 |
|
|
|
|
|
Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages contained in these archives without consent from the respective author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors. Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list 61-79-list); Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:05:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:05:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server To: 61-79-list digest users Reply-to: 61-79-list  ford-trucks.com Subject: 61-79-list Digest V2000 #125 Precedence: bulk ========================================================== Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1961-1979 Truck Mailing List Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the message. ========================================================== ------------------------------------ 61-79-list Digest Mon, 12 Jun 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 125 In This Issue: Re: GM, and gm truck list Re: Bellhousings Re: Carb Size E150 wheels Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Re: E150 wheels Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Re: Carb Size Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Re: E150 steel rims Re: FE swap. Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Cruise o matics 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: Stalling update Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Mercury FE valve covers... Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Re: 78 f250 front axle what is it? Re: 351M FMX Re: 78 f250 front axle what is it? I think I am about to tackle the paint/body work on my 66 Re: 64 Body trim ?? Where will it end.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 11:11:36 -0500 Subject: Re: GM, and gm truck list From: John LaGrone on 6/11/2000 8:33 AM, Ken Payne at kpayne ford-trucks.com wrote: > -snip- > >> anyhow, anybody know of a _chevy_ trucks list to get help on these things? >> I know pretty much zero about them. >> >> scott > > Don't know of any.... the Chevy guys don't have enough > technical savvy to set one up. :-> > > Sorry, couldn't resist. > > Ken Payne Along the same lines, my son has a Monte Carlo with a small block v8. It is basically a throw away engine. No where near as stout as a Ford v8. Oh Ken meant a web site, I thought he was talking about the trucks....... -- 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!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 11:15:29 -0500 From: "Don Yerhot" Subject: Re: Bellhousings I'm currently running an aluminum bellhousing that came form a 82 F150 that had a 300 and a SROD tranny. It's now in my 74 with a 351W and the original cast iron Ford 3 speed. I'm also using the 82 10" diaphram clutch. Gotta love the interchangebility of Ford parts! DonY 65 F250 351W 74 F100 351W < and Azie said: Some bellhousings between cars and trucks carry the same P/N of the years this list covers. I have no idea about later models, but for the 50's and 60's and the 70's this is almost always the case. Now when the toploader was introduced, it carries a larger "snout"(that thing that covers the inputshaft - the large circular thing that goes into the large hole in the bellhousing and is a tight fit), so they aren't interchangeable with the earlier 3 speeds and the T-10 4 speeds. I just discovered this last week while looking in my garage for some things for Stu. I believe in '66(or was that '65) when the all syncromeshed 3 speed was introduced in trucks, that the bellhousing on these also carry that large hole in them, but this is speculation on my part..Some transmissions carry two bolt patterns (small and large).. I have a toploader in my garage(not mine) that has both bolt patterns in it. If you have an FE bellhjousing, then it will fit any FE, but it might not fit any and! all transmissions, but that is easily compared, if both are out of vehicles. That would be the necessary obstacle to overcome, I bvelieve. Azie Magnusson Ardmore, Al.>> ------------------------------ From: "Michael White" Subject: Re: Carb Size Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 11:11:50 -0600 I'm sure if Edelbrock recommends a 600 CFM carb for your engine that it will work just fine for you. The 302 CID can maintain higher RPMs than a 390 FE big block. Your engine would need to run near 7,000 RPMs to make proper use of a 600 CFM carb. If you're sure that your 302 CID will never see RPMs over 6,000, then 600 CFM would be a bit to large for your application. CFM = (Engine CID * Maximum RPM) / 3456 Since this formula assumes a volumetric efficiency of 100%, some adjustments should be made to the final figure unless the engine is a fully modified racing engine. Michael ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I'm following the thread on the carb and am a little confused by the formula > to determine carb size. I have a 76' bronco with a 302 and was considering > putting on an EdellBrock Performace package on it. The package includes a > 600 CFM carb. By the formula