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 #304
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 Friday, August 27 1999 Volume 03 : Number 304



=======================================================================
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 - Msg in Subject line
FTE 61-79 - pi
FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding
FTE 61-79 - jet hot coating
Re: FTE 61-79 - jet hot coating
FTE 61-79 - cams
RE: FTE 61-79 - cams
RE: FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding
FTE 61-79 - C6 Swap question
RE: FTE 61-79 - C6 Swap question
FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop
RE: FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop
FTE 61-79 - 69 Bronco brake system upgrade
Re: FTE 61-79 - cam selection
Re: FTE 61-79 - cams
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Brake Bleeding (pressure bleeder)
Re: FTE 61-79 - pi
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Brake Bleeding (pressure bleeder)
FTE 61-79 - new transmission
FTE 61-79 - Re: Differential ratio formula's.
FTE 61-79 - Re: K-line
Re: FTE 61-79 - 69 Bronco brake system upgrade
RE: FTE 61-79 - list-Ranchero parts
FTE 61-79 - HorsePower
Re: FTE 61-79 - cams
FTE 61-79 - problems, problems
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: NOS Stuff
Re: FTE 61-79 - ' 64 Headlight switch
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: cylinder volume
RE: FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop
Re: FTE 61-79 - ' 64 Headlight switch

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:17:26 -0400
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Msg in Subject line

Sorry about that folks. I guess I did something really bonkers to get the
message all in the subject line, but for the life of me, I don't know what it
was.

Oh well!!.!!.!!...

Azie
Ardmore, Al.


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 12:42:04 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - pi

>> always use 3.1428 for pi

3.1415926536 is pi to ten places. Round it off as you like, but please round
it off correctly. 3.1428 will give you an incorrect answer every time.

Now you know a math teacher couldn't let that pass.

>> If memory serves correctly, and it usually does when numbers are
concerned, the value of pi is very close to 3.1415926535

Danger, I would say you are right on the money. I got the value from a
spreadsheet function and have no idea how it treated the last digit. It
probably rounded whereas you were required to memorize the first ten places.
Somewhere at home is a book that has pi to several hundred places. CRC
Mathematical Tables, if you are interested.

>>From distant math recesses, I always divided 22 by 7 which equals
3.14285714285 and then some.

22 divided by 7 is also an approximation of pi. I see where the first number
came from, now. 22/7 is only good for the first 3 places. It is handy if you
are working a problem by hand using fractions.

>> I don't use my head to calculate anything anymore....that's
why I build spreadsheets :-) You look these values up in the help screens,
type them in and forget them :-) When I need to do compound angles I get
the book out, study it, build the formula, put it back in the drawer and
forget everything I just learned....:-)

Well said, Gary.

- -- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com
1979 F150 Custom LWB Regular Cab 351M C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:57:18 EDT
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding

I've never heard of the "loop" over the diff cover holding air.....seems like
any air would have to get pushed out when that passenger side wheel was
being bled....

Not much help, but it doesn't sound like the problem....

Maybe I'm misunderstanding????

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:57:24 EDT
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - jet hot coating

Hey Stocker,

You had said:

I'm leaning towards having the Exhaust
"Jet Hot coated". It's clearly the best option but also the most expensive.

I just spoke with a guy at Century Performance who apparently has 100's of
headers "Jet Hot Coated". Apparently, he has had trouble with delivery times
(or something) with the original "Jet Hot" people, whoever they are.....He
now uses someone else who he thinks might be able to deliver the same quality
but on time.....I can't remember the name of the new people (then why write
all this, CJ?), but I can give you a phone number if you decide to go this
route...: (775) 746-4887...

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:08:51 -0400
From: James Oxley
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - jet hot coating

BDIJXS aol.com wrote:

> but on time.....I can't remember the name of the new people (then why write
> all this, CJ?), but I can give you a phone number if you decide to go this
> route...: (775) 746-4887...
>

Are they any cheaper? What is their guarantee?

OX


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 11:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: rich may
Subject: FTE 61-79 - cams

Is there any way to tell what cam that I have in my engine without
having to tear it apart? It is a 1968 390GT.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:22:20 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - cams

> Is there any way to tell what cam that I have in my engine without
> having to tear it apart? It is a 1968 390GT.
>

You could always guess ....

What are you trying to find ? The 390 GT's had their own cam from the
factory, are you trying to prove it is or isn't this one, or do you suspect
its been replaced with something else along the way ?

