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 #265
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 265



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE 61-79 - Not Again!
FTE 61-79 - air cleaner problems
Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On
FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic
FTE 61-79 - anti-theft devices
FTE 61-79 - look Ma, no key
Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On
Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices
Re: FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap
FTE 61-79 - RE: Run on
Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices
Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes
FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank
FTE 61-79 - RE: Engine won't crank
FTE 61-79 - Re: E-Test Woes
FTE 61-79 - Marino was here/progress on the 71 4x4
Re: FTE 61-79 - '66 F-100 Money Pit :)
FTE 61-79 - Re:anti-theft devices
FTE 61-79 - There was a sad sight today
Re: FTE 61-79 - There was a sad sight today
FTE 61-79 - Re: Carburaters
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)
FTE 61-79 - Re- Engine won't crank..kinda long
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)
FTE 61-79 - ford truck theft
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re- Engine won't crank..kinda long
Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On
FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...
Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic
Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes
FTE 61-79 - Highest gear ratio available for truck rear.
FTE 61-79 - RE: anti theft devices
Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia.
RE: FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Carburaters
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)
Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On
Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes
FTE 61-79 - RE: Generic Cruise-0-Matics ?
Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes
Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)
FTE 61-79 - RE:Sonic checking
Re: FTE 61-79 - ford truck theft
FTE 61-79 - accessing ford archives

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 05:29:53 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Not Again!

> Please Bill, never join a *ex fetish list. There are things some people
> do, I just don't want to know! :}

Yikes, there hasn't been anything popping up about women with horns has
there?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:12:59 -0400
From: "Upchurch, Jason"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - air cleaner problems

HI ALL!!
I have a need for some advice.
My 65 F-100 has a 300 inline 6 out of a 77 f-? I need help determining why
the motor wants to die when I put my air cleaner on. With it off it runs
like a champ, but as soon as I put it on it starts to die out and starts
missing. I tried adjusting the mixture screws, but it seems to get worse.
Take the cleaner off, runs good, put on - dies.
Any help you can give will be greatly appreciated!
by the way- I am in digest mode, so if you could e-mail me at:
jupchurch imps0014.us.dg.com
that way I can get her running like she should w/ the cleaner on!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:17:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Sean O'Malley"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On

> >I've heard a couple different reasons for Run-On after you turn off the
> >engine.

> 1) mixture, not too rich are we ?

I always thought it happened from being too lean--making the plugs
hot enough to keep igniting things after spark is cut off. Of course,
I guess you need gas as well to make this happen...

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:04:58 -0500
From: John Strauss
Subject: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic

> 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?
>
Oh, no, not at all, I just wanted to point out that, to my mind, we are in
pretty much total agreement. As for examples, in my '64 Ford Truck shop
manual, the automatic transmission for my (former) truck is referred to as
"HD Cruise-O-Matic", and in my '68 Ford Truck shop manual, there is a
section for "FMX", "C4", and "C6". As far as I can tell, the FMX and the
Cruise-O-Matic are the same.

But if I am wrong, that's fine, but can anybody point out to me the
DIFFERENCE between an FMX and a Cruise-O-Matic? I have been told since I
was in high school that they are the same thing so I am kinda stubborn on
this point.
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:18:14 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - anti-theft devices

OK, Dan, I'll bite. Disabling the coil, especially in a hard to detect way
sounds like a good idea. When you say low side of the coil, I'm fogged. The
coil has three connections. Battery, to the distributor cap, and a ground
that goes to the switching mechanism in the inside of the distributor. If I
understand you correctly, grounding this third wire disables the coil and
thus the ignition system. Hmmm.... Is there a possibility of any of the
electronics being damaged? This sounds like a good solution. Use a double
throw switch, ground the coil with one side and the nuetral start with the
other.

I have also seen the Grant removable steering wheels advertised. I have
never been impressed with The Club for exactly the reasons mentioned. So far
no one has mentioned how to keep a crook from dollying your truck and
removing it with a slide truck. Actually, I'm more concerned about little
pieces disappearing than the whole truck.

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:53:13 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - look Ma, no key

>>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!

I know the looks. My sister has the 55 B ick Century Riveria that my dad
bought new. It would be a great car if it had an FE and C6 instead of that
twin turbine Dynaflow.

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:43:25 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On

>> 1) mixture, not too rich are we ?
>
>I always thought it happened from being too lean--making the plugs
>hot enough to keep igniting things after spark is cut off. Of course,
>I guess you need gas as well to make this happen...

Hmmm... that's a possibility as well, just from what I've seen is that the
extra fuel is a big cause of it, course that's cause dad likes to tune
everything rich so it'll start in the winter, so every time I get one of
his cars I lean it back out and set the idle down below 1000 ...


