fordtrucks61-79-digest Monday, February 23 1998 Volume 02 : Number 107



=======================================================================
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: Ignition Disable Again ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
62 unibody [FORD-TRUCK-70 webtv.net (RANDY D)]
Carb swap, with much rejoicing! ["John F. Bauer III"
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
460 swap ["Harvey, Blaine" ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! [George Herpich
Re: Body Qestions [Brian ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! [George Herpich
RE: Torque specs on 1978 Ford 460 engine [Sleddog ]
A/C problem [George Herpich ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! ["Michael Redden" ]
Re: Ignition Disable Again [danadeb pacbell.net]
Re: 62 unibody [Dennis Pearson ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 460 swap ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 62 unibody [FORD-TRUCK-70 webtv.net (RANDY D)]
Re: Body Qestions [Tony Marino ]
confused [Jim Craig ]
Clearances in hydraulic lifters [am14 chrysler.com]
Re: confused ["Michael Connor" ]
Re: confused ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Unibody any Body [Don Grossman ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! [Mike Schwall ]
Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing! [Kurt Albershardt ]
Re: Body Qestions [Don Grossman ]
Re: confused [ECampb5214 aol.com]
Jokes from the Oral office [sdelanty ]
Re: Engine swap [sdelanty ]

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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 07:42:10 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Again

> From: danadeb pacbell.net
> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 17:14:09 -0800
> Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Again

> Antonio wrote:
>
> > But back to my question....
> > Effective or not, which coil wire should I interrupt, pos or neg?
>
> I would think that on a point type system the most useful place to
> tie it in would be on the wire from the coil to the dist. If you
> were to put it between the dist and the ignition switch a thief
> could just jumper between battery and "+" side but if the dist side
> "-" was interrupted then the thief would have to cut wires to make
> the connection.

This is a good point and it doesn't have to be points ignition to
implement it either. Any place you interrupt the current in the low
voltage circuit you should be safe from damaging the system so
between the coil and distributor is a good choice since it can't be
easily defeated or even located if you hid the wires in the
convoluted plastic tubing and run your switch wires back through the
bundle going through the fire wall.

Then if you use a reed switch with a magnet as suggested earlier you
can hang a refrigerator clip for receipts or something in precisely
the right place and just move it over a few inches when you get out
of the vehicle and move it back when you get back in. I really like
this idea. NOW, where do you get these reed switches???

> if you have a Duraspark or other electronic system then the trigger
> wires would do the same job and since you are only preventing a flow
> of electricity I don't think there would be any concerns. You could
> also disconnect the power to the ignition module at the same time.

Dana, this post had a bunch of other posts in it with junk in
between. Didn't look like a digest due to junk between each
post. Looked more like a mailer or mail box server concantonation
of some kind. It's large enought to crash most mailers including
Pegasus. Don't know how it happens but I get one of these from
different people now and then. Thought you'd like to know. Iearned
how to deal with them without crashing but I'm sure it's a pain for
others :-(

Does anyone know how this happens. There's a whole bunch of list
server or mail server junk between each post when this happens???

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

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:40:11 -0500
From: FORD-TRUCK-70 webtv.net (RANDY D)
Subject: 62 unibody

Guys all the talk about unibodys got me looking around .Guess what
about a 1/2 mile from me on a small car lot he has a 62 unibody for sale
1500.00 this truck is compleat body is very good shape from what i could
see , it has some rust that has been patched and some that has not .it
seam to run good . he said it needs brakes and brake lines .he said it
has been in his family since it was new and it sit most of the time . it
has 46.000 miles on it he said this is orignal miles??? it even has a
tail gate on it first one i have seen with one . If anyone is entersted
let me know i will let you know how to get here. also there is a 51 ?
52 ? ford truck close by for sale he said make him an offer.
PS; THANKS FOR ALL THE HELP IN THE PAST .
RANDY
1970 F100
351W 2WD
LOVE MY TRUCK :-)

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:34:16 -0500
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

Group:

After fiddling with my Holley 4160 (0-80457 to be exact) on my 77 E250
460/C6 4WD van, I finally ordered an Edelbrock 4106 (4bl, 600cfm, manual
choke, no EGR) from Summit. Since I have a drop base air filter, I had to
also order a "banjo fitting" plus a choke cable. Totaled $230.00 out the
door with OH state sales tax. And if you care to read further, I believe
this was money well spent.

