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 #417
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 Monday, November 15 1999 Volume 03 : Number 417



=======================================================================
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 - Fjord related ?
RE: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...
RE: FTE 61-79 - Body lift done-> clutch adj. question
FTE 61-79 - Wrong Torque Specs
Re: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland
RE: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?
FTE 61-79 - NEW TIRES AT LAST!!!
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?
RE: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland
Re: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...
FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351
FTE 61-79 - Choke options
Re: FTE 61-79 - torque specs 240
Re: FTE 61-79 - NEW TIRES AT LAST!!!
Re: FTE 61-79 - Choke options
FTE 61-79 - Prolonging the inevitable
FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...
RE: FTE 61-79 - Choke options
RE: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...
Re: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...
Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351
FTE 61-79 - (no subject)
Re: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:52:58 +0100
From: "Bill Brox"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Fjord related ?

Ok you funny guys....

Norway have built Fjord Trucks for many more years than the US have
exsisted, we call them "Fishing boats". (( I just thought you knew )).
And to those who don't know what a fjord is, it is a very deep inlet.

Bill



- ----------
> From: pdesanto Cinergy.com
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fjord related ?
> Date: 14. november 1999 05:04
>
>
> > From: Dennis Pearson
> > Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Not truck related, but FoMoCo related
> > A car called "Think" HAS to be a luxury vehicle in Norway... :>)
> > But will they eventually produce Fjord Trucks...?
> > Dennis Pearson
> ==================================================================
> Dennis, sometimes you don't say much, but when you do...you bring a smile
to
> my face. :-)
> Phil
>
>
>
> == 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: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:15:56 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...

Your engine is already dead, sorry to say. The 335 engines will self
destruct at some point and low or zero oil pressure is usually a good sign
it's getting ready. Metal shavings of any kind are a VERY BAD SIGN! I've
seen them spit lifters, pushrods, seize the oil pump and other things at
this kind of mileage. I would do two things before driving it again......

Pull the valve covers and check for any sign of bad lifters by rotating the
engine and checking each one. If this checks out Ok then pull the pan, pull
the oil pickup screen and examine both for signs of metal debris. If there
is any sign of this you need to clean the pump, replace the bearings and
maybe even polish the crank if it is still usable. I suspect you will find
either a lifter which has come apart or when you pull the front or rear main
cap you will find a severely scored crank.

This is the only way to "Prolong" the engine's life. If you drive it in
this condition it will fail catastrophically and the engine will be trashed.
If not the next time you start it, the one after that.......failure is
imminent from what you describe :-(

- --
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
- --

> This knock coincided with a change in oil pressure -> the
> gauge used to drop
> to 10 - 15 psi during extended driving, but now drops below
> 10 psi regularly
>
> Ah, I mentioned the peak at the valves/rockers - nasty. Lots of metal
> shavings clogging up everything. Looked much worse than the
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:28:55 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Body lift done-> clutch adj. question

This clutch should be a mechanical linkage with an adjustable rod. When you
lift the body you stretch the distance between the clutch pedal arm and Bell
crank arm so the rod between the clutch pedal and bell crank has to be
extended. You may have to have a short piece of rod welded in to reach the
needed length. Don't drive it in this condition unless you are sure there
is some free play in the pedal. If you try to take it up with the threaded
rod you will cause angle changes in the bell crank which may not work well.
You may find you have insufficient bell crank movement to operate the
clutch.

Since brakes are controlled with hydraulic lines and no linkage was
disturbed you must have introduced some air or damaged a line while lifting
it. Did you check your parking brake cable to make sure it is not
interfering with brake operation? This may need adjustment too.

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

> have a couple of things to fix. The clutch is now out of a
> adjustment,
> how do i lower the friction point on the clutch since now it is almost
> right at the top (is the only adj. mechanism the threaded rod by the
> clutch fork?). And my brakes feel not quite a powerful as they did
> before the lift what could have caused this?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:36:29 -0800
From: "O'Connor"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Wrong Torque Specs

Stephen,
Bolt torque has two reasons that know of. It puts a preload on the bolt to
keep it from coming loose. It also keeps it from failing during load. Too
little torque can allow the bolt to stretch too much under load and
fatique. Too much torque can damage the bolt or exceed the bolt limit
under load. We had a pump at work were the bolts kept failing. The
solution was to simply torque the bolts up to a higher limit. The preload
was not enough and they were stretching too much under load. Torque limits
for bolts are determined by the diameter and grade. A 460 V8 most likely
had bigger bolts or a higher grade or both. Retorquing the bolts is
cheaper than rebuilding the engine after a failure. Going from 87.5 to 135
ftlbs of torque is abot a 54% increase. Sounds extreme and the damage may
already be done to the bolts. Maybe you should consider putting in
different bolts! She'll understand.

