61-79-list-digest V3 #395

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 #395
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, October 29 1999 Volume 03 : Number 395

=======================================================================
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 - Mileage and Vacuum
FTE 61-79 - Model Truck
RE: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings
Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R
RE: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R
Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R
Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R
Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)
RE: FTE 61-79 - starter Solenoids
FTE 61-79 - Decode
FTE 61-79 - Flywheel
FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD
RE: FTE 61-79 - Driving Lights and terms
RE: FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD
FTE 61-79 - military and 390/C6
FTE 61-79 - Poised and ready
FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings
FTE 61-79 - Stinking cars
RE: FTE 61-79 - OD on Linc rear
FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info
Re: FTE 61-79 -Can anyone decode this ???
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info
RE: FTE 61-79 - 289 rebuild
RE: FTE 61-79 - 390GT flywheel
RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)
RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)
FTE 61-79 - Deacon Wake Up!
FTE 61-79 - Hey Bronco Guys! (and other "stabilizer bar" installers)
RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)
RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)
RE: FTE 61-79 - Hey Bronco Guys! (and other "stabilizer bar" inst allers)
RE: FTE 61-79 - no fuel, interesting variation
FTE 61-79 - Newbie/Questions about '72 F250 4X4
Re: FTE 61-79 - Deacon Wake Up!
Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 24 gear popping/4x4 column u-joint
Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)
Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)
Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)
Re: FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD
RE: FTE 61-79 - OD on Linc rear
FTE 61-79 - 4x4 column u-joint
FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info
RE: FTE 61-79 - 4x4 column u-joint
RE: FTE 61-79 - Body stuff, running Beast, high idle, w/s washer.
Re: FTE 61-79 - 1967-72 4x4 column u-joint
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Quadrajet on Offy 300 intake
RE: FTE 61-79 - 289 rebuild

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 06:49:04 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum

The 19" blade required more HP than the 17" blade. Since it turned at the
same speed as the engine it always had a drag. The Clutch fan only turns
when the engine is hot and freewheels the rest of the time so relieves the
engine of several HP which allows you to let off on the gas a tad. This
last is what actually affects your vacuum. Rpm is the same in both cases
but throttle position is different so vacuum is different. This is actually
the key to "Vacuum Tuning" since the less gas pedal you need the better the
engine is running for a given load and speed.

I once put lower gears on a truck thinking that it would improve the vacuum
and therefore would also improve the economy..........Ooooooooopppppps! The
theory only works if you maintain the same power train, tires and road
conditions as well as ambient temp and weather conditions. Vacuum is
affected by all these things so if you want to see what your tune has done
you have to maintain all these things exactly as they were for your base
line test.

Thought it was easy right? :-) For the 385 series there is a heavy duty,
police version for this clutch which costs about twice as much (about $75
last time I checked) as the standard one. If you plan on some revs I
recommend this one, that's what it was made for :-)

- --
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
- --

> Ditto what Gary Peters is saying - everything makes a
> difference in the
> vacume. It's all directly porportional to how hard the
> engine is working at
> a given moment.

> It had a 17
> inch flexfan - probably some 20 yrs old. Went to Autozone
> and asked for a
> fan for a 69 429 - they pulled out this huge 19 inch job -

> a clutch fan in a boneyard on a 78 E-150 with a 460. Bought
> it because I
> didn't like this 19 inch fan learjet sound at 3000 rpms. Put
> it on today at
> lunch and guess what. That's right - seemed to gain 25 HP
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 05:04:19 -0700
From: John Lord
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Model Truck

In a 4x4 mag, i found a model truck offered by the Franklin Mint.

A 1940's Ford pickup, the logo is "Built To Last"
It comes complete with rust, a transmission in the box, a 6 pack in the
passanger seat,
dent, a missing head light, and we cant forget the messed up front grill
and all the other features that give a nice truck personallity.

Now How's that for a way to express long lasting and Build Ford Tough.

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:11:11 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings

Mine didn't make any noise at all but I could "Feel" it in the shifting back
and forth on the highway under certain conditions. I could actually feel
the back end shift in turns :-( My front bearings OTOH sounded like a
little mouse squeaking, litterally and was intermittant so I ignored
it.........until one day it wasn't a mouse any more, it was the bat from
hell (any one see that movie where the huge bat lived under a cotton
mill...?) and yanked the steering wheel out of my hands :-( $240 later and
the mouse and bat are dead......:-)

- --
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
- --

> Rear wheel bearings go whump whump, whump, etc. The u-joints
> are more tinny
> and are louder as you pass close to a building are curb.
> How's that for a
> technical description?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:20:30 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R

In a message dated 10/29/99 2:57:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jedolson

juno.com writes:

> Leave the press work to the parts house where you get the bearings.
>
>
>
> Press work?, for rear wheel bearings on a ford, you don't need no stinkin
> press.
John:

I've done it the way you outlined many times before. But as I get
older...I continue to be fascinated with neat tools such as a press. For the
time you spend trying to end run the press you could have had it done on the
press and installed. Besides, one false move while driving the bearing on
with the BFH and ...you know the rest. The parts houses really don't charge
much to perform this service and you are usually there anyway buying the
bearing. Find a good local parts supplier. Make friends. Bring Beer or
other forms of bribery. A little kindness usually goes a long way.