The Edelbrock carb appeared to have less removeable parts. Without
disassembly, it appeared to be just a two piece unit with a top and bottom
section which differs from the Holley's separate fuel bowls, metering
blocks, etc. Single gasket between both top and bottom section is above
fuel bowls. Physical installation was a breeze, totaling about 90 minutes
with the biggest delay involving re-routing the fuel line. The holley fuel
intake was in the front right while the Edelbrock was in the rear left.
Banjo fuel fitting was needed to clear the drop base air filter, and for
the price, I think it could have been a bit longer to provide was easy of
hose clamp installation (I'm just using rubber fuel line at the moment).
The PCV valve connection was in the front as opposed to the rear (Holley).

And then the results, without any additional modifications, engine fired
right up the first time. A slight adjustment of idle rpms after engine
warm up and then it was off for a test drive. First improvement noticed
was off idle throttle response; much crisper than the Holley with hardly
any hesitation. The secondaries appear to kick in earlier than the Holley,
but will need further investigation. Unable to test WOT due to brief
cruise around quiet neighborhood without plates or insurance.

All in all, poured much time and effort into rebuilding and tweaking the
Holley to achieve better response and reliability that I just couldn't pull
off. Edelbrock bolted on and improved all areas of personal concern
without any major modifications.

John

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:03:00 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:34:16 -0500
> From: "John F. Bauer III"
> Subject: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

> All in all, poured much time and effort into rebuilding and tweaking
> the Holley to achieve better response and reliability that I just
> couldn't pull off. Edelbrock bolted on and improved all areas of
> personal concern without any major modifications.

We who own Holleys and want to be ex Holley owners applaud you and
hereby rest our case :-) My swap will be more costly due to manifold
purchase to accomodate the spread bore rochester but I expect similar
improvements along with MUCH improved economy :-) Now if someone
could just invent a diaphram, on demand fuel delivery for the
rochester to replace the floats.....................

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

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 04:10:00 -0500
From: "Harvey, Blaine"
Subject: 460 swap

An unwired friend needs advice on a swap. Seeing all the big big block
messaging, I am hopeful that someone can give him some leads.

Here's the problem. He has a perfect 460 (from a '68 car) that was
swapped into a 77 2-wheel auto F-150, since died of rust.

He wants to install the 460 into a 79 F-250 (C-6) 4x4 with a beat 351M
and has no idea how to proceed with motor mounts, pans etc. because it
the mounting is different than the 2wd donor truck and the '79.

Anyone have any insight/experience on what is involved with this swap?
Was this a factory offering circa 79?

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:04:26 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

> All in all, poured much time and effort into rebuilding and tweaking the
> Holley to achieve better response and reliability that I just couldn't pull
> off. Edelbrock bolted on and improved all areas of personal concern
> without any major modifications.

John, I had similar results. I got the Edelbrock with hopes of easier
tuning, mainly midrange. All you need to do is remove the small covers
on top and change metering rods.
No mess. I am so sick of removing fuel bowls and jet plates to change
power valves and scraping those impossible gaskets.
To my surprise the carb was perfect right out of the box and I never
changed anything.
Other than the 6V setup on my Galaxie I'll never go back to holley.
George

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:14:02 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: Re: Body Qestions

I'm not sure where your located, but here in Minnesota you title the
vehicle by the year of the cab. And if its newer than a '76, you must be
able to pass the emissions for that year. Just a thought I wanted to
give ya incase you have the same type of law, putting a newer body on
could turn into a nightmare.


