 |
|
|
|
|
|
Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages contained in these archives without consent from the respective author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors. From: owner-61-79-list-digest  ford-trucks.com (61-79-list-digest) To: 61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Subject: 61-79-list-digest V3 #471 Reply-To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com Sender: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Errors-To: owner-61-79-list-digest ford-trucks.com Precedence: bulk 61-79-list-digest Thursday, December 23 1999 Volume 03 : Number 471 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: majordomo ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: RE: FTE 61-79 - Dropping back to idle FTE 61-79 - re: One More Time RE: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... RE: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. RE: FTE 61-79 -Elementary Truckese Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. RE: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps Re: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) Re: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports RE: FTE 61-79 - Rough running on some cold mornings RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: FTE - barrel o' fun, etc FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel FTE 61-79 - Lug nuts RE: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. FTE 61-79 - NP 205 FTE 61-79 - NP 205 RE: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) RE: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel RE: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel FTE 61-79 - RE: 94 Tbird w/ 3.8 v6 Re: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... Re: FTE 61-79 - Rough running on some cold mornings FTE 61-79 - Bumpers Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. FTE 61-79 - Wiring Diagram Re: FTE 61-79 - Wiring Diagram RE: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers Re: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers RE: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: The cold & all FTE 61-79 - Reverse Rotation Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports Re: FTE 61-79 - Reverse Rotation FTE 61-79 - rough running on cold mornings FTE 61-79 - "Whiter whites, Brighter brights" Re: FTE 61-79 - Toys and stuff.... RE: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... Re: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. Re: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:12:30 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Dropping back to idle I agree Pat that's why I began using sillycone spray instead. There is nothing slippryer than sillycone :-) Oil dries out and gets gummy as well as attracting every piece of dirt that comes along, not good for the linkage. Silicone should not do that but only time will tell :-) I wouldn't use any lube at all except that my secondarys stick due to a warped intake pad. Some day I'm going to get in there and re-install the intake, fix the choke pulloff, rejet the carb, replace the power valve, fix the bad idle screw and add a stock air cleaner with heat stove but until then.........:-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > As Gary and wish pointed out, sticky choke and/or fast idle linkage. > Clean them with Berryman Chemtool and a small acid brush, DON'T LUBE! > Oil will just make everything sticky. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 06:14:37 -0600 From: ballingr bootheel.net Subject: FTE 61-79 - re: One More Time Thanks for the quick reply. I guess I'll pull the box again and see what I can do, after the holidays. Know where I can get a replacement bearing? There feels to be a slight "notch" or a "groove" in the steeing when I'm traveling in a straigth line, and play on either side of it, more on the right. I've had the kingpins replaced and the alignment set by Bear F&A in Denver. They put in the bronze bushings as well as bent one of the I-beams and it's been great ever since, except for this increasing play. In fact, it still tracks very well, with no wander to either side on a straight stretch of highway if I'm in the groove. I had the tie rods looked at by another guy in Brighton about 30K ago and though I was ready with all of the ends, he only replaced the drag link - everything's stll pretty good there. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this a manual box? Have you made sure the grease in the box isn't broke down? You'd be surprised how much that stuff helps in giving the box the proper feel and tightness, like a wheel bearing, it stiffens it up. A notchy feel like that makes it kind of sound like a (worm?)bearing preload problem. That bearing may need to be replaced. But for the heck of it I'd make sure it's got some grease left in it. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:17:30 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... The grey anti-seize made by Permatex or loctite is the best thing to use because it is impervious to water and will not wash off. It's much better than oil or grease for this. I use it on every nut and bolt on the truck. (except spark plugs and I may experiment with that on my next plug change :-)) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > I have never had a problem with the lug nuts coming loose because > of this, and I highly recommend the procedure, since you *will* > want to take those lug nuts off again at some point, and the grease > or oil you use to lube the threads will help keep the rust from > developing and making the job harder than it should be. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:36:24 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. As in military axles or are we talking "Uni.....Mog"? :-) Only one.....you can't shift in and out of OD on the fly with this setup :-) Will you have enough grunt to get it rolling from a stop light, light after light with this in gear? - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > cruising with my new trail rig. The MOG axles I am thinking > of stuffing > under my 78 have a 7.56 gear ratio. I have researched everything I can > think of. I looked at; > So why coudln't I do this (besides the fact I'm crazy :-)), any > comments?? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:47:21 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 -Elementary Truckese In our case, on this list we use "Pure Stock" :-) :-) :-) And it means just what it implies to the knowledgeable truck buff :-) Pure Crane, Pure Holley, Pure Melling, Pure Hillborn, pure 871, pure........:-) I like "Bone Stock" or "Stone Stock" or "Lock Stock....Oppps, wrong theme :-) god forbid it might have some secret arcane meaning...... - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > > So then, what's the expression you all use > > to describe the truck -- "stock everything"? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:05:29 -0500 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. Peters, Gary (G.R.) wrote: > > As in military axles or are we talking "Uni.....Mog"? :-) Unimog > Only one.....you can't shift in and out of OD on the fly with this setup :-) Can't shift into 4 WD either, but don't care too. One thing that willbe funny is since the mog axles have cable actuated lockers, I would have 2 levers for lockers, one normal TC lever and one add on TC lever. Hope I can rememnber what does what :-). > Will you have enough grunt to get it rolling from a stop light, light after > light with this in gear? Mog axles are 3.54 ring and pinion, with 2.13 hub reduction. That is a 7.54 gear. Assuming a 205 in LR is 1.9 or 2.0, that would leave me with about a 3.96 (or 3.73) gear. With a 36 or 38 inch tire and a mildy built 400, it should be fine for normal street driving. No rocket, but fast enough :-) OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 08:06:27 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps Jerry, what rpm is it running now and at what speed do you want to cruise?. You can build that motor up but it's still a 170 so is limited on torque you can get from it. Van's typically have a pretty fair wind resistance which has to be overcome at speed. Give us some info: 1..year 2..size. E-100 etc 3..axles 4..tires 5..speed you want to cruise at This engine probably won't be happy running any slower than about 3000 rpm at freeway speeds in a van depending on weight etc.. Modern, aerodynamicly designed trucks run about 2200 at 70 in OD but without an OD tranny you will need to sacrifice a little of that to gain more at the bottom since you don't have the gear spacing of the OD. Modern engines are also larger and designed with much stronger bottom end torque specifically designed for this rpm range. You can cam for this range also but still only have 170 cubes so there are limits. I don't think 2200 is a reasonable target for this engine, somewhat higher would be better IMHO :-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > -----Original Message----- > From: Jerry Godsey [mailto:godsey51 prodigy.net] > Sent: 12/22/1999 1:09 AM > To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps > > > I am looking to replace the gears in my Econoline's read end. > As near as I > can tell, they are 4:11's. What can I change them to in > order to get higher > top end? > Also, after seriously considering a 302 or 289 swap, I am > going to stick > with the 170 c.i. six. Clifford Performance says that with their 2bbl > adapter, and a header with single exhaust, you can get 25% > more horsepower > at the rear wheel. If I add one of their cams, it goes to > 40%. I am just > wondering if changing the gearing will make it better. > I'm not trying to hot rod the truck, I just want to be able > to cruise on the > freeway! > Thanks in advance. > Blessings, > Jerry Godsey > www.geocities.com/heartland/meadows/4275 > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info > http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:17:16 -0600 From: prozell oaielectronics.com (OAI Electronics: Paul Rozell) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) Additional question, how hard are the bands to adjust. Is there a procedure for this. Paul 65 F100 (my dads truck) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Brad Smith To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 9:32 PM Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: rich may > To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 2:49 PM > Subject: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) > > > > I was pulling out of the gas station yesterday, put it > > in gear and started to drive off. Guess what....it was > > stuck in first. I