Return-Path:
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 18:55:40 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V2 #160
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Wednesday, March 18 1998 Volume 02 : Number 160



=======================================================================
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: Oil Pressure Problem [George Herpich ]
Re: 351's [George Herpich ]
Re: Car Show ["Chris Hedemark" ]
Re: Engine Wars, 351s, V10s, and V12s. [Garr & Pam ]
Oil hole restriction [am14 chrysler.com]
Pwr Steering [am14 chrysler.com]
M's [am14 chrysler.com]
RE: 460 hop-ups [Sleddog ]
RE: M's [Sleddog ]
Re: 351's [Stu Varner ]
Re: 6 Cylinder Duraspark [Don Grossman ]
4V FE intake and 4100 carbs [Stu Varner ]
Re: wheels [Brian Koss ]
Re: engines [sbest ]
Re: M's [Chris Hedemark ]
Re: Gas fumes from in-cab tank [Rustforfun ]
460 Hop-up article [Alan Mittelstaedt / Chad Dailey ]
Re: Number 4 oil hole, etc [Marv Miller ]
Casting #. [am14 chrysler.com]
[none] [am14 chrysler.com]
Re: 460 Hop-up article [Chris Hedemark ]
Re: Engine Wars, 351s, V10s, and V12s. [George Herpich
Re: Location [dave.williams chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)]
Re: M's [George Herpich ]
RE 351's [cdriddervold juno.com (Charles D Riddervold II)]
Re: Car Show [Schottsweb webtv.net (George Schott)]
Re: 460 Hop-up article [Ken Payne ]
CHROME SIDE TRIM FOR 66 [BEANER12 ]
Ford truck article ["Michael Redden" ]
302 to 351W swap ["John May" ]

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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 06:36:40 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: Oil Pressure Problem

but I'm a little curious
> about how hard it is to change the rear main seal with the crank still
> in place. I had a hell of a time doing mine with the crank out and the
> engine on a stand...

If it's not leaking it's another good argument for leaving the bearings
alone.
If it has a rope seal it must be replaced with as rope seal unless the
crank is
pulled and the pin pulled out of the block side. To replace the rope
type you need a tool that pulls the upper half into place.
If it has a lip seal it is fairly easy to pull out the upper half and
replace it.
Just be sure to offset it 3/8 or so from the parting line of the cap.
If it's not knocking the new pump will buy you an easy two years with
none of that hassel.
George

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 06:37:28 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: 351's

Garr & Pam wrote:
>
> Bill Beyer wrote:
> >
> > ----------
> > > From: George Herpich
> > > To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> > > Subject: Re: 351's
> > > Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 3:38 PM
> > >
> > > This got turned around into some engine bashing sentimental thing. I
> > > have always had Fords and wouldn't think of using another engine in one.
> > > Not because I think the others are inferior but because anybody can make
> > > power with them and at half the price.
> > > At least until the 5.0 Mustangs came around. It' still damned expensive
> > > to build an FE but it's still my favorite.
> >
> > So you're saying it takes more money and more brains to make a Ford go fast
> > than a Che*y? This is a good thing?
> >
> > +-------------- 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/ ----------+
>
> Takes more money but not in the long run...I know guys who race Che*vys
> who put 3 to 4 motors a year in the cars and guys who race fords change
> motors every couple of years. What truly cost more?
> Chris

If a lot more guys build chevy's than proportionately there will be
more a-holes building them wrong, right:-)
The parts are made by the same companies out of the same materials
but since they sell so few Ford parts they have to charge much more
to cover cost of developement and tooling.

George

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 07:10:01 -0500
From: "Chris Hedemark"
Subject: Re: Car Show

>Chris and George (fomoconut too), you guys may be interested in this. The
>first saturday of every month the Carolina Cruisers Custom Car Club have
>a gathering here in Raleigh. It is held at the Char Grill hamburger joint
>on Wake Forest Road and is open to anyone. People bring out everything
>from wild customs to bone stock restos. Last time I went among other
>things there were four cobra replicas and one rail dragster. What a rush!


Hey now this sounds like a real sight. Raleigh is about 45 minutes from me
so this sounds like a worthwhile ride.

>The real treat is when the show breaks up and the participants start
>driving back home they always seem to apply too much throttle when
>pulling out of the parking lot. The sound of a 427 screaming up the road
>is beautiful to hear even if it is in a cobra replica. (Disclaimer: I do
>not endorse any activity that may be considered dangerous or unlawful.
>Any person or persons if caught and found guilty should be punished to
>the fullest extent of the law).


