fordtrucks61-79-digest Monday, April 27 1998 Volume 02 : Number 232



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979
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: Engine weights (wars?) [John MacNamara ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Engine weights (wars?) ["John F. Bauer III" ]
Re: The old engine war again... [Dennis Pearson ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Deacon" ]
is it just me [jniolon uss.com]
RE: The old engine war again... [Sleddog ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
FE oil pressure relief plug [John MacNamara ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Engine weights (wars?) [John MacNamara ]
Re:Truck Mileage and misc. [ballingr ldd.net (WILLIAM L BALLINGER)]
Re: is it just me [Ken Payne ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["SGT WILLIAM A WHITED"
RE: The old engine war again... [Sleddog ]
360_460 Swap / Apology ["J.Scott Harkema" ]
Hard Hot Starting...get a real good battery [George Herpich
Re: FE oil pressure relief plug [sdelanty sonic.net]
[none] [Jay & Barb Schwenk ]
Re: Hard Starting [Ractrk002 ]
Re: 360_460 Swap / Apology [Ractrk002 ]
RE: FE oil pressure relief plug [DC Beatty ]
Steve gets a web site [sdelanty sonic.net]
Dana 60 Hubs [BDIJXS ]
"New" 460 [A64F100 ]
Re: FE oil pressure relief plug [John MacNamara ]
Re: The old engine war again... ["Bill Beyer" ]
Question on Fe Tear down [Joe DeLaurentis ]

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

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

Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 10:59:09 -0700
From: John MacNamara
Subject: Re: Engine weights (wars?)

sdelanty sonic.net wrote:

> >anyway, $ for $, the 390 will be cheaper to build now, but the 460 will
> >give you the most bang for your buck down the road. it is more work to do,
> >but imagine the pride you'll have afterwards!
> >
> >and i still do not beleive that the 460 is heavier than the FE. one day i
> >think i'll have to put them on the scale.
> >
> >sleddog
>
> A friend of mine has a cheap cherry picker and I've helped him pull
> motors on a couple of trucks with it, including a late 60's FE390 and
> a '77 460. The FE was pretty scary on the light duty hoist, but was
> managable. The 460 was more than that little hoist could handle. Someone
> had to stand on the back of the hoist at all times to keep it from
> flipping over and it generally scared the hell out of us. We got
> it out without anything "bad" happening, but I had to clean my underwear
> afterwards... If I ever have to help Tom pull another 460 with that hoist
> the manifold and heads come off first!
>
> Based on the engine pulling "fearometer" using the same hoist, I'd wager
> good money that the 460 is a fat 50-100lbs heavier than an FE.
> An aluminum intake sheds another 50+ lbs off the FE too..
>
> How about some of You guys out there that are rebuilding Your motors
> getting out the bathroom scale and weigh some parts?
> Dave Williams engine weight list is good, but some of the sources and
> weighing conditions are vague and it's hard to know if You're comparing
> apples to oranges...
>
> We need a good truck engine weight FAQ for the Ford-trucks page.
> Everybody get Your scales out!
>

Hello: FYI, the FE weighs in around 625 lbs and the 460 a whopping 720lbs, so
there is a penalty of approximately 100lbs. I assume both have cast iron
intakes. This information came from the Ford High Performance magazine special
Hot Rod Magazine did in 1987.

Hope this helps solve the weight war.

Thanks
John MacNamara

78 F250 4X4 Supercab (400M replaced with a 460)



+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:02:03 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

Gary, one of us has been using starter fluid in a closed room again...cause
I just don't get this post!

- ----------
> From: Gary, 78 BBB
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: The old engine war again...
> Date: Monday, April 27, 1998 6:18 AM
>
> > From: "Michael Connor"
> > Subject: Re: The old engine war again...
> > Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 09:41:39 -0700
>
> > it. I went to a 400M when the 351 crapped out, and put all Edelbrock
>
> That's it MIke, I'm quitting the list if we can't be more accurate in
> our discussions..................There never was a 40.............:-)
> You did that on purpose just to see if we were awake right? Ok, Ok
> I'm just kidding, dang! you guys take all the fun out of it with all
> these disclaimers................
>

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 14:26:35 -0400
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Re: Engine weights (wars?)

Just for kicks, does that mag list the weight of a 300 I6 for comparison?

