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 #415
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 Saturday, November 13 1999 Volume 03 : Number 415



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE 61-79 - 170 c.i. hopups?
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: "electric clutch"
FTE 61-79 - 69 stepside
FTE 61-79 - Re: M block engines
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: M block engines
FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?
FTE 61-79 - Not truck related, but FoMoCo related
FTE 61-79 - RE: 351M and 400
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: 351M and 400
RE: FTE 61-79 -Latest developments re clutch
FTE 61-79 - 71 f100 questions...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Not truck related, but FoMoCo related
FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 hop-ups? (Australian Crossflow Head)
RE: FTE 61-79 -Latest developments re clutch
FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 hop-ups? (Australian Crossflow Head)
FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: the SPAM
FTE 61-79 - I'm baaaaaacccckkkkk!
Re: FTE 61-79 - I'm baaaaaacccckkkkk!

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 07:24:07 -0500
From: frenz.6 osu.edu (Dale Frenz)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 170 c.i. hopups?

You wanna make that thing move? First, once ya get it out to work
on it, push the engine stand way way over in the corner of the garage. Then
wheel your 427 over and get it all snuggled in the engine bay. Then bring
your 170 back over and stick it in the bed. This way you'll be guilt free
about having completely removed it, plus it might help those nylon pizza
cutters grab so traction when you drop the clutch 3000.

- -Dale (Who else do you know in good humor at 7:00am)
'79 Ruby
'00 Baby Powerstroke


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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 05:02:49 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: "electric clutch"

Unfortunately no. It was told to my by an old timer. Apparently offerd by
a now long gone automaker. The simplicity of the idea intrigued me. I do
remember him saying that the dirtier the oil in the "clutch" assembly the
better it worked. If there were a lot of metal shavings in the oil the
electromagnet would pull them into the magnetic field and it would aid the
coupling action of the clutch.

Tom H.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Brett L Habben [mailto:bhabben juno.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 6:54 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: "electric clutch"


Tom,
I've never seen an automotive application of that clutch, only industrial
applications. I've also seen electric brakes that are similiar. Do you
have any more info on who made the one you are referencing?
Brett
Super75cab
>Didn't someone in the 30's or 40's make some sort of "electric clutch"
where
>there was an electro magnet in the flywheel and a metal disk connected
to
>the trans. The whole affair was filled with oil and the dirtier more
metal
>shaving filled the oil was the better it worked. When the magnet was
engaget
>the whole mess locked together and tranmitted torque to the trans.
Since
>there was no friction surfaces there was very little to wear out.
>Tom H

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:19:33 -0600
From: John Strauss
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 69 stepside

> I just got a hold of a 69 F-100 stepside with original bed and tailgate.
>Most other stuff is also original but someone took out the manual trans and
>put an automatic(C-4) in it. Looks like it had a three speed on the tree and
>the clutch pedal is still there. I havn't found any other 69 stepsides for
>sale to see how much this one is worth. It has a 300 streight six and one
>barrel carb. This truck is in really nice shape.(I think so!) Can anyone
>help on a value and what trans was original for it? Or even where to
>research it?
>
Look for the rating plate which is attached to the rear face of the
driver's door. It will have a trans code. For 1969, the codes are as
follows:

A=4spd manual, B=3spd overdrive, C=3spd manual, D=MD 3spd manual, E=HD 3spd
manual, F=4spd manual, G=3spd automatic

Since it is a six, most likely your code will be a "C", but you never know.

I got this info from "The Ford Pickup Red Book". I think this is out of
print but you might try amazon.com. It's a little pocket sized book that
decodes VINs and gives basic information. Great to take with you when you
are going to look at a truck.

If the truck is in really nice shape, it is probably worth in the
neighborhood of $2500-3500. This is only a guess, it varies by region.
But it sounds like the truck is pretty bare bones which makes it less
desireable to a collector than, say, if it was a Ranger with a V-8 and
factory air.

Hope this helps.
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:54:21 -0500
From: "Serian"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: M block engines

> I always thought the "M" in 351M and 400M stood for "Modified". I
> recently found a Ford web page referring to a "Midland" family of
> engines. Is this what the 351M and 400M are actually titled? Is there
> another family of motors I'm not aware of? It makes sense to me...
> (Cleveland and Windsor are names of places and I suppose Ford could have
> a Midland plant somewhere). Seems like "Modified" just dont realy fit as
> well.

Officially, the M does stand for "Midland", but since the 351M shares
a number of parts with the 351C, many mechanics at the time called
it a "modified Cleveland", and the terminology stuck. The 400 is a
M-block engine, but it is not commonly referred to as a 400M. The
terminology is so widely known and used, that if you refer to a 351
"modified" or "modified Cleveland", the parts store clerks know what
you are talking about, even though it isn't the "official" Ford designation.
The terms 351 "Modified", 351 "Modified Cleveland", 351 Midland,
and 351M all refer to the same thing ... just depends on what you feel
like calling it.



