fordtrucks61-79-digest Thursday, February 19 1998 Volume 02 : Number 101



=======================================================================
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: Compression ratios? ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Compression Ratio!? ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Ignition Disable Switch [George Herpich ]
Headers & Brakes, '71 F100 [George Herpich ]
Tranny gear ratios [steve.peters mts.com]
Re: Ignition Disable Switch [Brian ]
Re:Dies at Idle / hot air intake ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 460 timing and other stuff ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Headers & Brakes, '71 F100 [Ken Payne ]
Photo Radar Block [Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)]
Re: 460 timing and other stuff ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Ignition Disable Switch [ECampb5214 aol.com]
Re: 460 timing and other stuff ["John F. Bauer III"
Re: Photo Radar Block [Stu Varner ]
Front quad shock brackets [james oxley ]
Re: Photo Radar Block [Rustforfun aol.com]
Re: 460 timing and other stuff ["JAMES MERLO" ]
ADMIN: Trim your posts [Ken Payne ]
Re: Compression ratios? ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Ignition Disable Switch ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Ignition Disable Switch ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: EGR & driveablility ["Dave Resch"]
RE: Ignition Disable Switch [Sleddog ]
RE: 73 grille for a 79? [Sleddog ]

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:31:13 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Compression ratios?

> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 19:47:16 -0800
> From: sdelanty
> Subject: Re: Compression ratios?

Sorry Steve, I just realized I forgot to fix the formula in the total
cell. Now I get 449.19 and a CR of 11.64. How's that?

> >> You don't. You get about 11.9:1
> >
> >Steve, I divided 61.02 by 1000 and used .06102 times the CC's to
> >get the volume and I get 10.99:1 now, thank you very much :-) How
> >did you get 11.9:1?

> >424.20 total volume >> Oooooops! :-) Should be 449.19
> >410.59 swept volume
> >038.60 compressed volume
> >10.99:1 ratio >>>>>>> Ooooops! :-) Should be 11.64

Changing it to 4.130 bore with all other specs the same I get:

465.75
426.97
038.78
012.01

Am I getting close?

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:39:04 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Compression Ratio!?

> From: "Harry Jennings"
> Subject: Compression Ratio!?
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 20:06:44 CST

> I don't figure it myself. I use a PC program (from Keith Black). It

I guess I'm just an incurable DIY guy so I use Excell spread sheets
for this kind of stuff. Helps me keep my hand in on the math a
little bit so I don't lose it all in my old age. As you can see tho,
I need a little help once in a while :-)

I could allow for valve relief and piston shape but these become very
subjective without actual volume figures so I just add a bit to the
combustion chamber size to allow for it if I need to. If I were
actually measureing these things I could add them at any time since
it's my spread sheet :-)

> ALSO, 'Car Craft' has a very nice article in the latest issue (March
> '98). BUY IT, BUY IT, BUY IT! THe article is 'How To Calculate
> Compression Ration' on page 84. There is also a 'Special All-Ford
> Reference Section.' It doesn't contain anything about trucks, but it

Peterson's used to publish a ford annual every year with great engine
build up ideas and procedures. I have quite a few old ones but
haven't seen any in a long time. Do they still do that?

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:37:58 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch

Deacon wrote:
>
> From: Antonio
> >Hello ford truck people,
> >My brother in laws car just got stolen, as well as a friends truck and
> this
> >has prompted me to
> > put in an ignition disable switch, activated by the cigarette lighter.
> >From what I understand it is preferable to disable the coil rather
> then
> >starter. Should I put the switch "inline" on the coils positive or
> negative
> >(ground?) wire?
>
> I wish I had better news. The old saying "If they want it, you can't
> stop them from taking it" is true. It's not like on TV. Professional car
> thieves are very good at what they do. But their not very impressive
> people. It's funny, people say "Professional car thief" like they went
> to Thieves University, belong to Taka Youra Stuffa fraternity, have a
> degree in stealing. It doesn't much aptitude to be a Professional car
> thief. There's no standard to achieve Professional car thief over just
> the run of the mill car thief.
> But if there was a way to stop them, they would be easy to spot.
> They would be the ones in the parking lot walking from car to car
> stomping their foot saying "Damn it, this ones got The Club too". :)
> Later!

