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 #483
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 Friday, December 31 1999 Volume 03 : Number 483



=======================================================================
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 - lower track bar bolt/sleeve.
FTE 61-79 - survey
FTE 61-79 - Fuel Pump Woes
FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes
RE: FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes
RE: FTE 61-79 - lower track bar bolt/sleeve.
FTE 61-79 - 73-79 crewcabs
RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Axle rebuild - Alignment
Re: FTE 61-79 - Wanted: 79 Gas tank filler hose.
FTE 61-79 - re: Truck Survey.
FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel
RE: FTE 61-79 - Weird overheating with re-built 400
FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?
RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
RE: FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?
RE: FTE 61-79 - '79 f100 4x4
Re: FTE 61-79 - Weird overheating with re-built 400
FTE 61-79 - Re: Ballast Resistor
Re: FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes
FTE 61-79 - Bronco, sick, one each, OD in color.....
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
FTE 61-79 - FUEL INJECTION FOR 460?
Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap
RE: FTE 61-79 - FUEL INJECTION FOR 460?
RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass
FTE 61-79 - have a nice weekend :-)
Re: FTE 61-79 - answers to survey
FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco
Re: FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco
Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap
Re: FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco
Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap
FTE 61-79 - Texas sCrap law
FTE 61-79 - H-pipe
Re: FTE 61-79 - Truck Survey
Re: FTE 61-79 - answers to survey
FTE 61-79 - Re: FE radiator on 300
FTE 61-79 - Truck Survey
RE: FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?
FTE 61-79 - years of the hi boys
FTE 61-79 - potential project truck....questions!
Re: FTE 61-79 - years of the hi boys
FTE 61-79 - engine paint
FTE 61-79 - FE oil pumps
Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint
FTE 61-79 - Spoiled ?

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

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 06:39:40 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - lower track bar bolt/sleeve.

I think I've seen them both ways OX. I know the first kit I got had sleeves
but it was a "Track bar Kit". I think the second one didn't have them but I
bought just the poly bushings as separate items that time from Cepek, can't
remember for sure.

You talking about the big honker on the passenger side in the axle itself?
I think those must be sweated in or pressed in. All of mine are really
tight and I've never gotten one out?? Haven't really tried too hard yet
since they do what they're supposed to but they don't just fall out like a
bolt :-( Don't recon we'd want them to either :-)

- --
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
- --

> Anyone have one off 78/79 1/2 ton front axle? I am replacing axles on
> one of my trucks and the "new" axle does not have a bolt. The
> old bolts
> are frozen solid on the other 2 extra dana 44's I have. I
> forget, do the
> sleeves usually come with the bushing kit. I seem to remember
> the rancho
> bushing kit having internal sleeves too!
>
> OX
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:27:16 GMT
From: "e. eversull" hotmail.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - survey

1. What year and model truck do you have?
1964 F100 custom cab short bed
2. Which of the following best describes your truck:

B. unrestored original or amateur restoration. From 30 feet the
truck looks new
From 300 feet it looks like a truck. It needs paint and interior.

3. Is this an everyday truck or a weekend hobby truck?
It could be driven everyday one week and the second week it would
need a weeks worth of work. It is driven on weekends now.

4. Would you drive it cross-country on a routine basis?
I had a couple pieces of furniture to pick up this summer 1200
miles one way. I flew for $300 and for $600 I rented a Penske, Fred
stayed home. At 6 mpg, loose steering, 2800 rpm 60 mph, and no
radio--no thank you.
______________________________________________________

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 07:32:52 -0600
From: ballingr bootheel.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Fuel Pump Woes

Did the pump crack? If not how did it pump gas into the crankcase? Please
explain, for I am quite confused.....
Brad
>>>>

The diaphram gets a pinhole in it, and it's 50/50 whether it shoots fuel
into the crankcase or onto the hot exhaust. It's obvious what the results
of the latter can be.

I don't know the route in the casting it takes to go internal, but sometimes
it's tragic when it happens and isn't caught right away. One thing
though, when you tear it down to rebuild it, it will be a little cleaner
inside. :-)

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 07:58:40 -0600
From: ballingr bootheel.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes

ATF

I beg to differ, the E40D in my '93 F150 is JUNK with a capital J
>>>>>

I've seen some run forever and then the one from hell comes into the shop.

A ' 91 F250 farm truck. The owner has a piece of ground along the
Mississippi here in southeastern Missouri, where the good Lord decided to
deposit this substance made to humble all the Nimrods in the world who think
they can cut the ground and grow things. Black, Mississippi Gumbo. Cruel,
Black, Mississippi Gumbo. You walk across a wet field, you'd better take a
rope with you, attached to someone or something to pull you out, your shoes
will grow 10 sizes and weigh 40 lbs a piece by the time you get out. All
the tractors use tracks instead of wheels.

This fellow has run both Fords and Ch*vies in this ground for many years and
had very little trouble with breaking things, he knows the vehicles
limitations. Then he bought the '91. By the time it got to us it had been
through 3 E4OD's, one from the dealer under warranty and two from Jasper,
his boys could swap the thing in an hour . They told him to go away. We
pulled it and took it to a guy we know who's a renouned builder and had him
update it to the latest parts and specs. It went a year and fried, so we
did it again and found that there were even more factory reccommended
updates to make it live. This tells me one thing, they have had some real
problems with this trans, and ours wasn't alone.

