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 #293
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 Saturday, August 21 1999 Volume 03 : Number 293



=======================================================================
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 - Crankshaft beating
FTE 61-79 - New Mains and Treasures in the Oil Pan
Re: FTE 61-79 - disconnect EGR on 400M
Re: FTE 61-79 - Spools and lockers!
FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement
RE: FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement
FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale
Re: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale
FTE 61-79 - Re: Spools and lockers!
RE: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale
RE: FTE 61-79 - Shift Improvement Kit woes
FTE 61-79 - Montana Mark?
FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes
Re: FTE 61-79 - a lot of oil leaking around here
Re: FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes
FTE 61-79 - 300 Offy intakes
Re: FTE 61-79 - 300 Offy intakes
FTE 61-79 - NEED INFORMATION

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:57:24 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Crankshaft beating

John D. writes: >>I had to remove the crank from the locked motor before I
could remove the
connecting rods ( I'm also using them), to do this I removed all the main
caps, installed the balancer and gave it a couple of good whacks with a
20# sledge, until the crank was far enough out of the block to get to all
the connecting rod nuts, macine shop checked crank, still straight and
true, runs great.

Y O LIST FOLK!!!! I certainly don't recommend this procedure. You might get
by doing it once in a while, but crankshafts are extremely hard(brittle) and
shocks are certainly not recommended. They will crack and only magnifluxing
will locate the crack sometimes. Not a good idea in my book.... All JMHO.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:52:41 -0400
From: frenz.6 osu.edu (Dale Frenz)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - New Mains and Treasures in the Oil Pan

Well, after several greasy hours under Rudy, I got the new mains
in. Thats a job I wouldnt wish on anybody who didnt have their engine
pulled. Key idea here: "Just because the old ones came out doesnt mean the
new ones will wanna go in." Hey, but at least I have oil pressure now thats
for damn sure.
Luckily, I didnt find any broken piston pieces or rings in the oil
pan. However, I did find about 4 or 5 small stones about the size of half a
pencil eraser AND a small brass rod about 1 inch long and 5/32" in
diameter. If I had to guess, I'd say it was a carb part, but how it got
there without damaging anything is beyond me. Scotty, beam all kinds of
junk down here.
Of course, I had to take the exhaust Y off to get the pan out, and
it didnt go back on as easily. Now it sounds like Im running open headers
'cause the simple ass thing isnt sealing. Its kinda cool actually because
it sounds like a big block running a .550 cam. Im not paying for a new
exhaust when my 460 is going in there sooner or later and that'll need a
new exhaust too. Oh well......on to the brakes.

Dale
'79 Ruby w/ new and improved oil pressure


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:27:05 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - disconnect EGR on 400M

>From: "steve potratz"
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - disconnect EGR on 400M
>
>Dave: I do not understand the need to
>disconnect EGR. From what I have
>experienced on my 400m in my 78 and
>my FI 5.0 Crown Vic, the EGR prevents
>some preignition, providing cylinder
>cooling by adding mass flow without
>more air. The crown Vic would ping all
>the time until I cleaned out the
>passageways. The mileage picked up
>too. Does changing the cam to a
>peformance cam reduce the effect or
>benefits of EGR? Seems like we went
>through this recently, but I do not
>remember the conclusions.

Yo Steve:

IMHO, if you're looking for performance, EGR gets in the way. By displacing
fuel/air mixture in the cylinder, it effectively reduces the engine's power
output potential. As I understand it, the main purpose of EGR is to reduce the
combustion temps produced by running a mixture that is too lean in the first
place. Lean mixtures were mandated to prevent excess CO and HC emissions at the
tailpipe, but a too lean mixture itself reduces power output potential (and
ultimately, overall engine efficiency). A side-effect of the too lean mixture
is excess NOx produced by the increased combustion temps, so EGR was mandated to
cure the unintended consequence of leaning the mixture too much. (What a
tangled web we weave, eh?)

On a carbureted vehicle where you can manually adjust the fuel/air mixture
(i.e., not a feedback carb system), you can tune the carb to produce maximum
power output and reasonable emissions. When the EGR is disabled, the fuel/air
mixture must be enriched to avoid the excess combustion temps caused by the too
lean mixture that the EGR was intended to offset. Thus, when you do it right,
you can achieve more of the engine's power potential.