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 08:45:40 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices

>It allows you to remove
>the wheel and replace it with a large red cap which reads "Grant Security
>System".

The Brits have a slightly different approach, while we're locking our
columns and removing the steering wheel, they disable it by putting the
wheel in "neutral" ... so the wheel spins freely with no effect on the
front wheels ... that'd be scarey if you were an American car theif and
tried to hot wire/steal a car in Britain ...



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 09:00:51 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Chassis/drivetrain questions, 5.0 swap

> So I have a few questions on 73-79 4wd Ford trucks. First off, what year
>did they come with front discs standard?

I think this was 76, though could be one year on either side ... they were
optional from 73 on .. someone said they were standard, that was for 4x2 ...


>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?

All you really need then is the bellhousing from a 302 to bolt up what
tranny? Nearly every combo has been available through the years, so it'll
likely be just find a truck with that option pak and grab the bellhousing
(or talk nicely with your parts guys) ... I think you'll need to decide
what you want exactly for tranny before you figure out an x-fer case option
... though my sister has an F250 w/5.0 E4OD BW1356 ... you may have to do
some rigging to get a shifter for the x-fer case, but if you swapped
everything over (including wiring or Baumann's kit for the tranny shift
points) you would probably get almost everything you wanted (except for
lots of power)


I read somewhere that I need to use an 11
>inch clutch, will this bolt to the 5.0's flywheel?

Probably depends how much hp you've got ... and what flywheel you use ...


Also, someone told me
>that on 78-79's the rear of the frame was wider. Is this true?
>
Dunno about 1/2 tons, 3/4tons changed mid 77 though ... that was also the
REAR frame rails, so just different bed bolt pattern ...


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 06:58:45 -0700
From: "Scott Jensen"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Run on

A few things I've encountered with run on are a loose ground between the
engine and firewall, (funny how that strap keeps popping up on the posts),
and vacuum leakage. I'd check to make sure the ground strap and carb are
still tight. Then check the vacuum hoses.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:02:16 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - anti theft devices

>
> 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!
>
That's what we all asked him! He just said his uncle was weird, and
must've bumped it one day, or realized it didn't start after he'd moved it
out of the def. position in the spring ...

definitely an anti-theft device 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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:13:23 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes

>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.

Dave, if this is an M-block I'm very disappointed ... :) hehehe ...

>Here are the details of my engine configuration:
>
>351M, all stock, except for slightly richer Mustang carburetor (installed a

Oh no! it is an M block!


>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.
>
Hmmm...running cooler may increase the emissions slightly, but can't say
that it should hurt things that badly ... if the truck is completely warmed
up when it goes in there it shouldn't be bad at all, unless its runnin
cooler and your choke isn't clearing itself all the way ...

>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.
>
2K is high rpm? you work on diesels don't ya ? Sorry for razzin ya so
bad, just havin one of those days ... I would start looking into elec.
problems, though I suppose that means duraspark for you doesn't it ?
hmm... might check plug gaps again, just to be sure they're close to what
they're supposed to be ... what about vacuum issues ? all those hoses good
and not cracked ? (heater control pod if you have a/c too?)

>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?)
>
Probably a good bet that's not bringin idle back where its supposed to be
... which could throw off emissions I would guess, might actually simulate
the vacuum issues ... hmmm... could be on to something there, but I
wouldn't have thought so ...

>Should I try leaning out the idle mixture screws? (but HC looks ok)

Maybe you should start by just fixing the little things (like the return
spring and such) ... also throw a vacuum gauge on ... see how its doin
there, possibly you are a bit off on mixture...

>Could a faulty fuel pump contribute to float level probs that would cause this
>failure?

If the pump was OVER pressurizing yes, otherwise it might cause a lean
condition, but I would think that would only be at high rev's ... the motor
runs off the fuel in the fuel bowls, not the stuff immediately out of the
hose (assumin carb not injector of course) ... it should only affect things
when it starts to get really low in the bowl, which isn't likely in the
idle situations.

>Could a defective thermostat making the engine run cooler than normal cause
>that
>high CO?

Yup, I would think so ... a probe in the radiator vanes might tell you
where you're runnin at...

>Could the (maybe original 19-yr old) cat converter be going bad? (HC reading
>still looks pretty good, though)
>
Noooo....those'd never go bad .... sounds like might be a good excuse for a
Dynomax hi-flo cat :) I would think you would notice some power losses
through a clogged/bad converter...


>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.
>
Does anyone else find this ironic ? Is this one of those systems that
works great when new, but sucks after 5 years ?

Don't take it too personally Dave :)

wait, why am I the only one responding to this when I'm one of the few
living in a non-emissions state ?

Lets hear from those of you who go through this every year ...


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 09:32:41 -0500
From: 3granch ayrix.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Engine won't crank

Where is the regulator???? is that the steel-grey box behind the solenoid on the inner fender???