pulled over, put it in park and back > > into drive. The same thing happened. I had to creep > > home. I came home today, and it was fine when I left > > work, but when I turned onto my road.....first gear > > again. It seems to happen once there is heat that has > > been built up. It doesn't want to upshift. I can go to > > 4500rpm and still nothing. I was in first and I > > crested this hill, and it kicked it into second. So > > today I got to drive home in second. There also seems > > to be a new vibration (still haven't found the first > > vibration). What could this be? > > > > Rich > Sounds like you have a band problem to me... I would change the fluid and > try adjusting the bands to see if that helps... As far as the vibration, > sounds like possibly a torque converter problem... Has the trucking been > "lugging" in high gear, like it just didn't have much power? If so, you've > got some broken springs in the converter... Remans are ~$100... Sounds like > we got lots O' tranny rebuilds going on here lately (I just finished up an > A4LD today out of a an 93 ranger).... Good luck! > > Brad > > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:24:14 -0600 From: prozell oaielectronics.com (OAI Electronics: Paul Rozell) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps I have a set of 3.00 in my rear end of my 65F100 and it will cruise on the highway with no problems. I am in the process of changing mine to a 3.89 or somewhere in that range, I want more bottom end. Paul 65 F100 (my dads truck) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry Godsey To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 12:09 AM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Gear swaps > I am looking to replace the gears in my Econoline's read end. As near as I > can tell, they are 4:11's. What can I change them to in order to get higher > top end? > Also, after seriously considering a 302 or 289 swap, I am going to stick > with the 170 c.i. six. Clifford Performance says that with their 2bbl > adapter, and a header with single exhaust, you can get 25% more horsepower > at the rear wheel. If I add one of their cams, it goes to 40%. I am just > wondering if changing the gearing will make it better. > I'm not trying to hot rod the truck, I just want to be able to cruise on the > freeway! > Thanks in advance. > Blessings, > Jerry Godsey > www.geocities.com/heartland/meadows/4275 > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:42:32 -0600 From: ballingr bootheel.net Subject: FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports >289's >have good ex port designs. and most FE's have good >exhaust ports. and the >351c,m The 289 port is just right for a 289, they should have increased the size of it when they went to the 302, and especially the 351W. That poor engine (the 351W) is hurting for exhaust port! I've even had to port them for a couple of 8000 rpm 289's if that tells you anything. I does the old ticker some good to hear somebody say what I've been saying for years. Actually about any FE exhaust port is good. They hardly changed them the whole time they were made, and were used in the same basic comfiguration from the lowly 332 to the 427 HR and TP's that were capable of over 600 hp. The only real difference was bigger valves and slightly larger bowls. Amazingly, you can cut any FE head's exhaust bowl out to same detail as a 427 HR or TP. The post '66 heads were starting to look at emissions, so you begin to see some changes taking place. Thermactor, smaller, faster burning chambers with the little pucker between the plug and the intake valve, etc. They put a 3/16 downturn to the exit in the port roof, I asume to fit the unibody manifolds. But they say it didn't hurt the flow much. (I still like the early heads better, and you can tell the difference by the number of bolt holes the the better ones have 8 holes in a vertical pattern) I never understood Ford's philosophy in the design of their later heads. Like a gorrila with a chimpanzee's rectum. (flame retardant array fully deployed) They cheated the 385 series almost criminally. I heard it said that the must have just wadded up shop towels and stuck them in the core box for the exhaust ports! Even the 351C 4V's needed port plates to get up to the intake side's potential. One thing they did for all of these engines that helped a huge amount was to design a good cheap iron exhaust manifold and make them in huge quantities. The FE suffered badly at the hands of the log type manifolds they were (and still are) saddled with. An FE must have headers to get anywhere near breathing effficiency, where any of these others can run stock manifolds. Let me reiterate, an FE turns into a stuttering, slobbering, rabid beast with headers and a bit more cam, enough that they will self-destruct if you don't improve the oiling on them. These other engines really don't gain as much from headers because the ports are restricted, and, all the oiling issues were solved in their design. They take less short-block preparation to run hard. I'd call that a tie in that respect. Please understand, I'm not trashing these engines. They do fine in a lot of applications. But, I've seen a poor guy shake his head at the strip when a properly built 390 (that was well tuned) with headers beat up on his 429, (that too had headers and about the same amount of cam) Sadly, I've seen it more than once. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:29:53 -0800 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Rough running on some cold mornings Does the carb have a working choke on it? Verify its operation. Make sure the choke plate closes fully when the engine is cold. Do you have a working warm air intake system? I mean the stock air cleaner with the heat riser off the exhaust manifold. Make sure the diverter door in the snorkle is working. Check that the high idle cam is adjusted properly. Tom H. > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck White [mailto:chuckebabe jps.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 9:44 AM > To: 61-79 Ford Trucks > Subject: FTE 61-79 - Rough running on some cold mornings > > > Hello all. I've got a '71 F-250 with the 390 and a C-6. > It's been punched > up a bit with a cam, Holley, Edelbrock intake, headers etc. Here's the > problem. On some cold mornings the truck runs really rough > until it gets > completely warmed up about 2 or 3 miles of driving. I have a > Mallory dual > point distributor on it that I was assuming was gathering > condensatiuon. > Trouble is when I pop the cap off I can't seem to see any > moisture at all. > There is already a small hole about the size of a pencil > lead drilled in > the side of the cap (it was there when I purchased the unit > used). My first > car was a '64 Comet which occasionaly had the same problem > but I always > found moisture in the cap when I opened it. Does anybody > have any ideas? > Also can someone tell me where I can get a manual for this > distributor? > > Thanks for any help, Chuck > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info > http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:29:52 -0800 From: "Hogan, Tom" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - RE: FTE - barrel o' fun, etc > I felt it was appropriate for the list so sent to them as > well Jeff :-) > > Yes, I've been lax myself about this stuff but I have gotten > wiser in my old > age and avoid prolonged contact with such chemicals. I wear > gloves for many > things now where it's appropriate and doesn't interfere with dexterity > requirments etc.. Having a bath room with hot water and good > hand cleaner > to keep the stuff off is a vast improvement over my old shop > too :-) I > think my next purchase will be an official shop coffee pot :-) > > For washing parts it's a good idea to have a HD pair of > gloves and use them > every time. This stuff not only is toxic in itself but > eventually contains > heavy metals and other toxins which can be absorbed and cause > damage. Also make sure the gloves won't react to the chemicals you're using. I was using some NAPA carb cleaner one time. The kind that comes in a gallon can and you soak the parts in it in a basket. Well I didn't have a basket but I did have latex gloves. I put the part in a bucket and using my hands in the latex gloves swished the parts around in the bucket. As I went the gloves DISSOLVED in the solvent. Polypropelyne gloves would have been better in this case. A PARTS BASKET would have been better (as recommended on the can!!!). On of the concerns of this hobby. Proper handling of the chemicals invlolved. Proper disposal is important as well. Tom H. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:43:08 EST From: BDIJXS aol.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel Will hooking up two 12V batteries directly in parallel affect their longevity??? Assume both are brand new. CJ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:49:22 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - Lug nuts High Plains Richard writes: >> Did Ford ever do this? If so when did they stop? Maybe with the new alloys and such that are used now it might be a good idea again?<< Our Church had a '82 E350 bus(dual rear wheels) that had left handed threads on the left side, both front and rear. I was on the transportation committee for a long time, and I was putting new brakes on the rear and found out the hard way. (ie. I twisted one off, before I remembered that this was done in some cases) I have a '76 Farm truck (F350 w/ dual rear wheels) with a 12' flatbed on it and it has standard threads on all lugs. MY '73 F700 has left handed threads on the left side, both front and rear. I really don't know if FOMOCO knows for sure if there was ever a "standard" or not for left handed threads, but Ford did do it sometimes. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:45:41 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. Have you told the bronco boys yet that you have a set of the coveted mog axles? :-) I can see them slobbering all over themselves already :-) Course it won't be long and we'll see the hummer axles out there available too which are about the same thing I guess :-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > Peters, Gary (G.R.) wrote: > > > > As in military axles or are we talking "Uni.....Mog"? :-) > > Unimog == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:16:27 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - NP 205 OX writes: >> 4. Runing 205 backwards in LR. I have 3, 205's, so no cost there. Making crossmember would be 100$ or less. Might need custom yokes, but would be less than several thousand. I saw in my 78 shop maual what looked like a divorced 205 case, as it had yokes on both ends. This might be a better option, using single U-joint between the cases. I will definately need some kind of shaft to fit in output (which used to be input) unless I can find the divorced case input shaft. Were there any other internal changes besides input shaft with divorced case.