Return-Path:
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 03:50:33 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks61-79-digest)
To: fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks61-79-digest V2 #2
Reply-To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks61-79-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks61-79-digest Saturday, January 3 1998 Volume 02 : Number 002



=======================================================================
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:

9" limited slip unit needed [jniolon uss.com]
RE: Fuel Economy [Thomas Hogan ]
Re: Fuel Economy ["kingw" ]
Autometer gauges ["Canuel" ]
bad lifter? [SAR HOG ]
Re: Fuel Economy [danadeb pacbell.net]
RE: front spoilers [Sleddog ]
RE: bad lifter? [Sleddog ]
Stan's Headers ["woody" ]
Re: Stan's Headers [marko ]

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 07:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: jniolon uss.com
Subject: 9" limited slip unit needed

A Happy New Year to everyone...

How many of you started on your New Years resolution when you said
"I've got to clean up this mess !!"

So.. in your diligent effort to do that...uncover that 9" limited slip
or traction loc pumpkin. I don't need the case or the axles...just
the 3rd member. any gear from 2.75 to 3.50.

Come on guys...I need the pumpkin...you need the floor space.
Everyone should be able to walk at least 6 feet thru their shop
without stepping over something, shouldn't they ?

I'll be....Standin' by the mailbox for the UPS guy with a hernia...
(hey !! that could be a country song...)

thanks
John

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

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 09:05:02 -0800
From: Thomas Hogan
Subject: RE: Fuel Economy

Jim,
If the motor needs refreshing I would chuck it in favor of a 390. The
feeling on the list is that the 390 gives more power with about the same
or better mileage. I don't know why this is. They are from the same
family and basically have the same design. Maybe the 390 is more
efficient because it can overcome internal friction better. If you
don't work with the truck (I use mine for commuting mainly) the first
choice would be to go to a lower numerical rear gear. Mine has a 3.00.
I would like to go to a 2.73 with a wide ratio C-6. Other mods that
could improve mileage are dual exhaust, better cam, intake or carb.
Spreadbore carbs with smaller primary venturies seem to offer good low
speed throtle response and efficiency (if you can stay out of the
secondaries). Jacobs electronics offers a multiple spark ignition
system and advertises better power and economy.

As far as converting from points ignition, the Ford duraspark system
eliminates points, is very reliable was offered on FE motors, and the
parts can be had at the salvage yard cheap. There is a web page with
this conversion featured but I forget the address.

Good luck and welcome to the list.

Tom H. 76 F-150 Supercab 390FE




Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 08:59:27 +0000
From: "James E. Brady III"
Subject: Fuel Economy

Guys,
I am new to the list and own a 1971 F-100. It has a 360 with
4barrel
manifold from a 390 and a Holley 600 cfm carb. The rest of the
driveline
is a four speed with granny low (is this a top loader?) and 9 inch with
3.70 or 4.11 rear gears. I want to improve fuel mileage. My first
obvious
choice is to get a taller rear gear since I don't even use first gear.
The
second thing I want to do is get 'The Ignitor' to replace the points.
Does
anyone have any suggestions for other improvements? I am willing to
change
to a more efficient cam also. The current cam is stock. I know this is

not the most efficient motor but any suggestions would be appreciated.

Jim

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

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 13:21:20 -0600
From: "kingw"
Subject: Re: Fuel Economy

Jim,
One, seems that w/ those rearend gears you would be tripping the
secondaries on
your carb a lot (thus killing your gas mileage). I would suggest lower
rearend
gears. Just for reference, I'm running 3.25s (w 235/70 15s) and run 2,000
rpms
at 55 mph in 4th gear (and 2,500 rpms at 69 mph in 4th). Depending on how
fast I go, I can usually knock down 15 mpg on the highway if I keep it
under 70 mph
(I am running a two barrel however).

Two, I don't think you have a toploader, for I have never heard of one w/ a
granny gear.

Finally, you might consider building a front spoiler for your truck if you
do a fair
amount of highway driving (*flame proof suit now on*). I had seen an old
Car
and Driver series from the early 1970s where they only put front spoilers
onto
a bunch of cars (I recall a Pinto and 240z) and got substantial mileage
improvements.
You could make one yourself out of sheet metal (I wouldn't buy one. They
may look nicer, but they won't work as well as one you made yourself. The
idea behind them
is very simple) and (provided you made it right) should see some
improvement.
Just an idea.

Bill

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 11:41:16 -0700
From: "Canuel"
Subject: Autometer gauges

Thought this might be of interest. I just bought an Autometer Fuel gauge
and matching sender from Summit, and guess what? The matched set is not
actually matched. There was apparently an error in Autometer's information
and they don't actually make a sender for the Ford type fuel gauge as they
advertise. So if anyone's thinking about buying one of these gauges, make
sure that you have a working sender.
Joe

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 18:26:30 EST
From: SAR HOG
Subject: bad lifter?