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, 29 Oct 1999 08:27:14 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R

Last one I pressed on took 12 tons :-) If you press it too hard or hammer
it too hard you risk splitting the inner race against the radius at the axle
shoulder or cracking a roller so there are limits. Once the retainer is
touching the bearing and the bearing is touching the shoulder you better
quit :-) That's always a concern when I press them on because it's hard to
see in there on my outfit.

The old method for this was to press the bearing on until seated which
usually could be done easily then you heated the ring red hot and dropped it
on the bearing, as per the directions in a tractor manual I had for an old
640 Ford. Now the directions that come with the bearings say "DO NOT HEAT
THE RETAINER!" in bold print :-) New bearings are one piece now so may have
shoulders built in to protect the rollers during pressing. They call these
preload spacers or shoulders etc.. The older style was two parts so you
could press the inner race on separately and keep an eye on it. With the
seal in there it's hard to tell when it's actually seated. An arbor press
works well for the bearing but the retainer requires more power than most
arbor presses can generate.

- --
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
- --

> Press work?, for rear wheel bearings on a ford, you don't
> need no stinkin
> press.

> I use an old Walkingbeam Bar from a dumptruck
> 8)slide pipe over the axle and use it to drive the new bearing and
> retainer on, use the pipe like a slide hammer, don't be
> afraid to hit it
> hard
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:30:39 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R

In a message dated 10/29/99 8:28:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
gpeters3

visteon.com writes:

> If you press it too hard or hammer
> it too hard you risk splitting the inner race against the radius at the
axle
> shoulder or cracking a roller so there are limits. Once the retainer is
> touching the bearing and the bearing is touching the shoulder you better
> quit :-) That's always a concern when I press them on because it's hard to
> see in there on my outfit.

Yet another reason to have the parts guy do it. If he breaks it he goes to
the shelf...if you break it you reach in your pocket!

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, 29 Oct 1999 08:30:42 EDT
From: JUMPINFORD

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings R&R

Ive got sumthing to throw in. When I was workin on Cat equipment, we would
sometimes heat the bearing to install it. We used an induction furnace, but
a home oven would work too. Heat the bearing to apprx 325'. If you have a
chest freezer, toss the axle in it. You gotta be fast, but the freezer will
shrink the axle, and the oven will enlarge the bearing. Its a pretty fast
way to set it all up. Ive never done this on a 9 inch, and Id make sure that
the heat wasnt gonna hurt anything, but I used this method to set bearings
and races without fail on numerous occasions.

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:35:45 -0400
From: j arnold
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)

At 10:02 AM 10/28/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Thanks for your message at 09:55 AM 10/28/99 -0700, Dennis Pearson. Your
>message was:
> >>Now this could to lead to some very "W A R P E D" imiginative
>>conclusions......
>>
>>This is not a new idea to me....It actually stems from something I read in
>>an automotive design book about 20 years ago. (Oh how I wish I had written
>>down the info on the book.) Anyway, in that book, one auto designer from
the
>>1950's who stated there was a conscious effort to give the cars sexual
>>characteristics to make them more appealing...It is not really W A R P E D.
>> It's just a fact indicating to what extreme the auto industry go to sell
>>vehicles...The 50's had certain fixations, the 60's theirs, and so on...
>>
>>One question I have is to what extent this was applied to trucks, in
>>particular Ford Trucks.
>>Myabe not at all, but then why change grills, lights, interiors, etc...

I happen to like the square headlights of the 79 versus the round. Does
this mean I'm a pervert or closet mass murderer or something?

stoney

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:50:41 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - starter Solenoids

This is true Azie, most selenoids are made for intermittant use to lock or
unlock things or start motors etc.. They have heavy springs in them to
return them since selenoids can only operate in one direction under power
and powerful, high energy coils to give them the power they need to overcome
resistance. Relays have special coils made for continuous use which use
very little power to operate and have mechanics in them which allow the
contacts to be made quickly and held on easily. They also have heat sinks
in them to disapate heat generated by the actuating coils. I was a little
leary of this use for starter relays myself but didn't say anything till you
brought this up :-)

A heavy duty transistor is another good possiblility since it has no moving
parts and is actuated by a gate voltage less than the main voltage so
switching is cheap and easy and they can be had in large amp ranges too :-)

- --
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've personally tried these FOMOCO starter relays(or
> solenoids or whatever - the
> thing that sits on the passenger side fender), and have found
> that they won't
> last if held "on" for really long periods of time. They
> always open, and I
> assumed that they were not made to be held "on" for very long
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:48:49 -0400
From: am14

daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Decode

Bill B. of Norway...