On a computer controlled FI vehicle like your Crown Vic, the fuel/air mixture is
regulated by the computer, along w/ the EGR function. Making changes to that
kind of system is a lot more complicated (and expensive). On a family car like
a CV, I would trade performance potential for reliability and stick w/ the stock
setup and maintain it properly. If you want to pursue performance options on a
car like that, the late model Mustang 5.0 guys have a lot of experience w/ that.

BTW: Thanks for the tip:-) My wife's CV has been pinging lately, and I haven't
been able to track it down. I'll take a look at the EGR passages this weekend.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 08:29:43 -0800
From: "Matthew Schumacher"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Spools and lockers!

Mark,

A friend of mine got a posi-unit from auburn gear and it is sweet. When
the rest of us are playing in the mud, he leaves his truck in 2wd and
rarely gets stuck. It is really nice on the street too. The only bad
thing about it is in the winter time here in alaska, it gets a little
squirrelly on ice.

schu


Mark Mcknight wrote:
>
> I am considering putting a spool in the diff of my truck. I want to have
> lots of traction but I also want it to handle good on the road.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 12:35:35 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement

Anthony H. writes: >> I have a 69 Bronco with a 302 and 3 spd manual tranny
and I also have oil
leaking from the pan area. I read somebody's answer to a post that said you
might want to replace the front and rear main seals while your at it. So
anyway here's my question: Can I replace the front and rear main seals
without dropping the tranny?

To which Darrell D. replies: >>The front one yes, thats an easy job, but the
rear is a lil more involved.
You have to drop the tranny, and the flywheel to get at it. On the plus
side, you'll be worryfree after its done.

To which I give my opinion !. !. !.

I think you got this one wrong Darrell !!!! The 69 models had the split seal
at the rear and can be replaced with out pulling the tranny. I'm not sure when
it changed to the one piece circular type that goes over the end of the crank,
but it was much later than '69(or at least I think it was much later - Mid 80's
maybe)

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:31:07 -0700
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement

...........>> I have a 69 Bronco with a 302 and 3 spd manual tranny
and I also have oil
leaking from the pan area...Can I replace the front and rear main seals
without dropping the tranny?

............To which Darrell D. replies: >>The front one yes, thats an easy
job, but the
rear is a lil more involved.
You have to drop the tranny, and the flywheel to get at it. On the plus
side, you'll be worryfree after its done.

...........To which I give my opinion !. !. !.

I think you got this one wrong Darrell !!!! The 69 models had the split
seal
at the rear and can be replaced with out pulling the tranny. I'm not sure
when
it changed to the one piece circular type that goes over the end of the
crank,
but it was much later than '69(or at least I think it was much later - Mid
80's
maybe)

Azie
Ardmore, Al.
............................................................................
......................................................................

So Azie,

I think you're correct because I went home last night and was checking my
factory service manual and it shows a rope type seal for the rear main. I
just don't know how good a job I can do without dropping the tranny. So I
have another question. Suppose I don't seat it in there 100% correct, is
there any harm I can cause to the crank? Are the rope seal one piece or two
pieces? I've never installed a rope type seal. Is it complicated? I have
extensive experience with rebuilding aircooled engines and I've rebuilt a
Buick 350 but neither of those engines had rope seals.

Thanks for the help. Its great to have such helpful people in a forum like
this where we can exchange ideas and experiences. FORD PEOPLE ROCK!

Anthony in Vista, CA
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:48:10 -0700
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale

I thought someone out there might be in need of truck and I have a good
friend who's selling one.

86 Ford F250 XLT Extended cab -460, auto, cruise, AC, PS, PB, tilt, P/locks,
P/windows, AM/FM/Cassette, tow pkg., captains seats, 102k miles. This truck
is really clean and runs great. He said it has an exhaust manifold leak on
the passanger side manifold but other than that needs nothing. If anyone
wants to speak with him, emial me off list and I'll give you his number.
The truck is in North San Diego County, CA.

