 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 #334 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, September 17 1999 Volume 03 : Number 334 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: majordomo ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions E: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions FTE 61-79 - Floyd and good ole frame! FTE 61-79 - Re: 78-79 460 header/exhaust manifolds Re: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions FTE 61-79 - RE: Still not charging FTE 61-79 - neutral safety switch Re: FTE 61-79 - neutral safety switch RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Rollbacks FTE 61-79 - My Club Wagon is now a "show truck" Re: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 FTE 61-79 - Floyd and grease FTE 61-79 - Oil sending unit RE: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III FTE 61-79 - Ex manifolds FTE 61-79 - FTE 61-79 - Cam Selection Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part V Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III FTE 61-79 - 78 bronco options RE: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power Re: FTE 61-79 - The 300, and what did I just step in? FTE 61-79 - 351M rpm's and calculations RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? Re: FTE 61-79 - Flooded Hot Starts Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions Re: FTE 61-79 - The sweetest sound Re: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? Re: FTE 61-79 - towing with a Bronco FTE 61-79 - RE: Still not charging III Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? FTE 61-79 - Blow by continued FTE 61-79 - Re:Armor all removal FTE 61-79 - Re - Still Not charging. Part III RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil sending unit Re: FTE 61-79 - Re:Armor all removal RE: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 FTE 61-79 - Leaf spring bushings FTE 61-79 - Questions about engine choices Re: E: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions FTE 61-79 - Pressure switch. FTE 61-79 - Carrier bearing mount ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 04:44:09 PDT From: "White Wolf" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions Not sure how this conversation is going but I paig $650 to have my '66 352" rebuilt back in April. and it still running 5000 miles later and good too. I think they were going to charge me $250 for a core if they couldn't rebuild mine.(but they could) >The 352 is part of the FE family (352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428). The >FE family has good reliability when not worn out. 1500 bucks doesn't sound >like too much to investment for a rebuilt motor. You may want to check the >quality of the rebuilder. Parts are redily available and most (if not all) >external FE accessories will swap (manifold, dist, headers etc). You might >check with Performance Automotive Wholesale (ads in any hotrod mag) to see >what they have (It is a lot!!). >As far as swaps go any of the above will swap as easy as removing the old >motor and bolting the new one in. Any other swap will entail expense for >mounts accessories etc. >You need to evaluate the truck and estimate how much life is left in the >trans, body and interior. If all you need is a rebuilt motor and the $1500 >unit is of good quality then $3000 for a total truck that will go another >100K miles doesn't seem like much to me. Also you probably know better >what >this truck needs as aposed to another one. > >Tom H. > ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:46:41 EDT From: SMOKEY5209 aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 I am ready to rebuild the engine for my truck and have been seeking opinions as to whether rebuild it as a 360 or a 390. I have been given various avenues of thought, one is that the 360 is known to have a weak crank, and the other is that the 390 has weak connecting rods. Before I spend the money it takes to go either way, I would like some input from the FTE users. Also is there an advantage to pocket porting the heads, I have conflicting opinions on this also. The truck will be used for a street truck, for show and go. Thanks in advance Ed == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:09:14 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions My son just rebuilt a 360 in a 72. He works for a shop in Columbus which has a good reputation in the area. He's an apprentice mechanic right now but sounds like he's picking it up pretty fast :-) He'd talk your leg off if you called for advice :-) The first thing to set up in a sitting engine is the rings. Before you get too carried away I would consider disassembly and clean up. You may find it doesn't really need a rebuild or at least for a little work you can get by with it for a while to capitalize on your investment :-) It depends on what you have more of and what facilities you have to work on it in. If the pistons move easily you can do this without removing the engine. Pull the pan and heads, disconnect the rods from the crank (keeping track of where things are) and,if there is no ridge, push the pistons out one at a time and clean them up. If there is a ridge rent or buy a reamer, clean up the ridge (keeping the chips cleaned up (I put a rag over the piston to catch them)) and then push the pistons out. If you have building to work in this should take no more than a weekend and will give you an opportunity to check it all out, replace oil seals on the valves etc.. - -- 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 - -- > I bought this truck a few months ago having been told that > the engine was > running fine when it was parked. Well, that's the risk you > take. Win some, > lose some. It runs, yes, but after warming up it has no oil > pressure and > smokes. So I'm assuming a complete rebuild is in order. I == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:04:28 -0500 From: Subject: E: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions >If the pistons move easily you can do this without removing the engine. Pull the >pan and heads, disconnect the rods from the crank (keeping track of where >things are) and,if there is no ridge, push the pistons out one at a time and >clean them up. If there is a ridge rent or buy a reamer, clean up the ridge >(keeping the chips cleaned up (I put a rag over the piston to catch them)) >and then push the pistons out. But if you are going through all this