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 #289
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 Wednesday, August 18 1999 Volume 03 : Number 289



=======================================================================
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 - Columbus Ohio List Members?
RE: FTE 61-79 - Slumbering van is fully awake!
FTE 61-79 - "Hot Rod Hoedown" Car Show in Philadelphia
FTE 61-79 - more air conditioning
FTE 61-79 - Columbus Ohio List Members?
FTE 61-79 - Vans
Re: FTE 61-79 - Vans
Re: FTE 61-79 - Vans
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance
FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes
FTE 61-79 - I whant power steering!
FTE 61-79 - RE: 400 performance
FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes
FTE 61-79 - HV Oil Pump... was 400 performance
FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal
Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)
Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.
RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal
FTE 61-79 - stereo
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)
Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)
Re: FTE 61-79 - stereo
FTE 61-79 - rebuild
Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.
FTE 61-79 - 1961 uni-body
FTE 61-79 - Unknown
Re: FTE 61-79 - stereo
Re: FTE 61-79 - Unknown

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 09:16:13 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Columbus Ohio List Members?

In a message dated 8/17/99 1:35:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
nukegm ford-trucks.com writes:

> >Anyone on the list live in or around Columbus?
> >
> >If so, the old free breakfast (or lunch) deal is open for this
> >Wednesday....if your truck is running, I'll pay for the meal....

Does it count if you have to swap parts between trucks to get them fired up?

Stock Man
1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims)
1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd
1966 F-250 I6 240 2wd LWB Flare Side
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 08:17:40 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Slumbering van is fully awake!

> Got all the lights and flashers working. Had to replace both sockets on
> left side. 12v going in, but only 2v coming out. New sockets ($5 each)
> fixed that. Self-c*ncel of turn signals doesn't work. Nothing looks
> broken. Any ideas?
>

Can you move the steering wheel around even though you don't have tilt ?
Likely your bearings/bushings are worn out in the steering column, that's
the problem with mine anyway ... someday I'll get around to replacing ...

> Took it into smog test station Saturday. Expected it to fail.
> Came back to
> see how bad and the guy told me it passed. Said it ran cleaner than most
> vehicles that are 10 years newer! Woo-hoo! Total cash outlay
> so far, $425
> and that includes a stereo! Van has only 111K on it and drives great.
>

Who says old trucks aren't cost effective ???

have fun and keep us up to date ...

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 4.6L
73ish F100 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 11:37:05 -0400
From: "Don Haring, Jr."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - "Hot Rod Hoedown" Car Show in Philadelphia

Hello,

I wanted to let everyone know about a new car show that I just found about.


HOT ROD HOEDOWN sponsored by the Lucky Hell Drivers
Sunday, September 12, 1999, 11am-5pm
Near Silk City Diner, 5th and Spring Garden St., Philadelphia, PA
FREE registration, FREE admission, FREE entertainment

The show is open to all makes, and the organizers are really hoping for
cars that are *driven*. Almost anything is welcome -- hot rods, kustoms,
trucks, beaters, antiques, motorcycles, bicycles, scooters, etc.

There are bands lined up and there will be a booth for pinstriping by
"Wildman", a 50s pinstripe artist. This should be a lively show and is not
intended as a competition, but rather a good chance for Philadelphia auto
nuts to get together.

There hasn't been much for the crowd in Philadelphia, and this show should
be a good start. Hopefully some other get-togethers and cruises will follow
in the future.

I don't have a phone number for the organizers, but if you are interested,
I'll try to get more information. I was told they have space for about 150
cars and you should be OK if you just show up. There are at least 50
vehicles pre-registered ... 50-100 cool vehicles together in the city will
be a very cool sight.

For those people in the Falcon Club, this is the same date as the trip to
Wellsboro. I don't want to steal anyone away from that trip, but this show
is a fun alternative if you are not going on the trip.

I'll be there with my Club Wagon since it's my daily driver.

- -don

- --
Don in Philadelphia
Internet Director, Keystone Chapter FCA | 66 Falcon Deluxe Club Wagon
Falconaut: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconaut | 61 Falcon Futura
Keystone: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconkey | classic scooters and bicycles


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 11:07:58 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - more air conditioning

>> Perhaps we can pool our intellectual resources, and fix both of our
ac units. I'm suffering through these south Texas days, too. I'll
have to fix the van's ac when I get it back, before I can truly enjoy
driving it again. I had the refrigerant checked around the first of
the year, and when I drove it this past weekend, it just wasn't
kicking out much cold air. Where do we start????

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 Monday, August 16, 1999 3:49 PM, John LaGrone
[SMTP:jlagrone ford-trucks.com] wrote:
> OK gang, I am going to take my prior knowlege and what you guys and gals
> have taugt me about air conditioning and fix the air on my wife's Towncar.
> The shop wanted $900 to replace a bunch of stuff that doesn't need
> replacing, so I have a big budget for errors. Want to bet I can bring it in
> for under $200? $300?
>
> FTE content: We now cruise around town in my air conditioned F150. :-)
>
> -- John

Jeff,

Here is my plan. Last night I drove my 79 F150 to HiLo and bought a new
accumulator (receiver-dryer), a new expansion orifice tube, and the special
tool to work Ford's wierd o-ring locks (not needed on our trucks). I already
have an o-ring assortment kit. Tonight the objective is to replace the
o-rings, pull a vacuum and see how it holds. If it holds well, then I am
going to figure out a way to check system pressure with my air compressor
and paint gun dryers. When I am satisfied that the system will hold both a
vacuum and pressure, I will replace the accumulator and orifice tube, pull a
vacuum, then take it to get charged. The shop said that both the condensor
and evaporator needed to be replaced. My theory is that the o-rings are the
culprits and the shop was approaching me with a jar of Vaseline and a rubber
glove. Too bad, too, I just bought over $400 worth of tires and thought they
were trustworthy.

