Return-Path:
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 03:50:22 -0600 (MDT)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V1 #302
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Tuesday, October 21 1997 Volume 01 : Number 302



=======================================================================
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:

[none] [sdelanty sonic.net]
Re: Ammeter [sdelanty sonic.net]
Towe Ford museum. [sdelanty sonic.net]
Engine Identification [Jerry & Lisa ]
Re: Bushings ["JAMES MERLO" ]
Re: 1/2 ton and Bronco front hubs [Brazzadog aol.com]
Re: Plugs and Carbs [dave.williams chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)]
Master Cylinder [Tom Hogan ]
Re: 1/2 ton and Bronco front hubs [Don Grossman ]
Re: Engine Identification [Don Grossman ]
Re: Master Cylinder [Don Grossman ]
C4 or C6 [GEGK00A prodigy.com ( DAN LEE)]
Re: Engine Identification ["deconblu" ]
Re: Plugs and Carbs ["deconblu" ]

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

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:29:35 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: [none]

>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 13:04:29 -0500
>From: "JAMES MERLO"
>Subject: Re: t98 trans
>
>My message was worded poorly. I was looking for guidance on what
>bellhousings that were used on the later model engines would allow me to
>use the t98. I was able to borrow a old Hollander interchange book, but it
>didn't provide any help.
>
>Jim

Lotsa bell housings are available for T-98's.

240-6, 300-6, 289, 302, 351W I believe all use the same bell housing.
Tons of T-98's had 240 or 300's so this one is easy. I may still
have one from a 240-6 lying in the weeds if You are in Northern CA...

FE.(360, 390, 427,etc)I've got one of these in my truck, so I know these
bellhousings exist!

351C, 351M, 400, 429, 460, I *think* all use the same pattern. Someone
educate me if I'm wrong please!
I believe bellhousings for these are also available. Never actually seen
one that I know of, but Im sure the T-18/T-98 was used with at least one or
several of these motors at some time..

Happy motoring,

Steve Delanty

"There are 2 kinds of cars. Fords and can't affords..."
-Edward Towe

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:29:38 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: Ammeter

>Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 21:39:38 -0500
>From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
>Subject: Ammeter
>
>The latest chapter in the never ending saga of the Ford Ammeter.........
>
>Steve your suggestion the other day of using a piece of #10 wire as a shunt
>seemed too reasonable not to try. Besides, I've been kicking this around
>for a couple of weeks. Waiting for a power resistor from radio shack, etc.
>.... it was time to try something!!!!!

Hi Dale,
Yeah, at R values this low, plain old wire is a cheap, easy way to go!


>5) Replaced the #14 with 3 feet of #12 wire, (.002ohms/ft x 3=.006ohms).
>Pretty good meter action. A little more sensitive than my Dad's old '69
>Plymouth. Engine off all accessories, headlights, heater fan, etc. on
>produces about 2/3 scale movement. I still think that a low battery hard
>charge condition will peg the meter, but I'm going to try it this way for
>awhile.
>
>Note: The wire was added to the original shunt wire. I didn't remove any
>of the original shunt. I used crimp connectors. If you solder your
>connections your results my vary.

With resistances this low, obviously many factors can influence the
final *total* resistances. Other wiring in the shunt circuit, connection
quality (crimp, solder, etc), individual meter resistance, wire in the
meter current path, phase of moon, etc can make a big difference in
how the meter reads. It's not a very deluxe meter setup, but it's what
Ford gave us, so we make the best of it I guess...

>Tom,
>I don't think there's any way your shunt resistance is 1.2ohms. Your meter
>may be telling you it is, but don't believe it! Measure your voltage drops
>and currents and calculate your resistance. I'll bet it's very close to
>the .025 that you set out to create in the first place.

Yes, it's very hard to get accurate measurements on this stuff without
a nice expensive milliohmeter, or measuring currents and volt drops and
using the calculator.

Toms shunt description sounds like it should give way less than 1.2 ohms,
and the fact that it works well suggests much less than 1.2 ohms.
Something is wrong with that number...
The article Tom wrote is excellent though, and should help lots of people
fix this odd Ford ammeter problem. It certainly makes one wonder what Fords
reasoning was tho!

Actually though, I'm a volmeter man myself...

Steve Delanty

"There are 2 kinds of cars. Fords and can't affords..."
-Edward Towe

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:29:42 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Towe Ford museum.

I visited a friend in Sacramento this weekend, and one of the many
entertainments She treated me to was a trip to the Towe Ford Museum!