Just curious as to what the ends of this exercise are ...


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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:21:36 -0500
From: Dave Jacobs
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding

Maybe check the proportioning valve. Mine was gummed up w/dirt and the rear
brakes were not getting anything, including air. '78 F150.

-----Original Message-----
From: BDIJXS aol.com [mailto:BDIJXS aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 12:57 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Brake Bleeding


I've never heard of the "loop" over the diff cover holding
air.....seems like
any air would have to get pushed out when that passenger
side wheel was
being bled....

Not much help, but it doesn't sound like the problem....

Maybe I'm misunderstanding????

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 15:34:20 EDT
From: LeeCraner aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - C6 Swap question

I have the opportunity to buy very reasonably a rebuilt C6 and torque
convertor to replace the C6 and convertor in my 73 F250 2WD (390 4 bbl).

Question: are all C6's and torque convertors interchangeable? The C6 is
listed as a 1978, but at this point I don't know if it was originally in a
truck or car.

Thanks in advance for your help.

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:46:10 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - C6 Swap question

> I have the opportunity to buy very reasonably a rebuilt C6 and torque
> convertor to replace the C6 and convertor in my 73 F250 2WD (390 4 bbl).
>
> Question: are all C6's and torque convertors interchangeable?
> The C6 is
> listed as a 1978, but at this point I don't know if it was
> originally in a
> truck or car.

C6's have an integral bellhousing and case design, so they must be for their
particular bolt patterns. Since you have a 390 and the tranny is from a 78,
I can tell you they aren't compatible. The FE's (360,390,428,etc) have one
bellhousing bolt pattern, while the Windsor/Cleveland family has anohter
(302/351), and the 335/385 series motors also share another pattern (351M,
400,460, etc)

So the short answer is, no, itwon't bolt in.


However I have heard of people swapping cases in order to get the correct
case with rebuilt guts inside it... nothing I'd probably mess with unless I
got a REALLY good deal, but you never know, stranger thigns have happened.


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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:38:29 -0600
From: "Samuel L. Benham"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop

Hi all. I have gone to great expense to build a 390 for my '70 F100 and
have had a hard time finding people that are knowledgable and experienced
with Fords to help isolate my problems.

Originally, the truck had a 302. When I installed the 390, I didn't have
an exhaust connected (just headers) so I am not sure if the engine had any
noises then as I couldn't hear over the rumble, but 2 days later I had it
fitted for dual exhaust. Immediately after that I noticed a little bit of
a piston slap when the engine is cold (first start of the day). I wasn't
too concerned with it as it goes away when it warms up, but I now have 2200
miles on the truck and the slap is louder. It still goes completely away
when the truck warms up to full op temp. It was a standard bore block that
I had bored 30 over. Is this fairly common or do I have a cylinder that is
out of round or maybe bored to big.

Also, I put an RV cam in it, but the cam says it will run with stock
lifters. I have at least two lifters that are very noisy when the oil
warms up, but almost all of them are making a little noise. I have a stock
oil pump and am running 60 psi cold/45psi warm with 30w oil. When I pull
the valve covers off and listen with a piece of hose the noise is coming
from between the rocker arm and valve stem. The heads are completely
rebuilt and I have all new pushrods, rocker arms and rocker arm shafts. I
also have between .035" and .045" of lifter preload on each lifter. The
valve train sounds like a volkswagon or subaru with solid lifters. Could I
have gotten a bad set of lifters? The cam is a Crane (#343901) and has a
.533 lift. Should I have used Crane lifters? Both noises are getting
louder, not quieter so I do not believe more break-in will help.

I have a feeling I will have to let it wear out to see what's wrong. I had
the engine balanced and spared no expence to get the "10 year" rebuild.
Any suggestions?

Sam Benham

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 15:55:46 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop

> Originally, the truck had a 302. When I installed the 390, I
> didn't have
> an exhaust connected (just headers) so I am not sure if the
> engine had any
> noises then as I couldn't hear over the rumble, but 2 days later

How warm did you get the motor with no exhaust on it ? You can do damage if
things like valves are cooled down too quickly ... if you had long tube
headers I wouldnt' worry about it, but with stock manifolds, those things
are pretty short and would let cool air in in a hurry ...


> from between the rocker arm and valve stem. The heads are completely
> rebuilt and I have all new pushrods, rocker arms and rocker arm
> shafts. I
> also have between .035" and .045" of lifter preload on each lifter. The
> valve train sounds like a volkswagon or subaru with solid
> lifters. Could I
> have gotten a bad set of lifters?