That Gumbo is mean, but C-6's and TH-400's handled it all right under the
same usage. One particular C-6 worked two engines to death and the body
had nearly rotted completely off.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:08:10 -0600
From: "William S. Hart" iastate.edu>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes

> I beg to differ, the E40D in my '93 F150 is JUNK with a capital J

> A ' 91 F250 farm truck.

> It went a year and fried, so we
> did it again and found that there were even more factory reccommended
> updates to make it live. This tells me one thing, they have had some real
> problems with this trans, and ours wasn't alone.
>

The E4OD NEEDS to have all the updates applied, nearly every update is
something that's heavier duty than it was before ... the 91-3's can be
shakey if not properly maintained and such, while the 95+ should be just
fine ... we just had my sister's rebuilt in her 91 F250 ... $1800+ ... when
we picked it up they pointed to another on the bench (they had 3 in there,
all before 95), said "that's his cousin ernie ... $2500+ is the estimate"

They're expensive trannies, but man they are nice when they work ... 4.10
gears in the Lightning and that OD keeps it under 2500 at 70mph :)

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:09:14 -0600
From: "William S. Hart" iastate.edu>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - lower track bar bolt/sleeve.

Hey here's a thought, whenever I need the stuff out of the track bar, I
usually use a drill and cut some holes in the rubber first ... you could
likely cut the rubber off of the sleeve with a hack saw, then clean up the
sleeve with some wire brushing and some solvent ... just a thought ...

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:24:24 -0700
From: Andrew Antipas sopris.net>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 73-79 crewcabs

Thanks Pat!

Andy

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:22:38 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Re: Axle rebuild - Alignment

That is probably true but what advantage is there in that since you have the
whole thing apart anyway to work on them? The shims are indestructable,
stable, cover the whole surface etc... The bushing is relatively small and
the camber can only be changed by some kind of traumatic event to the axle
which demands other attention anyway usually.

Yes, the bushing can be accessed without removing the spindle or ball joint
but......is it really an advantage since you only set the camber once each
time you replace the ball joints? I suppose it means one less assy
operation since you do have to install all the parts to check the camber
properly and then take it back down to install the shim. With the bushing
you could eliminate about 1/2hr of work but it won't be as solid as a shim
in any case. (you don't have to install the hub parts or fuss with the
bearing preload to check the camber so it's not a complete assy operation)

From an alignment shop standpoint the bushing might be an advantage but the
first time they put it in it will cost the same to align it since it all has
to be torn down and checked and adjustments made in any case but the next
time it just needs alignment it may cost less. My point is how often will
that ever happen?

Quite often the bushing is trashed when you take it out so the cam may be
trashed too, not sure. As you all know I use anti-seize on everything so
mine will come out clean next time but many shops don't bother with this.
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just pointing out a few things
which may influence the method you choose :-)

- --
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
- --

> > After looking at mine with the castleated nut off I am sure this
> > bushing is not for alignment as Gary states. The preload
> explanation
> > makes sense to me.
> >
>
> That doesn't mean it can't be. Specialty products sells alignment
> bushings for solid axle trucks, even dana 60 fronts.
>
> OX
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:11:37 -0500
From: Brent Cole ftc-i.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Wanted: 79 Gas tank filler hose.

Get ready to pay for that hose. My NAPA store had it for about $1.25 /
INCH! You should have cut the smaller one.

Brent


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:34:31 -0500
From: Jim Knapper sympatico.ca>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - re: Truck Survey.

1. What year and model truck do you have?
1968 F100 2WD long wheelbase 360 with a 600 holley and Hedman headers,
C6 auto.
2. Which of the following best describes your truck:
C. The trruck needs to be repainted, needs a right front cab mount and
some minor body work. Also a few dents and dings on the hood from when
it opened at about 60 mph. My bropther-in -law was the owner/driver at
the time.
3. Is this an everyday truck or a weekend hobby truck?
Its a hobby truck. I've owned it for about 4 years and have put only
around 1000-2000 miles on it. After I put the Holley and Headers on the
360, it started to get noisey so I don't like to go far with it. I'm
currently in the process of rebuilding a 390 complete with GT head to
replace the 360.
4. Would you drive it cross-country on a routine basis?
No, Fuel prices up here in Canada are much to high!

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:33:13 EST
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Batteries in Parallel

Hey Dan,

Ya, I kind of figured this was the case......

CJ
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 10:58:26 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Weird overheating with re-built 400

Are you sure it is "Sudden"? If so this could be the thermostat, or some
kind of blockage unless it is just a few miles in which case it may be an
air pocket.

No one's mentioned the head gaskets yet? On some engines it is possible to
reverse the head gasket and all but a few holes will line up so the error is
not immediately apparent. This sounds like a "partial" blockage of some
kind or perhaps an air pocket in the heads due to not burping it properly.
If you opted for the "cheap" radiator you may be under cooled too. The 400,
429 and 460 all need the "super cool", 4 tube, 26x24x4" radiator. On
occasion an thermostat comes from the factory not working properly too.....I
know, not in America right?

- --
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
- --

> We just put a totally rebuilt 400 in a '77 250 4X4. It runs
> great with
> plenty of power. New radiator, new exhaust also. The only
> problem is that
> after a few miles, sometime five, some times twenty, but
> every time it will
> all of a sudden start to overheat.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:00:09 -0500
From: William King bgnet.bgsu.edu>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?