Tim 66F100
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:33:35 -0600
From: "Norm"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland

George Ramsower wrote

> I wish I could remember which rod magazine I read it from, or even the
> year, but a dude with Ford wrote in one time to clarify this matter. He
> said the M stands for Midland, but it's been called Modified so much, by
> so many, even Ford recognizes the term Mofified as referring to the
> Midland.
> I gave up trying to tell people of this a long time ago, because they
> don't believe it. Nor do lots of ppl believe that Ford made a 400. I've
> had arguments with others that say ALL the M series are 400ci even when
> it's called a 351M.
> Very few people believe the first Windsor was 221ci, fewer believe the
> 427Ford existed, and some ppl think the flathead is still king.
> That was fun!

I have been following this thread for awhile....for no particular reason
then cuz I find debate fun and always enlightining!

Here are a few things I have too add to the fray....351modified.....351
midland...either way ya look at it.....a "M"

Walk into a parts house/salvage yard......ask for a part for a "m".....they
will ask one of two things...first will be this.....is it a 351M...or a
400M?....

The second will be "what year is it"

Ask for a part for a Modified/Midland.....ya will get blank stares!
Tell them that a 400 isn't a M....and they will say this......geeze..with
the exception of the bore and stroke it is identical almost to the 351M!
But yet it doesn't share the same name as it's little brother the 351M?

This folks is hard to argue!
I think that with the exception of a few of us "informed"
individules.....the 351-400 .....is considered just an"M" :-) in most of
todays world....or for that matter since I was a kid!

BTW 221 Windsor....yepp seen em drove one!
427 own one....... and have a friend with 5 more....and if ya haven't road
in a AC Cobra ya haven't lived I say!
FE series stuff is common in these parts!

And as for the flathead......stroked and bored Merc....Edelbrock heads, 6
carbs, Fenton headers, In a 36 Ford coupe that runs high 12's and still gets
20MPG driving to a rod run! I agree......The Flathead is King!
but the 385 series is "In charge"

This is all just my opinion, and is not based on actual fact, or should it
be concieved that I have any clue what I am talking about!
Norm

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:02:27 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland

I generally say "It's not a Windsor" and everyone, even the chimps
understand that :-) But, as long as we are on this, the 400 flywheel is
drilled for a different clutch than the 351 so beware if you try to replace
your clutch that there are two clutches for this engine and the bolt
patterns are different. I still lament the loss of my pressure plate over
this issue. By the time I realized the mistake I had made, my old one was
gone :-( Now I'm stuck with a slipping clutch which is what I was trying to
prevent in the first place :-(

Actually there may be more than two since my original was drilled for my
flywheel and it was definitely a HD clutch, even looked like the 400 clutch
they had but the holes were different. No one else in town had one on the
shelf and I needed to get it back on the road so I took the light duty one
instead of just using my old plate. I figured it needed to be replaced so
that's the choice I made. In retrospect, the surface was glazed but not
worn so the old plate would have been a vast improvement over the new light
duty plate with a new disk and resurfaced flywheel. Next time I will make a
different choice..........:-(

My understanding is that the cleveland was first, 400 second with a modified
block configuration but based on the original cleveland design and the 351M
came out to fill a need for more 351 sized engines. Since the 400 was
already in production they could use the same tooling to make the 351 by
simply changing the crank and pistons and apparently they had more
production capacity on that line than the windsor line so the 400 was
"modified" and made in the "Midland" plant and the blocks were cast in the
"Michigan Casting Plant" so to keep it separate from the "Windsor" and the
"Cleveland" they called it the "M". After all it already had three
witnesses to this choice so why not? The "M" designation was probably
suggested by three different engineering groups, from three different
perspectives and by the time it got into production it was officially
designated the "M" version on paper but the reason for the letter "M" was
not stated so there you go.......:-)

If you want to be 100% accurate with no possibility of being refuted call it
the 335 series engine and you will be correct in any case :-)

BTW, what is the number designation of the Windsor Series? The 302? Does
it even have one?