trouble and the cylinder walls are not gouged, why not go ahead and hone them and put in some nice new soft cast iron rings? Probably some new rod bearings and the motor will be almost as good as new?? For someone who has never done it before, I think a weekend is probably an optimistic guess. Especially if a parts run is needed. Few places have FE components on the shelf. Bryan Kirking 66 Step Side 352 FE, 4 speed Houston, Texas == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:02:07 -0400 From: Marvin & Michelle Meyer Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions >things are) and,if there is no ridge, push the pistons out one at a time and >clean them up. If there is a ridge rent or buy a reamer, clean up the ridge >(keeping the chips cleaned up I just went through this, if there is a ridge you need a bore because if you just re-ring you may encounter piston slap. Not a nice sound after all the work you went through. Up here in Canada a machine shop will re-bore.030 over plus hot tank and install new cam bearings for $30 per hole plus our GST Tax. New re-ground crank= $125 exchanged Marvin meyer stratford.webgate.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:28:33 PDT From: "Mark Mcknight" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Floyd and good ole frame! Hey ya'll I got me Truck almost totaly riped apart... gotta paint the frame yet... I was wondering if anyone knew where to get 2 rear frame cross members? And with all this talk on floyd if it comes around here its an open invite for anyone who wants to go four wheelin! I got a mudhole 1/4 mile long and in some places 3 feet deeP! =Þ anyone care to run! :o) anyways any insight into my frame problem would be GREAT!! thanx again for your help! Mark 94' M*zda B-3000 91' M*zda MPV 78' Ford F-100 2wd 76' Ford F-250 4x4 beater 46' G*C 3/4 ton pickup http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://SMCI.DYNIP.COM ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:49:00 -0700 (PDT) From: draco pacifier.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 78-79 460 header/exhaust manifolds Clem wrote: > Does anyone know which shorty headers will fit the best? Sanderson makes a shorty header model FF-460 that may work. You will have to look at the dimensions and photos from the catalog to try to determine if they will work in your truck. You can give them a call and ask them if they will work and get a catalog. I don't have the number, but they are in South San Francisco, CA. If you have a manual transmission you need to make sure the clutch linkage will clear. You can also look at www.centuryperformance.com for most of the information that is in the catalog including a pictures of the FF-460 headers. If you go to my web page and follow the Sanderson Headers link, the link at the bottom takes you directly to the Sanderson page on the Century Performance site. Mark in Southwest Washington http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacifier.com/~draco - -- '74 F-100 Ranger XLT 4X4 in digest mode == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 10:15:59 EDT From: TBeeee aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions > I just went through this, if there is a ridge you need a bore because if > you just re-ring you may encounter piston slap. The presence of a ridge is not always an indicator that the block needs to be bored. It just depends on how worn the cylinders are. Best thing to do is mic out all of the pistons and the bore and see whether or not you will still be within specs after honing. Many times the pistons are worn and should be replaced. You really can't make an informed decision until you have all the facts and figures. There is no sense leaving it to guess work. Stock Man 1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims) 1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd 1966 F-250 I6 240 2wd LWB Flare Side http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:37:11 -0700 From: "Scott Jensen" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Still not charging A few months ago I had charging problems. Work was busy so I just put the charger on it every few days till I got time to play with it. While the engine was running, I put the volt meter on the positive side of the battery, which resulted in a reading of 12.7 volts. This seemed low, should have been up around 14. I turned on my lights and fan. Voltage reading dropped to 11.5 volts. Cool, I thought, it's the alternater. Just for fun, I pulled out the cheesy clamp-on current tester that the shop has and clamped it on the main alt. wire. Then I started turning things on, one by one: lights, fan, radio, brake lights. Between each, I'd check the meter, and it never went above about 3 3/4 amps while the battery voltage kept going down. Since regulaters regulate voltage and fuses regulate current, I knew it was my alternater because the darn thing wasn't supplying the current everything needed. That's why the voltage was dropping. I knew I could just replace a few diodes cheaply, but it was a warrantied alt. so I took it to the Year? Make? Sorry, your truck doesn't have that motor, Store. They put it on their machine, which is basically an electric motor and a belt, with a voltmeter built in. "Guess what sir", they said, "your alt. shows 12.7 volts, it's fine." After much haggling, costing more of my time than a few diodes would, I walked out with a new rebuilt. I haven't touched my battery charger since then. My conclusion to the whole mess was that the alt. was "kinda" working. Enough to run everything, but not enough to run everything and also keep the battery deep charged. Just my 0.02000 cents. Scott 76 F100 4x4 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 08:07:50 PDT From: "Matt VanDewater" Subject: FTE 61-79 - neutral safety switch Hi, I've got a 74 F100. I let my brother drive it for a while and somehow the shifter on the steering column broke and is just dangling now. The vehicle will not even turn over and I made sure it was in park on the transmission. You can't shift from gears in the cab, but I figured if I could find the neutral safety switch and route the wires past I could get it started enough to move it into my garage. Anyone have any ideas where this switch is at. Is it fairly accessable under the dash or is it inside of the steering column. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Matt ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 10:19:33 -0500 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - neutral safety switch Matt You might on the shifting arm on the transmission and see if there is a half moom pastic module on it. If so this is it. At 08:07 AM 9/17/99 PDT, you wrote: > > >Hi, I've got a 74 F100. I let my brother drive it for a while and somehow >the shifter on the steering column broke and is just dangling now. The >vehicle will not even turn over and I made sure it was in park on the >transmission. You can't shift from gears in the cab, but I figured if I >could find the neutral safety switch and route the wires past I could get it >started enough to move it into my garage. Anyone have any ideas where this >switch is at. Is it fairly accessable under the dash or is it inside of the >steering column. Any suggestions would be appreciated. > >Matt > > >______________________________________________________ > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:23:11 -0400 From: Marvin & Michelle Meyer Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions I didn't want to get into a long winded discussion about it but: Assuming the following has been done: Compression test, Vac test, scraped carbon off the tops of cylinders, then if you take your finger nail and scratch gently and feel a ridge. Experience dictates a bore job. Just for additional proof then you can proceed if you want and measure everything up. Measure at the top, then middle, then bottom, of piston travel each at 90 degree intervals( that's a total of 6 measurements) then measure piston up 1" from leading edge of skirt, 90 degrees from piston pin. For an every day vehicle (daily driver) .004-.006, mild racing .005-.007 MAX My fault should have explained in detail the first time for the old FE Iron Horses Marvin Meyer Machinist, Tool & Die Stationary Eng. 3rd Class Industrial Maintenance Mechanic (Millwright) FAG Bearings LTD, Stratford, Ont. Canada meyer stratford.webgate.net The presence of a ridge is not always an indicator that the block needs to be bored. It just depends on how worn the cylinders are. Best thing to do is mic out all of the pistons and the bore and see whether or not you will still be within specs after honing. Many times the pistons are worn and should be replaced. You really can't make an informed decision until you have all the facts and figures. There is no sense leaving it to guess work. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 08:26:58 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Rollbacks Ok, I'll bite.......WHAT THE HECK IS A ROLL BACK????? Ok, I'm going to guess with my vast background of auto knowledge that it is one of those wierd looking slanted car hauler trucks with a winch and a bed that can be tilted for loading. I've seen two types, a flat bed with hydraulics to tilt it and one that stays tilted and has no hydraulics but the vehicle is held on with chains and blocks (course you chain it on a flat bed too :-)) Flat bed has to be more expensive but also much more useful IMHO :-) I had a normal stake truck with 15' ramps to do the same thing. Much cheaper but not quite as convenient :-) Wish I still had that truck, it was really cool :-) - -- 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 - -- > > So who has experince owning a rollback (flatbed). I see > late 70's F-350 > > big block rollbacks going for 5-6000$. What is the weight == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:14:56 -0400 From: "Don Haring, Jr." Subject: FTE 61-79 - My Club Wagon is now a "show truck" Hello all, I am proud to announce that my 1966 Falcon Club Wagon won an award at the First Annual Hot Rod Hoedown held here in Philadelphia last weekend on Sunday, September 12, 1999. There was a turnout of about 70 vehicles. I receieved a phone call from Furry, one of the organizers, who told me that he needed to confirm my address to send out the award. I left the show early since I was worn out from having driven back to Philly from Connecticut the morning of the show. I also got stuck in New York City on the way home when the George Washington Bridge was closed *while* I was on it. I was shocked to hear that I won an award. What did I win? ... "Best Lowrider" Wha?! Since my van was the ONLY truck there and easily the tallest vehicle present (it's stock and not lowered at all), there must have been a mistake. Nope, Furry said there was no mistake, but he didn't quite understand the selection either. Considering that there were a few actual LA-style lowriders present at the show, I can only imagine that my selection was some kind of organized joke. The majority of the show was 50s and 60s low-buck style rods with an emphasis on cars that are actually driven regularly, though, so perhaps it was a rally against the true high-zoot slammers. Keep in mind that my van is rusting out in the rear and has some primered patches along the wheel wells, as well as a full compliment of scrapes and dings. It does have flat suede blue paint (naturally aged, of course), some shiny polished Maverick wheel covers and a pair of chrome headlight covers, so it screams "kustom, baby!" ;) In any case, I'm happy about the award. As with most other aspects of my life -- I'll take what I can get. :) - -don - -- Don in Philadelphia Internet Director, Keystone Chapter FCA | 66 Falcon Deluxe Club Wagon Falconaut: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconaut | 61 Falcon Futura Keystone: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconkey | classic scooters and bicycles == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:26:55 -0500 From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 I've been running 390's for 11 years now and have never experienced a rod failure. In my younger years, I used to race my stock 390 against 5.0's. 6000 rpm shifts were the norm. Now I have weak valve springs, but never had a rod or crank failure. I'd rebuild it as a 390 and keep it below 5000 rpm. Jason SMOKEY5209 aol.com wrote: the other is that the 390 has weak connecting rods. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:33:11 -0500 From: "John LaGrone" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Floyd and grease >>Repack the wheel bearings, also. We had some heavy rains here in Iowa in '93 and I drove through it all! What a blast! That is, untill things started to break. This thread popped a question into my head that was there several days ago. I'm behind on the list and am reading the posts out of order. At any rate, I couldn't find real lithium chasis grease the other day and had to buy Mobil 1 synthetic grease. It said on the tube that it was 100% compatible wiht all lithuium grease. My questions: Is it really compatible? Any pitfalls? It's red so it's easy to spot. Should I hunt real lithium grease or continue to use the synthetic? You know how I feel about motor oil. :-) 78 hour work weeks wreak havoc on the enjoyment of my FoMoCo products and projects. (Everyone keeps telling me one of my tail lights is burned out. I've only had time to convert one side to the second bulb.) - -- 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: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:47:55 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Oil sending unit Clem writes: >>The oil pressure sending unit shouldn't be a problem, as it screws to the side of the block. Not on my 460's. It is behind the intake on top of the block. You are thinking of FE, I think. Maybe Windsor also - not sure there. It should still fit, regardless of engine or location. Just don't try to drive a gauge off a "Idiot light" unit. It must be for a gauge. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:43:12 -0400 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III It isn't logical which is why I keep coming back to the alternator. When you say you checked continuity, you mean on the fuseable link? The main current wire from the alternator? Have you checked the diodes in the alternator yet? Even though the alternator is putting out AC the battery will still read 12v on the dc multimeter but no dc voltage will show up in some places because a dc multimeter can't read ac, it will read zero because both sides are equal. - -- 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 doesn't seem logical that a voltage reg would work fine in one 1968 > Ford truck but not another. At this point I can't see what > else it could > be. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:52:42 -0400 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ex manifolds Clem writes: >>I've been running L&L headers (fenderwell exit) headers in my '79 350. I want convert to a shorty header or some 460/429 cast iron (stock) manifold. Does anyone know which shorty headers will fit the best? Are there any cast iron manifolds that fit this application, or has anyone tried to accomplish this? I've tried a set of 77 lincoln manifolds, but the right side is too wide, and there is frame interference. I'd either have to raise the motor, or modify the frame. If I had a choice, I'd want to find a set manifolds that fit. Try to find the right(passenger) side ex manifold off a Van or truck. They are supposed to clear the frame. The 460 engine was offered in 2X4 F series from '78 up, and some say as early as '74 in the F350. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:48:19 -0500 From: "John LaGrone" Subject: FTE 61-79 - >>My vehicles don't usually sit long enough to get cool, much less have rodents make a home in it. Azie, The squirrels ate a Buick LeSabre and a Cadillac DeVille in the parking lot at work one day. You don't have to sit still long if the moon is right. It must have been some sick or desperate rodents that would eat a Ford truck. Mine has sat for months at a time in its past life and not been eaten (yet). - -- 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: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:05:06 EDT From: SMOKEY5209 aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Cam Selection I am once again in a fix. I am looking for a camshaft that will give good performance and torque. I am rebuilding a 360 and was looking for a cam that didn't require changing all the other parts just to match it. I have been told Edlebrock, by some, Crane by others, Crower etc. I realize that everyone has their favorite and maybe that is where my problem lies. I am planning on having the block bored 30 over and installing 9 to 1 pistons, Edlebrock manifold and a 750 carb. If you could just tell me what some of you are using and how you feel about them I would appreciate it. I am looking for a tire burner, but not something that at idle shakes you off of the seat. Thank again Ed == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:35:35 EDT From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part V I posted this earlier this week with out being as direct. The alternator does not control the voltage on the DC bus. The Battery does! The DC bus voltage will only read what state of charge that the battery has at the moment you check. Replace your voltage regulator and let the battery charge. (You will not see the voltage go up until the battery is at a higher state of charge.) I spent 24 years on submarines and DC electrical systems are something I have lived! Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:43:51 -0700 From: Pat Brown Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III Don Grossman wrote: > I was leaving the gauge/ light out altogether. But that was the point of my post - the wiring is different depending on the whether an ammeter or light is used. > 1 test would be to use a jumper wire and give the Field 12v > manually and watch the meter. This is an excellent test of the alternator. It's called a "Full Field" test, and there are adapters available (snap- on, etc) that replace the regulator to do this quickly. However, Bill already knows that there isn't any drive on the field wire. This comes from the regulator, and he's replaced the regulator with a supposedly good one from his truck (Bill is working on a friends truck). > Here they are again for reference with out any Gauges involved Well, yeah, but this is for a sytem with an "ALT" light, not an ammeter. Once again, I'll lean on Steve for his schematic: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty/truck/fordchrg.jpg > "I" should be direct source of 12v from ignition switch Kind of correct. With an ALT light, then the light is in series with this lead. > "A" should be the capacitor/( this would also go the idiot > light if there is one) Capacitor is correct, idiot light is wrong. This terminal should be "always hot", it connects right to the battery side of the starter solenoid. > "S" this wire should go to the Stator post on the alternator Yes, on an ALT light system. With an ammeter this regulator terminal is connected to the switched 12 volts from the ignition switch, and