I'll update you tomorrow on how she holds. When you get ready to charge
yours up again, take it and ask for a system check and leak check. It is
worth the money (usually about $40) and then you know what parts to either
replace or investigate further.

- -- 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: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 11:10:45 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Columbus Ohio List Members?

>> > Wednesday....if your truck is running, I'll pay for the meal....
>
Oh sure, now you have to have the truck RUNNING ... ;)

Yea, but he didn't say MOVING. :-)

- -- 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: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 11:45:06 -0700
From: Al Evitts
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Vans

Ken Payne: I also am trying to save an E150 from the crusher, I have
got it going, runs fairly well,am starting on the interior. I have
replaced all the rubbers and window felts with JC Whitney stuff but cant
find any rear door rubbers know of a place that has them? This one has
been sitting also, don't know how long but it shows 38000 miles. I
believe the 2d generation Ford E series is the best vehicle they ever
made. I hope to resurrect this one. FWIW

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 13:07:20 EDT
From: TWL1911 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Vans


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 13:08:01 EDT
From: TWL1911 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Vans

Sorry again man aol has really been screwing me over anyways on FTE content
how do you guys manage to find these vans and stuff
Travis
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 10:17:10 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance

>What I found interesting is the warnings against the HV oil pump. I ran one
>in my old 400 for 35k miles with no problems with stock cleavite bearings
>(till the #2 intake pushrod bent & ejected the lifter). In fact, that pump is
>now running in the replacement 400 Ive installed. My old 302 (from years ago)
>also ran one well for a long time (60k miles). My only reason for doing so is
>to ensure plenty of oil is available. What is the weakness you're referring
>to introducing by doing so?

The problem with high volume and/or high pressure pumps is the extra
torque needed to turn them. The power required to drive a positive
displacement oil pump is: HP = PSI x GPM / 1714
(This is hydraulic horspower, and the inefficiencies of the pump must
also be added to obtain actual drive horspower)
If you increase both the pumped fluid volume (GPM) and the head pressure
(PSI) by 41%, you've doubled the torque requirement to spin the pump
for a given RPM.
That presents a greatly increased load on the pump drive shaft, and on
the distributor gear roll pin...
Even if the roll pin and shaft are up to the increased load, if you are
unfortunate enough to have a small piece of trash get sucked past the
screen and into the pump (bits of broken valve stem seals are the favorite
here), then the odds are much greater that the shaft will twist up or the
roll pin will shear. Lots of times you can get by with a HP/HV pump just
fine, but sometimes you get unlucky and they cause problems, as I'm sure
a few list members here can attest to. I've seen them used with both
good rsults, and with catastrophic results...
They can be very helpful for older motors that have large bearing
clearances (and low oil pressure, which helps keep the load on the pump
down), but for the most part I avoid using them unless absolutely
necessary.

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 15:19:03 -0400
From: kpayne ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!

Hi gang,

This is the web site admin for Ford Truck Enthusiasts. As many of
you know, we have a technical article section on the web site. Its
been a while since an article has been submitted and that section of
the site is a little stale. We like to have a lot of fun stuff for
our visitors. If you'd like to submit an article which describes a
project you've undertake, even a simple project such as installing a
K&N kit, please feel free to submit it to kpayne ford-trucks.com.
We'll publish it on the web site, along with full credit to you and
you retain the copyright.

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:22:46 EDT
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance

Ok, makes sense to me. I've got an electronics background and as such, the
details behind Hydraulics & it's related fields are somewhat unknowns to me.
You've made some good points though. Maybe that extra load is what is
stretching my timing chains. As far as I know, it had the original till 130k
(or was replaced earlier with a stock type before 50k when I got it). That's
when I installed the a decent double roller setup and the HV pump. When it
bent the pushrod & died at 170k, the chain again had about a 1/2" of slack in
it.
One other tidbit that might be in my favor, I'm a zealot when cleaning an
engine's insides during reassembly. The wife says I could eat from em so
there shouldn't be any "little bits o stuff" to jam the pump unless something
disintegrates.
Ill see how this one holds up while I assemble my new engine and make a
decision based on what I see then. Thanks o bunch

George M


In a message dated 8/17/99 1:21:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
sdelanty sonic.net writes:


>What I found interesting is the warnings against the HV oil pump. I ran one
>in my old 400 for 35k miles with no problems with stock cleavite bearings
>(till the #2 intake pushrod bent & ejected the lifter). In fact, that pump
is
>now running in the replacement 400 Ive installed. My old 302 (from years
ago)
>also ran one well for a long time (60k miles). My only reason for doing so
is
>to ensure plenty of oil is available. What is the weakness you're referring
>to introducing by doing so?

