Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:55:50 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V2 #162
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Thursday, March 19 1998 Volume 02 : Number 162



=======================================================================
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: 302 to 351W swap [George Herpich ]
Old Tools [George Herpich ]
Re: 302 to 351W swap ["Chris Hedemark" ]
T-5 & 78 I6, will they match? ["John F. Bauer III"
Re: 460 noises [Brian ]
RE: 351s [Sleddog ]
Re: Oil hole restriction ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Dennis K. Austin: Fwd: disc brake conversion [Ken Payne
Re: 4V FE intake and 4100 carbs [Don Grossman ]
Steel Braided Lines [Keith Srb ]
RE: Steel Braided Lines [Sleddog ]
Throttle Doohicky [sdelanty ]
Re: Old Tools ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Oil Filter Adapter [Kurt Albershardt ]
Re: Ignition Ignoramus ["Hogan, Tom" ]
RE: M's Now FE Parts availability ["Hogan, Tom"
Was Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole Now Volume VS Pressure ["Hogan, Tom"]
RE: Was Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole Now Volume VS Pressure [Sleddog ]
Re: 351s & Ms ["Dave Resch" ]
RE: 351s, strokes ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: T-5 & 78 I6, will they match? ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 460 noises ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Steel Braided Lines ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: Steel Braided Lines [james oxley ]
Re: Steel Braided Lines [Keith Srb ]
78-79, F350 front dirveshaft [james oxley ]
Re: T-5 & 78 I6, will they match? [Mike Schwall ]

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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 06:13:40 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: 302 to 351W swap

John May wrote:
>
> 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
> covers to the carb. I would like drop in a 351 and auto tranny into it. It
> has no ps or pb, only the alternator and A/C driven off the engine. I have
> located a 351 long block & trans to install, if it's not gonna be a MAJOR
> hassle.

In addition to what Harry said you will need the bracket that moves the
7/16
alternator bolt down to where the 302 one was. By "long block" I take it
that it
dosen't have any accessory brackets and you'll need that to mount the
alt.
Also, of course, the 302 intake won't fit in case you didn't get that.

George

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 06:25:48 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Old Tools

Sorry 'bout the non-truck question but I'm desperate.
I found cool old drill press at a yard sale. It is hand operated with
an adjustable automatic feed. Model is "Yankee 1005" mfg by North Bros.,
Phila., PA in 1914.
Anyone have any ideas were to look on the web for info on this thing?

Thanks, George

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 07:05:30 -0500
From: "Chris Hedemark"
Subject: Re: 302 to 351W swap

>Also, of course, the 302 intake won't fit in case you didn't get that.


Correct me if I am wrong here, but you'll need a distributor too I beleive.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:26:59 -0500
From: "John F. Bauer III"
Subject: T-5 & 78 I6, will they match?

Group:

In an effort to whip up my ideal Econoline daily driver, I have been trying
to dig up any info on the T-5. Only thing I can find is a listing in a
Jeg's catalog that shows it working with the '79-86' 302. Could anyone
confirm that the T-5 is a bolt in (to replace the existing Ford 3 speed
manual) in a '78 300 I6?

John

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 07:50:09 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: Re: 460 noises

I had hardend seats put into my '71 460 heads. The guy at the machine
shop said I was eating up the seats by running the unleaded fuel. I only
ran the motor about 15,000 miles and he stated that this already caused
some damage.

