Return-Path:
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 11:15:37 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V2 #171
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Sunday, March 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 171



=======================================================================
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: WHEEK BOLT PATTERNS [Fred F Robinson ]
302 Update [Schottsweb webtv.net (George Schott)]
RE: 65 F250 4X4 [BDIJXS ]
Re: F-250 4x4 hubs [Brian ]
Re: Message from Deacon. [Tyler Wilkins ]
HOT STARTS [Brian ]
Re: Message from Deacon. [Brian ]
'66 F250 Adventures [ROSITCH SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU]
Re: HOT STARTS [ROSITCH SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU]
Re: 302 Update [Mike Schwall ]
Twin Plugs ["Robert Harris" ]
Re: 302 Update [danadeb pacbell.net]
Re: HOT STARTS [danadeb pacbell.net]
Re: Message from Deacon. [Garr & Pam ]
Re: 360 vs 390 ID [Ken Payne ]
Re: Message from Deacon. [Ken Payne ]
Re: KEN Admin. Question . [Ken Payne ]
Re: 460 Dual Plug ["Bill Beyer" ]
Re: Message from Deacon. [Garr & Pam ]
Engine Theory [ballingr ldd.net (WILLIAM L BALLINGER)]
Re: KEN Admin. Question . ["Dale and Donna Carmine"

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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 03:07:01 -0800
From: Fred F Robinson
Subject: Re: WHEEK BOLT PATTERNS

At 02:42 AM 3/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
>I do not know if this will help anyone, but I found a fair list of bolt
>patterns.
>
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mr2.com/TEXT/WheelBoltPatterns.txt (Size 8.5K) Document
>date: 25 Jan 1995
>
>+-------------- 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 hope you do not mind this is a little long but it may interesting to
someone on the list.

Newsgroups: alt.hotrod
From: hotrod dixie.com (The Hotrod List) / Dave Williams
Subject: Wheel Bolt Pattern List version 93.16.02
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 93 19:11:40 GMT

first draft: dave.williams chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams)
(circa 1985-ish, from American Racing catalog)
as amended by: bill ecn.purdue.edu (Bill Drake)
contributors: none so far

6 Bolt Wheels ----------------------------------------------------------

6 on 5-1/2"
Chevrolet - all to '48
Chevy/GMC - P.U., van to '70
- 4x4 P.U., Blazer '71-'89
- LUV 2WD '72-'84
Dodge - D-50, Ram 50 P.U. '79-'87
Ford - Courier PU '72-'84
Mazda - P.U. '72-'89
Nissan/Datsun - P.U.. Pathfinder '67-'89
Toyota - SR5, 4WD P.U., Landcruiser, 4-Runner (some) to '89


5 Bolt Wheels ----------------------------------------------------------

5 on 4
64-69 Mopar "A" 13"
65-76 Mopar "A" 14"
Dodge - Aspen, Dart, Demon, Swinger (w/o discs) '63-'72
Plymouth - Barracuda, Duster, Valiant (w/o discs) '61-'74


5 on 4-1/4
Volvo 140, 164 15"
Volvo - all to '89
Ford - T-Bird '89


5 on 4-1/2 (114.3 mm)
AMC Gremlin, Hornet, Pacer, Javelin, Matator, AMX
AMC - most models (exc. Jeep) '40-'89
Chrysler/DeSoto - all full size RWD cars (exc. Imperial) '37-'89
Datsun/Nissan - 1600-2000 '65-'73
- 300ZX, 200SX V6 (some) to '89
Dodge van
Dodge 1/2 ton PU
Dodge - all full size cars & P.U.'s '37-'89
- Dart, Demon, Swinger '73-'80
Ford 1/2 ton van
Ford Granada, Monarch
Ford - All full size cars '49-'72; '79-'85
- Fairlane '62-'79
- T-Bird '55-'71; '77-'79
- Mustang (5-bolt) '65-'73
- Maverick 5-bolt all
- Mustang SVO '85-'86
- Ranchero '68-'84
- Aerostar, Probe, Bronco II/Ranger to '89
Hudson - all '48-'56
Lincoln - all '70-'72; '80-'89
Mazda - RX7 Turbo, 626, 929, MX6 '86-'89
Mercury - all full size cars '52-'54; '61-'72; '79-'85
- Cougar '67-'79
Mopar '73-up "A" body
Plymouth - all full size cars '37-'89
- Barracuda '70-'74
- Duster, Valiant, Volare '73-'80
Pontiac - Tempest, LeMans '61-'63
Studebaker - all '51-'66
Toyota Crown, Hilux PU
Toyota - 2WD P.U. '69-'89
- Supra Turbo '86-'89
Volvo 122, 1800