Anthony in Vista, CA
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 13:52:33 EDT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale

What is the asking price? Email address?
Thanks,
Gerald


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
To: "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:48:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
>From owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com Fri Aug 20 10:49:46 1999
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id NAA24597; Fri,
20 Aug 1999 13:40:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from solana.corp.winresources.com (www.winresources.com
[209.68.242.146]) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id NAA24573; Fri, 20 Aug 1999
13:40:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: ford-trucks.com: Host www.winresources.com
[209.68.242.146] claimed to be solana.corp.winresources.com
Received: by SOLANA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)id ;
Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:48:55 -0700
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk

I thought someone out there might be in need of truck and I have a good
friend who's selling one.

86 Ford F250 XLT Extended cab -460, auto, cruise, AC, PS, PB, tilt, P/locks,
P/windows, AM/FM/Cassette, tow pkg., captains seats, 102k miles. This truck
is really clean and runs great. He said it has an exhaust manifold leak on
the passanger side manifold but other than that needs nothing. If anyone
wants to speak with him, emial me off list and I'll give you his number.
The truck is in North San Diego County, CA.

Anthony in Vista, CA
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:01:54 -0700
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Spools and lockers!

On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, JJJJJGRANT aol.com wrote:
>
> never run a spool on the street, a guy was killed several years ago, they
> had a spool in a chevelle with the skinny tires on the front, went into a
> curve and it didn't turn, the driver blamed it on the spool. it doesn't give
> any in a corner or curve.

All you have to do is drive it like it's a three wheeler or a
quad...when you come to a corner, give it lots of throttle and shift
your weight to the outside. This breaks the inside drive tire loose and
you can turn on a dime. ;-)

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:37:46 -0700
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale

Sorry,

Asking price is $5200 email Justin for info. condon winresources.com

- -----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Ash [mailto:ga1998 hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 10:53 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale


What is the asking price? Email address?
Thanks,
Gerald


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
To: "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Truck for sale
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:48:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
>From owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com Fri Aug 20 10:49:46 1999
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id NAA24597; Fri,
20 Aug 1999 13:40:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from solana.corp.winresources.com (www.winresources.com
[209.68.242.146]) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id NAA24573; Fri, 20 Aug 1999
13:40:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: ford-trucks.com: Host www.winresources.com
[209.68.242.146] claimed to be solana.corp.winresources.com
Received: by SOLANA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)id ;
Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:48:55 -0700
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk

I thought someone out there might be in need of truck and I have a good
friend who's selling one.

86 Ford F250 XLT Extended cab -460, auto, cruise, AC, PS, PB, tilt, P/locks,
P/windows, AM/FM/Cassette, tow pkg., captains seats, 102k miles. This truck
is really clean and runs great. He said it has an exhaust manifold leak on
the passanger side manifold but other than that needs nothing. If anyone
wants to speak with him, emial me off list and I'll give you his number.
The truck is in North San Diego County, CA.

Anthony in Vista, CA
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 13:51:47 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Shift Improvement Kit woes

> Has a place for wires to plug into it also . I
> was surprised
> they made a C 6 for the smaller engines .
> Anyway I just wanted to clarify that there is someone else with
> one of these
> and that you are not mistaken about it .
>

Yup, Dad's got one in his 89 F250HD behind a 351W, so they shouldn't be
impossible to find, this one's even a 4x4 ...

Though I think after the E4OD got the nod the C6 kind of went by the way
side (with no OD and all)

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: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:51:18 EDT
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Montana Mark?

Hey Mark,

Can you send me another message so I can update my home computer????

Thanks!

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Lee
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes

My '53 F100 has a 351C-4v and a C6 from a donor '71
Torino. It is the 'baby' C6.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
351C-4V


>I learned just this year about the C 6 with the
>smaller bolt patternfor a 302 , 351C and 351 W . I
>have one that I had first thought was for anFE
>engine . The bell housing is not removable ( one
>piece case ) exceptfor the tail shaft . Has a place
>for wires to plug into it also . I wassurprised
>they made a C 6 for the smaller engines .
>Anyway I just wanted to clarify that there is someone
>else with one ofthese and that you are not mistaken
>about it .Rollie .

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 19:14:36 EDT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes

The Ford 269, 289, 302, 351W all have a small bolt pattern. The 351C, M,
400M, 429, 460, all have the large bolt pattern. However all police cars
and ambulances along with most wagons gone by used the small frame C6 case
as it's bullet proof. Get a case and exchange the guts.


