 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 #296 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 Monday, August 23 1999 Volume 03 : Number 296 ======================================================================= 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 - Just a note to re-introduce myself..... FTE 61-79 - STARTING TROUBLES..... FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question RE: FTE 61-79 - Crankshaft beating FTE 61-79 - Rear main seal Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question RE: FTE 61-79 - STARTING TROUBLES..... FTE 61-79 - more air FTE 61-79 - cuss word RE: FTE 61-79 - Crankshaft beating Re: FTE 61-79 - cuss word FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question FTE 61-79 - Dissasembly FTE 61-79 - Flashers FTE 61-79 - 351C overbore Re: FTE 61-79 - Dissasembly FTE 61-79 - RE: Hypereut's and nitrous FTE 61-79 - RE: Engine building question FTE 61-79 - Is this the Ken Payne from Gastonia? FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list Re: FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list FTE 61-79 - 429-460 Casting #'s FTE 61-79 - Truck not charging FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd RE: FTE 61-79 - Truck not charging RE: FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD FTE 61-79 - 73-79 for sale ads Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD FTE 61-79 - You didn't answer my first question? RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 06:23:55 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Just a note to re-introduce myself..... Hi, I'm Gary and I'm a fordahaulic :-) I know everyone's forgotten me by now but I thought I'd drop in for a spell and see what's happening with the gang :-) I finally decided to part the lincoln after noticing the frame was shot so I'm in the process of pulling every little piece of trim or mechanical part off of it I may want to use on the bronco. I really like the grill on that lincoln and may use it and the plastic headlight piece on the bronco and some of the other cool trim pieces. I'm also looking at the A/C system among other neat things. I think it has a limited slip rear too so that will definitely go into the bronc if it's a 31 spline :-) It's got these really neat side lights on the front lower fender that I just have to find a spot for too......Ok,. maybe not but the lincoln trunk key cover is going on for sure :-) Since this car has a very nice tilt steering column and auto shifter setup I may convert to C-6 when I put in the 460 (also from the lincoln). I'm not it any hurry for any of this so I have lots of time to sort it all out :-) What's really cool about this project is that the hardest part to get rid of, the tires, is already handled....the guy who sold it to me wants them back :-) Now if I could just get rid of all the upholstery as easily....:-( I do have a plan though, stick a piece in the trash here and there til it's gone :-) So, how's every one doin? - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 05:43:49 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - STARTING TROUBLES..... > Hey y'all! Lately my truck has has a slight problem starting. Most of the > time it's after it has been sitting for a few hours after I drive it, so I > know it isn't hot. It'll kinda sputter a few times and most times it'll start > up after a few tries. My shop teacher told me how sometimes when > ya turn the ignition it won't do anything, just be dead so with your left > hand pull up on the shifter lever thingy and it starts up right quick. But I > don't think this is the same thing. I was told it could possiblyy be my > battery? Any help would be much appreciated! =) Bye! If it starts and sputters, there's a couple of things you could have wrong. Your choke may need some work, get some choke spray and hose down the linkage, especially the pivot points. I don't know if your carb a has hot air or electric choke. If it's hot air, there's a tube on the side of the carb that goes down to the exhaust manifold. Check to see that it's still there and not broken up. If it is, get a repair kit from AutoZone in the Help section. If it's electric, check to see that it's working by seeing if it gets fire there, and then watch the choke blade to be sure it's opening all the way. A bad choke will foul your plugs, which is another thing that will cause hard starting. Look at the plugs for wetness, or a dark, shiny buildup. Another thing that can do this is is a worn out distributor, if it's a points type ignition, hook up a dwell meter, and if it goes all over the place, the ditributor is likely shot. I'm not as familiar with electronic distributors, some of the other guys can tell you how to tell how bad it's worn. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 05:53:52 -0500 From: ballingr ldd.net (William L. Ballinger) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question > Well I can't think of any cast iron blocks that couldn't take a .030 > overbore. Now maybe .060 is dicey but I'm having a tough time believing that > this motor couldn't take .030-.040 easy. You need to have it sounded, it's true that these blocks are thin, the 351-400M's are too. If it's ever been terminally hot, it'll be trashed. Core shift was common with these blocks, though I'd say most of those blocks have been weeded out by now. One block may take .030, another only .010. Keep in mind, if you find a thin spot you can bore the other 7 and sleeve the thin one, it will work just fine. But get it sounded, for sure. Another Cleveland caveat, is check the combustion chambers vary closely for hairline cracks. These heads were bad about it. A good machinist can stop them before they get bad by drilling holes and putting dowels in each end of the crack, stopping them from spreading. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:34:24 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question Just heard about the 427 being one of those that can't be bored due to it being a special FE block made for just the 427 and having thin cylinder walls. Never heard about the cleveland being one that can't be bored but there are some things the nascar guys did to make them hold up at high rpms due to thin castings. They put rods in the heads (4v) to support the combustion chambers for high compression applications and some other stuff I read about but never heard they couldn't be bored? - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > > Well I can't think of any cast iron blocks that couldn't take a .030 > > overbore. Now maybe .060 is dicey but I'm having a tough > time believing that > > this motor couldn't take .030-.040 easy. > Another Cleveland caveat, is check the combustion chambers > vary closely > for hairline cracks. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:33:08 -0400 From: David Henderson Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Crankshaft beating John E. Dohlson writes: >So, Azie how do you recomend disassembling an engine that has the pistons >rusted into the bores? John: The 300 I have in my truck sat in a friend's pasture for 7 years prior to rebuilding it. The number 2 and 3 cylinders were seized with rust and were holding water (a 0.040 over-bore fixed that nicely). I removed the crank from the block and the connecting rods. I then used a piece of hickory from a broken post-hole digger handle I had and my hammer to drive the pistons out from the top out the bottom of the block. Worked great and the hickory took the brunt of the force. Dave H - -- _ _| ~~. David Henderson \, _} DHenders VT.Edu \( Gig 'em Aggies! '93 Currently at: Interdepartmental Genetics Program 2010 Litton Reaves Hall Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA 24061 (540)231-4773 (540)231-5014 DHenders VT.Edu http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dasc.vt.edu/henderson/dhenderson.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:45:54 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rear main seal Anthony writes: >> 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? Not likely you're going to hurt the crank by doing something wrong in seating the rear main seal. The rope seals can be replaced by the newer neoprene(sic) seal and this is what I recommend. Both are two piece, and the neoprene is much easier to both remove and insert. Not very complicated, but requires patience and determination. The rope seal can be very very dificult to remove. I've spent 4 hours just getting one out, and I've tried about every method known to mankind. Some work in ceertain conditions and some don't. The best method I've found is to have a helper. Screw a small approx 1" screw in the end(of the rope seal) you are going to pull on, and have someone pull on that end with something while someone else is pushing on the other end with a blunt instrument about the same size as the seal and rotating the crank in the direction of the pull. This is my most successful method. There are others on this list that probably have just as good even though different methods. You can do it, just be ready to spend some time under the vehicle. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 05:54:20 PDT From: "George Litton" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question Now 'yall just put the six-shooters on the floor and back away!!! This is comical to sit here and listen[read]to you guys argue about Cleveland overbores. I work at a shop where we build 10-15 Clevelands a year with very little problem. I agree with Bill Ballinger about "sounding". The procedure is actually known as "sonic testing". The machinist takes a small radar unit to the block to look for thin spots in the casting. He usually measures in 12 spots in the bore. 12, 3, 6, 9 0'clock. This is done at bottom, middle, and top of cylinder. From this, he has a good "map" of the cylinders. Most go-fast guys will say .100 is as thin as you want to be. We use .090 as our guide for street engines with no cracking problems to date. Bills other suggestion about head cracks is kind of true, also. That is called "pinning". We drill and tap, then screw in a casr iron pin. Then it is broken off above the surface, and ground flush. This is done with over-lapping pins until 1 pin width past the end of the crack. Also a very reliable method. Final word, DON'T BE SCARED OF THE CLEVELAND!!! It is a very good motor with the right machinist at the helm. Good luck with your project, sounds pretty neat. P.S. Use the cast iron guides for longevity. Leave the bronze guides to the racers. George Litton >From: Dan Lee >Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com >To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com >Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question >Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 11:54:52 -0700 (PDT) > > >Well I bit the bullet. While my '53 F100 is in the Rod >Shop with the Engine and tranny out, I sent the C6 >tranny out for a rebuild & shift kit. I also planned >in sending the heads from the 351C-4V for reseating, >because I knew that there was some problems with the >valves seating. The motor sat for 20+ years. Well it >looks as though I'll be doing a complete rebuild. In >addition to needing bearing inserts, the cylinder >walls show some problems, and the valves need >replacing. I'll need a bore job, pistons, valves, >seats, guides. I am putting in a Crane Cam, lifters, >springs, retainers and roller rockers. I am going with >Manley valves and a roller timing chain. > >I have two questions one pertains to something that I >read here several weeks ago. Do I want bronze or >chilled iron valve guides? While I expect great >performance, this is a street rod and may never see a >track. Am I correct that bronze guides are better for >racing, but don't hold up in daily driving like >chilled iron. > >The second question is about pistons, surely I want >forged pistons, but do I want hypereutectic alloy? I >remember some discussion about that question as well. > >Dan Lee >'53 F100 >351C-4V >__________________________________________________ >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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:55:11 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - STARTING TROUBLES..... If it turns over it's not the transmission neutral switch or start relay. The starter system is not related to the running of the engine, it merely turns it over while other things are doing their job to start the engine and keep it running. The neutral switch prevents power from reaching the