Brian

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 09:54:46 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 351s

Hmmm, interesting idea. but, stroke doesn't "make" torque, it only limits
the engine to being built as a torque motor. my new 460 build according to
the desktop dyno should be making about 500 #ft at 2000 rpm. and, it won't
fall below that until about 8000 rpm, with a max near 5000rpm, of 700+ #ft
torque. find me M motor that can match that! (really, i would like to
find one! i'd put it in my other truck!)

really, the 460 makes more torque. the 400 just feels like it has more on
the bottom, because it gets so anemic after a couple of rpms there's no
"punch" at the top!



sleddog

- ----------
From: Dale and Donna Carmine[SMTP:dcarmine inetnebr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 1998 11:52 PM
To: Ford Trucks
Subject: Re: 351s

Besides even the rawest F-truck recruit knows that the
400 has a longer stroke than the 460, and with a bump in the compression
and
the right cam will run all over the 460 'til the RPM's get up to where the
460's bigger ports give it an advantage. But for a truck engine I'll take
a
warmed over 400 any day!

later,
dale c
'79 351M








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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 10:03:16 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Oil hole restriction

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

> 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
>
> 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

If this is true (and I'm not doubting you) I see what you mean but
I'm used to the 335 and 385 engines which feed (unless I've been
misled) from the pump to the crank and up to the cam and lifters
etc.?? Anybody know for sure? Why would they sell restrictor plugs
for the cleveland to go into the upper main saddle holes if this was
not the case? All the articles I've read on these engines say this
is the way they feed?

Now that I think about it I don't think I ever really questioned it
and never really tried to determine this for myself. Boy do I feel
foolish! :-( I will be making this a special consideration next time
I pull one down..............

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 --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 10:17:53 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Dennis K. Austin: Fwd: disc brake conversion

Dennis K. Austin or anyone else who can answer this,

This question came to me regarding the 65-72 disc brake
conversion guide. Since I don't have a 65 and have only
done this conversion on a 67 & a 68 I can't help this person.
Could you or anyone else offer them some advice? Post it
here and cc to them (jce gate.net). By putting it here we
all gain the knowledge.

Thanks,
Ken

>Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 10:18:40 +0000
>From: Ken Smith/Jennifer Nall
>Reply-To: jce gate.net
>Organization: World Ford / Hollywood
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
>To: webmaster ford-trucks.com
>Subject: disc brake conversion
>
>to kenneth payne--
>
>regarding the special instructions for the
>1965 conversion, you state to use the 73-79
>spindles using the 65 kingpin set. The 1965
>kingpin sets are .8592 in diameter and the
>73-74 pins are 1.2305 in diameter. Please
>clarify the conversion.
>
>please email o thanks for your help.
>Steve Tokarz


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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 07:40:33 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: 4V FE intake and 4100 carbs

DC Beatty wrote:

> Stu. I think it is for a vacuum block to be threaded into. Is it a threaded
> hole? Mine has a block in the approximate position you described and it's
> the manifold vac to the tranny modulator.
>
> Stu Wrote
>
> 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!
>
> STU
> Nuke GM!

Take a good look at what the hole is in. If it is in the intake runner you
have a vacume port. If it is a little closer to the base of the carb it might
be for the EGR. If the hole is in the intake runner it might be a good place
for the power brake booster to hook up to. Question regarding this in a
future post.

Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:57:55 -0700
From: Keith Srb
Subject: Steel Braided Lines

Other than the fact the Steel Braided Lines look good, are there any particle advantages to using them??


Does anybody know well I can find some info on using/making/buying Steel Braided Lines?


Thanks!




Keith Srbherbie netvalue.net

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.netvalue.net/herbie

Mesa, AZ

1986 Ford Bronco II, 2.9L (I HATE LITERS) V-6, Mitsubishi 5-Speed.

1980 Harley Davidson, XLH, Rebuilt from the frame up.

1974 Ford F250 Ranger XLT, Camper Special, 390ci 4bbl, Automatic, Long
Box, Style Side.

1966 Ford F100, 240 C.I. Straight Six, Model 1100 1bbl carb, Oil Bath Air
Cleaner,

Warner T-18 4-Speed, Short Box.

My Blood runs "TRUE BLUE FORD on Four Wheels and Pure HARLEY on Two
Wheels!"