The 181 probably is the wheelbase in inches, as that was a fairly common
wheelbase for many years.... Don't have a clue as to the remainder.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:54:17 -0400
From: am14

daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Flywheel

Rich M. writes: >>I was wondering if anyone knows of a fylwheel for a
390GT that is for sale. Would the flywheel be
different for a GT motor? Also, it has to be an auto
flywheel. I am willing to trade a manual one for it or
sell it. The motor is out of a 68' Stang.

You should be able to locate one at your favorite salvage yard that has any
older model Fords (Car or truck) with the FE engine. Any 332, 352, 360, 390
will work, and they were plentiful in Ford cars until about '70 and in Trucks
until 77.

GT is no different in this catagory.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:00:35 -0400
From: am14

daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD

Dennis writes: >>I just talked to my "official" Disabled Ford Mechanic Friend
and he said it
is probably an after-market device that actually acts the opposite of an
OD. It raises the gear ratio, most likely installed for towing a trailer...

Sounds pretty neat, whichever way it changes the gear ratio...

I'm still very interested..... I have one of these rears out of a '79 Mark.
Has 2.10 ratio, but doesn't have this device on it...

I sure want to know more about it... Imagine a B U I L T 460 with wide ratio
C6 and a 2.10 rear witrh an UD that brings it down to around 3.00 for getting it
going.... Ahhhhhhh the possibilities....

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:14:21 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Driving Lights and terms

They must be condensers.......How else could you pack so many electrons in
that little cylinder? :-) Before that they were called Lyden Jars :-)
(Don't whack me on the spelling either :-))

- --
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'll quit calling it a condenser when they quit printing it
> on the boxes
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:17:08 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD

Bronco guys are always talking about bigger axles.......why not one of those
Eaton 2 speed truck axles.......:-) Put a Detroit locker in that dude and
you're off......:-)

- --
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 sure want to know more about it... Imagine a B U I L T
> 460 with wide ratio
> C6 and a 2.10 rear witrh an UD that brings it down to around
> 3.00 for getting it
> going.... Ahhhhhhh the possibilities....
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 07:59:16 -0500
From: "John LaGrone"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - military and 390/C6

>>San Antonio , El Paso, or Kileen???? My guesses. The town I work in is
somewhat similar, but probably many less than your area, especially if it is
San
Antonio. 3 Air Bases and 1 Army, I believe..anyway lots and lots of
military.

Azie, it's all a question of scale. ASFAIK, Fort Hood is the only 2 division
installation and has the largest troop strength of any military bas eon the
planet. San Antonio and El Paso are big enough to have a lot of civilians
thrown in the mix. Around here, if you aren't connected to the military,
you're almost a freak. I grew up here and my grandpa showed up in the late
1800s. I'm a full blown freak.

Someone had a 390 and C6 together advertised for $375 in the local Thrifty
Nickel. If you are interested, e-mail me off list and I will hunt the phone
number for you.

- -- 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, 29 Oct 1999 07:36:21 -0500
From:
Subject: FTE 61-79 - rear wheel bearings

> The u-joints are more tinny
>and are louder as you pass close to a building are curb.

I checked the u joints by getting under the truck and rocking the drive shaft to see if
there was play / thumping and didn't notice any. The noise is a rather solid thump
but I can't be certain what causes it. I am also wondering if it may be something
inside the diff. Anyway, I doubt any of these parts have been serviced in quite a
while so if I end up doing bearings, U's, and cracking open the diff I will look upon it
as an "opportunity".

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, 29 Oct 1999 07:39:26 -0500
From:
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Stinking cars

Ken writes: >>the cars in Alabama, Louisiana and Texas all stunk! I wish ya'll
had emissions testing.

Some parts of Texas do have emissions testing. What seems really odd is that it
is done on a county by county basis (I think), so those in Harris county (Houston)
have to have testing. Those of us who live right next door in Brazoria county but
drive to Houston every day don't have to have emissions. Those of us with 66's
are exempt.
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, 29 Oct 1999 08:28:46 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - OD on Linc rear

> i saw an article on a boss 429 mustang once, they say it had a
> factory od
> unit on the rear end. must've been a strong unit.
>

Never heard of such a thing ... especially not on a Boss 429, a car you
could only choose what radio and what color you wanted ...

the 69 Cougar Eliminator on the other hand, that had a 2spd rear end
available for it according to my uncle (who was researching cars for my mom
that year, too bad he didn't go that route for her :) ...

I'd be VERY interested to see that article if you've still got it around ...

Just my $.02
wish

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:24:23 -0400
From: "David J. Turner"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 21:56:53 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 66 Wipers

In a message dated 10/28/99 7:24:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
DAVEBOY

esn.net
writes:

>
> Measurements as requested: The #508 is 12 1/4 overall and the #440
is
> 12 1/2 overall
>
> Dave Turner
> 66 F1 (hope it doesn't rain)

Dave:

The book shows the following: The right-hand arm should be the one that
is 12-1/4" which is stamped as 508. The left-hand arm should be 12-1/2"
long
and stamped 440. I will try to confirm this with another vehicle for you
just to be sure. I have two questions though: first, were the arms
installed correctly between them as to right and left; second, did you
examine the other parts in the wiper system to see if the pivot assemblies
or
other parts have any damage? In the meantime, I'll pray for dry weather
while we try to sort this out for you.

