Return-Path:
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:16:48 -0600 (MDT)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V1 #258
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Friday, October 3 1997 Volume 01 : Number 258



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks Digest
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
fordtrucks61-79-digest-request listservice.net
with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send
email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: Holley Rant [John MacNamara ]
Re: Holley Rant ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
RE: C5??? [Lee Weber ]
Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions? ["John F. Bauer III" ]
Re: The '57 gets Killed... [u0058543 hsc.hac.com]
Re: The '57 gets Killed... ["Jason K. Schechner" ]
RE: The '57 gets Killed... [Tom Hogan ]
9" rearend search [jniolon uss.com]
RE: Holley Rant [Sleddog ]
RE: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions? [Sleddog
Re: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions? [SuperMagot aol.c]
RE: Holley Rant [pharrell bae.uga.edu (Graphics & Research Fabrication)]
Re: I'm confused about Transmission Codes [Clark D Cotten
ADMIN: Other designs submitted for window sticker [Ken Payne
Re: C5??? ["Dave Resch"]
Re: 15" tires ? ["George Shepherd" ]
RE: 9" rearend search [Sleddog ]

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

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

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 10:17:08 -0700
From: John MacNamara
Subject: Re: Holley Rant

Graphics & Research Fabrication wrote:

> Here's the deal. All that Holley mentioned, I had already tried or checked out.
> I had put in a pressure regulator (with a guage), so pressure wasn't the problem.
> Set float levels (new carb, so new floats)..not the problem.
> New lower rated power valve. By the way, I'm sure it's not overtight, but how could
> that cause any binding? The way they're made it doesn't look like it would be
> a problem. I took it off and blew all passages, and installed a really good inline
> filter..so trash isn't the problem. They say it's "just plain flooding".
> True. It's really running rich at idle. It seems to run okay at cruise, but
> main jet size doesn't affect idle. Something I read in a Holley aftermarket book
> suggests placing a small wire in the idle circuit to reduce fuel flow. Holley
> doesn't mention this and I'm wondering how large a wire would do it, and more
> importantly, why would you have to? The book suggests to do this instead of
> enlarging the air bleed size because doing that would really affect too many
> other things. The carb is a 600 cfm 4160 (vacuum secondaries) # 0-9834, which

Pat : For whatever it's worth, I heard a long time ago that this particular carb from
Holley is junk and can't be fixed. I had bought one of these and wound up using it
for parts.

I bought a Holley carb for my 78 460 , however it was the smog one as I live in Calif.,
and it works fine.

Thanks!
John

78 F250 4X4 Supercab
67 GT500
66 Corvette

> is a general replacement carb that comes with a #64 main jets (I believe I
> remember correctly). The 302 is basically stock with a MILD RV camshaft.
> So, Gary (or anybody else), got any ideas?
> -------------------------------
> >From Holley technical support:
>
> > Nothing in the calibration of the carburetor via jets or metering
> > plates will cure the condition that you have described. The
> > carburetor is just plain flooding due to high fuel pressure, float
> > levels, blown powervalve or over torqued powervalve. Debris in the
> > needle and seat as well as blockage of a bleed or orifice would
> > cause the same thing. Check the floats for bouyancy.
> ------------------------------
> Pat
>
> Patrick Harrell
> pharrell bae.uga.edu
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks61-79-request listservice.net|
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:21:27 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Holley Rant

> From: pharrell bae.uga.edu (Graphics & Research Fabrication)
> Subject: Re: Holley Rant
> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 11:41:44 EDT

> really affect too many other things. The carb is a 600 cfm 4160
> (vacuum secondaries) # 0-9834, which is a general replacement carb
> that comes with a #64 main jets (I believe I remember correctly).
> The 302 is basically stock with a MILD RV camshaft. So, Gary (or

Again I ask is it designed for the 302? This is important because
they have several hundred metering blocks for various applications
which affects the idle and transition metering. I tried to alter one
on my 460 and didn't help it much (think I made it worse). I'd have
been much better off to figure out which metering block would best
work and purchase a new one. I notice the new catalog doesn't have
the nice layout of the old one I have which outlines the
characteristics of all the metering blocks so you can kind of figure
it out. I'll try to remember to bring them in tomorrow if I can find
the new one, someone misplaced it :-(

The swift of foot and slow of wit
have more off road experiences

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 10:26:57 -0700
From: Lee Weber
Subject: RE: C5???