5 on 4-3/4
Buick - Regal, Century, Special (most mid-size) '64-'80's
Chevy van
Chevrolet - all (exc as noted elsewhere) '49-'89
Corvette all
Corvair '65-'69 5-bolt
GM compact and midsize
Oldsmobile - 442, Cutlass, F-85, Toronado
(most mid-size) '60's-'80's
Pontiac - GTO, LeMans, Firebird, Grand Prix
(mid size) '64-'80's

5 on 5
Austin-Healy 3000
Buick LeSabre, Centurion, Riviera, Electra
Buick - Electra, LeSabre, Riviera, (most full-size) '35-'87
Cadillac - DeVille, Fleetwood '38-'89
- SeVille '77-'79
Chevrolet 3/4 ton vans
Chevrolet - Bel Air, Biscayne, Impala, Caprice, Kingswood
'71-'76
- above w/HD package wagons '77-'89
- Blazer 2WD '71-'83
Chrysler - Imperial '67-'71
Ford, LTD '73-'75
Ford - T-Bird '72-'76
- Galaxie, LTD, Custom '73-'78
Lincoln - all (exc Versailles) '60-'67; '73-'79
Mercury - all '55-'60
- Cougar, XR7 '73-'77
Oldsmobile - all full size RWD '40-'87
Packard - all '51-'55
Pontiac - all full size RWD '40-'86
Rover


5 on 5-1/2
AMC - Jeep (5 bolt) '42-'89
Chrysler - 8 cyl. & wagon '46-'55
- Imperial '54-'66
Ford 2 ton van
Ford Bronco, F100
Ford - all '28-'48
- full size P.U., van, Bronco '49-'89
International Scout, Travelall
Lincoln - all '52-'60
Mercury - all '39-'51
Suzuki - Samurai '86-'89


5 on 100mm
Buick - Century, Skylark, Skyhawk FWD '79-'87
- LeSabre, Riviera, Somerset '85-'88
Chevrolet - Beretta, Citation, Cavalier, Celebrity, Corsica
'80-'89
Chrysler - Laser, Lebaron '85-'87
Dodge - Daytona, Aries, Charger, Lancer, Caravan '85-'89
Oldsmobile - Calais, Ciera, FWD '82-'87
- Firenza, Omega FWD '79-'86
Plymouth - Sundance '87-'89
Pontiac - 6000, Grand Am, J2000, Sunbird, etc. FWD '82-'87
- Fiero '82-'88


5 on 112mm (4.409)
Audi - 5000 Turbo, Quattro '86-'87
Mazda - RX7 GSL '86-'87
Mercedes - all '77-'89
VW - Transporter, Vanagon '71-'89


5 on 115mm
Buick - Century, Electra, LeSabre, Regal, Riviera (some) '83-'89
Cadillac - Allante, most others '84-'89
Chevrolet - Celebrity '85-'89
Oldsmobile - Regency, Ciera, Cutlass, Delta 88 '84-'89
Pontiac - 6000 '83-'89
- Bonneville, Grand Am '86-'89


5 on 120mm (4.72)
BMW 2500, 2800, 3.0, 520, 530, 630, 730
BMW - all 5 bolt to '89