<< The divorced 205 was standard in F250's and F350's from '75 thru mid '77 I know for sure, and maybe some others. The internals are supposed to be identical. I would not recommend using a single u-joint between them. Either mate them directly, or use a double joint. I was told to do this because a single will cause you vibration that will litterally drive you crazy. I haven't tried the single u-joint, but I have faith in the person that told me this. He works Birmingham Spring in B'ham, Al. and is their driveshaft machinist. I might add that they do litterally hundreds of driveshafts weekly of all types from very large construction equipment to custom shafts for rodders etc. I've used him on several occasions and have come to trust his judgement totally. Your idea is a good one in theory. Be sure to let the list know if it works as well as it seems in theory. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:21:01 -0500 From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com Subject: FTE 61-79 - NP 205 OX writes: >>Was the divorced case a 205??<< Not all. 203's were also divorced in the same years and vehicles as mentioned previously. Also the divorced cases have a yoke on both ends, so you won't need an "input" shaft. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:37:39 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) C-6 only has one band and there is a torque setting for it. They are very easy to adjust but you have to have a 5/16 square socket and inch pound torqe wrench as I recall, maybe it was foot pounds....I think I used mine so it must be about 10 ftlbs or so on the C-4 at least. Don't remember doing the C-6 but pretty sure I put a band in it when I rebuilt it. I know I did because I also cut diagonal grooves in the friction material to make it shift faster. (this is not recommended by the way) You can buy the bands already cut for this. - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > Additional question, how hard are the bands to adjust. Is > there a procedure > for this. > Paul == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:29:48 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel Standard, lead/acid batteries have a finite life span measured in total amount of discharge. Once that has been reached, regardless of time on the battery or life span, the battery will not charge any more. The more often you run it down below a certain threshold the sooner it will die regardless of other care you give it. Theoretically then, the more batteries you have in the system the more "amps" you will have so the less each will be discharged at any given time and therefore should prolong the life of each battery but........will it be enough to be an improvement, cost wise? Can't say for sure. It depends on a lot of factors but I would be inclined to believe your over all battery costs/year will be about the same. What it will do is give you much more security, especially if you separate them so that only one is used at a time but both are kept charged. There are special switches you can buy to do this. Marine battery setups use this system to good advantage even though they typically use deep discharge batteries. - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > Will hooking up two 12V batteries directly in parallel affect their > longevity??? > > Assume both are brand new. > > CJ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:51:46 PST From: "Don Jones" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel > >Will hooking up two 12V batteries directly in parallel affect their >longevity??? > >Assume both are brand new. > Our Fire Dept has a rescue van (197? Ch#v powered)that had the batteries wired like that, along with a disconnect switch that isolated both batteries from the rest of the electrical system when it is not in use. The problem we had was that if a flaw develops in one battery then both are discharged. We ended up replacing both batteries once, then finally replaced them both with a large marine-type deep cycle battery. If you are buying two new batteries, then why not consider a single one with a larger capacity? Don Jones 1970 f-250 4X4 ~Fordzilla~ ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:57:24 -0500 From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: FTE 61-79 - RE: 94 Tbird w/ 3.8 v6 Thanks to all who chimed in :-) Went to Bauman and discovered that the 4R70W is basically a wide ratio AOD-E and is actually a decent tranny when set up properly. I'm going to get the AOD-E book and then some stuff from Bauman to repair mine and then it's on to the C-6's I have lying around.....for the trucks :-) - -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=167 - -- > You want this book: > Ford AOD-E > Located on this page: > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://transbuilder.com/store_atsg.