Tim,
Excellent! Another opportunity to disseminate the Gospel of the Toploader!
*Can I get a witness?!*
First, what is your current rear-end ratio? I did OK towing ~6000 lbs for
800 miles this summer and my truck has a 3.25 rear. The 3.25 isn't optimum
for towing that type of load, but it worked OK. Plus, I like the 3.25 for
around-town driving and it does alright on the highway.
Anyway....
There are three manual transmission options for an FE block that will
give you some type of 5 speed, OR overdrive. I've never heard of someone
putting a T-5 or T-56 behind an FE block, but that doesn't mean it hasn't
happened.
The first is a Richmond Gear 5 speed manaul. Unfortunately, 5th gear on
this tranny is 1:1, so you end up with the same final drive ratio you
now have. The idea is that you can now run a lower (e.g., 2.41 or 2.73)
rear end and still have sufficient gearing to pull your truck from a stop.
New Richmond Gear 5 speeds are running about $1700 from Summit.

Second, Richmond gear also makes a 6 speed, where 6th gear is a .86 overdrive.
Again, pricy (about $2700 from Summit).

Third, you can try to score an overdrive 4 speed 'Toploader' (aka a 3+1).
Basically, it's a 3 speed tranny (w/ a 1:1 3rd) with an overdrive 4th.
As I understand, they look like the legendary 4 speed Toploaders, but aren't
as strong. I believe they were used in vans during the 1970s (and perhaps
1980s). You could scour the junkyards to find one. Another list member
(as I recall, Seattle Mike) has one. If your heart is set on overdrive,
this seems to be your easiest and cheapest route.

There are other 'milege improving' changes you can make as well. For
instance,
have you thought about getting bigger (in diameter) rear tires? Larger tires
will decrease your revs at a give speed. For example, moving from a 24" dia
rear tire to a 26.5" dia rear tire decreases my revs at 60 mph by 250 (from
2732 rpms to 2474). Since it's a truck you could probably run ever taller
tires in back. Have your thought about making a front spoiler? In the 1970s
Car and Driver made spoilers for their 'Crises Fighter' Pinto and 240z and
realized some substantial mpg improvements. Finally, some list members swear
by their vacume gagues. Might help.

Hope this helps,
Ohio Bill
1968 F100 360 2v, 4 speed
1968 Torino GT 429 4v 4 speed

>Well, since the archives aren't available to be read, (Hope everything is
>okay with the family Ken!) has anyone ever heard of putting a 5 speed
>manual in a '69 F-250 w/ a 390? I'm using this truck as my daily driver,
>no offroading, no towing, and want to get better than 8 mpg. I've thought
>about putting new gears in the rear end, but still want the ability to tow
>or load up the bed if needed. Anyone else come up with an easy fix? (Yeah
>Right....) Thanks.
>
>Tim Neasham
>Benton City, Wa.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:13:53 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

You must have coolant flow in the block at all times so when the thermostat
is closed the coolant has to be able to get around it via a heater sized
hose of some kind. A bypass in your case my reduce the coolant flow to the
heater if left open all the time but I will try to remember to look at mine
tonight and see how it's hooked up. Probably won't get back the the list
til Monday, got a 3 day weekend starting tonight :-) Bronco will be in
peices, may not be back up for first good snow....I'll do another post on
this subject :-)

- --
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
- --

> When I bought my '53 it had a 351C-4V and no heater.
> Many dollars later, I have a 400 w/ the C-4V heads and
>
> Do I need a bypass line, which loops water between the
> pump and the block when the heater is shut off?
>
> If so, how is this handled in stock 400 setups?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:22:49 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?

Only one I can think of is the Clark that was actually used with this engine
and has the capacity to handle the torque on a daily basis. I think Azie
has one set up with a clark so when he gets back Monday, give him a jingle
:-)

- --
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
- --

> okay with the family Ken!) has anyone ever heard of putting a 5 speed
> manual in a '69 F-250 w/ a 390? I'm using this truck as my
> daily driver,
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:29:38 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - '79 f100 4x4

If you have ever run and engine with the valve covers off you would
understand why this is not accurate :-) The top of the head gets plenty of
oil when the engine runs, both sides equally, so this is not necessary or
even desireable.

Most V-8's use the same valve cover on both sides, just reversed as are the
heads. Various emmisions equipment is installed in the "fill" hole
depending on the year. The 79 probably had the PCV valve in the passenger
side connecte to a hose in the rear of the carb and a hose connected to a
screen filter in the air cleaner and to the driver side filler hole via the
top of the oil screen/cap which has a hole in the top for the hose. This is
the normal fill hole.

- --
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
- --

> My Father in law said that he recommended every time I oil
> it, to take turns
> in oiling the banks. Is that accurate?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:43:48 EST
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Weird overheating with re-built 400

In a message dated 12/30/99 12:28:09 AM Eastern Standard Time,
norville sosinet.net writes:

>
> > We just put a totally rebuilt 400 in a '77 250 4X4. It runs great with
> > plenty of power. New radiator, new exhaust also. The only problem is
> that
> > after a few miles, sometime five, some times twenty, but every time it
> will
> > all of a sudden start to overheat. We have check and double checked but
> > can't seem to find the problem. We changed the water pump, bypassed the
> > heater, checked each cylinder, etc.
> >
> > It's just like the cooling system gets stopped up, but shut it down, let
> it
> > cool off and everything is okay for a few more miles. ????
> >
> > Any one had a similar problem? Any suggestions of what to look for next?
> >
>
Somthing else to check, Ive had it happen to me. Check the lower radiator
hose to make sure it's not collapsing on itself. Often they have a spring
inside to prevent this from happening. With a good pump you can develope a
whole lotta suction and collapse the hose. The result is no coolant flow.
When you shut er off to check it out, it's back to normal and you dont see
it.