on this thread though, that is way too much > carb. ------------------------------ From: "Mike" Subject: E150 wheels Date: (No, or invalid, date.) Seems to me that the 92-up base model F150 wheels are similar to the slotted ones described. I'd suspect a size about 15x5.5 or 6" wide. I always thought they looked pretty cool, too. ------------------------------ From: "Michael White" Subject: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:00:27 -0600 What was the size of the original wheels for a 69 F250? All I can remember was that they were split rims (before I threw them away). How does a "235/85 R16 load range E" compare to a stock tire? Would you recommend using a 6" rim with 4" backspacing, or a 7" rim with 4 1/2" backspacing, and why is one better than the other? What about mixing the 2 different rim sizes on the same truck? Would the truck handle funny if there was a 7" rim on the left/front and a 6" rim on the right/front (using the same tire)? TIA Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:59:09 -0500 Subject: Re: E150 wheels From: John LaGrone on 7/25/2018 12:00 AM, Mike at bigred connect.ab.ca wrote: > Seems to me that the 92-up base model F150 wheels are similar to the slotted > ones described. I'd suspect a size about 15x5.5 or 6" wide. I always thought > they looked pretty cool, too. Be sure and check offset in addition to bolt pattern when swapping wheels. For example the dish may be deeper or not as deep and the wheel may hit on your calipers or your drums or the inner fender workings when you turn. You can ruin your wheels/tires or your brake components in short order. (Guess how I know.) Along this line, I have seen several late 70s Ford pickups with wheels from early to mid 70s full sized Buicks. They are the chrome wheels with the five spoke pattern. These wheels came in at least 6 combinations of bolt pattern, diameter, width, and dish, maybe more. Not for my Ford, but..... -- 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!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:07:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing From: John LaGrone on 6/12/2000 1:00 PM, Michael White at danger csolutions.net wrote: > What about mixing the 2 different rim > sizes on the same truck? Rarely a good idea, especially on the same axle. >Would the truck handle funny if there was a 7" rim > on the left/front and a 6" rim on the right/front (using the same tire)? Very likely. It is usually not a good long term solution to mix and match. The truck may drive OK, but it will likely not stop properly, typically pulling to one side. The narrower wheel will cause the tire tread to not lay as flat as on the wider wheel, giving you less tread on the road or at least a different footprint. You can compensate some by adjusting air pressure, but you are risking tire failure then. Like I said, mixing is not a good idea as a long term solution. -- 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!!!! ------------------------------ From: "wish" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:11:11 GMT Subject: Re: Carb Size OKay guys (generic term including all sexes/genders/species on the list), I think its time to realize that these are just SUGGESTIONS, your needs may change depending on how you drive, what you drive, and what you are looking for. If you don't have a carb at all, or any idea how big of one you need, then this is a good starting place. If you have a carb already, or have friends with SIMILAR setups then you've already got a starting point. Not the same motor necessarily, as what works for my buddy on the track with his 351 Cougar won't work as well for me with my truck since his motor is wilder. These are just suggestions based on calculated air flow requirements. >The 302 CID can maintain higher RPMs than a 390 >FE big block. Heh, I'm sure there's some guys who will take exception to that, any of these motors can be built to handle any number of rpm's, it all depends on applications and such ... > Your engine would need to run near 7,000 RPMs to make proper >use of a 600 CFM carb. If you're sure that your 302 CID will never see RPMs >over 6,000, then 600 CFM would be a bit to large for your application. > Also a 600 is a common sized carb, if you wanted a smaller one you'd be paying a ton of money for one, when a 600 will probably be fine. People do tend to "over carb" motors, putting on way bigger than they need a lot of times (Mustang Monthly did a comparison and "proved" this with an old 289 hi-po). Your best bet is to talk to people who have the stuff and see what they think works best. ps. I'm going through withdrawl, I haven't driven my truck in over a month now! 