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:35:29 EST From: TBeeee aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... In a message dated 12/22/99 7:19:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, gpeters3 visteon.com writes: > I use it on every nut and bolt on the truck. > (except spark plugs and I may experiment with that on my next plug change I have an old can of a military standard anti-sieze as well as a "never-seeze" brand and each indicate that it is acceptable in high heat applications. The petroleum base burns off but the graphite remains. I have used these products on spark plugs and was satisfied with the result. Stock Man 1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible (HELP!---I need 15 x5 factory rims) 1967 F-250 FE 390 4wd 1966 F-250 I6 240 2wd LWB Flare Side http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hometown.aol.com/tbeeee == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:53:41 EST From: Bad4dFilly aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Rough running on some cold mornings Hey there! I can't tell ya exactly what the prob is, but I do know that it helps A LOT to set the choke up up. WHen I first got my truck it took almost 15 minutes for it to get warmed up before I could even drive LOL *~*~Lisa and ENvy~*~* *~*~SIlly boys...trucks are for girls!~*~* == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:05:05 -0800 From: "Andrion, Michael" Subject: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers Hi all, I need some help. I have a 1962 F100 and I need bumpers. None of the catalog houses seem to carry my year. I have found several F100's at the junk yard a 61, 63 and a 65. The bracket holes seem to be different on these years. Can the bumpers from other years fit easily on my 62? Has anyone out there had the same problem and how you fix it. Also my truck seems to sag in the middle. I hear this is typical of the years 61 to 66. If so how can I also fix. Thanks in advance. Mike == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:32:09 -0500 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. Peters, Gary (G.R.) wrote: > > Have you told the bronco boys yet that you have a set of the coveted mog > axles? :-) I can see them slobbering all over themselves already :-) > > Course it won't be long and we'll see the hummer axles out there >available > too which are about the same thing I guess :-) > Not really. I don't think that indep. crap is in the same league personally. These are solid axles, with a real 6+ inches of extra ground clearance. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thecore.com/~luxjo/mog/mog05.jpg Relatively easy to transplant into any vehicle that had solid axles. Even front track bar and drag link are more or less in the same spot as 1/2 ton coil stuff. http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thecore.com/~luxjo/mog/mog03.jpg Axle shafts are almost 1-3/4. Even axles tube is about 4 inch. Not sure how I could get radisu arm mounts on there. Might have to go toa 4 link susp. They were designed for an std 38 and optional 42 inch tire. OX == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:46:16 -0800 (PST) From: Will Vanderstien Subject: FTE 61-79 - Wiring Diagram I am looking for a wiring diagram for my 1966 ford f-100 standard cab. Where can i find one??? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:27:03 -0600 From: prozell oaielectronics.com (OAI Electronics: Paul Rozell) Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Wiring Diagram Look on the Ford Truck enthusiasts web site at www.ford-trucks.com/cgi-bin/web_store/webshop.cgi. You can order a wiring diagram for 1963 to 1967 Ford Trucks. Paul 65 F100 (my dads truck) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Will Vanderstien To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 1:46 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Wiring Diagram > I am looking for a wiring diagram for my 1966 ford > f-100 standard cab. Where can i find one??? > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. > > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:25:01 -0700 From: "Matthew Senn" Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers here's a place that might have the bumpers . . . http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dennis-carpenter.com/ . . . hope this helps - -----Original Message----- From: owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com [mailto:owner-61-79-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Andrion, Michael Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 12:05 PM To: '61-79-list ford-trucks.com' Subject: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers Hi all, I need some help. I have a 1962 F100 and I need bumpers. None of the catalog houses seem to carry my year. I have found several F100's at the junk yard a 61, 63 and a 65. The bracket holes seem to be different on these years. Can the bumpers from other years fit easily on my 62? Has anyone out there had the same problem and how you fix it. Also my truck seems to sag in the middle. I hear this is typical of the years 61 to 66. If so how can I also fix. Thanks in advance. Mike == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 12:41:42 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Brown Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Bumpers > Hi all, > > I need some help. I have a 1962 F100 and I need bumpers. None of the > catalog houses seem to carry my year. I have found several F100's at the > junk yard