Brian

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:20:44 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

Gary, 78 BBB wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:34:16 -0500
> > From: "John F. Bauer III"
> > Subject: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!
>
> > All in all, poured much time and effort into rebuilding and tweaking
> > the Holley to achieve better response and reliability that I just
> > couldn't pull off. Edelbrock bolted on and improved all areas of
> > personal concern without any major modifications.
>
> We who own Holleys and want to be ex Holley owners applaud you and
> hereby rest our case :-) My swap will be more costly due to manifold
> purchase to accomodate the spread bore rochester but I expect similar
> improvements along with MUCH improved economy :-)

The Edelbrock is a Carter AFB and will replace a square Holley. I think
they do sell a Rochester clone also. This is a little too chevy-like for
me.
George

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:28:01 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Torque specs on 1978 Ford 460 engine

95-105 ft. lbs. for the 1/2-13 mains. mains do not need loctite. some on
the oil pump bolts may not be a bad idea, though i have never used it here.
these torque to 25 ft. lbs.

sleddog

- ----------
From: dave yerema[SMTP:dpyerema silk.net]
Sent: Monday, February 23, 1998 1:14 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Torque specs on 1978 Ford 460 engine

Hi,

I need to know the torque specs for the main crank bolts and oil pump bolts
(if applicable)....also is there any need to loctite any of these bolts.

Also if there is anyone out there with tips on how to swap out a 360 from a
1970 F-250 crew cab 4X4 to a 1978 460, I would appreciate the help.

Thank-you

Dave







+-------------- 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, 23 Feb 1998 09:31:43 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: A/C problem

We had a hot-humid day recently and I tried the a/c in my newly aquired
'71 F100. It works great but later I looked at the floor on the right
side and saw a good sized puddle of water on the rubber mat. I figured
the drain hose was clogged. No such luck.
It's leaking from between the cases. Someone had tried to fix this with
some kind of cauking putty.
Has anyone had this problem? Befor I discharge the system to remove the
unit I want to be sure there isn't a way around this. Maybe it could be
loosened and dropped enough to get the two halves apart and see if
there's a crack. Maybe RTV is needed too seal the seam.
BTW, it is factory air.
George

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:06:16 -0500
From: "Michael Redden"
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

After having gone to the trouble of getting a donor truck, looks like in
March, from TX, and hopefully getting a C-6 to replace my C-4 (from Serian,
on the list), I've decided to go ahead and get an Edelbrock manifold/carb
setup and some headers. Right now the engine runs fine, haven't done a
compression check, or leakdown check. I only replaced the plugs, did a
trans serv. and changed the oil 3 times after this thing had set for a year
before I bought it. New radiator, too.

I'm thinking though, should I do a more thorough rebuild, while I'm at it,
(besides cleaning things up and replacing gaskets)?
I know, it's only a 302. I'm satisfied with a small block V8.
The truck is a '71 F-250 2x4.

Thanks,

MikeR

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 07:13:25 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Re: Ignition Disable Again

Don't know Gary,

This is the second post I have seen from me, that had someone else as the
originator or someone else's post mixed in with mine.

E-Mail me privately ( danadeb pacbell.net )the next one you receive and I will
see if I can figure it out!

Dana

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 07:38:53 -0800
From: Dennis Pearson
Subject: Re: 62 unibody

Just out of curiosity, where are you located?

As to the question of the price of the 62 Unibody, it's hard to say. I
paid $2300 for mine, but it's pretty darn nice and w/ a great runnin' 351C.
And it's a short box with the large rear window (very hard to find). Oh
yeah, it has a tailgate, but not a very good one, and even the tailgates in
good shape are butt-ugly IMHO.

I would find it very hard to believe that it has 46,000 original miles,
and it is on a lot, which almost automatically means it is not a bargain,
again IMHO. If it is near me, I would try to get a look at it if it is the
short box. Just an obsession with me--looking at Unibody Ford trucks.

Dennis in Kennewick

Thanks for your message at 08:40 AM 2/23/98 -0500, RANDY D. Your message was:
>Guys all the talk about unibodys got me looking around .Guess what
>about a 1/2 mile from me on a small car lot he has a 62 unibody for sale
>1500.00 this truck is compleat body is very good shape from what i could
>see , it has some rust that has been patched and some that has not .it
>seam to run good . he said it needs brakes and brake lines .he said it
>has been in his family since it was new and it sit most of the time . it
>has 46.000 miles on it he said this is orignal miles??? it even has a
>tail gate on it first one i have seen with one . If anyone is entersted
>let me know i will let you know how to get here.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:46:43 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:20:44 -0500
> From: George Herpich
> Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

> The Edelbrock is a Carter AFB and will replace a square Holley. I
> think they do sell a Rochester clone also. This is a little too
> chevy-like for me. George +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts -

One of the fords back around 68 has a rochester from the factory so
it's still cool! :-) Saw it in a list somewhere for carb cross
referencing or something. It was either the 427 or 428 FE engine in
a Galaxy or something but only one or two years.