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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:00:48 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Steel Braided Lines

o "good quality" steel braided brake line helps remove some of the spongy
feeling from brakes. they also are a little more abrasion resistant i
understand. i was thinking about using them for my new fual system, but
haven't done any research yet. i also need info on making up the lines.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Keith Srb[SMTP:herbie netvalue.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 1998 10:57 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: Steel Braided Lines

Other than the fact the Steel Braided Lines look good, are there any
particle advantages to using them??


Does anybody know well I can find some info on using/making/buying Steel
Braided Lines?


Thanks!




Keith Srbherbie netvalue.net

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.netvalue.net/herbie

Mesa, AZ

1986 Ford Bronco II, 2.9L (I HATE LITERS) V-6, Mitsubishi 5-Speed.

1980 Harley Davidson, XLH, Rebuilt from the frame up.

1974 Ford F250 Ranger XLT, Camper Special, 390ci 4bbl, Automatic, Long
Box, Style Side.

1966 Ford F100, 240 C.I. Straight Six, Model 1100 1bbl carb, Oil Bath Air
Cleaner,

Warner T-18 4-Speed, Short Box.

My Blood runs "TRUE BLUE FORD on Four Wheels and Pure HARLEY on Two
Wheels!"










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

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:14:03 -0800
From: sdelanty
Subject: Throttle Doohicky

>That's what that dohicky on the intake manifold is for. As the engine
raises the
>dohicky moves farther away from the firewall but the link between the dohicky
>and the firewall causes the dohicky to compensates for the distance and the
>throttle doesn't move much more then if the engine had not rocked!
>
>Dana

Say, uhhh, what's this here doohicky You speak of?
My '71 just has a solid rod from the carb throttle to the gas pedal
arm on the firewalll. If a motor mount broke I think it would do
the fun little dance that Ken described...
Was this "doohickey" only used on certain years?
Whazzit look like?

Steve

Though good may come of practice, this primal truth endures;
The first time anything is done, it's done by amateurs.
-- Art Buck

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:53:51 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: Old Tools

You might have some luck with these guys:

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mjdtools.com/

- ----------
> From: George Herpich
> To: Ford Truck List
> Subject: Old Tools
> Date: Thursday, March 19, 1998 3:25 AM
>
> Sorry 'bout the non-truck question but I'm desperate.
> I found cool old drill press at a yard sale. It is hand operated with
> an adjustable automatic feed. Model is "Yankee 1005" mfg by North Bros.,
> Phila., PA in 1914.
> Anyone have any ideas were to look on the web for info on this thing?
>
> Thanks, George

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:28:16 -0800
From: Kurt Albershardt
Subject: Re: Oil Filter Adapter

At 08:55 PM 3/17/98 -0500, Ken Payne wrote:
>Try this one out:
>I gave it some gas pulling into a parking lot. Engine mount
>broke, pulling the left side of the engine up. This in turn
>pulled the throttle linkage, pulling the engine up further,
>pulling the throttle linkage.... you get the picture?

My version is in Mom's '68 D*dge Coronet 440 wagon. Power braked, revved
the engine up to 2500 or so, let off the gas. Blew away the mid-'70s smog
Corvette in the next lane. Due to all the torque, the engine mount broke,
allowing the block to fall back against the throttle linkage, pushing it
against the firewall. Being a newbie driver (just traded my permit for a
real license the week before), and finding my accelerator stuck, I
dutifully reached down and tried to pull it back up, unaware that I was
trying to lift a V-8 against a 10:1 reverse leverage ratio. Shaking in my
seat, I lurched home, shifting into neutral and chirping my way through
stopsigns all the way.

I explained the situation to my Dad, who promptly headed out to see for
himself. Despite my protestations that he be careful, he got in the car,
started it up, and threw it into drive. The car bolted forward, laying a
nice rubber streak in front of both our house and the neighbors'.