The problem with high volume and/or high pressure pumps is the extra
torque needed to turn them. The power required to drive a positive
displacement oil pump is: HP = PSI x GPM / 1714
(This is hydraulic horspower, and the inefficiencies of the pump must
also be added to obtain actual drive horspower)
If you increase both the pumped fluid volume (GPM) and the head pressure
(PSI) by 41%, you've doubled the torque requirement to spin the pump
for a given RPM.
That presents a greatly increased load on the pump drive shaft, and on
the distributor gear roll pin...
Even if the roll pin and shaft are up to the increased load, if you are
unfortunate enough to have a small piece of trash get sucked past the
screen and into the pump (bits of broken valve stem seals are the favorite
here), then the odds are much greater that the shaft will twist up or the
roll pin will shear. Lots of times you can get by with a HP/HV pump just
fine, but sometimes you get unlucky and they cause problems, as I'm sure
a few list members here can attest to. I've seen them used with both
good rsults, and with catastrophic results...
They can be very helpful for older motors that have large bearing
clearances (and low oil pressure, which helps keep the load on the pump
down), but for the most part I avoid using them unless absolutely
necessary.

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty
>>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:23:49 EDT
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 performance

Ok, makes sense to me. I've got an electronics background and as such, the
details behind Hydraulics & it's related fields are somewhat unknowns to me.
You've made some good points though. Maybe that extra load is what is
stretching my timing chains. As far as I know, it had the original till 130k
(or was replaced earlier with a stock type before 50k when I got it). That's
when I installed the a decent double roller setup and the HV pump. When it
bent the pushrod & died at 170k, the chain again had about a 1/2" of slack in
it.
One other tidbit that might be in my favor, I'm a zealot when cleaning an
engine's insides during reassembly. The wife says I could eat from em so
there shouldn't be any "little bits o stuff" to jam the pump unless something
disintegrates.
Ill see how this one holds up while I assemble my new engine and make a
decision based on what I see then. Thanks o bunch

George M


In a message dated 8/17/99 1:21:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
sdelanty sonic.net writes:


>What I found interesting is the warnings against the HV oil pump. I ran one
>in my old 400 for 35k miles with no problems with stock cleavite bearings
>(till the #2 intake pushrod bent & ejected the lifter). In fact, that pump
is
>now running in the replacement 400 Ive installed. My old 302 (from years
ago)
>also ran one well for a long time (60k miles). My only reason for doing so
is
>to ensure plenty of oil is available. What is the weakness you're referring
>to introducing by doing so?

The problem with high volume and/or high pressure pumps is the extra
torque needed to turn them. The power required to drive a positive
displacement oil pump is: HP = PSI x GPM / 1714
(This is hydraulic horspower, and the inefficiencies of the pump must
also be added to obtain actual drive horspower)
If you increase both the pumped fluid volume (GPM) and the head pressure
(PSI) by 41%, you've doubled the torque requirement to spin the pump
for a given RPM.
That presents a greatly increased load on the pump drive shaft, and on
the distributor gear roll pin...
Even if the roll pin and shaft are up to the increased load, if you are
unfortunate enough to have a small piece of trash get sucked past the
screen and into the pump (bits of broken valve stem seals are the favorite
here), then the odds are much greater that the shaft will twist up or the
roll pin will shear. Lots of times you can get by with a HP/HV pump just
fine, but sometimes you get unlucky and they cause problems, as I'm sure
a few list members here can attest to. I've seen them used with both
good rsults, and with catastrophic results...
They can be very helpful for older motors that have large bearing
clearances (and low oil pressure, which helps keep the load on the pump
down), but for the most part I avoid using them unless absolutely
necessary.

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty
>>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 15:33:43 -0700
From: grahams thefuture.net (Smith, Graham)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes

Howdy,
I am one these guys out here reading all this wonderful info. I really
like the 400M discussions especially in light of my current situation.

I am rebuilding a 400M for my truck. I decided to go with a Edlebrock
intake and carb(1400) because I want some additional kick. My question
quickly becomes what do you have to do to get the 4 Barrel carb to work
with the emissions stuff from the factory 2 barrel carb. Or what can
you leave off and have an even better running truck ;-)

This truck does not have a smog pump. It just has the coffee can thing
in the right front by the battery. It also has the two small plastic
values with two vacuum hoses each coming off of the thermostat housing.
There is another small dohicky that was mounted on the right rear of the
motor.

Besides the carb question, does anybody know where to get the tool to
remove the hex plug that is on the right front top of the intake
manifold. I measured it to be a 21/32nd and I haven't found a allen
wrench to fit it yet.

Thanks
Graham
'78 Supercab 4x4 'The Black Beast'



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

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

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 12:48:20 -0400
From: Brent Cole
Subject: FTE 61-79 - I whant power steering!

I have a 1976 2wd parts truck with all the power steering components still
attached. I would like to swap them into my 79 2wd that has a manual setup
on it. Does anyone know of any pitfalls that I don't see in changing the
power steering? The 79 has a 351M and the 76 has a transplanted 1977 400
from a truck in it, so the power steering pump and bracket are swapable and
the gear box looks like it will bolt right in. I just want to be sure it
will work before I tear down the 79's steering. Also I will have a good
manual box for sale if it all works out.

