 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 #399 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 Tuesday, November 2 1999 Volume 03 : Number 399 ======================================================================= 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 - Ford rules at the bar last night RE: FTE 61-79 - re:vibration problem FTE 61-79 - Drivetrian questions. FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem RE: FTE 61-79 - FE hate mail Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum Re: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation FTE 61-79 - FE Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation FTE 61-79 - Re: Motor ID decode RE: FTE 61-79 - Newbie/Questions about '72 F250 4X4 RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Re: FTE 61-79 - Drivetrian questions. FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed Re: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... FTE 61-79 - Just when i thought things wer going well ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:03:21 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford rules at the bar last night Bar Room racing is a lot better than the ole Desktop Dyno. You get to see the other guy back down. ;-) We must not live to far from you. We went through the same three hurricanes and a whole town went literally under water. The town of Chinquapin is still trying to dry out. Most of the houses were totally under water. The road I live on has a similar creek and this little creek washed out a bridge and the road around it. Not fun!! Glad to hear you made it through okay, though! - -Ted "George W. Selby, III" on 10/30/99 11:13:48 AM Please respond to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com To: "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'" cc: (bcc: Ted Freeman/MURPHY_FAMILY_FARMS) Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford rules at the bar last night After that he shut up. So I went on to tell him how my Ford had pulled out my buddies S-10 that got stuck in my yard (still kinda wet here from our trio of hurricanes this year, got a chance to go see the town 10 miles away from me where I usually launch my boat, and around the boatramp, mobile homes were wrapped around trees, and houses were undermined and sitting broken up in pits from the force of the water. We never though we would see this in our area, for instance the creek behind my house only rose 2 feet out of its banks at the worst I have ever seen it, never over the bridge, and this time it rose like 10 feet higher and 100 yards wide, this is a creek usually 3 feet wide and 3 inches deep. Some towns only had a area 100 square feet that were above water for days) George Selby 78 F-150 400M, 4 on floor, 4x4 86 Nissan 300ZX 82 Jeep Cherokee 85 Dodge W-100 jumbofordman earthlink.net == 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:47:06 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - re:vibration problem It would be impossible to install an auto using the manual flywheel. There is no way to make that work so he had to have used a flex plate. The same bolt pattern is used on several engines which are not compatible, balance wise so this could be an issue but it's not likely it would smooth out at higher rpms, more likely to get worse. As I said, it sounds like an ignition or cam or valve problem to me. - -- 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 am also having a vibration problem. I have a 1976 > F250 with a 390GT and a C-6. It originally had a > manual tranny and I think that the old owner didn't > bother to change flywheels. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 08:46:43 -0500 From: Steve Schaefer Subject: FTE 61-79 - Drivetrian questions. OK guys, I have a few questions to ask. I picked up a 76 crewcab about 2 months ago. It has a Dana 70 with 3.73 gears. The question I have is, can I switch to 4.11 or 4.56 gears without changing the carrier? I know that some axles use different carriers for different gears. The second question is, I have located a bolt on OD for a C-6 2wd, I was wondering if one of these units could withstand the torque of a 460 and about 15000 lbs? As far as I know, this is a Ford OD unit. I don't know what it came out of. I was thinking, wide ratio C-6, OD, 4.11 or 4.56 Dana 70. Should be able to pull anything I want, and get respectable gas milage. Thanks for any info. Steve S. 76 F-350 Crewcab dually flatbed 77 F-250 Supercab (yellow/purple) http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Shop/8663/ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 05:56:32 -0800 From: Tim Bowman Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem Rich: With vibration all of the time, there are a few possibilities: 1. Harmonic balancer out of balance (on front of engine) 2. Broken motor mounts 3. Torque converter out of balance 4. One or more dead cylinders (could be a mechanical cause or simply an ignition issue). Hope this helps. Tim Bowman Burien, WA 71 F100 Rich wrote: It shakes all the time, not only when it is in gear. What does that sound like to you? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:21:09 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE hate mail >such as the FE and 460 :-) Not sure why the 390's burn valves but wonder if >it has anything to do with unleaded gas? Hardened seats weren't around >untill about 73 as I recall? Guess I just can't figure how you burn valves >if they are adjusted properly and mixture is correct for the application? Not sure where this cropped up from, as no one else has mentioned it ... but I don't think FE's ever came with hardened seats ... the 74 motor I had didn't have them, nor did the 76 390 that I just put together ... granted neither was an unleaded vehicle from the factory, but putting unleaded in them I would think would probably do bad things (actually I know it does, I think the 360 valves were sunk close to 1/8th of an inch and it still ran fine) Just my $.02 wish (no fancy sigs here, my stupid computer died) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:18:17 -0600 From: "JIM OBERG" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem your problem may be a 428 flexplate instead of a 390 flexplate. 428's are externally balanced and that problem happens quite often when people install a 428 in place of a 390. just a thought. later jim. 70f100 302. 67 f350 390 4spd .70 f350 390 4 spd. 74 f350 390 4 spd. 69 ranchero 428cj r code c6. - -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bowman To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Monday, November 01, 1999 8:19 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem >Rich: > >With vibration all of the time, there are a few possibilities: > >1. Harmonic balancer out of balance (on front of engine) >2. Broken motor mounts >3. Torque converter out of balance >4. One or more dead cylinders (could be a mechanical cause or simply an >ignition issue). > >Hope this helps. > >Tim Bowman >Burien, WA >71 F100 > > >Rich wrote: > >It shakes all the time, not only when it is in gear. >What does that sound like to you? > > > > > > > > >== 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 10:17:00 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Okay folks....tried installing my new cam this weekend. I have new bearings and a new cam. it goes in to the third journal then as the cam starts to move about 2/3 of the way through there is a definite "pink" sound. Metal to metal. The cam will rotate nice in the bore but will not go in any further. The crank and pistons are installed. I've never done an FE before and this thing should slide right in place according to the shop manual and Steve Christ book. The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam bearing size, or a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like to get all my facts together before I contact the machine shop. Thanks, - -Ted == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:26:52 -0600 From: "JIM OBERG" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation i have done a dozen or so fe cam installations and have the steve crist book also. sometimes they can be a bit tight but this sounds more serious. once my machinist had to make adjustments to cam bearings after installation to get the right fit. i think you can shave the cam bearings slightly but that is a job for the machine shop. later jim. - -----Original Message----- From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Date: Monday, November 01, 1999 9:25 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation >Okay folks....tried installing my new cam this weekend. I have new bearings and >a new cam. it goes in to the third journal then as the cam starts to move about >2/3 of the way through there is a definite "pink" sound. Metal to metal. The >cam will rotate nice in the bore but will not go in any further. The crank and >pistons are installed. I've never done an FE before and this thing should slide >right in place according to the shop manual and Steve Christ book. > >The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam bearing size, or >a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like to get all my >facts together before I contact the machine shop. > >Thanks, > >-Ted > > > > > >== 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: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 09:56:40 -0600 From: David.R.John deluxe.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering Well since we have been discussing steering problems lately, let me add a questions to the pile :--). What will cause my steering to be stiff? When I turn to wheel it is kind of easy, hard, kind of easy.... But mostly it is hard. It is on a 78 F250 4x4. Some other info: once in a while it will be perfectly normal and turn easy as can be for miles at a time, also it does not feel any different if the front wheels are jacked up, it still feels stiff. I have tried turning it lock to lock many many times to try to bleed it, just in case it has air in it. The pump is full (auto trans fluid) and does not make any noise to speak of. Is this a bad pump? gearbox? steering ujoint?...... Thanks again for all of your help!!!! David John 78 F250 4x4 supercab 460 C6 78 F250 4x4 400 parts truck == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:01:41 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Does the FE use a stepped journal size? I've heard some engines use this to make cam installation easier. In this case I would suspect the bearings are also stepped in the ID but not necesarily in the OD so the bearings could be installed in the wrong hole? Reason I question this is I've never actually put them in myself, the shop always did it because I didn't have an installation tool. I did the 460 but don't recall this being stepped and it was too long ago for my old foggy brain to pull up the data :-) I would think if it rotates but won't go in further it is not bearing size but a shoulder obstruction of sime kind? - -- 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 - -- > cam will rotate nice in the bore but will not go in any > further. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:03:55 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum Perhaps this is why Ford has gone to "Coil on plug" now? - -- 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 - -- > shields) the spark plug that is capable discharging in nanoseconds. > Basically it increases the power (Amps) by 500 times in the > spark. This > directly translates to a larger flame kernel which in turn > burns the fuel > more completely and quickly. And thus better MPH. An > engine are flat amazing. For best results get enough Direct > Hits for all of > your spark plugs == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:08:52 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering I have exactly the same problem with my 79 F250 4X4 and haven't been able to diagnose it yet. Nothing is binding underneath that I can see and it does it with the wheels in the air also. Sometimes it's fine, others it's not. I've been told it's either the pump, the gear or both. Gee, thanks for narrowing it down for me! Sorry not much help but just wanted you to know that you're not alone. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 7:56 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering > Well since we have been discussing steering problems lately, let me add a > questions to the pile :--). What will cause my steering to be stiff? > When I turn to wheel it is kind of easy, hard, kind of easy.... But mostly > it is hard. It is on a 78 F250 4x4. Some other info: once in a while it > will be perfectly normal and turn easy as can be for miles at a time, also > it does not feel any different if the front wheels are jacked up, it still > feels stiff. I have tried turning it lock to lock many many times to try > to bleed it, just in case it has air in it. The pump is full (auto trans > fluid) and does not make any noise to speak of. Is this a bad pump? > gearbox? steering ujoint?...... Thanks again for all of your help!!!! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 10:11:31 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum >If I recall you have a 400 in a F-250? The axles alone are a drag in that >case and you will not typically see the same economy with a 3/4 ton as with >a 1/2 ton truck with exactly the same power train but the exception of the >axles. There is more weight and the larger gears have more resistance etc.. >12 is pretty normal for a 351M/400 in a truck but some lucky guys do get >better than that. What are you babbling about ? I am having trouble believing there's that much difference to affect mileage more than 1 or 2 between a 3/4 and 1/2 ton similarly equipped ... granted one or 2 is a lot for most of us (nearly 10%!) but I don't think its usually the axles causing the losses any more on one or the other ... what one loses in acceleration the rotational mass should make up for in cruise ... > When you figure it out, let us know and we will go into >business selling the your setup. Make a little pamphlet and do a direct >mail add campaign, make a million bucks :-) I'll be your agent......:-) > A little sarcastic aren't we ? I don't even remember the original post now, was someone looking for 15 or something ? >Seriously, I plan to build a 15 mpg 460 for my bronco but it won't be stock >and I don't expect success on the first try. When I say 15 I mean "Average" >:-) > Are you planning on using an OD or just the usual 460/wide ratio C6/low stall converter and hellaciously (sp) low gears ? >My plan for a high power, high efficiency, high economy 460 is roller >everything, not air intake, hot cross over, rochester spread bore carb, >headers and dual exhaust with cross over balance tube and tall gearing. The >right combination of these will do it but which combination is it???????? Hot air intake ? or no air intake ? either one will hurt efficiencies to say the least ... and I don't think mileage will increase if you do this ... actually I dare say it will decrease if you use a hot air intake ... that's like using a hair dryer as a super charger ... its blowing warm air, which is less dense, and probably not actually blowing enough to keep things in check ... Why not look at a fuel injected 460 with the roller stuff, some headers and an OD ... but then again that might be too easy ... Just my $.02 wish == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 10:14:35 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... >The clutch life is entirely dependant on the driver :-) Always ... > Keep it adjusted, always take >your foot completely off the pedal between every shift, put it in neutral at >stop lights and never, never, never ride the clutch pedal or slip the clutch >when shifting and it will last over 100k easily. What's up with the neutral at stop lights ? If the clutch is disengaged, then there should be no power transfer because slippage will be 100% and there will be no contact right ? Actually I would think letting the clutch out at the light would be one more engage point and another chance for some more wear ... in actuality I don't think whether you hold it in at the light or put it in neutral has any effect on the clutch itself ... your leg maybe, but not the clutch. Just my $.02 wish == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:16:31 