start selenoid preventing both ignition and starter energizing with the same wire. The start relay does the same thing in that the start energy and ignition come from the same source so if the engine turns over this is not the problem. Suggestions already made are good places to look but learn to isolate the problem by it's nature. Learning each part of the cycle and what it does helps you be able to do this. In virtually every case where the starter will turn normally you should have power to the ignition, if not then such things as coil wires (red and green), contacts, terminals, modules, connectors (very troublesome on fords) plug wires and plugs, Carburation, fuel delivery, clogged filters, etc., etc., etc....are more likely the cause. Normally, if the starter runs normally, the battery will not be the cause of any engine problems since running the engine itself taks very little power from the battery, you can maintain engine operation with a 6 volt lantern battery once it's started. Does it run normally once started? Off idle hesitation? High speed missing? Gas smell indicative of leaks or over rich conditions? - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > > know it isn't hot. It'll kinda sputter a few times and most > times it'll start > > up after a few tries. My shop teacher told me how > Fords> sometimes when > > ya turn the ignition it won't do anything, just be dead so > with your left > > hand pull up on the shifter lever thingy and it starts up > right quick. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:07:45 -0500 From: "John LaGrone" Subject: FTE 61-79 - more air Jeff, I got the Towncar air conditioner fixed at about 6 p.m. Thursday. I=B9ve had eye surgery on Friday a.m. and been traveling all day Saturday. I am behind on reading the digests. Here is the scoop. I had to replace the evaporator core. I am hard pressed to rate the manufacturers on who has the worst scenario for replacement of this piece. I guess everyone is just plain old bad. I started at 5:30 p.m. Wednesday night and finished at 12:30 a.m. Thursday. I still had a leak. It turned out to be a cracked pressure switch= . Then the guy working on it only put in 3 twelve ounce cans of R12. That las= t can of R12 at 6 p.m. did the trick. I spent right at $500 for the repairs. That includes replacing heater hoses and clamps, but not my time, aggravation, and sore muscles. $80 of that was wasted on two different shops, the first wanted to replace everything, the second wouldn=B9t replace anything. I finally found a guy who would talk to me and didn=B9t look at me like a walking wallet. Remember that first shop wanted $900 to replace everything but the compressor and retrofit to R134. On the R134 front. My mom spent $700+ to replace the compressor and retrofi= t her 93 Bui k Century about 4 weeks ago. She hates it. It cools fine going down the highway, but quits cooling at idle. I=B9m glad I didn=B9t retrofit either the Towncar (aka Dee) or Henry. - -- 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:09:00 -0500 From: "John LaGrone" Subject: FTE 61-79 - cuss word Stu, We already nuked Mazda once. I have owned 3 Mazdas: 2 cars and one truck. I like to think that I am a little wiser now. One of them should have been enough warning. The last two were my own fault. I=B9ll walk before I own another. - -- 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 09:14:42 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Crankshaft beating Yeah, don't use a steel punch :-( My old 460 sat open for a long time and I decided to try to save some of the rods and the block since I knew the rest was junk but two of the pisons would not move. I removed all the rod caps I could reach and took out the pistons I could get to move after ridge reaming the cylinders but the crank throws got in the way and locked some of them up so the crank had to be turned to get them out. Decided to scrap two pistons to save the others and my punch slipped putting a hole right through the cylinder wall, end of block, end of project....:-( There wasn't enough room for a wood punch with enough strength to do the job so I used a large steel one figuring I cold control it... Saved 6 rods, thats it :-( Crank junk, block junk, heads ??? Course it's a 75 engine so the heads probalby aren't worth bothering with anyway....:-) Oil pan is still in pretty good shape...:-) If you really need to salvage the engine, let it soak with penetrating oil for a few weeks and keep it nice and wet before attempting to move anything and ream the ridge out of the cylinders so you have more options if you need them. I was just trying to save a few pieces and didn't rally care all that much about salvaging the parts but I did want to salvage the block, darn! It was dark in there and lots of shadows so I was feeling my way around and got a little out of whack, one whack that is and that's all it took :-( - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > John E. Dohlson writes: > >So, Azie how do you recomend disassembling an engine that > has the pistons > >rusted into the bores? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 09:16:48 EDT From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cuss word In a message dated 8/23/99 6:07:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time, jlagrone ford-trucks.com writes: > I wish I had pics of the Mazda I curled around my dads 75 F-250 hi-boy. She decided to stop at the exact time I was hammering the throttle to move around her. I learned your not supposed to drive like this on the Vegas strip, she learned that Mazdas arent safe. That little car had to be dragged onto the flatbed tow truck, I drove away with a small dent in the grill from where the trunk lid came up and smacked it. I really felt bad, I mean the car was only 3 days old, but I tell ya, I didnt even feel it. After that night I dont even feel safe riding in a car to the 7-11. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:48:54 -0500 From: "Don Yerhot" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question I have heard that the 351C's are fairly thin walled too. If you're going to go over .030, it's probably a good idea to have the block sonic tested. My own experience was a .030 over Cleveland is that it ran perfect for over 90K. I've also got bronze/alloy guides in one of my 351W's, supposedly, the bronze guides do a little better job of transferring the heat off the valve. Also got KB Hypereutectic 10.5.1's in the other. The bores can be set up tighter than when using forged. Don't know how much tougher forged is, but I have a friend running the hyper's in a Sprint car, constantly running over 7000 r's. Good luck Dan, sounds like there's going to be a lot of Ch##y's seeing your tail-lights. DonY 65F250-351W 74F100-351W read here several weeks ago. Do I want bronze or chilled iron valve guides? While I expect great performance, this is a street rod and may never see a track. Am I correct that bronze guides are better for racing, but don't hold up in daily driving like chilled iron. The second question is about pistons, surely I want forged pistons, but do I want hypereutectic alloy? I remember some discussion about that question as well.> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 10:00:20 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Dissasembly John D writes: >>So, Azie how do you recomend disassembling an engine that has the pistons rusted into the bores? Soak thouroughly for several days in your favorite penetrating oil. If sudden force(shock) is required to break it loose I suggest a short wooden 2 X 4 placed over the top end of pistons and smacked sharply with a large(sledge) hammer. You may loose the pistons this way(if they were not lost already, but the chances of damaging the crank are much less. It kinda depends on which parts you are trying to salvage, but striking the crankshaft directly (or the vivration damper) is really rather risky for trying to salvage the crank. I have also used the 2 X 4 on the different counterweights of the crank to try to get it to rotate just a bit, but haven't had much luck with it. If pistons are rusted to the bores for very long, it is difficult if not impossible to break loose again without breaking something. I have a good friend that has used the torch to thouroughly heat the pistons in the bores to break them loose and has had very good luck doing it, but I still don't use that method either. Again JMHO, here. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 10:05:22 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Flashers David Turner writes: >> My 66 F1 has verrrry slow turn signals. I mean at a stoplight you get maybe 2 or 3 blinks at most. However the 4 way flasher works fairly quick. So far my examination has revealed that even when I remove the flasher the 4 ways still operate. What gives? Does this truck have two flashers on it? Bottom line, why do my turn signals blink so slow, and more importantly, how do I fix it? You do have 2 flashers. The turn signal flasher is weak. Replace it with a heavy duty one made for the extra lights like you are pulling a trailer. The bulbs have probably been replaced with later model brighter bulbs and pulls more amps than the originals. Azie Ardmore, Al == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 10:26:20 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351C overbore Bill Beyer writes: >>Well I can't think of any cast iron blocks that couldn't take a .030 overbore. Now maybe .060 is dicey but I'm having a tough time believing that this motor couldn't take .030-.040 easy. I can't say, but I'd venture to say that if FOMOCO ever made oversized pistons for it, that it would be OK.. I would think that the parts guru at your local Ford dealer could dig through some V E R Y O L D books and tell you if, and what sizes were available...... Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:36:52 -0400 From: Ted Wnorowski Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dissasembly At 10:00 AM 8/23/99 -0400, you wrote: >Soak thouroughly for several days in your favorite penetrating oil. While I'm thinking of it, I tried that Kroil somebody had mentioned. It beats WD-40 hands down. It works a little better than PB Blaster. The thing that sold me. The Kroil smells a %1000 better than the Blaster. Ted Wnorowski Bellevue,OH == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:43:11 -0400 From: "George W. Selby, III" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Hypereut's and nitrous Actually one of the best uses for Hypereutectic pistons is in a nitrous application. Something about the structure makes them better than cast or forged. This somehow prevents holes in your pistons while on the squeeze. If not on the juice, then cast should do if not racing, forged if you are. George Selby 78 F-150 400M, 4 on floor, 4x4 86 Audi 4000CS Quattro IsuzuG prodigy.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:46:54 -0400 From: "George W. Selby, III" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Engine building question I, too, have heard not to bore some of the Cleveland series, but what I heard was not to bore a 351M or 400 if it was a block built before somtime in 1977 I believe. Something about core shift and weak thin water jackets that tended to crack. I don't know if this applies to the 351C. George Selby 78 F-150 400M, 4 on floor, 4x4 86 Audi 4000CS Quattro IsuzuG prodigy.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 09:01:07 -0700 From: Brett Withers Subject: FTE 61-79 - Is this the Ken Payne from Gastonia? Ken if this is you and you used to work for the Ford dealer in Gastonia. Thanks for all the help years ago when I built my 65. I'm out in Portland now. Still drivin' and restorin' old fords. RBW 65 f-100 352 police interceptor 74 bronco 302 78 bronco 351 Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 20:52:13 -0400 From: Ken Payne > Subject: FTE 61-79 - FTE in Truckin' magazine Hi gang! Check out the latest issue of Truckin' magazine (October 99). Gary Pratt, of "Ford Folio" fame, gave us a nice tip of the hat in his report on the 21st annual F100 Supernationals in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. He even mentioned Don Neighbors and myself by name! The article is pretty good. There's mention of some of the new products out there. The whole article makes me wish I was at the show again. Ken Payne Ford Truck Enthusiasts == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:32:01 -0500 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list With quite a bit of help from