Uhm ... do you have adjustable rockers on this one ? Mine weren't
adjustable, so you don't preload anything, just torque the rocker shafts
down ... that could cause quite a bit of noise ...


The cam is a Crane (#343901)
> and has a
> .533 lift. Should I have used Crane lifters? Both noises are getting
> louder, not quieter so I do not believe more break-in will help.
>

Did you use new valve springs or just re-use the old ones ?

> I have a feeling I will have to let it wear out to see what's
> wrong.

if its makin unwanted noises it will wear out that much faster, don't wait,
fix it now.

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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:54:37 -0700
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 69 Bronco brake system upgrade

Hi Everyone,

I've been contemplating an upgrade from manual to power brakes on my 69
Bronco. This past weekend I went to the bone yard and was poking my nose
under every Ford hood I could find in the place. I came across a mid 80's
model Ranger that had a relatively small power booster and I measured the
mounting bolt pattern on the firewall and it will fit in my Bronco. Should
I use a booster from a different vehicle that is easily obtainable? In an
early Bronco there is interference problems with the valve cover and you
need to use an adapter bracket that sells for upwards of $100. I will buy
the bracket that angles the booster/master cylinder assembly away from the
firewall and towards the drivers side inner fenderwell. My question: is
there a relation between booster size and master cylinder size and vehicle
size? I know there some relationship between mc bore and wheel cylinder
bore but I don't what it is. Can someone enlighten me? Am I venturing on
journey from which I will have to retreat? There are kits available to do
this from parts suppliers but the cost is beyond my means at the moment,
upwards of $450 for the whole setup.

TIA

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:16:37 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cam selection

>From: "ben"
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - cam selection
>
>I'm building my '71 400 and need some advise
>on selecting a cam.
>snip
>I'm looking for somthing off-idle
>to about 5k, with the possibility of headers.
>
>- -Keith Black cam and lifter kit for 1970-1982
>Ford-Mercury V-8 Boss 351-351C-351M-400
>CU IN. LIFT: Intake 484, Exhaust 510.
>DURATION: Intake 260, Exhaust 270.
>
>- -Keith Black cam and lifter kit for 1970-1982
>Ford-Mercury V-8 Boss 351-351C-351M-400
>CU IN. LIFT: Intake 509, Exhaust 509.
>DURATION: Intake 274, Exhaust 284.
>
>Which one would work the best if any? Any
>suggestions on different cams or
>any other parts would help alot.

Yo Ben:

Both of the cams you mention look ok from here, but I would also want to know
the duration at 0.050", as well as lobe separation.

For my M-block performance tastes, I like a cam w/ advertised duration of no
more than 270 degrees and 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". Both of the KB cams you mention
are pretty close to the high end of my preferred duration, but I think the first
one is a little shy on valve lift. IMHO, the ideal M-block cam for truck
performance (i.e., lots of low-end torque) combines relatively short duration
with high lift.

>From: Dan Lee
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: cam selection
>
>I'm doing the same as you, except mine is a
>'72 400. I will go with '71 pistons if I can find
>them.

Last week, Bill Beyer posted the name of a company that makes a '71-style flat
top 400 piston: Ohio Piston & Pin, 7915 E. 30th St., Indianapolis, IN 46219.
Their phone is 800-428-4591. I think their pistons are also sold under the
brand names Nylen and Speedway.

>I have a Edelbrock Performer w/a
>750 cfm Carter, '71 351C heads(66cc
>chamber). I selected a Crane HMV 278-2
>LIFT: Intake .539, Exhaust .534
>DURATION: Intake 278 Exhaust 290
>Lobe Separation: 114 Degrees
>
>This may be hotter than you want.

Since Dan is using 351C 4V heads on a 400, he will have to go for a considerably
more aggressive cam than I would want to use w/ 351C 2V or M-block heads.
Revving the 400 up past 4K rpm is the only way to achieve adequate port flow
velocity w/ the 4V heads, and he'll need a cam that supports a higher rpm range
to get decent power output from the M-block/4V head combination. I would not
recommend that combination in a normal "truck" application, but I understand
Dan's hot rod intentions.

>One question I have is about your heads.
>In '70 351C had closed chamber heads
>(58cc). With those heads and flattop pistons
>('71 400) you'll be near or over 11:1
>compression and you will never get gas that won't
>detonate (unless you use racing fuel).