5 on 130mm
Porsche - 911, 912, 944 to '89


4 Bolt Wheels --------------------------------------------------------

4 on 3-3/4
Austin Marina
Triumph Spitfire, TR7
Lotus


4 on 98mm (3.858)
Alfa Romeo Alfetta
FIAT
Lancia


4 on 100mm (3.93)
Acura - Integra to '89
Audi - most models to '89
Audi Fox
BMW 1600, 2002
BMW - 2002, 300-series to '89
Chevy - Chevette '76-'87
- Spectrum, Nova '80-'89
Dodge - Omni, Rampage, Aries, 024 '79-'85
- Charger, Daytona (FWD) '82-'89
Honda - all (except '76-'80 Accord, Civic) to '89
Isuzu - Impulse, I-Mark to '89
Nissan - Pulsar, Sentra '87-'89
Opel Kadett
Plymouth - Horizon, TC3, Reliant, Voyager '78-'89
Renault - all to '89
Toyota - Celica, MR2, Tercel '86-'89
VW - Dasher, Fox, Jetta, Rabbit, Scirocco to '89


4 on 4
Austin-Healey Sprite
Crosley - all '39-'52
MG Midget
Jensen Healey
Opel Manta, Kadette
GM L-body
Buick Skyhawk '75-'81
Chevrolet Vega, Monza '71-'81
Pontiac Sunbird, Astre '76-'81
Oldsmobile Starfire '75-'81


4 on 4-1/4 (4 on 108 mm)
Alfa Romeo (exc. Alfetta)
Ford - Fairmont '78-'86
- Mustang 4-bolt patterns '74-'93
- T-Bird '80-'88
- Pinto '71-'80
- Fiesta '78-'85
- Escort all (RWD and FWD)
- Cortina all
- Taurus, Tempo, EXP to '89
- German-built Capri I, II, III '69-'8?
Mercury - Capri '71-'88
- Cougar '79-'88
- Merkur, Topaz, Lynx '80-'89
- Zephyr '78-'86
Plymouth Cricket
Porsche - 924 '77-'84
Sunbeam - Tiger, Alpine '65-'70


4 on 110mm (4.33)
Mazda - RX2, RX3, RX4, GLC, 626, P.U. '71-'82
- RX7 to '85

4 on 4-1/2
Acura - Legend '86-'89
Buick - Special '61-'63
Chevrolet
Corvair all 4-bolt
Chevy II all 4-bolt
Sprint '85-'87
Nova ('61-'70)
Datsun/Nissan - most models to '89
Dodge Colt '79-'88
Dodge Colt (early)
Ford
Mustang all '65-'68 4-bolt
Falcon, Maverick, Granada all 4-bolt
Mazda - 626, RX7 '83-'87 ????
MGA, MGB, MGC
Olds - F-85 '61-'63
Plymouth - Arrow, Sapporo '79-'88
SAAB all ???
SAAB - 900 to '87
Toyota - most exc. MR2 and P.U. to '89
Triumph TR 1..6


4 on 110mm (4.724)
Honda


4 on 130mm (5.11)
Porsche - 914 '71-'82
VW Beetle, 411, 412, 1500 Sedan, Transporter/Vanagon

____________________________________________________________________________
Jari Porhio eppu cc.tut.fi : No offence :)

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:21:36 -0500
From: Schottsweb webtv.net (George Schott)
Subject: 302 Update

Thanks for the comments fellas I don't understand how it can be the
distributor the motor ran fine when I pulled it from the car and I
did'nt rebuild the motor and did'nt touch the distributor all I did was
add some bolt-ons. I am going to try the distributor today what the heck
it can't hurt anything I guess but I just don't get it.

Duke's
Fine 69
F-100
302

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:56:09 EST
From: BDIJXS
Subject: RE: 65 F250 4X4

Hi,

Don't know if this is any help at all....have you checked the PCV valve? I
remember a discussion here of the consequences of the valve being bad and its
such a simple thing to look at....it won't explain the noise, but maybe some
of the blowby????

I may have missed it, but have you have a chance to look at the plugs?

Colorado Jeff

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 09:30:40 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: Re: F-250 4x4 hubs

> Spindles are the hardest parts to find. If anyone has a
> source for Ford 4x4 spindles (Disk) let me know.


I've got a friend here in Minnesota that owns a shop called Total Gear.
He's probably got about 1000 axels at a time laying around. He has any
part you may need for them used, or if ya want new...He has the source.
Here's his Number 612-438-2943, He also has anything for your manual
transmissions...or transfer cases. He rebuilds these units and sends
them all over the country.

Brian

And if ya want to save a long distance charge, just e-mail me with what
your looking for and I'll get a price for ya.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 09:39:32 -0600
From: Tyler Wilkins
Subject: Re: Message from Deacon.