John

>Hello: FYI, the FE weighs in around 625 lbs and the 460 a whopping
720lbs, so
>there is a penalty of approximately 100lbs. I assume both have cast iron
>intakes. This information came from the Ford High Performance magazine
special
>Hot Rod Magazine did in 1987.
>
>Hope this helps solve the weight war.
>
>Thanks
>John MacNamara
>
>78 F250 4X4 Supercab (400M replaced with a 460)
>


+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:44:54 -0700
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

Thanks for your message at 12:28 PM 4/27/98 +0000, Gary, 78 BBB. Your
message was:
>> From: "Peters"
>> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 08:02:50 +0000
>> Subject: Apology......
>
The 429 is the same block. Where would you put the potential of a 1970
vintage 429(stock 2-barrel). Should the proper setup involve head/valve
work? I've heard the 429 is quicker than a 460 (given of course everything
else being equal). I have a 429 and I am trying to decide if it goes into
my 73 Mustang or a 62 stepside. Would it be a better truck engine or
should I go for a 460 in the pickup (I have access to one)? Decisions,
Decisions.


>The reason many of us prefer the 460 is due to availability and it's
>the cheapest way to get 400# of torque at 2000 rpm with no fuel
>economy penalty, that's right, NO FUEL ECONOMY PENALTY!. People who
>claim it's more of a gas hog than the 360 or 351M or 400 haven't
>really paid much attention to reality. A poorly tuned 460 will eat a
>lot of gas as will a poorly tuned 360 or 351m or 400 but a properly
>tuned 460 will give you an economical run for your money and 400# of
>torque to boot and parts are easier and cheaper to find etc..
>

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1970 Marquis 429
1973 Mustang 302 (tired)
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:04:45 -0700
From: "Deacon"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

From: Bill Beyer
>Gary, one of us has been using starter fluid in a closed room
again...cause
>I just don't get this post!

Cheeses Bill! If everyone could be funny like us, we'd loose our
place in the world of list! It's OK Gary. Your jokes have gotten better
in the last year. There was a time I couldn't tell your jokes were funny
either! :)


Deacon
deconblu gte.net
=============================
Nuke the unborn baby whales.
=============================
Deacon's
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home1.gte.net/deconblu/



+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 14:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: jniolon uss.com
Subject: is it just me

or did anyone else notice that the archieve numbers have jumped from
220 something to #1 and then to 231 ??? and the index at the top is
gone...
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:15:03 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: The old engine war again...

460 for the pickup. the cubes aid torque at lower rpms. special head
valve work? no, just the normal 3 angle will do fine, or a 30 deg intake
will do if you want even more bottom end, at a possibly slight decreasee of
top end. the normal also includes grinding away the thermacor lump in the
exhaust port. good for 20+hp.

sleddog

oh, is the 429 quicker than the 460? sounds like BS to me. equally
prepared, the 460 should make more power under the curve.

- ----------
From: Dennis Pearson[SMTP:dpearson ctc.ctc.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 1998 2:44 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

Thanks for your message at 12:28 PM 4/27/98 +0000, Gary, 78 BBB. Your
message was:
>> From: "Peters"
>> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 08:02:50 +0000
>> Subject: Apology......
>
The 429 is the same block. Where would you put the potential of a 1970
vintage 429(stock 2-barrel). Should the proper setup involve head/valve
work? I've heard the 429 is quicker than a 460 (given of course everything
else being equal). I have a 429 and I am trying to decide if it goes into
my 73 Mustang or a 62 stepside. Would it be a better truck engine or
should I go for a 460 in the pickup (I have access to one)? Decisions,
Decisions.


>The reason many of us prefer the 460 is due to availability and it's
>the cheapest way to get 400# of torque at 2000 rpm with no fuel
>economy penalty, that's right, NO FUEL ECONOMY PENALTY!. People who
>claim it's more of a gas hog than the 360 or 351M or 400 haven't
>really paid much attention to reality. A poorly tuned 460 will eat a
>lot of gas as will a poorly tuned 360 or 351m or 400 but a properly
>tuned 460 will give you an economical run for your money and 400# of
>torque to boot and parts are easier and cheaper to find etc..
>

1962 Unibody, short box, big window--351C
1970 Marquis 429
1973 Mustang 302 (tired)
1962 short stepside (big empty space under the hood)

+-------------- 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/ ----------+




+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:19:56 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:44:54 -0700
> From: Dennis Pearson
> Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

> The 429 is the same block. Where would you put the
> potential of a 1970 vintage 429(stock 2-barrel). Should the proper
> setup involve head/valve work? I've heard the 429 is quicker than a
> 460 (given of course everything else being equal). I have a 429 and
> I am trying to decide if it goes into my 73 Mustang or a 62
> stepside. Would it be a better truck engine or should I go for a
> 460 in the pickup (I have access to one)? Decisions, Decisions.