According to my book (Monroe), the smallest 351C combustion chambers were 62.8cc
in the early 351C 4V heads used in the '70-'72 model years. Later 351C 4V heads
('72-'74) had 75.4cc chambers. The only 351C heads w/ 66cc chambers were the
'71 Boss 351 heads (casting D1ZE-B), and those are pretty rare.

Good luck.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 12:41:01 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cams

> Is there any way to tell what cam that I have in my engine without
> having to tear it apart? It is a 1968 390GT.
.......

According to Steve Crist's book...

67-68 390 335hp 4v GT
0.278 intake at lifter, 0.481 intake at valve
0.283 exhaust at lifter, 0.490 exhaust at valve


Danger


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:21:13 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Brake Bleeding (pressure bleeder)

> Hey, I need one of these! Where did you get it? How much did it
> cost? What is the reservoir made of? Could it be converted to be
> used with a compressor by adding a metal valve stem and pressure
> gauge? How does the part that clamps on the MC fit? Does it leak
> around the edges? Do you know the brand name?
> I really need to be able to do this myself.
>
>
> Mark in Southwest Washington
.............

Your local tool supply store should have this type of item in stock.
There is a plastic hand pump version and a metal pneumatic version which is
more expensive. You could modify the hand pump version with a fitting, but
it would probably be more trouble than it was worth. Don't worry, it's not
like your pumping up a 16" tire by hand or anything, it only takes a few
strokes to build enough pressure inside the container to push the fluid
through at a rapid pace.
The attachment for the master cylinder is a rectangular plate & thick
rubber gasket with quick release fitting for a hose to attach. Yes, you can
expect to spill some fluid when removing the attachment, but if you prepare
by laying a towel under the MC than you won't have to worry about the paint.


Danger



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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 13:18:20 -0700
From: "Danger"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - pi

> I got the value from a
> spreadsheet function and have no idea how it treated the last digit. It
> probably rounded whereas you were required to memorize the first ten
places.
> Somewhere at home is a book that has pi to several hundred places. CRC
> Mathematical Tables, if you are interested.
.............

The value I quoted was obtained from a computer science class (thousands
of digits!... hehe) taken 18 years ago while in high school. It seems like
the subject was floating point numbers & rounding errors and pi made an
excellent example.

Danger


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 15:50:12 -0700
From: "James Krehmke"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Brake Bleeding (pressure bleeder)

Or use DOT5 brake fluid in a CLEAN syatem to preserve paintwork..

- -jwk-

- -----Original Message-----
From: Danger
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, August 26, 1999 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Brake Bleeding (pressure bleeder)


>> Hey, I need one of these! Where did you get it? How much did it
>> cost? What is the reservoir made of? Could it be converted to be
>> used with a compressor by adding a metal valve stem and pressure
>> gauge? How does the part that clamps on the MC fit? Does it leak
>> around the edges? Do you know the brand name?
>> I really need to be able to do this myself.
>>
>>
>> Mark in Southwest Washington
>.............
>
> Your local tool supply store should have this type of item in stock.
>There is a plastic hand pump version and a metal pneumatic version which is
>more expensive. You could modify the hand pump version with a fitting, but
>it would probably be more trouble than it was worth. Don't worry, it's not
>like your pumping up a 16" tire by hand or anything, it only takes a few
>strokes to build enough pressure inside the container to push the fluid
>through at a rapid pace.
> The attachment for the master cylinder is a rectangular plate & thick
>rubber gasket with quick release fitting for a hose to attach. Yes, you can
>expect to spill some fluid when removing the attachment, but if you prepare
>by laying a towel under the MC than you won't have to worry about the
paint.
>
>
>Danger
>
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:29:07 -0500
From: "Eric Washburn"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - new transmission

Alright guys, I need some help :-) I have a '67 F100 Long Bed pickup. It has
the original 240 engine and Ford 3-spd LD tranny, plus the 9" diff :-), My
3rd gear is messed up, and I was wanting more gears anyways, so I am going
to the junkyard this weekend. I need to know what type of transmissions and
vehicles I can get a tranny from that will bolt up exactly the same as the
3-spd. Any help will be greatly appreciated cause I start college Monday
:-)!


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:53:47 -0500
From: "Brett L. Habben"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Differential ratio formula's.