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 Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com ------------------------------ From: "Southerland, Rich" Subject: Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 11:11:06 -0700 FWIW, the 235/85/16 was the stock size tire (may be still even) on most 80's-early 90's F250-350 4x2's. The load range "E" is the highest load capacity available. (10 ply) It's like night and day comparing them to the old bias stockers... I wouldn't mix rim sizes, but then again I like to rotate. Some people don't. I don't know whether mixing rim widths on the same axle with the same size tire would cause adverse handling, but then again I can't really understand why you'd ask that question. Unless you are planning running 7" in the back and 6" in the front and were concerned about having to use the spare. But then we're back to the same question. If you're running the same size tire front and back, then why buy different width rims? I can think of no reason to do that. Hope I haven't clouded the issue too much... Rich -----Original Message----- From: Michael White [mailto:danger csolutions.net] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 11:00 AM To: FTE List Subject: [61-79-list] Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing What was the size of the original wheels for a 69 F250? All I can remember was that they were split rims (before I threw them away). How does a "235/85 R16 load range E" compare to a stock tire? Would you recommend using a 6" rim with 4" backspacing, or a 7" rim with 4 1/2" backspacing, and why is one better than the other? What about mixing the 2 different rim sizes on the same truck? Would the truck handle funny if there was a 7" rim on the left/front and a 6" rim on the right/front (using the same tire)? TIA Michael ========================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the message. ------------------------------ From: "wish" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:15:47 GMT Subject: Re: E150 steel rims >I've been told by numerous people that '99-down E150 wheels will bolt onto >our older 1/2 ton vans/trucks. The F150 changed bolt patterns when it was >redesigned in '97, but the E150 did not. Don't know if the '00 E150 wheels >will fit or not. > Sounds right ... I saw those rims on a pre-97 van today, and I remember now seeing them on pre-96 F150's running around the University, probably from a "fleet vehicle" purchase, I'd bet the local salvage yards and such can probably come up with some ... 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 Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com ------------------------------ From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick" Subject: Re: FE swap. Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:30:47 -0500 ----- Original Message ----- From: wish Wish wrote: > Thinner ? as in diameter or truly thickness ? Since he runs a machine shop > I'm not sure this is really a deterrant for him. I don't remember if he's got > a manual or an auto, but there's a flywheel on the motor with some adapter bolted > to it to connect it to the pumps. I'm curious as to why an FT application clutch > wouldn't solve the problem of it mating up, or would that have such a big ring > gear that it wouldn't fit in the bellhousing ? An FT tranny and clutch will save him from having to thin the flywheel flange. The following quote is from Steve Christ's book, "How to rebuild your Big Block Ford" " An FT crank can be used in an FE engine (or application) if the crank nose is machined to a smaller diameter (from 1.750" to 1.375"). The rear flange must also be shortened (thinned) 3/16". " end quote. The thicker flange on the FT's was primarily used to better handle the added weight of the FT flywheel and heavy-duty clutch assemblies. Likewise, the extra stout crank nose was designed to run a pto. > He's got the balancer for the motor, they just unbolted it from a corn picker > and pulled it out, everything's there it looks like. If he's got the balancer and all associated pulleys, bracketry, and accessories, then he'll just be able to use those instead of machining the crank nose and using FE parts. > > Almost all FT's > >had a larger oil pump drive shaft, along with matching sized distributors > >and oil pumps. Also, the distributor guide hole in the block of most FT's is > >larger than FE's. If he wants electronic ignition, it looks to me like the > >Pertronics conversion would be the way to go. > > So even the distributor on the inside has a bigger diameter shaft, so swapping > the "guts" from a duraspark unit wouldn't convert it over ? He'll have to use the FT dizzy housing and the shaft. If the point cam will come off the shaft, and he can get the armature back on and indexed properly, then he will be able to convert it to the Duraspark. > He's putting this in an F350 with a GVW of 12,000 lbs ... so I don't think using > FT heads and such to up that low end grunt will really hurt him any ... Personally, I think if he's going to be doing a lot of heavy hauling, he'd be better off with an FT. Jason Kendrick ------------------------------ From: skordik yahoo.com Subject: Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:16:22 -0500 The original tire size with split rims would have been 7.50X16. (I still have a set for my 71 F250) The closest diameter would be a 235/85R16. The wheels on my truck were updated last fall before I drove home to Wisconsin from Colorado. The replacements are a 6 inch rim. Steve Kordik > -----Original Message----- > From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com > [mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Michael White > > What was the size of the original wheels for a 69 F250? All I can > remember was that they were split rims (before I threw them > away). How does > a "235/85 R16 load range E" compare to a stock tire? