fordtrucks61-79-digest Friday, February 6 1998 Volume 02 : Number 075



=======================================================================
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: Fwd: Re: '62 Tailgate, unibody? [John Pajak ]
Re: greasable throw bearing [George Herpich ]
RE: 9" gear changes [Sleddog ]
Re: Vent windows. [FoMoCoNUT2 aol.com]
Re: Vent windows. ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 390/428 flywheel questions [George Herpich ]
Re: rebuilt distributor [George Herpich ]
RE: 15 " rims with 3/4 ton front brakes [Sleddog ]
RE: Carb size and V.E. software [Sleddog ]
Re: sounds like trouble [George Herpich ]
9" gear changes [jniolon uss.com]
Re: '62 Tailgate, unibody? [Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D]
390 or 460? [John Pajak ]
Re: greasable throw bearing/tranny/transfer question ["Gary, 78 BBB"
RE: 390 or 460? [Sleddog ]
Re: 390/428 flywheel questions [marko ]
428 flywheel [am14 chrysler.com]
Re: Brakes, bleeding, pressure...... ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 390 or 460? [marko ]
Re: 390 or 460? [marko ]
428 flywheel [am14 chrysler.com]
Re: 9" gear changes ["Gary, 78 BBB" ]
Re: 428 flywheel [marko ]
What coil springs to use? [shoman p3.net]
Brakes part 4 [danadeb pacbell.net]
Re: What coil springs to use? [danadeb pacbell.net]
Divorced Xfercase [am14 chrysler.com]

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

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 03:03:56 -0800 (PST)
From: John Pajak
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: '62 Tailgate, unibody?

- ---Don Grossman wrote:
I think it was more flex than vibration in the 4x4's. Lets just look at
this a minute, solid sheet metal from front of cab the the tail gate in
an off-road situation in which the ladder construction frame will allow
3 to 4 inches of flex and a body that doesn't.

>>That's what I meant....just couldn't find the right words at the
time...... :)

John Pajak
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 06:56:48 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: greasable throw bearing

marko maryniak wrote:
>
> Hey all
>
> A while ago, a guy was posting about installing a greasable throw bearing
> but didn't know what kind to use, or if there was one, etc.
>
> Well, I just got a new one for my FE with NP435, and it is greasable. Any
> jobber should have one, it's made by CR Bearing and it's a "heavy duty"
> lists for about $55 Can (I got it for $24 but that's another story) and I
> don't have the part number here but if anybody needs it I've got it at home.
> It should fit any manual with the 1-1/16" 10 spline input shaft.
>
> marko

Carefull with that. Don't use chassis gease. They use a special high
pressure grease. Also overgreasing will make a big mess in the bell
housing and if any gets on the clutch...............
George

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

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 12:00:07 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 9" gear changes

AFAIK, any gear size will fit into the 9" carrier, and the carrier has 2
different bearing sizes. the adjusting nuts are the reason why there isn't
a split, like a dana 44.

sleddog

- ----------
From: jniolon uss.com[SMTP:jniolon uss.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 1998 1:33 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net; fordtrucks ListService.net
Subject: 9" gear changes

o.k. differential experts,

all the "experts" I talk to here in B'ham tell me that you can
exchange ring and pinion gears from a conventional 9" pumpkin with a
limited slip or equal-loc. As long as the carrier bearings are the
same size. i.e. small bearing carrier or large bearing carrier.

But I want the word from the real experts. I've received a reply on a
9" equal-loc with 3.5 gears and want to make sure I can put my
tall(er) gears (2.75) in this pumpkin.

My second question is ...with my calculations given the following data
26.5" tires & 2.75 gears 70 mph = 2440 rpm
26.5" tires & 3.50 gears 65 mph = 3106 rpm

giving a 666 rpm difference

I know it's only 666 rpms but is it worth the trouble to change out
the gears for a 666 rpm drop while cruising. Keep in mind this is a
460/C-6 mildly built combo in a '53 F-100 that is going to be a cruise
machine instead of for racing.

Would the only advantage be gas mileage ? (with a 460 ? yea right !)


Your expertise is anxiously awaited.






+-------------- 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, 6 Feb 1998 07:15:51 EST
From: FoMoCoNUT2 aol.com
Subject: Re: Vent windows.