Deacon wrote:
>
> Hi Gang. Today I got to missing this list to the point I had to come
> back! You guys are friends of mine, I didn't realize how much you are
> all part of my life until my Inbox was empty every day.

Welcome Back Deacon! You have truely been missed by all members of the
list! I don't think a single person would truely object to your
returning.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 09:51:40 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: HOT STARTS

Ok list.
Here's one for ya. I know that an old starter or bad one can
be hard starting when it gets hot, But, I've got a rebuilt one(which
could be bad) that doesn't want to start my 460 when the engine gets hot
, normal operating temp. 192 degrees. So here's my question, Has anyone
tried wrapping the starter with a header type heat wrap ?? And do the
heat sheilds really work ??

I really don't feel that the starter is getting that hot though, I've
removed a large portion of the inner fenders to allow better cooling of
the engine compartment, I was also wondering if the starter solenoid
could cause this problem ??

Brian
'64 F100 Shortbox (460/C6)
'78 F150 4X4 (300/4spd)
'94 Chr*sler LHS
'96 F150 4X4 Shortbox (302/auto)

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 09:54:40 -0500
From: Brian
Subject: Re: Message from Deacon.

> Deacon wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gang. Today I got to missing this list to the point I had to come
> > back! You guys are friends of mine, I didn't realize how much you are
> > all part of my life until my Inbox was empty every day.
>
Welcome back to the Deacon...you really missed the empty box ? !!
I feel the affects when there's only about 20 "e's" and not 75 !!

Brian

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: ROSITCH SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: '66 F250 Adventures

Hello Everyone,
Well, I think my truck is trying to tell me something. I have been
driving it with bad valves and a cranky transmission for about two
years now. Thursday I drove it about 150 miles running errands (nice
drive- Redwood City CA to Santa Cruz, then up the coast and inland to
La Honda and back to Redwood City through the forest) and when I got
home I noticed fresh oil spots under the BACK of the truck (I'm used
to oil spots under the front of the truck....). I looked underneath
and discovered that the pinion seal has decided to no longer seal and
I have managed to rust-proof the entire underside of the bed and frame!
I think I better wrap up my Mustang restoration and get to work on the
truck (I think it is getting jealous!). I have a nice new 390 and many
assorted parts saved up but I needed to finish the Mustang to have
something to drive before I started on the truck (I HAVE installed the
cool finned aluminum oval air cleaner- it kinda floats above that
little Autolite 2100 two-barrel. It will look better on the new four-
barrel carb...). Maybe I'll start by making a side-oiler passage
on the 390 using bondo, then glue on some 7/16" bolt heads for the
cross-bolted mains, paint the heads dull silver to resemble aluminum,
grind off the "352" on the front of the block..... just kidding
(for the most part... Well, just the last sentence.).

Happy Sunday,

Don Rositch

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: ROSITCH SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: HOT STARTS

Brian,
Check the cable to the starter and the connections for it.

Don Rositch

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 10:08:08 -0600
From: Mike Schwall
Subject: Re: 302 Update

At 08:21 AM 3/22/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Thanks for the comments fellas I don't understand how it can be the
>distributor the motor ran fine when I pulled it from the car and I
>did'nt rebuild the motor and did'nt touch the distributor all I did was
>add some bolt-ons. I am going to try the distributor today what the heck
>it can't hurt anything I guess but I just don't get it.

What bolt-ons?

Let the list know what you added/changed.

Mike

_____________________________________________

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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:18:58 -0800
From: "Robert Harris"
Subject: Twin Plugs

"True Dual Plugs" have little or nothing to do with the electricals behind
them. A coil per plug performs no better most of the time than a single
coil for 8 or 16 plugs. What primarily matters is the combustion chamber
design, followed by the location(s) of the plug. A small, fast burn
chamber, with good compression, swirl and plug location(s) like on most FORD
engines will be far less likely to be "improved" by an expensium exotic
wazoo mega-blaster bazillion volt multi park Dr Weird Science ignition than
a larger open chamber design (Ch*vy) (351 4V vs. 351 2V). The same chamber
is more tolerant of EGR, compression and crap gas.