Thanks
Brent


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:03:47 -0700
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 400 performance

- -> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 12:04:00 -0600
- -> From: "Dave Resch"
- -> Subject: 400 performance
- -> In Reply To:
>From: GMontgo930 aol.com

SNIP
>I'm after Torque (with a peak around 3000-3500
>rpm) and improved gas mileage (something
>over the 8-10 MPG she's always averaged). I
>want a good pulling daily driver that runs on
>regular (87 Octane) gas.

Torque is easy, mileage is not
SNIP

I agree, peak torque at this RPM is going to give less MPG not more. Move
that peak Torque down to 2000-2500 RPM and then you should be able to knock
down 12+MPG.

>1. SNIP
>compression pistons & a high volume oil pump.

- -> I would recommend against a high volume oil pump, unless
- -> you plan to run full-groove race bearings w/ loose
- -> tolerances. Otherwise, the high vol pump is
- -> overkill and it may actually introduce a weak point in an
- -> otherwise solid foundation. I have seen a few and
- -> heard of many more problems w/ high vol pumps blowing
- -> up. As I recall, Ox toasted a high vol pump in his M-
- -> block last year.

We have built a bunch of these Engines and have never had a failure of the
HV pump. I have also never seen a pump failure that was the pump’s fault.
These pumps including the stock one are susceptible to dirt or other junk
(Valve Seal Material) jamming them but that is not the pump’s fault, it is
an inherent trait of this design, high or low volume, Ford Chrysolet or
Mitsususu.

>I've read the info about running Cleveland pistons
>in the 400M, but would rather stick with one for a
>400M if at all possible.

- -> I am waiting to see what Dale Frenz has to suggest.
- -> I have been looking for 9:1 400 pistons for 5 years
- -> w/ no luck. Several companies used to make them (as
- -> direct replacements for the 1971 400), but all I know
- -> of have discontinued them.
- -> That's why I have used 351C pistons and recommend them if
- -> you don't want to shave the block and heads.

Personally I don’t like Bushed Rods. I have my reasons, strength being one.
Wysco will custom build you a set of any ratio you want with the correct
pins, last time I checked $600.00; for "me" that is not much more then the
cost of the 351C Pistons and the price of bushing them. That "not much
more" is a small price for "me" to pay for piece of mind.

>I've also read about some
>oil restricters that increase the oil flow to the main
>bearings. Anybody ever tried these and
>are they any good? I'm curious.

- -> AFAIK, these are only recommended for an engine you
- -> plan to run over 5-5.5K rpm routinely. I have never
- -> heard of using them in a truck M-block.

If you are running True Roller Rockers such as the Stainless Crower units,
or any other true roller, Not the conversion kits and not the Roller Tip
only! You do not need all of the factory oil flow to the heads. So, if
your running roller rockers because you intend to rev the engine why not
redirect the oil to the mains where you need it!?
Well Dave, I suppose that you have now heard of someone who regularly
restricts the oil flow to the top end.
Fully Grooved Bearings are a real no-no! Even with the large mains that we
have in this engine it is foolish to reduce the bearing surface area on the
high load half of the bearing (bottom). You can extend the oil grooves out
to 2/3 by hand, but never run full grooved main bearings!
One other thing is that I run the "MPG" External Oil By-pass line that feeds
oil pressure to the back end of the oil system, I strongly recommend this if
you have a tendency to rev above 4500 RPM and stay there for a any length of
time.

>2. I'm looking at installing replacement timing
>gears vs the factory style or double roller chain.
>I've seen em in Summitt catalogue and a few
>others. The 400 seem to stretch the chains some
>and I am getting somewhat tired of replacing it.

- -> The roller type chain should give a little more
- -> longevity, but I still think you'll need to replace
- -> it by 75-100K miles. OTOH, gears shouldn't have
- -> that problem (theoretically), but I don't know of
- -> anyone who's used them long-term in an M-block,
- -> so I can't attest to their durability.
- -> The gears will set you back about 4 times the cost
- -> of a top-quality roller chain set, though.

At the RPM’s that using a Stock Crankshaft and Rods limit you to there is no
reason to run a real gear drive set-up
(Milodon and similar 3 gear drives). The 4 gear drives, Pete Jackson, Etc.
are no better then a Tru Roller Chain, except that they can sound kinda cool
if ya get the "Noisy" cut set. They will not help the performance or life
in any measurable way.

>3. My camshaft of choice is a strong RV model.
>My last 400 had one by Blue Racer with .490 Lift
>and ~280 duration (if memory serves me right)
>and appropriate valve springs.

- -> I like a little less total duration and a little more
- -> lift. I think you'd get even better torque output,
- -> especially at low revs, w/out sacrificing much (if
- -> any) higher rpm power. The numbers I like are intake
- -> duration 0.050" of 210 to 225 degrees, exhaust
- -> duration 0.050" of 215 to 230 degrees,
- -> lobe separation minimum 110 degrees, and gross
- -> lift of 0.490" to 0.530".

