 |
|
|
|
|
|
From: owner-61-79-list-digest  ford-trucks.com (61-79-list-digest) To: 61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Subject: 61-79-list-digest V3 #264 Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Sender: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Errors-To: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Precedence: bulk 61-79-list-digest Thursday, July 29 1999 Volume 03 : Number 264 ======================================================================= 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 - RE: vacuum advance (ignition) RE: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic, was Various Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic, was Various FTE 61-79 - Coooool Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Re: FTE 61-79 - '68 F-100 Turn Signals FTE 61-79 - TEMP GUAGE Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long FTE 61-79 - Run-On Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long FTE 61-79 - Not Again! FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking) Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod Re: FTE 61-79 - Carburaters Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes RE: FTE 61-79 - TEMP GUAGE Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: vacuum advance (ignition) Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On Re: FTE 61-79 - Not Again! Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - Not Again! Re: FTE 61-79 - 1978 and JC Whitney Overhead speakers Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap Re: FTE 61-79 - '68 F-100 Turn Signals FTE 61-79 - RE: '68 F-100 Turn Signals FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. Re: FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices FTE 61-79 - '66 F-100 Money Pit :) ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:08:03 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: vacuum advance (ignition) >I installed a new temperature switch (the old one seemed to be stuck, >that's why I started fiddling with it in the first place), and a high-flow >thermostat. So far it's been good. I also installed an aftermarket temp >gauge with a SCALE so I'm not being fooled by the crappy gauge henry bought >for us at the flea market. > Bas, you changed 3 variables ... so we don't know which one "fixed" it ... for all we know the gauge could have been wrong ... if you happen to find out which of them it was (ie it starts doing it again), then let us know! That's one problem even my boss has, something's not working so he changes 10 things then wonders "I wonder what fixed it ?" and the next time it happens he has to try and remember which thing he changed. >The only time it really boiled over was when I was stupid enough to let my >idiot "friend" drive it. I still start spitting fire when I think of that. >After I got it back it was almost 2 gal low on coolant, and the pressure >had cracked the heater core. Did this happen shortly before it started overheating ??? If so, check the gaskets and fluid loss! Its possible you fried a headgasket or worse if it got that hot... 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: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 12:13:59 -0700 From: "Southerland, Rich" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices I too have a friend who has a microswitch that must be activated in order for the car to run. In his case, the lighter must be pushed in! - -----Original Message----- From: William S Hart [mailto:wish iastate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 12:03 PM To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices > Here's one to think about . How about putting the switch on the seat so you >have to slide it all the way back or forward to engage it , but only to start >not to run and then you can put the seat where ever you like it . I know I'll >hear about that one . LOL Here's something about that one ... some of us always have the seat all the way back and CAN NOT fit in with the seat all the way forwards! But its so hot right now that I'm leavin the windows down and everything, also being summer there aren't too many kids around (an advantage of working at a school :). >A friend of mine has microswitches mounted behind the heater/vent control >levers. They have to be in a certain position to engage the starter...I >LIKE this. I had a friend who had that too ... only problem was it wasn't intentional! The heater controls on his B*ick shorted somewhere so the car would only start if you held the slider all the way into the defrost position ... you had to hold it too (momentary style switch) while you hit the key ... I guess he got pretty good at it after drivin it for a year! Some days he just left the keys in it since no one could start it easily ... and who would want it ? It was a station wagon even ... Another friend had a key cut so that half of it was for her 'scort and the other half was for her dad's truck ... not fool proof, but she would just turn the key over and put it back in the ignition ... wouldn't even turn, and most wouldn't think to reverse it ... these were all dumb high school tricks though ... Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:12:58 -0500 From: John Strauss Subject: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic >> "Cruise-O-Matic" is a Ford term which is applied to all 3-speed automatics >> in sales literature. >> > I would disagree that its become a generic term to refer to the 3-spd >autos. I would agree that most sales lit. I have seen does just mention the >Cruise-O-Matic and not the C4 or C6. This question first came up for me a >few weeks ago in answering CJ's question on which tranny he had in his 1967. >My literature mentions the Cruise-O-Matic and no mention of the C4 or C6. >Yet the shop manual has a section for both the C4 and the HD Cruise-O-Matic. >Also my master parts Illustration catalog has seperate pictures for each of >these trannies (C4, C6 and Cruise-O-Matic). As a side note my Galaxie also >has the Cruise-O-Matic from the factory. I don't want to start a tranny war >but I would welcome any contrary point of view. > I guess I don't understand