In a message dated 98-02-05 21:50:11 EST, you write:


prevent this from happening again.. >>

Normally the roll pin that secures the lock handle to the shaft is worn
out. Remove the roll pin and inspect. Replace with new. The wing window seal
is of course sometimes the culprit but is much more work, inspect the seal
also as well as the nylon cam on the lock handle itlself. After replacing the
roll pin and inspecting the seal and cam, clean both the seal and the areas of
the window itself that contact the seal, then lubricate the seal with
silicone. In regard to preventing this from occurring again, well that roll
pin just wears out and must be replaced from time to time.. I hope this
helps..

John Miller
96 F350 4x4
68 F350 4x4
75 F100

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 07:26:46 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Vent windows.

> From: "s"
> Subject: Vent windows.
> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:30:33 -0500

> Can anyone tell me how to fix vent window leak's?
> I have a 79 250 supercab. With about a half a note pad of paper
> holding the vent lock's shut on both the pass and driver side! And
> it's not getting any better... How can I fix this without replacing
> the whole window? Also how can I prevent this from happening again..

The ones I've seen including both of mine are rusted underneath so
that the whole latch assy is canted out and won't pull shut. The
only fix I know of is to call Dennis Carpenter and get new ones for
$74/pc. That gives you a whole new window frame with latch and front
window track for the side window as well. It may or may not come
with the track felt, not sure. You have to save the window and put
it back in the new frame with windshield goop or what ever.

To fix the problem I'm aware of you would have to cut some parts off
and rebuild the frame but It doesn't look like you could get it back
together since some of the pieces would be destroyed in the process??
Of course the chrome would be gone as well. Anybody ever get one
apart? The whole frame assy comes out fairly easily, couple of
screws in the top, one at the bottom of the track, roll the side
window all the way down and work it out but how to get th latch off
without destroying it??

Where's Murphy when
you really need him??

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:29:21 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: 390/428 flywheel questions

Is the problem that the 428 flywheel is no longer available? Even if
it's not you should be able to get a billet aftermarket unit for close
to the prices you guys are talking.
The 428 has a counterweight cast into it. It does not have to be
balanced. When the engine is balanced it is done with the balancer and
flywheel attached.
I would much rather have an original than one with wieghts attached to
it.

George
> >
> >As I am doing with my 352 flywheel which I am putting on my 410, and having
> >Detroit balanced.
> >
> >
> >marko in vancouver
> >marko helix.net
>
> Okay, okay, I'll calm down. The 410 and 428 flywheels should be, when
> bought from the parts counter, the same cause they have nothing to be
> detroit balanced to until they are put on an engine then balanced.
>
> So theoretically if I, say, needed to replace the flywheel on my 428 one
> day, I'd go to ford, buy a zero balanced unit, then the machine shop would
> counterweight it the same as the one which I was replacing it.
>
> That's all I meant, sorry for the confusion. But if you got one 428
> flywheel that was already detroit balanced, I would think you'd have to
> re-balance it to your own 428 cause I don't think they were all detroit
> balanced exactly the same.
>
> marko in vancouver
> marko helix.net
>
> +-------------- 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, 06 Feb 1998 07:38:54 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: rebuilt distributor

marko wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I also picked up a rebuilt distributor today, for $69.95 Canadian (about 2
> quarts of milk for you statesiders). It's an electronic ignition
> distributor for a 360-390 (for my 410). It's built by AutoLine and it's a
> D4008.
>
> I have a question, it seems to be made of gray iron, not of cast aluminum
> like some others. Does this really make any difference?
>
> It says "motorcraft" on it so I would think it's probly just a later casting.

If it's cast iron it could only be better. Don't forget to have it
recurved. The truck advance curve may not work that well in your
application. If you have a good distributor guy locally you can tell him
everything about your setup and he'll be able to tailor a good curve for
you.
George
ps, I'm not assuming that you don't allready know this and please don't
think I'm picking on you. I seem to be answering (I hope correctly) all
your posts:)

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

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:56:32 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 15 " rims with 3/4 ton front brakes

sometimes it is cheeper to buy a used 1 ton, than buy just an axle. when i
bought my 79 1 ton, i payed for the front axle and got a 460, 4 speed, 205
t-case, dana 80 rear, chassis, cab, tires, etc, etc. etc. for free. $1500
and i drove it away (with the tires smoking (love that posi!) as i took it
sidways out the driveway! the truck needs some TLC, but the price was
worth the axles alone, and they may end up under my 77 f150.