Stock Man,
I truly appreciate you patience and indulgence on this problem.

Here's my assessment so far: The assembly in my truck when I took it out
had the #508 arm installed on the driver's side and the #440 arm on the
passenger side. (The 440 was placed on the drive motor shaft first and
then the 508 next.) As you know this assembly could easily be reversed. I
can change this around and try it, but it's a real pain to get the bolts
back in, just for a trial run. (I may have to do that anyway.)

I have inspected the parts for wear and don't see any excess anywhere,
although there is some play between the shafts and the bushings in the arms.
The pivot assemblies look okay to me. The rivets are tight and the splines
look good.

I'll keep my eye out for some stock rims for you. (Thanks for your
prayers, must be working, it's a beautiful day.)

Dave Turner
66 F1

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:34:41 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 -Can anyone decode this ???

In a message dated 10/28/99 7:02:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bill

online.no
writes:
> Can anyone decode this:
> F-600
> Warranty number F60BE542309

I base this decode on the assumption that this truck was assembled in the
United States as opposed to Canada.

F60 = Series Code (F600 -gas-4x2)
B= Engine Code (262 cid 1v gas)
E=Assembly Plant (Mahwah New Jersey)
542309= Consecutive unit no. 445,001 was first truck, 580,000 was last truck
off the line.

WB=Wheel Base (174 inches)
Color L is "Dark Green"
Model 602 is a standard F-600 model 4x2 gas powered truck with a Gross
Vehicle Weight rating of 20,000 lbs.
Body (181) The first "1" stands for the interior trim code. The type and
color scheme is: Light gray crush vinyl with light gray rib vinyl; The 81
is the body type which means a conventional with a single rear axle and gas
powered engine.
Trans Code "F" = either be a Synchronized Warner T98A 4spd or a dagenham
4spd. My bet is the Warner model.
Axle code "F7" = Eaton Built Two-Seed Model 13802 with 5.83/8.11 ratios for
the two speeds and rated at 15,000 lbs.
Max GVW =Maximum Gross Vehicle Weight Rating in pounds (20,000).
132 is the certified net horsepower at the stated R.P.M. (in this case 3600
R.P.M.); This correlates to the 6 cyl. 262 cid 1V gas powered engine.

DSO is the District Sales Office responsible for this order. Anything in the
90's specifies that the truck was intended for export. 93 in this case
probably means the truck was originally intended for the Netherlands which is
where I think you said the truck is now. This makes sense that the truck was
built in Mahwah New Jersey because that is a stone's throw from the Port of
Newark which is a major point of entry and exit for cars by ocean bound
freightliners.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

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, 29 Oct 1999 09:39:14 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info

DAVEBOY wrote:
> I truly appreciate you patience and indulgence on this problem.

Then wrote some more:

> I have inspected the parts for wear and don't see any excess anywhere,
> although there is some play between the shafts and the bushings in the
arms.
> The pivot assemblies look okay to me. The rivets are tight and the splines
> look good.
>

Pain to reassemble if it still won't work...I can probably get under the dash
over the week-end here and have a look see.

> I'll keep my eye out for some stock rims for you. (Thanks for your
> prayers, must be working, it's a beautiful day.)
I appreciate the look-out for the rims...the more eyes peeled the
better.....Bright and sunny here in Central New York too. A great day to
work on a truck....too bad I'm in the office :-(

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, 29 Oct 1999 08:41:16 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 289 rebuild

> I'm getting ready to rebuild a 289 for a '58 F100 and I had a couple
> questions. How many rpm's and horsepower will the stock connecting rods
> (with aftermarket rod bolts) handle? I'd like to get 325 to 350
> horsepower, with the power curve peaking around 6000 rpm. Is this
> possible?

Shelby ran his factory hi-po motors to 306 when he put them out for street
use, and 350 I think for race (maybe it was 360 or so) ... at any rate he
was using mostly stock internal parts on those builds I think, so if you
pick up some good bolts I don't think you'd have a problem ...

I am going out on a limb here, but I would think for most street builds its
not the rod itself that fails, but the bolt, then when that goes funky
things start happening to the rod of course ...

Just my $.02
wish

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:42:06 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 390GT flywheel

> I was wondering if anyone knows of a fylwheel for a
> 390GT that is for sale. Would the flywheel be
> different for a GT motor? Also, it has to be an auto
> flywheel. I am willing to trade a manual one for it or
> sell it. The motor is out of a 68' Stang.