I agree but......If you do nothing any kid with almost no skills can
steal an old vehicle. The more you do the more professional a thief it
will take.
I think the fuel line idea is best because if a pro grabs it, by the
time he finds out there's something else to deal with he's out in the
middle of the street where he's much more conspicuous. Even the pro may
give up in this case.
It's all about getting the odds more in your favor.

George

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:49:59 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Headers & Brakes, '71 F100

I'm looking for ideas about headers for FE equipped '71 F100's, what's
available and where to get them.

Also, what's involved in converting to front disks. I recall a recent
tread on 4x4, I believe late 70's spindles and brakes were used. Does
this apply to 4x2 also?

Thanks, George

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:15:50 -0500
From: steve.peters mts.com
Subject: Tranny gear ratios

> From: danadeb pacbell.net
> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 17:56:04 -0800
> Subject: Tranny gear ratios

> What are the standard 1st and 2nd gear ratios in a C6 trans?
>
> Also what are the "wide ratio" gear ratios for same?

1st is 2.46:1, 2nd is 1.46:1 (reverse is 2.17:1)

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 07:41:14 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch

What I did on my '64 was to locate the start wire from the ignition
switch, then I spliced in a momentary contact switch. In order to start
the truck, you need to turn the key while pushing on the switch. I
mounted the switch well up inside the dash where it can't be seen nor
found unless you know its location.
Brian

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:29:02 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re:Dies at Idle / hot air intake

> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 21:11:14 -0800
> From: Thomas Hogan
> Subject: Re:Dies at Idle / hot air intake

> Gary,
> This is something I've been thinking about. On some Ford
> aircleaners the snorkel baffel is controlled by a thermostat in the
> snorkel. They do not require vacuum or sensors so they are self

My feeling is that the vacuum control is better since it gives you
hot air only when you need it. My understanding it the hotter the
better at idle and cruise where power isn't a concern and you are way
below max volumetric efficinecy. As you open the throttle on a hill
for instance the vac drops and the door opens to the cold air
automatically as required.

> I also remember an article in Hot Rod many years ago featuring a
> motor that Smokey Yunik (sp?) built that used coolant and exhaust
> heat to heat the incoming air charge to help vaporize the fuel.
> Interesting idea since everyone touts the use of cold air for
> density. He was more concerned with vaporizing the fuel with heat
> so it wouldn't fall out of the intake charge and would burn more
> evenly in the conbustion chamber. No large droplets of fuel.

The article I remember talked about getting 40 mpg with 240 hp in a
small engine using two pumps to "grind" the fuel and atomize it, a
heater to vaporize it and an intercooler to cool it just before the
ports (or a turbo to compress the hot charge, can't remember now)
but it was very sophisticated and hard to keep optimised so it wasn't
expected to become the OEM standard :-) I remember something about
getting the heat right so it didn't blow up in the intake system :-)

Goes to show you it can be done if you really want to. For some
reason the OEM's seem to be balking???

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:49:24 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 19:47:19 -0800
> From: sdelanty
> Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

> You've got it right Gary, cooling the combustion temp is what it's
> all about for EGR. Nitrogen and oxygen won't combine until the
> temps get quite high. EGR doesn't change the A/F ratio and the
> amount of *available* oxygen, since it displaces both fuel and air.
> It's just a flame temp thing...

Thanks Steve for straightening me out on that. If the EGR introduced
the gases in the intake above the carb this notion would have been
more likely correct but then you eliminate the thing we strive for
volumetric efficinecy for, power, right? Seems like complete
combustion at a lower temp is what we really want but complete
compustion sort of dictates the maximum temp doesn't it :-(

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:49:36 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Headers & Brakes, '71 F100

At 07:49 AM 2/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm looking for ideas about headers for FE equipped '71 F100's, what's
>available and where to get them.
>
>Also, what's involved in converting to front disks. I recall a recent
>tread on 4x4, I believe late 70's spindles and brakes were used. Does
>this apply to 4x2 also?
>
>Thanks, George


George,

I wrote up a long (serveral pages) article on this conversion since
its a common question that isn't quickly answered. Its an easy
conversion. Article is on the web site (there are other good articles
there contributed by other list members). Several people have emailed
me during or after the conversion and made suggestions. Its become
a fairly solid guide and its rather satisfying to know its helpful. If
you find it useful and have any additions or suggestions, email them
to me: kpayne mindsrping.com

http://www.ford-trucks.com

Ken

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 06:53:53 -0800
From: Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)
Subject: Photo Radar Block

FYI

There is product on the market that one can spray
on your license plate, dries clear, and prevents
photo radar from getting an image of your plate.