George
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 08:58:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Dan Lee yahoo.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Ballast Resistor

OK, This is confusing, but read carefully.

First a coil is a current device it only cares about
the current through it. The Ballast Resistor serves to
limit the maximum current through the coil to prevent
it from overheating. Heat is the enemy of the coil.
When the engine is not running, ignition 'on', and the
points(or electronic ignition) are closed the coil
will saturate and max current will flow. The voltage
on the low side(dist)of the coil will be near zero,
the voltage on the high side (connected to the
resistor) will be the saturation voltage(6V or more).
If at this time the battery voltage is 12V, then 6V
are dropped across the resistor(12-6). When the points
are open, no current flows and battery voltage will be
read everywhere under the same conditions.

When the engine is running at idle or faster, the
points open and close, the voltage across the coil
will be the battery voltage minus the resistor drop
averaged with the full battery voltage((12-6)/2=9V?).
The duty cycle of this averaging may or may not be
50%, depending on the dwell of the points. If the
dwell is less that 50% the average voltage will be
higher.

Add to this that the Alternator output will be 14V or
more, then it becomes very difficult to determine what
the coil voltage should be.

If the average voltage across the coil is more than
battery voltage minus (battery voltage minus
saturation voltage divided by two) then your dwell is
wrong.

If saturation voltage is much more than 6 V, then
your resistor is wrong.

I hope this helps, but I think 10.5V may be OK with
>14V from the alternator.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
400C-4V




>Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 12:10:11 -0800
>From: sparky mail.island.net
>Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re - Ballast Resistor

>>Now, I see where some people are reading 8V at the
>>coil, and other people say that this voltage will
>>constantly be varying between about 12 and 9,
>>and the "averaged" reading displayed on the meter
>>will be about 10-1/2V (this is what >I read).
>>should it really be 10.5,or hold constant at 8????

>>I must go and recheck my truck sometime. I seem to
>>remember that after I installed the ballast resistor
>>it read about 8v maybe closer to 9v, but my memory
>>seems to be slipping. Either I am getting older or
>>the beer is starting to kill the good brain cells
now >>:)
>The more I think about it the more I convince myself
>that the coil voltage will vary. After all the
voltage >output from the alternator will vary
>between about 12-14 volts won't it? Depending on
>engine speed and what accessories you have on.
>Therefore since it is only a resistor (and not a
>voltage regulator) the voltage to the coil will vary
>according to the voltage output from the alternator.
>So a reading between 12-9 volts seems correct and
most >likely the average reading would be 10.5v. Now
if the >alternator output is a constant voltage then
the input >to the coil will be a constant voltage.

>Sparky
>73ish F250
>4x4 FE3?0

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://messenger.yahoo.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:58:32 EST
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - E4OD Woes

In a message dated 12/30/99 9:10:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
wish iastate.edu writes:

>
> The E4OD NEEDS to have all the updates applied, nearly every update is
> something that's heavier duty than it was before ... the 91-3's can be
> shakey if not properly maintained and such, while the 95+ should be just
> fine ... we just had my sister's rebuilt in her 91 F250 ... $1800+ ... when
> we picked it up they pointed to another on the bench (they had 3 in there,
> all before 95), said "that's his cousin ernie ... $2500+ is the estimate"
>
> They're expensive trannies, but man they are nice when they work ... 4.10
> gears in the Lightning and that OD keeps it under 2500 at 70mph :)
>

All this talk about E4OD's is givving me real warm fuzzies for the one in my
'92 Conversion Van. Ill admit, it's running fine right now, but then I said
the same thing 2 weeks ago about my '91 Taurus right before the AXOD started
makeing strange "tummy hungry growling noises". Right now, I dont need any
more tranny concerns lest I never get back to my '79 Bronco work & quasi
resto!

George M
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:04:45 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Bronco, sick, one each, OD in color.....

Ok, so it's not OD in color :-) Old army thing.....:-) Got this thumping
in the back end when I go over bumps, got this loose feel to the steeing,
got water coming in from all over the place in the floor so I ordered some
sheet metal. Got it out of the box and the front cab mounts I got didn't
make any sense until I said the name over and over in my head and the light
went on....."CAB" mounts was the key word, not "FRONT CLIP"
mounts.......DANG IT! Where is an old man's head when he really needs
it???!! Oh well.....I probably have to piece that together from plates
anyway. Discovered that I'm missing 3 bolts in otherwise solid mounts and
the front (there is that word again) clip mounts, next to the radiator are
both trash, most of the floor is trash, some of the floor supports are trash
but......the frame is pretty solid and the "front cab mounts" are like new
:-) (one of those bolts is missing too).

The radiator is trashed due to the trashed front clip mounts so I have to
strip the whole front end off this thing this weekend and try to patch it up
along with the radiator and put new belts on it.....again and if I have
time, reinstall the stupid valve covers with CHEVY gaskets!!!# # $ %## #
Anything got to work better than the ones I put on last time! :-( Perhaps I
will weld them on while I have the front clip off.......:-)

Several of the rear floor braces will have to be fabbed and replaced so I
need to get to "All Metals" and get some flat sheets to make stuff out of.
Tried out my new flanger last night and it works really cool....has a 3/16"
punch and a flanger in one tool, flange it and then punch it for rivets to
hold it together while welding. Can't wait to try it out :-)

Anyhoooo.....I'll probably be driving the bird for a few days or weeks while
i try to get this all back together. Right now the mounts are is such bad
shape I would be affraid to drive it :-( Glad I put it on the lift last
night....today could have been the fatal day :-( I won't unsub*cribe but
will be out of the office til Monday. Be leaving in about 2 hours (2:30).