Yes. I got one at Autozone for $10. My battery was worn down to the point that I could not jump start it or even charge it. In its final minutes of cranking on it, I would loose power to the radio just like you described. I don't know if this will solve your problem but I hope it helps.

Ronnie Rowton
Braxton, MS
78 F250 4WD 351M NP435
76 F100 2WD Supercab 360 C6




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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:37:27 -0700
From: "Scott Jensen"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Engine won't crank

I went through this a few years ago and after I replaced the normal things
the intermittent problem was still there. Seems to me a new starter switch
solved the problem.

I've used my Ohm meter to check the battery and its worked well; however, a
clamp on current tester will tell you what kind of shape the alternator is
in and show other problems as well. Clamp it on, start the motor, (ooops,
if you can!), and turn everything on. Lights, stereo up, 4 ways, and fan.
Doing this, I've found that a few brand new rebuilt alt. don't produce the
rated current. Sure, they produce enough so the tester at the parts store
shows them to be good, especially if the tester only measures voltage. But
not enough to keep the battery charged for more than a couple weeks. A
lifetime warranty would be great if it covered labor, pain and suffering,
but they don't. I take mine to the electrical shop now. They clean em up,
use quality parts and the darn thing works when they're done. It doesn't
cost all that much. I've rebuilt my own before, but not in my sleep..:)
Just my 2 cents.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: draco pacifier.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: E-Test Woes

I am not an expert at this, but I have had some experience.

Dave R wrote:
> 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!

I wouldn't use the words "way higher" unless the difference was
more than twice. Also the High RPM CO doubled, yes, but still
is at a reasonable level.

> The e-test report lists the following possible causes for high CO
> failure:

High CO is unburned fuel meaning too rich.

> Incorrect air/fuel mixture
too rich.

> Dirty air cleaner, choke or carb/fuel injection
Air cleaner restricting air, choke not fully open, both can
cause a rich condition.

> Carb float level improperly adjusted
Causing a rich condition.

> Inoperative air pump
No air injected into the exhaust to complete combution of
unburned fuel.

> Diluted lubricating oil
New one on me.

> Soaked fuel evaporative canister
So the air cleaner is drawing fuel from the canister?

This is not rocket science.

> Here are my guesses/questions:

> Should I try leaning out the idle mixture screws? (but HC looks ok)

Here are my last numbers from WA emissions test.

HC CO CO+CO2
LIMIT 900 6.00 >=6.00 Idle speed 956 rpm
MEAS. 277 6.72 17.36

HC CO CO+CO2
LIMIT 410 4.30 >=6.00 Cruise speed on a treadmill
MEAS. 136 4.09 16.50

Like you, the only failure was idle speed CO. I turned my
idle screws in to the point the motor would barely keep runnnig
smoothly and the next result was:

HC CO CO+CO2
LIMIT 900 6.00 >=6.00 Idle speed 956 rpm
MEAS. 86 0.16 12.44

HC CO CO+CO2
LIMIT 410 4.30 >=6.00 Cruise speed on a treadmill
MEAS. 114 3.73 16.38

Notice just how much the Idle CO dropped with a slight drop in
cruise CO. These numbers are for my car BTW, not my truck.

The only way to be confident you will pass is to take it to a
shop that has an exhaut analyzer. Our emission check fees are
$12 for two checks. So I usually try it myself first.

> Could a faulty fuel pump contribute to float level probs that would
> cause this failure?

Anything that affects your float level will affect the mixture.
If the pump is putting out too much pressure your float level
might be high. If not enough flow the level may be low.

> Could a defective thermostat making the engine run cooler than normal
> cause that high CO?

I would look at the carb. first.

> Could the (maybe original 19-yr old) cat converter be going bad? (HC
> reading still looks pretty good, though)

My cat of the feline variety, so I can't speak from experience.


Mark in Southwest Washington
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacifier.com/~draco
- --
'74 F-100 Ranger XLT 4X4

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:12:45 -0500
From: Stu Varner
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Marino was here/progress on the 71 4x4

Fellas, Tony "the kid" Marino just left and I thought I would update you
all on
what was accomplished with his efforts over the last few days on my 71 4x4
resto.

Tony needed a little vacation from the busy life he has at work (we all
know he does nothing all day long)
so I invited him down for a little truck fun, he also had some trannies an
engine and a few other parts he was bringing me
so this worked out perfectly.

First we ripped into the front end of the Dana 44 and completely reworked
the front hub
assemblies with new Timken bearings and races. The axle shafts were soooooo
clean you could read the hand written part numbers in yellow paint. Truly
amazing!
The drums on the front are original to the truck
and turned up nicely. Then we installed new brake shoes and wheel
cylinders etc.

I received quite an education on Dana 44 front hub assemblies!!!!!