I recently had a minor lesson about C-4s and C-5s...According to info in =
this group and some tec manuals a C-5 is "like" a C-4 except that there =
is a torque converter locking mechanism in the system...I bought a tec =
manual for the C-5 and it stated it could be used for the C-4 =
also...Irregardless of bolt patterns and shape of oil pans, I believe =
that the C-4 and C-5 look alike from the outside...BUT if you take the =
oil pan off, the C-5 has has an "auxillary" valve body attached to the =
main valve body..According to the tech manual...This "extra" valve body =
controls the torque converter lockup timing...=20
The trans I have was sold to me as a "C-5", but after some inquiries =
here, info from tech manuals and a trip to the shop to have it =
rebuilt...I am convinced it is a C-4...
Hope this helps
Lee Weber
'56 F-100 - parts all over the garage but coming together...
- ----------
From: A64F100 aol.com[SMTP:A64F100 aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 1997 11:24 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: C5???

I have A question I'd like some input on. I have a 1964 F-100 longbed,
custom cab with a '78 400M out of a Mercury Cougar. I was told that the
tranny is a C5, but soneone else who owns a tranny repair shop says it's =
a
C4-S. Is there a way to tell the difference? I have a Chilton's book =
on
that car, and it calls it a C5. Are there 2 different names for that =
tranny?
Also, I plan to use my truck for minor racing (showing off, basically) =
and
is that a strong tranny for doing so?

Thanks all,

Scott=20




+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
| Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
| Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks61-79-request listservice.net|
+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:35:17 -0400
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions?

I know a few weeks back there was some discussion (which I found quite
interesting and helpful) on vaccum advance/retard on distributors to better
tune engine timing at different RPMs. Does this seem like a worthy postulation?

BTW, I'm pretty new at this stuff, but eager to get my hands dirty.

77 460 with vaccum advance/retard distributor setup, its currently running
roughon startup cold, and once warmed up, engine shakes a bit at idle and
continues to shake until reaching about 15mph when it runs pretty smooth,
revving engine shows smoothness of engine and loss of vibration with the
pedal slightly depressed all the way to the floor. Thus, idling and low
rpms seem to produce engine vibration. If the timing were correct when
advanced for higher rpms, and correct for "middle" rpms (when the distrib.
was not advancing nor retarding), yet the retardation was not occurring due
to lack of correct vaccum, bad vaccum line or failing diaphram, could this
be a likely reason for engine vibration due to poor timing at idle as well
as high HC emissions (failed Ohio E check due to very high HC emissions in
idle test)? Engine mounts appear okay, plugs relatively new, wires
relatively new, harmonic balancer is there (what else can go wrong with the
h.balancer?) happens in park/neutral as well as drive (thus can't be
driveline if in neutral).

Anyone think I just might be on right track? Any other suggestions?

John

96 F150 302, 2WD daily
77 E250 460, 4WD, custom van!

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 10:58:45 -0700
From: u0058543 hsc.hac.com
Subject: Re: The '57 gets Killed...

>This morning the State Patrol called, the person who stole it is in the
>hospital with multiple fractures.....

I'm very sorry to to hear of the loss of your truck. I'v got a 69 F250 thats
been in my family since new. I drove it to high school in the 70's. If it were
to be taken from me I think I'd cry for a month.
My suggention is to find out what hospital that Mo&%# er is in and piss in his
"I.V. bottle". There is no punishment possible by law to compensate for your loss.
Best wishes and keep on trying.
Jeff Wallace in So. Cal.
"69 F250 camper special. w/170,000 mi."
"74 F250 XLT w/90,000 mi. and a Lance camper."

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:15:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jason K. Schechner"
Subject: Re: The '57 gets Killed...

On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, Steve & Rockette wrote:

> Tuesday night, someone stole the '57 ( the one in Mother Kens photo gallery)
> while She Who Must Be Obeyed and I were shopping for a new stereo for the
> '63.
>
> This morning the State Patrol called, the person who stole it is in the
> hospital with multiple fractures. He apparently lost control during a "medium
> speed" chase, dropped a wheel off the pavement on a curve, spun 270 degrees
> into the path of a mid 80's C-word.