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:45:11 -0500 From: John Strauss Subject: Cruise o matics The first Ford automatic transmission was the Ford-O-Matic and it was a 3-speed. Later, the Ford-O-Matic became the Cruise-O-Matic and the Ford-O-Matic name was shifted (no pun intended) to a 2-speed (late fifties I think). When the C4 came out (early sixties), Ford started using "Cruise-O-Matic" as a marketing term to refer to any 3-speed automatic trans. When that started, the "FMX" term came along which referred to the original iron case Cruise-O-Matic. This trans was used up until the late seventies. It did not ever come as an OD trans AFAIK. The AOD was based on the C4 (aluminum case) and was introduced around 1980-81 and some transmission guys at first referred to them as an "Overdrive C4". The FMX or Cruise-O-Matic is quite heavy duty, it was offered in trucks up thru the F-350 in the sixties before the C6 came out in 1968. In my 1964 F-Series service manual there are two transmissions listed - 2-speed Ford-O-Matic and Heavy Duty Cruise-O-Matic. Internally, the FMX is more akin to the C6 as it uses a band for 2nd gear only. The C4 uses a band for 2nd and another band for high/reverse. The original Cruise-O-Matic would start in either 1st or 2nd gear, depending on which lever position was chosen. But, in either case, the trans would shift up automatically (i.e. it could only be locked in 1st gear by selecting 1st on the lever but could not be locked in 2nd). Instead of the more common "D-2-1" shift pattern, the Cruise-O-Matic was "D2-D1-L". The shift indicator often had a white dot (D2) and a green dot (D1) on the column instead of "D2" and "D1". But D2 came first on the selection (i.e. right after neutral) and in D2 the trans would start in 2nd and then shift to high. You had to go to what later was commonly "2nd" (the position after "Drive" which on this trans was "D1") in order for the trans to go thru all 3 gears. Conversely, the C4 and C6 would stay in 2nd if 2nd was chosen. I believe the FMX at some time was converted to this configuration but not sure when. I hope this helps clear up some confusion about the Cruise-O-Matic but probably I just muddied the waters even more. _ _| ~~. John Strauss \, *_} jstrauss inetport.com \( Texas Fight! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:18:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Neal De Pape Subject: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar I'll apologize for the off topic post right away. My lame excuse is that this list is the only group that I know of that might be able to answer these questions. Now to the question, I am looking at purchasing a 1969 Mercury Cougar XR7 convertible. I am told that it has a 351 Cleveland in it. Was the Cleveland an option in 1969 for Cougars? I thought only the Windsor was available. Also, what transmission might be used behind this engine? The current owner only knows its a Ford automatic. FTE content: If I buy it, I'll go pick it up in my 1968 Mercury pickup. TIA, Neal DePape 1968 Mercury M(?)-100, 300-6 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: "Chuck White" Subject: Re: Stalling update Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:25:23 -0700 I just wanted to give you people an update on my stalling problem. I replaced the condenser, and the ballast resistor(had a new one laying around) and the coil (I had an MSD Blaster in but I wanted to go back to stock). That was the day before yesterday and so far I have not had a reoccurrence of the problem. Hopefully, it was one of those two things but I am also going to check my fuel filters today even though they have only been on the truck for 1k miles. I want to thank everybody who responded to my plea for help both on the list and by e-mail. It is very cool that we all help each other out when in need. When I showed my wife all the responses she was amazed because she had no idea what the list was about. Again -- Thanks Chuck '71 F-250 390 C-6 ------------------------------ From: "Michael White" Subject: Re: Tire Sizes, Rim Width & Backspacing Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:43:22 -0600 > FWIW, the 235/85/16 was the stock size tire (may be still even) on most > 80's-early 90's F250-350 4x2's. The load range "E" is the highest load > capacity available. (10 ply) It's like night and day comparing them to the > old bias stockers... ~~~~~~~~~~~ Yep, I took the wheels off of my 92 F250 HD 4X4 before I sold it and have been using them on my 69 F250 ever since. They