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering Rear Steering shaft Ujoint, for sure! :-) I bought a new pump due to this same thing only to discover that there was no improvement. I had never had a setup with ujoints so it didn't occur to me right away. I then disassembled every part of the steering shaft between the box input and column output and discovered that I could not even move the joint by hand, had to put it in a vise and work it with vise grips to loosen it up. I now have a wrought iron ujoint with hammer dents all over it due to my ujoint improvement strategy which, while crude, worked :-) Had I known about the parts list for the joints I would have fixed it right :-) - -- 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 - -- > questions to the pile :--). What will cause my steering to be stiff? > When I turn to wheel it is kind of easy, hard, kind of > easy.... But mostly > it is hard. It is on a 78 F250 4x4. Some other info: once == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 10:22:18 -0600 From: William S Hart Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation >The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam >bearing size, or >a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like >to get all my >facts together before I contact the machine shop. Yikes, got the pistons and everything in already ? I did that first, it was nice and easy to reach up the middle and hold the cam so it didn't hit anything ... If I remember right the journals are not at similar distances, so some will get to the bearing before the others, so it has to be absolutely straight every time one of those is ready to pass through (ie check a front bearing to be sure its lined up right even though you are guiding based on the rear journal)... also seems like if you have a heavy cam there's a chance that a lobe might be catching just a shade... seems like a slightly different angle fixed that ... though it seems like it would have to be a pretty hefty cam to have a lobe catch on a journal ... hmmmm ... likely not the case huh ? :) just my $.02 wish == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:41:47 -0800 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering Well since we have been discussing steering problems lately, let me add a questions to the pile :--). What will cause my steering to be stiff? How about one too many martinis? Sorry, couldn't resist. (Shoulda, coulda but didn't) Beyond trying to brighten your day a little afraid I can't offer any constructive advice. ;0) Tom H == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:49:08 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum Ok, one at a time: I think it's been well established that the dana 60 will rob more power than the ford 9" but as you say it's probably not a great deal. It all adds up though. As to the inertia helping at cruise, the engine still has to generate power to overcome the inertia initially and then maintain a larger mass so energy will be expended there. Larger rotating mass aids in "smoothing" out impulses and adds "Very short duration" torque when obsticles are encountered such as logs in the woods with dirt bikes etc. but it does not reduce the amount of engery required, it increases it. I wasn't trying to be sarcastic at all, sorry about that ("Babbling" may well be defined as sarcastic though :-)) :-( I was trying to express the feeling of most truckers who have become weary of trying to get any economy out of their rigs :-) If my comment was misunderstood I appologize. As I've said before, with a large engine, the wide ratio C-6 "Acts" like an overdrive with tall gearing because the lower low get it off the line much better so you can afford to use taller gearing which does the same thing as OD in top gear. The main difference between this setup and a real OD is that you get at least one more gear so the engine can be kept (theoretically) closer to it's sweet spot more of the time for better economy. With large, torquey engines this becomes less of an issue than with smaller engines but I'm sure an OD tranny would improve the economy even more. Ok, I typed "not" but I meant "hot", sorry :-) It's a well known fact that hot air atomizes and maintains the vapors better than cold air so at WOT you are absolutely right, you want to pack everything in there you can for best power and you also don't give a rat's *** about economy in that case but at cruise you are running a very lean mixture and the droplets are spread out more so atomization becomes the main issue and will definitely improve economy because more, smaller droplets, more evenly distrubuted burn more completely. The main reason the exhaust cross over is there is to super heat the center of the plenum floor to instantly frizz the fuel droplets into a vapor and the warm coolant coursing through the "Wet" manifold is primarily for the purpose of keeping the runners hot so the droplets won't condense on the sides before reaching the valves. It also allows more uniform coolant flow through the engine, of course. Hot air intake does three things: It helps prevent carb icing at idle and cruise, It atomizes fuel better when the engine is cold for better drivability and quicker engine warm up and it atomizes fuel better at cruise for better economy. The hot air intake, when properly set up does not interfere with WOT since it is vacuum operated and the hot coolant in the manifold along with the hot spot become less of an influence on a higher volume