A both of these are good mild camshaft parameters. The key is to choose one
based on the truck, Manual or Auto, and how you drive. The manual can take
more cam then the Auto and if you tend to run hard than this would lead to
the higher duration.
This is my rule of thumb 220° of duration at 0.050 lift is a good practical
limit for a stock converter (though you can fudge’it a bit); 220° is also
about the limit emissions wise also.

>4. A set of roller rockers, Brand & exact style still
>undetermined though.

- -> Although pricey, I think the ultimate in long-term
- -> durability (i.e., reliability) are the Comp Cams
- -> Pro Magnums. You can get less expensive pieces,
- -> But I don't think the aluminum parts would hold
- -> up like steel ones.

I agree for an endurance engine, steel is the way to go.
I like the Crower units, but there are others as mentioned.

>5. New pushrods, something that wont bend and
>maybe some guide plates as
>additional insurance.

- -> Not a bad idea, if you plan to push the engine very
- -> much. OTOH, if you build the valvetrain properly and
- -> use roller rockers, you should have less likelihood
- -> of bending pushrods. If you go w/ a high lift cam,
- -> you must get the correct valve springs.
- -> Stock M-block valve springs in spec will bind at
- -> 0.490" lift. To be on the safe side, I wouldn't
- -> use stock-type springs w/ a lift over 0.450".

Up the OD of the P/rods one size, 3/8" hardened, forged are my favorite.

>6. I might do some mild port work on the heads
>in addition to the standard reworking.

- -> A little is all it takes. I think basic clean-up,
- -> smoothing out the Thermactor bumps, and "gasket matching"
- -> is as far as you need to go for a cost effective,
- -> powerful M-block.

Actually if the ports are close to matching this is the least critical area
in them. Do smooth out all of the bumps and such. Do not polish them. Do
smooth out and streamline the Bowls and do remove metal on the top and sides
of the exhaust port, just smooth out the port floor.
If you simply have to polish something do it in the exhaust side.

>7. A strong high output coil, Accell solid core
>wires, and Splitfire plugs. I plan on keeping
>the stock Duraspark ignition system as it's
>been working well all these years.

- -> The only item I'd drop is the Splitfire plugs.
- -> I don't think they're cost effective.
- -> I've always had the best results w/ plain old Autolites.

Totally agree! Everything Splitfire has made is 100% Hype, offering no gains
in a properly tuned engine! I have seen the Dyno Results and their products
simply do not work as claimed! That’s why the got their arshez slapped by
Uncle Sam!
Add a new Coil in to your Build.

Good luck.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)

Me Too!-)
Muel


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 19:09:41 EDT
From: Bad4dFilly aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.

Hey y'all, well I got an Audiovox single disc CD player today for $129 but I
didn't get speakers. I want to get a speaker to go behind my seat but
I also have to get speakers in my door panel, don't I? I am
kinda confused because I saw this one speaker that goes behind the seat that
had bass and tweeters but the salesman said it would be kind of a waste of
money to get that cuz I would need to get an amplifier. WHat does an
amplifier do?? Then, I saw another speaker that was just bass
he said I wouldn't need an amplifier> but then I would need to get higher
pitched speakers in my door correct? Basically what I guess I'm askin
sorry is this is kind of confusing LOL> should I go with a speaker behind my
seat that has bass and higher pitched speakers WITH an amplifier or should I
go with a bass box behind my seat and higher pitched speakers in my door W/O
an amplifier?? Anything would help at this point! Thanks y'all and sorry its
so long!

*~*~Lisa and Envy~*~*
*~*~SIlly boys...trucks are for GIRLS!~*~*
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 17:31:45 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes

>I am rebuilding a 400M for my truck. I
>decided to go with a Edlebrock intake
>and carb(1400) because I want some
>additional kick. My question
>quickly becomes what do you have to
>do to get the 4 Barrel carb to work
>with the emissions stuff from the factory
>2 barrel carb. Or what can you leave off
>and have an even better running truck ;-)

Yo Graham:

The only emissions stuff from the factory 2V carb are the vacuum ports for the
EVAP purge and PCV. Though not part of the carb itself, the EGR valve and
spacer sit just under the carb.

Edelbrock carburetors have the PCV port on the front of the carb. The EVAP
purge hose can be connected to the PCV port (just "tee" it in line w/ the PCV
hose). The Purge control valve (Purge CV) should be controlled by a carb ported
vacuum signal routed through a thermal PVS (one of those valves on the
thermostat housing).

If you want to have the EGR system working, you'll have to get the Edelbrock
Performer 400 EGR manifold (#3771), which has the carb flange w/ an integral EGR
passage. This manifold comes w/ an EGR spacer that fits the Motorcraft 2150 2V
carb and OEM Ford EGR valve to maintain emissions legality. You'll have to
cough up a few more bucks for the 4V EGR spacer to use a 4V carb and keep the
EGR system working, and apparently, now Edelbrock makes a 4V spacer to block off
the EGR port so you can use this manifold and disable the EGR.

Personally, I would get the EGR manifold and 4V EGR spacer for emissions
legality reasons and then disable the EGR valve (just disconnect and plug the
vacuum control hose) for better performance. Then, if necessary at some future
time, the EGR function is easily restored.