The 429 isn't that much different from the 460 in my experience but I
think it will rev better so might be a better choice for the mustang
if it needs an engine. I've had 429 and 460 both in a 75 van and
they both ran pretty well. They certainly both have plenty of torque
for a truck but the 460 has an edge in torque so is preferred for the
truck application. I wouldn't be afraid to use either one myself and
it would depend on my finances and time and future plans for
restorations etc. which one I put it in. If you plan to put
"something" else in the truck and the mustang both then by all means
put the 429 in the stang and get a 460 for the truck. Allow at least
$1500 for any planned rebuild even for a stock engine though when
considering cost options. I always bolt them in and run them till
they drop and then rebuild but some say to rebuild first. Depends on
your wants and needs I guess :-)

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 Lincoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!

- -- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:22:42 -0700
From: John MacNamara
Subject: FE oil pressure relief plug

Hello: Got a question for those really knowledgeble FE engine
builders. The machinist who is rebuilding my sideoiler block doesn't
remember how the oil pressure relieve pieces are installed. there is a
spring and a plunger in the gallery located in the lower left hand
portion of the block. Which goes in first the spring or the plunger?
Also I think there is a question on the orientation of the plug, head in
or out.

Hope someone can help, as i couldn't find any reference to this in my FE
manual.

Thanks
John MacNamara

78 F250 4X4 Supercab


+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:27:40 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

> From: "Bill Beyer"
> Subject: Re: The old engine war again...
> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 11:02:03 -0700

> Gary, one of us has been using starter fluid in a closed room
> again...cause I just don't get this post!

Just teasing about the "M" thing attached to the 400. We've tossed
this around a bunch and a few still have to nitpick. It's going on
on the bronco list too so I probably got confused about which
argument I was teasing about. As we all know the 400, like the
chicken, came first and then was modified to the stroke of the 351
and thus the "M" (or egg) :-)

I personally don't care what anyone calls it, just responding to
someone else's nitpicking :-)


78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 Lincoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!

- -- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:45:39 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

There now y'see it was me all along! I've got a mind like a steel sieve!
Musta been the 40 that threw me off! Thanks for the clarification...now if
I could just figure out how to get the new "child proof" cap offa my
Prozac...

- ----------
> From: Gary, 78 BBB
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: Re: The old engine war again...
> Date: Monday, April 27, 1998 8:27 AM
>
>
> Just teasing about the "M" thing attached to the 400. We've tossed
> this around a bunch and a few still have to nitpick. It's going on
> on the bronco list too so I probably got confused about which
> argument I was teasing about. As we all know the 400, like the
> chicken, came first and then was modified to the stroke of the 351
> and thus the "M" (or egg) :-)
>
> I personally don't care what anyone calls it, just responding to
> someone else's nitpicking :-)

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 12:05:40 -0700
From: John MacNamara
Subject: Re: Engine weights (wars?)

John F. Bauer III wrote:

> Just for kicks, does that mag list the weight of a 300 I6 for comparison?
>
> John

John:

No, unfortunately all the articles were written on the various Ford V8's.

Sorry:
John

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:15:14 -0500
From: ballingr ldd.net (WILLIAM L BALLINGER)
Subject: Re:Truck Mileage and misc.

The posts on this subject have been top-notch. I'm proud of the 13.9 mpg I
got out of my truck last week back and forth to work. It's geared perfectly
(4.56) for around town trolling but I doubt that highway mileage would be
any better. It turns about 2800 to 2900 at 60 mph. This is as good town
milage as my fuel-injected 302 '83 Grand Marquis delivered, but of course it
would do 25 mpg on the highway. The truck weighs in at 4800 lbs, and I like
to pull good through the gears, so what do you guys think? The Q-jet is a
fantastic carb, even with a weak cylinder and horrendous blow-by running 4
miles each way, the tailpipes are chalky white. Power? It has it by the
spadeful.