of cold air coming in which actually cools these off rather quickly so they have "less" impact at WOT than at cruise. I won't argue that they have "no" effect but the effect in a street driven vehicle with economy and drivability as the primary focus will not be an issue in most cases :-) - -- 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 - -- > What are you babbling about ? I am having trouble believing there's > that much difference to affect mileage more than 1 or 2 between a 3/4 > and 1/2 ton similarly equipped ... granted one or 2 is a lot for most > of us (nearly 10%!) but I don't think its usually the axles causing > the losses any more on one or the other ... what one loses in > acceleration the rotational mass should make up for in cruise ... > > > > When you figure it out, let us know and we will go into > >business selling the your setup. Make a little pamphlet and > do a direct > >mail add campaign, make a million bucks :-) I'll be your > agent......:-) > > A little sarcastic aren't we ? I don't even remember the original > post now, was someone looking for 15 or something ? > > Are you planning on using an OD or just the usual 460/wide > ratio C6/low stall > converter and hellaciously (sp) low gears ? > > Hot air intake ? or no air intake ? either one will hurt > efficiencies to say the least == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:52:49 -0800 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... > Keep it adjusted, always take >your foot completely off the pedal between every shift, put it in neutral at >stop lights and never, never, never ride the clutch pedal or slip the clutch >when shifting and it will last over 100k easily. What's up with the neutral at stop lights ? If the clutch is disengaged, then there should be no power transfer because slippage will be 100% and there will be no contact right ? Actually I would think letting the clutch out at the light would be one more engage point and another chance for some more wear ... in actuality I don't think whether you hold it in at the light or put it in neutral has any effect on the clutch itself ... your leg maybe, but not the clutch. I agree. At a stop the only part of the clutch assy getting wear would be the throw out bearing. The clutch friction surface would be completely separated from the flywheel pressure plate. Letting the clutch out in neutral at the light however won't any measurable wear to the clutch because the mass it is starting to spin is only the input shaft of the trans and any connected gears/bearings. Probably less that 1 ft/lb of force required to turn it so I would not think there would be any slippage which is what causes your wear. Tom H == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:03:24 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... There are other parts in there beside the flywheel, clutch disk and pressure plate that wear. The throw out bearing is designed for intermittant use. The more you make it work the sooner you will be replacing it and every time you press on the clutch pedal you are pressing the crank against it's thrust bearing with a lot of pressure. What you feel in the pedal is only a small portion of what the crank feels. In many manuals you will see different thrust specs for manual and auto trannys for this reason. How much wear would you expect when engaging against an essentially free wheeling, relatively low inertia part? In neutral you are only dealing with the clutch disk itself and the imput shaft with no load on it. Personally I think saving my leg is important too :-) The older I get the more of an issue this becomes :-) - -- 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 - -- > What's up with the neutral at stop lights ? If the clutch is > disengaged, then there should be no power transfer because slippage > will be 100% and there will be no contact right ? Actually I would > think letting the clutch out at the light would be one more engage > point and another chance for some more wear ... in actuality I don't > think whether you hold it in at the light or put it in neutral has > any effect on the clutch itself ... your leg maybe, but not the > clutch. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:02:47 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation I was wondering if they were stepped. I assumed that the ID would all be the same. Guess that's what happens when I assume stuff. I bought the cam from the same shop that installed my bearings I would have thought that they would've checked. I also noticed in the shop manual that each bearing has a different part number and said they had to be put in in a the right order or bearing damage would occur. I guess they are stepped. Thanks, - -Ted "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" on 11/01/99 11:01:41 AM Please respond to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com To: "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'" cc: (bcc: Ted Freeman/MURPHY_FAMILY_FARMS) Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Does the FE use a stepped journal size? I've heard some engines use this to make cam installation easier. In this case I would suspect the bearings are also stepped in the ID but not necesarily in the OD so the bearings could be installed in the wrong hole? Reason I question this is I've never actually put them in myself, the shop always did it because I didn't have an installation tool. I did the 460 but don't recall this being stepped and