Yeah the side oiler does have quite a distinctive exhaust note. I've only
ever been blessed enough to hear but one, and the same platform (faux
cobra).

>I may enter my F100 after I get it painted. FTC


Do you hang out there when they meet? I mean, just drive whatever your
daily driver is and check out what is there?

The one thing that I hate about these car shows is that I show up in my 96
Mustang, not to show or anything. This car is my daily driver. But just
because it is a little better looking than stock, people look at it, and I
get a lot of snide looks just because its supposed to be a show for older
cars. AAAAHHHHHH!!!!! Maybe if I showed up in an 81 Fairmont Futura I'd
get a warmer reception. :-) I have pictures of the car at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.yonderway.com/hedemark/automotive.htm

Chris Hedemark
Yonder Way
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.yonderway.com

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 07:50:43 +0000
From: Garr & Pam
Subject: Re: Engine Wars, 351s, V10s, and V12s.

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> At 09:12 PM 3/16/98 CST, you wrote:
> -snip-
> >
> >BTW, I have one of those old V6's laying around (I am not sure if it is
> >a 305 or 351). It came out of a '65 GMC 1/2 ton. Pulled real hard off
> >the line! All torque! (I am talking max torque 2000 RPM). A real
> >conversation piece. When I mantion it most people *correct* me by saying
> >"No, you mean a 305 or 351 V8." He, he, he. Oh yeah, the engine *looks*
> >as big as a V8 and has the spark plugs on the intake side of the head
> >rather than the exhaust side.
> >
> >Still not as cool as a Ford 300 I6, though...:)
> >
> >Harry.
> >
>
> My dad had one of those 305s V6s. Anytime you fit that many cubes
> into 6 cylinders you're going to get a torque monster. Did Ford
> ever make a similar beast?
>
> -Ken
>
> +-------------- 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/ ----------+

I was wondering why no one has mentioned the Ford 406...It ranks right
up there with 427, 428 and 429 Fords. Also does any of you lucking
people own a 390 with the 3 2 barrel carb setup...I think it produced
400 hp.
Chris

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 08:32:43 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: Oil hole restriction

Gary writes: >>Azie and Marv, Why did you guys do this again?? It
seems to fly in the face of modern thinking from what I've read? I
know for a fact that the cleveland required restrictors in the cam
passages from the mains to run hard or all the oil got pumped up into
the top end and cavitated the bearings??

This is a Main hole - not a cam bearing hole. Remember the FE's
(except the side oilers)feed oil to(read through) the Cam then the
mains. The # 4 main oil hole is about 1/2 covered by the bearing shell
meaning only half as much oil can get to #4. If memory serves me
correctly the #2 has somewhat of a restriction, but not as severe as
the #4. By opening the block passage from the oil filter adaptor up
into the block where the oil turns down to go to the rear of the block
from the 3/8" (or maybe 7/16") to 1/2" and opening the passages to
these mains, you make the FE nearly indestructable. I always added a
larger oilpan also, because I sucked one dry one time and cost me a
crankshaft. Only crankshaft I ever ruined and I raced the FE's for 15
plus years. I did a few other things, but these are the most important,
and are more than sufficient for a very dependable truck motor.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 08:38:52 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: Pwr Steering

Dennis writes: >>Will this setup work on my '70 F250 4X4 ?

I'm not sure Dennis. I really don't see why not. Might have to do a
small amount of "engineering/modifying" but I would think it to be
adaptable.
Someone on here should have tried it at least once.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 08:59:37 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: M's

Chris writes: >>
The M is not that bad. I have never owned but my neighbor has a 78 F250
with the M and it does nothing but work. The only time its driven is to
tow a tractor or haul wood or both at the same time. It seems to have
great low end torque. Close to 200,000 miles now and no major work has
been done to it. As far as racing one...I have not got a clue
Just saying his motor has been great so far>

I don't think anyone is questioning the longevity nor the dependability
of the M's. The point
everyone is trying to make is that for the same monies, the 429/460
series will last just as long -
do quite a bit more work - just as economically and have more power
while doing it.
I've had a couple of M's. but have never tried to make hotrods of
them. I've lately gone to the
429/460 series and am very pleasantly pleased with my decision. I also
like the FE's, but I'm
afraid that since they went out of production so long ago, that the
parts market is going to dry
up very soon.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:31:47 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 460 hop-ups

i hear that! thanks!

sleddog

- ----------
From: Alan Mittelstaedt / Chad Dailey[SMTP:am33009 navix.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 11:53 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: 460 hop-ups

Hi all--

Just reading thru my new National Dragster (vol. 39 issue 9, Pit Talk,
page 34), and saw a page long article on 460 build-ups. There are some
impressive torque numbers in this article. William McKinley in Ada,
Ohio (419) 634-7556 is the responsible gentleman for the improvement. I
am willing to scan this article for those of you interested. (Sleddog,
do you hear this?)