Just read it in an article in 'Automobile' magazine,
and no I don't know which issue, but it features the
Porsche Boxster on the cover as the Automobile
of the Year.

It shows two photos, one with and one without the spray.
Shown as part of a large article on a Auto show,
SEMA I think.

They didn't mention the product name however.

Finally a magazine worth reading at a doctor's office!

Jeff

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:01:20 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

> From:
> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 02:09:09 -0800
> Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

- -- Steve --

> > I'll provide a slight correction if I may...
> >
> > Yes, EGR reduces NOx, but EGR does not reduce the amount of
> > available oxygen, since it displaces both fuel and air. It does

- -- Rick --

> I stated from the beginning that my explanation was simplified and
> missed some engineering points. The original poster asked for a
> definition in laymans terms, not the whole chemical/physics
> dissertation. I have 15 years of experiance in NOx reduction in both

- -- Gary --

Ricky, don't get riled :-) I think you did a fine job of answering
the question and helped me to see this more clearly. Steve has good
ideas as do I but most of us aren't "experts" so I take what people
say and run it through my own grinder so to speak and only keep what
tastes good :-) Sometimes I have to bite my tongue too but we're all
getting smarter by the minute :-) Thanks again for the clarification
:-) I, for one, do appreciate a more technical explaination on such
things (I wasn't the original poster) :-)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:07:11 EST
From: ECampb5214 aol.com
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch

Hi everyone

I was thinking about just putting a aux. fog light in the dash, and just cut
the hot wire (the one that supplys the power), then just splice that to the
switch. A dumb criminal well just ignor the switch (thinking it was for the
lights especially if it says KC on it). Then when he hot wires it, no juice
he strugles, starts swearing, and out here were the houses are 10 feet apart
that well be enough. please respond tell me if my idea holds water. and
which wires to use on my 76 250

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:08:14 -0500
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

I was the original poster and greatly apprecaite the low and high lever
explaination. Thanks all for the great help as always.

John

At 10:01 AM 2/19/98 +0000, you wrote:
>> From:
>> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 02:09:09 -0800
>> Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff
>
>-- Steve --
>
>> > I'll provide a slight correction if I may...
>> >
>> > Yes, EGR reduces NOx, but EGR does not reduce the amount of
>> > available oxygen, since it displaces both fuel and air. It does
>
>-- Rick --
>
>> I stated from the beginning that my explanation was simplified and
>> missed some engineering points. The original poster asked for a
>> definition in laymans terms, not the whole chemical/physics
>> dissertation. I have 15 years of experiance in NOx reduction in both
>
>-- Gary --
>
>Ricky, don't get riled :-) I think you did a fine job of answering
>the question and helped me to see this more clearly. Steve has good
>ideas as do I but most of us aren't "experts" so I take what people
>say and run it through my own grinder so to speak and only keep what
>tastes good :-) Sometimes I have to bite my tongue too but we're all
>getting smarter by the minute :-) Thanks again for the clarification
>:-) I, for one, do appreciate a more technical explaination on such
>things (I wasn't the original poster) :-)
>
>78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
>78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
>
>-- Gary --
>+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
>| Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
>| List removal information is on the web site. |
>+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:29:19 -0600 (CST)
From: Stu Varner
Subject: Re: Photo Radar Block

At 06:53 AM 2/19/98 -0800, you wrote:
>
>FYI
>
>There is product on the market that one can spray
>on your license plate, dries clear, and prevents
>photo radar from getting an image of your plate.

SEE if we can find out the name of this stuff. I want some! I make way
too many 1200 mile round trip journeys through 4 states to my parents in my
FORD (FORD CONTENT)car. This could be useful since I tend to bend the speed
limit 99% of the way.

STU
Nuke GM!

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:07:51 -0800
From: james oxley
Subject: Front quad shock brackets

Howdy

I remember someone was looking for a front swaybar and quad shock
brackets. I was at this 4WD center last night eyeing up a dana 60 front
and asked the guy if he had the quad shock brackets. He just got an
E-mail account and is in central Jersey. He's at ACMTOOL aol.com. His
name is Rick.