this list I have a very trust worthy and hard working 74 f350 now. Now I need some guidence in another area. Have pick up a 83 mustang wo/engine. to rebuild for my son's first car. Have searched the internet for mustang sights. I find early (64.5 - 70's) and later (90's) mustang list. Has anyone run across a list dealing in the 80's range. Keeping it a ford family. TIA Larry == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:18:07 -0600 From: "JT Kelly" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list I at one point was on one for 80-90's 5.0's I think it was called 5.0natics. JT Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.angelfire.com == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:23:17 -0600 From: "JT Kelly" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 429-460 Casting #'s Ok I can find any Cheby casting # I want online but I'm having a heck of a time finding Ford numbers. A buddy of mine has either a 429 or 460 and he is now thinking getting it built it to put in a truck and we need to be sure of what we have and the chamber size of the heads so I can get the pistons. Here are the numbers mabey one of you can help: Block # - C9VE-B and the Heads - C8VE-E. Thanx JT Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.angelfire.com == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:21:24 -0400 From: William King Subject: FTE 61-79 - Truck not charging I'm stumped, A coworker of mine has a 1968 F100 almost exactly like mine but with a 429. He dropped by the other day b/c he just got the truck running again (after sitting for a long time), but the truck isn't charging. Here's what I tried (none of which helped). First, I checked the battery voltage when the truck was sitting and running: both times 12 to 12.5 volts. The battery has no problem cranking the 429, so I assume it's OK. Oh yeah, the alternator light in his truck stays on too. Second, I swapped my truck voltage regulator (which I use everyday, so I assume it's good) for his. The alternator light went out, but no effect at the battery (still 12.5 volts when running). Next we pulled the alternator and had it tested at Advanced Auto. They said the alternator was fine. Third, I cleaned all the alternator connections, all the starter solenoid connections (where the alternator connects), the grounds, and added a ground strap from the block to the frame. All to no effect, the battery still shows 12.5 volts when running. Finally, I checked the four wires from the voltage regulator for continuity (ie the three wires from the alternator to the voltage reg, and one wire which heads into the firewall), and all were fine. What (or what else) could be the problem? I'm really stumped about this, and since I'm supposed to be an 'expert' with those awseome 68s, I'd love to pull through for this guy. Any suggestions? Am I overlooking something simple? Ohio Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:47:15 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Was the E4OD ever offered with the Small (351W) bolt pattern?? When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? Here are the reasons for my questions: My wife has purchased a '76 F100 2wd styleside. It currently has a 4speed Granny geared transmission (NP435 or T18) and 302 with 3.25 open 9" rear. I purchased a 351W Saturday (core) for rebuild and installation, but she also wants an automatic. While I'm on the lists - Where is the best information for the 400 cu in W series, and which heads do I want to use. I'm looking for horsepower and torque in the 1800-4800 rpm range. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:47:42 -0400 From: kpayne ford-trucks.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 80's mustang list Go to the FTE links page and look for Fordnatics. They have a 5.0 mailing list. Larry Schmiedekamp wrote: > > With quite a bit of help from this list I have a very trust worthy and hard > working 74 f350 now. > > Now I need some guidence in another area. > > Have pick up a 83 mustang wo/engine. to rebuild for my son's first car. > > Have searched the internet for mustang sights. I find early (64.5 - 70's) and > later (90's) mustang list. > > Has anyone run across a list dealing in the 80's range. > > Keeping it a ford family. > > TIA > > Larry > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:00:12 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question >From: "Gerald Ash" >Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Engine Rebuild Question > >Here is a option. Go with the 351 M engine and >keep the Cleveland Heads. I know of a company >that builds an intake maniford, gaskets, ect to put >the Clevland heads on the Mod or W engine. >Then you get the best of both worlds, breathing, >cubic inches, and a real hot rod. Yo Gerald & Dan: I like M-blocks as much or more than the next guy, but I don't think it makes any sense to replace a 351C w/ an M-block, unless you're looking for the additional cubes of a 400. Even then, the 351C and 400 are very different engines w/ very different operating characteristics and purposes. The 351M is basically a bowdlerized 400 that was produced to make up for the loss of 351C production after the 1974 model year. The 351M had the additional benefit to Ford (probably why the 351C was discontinued) of reducing manufacturing costs because the 351M shares almost all of its components (all except pistons and crankshaft) w/ the 400. Relative to a 351C, the big disadvantage of the 351M is that it has a bigger, heavier reciprocating/rotating mass (bigger heavier crankshaft, connecting rods, and pistons). For that reason, the 351M will never be able to rev like a 351C. The 351M also has a bigger, heavier block than the 351C and it will weigh down the front end of your truck more than a 351C. Any engine block is inherently weaker when bored or otherwise modified, and I suppose that if you planned to throw everything in the book at it (forced induction, nitrous, etc.), you'd have to expect some compromise in longevity, bored or not. Personally, I don't know of any engine builder (including hard-core Ford guys) who has expressed any reservation about boring a 351C block 0.030" over for street use. That's just my experience, though. As for valve guides, bronze guides are purported to generate less