Did they tell you what hospital he's in? Sounds like he could use
some more fractures.

> I'm almost too scared to go and look at it, I have spent ten years with
> that old truck, it improved every year, and this winter was going to
> have a 429 stuffed into her.
>
> Oh well..... The best laid plans of mice & men.....

You have my sympathies and condolences. Let's hope the damage
isn't too bad and you can repair it without too much trouble. Those older
trucks (especially Fords) are built a lot tough than newer ones
(especially c%#)ys) so there's still hope. And on the relative bright
side at least they got the loser and he got a bit of what he deserved.

- -Jason

- -----
Jason K. Schechner - check out www.cauce.org and help ban spam-mail.
Let me know if your e-mail to me bounces: Send to FiXXiT bigfoot.com

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:11:49 -0700
From: Tom Hogan
Subject: RE: The '57 gets Killed...

Steve,

My condolences on the '57. I hope none of the innocents in the C**vy
were hurt when this sphincter-brain lost it. I hope that it wasn't
totaled or that you can get reimbursed for it. Too bad capital
punishment isn't still used for low-lifes that would steal someone's
steed. ("Horse thieves get hung in these hyer parts") To bad father
Darwin didn't finish the job of cleaning the gene pool of this loser
scumbag.

Good luck.

Tom H.
(X)
/ \
/ \ (black ribbon of mourning)
______________________________________-
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 09:35:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve & Rockette
Subject: The '57 gets Killed...

Tuesday night, someone stole the '57 ( the one in Mother Kens photo
gallery)
while She Who Must Be Obeyed and I were shopping for a new stereo for
the
'63.

This morning the State Patrol called, the person who stole it is in the
hospital with multiple fractures. He apparently lost control during a
"medium
speed" chase, dropped a wheel off the pavement on a curve, spun 270
degrees
into the path of a mid 80's C-word.

I'm almost too scared to go and look at it, I have spent ten years with
that old
truck, it improved every year, and this winter was going to have a 429
stuffed
into her.

Oh well..... The best laid plans of mice & men.....

Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach
'57 F100 Shorty
'63 F100 Longbox

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

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: jniolon uss.com
Subject: 9" rearend search

Gary, Steve, Clark,

Mea Culpa,

I as usual didn't give enough detail in my first post

The search for the 28 spline is because I already had a Lincoln 9"
rearend with disk brakes that I wanted to use. It and the axles have
been shortened and hung from custon ladder bar suspension on the frame
now.

If I go with 31 spline, I've got the added cost of cutting and
resplining the axles again.. I think the 28 will be strong enough for
the street truck (just crusin...no pulling or racing) but I think the
limited slip will help considerably with the occasionally heavy foot
on the 460 in a pickup...one wheel burnouts are not cool...

Thanks for the info, all ...it should help narrow down my search
somewhat..

And I'm still looking for the 28 spline if it's out there under the
bench


John

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:47:18 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Holley Rant

i can't answer these questions. i have no firsthand knowledge of the 4160
carbs as i have been using the 4150 series. but, can someone tell me what
the difference is between the 4160 and 4150 of same CFM and with vacuum
secondaries?

sleddog

- ----------
From: Graphics & Research Fabrication[SMTP:pharrell bae.uga.edu]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 1997 11:41 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Re: Holley Rant

Here's the deal. All that Holley mentioned, I had already tried or checked
out.
I had put in a pressure regulator (with a guage), so pressure wasn't the
problem.

EDITED FOR SIZE
- ------------------------------
Pat

Patrick Harrell
pharrell bae.uga.edu

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:54:48 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions?

disconnect vacuum line, rotate destributer by hand (carefully) untill the
vibration goes away. if it goes away the timing is way off. of course
moving timing may just compensate for something else. give it a try and
see what happens. it at least will give you more info on the problem.

sleddog

- ----------
From: John F. Bauer III[SMTP:bauerjf ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 1997 12:35 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions?

I know a few weeks back there was some discussion (which I found quite
interesting and helpful) on vaccum advance/retard on distributors to better
tune engine timing at different RPMs. Does this seem like a worthy
postulation?

BTW, I'm pretty new at this stuff, but eager to get my hands dirty.