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: Dan Lee
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
>From owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com Fri Aug 20 14:29:31 1999
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id RAA19140; Fri,
20 Aug 1999 17:23:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web119.yahoomail.com (web119.yahoomail.com [205.180.60.120])
by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id RAA19068; Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:23:36 -0400
(EDT)
Message-ID:
Received: from [192.31.86.35] by web119.yahoomail.com; Fri, 20 Aug 1999
14:24:05 PDT
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk

My '53 F100 has a 351C-4v and a C6 from a donor '71
Torino. It is the 'baby' C6.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
351C-4V


>I learned just this year about the C 6 with the
>smaller bolt patternfor a 302 , 351C and 351 W . I
>have one that I had first thought was for anFE
>engine . The bell housing is not removable ( one
>piece case ) exceptfor the tail shaft . Has a place
>for wires to plug into it also . I wassurprised
>they made a C 6 for the smaller engines .
>Anyway I just wanted to clarify that there is someone
>else with one ofthese and that you are not mistaken
>about it .Rollie .

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 20:38:12 EDT
From: CATLN7 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - a lot of oil leaking around here

Darrell Duggan wrote:
>
> without dropping the tranny? >>
>The front one yes, thats an easy job, but the rear is a lil more involved.
>You have to drop the tranny, and the flywheel to get at it. On the plus
>side, you'll be worryfree after its done.

As long as it's an 60's or 70's 302 you shouldn't have to remove the
flywheel. Ford didn't go to one piece seals on the windsors until the 80's.
It should be a split rubber (ie 2 piece) seal.

Chris Thompson
67 F100 302/C4 PDB, P/S finally!!!
68 Cougar DGS 302/C4
82 Merc LN7 1.6L/4sp
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:00:48 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Seal replacement

In a message dated 8/20/99 9:44:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
am14 daimlerchrysler.com writes:


seal
at the rear and can be replaced with out pulling the tranny. >>

I swear, yall teach me something new everyday. Thanks Azie. I have never
had to do the job on an early ford V-8, and Cat diesels, so I assumed all
were the same. You know what they say about assuming.....

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:05:11 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Shift Improvement Kit woes

In a message dated 8/20/99 4:19:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ga1998 hotmail.com writes:

>

you need to move the 351c over to the small pattern list. :)

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 21:56:35 -0500
From: "Brett L. Habben"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 300 Offy intakes

Folks,
Today I drug home a 300 complete with an Offy intake and 390 Holley.
After depositing my new prize in the garage I realized that it has an
Offy "Competition" intake, not the "Dual Port". Bummer.
Have any of you folks used the Offy "Competition" intake on a 300? This
is a single plane manifold, with the carb mounted longitudinally, not
crosswise. I was aiming for the "Dual Port" because of the economy and
torque. Will there be a noticable loss of either with this intake
instead?
Thanks,
Brett
Super75cab

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 23:05:08 EDT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 300 Offy intakes

I just read a article from Clifford Performance stating to use a two bbl
adapter plate and carb to get more torque, better idle,ect. I have no idea
but it makes good sense. If you want to sell that thing let me know I will
try it.


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "Brett L. Habben"
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 300 Offy intakes
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 21:56:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
>From owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com Fri Aug 20 20:00:06 1999
Received: from [192.41.63.203] by hotmail.com (2.1) with ESMTP id
MHotMailB9876134009BD82197B1C0293FCB08530; Fri Aug 20 20:00:06 1999
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id WAA10038; Fri,
20 Aug 1999 22:57:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from m3.boston.juno.com (m3.boston.juno.com [205.231.100.198]) by
ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id WAA10007; Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:57:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from bhabben juno.com) by m3.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id
EJHW99X9; Fri, 20 Aug 1999 22:56:28 EDT
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,3,8-11
X-Juno-Att: 0
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk

Folks,
Today I drug home a 300 complete with an Offy intake and 390 Holley.
After depositing my new prize in the garage I realized that it has an
Offy "Competition" intake, not the "Dual Port". Bummer.
Have any of you folks used the Offy "Competition" intake on a 300? This
is a single plane manifold, with the carb mounted longitudinally, not
crosswise. I was aiming for the "Dual Port" because of the economy and
torque. Will there be a noticable loss of either with this intake
instead?
Thanks,
Brett
Super75cab

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== 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.