the alternator STA term either isn't connected or is used to drive an electric choke heater. > "F" is the for the Field post on the alternator. Always. > 1 wire on the Alternator will go to the Battery " Bat" One BIG wire :-) > And the last one is the ground ( frame, battery any good ground) > If all of these are correctly hooked up and the regulator tests > good, it has to be the alternator > > Sorry for going back to the beginning but sometimes it helps It ALWAYS helps when I get stuck :-) - -- Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:35:39 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: FTE 61-79 - 78 bronco options As some of you know I have a 78 bronco which I purchased a year ago. The longer I have it, the more I find out - but also the more questions get raised. It says it is a "custom" which is the basic model. But it does have two-tone, all the moldings, carpet, chrome bumpers, automatic transmission (C6), sunscreens with clips, front and rear sway (stabilizer) bar, shocks, and some other stuff that's listed for XLT only. It does not have the woodgrain on the steering wheel, and square headlights that are also listed for the XLT *only*, not available for the custom. I read about these options in a html file at the site with the online VIN decoder (there's a link from the ford-trucks page). The VIN decoder itself only tells me what I already know, a 78 bronco with a 351M. Would this be a truck that someone made from lots of spare parts? It did have a new engine, and some other stuff (transmission) looked like they had been out too. Then again some were original ford parts that looked like they had never been out. Does anybody know more, or perhaps a web site / book with more info? Of course all this doesn't really matter in the sense that the truck is what it is, and whether something was stock or an option doesn't matter anymore.. unless you're a real FTE and want to know exactly what you have and what you miss! What engines were available for these bronco's? I only know of the 351M and 400. Thanks, Bas. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 10:51:15 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 66 ford pulling power >> been the engine of choice for years. The I-6 will get down to >> a pull and stay there; So will my 351M, even when I'm right up to my 6100lbs GVWR it'll pull pretty much any hill in second (meaning 50-55 mph). Up the hill, what matters is pure horsepower. Then all you need is the right gears to keep the engine at its peak performance.. I'm sure the older 300's will have higher compression and no emission cr#p, so they can very well have more hp than the newer V8's.. Plus, my engine sometimes has power left in 2nd but then in third with 2300 rpm or so it doesn't pull.. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 11:38:54 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - The 300, and what did I just step in? >You can lean on a Ford door and not total the cab. You can live in a coastal That reminds me of a forest service guy who drove a d#dge, he said "man these things have a strong frame, but the body gets dented while sitting in the garage" But didn't ford go the same way? I was astonished when I found out my 78 bronco weighs almost as much as my uncle's 81 F250 *WITH* the 1500lbs camper. And then the F250 has IFS, extra leaf springs etc, how come it is that much lighter? Must be the body or something. The government should mandate a minimum average lifetime rather than a minimum gas mileage. >county and not have the rust to eat up your floorboard and fender wells >before the payment book is empty. But pull out by a Chevy at the red light I know somebody from indiana who replaced his rocker panels every 5 years.. then again the bronco is from '69 and it is pretty impressive that it survived 30 years of four wheeling, his son is using it now with big 36" tires. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 11:12:43 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: FTE 61-79 - 351M rpm's and calculations What's a safe redline rpm for the 351M? I have no tach so I just stick to the speeds my C6 will allow in Drive. I'd like to calculate my rpm; questions: - - How much slip does a torque converter normally have? This is a '78 bronco / C6 - - What's the standard gear ratio? 3.54? With the third gear 1:1, 33" tires, 3.54:1 rearend, say 90 km/h (58 mph or so?), I get 2016 rpm. With the slip that would be 2100? That's pretty good.. but yeah at 50 mph that would be 1800, no wonder it starts loosing power then. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:48:49 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? > Has anyone or is it possible to add a tranny cooler to a radiator without > it? I'm not talking about an auxilary cooler (which I will have to do if Sure, just get the very biggest one you can find. May cost you $75-$100 or so but it beats having any kind of problems. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:41:43 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Flooded Hot Starts >>> If I needed one and couldn't find a place to buy it I wouldn't >>> hesitate a bit to make one myself... > Naw, I'd make it out of whatever was lying around the garage... Perhaps you can start manufacturing concrete spacers ;-) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:47:53 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford 9 inch rear end questions >I have a 1972 F-100 with a bad rear end. I have access to a 1975 F-100, but >it has longer axles and 31 spline axles. My 72 has 28 spline axles. Will I >be able to find the 31 spline axles in the correct length, or will I have to >get the ones out of the 75 shortened if I want to use them? Also, anyone My bronco had a bent axle and I got a brand new one, I think it was about $200 or so. Actually my mechanic got it for me, not sure where he ordered it. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 09:07:30 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - The sweetest sound >away, we did sumthin wrong. Well folks that starter wasnt engaged for more >than 1/4 of a sec before that beast roared to life. And I mean ROAR (still That sure must have been a great feeling! Congratz! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:21:14 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? >Good point about the temp gauge. Ive got a temp & pressure gauge installed Where do you get those? I have been thinking about it, but somehow never ran into one. > line going into the transmission. The optimum temperature for the > transmission is 180-200F. when the temperature starts getting in above > 200-210F range, seals start cooking and the fluid breaks down. Note that it > is equally important for the transmission not to run too cool. For this > reason, the winter months (if applicable) can be bad as well. Use a guage Hmm I have a BIG cooler because it was running kinda hot when four wheeling (don't have a gauge but I just had this feeling.. although in the end the oil did not look like it had been hot). But now I can hold my hand on the pan and it only feels like 40-50 deg C (100-120F) or something, and that's with hwy driving in SUMMER. You're the first I hear talking about running cool being bad. Most people I talked to said that would be OK as it does not have contaminating gasses like an engine. > at first, and if things dont work out, ad the radiator cooler as well. Or in my case a thermostat ;-) > Note: using a aftermarket tranny filter (Summit Racing has them) can only > help. Unless it gets plugged.. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 17:16:37 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? >wet snow for hours on end, and and shifting all the time), and once while >plowing for 32 hours non-stop, the tranny started acting up. It was all of 32 hours??? yeah, rite... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 11:55:44 From: Bas van der Veer Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - towing with a Bronco >>>Does anybody have experience in towing with bronco's? I have a '78 >Well I have been unable to determine who started this thread, sorry. There I did.. >is another small problem with towing a large trailer with a Bronco. That >short wheelbase is going to let a big trailer whip you around if you get >.... careless. I had a G*C Jimmy when no one knew what one was and my Yeah that's merely why I asked; the wheelbase is really the only difference when compared to the pickups. I know a shorter wheelbase is worse for towing (although nice when backing up) but I expected the weight to compensate somewhat. >brother had a R mch rger. We both had the same problem. The power was there, >the suspension could handle the weight, but the trucks would verge on Actually I just redid my springs, had them re-arced and added a new (6th) leaf. The bronco used to hang backwards quite a bit, when fully loaded it would be only 1-1.5" from the stops. Now it sits some 5 inches higher (maybe 1-1.5" over stock) and doesn't come down as much with increased loads. I also got a 4-core radiator, PS cooler, and the biggest tranny cooler I could find. With "usual" highway driving the trans oil stays around 100 deg F, judging from the oil pan temperature. Just nice to the touch! >becoming uncontrollable with his boat, an 18 foot old, heavy monster in tow. >My crew cab, OTOH would pull it all day with no problems. Just something >else to think about.... Sounds like I just need to be careful. Thanks for the advice! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:42:36 -0400 From: William King Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: Still not charging III OK. I think this is done. Hopefully. Last night I picked up a new voltage reg. Installed in the 'non-charging' truck. Then I put the key in the 'run' position and checked the Field (orange) wire. Lo and behold: 10 volts at the Field terminal on the alternator and the alternator light was glowing. I was getting neither voltage nor a glowing alt. light w/ the volt reg from my truck. Next, I fired the truck up. The alternator light flickered (for .25 seconds) then went out. The truck still shows 12.5 volts at the battery when running. I flipped the headlights on, and the voltage stayed around 12.5 volts. At this point I'm going to conclude it's fixed. I'd rather see 13 or 14 volts, but I'm starting to wonder if I'm really sane. We'll drive the truck a bit and see if the battery's charging or not. That'll be a good test for sure... Of course, I don't know why one voltage reg works fine in my truck, but not in his. I cleaned the volt reg ground a while back, and my voltage tester shows a nice, clean ground there, so I know it wasn't the volt reg not grounding out. I want to thank everyone who offered help on this. I really couldn't have helped my friend without everyone's help. Thanks a bunch. Ohio Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:22:06 -0700 From: Don Grossman Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Still Not charging. Part III For information regarding this post refer to Pat Brown's last post. Thanks Pat, A word of caution for anyone using the Haynes books.... Don't ;) So far Steve has the best layout. Part of what lead me to my wiring is what is on my truck. I have the Idiot light and an ammeter. Only my ammeter is inline with the charging wire ( aka "The Big One") I just went out to look at my trucks wiring and the A terminal connects to the capacitor and the Bat side of the Alt. The same difference as it still always gets 12V constant. Also my wires are not all the same color so I guess I followed the wrong one the first time. Ohio Bill Just do the field test and get back to us Please so we can be done with this thread ;) - -- Don Grossman duckdon pacific.net 99 Contour 63 F-100 4x4 43 GPW == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:35:26 -0600 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish >From: "Bill Beyer" >Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish > >>don't think we'll have much success, though!!!!!! >>Dave told me last night that "Not just >>anyone can have an M-block"..... > >Now Dave I expect you to be strong and not give >in to the Dark side. Aw, Bill. I try to be ecumenical about all this and I just can't bring myself to say that any hunk of cast iron made by Henry's boys could be associated w/ the Dark side. The most I could say is that these poor FE lovers are merely misguided, but not truly evil. Now, that stuff from the Great Malevolence... that's stuff from the Dark side! Really, the bigger threat to my parochial beliefs is that Wish guy and his OHC proselytizing -- trying to lead me astray from the Almighty Pushrod.... It's insidious, and yes, I must confess, even I have been tempted by the siren song of the high revs, but I am strong and steadfast in my love for real low-end torque, and I still firmly believe