77 460 with vaccum advance/retard distributor setup, its currently running
roughon startup cold, and once warmed up, engine shakes a bit at idle and
continues to shake until reaching about 15mph when it runs pretty smooth,
revving engine shows smoothness of engine and loss of vibration with the
pedal slightly depressed all the way to the floor. Thus, idling and low
rpms seem to produce engine vibration. If the timing were correct when
advanced for higher rpms, and correct for "middle" rpms (when the distrib.
was not advancing nor retarding), yet the retardation was not occurring due
to lack of correct vaccum, bad vaccum line or failing diaphram, could this
be a likely reason for engine vibration due to poor timing at idle as well
as high HC emissions (failed Ohio E check due to very high HC emissions in
idle test)? Engine mounts appear okay, plugs relatively new, wires
relatively new, harmonic balancer is there (what else can go wrong with the
h.balancer?) happens in park/neutral as well as drive (thus can't be
driveline if in neutral).

Anyone think I just might be on right track? Any other suggestions?

John

96 F150 302, 2WD daily
77 E250 460, 4WD, custom van!







+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
| Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
| Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks61-79-request listservice.net|
+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:38:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: SuperMagot aol.com
Subject: Re: Timing causing engine vibration and poor emissions?

Some one already made a suggestion about the timing, and thats a good one.
Rotate the dsitributor around and see what happens.

Since this seems to be happenning only at idle, perhaps there is something
wrong in the idle circuit in the carb. (Im not a carb man so I have no ideas
here)

Also, check for a missing cylinder. Most "shaking" problems I ever had had
to do with a cylinder not firing. Low coil supply voltage can cause this
too. Use a timing light to check all cylinders for a strong zap.

Also, make sure your idle mixture is ok. When I tune mine up and make it to
lean, it does a mean macarena.

As far as the harmonic balancer a friend of mine had a C!&vy pickup in which
power was done severely. That engine had two issues (one which doesnot apply
to Fords thank god) is the rocker pedastal pin was falling out and the
Harmonic balancer was lose. Yes Lose! The three bolts that held it in where
finger lose! That also caused a mean engine shaking. I tightened em up and
fixed it pretty quick.

Hope this helps...

- - Mike

70 2WD SWB 460 C-6

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 97 16:16:48 EDT
From: pharrell bae.uga.edu (Graphics & Research Fabrication)
Subject: RE: Holley Rant

sleddog sez:
i can't answer these questions. i have no firsthand knowledge of the 4160
carbs as i have been using the 4150 series. but, can someone tell me what
the difference is between the 4160 and 4150 of same CFM and with vacuum
secondaries?
- ---------------------------
The main difference is the 4150 has a secondary metering block just like the
primary except that usually it doesn't have adjustable idle mixture screws.
This is the one folks usually build for racing and will have two accelerator
pumps (called a "double pumper"). The 4160 has a thin metering plate with
holes instead of replaceable jets, and usually has vacuum actuated secondaries.

Oh yeah, Gary I think you're on the right track. This 4160 is a general
replacement carb (like 1850), but I had to assume that it was meant for
the Ford because it came from Summit with the Ford transmission kickdown lever.
It's not one of the later smog models that have the reverse idle screws (that
meter the air instead of the fuel), but my truck doesn't have any smog stuff
on it except the PVC valve.I'm thinking the problem is in the primary metering
block having too large a fuel passage in the idling circuit, but I wasn't aware
that there were different primary metering blocks available. Hope you find the
catalog.

Pat

Patrick Harrell
pharrell bae.uga.edu

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

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 15:17:58 -0500
From: Clark D Cotten
Subject: Re: I'm confused about Transmission Codes

>Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:30:30 +0000
>From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
>Subject: Re:I'm confused about Transmission Codes

>> From: ccotten entergy.com
>> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 09:34:49 CST
>> Subject: Re:I'm confused about Transmission Codes

>> Is there some identifying tag somewhere that would indicate
>> which ratio set is in there? You are right about the rear end
>> ratio. I'm not really happy with the 2.75 rear end and would
>> like to move to a 3.50 but I just haven't gone shopping enough
>> yet for a used 3rd member. I do some towing with this truck
>> and it's a real struggle the way it's geared now. Any
>> suggestions would be appreciated.

>I'm not familiar with all the tag codes and don't have any books on
>it yet but with a 2.75 gearing I would bet you already have this.

