 |
|
|
|
|
|
61-79-list-digest Tuesday, January 12 1999 Volume 03 : Number 008 ======================================================================= 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 - Tranny & Oil Pressure FTE 61-79 - 240~300 swap (almost) FTE 61-79 - engine paint FTE 61-79 - Fuel tank switch FTE 61-79 - Front disc FTE 61-79 - Front disc FTE 61-79 - Tranny & Oil Pressure Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint Re: FTE 61-79 - Pitman arm Re: FTE 61-79 - Carb Questions? Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 FTE 61-79 - Fuel problem Re: FTE 61-79 - slack in timing chain? Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 FTE 61-79 - Differential Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint FTE 61-79 - 76 to 74 power steering pump Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles FTE 61-79 - 5 spd trannys FTE 61-79 - Fuel Switch FTE 61-79 - on-going mystery Re: FTE 61-79 - on-going mystery FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - 240~300 swap (almost) Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot Re: FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot FTE 61-79 - RE: Pitman arm Re: FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot FTE 61-79 - 4.10 Gears FTE 61-79 - VIN decoder Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Re: FTE 61-79 - Fuel Switch ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 04:19:08 -0800 From: John Lord Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Tranny & Oil Pressure your oil pressure sounds resonable to me. If your engine has a few miles on it your bearing clearances will lower the pressure, you could always go to a thicker oil. Since your pressure goes up when you rev the engine it means the pressure relief spring in the pump is working fine. the older ford engines tend to react the way you describe. cannandale netpointe.com wrote: > > Couple of Questions: > > 1st, my oil pressure. Installed a new oil pump around 8,000 or so miles > ago. And just recently it has started doing this. Cruising down the road > no matter what rmp it reads around 25psi or so. If you push on the gas > though, the pressure goes down, but when you let off on the gas, it jumped > to like 40 or 50, till you press on the gas again. I dont know if that has > anything to do with the weather that we are having considering that it is > been below freezing for 2 weeks and im running 10w40. I dont think it > would matter, but... > > 2nd. Im running a C6 and was looking at maybe going to an overdrive > tranny? I at first looked at maybe a manual which is what I really want. > But I dont have the funds to lengthen/shorten driveshafs, new cluth, etc. > So I decided that I want to go to an overdirve automatic? Is there any > certan ones I can use? Without doing huge modifications? its a 4x4, > Np205, 460. If that helps any. Also is there any other years of colums > that I could use that would have overdrive on the shifter? It dosent have > to be a direct bolt in, just something that will work, I can do the > modifications.. > > Thanx, > cannandale > '78 F250 4x4, 460 > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:55:33 -0500 From: Doug Roach Subject: FTE 61-79 - 240~300 swap (almost) All, I finally got the scratch together for a rebuilt 300 I-6 from a reputable outfit down here. The 240 in my '67 F-100 had dropped a valve and was really tired. Last weekend some friends & I decided to go for it. NONE of us had ever done a complete engine swap before but the Dolphin game didn't look too promising so what the heck. By Sunday evening, everything was done. We fired it up...it ran rough...adjusted the timing...and for only one minute that new 300 purred like kitten. (High fives all around.) Then the freeze plug blew. The coolant wasn't even hot. The truck does have the original size (read:very small) radiator and I know that I'll have to get a bigger one eventually. The water pump works fine. The original manifolds (which we transferred to the new block) have no cracks or other problems that we can see. The thermostat was new three months ago... should I just take it out? There is one other thing we can't figure out. The original FoMoCo one-barrel carb mounts to the intake and there is a threaded hole on that intake directly beneath the carburator with the open end down. Nothing is mounted there and as far as we recall, nothing came out of that hole. It seemes to be about three inches deep and one guy said he noticed that air was coming out of it in time with the cylinders firing when the engine was running. (He stuck his finger under there for some reason.) Does this hole do anything? The guy at the engine place said the engine was dyno-tested before delivery and suspects that it's just a lousy install on the freeze-plug. Before I put a new one in, is there anything else this type of incident may indicate? The plugs in the block are steel. Should I replace the blown one with steel or brass? Do I need to change them all? Is there a glue that's better than others? Please, guys, help get this old warhorse back on the road. where it deserves to be. After all, like Pat says... "We are FTE!" (even if some of us ARE a bit less savvy.) Thanks, Doug Roach '67 F-100 (currently in limbo in Miami.) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:00:29 -0600 (CST) From: Stu Varner Subject: FTE 61-79 - engine paint >>I have seen two different shades of blue used on Ford engines. Seems like >>I've seen some '60s Mustang engines that used a darker blue. > >I've noticed this too .. sometimes I think its just the Mustang folks going >overboard, but there were two different colors listed at the parts store >where I was getting some for an air cleaner... > > Does anyone >>know what years used what shades (lighter and darker)? Were different >>shades of blue used on different vehicle applications at the same time? >> >Dunno this one, but I know 82 was the switch to grey ... in the cars... > >Lemme know what you find out if someone emails you privately instead please. > Now, now boys, let's not be so secretive about this. Inquiring minds want to know. I was always under the impression from "sources" that the darkest "corporate" blue was used from 1948-the very early 60's when they switched to the #205 lighter blue (but darker than the baby blue used for a while in the 70's on cars.) I may be way off here but I have been *very* curious as to the exact color of paint I should use. I have tried to match the new paint to the old factory paint from a valve cover and the valve cover just appears a little,teeny, tiny bit darker. Would age and oil/grease have anything to do with it? #205 was the closest FoMoCo blue color I found to it so that is what I have been using on valve covers and air cleaners. If anyone knows a definite answer, please share openly. Some of us anal/technical people who are trying to authentically reproduce a factory appearance want to know. Stu Nuke GM! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/stu == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:05:15 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fuel tank switch Bill Hart writes: >>Wasn't there a thread a while ago where someone mentioned there was a valve AND a switch you had to change, that way it would work for both tanks ? Don't remember the thread, but very easily could have been. On all the factory setups I have owned with dual tanks, the fuel guage read the tank the switch had selected. All of these have had the switch in the heater control panel. I've never owned one of the older versions that had a manual valve in the floor. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:10:32 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front disc Bill Hart writes: >> Can we (with the disc brakes ? Not sure, but I would think that if you have the donor vehicle, then you can swap enough of the parts to make it work. If both are '75's, then It should be a very straight forward swap, but then again I haven't done this, so I may be all wet. Wouldn't be the 1st time. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:20:32 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Front disc Tony Marino writes: >>Part of the new changes made to ford trucks in '73 was front disk brakes on all F-100 & F-150 4x4 models Then it had to be an option, or something wo do with standard vs heavy duty, because the '74 F150 4X4 that I had, that was stolen had front drums. I didn't but it new, but it was a Ford Executive lease vehicle with only 6600 miles on it whin I got it. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:19:45 -0600 From: David John Subject: FTE 61-79 - Tranny & Oil Pressure cannandale wrote> 2nd. Im running a C6 and was looking at maybe going to an overdrive tranny? I at first looked at maybe a manual which is what I really want. But I dont have the funds to lengthen/shorten driveshafs, new cluth, etc. So I decided that I want to go to an overdirve automatic? Is there any certan ones I can use? Without doing huge modifications? its a 4x4, Np205, 460. If that helps any. Also is there any other years of colums that I could use that would have overdrive on the shifter? It dosent have to be a direct bolt in, just something that will work, I can do the modifications.. >>>> I have been looking into this for quite awhile, wanting to convert my 78 F250 4x4 supercab w/ 460 and 4 speed to an automatic. While this can be done it can not be done cheaply. The main reason being that it requires a computer to control the shifting of the tranny in the E4OD. Premier Performance will sell just the computer for $1300. So unless you are able to do that type of modification I believe the manual would be the cheaper route to go. Azie I believe is doing his homework on this too, he has a post in this digest about a Bauman unit which I believe another member pointed us too awhile back. I have been told that the E4OD would be a direct bolt up to the 460 np205 with some cross member movement and the associated driveshaft adjustment. So the big block 5speed should be also(I don't know this for sure - anyone else??), while it probably has a hydrolic clutch, linkage should be easy enough to make to get around this and new clutch will surely be less than $1300. I would think you could buy and install the 5speed for less than the computer would be for the auto. You and Azie keep us posted on the 70's trucks venturing into overdrive land, I'm sure many of us are very interested. David 78 F250 4x4 CS supercab; 460, 4spd, NP205 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:35:12 -0500 From: shoman p3.net Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint Being one of those anal 64-73 Mustang people before getting addicted to my 68 truck, I have a 69 Mustang that has the dark blue engine color and from the shows I attended ford used the lighter Blue(sky blue) up until 1966 then switched to Ford Dark Blue(corporate blue???) But also remember ford did some strange things in 65/66 too they had 289's painted black for awhile in mustangs...Also my 68 has the original motor and its dark blue..Hope this helps........ Joe == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 05:44:57 -0800 (PST) From: Arlene Mason Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Pitman arm We've always used the Pitman Arm Puller. It's a special tool for doing that. They cost about $15 to $20 and are worth it, or if you can find a place to borrow/rent one that's even better. Arlene '77 F-100 400/c6 - ---Marc A Stine wrote: > > Anybody know of an easy way to pull a pitman arm? I've tried two > different sized three jawed pullers and this darn thing won't come off. > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 05:50:03 -0800 (PST) From: Arlene Mason Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Carb Questions? Sounds like something I could use. I don't want to go racing around (save that for the Mustang). But, keeping up with traffic around here is a consideration. Dallas traffic waits for no one. Thanks for the input. Arlene '77 F-100 400/C6 - ---Lord_Xaenon wrote: > > Arlene Mason wrote: > > > engine back together because the guys want a 4v). So, the question is, > > which 4 barrel carb do you suggest? We have been looking at the > > Edlebrock 600, but, I don't know much about it. I really don't want > > one that you would have to "fiddle" with a lot, as in adjusting it all > > the time. Can you help? > > The Edelbrocks are great carburetors. You set 'em once and forget 'em. > They're basically revamps of the old Carters from years ago, and they > are solid and reliable. They don't make as much "all out" power as a > Holley, but you don't have to adjust them every twenty minutes, either. > I had an Edelbrock 500 cfm on my old 1964 Comet (289 V8) and I only > adjusted it twice in the three years I owned it (aside from initial > setup). It always started right up, idled well, and turned in some > pretty good performance. Not race-level performance, but it'd still > haul when I got on it, and I embarrassed more than a few IROC-Z owners. > The engine was mostly stock, aside from headers, electronic ignition, > a mild Crane cam, an open-element air cleaner, and a Performer intake. > > One thing I've noted on them, they seem to be a little sensitive to > dirt in the fuel. Make sure you have a good fuel filter (I ran two) > and change it regularly. > > Mark. > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 05:56:50 -0800 (PST) From: Arlene Mason Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 - ---David Wadson wrote: > > >I have a 64 F-100 stepside and I need some help/advice with it. The > >brakes have gone out on it and I'm not sure what to do with it anymore. > >The body is in great condition, a local vocational school removed all > >the rust, and repainted it. The bed is brand new restored with new > >slats of wood. The interior needs help which I've been doing slowly. > > > >Anyway, the city where my parents live have decided to declare the > >truck a "nuisance" even though it's on private property and has a > >fresh paint job! I have to prove that it's driveable otherwise they > >will impound it and sell it off. Moving it to another location won't > >help > >matters because they told me that they would just track it down and > >impound it. The law is that a car can't be left "in a state of repair" > >in public view or be left in one location for more then 72 hours even > >if it's on private property. The truck has always been registered as > >an operating vehicle. It's a very pretty blue > >truck with fresh paint, no rust and it doesn't even leak oil. The engine > >is still in good shape. It's missing an air cleaner and the acclerator > >rod is a little sticky, but other then that, it's a good truck. > > The missing cleaner should be easily replaced with an simple aftermarket > one if you can't get an original. The accelerator can be loosened up with a > bit of lubricant and those brakes can't be too hard to fix. Your other > options are to push it into a neighbours driveway for 3 days, than back > into the parents for another 3...build tent around it...take all 4 tires > off and drop it onto the ground...course if they got serious about towing > it then they would probably trash the truck while picking it up... > > Oh well, let's fix that truck up...it should be out cruising the streets > anyways! > > > David Wadson - wadsond air.on.ca > "PS2" - 78 F100/302/C4 > The fate of your wonderful truck makes me very sad.... Last year mine was in similar danger, although Dallas Police seen to take just a little longer before they get annoyed. My truck was in my Mother-in-laws back yard for 364 days. Anyway, we had it behind a locked gate with two chow dogs in the yard. That would deter anyone from moving it. -- Also, you could try what the guy next door to my MIL did, he had a carport and backed his truck into it, and put tarps all around, while he was working on it. His was in there much longer than mine and no one bothered him. So I guess it's where you live. -- I vote for getting the truck back on it's feet!!! Arlene '77 F100 400/C6 _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:12:29 -0600 (CST) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Steve, Sounds like your parents have some crotchitie old neighbors with nothing better to do. Brakes are not that difficult. I don't know if 64's had hydraulic brakes, but if so, start by making sure you have plenty of fluid in the resorvoir. If that's not a problem and your not leaking fluid, you most likely just need new shoes/pads. In Texas, you can obtain a registration class for "show" cars/trucks that basically is only for driving to and from car shows etc. If you can't get the brakes fixed in time, perhaps you could argue that the truck is a "show" vehicle? Anyway, I hope it doesn't come to that for you. Get the brakes fixed so you can drive it. A truck in that good a shape needs to be used. Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:26:14 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint >I was always under the impression from "sources" that the darkest >"corporate" blue was used from 1948-the very early 60's Which engines was this on ? The 289/260 and other small blocks at this time were either black with gold valve covers and air cleaners, or black with orangish red ... til about 66 or 67. I know the T-birds followed a similar paint scheme with their 8's, the top one always getting the gold valve covers and air cleaner. The 6's may have been blue ... I don't really recall seeing too many of those to know what they're supposed to be though... when they switched >to the #205 lighter blue (but darker than the baby blue used for a while in >the 70's on cars.) This switch is the one I'm pretty interested in. Not that I'll ever NEED to know it, I'd just like to use the darker one for my 390 when its ready to go in. No point in keeping it original, I just like the darker color better. I have tried to match the new >paint to the old factory paint from a valve cover and the valve cover just >appears a little,teeny, tiny bit darker. Would age and oil/grease have >anything to do with it? #205 was the closest FoMoCo blue color I found to >it so that is what I have been using on valve covers and air cleaners. > That sounds logical, and yes, I would think oil and grease would get down into the paint and darken it a bit. Not to mention whatever you use to clean the grease off may also add to the darkening, not dramatically but enough to make it look a touch lighter... This is just my guess ... seems like I saw something on it once, but can't remember where, or what it said (Mustang Monthly a couple years ago maybe?)... and I'm not really old enough to have seen them new ... sorry guys. Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:31:20 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 > Brakes are not that difficult. I don't know if 64's had hydraulic brakes, When was the last time you saw mechanical brakes ? I'd have to guess the 30's pretty much got rid of all those ... Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:33:01 -0500 From: "Parsons, Raymond" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fuel problem I replaced the fuel pump on my 67 352 and am still not getting fuel to the carburetor. I suspect I have a problem somewhere between the tank and the pump. Tonight I am going to see if the pump picks up fuel from another container (possible I am not getting the pump shaft onto the cam). What else should I look for; I vaguely remember reading about a pick up tube in the tank (tank is behind seat). Any suggestions are appreciated as I need to get the truck back on the road as SWMBO has a horse show in two weeks and is already getting wound up about the truck being in the garage and not on the road. Ray == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:33:32 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - slack in timing chain? > I just bought a used 460 from a 70 model lincoln. I have been checking it >over . With the plugs out and with me turning the crank, i can feel slack in >the timing chain. Is this ok? Please let me know, before i install this When the timing chain on my truck was loose, it was forever hesitating and a pain to tune up, as soon as I'd tune it, go out and drive it around and bingo back where I started. Kind of really frustrating. I put a new timing chain on and it runs better than it has since I bought it 5 years ago. Almost makes me want to keep this motor, but I'm hopin I can get the power from a 390 I'm workin on. At any rate, for $20 I wouldn't hesitate to put a new timing chain on, they're not that expensive and you'll know that's not the problem. Just my point of view Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:51:06 -0500 From: luxjo thecore.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 > -- Also, you could try what the guy next door to my > MIL did, he had a carport and backed his truck into it, and put tarps > all around, while he was working on it. I don't remember where I originally heard this, but the best "good one" I ever heard on this subject was the suggestion of having a mural painted of your truck (or some rusty piece of junk) up on jack stands on a legal fence facing the street. I'm know that is not constructive to the whole situation and it's an invitation to harrasement, but it still sounded good to me ;-). OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:14:54 -0500 From: Jimbo Subject: FTE 61-79 - Differential What does a factory limited slip look like? I found a 9Inch centersection sitting in the local junkyard with a curious looking diff inside. I could see the bevel cut gears inside, and I could rotate the axle splines by hand, but it had a different case than mine. Thanks Jimbo '77 Supercab 466 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:32:51 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint I had a 63 Fairlane with the original 260, never been opened and the factory color was light blue. Hope this adds to the confusion...;-) - -----Original Message----- From: William S Hart To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 6:28 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint >>I was always under the impression from "sources" that the darkest >>"corporate" blue was used from 1948-the very early 60's > >Which engines was this on ? The 289/260 and other small blocks at this >time were either black with gold valve covers and air cleaners, or black >with orangish red ... til about 66 or 67. I know the T-birds followed a >similar paint scheme with their 8's, the top one always getting the gold >valve covers and air cleaner. The 6's may have been blue ... I don't >really recall seeing too many of those to know what they're supposed to be >though... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:07:07 -0600 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: FTE 61-79 - 76 to 74 power steering pump Hi I am replaceing the power steering gear box in my 74 f350 with one out of a 79 f250. Now for the pump. Is there any way to check the pump to see if its good, without installing it? I have a pump out of a 76 ford car. It feels alot tighter then the one off the truck. If I need to use this one, I will need to exchange the pully. Anyone do this before. What tools are required? Are they pressed on? TIA Larry == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:58:45 -0600 (CST) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 >When was the last time you saw mechanical brakes ? I'd have to >guess the >30's pretty much got rid of all those ... But if I assumed it was hydraulic and answered as such, there would be a flood of emails saying that THIS one didn't have hydraulics :-) Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:29:24 EST From: bobherring juno.com (Bobby D Herring) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 >From: "Stephen Lau Jr" >I have to prove that it's driveable otherwise they >will impound it and sell it off. Moving it to another location won't >help matters because they told me that they would just track it down >and impound it. > >Steve If I lived closer I would volunteer. Where I live in Texas, if it is visible from the street, they say it has to have current registration and safety inspection or it is considered "junk". I received on of these for my '64. They said I had 10 days to get rid of it or they would scrap it for me! Luckily, I had access to a place out in the country to move it to. It's been there for several years. 