I would think you could still get one of these from the local parts store
... I just got one last year when I was doing my motor rebuild ... can't
remember how much it cost, but it wasn't too bad (compared with a total
rebuild I guess) ...

Just my $.02
wish

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:39:16 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)

Ha! you just think you can annoy Gary! :-) You have to get up pretty early
in the morn........Anyway I used to know exactly what that stuff did but not
any more, I just yank it all out and put in a single and run it to manifold
vac....If god wanted ported vacs he's have created the.........well maybe
not but ported vac falls in the same catagory as EFI in my book :-) Most of
that stuff was put on there to aid driveability because they messed up
something else that was working just fine til some young punk fed got his
mits on it......:-(

Here's what I usually do.....hook up all the stock stuff until you start
making changes to the engine which eliminates the need or a place to hook
them to. When that happens, get them off and make what ever allowances you
have to to regain your drivability. EGR plate is a good example. Until you
have a carb you can tune you better leave it on because the stock carb needs
it for proper operation. If you run on the street and want some economy you
better pay attention to all the little details like timing, hot air intake,
hot exhaust cross overs which primarily generate the hot spot under the
plenum for better atomization etc.. The power you lose from all this stuff
is minimal but the economy you lose by taking it off without doing your
homework can be very significant.

- --
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
- --

> If this is truely the routing its supposed to have (this can
> get confusing,
> its mostly for my own logic and to annoy Gary enough to
> correct me if he
> thinks it works differently :)

> > didn't follow the ported/unported explanation (sorry, I'm not too
> > mechanical)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:49:54 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)

Ported vac simply means the port for this is above the throttle plate so no
vacuum is available to it until you open the throttle and then it gradually
increases to almost the same as manifold vac. The vac testing I've done on
this indicates that there is some vacuum difference even at full vac between
ported and manifold (ported is always less) so depending on how you prefer
your engine to run and the carb you have on it you may like ported more than
manifold, I prefer manifold myself.

The dual vac uses some form of both at different points in the operation of
the engine but I don't know for sure exactly why or how or when it uses
which one. I would venture to guess that the ported is always pulling
against the mainfold and mitigating it somewhat but not sure which way they
are connected so can only speculate.

Logic almost certainly dictates that you have manifold to the rear, pulling
in the normal manner and ported in the front to mitigate it's effect under
certain conditions but can't for the life of me see what for???

- --
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'd like to ask Wish or Gary for a clarification: should I
> reconnect it? I
> didn't follow the ported/unported explanation (sorry, I'm not too
> mechanical)_but I really don't like seeing unplugged inlets
> on both the
> dizzy and carb since he removed the rubber hose. BTW the main
> vac line runs
> from the dizzy to the base of the carb (Carter 1-barrel).
> Should I leave
> well enough alone? Thanks.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 07:03:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill Ballinger
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Deacon Wake Up!

>Oh my Lord! Daver has gotten ahold of the Deacon and
>brainwashed
>him..........Tell me it ain't so man!
>You're not snatching that FE outta the rig and
>replacing it with an
>M-Block
>are you?????

>sniff, sobb, boo hoo......another FE may soon bite
the >dust......

>(Good to have you back my man!)

Deacon, I realize you are under alot of pressure from
the "M-Block cartel" to trade in your antedeluvian
powerplant for the icon of the smog era, the M-block.
I know it's the environmentally correct engine of the
day, and it's a fine engine in it's context, what with
those evil old FE's belching out elevated levels of
HC's and NOX due to the combination of their high
compression, power oriented combustion design and
overadequate breathing capacity. I know that a truck
engine has no right to make as much power and run so
long between overhauls as the FE does, but they do and
they just can't help it.

Resist the temptation man, truck engines are supposed
to make your eyes water. They're supposed to burn
your tires off. And 10 MPG ain't that bad,
considering. Next thing you know they'll try to get
us trade in our .45's for water pistols. They already
have people thinking a 9mm is just as good, so what's
next?

That would be the the death of my southern soul!

M-blocks are well, OK(kinda like 9mm's), but FE's
rule!(especially with headers)

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:59:25 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Hey Bronco Guys! (and other "stabilizer bar" installers)

Okay guys, hopin for some help on this one ... I've got the sway bars for my
truck all ready to go on, just gotta get some bolts at the store today and
*cringe* drill some holes in the frame to mount it ...

My question is how did the factory deal with the boxed frame ? really long
bolts all the way through or what ? maybe I'll get lucky and find a welded
nut in there somewhere ...

Anyway just wanted to find out how your links were attached to the frame ...

Just my $.02
wish

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:15:08 -0500
From: "William S. Hart"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)

> Ported vac simply means the port for this is above the throttle
> plate so no
> vacuum is available to it until you open the throttle and then
> it gradually
> increases to almost the same as manifold vac. The vac testing
> I've done on
> this indicates that there is some vacuum difference even at full
> vac between
> ported and manifold (ported is always less) so depending on how
> you prefer
> your engine to run and the carb you have on it you may like
> ported more than
> manifold, I prefer manifold myself.
>

One other thing that is different about manifold and ported vacuum ... when
you let off manifold will jump up a lot, ported will pretty much stay where
it is or drop off ... all a function of position relative to throttle plates
... I would think this would affect the design and implementation of the
advance mechanism itself, so a dist. designed for ported vacuum would
actually run poorly with manifold vacuum ...