OX

PS, I tried mounting up one of my 15 X 8, 8 luggers to the dana 60 front
and it doesn't seem that that much material has to come off to get them
to fit. It was dark, so I could be wrong, but it looks do-able.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:04:21 EST
From: Rustforfun aol.com
Subject: Re: Photo Radar Block

Don't count on these things, most are completly worthless and are great
money makers for the people who sell them. Of course, the only way to find
out is to field test it for yourself.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:32:32 -0600
From: "JAMES MERLO"
Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff

Please explain to me this "low pressure cracking valve" to introduce the O2
into the
catalytic converter - what controls it, where to get one. I am interested
in a similar application.

Jim

- ----------
> From: Caradawc concentric.net
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: 460 timing and other stuff
> Date: Tuesday, February 17, 1998 5:25 PM
>
>
>
> John F. Bauer III wrote:
>
> > Hopefully not belaboring the point as to roll the eyes of list readers,
but
> > in an effort to preserve a performance beefed up engine yet still
comply
> > with newer smog reduction efforts, is it too oversimplified to say that
> > with point #2 (below), the introduction of a universal catalytic
converter
> > into a vehicle that originally did not use one would balance the
increased
> > NOx output as to comply with legal smog output levels?
> >
> > John
> >
> > At 12:57 PM 2/16/98 -0800, you wrote:
> > >John F. Bauer III wrote:
> > >
> > (much deleting of the other points along with my gratuitous rantings
about 70's
> > and 80's emmission controls)
> >
> > > 2. However...more spark advance also tends to increase combustion
> > >temperatures which again leads to an increase in NOx.
>
> Yes, with qualifiers. remember the original posting was an attempt to
simplify the
> explanations.
>
> The only real complaint I have (had I should say) with cats is that I am
from
> California. Cats are a part of the exhaust system which Ca. said cant be
altered.
> This means that if you have a car with single exhaust, you cant convert
to dual
> exhaust, even if you add a cat so that there is one on both sides. Also
if you
> have 1-3/4 inch exhaust, you cant upgrade to 2-1/4 or 2-1/2 because you
would then
> have to use a cat with larger inlet and outlet sizes, ie a non-original
cat which
> is forbidden in CA, you MUST use original equipment or an approved
substitute. and
> yes I am familiar with all the "cat-back" aftermarket exhaust systems, it
does
> little good to have a dual exhaust system behind your cat when all the
gases going
> into it have to squeeze through a single 1-3/4 inch pipe.
>
> In my current situation I have a vehicle that didnt come with cats so I
am free to
> play in that area as I wish. I intend to have 2, three inch cats in my
exhaust
> system (one for each side) along with low pressure cracking valves to
supply the
> supplemental O2. All racers are not mindless brutes with no concern for
the
> environment. My personal goal with my 460 Lincoln powered, 73 F-100 is
sub 13 sec
> 1/4 miles, 20 MPG, and meet current (not '73) emissions standards. It can
be done
> but not with low-ball "lets meet the Govt. regs with minimum cost per
vehicle and
> performance be hanged" engineering. The old saw about "speed is money,
how fast
> can you afford to go" applies here.
>
> Off the soap box, next point
>
> In actuality, one of the best methods of reducing NOx is exhaust gas
recirculation
> (EGR). At part throttle applications, diluting the air/fuel mixture with
O2
> depleted air (exhaust gases) reduces the amount of available oxygen. From
a
> chemical reaction standpoint, the carbon based fuels "want" the oxygen
more than
> the nitrogen does. In an oxygen depleted atmosphere, the fuel hogs the
oxygen
> leaving little for the nitrogen to use in the formation of NOx. Part
throttle
> operation usually implies leaner mixtures which also tend to increase
NOx. One of
> the early "mistakes" in emissions engineering was the significant leaning
of the
> air/fuel mixture in an attemt to control hydrocarbon emissions,
unfortunatly, the
> leaner mixtures caused a huge increase in NOx generation (leaner mixtures
burn
> hotter increasing NOx (see point 2) and leaner mixtures leave more
available O2 in
> the exhaust gases which also increases NOx, a double whammy). oooops!
>
> EGR is all well and good at part throttle applications when full engine
output is
> not required. At full throttle, Air/fuel mixtures are richer (usually)
and so NOx
> production goes down while hydrocarbons go up. Not a major factor in most
cases
> because even lead-footed miscreants such as myself have to keep their
foots out of
> the throttle plates for 99.9% of the time. My biggest complaints against
the EGR
> technology wasnt the basic premis, it was the poor implementation of the
70's and
> 80's. When EGR valves fail open, the motor runs like a three legged dog.
when an
> EGR valve fails closed, NOx emissions skyrocket, neither failure mode is
> acceptable.
>
> Rick Brewster
> '73 F-100, 460 by Lincoln
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:39:57 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: ADMIN: Trim your posts