sleddog

- ----------

I have been looking, on and off, for 2 years now for a reasonably priced
Dana 60 front and the only one I have found for a Ford was $1600 used no
less.
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net


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






+-------------- 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, 5 Feb 1998 11:48:28 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: Carb size and V.E. software

- ---snip-----
Now, someone else said that V.E. depends upon C.I.'s. My program says
that is depends upon bore and stroke, not just C.I. For instance, a
Ch*vy 400 C.I. engine needs 840 CFM for MAX HP, a Chrysl*r 400 C.I.
engine requires 930 CFM, and a Ford 400 C.I. engine only needs 790 CFM
(which is less than the Ford 390). BTW, all three made near 320 HP at
about the same RPM (5200). Actually the Chrysl*r needed about 750 extra
RMM to get close to 320 (never quite made it) and the Ford made 325 HP a
bit sonner that 5200. Go Ford!
- ---snip-----

Harry Jennings.


this is a good point, the bore to stroke ratio does affect how "big" the engine "looks" to the carb.

sleddog

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:44:50 -0500
From: George Herpich
Subject: Re: sounds like trouble

ECampb5214 aol.com wrote:
>
> Hi All
> Under the hood in the morning, I hear like a pinging, i doubt its pre
> igntion, cause i advanced it the other day. could it be the push rods? If so
> what would it sound like? Its got 140.000 mi. I hear it under the ac unit.

You need to retard the timing to eliminate ping.

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 06:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: jniolon uss.com
Subject: 9" gear changes

o.k. differential experts,

all the "experts" I talk to here in B'ham tell me that you can
exchange ring and pinion gears from a conventional 9" pumpkin with a
limited slip or equal-loc. As long as the carrier bearings are the
same size. i.e. small bearing carrier or large bearing carrier.

But I want the word from the real experts. I've received a reply on a
9" equal-loc with 3.5 gears and want to make sure I can put my
tall(er) gears (2.75) in this pumpkin.

My second question is ...with my calculations given the following data
26.5" tires & 2.75 gears 70 mph = 2440 rpm
26.5" tires & 3.50 gears 65 mph = 3106 rpm

giving a 666 rpm difference

I know it's only 666 rpms but is it worth the trouble to change out
the gears for a 666 rpm drop while cruising. Keep in mind this is a
460/C-6 mildly built combo in a '53 F-100 that is going to be a cruise
machine instead of for racing.

Would the only advantage be gas mileage ? (with a 460 ? yea right !)


Your expertise is anxiously awaited.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 04:58:12 -0800
From: Jeffrey.Carver Aerojet.com (CARVER, JEFFREY D)
Subject: Re: '62 Tailgate, unibody?

Other than being rear engined, air cooled and made by
that 'other' company, you know the one that has a 'C' at the
beginning, they are kinda the same! But seriously,

The Greenbriar was the Corvair answer to the VW truck, which
was also made with unibody construction.

Jeff '64 F100 CrewCab
- - - - - - - - - - snip - - - - - - - -

call the van/pickup dohickys and what years were they made? >>

well, I'm not quite sure, but I know there's econoline pickups, and
greenbriars. They're both kinda the same from what I understand...

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 05:11:21 -0800 (PST)
From: John Pajak
Subject: 390 or 460?

Alright folks, help me out! Should I convert my 360 to a 390 or
go through all the pain and heartache of finding a 460/C6 and all the
mounts, manifolds, etc to make the conversion? I realize the 460 has
more ultimate potential but I don't need a race truck :) ....But, how
well does a mild 390 4V run in a truck? I have 3.50 gears in there
now...and a 2.75 9" pumpkin in stock. I tow 5500 lbs of car trailer
and race car occasionally. The current 360 has virtually no
ooomph...thanks to the previous owner who installed a big cam :( And,
he also put on a Performer intake and Holley 750. I do have a 600
Holley in stock also though....