If any of You find Yourselves in Sacramento Ca. this is a pretty cool
place, with *many* old Ford trucks and autos on display, as well as old
tools and accesories and general Ford memorobilia.

The Towe Ford Museum is open 7 days a week from 10am to 6pm.
Closed Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years day.
They are located at:

2200 Front St.
Sacramento, Ca.
95818-1107
Phone: 916-442-6802

Happy motoring,

Steve Delanty

"There are 2 kinds of cars. Fords and can't affords..."
-Edward Towe

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:24:54 -0700
From: Jerry & Lisa
Subject: Engine Identification

Hi all, we were hoping someone could help us decode a VIN. We have been
looking for an FE engine and think we found one in a 1972 F100. We have
never seen one before and would like some tips on identifying an FE. The
engine in this truck had the exhaust crossover on the front of the
engine. Is this a characteristic of this family of Ford engines? The
number is:
F10CE447882

Thanks in advance for any help.

Gerald & Lisa Hoel

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:21:42 -0500
From: "JAMES MERLO"
Subject: Re: Bushings

Don,
I have a 62 1 ton - it has 6 lugs

On that 61-64 down the street, I am in dire straits for: on the left rear
spring, the back shackle bracket. I would love to get the rest of the
related pieces too - shackle, pin, etc. I would be eternally grateful if
you could arrange something like this - I would hope money could be
adequate compensation for such a favor.

Also, since I in the begging position, I was able to acquire the rear
crossmember and the mounting brackets for the rear shocks of this truck (or
at least I lead to believe they were for this truck). I was told - it is
obvious how it attaches - unfortunately not to me. Does this upper
crossmember that provides the upper shock mount point go in front of,
behind or directly above the axle? I really don't see any good holes that
match up. Do the shocks go in front of the axle or behind or stagger? The
lower shock brackets I got mount to the bottom of the U bolts that hold the
springs on - except they seem to have slightly misaligned holes. A picture
would be worth a million words as how this hooks up ( I have the shop
manual and it doesn't provide help.)

Let me know if you could help me with these parts or a picture. Feel free
to contact me here or personally.

Thanks a million,

Jim

- ----------
> From: Don Grossman
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: Bushings
> Date: Monday, October 20, 1997 12:55 PM
>
> My 63 uses cast iron shackles and mounts. The truck was a (well still
> is really) an F-100 4x4. I have replaced so much of the running gear
> with 3/4 ton stuff I just call it an F-250. Anyway the shackles and
> mounts are cast iron. A good spring shop should be able to set you up
> with the correct bushing or if not could make you up a set with rubber
> or poly bushings for ease of future replacement. The big problem I see
> with the bronze bushings is the wear. If you don't keep them well
> greased they will go south really fast. The ones on the rear of my
> truck have enough play in them to cause a rear steer situation.
>
> Speaking of wheels, there is a 61-64 ( I haven't looked that close at it
> since not much is left) 1 ton just down the street. It still has the
> six lug wheels and tires on it. Only things left are the cab, frame,
> rear end and front end. Doors, fenders, interior, bed are all gone. I
> might go over and check it out if you are really in need for a set of
> wheels.
>
>
> --
> Don Grossman
> duckdon pacific.net
>
>
> 63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
> steering, power brakes
> +-------------- 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: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:10:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brazzadog aol.com
Subject: Re: 1/2 ton and Bronco front hubs

I'm sorry I wasn't very clear. I'll try to do better. The '78 F-250 had
nothing to do with the question. I simply brought it up by way of
introduction.

Here is the deal. I have a '71 Kaiser/Jeep Wagoneer with a Dana 30 front
axle and the stock Ford bolt pattern rims all the way around. I've been told
by a a "Jeep guy" that I can swap in a '74-'79 Dana 44 front axle out of a
Wagoneer and keep my bolt pattern if I discard the hub/rotor assembly and use
ones off an early full size bronco ('78-'79). I would feel better about the
swap if the hub/rotor didn't have to come from such a small range of
vehicles.

Now, here is where I'm guessing and need some help. It seems like the front
axle on these years of bronco was the same as the 1/2 ton pickups of the same
vintage. It also seems like the front axle went basically unchanged for
broncos and 1/2 tons until Ford went with the TTB front axle. This would
greatly widen the junkyard possibilities if I'm right, but I don't know what
year this takes me up to either. I also think I remember that the broncos
and 1/2 tons with the TTB were considered Dana 44s and therefore might also
have the same hub/rotor assembly as the '78-'79 bronco that I was originally
referred to. Here again, I don't know what year this takes me up to. So
here is the bottom line -- were bronco and 1/2 ton front axles the same and
if so for how long?