it was too long ago for my old foggy brain to pull up the data :-) I would think if it rotates but won't go in further it is not bearing size but a shoulder obstruction of sime kind? - -- 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 - -- > cam will rotate nice in the bore but will not go in any > further. == 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:07:58 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation This is what I was thinking too. Seems like it's easier to get it in with the crank out of the way? Maybe the stepping I was thinking of was this, the bore spacing not the size? I just remember something being stepped. I should have pointed out, as you did, that extreme care is needed to avoid shaving the bearings which is another reason to have the crank out for better access. So easy to pinch your fingers in there as it is :-( - -- 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 - -- > Yikes, got the pistons and everything in already ? I did that first, > it was nice and easy to reach up the middle and hold the cam so it > didn't hit anything ... > > If I remember right the journals are not at similar distances, so > some will get to the bearing before the others, so it has to be == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:11:40 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Just call me "Mister Bonehead!". I installed the crank and all with some copied procedures from a shop manual. I didn't even look at the "what to do first" part. I assumed that when I put a cam in an engine mounted in a vehicle, that the bottom end will be there and I would just "fish" the cam through and be done. After getting Steve Christ book, I realized that I was totally wrong and should have done it your way. I' m putting in a 275H cam in this thing. Shouldn't be to radical. At least not to cause the lobes to hit. I can see the first and third bearing surfaces go through about 2/3 the second surface appears that it isn't touching anything (at least from what I can see through the lifter bores). I guess the second cam journal could be hitting the bearing on the side, if it has stepped bearings. Thanks for the info, - -Ted William S Hart on 11/01/99 11:22:18 AM Please respond to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com cc: (bcc: Ted Freeman/MURPHY_FAMILY_FARMS) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation >The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam >bearing size, or >a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like >to get all my >facts together before I contact the machine shop. Yikes, got the pistons and everything in already ? I did that first, it was nice and easy to reach up the middle and hold the cam so it didn't hit anything ... If I remember right the journals are not at similar distances, so some will get to the bearing before the others, so it has to be absolutely straight every time one of those is ready to pass through (ie check a front bearing to be sure its lined up right even though you are guiding based on the rear journal)... also seems like if you have a heavy cam there's a chance that a lobe might be catching just a shade... seems like a slightly different angle fixed that ... though it seems like it would have to be a pretty hefty cam to have a lobe catch on a journal ... hmmmm ... likely not the case huh ? :) just my $.02 wish == 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 12:33:23 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation I'm very rusty to say the least but that's how I remember it too. The small end is at the rear of the engine and they get larger as you move toward the front. I do know that you have to install the rear ones first and work toward the front so you don't damage them with the intallation tool and so you can pull it back out etc.. You also have to lightly radius the bores so the bearings don't peel when you press them in, keep the oil holes lined up as you go and they go in with no oil for best heat transfer characteristics. - -- 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 - -- > checked. I also noticed in the shop manual that each bearing > has a different > part number and said they had to be put in in a the right > order or bearing > damage would occur. I guess they are stepped. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 09:55:03 -0800 From: "S.Harkema" Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE >But the problem is that the exhaust >valves and seats run hotter than with other head >designs. What you say about FE engine design makes sense. I always thought the unique exposed exhaust port design helped with the heat situation.Imagine the valve situation would be worse if they had a more conventional port. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:47:28 -0700 From: "Danger" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation > The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam bearing size, or > a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like to get all my > facts together before I contact the machine shop. > > Thanks, > > -Ted ............. Perhaps a lifter is still in its bore? Is it possible that a small child could have been trying to "help daddy" put the engine together and done something to the engine without your knowledge? Danger danger csolutions.