A common email list courtesy is trimming lenghty posts (go to CNet to
find FAQs about this in the How-To section). When replying to a long
post, please trim the original so that only the portions that are
relavent to your reply are left. Lenghty posts only serve to create
more digests, increases the load on the server and in the long run
costs me money because it increases the drive space requirements
needed for the archives. And last, but certainly not least, we don't
need to see the same post 50 times in all the replies. Who really
needs to reply to 50 lines with a "me too"?

Many lists have policies against untrimmed replies to long posts,
we don't. Please police yourselves.

Thanks,
Ken
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:49:15 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: Compression ratios?

- ----------
> From: sdelanty
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net

> I'm glad I'm not the only one that happens to Gary! Sometimes my brain
> gets it's wheels spinning and someones gotta shove a board under my tire
> to get me going again! (~:

That's gotta hurt!

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:01:47 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch

- ----------
> From: Deacon
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch
> Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 11:39 PM
>
> I wish I had better news. The old saying "If they want it, you can't
> stop them from taking it" is true. It's not like on TV. Professional car
> thieves are very good at what they do. But their not very impressive
> people. It's funny, people say "Professional car thief" like they went
> to Thieves University, belong to Taka Youra Stuffa fraternity, have a
> degree in stealing. It doesn't much aptitude to be a Professional car
> thief. There's no standard to achieve Professional car thief over just
> the run of the mill car thief.
> But if there was a way to stop them, they would be easy to spot.
> They would be the ones in the parking lot walking from car to car
> stomping their foot saying "Damn it, this ones got The Club too". :)
> Later!

Your point is well taken Deacon, but since bad guys aren't known for their
sterling work ethic it also stands to reason and has been proven many
times, that they will take the easiest target. If some a**hole really has a
thing for your truck then yes he will find a way to get it. But if he just
wants a ride then he's gonna look for the easiest possible target. I think
the goal isn't necessarily to make a truck "theft-proof" but to make it
"theft-resistant" enough to make the bad guy keep on walkin' to the next
guys truck ;-)

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 08:53:23 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch

- ----------
> From: sdelanty
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Switch
> Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 7:48 PM
>
> Oh man, I hate to here about someones ride being stolen... )-:
>
> I've been thinking about truck theft lately. (as a potential victim, not
a
> potential thief!)
> With a points type ign, the thief mearly needs to lift the hood, yank
loose
> the hot wire to the coil, attach a 3' wire from the coil to the battery,
hit
> the starter relay to crank it over, and off He goes...
> With an electronic ign it's a little easier to provide a disable switch
for
> the ign electronics.
>
> I'm installing a setup I've used before that uses an electric fuel
solenoid
> and a magentic reed switch mounted in a *secret* location. You have to
stick
> a small magnet in the right spot (on the dash, or wherever) to get any
fuel
> delivery...
> The theif can start it and drive it on whatever fuel is in the float
bowl,
> probably about 2-3 blocks, then the thing dies and He's on foot again...
> It's good for car (truck)jackings too, cuz it gets the thiefs gun out of
> Your face when He drives away in Your pride and joy, but leaves him
stranded
> just a few blocks away... (hopefully in a real conspicuous location, so
even
> the cops can find it)
>
> Just food for thought, there's lotsa ways to protect Yer pride and
joy...

Jacobs Electronics sells a vehicle disabler, they include it with their
"Team" systems, that essentially does the same thing. When you get out of
the truck you flip a "hidden" switch and if a bad guy gets in your truck
and gets it started it runs for about 15 seconds then dies. Just enough to
get him stuck in a (hopefully) very conspicuous location.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:17:38 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: EGR & driveablility

>From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
>Subject: Re: EGR & driveablility
>
>In the never ending search to get my '79 351M running like new,
>I checked my EGR valve tonight looking for the source of an
>inconsistent idle. The manual says if I rev the engine to 2500 rpm
>I should see the EGR move and then oscillate. Nothing moved.
>So I pulled the vacuum line off the EGR valve and hooked up the
>vacuum gauge. Strong vacuum at 2500 rpm. So the valve is bad
>but my understanding is that this will cause high NOx emissions
>but should not affect driveability. Is this correct?

