 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 #402 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 Wednesday, November 3 1999 Volume 03 : Number 402 ======================================================================= 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 - Oil slingers & M blocks FTE 61-79 - yugo facts? FTE 61-79 - Rotors for 76 f-250 Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation RE: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed RE: FTE 61-79 - Dead cylinder Re: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Miscellany RE: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering and tranny cooler FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering and tranny cooler FTE 61-79 - Manifold Heat Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks FTE 61-79 - Tires, gear ratios, effect on speedo RE: FTE 61-79 - Dead cylinder Re: FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? RE: FTE 61-79 - Manifold Heat FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem FTE 61-79 - parts needed FTE 61-79 - 262 Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum FTE 61-79 - OD RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum FTE 61-79 - Cam install in FE Re:FTE 61-79 - Steering wheel mystery FTE 61-79 - FE cam install RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... RE: FTE 61-79 - Auto -vs- NP435 RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks FTE 61-79 - steering col.and wheel FTE 61-79 - Lord-going well HA! Re: FTE 61-79 - Rotors for 76 f-250 RE: FTE 61-79 - Tires, gear ratios, effect on speedo FTE 61-79 - front brake problems Re: FTE 61-79 - steering col.and wheel Re: FTE 61-79 - Cam install in FE Re: FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? FTE 61-79 - Project Status FTE 61-79 - Unibody vs Styleside Same Year ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 06:58:38 EST From: GMontgo930 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks Now that you mention it, I dont remember seeing one when I was working on my tired ol 400. Was down in that area several times over the years. Ive still got an old 400 mostly apart in the garage. If needed I can check for a slinger to see if it's got one. I dont think it does though. And no, Im sorry, you cant have mine (if it's there)! George In a message dated 11/02/1999 2:56:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, bbeyer pacifier.com writes: elusive crankshaft oil slinger, the one that fits between the crank sprocket and the timing cover. The short block I bought didn't have one but the cover was already off when I got it so I figure it got lost. The parts guy looks at the computer and tells me that while there is a picture of one in the 'puter, there's no part # associated with it. So we go to the book...same results, his explanation is that the picture covers all motors including the 460 and maybe there isn't one for the 351M/400. The factory manual I have doesn't mention it in the 351M/400 section but it doesn't in the 460 section either. The Monroe/HP book and Haynes manuals do. Question: Do I need to bust my butt searching for one of these things? Is it that critical? Has anyone ever spotted one during an M block overhaul or does everybody just swap in a 460? >> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 04:40:11 -0800 (PST) From: Daniel DiMartino Subject: FTE 61-79 - yugo facts? i may be wrong but from what i remember the yugo factory bought the plans for a fiat 127 and built the fine euro import known as the yugo. i owned a spanish 127 (S.E.A.T) in spain and i will swear it was the best beat box going. i sealed up all the electrical stuff on the motor and water proofed it so i could do my version of the "dukes of hazzard" on muddy dirt roads while intoxicated. ah, yes the memories.... ===== Daniel DiMartino 1968 F-250 soon to be a 4x4 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 05:29:15 -0800 (PST) From: JOSEPH SUITS Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rotors for 76 f-250 I am looking for a good set of front brake rotors for a 1976 f-250 trailer special. the truck has the double piston brakes. None of the Hardware stores in this area can find them for me. I check all the local junk yards and could not find any f-250s from that vintage with double piston brakes. HELP!!!! Any Suggestions ===== Joe Suits __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:29:42 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - FE Cam Installation Okay...here's what I found out about my problem. First off, Thanks Terry for sending me the info. It really helped. The FE's OD of the cam is tapered with a standard ID. The cam journals should be all the same size. What I've found out is that the cam still won't go in no matter which end goes first. I tried to install it in the correct orientation with no success, then flipped the cam 180 and I have the same problem. That tells me the cam is most likely okay and that I have a problem with a bearing. I'm calling the machine shop today and will drop it off tomorrow afternoon. I'll get you an update as soon as I find out anything. Thanks, - -Ted == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:12:54 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed > >351W's use a different head bolt, so you would need a special one to put > >those heads on your 302 ... > > > > You can use HARDENED washers to put 351W heads on a 302, as the locating > bushings are the same between the two motors, but they must be HARDENED > washers. The alternative is to have the 302 block drilled and tapped for > the 1/2" > head bolts of the 351W. > I heard somewhere that there was a company making special bolts to do the trick, I thought those sounded like the easiest for what most of us do to our motors ... they are the smaller diameter for the block side and have a large shank to hold the head securely ... don't remember who made them though :( > Today I went and looked at a '68 F100, 390ci, C6, long bed, dual tanks, > fresh heads, > good tires, body, front end, $750, SOLD!! Was used to tow a boat > to Eastern > Wa. it's > entire life. The owner bought a new Diesel D*dge 4X4..... > Sold to you, or some one else ? Congrats if you got it, sounds like a great truck ... Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:14:26 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Dead cylinder > >What is the best way to check if you have a dead cylinder?` > > I use a timing light to trouble shoot ignition problemsClip the light to > each wire one at a time.The dead one won't make the timing light blink. Wow, this sounds like the least painful so far ... good thinkin! Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:20:10 -0500 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed William S. Hart wrote: > > > >351W's use a different head bolt, so you would need a special one to put > > >those heads on your 302 ... > > > > > > > You can use HARDENED washers to put 351W heads on a 302, as the locating > > bushings are the same between the two motors, but they must be HARDENED > > washers. The alternative is to have the 302 block drilled and tapped for > > the 1/2" > > head bolts of the 351W. > > > > I heard somewhere that there was a company making special bolts to do the > trick, I thought those sounded like the easiest for what most of us do to > our motors ... they are the smaller diameter for the block side and have a > large shank to hold the head securely ... don't remember who made them > though :( > They also sell sleeves to use the stock 302 head bolts. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:13:53 -0500 From: "Clem Salek" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... In a message dated 11/2/1999 5:45:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, c_salek gpinet.com writes: possible between clutch overhauls (with no real abuse) who really cares. >> You're right!... I've laid on the cold hard ground to change a snapped clutch fork, among other snowplowing mishaps. Sometimes using the greaseable throw-out bearings can extend bearing life. Seems like I'm swapping motors or rebuilding gear cases too often, and never end up letting the clutch go to it's full useful life anyway. Clem "Recon Unit 1" '79 F350,460,NP435 10Ton PTO Winch == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:49:57 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Miscellany Okay, all this discussion prompted me to pull out my trusty "Tractors and their Power Units" book ... "The temperature at which an engine operates affects both fuel economy and wear. Fuel consumption tests showed increasing specific fuel consuption as the jacket temperature was decreased from 93deg to 38deg C." So that shows that yes indeed, fuel needs to be heated ... those numbers are roughly 200deg F and 100deg F ... unfortunately no graph is provided to show what those effects are ... there is a graph showing wear based on temp though, not that that helps us any ... The next couple of sentences are the ones that got me though ... "A change in jacket temperature when the engine was operating at near maximum load affected the specific fuel consumption very little, whereas decreasing the temperature at light loads affected it considerably. The increase in specific fuel consumption wiht a decrease in engine temperature at low loads was attributed to lower manifold temperatures." To me this explains why the big - high horsepower motors don't care about the heat of the manifold, under heavy loads it doesn't matter, so the cooler air will actually make a denser charge and work better than the warmer air will ... I realize they aren't worried about gas mileage, but they are worried about efficiencies ... at any rate since at cruise nearly all our vehicles (except maybe those Yugo's yesterday) are at a very light load compared with their maximum power, hence they are severly affected by manifold temps. Is this affect enough to get me to switch to a 195 or 200 deg thermostat instead of th 180 ... no probably not, but I thought it was interesting to note ... Also interesting, (this was all in the cooling section) was that occasionally people ask how much the temp difference should be between the top of the rad. and the bottom (or across if you flow that way) ... "...with a temperature drop through the radiator of 5.5deg to 8.5degC may be assumed..." so there ya go ... 10 to 15 deg F drop from top to bottom ... Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:56:04 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed Discuss, discuss, discuss :-) I think the point being made here is that a 302 will never be a 351 no matter what kind of head you put on it. This same head on the 351 will make more power at a lower rpm so will produce more torque regardless. The 351 has 50 cubes on the 302 and the difference is in the stroke which pretty much guarantees more torque all by itself, all other things being equal. (got to throw that in or someone will try to show how I'm wrong by taking it out of context :-)) Comparing a stock 302 of a given year and a 351W from the same year will certainly prove this out regardless of how they are applied with the possible exception of a roller HO or Boss 302 which is hardly what we could consider "Stock" even though they came from the factory. The 351W will have more power and torque in any case if the basic design parameters are the same :-) Put a roller cam and hot parts in the windsor, then compare it to the Boss or HO 302, see what I mean? The 351 heads improve the intake flow of the 302 thus giving it a new lease on life but it's still JUST a 302 :-) - -- 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 I meant was > > that if you expect the torque of a 351W you will not have > it from the 302, > > if we compare two stock engines from the same year. > > > > I've grown to love this phrase :) When was the last time > anyone was able to > effectively do that ? > Just something to ponder, not really meant to start any > discussions about == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:31:02 -0600 From: "John LaGrone" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 302 info needed >>Check your firing order ... and the intake manifolds, I think there are some diffs there too ... the DPS pursuit car was a 5.0 'stang ? I know the firing order is different for the HO vs the non-HO ... I will have to do some checking here. I have been fooled before by looks. - -- 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: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:15:23 -0600 From: David.R.John deluxe.com Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering and tranny cooler I wrote: > 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. Gary wrote: >>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. Now I say: You were exactly right!