that I (and those who believe like me) will be ultimately rewarded by getting more than 25K miles out of a clutch while enjoying real performance. As for me and my M-block devotion, it is unswerving. I shall always carry the M-block light to show the way of true enlightenment for all my fellow Ford lovers. Dave R. (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:54:42 -0700 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish - -----Original Message----- From: Dave Resch To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Friday, September 17, 1999 11:37 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - CJ gets some work out of Wish >Aw, Bill. I try to be ecumenical about all this and I just can't bring myself >to say that any hunk of cast iron made by Henry's boys could be associated w/ >the Dark side. The most I could say is that these poor FE lovers are merely >misguided, but not truly evil. Now, that stuff from the Great Malevolence... >that's stuff from the Dark side! Good point! >Really, the bigger threat to my parochial beliefs is that Wish guy and his OHC >proselytizing -- trying to lead me astray from the Almighty Pushrod.... It's >insidious, and yes, I must confess, even I have been tempted by the siren song >of the high revs, but I am strong and steadfast in my love for real low-end >torque, and I still firmly believe that I (and those who believe like me) will >be ultimately rewarded by getting more than 25K miles out of a clutch while >enjoying real performance. Leave us not forget that the NASCAR boys seem to do pretty well in the revs dept., even with lowly pushrod mills. Can you say 351W, Cleveland heads, 9000+ RPM, it gives me goosebumps! >As for me and my M-block devotion, it is unswerving. I shall always carry the >M-block light to show the way of true enlightenment for all my fellow Ford >lovers. Amen brother! Praise the lord! Somebody pass me a camshaft... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:58:47 -0400 From: "Clem Salek" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? Hey, other than 15-20 minutes of idleing time for re-fuelings, coffee breaks, and grabbing somethin' to eat, it was every bit of 32 hours...I probably shut the truck off once for 20 minutes the whole storm. I've got my paycheck and timeslips to prove it. I'm glad the guy I work for isn't as skeptical as you seem to be! Anyways, that's why old Fords, 460's and all the excellent hardware that goes along with these trucks rule. While plowing, I ran across some dude with a brand new Dodge W350, auto. After plowing for about 10 hours with this guy, I could smell his tranny from the other side of the parking lot. He soon lifted the hood, and let things cool down for about 1/2 hour...He soon went home...I pulled a 3 grand donut around him and went on pushing snow. I guess he didn't want to ruin a brand new truck. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Bas van der Veer Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 1:17 PM To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Add tranny cooler to radiator without it? >wet snow for hours on end, and and shifting all the time), and once while >plowing for 32 hours non-stop, the tranny started acting up. It was all of 32 hours??? yeah, rite... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:50:54 -0500 From: David.R.John deluxe.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Blow by continued Thanks to all who have responded to my 78 4x4 460 with the oil puking problems. Just to answer some of the lingering questions: the person I bought the truck from seemed very trustworthy, the motor did seem just over hauled, clean engine new gaskets, receipts etc. Plus the gentleman said to give him a call anytime after, which I had done. He couldn't believe about the oil and he too figured that the rings hadn't seated. I have checked the PCV and it is sucking away through the valve, but it can't keep up apparently. I tried the bon ami last night and took it for a spin and drove it pretty hard. Well I'm guessing this technique is not instant, but it blew hard enough to push my dipstick out (I had taped it on pretty good). Also force oil out from the filler cap!! So we are all saying rings right?? What do I do? Can I do the work without pulling the engine? I can do a lot of tearing apart and have someone else do the technical stuff. Do I pull the engine get the pistons out have the appropriate work done and then hire someone to assemble it and I'll put it back in the truck. Any guesses on the costs? Sorry my posts are so long, just trying to give some detail. Thanks all!! David 78 F250 4x4 Supercab 460 4spd 78 F250 4x4 400 C6 (parts truck for tranny swap) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:49:51 -0700 From: "Christeen Bradley" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re:Armor all removal You should have seen what I did in my younger days! I thought Armor All was cool and I put it on everything, including the gas, brake and clutch pedals. My poor feet didn't know what to do. I sanded them to remove it. Not much help for your dash but they say that laugher is good medicine. Good Luck Scott 1966 F-100 Shortbox 351C == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:59:03 -0700 From: sparky mail.island.net Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re - Still Not charging. Part III Two thoughts on this problem. First are you sure the regulator is grounded. The regulator is case ground and without a good ground I am fairly sure it wont work. This could be the problem as the reg works in your truck. Try grounding the regulator mounting bolt directly to the battery negative post, of course clean the mounting area very good first. Second when you measure the voltage I assume it is with the connector off the regulator. So you could have a corrosion problem in the green/red wire from the ignition switch or the yellow wire from the battery. This will let you measure the voltage but when you try to use it the voltage is dropped at the corroded part. I have seen this many times working on vehicles and boats. Corrosion is not our friend :) Here is a way to check this, be patient I am making this up as I go :) Remove the green/red wire from the regulator connector leaving the others connected to the regulator. Start the truck. Then using a jumper wire put 12volts from the battery direct to the spot where the green/red wire should go on the regulator, and check for 