Yo Dale:

If your EGR valve failed closed (valve stuck in the closed position), your
diagnosis would be essentially correct. It would be the same as having no
EGR function, with the resultant effect on emissions, and it should have
little or no affect on driveability (in general, see my note below).

OTOH, if your EGR valve failed open (valve stuck in the open position),
you'd be getting unregulated EGR w/ exhaust gases constantly injected,
which would adversely affect engine operation, particularly at idle,
deceleration, and WOT (where the control systems would normally cut off
EGR).

The only way to know for certain is to remove the EGR valve and examine its
valve port(s). Sometimes, a valve that is stuck partially open is not
readily apparent even then because of the accumulated carbon deposits from
the exhaust. If you can blow air through the EGR valve from one side to
the other when no vacuum is applied to the diaphragm, the valve has failed
open and must be either replaced or blocked off to solve the problem. (Of
course, blocking off or otherwise disabling the EGR valve may not be legal
for sale or use on pollution controlled motor vehicles, blah blah blah...)

If you're really cheap and meticulous w/ an air gun and dry lubricants, you
can sometimes repair an EGR valve that has failed mechanically (valve
stuck). If the vacuum diaphragm is also leaky, though, it is probably not
repairable.

BTW: On my 351M, when I finally got the entire EGR system working according
to spec, it actually improved my cold weather driveability during the first
few minutes in the morning. W/out EGR, even after allowing the engine to
warm up to proper operating temps, if ambient air temp was less than 25F or
so, it ran like crap for the first 10-15 minutes. I'm not sure I can
explain why, except that the warm exhaust gases may be supplementing the
warm air from the snorkel/heat stove to improve cold temp fuel behavior.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:24:36 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Ignition Disable Switch

i think jocobs sells a similiar system (stop theif i think it is called) that disables the ignition after a couple of minutes.

sleddog

I'm installing a setup I've used before that uses an electric fuel solenoid
and a magentic reed switch mounted in a *secret* location. You have to stick
a small magnet in the right spot (on the dash, or wherever) to get any fuel
delivery...
The theif can start it and drive it on whatever fuel is in the float bowl,
probably about 2-3 blocks, then the thing dies and He's on foot again...
It's good for car (truck)jackings too, cuz it gets the thiefs gun out of
Your face when He drives away in Your pride and joy, but leaves him stranded
just a few blocks away... (hopefully in a real conspicuous location, so even
the cops can find it)

Just food for thought, there's lotsa ways to protect Yer pride and joy...


Steve

"Remember, with lunacy comes responsibility;
we have a duty to make life at least a little more
surreal for those whose lives make too much sense."
-- Trygve Lode






+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
| Send posts to fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net, |
| List removal information is on the web site. |
+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:34:46 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 73 grille for a 79?

well, i don't see any other replies, so i'll give it a try.

a while ago i wanted to put my 79's front onto my 77. i got them both
apart down to the radiator support. found out that the radiater support,
and radiator since the supports were different, would need to be changed.
the quarter panels were ok, but everything from the hood latch to the
headlight and signal buckets needed to be changed, which required the
support be changed and the radiators had different mountings, so the
radiator needed to change too. i didn't even get to looking at the
electrical wires to see if the conects would be the same. after they both
sat apart for 2 monthes or so i just put it all back together the way it
was. the bolts holding the grill on were a real b**ch to get to even with
a LONG extension and swivel. lots of cut knuckels.

the conversion CAN be done, but it is a question of being worth it. i know
that the 70's plastic grills can be hard to find in one piece, and the
chrome part is almost always dented really bad, but i did eventually find
good pieces for mine. if you are good at fabricating, a custom tube grill
from other yearss or even other vehicles may be able to be worked into
place, and i have seen many of these in decent shape at the junk yards.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Marc A. Stine[SMTP:mstine eagle.ycp.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 11:56 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: 73 grille for a 79?

Hello list, I've been reading the posts on the list for about six months
now. Now I've run into a problem I think someone out there might be....


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.