how you and I disagree. I specifically said that "Cruise-O-Matic" was a term applied to 3-speed autos in SALES LITERATURE. You say you agree with that. I also said in my post that the FMX was called Cruise-O-Matic in the shop manuals and that the C4/C6 were not. So we agree there too. I think we are saying the same thing, no need to use the word "disagree" at all. Could it be that the FMX and the Cruise-O-Matic are the same thing (which I contend they are) but the term "FMX" was only introduced to the lexicon after the C4 and C6 came out and were also referred to as Cruise-O-Matic? If you are Ford, and you have been calling one trans the Cruise-O-Matic, and now here comes marketing and they wanna refer to ALL 3-speed automatics as Cruise-O-Matic, you gotta come up with a different term so that parts guys and trans guys will know which one is which. So you rename the "real" Cruise-O-Matic as FMX. Make sense? _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:12:56 -0500 From: John Strauss Subject: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic, was Various >> The first 3-speed auto Ford produced was the FMX > >Uhmmm...I thought the FMX didn't come out until the late 60's as sort of a >small block version of the C6 ... there was a tranny before that that was >not the C4 or C6, but don't know what the name of it was (Cruise-O-Matic ? >:) ... just goin off the little bits and pieces I remember from prior >discussions, the casing was changed from steel to aluminum when they went >to the FMX, along with possibly gear choices and such ? Hmmm...maybe a >hunt through the archives is in order here ... > I still maintain the FMX and the original Cruise-O-Matic are the same thing. For sure the FMX is a cast iron case and seperate bellhousing, as is the Cruise-O-Matic. C4 is aluminum case with seperate bellhousing, and C6 is aluminum case with integral bellhousing. After the C4 and C6 were being used, the FMX was a sort of heavy-duty C4. That is to say it was used in larger (read heavier) cars with Windsor motors, for example the last FMX I rebuilt was in a '74 Mercury Cougar with a 302. _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:26:25 EDT From: IanBoss69 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long the place i took it,,,BP (gas station),,,said the battery was fine,,,,i don't know how they figured that out, just a little meter they hooked up to it,,,, could it still be bad? Ian 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home.htm True Blue Ford Blue == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:26:07 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic, was Various >After the C4 and C6 were being used, the FMX was a sort of heavy-duty C4. >That is to say it was used in larger (read heavier) cars with Windsor >motors, for example the last FMX I rebuilt was in a '74 Mercury Cougar with >a 302. Hmmm... I dunno about heavier ... we have 3 at home, 2 in 69 Cougars (not a heavy car yet, just a Mustang in disguise) and a 70 Torino ... I've never messed with them, other than to read the codes to figure out what they were ... now that I think about it our 74 Grand Torino Elite probably has one in it too .. (the 74 and one of the Cougars are parts cars) ... I'll have to check them out sometime when i'm home again ... 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: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:32:41 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Coooool Kim, I just can't wait to tell you the news. I borrowed enough from Union Planters to get both cars into one note ($13,300 or therabouts) at 8.75%!!!! The payment is around $275 total!!! I'm so happy...:-) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:31:04 EDT From: IanBoss69 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long I did take the battery out of my dads van and it still didnt change anything, the starting switch will make the lights come back on if i click it off and on a couple times, from the acc to the on position,,,,, Ian 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home.htm True Blue Ford Blue == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:28:56 -0700 From: "Danger" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - '68 F-100 Turn Signals > Before I dismantle my entire steering column in an exploratory... I thought > it might be better to ask someone else. Does a '68 F-100 have > self-canceling turn-signals? Mine either don't work or weren't there to > begin with. > jc ........... Yes the 68 has self-canceling turn signals. Either the cab corner has collapsed slightly on the drivers side front bushing which creates a gap between the column collar and the steering wheel, or the plastic piece under the steering wheel has become brittle and broken. If the problem is due to a collapsing cab, I would remove the entire column and expect to find damage located around the lower bearing of the steering column shaft. BTW:) I make it a habit to bring the tools needed to the salvage yard in order to remove an entire column assembly (auto preferred) in order to have spares on hand should I need them for either of my trucks. It's just a matter of time before I install power steering and will once again find myself working on the steering column in order to change shafts. Danger 69 F250 (green) with JC Whitney cab corner repair panel (drivers front) and parts taken from 3 trucks (one was a 68) to create new steering column assembly with working turn signal returns and horn. 69 F250 auto (red) with rebuilt column due to broken shift collar (where the gear selector lever pivots). == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:33:46 -0500 From: "Rusty Nail" Subject: FTE 61-79 - TEMP GUAGE This week my temp guage went on the fritz. It stays all the way to the left and once and awhile will go clear over to the other side and then back. Any way, was wondering does this mean the guage itself is bad or is there a sensor that needs replaced. Any info would be appreciated. Rusty '77 400 Explorer - -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:34:27 EDT From: IanBoss69 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Where is the