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well kind of.....you didn't think that I would be able to get it freed up with WD40 :--). Actually I think I just got lucky for once and had something go right. I just sprayed with WD40, take tire iron pry and wiggle the joint with it still hooked up, turn the steering wheel a bunch, spray with WD40, pry and wiggle, turn and turn .... (boy I bet the neighbors thought I was weird :--)) I put the cooler in last night too, and it went smooth too. Maybe I should buy some lottery tickets!!! I ended up putting the cooler after the radiator to get a little more cooling. Even though I live in MN, I fear my tranny running hot due to my 2 and 1/2" dual exhaust running about an inch away from my tranny. Does anyone think I need a heat shield there or is this how it is?? Thanks again!!!! David John 78 F250 4x4 Supercab 460 "cool" C6 and smoooooth steering!!! 78 F250 4x4 regular cab 400 parts truck == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:18:10 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? Well I've been kind of whining all summer that no one would ever "race" me in my Mustang ... or my truck for that matter (nothing but sports cars out when I drive the truck, nothing but trucks out when I drive the car ... its a conspiracy I tell you ...) I finally got the truck almost completely ready for winter ... since putting the new motor in it has taken me forever to get enough miles and heat/cool cycles to get the gaskets seated in the oil pan and valve covers ... got those done finally I think, and topped off the brake fluid and oil, and the fuel ... On the way home, I was catchin all the lights green (gotta love that!), there was a car sitting at one that was going to turn as I got there, so I changed lanes even though mine ended in 1/2 mile so I wouldn't have to slow down as much ... light took longer than I thought so I had to hit the brakes a bit hard ... from 50 down to 35 or so ... he nails his grand am in an attempt to pin me in this lane ... the truck never shifted out of third and just walked away from him (gotta love low end torque :) Then he rode my butt (what on earth can you see when you follow a 4x4 pickup that closely? a couple exhaust pipes I suppose) and to top it off, he turned about 1/4 mile after the road narrowed ... I would have killed him if he'd beat me and then I'd had to wait for him to turn ... So then today on the way into work I bring the truck again ... going down another 4 lane, some dork in a civic cuts me off as we are coming to a stop sign so I have to get on the brakes pretty hard (it was tempting to not hit them at all) ... catch him just for fun, end up passing him after we turned ... we both turn again onto a twisty hill that is 4 lane, and I'm leading, but he's gunnin that little 4banger for all its worth, so I lay into the 4V (note that's barrels not valves or cylinders:) and proceed to just walk away from him in the twisties too ... lots of body roll though, I'd forgotten how much there is in that truck with the new front springs ... this guy turned onto a 2lane behind me then, and before I knew it he had turned ... again I'd have had to wait for him to turn if I'd been behind him ... You would think that would be the end of it right ? After all its only about 15 miles to work ... Some dork in a LeSabre (I was shakin believe you me) tries to get the hole shot from the right lane (ends 1 block from the light) by starting a few feet behind me ... the 390 hauled up to 30 with plenty of time to spare, I didn't even bother flooring it (yes the tires spin then), and actually thought about letting off just to make him stop so the car behind me could get in front too, but I didn't ... Sure enough, we go a few blocks, he turns too ... what is up with that? Do you guys race someone off the light then turn in front of them? its a big pet peeve when I'm in my truck 'cause the 4 drum brakes just don't stop as well as the discs on most cars ... not to mention the extra mass ... Anyway that's my rant for today ... and thanks to this list for all the help putting the motor together and keeping things tuned/running right :) Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:24:01 -0600 From: "William S. Hart" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Stiff steering and tranny cooler > tranny running hot due to my 2 and 1/2" dual exhaust running about an inch > away from my tranny. Does anyone think I need a heat shield there or is > this how it is?? > With the air flow under the truck, I wouldn't think it would be a big issue ... also that is likely a straight section of pipe, which means it won't create/give off as much heat as if it were at a corner ... it probably wouldn't be too hard to make a shield if you couldn't find one easily, but I probably wouldn't worry about it unless you spend lots of time sitting in traffic not moving ... even then I probably wouldn't, but that's just me ... Just my $.02 wish 96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L 73ish 1/2ton 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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:29:09 -0800 (PST) From: Bill Ballinger Subject: FTE 61-79 - Manifold Heat >Only dry manifold I'm familiar with is the M block and >it gets so hot >I'm >not sure if it would need any help :-) Maybe they >plumb more exhaust >in >there? What I discovered on my 460 was that the >warmer the incoming >air >charge and intake was the better it runs and the >better the mileage :-) >Since, in that condition, it outperforms most vehicles >I encounter on >the >road and I don't drag race it the rest doesn't matter >to me :-) >Interestingly enough I believe the edlebrock manifold >on my bronco 351M >has >no cross over but haven't really checked it out yet. >Had the carb off >too......Duuuuuu....just