>This truck does not have a smog pump. It
>just has the coffee can thing in the right
>front by the battery.

The coffee can thing is the charcoal canister for the Evaporative emissions
control system (EVAP).

>It also has the two small plastic
>values with two vacuum hoses each
>coming off of the thermostat housing.

Those are thermal PVSs (Ported Vacuum Switches) that open or close vacuum
control circuits, depending on the engine coolant temperature.

>There is another small dohicky that was
>mounted on the right rear of the motor.

Could that be the main manifold vacuum distribution tee? Was there a hose from
that piece to the brake power assist booster?

>Besides the carb question, does anybody
>know where to get the tool to remove the
>hex plug that is on the right front top of the
>intake manifold. I measured it to be a
>21/32nd and I haven't found a allen
>wrench to fit it yet.

You can get a hex key "socket" to fit a 3/8" or 1/2" drive handle. You might
have to look at one of the better parts houses for such a beast. Some of the
big chain parts houses will rent the tool to you.

Dave R (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 18:12:09 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - HV Oil Pump... was 400 performance

> Lots of times you can get by with a HP/HV pump just
> fine, but sometimes you get unlucky and they cause problems, as I'm sure
> a few list members here can attest to.
...................

When I was rebuilding my first 390, the machinist I was dealing with
suggested a high volume pump and said "It helps to keep the heads cooler".
After driving about 10,000 miles on the rebuild without any problems, I
rebuilt my 2nd 390 which has just over 1,000 miles on it now. Perhaps I was
lucky or just haven't gone far enough, but I suggest that it was the fact
that I hot tanked both engines, used true double roller timing chains,
replaced the hex shafts, and carefully cleaned the pickup tubes & screens
before I assembled that has prevented the problems others have had.

IMHO:) If debris gets past your pickup screen, I don't really think it
matters which kind of oil pump or hex shaft you have.



Danger






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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 20:20:17 -0400
From: Garry Bowling
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal

Do any of you folks know if the oil pan on the FE engine (352) can be
removed without pulling the engine or raising it up. I need to replace
my gasket and would prefer not to have to pull the engine out or lift it
up.
Thanks
Garry Bowling
garrya bellsouth.net
67 F100

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 18:42:51 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.

The recent subject of stereos has reminded me of an incident which
occurred a short while ago while I was driving my truck around town. A car
with a loud stereo rounded a turn at the same exact time as an ambulance
with it's light's and siren going full blast. It could have been a real
nasty head on collision, which was avoided only by the driver of the car
jumping the curb and sidewalk.

IMHO:) If you can't hear a siren or a horn while driving, then your putting
lives at risk including your own.

Danger


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 18:50:09 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes

>> I measured it to be a
> > 21/32nd and I haven't found a allen
> > wrench to fit it yet.
...........

Perhaps it is a 5/8" with a slight taper to allow for a wrench to be
fitted?

Danger


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 21:55:53 -0400
From: "Ted and Sarah Freeman"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal

I couldn't get it done. I unbolted the motor mounts and lifted the front of
the block till it just touched the firewall and was able to get to
everything.

- -Ted

- -----Original Message-----
From: Garry Bowling
To: Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Date: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 8:18 PM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal


>Do any of you folks know if the oil pan on the FE engine (352) can be
>removed without pulling the engine or raising it up. I need to replace
>my gasket and would prefer not to have to pull the engine out or lift it
>up.
>Thanks
>Garry Bowling
>garrya bellsouth.net
>67 F100
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:17:34 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400M Rebuild with some changes

Dave Resch wrote:
>

> The coffee can thing is the charcoal canister for the Evaporative emissions
> control system (EVAP).

That is a charcoal canister? It's totally different than what the 79's
had. I thought it was a vac reservoir. Does it just hold vapor coming
from the carb?. I know the 3, 78's Ive had (Broncos anyway) don't have
the gas tank check valve or the charcoal canister right over the frame
on passenger side

OX

> >It also has the two small plastic
> >values with two vacuum hoses each
> >coming off of the thermostat housing.

At least one of these control when the EGR works. I think it keeps
the EGR off until the engine warms up.

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 21:38:32 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal

Garry Bowling wrote:

Do any of you folks know if the oil pan on the FE engine (352) can be
removed without pulling the engine or raising it up. I need to replace
my gasket and would prefer not to have to pull the engine out or lift it
up.



It can be done. Remove the balancer and drop the pan. Now drop the oil
pump, oil pump shaft, and pickup into the pan in order to slide the pan
out. To put it back together, you'll need to insert the oil pump shaft
up into place before sliding the pan under the motor. Either wedge it
into place with a screwdriver from above or use needle-nose visegrips to
clamp it(best idea!!). Now with the oil pump/pickup laying in the pan,
slide the assembly back under the motor. Wedge your hand down into the
pan and raise the pump/pickup assembly into place(don't forget the new
oil pump gasket!). Now with one hand holding up the pump, use your other
hand to place an oil pump bolt into the closed end of the appropriate
wrench. Now make your first of many attempts to get the bolt started
into the oil pump mounting pad. If you drop the bolt, you have to pull
the pan out to get it back! Once the oil pump/pickup assembly is bolted
into place, try to place the oil pump driveshaft into the drive socket
of the oil pump. If you miss, you get to take it all apart again! How
fun! Once you've managed to accomplish this small feat, bolt the oil pan
back into place, replace the balancer, install the distributor, and fill
with oil.
I've done this twice, so I know it can be done. By the way, it's easier
to lift the motor.