regulator???? is that the steel-grey box behind the solenoid on the inner fender??? Ian 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home.htm True Blue Ford Blue == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:38:39 -0500 From: "Rusty Nail" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Run-On I've heard a couple different reasons for Run-On after you turn off the engine. I have a rebuilt engine and have broke it in (about 1000 miles on it). I am now occasionally getting some run-on. Would like suggestions or ideas on this cause and if I should increase octane or something else . Rusty KCMO '77 400 Explorer == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:39:06 -0400 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long Ian, To truly test the battery, you need to put a load on it. I had battery that had bad plates in it. Without the load the plates were close together and the battery read 13.1 volts, when a load was placed on the battery the plates would pull apart and the battery would go to 0 volts in a matter of seconds. Check the battery with a load test, which most good shops have and places like Autozone have them as well....just checking with a multimeter isn't sufficient. - -Ted the place i took it,,,BP (gas station),,,said the battery was fine,,,,i don't know how they figured that out, just a little meter they hooked up to it,,,, could it still be bad? Ian 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home.htm True Blue Ford Blue == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:43:15 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Not Again! Darn it, I did it again. I get this in my address book and post to FTE all the time, so I think it jumps to FTE sometimes. Either that or I'm getting stooopid. Doncha say it! The joy is that I just got a '98 Contour w/ 25,000 miles and a pristine '93 Mustang convertible (4 banger) w/ 48,000 miles bought at a great rate, and was able to trade my '95 Contour with 115,000 miles and a bad trans in for $13,300 difference. Now does any one want my credit card numbers while we're at it. :-) > Kim, > > I just can't wait to tell you the news. I borrowed enough from Union > Planters to get both cars into one note ($13,300 or therabouts) at > 8.75%!!!! The payment is around $275 total!!! > > I'm so happy...:-) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:45:28 EDT From: BDIJXS aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking) Hey there, Stu is correct, I picked up a couple of 1U cranks from the guy in Ohio...they were in pretty good shape, 20-20's I think..... And at the time, yes, you could get a brand new 428 block for in the $1200 range.... But also, I've found a couple of 428 blocks for in the $400 to $600 range, had to go 30 over... They are out there, you just need a little time and patience in finding them.... CJ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:48:28 +0200 (MET DST) From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices > Here's something about that one ... some of us always have the seat all the > way back and CAN NOT fit in with the seat all the way forwards! But its so Yeah, my truck would be much more comfy with the gas pedal further away. On long trips I quite often get my shoe off and stick it under my foot so I don't have to hold it up all the time :) I drove my landlord's 74 F250 once and it was much worse. The brake pedal was so far up compared to my bronco. My bronco has the brake pedal almost at the same height as the gas, I like that more. The only thing is that it feels like the brakes are low when you're used to having the brake pedal so far up. > hot right now that I'm leavin the windows down and everything, also being > summer there aren't too many kids around (an advantage of working at a > school :). I was wondering how you could afford all these truck things as a student :) but now I understand. So which state university are you at? > guess he got pretty good at it after drivin it for a year! Some days he > just left the keys in it since no one could start it easily ... and who > would want it ? It was a station wagon even ... I like stations.. really the only type of car I like are those big old Lincoln station wagons, with the large door on the back and the large 460 in front :) .. and 9 mpg. Other than that, even since I first drove a truck I lost interest in cars. My uncle's F250 would start without the key. He'd just lock it, nobody knows that anyway. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:50:41 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod >From: GMontgo930 aol.com >Subject: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod > >Ive got a 79 Bronco with a 400M & 170k miles >on the original motor. While I know it's >approaching time for a rebuild, I recently bent >the #2 intake pushrod to the point where it >fell out along with the lifter. Needless to say >I didn't go much further with no oil pressure. > >My Biggest question is what would cause an >engine to bend a pushrod like that? Ive never >seen it before and had many hi mileage >engines. It wasn't driven hard, 70 MPH cruise >on the freeway down towards Miami. Yo George: I would guess that maybe the rocker fulcrum is getting worn out and might cause occasional binding. On a high mileage engine, it is unlikely that the valve could contact the piston and cause the pushrod to bend. The only way that could happen is if the rod was really loose and elongated, and if that was the case, the rod knock noise would be quite noticeable. Dave R. (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:51:34 EDT From: TWL1911 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Carburaters Hey all i just recently got a 4 barrel carb from a guy for free. origanaly it was on a ford 460, then they used it on a figure 8 car with a ch*vy motor and they didnt like it because of the vent holes on the sides. question is 1 i would like to put it on my 352, but i need a intake if anyone has a 4 barrel intake for sale let me know. 2 what cfm is the carb, i think its a 600 but i would like to find some one who could verify that. 3 i may not use it right away on the ford but i have a