The mechanic (a former racer) dutifully fixed the beast, explaining to my
parents that smog had deteriorated the rubber and "these things just happen
sometimes." He then took me aside and warned me to stay off the gas ;>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 10:57:51 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: Re: Ignition Ignoramus

>In 1976 Ford offered the Duraspark electronic ignition stock on their
FE
>motors. This conversion on your motor should be a simple retro fit.
In
>your original post you mentioned the Jacobs system. I have been
reading
>up on them and am interested in their system. They guarantee a
>performance/mileage improvement. Has anyone on the list used the
Jacobs
>Electronics system? What was your experience?
>
>Tom H.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>
> replacing my distributor with a non-mechanical, electronic ignition
set
> up. Some of the systems that I've been researching are more expensive
> than others, I'd like to know how to spend my dollars wisely. Does
> anyone on the list have any experience with the following products on
a
> FE series engine?
>
> 6) Ford's DuraSpark system
> >>
>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:15:52 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: RE: M's Now FE Parts availability

I guess it could happen, but with the tremendous installed base I don't
see it happening anytime soon. Acutally, Hot Rod magazine featured
sources of aluminum cylinder blocks this month and there were 2 sources
for FE blocks. With the Cobra Replicar market that should also help
keep it going.

Tom H


----------
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: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:34:28 -0800
From: "Hogan, Tom"
Subject: Was Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole Now Volume VS Pressure

I remember reading an article about the relationship between volume vs
pressure. I can't recall all of the details but it was aimed toward
oiling systems. As I remember they were talking about using high volume
oil pumps in street applications. The important thing for proper oil
system operation is flow. You could have 100 psi pressure and if there
was no place for the oil to flow out of there would be zero flow. The
oil would overheat, no new oil could replace it and the bearing surfaces
would die because with no flow the heat could not be carried away. We
commonly see the opposite happen with older engines. The bearing
clearances open up through wear and allow a pressure drop due to less
restriction. The same volume of oil is being pumped but it all flows
out of the system at the first large bearing clearance causing a
starvation condition for the other bearings. A high volume pump would
probably help an older engine because it could pump more volume of oil
that the bearings could bleed and the rest of the bearings would see
sufficient lubrication and the life of the engine could be extended.
.

Most racers run larger bearing clearances because greater heat is
generated in their engines. The greater heat causes more expansion and
they need the larger cold clearances. Consequently they need a high
volume pump to be able to obtain enough pressure to ensure that all
bearing surfaces are lubricated. Also with larger clearances and a high
volume pump there will be higher flow of oil which will better carry the
heat away from the bearings.


Having said all that, would there be an advantage to a high volume pump
on a street engine. With the same bearing clearances the pressure with
the high volume pump would go up but would the oil flow increase as
well? It seems that there may be a slight increase in flow but the
reason that the pressure goes up is that there is more resistance to the
higher volume of oil flow. So for a new street engine there may not be
as much benifit with a high volume pump

Tom H.


===================================================
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: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:53:02 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Was Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole Now Volume VS Pressure

a high volume oil pump really isn't needed for most street engine
applications. it takes a couple more HP to turn the pump, and no real gain
can be quantified. but, for strret performance, i personally use the high
volume pump, even with the lesser bearing clearances. i read that the 460
for example can use the stock pump for even a fairly good performance build
as long as the rpm's aren't going over something like 5500 or something
like that.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Hogan, Tom[SMTP:Tom.Hogan kla-tencor.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 1998 2:34 PM
To: 'fordtrucks61-79 listservice.net'
Subject: Was Re: Number 4 Main Oil Feed Hole Now Volume VS Pressure

Having said all that, would there be an advantage to a high volume pump
on a street engine. With the same bearing clearances the pressure with
the high volume pump would go up but would the oil flow increase as
well? It seems that there may be a slight increase in flow but the
reason that the pressure goes up is that there is more resistance to the
higher volume of oil flow. So for a new street engine there may not be
as much benifit with a high volume pump

Tom H.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:57:17 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: 351s & Ms

>From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
>Subject: Re: 351s
>Has the Earth's axis shifted or what??

Just slightly:-). You and I know what the greatest Ford engine really was.

