|
|
From: owner-61-79-list-digest
To: 61-79-list-digest Subject: 61-79-list-digest V3 #415 Reply-To: 61-79-list Sender: owner-61-79-list-digest Errors-To: owner-61-79-list-digest 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 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 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 - -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 Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 6:54 PM To: 61-79-list 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 \( 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 == 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 ) == 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 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 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 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 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.
|