Our best guess is the original owner probably never put brakes on this
truck.....ever.

New brake lines were formed and installed and the rear brakes received new
drums
and shoes along with new springs and wheel cylinders etc.

New universal joints were installed, drive shafts were painted and are
ready to be installed.

Then we went junkyarding where he found a really nice rear slider for his
93 F-150 4x4
and a set of 1979 "Freewheeling F-150 package" Ford stock aluminum rims
that are 15 x 6.
They are sweet and that kid stole them from the salvage yard owner!

dialog went something like this:

Druie the boneyard owner: "I'll take for them"
Tony's reply before the owner finished saying the word 'them': "I'lltakem"
(one word!) hehehe
Tony almost broke his arm getting to his wallet! Funniest thing I have
ever seen!!!
They are very rare, I have only seen them on 2 other trucks in my life.

Had I known those rare rims were there I would have bought them myself! I
guess they will look awesome on his 1970 flareside 4x4.

Then we hung the hood on my truck, the final body part to be installed, and
adjusted it. Fits and closes nicely.
I have front and rear glass coming tomorrow to be installed. It is
starting to look like a truck again, finally!

I was disappointed we ran out of time and did not get to fire the engine
for the first time while he was here.
My goal was to get it running and cam broke in by yesterday but it was not
to happen......soon though, I WILL get to that soon.

Overall we enjoyed 3 great days (30 hours of working) of Ford Truckin fun
together even if it was 98 degrees and a heat index pushing 106 to 109.

We should have some new pics of the engine/tranny and tailgate posted to
the web site in a day or two.
In a few more weeks, I should have some of the completed truck assembled to
share. Stay tuned.

Is this list great or what! Thanks Tony! Thanks Ken!

Later,

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: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:22:39 -0700
From: "Sam Weatherby"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - '66 F-100 Money Pit :)

Try scoring a cheap running FE from a junkyard or classifeds, swap that in
and rebuild the original at your leisure.
-srw

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Lee
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:anti-theft devices

What do you do with the wheel after you remove it. In
a car you could lock it in the trunk, but I would have
to leave it in my pickup cab or carry it around all
day.

>It allows you to remove
>the wheel and replace it with a large red cap which
>reads "GrantSecurity System".


_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:31:28 -0700
From: Don Grossman
Subject: FTE 61-79 - There was a sad sight today

Just got home from work and had the misfortune to see 1 of the
cleanest 76-77 F-250 4x4's on the back of tow truck. The Warn 8274 and
bumper were somewhere in the location of the radiator, both front frame
rails bent about six inches to the drivers side and the whole truck had
a twist. Sorry to bring the bad news but another one heads to that
great FoMoCo in the sky..... :(

- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net
99 Contour
63 F-100 4x4


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:41:42 -0400
From: James Oxley
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - There was a sad sight today

Don Grossman wrote:
>
> Just got home from work and had the misfortune to see 1 of the
> cleanest 76-77 F-250 4x4's on the back of tow truck. The Warn 8274 and
> bumper were somewhere in the location of the radiator, both front frame
> rails bent about six inches to the drivers side and the whole truck had
> a twist. Sorry to bring the bad news but another one heads to that
> great FoMoCo in the sky..... :(
>
> --

I go to a yard (Dave and Shorties!)in eastern Pa (slightly west of
philly). You should see some of the trucks that get in there. I saw a
78, almost perfect body, red/black 2WD extended cab. I'm like, "what the
heck is this doing here". Even the interior seemed nice (although mostly
stripped allready). The fenders and hood were allready crunched from
someone damaging them in the yard. They won't sell whole trucks. Too
bad, as they get some nice one's.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:11:36 -0800
From: "Matthew Schumacher"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Carburaters

Travis,

First of all you need to tell us who makes the carb. Is it a holley?
Is it a motorcraft? If its a holley send the list number to me and I'll
tell you exactly what it is. The list can be located right on the front
where the air cleaner and choke is.

Second, do you care about the kick down linkage? If it was on a ch*vy
chances are it doesn't have the right kick down.

Last, are the second two barrels mechanical or vacuum? If they are
vacuum then it might work, if they are mechanical then it will more
than likely be set up for big block racing and you might need to play
with it so it doesn't flood your engine.

schu

oh, everyone check out my first wheels, I am only 17 in the picture...
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://staff.denalisites.com/schu/truck.jpg
I don't have a pic of my newest ford truck :(

Travis Wrote:

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: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:27:06 -0700
From: MC
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)

So what exactly makes a 428 a 428? I understand that it is an FE,
but is it a special block FE? The 360 & 390 both have a 4" bore, with
the 360 having about 3.5" stroke, and the 390 having about 3.75", right?
So is the 428 a longer stroke or a bigger bore? And where does the 427
fit in? and the 410?