- --
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
- --

> Walk into a parts house/salvage yard......ask for a part for
> a "m".....they
> will ask one of two things...first will be this.....is it a
> 351M...or a
> 400M?....
>
> The second will be "what year is it"
>
> Ask for a part for a Modified/Midland.....ya will get blank stares!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:06:21 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?


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, Doesn't Jerry live in San Francisco or am I just imagining that? If
he does there are some serious hills in that town. :0)

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:08:41 EST
From: Bad4dFilly aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - NEW TIRES AT LAST!!!

Hey y'all! Well I FINALLY got new tires on Envy yesterday. The old ones
weren't 100% bald yet, but my 'rents didn't want me drivin with them like
that in the rainy season. Anyways, I got the same size cuz the bigger
ones were just too expensive. I got Big-O Bigfoot A/T
cool white lettering on the outside, so now I gotta be extra careful when I
park> and they look really good. Well, just thought I'd let ya know. And BTW,
the people workin there were really nice and Big-0 has a no charge warranty
that includes: if the tire pops, they'll replace it free, all I gotta do is
find the nearest Big-O dealer and they'll give me a new one at no charge

ther LOL> Free flat repair, free balancing, mounting, replacement if wear
becomes bad etc. So anyways, I guess I'll shut up now. C y'all later!
*~*~Lisa and Envy~*~*
*~*~SIlly boys...trucks are for GIRLS~*~*
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 08:26:56 -0800
From: "Jerry Godsey"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?

Nope, I line in Delano, thirty miles north of Bakersfield on Highway 99.
Not a hill in sight until you get to the Grapevine about an hour away. I
doubt very seriously I'll be taking the truck up there!
Blessings,
Jerry Godsey
- -----Original Message-----
From: Hogan, Tom
To: '61-79-list ford-trucks.com'
Date: Sunday, November 14, 1999 8:12 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: 170 c.i. hopups?


>
>
>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, Doesn't Jerry live in San Francisco or am I just imagining that? If
>he does there are some serious hills in that town. :0)
>
>Tom H.
>== 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: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 09:09:44 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...

Howdy List:

My '79 Bronco has 65,000 on the odometer, but considering the accessories
replaced/rebuilt, condition of the rockers/engine metal after glancing under
the valve covers once (trying to fix an oil leak), and size of (unfixed) oil
leak I suspect this has 165,000 miles on it... Possible? Unlikely?


Probably 165,000

The leak is definitely the rear main seal, and the newest ailment the engine
seems to have acquired is a nifty knocking when accelerating around 40 mph.
Main bearing? Timing chain? Or just timing adjust...?


Whith what you mention in the snipped portion and below I think it is
probably Main bearing knock.


Ah, I mentioned the peak at the valves/rockers - nasty. Lots of metal
shavings clogging up everything. Looked much worse than the Ch*vy 350 I
rebuilt in my childhood after cracking a valve...

So, (1) how to prolong death in this engine? Someone said use hotter plugs.
Someone else said just carry a starter and water pump around with you on
longer trips. I would love to try and squeeze one more Baja trip out of the
beast before dropping in a new _______.


Man, you're really looking for punishment aren't you. Do you in any way
want to save/rebuid this motor? If you continue to run it you will likely
ventilate the block. If this is the case I would suggest building the
replacement motor now. A first choice based on simplicity and probability
of passing smog would be a 400. Goes right in place of your 351M. If you
want max power then 460 is probably your best bet. Actually I think the 460
will bolt up to your transmission. The only drawback will be the smog
inspections.

Good luck (and I mean it)

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:11:52 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland

Just to throw the last little bit of confusion into the issue...the 76 M
block I'm rebuilding was cast in the Cleveland engine plant...not Michigan.

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

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Peters, Gary (G.R.)
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 7:02 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Modified or Midland


> the 400 was
> "modified" and made in the "Midland" plant and the blocks were cast in the
> "Michigan Casting Plant" so to keep it separate from the "Windsor" and the
> "Cleveland" they called it the "M". After all it already had three
> witnesses to this choice so why not? The "M" designation was probably
> suggested by three different engineering groups, from three different
> perspectives and by the time it got into production it was officially
> designated the "M" version on paper but the reason for the letter "M" was
> not stated so there you go.......:-)



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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 10:15:18 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...

Yes it does.

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

- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 1999 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging death in my 351M...


> I've heard the 400 can be made to run
> real strong if you know the right tricks and I read somewhere that the 400
> has the longest stroke of any Ford V8. I hope to apply them to my engine
> stand model!