The carter Thermo Quad, Rochester, or Holley 4165/75 will all fit the
same spread bore manifold flange so we still have some choices.
AFAIK, of these three, only the rochester was ever used on a ford :-)

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

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:55:28 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: 460 swap

> From: "Harvey, Blaine"
> Subject: 460 swap
> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 04:10:00 -0500

> He wants to install the 460 into a 79 F-250 (C-6) 4x4 with a beat
> 351M and has no idea how to proceed with motor mounts, pans etc.
> because it the mounting is different than the 2wd donor truck and
> the '79.

The list goes something like this:

Van or 4x4 oil pan, dipstick and tube
L&L or Advance adapters mounts
Right side truck manifold or headers made for his application
New radiator may be necessary to handle extra heat
All accessory brackets must be made to fit the 460, other engines
have different mount points and shapes.
4X4 transmission tail shaft and housing with 4x4 xfer case adapter
May require new drive shaft, depends on application

Some have installed them without changing the pan, depends on
application.

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

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 10:58:23 -0500
From: FORD-TRUCK-70 webtv.net (RANDY D)
Subject: Re: 62 unibody

this truck is in CHARLESTON WV This lot is a little HOLE IN THE WALL :)
He does work on autos and sells a few cars on the side the truck is a
short -box but not sure about window it is for sale or trade he is a
HORSETRADER :)
He will trade for guns , or about any thing.
it has a 6cyl 3sp on column i heard it run but did not move it and i
agree the tail gate is BUTT
UGLY! I would love for someone to get this truck and restore it these
trucks are disapering
fast (CRUSH)
RANDY
1970 F100

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:01:06 -0500
From: Tony Marino
Subject: Re: Body Qestions

I'm in Ohio. I don't know how it is here for titleing a "home built"
vehicle. I think that it's 25 years. Can anybody tell me for sure? I
would actually like to go older, something around the 64 range, that's why I
was wondering if the body mounts would line up on the 78. Thanks.

Tony Marino
(if near Alliance Ohio, I have a free C-6, and full time transfer to give away!)
(yes, they work!)

At 08:14 AM 2/23/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm not sure where your located, but here in Minnesota you title the
>vehicle by the year of the cab. And if its newer than a '76, you must be
>able to pass the emissions for that year. Just a thought I wanted to
>give ya incase you have the same type of law, putting a newer body on
>could turn into a nightmare.
>
>
>Brian

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:00:24 -0600
From: Jim Craig
Subject: confused

Am I correct in assuming that an overdrive will help mileage? Right now, I
get 13-15mpg with a 351M, C-6, turning 3.08's. My old man's '90 with a 302
and E4OD gets 15-17. Did someone say he gets 15 with a 460?! I want an
overdrive to help highway RPMs, and so I can lower my rear end ratio for
better acceleration :-) What OD will fit the 351M/400/429/460 pattern? And
as far as autos go, where does the computer fit in? Thanks.

Jimbo
77 Supercab 351M
460 collecting dust

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:11:48 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: Clearances in hydraulic lifters

Gary states: I've never seen any hydraulics which required
clearance, has anyone else??

Neither have I.

Azie

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:51:14 -0700
From: "Michael Connor"
Subject: Re: confused

>Am I correct in assuming that an overdrive will help mileage? Right now, I
>get 13-15mpg with a 351M, C-6, turning 3.08's. My old man's '90 with a 302
>and E4OD gets 15-17. Did someone say he gets 15 with a 460?! I want an
>overdrive to help highway RPMs, and so I can lower my rear end ratio for
>better acceleration :-) What OD will fit the 351M/400/429/460 pattern?
And
>as far as autos go, where does the computer fit in? Thanks.
>
> Jimbo
> 77 Supercab 351M
> 460 collecting dust
>

Friends,

I'm gonna guess and say that it may a combination of not only the overdrive
but the smaller (302) engine.