Chad
- --
No good deed goes unpunished.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:53:01 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: M's

i don't see that happening for a long time. would edelbroke make a
manifold for an engine that will soon be unable to be built? there are so
many FE's around and the aftermarket still supports them fairly well.
besides, from what the FE lover's say, a good fe build will last a
lifetime! ;)

sleddog

- ----------
From: am14 chrysler.com[SMTP:am14 chrysler.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 1998 8:59 AM
To: Fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: M's

I've lately gone to the
429/460 series and am very pleasantly pleased with my decision. I also
like the FE's, but I'm
afraid that since they went out of production so long ago, that the
parts market is going to dry
up very soon.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:14:19 -0600 (CST)
From: Stu Varner
Subject: Re: 351's

Brother Daver, Now you've doneit!
>
>Now you've done it. Yanked me right back out of lurking (er, working,
>yeah, that's the ticket!)
>
>Now, if my old M-block was half the engine it was 170K miles ago, it would
>take a FLAMETHROWER to this place and toast all you disbelievers and yer
>FEs an' 460s an' whatevers an'.... an'.... well, heck.

You brought up the FE thingy! I'll deal with you later!! AARRGGHH!! :o)

Still coming to Memphis? Holler at me when you do. April / May is no biggie!
STU
Nuke GM

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 07:21:52 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: 6 Cylinder Duraspark

sdelanty wrote:

> >Don, Any suggestions for sources for the electronic distributor parts ?
> >
>
> Dunno where Don gets His, but I know where I get mine...
>
> Used at the wrecking yard, rebuilt at any auto parts store.
> I usually search the wreckers first.
>
> Happy motoring,
>
> Steve

Wrecking yards are my friend.

There has to be a bone yard somewhere near you that you can start your
search. Check the price at your local parts place and see what the core
charge is. If you can get a rebuilt cheap the the core is only $3 or
something than go with that. If they want $50 for a core or something go
to the wreckers first. You will need to hit the junk yards for the wiring
anyway so pick up the IM there too. You can use the wires off a 6 or V8
they are all the same. I pulled the wires for my 390 off of a 77 300 six
and using the IM off of a Ford Ranger (Genuine FoMoCo).

Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:32:52 -0600 (CST)
From: Stu Varner
Subject: 4V FE intake and 4100 carbs

Went to the local (60 miles away) pick and pull and found one of those
really nice older
salvage yards. lots and lots of older stuff. Very organized for a salvage
yard, anyway,

Q#1
I picked up an FE 4V intake and an Autolite 4100 carb for my restomod
project. The intake has a D5 casting, meaning 1970's year 1975. No
problem with these numbers. But, I have a curious little problem with the
intake once I got it home. I noticed on the passenger side
of the intake next to the carb mounting, was a hole about the size of a dime.
Someone got a clue as to what this is for? Is it for exahusting
something? I dunno. My 2V intake has no such hole anywhere like this.
How do I need to address this when I rebuild the engine? Plug it? It is
not for vacuum Is it? HEP me!

Q#2
The 4100 Autolite I bought is in really good shape. casting date was
3-18-1964.
But, at the base of the rear valve on the back of the carb/ passenger side
where the bottom right hand screw mounts, there seems to be a small hole
right acress where the threads would run. Could this/would this
(been reading Dr. Suess to my babies) cause a problem?? Can it be reapired
/ patched in some way? Does it need to be??

I am on spring break so I will try to get in in the next few to check mail.

STU
Nuke GM!