Until you reach the performance "edges" of the combustion envelope, a
standard spark works spiffy fine. With a small fast chamber - the edges are
further away than a larger more open chamber - therefore more resistant to
improvement by wallet lightening. Before "I think not", check with Dave
Vizard, Grumpy Jennings, John B. Heywood and other knowledgeable sources
please. I personally have never seen anything more than placebo effect on
any standard street engine. But then, I've never put a magnet on my fuel
line, used high speed body wax, put the latest reverse impulse swirl
spacer - good for 15% improvement according to the article - advertized on
page 97 in the current issue on my vehicles either.

In my not so humble opinion, reliability is the primary advantage for
standard performance street engines of electronic ignition over the old
Kettering point ignition. But the self appointed and self anointed
salespeople for miracle science will strongly disagree.

Multiple sources of ignition vs. a single source virtually always work
better than a single source. Never seen an exception (but there might be).
And generally work MUCH better. It all deals with time. The multiple plug
design burns the mixture faster and generally more completely. They reduce
the spark advance needed and thus the negative power (pressure opposing
piston movement before Top Dead Center) caused by spark advance. Since there
is multiple controlled flame fronts, the combustion speed is improved -
reducing the time the end gas's have to "detonate", and consuming more of
the mixture.

Since multiple plugs enhance the efficiency of combustion, the result is an
improvement in torque, horsepower and mileage without Weird Science. The
460 has a very large diameter bore, which means it chamber will burn slower
than a smaller bore. This implies that multiple plugs will improve its
performance much more than a smaller bore 4 cylinder. Simple physics - like
X-lax - always works for me.


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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 02:14:38 CST
From: "Harry Jennings"
Subject: 460 Dual Plug

Well, I just read the article. Dual plugs is nothing new by a long shot.
The first one *I* remember seeing was in a friends '87 Nissan P/U. The
Ford Ranger uses such a set-up in the 4 cyl.

I am sure that a dual plug set-up has advantages. But the claims made in
that article seem, well, optimistic at best. True dual plug set-ups use
more than one coil and such. This engine just split the plug wires. All
that was accomplished was producing 2 sparks rather than one. I doubt
that modification alone would make a big difference.

A dual plug stroked 460 (480ci's) get better mileage than a similar
built single plug 460ci engine? I don't know about that. How were the
other engines built? Was the 460 and V10 dead stock?

I think that a good high quality ignition would work just as good as
that "dual plug" 480 system! Maybe if the second set of plugs were ran
off of their own system?

sceptical

:o)

Harry.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 08:58:11 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Re: 302 Update

If you changed the carb, the vacuum lines might have gotten mixed up applying
full manifold vacuum to the vacuum advance causing it to advance too far!!!

Just a thought!

Dana

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 09:16:56 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Re: HOT STARTS

I have the same problem with my 460 sometimes!!!

The engine doesn't even need to be all that warmed up.

My theories are as follows;

1) Starter getting too warm causing hard cranking.
2) Battery on the weak side.
3) Too many connections in line with the starter motor.( 460 starters have
a starter solenoid / gear throwout mounted on them then if you put the
engine in a 72-older you usually hook that up to the existing solenoid
= lots of voltage / amperage loss )
4) Too much initial advance ( not enough cranking retard for the
duraspark crowd , there is a module that provides 16 deg retard if anyone
wants to know I will call the manufacture and get the number)

I think that any one of these theories could cause the problem. I have not tried
to resolve the problem on my truck since it happens so seldom and I usually just
work around it.

Dana

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 12:49:58 +0000
From: Garr & Pam
Subject: Re: Message from Deacon.

Welcome Back! Deacon

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 12:56:18 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: 360 vs 390 ID

No way to tell. You have to measure the stroke.

At 01:04 AM 3/22/98 EST, you wrote:
>I'm sure this has beeb asked B4, but are there any external markings to
>differentiate between a 360 and a 390? I was told that I purchased a 360 but
>htis thing just won't quit. I pulled a 77 Lincoln 388 miles with it and I
>think I got better gas milage with a load and I wasn't lacking any power
>either.
>

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 13:00:00 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Message from Deacon.