14-15 volts at the battery. This should bypass the ignition switch and associated wiring and allow the reg to work if the igntion switch circuit is the problem. For the yellow wire, you could also run a jumper wire from the battery direct to the spot where the yellow wire is supposed to hook to the regulator. If this fixes the prob then yellow wire circuit is corroded. If this helps do not leave the truck wired with the jumpers and think the prob is fixed. Repair or replace the defective wiring and or igntion switch. Good luck. Sparky 73 F250 4x4 3?0FE 4v >Hi all, >I checked the green wire w/ red stripe this morning. It has >12 volts when the key is in the 'run' position. I also >checked continuity (for the 5th time) in the orange (field) >wire from the Volt reg to the alternator. It's good (ie no breaks). >This leads me to the conclusion that the voltage reg is no good. >However, this same voltage reg is back in my truck, and works fine >(I KNOW this particular volt reg is good b/c I just put 100+ >miles on my truck in 2 days with it). > >It doesn't seem logical that a voltage reg would work fine in one 1968 >Ford truck but not another. At this point I can't see what else it could >be. >The volt reg has power from the yellow wire all the time, and voltage from >the green/red wire in the 'run' position. Am I missing something >here (besides 14 volts when running....but...never mind)? I think I'll >have my friend pickup a new voltage reg and see how that works. >Thanks again to everyone for their help. >Ohio Bill > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:00:20 -0400 From: "Clem Salek" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil sending unit Yea...my mistake. I guess my point was that it screws to the block. Clem writes: >>The oil pressure sending unit shouldn't be a problem, as it screws to the side of the block. Not on my 460's. It is behind the intake on top of the block. You are thinking of FE, I think. Maybe Windsor also - not sure there. It should still fit, regardless of engine or location. Just don't try to drive a gauge off a "Idiot light" unit. It must be for a gauge. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:26:31 -0500 From: Larry Schmiedekamp Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re:Armor all removal Remains me a few years ago I drove my ford truck to my local exhust shop for some work. Walk in and the owner was on crutchs with a broken leg. Ask what happen and he pointed to his shiney Harley in the corner. Said Armor All works good on everything except the tires. He had Armor All the sides of his tires and when the took a corner down it went breaking his leg. Glad you and not me. Larry At 01:49 PM 9/17/99 -0700, you wrote: >You should have seen what I did in my younger days! I thought Armor All was >cool and I put it on everything, including the gas, brake and clutch pedals. >My poor feet didn't know what to do. I sanded them to remove it. Not much >help for your dash but they say that laugher is good medicine. > >Good Luck >Scott >1966 F-100 Shortbox 351C > >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:33:49 -0700 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 I've never heard of any weakness in the 390 rods. I have a 390 and am very happy with it. It is a very good all around truck motor. The prevailing wisdom on this list from past discussions is that the 390 will give better torque and about the same gas mileage as a 360. So if you have a choice why not go with the extra cubes. You'll never regret it. Tom H > ---------- > From: SMOKEY5209 aol.com[SMTP:SMOKEY5209 aol.com] > Reply To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 7:46 AM > To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: FTE 61-79 - 360 vs 390 > > I am ready to rebuild the engine for my truck and have been seeking > opinions > as to whether rebuild it as a 360 or a 390. I have been given various > avenues > of thought, one is that the 360 is known to have a weak crank, and the > other > is that the 390 has weak connecting rods. > Before I spend the money it takes to go either way, I would like some > input > from the FTE users. > Also is there an advantage to pocket porting the heads, I have conflicting > > opinions on this also. > The truck will be used for a street truck, for show and go. > Thanks in advance > Ed > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 19:32:31 -0500 From: "mstrawn" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Leaf spring bushings I am going to replace the suspension bushings in my 77 F-100. I want to start with the leaf springs since they seem to be the most worn out. Does anyone have some advise for making this less painfull than it looks? I have received the full Prothane set for the entire truck and would like to make this happen before hunting season opens here in Oklahoma. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 20:32:04 -0400 From: Greg Fisher Subject: FTE 61-79 - Questions about engine choices Hi. New to list. Have a question. I have a '68 F100 longbed that my Grandfather bought new. Has 2V 360/C6. The 360 could use a rebuild. The options I've been considering are: 1) rebuild the 360 with 4V and a cam that get more from it. Will 4V heads be needed to match the new intake? 2) Going to 390. Can the 360 be bored and stroked to make it a 390 or is this a waste of time and should I just find a 390 block. 3) My Dad has 2 '70 2V 351C. Rebuild one of these, but change to 4V. New heads also? I know Edlebrock makes an intake to use a 4 barrel carb with 2 barrel heads, but would the switch to the 4 barrel carb heads be better? Thanks in advance. Greg Fisher '68 F100 longbed == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:02:19 -0700 (PDT) From: canzus seanet.com Subject: Re: E: FTE 61-79 - 65 F100 needs 352 engine rebuild - questions At 08:04 AM 17:9:99 -0500, bkirking bcm.tmc.edu wrote: >For someone who has never done it before, I think a weekend is probably an >optimistic guess. Especially if a parts run is needed. Few places have FE >components on the shelf. > >Bryan Kirking When I worked as a semi-pro engine builder I built 2 a-day, I can still build an engine in about 5 hours, If I have to... Steve & the Rockette 63 F100 72 Capri 2000, hers 73 Capri 2600, soon to be a 302 73 MGB GT, Our Toy 94 SHO, SWMBO's 97 Contour, Mine == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 18:27:23 -0700 .... 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. 
|