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 08:03:27 -0800
From: Brian Koss
Subject: Re: wheels

The 16" five lug wheels were farly common ountil the mid 70's. The
origional owners amnmanual that came with my '66 F100 4x4 lists them as
standard equipment on the lower payload F100 models. For the 5800 GVW,
which I have, they list 7.00x17" tire as standard. I have never seen a 17"
5 lug rim. I have 2 of the 16" rims. The only problem is they are 5" which
limits them to bias ply. All the tires manufactures recommended rim widths
of 5.5" or greater for the 85 series radials. Im interested in get two
additional rims to make a set or if anybody knows where I can get a set of
17" I'm really interested. Email me privately, as I will be leaving for a
10 day vacation starting this afternoon.(Yes!!!!) I will get back to you
then.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 08:54:15 -0400
From: sbest
Subject: Re: engines

>Hey .. speaking of the 289-4V; I got a '78 302 in the garage that I cleaned
>up, put a new rear main seal and all new gaskets in ... and on top, an OEM
>4 barrel manifold that my uncle gave to me off a '66 289.
>( Now thats a heck of a hybrid for ya ! )

>== Serian

I always liked the interchangability of Ford parts. The biggest
mess I ever made was a 67 289 crank, rods and pistons in a 68 302 block.
On that I stuck 69 351W heads on top of with cut down 351C exhaust valves.

For the solid lifter valvetrain I made my own adjustable rocker
studs and plates and used 260 rockers and pushrods. I kind of liked the
aluminum water pump on the 260 so I had to use the oddball wide timing
chain and cover too.

This was back in the late seventies when 5 speeds were starting to
come in vogue, so I had to have one too. Put a toyota Celica 5 speed
behind this combination. The Toyota speedometer cable actually plugged
right into the dash and read proper for 3.50 gears, nothing else went
that smoothly. The gears were well suited to the 289. Held up
surprisingly good over the years too.


Steve Best, Nova Scotia, sbest glinx.com
6.9 litre diesel Ford van, full-time 4 wheel drive
"Hang on kids, we're going through..."
4 wheel drive van page: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.glinx.com/users/sbest
Tire chains, camping gear, tools and first aid stuff too...

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 12:10:31 -0500
From: Chris Hedemark
Subject: Re: M's

Sleddog wrote:
>
> i don't see that happening for a long time. would edelbroke make a
> manifold for an engine that will soon be unable to be built? there are so
> many FE's around and the aftermarket still supports them fairly well.
> besides, from what the FE lover's say, a good fe build will last a
> lifetime! ;)

I will beleive that the FE market will disappear after I see the
flathead market disappear.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 12:28:58 EST
From: Rustforfun
Subject: Re: Gas fumes from in-cab tank

I had the same problem, the reason the hose is so expensive is that it is
a "special" type of rubber that resists cracking from fuel exposure. Only
time will tell if that is true.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 12:04:59 -0800
From: Alan Mittelstaedt / Chad Dailey
Subject: 460 Hop-up article

Dave--

I guess I should have been more explicit. I will send this to private
email accounts, unless Ken requests that I post it. Chris, Dave, you
should be getting copies about now. Not all of us here are
460-oriented, and I didn't want to choke up digest space with a big
article. Also, I didn't know if there were any copyright issues to deal
with (Ken, can you help me here?). You can request it from me via
private mail (preferred), or the list (I might be slow, I get the
digest).

The reason I saw FTC in the article were the impressive low-rpm
horsepower numbers that I felt would be well suited to a truck.

Chad

> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 22:33:31 -0800
> From: "David W. Anderson"
> Subject: Re: 460 hop-ups
>
> Chad - I'd sure like to see that article as well. I didn't know if you
> planned on posting to the list or individually so I responded directly.
>
> Dave
- --
No good deed goes unpunished.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 10:39:32 -0800
From: Marv Miller
Subject: Re: Number 4 oil hole, etc

sdelanty , Steve, wrote:
Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole

> Ummm, I'm confused here... Are we talking about opening the hole on
> the #4 main bearing saddle? Since the FE bearings are oiled from
> above, from the cam bearing area, how does opening this hole
> increase oil to anything but the #4 bearing? (Yes, I opened mine up)
> Remember that the regular, "non side-oiler" FE's have the main oil
> passage *above* the camshaft. Oil comes thru this passage, down to
> the cam bearings and then down to the mains. Opening the #4 oil hole
> does not increase flow to the top end, only to the #4 bearing.

In the words of Ed McMahon: "You are CORRECT, Sir!" You're not
confused, at all. But somebody else in this group is.

> One of the problems with the FE is that it pumps *way* too much oil
> to the rocker assemblies, robbing pressure from the bottom end and
> also filling the rocker chambers with oil at high RPM's.

EeeeYuppp!