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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:07:38 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: M block engines

I'm curious as to which official source you're basing this on.

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

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Serian
To:
Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 8:54 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: M block engines


> Officially, the M does stand for "Midland", but since the 351M shares
> a number of parts with the 351C, many mechanics at the time called
> it a "modified Cleveland", and the terminology stuck. The 400 is a
> M-block engine, but it is not commonly referred to as a 400M. The
> terminology is so widely known and used, that if you refer to a 351
> "modified" or "modified Cleveland", the parts store clerks know what
> you are talking about, even though it isn't the "official" Ford
designation.
> The terms 351 "Modified", 351 "Modified Cleveland", 351 Midland,
> and 351M all refer to the same thing ... just depends on what you feel
> like calling it.



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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:05:12 -0800
From: Marv Miller
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?

Jerry Godsey wrote:
> Does anybody know of any hop ups for the 170 c.i. in my 65 Econoline? I
> love the truck, but if I run over gum on a hot day I'll get stuck!

Jerry, I worked on literally hundreds of these things for a couple of years when
I
was in the Air Force back in the '60's. Remember, they are Econolines.
^^^^^
They are not meant to get around with a lot of pep. Think of them as a VW
Beetle
that can haul stuff. Slowly, but surely. Yours looks about as nice as the
green
one that recently sold on eBay. Unless you bought it to hot-rod, my belief is
that
you should leave it stock.

There are two weak areas with these trucks. The clutch, which I'm not sure is
really
weak or GI's just abused them, and the oiling for the valve rockers. There was
a kit
to add external "help" to the upper cylinder oiling, but your Boss only knows if
the
its are still available. You might check with an old mechanic at the Ford
agency.

Minor things include the shifter linkage bushings get worn out, and the turn
indicator switch will go bad. Everything else (brakes, master cylinder, water
pump, etc.) are just routine maintenance items.

These are simple little econoboxes. Underpowered, yes. But you get a great
deal of
reliability in their simplicity.

Besides, there are no mountains where you live. And my suggestion to you is to
not take it to them.

Best of luck with your new toy truck.

Regards,

- -M-
- --
Marv Miller mailto:ae722 lafn.org
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 19:08:41 +0100
From: "Bill Brox"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Not truck related, but FoMoCo related

Today the Norwegian King, and representatives from Ford Motor Company,
opened the first plant for production of a car in Norway.
The car is called "Think" and the company is mostly owned by Ford Motor
Company.
They bought the company earlier this year, and today the first massproduced
automobile was built in Norway.

Hope the idea works....

If anyone wants to take a look at it, you find their site at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.think.no


Bill Brox





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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:28:25 -0500
From: "George W. Selby, III"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 351M and 400

I don't exactly know what the M in 351M stands for, but I've always heard
it is for Modified (Because it's a Modified 400). Both are actually
versions of the Cleveland engine family (So calling it yet another city
doesn't sound right.) As far as that web site that claims they are
'Midland' engines, it is the site I would go to LAST to find any correct
information about your Ford Truck (I know which one it is, just don't want
to name names.)

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:35:41 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: 351M and 400

Well I'll name names...the only site I was able to locate referring to the
351 "Midland" and 400 "Midland" was Advance Adapters. I don't think they
have any particular insight into the workings of FoMoCo especially since
they refer to the 400 incorrectly anyway.

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

- ----- Original Message -----
From: George W. Selby, III
To:
Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 10:28 AM
Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 351M and 400


> I don't exactly know what the M in 351M stands for, but I've always heard
> it is for Modified (Because it's a Modified 400). Both are actually
> versions of the Cleveland engine family (So calling it yet another city
> doesn't sound right.) As far as that web site that claims they are
> 'Midland' engines, it is the site I would go to LAST to find any correct
> information about your Ford Truck (I know which one it is, just don't want
> to name names.)



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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:22:00 -0700
From: "Kiernan, Denny"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 -Latest developments re clutch

I yi yi. This information from Gary Peters arrived the day after the
mechanic had called me saying that he welded the new fulcrum bracket on
the bell housing.

> > ABSOLUTELY DO NOT WELD ANYTHING ON IT! This certainly will cause a
> > stress
> > line and it CERTAINLY will crack, riviting or bolting is the ONLY solution.

So now, I'll just have to drive it like it is and wait to see what
happens. I dont know anything about welding. Is the idea that the heat
of the welding creates a weak spot in the cast iron of the housing?