Wish and George,
While one spin is enough for grizzled veterans, it's the logic behind it
that's easier to remember than the formula.
>This spinning the tire 10 times sounds easy enough, but just try to
>remember how many times each one spins while you are doing it is easier
>said than done.
What? Haven't mastered walking and chewing gum at the same time? (just
kidding!) How about having your lovely assistant spinning the tire and
unable to count to 10 silently (6,7,8,.. SHUTUP! d...now where was
I.....?)
Try pen and paper, make a hash mark each time a revolution passes for
each.
>Why not just divide by 5, or spin the wheel 20 times instead of 10 ?
Sorry,
>always lookin for easy ways out of math ... :)
Cheater! I bet you used crib notes...eh?
>Funny how you never get exact isn't it ? But then that's why you're
>eyeballin it right ?
>Just my $.02
>wish
Yep. Even the books "3.73" is close but no cigar. It's really closer to
the number of ring gear teeth (41) divided by the number of pinion gear
teeth (11): 3.727272.......(infinity)
For inquiring minds that haven't a better thing to do on a Friday night,
beginners without ring and pinion references, and grizzled veterans
presented with an unfamiliar axle assembly.
Adios,
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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:05:29 -0500
From: "Brett L. Habben"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: K-line

Steve,
Thanks for the info. So these are the same bronze wall guides that have
been around for 20 years then. I called this one head shop and got this
sales pitch about this "new hi-tech expensive K-line machine". Sounds
like someone was trying to blow smoke up my tailpipe....
I've been calling around and the rates for a 300 head hover around
starting at $85 for the basic valve grind plus $40 for the surfacing.
Exhaust seats, guides, valves, springs etc. all add up from there. Is
that about average?
Thanks,
Brett
Super75cab

>Brett asked about K-line valve guides. I use these everyday (I am a
>cylinder head machinist).
>Regards, Steve



___________________________________________________________________
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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 20:59:27 EDT
From: "Gerald Ash"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 69 Bronco brake system upgrade

I think that might work but I also am not sure. I did change a large one
for a small one and it works great as all it uses as the vacume to assist
your foot pressure,,,,,I THINK????? Let me ask and post this one. On my 9"
Ford 1978 rear can or is there a way to ch$ convert my rear drum brakes
to disc brakes? This could really help in wet and loaded conditions that my
pickup sees.
GA


- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "Hernandez, Anthony"
Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
To: offroad-list ford-trucks.com, "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'"

Subject: FTE 61-79 - 69 Bronco brake system upgrade
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:54:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
>From owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com Thu Aug 26 14:57:09 1999
Received: from [192.41.63.203] by hotmail.com (2.1) with ESMTP id
MHotMailB98F032C018DD820F3B1C0293FCB0C8E0; Thu Aug 26 14:57:09 1999
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id RAA04283; Thu,
26 Aug 1999 17:49:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from solana.corp.winresources.com (www.winresources.com
[209.68.242.146]) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id RAA04056; Thu, 26 Aug 1999
17:48:28 -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 ;
Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:56:29 -0700
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Sender: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk

Hi Everyone,

I've been contemplating an upgrade from manual to power brakes on my 69
Bronco. This past weekend I went to the bone yard and was poking my nose
under every Ford hood I could find in the place. I came across a mid 80's
model Ranger that had a relatively small power booster and I measured the
mounting bolt pattern on the firewall and it will fit in my Bronco. Should
I use a booster from a different vehicle that is easily obtainable? In an
early Bronco there is interference problems with the valve cover and you
need to use an adapter bracket that sells for upwards of $100. I will buy
the bracket that angles the booster/master cylinder assembly away from the
firewall and towards the drivers side inner fenderwell. My question: is
there a relation between booster size and master cylinder size and vehicle
size? I know there some relationship between mc bore and wheel cylinder
bore but I don't what it is. Can someone enlighten me? Am I venturing on
journey from which I will have to retreat? There are kits available to do
this from parts suppliers but the cost is beyond my means at the moment,
upwards of $450 for the whole setup.

TIA

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: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 22:26:53 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - list-Ranchero parts

Forwarded for: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"

There are some ranchero lists out there and I believe one at this site as
well but Dennis Carpenter and AutoKrafters come to mind as well as JC
Whittney for body panels and other trim parts.