> This is easily cured by tapping the oil passage in the head (just
> under the rocker stand) and inserting a restrictor plug.
> This passage is the right diameter to tap for a 3/8"-18 bolt.
> I ran a tap down the passage, took a 3/8"-18 bolt and cut a piece
> about 7/16" long off of it so I had a short "stud". I took this
> piece and sawed a groove on one end of it for a screwdriver slot,
> then drilled a 1/16" hole (.062") down the center of it.
> These were my "restrictor plugs". I screwed them into the tapped
> passages in the heads and put the rockers back on and all done...

I simply machined a round dowel of the size of the rocker passageway
with a 1/8 inch hole in the center of it. Shoved it into the hole in
the head. I made it about an inch and a half long, and it isn't going
anywhere. Where could it migrate to, anyway? So I didn't go through
the tapping process, but it's still an excellent idea!

> This change brought my "summertime hot" idle oil pressure up from
> 12-13psi up to 16-17psi. I use 10-40 oil... The rockers still get
> more than enough oil and I may change the restrictor plugs to 3/64"
> (.047") next time I've got a reason to take the rockers off.
> Have any of You other FE guys done this "restrictor trick" yet?

Yes, but I was going completely through the motor, anyway, with a new
TRW (Melling) pump, so I don't have a "before" baseline figure to
compare
to. The rockers get PLENTY of oil with this setup. Imagine what was
wasted on the rockers before. If I want to waste oil flow, the bottom
end is where I want to do it. Remember, the rod journals are fed by
these same main bearing holes, through the cross-drills in the crank.
(That is, of course, unless you have an old "splash" oiling system. The
FE's never did, but the 6's in the 1930's did.)

I once asked Dick Landy what his Pro Stocker had for oil pressure at
idle. He said "Almost zero". He then went on to explain that FLOW was
the important thing. Pressure just makes it happen. He said he was
still flowing LOTS through the bottom end at idle.
- -Marv-

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:41:31 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: Casting #.

Steve writes: >>It seems not all FE blocks have a number. Do Yours?
Where are they?

I've never seen an FE with the P/N on it anywhere.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:39:30 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: [none]

Steve writes: >>Have any of You other FE guys done this "restrictor
trick" yet? If You're carefull and adventurous it can be done in a
couple hours without removing the heads..

Yes Steve - this is one of the other things I did when I was racing,
but its hardly necessary for an every day driver that may be hotrodded
once in a while. I used allen head set screws with a .060" hole
drilled in them.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 15:27:24 -0500
From: Chris Hedemark
Subject: Re: 460 Hop-up article

Alan Mittelstaedt / Chad Dailey wrote:

> I guess I should have been more explicit. I will send this to private
> email accounts, unless Ken requests that I post it. Chris, Dave, you
> should be getting copies about now. Not all of us here are
> 460-oriented, and I didn't want to choke up digest space with a big
> article. Also, I didn't know if there were any copyright issues to deal
> with (Ken, can you help me here?). You can request it from me via
> private mail (preferred), or the list (I might be slow, I get the
> digest).
>
> The reason I saw FTC in the article were the impressive low-rpm
> horsepower numbers that I felt would be well suited to a truck.

Yes I got (and read) the article a few minutes ago. I don't know the
legalities of posting this, but I must say that everyone here has
something to gain by reading it. The numbers are most impressive, but a
plug change becomes a major job on a powerplant like this. :-) (hint
for those who haven't read it: you need a lathe to do a plug change)

Will I apply this technology to my own projects??? Who knows. It sounds
rather risky to me to go drilling through water jackets like that, with
only a spark plug to keep it from leaking.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 17:12:28 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: Engine Wars, 351s, V10s, and V12s.

Garr & Pam wrote:
>
> Ken Payne wrote:
> >
> > At 09:12 PM 3/16/98 CST, you wrote:
> > -snip-
> > >
> > >BTW, I have one of those old V6's laying around (I am not sure if it is
> > >a 305 or 351). It came out of a '65 GMC 1/2 ton. Pulled real hard off
> > >the line! All torque! (I am talking max torque 2000 RPM). A real
> > >conversation piece. When I mantion it most people *correct* me by saying
> > >"No, you mean a 305 or 351 V8." He, he, he. Oh yeah, the engine *looks*
> > >as big as a V8 and has the spark plugs on the intake side of the head
> > >rather than the exhaust side.
> > >
> > >Still not as cool as a Ford 300 I6, though...:)
> > >
> > >Harry.
> > >
> >
> > My dad had one of those 305s V6s. Anytime you fit that many cubes
> > into 6 cylinders you're going to get a torque monster. Did Ford
> > ever make a similar beast?
> >
> > -Ken
> >
> > +-------------- 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/ ----------+
>
> I was wondering why no one has mentioned the Ford 406...It ranks right
> up there with 427, 428 and 429 Fords. Also does any of you lucking
> people own a 390 with the 3 2 barrel carb setup...I think it produced
> 400 hp.
> Chris