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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 14:18:09 -0500
From: "Gary L. Perry"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351

I fail to understand WHY people wish to run the S--- out
of their trucks, when it's obvious that they need serious work.
Problem is: It takes serious money to rebuild old, worn equipment
and is generally NOT worth time unless, you have some "personal"
love of the vehicle. That's why they make NEW trucks, to replace
the old. If one can't afford to fix-it, then buy something you don't
have to fix! "G"

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

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

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 02:37:19 -0500
From: Dayton Boyd
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351

usually thats why they bother to fix them, because they do love them, i love
my truck!!

cannandale
'78 F250 4x4, 460

hey, havent been on list for a few months, because ive been in Germany, its
nice to be back.. :)

61-79-list ford-trucks.com wrote:

> I fail to understand WHY people wish to run the S--- out
> of their trucks, when it's obvious that they need serious work.
> Problem is: It takes serious money to rebuild old, worn equipment
> and is generally NOT worth time unless, you have some "personal"
> love of the vehicle. That's why they make NEW trucks, to replace
> the old. If one can't afford to fix-it, then buy something you don't
> have to fix! "G"
>
> == 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: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 12:51:18 -0700
From: "Greg Sage"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Choke options

Hey Folks. Have a manual choke in this 78 F150 I bought recently. I have
had some problems with setting it right for starting and when warmed up.
It just comes down to a matter of messing with it constantly to get the
right setting while driving. The wife get's in the truck and is rather
confused as to how the manual choke works, and it stalls on her all the
time. Talked to a buddy about this and he highly recommended an "electric
choke". Never heard of one. I remember when I had my 71 F100 that I was
sick of the automatic choke in it and put in a manual. I loved it, but no
one else could figure it out when I lent them the truck. Now I know the
obvious solution to my problem, "Don't let anyone else drive your
truck"..hehe. Has anyone heard of an electric choke? Anyone have other
solutions? Thanks in advance!

Greg Sage
Calgary, Alberta Canada
78 F150 2WD REGULAR CAB 351M/400 C6

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:10:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Will Vanderstien
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - torque specs 240

hey, i just got me a 1966 shortside fleetbet p/u with
a 240 6 cyl engine. Anyone know what kind of torque
this stout little beast puts out???

=====

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:26:46 EST
From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - NEW TIRES AT LAST!!!

In a message dated 11/14/99 9:12:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
Bad4dFilly aol.com writes:


that includes: if the tire pops, they'll replace it free, all I gotta do is
find the nearest Big-O dealer and they'll give me a new one at no charge >>

Got the same warrenty on my tires from Discount, used it a few times too. 75
mph through open brush is hard on tires. Cool thing is I will never have to
buy tires for Tweety again. If they start to get worn, I just go to one of
those "Do not Reverse, Severe Tire Damage" and back up. If they ask what
happened, tell em it was dark and the light in the sign was burned out. Dont
think thatl happen though, as I seem to poke stuff through the sidewalls from
wheelin long before the tread shows any wear.

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 14:13:03 -0800
From: Mike Pacheco
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Choke options

Electric chokes are real common, I have a Edelbrock 600 with an
electric, you can purchase a carb with manual or electric chokes in most
cases.
Mike in Burien
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 15:02:09 -0800
From: "Jeff Norville"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Prolonging the inevitable

Thanks all for the good responses - hoped I was wrong but had concluded the
same. Thanks Gary - found a really bad lifter - though several seem like
they might have hernias. Haven't seen the crank yet, but everything looks
generally unhappy.

Have shopped for new engines, mostly deciding to stay stock with another
351M (though the 400 was tempting, George).

The reason I have put so little into keeping this engine alive were the
distractions that come along with owning an older truck. Suspension work -
had to weld the rear axle to fix a bad lift kit due to the former owner ($),
add-leaf ($$), shocks ($$$) - the body work ($$$$) - etc. Signed off the
engine because I figured it would last for a "while," I'd squeeze blood out
of it while repairing everything else, and finally just put in a new engine.
Then there was the question of WHICH engine...

Guy who did my welding was pretty excited about swapping in an EFI 351
Cleveland - I outgrew that when I realized I would have a very small part in
the process, as the swap would have to be done by a
smog-certificate-wielding magician in California... ($$$$$)

But I'd save in fuel costs, right? Hm.