- --
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
- --

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:17:43 EST
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

In a message dated 12/30/99 11:16:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,
gpeters3 visteon.com writes:

>
> > When I bought my '53 it had a 351C-4V and no heater.
> > Many dollars later, I have a 400 w/ the C-4V heads and
> >
> > Do I need a bypass line, which loops water between the
> > pump and the block when the heater is shut off?
> >
> > If so, how is this handled in stock 400 setups?

Well, Im probably gonna get some flack from Gary, but here goes. On my '79
Bronco w 400, there is no bypass. What Ive got is the hot water coming from
the block to a vacuum on/off valve then into the right size of the heater
core (as viewed standing in front of the truck). The other line comes from
the left side of the heater core and runs straight to the pump. Since Ive got
A/C that's what the vac on/off valve is for, (to keep hot water out of the
core when the AC in on).

What I find supprising is all the talk about the bypass line for 400's and
how it's needed. Well, with this little vacuum valve closed, Ive got next to
no water flow. Im talking on the order of drips. Now with the thermostat
closed also, Ive got virtually no water flow through the block unless there
is an internal bypass someplace. Ive had it this way since I got it in '84
and she's never run hot or overheated without a reason.

I guess my babbling is saying, if you need a bypass on a 400, it aint gots to
be much to make it happy. Though in all honesty, Ive never run one without
it. Ive got a friend who has (capped the heater hose fittings on the block
and pump of his 400) and hasnt made any nasty comments.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:34:46 -0600
From: "William S. Hart" iastate.edu>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

> I guess my babbling is saying, if you need a bypass on a 400, it
> aint gots to
> be much to make it happy. Though in all honesty, Ive never run
> one without
> it. Ive got a friend who has (capped the heater hose fittings on
> the block
> and pump of his 400) and hasnt made any nasty comments.

I'll take that flack with you George ... I've been sittin here thinkin about
it, and I don't see how it can overheat because of bypass, ESPECIALLY not if
you are reading a factory gauge ... after all isn't the sending unit near
the thermostat? so if the gauge reads hot, then the thermostat should also
"sense" that heat and open up ... now that's not to say it won't get a
little warm then cool off, like a sticky thermostat (or low coolant) will
do, but i wouldn't think it would actually overheat unless you had some
other problems ...

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:39:05 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

Some water pumps have openings in the back which mate with openings in the
block or timing cover so the bypass could well be in that arrangement but if
water does not flow while the engine is heating up the heads will cavitate
due to steam and you will have water boiling in a matter of only a few
minutes. I think my 460 was good for about 5 minutes before it pushed all
the water out via the bottom hose and radiator cap. What happens is that no
coolant flows past the thermostat to heat it up so it can open. The coolant
in that area is not near any heat source and if the coolant is not flowing
none will get to it. The heads take the brunt of the heat exchange so if no
coolant flows there it will very quickly turn to steam and you will get some
flow but it will all be back through the bottom hose to the radiator cap and
out as steam.

If you are getting away with it then the pump is internally plumbed to flow
through the block via a smaller passage in the pump and openings to the
block. Since the bottom hose goes to the pump as it's inlet you only need
one outlet to the block to ccmplete the circuit. Next time you pull a water
pump, take a look at it's ports :-)

- --
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
- --

> What I find supprising is all the talk about the bypass line
> for 400's and
> how it's needed. Well, with this little vacuum valve closed,
> Ive got next to
> no water flow. Im talking on the order of drips. Now with the
> thermostat
> closed also, Ive got virtually no water flow through the
> block unless there
> is an internal bypass someplace. Ive had it this way since I
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:36:12 -0600
From: prozell oaielectronics.com (OAI Electronics: Paul Rozell)
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FUEL INJECTION FOR 460?

Hey Guys,
I am wondering what would be the easiest way to put fuel injection of a 460
that was carburated? What trucks with 460's had injection? What components
would a person need to procure in order to install injection.

Thanks,
Paul
65 F100 460 C6

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 13:47:40 EST
From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

Well, Gary, Ive got the answer for ya on this bypass issue. Just looked at
the old 400 Block in my garage and it's got 3 ports going to the water pump.
Two ports lead to the block/heads. The other comes from the thermostat area
and functions as a bypass when the thermostat is closed. You can see it with
the thermostat out and looking down into the cavity (or with the pump off).

I never really disagreeded with your statement about the coolant needing to
flow during the warmup or thermostat closed periods as it only makes sense.
It was just the statements (possibly made by someone else, I dont remember)
that an external bypass (ie heater or hose) was needed on the M blocks. Well,
that issue is put to bed, and we even learned somthing to boot!

The more I mess with these M blocks, the more I like em. There was some
thought put into their design!