don't recall what was in >there :-) Anyway it >does >pretty well on economy but performance is a little >shaky :-) I haven't >checked the plugs since I got it either. It ran so I >drove it :-) >That's >on my list though :-) One thing we might seperate in this debate is the meaning of "running better." Drivability from cold to fully warm is what we're talking about here, am I correct? The introduction of a heated carb/intake is reduce the amount of choke needed to keep an engine running smooth when cold, and as part of a syncronization of automatic chokes to shorten the time it needs it to the time the choke is set to deliver. If you have a hot air choke, (electric chokes pretty well act the same way) the exhaust temp jumps up pretty consistantly and the time it influences the choke is fairly well the same within it's range. So how do you deal with a 50 degree temperature and 50 percent humidity swing? A manual choke , you just leave the choke out till it runs funny (burns alot of gas) You can only get so far with spring pressure on the auto choke until you hurt it in warm weather (keeping the choke on too long) There's no doubt that bringing up the intake tract to operating temperature as quick as possible is going to improve drivability. The fuel drops are smaller and don't "clump up," and if the air into the carb is heated or a direct butterfly heat is applied there will be no tendency to "ice up" in cold weather. I've found that in cool damp weather it helps too, probably because it dries everything out. So it syncronizes the ambient air temp to the time and degree of the choke available, and makes drivability more consistant. Fuel mileage will improve because you don't have to have the choke shut every time you start the engine. Now the other side of the coin is this. When you get fully warmed up and the engine has reached it's peak ability to burn fuel it wants cool air to increase the density of the charge, (this applies to normal outside conditions, not extremely cold weather, but will to apply to hot weather) because the warmed charge droplets have swung to the opposite end of the spectrum and are too small for peak performance, likely due to reduced oxygen density in the warm air. (I'm no expert on chemistry, I'm just figgering here by my own lights) The exhaust heat in the intake manifold isn't needed any more, since the chambers can now burn what ever you feed them, and the intake tract has reached harmony in temp with the rest of the engine. So the devices in place to provide temperature elevation during warm up, have to go away when it's warm or it will hurt the performance of the engine. A warm engine needs cool dense air, and will make more power if the intake tract is kept cool. The idea is to make constant and syncronous the density of the charge to the ability of the engine to digest the mixture. Whether cool or warm. Constant heat to the intake tract won't do this, and neither will none. It's a balance to be achieved. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:37:07 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks If you could check to see if it has one I'd appreciate it. I'm kinda stuck on this rebuild until I can figure out where to get one or if I even need one. Thanks, Bill "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 3:58 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks > Now that you mention it, I dont remember seeing one when I was working on my > tired ol 400. Was down in that area several times over the years. Ive still > got an old 400 mostly apart in the garage. If needed I can check for a > slinger to see if it's got one. I dont think it does though. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:43:21 -0600 From: David.R.John deluxe.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Tires, gear ratios, effect on speedo If anyone can straighten this out for me you all can. My truck originally had 4.10 gears now it has 3.54's this will have approx. a 16% effect on my speedo right? (4.10/3.54=1.158) Therefore I am going 16% faster than my speedo says right? Now the next effect, tires: the sticker on the door says tires ==> 9.50-16.5D rims ==> 15.5x6.75 I don't know what size tire this setup is but there were 31x10.5R16.5LT tires on the truck which I just replaced with 255x85r16 on 16" rims. I figure the height of the tire to be about 33" leaving out the contact patch and all that stuff :--) Am I correct (providing the tires that were on there were pretty close to stock height that the new tires will have another 6% effect on my speedo? (33/31=1.065) Can I now add these 2 effect together and say that my speedo is now telling me I am going 22% slower than I am actually going? I am approximating some stuff here so don't rip on me, but am I close or just full of it? Thanks again, David John 78 F250 4x4 Supercab 460 C6 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:46:41 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Dead cylinder Won't tell you if the plug, valves, rings, piston are dead though :-( Only tells you if you have spark "to" the plug :-) Seems like those diagnostic computer things have a way to catch the spark to a specific plug and ground it for this test? Course that setup only costs $25,000.00 :-( - -- 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 is the best way to check if you have a dead cylinder?` > > > > I use a timing light to trouble shoot ignition problemsClip > the light to > > each wire one at a time.The dead one won't make the timing > light blink. > > > Wow, this sounds like the least painful so far ... good thinkin! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:17:38 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? i love it when someone pulls out in front of me, in my old beat up blue 78 f150 4x4 w/5" of lift 35" tires and a hellacious winch bumper, i slow down just enough to keep the bumper in their rear view mirror. figured i'd grow out of being that way, but most of them are in a hurry to pull out in front of you, then go about 40 in a 55 and then turn 1/4 mile down the road. usually its some teenager in a mini truck or foreign car. of course i do respect my elders. jeff grant == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:20:21 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Manifold Heat It will make more power at WOT but not at cruise or idle. Both of these conditions require the most advance and also the leanest mixture which also requires the best vaporization which is why the flapper in the inlet snout is vacuum operated. When the vacuum drops at WOT the flapper closes off the hot air and you get only cold air. The increased volume of the colder air passing over the plenum floor also cools the metal of the plenum so the "hot spot" has negligeable effect on the temp of the charge but the walls of the manifold remain warm enough to prevent condensation so you get the best of both when you need them :-) If you run strictly cold everything you will notice a marked drop in economy and sluggish cruise performance due to these issues. Unless you re-curve the dizzy, both mechanical and vacuum advance, you will have to run timing which is not the best and mixture which is not the best to get the performance back where you want it at cruise and then the timing issue will rear it's ugly head at lower speeds and affect driveability. Like I keep saying, there is no free lunch but the OEM's have done a good job in providing 3 balanced meals in most touring engines by using the above strategies. One place I've noticed this difference is in the light throttle, cruise, small amounts of throttle change such as when passing traffic where they run radar so you can only get a couple of MPH over the guy you're passing or slowly building speed from lower rpms in high gear etc.. With hot air and proper vacuum as well as OEM stock dizzy you have excellent throttle response in this case but with totally cold intake and stock dizzy curves, throttle response here is very sluggish and unpredictable. The neat thing about this is that you can have your cake and eat it too because if you set up the intake system correctly you will also be able to get good power at WOT. Again, you can't mix racing application and street application in the same engine but you can certainly gain enough WOT power to keep most of us happy and have good economy at the same time :-) BTW, I just got my hands on a 71 (GM) rochester carb. No choke on it but the throttle lever is exactly what I need to fit a ford link and on the right side too :-) Now all I need is a book and a new manifold :-) How does $50 sound to you guys? (doesn't matter, I thought it was a pretty good price :-)) I may be hollering at ya shortly Bill for some advice :-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > So the devices in place to provide temperature > elevation during warm up, have to go away when it's > warm or it will hurt the performance of the engine. A > warm engine needs cool dense air, and will make more > power if the intake tract is kept cool. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:34:10 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lee Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Vibration Problem The whole truck chattered on take off, and did a rock and roll at idle. It was smooth and powerful at mid RPM. What happens is the valves rotate and seat sometimes, and sometimes not. At idle it is like a wild cam, but more random. At higher RPM it happens so fast that it seems smooth because it is dampened. My motor sat for many years, the seats rusted. Did yours sit for any length of time? Dan Lee '53 F100 400C-4V >Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re:Re: Vibration Problem >Did your motor shake the whole cab? Mine shakes so >hard that it actually rattles everything including >thecab. >- --- Dan Lee wrote:\ >> Rich, >> It sounds exactly like my 351C with the bad valve >>seats. > > Dan Lee >> '53 F100 >> 400C-4V ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:21:18 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - parts needed i need an oil pan and pick up tube for a 351m or 400m in a 78-79 4x4, i ordered a rebuilt 400 for the f250 extended cab, someone put a front sump oil pan in the truck and it has made contact a time of two. jeff grant griffin, ga. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 17:23:08 +0100 From: "Bill Brox" Subject: FTE 61-79 - 262 Hi all. Are there any info about the 262 truck engine from 1964 on the net. And are there any I6 Ford truck engine books out to the public ? Is this 262 truck engine in the 223 family ? Or where does it belong ? Bill == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:39:56 -0700 From: "Dave Resch" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks >From: "Bill Beyer" >Subject: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks > >The parts guy looks at the computer and >tells me that while there is a picture of one in >the 'puter, there's no part # associated with it. Yo Bill: You can get an oil slinger that is listed for the 351C and early production 400 (#D0AZ-6310-A). I know of a dealer in the Denver area that actually has them in stock for about $4.50. >The factory manual I have >doesn't mention it in the 351M/400 section >but it doesn't in the 460 section either. The >Monroe/HP book and Haynes manuals do. >Question: Do I need to bust my butt searching >for one of these things? Is it that critical? Has >anyone ever spotted one during an M block >overhaul Personally, the only time I have ever seen an oil slinger on an M-block was in a 400 from a 1973 LTD that had never been opened up. I have not found an oil slinger in several later model M-blocks (77-up), either 351M or 400. I believe that Ford quit using the oil slinger after the first few years of M-block production, maybe even as early as the introduction of the 351M in 1975. I have never used an oil slinger on the M-blocks I've rebuilt. >or does everybody just >swap in a 460? Not me. Dave R (M-block devotee) == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:53:18 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks Dave your a life saver man! Thanks a lot. I'm not gonna put on the slinger if I don't need it. I just spent $10 for a lousy front pump seal for the tranny which I'm going to replace while I have the motor out of the truck so I'm not gonna spend anymore money at the dealer than I have to. Thanks again. Bill "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" - ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Resch To: Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 8:39 AM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks > Yo Bill: > > You can get an oil slinger that is listed for the 351C and early production 400 > (#D0AZ-6310-A). I know of a dealer in the Denver area that actually has them > in stock for about $4.50. > > Personally, the only time I have ever seen an oil slinger on an M-block was in a > 400 from a 1973 LTD that had never been opened up. I have not found an oil > slinger in several later model M-blocks (77-up), either 351M or 400. I believe > that Ford quit using the oil slinger after the first few years of M-block > production, maybe even as early as the introduction of the 351M in 1975. I have > never used an oil slinger on the M-blocks I've rebuilt. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:56:45 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum There are maintenance issues I would think and while simple it would still be difficult to do on an assembly line and have all your ducks in a row plus the temp problem you pointed out etc.. Water injection is simple too but no OEM ever used it I know of? Probably some kind of conspiracy to keep oil companies in business, eh? I used to read all that kind of stuff. I still have quite a library but most of the info is now more or less defunct, like me :-( The grinder pump was the word he used in the book and I thought I remembered reading about more than one being used in that setup? Pretty rusty on this right now. Read this about 10 years ago :-) Maybe he had more than one design? Maybe yours was a streamlined version? Not sure :-) - -- 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 take exception about complex since in 1983 I built a > prototype similar to > Smokey's using data from Smokey. It was then and is now very > simple. > I was beginning > to think no one knew about some of these projects. What's a > grinder pump? > The turbo homogenized the mixture. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:05:47 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - OD Steve S. writes: >>I have located a bolt on OD for a C-6 2wd, Tell us more about this "Bolt on " OD for C6!!!!! Inquireing minds want to know!!!!!!!! Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:23:07 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum Thank you Burt :-) I am running on fumes here since I haven't actually studied any of this in over 10 years and am going from memory. Since I have never really had time or money to experiment with this stuff I am spouting theory mostly but have had some experience with some of these things at various times. I did quite a bit of messing with the 460 when I first built it and started with what I thought were matched ports but didn't match them correctly so had some reversion. I also sealed off the crossover, removed the EGR and intake snout and the biggest mistake of all was I put a Holley on it :-( I re-curved the dizzy (actually took the curve out of it :-)), played with jets and transition circuits and rear gears to no avail. When I put the same engine in my Pickup I cleaned up some of the port mismatch by putting a stock, untamperedwith spread bore, OEM, hot cross over manifold with OEM spread bore carb on it, bought a junk dizzy from a 70 vintage 385 series engine and left the dang thing alone! and added headers along with hot air intake. Originally it had the 2 into 1 in this truck till they fell off and it ran like a scared rabbit. I put headers on with no other changes and lost about 15 mph in second and got some backfiring to boot but otherwise it runs as well as before. In the van I got 6 mpg, in the pickup I get 12. The van had standard ratio C-6 with 4.11 gears, the pu has wide ratio and 2.75 gears and believe it or not runs much better including off the line. Not very scientific but I've gleaned a few things from all this and most of it has been posted in this discussion :-) Most important thing I learned is DON'T LOSE THE BLACK SPRING IN THE DIZZY! There is no replacement for it's exact characteristics :-( I had 30 springs and not one would duplicate the curve I had with that one which I lost when the pliers slipped :-( One thing I have yet to test is the 38 degree total advance concept. Ford dizzy's go up to about 21 degrees in the mechanical advance. I looked through every cam we had in the plant and that was the largest number I could find so to get 38 degrees with only 10 initial you have to open up the slots in the cam wings or figure out how to make it run with 17 degrees of initial advance :-( - -- 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 - -- > Gary is right. As long as there is a passage open to the hot > exhaust gases > that passage will remain very close to the temperature of the > hot gas. > As I mentioned liquids do not burn, only vapors in a gaseous > form. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:13:19 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Cam install in FE Ted Freeman writes: >>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. I'm a bit behind, and you probably already have it in, but here is one thing to look at: Look into all the lifter holes to see if you can locate the "pink" sound as you move it just slightly in/out. Might be something in one of the lifter bores. If the lobes go in one cam bearing, then they ought to go in all the cam bearings. Rotate the cam as you insert it. This usually helps!!!! Thats all I can think of. Really sorry to hear about Chinquepin being under water. That must be a completely helpless and devestating feeling. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:28:54 -0700 From: "Kiernan, Denny" Subject: Re:FTE 61-79 - Steering wheel mystery "steve potratz" wrote: > I'll take a stab at it-I bet that at some point power steering was added > from a later model(or a different manual box) and the shaft in the the > steering column was not. I had a truck that this happened to and the ears > on the column were cut to alow for the increased shaft length-not too safe > an idea. You need to track down a shorter shaft. There's definitely no power-steering on this truck. Wrasslin' this steering wheel, especially in and out of tight parking places, is what keeps me in prime physical shape. Denny == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:26:26 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE cam install Ted F. writes: >>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. Naw!!! Don't think so. Going from memory, here and sometimes that is really way off, but the book only list one cam bearing size for all the journals, I think. I believe this to be true on all Ford Engines. Same cam bearing journal diameter for all the journals on the cams for each family of engines. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:31:26 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Mileage and Vacuum They actually do a little of both. The design of the jets tends to beat the fuel up atomizing it somewhat but also restricts the total flow into the venturis as well. The annular discharge nozzles were added to atomize it even further and also help to evenly distribute the smaller droplets around the venturi for a more consistant mixture. - -- 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 thought the purpose of jets was to meter the amount of > fuel and had > nothing to do with atomizing the mixture? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:38:13 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Clutches and things... Plowing will probably cause autos to over heat so the stick is the better choice there just as in mud running. Working a truck as hard as you do to plow snow I would not expect 100k mileage from clutches or gear boxes or throw out bearings, syncros would be shot pretty quickly in second gear I should think :-) If you pay attention to the sounds and do some maintenance I should think lying on the ground could be eliminated. I usually put mine up on the hoist for this........:-) (think before responding, it's a trick statement :-)) - -- 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 - -- > > possible between clutch overhauls (with no real abuse) who > really cares. > >> > > pulled the > > > > > You're right!... I've laid on the cold hard ground to change a snapped > clutch fork, among other snowplowing mishaps. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:42:40 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Auto -vs- NP435 YES! Where do you live? You did say it was in a 429 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 - -- > columns) Anybody need > a balenced clutch plate and brand new clutch set/throwout bearing? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 12:44:24 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks I'd use the slinger if there is one for it. I wish the 460 had one.....or does it? You'd be surprised how much oil it keeps off the seal and the ground :-) - -- 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 - -- > Dave your a life saver man! Thanks a lot. I'm not gonna put > on the slinger > if I don't need it. I just spent $10 for a lousy front pump > seal for the > tranny which I'm going to replace while I have the motor out > of the truck so > I'm not gonna spend anymore money at the dealer than I have to. Thanks > again. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 10:57:44 -0700 From: William Whited Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Oil slingers & M blocks Gary, I've seen some in some mags I think I can look again if you'd like? William A Whited 74 F100 Ranger Supercab 390 77 F150 Custom 460 "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" wrote: > I'd use the slinger if there is one for it. I wish the 460 had one.....or > does it? You'd be surprised how much oil it keeps off the seal and the > ground :-) > > -- > 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 > -- > > > Dave your a life saver man! Thanks a lot. I'm not gonna put > > on the slinger > > if I don't need it. I just spent $10 for a lousy front pump > > seal for the > > tranny which I'm going to replace while I have the motor out > > of the truck so > > I'm not gonna spend anymore money at the dealer than I have to. Thanks > > again. > == 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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:03:45 -0500 From: "Gary L. Perry" Subject: FTE 61-79 - steering col.and wheel Denny, I'll bet your cab mounts are gone, cab settled, pushing on steering column and pushing out of place. VERY common on old Fords. OR maybe someone replaced column with wrong type, as not all are interchangeable between 2 and 4 wheel and others, and shaft is wrong length. Having trouble with shifter? another indication of cab mount probs. "G" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:07:10 -0500 From: "Gary L. Perry" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lord-going well HA! Didn't you notice some NOISE sometime in your trucks life? How you could drive it everyday w/out realizing something wasn't right is beyond me. 4x4 much? "G" == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:15:46 -0700 From: "Danger" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rotors for 76 f-250 > I am looking for a good set of front brake rotors for > a 1976 f-250 trailer special. the truck has the > double piston brakes. None of the Hardware stores in > this area can find them for me. I check all the local > junk yards and could not find any f-250s from that > vintage with double piston brakes. HELP!!!! > > Any Suggestions > Joe Suits ............ Last year I bought new rotors for my 69 F250 with dual piston calipers when I did my power disc brake conversion (front drum brakes seem "dangerous" to me). Although they were a special order item, many of the local "auto parts stores" (not hardware stores) would have been happy to order a pair. You should be able to purchase rotors for your 76 F250 from any number of locations (Checker Auto, AutoZone, Pep Boys, Napa, etc...) Danger danger csolutions.