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 V4 #18
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, January 13 2000 Volume 04 : Number 018



=======================================================================
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 -Discussions and rules for them... or not...
Re: FTE 61-79 - poor braking
FTE 61-79 - Duraspark question
RE: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark question
FTE 61-79 - P/S rebuild
Re: FTE 61-79 - 63 f-100 , new to list
FTE 61-79 - '74 (?) 1 ton stretch frame
FTE 61-79 - timing
Re: FTE 61-79 - Say.....Ken, about that ford link...
Re: FTE 61-79 - South/Central Californians
FTE 61-79 - Sale prices?
FTE 61-79 - compression ratio and power
FTE 61-79 - Re: Rust! The Silent Killer
Re: FTE 61-79 - compression ratio and power

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 13:46:52 -0700
From: William Whited ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 -Discussions and rules for them... or not...

Gary, I do not think that you really need to do that. I for one have learned a
great deal from your discussions in the past. I do not think list would be
served any better if everyone only used the right terms. I think that most of
the list would agree that they do not know all the correct terms to be used for
everything. Some of the list members are used to working on different vehicles
and the same part may be called something different. I for one am one of those
guys that everything is themagig or a dohicky. So please do not refrain from
commenting on anything. I think the point that was trying to be made was for
when people need to order parts that the correct part name is important. These
are just my opinions. I would concur with you on the what if discussions and
that if the main theme of the message changes then the subject line needs to be
looked at.

William Whited
74 F100 Ranger Supercab 390
77 F150 Custom 460
El Paso, TX
Semper Fi

"Peters, Gary (G.R.)" wrote:

> I for one will be more careful about how I respond and
> to what I respond in the future and I will be staying away from the what
> if's no matter how tempting they may be, they only cause trouble :-( If I
> don't know the correct terms I will refrain from responding so I don't
> confuse anyone.
>
> Sometimes I feel I'm in a court of law and have to watch every detail
> including the way I look at the judge......This, of course, pretty much
> takes the fun out of the discussion for me :-(
>
> --
> Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
> 78 Bronco Loving, Gary
> --
>
> > Well this has gotten lengthy enough, and if its enough to get
> > me kicked off
> > the list, then I imagine I've already gotten there.
> == 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, 12 Jan 2000 16:27:25 -0500
From: "G.T. Herpich" bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - poor braking

So, what kind of a problem is it? What's it doing or not doing?

chris koran wrote:

> i got a problem with the brakes on my truck. i have torn apart the
> front discs - turned the rotors and replaced the pads. the rears were
> torn apart but were in fairly good shape. i have just recently acquired
> the truck and haven't been able to find the problem. i bled the brakes
> completely front to back. the booster is working (when i disconnect the
> vacuum, i have 'no' brakes at all) but i don't know if they have a
> tendency to weaken internally after many years. maybe one of you out
> there have a good idea i could use. oh yeah, thanks to Rob Bowen for
> the idea on the glovebox. i didn't use the post office box, but found a
> suitable sub from a large piece of straight sheet plastic siding. the
> idea worked great. i went one step further and used 3M spray-on rubber
> floor matting on the bottom of the box to keep scrounge nuts and bolts
> and loose change from rattling. keep them coming. i appreciate any
> ideas on the brake problem.
>
> quadna bellatlantic.net
> 79 F-250 4WD Regular Cab 300 w/4 speed
>
> == 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, 12 Jan 2000 15:40:25 -0600
From: ballingr bootheel.net
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark question

I got a distributor in from the parts house today. I ordered a '75 360
Duraspark with the single vacuam line. It's a Hastings reman, and looks
good.

My wiring loom came from an '83 F250 with an M-block in it.

I am wondering about what application I should request on the module, the
'75 360 or the '83 M-block? I'm also wondering how to wire it up to my
existing system in the '65. Alot of the articles I've read are pretty
vague, and I've seen some discussion from time to time about the system
here, so any enlightenment would be much appreciated.

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 16:07:29 -0600
From: "William S. Hart" iastate.edu>
Subject: RE: FTE 61-79 - Duraspark question

> I am wondering about what application I should request on the module, the
> '75 360 or the '83 M-block?

They should be the same module, unless one's a DS I and the other's a DSII
module. I'd go for the DSII module from the later one personally ... but
I'd be surprised if they were different ...