a 61, 63 and a 65. The bracket holes seem to be different on > these years. Can the bumpers from other years fit easily on my 62? Has > anyone out there had the same problem and how you fix it. Hi Mike, I just put a new (rebuilt) bumper on my '70 F250. After looking at many bent, rusty bumpers at the wreckers I stopped into a local body shop and ordered it for about $150, no shipping charges. I got a nice, straight, re-chromed bumper in a few days, and they took my old one in trade to be reborn for the next guy. > > Also my truck seems to sag in the middle. I hear this is typical of the > years 61 to 66. If so how can I also fix. > Cab mounts and/or bent frame - Ever seen a S-10 that has been overloaded? :-) - -- Pat Brown Sebastopol, California == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:16:55 -0800 (PST) From: rich may Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - C-6 dilemma (new) Gary, I went out this morning thinking that the problem had been solved. I started her up and took off. When I returned it was doing it again. Could I have "burnt out" the modulator? At this stage, I am ready to drop a 4-speed back into the thing. Rich __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:22:51 EST From: WEDIVE247 aol.com Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Re: The cold & all In a message dated 12/21/1999 10:07:33 PM EST, saintnsinner mpinet.net writes: << It also depends on where you are . Its 80 ' in Dec. here in >Florida...... To which I must add..." Well put brother Floridians!!" Let them have the cold frozen North... I will even put up with the tourists & mice over the cold!! >> You better believe that , give that man an egg-nog. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 16:36:08 -0600 From: ballingr bootheel.netSubject: FTE 61-79 - Reverse Rotation Thanks Gary you jogged my memory on something with your lug nut post. It's unrelated, but it rang the bell. I see in the 4X mags stuff about some Fords having "reverse rotation" to do with the drive axles. What is it all about, anyone know? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:49:00 EST From: A4x4junky aol.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports In a message dated 12/22/99 8:45:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, ballingr bootheel.net writes:<< Let me reiterate, an FE turns into a stuttering, slobbering, rabid beast with headers and a bit more cam, enough that they will self-destruct if you don't improve the oiling on them. >> What in your opinion would improved oiling require? Anthony == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:05:30 -0800 From: "Bill Beyer" Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Reverse Rotation Reverse rotation actually refers to the angle of the cut on the ring/pinion gears. Some front axle D44s and D60s have pinions which enter the housing at the top instead of the bottom. My understanding is these were used to facilitate front driveshaft clearance/angles. These front axles require a different gear set from the normal D44/D60 tho' they don't actually rotate in a different direction. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Ford Truck Enthusiasts <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 2:36 PM Subject: FTE 61-79 - Reverse Rotation > Thanks Gary you jogged my memory on something with your lug nut post. It's > unrelated, but it rang the bell. > > I see in the 4X mags stuff about some Fords having "reverse rotation" to do > with the drive axles. What is it all about, anyone know? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:18:39 -0800 From: "Chuck White" Subject: FTE 61-79 - rough running on cold mornings Thanks for the info about the choke. It is an electric and the next time it happens I'm gonna pull off the air cleaner and check out what is happening with it. I live near San Francisco so we don't get too many cold and damp mornings. ;-) Again though I would still like to know if anybody is aware of a web site where I can get some info on the Mallory dual point I have in the truck. Does Mallory have their own web site? Thanks people! Chuck == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 15:55:56 -0800 From: "Chuck White" Subject: FTE 61-79 - "Whiter whites, Brighter brights" I'd just like to thank Steve Delanty for his great tech bulletin on getting the most juice out of my halogen headlights. I'm now blazing along with all the newer models! I do have one suggestion. In the bulletin, (Steve mentions the work was done on a '71 F-100), mention is made of the stock colors for the high and low beam wiring harnesses at the headlights (red for highbeam, green for low). On my truck ('71 F-250), the green is the high and the red is the low! This made for some anxious moments when I first turned them on after the work was completed I can tell ya! Anyway my suggestion is to test the leads at the headlights in the on and then the high beam position to determine which is which before you cut them. Again, thanks for the great bulletin - I couldn't be happier with the results. And by the way you were right Steve - It's easier than it appears to be just reading the instructions. The beer helps ;-) Chuck == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:16:38 EST From: OldTrux aol.