I've had both the 351 and 400 in my 77 F250. The best MPG I've ever gotten
with
either was 11-12 with a manual trans.I generally got about 9-10 average.
13-15 sounds good to me...:-)

I had a ZF 5 speed manual overdrive behind the 400 before it decided to
break its crank on my way to work one morning. Although the overdrive
dropped my RPM at 60mph from around 2700rpm to around 2000rpm
I experienced NO improvement in mileage. Thats right, with the
overdrive, my mileage stayed the same. I tried tweaking the carb, timing,
etc. Still got around 10mpg, but could go much faster.:-) A wise old
mechanic friend may have hit the nail on the head when he said,
"After a certain point it doesn't matter what you do; trying to push a
6000 pound truck through the wind at 60mph is going to take a certain
amount of gas to keep it going. In the case of a carburated full size 4WD
truck, they seem to center around 9-12mpg. The newer fuel injected
engines do a little better; deisels the best at around 17-22mpg."

In my case, I went to a built 460/C6 combo. I get the same mileage as my old
351/400 engines (9-10mpg) but with MUCH more grunt and power.

FWIW,

Mike
Phoenix, AZ

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:07:03 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: confused

> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:00:24 -0600
> From: Jim Craig
> Subject: confused

> Am I correct in assuming that an overdrive will help mileage? Right
> now, I get 13-15mpg with a 351M, C-6, turning 3.08's. My old man's
> '90 with a 302 and E4OD gets 15-17. Did someone say he gets 15 with
> a 460?! I want an overdrive to help highway RPMs, and so I can lower
> my rear end ratio for better acceleration :-) What OD will fit the
> 351M/400/429/460 pattern? And as far as autos go, where does the
> computer fit in? Thanks.

Not sure when the wide ratio came out but I'd advise you to get the
wide ratio C-6 gear set and keep the 3.08's. With stock size 235
tires you're just about right but the wide ratio gives 11% more at
the bottom for that take off you want. If you OD it as is you will
be very unhappy with cruise economy since the engine was designed to
run near 2500 at cruise. You can normally go taller and make it lug
a bit, say 2100 - 2200 and get better economy but it depends on the
cam they put in it.

The only OD's available for this engine are the ZF 5 speed manuals
and the E4OD which is electronicly controlled and difficult and very
expensive to set up. I get 12 with my wide ratio, 235 tires and 2.75
gears. I actually believe lower gears (3.00) might do better on
economy but power wise there's no problem at all. We've been teasing
each other with the 15 mpg figure but this will require some serious
engine design work in the rebuild with right cam and carb etc. to get
it done in a truck and it probably won't be smog legal. Lincolns and
Merc's got up to 17 mpg with this engine, stock with 3.25 or so
gears.

If you look at newer cars and trucks the OD puts them at about 1800
rpm at 60, across the board that I've seen but the cam is designed to
give max torque at that speed too which is why it works.

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

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:15:10 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: Unibody any Body

Blackthorn Group, Inc. wrote:
>
> I have a '61, F250 Unibody (Styleside) truck. It's a 292 Y-block with three
> on the tree. It has the heavy Spicer rear end and 8 lug wheels.
>
> Anybody know if this truck is worth anything? I'm in a quandry about
> whether to go deep into resto or to hold back. Is it rare? How many were
> made? What's it worth guys?
>
> Thanks,
> DW

Worth? Next to nothing, I'll be by later to take it off your hands ;)

It all depends on the shape that it is in and the person who wants it.
The other day was the first time that I have seen one so they must be
kind of rare or at least scarce.