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 '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: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:00:51 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 At 11:58 AM 1/12/99 , you wrote: >>When was the last time you saw mechanical brakes ? I'd have to >>guess the >>30's pretty much got rid of all those ... > >But if I assumed it was hydraulic and answered as such, there would be >a flood of emails saying that THIS one didn't have hydraulics :-) True :) Darned if you do, darned if you don't ... :) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:06:16 -0500 From: Tony Marino Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 Besides the fact that I'm totally blown away by this- Isn't the whole issue because it is not registered/has recent plates? When my buddy and I started to tear down his '72 we had a "representative" from the highway patrol stop by and tell Keith he had 30 days to get rid of the truck in the yard, or the same thing would happen. He went and bought new plates for it, and duct taped the plate to the windshield of the cab sitting in the yard, and nobody could say anything. I have to make an observation that may be a really stupid one- If the vehicle registered and you "just don't drive it" for weeks on end because you have second vehicle, what do people do? Come around to your house and ask to safety inspect your vehicle?! By the sound of it, you're truck sure isn't an eyesore! 8-) Tony tony pscico.com http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/~tony At 01:29 PM 1/12/99 EST, you wrote: >>From: "Stephen Lau Jr" >>I have to prove that it's driveable otherwise they >>will impound it and sell it off. Moving it to another location won't >>help matters because they told me that they would just track it down >>and impound it. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:23:13 EST From: "bill comstock" Subject: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles I was just wondering if anyone could suggest why my '78 f150 has a tendency to lose power steering when i go through deep water holes? The power seems to reappear after ~30 seconds. It does not happen when i hit a pothole on rough roads (side to side force exerted on only one wheel). Is my pump cavitating? To the owner of the larger 9" rear: I had the same in the back of my '79 t-bird, boy at the parts counter didn't believe me till i took it in for him to see--the axles are 1/3 again larger than the ones in my truck, too bad they are too short. Was this a special order from ford? keep truckin' bc ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:25:19 -0500 From: Tony Marino Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles You're power steering belt is probably slipping. 8-) Same problem! Tony tony pscico.com http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/~tony At 02:23 PM 1/12/99 EST, you wrote: >I was just wondering if anyone could suggest why my '78 f150 has a >tendency to lose power steering when i go through deep water holes? The >power seems to reappear after ~30 seconds. It does not happen when i >hit a pothole on rough roads (side to side force exerted on only one >wheel). Is my pump cavitating? > >To the owner of the larger 9" rear: I had the same in the back of my >'79 t-bird, boy at the parts counter didn't believe me till i took it in >for him to see--the axles are 1/3 again larger than the ones in my >truck, too bad they are too short. Was this a special order from ford? > >keep truckin' >bc > >______________________________________________________ > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:31:30 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Impounding my F-100 At 01:06 PM 1/12/99 , you wrote: >Besides the fact that I'm totally blown away by this- Me too ... I know lets have a big FTE party at that house and we'll all park our trucks in the driveway for the weekend, if we pick a long weekend it'll be more than 72 hours too, so they'll have to either tow them all, or just let it be ... Sorry must be crazy thought day ... i guess I'd say just turn it around so its facing the other way every couple of days, then tell them you're working the nite shift, they jsut don't see you move it ... :) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:34:00 -0600 (CST) From: bkirking bcm.tmc.edu Subject: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles >Is my pump cavitating? >From my understanding of cavitation (a decrease in the pressure causing small bubbles that implode), I doubt your pump is cavitating. I would suggest that its either the belt slipping or (less likely) perhaps a sudden slow down in pump speed due to water resistance or a quick temperature change (cooling) of the hydraulic fluid affecting pressure. My power steering doesn't waver until my arms get tired :-) Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:35:27 -0600 From: Steve Schmeckpeper Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles Bill, Could the belt be slipping?? Smeck bill comstock wrote: > I was just wondering if anyone could suggest why my '78 f150 has a > tendency to lose power steering when i go through deep water holes? The == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:33:53 -0600 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - power steering and re: axles I think that it might be your pump belt getting wet and slipping. When it dry's (approx. 30 seconds) it starts to turn the pump again. _ At 02:23 PM 1/12/99 EST, you wrote: >I was just wondering if anyone could suggest why my '78 f150 has a >tendency to lose power steering when i go through deep water holes? The >power seems to reappear after ~30 seconds. It does not happen when i >hit a pothole on rough roads (side to side force exerted on only one >wheel). Is my pump cavitating? > >To the owner of the larger 9" rear: I had the same in the back of my >'79 t-bird, boy at the parts counter didn't believe me till i took it in >for him to see--the axles are 1/3 again larger than the ones in my >truck, too bad they are too short. Was this a special order from ford? > >keep truckin' >bc > >______________________________________________________ > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:49:49 -0800 From: "Jeff Hannon" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 5 spd trannys I have a '79 F150, 300-6 and I would *really* like to put in a 5 speed from an '80-'90s F150. Can anyone tell me what model year they started bolting 5 speeds to the 300 six? I've looked at the Edmunds web page but'89 is the oldest truck they listed. Also, does anyone know who makes the 5spd or anything about it? Gear ratios? Transfer cases it works with? How about a tranny with more gears from a commercial truck that would bolt to the 300-6. I don't mind getting new shafts made. Jeff == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:58:40 -0800 From: "J.S.H." Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fuel Switch Andrew writes: >>The next question is should the fuel gauge read for both>tanks? > >Yes. Whichever you select. > Wasn't there a thread a while ago where someone mentioned there was a valve AND a switch you had to change, that way it would work for both tanks ? Just my 2cents My Dad's 72 has a manual valve on the driver's side floor and a "Fuel "switch on the dash. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 15:02:56 -0500 (EST) From: jdklaers mailhost.magicnet.net (PredFan) Subject: FTE 61-79 - on-going mystery Here's a case for all you Ford Detectives out there. Your mission: To discover the true year and model of my truck and explain to me how the #%#^&*$ it got so jumbled up. Clues and facts: The Vehicle ID plate is missing. The VIN number (which doesn't indicate the year) is on my title and no where else that I can find. The Title says 1971. The steering wheel belongs to a pre '71 truck. The grille is from a '68. I have to buy brake shoes for a '68, if I buy them for a '71 they won't fit. A 302 V8, which mine has, wasn't offered (standard) in '68 but was in '71. The VIN number (on the title) says that I have a 240 six cylinder which I don't. The bumper is chrome which was offered in '71 but the chrome trim on the lip of the hood which was standard on '71s is missing on mine. Good Luck. John Klaers 1968-1971 F-100 Custom Flare-side == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:18:03 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - on-going mystery >Clues and facts: > >The Vehicle ID plate is missing. > >The VIN number (which doesn't indicate the year) is on my title and no >where else that I can find. > >The Title says 1971. > >The steering wheel belongs to a pre '71 truck. > >The grille is from a '68. > >I have to buy brake shoes for a '68, if I buy them for a '71 they won't fit. > >A 302 V8, which mine has, wasn't offered (standard) in '68 but was in '71. > >The VIN number (on the title) says that I have a 240 six cylinder which I >don't. > >The bumper is chrome which was offered in '71 but the chrome trim on the >lip of the hood which was standard on '71s is missing on mine. > Sounds familiar .. have you seen my web page ? Here's part of the stuff on it : 73 Cab 74 Drive train/chassis 74 Bed 79 Grille/Right fender(?) Which is okay now that I know that ... before the guy told me it was 76 running gear ... great a change-over year, but started hunting down part numbers and such, and everything has lined up with the 74 that he told me the chassis was ... I know mine was put together from several, and it has introduced its problems by doing so, but if a guy knew what he was doing when he did this he shouldn't have too many problems at all. I would guess something similar has happened in your case, whether it was just parts changed out to make it look better, or a couple of totalled trucks put together to make a nice one. I would guess from your descriptions that the guy probably blew the motor or something and put in a new one along with a new bumper for some unknown reason along the way ... as for the title saying its a 71 ... well strange things happen when vehicles get so old ... had a guy swear he had a 68 mustang for parts ... all I saw was a 69 sittin around ... but he swore the title said 68 .... hard to miss when 69 is the only year with 4 round head lights ... Anyway things can get goofed up ... just take your time and see what part numbers you have on things that you recognize ... C8XXX will be 68 part numbers, D1 71 numbers, and just go from that ... Hope this helps a little ... Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:24:36 -0800 From: "Stephen Lau Jr" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 Thanks for all the replys! Still trying to sift through them all. ;-) Here's some more details about the impound process here. An officer is going to come out to my parents house on the appointed day (Jan 20th) and watch me drive it forward, backwards, a complete 360 degree turn to the left and to the right, and watch it idle for 15 mins by itself without stalling. It also has to be completely street legal. All the lights in place, working door handles, horn, windows, exhaust, carb, brakes, etc. If it fails any of these tests then it can and most likely will be impounded. If I notify the police officer and tell them that the vehicle is non-operable before they come out to inspect it, I will get a free tow to the impound yard and the scrap metal heap. If it fails the test without telling them beforehand, then I will get charged something like $200.00 for the inspection fee and still get impounded. If it passes, then I get to keep the truck, BUT it doesn't prevent the truck from being tagged AGAIN as a nuisance vehicle at any time. To be honest though, the officer I talked with said that if the same vehicle was re-tagged within a month they would probably ignore it. I can't hide the vehicle in a shed or anything because they will flag the vehicle as being in violation and I won't be able to register it next year with the California DMV. Also, if anyone sees me driving it around, they can immediately impound it on the spot. The city ordinance is built on California Vehicle Code 22660 which gives the right for cities to remove any vehicles on public OR private property that are declared "nuisances". As for the truck's brakes... I have gotten a couple of leads for places around here that would be willing to fix the brakes for me. I have a new accelerator pedal on order that hopefully will arrive before Jan 20th. Since I'm a member of AAA, I'm going to have a tow truck come out and tow it to the repair shop and have them work on the brakes for me and make it street legal. It was suggested that I should do this because if the officer complains that the brakes aren't legal, I can show him the repair bill and claim "it wasn't my fault". It looks to me like there is a leak in the brake lines somewhere, but I'm not sure where. The front reservior for the brake fluid is running low even after I fill it back up and the rear brake lights won't work. The brake light sensor is attached to the fluid lines that leads to the front reservoir. I had checked the electrical lines to the brake lights and those are fine, so it looks like a pressure problem. By poking around underneath the truck, I don't see where the fluid is leaking out. Hope this helps clarify some of the problems. Thanks a