>First Deacon leaves and now Dave R. is making derisive
>comments about his beloved M block.
>
>Come on Dave....you're just just shaking the trees for a reaction
>with that one....aren't you?

Actually, w/ the recent departure of our beloved Deacon, I felt moved to
make a sarcastic attempt at misguided humor, sort of a feeble tribute to
our prodigal compatriot.

Oh, Garcon, as for that engine, make mine a 400, too!

Dave R. (true blue M-block devotee)

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:26:56 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: RE: 351s, strokes

> From: Sleddog
> Subject: RE: 351s
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 09:54:46 -0500

> Hmmm, interesting idea. but, stroke doesn't "make" torque, it only
> limits the engine to being built as a torque motor. my new 460

Yeah, 0.150" of stroke isn't much compared to .360" more bore. Ya
can't beat cubes for more power, no way, no how :-) Longer strokes
mean higher piston speeds so torque motor is all you can make it.
Course ya see 500 - 600 460 (429) stroker motors that have more than
4" stroke and make big revs too, so how do you reconcile that?

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 --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:47:13 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: T-5 & 78 I6, will they match?

> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:26:59 -0500
> From: "John F. Bauer III"
> Subject: T-5 & 78 I6, will they match?

> 302. Could anyone confirm that the T-5 is a bolt in (to replace the
> existing Ford 3 speed manual) in a '78 300 I6?

The bell housings are identical and will bolt up but there was an odd
bolt pattern in the 302 at one point so make sure you get the later
version. I don't know all the particulars on this but one version
had one more bolt than the other.......

351C, 351W, 302, 289 and 300 I6 all use the same bell housing except
for that one exception AFAIK. There may be a spline difference
between the T-5 and 3 speed but that's handled by changing the clutch
disk. Throw out bearing may be different too, not sure.

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 --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 16:03:17 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: 460 noises

> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 07:50:09 -0500
> From: Brian
> Subject: Re: 460 noises

> I had hardend seats put into my '71 460 heads. The guy at the
> machine shop said I was eating up the seats by running the unleaded
> fuel. I only ran the motor about 15,000 miles and he stated that
> this already caused some damage.

I don't know how long it takes but the hardness difference is
measured on the brinell scale as I recall which is signigicant but
not as significant as the "C" scale. It's more a consideration of
how it's used, not so much for a cruiser as for one that gets beat
up.

I've seen pictures of recessed valves in chrysler 340's (360's?) that
were 3/8" embedded. I'm running 70 vintage heads on my 460 and it
has roughly 70 - 80k miles on it since the rebuild and still runs
very strong so I suspect they have not deteriorated much and it's
been pushed hard many times passing long strings of traffic etc..
Dang hard not to push it when it's so much fun :-)


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 --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 16:11:08 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Steel Braided Lines

> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:57:55 -0700
> From: Keith Srb
> Subject: Steel Braided Lines

> Other than the fact the Steel Braided Lines look good, are there any
> particle advantages to using them??

They are reputed to be stiffer than stock but stock lines have
braiding in them too. The external braiding makes it easier to
detect chafing or other damage to the line but probably isn't any
stronger than stock.

> Does anybody know well I can find some info on using/making/buying
> Steel Braided Lines?

Earl's is a good source. They can make them up or mix and match
shelf stuff for you as I understand it. That's where I got my front
wheel lines, $52 for two as I recall, not sure now tho :-)

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 --

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 16:24:31 -0800
From: james oxley
Subject: Re: Steel Braided Lines

Keith Srb wrote:

> Other than the fact the Steel Braided Lines look good, are there any
> particle advantages to using them??

Keep from getting cut offroad.

> Does anybody know well I can find some info on using/making/buying
> Steel Braided Lines?

Here is a post I made to the bigbronco digest a while back. Hope it helps


Yo!!

Someone asked me about the SS axle-caliper brake lines I put in on my
78. I knew I posted it to the list, but could not find it. Thanks to
Franks new search engine, I have located it. Anyway, here it is again.