> I'm also wondering how to wire it up to my
> existing system in the '65. Alot of the articles I've read are pretty
> vague, and I've seen some discussion from time to time about the system
> here, so any enlightenment would be much appreciated.
>

I haven't tried this yet, but since its FE and such, I'm just going the plug
and play route I hope ... still debating what I'm going to do for a wiring
harness, I have one, but its shape is questionable, so I'll just sit back
and see what everyone else thinks about wiring ...

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: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 18:38:57 EST
From: BDIJXS aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - P/S rebuild

I wonder if that is the same L&M Steering that used to be in San Jose,
California???? If so, I had bought a steering box and pump from them in 1980,
and they both worked great until I swapped them for new units just about a
year or two ago....

In other words, if its the same guys, I can attest that they do good work!!!

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

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 16:57:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Daniel Koster yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - 63 f-100 , new to list

Steve,

it's been a while.

Any luck with the remake of your 63 F100?


Later,

Dan

*proud '63 F100 owner*



- --- stevegoins email.msn.com> wrote:
> I have been reading this list for a few weeks now and really enjoy,have also
> learned a lot. Ihave a 63 F-100 that was originally my grandfathers truck.
> It has been reasonably well maintained except it has been sitting for the
> last 8 years. Yesterday i replaced starter,new battery,changed fluids,
> drained fuel system/refilled, and it fired right up! It is a Ford after all
> !
>
> 63 F-100/ I-6 (240 or 262 ? Not quite sure ) / 3 on the tree manual /
> Standard side short bed.
>
> I plan to restore to as close to stock as possible ( Needs a lot of cosmetic
> TLC and a paint job). Am badly in need of a shop manual and have been unable
> to locate one specific to 63. Any help would be appreciated.
>
> 63 seems to be an off year for info or parts from the browsing I've done. Do
> 61-65 parts match up? What changes were made in these model years?? What
> parts/accessories are model specific ??
>
> Would also appreciate any help , suggestions, tips ,etc. from members who
> have done similar restorations.
> I have experience restoring vintage motorcycles but this is my first truck .
> you can repond direct e-mail. I also have pictures availiable if
> interested. Iwill be documenting this entire process from the beginning.
>
> Thanks in advance to all.
>
> SKID (nickname from old motorcycle adventure}
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 20:13:34 EST
From: A61fordtruck aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - '74 (?) 1 ton stretch frame

While passing thru Conroe TX, I found a 74 (?) one ton stretch frame ford.
It was an XLT with the original 460 in it. the air blew cold as well. it
had 10 inch wheels in the back with stock hub caps all around. it appeared
to be in decent shape. if anybody out there is interested the number is 409
788 1800, ask for John
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 21:18:20 EST
From: BanksRVA aol.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - timing

Hey folks,
The timing mark on my 300 six will only show up if the timing light is hooked
to
the 3rd or 4th plug wire. Anyone have a clue why this is happening?
Thanks in advance.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 20:17:35 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Say.....Ken, about that ford link...

At 07:48 AM 12:1:00 -0600, ballingr bootheel.net wrote:


>I'd like ask why they stopped making the best car they've made in years, the
>Contour, and are now producing the Feces, oh I'm sorry , Focus.

I have to agree with this point, the Contour is one of the finest captive
imports Ford has, next to the Capri, that is...and I am also agreement
with the Feces comment. There is C_word ugly(Monte Craplo) and then
the Focus. Altho they hired one of the finest rally drivers ( Colin McCray).

>But I wont
>because I'm not going to embarrass Ken. Ford truck content only, and
>nothing at all about those stupid hydraulic throwout bearings I've fought
>for 10 years, GRRR!

The '57 had a hydraulic clutch, and *IT* actually worked....

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, 12 Jan 2000 20:17:36 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - South/Central Californians

At 10:55 AM 12:1:00 -0500, j arnold wrote:
> Would appreciate some help in locating an older Ford F series truck in
>California. We've been on the list a long time and heard from quite a few
>of yawl from that way so, thought I would start here.
> My son, Bud, joined Marine Corps last summer and after all training is now
>stationed at 'Twenty-Nine Palms' (just south of Barstow, in desert). Now
>that he is permanent (Marine? permanent? HA!), he is in need of
>transportation. Which puts me in tough position. Put enough money into one
>of six F series trucks we currently have, '57 through '84, so that 1.) is
>California leagal

Go with the '57, there aren't to many of these on the road these days,
plus, they're cool.....