At 01:05 AM 3/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
> Hi Gang. Today I got to missing this list to the point I had to come
>back! You guys are friends of mine, I didn't realize how much you are
>all part of my life until my Inbox was empty every day.
- -snip-

>
>Boy, here I thought my first post was going to be comical! :)
>
>Later!
>

Told you he wouldn't stay gone for long! One of these days we've
got to meet.

FTE content, has anyone here had success with sway bars on a
67-72 F100? Was it worth it? I've been seriously thinking about
adding them...

Ken

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 13:07:01 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: KEN Admin. Question .

At 02:00 AM 3/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Sleddog and I appear to have moved this discussion far beyond the simple fun
>of the 400M-VS-460 debate.
>
>As this thread has spun it's way out we are getting into some technical
>areas that require some basic understanding of Physics, Thermodynamics,
>Finite Amplitude Wave theory, History, Politics, and Whisky. (I don't know
>the last two just seemed to fit right in.)
>I started to reply to some questions... Stroke, Port Configurations, etc...
>The answers get into physics and theory so quickly... there is no way to
>simplify it and have it remain intelligible...
>So a simple answer to a seemingly simple question turns into a 3 page
>document, which I am willing to do.
>
>Ken, just how long can a post to this list be??

The server is set to bounce anything over 10k. This gives you
plenty of space. If its not enough, you can post twice.

>
>Do you/we have any guidelines for just how technical we want to get here?
>

As long as its on topic, go ahead. I just hope my eyes don't
glaze over. Although I'm comfortable doing rebuilds I'm nowhere
near the technical levels of some of the people here. My
expertise is computers. I wish engines came as naturally.

Anyways, the information ought to be a good learning experience.
Just remember though, as many auto engineers have found out,
that what the figures say and what's on the drawing board often
turn out to be false in real world use.

Ken

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 10:03:36 -0800
From: "Bill Beyer"
Subject: Re: 460 Dual Plug

Drag racers have been using dual plugs for a long time. I also remember a
tech article detailing how to make a dual plug Harley Davidson. The N*ssan
dual plug 4 cyls had dual coils and the dist looked like an 8 cyl. It
didn't fire both plugs simultaneously. I was told that this was an
emissions issue not really a performance enhancement.

- ----------
> From: Harry Jennings
> To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
> Subject: 460 Dual Plug
> Date: Sunday, March 22, 1998 12:14 AM
>
> Well, I just read the article. Dual plugs is nothing new by a long shot.
> The first one *I* remember seeing was in a friends '87 Nissan P/U. The
> Ford Ranger uses such a set-up in the 4 cyl.
>
> I am sure that a dual plug set-up has advantages. But the claims made in
> that article seem, well, optimistic at best. True dual plug set-ups use
> more than one coil and such. This engine just split the plug wires. All
> that was accomplished was producing 2 sparks rather than one. I doubt
> that modification alone would make a big difference.
>
> A dual plug stroked 460 (480ci's) get better mileage than a similar
> built single plug 460ci engine? I don't know about that. How were the
> other engines built? Was the 460 and V10 dead stock?
>
> I think that a good high quality ignition would work just as good as
> that "dual plug" 480 system! Maybe if the second set of plugs were ran
> off of their own system?
>
> sceptical
>
> :o)
>
> Harry.
>
> ______________________________________________________
> > +-------------- 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: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 13:08:53 +0000
From: Garr & Pam
Subject: Re: Message from Deacon.

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> At 01:05 AM 3/22/98 -0800, you wrote:
> > Hi Gang. Today I got to missing this list to the point I had to come
> >back! You guys are friends of mine, I didn't realize how much you are
> >all part of my life until my Inbox was empty every day.
> -snip-
>
> >
> >Boy, here I thought my first post was going to be comical! :)
> >
> >Later!
> >
>
> Told you he wouldn't stay gone for long! One of these days we've
> got to meet.
>
> FTE content, has anyone here had success with sway bars on a
> 67-72 F100? Was it worth it? I've been seriously thinking about
> adding them...
>
> 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/ ----------+