- --
Matt Cozad
When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.

[||||||]=[|00|]=(|____________________)


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:33:40 -0700
From: sparky mail.island.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re- Engine won't crank..kinda long

Ok time for my input, be it right or be it wrong :) I am on digest-mode so
I am a little behind on this thread. To me it sounds like you have a
"tremendous extra resistance" somewhere in the ground circuit. As soon as
you try to turn the starter the current is all dropped at this resistance.
I seen this a while back when I helped a friend who had the same problem
on his Ch*vy, at first I thought it was a bad starter then cables then
battery but all were checked fine. It turned out to be a dirty/corroded
mounting plate for the starter. The ground circuit for the starter actually
goes thru the starter casing to the engine block. I removed his starter,
wire brushed the mounting face and also the mounting face on the engine,
then wire brushed the mounting bolts. Put on a coat of dielectric grease,
reinstalled the starter and it started like it was supposed to.
A quick way to check this is to run a jumper cable from the negative
battery post to the starter casing, ensure both contact points are very
clean, use a wire brush to clean them up regardless better to be sure. Then
try and start your truck, and well if it starts fine that is the problem if
not I would check all the electrical connections again, cleaning them very
well with a wire brush then slapping some dielectric grease or vaseline
over them so they wont corroded again.
You could also remove the starter from the truck and reconnect the power
wire to it then ground the casing to the negative battery terminal or the
engine block using a jumper cable. Then while holding the starter securely
against the inner fender or wherever get someone to turn the key to start
momentarily. If the starter turns then your solenoid, battery, starter,
ignition switch and asscociated wiring are most likely ok. However you
could still have a high resistance somewhere as there is no real load on
the starter, but at least you will confirm that everything will work. Be
sure you are clear of the starter drive, dont want you to catch your
pinkies or have it grab it a wire bundle :)
Let us know if this helps. If it doesnt I will continue to research this
"werid" electrical problem, and try to come up with more ideas.

Sparky
73 F250
4x4 3?0FE (still havent measured the stroke to find out for sure)

> From: IanBoss69 aol.com
>started fine one morning, went to the
> store, came back out, wouldnt start,,,,,large tow truck tried to jump
> it,,,didnt work,,,guy said it was probably wa the starter,,,,got a new
> starter,,,,didnt start, lights and radio seemed to shut off every time i
> tried to crank the engine,



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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:41:20 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)

> So what exactly makes a 428 a 428? I understand that it is an FE,
>but is it a special block FE?

Well there's different 428's even, like the Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet.
The 428 has a block similar to the rest of the FE's ... the CJ and SCJ have
thicker main webbing and are stronger blocks (see www.wrljet.com for more
info on these motors, but I'll cover the basics)


>The 360 & 390 both have a 4" bore, with
>the 360 having about 3.5" stroke, and the 390 having about 3.75", right?

Yup so far so good ...(4.05 technically)

>So is the 428 a longer stroke or a bigger bore?

Yes, a little of both ... 3.98" stroke, 4.13", enough that very few blocks
will bore that far out without the castings getting too thin to use. (rumor
is the FT motors will)


> And where does the 427
>fit in?

The 427 is a bigger bore shorter stroke, generally higher performance
because of intake and exhaust stuff ...

>and the 410?

This one's easy 428 crank 360/390 block ...


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 18:42:22 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ford truck theft

> >> 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

No your sentence is what you'd say if the truck was already stolen but you
were not sure yet whether or not it was a real thief.


> I would feel a lot better knowing my truck were stolen by an unreal thief...

Ahh in that case you're the first person I hear of feeling better after
your truck was stolen :)

But yeah a casual thief may drive it around, beat it up and then
leave it somewhere when it runs out of gas. Bad enough but an "organized"
thief may steal it and take it to mexico and you never see it again.

Sometimes on TV you see how thieves get spotted and use a stolen truck/car
as a getaway car. They just keep going until there is nothing left to go
on. I can't imagine what the owner would be going through when he sees a
video like that ..

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:44:53 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re- Engine won't crank..kinda long

> I seen this a while back when I helped a friend who had the same problem
>on his Ch*vy, at first I thought it was a bad starter then cables then
>battery but all were checked fine. It turned out to be a dirty/corroded
>mounting plate for the starter. The ground circuit for the starter actually
>goes thru the starter casing to the engine block.


I just thought of that this morning ... my truck did this once and I took
the starter in to get tested, tested fine, put it back on started right up
.. the starter just wasn't tight enough to get a good contac (well that and
there was grease/gravel/mess between the starter and the bellhousing) ...
definitely something worth checking into ...


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 19:00:49 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On

> extra fuel is a big cause of it, course that's cause dad likes to tune
> everything rich so it'll start in the winter, so every time I get one of
> his cars I lean it back out and set the idle down below 1000 ...