friction and less wear on the valve stems, but iron guides will last longer. If you're willing to spring for some roller rockers to reduce valve guide wear, I'd guess that in normal street operation (which in my book includes frequent spanking of those naughty Chebbies), there wouldn't be that much difference in longevity out to 100K+ miles. Iron guides are less expensive, and if you want to save expense in the valve train, you can't go wrong w/ them. Dave R (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:11:49 -0500 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD > > Was the E4OD ever offered with the Small (351W) bolt pattern?? > Yes, got one in my sister's F250 with 5.0 ... > When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? > I'm not sure it ever did in the larger trucks, I think it was around 91 or 2, early 90's at any rate ... > What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? > The strongest will probably be the ones that were behind the 5.8 in the police cars ... though I think there are at least a few options for upgrading them, drag racers will use them until they get too much hp then they switch to the C4 usually ... > Here are the reasons for my questions: My wife has purchased a > '76 F100 2wd > styleside. It currently has a 4speed Granny geared transmission > (NP435 or T18) > and 302 with 3.25 open 9" rear. I purchased a 351W Saturday > (core) for rebuild > and installation, but she also wants an automatic. > Wouldn't it just be easier to buy one that was an auto to start with? I'm sure it would, but what's done is done right ? Anyway sounds like a good project. We've got that 3.25:1 in our Ranchero, love that ratio, its not too high on the interstate, and still gets pretty good launches around town ... > While I'm on the lists - Where is the best information for the > 400 cu in W > series, and which heads do I want to use. I'm looking for > horsepower and torque > in the 1800-4800 rpm range. > 400ci W ? wow, that's scarey sounding ... as for heads and such, talk with the 5.0 guys, or search around their info, they can usually recommend something ... I think the ultimate right now is the TFS twisted wedge, but they are pretty pricey ... I think the old heads are still some of the best for steel ... or the newer ones off of the Explorer's are also supposed to be pretty darned good... (gt-40's of some sort) 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:19:10 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD >Was the E4OD ever offered with the >Small (351W) bolt pattern?? Yo Azie: Yes to the first question. But if you're planning to use it in a non-EEC/EFI vehicle, you'll need a stand-alone computer controller for it. >When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? >What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? The AOD never used electronically controlled shifting. It's successor (can't remember the exact model designation now) was electronically controlled (basically the E4OD's little brother, like the C4 was to the C6). The AOD was used in Mustangs, Tbirds, and Crown Vics behind the mighty 302/5.0 V8. It was used behind 351Ws in Police Crown Vics from 1979 to 1989 or so. It was used in some early '80s F100/F150s, but I'm not sure w/ what engines. >While I'm on the lists - Where is the best >information for the 400 cu in W series, and >which heads do I want to use. I'm looking >for horsepower and torque in the >1800-4800 rpm range. Are you talking about a "stroker" Windsor? Dave R. (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:19:41 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Azie, they put E4OD's behind 302's in broncos so I know they are out there for small block patterns and it's a much better deal than the AOD but you need the EEC to run it. My 92 AOD ran very well but the 94 is a piece a junk. I would personally never recommend an AOD for a truck and will personally never have one in a car again even if I have to run old cars from now on :-( For light duty, the original, mechanical version (92) may be OK but stay away from the electronic ones, the torque converter won't hold up. I am personally very fond of the C-6 and with the right gearing and wide ratio gear set you might be surprised how well they do on economy. I have a small block C-6 case in the shed so they came with them too. Mine was attached to a 351W in a van. When you say 400W do you mean the 400, 335 series? I didn't know they ever made a 400 in the windsor block? - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > Was the E4OD ever offered with the Small (351W) bolt pattern?? > > When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? > > What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? > > While I'm on the lists - Where is the best information for > the 400 cu in W > series, and which heads do I want to use. I'm looking for > horsepower and torque > in the 1800-4800 rpm range. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:35:49 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD What the heck is in my 94 bird then? It dang sure aint an E4OD and it dang sure shifts (when it feels like it) electronically?? The torque converter also slips as does every other one made in that year I've ever heard of...:-( I wonder if my wife's drunk cousin is doing ford electronics along with his Chrysler stuff.......:-( (sorry Azie :-)) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > The AOD never used electronically controlled shifting. It's == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:40:04 PDT From: "MARTY COLMAN" Subject: FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd My 4spd tranny seems to be shifting a little harder than normal. It is in my 73 F100 390 2wd, as far as I know it is the original tranny and nothing has ever been done to it other than a clutch or two. Where I notice it the most is when I come to a stop sign. Used to be it would drop into second while it is still slowly rolling with just the weight of my hand resting on it. Now even when I stop, it won't drop into gear, I have to pull it and it goes pretty hard, but never grinds. The clutch is adjusted properly and seems to be disengaging completely. The tranny has never given me any troubles before, all I've ever done to it is replace the