Ken I dont own an older truck but I had a Splash with front and rear
sway bars and it handle awesome it ran with Z 28s and Mustang GTs around
corners...just too bad I got blown away once out of the turns! I can say
it makes a big difference in corner stability compared to my friends
ranger without them. My Lightning handles well also but the suspension
is completed different on it than a regular F-150 so its not fair to
compare but I think they are indeed worth it...I think you can get a
set(front and rear)bars from Hellwig for about $220. JCWhitney carries
them and they come with polyurethane bushings which is a plus!
Hope this helps
Chris

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

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 12:06:54 -0600
From: ballingr ldd.net (WILLIAM L BALLINGER)
Subject: Engine Theory

I am new to the list, and I wish to thank Mr. Payne and co. for their time
in giving us this forum to discuss our trucks needs and strengths, and to my
fellow list members who take the time to share their knowledge and experience.
I hope that I am not speaking out of turn to jump into the fray over which
engine is better than others, If I am then accept my apology.
There are many factors that determine the utility af a given device. A knife
makes a lousy spoon and vice versa, but they are both utensils and can be
used to eat with. The versatility of a given device requires compromise, it
wont be the best at either end of its range of utility, but will perform
acceptably if matched to the task it spends the most time doing.
Being a Fordnatic, I've always heard from my Chevy and Chrysler buds the
criticism of Ford for making so many different engines with changes through
the years that defeat interchangeability. My answer is that if you look at
the engine vehicle combination they are for the most part the best matched
in their class to the work involved. The changes made address a weakness in
design that make an improvement to suitability for it's work.
I will not criticize any Ford engine family because they are all good if
used for what they were made for except for one exception that I will come
to later.
First off, we all may have a different definition of the word work as it
applies to trucks. Drag racing and mud bogging use a different setup than a
daily driver or trailer puller. Is there an engine family that can do it
all? On one level, yes, but not without compromise. No engine can provide
optimal performance in every aspect for every purpose.
****
My opinions on engine use to purpose.
289/302
Makes a fine light duty commuter engine, but will suffer if asked to pull a
lot of weight for extended periods. Light internals give it less compression
braking ability than might be needed for towing. Put one in a Ranger or
Bronco II or a short F-100.
292/312
For it's day it was the best truck engine in existence. There are still
quite a few doing an honest days work. Great powerband for everyday driving
and good compression braking for towing. Obviously limited potential for
competition use due to age of components and lack of aftermarket interest.
240/300
The best six ever made. Also the most versatile truck engine in it's
displacement class. Good strong torque at a useable rpm level, good
compression braking. Keep up the cooling system though, if you tow, they
will heat up a little if worked hard.
351 W
Great all around performer, one of the best choices for anything but heavy
hauling. Great everyday power and step-up to the plate potential. Great
aftermarket support, just don't get stupid with the cam or it will be a
whole different animal. The firing order makes it a very smooth engine.
335 SERIES
This engine series is not the best choice for trucks at either end of the
utility scale. It has a lot of trouble when asked to work hard for extended
periods, and uses a lot of gas for commuting. It's strenghs are good middle
of the road performance and the good supply of parts still available. It
really has suffered the most from living in the shadow of the FE and the
460. I think that these engines will begin to get a little more respect as
time goes by, though I strictly classify it as medium-duty and good if you
don't ask it to do more.
429/460
The best large displacement truck engine in existence. Short of a diesel,
They do more modern day towing than any other Ford. Torque is great but
comes with a hefty price tag in fuel. The diesel would do better if you put
on a lot of miles.
The best Ford engine to modify for competition in trucks, the big
bore-stroke relationship SVO CJ heads and other aftermarket and factory
goodies make it the best for truck competition, if you have the cubic
dollars to spend. They are expensive.
Bet you thought I forgot one......
FE SERIES
The crown-jewel of truck engines. NEVER in the history of trucks has there
been a better designed engine for truck use. It makes torque, horsepower,
and good compression braking. It is the most versatile and probably the
closest that anyone ever came to making an engine that can do it all. They
are rugged and live a long time under the most arduous circumstances. They
can tow, commute, and compete for less money than any engine in it's class.
A properly built 428 will give the 460 a run for it's money unless it has
some trick stuff. Of course it's heavy and loves plugs and gas, but new
technology is making them better all the time. I never understood why they
stopped making them, emissions, mileage? I see a lot of degign cues in the
most modern of engines, port cofiguration,chamber shape, there was a reason....

---

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.