I have one on my 63 1/2 galaxie. It was a dealer installed option rated
at 340 hp. The best 390 was the '61 hipo, 375hp 4v and 401hp 6v.
George

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 08:04:00 -0500
From: dave.williams chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: Location

- -> None taken. Actually I believe that Sebastopol has Russian roots.
- -> There was alot of Russian fur trading along the No Cal coast in the
- -> late 1800s. I've been told that Geyserville is named because of some
- -> nearby hot springs.

Alaska, Washington State, Oregon, and California down to approximately
Sacramento were claimed by the Czars as Imperial Russian territory.
Spain claimed everything south of that. Neither could or would do much
as waves of Yankees moved in from the east, and these lands "declared
independence" and then "petitioned to join the United States," except
for Alaska, which we wound up having to buy.

The United States, btw, is the only country to have ever acquired more
land by purchase than by conquest. The dollar is mightier than the
sword!


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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 17:37:41 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: M's

Sleddog wrote:
>
> i don't see that happening for a long time. would edelbroke make a
> manifold for an engine that will soon be unable to be built? there are so
> many FE's around and the aftermarket still supports them fairly well.
> besides, from what the FE lover's say, a good fe build will last a
> lifetime! ;)
>
> sleddog

There was nothing new for FE's for many years. We can thank the
popularity of
Cobra kit cars for the new interest edelbrock has shown. We can also
curse
cobra kit cars for the inflated side oiler prices.

George

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 17:41:07 -0500
From: cdriddervold juno.com (Charles D Riddervold II)
Subject: RE 351's

I must say that I daily race my truck too. I owned a 76 F-150 w/ a 460
and it was fast with monster torque, but I like my 351 better. I have
240,000 miles on this motor and olly changed the oil pump. Its getting
tired and is due for her first rebuild this spring, but for a work truck
that goes 60 miles a day and parks in the mud I'm real happy.


Charlie
'78 F-250, 351M, NP435, 4WD

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 18:36:28 -0500
From: Schottsweb webtv.net (George Schott)
Subject: Re: Car Show

Thanks Jon I appreciate the info. I will be there next month. I was
wondering where there might be some stuff like this around here. OOPS!!
I'm off topic here Uuum well on topic the 69 will finally breath this
weekend after the 302 swap just waiting for the radiator to be finished
then it will Purrr.

Duke's
Fine 69
F-100
302

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:31:14 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: 460 Hop-up article

At 12:04 PM 3/18/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Dave--
>
>I guess I should have been more explicit. I will send this to private
>email accounts, unless Ken requests that I post it. Chris, Dave, you
>should be getting copies about now. Not all of us here are
>460-oriented, and I didn't want to choke up digest space with a big
>article. Also, I didn't know if there were any copyright issues to deal
>with (Ken, can you help me here?). You can request it from me via
>private mail (preferred), or the list (I might be slow, I get the
>digest).

To be on the safe side, I wouldn't post it (sorry guys). Remember
not too long ago many of us were upset because some site snatched
up photos off the pictorial without permission.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:35:02 EST
From: BEANER12
Subject: CHROME SIDE TRIM FOR 66

I have a 66F100 just about ready to paint but I still have one problem. I
cant find all the side trim for it. I have some parts books, but none of them
show the door piece or the hood piece. Any info on where to buy or if anyone
has some chrome they want to get rid of I would greatly appreciate any help.

Thanks, Eddie

66F100
Winter Haven, Fl.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:43:28 -0500
From: "Michael Redden"
Subject: Ford truck article

I bought the May issue of Sport Truck. It features an article; 50 years of
Ford Trucks.
The article also showcases readers trucks. Among them is Stu V's '71
F-100.
Nice to see it in print, Stu.

Mike

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

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 20:02:32 -0600
From: "John May"
Subject: 302 to 351W swap

I'm about to have company truck taken away from me for commuting and I've
gotta do something quick (cheaper, faster as my co. says) to have reliable
transport for driving to work (200 miles a week). I have a 71 F100 2wd swb
w/ a 302 & 3sp in the tree. This engine is very tired. It smokes when
started for about 30 secs and has a large amount of "blowby" thru the valve....


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.