Just my $.02
wish

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:59:22 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - dual vacuum distributor (was F-600)

Since a single vac is operated the same with either ported or manifold the
main differences will be in the stroke and spring tension. Tension can be
adjusted and, on some, I heard even the stroke is adjustable but I've never
messed with the stroke. They may change the mechanical advance somewhat to
compensate for this, not sure. What I do is buy dizzys designed for older
engines. They usually have a better power curve. I get nearly 40 degrees
at idle and it drops right down to the initial and mechanical at WOT which
is what it's supposed to do so I'm happy :-) This idle advance is one of
the main concerns with ported vs manifold.

With more advance due to manifold vacuum, you also have to have a leaner
idle and a richer tipin for off idle transition to make up for the lean
idle. With less (=initial) you need a richer idle mixture and the carb has
to have a different transition mixture gradient to avoid off idle stumble.
If you have a carb with ported vac port in it, try it and see if your
stumble goes away but make sure you re-set the idle mixture when you do this
to keep it running as smoothly and efficiently as you can. You should
notice a change in the idle speed as well and this will also need
adjustment.

Once off idle and into the main jets, the ported/manifold thing is less
noticeable but there is still a difference in the vac values due to the
location of the port relative to the venturi.

- --
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
- --

> One other thing that is different about manifold and ported
> vacuum ... when
> you let off manifold will jump up a lot, ported will pretty
> much stay where
> it is or drop off ... all a function of position relative to
> throttle plates
> ... I would think this would affect the design and
> implementation of the
> advance mechanism itself, so a dist. designed for ported vacuum would
> actually run poorly with manifold vacuum ...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:04:06 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Hey Bronco Guys! (and other "stabilizer bar" inst allers)

I believe, on the bronco, the bolt goes all the way through the frame and
there is a tube in there for reinforcement but I can't really picture it
right now for sure.......that's how I remember it though :-)

Remember this "Spring" is very strong and will take a really solid mount for
the links. They get hit and abused on every bump so you don't want them
attached to one layer of thin metal for sure and you don't want them in a
hole that can easily be alongated with abuse either.

- --
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
- --

> Anyway just wanted to find out how your links were attached
> to the frame ...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:09:31 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - no fuel, interesting variation

This could mean that it is running on fuel in the lines and no fuel is
getting through from the aux tank at all. The valve may be faulty or the
aux tank pickup tube sock filter could be clogged. This was a very common
fault in those years. Unfortunately no one has replacement socks for these
that I've found so I just flare the end of the tube and add a chunk of brake
line to get all the way to the bottom of the tank when I pull the sock off.

Your vapor reclaiming system may not be allowing air back into the tank if
it is a sealed type or you may have a sealed cap on a non-vented system too
and a vacuum is generated in the tank over time.

- --
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167
- --

> The truck has twin tanks (I checked, neither is LPG) and it
> runs mostly okay except it starves out once in a while; I hit
> the tank switch and it starts running right again, but when
> running on aux. tank it runs great for about 1-2 minutes and
> then starves out *completely*... flip it back to main and it
> runs okay until the next time it cuts out...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:14:53 -0700
From: Phil Clements
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Newbie/Questions about '72 F250 4X4

Hi all - just read my first digest and decided to introduce myself to
the group. I'm a full time non-traditional student at Eastern
Washington University majoring in Finance and Economics. I have a '72
F250 4X4 that I've owned for 21+ years. It started life as a 4X2, but I
converted it to 4X4 (that's another story!) about 15 years ago. 10
years ago I supplanted the second 360/NP-435 with a 429/C-6. Although I
don't miss that 360 by any means, I sure miss the 4-spd! Oh well,
it's not likely I'll change it back.

So, here are my questions:

1) My transfer case is a Dana 24 2-spd. Nice unit, been trouble free
since I've been running it, going on 15 years. It has started to "pop"
out of 2 Hi into neutral. Any ideas as to what might be causing this?
Am I looking at a major overhaul or just a simple fix (never happens in
my case!)? I went through the t-case just prior to installing the 429
and replaced bearings, seals, etc.

2) When I replaced the 360 I used the Hooker kit (want to know what I
think of it - $$#

#$%^^#$) and it did not have any option for a t-case
shifter. I talked to a customer service rep (yeah, back when you could
do that) and he told me I'd have to fabricate my own shifter. I didn't,
and haven't. Yep, that means I crawl under the truck and shift it by
hand. Now I want a shifter since having to stop on the highway, shut
the engine off, put the brake on and crawl under the truck (see #1) is
very uncomfortable! Did Ford produce these trucks with 4WD and
automatic? How was the t-case shifted? My truck uses the "mid-frame"
mount for the t-case and I have three drive shafts. I'm just searching
for ideas here, hopefully someone will have some.