>The problem is that the 302 doesn't have enough torque to support
>wide ratios in a heavy vehicle and really needs an over drive. The
>AOD would be a good transplant and would keep your top end close to
>what you have now with the 3.5 gearing (let me go visit my spread
>sheet, just a moment) I'm back, the 2.75 at 60 mph with 29" tires is
>1912 rpm. With 3.50's you would be running 2434 with the
>present setup and with a 25% overdrive it would be 1826 so with an
>over drive you could go even lower and still get good economy but
>would pull much better in the lower gears and it would give you one
>more gear which the 302 really needs IMHO :-)

>I don't know off hand what the overdrive actually is but most I've
>seen listed seem to be around .8 in which case 3.86 would net you
>2145 at 60 with 29" tires but would give you some nice torque in the
>lower gears. 3.55 would give you 1975 which is a slight improvement
>over your current condition in top gear but would give you more
>options in the lower gears. The GT mustangs ran 2000 rpm or so in
>top gear but they had Hypo engines and light vehicle weight and
>weren't designed to tow but they got good mileage at that rpm.

So what you are saying is a complete change out of the existing
transmission to an AOD with something in the 3.55 range for a rear end?
That would give a topend similar to what I presently have with my C6 and
2.75 but give a better range of gearing up to that time.

Is the AOD a direct boltup? Any driveline changes? My '79 ford book
didn't list these rear end ratios for the truck. Are these ratios out
of a car application? This sounds good but you have sure raised a lot
of questions.

Anybody done any of this type of conversions?

Thanks for the help!

Clark Cotten

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

Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 16:29:42 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: ADMIN: Other designs submitted for window sticker

I've received the following two suggestions for the window
static:

" My Veins Run True Ford Blue,
www.ford-trucks.com "

+---------+ (that's a poor-man's ASCII
Tried, True and | F O R D | Blue representation of a Ford
[ ]-------[ ] backend, the actual design
www.ford-trucks.com would be scanned and outlined)

Both are better than the current:
Ford Truck Fan?
www.ford-trucks.com

I also received:

Truck suck? Should've bought Ford...
www.ford-trucks.com

Though I suspect the submission was supposed to be a joke.

Let me know what everyone thinks, perhaps this should go to a
vote? If so, printing will be delayed by a day or two (press
time is supposed to be Monday.) Also, I'm going to check to
see if a Ford blue color will show up through window tint.
If it does, the sticker will change to Ford blue.


Ken

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:40:24 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: C5???

Seems like I read somewhere recently (maybe even this list or one of the
other lists) that the C5 was just a C4 with a lock-up torque converter.
Apparently, the lock-up torque converters were a weak link, and a lot of
rebuild places just ditch the converters when they redo them and resell the
trannies as C4s.

I'd go with the advice of using a C6, if you can get one.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 15:44:09 -0500
From: "George Shepherd"
Subject: Re: 15" tires ?

Shouldn't have to change spindles(unless he wants to go to 8 hole wheels).
Station Wagons had 15" wheels as well as a few big fords and merc's.

- ----------
> From: GMPACHECO aol.com
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: 15" tires ?
> Date: Friday, October 03, 1997 7:33 AM
>
> I have another question that sort of relates to this, I have a friend
that
> has 14" tires on his 73' Ranchero and want to change spindle and tires
to
> 15". What vehicles can he rob from at the junk yard to change this, or is
> there another source to get these parts?
>
>
> Mike In Seattle
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks61-79-request listservice.net|
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 17:06:55 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 9" rearend search

i think the the best thing you could do is call currie enterprises and talk
to the pros. they know the 9" very well and if there isn't available what
you want, they'll be happy to make it for you if they can. i have not
personally done business with them but i have only heard good things.
their ads are in most car/truck mags for the phone number. it may at
least be worth the call to get any even small amount of info.

sleddog

- ----------
From: jniolon uss.com[SMTP:jniolon uss.com]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 1997 8:41 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: 9" rearend search

Gary, Steve, Clark,

Mea Culpa,

I as usual didn't give enough detail in my first post

The search for the 28 spline is because I already had a Lincoln 9"
rearend with disk brakes that I wanted to use. It and the axles have
been shortened and hung from custon ladder bar suspension on the frame
now.

If I go with 31 spline, I've got the added cost of cutting and....


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.