===
John Pajak JSPajak rocketmail.com
Lexington Park, Maryland http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak

75 F100
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:21:15 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: greasable throw bearing/tranny/transfer question

> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 23:30:54 -0500
> From: "J. Oxley"
> Subject: Re: greasable throw bearing/tranny/transfer question

> Speakin of this. Does the NP435/NP205 have different
> input/main/output shafts between 1/2 ton and 3/4 or 1 ton??

I understand they do and I talked to Tom's broncos and he said I
could talk to his repair staff and they could help me fix one up but
he didn't know for sure himself. I never called them since I wasn't
ready to buy a HD rebuild :-(

I read an article that implied this was true at least with the
NP-205 but don't know where to get any info on it and don't know
what, it any, effect it has on other components like gears which must
fit on it etc..

Where's Murphy when
you really need him??

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:29:03 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: 390 or 460?

keep the FE, make it a 390 and don't go bigger than a 280 duration cam ( 0.050").
a 390 4v mildly done will tow the trailer and still be enjoyable to put your foot into it on the way to work :)
now, if you want to pull that trailer and while towing make putting your foot into it enjoyable go with the 460!
but, it will be alot cheepar and easier to just do up the FE.

how about a 410?

sleddog

- ----------
From: John Pajak[SMTP:jspajak rocketmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 1998 12:11 AM
To: fordtrucks61-79 ListService.net
Subject: 390 or 460?

Alright folks, help me out! Should I convert my 360 to a 390 or
go through all the pain and heartache of finding a 460/C6 and all the
mounts, manifolds, etc to make the conversion? I realize the 460 has
more ultimate potential but I don't need a race truck :) ....But, how
well does a mild 390 4V run in a truck? I have 3.50 gears in there
now...and a 2.75 9" pumpkin in stock. I tow 5500 lbs of car trailer
and race car occasionally. The current 360 has virtually no
ooomph...thanks to the previous owner who installed a big cam :( And,
he also put on a Performer intake and Holley 750. I do have a 600
Holley in stock also though....

===
John Pajak JSPajak rocketmail.com
Lexington Park, Maryland http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak

75 F100
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?






+-------------- 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, 06 Feb 1998 07:42:04 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: 390/428 flywheel questions

At 07:29 AM 2/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Is the problem that the 428 flywheel is no longer available? Even if
>it's not you should be able to get a billet aftermarket unit for close
>to the prices you guys are talking.
>The 428 has a counterweight cast into it. It does not have to be
>balanced. When the engine is balanced it is done with the balancer and
>flywheel attached.
>I would much rather have an original than one with wieghts attached to
>it.
>
>George
>> >
>> >As I am doing with my 352 flywheel which I am putting on my 410, and having
>> >Detroit balanced.
>> >
Aha, so I'm wrong! No, I'm WRONG!!

There that felt better.

I will ask my machine shop guy if the counterweight will fall off.
Actually, he may have drilled the flywheel to remove opposite weight rather
than adding counterweights...
I don't know. I suppose what with liking my legs and all I should ask.


marko

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:46:38 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: 428 flywheel

Jeff writes: >>Also, while talking to Ford about the 390 flywheels, he
said they were different between pre- and post about 1973 or 1974. He
said he thought the ring gears were different. Do you happen to
know?

Yes the earlier versions and the latter versions have different spacing
between the teeth on the ringgear. I'm not certain about the year this
occurred, but I do the know '61 had different spacing than the '69, so
I suspect it was earlier than the FOMOCO parts guy says. The starter
is the identifier here. If it has a half cover over the Bendix, and
the shaft for the bendix is enclosed on the end of this covering, then
it is the later version(more teeth on the ringgear). If the bendix is
just hung out there on a shaft exiting from the starter with no
surrounding at all, then it is the earlier version with fewer teeth on
the ring gear.

As for the preference in the 390 and the 428 flywheel, it is a matter
of what you want and are willing to pay for. I would be satisfied
with either. You must have confidence in the machine shop to go with
the 390, but they are in the business and if they can't do a balance as
simple as this one, then they aren't likely to stay in business very
long. Go with what you are comfortable here.

Azie

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:49:20 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: Brakes, bleeding, pressure......

> From: danadeb pacbell.net
> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 21:38:52 -0800
> Subject: Re: Brakes, bleeding, pressure......

> The loops were there to keep the lines from fatiguing and braking,
> when the body flexes relative to the frame. I hope you don't have
> problems in the future!