3) Where can I find the u-joint for the steering column, just forward
of the cab? I have tried everywhere around here and even gone through
the local Ford garage (rural farm Ford gurus) and they couldn't help
either.

Hope my questions about the t-case and shifter aren't on the wrong
list. If so, I'll post to the offroad list.

Thanks!

Phil
'72 F250 4X4, 429/C-6
removed all non-truck vehicles (at least they're ALL Ford
products!)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:46:32 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Deacon Wake Up!

Cartel? I've never considered myself a member of a cartel. However I do
drive an M block and shoot a 9mm so who knows?

Beeg blocks?...We don' need no steenkin' beeg blocks!

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets"

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Ballinger
To:
Sent: Friday, October 29, 1999 7:03 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Deacon Wake Up!

>
> Deacon, I realize you are under alot of pressure from
> the "M-Block cartel" to trade in your antedeluvian
> powerplant for the icon of the smog era, the M-block.
> I know it's the environmentally correct engine of the
> day, and it's a fine engine in it's context, what with
> those evil old FE's belching out elevated levels of
> HC's and NOX due to the combination of their high
> compression, power oriented combustion design and
> overadequate breathing capacity. I know that a truck
> engine has no right to make as much power and run so
> long between overhauls as the FE does, but they do and
> they just can't help it.
>
> Resist the temptation man, truck engines are supposed
> to make your eyes water. They're supposed to burn
> your tires off. And 10 MPG ain't that bad,
> considering. Next thing you know they'll try to get
> us trade in our .45's for water pistols. They already
> have people thinking a 9mm is just as good, so what's
> next?
>
> That would be the the death of my southern soul!
>
> M-blocks are well, OK(kinda like 9mm's), but FE's
> rule!(especially with headers)

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:45:38 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Dana 24 gear popping/4x4 column u-joint

In a message dated 10/29/99 11:18:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
crusader

arias.net writes:

>
> 1) My transfer case is a Dana 24 2-spd. Nice unit, been trouble free
> since I've been running it, going on 15 years. It has started to "pop"
> out of 2 Hi into neutral. Any ideas as to what might be causing this?

Welcome to the list. My experience tells me that this is a sign of worn
bearings and most notably the needle bearings that go between the main input
and output shafts. I replaced my needle bearings in mine and the gear
popping problem cleared right up.

> 3) Where can I find the u-joint for the steering column, just forward
> of the cab? I have tried everywhere around here and even gone through
> the local Ford garage (rural farm Ford gurus) and they couldn't help
> either.

When I replaced my column u-joint on my 67 F250 4x4 I used an NP-1-1475.
I purchased through a drivetrain shop. That should be a standard number you
might try. I think Tony Marino has a part list for this repair and may have
a more current part number. If you want an original Ford joint it might be
available as NOS and I can get you the Ford Part number.

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, 29 Oct 1999 09:58:39 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)

Thanks for your message at 10:33 PM 10/28/99 -0800, Mike Sealey. Your
message was:

>This is a Ford list and this thread hasn't mentioned the obvious, the
'58 Edsel?

I was afraid...Thank you for doing it for me...

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:04:45 EDT
From: SevnD2

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)

In a message dated 10/29/1999 8:41:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
stoney

ford-trucks.com writes:

this mean I'm a pervert or closet mass murderer or something?

stoney >>

Now if you could figure out how to use one of each , that may be a sure sign
of something ! :)
Actually the rectangular ones first appeared in 1978 and both were available
. Just not one of each on the same truck . :)
Rollie.
76 Explorer , 391FT (428ci)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:05:12 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Grills and other matters( typos corrected)

Thanks for your message at 08:35 AM 10/29/99 -0400, j arnold. Your message
was:
>I happen to like the square headlights of the 79 versus the round. Does
>this mean I'm a pervert or closet mass murderer or something?

I'm not sure...would you like to go with that...? Do you have hostility
towards the clothes in your closet...?
Do you like dual exhaust...? Do you prefer the FE or the Windsor? Maybe
Cleveland?

Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:07:59 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 9" with OD/UD

Thanks for your message at 09:00 AM 10/29/99 -0400,
am14

daimlerchrysler.com. Your message was:
>
>I sure want to know more about it... Imagine a B U I L T 460 with wide
ratio
>C6 and a 2.10 rear witrh an UD that brings it down to around 3.00 for
getting it
>going.... Ahhhhhhh the possibilities....
>
Pretty exciting. I just want to know why this has been such a secret...

Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:12:49 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - OD on Linc rear

Thanks for your message at 08:28 AM 10/29/99 -0500, William S. Hart. Your
message was:
> > i saw an article on a boss 429 mustang once, they say it had a
> > factory od
> > unit on the rear end. must've been a strong unit.
> >
>
>Never heard of such a thing ... especially not on a Boss 429, a car you
>could only choose what radio and what color you wanted ...
>
>the 69 Cougar Eliminator on the other hand, that had a 2spd rear end
>available for it according to my uncle (who was researching cars for my mom
>that year, too bad he didn't go that route for her :) ...
>
>I'd be VERY interested to see that article if you've still got it around ...

So would I...Where are all these things coming from? Have I slipped into
another dimension?
Bizzaroworld.
Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1966 F250 Custom Cab, 352, 4-speed
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)
I shortened this to only FT's

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.att.net/~dlpearson/levi.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:23:30 -0400
From: Tony Marino
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 4x4 column u-joint

>I think Tony Marino has a part list for this repair and may have
>a more current part number. If you want an original Ford joint it might be
>available as NOS and I can get you the Ford Part number.

Ummm... I had the numbers list at work and they got nuked when I left...
If somebody could please supply them, for both this gentleman and myslef
once again, that would be great.

Certainly the best U-joint fix I've heard/seen for $45 bucks.

Tony
redneck

raex.com

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:27:59 -0600
From: "Danger"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 66 Wipers - add'l info

> I have inspected the parts for wear and don't see any excess anywhere,
> although there is some play between the shafts and the bushings in the
arms.
> The pivot assemblies look okay to me. The rivets are tight and the
splines
> look good.
>
> Dave Turner
> 66 F1
..................

I don't have the original post handy, but I seem to recall that the
problem was the wipers would "get stuck". Have you considered replacing the
wiper motor? Perhaps the local auto parts store would have these for a
reasonable price, and a lifetime warranty.

Danger
danger

csolutions.net

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

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:34:21 -0400
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 4x4 column u-joint

Been carying that post around in my lunch box so here they are:

10-40431SX
5-170X
10-4-13

Don't know which is which but these are the numbers you posted and I still
haven't got around to calling anyone to see if I can get them locally :-(

- --
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
- --

> Ummm... I had the numbers list at work and they got nuked
> when I left...
> If somebody could please supply them, for both this gentleman
> and myslef
> once again, that would be great.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:37:11 -0400
From: Ted Wnorowski
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Body stuff, running Beast, high idle, w/s washer.

I don't know if this went through last night. I've been having
local server problems all week!

At 01:44 AM 10/29/99 -0400, you wrote:
>At 08:16 AM 10/18/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>.. the rubber in hockey
>>pucks isn't nearly as flexible as that found on motor mounts ...
>> if you drop it
>>on your head you will really be not very happy
> I know it's a little late on this one. Hockey pucks are the least
> rubber like thing made of rubber, if that makes any sense. They have a
> very high clay content that makes them hard as rocks. I can still feel
> the scar on the inside of my bottom lip! Couldn't eat for about 4 days.
> Anyway, the Beast is running again. It took a floor jack, some
> small blocks of wood, and a couple of holes reamed out to get it all
> lined up. It changed the gap on the passenger side door also. I think
> that could be the rotted out cab mounts and the floor being gone. When I
> put the "new" inner fenders in next summer, I'll address that problem.
> Right now with the weather a little colder, with the exception of
> the next few days, I can't get my new carb to "high idle". It will if I
> pull the choke out when it's warmed up. It went down shortly after I put
> the new carb on it, so it's still running a little rich. I don't know if
> that would have anything to do with it? Any suggestions? I'm new at
> fiddling with adjusting a carb any more than the curb idle adjustment. I
> can always dig a book out but figured someone out there could give it to
> me in plain English.
> My next dilemma has to do with windshield washer plumbing. I've
> been amassing the parts to add a w/s washer to my truck. I have the"See
> Clear" bag, a brand new NOS foot pump and a couple of jets. I can't
> completely figure out how the hoses hook up to this thing. There is a
> large and a small fitting on the pump and the bag cap.Do I hook up large
> to large and small to small? If so, which one do I tap into to go to the
> washer jets?
> As always, any and all help is greatly appreciated.
>
> Ted Wnorowski
> Bellevue,OH
> ' 64 F-250
> 352
> transplant
> 4
> speed
>
>
>
>== 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, 29 Oct 1999 14:19:43 EDT
From: TBeeee

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 1967-72 4x4 column u-joint

I just spoke to my parts guy at Car Quest who checked the number I previously
posted. It is still a good number. Their number is 1-1475. He gave me the
u-joints specs from his book as follows.

1.960" trunnion size (end to end with caps removed)
.969" Cap diameter

I verified the dimensions he gave me against the u-joint on the shaft for
my 68 F-250. That shaft needed a u-joint too! So I ordered one. Regardless
of which supplier you go to....any good parts supplier should be able to take
the measurements from your u-joint and shaft and look in their u-joint chart
to find the correct part number for their u-joint vendor. FYI: The Ford
Part No. for 1967-72 F100/250 4x4 steering shaft u-joints is C6TZ-3815-B; I
hope this helps.

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....

To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.

Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.