pin that the shifter pivots on (last fall). But it doesn't feel like the shifter is binding, it's like it just won't go into gear. The tranny has never leaked or been low on oil for the 4yrs that I've owned it. I just checked it, it's full. I believe that it has 90 weight in it. I think there was a discussion some time ago about using 50 weight oil, but I don't remember how it went. Would that effect what I'm experiencing? Do you have any ideas? All that I can figure is that it is something inside the tranny, I don't know much about the inside workings of a tranny. Rebuilt several motors and a few rear ends and many front ends, never a tranny. I'd appreciate your thoughts, I'm on digest so I'll be a little slow on the responses. Marty Colman _______________________________________________________________ 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:44:20 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD > > Was the E4OD ever offered with the Small (351W) bolt pattern?? > > > Starting in 89, they were in some broncos. > > While I'm on the lists - Where is the best information for the > > 400 cu in W > > series, and which heads do I want to use. I'm looking for > > horsepower and torque > > in the 1800-4800 rpm range. > > One guy on the Bronco list has an EFI 426. Another just put together a 406. May want to post to that list for their combo. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:53:59 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Dave Resch wrote: > > >Was the E4OD ever offered with the > >Small (351W) bolt pattern?? > > Yo Azie: > > Yes to the first question. But if you're planning to use it in a non-EEC/EFI > vehicle, you'll need a stand-alone computer controller for it. > Thats true. > >When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? > >What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? > > The AOD never used electronically controlled shifting. It's successor (can't > remember the exact model designation now) was electronically controlled > (basically the E4OD's little brother, like the C4 was to the C6). Wasn't that called the AOD-E. > The AOD was used in Mustangs, Tbirds, and Crown Vics behind the mighty 302/5.0 > V8. It was used behind 351Ws in Police Crown Vics from 1979 to 1989 or so. It > was used in some early '80s F100/F150s, but I'm not sure w/ what engines. Broncos, from 87-90 OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:58:08 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd MARTY COLMAN wrote: > I'd appreciate your thoughts, I'm on digest so I'll be a little slow on the > responses. > > Marty Colman > Probably the second gear synchro is going south. As for rebuilding, if it's a NP435 or T-18, they are pretty easy to rebuild. This was the first man trans I ever rebuilt and it worked fine when I ws done. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:03:47 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Truck not charging Only thing I see left out here was the fusable link from the alternator to the battery? I don't think they did it back then but if he has a 429 he may also have a newer alternator which uses the electric choke as the ground for some part of the alternator wiring.....that one stumped me for a while.... - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > all the alternator connections, all the starter solenoid > connections (where the alternator connects), the grounds, and > added a ground strap from the block to the frame. All to > no effect, the battery still shows 12.5 volts when running. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:08:45 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - tough shifting 4spd That's always good to hear :-) My second gear has zero syncros :-( Hollywood stops are a bummer :-( Better than going for third through a traffic light and not being able to make the shift while turning in front of traffic though :-) Got two of them, one has second the other has third.....tough choice when you're too lazy to rebuild either one :-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > it's a NP435 or T-18, they are pretty easy to rebuild. This was the > first man trans I ever rebuilt and it worked fine when I ws done. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:16:53 -0500 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD > > Yes to the first question. But if you're planning to use it > in a non-EEC/EFI > > vehicle, you'll need a stand-alone computer controller for it. > > > > Thats true. > Baumann also makes one of these, something like $400, not advertising for them, just givin you a ball park to play in on cost ... I've never actually used one ... > > >When did the AOD change to Electronic shift??? > > >What is the strongest AOD years/vehicles??? > > > > The AOD never used electronically controlled shifting. It's > successor (can't > > remember the exact model designation now) was electronically controlled > > (basically the E4OD's little brother, like the C4 was to the C6). > > Wasn't that called the AOD-E. > That's what I've always heard it called. After my incidents this weekend with a 98 stang and an auto, I'm not impressed, but the auto in my gf's 92 is great, you hit 2, it goes in right away ...the other has to think about it for a while, not a big deal in a truck usually, but if you're racin then its a big deal (autocross, it was legal and everything!) 