Gearing and tuning to your purpose is the key to economy and satisfactory
power. Around town running differs greatly from highway use, which differs
from putting aroung logging trails. Cubic inches geared and tuned properly
do all of this best. Someday I might run a 385 series, but to be truthful
the 390 ( which I'm beconing more convinced that I have in my truck ) has
saisfied me in every job I ever asked of one. But my expectations might
differ from yours. I've found the 302 a little overmatched for any thing but
light-duty highway commuting in trucks, and will have to work harder to do
the job that a larger displacement motor will breeze through, delivering in
many cases lower economy.

Does any one know if 360's had slipper skirt pistons? When I had my pan off,
I noticed that I had slipper skirts like I've always thought that only 390's
on up had. If it's a 390 it would explain why it pulls so good.

This old truck is turning out to be a real jewel, though I've had to put a
lot of time in on it that I should have spent doing other things that are
catching up to me now. It gets in your blood and keeps you wanting to pull
it in in the middle of the night to tighten something up. The payoff is when
I pull up to work next to all of the new trucks and here the "Look at
THAT..." from everyone. And they freak, when I take someone for a ride, at
how tight and powerful it is. To look under it and not have any oil spots
under it. Yeah it's been worth it. I want to thank everyone who answered my
questions and gave me advice and helped me track down how originally
equipped it still is. You all deserve a lot of credit for another classic
rig still serving a useful purpose, and serving it ( for me ) as well as a
new truck. Now, when the wife gets over this little interlude, I think I'll
start looking for an old Panhead to restify......

1965 F250 4X4 Loookin good and pulling strong with 13.9 mpg in town.(I'm amazed)
1995 Contour 80,000 miles and about to get a new clutch.


Ballinger
ballingr ldd.net

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 16:28:05 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: is it just me

At 02:07 PM 4/27/98 -0400, you wrote:
> or did anyone else notice that the archieve numbers have jumped from
> 220 something to #1 and then to 231 ??? and the index at the top is
> gone...

You can blame our list provider. They overwrote my list configuration
files without notifying me after I complained that there had been
more digest problems. I guess they thought they would fix the problems
by trashing my working configurations. I'm hard at work trying to
get the lists working on the new server. So far live lists are working
but I haven't yet gotten digests working. This is my #1 priority as
I'm losing a lot of digests.




+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 98 13:04:41 -0400
From: "SGT WILLIAM A WHITED"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

How did you like the Edelbrock stuff? I have a 390 that I'm going to
rebuilt in about a year. It currently has a 2 carb, I want it to between
screaming and fun to drive when I get done with it.

74 F100 RANGER SUPER CAB 390
- -------------
Original Text
From "Michael Connor" , on 4/27/98 12:41 PM:
To: SMTP3 SMTP3 MCB LEJEUNE[]

Friends,

Let me echo Gary's comments about the fuel economy of the
various engines mentioned.
I've ran the 351M,400M and the 460 in the same truck spanning
a period of over 18 years. The original bone stock 351M got around
10mpg, loaded down or empty, didn't matter, and was GUTLESS.
I know there are guys that like the M's but boys thats all I can say
about it. I went to a 400M when the 351 crapped out, and put all
Edelbrock stuff in it (cam, timing set, lifters, intake, and Carter
9637 carb). The 400 had more power over the 351 but still got the
SAME mileage. The 460 I currently run easily has twice the power
and torque of the M engines and gets the same mileage, about 10mpg.
I'm very pleased with the 460 and would heartily recommend them.
You won't be sorry.


Regards,
Mike
Phoenix, AZ.

+-------------- 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/ ----------+
- -

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 16:43:08 -0400
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: The old engine war again...

a really big hammer usually works for me. got one for the prozac, and one
for the whoever tries to take it away...or is that the vallium...gosh,
maybe i am thinking of the lithium pills again...

- ----------
From: Bill Beyer[SMTP:bbeyer pacifier.com]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 1998 3:45 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

There now y'see it was me all along! I've got a mind like a steel sieve!
Musta been the 40 that threw me off! Thanks for the clarification...now if
I could just figure out how to get the new "child proof" cap offa my
Prozac...