d*odge truck with a 318 on it i wouldnt mind useing it on that for a bit of time just so it gets used and doesnt sit on my work bench. any info is really apreciated Travis == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 17:13:26 EDT From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod In a message dated 7/28/99 6:25:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time, wish iastate.edu writes: it hard, that could only be one of two things. a) the piston hit the valve or b) the valve floated momentarily. I think you would have heard either of these. And it may not sound like you were doing much (70mph on the freeway that is), but on some of these old trucks, with the wrong sized tires and a towing rear end, you can really get the rev's up there before you know it... Check your valve springs, make sure none of them are cracked/broken, that could cause a valve float also. A motor with this many miles on it may just be getting tired, so the springs could be getting weak ... I'm not an M-block guy like Dave R though, maybe he knows of something that's prone to happen in these ... Do you have a tach to see how many revs you are pulling ? Might want to wire one up briefly just to see ... >> I think this is excellent advice. The lifters on an engine not using synthetic oil have a build up (carbon, shellac) on the lower barrel of the lifter after 100K miles, and in higher mileage engines you start getting mushrooming of the lifter bottom, both of which, making it difficult to for them to pop out of the hole. Through doing stupid things I have bent several push rods and the lifters never popped out. The oil pressure does not tend to push the lifter out, the force from the oil is balanced in both directions. So the only thing left to get the lifter out is the cam, and I believe that only high RPM would eject a lifter due to the previously discussed build up on the lower body of the lifter. Of course there are exceptions to everything. Burt Hill 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:18:06 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes Yo Gang: OK, I know a lot of you guys don't have to deal w/ emissions tests any more, but my 1980 F250 failed its first emissions test since I bought the truck in 1993. The only failure was idle CO%. At idle (which the test station recorded as 1177 rpm) the test measured 2.19% CO. In Colorado, the standard for my truck is 1.5% CO and 400 ppm HC. On 1981 or older vehicles, the only tests are for HC (ppm) and CO (%) at idle and at 2500 rpm. No treadmill/dyno. Here are the details of my engine configuration: 351M, all stock, except for slightly richer Mustang carburetor (installed a little over 1 year ago and e-tested then w/ no probs). Catalyst equipped (under 8500 GVW). EGR disabled. Thermactor AIR system working w/ bypass valve connected according to vac schematic on original emissions label. Evap canister and hoses connected according to same. Ignition is stock DuraSpark II w/ Mallory ProMaster coil, Accel 8.8 spiral-wound wires, and Accel cap & rotor set, new #25 (OEM spec HR) Autolite plugs. Timing is set to 12 BTDC (10 BTDC is spec). Exhaust system all stock, except cat-back 2.5" single pipe and Dynomax Super Turbo muffler. Last year, right after installing and adjusting the freshly rebuilt Mustang carb (Motorcraft 2150 2V), the truck e-tested as follows: idle (906 rpm) 0.03% CO, 50.5 ppm HC, 12.91% CO2 2383 rpm 0.23% CO, 44 ppm HC, 11.45% CO2 This year, the results are: idle (1177 rpm) 2.19% CO, 57.6 ppm HC, 12.57% CO2 2243 rpm 0.48% CO, 37.3 ppm HC, 12.54% CO2 Comparing the two test results, the only thing that jumps out is the (way) higher CO. High rpm CO has doubled and idle CO has skyrocketed! Other than routine maintenance (spark plugs, oil & filter changes), the only engine-related change between the tests is a new 4-row radiator and thermostat. A few weeks after the new 195 degree thermostat (OEM spec) went in, my temp gauge started showing cold most of the time. I am assuming it may be a wiring problem, defective temp sensor, or possibly a defective thermostat. Overall, the engine seems to be running fine. Over the last few weeks, I have noticed an intermittent high rpm power loss (usually when accelerating hard over 2K rpm) and I am suspecting the mechanical fuel pump. Fuel and air filters have been changed w/ no affect on the problem. Also, while changing the oil last weekend, I discovered the throttle return spring that attaches to the bracket beside the carb is broken. I'm running w/ just the coil return spring on the throttle shaft temporarily. (Maybe that's throwing off the idle speed?) The e-test report lists the following possible causes for high CO failure: Incorrect air/fuel mixture Dirty air cleaner, choke or carb/fuel injection Carb float level improperly adjusted Inoperative air pump Diluted lubricating oil Soaked fuel evaporative canister Here are my guesses/questions: Should I try leaning out the idle mixture screws? (but HC looks ok) Could a faulty fuel pump contribute to float level probs that would cause this failure? Could a defective thermostat making the engine run cooler than normal cause that high CO? Could the (maybe original 19-yr old) cat converter be going bad? (HC reading still looks pretty good, though) I'm feeling kind of stupid taking the truck in for the e-test w/ a possibly bad fuel pump, but I figured that wouldn't affect it. This truck has always passed w/ flying colors. Its worst year (though still passing) was when I got the EGR plumbing corrected and had EGR operating properly. The next year, I disconnected it again and emissions tested much cleaner. Thanks for your help. Dave R (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:32:49 -0700 From: "Steve Schwartz" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - TEMP GUAGE 90% it's the sender, 10% it's the wire off the sender, flopping around, grounding itself intermittently... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com > [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Rusty Nail > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 1:34 PM > To: ford post > Subject: FTE 61-79 - TEMP GUAGE > > > This week my temp guage went on the fritz. It stays all the way > to the left > and once and awhile will go clear over to the other side and then > back. Any > way, was wondering does this mean the guage itself is bad or is there a > sensor that needs replaced. Any info would be appreciated. > > Rusty > '77 400 Explorer > -- > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 23:41:34 +0200 (MET DST) From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: vacuum advance (ignition) > >I installed a new temperature switch (the old one seemed to be stuck, > >that's why I started fiddling with it in the first place), and a high-flow > >thermostat. So far it's been good. I also installed an aftermarket temp > >gauge with a SCALE so I'm not being fooled by the crappy gauge henry bought > >for us at the flea market. > Bas, you changed 3 variables ... so we don't know which one "fixed" it ... I know, but I'm about to go on a three-week vacation to canada, will be driving thousands of miles. I just had one weekend to fix it so it just HAD to be fixed. Plus, it is much easier doing it all at once. The temp gauge is electrical and the sensor is grounded to the engine block, just like the factory one, except that it has an internal regulator and is just more accurate in general. I'm not sure if I stated this in the original post already, but I grounded the gauge to the engine directly, in order to avoid ground problems. The needle is steady, only my signal blinker makes the needle go up and down a little bit. All the other things like turning the headlights on/off don't influence it. The needle only goes up and down 1 or 2 degrees, it is not really obvious. But really weird. > for all we know the gauge could have been wrong ... if you happen to find > out which of them it was (ie it starts doing it again), then let us know! Frankly at this point I'd rather have the problems stay away! The only thing is that it always is steady at 190 degrees (or at least there is a marker at 160, then an unlabeled marker in the middle, and another at 220 degrees, it is steady at the unlabeled marker in the middle, which would logically be 190). I wonder if the gauge is off, or the thermostat, or the unlabeled marker is meant to be 180. > >The only time it really boiled over was when I was stupid enough to let my > >idiot "friend" drive it. I still start spitting fire when I think of that. > >After I got it back it was almost 2 gal low on coolant, and the pressure > >had cracked the heater core. > > Did this happen shortly before it started overheating ??? If so, check the > gaskets and fluid loss! Its possible you fried a headgasket or worse if it > got that hot... No this happened last summer, I have been driving it for half a year without loosing a drop of coolant. The other half a year I have been driving around with the cracked heater core. Somehow it temporarily fixed itself and then I was on a dirt road with terrible washboards and all of a sudden the heater started spraying coolant. Then when changing the heater core I flushed the system and replaced all the rubberware. Like I said after that the level did not go down at all. Lately I've had the cooland out and spilled some, but I don't see any external leaks so I should be fine. Maybe check to be sure. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:54:16 -0700 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices >>> A real thief wouldn't mess with a 20 year old vehicle to begin with, I'd feel a lot better knowing my truck was stolen by an unreal thief...maybe a thief-in-training... Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA 1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C 1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed 1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood) I shortened this to only FT's http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:57:37 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On >I've heard a couple different reasons for Run-On after you turn off the >engine. I have a rebuilt engine and have broke it in (about 1000 miles on >it). I am now occasionally getting some run-on. >Would like suggestions or ideas on this cause and if I should increase >octane or something else . > Things to check : Carb 1) mixture, not too rich are we ? 2) float, be sure its not too high and flowing over after you shut it off 3) idle, if its set too high it will continue to diesel (run-on) after you shut the key off Timing might be another good thing to check ... if its a fresh motor that's about all that's left that I can think of ... did you set the idle on the carb back down after you broke the motor in ? that can do it ... Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 17:00:25 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Not Again! At 03:43 PM 7/28/99 , you wrote: >Darn it, I did it again. I get this in my address book and post to FTE >all the time, so I think it jumps to FTE sometimes. Either that or I'm >getting stooopid. Doncha say it! > hehehe ... its okay Bill, but for sanity's sake you might want to put a few more addresses between this one and the one you intend ... change the name or something ?? >The joy is that I just got a '98 Contour w/ 25,000 miles and a pristine >'93 Mustang convertible (4 banger) w/ 48,000 miles bought at a great >rate, and was able to trade my '95 Contour with 115,000 miles and a bad >trans in for $13,300 difference. > Hey, sounds like a good deal to me, hope you enjoy that 'stang ! My g.f. is always buggin me to hop up her little 4banger ... >Now does any one want my credit card numbers while we're at it. :-) > Naaa, I have a hard enough time keepin from spending my own money, can't imagine if I had someone else's (other than the school's which unfortunately has to be approved by an accountant first) to spend too ... though I've been really lookin at those Sanderson Headers... Just my 2cents wish Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html '73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html '96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:02:47 +0200 (MET DST) From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices > >>> A real thief wouldn't mess with a 20 year old vehicle to begin with, > > I'd feel a lot better knowing my truck was stolen by an unreal > thief...maybe a thief-in-training... your truck got stolen? Never saw it back? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 17:03:12 -0500 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices >I was wondering how you could afford all these truck things as a student >:) but now I understand. So which state university are you at? > hehehe ... actually I think I took a pay cut after graduation ... well not too bad of one of course, but so many more expenses now ... though doublin the vehicles hasn't helped any that's for sure! iastate=Iowa State in Ames, Iowa ... if anyone's ever in the area feel free to let me know, we can talk trucks and such all you want ... might even be able to haggle a meal out of me :) >I like stations.. really the only type of car I like are those big old >Lincoln station wagons, with the large door on the back and the large 460 >in front :) .. and 9 mpg. Other than that, even since I first drove a >truck I lost interest in cars. > Hahaha ... yeah I like em, but this was a box with the windshield bein the only angular piece on it, you could see it comin a mile off, and that wasn't a good thing in this case! Speakin of vehicles you can start without the key ... we've got the foot starter hooked up on our 50 Buick ... you should see the look on people's faces when you have both hands on the wheel and the starter is crankin! 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: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:14:21 -0700 From: Dennis Pearson Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices Thanks for your message at 12:02 AM 7/29/99 +0200, Bas van der Veer. Your message was: >> >>> A real thief wouldn't mess with a 20 year old vehicle to begin with, >> >> I'd feel a lot better knowing my truck was stolen by an unreal >> thief...maybe a thief-in-training... > >your truck got stolen? Never saw it back? Ahh....now the English teacher goes to work. "I'd" is a contraction for "I would," indicating subjunctive mood, in which case I should have typed I would feel a lot better knowing my truck were stolen by an unreal thief... But you can see how that would appear to the rest of the group... Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA 1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C 1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed 1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood) I shortened this to only FT's http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:19:46 -0700 From: "Deacon" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Not Again! > Darn it, I did it again. I get this in my address book and post to FTE > all the time, so I think it jumps to FTE sometimes. Either that or I'm > getting stooopid. Doncha say it! OK, I'm not going to say it, but we all know it's not your computer! ;] > Now does any one want my credit card numbers while we're at it. :-) No doubt, one day you'll post them by mistake. Some people shouldn't be allowed to use ATM's! "] Please Bill, never join a *ex fetish list. There are things some people do, I just don't want to know! :} Later! Deacon http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/ ================================================================ '76 F350 FE360 C6 \ '73 F100 302 C4 '66 Mustang 289 C4 \ '89 Aerostar Who cares! ============================================== Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:39:19 EDT From: Bad4dFilly aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 1978 and JC Whitney Overhead speakers In a message dated 07/27/1999 6:13:37 AM !!!First Boot!!!, shane269 home.com writes: > I get the LMC catalog and it has a lot of great original stuff for ford trucks at reasonable prices == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:09:35 +0200 From: "Bill Brox" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long > > To truly test the battery, you need to put a load on it. I had battery that had > bad plates in it. Without the load the plates were close together and the > battery read 13.1 volts, when a load was placed on the battery the plates would > pull apart and the battery would go to 0 volts in a matter of seconds. > > Check the battery with a load test, which most good shops have and places like > Autozone have them as well....just checking with a multimeter isn't sufficient. > Well, a load test is just a different way, the starter is a load, and a voltmeter tells just the same as the load test does.... there is more than one road to Rome... Also, if you use the starter as the load, and the voltmeter, you can read a lot more out of the test than if you only have a load test. If the starter does not make the battery to drop in voltage it means there is no current, which in turn means the connections is bad, just as Azie said.... or the starter is bad... most often worn brushes. But in your case the starter was ok,,, and if the solenoid is ok too, there is only the cables left, assuming the battery is ok. If the ground wire between the engine and body is bad, the solenoid would not work either..... Bill > -Ted > > > > > > the place i took it,,,BP (gas station),,,said the battery was fine,,,,i don't > know how they figured that out, just a little meter they hooked up to it,,,, > > could it still be bad? > > Ian > 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M > members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home.htm > True Blue Ford Blue > == 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 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:40:30 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices In a message dated 7/28/99 12:07:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wish iastate.edu writes: start if you held the slider all the way into the defrost position ... >> How does someone figure this out. I mean, If my truck doesnt start, I dont check to see if turning my wipers on would help. This is just odd! Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:27:10 -0400 From: "Ted and Sarah Freeman" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank..kinda long As long as he is watching the voltage drop as he is cranking the engine and using the starter as a load...I agree! I don't think it's the battery anyway after he said he replaced his battery with his Dad's and it did the same thing. - -Ted >Well, a load test is just a different way, the starter is a load, and a >voltmeter tells just the same as the load test does.... there is more >than one road to Rome... > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:36:54 EDT From: TBeeee aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic In a message dated 7/28/99 4:15:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jstrauss inetport.com writes: > I also said in my post that the FMX was called Cruise-O-Matic > in the shop manuals and that the C4/C6 were not. John: Perhaps disagree was not a good choice of words in my earlier post, but its not a dirty word and I hope your not offended. My point is simply that the Cruise-O-Matic is an actual transmission and should not be confused with a C4 or a C6. I am curious about your theory that it may be the same as an FMX. You mention that the FMX was referred to as the Cruise-O-Matic in "shop manuals". Do you have any citations? Stock Man 1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims) 1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:30:38 -0600 From: Larsen Subject: FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap I currently have a '69 longbed 2wd truck, I bought it to put the body on a later half ton 4wd frame Because I like the looks of the '67-'72s, and most 4wd's of that year are hard to find and expensive, and it gives me a chance to do a frame-off resto. Plus, the newer parts are easier to come by(lift kits, etc.), disc brakes are nice too. I also get to sell a 2wd truck after I'm done to make some $$ back.(its 3/4ton, has front discs a good running 360). So I have a few questions on 73-79 4wd Ford trucks. First off, what year did they come with front discs standard? I read in a magazine that the NP435 transmission is better than the T-18, is this true? Do they use the same bellhousing bolt pattern? What years where they used? Do '66-'77 broncos come with the same transmissions as the trucks? Will the small block bronco bellhousing interchange with trucks?(I have a 5.0 liter H.O. engine I'm goint to put in the truck). What other transmission options do I have?(like newer Aod's, will they mate to the T-case?) Is there any other bellhousings I could find at the salvage yard? I read somewhere that I need to use an 11 inch clutch, will this bolt to the 5.0's flywheel? Also, someone told me that on 78-79's the rear of the frame was wider. Is this true? Thanks in advance == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:54:51 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - '68 F-100 Turn Signals Forwarded for: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Yes...mine does. I had to change the steering wheel out to get the pin to c*ncel them though. - -Ted Before I dismantle my entire steering column in an exploratory... I thought it might be better to ask someone else. Does a '68 F-100 have self-c*nceling turn-signals? Mine either don't work or weren't there to begin with. jc == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:00:16 -0400 From: Garry Bowling Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: '68 F-100 Turn Signals jc you asked: Before I dismantle my entire steering column in an exploratory... I thought it might be better to ask someone else. Does a '68 F-100 have self-canceling turn-signals? Mine either don't work or weren't there to begin with. In my 67 it has self canceling turn signals. There is a plastic turn signal switch (for the lack of a better word) that over time gets old and breaks. It has two little pieces that cancel the signal (one on each side). I suggest you pull your steering wheel and go to an autoparts store or Ford for the part adn repalce it. Garry == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:04:57 EDT From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. saw a couple of cheap trucks in a local trade magazine today, if anyone is interested let me know, i'll get the phone numbers can't remember much about the ads but one was a 72 ford 4x4 for 600.00, it didn't say if it was f250 or 150 other one said: 59 ford f250 4x4, 292 v8 needs work 1500.00 last one said: 73 f150 4x4 for $900.00 the 72 is actualy a friends truck, i recognized his number: he has alot of rare FE parts, 428's, 427's he even has a 427 SOHC in his personal stash. jeff grant == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:58:36 -0500 From: Melanie & Ronnie Rowton Subject: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices When I bought my truck I was living in Chicago. I had two cars stolen and they were not going to get my truck. Kill switches are nice but they do not prevent a theif frrom breaking in and causing several hundereds of dollars in damage, especially when they they crash the column. I asked around and most people had good expeerience with the Club. However, an average size bolt cutter can cut the steering wheel and slip off the Club. I was looking at the Grant steering wheels as a beafier replacement to the thin wheel in my truck and I found that grant has an anti-thef device. I think I paid about $100 for the adapter and $80 for the wheel. It allows you to remove the wheel and replace it with a large red cap which reads "Grant Security System". I lived in dowtown Chicago for four years and never had a problem. It's a little pricey but I beleive it more effective than a kill switch by keeping theifs from entering the truck. Just another option to consider. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:10:44 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. In a message dated 7/28/99 9:07:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, JJJJJGRANT aol.com writes: > This man is a god. We should all be so lucky! Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:23:52 EDT From: GMontgo930 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Bent Pushrod Yes, I do have a tach and with the 3.5 gears in the axles it spins at about 3k RPM. The heads were rebuilt about 30k miles earlier and got 7 new valves (all exhaust) and new springs at that time. Everything was all nice and quiet till she went to "Missing" and then clattering as the oil pressure went to zero cause the lifter came out also. I've got it all fixed up now with a fresh rebuilt 400 (different motor). I'm kinda thinking about building this one up and then putting it back in. I was just kinda curious cause I've never bent a pushrod before and have traveled almost 400k miles behind Ford motors (302, 390, & 400) Thanks for the info though.... George In a message dated 7/28/99 9:25:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, wish iastate.edu writes: >My Biggest question is what would cause an engine to bend a pushrod like >that? Ive never seen it before and had many hi mileage engines. It wasn't >driven hard, 70 MPH cruise on the freeway down towards Miami. If yall can >shed some light on this it'd be great. I know how to fix the motor. > Usually the only way to bend a pushrod is to cause something to slam into it hard, that could only be one of two things. a) the piston hit the valve or b) the valve floated momentarily. I think you would have heard either of these. And it may not sound like you were doing much (70mph on the freeway that is), but on some of these old trucks, with the wrong sized tires and a towing rear end, you can really get the rev's up there before you know it... Check your valve springs, make sure none of them are cracked/broken, that could cause a valve float also. A motor with this many miles on it may just be getting tired, so the springs could be getting weak ... I'm not an M-block guy like Dave R though, maybe he knows of something that's prone to happen in these ... Do you have a tach to see how many revs you are pulling ? Might want to wire one up briefly just to see ... >> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:48:32 -0700 From: "Danger" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. > > > This man is a god. We should all be so lucky! > > Darrell Duggan ......... I've often found myself drooling while viewing the page at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.wrljet.com/engines/427sohc.html with thoughts of building an F series truck around this engine. I'm assuming it produces gobs of torque along with the massive HP? Anybody have some specs on this? Danger == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:56:42 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. In a message dated 7/28/99 9:53:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, danger csolutions.net writes: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.wrljet.com/engines/427sohc.html with thoughts of building an F series truck around this engine. >> I have this crazy Idea of using one of those in a 67 F-100 short bed, and making a sort of pseudo Lightning. Improve the brakes, add sway bars, lower it, and then hit up a lightning for the rims and bucket seats. Cool huh? The reason for the 67 is here in NV 67 and older dont have to be smogged. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:15:53 EDT From: GMontgo930 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap In a message dated 7/28/99 9:48:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mtlarsen vii.com writes: > I currently have a '69 longbed 2wd truck, I bought it to put the body on a > later half ton 4wd frame Because I like the looks of the '67-'72s, and most > 4wd's of that year are hard to find and expensive, and it gives me a chance > to do a frame-off resto. Plus, the newer parts are easier to come by(lift > kits, etc.), disc brakes are nice too. I also get to sell a 2wd truck after I' > m done to make some $$ back.(its 3/4ton, has front discs a good running 360). > > So I have a few questions on 73-79 4wd Ford trucks. First off, what year > did they come with front discs standard? I read in a magazine that the NP435 I previously owned a '73 F100 w 302 & C4. It had front disk's standard. > transmission is better than the T-18, is this true? Do they use the same > bellhousing bolt pattern? What years where they used? Do '66-'77 broncos come > with the same transmissions as the trucks? Will the small block bronco > bellhousing interchange with trucks?(I have a 5.0 liter H.O. engine I'm goint > to put in the truck). What other transmission options do I have?(like newer > Aod's, will they mate to the T-case?) Is there any other bellhousings I could > find at the salvage yard? I read somewhere that I need to use an 11 inch > clutch, will this bolt to the 5.0's flywheel? Also, someone told me that on > 78-79's the rear of the frame was wider. Is this true? > > Thanks in advance > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:16:18 EDT From: IanBoss69 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia. In a message dated 7/29/99 12:53:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, danger csolutions.net writes: > I'm assuming it produces gobs of torque > along with the massive HP? horsepower 616 Bhp 7,000rpm (4V) 657 Bhp 7,500rpm (8V) torque 515 lbs./ft. 3,800rpm (4V) 575 lbs./ft. 4,200rpm (8V) maximum standard bore x stroke 4.232" x 3.784" heavy-duty crossbolted mains compression ratio (advertised) 12.0:1 combustion chamber (volume) 118.5cc - 121.5cc (hemispherical type) carburetor Holley 4150-C (4V - 710cfm) Holley 4160 (8V - 2 780cfm) aluminum intake manifold intake valve (head diameter) 2.235" - 2.265" exhaust valve (head diameter) 1.938" - 1.968" distributor single-pointset mechanical advance (transistor ignition) spark plugs Autolite BF-32 no emission controls assembled weight 680 lbs 'tis a shame it never found its way into a mustang or any other production car for that matter Ian 79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M members.aol.com/ianboss69/page/home/htm True Blue Ford Blue == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:33:39 EDT From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices In a message dated 7/28/99 2:56:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dpearson ....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. 
|