Where are you at? Location might also play a role in the price.
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


63 Ford F-100 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
steering, power brakes, and now ON BOARD AIR!

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:12:17 -0600
From: Mike Schwall
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

At 08:34 AM 2/23/98 -0500, you wrote:
>And then the results, without any additional modifications, engine fired
>right up the first time. A slight adjustment of idle rpms after engine
>warm up and then it was off for a test drive. First improvement noticed
>was off idle throttle response; much crisper than the Holley with hardly
>any hesitation. The secondaries appear to kick in earlier than the Holley,
>but will need further investigation. Unable to test WOT due to brief
>cruise around quiet neighborhood without plates or insurance.
>
>All in all, poured much time and effort into rebuilding and tweaking the
>Holley to achieve better response and reliability that I just couldn't pull
>off. Edelbrock bolted on and improved all areas of personal concern
>without any major modifications.
>
>John

I had the same exact Holley, which is now sitting on the shelf. I bought
an Edelbrock #4105 with electric choke kit installed from a list member. I
too noticed the performance gain from the Edelbrock carb. One thing to
remember about the secondaries - on the Holley, they were vacuum operated.
When the vacuum drops a certain amount they start opening. On the
Edelbrock, however, they are opened by the throttle. When the throttle is
moved past the half way point, the secondaies are opened mechanically.
Much better than the Holley, IMHO.

I like the Edelbrock because you can really fine tune the performance. You
can tune/tweek the cruise mixture, power mixture, and of course, idle
mixture and pump shot/duration. You can also adjust when the power stage
occurs (similar to the Holley power valve) by changing springs. I bought
the Edelbrock performence kit from Summit (a mildly overpriced kit, to say
the least). In it you get an assortment of power stage springs, rods,
jets, and rod retaining springs. It would probably be cheaper to buy only
the parts you need instead of buying the whole kit. The manual that comes
with the Edelbrock carb is very detailed in calibrating your carb.

Mike
as always, YMMV


_____________________________________________

Email: mikes intx.net
Home Page: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.intx.net/mikes

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:03:07 -0800
From: Kurt Albershardt
Subject: Re: Carb swap, with much rejoicing!

At 09:20 AM 2/23/98 -0500, George Herpich wrote:
>
>The Edelbrock is a Carter AFB and will replace a square Holley. I think

I thought I saw something on this list about the Edelbrock carbs being
OEM'd from Weber.

Am I hallucinating?

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:21:17 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: Body Qestions

Tony Marino wrote:
>
> Big Questions Guys!
>
> I have a 78 F-250 4x4 that I have the rolling chassis restored on. Its
> come to the point of putting the body on it and I don't know what year
> to go with! The original is totally shot, so my question is,
>
> What bodies of what year ranges will directly mount to the frame? What
> about wheelbase? I think the 67-96's are all the same, but what about
> older? I don't really want to do fab-work to run the
> steering/clutch/body mounts so whattya think?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Tony Marino


You can put a 65-79 body( just the cab) on that frame. The beds are a
different story. The mounting positions of the bolts changes depending
on year. If you went with an earlier bed you would have to fab up some
mounts for it. A flat bed would be a simple solution.

The only thing with some of the earier trucks will be the inner
fenders. They may have to be trimmed to clear the steering shaft.
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


63 Ford F-100 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44, power
steering, power brakes, and now ON BOARD AIR!

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:17:28 EST
From: ECampb5214 aol.com
Subject: Re: confused

Overdrive does increase gas mileage. But our 93 E350 which is a RV (30' Four
Winds it had horible aerodynamics but i geuss it couldn't of been better), it
only got 5 -6 miles per gallon,in over drive but that was 12,000 lbs. Any way
good luck !

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:52:56 -0800
From: sdelanty
Subject: Jokes from the Oral office

When pres Clinton called Mionica Lewinsky and asked Her to lie
on Her deposition, that was a misqoute... What He really said was
"Lie in a different position".

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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:52:53 -0800
From: sdelanty
Subject: Re: Engine swap

>The truck is 2 wd. The motor sits too far front it's not lining up with
>the clutch pivot point that hooks up to the block nor does it line up
>with the trans. mount. there are two holes side by side on the frame for
>the trans. mount but the second one would move the mount back instead of
>forward. the drive shaft is also too short the distances for all of
>these is about 2.5 inches. I did get the mounts from a 67-72 truck with....


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.