Yeah, I left quite a bit of line so it can move around quite a bit.
It still has a big "bulge" in it near the MC, just not a full loop.
I leave several bends in all my lines to allow for shrinkage in
winter as well. If my body and frame flex away from each other that
much I'm in trouble anyway :-) I've actually been thinking of using
braided teflon line for the whole system. Anyone ever try that?
Might make the brakes a little more mushy? Might be an improvement
:-) Wouldn't take much to improve my brakes :-(

Where's Murphy when
you really need him??

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:49:08 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: 390 or 460?

At 05:11 AM 2/6/98 -0800, you wrote:
> Alright folks, help me out! Should I convert my 360 to a 390 or
>go through all the pain and heartache of finding a 460/C6 and all the
>mounts, manifolds, etc to make the conversion? I realize the 460 has
>more ultimate potential but I don't need a race truck :) ....But, how
>well does a mild 390 4V run in a truck? I have 3.50 gears in there
>now...and a 2.75 9" pumpkin in stock. I tow 5500 lbs of car trailer
>and race car occasionally. The current 360 has virtually no
>ooomph...thanks to the previous owner who installed a big cam :( And,
>he also put on a Performer intake and Holley 750. I do have a 600
>Holley in stock also though....
>
>===
>John Pajak JSPajak rocketmail.com
>Lexington Park, Maryland http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak

There was another guy on the list who did what I am doing, and runs a 410 in
his f250. A Ford Performance book I have sez the 410 makes 444 pounds of
torque, at 2300 and 330 hp at 5000 or so. That is a huge amount of torque.
Azie told me also to go for the 410, when I was humming and haw-ing about
whether or not to go for it.

Of course the build takes a bit of work. You need the crank, the pulley, a
flywheel (more on that in a later post) but you can use new 390 pistons and
the valvetrain is all the same. Your existing exhaust setup, bellhousing,
tin (pan, valve covers), front cover and distributor etc will all bolt right
up.

But if you were to build something, why not the 410? Or, if your block can
stand the bore (depends) you could do a full-blown 428.


marko

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:53:04 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: 390 or 460?

At 05:11 AM 2/6/98 -0800, you wrote:
> Alright folks, help me out! Should I convert my 360 to a 390 or
>go through all the pain and heartache of finding a 460/C6 and all the
>mounts, manifolds, etc to make the conversion? I realize the 460 has
>more ultimate potential but I don't need a race truck :) ....But, how
>well does a mild 390 4V run in a truck? I have 3.50 gears in there
>now...and a 2.75 9" pumpkin in stock. I tow 5500 lbs of car trailer
>and race car occasionally. The current 360 has virtually no
>ooomph...thanks to the previous owner who installed a big cam :( And,
>he also put on a Performer intake and Holley 750. I do have a 600
>Holley in stock also though....
>
>===
>John Pajak JSPajak rocketmail.com
>Lexington Park, Maryland http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.tripod.com/~JSPajak
>
From: Chezpip
Return-path:

John, here's the post the guy sent me about his 410. marko ;-)


the 410 came from a mercury car. it is a '66 motor with 10.5:1 compression.
it originally had a 4 barrel autolite, but i replaced it with a Rochester
Quad. i had the heads redone, put a 268 cam with .490intake lift and .510
exhaust lift. the only problem is pre ignition... i have the thing retarded
to about 2 degrees BTDC to keep from pinging, and do not have the vacuum
advance hooked up. The motor feels like it's got Twice the power of the
original 360 2V but i feel like the 92 octane unleaded gas is cheating me of
horses. if only racing fuel were a tad cheaper. the motor came with 330
stock horses, and i'd guess that i'm running close to 270, based on the way it
still pulls away. it sounds great with the dual exhaust, and the Quadrajet
(believe it or not). those secondaries howl like a werewolf and the exhaust
roars like a bear. i have the truck running through a stock C6, stock 3.73
gears and 33"s. i tow the 21' bayliner like it's not there. enough
already... >75 F100

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 10:03:10 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: 428 flywheel

Marko writes: >>
The 352,360,390, 406, 410, 427 and 428 flywheels are ALL THE SAME with
the
exception of 361 and 391FT engine flywheels which are thicker.