So I have finally concluded that staying stock and learning all about
carburetors is probably my best, least-expensive, most do-it-myself option.
Should get something better than 10 MPG out of a new engine with a rebuilt
carb, even *with* the smog gear. And reap the satisfaction of making an old
jalopy run clean. And be able to repair it/avoid computers while bouncing
around Baja, roof rack loaded with sea kayaks.....

Jeff "Looking for a Cheap Hoist" Norville
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:02:11 -0800
From: "Josh Assing"
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...

My truck is suddenly eating (losing) oil!

My truck suddenly (really!) started using oil. I don't think it's thru
the rings/valves; as the spark plugs are fine.

For FE engines; is there a common thing that causes rapid oil
lose?

I'm going to change the oil pan gasket this weekend just in case; 2
quarts in less then 500 miles is a lot of oil!.

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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 18:14:53 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Choke options

Electric chokes are a flavor of the automatic chokes. They use an electric
current to heat a coil heats a thermally sensitive element (bi-metal coil
spring?). This element is connected to the choke and as it heats up opens
the choke. I have one on my '76. I like it. Usually you mash the gas
pedal once to set the choke in the morning and then start the truck.

Tom H.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Greg Sage [mailto:gsage home.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 11:51 AM
To: Ford List
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Choke options


Hey Folks. Have a manual choke in this 78 F150 I bought recently. I have
had some problems with setting it right for starting and when warmed up.
It just comes down to a matter of messing with it constantly to get the
right setting while driving. The wife get's in the truck and is rather
confused as to how the manual choke works, and it stalls on her all the
time. Talked to a buddy about this and he highly recommended an "electric
choke". Never heard of one. I remember when I had my 71 F100 that I was
sick of the automatic choke in it and put in a manual. I loved it, but no
one else could figure it out when I lent them the truck. Now I know the
obvious solution to my problem, "Don't let anyone else drive your
truck"..hehe. Has anyone heard of an electric choke? Anyone have other
solutions? Thanks in advance!

Greg Sage
Calgary, Alberta Canada
78 F150 2WD REGULAR CAB 351M/400 C6

== 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: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 18:42:43 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...

Check the rear main seal. If you have a lot of oil dripping out of the
clutch/torque converter inspeciton cover it probably is due for R&R.

Tom H

- -----Original Message-----
From: Josh Assing [mailto:jassing ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 1999 4:02 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...


My truck is suddenly eating (losing) oil!

My truck suddenly (really!) started using oil. I don't think it's thru
the rings/valves; as the spark plugs are fine.

For FE engines; is there a common thing that causes rapid oil
lose?

I'm going to change the oil pan gasket this weekend just in case; 2
quarts in less then 500 miles is a lot of oil!.

- -josh
== 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: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 21:01:53 -0600
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 72 fe motor losing oil...

Josh, Also check the front and rear of the intale manifold for leaks.
The end gaskets will sometimes work loose.

Jason Kendrick



Hogan, Tom wrote:
>
> Check the rear main seal. If you have a lot of oil dripping out of the
> clutch/torque converter inspeciton cover it probably is due for R&R.
>
> Tom H
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 19:30:22 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: Prolonging death 351

At 02:18 PM 14:11:99 -0500, Gary L. Perry wrote:
>I fail to understand WHY people wish to run the S--- out
>of their trucks, when it's obvious that they need serious work.
>Problem is: It takes serious money to rebuild old, worn equipment
>and is generally NOT worth time unless, you have some "personal"
>love of the vehicle. That's why they make NEW trucks, to replace
>the old. If one can't afford to fix-it, then buy something you don't
>have to fix! "G"

So you are of the opinion that new trucks are cheaper to own than
old trucks? Have you ever priced out the cost of replacing an emissions
part on an old truck?? Or a TPS on an "old" truck?? How about a MAS
on an "old" truck?? Maybe you should be spouting your advice on the
"New" truck list.

Let me explain it to you in short words you'll hopefully understand,
this list is about loving and keeping old trucks running. We (as in the
royal We) are here to give advice and moral support on the weakness
"We" have for old trucks. I used to drive a modern truck, aside from a
lack of torque and fuel economy, it was made of less than adequate
stuff. I once tossed a digging bar into the box, it poked a hole in the front
panel. When I bought my '63, I tried to poke a pair of drainage holes in
the bed floor, with the same digging bar, all I managed to do was put a
dent that I could use to drill 1/2" holes.

I use and rebuild "old" equipment because thats my job. And the
parts are still available. Some of us have budgets to live within......

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

------------------------------
....


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.