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:51:46 -0700
From: "J.Scott Harkema"
Subject: 360_460 Swap / Apology

I have owned my 76 F-250 4x4 for 20 yrs.When I bought it ,it had a stock 360.
I installed a cast iron 4bbl. intake,Holley 600,El Cheapo ($50)
headers ,2 1/2 "dual exhast and removed (& saved ) the smog equipment.
What a difference! I could actualy beat some of my friends 350 c****s
&360 D****s.
I later installed a 390 W/ 10.5 pistons , 428 CJ cam and aluminum
intake .I switched all my accessories (p/s,a/c, chrome valve covers
headers Etc.) from my 360 to my 390 .Try that with a 460.
I had some success at the local Sand Drags with this motor.(What a
blast 6000 rpm open headers & c****s fading in my mirrors).
I now have a 428 with 10.5 pistons, Melling RV cam,600cfm AFB carb.
aluminum intake and dual exhaust C****s still disappear in my mirrors,
but now its when I have my family with me and we're towing our travel trailer up
Donner Pass.(what a difference 15 yrs. makes)
I don't have any thing against 460s at all, but as a survivor of swapping a
460 for a 6.9 diesel in my Dads 84 f-350 ,I'd rather bolt more power in any day.
As far as power goes its a dead heat with my Dads truck when it comes to towing.
And yes the engines are equiped the same ,the gearing is the same and load is the same.
In closing I feel that what ever floats your boat is fine with me it's your time and money.
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:52:10 -0400
From: George Herpich
Subject: Hard Hot Starting...get a real good battery

I've been sitting back watching all these hard starting posts. I have
gone through the same problems with 335-385 motors among others and went
through the entire starting circuit. The cure for me has always been the
Interstate Megatron battery. There may be others equal to it but I use
nothing but. There's no substitute for raw amperage!
George

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:13:03 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FE oil pressure relief plug

>Hello: Got a question for those really knowledgeble FE engine
>builders. The machinist who is rebuilding my sideoiler block doesn't
>remember how the oil pressure relieve pieces are installed. there is a
>spring and a plunger in the gallery located in the lower left hand
>portion of the block. Which goes in first the spring or the plunger?
>Also I think there is a question on the orientation of the plug, head in
>or out.
>
>Hope someone can help, as i couldn't find any reference to this in my FE
>manual.


John,
Hopefully someone else here will have the info You need sooner,but
if You don't have it in a couple days send a reminder note to me
thursday and I will scan the pages You need from my girlfriends
GEN-U-INE Ford manual for 67 full sized sedans when I see Her this weekend.
It's got full rebuild info for the 390/427's including an oil system
schematic for the side oiler and LOTS of pretty pictures...
I like the 3/4 view of a dual 4-bbl FE427. I sure wish Her car had THAT
option!
You can see the picture at:
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty/show-n-tell/2x4FE427.jpg

Remind me if You still need the oiling info thursday..



Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty/

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
-- Hunter S. Thompson

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 19:51:40 -0400
From: Jay & Barb Schwenk
Subject: [none]

Been reading your mail for about a month now and thought I'd try
posting one.

I'm not a mechanic I don"t fix um, just drive um. In fact I spent
the last 6 years of my SP career chasing speeders up and down I-81
in central NY in my 5.0 Mustang....then thry traded for a Camero
and I retired.

My beautiful beast is a 77 F 150 Explorer Custom w/351M and good or
bad it pushes fast enuf for me....pic on pictorial page of ford-trucks.

Thanks for all the good info I've been able to garner on all the posts
and when I get stuck with a problum I'll holler.
BW

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:17:12 EDT
From: Ractrk002
Subject: Re: Hard Starting

> I have a '53 F100 with a 351C-4V. When the engine is cold I pump the
> gas once to set the choke, crank the starter a few turns and it
> starts up and runs fine. If I stop and shut the engine off and try
> to restart in a short time, it is real hard cranking.

All the 335 and 385 series engines I've had do the same thing, once
the engine is fully warmed up and shut off for roughtly 5 minutes.
If you leave it longer or get back to it sooner it starts fine. This
symptom suggests "Hot Soak" IMHO which can be any of several things
but most often is percolating of fuel into the intake due to heat and
when restarting you have an over rich mixture which causes the
timing to be way too advanced for the mix and it kicks or back fires
on startup. My 460 will sometimes turn over very slowly and could be
a starter heat probelm due to the headers or bad cables as one
suggested, not sure but I suspect it's the same thing as the bronco
and is fuel related as well since both really stink of fuel after
sitting.