Don't you have the choke / accel pump / high idle cam for that? The only
effect extreme cold seems to have on my truck (tested down to -10 F) is that
it hardly shifts in 2nd by itself until it's warmed up a little. I guess
that's also because the transmission oil is really thick.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:09:54 -0700
From: "Southerland, Rich"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...

Anyone changed to a newer front group on '75-up van with round headlights to
the newer square version?

My '77 E150 project is moving slowly, but moving. A "friend of a friend"
has an '86 E250 that was t-boned. He bought it back from the ins. company
for practically nothing. The drive train and suspension are spoken for, but
the front group and both bumpers are there.

What all do I need to take from the '86? How much fabrication will be
required? BTW, I get the gas tanks too!
Thanks in advance...
Rich

The extra mile has no traffic jams...

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:38:45 -0700
From: "James A. Doty"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...

Hi


"Southerland, Rich" wrote:

> Anyone changed to a newer front group on '75-up van with round headlights to
> the newer square version?

I have a '78 E-150 that I plan to do the same thing to. After asking around I
was
told that it's just a matter of replacing the grille and replacing the headlight
mounts.

Our front blinkers/markers are mounted below the grille though, so I've been
wondering
what to do about the grille mounted blinker/markers. I wonder if driving lights
couldn't
be installed there?

James A. Doty
dotyj earthlink.net

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:47:50 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What is a Cruise-O-Matic

In a message dated 7/29/99 9:06:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jstrauss inetport.com writes:

> As for examples, in my '64 Ford Truck shop
> manual, the automatic transmission for my (former) truck is referred to as
> "HD Cruise-O-Matic", and in my '68 Ford Truck shop manual, there is a
> section for "FMX", "C4", and "C6".
Now we're getting somewhere! The 67 Shop manual does not mention the FMX. I
had heard before though that the FMX was a hybrid of two other older
transmission types. More data needed...anybody else care to jump in?

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: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 19:50:29 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes

> Probably a good bet that's not bringin idle back where its supposed to be
> ... which could throw off emissions I would guess, might actually simulate

For some reason my idle tends to stay high too, I am confident I do not
have vacuum leaks but the throttle just seems to hang up a little bit. I
can take the idle screw out and it'll still do 500 rpm. Only when I pump
the gas quickly it would close far enough to stall the engine. I put the
return spring on another point where it is stronger and now it idles at
560 rpm in drive. The spec is 550 so that's good enough.

> If the pump was OVER pressurizing yes, otherwise it might cause a lean
> condition, but I would think that would only be at high rev's ... the motor

The specified pressure is 7-8 psi I believe, but my 351M still runs okay
at 1.5 psi, be it a little lean. I use that when I go to high altitude,
works like a charm.

> >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.
> >
> Does anyone else find this ironic ? Is this one of those systems that
Yes I noticed that. I always thought the EGR recirculated the exhaust
gasses to complete combustion whenever you're not using all your CID's.

And I thought that the only problems were that they'd get stuck open
(like a huge vacuum leak) or stuck closed (higher emissions).
Disconnecting it will probably close it.

> wait, why am I the only one responding to this when I'm one of the few
> living in a non-emissions state ?
they still exist?

> Lets hear from those of you who go through this every year ...

Well when I bought my bronco it did not have smog. Legally the seller has
to provide this, but hey, I got a good deal so I went for it. First
visual was a problem, they said I needed cats. But then it turned out to
be an out-of-state vehicle that never had them (specified on valve cover
also) so he let me through. This was a state referee so it must even have
been legal. It had, lets see..

max avg your
HC 350 95 13
CO 3.50 0.90 0.72
CO2 14.3
O2 0.1
rpm 2421

Since then I've done a lot of tuning up, rebuilt the carb, fixed vacuum
problems, worked on the ignition system etc. I wonder if the emissions
are any better. It certainly runs better, feels like it has halfway more
power and it gets 12 mpg instead of 8 like it used to. Then again
emissions don't always go together with engine performance...

Going back to the original message, I read it, and concluded he'd already
thought of everything I could think of. If the cat is 19 yr old I would
start there. Didn't I read a post here on the list they already start
going downhill after 3k miles?

A fuel pressure regulator may also work, you can influence the mixture a
little by changing the pressure. But if he never needed it something must
have gone bad or out of adjustment.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:54:02 -0400
From: James Oxley
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Highest gear ratio available for truck rear.

Hey all,

As many of you know, I have been contemplating putting Unimog hub
reduction units on the end of a set of Ford axles. If you want to know
why, see this;

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thecore.com/~luxjo/mog/mog05.jpg

Anyway, I found out that the Mog pumpkin ratio is 3.54 which you would
think would be perfect, but the hub ratio is 2.13. This would make an
effective ratio of 7.54. That is a little high, even with the 44 inch
tires I have (maybe I need 54's, heehee). It would be like having 5.14's
with stock 30 inch tires :-(.