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:27:44 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD William S. Hart wrote: > > That's what I've always heard it called. After my incidents this weekend > with a 98 stang and an auto, I'm not impressed, but the auto in my gf's 92 > is great, you hit 2, it goes in right away ...the other has to think about > it for a while, not a big deal in a truck usually, but if you're racin then > its a big deal (autocross, it was legal and everything!) That stuff can be adjusted with a chip, thats one nice thing about it. Here is all the stuff that can be changed with a chip on EEC-IV, AOD-E's These values are from a 5.0 mustang WOT_1_2_SHIFTPOINT 4400 # WOT 1-2 shift point WOT_2_3_SHIFTPOINT 4900 # WOT 2-3 shift point WOT_3_4_SHIFTPOINT 5000 # WOT 3-4 shift point TV_ADDER_1_2_SHIFT 0 # TV Adder 1-2 shift TV_ADDER_2_3_SHIFT 0 # TV Adder 2-3 shift TV_ADDER_3_4_SHIFT 16 # TV Adder 3-4 shift MIN_ECT_FOR_TORQUE_CONTROL 160 # Minimum ECT to allow torque control DYNAMIC_1_2_TV_PRESSURE_VS_TP # Dynamic 1-2 TV pressure vs. TP ( 4.98047, 30 ) ( 2.92969, 25 ) ( 1.46484, 12 ) ( 1.23047, 12 ) ( 0.742188, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) DYNAMIC_2_3_TV_PRESSURE_VS_TP # Dynamic 2-3 TV pressure vs. TP ( 4.98047, 5 ) ( 1.95312, 5 ) ( 1.95312, 0 ) ( 0.488281, 0 ) ( 0.253906, 251 ) ( 0, 251 ) ( 0, 251 ) ( 0, 251 ) ( 0, 251 ) DYNAMIC_2_1_TV_PRESSURE_VS_TP # Dynamic 2-1 TV pressure vs. TP ( 4.98047, 246 ) ( 3.18359, 246 ) ( 2.44141, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) DYNAMIC_3_2_TV_PRESSURE_VS_TP # Dynamic 3-2 TV pressure vs. TP ( 4.98047, 15 ) ( 1.95312, 15 ) ( 1.71875, 10 ) ( 0.976562, 10 ) ( 0.488281, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) ( 0, 0 ) SECOND_GEAR_LOCKUP_VS_TP # Second gear lockup vs. TP ( 4.98047, 32 ) ( 1.58203, 32 ) ( 1.09375, 20 ) ( 0.976562, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) ( 0, 9 ) THIRD_GEAR_LOCKUP_VS_TP # Third gear lockup vs. TP ( 4.98047, 46 ) ( 1.23047, 46 ) ( 0.859375, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) ( 0, 18.5 ) FOURTH_GEAR_LOCKUP_VS_TP # Fourth gear lockup vs. TP ( 4.98047, 97 ) ( 1.83594, 97 ) ( 1.34766, 78 ) ( 0.488281, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) ( 0, 35.5 ) UPSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_1_2 # 1-2 Upshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 50 ) ( 3.26172, 50 ) ( 3.26172, 40 ) ( 1.95312, 36 ) ( 1.62109, 33 ) ( 1.23047, 28 ) ( 0.742188, 15 ) ( 0.390625, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) ( 0, 10 ) UPSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_2_3 # 2-3 Upshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 82 ) ( 3.26172, 82 ) ( 3.26172, 74 ) ( 2.07031, 68 ) ( 1.62109, 62 ) ( 1.23047, 48 ) ( 0.820312, 36 ) ( 0.371094, 20 ) ( 0, 20 ) ( 0, 20 ) UPSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_3_4 # 3-4 Upshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 118 ) ( 3.26172, 118 ) ( 3.26172, 108 ) ( 1.83594, 100 ) ( 1.34766, 85 ) ( 0.488281, 40 ) ( 0.390625, 37 ) ( 0, 37 ) ( 0, 37 ) ( 0, 37 ) DOWNSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_2_1 # 2-1 Downshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 38 ) ( 3.26172, 38 ) ( 3.26172, 31 ) ( 2.55859, 25 ) ( 2.20703, 7.5 ) ( 0, 7.5 ) ( 0, 7.5 ) ( 0, 7.5 ) ( 0, 7.5 ) ( 0, 7.5 ) DOWNSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_3_2 # 3-2 Downshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 68 ) ( 3.37891, 68 ) ( 3.37891, 55 ) ( 2.07031, 35 ) ( 1.71875, 15 ) ( 0, 15 ) ( 0, 15 ) ( 0, 15 ) ( 0, 15 ) ( 0, 15 ) DOWNSHIFT_SPEED_VS_TP_4_3 # 4-3 Downshift speed vs. TP ( 4.98047, 102 ) ( 3.26172, 102 ) ( 3.26172, 95 ) ( 1.71875, 80 ) ( 1.46484, 45 ) ( 1.34766, 23 ) ( 0, 23 ) ( 0, 23 ) ( 0, 23 ) ( 0, 23 ) OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:38:40 PDT From: "MARTY COLMAN" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 73-79 for sale ads I was surfing the net and found this site for Truck, Race, Rec magazine, and noticed quite a few 73-79 Fords for sale. A few are fixed up and a few are fixer-upers. There are two crew cabs, one super cab and a few regular cabs. I know alot of you are dying to get a crew or super cab. Thougt you might be interested. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.truckracecycle.com/private/browse.cfm?Cat=73%2D79%20Trucks Marty Colman _______________________________________________________________ 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:31:12 -0700 From: "James Krehmke" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Check: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.baumannengineering.com/retro.htm They have LOADS of information on this subject... - -jwk- == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:42:25 CDT From: "Bill Richardson" Subject: FTE 61-79 - You didn't answer my first question? Hey Ya'll, That's great and all about the transmissions and small block/big block, but I didn't ever get an answer to my first question. After I put the Shift Improvement Kit in the tranmission make kind of a whistling sound. It shifts okay I guess. I can't take it on the publick roads cause it's three years out of inspection plus all the metal is off. Is the trans supposed to make this sound or am I in trouble? Thanx. Bill Richardson 1979 F-100 Ranger 2wd Baton Rouge, La. _______________________________________________________________ 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 14:49:29 -0500 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD > That stuff can be adjusted with a chip, thats one nice thing about it. That's a nice thing about it ???? Sorry bud, but I'll stick with the manual I've got in my own car...it shifts when I tell it to (not even an override like the 'vettes have) > Here is all the stuff that can be changed with a chip on EEC-IV, AOD-E's > These values are from a 5.0 mustang > yeah, except the 98's are on EEC-V aren't they ? and which costs more, a shift kit from B&M, or a chip ? i think you'll find the shift kit wins out, and is more tuneable ... though the aftermarket is catching up on this one, none of this is legal for a stock class vehicle in the SCCA ... yeah no one would notice necessarily, but if someone did ... 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: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:49:55 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD Yo Guys: I think actual model "name" of the so-called AOD-E was actually 4R70W. It is the electronically controlled automatic overdrive transmission used in cars and light trucks (F150s and Broncos) after the AOD was discontinued, but I don't know how much, if any, it has in common w/ the AOD. Dave R (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 16:09:44 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - AOD & E4OD William S. Hart wrote: > > > That stuff can be adjusted with a chip, thats one nice thing about it..... To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session
cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.
Advertising -
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy -
Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company. 
|