> Hey all
>
> Well I ordered everything I needed to make a set of SS braided Caliper
> to Axle lines. It ended up costing me way less than I thought. These
> lines will not be DOT approved, but the only difference between the
> approved ones and non-approved ones is a small support that is added to
> the banjo fitting that connects to the caliper. This support is supposed
> to keep the line from bending in half while turning.
>
> I ordered all the stuff from BSR Products.
>
> QTY Product Price$ (ea)
>
> 2 24" SS braided line with 3/8 banjo 11.50
> fitting on one end and -3 AN fitting
> on other end
>
> 2 -3 AN unions 2.89
>
> 2 3/8-24 single groove banjo bolt 3.00
>
> 4 3/8 banjo bolt washers .45
>
> 2 -3 Tube sleeve (same size as 3/16 brake line) .45
>
> 2 -3 AN Tube nut (fits over 3/16 brake line) .45
>
> 1 30" 3/16 brake line with two 4.99
> male 3/16 flare fittings
>
> Ship 10.00
>
> Total 48.82
>
> Anyway.
>
> The stock caliper uses a 3/8-24 banjo setup. The rubber part of
> stock front brake lines are about 23 inches. The extra inch can be built
> into the slack anywhere you want. The traction beam mounts for the stock
> rubber brake line will have to be modified (closed up a bit) somewhat due
> to the -3, 24", SS line being much smaller dia than the rubber lines. The
> other end of the 24" line has a -3 AN fitting. The -3 AN union screws
> into this.
>
> At the stock junction block on axle, is two 3/16 female flares.
> Cutting the 30", 3/16 brake line (short piece for drivers side and long
> piece for pass side) runs brake tubing to the point of connection of SS
> lines. Using the tube sleeve, a double flare needs to be put in
> the opposite ends of 30" line you just cut. Before flaring, make sure
> tube nut and then tube sleeve are slipped on 3/16 tubing. After double
> flair is put in, tube nut will screw onto other end of -3 AN union and
> tube sleeve will push double flair against "nose" of AN fitting. You will
> need to buy a double flare tool set at Sears or somewhere if you don't
> have it.
>
> Stuff should be in Fri, hope to have it done Fri night.
>
> OX

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 14:34:31 -0700
From: Keith Srb
Subject: Re: Steel Braided Lines

Gary,

Can you give me a little more than Earl's, since I have no idea who or what
Earl's is ??? :)

Thanks!


At 04:11 PM 3/19/98 +0000, you wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:57:55 -0700
>> From: Keith Srb
>> Subject: Steel Braided Lines
>
>> Other than the fact the Steel Braided Lines look good, are there any
>> particle advantages to using them??
>
>They are reputed to be stiffer than stock but stock lines have
>braiding in them too. The external braiding makes it easier to
>detect chafing or other damage to the line but probably isn't any
>stronger than stock.
>
>> Does anybody know well I can find some info on using/making/buying
>> Steel Braided Lines?
>
>Earl's is a good source. They can make them up or mix and match
>shelf stuff for you as I understand it. That's where I got my front
>wheel lines, $52 for two as I recall, not sure now tho :-)
>
>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/ ----------+
>
>
Keith Srbherbie netvalue.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.netvalue.net/herbie

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

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 16:42:58 -0800
From: james oxley
Subject: 78-79, F350 front dirveshaft

Hey all

I have been told that the 78-79 F350 front driveshaft did not have the
double cardan joint that the bronco (and maybe F-250) did. If this is
true?? If so, I assume that it is because the F350 had the dana60 front
and could not fit the double cardan.

I am in the process of welding radius arm mounts (froman old dana
44 front) to a 79 dana60 front, to put in my 78 Bronco. I need to know
about the driveshaft to know if I need a straight DS to pinion angle
(using double cardan) or the same angle as the DS to transfer case flange
(not using double cardan).....


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.