WRONG -- WRONG -- WRONG. The 428's and the 410's are balanced
differently from the
remainder of the FE family. They all carry the same flywheel to
crankshaft bolt pattern, and they
all carry one of two different pressure plate bolt patterns, but they
definitely aren't balanced the
same. The 410/428 is externally balanced. The remainder of the FE's
are internally balanced.

You will get one big vibrating engine by mixing these, unless you have
the flywheel balanced to
thje engine.

Azie

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 10:08:09 +0000
From: "Gary, 78 BBB"
Subject: Re: 9" gear changes

> From: SARHOG aol.com
> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 15:10:41 EST
> Subject: Re: 9" gear changes

> > The carrier has a flange for the ring gear. The only difference
> > I'm aware of is the flange location axially to allow for thinner
> > ring gears without the carrier hitting the housing. The step
> > over is around 3.73 or 3.86 so your are fine in any case.
>
> I have a 4.11 ratio in my truck now, and I'm planning on
> switching to a
> 3.50 real soon. After reading the above it made me wonder, is this

I put "thick" 4.11 ring gear on a 3.50 carrier and had to grind off
some casting flash in a few spots to make it work. The 4.11 can be
had either thick or thin depending on the carrier you have but you
have to tell the saleman what you have or you may get the wrong set
for your application.

As the ratio gets larger the pinion gets smaller so the ring gear
gets thicker. At some point it gets too think to be practical and
they move the flange over and thin it back out. The 4.11 is the
transition ratio between these extremes and will fit either carrier
but you have to get the thin set for the larger ratio carrier and the
thick set for the 3.50 carrier. The thicker gear and inner location
of the teeth is what causes it to rub toward the center of the
housing. The 3.25 gear I have is about 1/2 the thickness of the 4.11
I used and has much smaller teeth.

The pinion size and location doesn't change due to the 9" diameter
constraint of the ring gear. Counting teeth is a convenient way to
determine ratio but the two diameters are actually what determines
the phycal ralationship. Since the teeth are constrained by this
relationship as well they always work out to the same ratio as the
diameters.

Where's Murphy when
you really need him??

- -- Gary --

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 08:22:19 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: 428 flywheel

At 10:03 AM 2/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Marko writes: >>
>The 352,360,390, 406, 410, 427 and 428 flywheels are ALL THE SAME with
>the
>exception of 361 and 391FT engine flywheels which are thicker.
>
OK Azie, help me out here.

I have one flywheel with the 11" clutch bolt pattern out of a 352.

Then I have another flywheel with the 11.5" three-finger hd clutch bolt
pattern out of a 360.

I need a flywheel for my 410. Actually I already did something, and here's
what it was.

I took the 352 flywheel cause you can't buy an 11.5" anything except another
Ford clutch which albeit strong tends to chatter. I bought a Centerforce
clutch 11" clutch and took my flywheel and pressure plate to the machine
shop which is building my 410 and they balanced it together with the
crank/pulley assembly.

Is this gonna be okay? The shop seems to think so.

What do you think?

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 10:30:03 -0500
From: shoman p3.net
Subject: What coil springs to use?

With spring approaching, I getting my apples in a row..
I'm swapping my 302 to a 390 wat coil springs should I use???I assume
the 302's wont hold the extra 150+ pounds can i use the ones
from a 76-79 F-150 that i got the dana 44 from??I swapping to discs
at the same time the truck that i got the dana44 from had a 400 in it.
Also can i use F-250 rear springs in my f-100???74 is the f250 year?
Joe

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:43:14 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Brakes part 4

I WIN!!!!!!!!

Complete refund from Winston Tires!

Still no apology or direct admission that they had made a mistake.

But I did get a new drum out of it for my "Hassle Factor"


:-)

Dana

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

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 07:47:32 -0800
From: danadeb pacbell.net
Subject: Re: What coil springs to use?

shoman p3.net wrote:
>
> With spring approaching, I getting my apples in a row..
> I'm swapping my 302 to a 390


Joe,
Go for the gusto!!! If your going to go through the hassle to swap to a 390 (
old technology [flame suite on]) then go all the way---> go 460 ;-)

Dana

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

Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 10:49:53 -0500
From: am14 chrysler.com
Subject: Divorced Xfercase

Marko: The F150 4X4 changed to married xfercase earlier than the
F250's and F350's. The latter of these did not change until the '78....


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.