lot for everyone's help so far, I really appreciate it. Steve - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen Lau | Lawrence Berkeley National Labs | Change is inevitable, 1 Cyclotron Road, 50F, Berkeley CA 94720 | except from a vending (510) 486-7178(Work) (510) 486-5548(Fax) | machine. slau lbl.gov http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www-vis.lbl.gov/~slau | main(i){putchar(i["irj^q;f[d%]djxi"]+i) &&i++%13&&main(i);} - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:33:46 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 At 02:24 PM 1/12/99 , you wrote: >Thanks for all the replys! Still trying to sift through them all. ;-) > Sorry to add to them, but something sounds a lot fishy to me ... >Here's some more details about the impound process here. An officer >is going to come out to my parents house on the appointed day (Jan 20th) >and watch me drive it forward, backwards, a complete 360 degree turn >to the left and to the right, and watch it idle for 15 mins by itself >without stalling. Makes sense, almost ... a full 360 degree turn is going to take some room ... just a hunch your driveway isn't that big ... be sure you've got enough gas for the idling too ... >If I notify the police officer and tell them that the vehicle is >non-operable before they come out to inspect it, I will get a free tow >to the impound yard and the scrap metal heap. If it fails the test >without >telling them beforehand, then I will get charged something like $200.00 >for the inspection fee and still get impounded. If it passes, then I If they impound it do you still get a chance to fix it before it becomes scrap ? Oh you're in CA aren't you ... probably not then ... >get to keep the truck, BUT it doesn't prevent the truck from being >tagged >AGAIN as a nuisance vehicle at any time. To be honest though, the >officer >I talked with said that if the same vehicle was re-tagged within a month >they would probably ignore it. > That's good, why can they tag it as nuisance unless someone is complaining about it, if it runs and is only driven occasionally it is still likely to fall into this category just because someone doesn't like you ... >I can't hide the vehicle in a shed or anything because they will flag >the vehicle as being in violation and I won't be able to register it >next year with the California DMV. In violation of what ? If its in a shed/garage, then its not in sight of everyone and not a nuisance (or can they make you clean your room when you get too much junk in it ?)...If you decide to put it in the garage to avoid the nuisance charge .... just seems like it wouldn't qualify if it was not in the same place ... Also, if anyone sees me driving it >around, they can immediately impound it on the spot. > Why ? I thought the whole problem was that it was parked in the driveway for too long, if its out driving around then its not parked in the driveway and according to the definition you gave us before its not a nuisance vehicle, its a perfectly roadworthy (as far as they know) vehicle that you finally decided to take for a spin ... >The city ordinance is built on California Vehicle Code 22660 which gives >the right for cities to remove any vehicles on public OR private >property >that are declared "nuisances". > Seems to me that the term nuisance needs to be defined somewhere along the line ... At any rate, you should probably get the brakes fixed and start driving it before it becomes a nuisance that you can't drive or anything ... but it seems like an awful mess, glad I don't have to deal with that ... heck I dont' even have to deal with emissions stuff ... and I really don't envy you guys who do ... Good luck Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:51:20 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 Your tax dollars at work! And you all thought the government wasn't here to help the citizens...I mean if this isn't an example of the government striving to improve our quality of life then I don't know what is. - -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Lau Jr To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 12:27 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Impounding my F-100 >Here's some more details about the impound process here. An officer >is going to come out to my parents house on the appointed day (Jan 20th) >and watch me drive it forward, backwards, a complete 360 degree turn >to the left and to the right, and watch it idle for 15 mins by itself >without stalling. It also has to be completely street legal. All the >lights in place, working door handles, horn, windows, exhaust, carb, >brakes, etc. If it fails any of these tests then it can and most likely >will be impounded. > >If I notify the police officer and tell them that the vehicle is >non-operable before they come out to inspect it, I will get a free tow >to the impound yard and the scrap metal heap. If it fails the test >without >telling them beforehand, then I will get charged something like $200.00 >for the inspection fee and still get impounded. If it passes, then I >get to keep the truck, BUT it doesn't prevent the truck from being >tagged >AGAIN as a nuisance vehicle at any time. To be honest though, the >officer >I talked with said that if the same vehicle was re-tagged within a month >they would probably ignore it. > >I can't hide the vehicle in a shed or anything because they will flag >the vehicle as being in violation and I won't be able to register it >next year with the California DMV. Also, if anyone sees me driving it >around, they can immediately impound it on the spot. > >The city ordinance is built on California Vehicle Code 22660 which gives >the right for cities to remove any vehicles on public OR private >property >that are declared "nuisances". > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:58:14 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 240~300 swap (almost) Doug boasted: > I finally got the scratch together for a rebuilt 300 I-6 from a > reputable outfit down here. The 240 in my '67 F-100 had dropped a valve [Non-football game, va-room, high fives deleted] > Then the freeze plug blew. > The coolant wasn't even hot. The truck does have the original size > (read:very small) radiator and I know that I'll have to get a bigger one > eventually. The water pump works fine. The