are 16" x 7" Accuride rims with 4 1/2" backspacing and Goodyear Wrangler 235/85/R16 E tires. The old tires now have dry rot cracks on the sidewalls, so I recently ordered a new set of 5 tires. ~~~~~~~~~~~ > I wouldn't mix rim sizes, but then again I like to rotate. Some people > don't. I don't know whether mixing rim widths on the same axle with the > same size tire would cause adverse handling, but then again I can't really > understand why you'd ask that question. > > Unless you are planning running 7" in the back and 6" in the front and were > concerned about having to use the spare. > > But then we're back to the same question. If you're running the same size > tire front and back, then why buy different width rims? I can think of no > reason to do that. > > Hope I haven't clouded the issue too much... > Rich ~~~~~~~~~~~ Since I have two 1969 F250's, it would be nice to have 10 identical rims & tires, but I don't (not yet anyways). If you also count the trailer that I'm currently building using a Dana #60 full floater, then 12 identical tires would be "ideal" for best interchangeability in the future. I do have 5 rims that are 7" wide with 4 1/2" backspacing, 5 rims that are 6" wide with 4" backspacing, and 5 new Goodyear Wrangler 235/85/R16 load E highway tread tires. The new tires will be here soon, and I was wondering which rims they should be mounted on, or if it even makes a difference. I planned on buying another set of 5 (or 7) tires when I can afford it, and wondered if I should buy 5 (or 7) more rims so all 10 (or 12) wheels on both trucks and trailer would be identical, or just mount them on the "other" set of 5 matching rims. My final objective is to be able to tow the trailer with either truck and have that trucks spare tire fit any location on the truck or trailer without any negative effects. If 12 identical wheels are required, then which rim size would be best? Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:34:11 -0700 (PDT) From: "D. DiMartino" Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar I am told that it has > a 351 Cleveland in it. get the VIN #'s and check it out with a manual, or go down to walden books or a store like that and research! have a cafe latte while your there... ===== Daniel DiMartino 1968 F-250 soon to be a 4x4 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:43:11 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar At 03:18 PM 6/12/00 , you wrote: >I'll apologize for the off topic post right away. My >lame excuse is that this list is the only group that I >know of that might be able to answer these questions. Try the Fordnatics link in our links section of the site. Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts ------------------------------ From: "Laura Spencer" Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:56:24 -0500 I don't know about the Cleveland being an option in the 69 Cougars, but I use to own a 69 Cougar with the 351 Windsor. It also had the smoothest 3 speed behind it you could ever imagine. I kick myself everytime I think about when I gave that car to my little brother. Oh...and that Cougar sure ate a lot of Chevy's up. hehehehe Laura ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neal De Pape" To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 2:18 PM Subject: [61-79-list] 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar > I'll apologize for the off topic post right away. My > lame excuse is that this list is the only group that I > know of that might be able to answer these questions. > > Now to the question, I am looking at purchasing a 1969 > Mercury Cougar XR7 convertible. I am told that it has > a 351 Cleveland in it. Was the Cleveland an option in > 1969 for Cougars? I thought only the Windsor was > available. Also, what transmission might be used > behind this engine? The current owner only knows its > a Ford automatic. > > FTE content: If I buy it, I'll go pick it up in my > 1968 Mercury pickup. > > TIA, > > Neal DePape > 1968 Mercury M(?)-100, 300-6 > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://photos.yahoo.com > ========================================================== > To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with > the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the > message. > ------------------------------ From: canzus seanet.com Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar At 04:56 PM 12:06:2000 -0500, Laura Spencer wrote: >I don't know about the Cleveland being an option in the 69 Cougars, but I >use to own a 69 Cougar with the 351 Windsor. Going from memory, the 5th letter of the VIN should be an "M", and should be a 4 bbl carb, I think...but thats no guarantee that the original engine is in the vehicle, and it's a 351C... 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 98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine.... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:46:33 -0500 From: Stu Varner Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/cougdb/ According to the engine decoding sources on this page listed above, the W was the only option in 1969 in both 2 and 4V versions. I see no C's listed. Stu Nuke GM! http://www.ford-trucks.com/~nukegm (for sale!!!) At 02:34 PM 6/12/00 -0700, you wrote: > >I am told that it has >> a 351 Cleveland in it. ------------------------------ From: "davidl" Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:33:44 -0500 sent this sunday will call tue with card ## Let me know you can take mastercard? and how do i do that? do i send you my card # let me know zip code is 60178 David Lindenmayer 12293 north grove Sycamore Il 60178 thanks Dave -----Original Message----- From: Stu Varner To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Date: Monday, June 12, 2000 7:48 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar >http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/cougdb/ > >According to the engine decoding sources on this page listed above, the W >was the only option in 1969 in both 2 and 4V versions. I see no C's listed. > >Stu >Nuke GM! >http://www.ford-trucks.com/~nukegm (for sale!!!) > >At 02:34 PM 6/12/00 -0700, you wrote: >> >>I am told that it has >>> a 351 Cleveland in it. > > >========================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the >message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:34:12 -0500 From: Stu Varner Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar DO NOT SEND ME YOUR CARD NUMBER!!!!!!!! Do not send anyone your card number via email! What are you wanting to buy??? At 08:33 PM 6/12/00 -0500, you wrote: >sent this sunday will call tue with card ## > >Let me know >you can take mastercard? and how do i do that? > >do i send you my card # >let me know > >zip code is 60178 >David Lindenmayer >12293 north grove >Sycamore Il 60178 > >thanks >Dave > >-----Original Message----- >From: Stu Varner >To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> >Date: Monday, June 12, 2000 7:48 PM >Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar > > >>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/cougdb/ >> >>According to the engine decoding sources on this page listed above, the W >>was the only option in 1969 in both 2 and 4V versions. I see no C's >listed. >> >>Stu >>Nuke GM! >>http://www.ford-trucks.com/~nukegm (for sale!!!) >> >>At 02:34 PM 6/12/00 -0700, you wrote: >>> >>>I am told that it has >>>> a 351 Cleveland in it. > ------------------------------ From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Mercury FE valve covers... Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:42:18 -0700 I seem to recall some dim memory of someone on the list looking for Mercury FE valve covers. This guy has some for sale: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.bob2000.com/pinto2.htm Scroll down a little over halfway down the page... "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" ------------------------------ From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 18:45:58 -0700 Easy there Stu...what's so bad about sending your card # via email? You ever buy dinner in a nice restaurant? Ever have the waitress disappear with your card for a little while? Think she couldn't write your # down for use later by her scum-sucking maggot of a boyfriend? Ask me how I know... "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" ----- Original Message ----- From: Stu Varner To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 6:34 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 351 Cleveland in a 69 Cougar > DO NOT SEND ME YOUR CARD NUMBER!!!!!!!! Do not send anyone your card > number via email! > What are you wanting to buy??? > > ------------------------------ From: "Bill Capers" Subject: Re: 78 f250 front axle what is it? Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:09:08 -0400 There should be a 60 cast into the body of the pumpkin near the top of the web where the tubes stick into it.. You can also tell by looking at the u-joints. The u-joints on the 60 are MUCH bigger than the 44. Actually everything about the 60 is much bigger. Bill Capers '78 F150 (with Dana 60 front and rear...) ----- Original Message ----- From: craig taylor To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 3:52 AM Subject: [61-79-list] 78 f250 front axle what is it? > Can anyone on the list help me ID this axle. It came out od a 78 f250, vin # > f26hrce1081. It has disk breaks, large hubs, eight lug and is high pinion. > The numbers on the tag are as follows, 409 D8TA AGG 610040-4. I sure the 409 > is the ratio but want to find out if it is a dana 60 or 44. Thanks, Craig > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > ========================================================== > To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with > the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the > message. > ------------------------------ From: "Bill Capers" Subject: Re: 351M FMX Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:00:37 -0400 I have heard rumors of a 400 Cleveland motor preceding the 351M/400. Perhaps