I've been chasing my fouled #1 plug problem for quite some time now with
no luck so far. Today, I pulled the intake manifold, hoping to find the
problem. The intake gasket looks fine, all the intake runners on the heads
are the same shade of black , the intake runners on the intake are clean.
While I was in there, I spun the pushrods to make sure they weren't bent (they
aren't), then I tried to move them up and down against the lifters. All were
tight except for the #1 intake one. It will move up and down considerably.
So now I'm thinking I need a new lifter. Is there a way to tell, besides what
I just did? Can I just replace one, or do I need to replace the whole set?
Anything else I should be looking at? Thanks for the help folks.

John Z
67 F-100 460/C-6

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

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 19:18:06 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Re: Fuel Economy

Thomas Hogan wrote:
>
> As far as converting from points ignition, the Ford duraspark system
> eliminates points, is very reliable was offered on FE motors, and the
> parts can be had at the salvage yard cheap. There is a web page with
> this conversion featured but I forget the address.
>

Here is the site:
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.wrljet.com/engines/duraspark.html

Dana

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

Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 22:28:21 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: front spoilers

on low vehicles the front spoiler works by reducing the airflow under the
vehicle. on trucks, especially 4x4, there is no substantial reduction
without getting the spoiler very close to the ground, and that removes part
of the reason for owning a truck - ground clearance. it also looks very
odd, unless your truck is already "in the weeds!"

some new trucks are sold with a spoiler as a option, but they are really
just for looks. i am not saying it wouldn't work on a low truck. but
that's the key, it's gotta be low.

sleddog

- ----- I am so jealous of all of you getting over 10 MPG, hell, if i could
get 8 MPG I'd throw a party!!


Finally, you might consider building a front spoiler for your truck if you
do a fair
amount of highway driving (*flame proof suit now on*). I had seen an old
Car
and Driver series from the early 1970s where they only put front spoilers
onto
a bunch of cars (I recall a Pinto and 240z) and got substantial mileage
improvements.
You could make one yourself out of sheet metal (I wouldn't buy one. They
may look nicer, but they won't work as well as one you made yourself. The
idea behind them
is very simple) and (provided you made it right) should see some
improvement.
Just an idea.

Bill







+-------------- 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: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 22:33:03 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: bad lifter?

you may want to check the rocker for extreme wear at the locations it
contacts the valve and at the pushrod. it may cause the slop, or, if it is
the lifter the slop could have beat the rocker arm up and maybe even the
tip of the valve.

i hate to say it, but it is remotely possible (unlikely) that one cam lobe
is wiped. if you pull that lifter and it is worn badly on the face, it
definatly damaged the cam.

sleddog

- ----------
From: SAR HOG[SMTP:SARHOG aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 02, 1998 6:26 PM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: bad lifter?

I've been chasing my fouled #1 plug problem for quite some time now
with
no luck so far. Today, I pulled the intake manifold, hoping to find the
problem. The intake gasket looks fine, all the intake runners on the heads
are the same shade of black , the intake runners on the intake are
clean.
While I was in there, I spun the pushrods to make sure they weren't bent
(they
aren't), then I tried to move them up and down against the lifters. All
were
tight except for the #1 intake one. It will move up and down considerably.
So now I'm thinking I need a new lifter. Is there a way to tell, besides
what
I just did? Can I just replace one, or do I need to replace the whole set?
Anything else I should be looking at? Thanks for the help folks.

John Z
67 F-100 460/C-6






+-------------- 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: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 21:27:05 -0700
From: "woody"
Subject: Stan's Headers

Anyone out there installed headers for a 460 transplant into 1970s F250
chassis from Stan's Headers (N. Auburn, WA)? They're a 4-2-1 design like
the Thorley product for 1980s and newer vehicles. Would like user
experience on fit... well/poorly, quality of finish, etc. (web site
stans-headers.com).

Woody
wfriesen worldnet.att.net

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

Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 23:55:02 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: Stan's Headers

At 09:27 PM 1/2/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Anyone out there installed headers for a 460 transplant into 1970s F250
>chassis from Stan's Headers (N. Auburn, WA)? They're a 4-2-1 design like
>the Thorley product for 1980s and newer vehicles. Would like user
>experience on fit... well/poorly, quality of finish, etc. (web site
>stans-headers.com).
>
I am just about to get a set for my FE 4x4 from him. I called the guy and
it sounds like he makes them quite well, they are nickel-chrome plated, and
made-to-order. I get the feeling I am dealing with a small shop here that
will fix anything that isn't right. Apparently Stan has been in business....

---

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.