Gary also wrote:

> The bell housing is cast iron, you're not going to crack it by drilling and
> riviting or it would have cracked at the factory :-)

Sounds logical. I dont know why three machine shops here refused the job
saying they were afraid of cracking it.

> Drill it out being as
> carefull as you can to get the drill in the center but if it goes out just
> put in larger bolts. The critical thing here is to get button heads or
> other low head bolts so there are no interferance points in the linkage
> when
> you are done and use self locking nuts so it won't come loose.

I assume that you mean the bolt heads on the inside of the housing, and
the locknuts outside. When I need to do the job all over, at least :-)

BTW, thanks to all for the input.

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 14:44:44 -0600
From: "Daniel R. Olinick"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 71 f100 questions...

I have a few questions.

The bench seat in my truck is worn out so
I thought about replacing it with another seat.
I heard that I could get a seat out of a newer model
truck. What truck seats will fit? Or would it make more
sense to try to have it repaired somewhere?

My truck was missing the dust cover over the flywheel
and I found one at a salvage yard but It was missing two
bolts. Where can I get two bolts? NAPA? Maybe I should just
bring in one of the existing bolts for the right size.

The small plates connecting the shifting linkage to the (3spd)
transmission are loose. Can I get these at ford? Is it possible
that the looseness is inside the transmission. I don't want to
have to mess with the transmission I just want the shifter to have
less play in it. Perhaps I should investigate that truck I stole the
dust cover from. It would probably have the same parts.

Now then there is the stereo. Mine is a sparkomatic am/fm tape deck
with built in equalizer but it sucks. It is difficult to tune in stations
and I don't like it. The problem is that it has those nice black and
chrome
knobs on it that match the rest of the knobs. Will they fit on a new
radio?
I guess I will go test fit them. Now we will need some good kickin' bass
and crisp clear treble. Do we have room for the speakers and possible
amp? What kind of stereo systems do you have installed. Are they out of
site? Did you have to cut holes in your door panels?! My truck already
has
holes cut in the door panels. I don't know whether to just slap some
speakers
in there or go find some panels that aren't damaged. To customize or
restore
that is the question. This may be getting silly but I will ask. What can
be done
to reduce road noise besides making sure the door gaskets are sealing
properly?
Have you added any insulation anywhere or carpet or something.

Daniel

p.s anybody want to buy my 93 GMC? I don't need it anymore I have my Ford.

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:20:00 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Not truck related, but FoMoCo related

Thanks for your message at 07:08 PM 11/12/99 +0100, Bill Brox. Your message
was:
>Today the Norwegian King, and representatives from Ford Motor Company,
>opened the first plant for production of a car in Norway.
>The car is called "Think" and the company is mostly owned by Ford Motor
>Company.
>They bought the company earlier this year, and today the first massproduced
>automobile was built in Norway.

A car called "Think" has to be a luxury vehicle in Norway... :>)

My Swedish ancestors are chuckling along with me...


But will they eventually produce Fjord Trucks...?





Dennis Pearson in Kennewick, WA

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:09:21 -0500
From: "Don Haring, Jr."
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 hop-ups? (Australian Crossflow Head)

Steve & the Rockette said:
> Unfortunately the 144/170/200/250 have the intake manifold cast into the
> head. HOWEVER, the nearly as astute hotrodders of Oz have the solution,
> it seems the 200cid(3.3L) was offered in Oz as a crossflow head, and is a
> bolt on modification for any US 200cid. I seem to remember Clifford
> offering these heads with the correct manifolds. Said to increase HP by
> 75 or there abouts....

Steve, this exact discussion is going on in the Falcon list to which I am
subscribed. It's also come up in past, and as far as anyone here can tell,
this crossflow head is NOT a bolt on to the small I-6 blocks here in the
USA. Someone recently had a head gasket shipped over to check, and it was
1" wider, with different coolant ports as well. There are several
Australians on the Falcon list, and they are looking into it again. And
obviously, it would cost prohibative to ship an entire engine over to the
US. If you know of more specifics about the crossflow head, let us know
because I know a lot of curious people. BTW, there is also current
discussion on the list regarding a mysterious bellhousing that allows for a
bolt-on installation of a Toyota 5-sp gearbox. I don't mean to upset anyone
at the mention of Toyota, but an economical 5-sp for the 200 engine would
be very cool.

- -don

- --
Don in Philadelphia
Internet Director, Keystone Chapter FCA | 66 Falcon Deluxe Club Wagon
Falconaut: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconaut | 61 Falcon Futura
Keystone: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fedora.net/falconkey | classic scooters and bicycles


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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:56:22 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 -Latest developments re clutch

At 12:22 PM 12:11:99 -0700, Kiernan, Denny wrote:
>I yi yi. This information from Gary Peters arrived the day after the
>mechanic had called me saying that he welded the new fulcrum bracket on
>the bell housing.
>
>> > ABSOLUTELY DO NOT WELD ANYTHING ON IT! This certainly will cause a
>> > stress
>> > line and it CERTAINLY will crack, riviting or bolting is the ONLY solution.
>

I've welded cast iron on many occasions, there is a welding rod
designed specifically for it. All you need to do is preheat to a specific
temp for the type of cast iron you're welding. After all, cast iron is
one form of mild steel.....