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:21:00 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Tires, gear ratios, effect on speedo Since 1.158 and 1.065 are ratios which act on each other I would say you multiply them to get the final ratio of change just as you do when combining the ratios of the rear end, tranny and transfer case but either way you come up with only 1% difference so take your pick :-) Adding you get 22.3% and multiplying you get 23.327% :-) I believe you will find that the original tires were not 31" diameter though, probably only 30" I believe my daughter's 97 has 17" wheels on it and her tires are just about 30" - -- 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 - -- > Can I now add these 2 effect together and say that my speedo > is now telling > me I am going 22% slower than I am actually going? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:29:12 -0900 From: Matthew Schumacher Subject: FTE 61-79 - front brake problems Hello All, I am having some serious brake problems with my truck. It is a 76 F-150 with the dana 44 and disks up front. Anyway, it makes a grinding/whinning sound going down the road, so I took it to a local brake shop and they replaced the springs on the calipers and adjusted a couple of things then sent me on my way. Well I got about 10 miles and the truck started making the grinding sound again so I took the truck back to the shop. This time they wanted to replace the front calipers, turn the rotors, and put new pads on for $400. I told them that that was to much and went to NAPA and bought a new caliper for the side that was making the noise. I didn't turn the rotors because they where turned 3 months before and it was still in really good shape. Well, that lasted a while longer but then started making the grinding sound again. The grinding sound lasted a couple of days and then went away, now the other side is making noise. note: I don't think it is front wheel bearings because it isn't consistent at all, it isn't making a rubbing sound, and my brakes lock up sometimes. Here are the questions: What exactly causes the brakes to grind against the rotors? What should I do to fix the problem? Thanks for any help you can send. schu == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:32:56 -0700 From: "Danger" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - steering col.and wheel > Denny, I'll bet your cab mounts are gone, cab settled, pushing > on steering column and pushing out of place. VERY common > on old Fords. OR maybe someone replaced column with wrong > type, as not all are interchangeable between 2 and 4 wheel and > others, and shaft is wrong length. Having trouble with shifter? > another indication of cab mount probs. > "G" .............. That's one bet I wouldn't make because... I'm quite sure the heart of the problem with the gap between the steering wheel & column is due to the cab mounts and/or bushings. The steering assembly was not designed to hold the weight of the cab and damage can be expected to occur to the lower column shaft bearings & retainer (flat washers which holds lower bearings into place should be deformed). The bearing housing on the bottom of the column could also be deformed/damaged. The reason I'm so sure about this paticular problem is because I've recently rebuilt both columns in my 69 F250's, and one of which was because of the cab mount failure (other was broken shift collar on an automatic... ouch!). Of course it is possible that somebody has installed the wrong shaft/column on the truck, but I doubt it very much. Danger danger csolutions.net == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:32:31 -0500 From: tfreeman murphyfarms.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Cam install in FE I'm heading to the machine shop Thursday afternoon. I don't know exactly whats hitting. I'm sure they can figure it out. About the only thing you could tell that Chiquapin was even there was the water tower. "Welcome to Chiquapin" on the top and you could see a few roof tops here and there. Most of our area is still trying to recover. My wifes aunt and a cousin lost their house. We were just lucky. - -Ted I'm a bit behind, and you probably already have it in, but here is one thing to look at: Look into all the lifter holes to see if you can locate the "pink" sound as you move it just slightly in/out. Might be something in one of the lifter bores. If the lobes go in one cam bearing, then they ought to go in all the cam bearings. Rotate the cam as you insert it. This usually helps!!!! Thats all I can think of. Really sorry to hear about Chinquepin being under water. That must be a completely helpless and devestating feeling. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 10:33:43 -0800 From: "Mike Sealey" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - What were they thinking ? On Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:18:10 William S. Hart wrote: (lotsa entertaining dork stories snipped) >Sure enough, we go a few blocks, he turns too ... what is up with that? Do >you guys race someone off the light then turn in front of them? its a big >pet peeve when I'm in my truck 'cause the 4 drum brakes just don't stop as >well as the discs on most cars ... not to mention the extra mass ... In the cab business, we see this kinda behavior all the time, and refer to it as "compensation for phallic deficiency". (I know with the high intellectual level of the posts on this list -- another stereotype bites the dust! -- I won't have to explain further...) Anyway, there's some kinda primal thing in some people that makes them act like they gotta strut whatever ineffectual "stuff" they have whenever faced with someone who looks like they might be having more fun in life. I don't see much of this in *my* truck, which is a clean older model with a camper shell that looks and sounds like it still belongs to its elderly first owner, but I do get it in the cab, and I do get it to a lesser degree in my cars from the '60s. Mike Sealey '75 F-150, '99 Windstar (taxicab) and multiple non-FoMoCo vehicles Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.angelfire.com == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:09:22 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Lee Subject: FTE 61-79 - Project Status Here is the status of my project. This is in addition to TCI IFS and Power Rack and Pinion Steering, Tilt.... 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. 
|