, but the TPS is another problem area and should be checked with an ohmmeter. Rick Russell http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.talkcity.com/GasolineAlley/l3013/ http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=222 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com > [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of John Lord > Sent: Friday, February 19, 1999 5:44 AM > To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Lincoln Woes. > > > You have a Variable Venturi carb. (I feel sorry for ya,) I recommend > that you throw it out for a real carb. It sounds like you might have > fuel pump problems, put a pressure gauge on it and if your above 3 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:01:51 -0800 From: Al Evitts Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351C vs 35l Windsor Guys: The best of both worlds is a built 351 W with Australian 2 barrel heads.(still some around) As The man who ran the "Best Damned Garage in Daytona Beach" said an engine dont know what it is till you put the heads on. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:37:50 PST From: michael.rogers excite.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 65 F-100 REAR SPRINGS MY 65 F-100 HAS 3 1/4" SPRINGS. THERE JUST AREN'T ANY LEFT TO BE FOUND IN THE GRAVE YARDS I VISIT. 3.5" AND ABOVE ARE PLENTIFUL. CAN I SAFELY STRETCH MY MOUNTING SHACKLES TO FIT THE 3.5" SPRINGS OR SAFELY SHAVE THE SPRINGS AT THE MOUNTING EYES TO FIT 3.25" SHACKLES? I LOVE MY FORD AND MY WIFE, KEEPING THE DOLLAR VALUE OF MY REPAIRS DOWN WILL ENSURE THEY BOTH STAY IN THE FAMILY FOR A LONG TIME. THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS. _______________________________________________________ Get your free, private email at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mail.excite.com/ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:44:53 PST From: michael.rogers excite.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 65 F-100 PS CONVERSION I HAVE A 352 IN MY 65 F-100. ALL PARTS FOR THE CONVERSION HAVE BEEN COLLECTED EXCEPT A DOUBLE CRANK PULLY AND FAN PULLY. IN MY SEARCH I HAVE NOTICED THAT THE HARMONIC BALLANCERS ON THE 360'S AND 390'S ARE CONSIDERABLY LARGER THAN WHAT IS ON MY 352. THE REMOVABLE PULLYS WILL NOT MATCH THE BOLT PATERN ON MY CURRENT RIG. CAN ANY ONE CONFIDENTLY SUGGEST CORRECT APPLICATIONS? THANX. _______________________________________________________ Get your free, private email at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mail.excite.com/ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:38:48 EST From: Fignewtun aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 84 460 / 70 460 swap pulleys and brackets Dear Sirs, I just installed a 70 model 460 into my 78 4x4. It did'nt come with brackets or pulleys. I have found an 84 with all the brackets and stuff. Will this work in my application? Thanks, fig == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:42:24 EST From: Fignewtun aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Carb for 70 model 460 Dear Sirs, I have just installed a 70 model 460 into my 78 4x4. The edelbrock carb that was on my old 400, wont fit on the 460. The linkage hits on the stock manifold. Should i get a stock ford 4 barrel carb for it. Or is there another way to do this. Do they make a spacer plate to lift the edelbrock up some? It needs aabout 5/8 inch to clear the manifold. Thanks, fig == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 19:49:40 -0500 From: "Serian" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Pennsylvania salvage; Was: FTE 80-96 - Harry's U-Pull It in Hazelton Pennsylvania > Greetings all. Anybody been to Harry's ?. I seem to recall some mention > of this at some point, somewhere in the past. > > I see in the commercials that all cars are suppossed to be off the > ground, and they have some ridiculous amount of acerage there(thought > they might have said a 100 in the commercial). Anyway, are the cars > seperated/organized by make or manufacturer to make things easy to find? > Or should I take a sleeping bag, and expect to only be able to write > home on weekends ? ;). > >"EJ" In Hamilton Township, New Jersey, suburb of Trenton You're quite a ways away from Hazleton, PA, there ! If you are willing to travel that far, though, a couple other places to check out for parts ... in Schuylkill County, PA (I went to college there), there is two places I always went for parts. One is just out back of the Penn State Campus in Schuylkill Haven Dierwechter's Used Auto Parts (570) 385 3775 The other is just off route 61 in Palo Alto (Pottsville) "All indoor auto parts" (I dont know their number, but the place is easy to find) These places have a reasonably good selection of late '70's and newer parts. So far, I have always found what I looked for there. If yer in the Bradford county. PA area looking for OLD parts, I recommend checking with Dick Morse in Allis Hollow, PA. He has all kinds of older stuff, even a little bit of 1950's parts, and a whole host of 60's and 70's trucks. (I think I even saw a 4V FE last time I was there ... though it might have been nabbed by now...) Another good yard is just outside Mill Hall, PA south on route 150 ... don't remember the name of it, but you can't miss it, as it is clearly visible from the highway. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 19:40:40 EST From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 Ok folks, real quick question. I have the valve covers off and Im trying to identify my heads. I dont see any D?VE #'s, or anything close. Only one I know of for sure is a big 201 cast into it. Exactly where is the date code stamped? Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" (awaiting Aluminum valve covers) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 20:27:34 EST From: TBeeee aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 The casting nos. on FOMOCO heads are consistently located on the exterior area of the head near one of the exhaust ports. Do you see any casting nos. located anywhere which looks like a Ford number? I am sure if you post "all" of your casting information is on the head someone will be able to help you ID them. ~~Thom B~~ 1967 F-250 4wd http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/tbeeee/page/index.htm == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 20:43:26 EST From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 84 460 / 70 460 swap pulleys and brackets In a message dated 2/19/99 2:51:26 PM Pacific Standard Time, Fignewtun aol.com writes: I just installed a 70 model 460 into my 78 4x4. It did'nt come with brackets or pulleys. I have found an 84 with all the brackets and stuff. Will this work in my application? Thanks, fig >> The threaded holes in the block and heads are the same so I can only guess that the brackets and stuff will fit. When I put my 460 in my 1972 4x4 I had to reposition the alternator to a higher position to clear the frame. I believe that is not a problem on wider framed trucks which I think 78 4x4's are. Caution, I assume you are using the 70 harmonic balancer. If you were to use the 84 balancer and counter weight you would have balance problems. I only mention this as your main drive pulley is attached to the balancer and someone like me, before I learned, would be tempted maybe put the newer one on if I had it. Burt Hill Kennewick, Wa 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 20:49:44 EST From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 460 In a message dated 2/19/99 4:49:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, JUMPINFORD aol.com writes: Ok folks, real quick question. I have the valve covers off and Im trying to identify my heads. I dont see any D?VE #'s, or anything close. Only one I know of for sure is a big 201 cast into it. Exactly where is the date code stamped? >> The number is not under the valve covers. It is on the exhaust port side centered on a small ledge just above the exhaust ports. You may need to wire brush it as sometimes a little oil and the heat from the exhaust make a hard covering on the numbers. Burt Hill Kennewick Wa 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:03:43 -0500 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure Finally finished up my 9 inch rebuild procedure. Check it out at. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thecore.com/~luxjo/REBUILD9IN/F9inch_rear_end_rebuild.htm Enjoy!! OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:49:48 -0500 From: "Master Costanzo" Subject: FTE 61-79 - test,,, 61-79-list ford-trucks.com? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:49:34 -0500 From: "Ted & Sarah Freeman" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - test,,, Yep! You got here! - -----Original Message----- From: Master Costanzo To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 9:47 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - test,,, >61-79-list ford-trucks.com? >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 21:53:33 EST From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 460 thanks Thanks folks, It turns out I have D3VE-A2A heads. So next on the perf addition is gonna be some better heads. Thanks again everyone. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 22:06:32 EST From: TBeeee aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure In a message dated 2/19/99 9:16:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, luxjo thecore.com writes: > Finally finished up my 9 inch rebuild procedure. Check it out at. Nice article the best part was your final advice: "PS; IF IT BLOWS UP IN 20 MILES, JUST GET IT OVER WITH AND GET A DANA 60. IT'S A MUCH BETTER REAR ANYWAY. HEEHEE. " ~~Thom B~~ 1967 F-250 4wd http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/tbeeee/page/index.htm == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 22:26:26 -0500 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 9 inch rebuild procedure TBeeee aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 2/19/99 9:16:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, luxjo.... To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session
cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.
Advertising -
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy -
Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company. 
|