George M

In a message dated 12/30/99 12:41:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
gpeters3 visteon.com writes:

> Some water pumps have openings in the back which mate with openings in the
> block or timing cover so the bypass could well be in that arrangement but
if
> water does not flow while the engine is heating up the heads will cavitate
> due to steam and you will have water boiling in a matter of only a few
> minutes. I think my 460 was good for about 5 minutes before it pushed all
> the water out via the bottom hose and radiator cap. What happens is that
no
> coolant flows past the thermostat to heat it up so it can open. The
coolant
> in that area is not near any heat source and if the coolant is not flowing
> none will get to it. The heads take the brunt of the heat exchange so if
no
> coolant flows there it will very quickly turn to steam and you will get
some
> flow but it will all be back through the bottom hose to the radiator cap
and
> out as steam.
>
> If you are getting away with it then the pump is internally plumbed to flow
> through the block via a smaller passage in the pump and openings to the
> block. Since the bottom hose goes to the pump as it's inlet you only need
> one outlet to the block to ccmplete the circuit. Next time you pull a
water
> pump, take a look at it's ports :-)
>
> --
> 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
> --
>
> > What I find supprising is all the talk about the bypass line
> > for 400's and
> > how it's needed. Well, with this little vacuum valve closed,
> > Ive got next to
> > no water flow. Im talking on the order of drips. Now with the
> > thermostat
> > closed also, Ive got virtually no water flow through the
> > block unless there
> > is an internal bypass someplace. Ive had it this way since I
> == 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: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 12:51:02 -0800
From: wicowboy gateway.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap

Got a few questions, I'm new to the half-ton world, all I've ever owned
is 3/4 ton, i've had quite a few. I now have a '77 SWB F-150 with an
eight inch lift and 40's. I put a 460 and c-6 in it and with this warm
weather I just got my first chance to take it to the fields to play.
After 10 minutes the front axle started clicking real bad and under
serious throttle it would not turn the front tires. Sounds like front
drivers side hub is where the noise is coming from maybe, not too
worried about it. The rear axle is leaking gear lube out the outer seal
on the driver side. I have a pair of dana 60's laying here I was going
to put on it in spring and convert it to leave spring set-up my question
is can I get them on usiong the half-ton front suspension? The truck
already has a eight inch lift and I don't wanna buy a new lift if i
convert it to leave springs. What would be necesarry to use the 60 front
with the coil set up? If it isn't that big of a project I'd like to
just do it now instead of fixing the worthless half-ton axles just to
last me until spring....
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 13:10:14 -0600
From: "William S. Hart" iastate.edu>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - FUEL INJECTION FOR 460?

> I am wondering what would be the easiest way to put fuel
> injection of a 460
> that was carburated? What trucks with 460's had injection? What components
> would a person need to procure in order to install injection.
>

I would just find a late model 460 in a salvage yard and buy the whole truck
...then you get all the sensors, wiring and computers that you need ... then
if you need things changed, at lest you have a decent starting point and
know what all the components are...

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:20:24 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 400 and Heater Bypass

Well, I never said "M blocks" specifically, I kept the discussion general
for good reason.....I didn't know what has what so couldn't say but I do
know the principle involved :-) Got to have flow, one way or T'other :-)

- --
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 never really disagreeded with your statement about the
> coolant needing to
> flow during the warmup or thermostat closed periods as it
> only makes sense.
> It was just the statements (possibly made by someone else, I
> dont remember)
> that an external bypass (ie heater or hose) was needed on the
> M blocks. Well,
> that issue is put to bed, and we even learned somthing to boot!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:21:46 -0500
From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" visteon.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - have a nice weekend :-)

Got to go, see y'all Monday :-) I'll let y'all know how the bronco
fares.....

- --
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
- --

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 15:11:41 EST
From: Bad4dFilly aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - answers to survey

In a message dated 12/29/1999 5:32:46 AM !!!First Boot!!!,
idahoans earthlink.net writes:

<< I'm *brand* new to this list and the survey replies look interesting --
could someone forward me a copy of the questions? Thanks!
Carla >>

WOW! Another chick on the list? AWESOME!!!!

*~*~Lisa and Envy~*~*
*~*~Silly boys...trucks are for girls!~*~*

P.S. I meant "chick" with the utmost respect! =P
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:33:16 -0800
From: wicowboy gateway.net>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco

Posting this for my cousin. We are debating putting a 460 in a '83
Bronco or replacing the 302 with another 302. He is planning on slowly
building the truck, 3/4 ton swap next year, lift etc. His 302 just died
and we have another to put in it but going through all this effort i
suggested we put one of my 460/c-6/np205 (married) set-ups in it.
Anyone done this swap in the 80 series bronco's? Is the tranny linkage
usable, theres a c-4 in it now. I know driveshafts may need to be
changed. How would the motor mounts have to be altered if at all?
Would the frame have to be notched in this year as in the 70's series?
What else? Let me know if you've done this swap or you have any
suggestions....
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:04:08 EST
From: A4x4junkyaol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco

In a message dated 12/30/99 3:36:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
wicowboygateway.net writes:

<< Posting this for my cousin. We are debating putting a 460 in a '83
Bronco or replacing the 302 with another 302. He is planning on slowly
building the truck, 3/4 ton swap next year, lift etc. His 302 just died
and we have another to put in it but going through all this effort i
suggested we put one of my 460/c-6/np205 (married) set-ups in it.
Anyone done this swap in the 80 series bronco's? Is the tranny linkage
usable, theres a c-4 in it now. I know driveshafts may need to be
changed. How would the motor mounts have to be altered if at all?
Would the frame have to be notched in this year as in the 70's series?
What else? Let me know if you've done this swap or you have any
suggestions.... >>

Are you sure it has a C-4 in it? You said it is an 83, and a C-4 shouldnt be
there to the best of my knowledge. It should be a C-6. When you say that
the frame has to be notched on the 70s Bronco, are you talking about the 78s
and 79s? If so, there is a way around the notching...actually a couple of
ways.