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:45:03 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)

In a message dated 8/17/99 8:20:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
garrya bellsouth.net writes:

> Do any of you folks know if the oil pan on the FE engine (352) can be
> removed without pulling the engine or raising it up. I need to replace
> my gasket and would prefer not to have to pull the engine out or lift it
> up.

Garry:

Below is the text as printed in the 67 shop manual regarding oil pan
removal and installation. Let me know if you need anything else.


OIL PAN REMOVAL

1. Raise the vehicle and place safe-
ty stands into position. Drain the oil
from the crankcase.
2. Disconnect the stabilizer bar at
the connecting links and pull the ends
down.
3. On the F-100 and F-250 series
allow clearance for removal of the oil
pan as follows: Remove the engine
front support insulator to intermediate
support bracket nuts and lock washers.
Install a block of wood on a floor jack
and position the jack under the front
leading edge of the ofl pan. Raise the
engine approximately 1 1/4 inches and
insert a I inch block of wood between
the insulators and the frame cross
member. Remove the floor jack.
4. Remove the oil pan retaining
screws and lower the oil pan to the
frame cross member.
5. Crank the engine to obtain the
necessary clearance between the
crankshaft counterweight and the rear
of the oil pan. Remove the upper bolt
and loosen the lower bolt on the inlet
tube (Fig. 57). Position the inlet tube
and screen out of the way, and remove
the oil pan.

INSTALLATION

1. Clean the oil pan and cylinder
block gasket surfaces. Clean the oil
pump inlet tube screen. Position a new
oil pump inlet tube gasket on the oil
pump and install the inlet tube (Fig.
57) with the lower bolt only. Do not
tighten the bolt.
2. Apply oil-resistant sealer to the
oil pan gasket surfaces and position the
gasket on the oil pan.
3. Position the oil pan on the cross-
member and install the inlet tube to oil
pump upper mounting bolt. Tighten
both bolts.
4. Hold the oil pan in place against
the cylinder block and install a retain-
ing screw on each side of the pan.
Using the special spring washers, in-
stall the oil pan to rear main bearing
cap bolts. Install the remaining screws
and tighten them from the center out-
ward. Torque the screws to specifi-
cations.
5. Position the floorjack and block
of wood under the leading edge of the
oil pan. Raise the engine slightly and
remove the wood blocks from beneath
the insulators. Lower the engine and
remove the jack. Install the insulator
to frame lock washers and nuts.
Torque the nuts to specifications.
6. Connect the stabilizer bar. Re-
place the oil filter. Remove the safety
stands and lower the truck.
7. Fill the crankcase with the proper
grade and quantity of engine oil. Oper-
ate the engine and check for oil leaks.

Stock Man
1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims)
1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd
1966 F-250 I6 240 2wd LWB Flare Side
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 21:43:00 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.

I would go with a subwoofer behind the seat, and midrange and tweeters
in the doors or under the dash somewhere. Just make sure your tweeters
are not blocked-the sound doesn't travel around objects very well.

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 21:54:03 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal

> It can be done. Remove the balancer and drop the pan. Now drop the oil
> pump, oil pump shaft, and pickup into the pan in order to slide the pan
> out.


This seems like overkill for an oil pan gasket :) though I guess he didn't
really specify if it was the oil pan gasket or the oil pump gasket :)


Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 4.6L
73ish F100 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 20:05:03 PDT
From: "Mark Mcknight"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - stereo

A freind of mine has a 10,000 dollar sound system in his 88 mustang. just
goes to show how expenseve and obsesion stereos can be. If you would like
to contact him his name is Steve and his E-Mail address is
Madness6667 hotmail.com

He also has no glass in his car at this present time he lost hit hatch
window on the 401 somewhere!


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:04:15 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)