this is what you might find in front of an FMX? Bill Capers '78 F150 ----- Original Message ----- From: NP 540 To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 5:12 PM Subject: [61-79-list] 351M FMX > > > > >From: "wish" > >Seems like DaveR has mentioned a 400 > >with a small block bellhousing pattern > >on it from around that year, can't > >remember if that's a high compression > >version too or not... > > There was a 1973-only M-block 400 w/ the small-block bell housing bolt > pattern > (casting # D3AE). This engine was used w/ the FMX tranny. AFAIK, all other > car > M-blocks used the C6 tranny. I noticed someone recently posted that they > have a > '76 LTD w/ a 351M and FMX, so maybe there was also a big-block bellhousing > for > the FMX, but I have never seen one attached to an M-block. > > In 1971, the first model year they were available, the 400 had decent > compression (9.0:1). Thereafter, the 400 compression ratio was 8.4:1. > > Dave R (M-block devotee) > > > Yep, indeed there was a FMX behind those 351M: I have one > behind the 351M in my (almost dead) 1976 LTD. I am also sure that > they were also behind 351M into 77-79 Thunderbirds and Cougars. > My neighbor also had a FMX behind the 351M on his 1975 Mercury > Montego station-wagon. I know, that FMX is now mine. A friend of mine > also has a FMX behind the 400 with 351C-4V heads with nitrous and > SPECIAL pistons that he often drag-race with; 1977 LTD-II. VERY > fast car!!! :) He likes the FMX because the case is cast-iron; > says it is stonger. Never had problems with it that I know of. > > Now, I need the FTE list wisdom: the axle on my Dana-44 from my > 1979 F-150 4x4 is junk (driver's side). Does the axle part that > goes from the U-joint to the wheel is the same for BOTH sides? > In my Hollander, it says that there were two styles of splines for > those axles. I assume that they meant the splines that goes INTO > the differential. Or is it ALSO the splines that goes to the hubs? > I know one junkyard that have a dana-44 for my truck, but the > driver-side axles has been sold, and I was wondering if the axle > part that goes from the U-joint to the hub is the same as passenger > side, so then, it will be one less part to hunt for. I checked a place > where they sell axles: they want around $200.00 CAN. for complete > driver's side axles, less U-joint. Or anybody had experience with > the places that repair those axles: welding a good piece that holds > the U-joint to the axle? Is this a whortwile repair? Does it hold-ups > well? > > Many thanks! > > Gerry > Vive le FORD! > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > ========================================================== > To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with > the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the > message. > ------------------------------ From: "davidl" Subject: Re: 78 f250 front axle what is it? Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:38:42 -0500 Go to the parts store tell the you want to see the ujiont for a 44 and a 60 then you will tell by looking at the joint. 4.10 or 4.11 not heard of 4.09 take the cover off and check the # on the ring gear or count the teeth on ring and pinion and divide just my thought not my final answer Dave -----Original Message----- From: Bill Capers To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Date: Monday, June 12, 2000 9:23 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 78 f250 front axle what is it? >There should be a 60 cast into the body of the pumpkin near the top of the web >where the tubes stick into it.. You can also tell by looking at the u-joints. >The u-joints on the 60 are MUCH bigger than the 44. Actually everything about >the 60 is much bigger. > >Bill Capers >'78 F150 (with Dana 60 front and rear...) > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: craig taylor >To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> >Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 3:52 AM >Subject: [61-79-list] 78 f250 front axle what is it? > > >> Can anyone on the list help me ID this axle. It came out od a 78 f250, vin # >> f26hrce1081. It has disk breaks, large hubs, eight lug and is high pinion. >> The numbers on the tag are as follows, 409 D8TA AGG 610040-4. I sure the 409 >> is the ratio but want to find out if it is a dana 60 or 44. Thanks, Craig >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> >> >> ========================================================== >> To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >> the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the >> message. >> > >========================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the >message. ------------------------------ From: "Garrett Nelson" Subject: I think I am about to tackle the paint/body work on my 66 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:39:21 -0500 The truck- www.1966ford.com I have a friend that has a spray booth out at his farm and between the two of us and his uncle we are going