Anthony
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 14:33:12 -0800
From: John Lord home.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap

I have seen 3 mid 70's f-250,350's that were converted to coil spring for
better handling while rock crawling, if you spend alot of time offroad you
might be better off leaving the coils in and modifying the spring mounts on
the axle housings. the setups i have seen use a minimum of 2 shocks on each
wheel (one on each side of wheel). a long lattice bar or stabilizer, (to
prevent fore and aft movement) is used from the spring mount area to the
frame on each side (mounted at about the mid point along the frame), all
with bushings and pivot points. and their are other stabilizers to prevent
cross movement.

If you look hard enough you would find this info in a few 4x4 mags. it is a
big project but your part way there having a coil spring setup now

wicowboy wrote:

> Got a few questions, I'm new to the half-ton world, all I've ever owned
> is 3/4 ton, i've had quite a few. I now have a '77 SWB F-150 with an
> eight inch lift and 40's. I put a 460 and c-6 in it and with this warm
> weather I just got my first chance to take it to the fields to play.
> After 10 minutes the front axle started clicking real bad and under
> serious throttle it would not turn the front tires. Sounds like front
> drivers side hub is where the noise is coming from maybe, not too
> worried about it. The rear axle is leaking gear lube out the outer seal
> on the driver side. I have a pair of dana 60's laying here I was going
> to put on it in spring and convert it to leave spring set-up my question
> is can I get them on usiong the half-ton front suspension? The truck
> already has a eight inch lift and I don't wanna buy a new lift if i
> convert it to leave springs. What would be necesarry to use the 60 front
> with the coil set up? If it isn't that big of a project I'd like to
> just do it now instead of fixing the worthless half-ton axles just to
> last me until spring....
> == 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: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:50:46 -0800
From: wicowboy gateway.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 302-460 Swap in Bronco

> Are you sure it has a C-4 in it?

No, but regardless it won't bolt up to a 460

When you say that
> the frame has to be notched on the 70s Bronco, are you talking about the 78s
> and 79? If so, there is a way around the notching...actually a couple of
> ways.
>

I know but most people end up notching them....
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:56:57 -0800
From: wicowboy gateway.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 3/4 ton Axle Swap

John Lord wrote:
>
> I have seen 3 mid 70's f-250,350's that were converted to coil spring for
> better handling while rock crawling, if you spend alot of time offroad you
> might be better off leaving the coils in and modifying the spring mounts on
> the axle housings. the setups i have seen use a minimum of 2 shocks on each
> wheel (one on each side of wheel). a long lattice bar or stabilizer, (to
> prevent fore and aft movement) is used from the spring mount area to the
> frame on each side (mounted at about the mid point along the frame), all
> with bushings and pivot points.

Like the radius arms that are already in place....maybe beefed up a bit


> If you look hard enough you would find this info in a few 4x4 mags. it is a
> big project but your part way there having a coil spring setup now

So all I have to really do is change the spring mounts, i was planning
on that but i was trying to figure out if the dana 60 axle tube would be
too large to fit the spring mounts on and/or fit in the stock set-up.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:17:11 -0600
From: Brett L Habben juno.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Texas sCrap law

Pat,
Since we're about to feel California smog laws up our Texas Tailpipe,
how exactly does this '73 cutoff work? Is this year set in stone? Or is
this some sort of a sliding window, where each year they only test back
27 years? Secondly, how about those mobile smog sniffers they place
along the freeway? If you zip by in your stock '70 F100 it obviously
makes the machine go "TILT". Do they send you a nastigram in the mail?
Ticket? Dispatch a Smog Nazi to arrest you?
Oh, I love Merc outboards, too. Are they completely banned or what?
Brett
Super75cab
>Nahh, just send all those rust-free California trucks back home
>to us. We don't test them anymore 73 & older. No test, No Crush :-)
>New cars aren't tested until their seventh birthday now, but if
>you have a two-stroke outboard or jet ski - get it out of here!
>Pat Brown sonic.net>

________________________________________________________________




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 17:49:42 -0800
From: "S.Harkema" ford-trucks.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - H-pipe

1) I have recently put headers and 2 1/2" exhaust pipe on the '71 390.
>What I am wondering does anybody know where I could get an H-pipe >section to put between the pipes behind the headers?

Summit Racing has them.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 10:09:30 +0800
From: "David and Cherie" mns.net.au>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Truck Survey

>1. What year and model truck do you have?
1968 F350
>2. Which of the following best describes your truck:

D. Project truck which needs motor, driveline, or bodywork before
being drivable.

3. Is this an everyday truck or a weekend hobby truck?
It will be an everyday Truck when I get it finished. It is going to be used
as a car transporter for my race car and also used for my work. I am going
to extend the chassis and tray.

4. Would you drive it cross-country on a routine basis?
Yep but only 2 wheel drive.

Dave,
Western Australia.
Happy new year.
only 13 and 3/4 hours to go.
see you all on the other side.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:00:55 EST
From: IanBoss69aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - answers to survey

In a message dated 12/30/99 3:14:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Bad4dFillyaol.com writes:

> WOW! Another chick on the list? AWESOME!!!!
>
> *~*~Lisa and Envy~*~*
> *~*~Silly boys...trucks are for girls!~*~*
>
> P.S. I meant "chick" with the utmost respect! =P
you're willing to share all of the guys' attention lisa?