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to your replies. I'm in digest mode
and sometimes have trouble retrieving the longer digests after downloading.

Ben
PS -- I've got a buddy down the street who's working on an old Mercury pickup
and was very excited when I told him I found you guys. You may hear from him
soon.

In a message dated 97-10-20 06:01:06 EDT, you write:


IFS system? Why would you want to change from 1/2 ton to 1/2 ton on the
front end? I could see putting a live axle in place of the TTB or
changing the 1/2 ton TTB to a 3/4 ton with hubs and rotors. any way
76-86 should interchange from the spindle out. Remember the "should"
Look at the parts an do a comparison just to make sure. All the
spindles that I have seen are attached with 5 studs all in the same
pattern. The caliper mount should stay and the hub simply is attached
to the spidle so if the spindle will work so should the hub.

Shake your head a little and share some more information with us on what
you are doing. >>

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:26:00 -0500
From: dave.williams chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: Plugs and Carbs

- -> If the spread bore manifold is so great why don't more people use
- -> them? Why doesn't the industry have a lot of them available?

They do. And are. Almost all GMs and most larger Chrysler products
used spreadbore Quadrajets and Thermo-Quads. Ford used them on some
460s and 351Cs as well.

The QJ and TQ were sophisticated instruments that worked very well for
both street and performance use, but Holley has had the speed market
locked in ever since they eclipsed the Strombergs in the early '60s.
With "performance" and "Holley" synonymous, there are very few Ford
aftermarket manifolds to buck the trend. Offenhauser is the only
manufacturer to offer a full line of spreadbore intakes.

A Holley is a pathetic piece of pot metal compared to a ThermoQuad or
Quadrajet, but that's not relevant to marketing.


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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:18:23 -0700
From: Tom Hogan
Subject: Master Cylinder

Well, It looks like it may be time for me to delve into the world of
brakes. I believe the master cylinder went out on my 76 F-150. I
checked and the big resivoir (front disk circuit?????) is low (empty!).
As the problem came up I noticed that sitting still with my foot on the
brake the pedal would slowly travel to the floor. The last time I had a
similar problem it turned out to be the MC. I looked tonight and I
don't see where the fluit is going. None showing on either of the front
brake assemblies or wheels. None on the rear end. None near the MC. I
checked at my last oil change 6 months ago (no I don't drive it much,
it's 1.1 miles to work now so I walk a lot) and the resivoir was full.

Two questions:
1. WHERE IS THE BRAKE FLUID GOING????!!!! Could it be going into the
booster and would this cause a problem?

2. Is there any advantage to putting a 1 ton MC in place of the 1/2 ton
unit? I checked and the 1 ton has a larger piston but it looks like the
flange may be slightly different and the brake lines connected on the
other side from the 1/2 ton MC.

I'll probably start work this weekend, after I teach my wife how to help
bleed the brakes. "Ok honey, push the pedal twice and HOOOOLLLD
IT..........


Tom H
San Francisco, California
76 F-150 SuperCab 390FE
96 Windstar 200 hp 3.8L (Wife's Hot Rod)

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:31:03 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: 1/2 ton and Bronco front hubs

Ok, lets start here,

Does your 71 have disk or drum brakes? Sure the 44 can go under your
truck with no problem. The little catch here is if you want to go with
disk or drum brakes. If you want to keep the drum brake set up you
would just have to add the hub, drum, and backing plate and keep the
spindle that came with the 44 housing. If you want to go with disk
brakes (which would seen like the thing to do since you are upgrading
anyway :) ) You will need to get the knuckle, spindle, hub-rotor
assembly caliper support and caliper. truck pieces will work here
also. Some of the earlier TTB (DANA 44) parts will work but I am not
sure what year they changed the parts. Run by the local friendly parts
house and check the bearings needed for the 79 and earlier dana 44 and
80 and up TTB dana 44. If the wheel bearings are a match you might be
in luck. The next thing to check is the spindle bolt pattern. On the
earlier drum brakes Ford used 6 spindle attaching bolts just like the
Ch*vy dana 44. It is actually easier to put Ch*vy calipers on a Ford or
Jeep front end( you can use the Ford hub and rotor for the wheel bolt
pattern). When Ford went to disk brakes in 76 on the 4x4's they changed
the spindle bolt pattern to 5. If you want to keep Ford calipers you
will need to change the knuckle and spindle. It would be a little more
work but it you get a complete donor axle you will have all the parts
you will need. If you wanted to go to the 8 lug pattern you could use
Ch*vy parts because the are a direct bolt in for the 6 lugs on the 1/2
ton Chebs which would then bolt right on to the Jeep housing.