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:02:30 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Nope, no kids. At least not yet anyway. I did check the lifter bores though. I thought the same thing at first. Maybe somehow a socket slipped into one. I don't appear to be that lucky. Thanks, - -Ted "Danger" on 11/01/99 01:47:28 PM Please respond to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com cc: (bcc: Ted Freeman/MURPHY_FAMILY_FARMS) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation > The only things I know to check are: Cam bearing diameter, Cam bearing size, or > a bent cam. Anything else I'm missing or need to check? I'd like to get all my > facts together before I contact the machine shop. > > Thanks, > > -Ted ............ Perhaps a lifter is still in its bore? Is it possible that a small child could have been trying to "help daddy" put the engine together and done something to the engine without your knowledge? Danger danger csolutions.net == 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:03:37 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Looks like I'm going to have to gear up for a dreaded trip to the machine shop. :-( Thanks, - -Ted "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" on 11/01/99 12:33:23 PM Please respond to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com To: "'61-79-list ford-trucks.com'" cc: (bcc: Ted Freeman/MURPHY_FAMILY_FARMS) Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation I'm very rusty to say the least but that's how I remember it too. The small end is at the rear of the engine and they get larger as you move toward the front. I do know that you have to install the rear ones first and work toward the front so you don't damage them with the intallation tool and so you can pull it back out etc.. You also have to lightly radius the bores so the bearings don't peel when you press them in, keep the oil holes lined up as you go and they go in with no oil for best heat transfer characteristics. - -- 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 - -- > checked. I also noticed in the shop manual that each bearing > has a different > part number and said they had to be put in in a the right > order or bearing > damage would occur. I guess they are stepped. == 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: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 12:09:45 -0800 From: Phil Clements Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Motor ID decode Forest New wrote: > Does anyone out there have an older codebook. Not a codebook, but one with a few codes that cover the Y-block. I can't ID the block by displacement, but I can tell you there is a picture in the Y-block section of a block with the same casting number you listed - ECZ 6015 A. The head casting number, ECZ-C, ID a head from a '56 passenger car 272/292/312 engine. I don't know how accurate this info is as it's from an old Peterson's book, "Complete Ford Book." Some additional info, production started in '54 with the 239 (the only year of manuf.) and progressed to the 272/292 in '55. Mercury also had a 256 in '55, but it and the 239 were the oddballs in the line-up. The 312 was added in '56 and continued until '57 when it was dropped from the line-up. The 292 continued on until the '62 model year when it disappeared from the line-up all together. Some additional specs: CI Bore Stroke Rod Length Rod wt Piston wt Mains/Rods 239 3.5 3.1 6.324 24.06 N/A 2.498/2.188 272 3.625 3.3 " " 18.7 " 292 3.750 3.3 " " " " 312 3.8 3.44 6.252 23.04 20.70 2.623/2.188 In '57 the 292 got a heavier piston, 19.60, which remained constant during the remaninder of the 292 production run. I assume all weights to be in ounces (no mention made in the chart) since the weights would be far too light in grams. Exhaust valve sizes are listed as 1.510 for all engines and intakes are 1.647/1.78/1.925 depending on the year and displacement. Rocker ratios were either 1.43 or 1.54, the latter being found on the '56 -'57 models. I have fond memories of the "old" Y-block. It powered the '46 Ford P/U I drove in HS. With high compression pistons, 312 heads, a reground cam with .444 lift/.270 duration, and custom hand fabbed headers by Art Morrison, it would get rubber in all three gears of the cruise-o-matic. Never had a chance to get a really good run in at the drags, but my best was a 16.0 on street tires before the rear u-joint let go at the far end. That destroyed the driveshaft and tail shaft housing. Nothing worse than calling Dad to come tow me home when he didn't know I was at the drags - as a participant. :-( Phil '72 F250 4X4, 429/C-6 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 14:02:52 -0500 From: "Clem Salek" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Newbie/Questions about '72 F250 4X4 Phil: Nice to see someone else is as fond of the NP435 as I am. I converted from the C6/460 to the NP435/460...Whole different animal with the 4spd. Clem "Recon Unit 1" '79 F350,460,NP435 10 Ton PTO Winch == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 18:04:33 -0600 From: Stu Varner Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation I had absolutley NO problems getting my cam installed in my 360. Did it with pistons and crank in place. Nothing hung and it slid right in like it was made for the engine. It was a 30 year old Ford cam from the shelf of an obsolete dealer....... I doubt seriously that has anything to do with it. I was really worried it may be bent after sitting that long. Turns snug but freely. 