Steve & the Rockette
68 F100, 390cid, FMX
63 F100, 292cid, 3speed
72 Capri 2000, hers
73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in.....
73 MGB GT, Our Toy
94 SHO, SWMBO's
97 Contour, Mine

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:56:34 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 hop-ups? (Australian Crossflow Head)

At 06:09 PM 12:11:99 -0500, Don Haring, Jr. wrote:

>> Unfortunately the 144/170/200/250 have the intake manifold cast into the
>> head. HOWEVER, the nearly as astute hotrodders of Oz have the solution,
>> it seems the 200cid(3.3L) was offered in Oz as a crossflow head,

>Steve, this exact discussion is going on in the Falcon list to which I am
>subscribed. It's also come up in past, and as far as anyone here can tell,
>this crossflow head is NOT a bolt on to the small I-6 blocks here in the
>USA. Someone recently had a head gasket shipped over to check, and it was
>1" wider, with different coolant ports as well. There are several
>Australians on the Falcon list, and they are looking into it again. And
>obviously, it would cost prohibative to ship an entire engine over to the
>US. If you know of more specifics about the crossflow head, let us know
>because I know a lot of curious people.

The info I got was from an interview with the gang at Clifford Research,
now called Clifford Performance, back in the mid '80's.

> BTW, there is also current
>discussion on the list regarding a mysterious bellhousing that allows for a
>bolt-on installation of a Toyota 5-sp gearbox. I don't mean to upset anyone
>at the mention of Toyota, but an economical 5-sp for the 200 engine would
>be very cool.

I thought all the Toyo's had intergrally cast bellhousings. All you'd need
is an adapter plate, like the MG's have....

Steve & the Rockette
68 F100, 390cid, FMX
63 F100, 292cid, 3speed
72 Capri 2000, hers
73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in.....
73 MGB GT, Our Toy
94 SHO, SWMBO's
97 Contour, Mine

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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 20:03:41 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE 61-79 - ADMIN: the SPAM

To all Ford Truck Enthusiasts list members:

A spammer subscribed to all our mailing lists and
managed to post his garbage to two of the lists
before I managed to put a halt to it. As you may
know, we take measures to fight spam and protect
email addresses, including, but not limited to, use
of a robots.txt exclusion file, POP before sendmail
confirmation, subscription confirmation for the
discussion groups and blocking web access to known
email harvesting sites.

However, even with all these measures, there is
nothing that can be done against a spammer who
subscribes, confirms the subscription and then
spam. The spammer has been blocked from the lists
so they cannot post again. We have, however, not
unsubscribed them. This means they cannot unsubsribe
and will have to find a way to deal with the 100s
of emails the live lists sends out.

Please do not make the problem worse by posting about
it here, the issue has been resolved. I strongly
urge you to send email the spammers TRUE email address
at ldchen webresearch.8m.com and express your thoughts.

We are preparing a bill for them for the time spent
to block their email address and to clean up their
spam from the lists. We've notified them that we
will seek a small claims case if we are not paid since
the FAQ clearly states that anyone who spams the lists
will be billed for the cleanup.

Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com


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

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

Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:24:26 PST
From: "NP 540"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - I'm baaaaaacccckkkkk!

Hi everyone!
I am back! I had to; now that I have THREE Ford trucks!
1978 F-150 4x4 super-cab, NP435-205, junk body
1979 F-150 4x4 regular-cab, NP435-205, junk body
1975 F-250 2x4 extended-cab, camper-special, for parts only
As you can see, I have my hands full with projects now! :D
Now for a question for you fellow FTE:
Does the Dana-44 front axles from a 74-79 F-150 Ford 4x4
interchange with thoses from a Chevy (THE UGLY WORD!) Dana-44
4x4 axles from 73-91? More specifically, the short ones?
I am asking as the short axle on the regular-cab 4x4 had it's
U-joint disintegrate while the 4x4 was engaged, resulting in
no-more-good short axle, both sides of U-Joint. And since I have
access to a few Junked Chevies 4x4 trucks, for cheap.......
Yea, yea, I know, Ford in Ford, ect..., but there is no junked
Fords in my imediate area available for parts!
Also, any fellow FTE in my surounding area; northern
New-Brunswick, Canada? Oui, je parles francais! :D
....


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

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

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




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

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