Go to the ford-trucks site and look around in the FAQ and links for more
inf* :-)

- --
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
- --

> Does anyone know I good parts place for older cars I have a 1978 Ford
> Ranchero500, and I know it is not totally a truck but it is
> part truck, so
> can anybody help me? Thanks

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:35:07 PDT
From: "Mark Mcknight"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - HorsePower

I have a stocker 302 that when it was dynoed b4 I started to rebuild it ot
read 262hp.... that don't seem to be right to me can someone help me... its
in a 78 F-100 2wd ?

thanx very much
Mark


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 21:29:58 -0500
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - cams

Yes there is a way! Swap me motors, and you'll have a factory cam for a
'70 275hp 390!


Jason


rich may wrote:
>
> Is there any way to tell what cam that I have in my engine without
> having to tear it apart? It is a 1968 390GT.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> >
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 23:11:54 -0700
From: "Michael J. Platt"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - problems, problems

Hello,

First time I ever posted on the list, but I've been
reading it for a while. I have a 300 straight six in my
79 F-100. Recently I had a grommet on the PCV
valve deteriorate, so I replaced it. It had been leaking,
and made up/compensated for many problems... One problem
proved to be a sticking EGR valve, and a clogged port in the EGR
baseplate. Also a problem was the Carter YFA carb...so I rebuilt that...

I replaced the coil, for the other one was weak, and also the cap,
rotor, wires, module, and plugs at various times before the initial pcv
problem. Now that I have done all of this, the engine runs beautiful
under no load conditions, but as soon as you drop it into gear it runs a
little rougher (it
has a C6 tranny) and then it runs rough as you accelerate. Sometimes it
accelerates alright, then when you stop and start again, it misses a
little more. I checked the timing
today and it was right on the money, 10 BTDC. It really has me
stumped this time. Any help would be appreciated.
BTW... My name's Mike Platt, 16, from Pennsylvania.... just figured
I'd better formally introduce myself to ya'll before I close down the
system here and head to bed....its been a long, puzzling day!


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 22:32:24 -0500
From: Stu Varner
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: NOS Stuff

>
>I know this was meant to be a personal message, but I'm gonna horn in anyway
>:P
>
>Anyway you might stop and think about what else NOS stands for ... (Nitrous
>for instance) ... you want people tryin to race you all the time ?? :)

Wish,

When they see the knobby bias ply tires and white steel rims, they will
know for sure it ain't no race truck!
hehehehehe

8^)

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: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 01:10:52 -0400
From: Ted Wnorowski
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - ' 64 Headlight switch

I don't know why I thought the build date code book would help me.
What I need to know is what's the difference between the C4DZ and the C4AZ.
They both look the same to me. Any help is always greatly appreciated.


At 02:23 AM 8/25/99 -0400, you wrote:
> Sorry if this came through already.
> Does anyone know the difference, if any, between these 2
> switches? One is part # C4DZ-11654-A the other is # C4AZ-11654-A. I'm too
> lazy to dig out my build code book right now.
>
>
>Ted Wnorowski
>Bellevue,OH
>'64 F-250
>352 transplant
>4 speed
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

Ted Wnorowski
Bellevue,OH
'64 F-250
352 transplant
4 speed
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 01:41:37 -0500
From: "Shane"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: cylinder volume

Here is the value of pi. This is 49 decimal places, memorize away.


Shane



3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751


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

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

Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 02:38:34 -0600
From: "Samuel L. Benham"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Piston Slap and valve train slop

>How warm did you get the motor with no exhaust on it ? You can do damage
if
>things like valves are cooled down too quickly ... if you had long tube
>headers I wouldnt' worry about it, but with stock manifolds, those things
>are pretty short and would let cool air in in a hurry ..

I have long Headman tube headers. I drove the truck back and forth from
work (40 miles) for 2 days.


>Uhm ... do you have adjustable rockers on this one ? Mine weren't
>adjustable, so you don't preload anything, just torque the rocker shafts
>down ... that could cause quite a bit of noise ...

The rockers are non adjustable, however the machinest that did my heads
told me to check the preload and that it might be necessary to shim the
rocker arm assembly to achieve the desirable preload of .030" to .060". I
ended up putting about .032" on the drivers side and .045" on the passenger
side. I have tried taking the shims out to see if that would quiet it down
and it did nothing.


>Did you use new valve springs or just re-use the old ones ?

I used new springs that are slightly heavier than stock, as well as
phospher-bronze valve guides and stainless steel seats.
I just thought of something else. I was told by someone that my particular
cam will run with stock lifters and stock springs, but since I had beefed
up springs put in, would that require the need for a stronger lifter?

Sam Benham


== 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.