Looking at a TTB diagram here.... I do see one little problem with the
TTB Dana 44. The caliper support bracket is intigral with the steering
knuckle. The spindle bolt pattern and the hub and rotor look right. To
be on the safe side I would start looking for 79 and earlier parts.
Dodge parts can interchange the same BTW.

Mo Later
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
steering, power brakes

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:34:54 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: Engine Identification

Jerry & Lisa wrote:
>
> Hi all, we were hoping someone could help us decode a VIN. We have been
> looking for an FE engine and think we found one in a 1972 F100. We have
> never seen one before and would like some tips on identifying an FE. The
> engine in this truck had the exhaust crossover on the front of the
> engine. Is this a characteristic of this family of Ford engines? The
> number is:
> F10CE447882
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> Gerald & Lisa Hoel

Just look to see if the intake runs under the valve covers. If it does
you have an FE. Another good way is to look for the #352 cast into the
block just to the right of the water pump on the front of the block just
under the head.

- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
steering, power brakes

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:41:17 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: Master Cylinder

Tom Hogan wrote:
>
> Well, It looks like it may be time for me to delve into the world of
> brakes. I believe the master cylinder went out on my 76 F-150.
snip

> Two questions:
> 1. WHERE IS THE BRAKE FLUID GOING????!!!! Could it be going into the
> booster and would this cause a problem?

I have no idea, and YES.

> 2. Is there any advantage to putting a 1 ton MC in place of the 1/2 ton
> unit? I checked and the 1 ton has a larger piston but it looks like the
> flange may be slightly different and the brake lines connected on the
> other side from the 1/2 ton MC.

The one ton o fun MC should bolt right up. You might need some adapters
for the change in brake line diameter but that should not be a problem.
I know a 3/4 ton will change over just fine and the 1 ton shouldn't be
much different, just a little extra brakeing ;)

> Tom H
> San Francisco, California
> 76 F-150 SuperCab 390FE
> 96 Windstar 200 hp 3.8L (Wife's Hot Rod)

You don't live like down town do you?

Laters
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
steering, power brakes

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 01:08:11, -0500
From: GEGK00A prodigy.com ( DAN LEE)
Subject: C4 or C6

My '53 F100 has a '71 Torino engine and tranny. The engine is a 351C-
4V and I think the tranny is a C6. I found it sitting in a garage in
So. Ca., where it had been for 20+ years. The engine runs great and
doesn't seem to have any problems (aside from water and fuel pumps
and carb which I have replaced). The tranny on the other hand leaks
from every seal, I have added transmission sealer just to keep it
together until I get the truck cleaned up. At that point I will
rebuild or replace the tranny. Since most of my transmission
experience is with sticks, I can't tell the difference between a C4
or C6. Can someone tell me how to determine whether I have a C4 or C6?

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

Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:25:49 -0700
From: "deconblu"
Subject: Re: Engine Identification

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.wrljet.com/engines/fe.html Here's some good information on the
FE at the Ford Engine Workshop. A good place to bookmark too. Has some of
the best Ford engine information on the Internet (wish it was mine)!

> F10CE447882

C doesn't show up in my Chilton but a G is a 302. Don't put much weight in
Chilton, it has been known to be wrong.

Remember if you contact (i.e. send e-mail or sign a guest book) a site, say
you seen it on our list!

Deacon Blues deconblu gte.net
================================================
Visit The Deacon Blues Homepage
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home1.gte.net/deconblu/
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dragonfire.net/~site/tbirdknights/

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:12:37 -0700
From: "deconblu"
Subject: Re: Plugs and Carbs

> They do. And are. Almost all GMs and most larger Chrysler products
>used spreadbore Quadrajets and Thermo-Quads. Ford used them on some
>460s and 351Cs as well.

Good You and Gary remember Ford using Q-Jets. I don't feel like the Lone
Stranger!

> The QJ and TQ were sophisticated instruments that worked very well for
>both street and performance use

I just rebuilt my first Q-Jet. It started out pretty frustrating at first,
but once I started recognizing the parts and what they do, it assembled
solidly and works great.

> A Holley is a pathetic piece of pot metal compared to a ThermoQuad or
>Quadrajet, but that's not relevant to marketing.

Its True. After doing this Q-Jet I am impressed compared to the Holley I
rebuilt. The Q-Jet adjust to altitude, has a separate fuel well from the
float bowl. Everything nice and tight. But like I said it started out a real....

---

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.