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, 12 Jan 2000 22:26:49 -0700
From: "Idahoans" earthlink.net>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Sale prices?

I've seen some sale notices on the list, anywhere from $500 to
$3500. How do you determine the value of an old truck? Obviously
the "blue book" doesn't go back that far. I'll be selling my '71 soon,
I guess, and really wonder how to price it.

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

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 01:42:24 -0500
From: Brent and Millie Price mciworld.com>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - compression ratio and power

There appears to be a big difference in the "car" 390's versus the lower
compression truck 390's, in power and economy.

I rebuilt a 9.5 compression ratio car 2 bbl engine for my 67 F100 sb 2wd
back in 1990. The engine was only honed, stock cam, 3 spd on the column,
dual exhaust but no headers, 3.50 rear, normal size tires. Nice and strong
(not a major hotrod though) and always nuisance spinning. I checked my
mileage on a trip, mostly highway, carrying 800 lbs of goodies to sell at
the Charlotte Auto Fair. Got 16.5 mpg. Sold it, floorboard was too rotten.

Later, and I know this isn't a 390, but I bought a stock 72 F100 sb 2wd with
the 360 and 2 bbl and 3 spd, with 140k miles, single exhaust, geared for
highway. This truck ran okay, did use some oil, but the mileage on highway
was 13.5 mpg at best. And the power was aweful, as the 67 would run laps
around it. I developed a real bias against the 360 truck engine after
owning this one. Sold it to someone from PA who wanted it worse than I did.

Now I have a daily driver 76 F100 sb 2wd, original 2 bbl and 390, single
exhaust, this time with C6 and 3.00 gear, 105k miles, well tuned. It still
has no where near the power of the "car" 390, and only gets 12 to 12.5 mpg
on the highway.

Bottomline, remember the power of the CR! The next one I build will have 9
to 9.5 CR flattops for sure.

I would also like to hear from others with 2wd FE's and your mileage
readings, and any tips to improve mileage on the daily driver.


ME from NC
76 F100 XLT 390 2wd sb
67 F100 2wd sb





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

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 18:30:29 -0800
From: "Pat" aisl.bc.ca>
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Re: Rust! The Silent Killer

Howdy Folks,
For many of the people on the list, they've built many neat trucks.
Well, I'm going to build my Dream Truck and I'd like to hear ways of keeping
the Lariat cab and clip pristine while still using it. Ways of prepping
metal to not allow rust to start, in short a dialogue from the many
knowledgeble folks out there on the evil one, rust.
Pat Patrick
Patsplace on the List
78 F-150 W/Overloads
77 F-250 4X4
79 F-250 4X4 Dream Truck Under Way
72 F150 Ranger parts truck
79 F250 Lariat donor vech. for the '79 4X4







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

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 05:31:37 -0500
From: "G.T. Herpich" bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - compression ratio and power

If you use flat tops you will get 10.5. The car dished pistons are 9.5.

George



Brent and Millie Price wrote:

> There appears to be a big difference in the "car" 390's versus the lower
> compression truck 390's, in power and economy.
>
> I rebuilt a 9.5 compression ratio car 2 bbl engine for my 67 F100 sb 2wd
> back in 1990. The engine was only honed, stock cam, 3 spd on the column,
> dual exhaust but no headers, 3.50 rear, normal size tires. Nice and strong
> (not a major hotrod though) and always nuisance spinning. I checked my
> mileage on a trip, mostly highway, carrying 800 lbs of goodies to sell at
> the Charlotte Auto Fair. Got 16.5 mpg. Sold it, floorboard was too rotten.
>
> Later, and I know this isn't a 390, but I bought a stock 72 F100 sb 2wd with
> the 360 and 2 bbl and 3 spd, with 140k miles, single exhaust, geared for
> highway. This truck ran okay, did use some oil, but the mileage on highway
> was 13.5 mpg at best. And the power was aweful, as the 67 would run laps
> around it. I developed a real bias against the 360 truck engine after
> owning this one. Sold it to someone from PA who wanted it worse than I did.
>
> Now I have a daily driver 76 F100 sb 2wd, original 2 bbl and 390, single
> exhaust, this time with C6 and 3.00 gear, 105k miles, well tuned. It still
> has no where near the power of the "car" 390, and only gets 12 to 12.5 mpg
> on the highway.
>
> Bottomline, remember the power of the CR! The next one I build will have 9....


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.