to gut the truck, do a little welding and repair, and paint it a nice dark shade of blue. I am going to cover the interior with sound deadening while I am at it, and replace all the weather-stripping and misc. small parts like that. I just got my Dennis Carpenter catalog today, and found lots of stuff that should help me out. I have a little bit of experience with body work but have never done a project this big before. Is there anything I should look out for? Anyone have some good advice? And how much can I expect to spend on this project? I got a few quotes at body shops in town ranging from $2,000 up to $10 grand. Tell me I am doing the right thing, this will be using up most of my paychecks for quite a while now. ---Garrett ------------------------------ From: WEDIVE247 aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:08:52 EDT Subject: Re: 64 Body trim ?? In a message dated 6/11/2000 9:55:49 PM EST, Natp244 cs.com writes: << OOPS! I did give you the wrong one. it should be http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fordoldpart.com sorry for the mix-up. Good luck in your search Nate >> Thanks Nate . That one worked more better . Steve ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:02:09 -0400 From: David Wadson Subject: Where will it end.... While I got the oil seal changed in that 351M finally. By jacking the frame way up I was able to get enough clearance to get the oil pan out. Unfortunately in the process we mangled the dipstick. The tube has a brass fitting that screws into the oil pan and the wrench was rounding of the fitting. Not thinking it was too wrong, we bent and broke the dipstick tube in order to get the pan out. I got the kick in the teeth a few days later when I went to the Ford dealer and found out that tube was worth $59. Kick in the teeth #2 - all the trucks in the scrapyard are 2WD models with dipsticks that go into the block at the timing chain cover. Checked our local performance automotive store...351M 4x4 with dipsticks going into the pan....haha! So we're going to try to fabricate a new tube from the old fitting. Final kick in the teeth...I've had a brand new, unused set of flarenut wrenches sitting in my living room for weeks. Why oh why didn't I think of them before I broke the dipsticks. Got my front driveshaft back from being rebuilt...nice and pretty and the slip yoke works great now! As I was installing it and looking at the yoke on the front diff I got a sick feeling that maybe when my mechanic wrote "front drive shaft yoke no good" he may have meant the yoke on the diff. The little tabs (for lack of a better word) on the side of the yoke that hold against the end of the u-joint caps have been broken and pieces of metal welded onto the yoke. The u-joint fits all right in there but I hope he did mean the slip yoke on the driveshaft...it was toasted. I'll have to double check with him. Started on the rear axle to replace the seals. 60 minutes to get one brake drum off (doesn't help when you turn the adjusting wheel the wrong way and then have to back it off even further). The other drum came off no problem...doesn't take much when there's next to nothing left of the brake pads. The axles came out easily and a pair of visegrips were able to mangle the seals enough to pull them out with a slide hammer puller. Time for another kick in the teeth...the ring inside the axle that the seal bottoms out against...big chunk out of it and a good gouge on the inside of the axle. We suspect the previous owner may have broken an axle at some point in time. Whatever the case, I doubt that the new seal will keep the fluid from leaking out and that's probably why that side had a bunch of silicon in there. Luckily I had picked up a couple 2WD trucks last year for parts and we still have the back half of one of them. It gets kind of funny how flippantly you look at the back of the truck and go..."Let's see, remove the driveshaft, take off that brake hose...undo the u-bolts...hey, let's just swap the whole axle out!" I guess after changing the rear main oil seal anything else seems pretty easy... Oh well, as I've been saying for the past month...honey, it'll be ready in two weeks... David Wadson - wadsond air.on.ca"PS1" - 79 F100 ...ground into a million pieces. "PS2" - 78 F100 ...currently alive and kicking. "PS3" - 79 F150 4x4 ...now what have I gotten myself into... Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada ------------------------------ End of 61-79-list Digest V2000 #125 *********************************** ---------------------------------------------------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1961-1979 Truck Mailing List Send posts to 61-79-list ford-trucks.comIf you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send an email to: listar ford-trucks.comwith the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the message. Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com ---------------------------------------------------------- .... 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. 
|