TBeeee aol.com wrote:
>

>
> Below is the text as printed in the 67 shop manual regarding oil pan
> removal and installation. Let me know if you need anything else.
>
> OIL PAN REMOVAL
>
> 1. Raise the vehicle and place safe-
> ty stands into position. Drain the oil
> from the crankcase.
> 2. Disconnect the stabilizer bar at
> the connecting links and pull the ends
> down.
> 3. On the F-100 and F-250 series
> allow clearance for removal of the oil
> pan as follows: Remove the engine
> front support insulator to intermediate
> support bracket nuts and lock washers.
> Install a block of wood on a floor jack
> and position the jack under the front
> leading edge of the ofl pan. Raise the
> engine approximately 1 1/4 inches and
> insert a I inch block of wood between
> the insulators and the frame cross
> member. Remove the floor jack.
> 4. Remove the oil pan retaining
> screws and lower the oil pan to the
> frame cross member.
> 5. Crank the engine to obtain the
> necessary clearance between the
> crankshaft counterweight and the rear
> of the oil pan. Remove the upper bolt
> and loosen the lower bolt on the inlet
> tube (Fig. 57). Position the inlet tube
> and screen out of the way, and remove
> the oil pan.
>
> INSTALLATION
>
> 1. Clean the oil pan and cylinder
> block gasket surfaces. Clean the oil
> pump inlet tube screen. Position a new
> oil pump inlet tube gasket on the oil
> pump and install the inlet tube (Fig.
> 57) with the lower bolt only. Do not
> tighten the bolt.
> 2. Apply oil-resistant sealer to the
> oil pan gasket surfaces and position the
> gasket on the oil pan.
> 3. Position the oil pan on the cross-
> member and install the inlet tube to oil
> pump upper mounting bolt. Tighten
> both bolts.
> 4. Hold the oil pan in place against
> the cylinder block and install a retain-
> ing screw on each side of the pan.
> Using the special spring washers, in-
> stall the oil pan to rear main bearing
> cap bolts. Install the remaining screws
> and tighten them from the center out-
> ward. Torque the screws to specifi-
> cations.
> 5. Position the floorjack and block
> of wood under the leading edge of the
> oil pan. Raise the engine slightly and
> remove the wood blocks from beneath
> the insulators. Lower the engine and
> remove the jack. Install the insulator
> to frame lock washers and nuts.
> Torque the nuts to specifications.
> 6. Connect the stabilizer bar. Re-
> place the oil filter. Remove the safety
> stands and lower the truck.
> 7. Fill the crankcase with the proper
> grade and quantity of engine oil. Oper-
> ate the engine and check for oil leaks.
>
> Stock Man

This sound much easier than my method!

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:16:50 EDT
From: TBeeee aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil Pan Removal/Installation (1967 V-8 352)

In a message dated 8/17/99 11:13:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kendrick mddc.com writes:

> This sound much easier than my method!

The shop manuals are worth their weight in gold. I have them for 67 and some
other years. I'm happy to help out if anyone needs any information.

Stock Man
1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims)
1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd
1966 F-250 I6 240 2wd LWB Flare Side
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 22:35:07 -0500
From: Stu Varner
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - stereo

At 08:05 PM 8/17/99 PDT, you wrote:
>A freind of mine has a 10,000 dollar sound system in his 88 mustang. just
>goes to show how expenseve and obsesion stereos can be. If you would like
>to contact him his name is Steve and his E-Mail address is
>Madness6667 hotmail.com
>
>He also has no glass in his car at this present time he lost hit hatch
>window on the 401 somewhere!

If this is the 401 in Canada near toronto, I have been there!! No place to
lose anything let alone glass!!!
Stu
Nuke GM!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pscico.com/stu

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 20:31:20 PDT
From: "Mark Mcknight"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - rebuild

Remember me!!! Well now I have started to rebuild the engine on my 78' And
I have noticed that the cams and valves are coated in black goop! the 302 is
not out of da beast and is partialy tore down.... those heads are heavy
little suckers! There isn't one bit of play in the bearings. I plan on
putting in flat top pistons to match the GT-40 roller cam. :o) Right now
the beast has 235/70R15s and she will squake em and runs the quarter mile in
14 seconds !! :o) pretty sweet for a stocker I must say.... I right now am
trying to make it run the quarter mile in 10-12 seconds and still have the
power for off-road racing. I live in canada and when the truck is done if
anyone wants to race i'll glady give you a run for your money :o) Anyway the
question I want to ask is do I need all this pollution stuff ? with the Kats
off she had an extra 7 ponies. I also wanna know why when you put the gas
to the floor it sputters and backfires so I think I could run the quarter
mile faster if it didn't. Any suggestions would help alot!! thanx :o) BTW
this disscussion group kicks!!!

Thanx again
Mark Mcknight
1978 ford F-100
1992 Mazda MPV
1994 Mazda B3000

Is Mazda a curse word here ?


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:48:57 EDT
From: IanBoss69 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - STEREOS....cont.

Lisa, sounds to me like you're going on overkill if your just wanting an
enjoyable system, if you want a thumper thats one thing but if you want
something that sounds good for what you listen to its another. You mentioned
that you listen to country music? maybe some others as well, Your CD player
should be 35-45 watts times 4 channels. For the doors i'd recomend 6 1/2" 2
channel speakers (woofer/tweeter) or if you want to spend a little more and
get a pair of 3 channel 6x9's that would really help your lower tones. i use
a 45x4 headunit myself, with 2 6x9" speakers in the door and a 12" subwoofer
with a 100watt amp, behind the seat(soon to be between bucket seats) anyways
i listen to all sorts of stuff, country classic rock, modern rock, the
subwoofer works well but i think if i had 4 6x9' instead it'd sound better.
But you'll have to decide what you want for what you listen too, and as
always dont take my advice to seriously:-)

Ian
79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M
True Blue Ford Blue
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:56:43 -0400
From: "Forest V. New"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 1961 uni-body

I thought I would let everyone know of a recent junkyard find thats a good
project truck thats all there. This is a private yard so it hasn't been
picked thru much. I found a 1961 shortbed unibody with the 292 y-block.
The man wants 500 for the truck if anyone is interested.

Does anyone have a drivers side grille insert for a 72 f-100?

Forest New
racer23 mindspring.com

1972 XLT ranger
1969 MACH 1 mustang
1989 XLT ranger
....


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.