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Toys and stuff.... In a message dated 12/21/99 7:20:17 AM Central Standard Time, luxjo thecore.com writes:> Speaking of which, anyone know a source for a cheap, self priming, > drill run pump I could use to transfer gas from one tank to another? Won't the sparks from the drill motor......BOOM!!!!! == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:56:41 -0800 (PST) From: canzus seanet.comSubject: RE: FTE 61-79 - On the subject of lug nuts .... At 07:17 AM 22:12:99 -0500, Peters, Gary (G.R.) wrote: >The grey anti-seize made by Permatex or loctite is the best thing to use >because it is impervious to water and will not wash off. It's much better >than oil or grease for this. I use it on every nut and bolt on the truck. >(except spark plugs and I may experiment with that on my next plug change >:-)) > >-- A truer statement has not been said, I even use it on my plugs.... Steve & the Rockette 68 F100, 390cid, FMX 63 F100, 292cid, 3speed 72 Capri 2000, hers 73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in..... 73 MGB GT, Our Toy 94 SHO, SWMBO's 98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine.... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:57:00 -0800 (PST) From: canzus seanet.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel At 10:43 AM 22:12:99 EST, BDIJXS aol.com wrote:>Will hooking up two 12V batteries directly in parallel affect their >longevity??? Absolutely, My '57 had 2 batteries in parallel, in a custom built battery box under the pasenger seat, they were 48 month types, and lasted 9 years... >Assume both are brand new. assumed... >CJ Steve & the Rockette 68 F100, 390cid, FMX 63 F100, 292cid, 3speed 72 Capri 2000, hers 73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in..... 73 MGB GT, Our Toy 94 SHO, SWMBO's 98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine.... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 18:56:51 -0800 (PST) From: canzus seanet.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Running 205 TC backwards in low range. At 08:05 AM 22:12:99 -0500, James Oxley wrote: > Mog axles are 3.54 ring and pinion, with 2.13 hub reduction. That is a >7.54 gear. Assuming a 205 in LR is 1.9 or 2.0, that would leave me with >about a 3.96 (or 3.73) gear. With a 36 or 38 inch tire and a mildy built >400, it should be fine for normal street driving. No rocket, but fast >enough :-) > If you mount the 205 upside down, you could use the front drive to run a PTO hydraulic unit, for a hydraulic winch or other toy couldnt ya?? Steve & the Rockette 68 F100, 390cid, FMX 63 F100, 292cid, 3speed 72 Capri 2000, hers 73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in..... 73 MGB GT, Our Toy 94 SHO, SWMBO's 98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine.... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:19:46 EST From: SHill48337 aol.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel In a message dated 12/22/99 10:46:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, BDIJXS aol.comwrites: << Will hooking up two 12V batteries directly in parallel affect their longevity??? Assume both are brand new. >> Hi CJ, thanks again for lunch it was great. I read ahead and looked at some of the other responses on batteries and can say I they are fairly accurate in regard to the standard lead acid battery. Let me add though the primary mode of failure is distruction of the plates such that they do not get a uniform build up of material. Sometimes treeing happens from high charge rates when material reaches out and touches another plate shorting it out. Or due to vibration the plate material ends up in the basin below the cells and eventually shorts the bottom of the plates out. Then some plates due to uneven distribution during charging swell and short out. My submarine batteries were very similar to standard deep cycle, but we monitored the charge and discharge rate, maintained electrolyte level, keep all of the connections tight, and they lasted for 6 years before cells would start to fail. My recommendation is to get the new Optima batteries, they do not suffer from the above problems, they do cost around $130 a shot, but will last 6+ with no water addition and no problems with vibration, can be mounted up side down. Yes, 2 batteries in parallel should live longer, but you have doubled your connections and increased the probability of problems associated with bad connections. Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:47:48 EST From: JJJJJGRANT aol.comSubject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Ford Exhaust Ports to improve oiling on the fe, install restrictors in the rocker arm oil holes, this keeps the oil in the bottom end, instead of the top end. some of the old fe drag racers used to talk about cutting short pcs of pipe (the kind you smoke) filters and putting them in the oil holes to restrict the flow, but i think i would rather have a machined restrictor. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ End of 61-79-list-digest V3 #471 ******************************** +----- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 though 1979 Trucks And Vans -----+ | Send posts to 61-79-list ford-trucks.com, || List removal information is on the web site. | +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+.... 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 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. 
|