Using late model big block 5 spd (assuming overdrive of .67) would
give me an equivlant gear ratio of 3.44 in 5th gear (with diff ratio of
3.54 and 44 inch tires).

Keeping stock tranny (1:1 4th), if I dropped to 3.00 diff ratios, it
would be like having 4.35 gears with stock 30 inch tires (that would not
be that bad, I guess (3200 RPM 55 mph). So my question is, what is the
highest gear ratio for a front dana 44 and 60, and a rear dana 60.
Reider racing shows 3.00 for all of these. I'm sure 9" rears came with
some rediculous high gears used in cars. My biggest hurdle would prob be
the reverse rotation fronts I'm sure. I don't really need big diff's, as
won't be transferring much power to the axle shafts. I'm sure the mog
hubsets will hold up as they have rediculous first gears of 20:1 and
GVWR of 8-9000 and up.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:54:20 -0400
From: "Parsons, Raymond"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: anti theft devices

>>. I might try putting something in the door jamb
right above the interior light switch. Something protected from the
elements, but not an obvious place to look.

I did just that in my 67 F250; I bought a keyed switch (alarm switch from a
Corve%&). I drilled a hole in a piece of 1/8" steel and mounted the switch
in the steel, then riveted the sheet over the access hole in the door jam
(towards the front of the door). If someone was to try to remove the
switch, it falls into the void and can not be retrieved without removing the
rivets ( I know, I tried it!!). The switch is wired into the coil so that
if the switch is not turned on, no power will go to the coil. I have also
chained the hood; not the prettiest but at least I know my truck is somewhat
secure ( I have to store it as I am at the limit on cars at home).
Ray

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:58:29 EDT
From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cheap 4x4's in georgia.

i heard a story about a 427 SOHC that was shoehorned into a 67 shelby, by a
ford dealer, it was a drag car and had been running a warmed over 427 medium
riser in it.
the engine blew up and they ordered a stock bottom end and over the counter
cammer goodies to go on it, first pass at the track it toted the front end
and trashed the rear quarters on the car.

jeff grant

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:00:05 -0500
From: Jeff Lester
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Changing front group on van...

But why?????? I just found a new grill for my 78 E350 after the wife acquired
a new "hood ornament" a few months ago. The grill are hard to find, but sure
are worth it. There are tons of the 79-91's running around, but not to many
75-78's. I think the the 75-78's look cooler 8^))

But the change to not too hard. The only differences I am aware of are the
following:

1. Grille on the 79-91's incorporates the front marker lights. 75-78's are in
the valence panel.
2. Valence panel on the 79-91's is identical to the 75-78's, minus the marker
light holes.
3. The radiator side support (behind the headlights) might have different hole
patterns between the two series. Might have to drill a few well-located holes.
4. The remaining parts should be identical.

Jeff Lester - La Porte, Texas
78 Ford E350 4x4, 460, C6, NP205, D44/70, 35" BFG MT's
http://www.ford-trucks.com/pictorial/big/1978_e350_1.html

On Thursday, July 29, 1999 12:10 PM, Southerland, Rich [SMTP:rsouther alldata.com] wrote:
> Anyone changed to a newer front group on '75-up van with round headlights to
> the newer square version?
>
> My '77 E150 project is moving slowly, but moving. A "friend of a friend"
> has an '86 E250 that was t-boned. He bought it back from the ins. company
> for practically nothing. The drive train and suspension are spoken for, but
> the front group and both bumpers are there.
>
> What all do I need to take from the '86? How much fabrication will be
> required? BTW, I get the gas tanks too!
> Thanks in advance...
> Rich
[snip]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:17:43 EDT
From: TWL1911 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Carburaters

Hey
no its a holley, but seeing how i have a manual tranny i wouldnt need a
kickdown linkage. its a mechanical linkage. so if you know how to fix that
thanks
travis
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:25:17 -0700
From: MC
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)

William S Hart wrote:

> Well there's different 428's even, like the Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet.
> The 428 has a block similar to the rest of the FE's ... the CJ and SCJ have
> thicker main webbing and are stronger blocks (see www.wrljet.com for more
> info on these motors, but I'll cover the basics)

Wow! I want one of those! I've seen that web address before, but I never
checked it out until now. Thanks Wish!

- --
Matt Cozad
When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.

[||||||]=[|00|]=(|____________________)


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:33:03 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Run-On

>> extra fuel is a big cause of it, course that's cause dad likes to tune
>> everything rich so it'll start in the winter, so every time I get one of
>> his cars I lean it back out and set the idle down below 1000 ...
>
>Don't you have the choke / accel pump / high idle cam for that? The only
>effect extreme cold seems to have on my truck (tested down to -10 F) is that
>it hardly shifts in 2nd by itself until it's warmed up a little. I guess
>that's also because the transmission oil is really thick.