original manifolds (which we > transferred to the new block) have no cracks or other problems that we > can see. The thermostat was new three months ago... should I just take > it out? "Parts left out cost nothing and cause no service problems". Leave the thermostat in, it's a good thing. > There is one other thing we can't figure out. The original FoMoCo > one-barrel carb mounts to the intake and there is a threaded hole on > that intake directly beneath the carburator with the open end down. > Nothing is mounted there and as far as we recall, nothing came out of > that hole. It seemes to be about three inches deep and one guy said he > noticed that air was coming out of it in time with the cylinders firing > when the engine was running. (He stuck his finger under there for some > reason.) Does this hole do anything? '67? Is the PCV system intact? Can't think of anything else, I'll let the six owners take this one on . . . . > The guy at the engine place said the engine was dyno-tested before > delivery and suspects that it's just a lousy install on the freeze-plug. > Before I put a new one in, is there anything else this type of incident > may indicate? The plugs in the block are steel. Should I replace the > blown one with steel or brass? Do I need to change them all? Is there a > glue that's better than others? I'd agree. Just put a new plug in. Use some non-hardening sealer (permatex) on it, and pound it in. Use a pretty brass one if you like, steel are fine. Don't use one of the rubber-expando thingies, It WILL fall out when you don't want it to:-|. > Please, guys, help get this old warhorse back on the road. where it > deserves to be. Yea! before it gets towed away! (oops, that's another thread). > After all, like Pat says... "We are FTE!" (even if some of us ARE a bit > less savvy.) All together now, chant after me . . . :-) - -- Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:06:25 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint Stu, and a bunch of other people, have been writing about #205 Ford Blue. So, I assume it (#205) is a stock number. Whose number? Ford? Krylon? I just want to make sure I don't paint my parts the wrong blue - although I did just paint a Ni$ engine ford blue :-) - -- Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:11:46 -0800 From: "Wiltzius, Tom" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot Hi all, a couple of quik questions- Just got the exaust system on my truck done and the guy said I need header gaskets as versus manifold gaskets. The engine is a 360 with headers not the cast iron FE manifolds. What gives? Any enlightenment appreciated. The starter cranks slowly after engine has been run awhile almost like a run down battery, but after it sits awhile cranks real well. I know this has been discussed in the past but I cannot rememberr the answers. Thanks Tom Reno,NV == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 15:27:57 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot >Just got the exaust system on my truck done and the guy said I need header >gaskets as versus manifold gaskets. >The engine is a 360 with headers not the cast iron FE manifolds. What gives? >Any enlightenment appreciated. > You can actually use the manifold gaskets just as well as the header gaskets. The manifold gaskets will be all one piece, the others are individual ones for each port. The header gaskets are thicker, so they may claim they seal better, but you will be replacing them often if you don't keep them tight. I have the same problem with stock manifolds and stock gaskets, but not every 6 months like before ... >The starter cranks slowly after engine has been run awhile almost like a run >down battery, but after it sits awhile cranks real well. >I know this has been discussed in the past but I cannot rememberr the >answers. > Could be a couple of things ... first off with headers you have more heat in the starter, that's a bad thing, wears them out quicker and will cause this. I never experienced this, so the other thing to check is the timing, if you're running advanced timing it will crank harder... this would probably only be really noticeable after probably 15deg or so of initial advance. I know my mom's 351W has always done this, even with a new starter and only 6deg of advance ...it seems to be a characteristic of the old 351W's (we've had 3 that did that anyway), but the 360's I've heard of no such thing .. Just my 2cents Bill Auto Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/cars.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Trucks/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/Cars/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:27:22 EST From: Brazzadog aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Pitman arm I had the same problem with the standard puller on my '78 F-250 4wd. I used a cheap little 3 jaw puller from WalMart, heated the pitman arm with a propane torch and did some light hammering. Actually, got good at it since it took 3 tries to get a rebuilt steering box that worked correctly. Ben Williams '78 F-250 4wd > >Anybody know of an easy way to pull a pitman arm? I've tried two different >sized three jawed pullers and this darn thing won't come off. > >There is a specific tool called a pitman arm puller available at most >places that rent automotive tools. Works good. >The over the counter pitman arm puller isn't wide enough to pull the pitman >arm on my 1977 F250 4wd. Snap On has a puller that will yank that pitman >arm faster than you can say shazam! Unfortunately, the Snap On puller is >kinda on the pricey side! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:24:11 -0800 From: "sam weatherby" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Header gaskets ; hard starting while hot >The starter cranks slowly after engine has been run awhile almost like a run >down battery, but after it sits awhile cranks real well. >I know this has been discussed in the past but I cannot rememberr the >answers. Heat is the problem... Exactly how depends. Verify battery is good. Check all the cable connected to the battery, solenoid and starter. If they are all fine your starter may be nearing the end of it's life. -srw == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------.... 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. 
|