8^) Your cam may be bent or the bearings may be scewy......wrong size?? Do they make different sized bearings for the cam? I dunno what else to offer, most everyone has given possibilties, I am just giving my trouble free experience. How radical is the grind??? Stu Nuke GM! At 12:07 PM 11/1/99 -0500, you wrote: >This is what I was thinking too. Seems like it's easier to get it in with >the crank out of the way? Maybe the stepping I was thinking of was this, >the bore spacing not the size? I just remember something being stepped. I >should have pointed out, as you did, that extreme care is needed to avoid >shaving the bearings which is another reason to have the crank out for >better access. So easy to pinch your fingers in there as it is :-( > >-- >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 >-- > >> Yikes, got the pistons and everything in already ? I did that first, >> it was nice and easy to reach up the middle and hold the cam so it >> didn't hit anything ... >> >> If I remember right the journals are not at similar distances, so >> some will get to the bearing before the others, so it has to be >== 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: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 20:04:42 EST From: JUMPINFORD aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Drivetrian questions. In a message dated 11/1/99 6:52:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, schaefer plastekgroup.com writes: is, can I switch to 4.11 or 4.56 gears without changing the carrier? >> 4.11 yes, but not the 4.56, that will require a new carrier. I had one too, had 4.56 in my 70, swapped over to a 4.10, and had to get a new carrier. Sold the old one, needed some cash. Darrell Duggan 74 F-350 "Tweety" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:33:57 -0600 From: "Eric Washburn" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed Ok, I own a 1988 Lincoln Town Car, with a 302 in it. I'm assuming it's the same one they put in the trucks, so don't bite my head off :). I was just wondering, is this a Windsor? I'm thinking of hopping up the engine somewhat :), and don't say that this doesn't relate to Ford trucks, cause I'm also thinking about putting one in my truck. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 19:42:42 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed A "Windsor" is a 351W which distinguishes it from an M or C. The 302 you have is commonly known as a small block, no real designators but a 351W is also a small block. There are tons of hop up parts for these engines. Just get a P.A.W. or Summit or Jegs catalog and break out the credit card. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" - ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Washburn To: Sent: Sunday, October 31, 1999 7:33 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed > Ok, I own a 1988 Lincoln Town Car, with a 302 in it. I'm assuming it's the > same one they put in the trucks, so don't bite my head off :). I was just > wondering, is this a Windsor? I'm thinking of hopping up the engine somewhat > :), and don't say that this doesn't relate to Ford trucks, cause I'm also > thinking about putting one in my truck. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 00:16:20 EST From: SHill48337 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... In a message dated 11/1/1999 8:16:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, wish iastate.edu writes: think letting the clutch out at the light would be one more engage point and another chance for some more wear ... in actuality I don't think whether you hold it in at the light or put it in neutral has any effect on the clutch itself ... your leg maybe, but not the clutch. >> I usually go for neutral, saves the throwout bearing. Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 22:08:40 PST From: "White Wolf" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... I noticed when I rebuilt my engine in April that something was missing/broken from my 'fulcrum'.. Does anyone know where I could find a picture of the correct and working version? Its a '66 F100 with the 3-speed on the column. 352 White Wolf >From: "Danger" >Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com >To: >Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:59:38 -0700 > > > My buddy says the boot is what holds it in position, and if the > > boot wears out, the lever is free to rotate counterclockwise to where > > it's hanging now. He says replacing the boot will do the job. Who is > > right? >........... > > When you remove the linkage and spring from the fork, it will allow >the >fork to wiggle a bit even if all other parts are ok. The boot doesn't hold >the clutch release fork into place. The fork is held by clips on the >throwout bearing and also at the fulcrum inside the bell housing. You can >feel the fulcrum with your fingers with the boot removed, but you might be >able to see inside the housing with a light and a small mirror. The >throwout >bearing could have a broken clip, or the fulcrum could be broken, or both. > > When I installed the last clutch assembly in my 69 with T18, I found >it >necessary to fabricate a new fulcrum (using pieces of old fulcrum as >pattern) from angle iron and to attach it to the bell housing with special >bolts (tapered head to match counterbore hole in bell housing). > > >Danger >danger csolutions.net > > >== 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: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 22:12:27 -0700 From: "Kiernan, Denny".... 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. 
|