Yeah, the choke/high idle cam are for that, but he always sets the mixture,
then the choke, so he's set the mixture on a cold car, and the choke on a
warm one ... later he'll fix the choke, and not lean it back out ... it
will start and stay runnin when its cold, I'll give him that, but man is it
rich, not to mention easy to flood ...


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 13:37:21 -0500
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes

>> Probably a good bet that's not bringin idle back where its supposed to be
>> ... which could throw off emissions I would guess, might actually simulate
>
>For some reason my idle tends to stay high too, I am confident I do not
>have vacuum leaks but the throttle just seems to hang up a little bit. I
>can take the idle screw out and it'll still do 500 rpm. Only when I pump
>the gas quickly it would close far enough to stall the engine. I put the
>return spring on another point where it is stronger and now it idles at
>560 rpm in drive. The spec is 550 so that's good enough.
>
That reminds me of an important tip when setting your idle, throttle it
back with the screw, then manually snap the throttle open and let it come
back to rest, you'll usually find its a bit lower than where you expected
... why do this? so when that idiot in the other lane changes without
signaling you don't kill the motor ...



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 13:58:11 -0500
From: pdesanto Cinergy.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Generic Cruise-0-Matics ?

> From: John Strauss
> Subject: What is a Cruise-O-Matic ?
>
> >> "Cruise-O-Matic" is a Ford term which is applied to all 3-speed
> automatics
> >> in sales literature.

same
> thing. For sure the FMX is a cast iron case and seperate bellhousing, as
> is the Cruise-O-Matic. C-4 is aluminum case with seperate bellhousing,
> and
> C-6 is aluminum case with integral bellhousing.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
John- that's been my take on the "Cruise-O- Matic" term for years
too. Seems they called them all that, right or wrong. Kinda like calling
tissues.... "Kleenex", of your refrigerator a "Frigidare". On my 66 Mustang
the trans was called a Cruise-O-Matic, even though it was a C-4. My 71 F-250
had one too, but it was a C-6. I had a 79 Cougar XR7 with a 302 that had the
FMX.
I think Ford's first auto was in 52, and it was a FX or FM or
something like that. ( can't remember now, and tranny books are at home )
But I think it evolved into the FMX of later years. It also had the cast
iron case and separate bellhousing that all the FMX's have. As far as them
being similar to the C-4, the ones I've done didn't seem to have much in
common with thier older cousins. The FMX's were built big, heavy, and 50's
tough. Everything in a C-4 is tiny by comparison.


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Pat Brown
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - E-Test Woes

Wish writes:
> >
> >For some reason my idle tends to stay high too, I am confident I do not
> >have vacuum leaks but the throttle just seems to hang up a little bit. I
> >can take the idle screw out and it'll still do 500 rpm. Only when I pump
> >the gas quickly it would close far enough to stall the engine. I put the
> >return spring on another point where it is stronger and now it idles at
> >560 rpm in drive. The spec is 550 so that's good enough.
> >
> That reminds me of an important tip when setting your idle, throttle it
> back with the screw, then manually snap the throttle open and let it come
> back to rest, you'll usually find its a bit lower than where you expected
> ... why do this? so when that idiot in the other lane changes without
> signaling you don't kill the motor ...

This is usually a sign of worn throttle shaft bores. I had one get
so bad that the throttle would stick starting out, making me push
a little harder, then giving everyone whiplash when the throttle
finally opened. Repeated 'snapping' on the gas pedal would give a
different idle every time. This is usually made worse by the
installation of a heavy-duty (read:garage door) sized return
spring, which greatly accelerates(!) the wear.

A well equipped carb shop can rebore and install bushings, it's
fairly inexpensive, and helps out old carbs a lot! This can also
be done to EFI throttle bodies.
- --
Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 15:20:49 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 428 block prices, was (Sonic checking)

Bore and stroke for various Fe's

352 = 4.00 bore 3.50 stroke
360 = 4.05 bore 3.50 stroke
390 = 4.05 bore 3.78 stroke
410 = 4.05 bore 3.98 stroke
427 = 4.23 bore 3.78 stroke
428 = 4.13 bore 3.98 stroke

Jason



MC wrote:
>
> So what exactly makes a 428 a 428? I understand that it is an FE,
> but is it a special block FE? The 360 & 390 both have a 4" bore, with
> the 360 having about 3.5" stroke, and the 390 having about 3.75", right?
> So is the 428 a longer stroke or a bigger bore? And where does the 427
> fit in? and the 410?
>
> --
> Matt Cozad
== 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 not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.