78 F-150, 2wd, 460, C-6, 235's
78 Bronco 351M, Np 435, Np 205, 33's
78 Lincoln Town Car, 460, C-6, 19.5' long!


My 302 does the same. Wait a few and she does like to start at all. Never
could figure it out. My friends old 390 did the same ,his 351 never does
though.
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:19:46 EDT
From: Ractrk002
Subject: Re: 360_460 Swap / Apology

I don't understnd why anyone would have to apologize for wanting to swap
between FE's or 385's do what ever yah want. I'm going from a 302 to a 289
for the hell of it and to prove I can get one to beat a BB Chevy.
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:31:47 -0400
From: DC Beatty
Subject: RE: FE oil pressure relief plug

John. Got a side oiler, 'eh? You lucky dog...

All envy aside, Pat Ganahl's "Ford Performance" book has a couple of
pictures of this and I'll try to describe them. There are two pics and th=
ey
both show the spring going in first, then the valve (thicker, spool-type
end first), then the plug. If you can get hold of the book the photos are=

on pages 59 and 64. =


Hope this helps. If I'm unclear let me know.

Drew Beatty
1967 F100 352 (soon to be 390)
1974 Maverick 302




builders. The machinist who is rebuilding my sideoiler block doesn't
remember how the oil pressure relieve pieces are installed. there is a
spring and a plunger in the gallery located in the lower left hand
portion of the block. Which goes in first the spring or the plunger?
Also I think there is a question on the orientation of the plug, head in
or out.

Hope someone can help, as i couldn't find any reference to this in my FE
manual.

Thanks
John MacNamara

78 F250 4X4 Supercab >> =

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:38:21 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Steve gets a web site

Yep folks, this is the moment You've all waited for.. (drumrollll)
I've got a web page up! It's new, it's sparse, it's unexciting,
but if You follow the "F100" link You can see another Fordtruck
members pride and joy... More to come later.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty/

Thanks to Deacon for helping get me pointed in the right direction
when I was ready to do a web page!

Steve
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty/

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
-- Hunter S. Thompson

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:39:56 EDT
From: BDIJXS
Subject: Dana 60 Hubs

I recently found a Dana 60 (rear) out of a 67-72 (not sure which year) F-250
complete with hubs. I have also found 73 F-350 with another Dana 60, and this
one seems to have wider hubs, meaning in might have wider brake shoes. I'm
wondering if the 73 hubs/backing plates, etc. will bolt up to the earlier
model unit? Also, I understand there are 3" wide brakes available for the Dana
60's. Anyone know if they can be used on the 67-72 units? What years/models
did the 3" hubs come out on? Has anyone upgraded from the thinner brakes to
the wider ones?

Thanks!

Colorado Jeff

+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 20:58:49 EDT
From: A64F100
Subject: "New" 460

Well, after being engineless for about a week, I finally bought another motor.
After seeing all that happened to my 400, I decided I'm going to build this
460 the right way. I have it all apart in the garage. I'm going to get the
block magnafluxed, the heads done and a rebuild kit for it from P.A.W. I
looked at the block and the heads and pistons and determined that the block
was a '71 and the heads and pistons were '73. Not being an expert on the 460,
I have a couple questions. Are these good years to have? Also, what is the
comp. rartio for '73? Wouldn't you know it, I have manuals that cover 60-69
and 78-85, but not 70-78. And are there any other suggestions from you 460
experts?

Later,
Scott L

*Keep It Ford Blue*
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:12:05 -0700
From: John MacNamara
Subject: Re: FE oil pressure relief plug

DC Beatty wrote:
>
> John. Got a side oiler, 'eh? You lucky dog...
>
> All envy aside, Pat Ganahl's "Ford Performance" book has a couple of
> pictures of this and I'll try to describe them. There are two pics and they
> both show the spring going in first, then the valve (thicker, spool-type
> end first), then the plug. If you can get hold of the book the photos are
> on pages 59 and 64.
>
> Hope this helps. If I'm unclear let me know.
>
> Drew Beatty
> 1967 F100 352 (soon to be 390)
> 1974 Maverick 302
>

DC: Thanks, makes sense to me. The machinist couldn't remember the
order and I can't fault him for that.

I have the Steve Christ book and I've heard the Pat Ganahl book
mentioned several times and that looks like the book to have.

Thanks again for your help.

John

78 F250 4X4 Supercab
+-------------- 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: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 18:35:07 -0700
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: The old engine war again...

Oh my... the mental image of a guy in a hopped up FoMoCo p/u with a 460 at
WOT while on Prozac...now that's my idea of a nightmare! ;-)

- ----------
> From: Sleddog
> To: 'fordtrucks61-79 ....


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.