Ian
79 F250 4x4 4spd 351M
True Blue Ford Blue
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:34:38 -0600
From: Brett L Habben juno.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: FE radiator on 300

Tony,
What's your trick? I've still got my Monster SuperCooling FE390 radiator
laying there.....
Brett
Super75cab
>and I also have a radiator trick where you can still use your
>3-core FE radiator with the 300 should you consider this swap also.
>Tony Marino

________________________________________________________________




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:38:17 -0500
From: "Chip's Mail" delanet.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Truck Survey

>1. What year and model truck do you have?
'65 F100 Shortbed, 302, Three speed stick, no power nuthin.

>2. Which of the following best describes your truck:

D. Project truck which needs motor, driveline, or bodywork before
being drivable. Motor's kinda tired, needs lots of cosmetic work,
and front suspension work. This Spring, I hope to get it started.

> 3. Is this an everyday truck or a weekend hobby truck?

Was daily driver until front got so bad I didn't feel safe driving it.
Now it sits patiently awaiting an new lease on life

> 4. Would you drive it cross-country on a routine basis?

Not at the moment.

>Additional Comments:

bought the truck in 1981, spent many hours/miles on hunting trips and
taught two sons to drive. I think I'll keep it for awhile.

Happy and Safe New Year to all the fine folks on the list.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:19:30 -0600
From: Stu Varner ford-trucks.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - 5 Speed in a '69?

I wonder if the NV 4500 could be adapted in some fashion???
You could all Advance Adapters at 800-350-2223

www.advanceadapters.com

They may be able to help out some, who knows.....I am sure it won't be
cheap either! 8^)

Stu
Nuke GM!

At 11:22 AM 12/30/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Only one I can think of is the Clark that was actually used with this engine
>and has the capacity to handle the torque on a daily basis. I think Azie
>has one set up with a clark so when he gets back Monday, give him a jingle

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 03:26:47 GMT
From: "Brian Vance" hotmail.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - years of the hi boys

What years where factory hi boys made? Mine was advertised to me when I
bought it as a hi boy. Nothing looks aftermarket under the truck that I can
tell. A friend told me the last year Ford made them was 76. Mine is
stamped January 77.

Thanks
Brian
77 F250 4X
______________________________________________________

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 21:39:07 -0600
From: Stu Varner ford-trucks.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - potential project truck....questions!

Out checking out the local boneyard for rims today and found the owner has
just acquired a 68 F-100
with an absolutely rust free cab/doors and bed.......the front end was
t-boned from the pass side and it utterly destroyed the
entire front clip. Bent the radius arm on passenger side and munched the
tie rod. It has been put on the frame straightener
while he is trying to locate all the parts he needs to make it a running
truck again.

Oh yeah, did I mention this is an original 31,000 mile truck, 240 inline
and a 3 speed (which will be yanked some day and replaced with an FE C/6 I
am sure!), pebble beige and a swb to boot for $1250 as is without a front
clip! Basically, this truck is the twin sister to my 71 F-100 4x4 which is
also tan. The idea of having two almost identical trucks side by side
would be too awesome......anyway.......

Questions to the list for a private response please......

Looking for:

1. one pass side inner fender
2. both fenders
3. stone guard
4. core support
5. painted 68 or 69 grille shell and doors

If you have these parts please lemme know asap with price and description.
I will be searching the FTE classifieds etc. as well as all my other sources.
I am sure with enough searching I can locate what I need, BUT, it would be
nice
to know what I can come up with in the next few days.

Thanks guys!

Stu
Nuke GM!


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 22:00:26 -0800
From: wicowboy gateway.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - years of the hi boys

Brian Vance wrote:
>
> What years where factory hi boys made? Mine was advertised to me when I
> bought it as a hi boy. Nothing looks aftermarket under the truck that I can
> tell. A friend told me the last year Ford made them was 76. Mine is
> stamped January 77.

What I've heard is generally 73-77.5 which means yours might be real
close to that .5 mark and it may actually be one....
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 23:17:27 EST
From: JJJJJGRANTaol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - engine paint

i'm getting ready to install the 400 in the 79 f250, anyone know who makes
the best match engine paint to the original color ford blue. i've seen some
that is way too light and some that is way too dark,

thanks,
jeff grant
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 23:54:12 -0600
From: "Jason & Kathy Kendrick" mddc.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - FE oil pumps

Has anyone ever seen an FE with a factory aluminum oil pump? If so, what
years were they used?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 00:59:25 EST
From: GMontgo930aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - engine paint

The Plasticote blue Ford engine paint has always been real close for me. If
ya like I can get the number (I think it's 203). It's what I used anyway and
looks real close.

George M

In a message dated 12/30/99 11:20:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
JJJJJGRANTaol.com writes:

> 'm getting ready to install the 400 in the 79 f250, anyone know who makes
> the best match engine paint to the original color ford blue. i've seen
some
> that is way too light and some that is way too dark,
>
> thanks,
> jeff grant
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 04:43:24 -0500
From: oldfords63juno.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Spoiled ?

Have your thought about making a front spoiler? In the 1970s
> Car and Driver made spoilers for their 'Crises Fighter' Pinto and 240z
and
> realized some substantial mpg improvements.
====================================================================
I remember I once put a large rubber air dam ( spoiler) on the front of
our Granada and picked up a little milage. ( come on guys don't
laugh....it was the 80's! ) :-)
________________________________________________________________




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

End of 61-79-list-digest V3 #483
********************************

+----- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 though 1979 Trucks And Vans -----+
| Send posts to 61-79-listford-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 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.