|
|
Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Tue, 22 Aug 2000 18:25:49 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 18:25:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server <listar To: 61-79-list digest users <listar Reply-to: 61-79-list Subject: 61-79-list Digest V2000 #208 Precedence: list ========================================================== Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1961-1979 Truck Mailing List Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com To unsubscribe, send email to: listar the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the subject of the message. ========================================================== ------------------------------------ 61-79-list Digest Tue, 22 Aug 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 208 In This Issue: sideloader woes Re: 351M Headers for '78 Bronco Sounds Good to me Re: Thanks Tom! Re: Tweety's gettin parked Re: Tweety's gettin parked Re: 351M Headers for '78 Bronco Re: The REAL story behind the M... Re: The story of the "M" Re: Stroker W's List Replying Re: Tweety's gettin parked Where socks go! Headers Re: Where socks go! Re: Tweety's gettin parked Re: Tweety's gettin parked Re: Brake lines Re: Headers Re: 300 six rear mail seal. Re: Tweety's gettin parked Re: List Replying 460 4X4 Re: Engine Re: Brake lines ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Alex Cook" <alexcook32 Subject: sideloader woes Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:03:19 GMT Hi all, LONG time lurker here. I'm a bit reluctant to ask this since I think I know the answer, but I'm sure someone here can help. I recently got a great deal on a t-10 sideloader (it was practically given to me) with some other stuff for a '63 390. Or so I thought. When I got it home it had the narrow bolt pattern on the case like a small block--it would not fit to my eared 390 bellhousing. a knowledgeable friend is convinced (but I'm skeptical) that the transmission is only for 406/427 hi-po engines, and is worth $$. I didn't think that 406/427 had a unique bolt pattern, is that the case? I'm speaking of the tranny to housing bolts, not the housing to block. Anyone able to clear this up for me?? Thanks... ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam Subject: Re: 351M Headers for '78 Bronco Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 13:30:01 -0400 check with Hooker Headers or Edelbrock Exhaust systems. -----Original Message----- From: Eric Finn <ecfinn To: 61-79-list Date: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 9:45 AM Subject: [61-79-list] 351M Headers for '78 Bronco >Hey gang, > >Since I'm sure this question has been asked many times before I'll try to >keep it brief. I'm getting to the point in my Bronco project where I'm >starting to finish things off and one of those big items left on the list >is the exhaust for "The beast." When I bought this truck it had the stock >351M with factory exhaust manifolds, true dual exhaust (no cats) and glass >packs. It sounded great. At the time it had the stock 2bbl Motorcraft >carb. Since then I put on the Edelbrock performer intake with Carter 4bbl >carb. It definitely helped the power. > >My question now is what would give me the best setup for this truck from >an exhaust perspective. I was considering headers, true dual exhaust >(like before) and some sort of high-flow mufflers or maybe even glass >packs again. I've been looking at the various header manufacturers and >the only direct listing for the '78 Bronco is two different ones from >Hedman. Thorley, JBA, Sanderson, and Gibson don't list anything. Am I >missing any manufacturers I should be looking at? What do you all have >for headers on your '78-'79 Broncos with 351M/400 engines? TIA! > >Later, > >Eric Finn >'78 Bronco "The Beast" (Project still in Progress!) >'95 Mustang GT "Beauty" >'98 Honda Shadow 750 ACE >Personal Homepage: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.home.net/ecfinn/ >http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.superford.org/cgi-bin/sf.cgi?uid=default&vr2=1&ID=788 > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! >http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mail.yahoo.com/ >============================================================= >To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 >Please remove this footer when replying. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:21:59 -0700 (PDT) From: "Michael (Cut me and I'll bleed FORD Blue) Whittington" <broncoman85 Subject: Sounds Good to me Go Ahead Deacon, tell'em like it is Whit 77 F250 4X4 20 inchs lift 800 horse 429 44 Boggers 75 F100 460 78 Bronco 11 inchs lift stock 351M 44 Gumbos 69 F100 302 76 F250 Dual wheels 390 Tow Truck 85 Bronco 302 _______________________________________________________ Say Bye to Slow Internet! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html ------------------------------ From: "Hogan, Tom" <Tom.Hogan Subject: Re: Thanks Tom! Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:23:20 -0700 > > > Tom, > > Thanks. I looked at a 72 Suburban today and the SCab is still > on the 1st of > the list. Ford's paint has held up a lot better! Is your > truck the one on the > PIC list? > > Glenn in TN > 57 F100 -- in progress > 74 F100 Supercab -- daily driver???? Yes, It is the green one with the red camper shell. Drove it cross country twice and would do it again tomorrow. Tom H. ------------------------------ From: "Deacon" <deconblu Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:59:36 -0700 > Im going to park Tweety for the next year or so, > Finish my engine rebuild, clean up the wiring mess under the hood, rebuild my > front suspension. ALL the brakes need attention. After thats done, Im going > to gut the interior, and put in a new seat, new carpet, recover the dash. > Rebuild the stereo system, etc etc. Only to take it out jumping every dirt mound you can find just to see how high and far you can fly before slamming into the ground. Kewl! If you can't have fun with a truck, why have it! 8] > But on the plus side, Im the proud owner of a 71 Stang with a Cleveland. No Darrell, Don't do it! A '71 Stang isn't a jumping Ford! It's a stay on the ground, go fast, look kewl Ford! Why I'm I even trying. You and your family are nuts! They'll talk you into a lift kit and then you'll not be able to stop yourself. Your just like one of those Xgame fools that loose a spleen or brake a leg then drag their bloody carcass back to the top of the hill to go again. >:] I have a '66 Stang. I have it looking kewl. Only bad thing I can say about Stang's is that most of the people that own them are... Lets just say their not like Ford truck owners. ;] Later! Deacon deconblu deconblu http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 13:34:11 -0400 From: Joe <shoman Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked Deacon I have to agree with you there Being an owner of a 69 Stang..The owners i've met at shows are way to..Stuck on themselves(sorry if i offend anyone) they are not Truck owners for sure :) Joe 68 4x4 390 Auto 69 Mustang 351w Deacon wrote: > > Im going to park Tweety for the next year or so, > > Finish my engine rebuild, clean up the wiring mess under the hood, > rebuild my > front suspension. ALL the brakes need attention. After > thats done, Im going > > to gut the interior, and put in a new seat, new carpet, recover the > dash. > > Rebuild the stereo system, etc etc. > > Only to take it out jumping every dirt mound you can find just to > see how high and far you can fly before slamming into the ground. Kewl! > If you can't have fun with a truck, why have it! 8] > > > But on the plus side, Im the proud owner of a 71 Stang with a > Cleveland. > > No Darrell, Don't do it! A '71 Stang isn't a jumping Ford! It's a > stay on the ground, go fast, look kewl Ford! Why I'm I even trying. You > and your family are nuts! They'll talk you into a lift kit and then > you'll not be able to stop yourself. Your just like one of those Xgame > fools that loose a spleen or brake a leg then drag their bloody carcass > back to the top of the hill to go again. >:] > I have a '66 Stang. I have it looking kewl. Only bad thing I can say > about Stang's is that most of the people that own them are... Lets just > say their not like Ford truck owners. ;] > > Later! > > Deacon > > deconblu > deconblu > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/ > > ============================================================= > To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 > Please remove this footer when replying. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:47:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Finn <ecfinn Subject: Re: 351M Headers for '78 Bronco Thanks for the suggestions. So far in my research I've found the following: Thorley - nothing Hedman - Street #89210 Elite #89218 JBA - nothing Sanderson - nothing Gibson - nothing Hooker - #6832 Dynomax - Cyclone and Blackjack are now Dynomax but I can't find an application guide for their headers. Flowtech - Painted #12520 - Ceramic #32520 Edelbrock - nothing So it seems as if there are only three (maybe four if Dynomax has something) manufacturers that make headers for the 351M/400 for a '78 Bronco. That would seem to be an un-tapped market given the number of Bronco's I see running around of that vintage. Oh well. Thanks for the help guys. Now I just have to see where I can buy these things... :-) Later, Eric Finn --- Tim and Pam Allgire <tim-pam > check with Hooker Headers or Edelbrock Exhaust systems. > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Finn <ecfinn > > >Hey gang, > > > >My question now is what would give me the best setup for this truck > from > >an exhaust perspective. I was considering headers, true dual exhaust > >(like before) and some sort of high-flow mufflers or maybe even glass > >packs again. I've been looking at the various header manufacturers and > >the only direct listing for the '78 Bronco is two different ones from > >Hedman. Thorley, JBA, Sanderson, and Gibson don't list anything. Am I > >missing any manufacturers I should be looking at? What do you all have > >for headers on your '78-'79 Broncos with 351M/400 engines? TIA! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:49:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone > I have a '66 Stang. I have it looking kewl. Only bad thing I can say > about Stang's is that most of the people that own them are... Lets just > say their not like Ford truck owners. ;] I think what the Deacster is trying to say is that a lot of people (no way all) who own Mustangs don't appreciate their Fordness, but rather are looking for lost youth or maybe you could say they are in their 2nd or 3rd childhood. Ford truck owners OTOH have their feet solidly on the ground (except when they are flying over dunes) and have excellent cognizance of their environment. Ford truck owners know what needs to be done and then they do it. Was that it Deacon or did I miss something? -- John jlagrone 1979 F150 Custom, Long Wide Bed, Regular Cab, 351M, C6 (Henry) http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm Dearborn iron rules!!!! ------------------------------ From: "Deacon" <deconblu Subject: Re: The REAL story behind the M... Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:24:38 -0700 From: "Bill Beyer" > Has anyone (but me) has ever noticed that between the letter C and the > letter W there are exactly 19 letters? That means that between the letter C > and the letter M there are 9 letters D-L. Still referring to our trusty > alphabet we see that between the letter M and the letter W there are also > EXACTLY 9 letters, N-V. The letter M is dead center in the middle of C and > W...I think we can safely hypothesize from this that Ford engineers simply > decided "what the hell, it's as good a letter as any other and people will > wonder for years what that stupid M means" Then could that mean it could stand for middle? I think you may be on to something or your on something. 8] > "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" Well, I'm not riddled with bullets but I am dazzled. But I don't think it's by brilliance. ;] LSHICMP Later! Deacon deconblu deconblu http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/ ------------------------------ From: "wish" <wish Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:02:23 GMT Subject: Re: The story of the "M" > To end this confusion, I will give you the background where "M" in >351M & 400M originated. > I hope this clears up the confusion. It took a lot of time making >this up. I felt someone had to, so why not let it be me. Got to admit >that it sounds good, don't it! 8] > Deacon, that's great ... I saw it was you and knew what to expect a head of time, but it still made me laugh :) It'd be almost too funny if that's what really happened :) 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 Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com ------------------------------ From: "wish" <wish Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:12:17 GMT Subject: Re: Stroker W's > It runs low 14's in the 1/4 mile which isn't bad for a 5500 lb brick >shaped vehicle, IMO. 5500#'s in an Early Bronco ? That seems heavy to me, I mean my full size 4x4 doesn't weigh quite that ... I suppose if he was a BIG boy he might make up some of that weight ... but still 5500 seems high ... any insight into what else he's done to the truck ? 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 Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com ------------------------------ From: "Dave Emerick" <djemerick Subject: List Replying Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 13:10:11 EST Ok....I know I've read this in the past, but seem to forget the proper method for replying back on the list. Some instructions would be most appreciated... Dave ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: "wish" <wish Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:19:01 GMT Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked >> I have a '66 Stang. I have it looking kewl. Only bad thing I can say >> about Stang's is that most of the people that own them are... Lets just >> say their not like Ford truck owners. ;] > >I think what the Deacster is trying to say is that a lot of people (no way >all) who own Mustangs don't appreciate their Fordness, but rather are >looking for lost youth or maybe you could say they are in their 2nd or 3rd >childhood. Ford truck owners OTOH have their feet solidly on the ground >(except when they are flying over dunes) and have excellent cognizance of >their environment. Ford truck owners know what needs to be done and then >they do it. Was that it Deacon or did I miss something? > John, I think you hit the nail on the head ... I've got a newer Mustang and notice that some people are really friendly, others are really stuck on themselves, and yet others just resent me ... there's a woman who drives a white V6 that looks very similar to mine (white GT w/Cobra parts on it), she waves every time we pass each other, others sneer at me with their older Mustangs, and still others won't even acknowledge that I exsist. The other thing is there are probably just as many or more Mustangs in the world than Ford Trucks, so you get ALL kinds ... The funny part is that no one in the housing addition I live in will acknowledge that they know me (except my immediate neighbor) when I'm in my truck ... when I'm in my car, they're all my best friends, unless I'm blocking them 'cause I'm only driving 20 on the gravel, then they're mad ... funny how they can never seem to get around me on the pavement though ... 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 Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:07:46 -0400 From: George Selby <digiman Subject: Where socks go! At 12:03 PM 8/22/00 -0400, you wrote: >Someday I'll clue you in on >my theory about where all those socks go... They go down the dryer vent tube. If you've ever had the opportunity of changing or cleaning one of these, there are always socks in it. If you are ever having trouble with your dryer drying, clean the socks and lint out of your vent tube. Kinda off topic, but it answers one of life's little mysteries. George Selby 78 F-150 4x4 400 4 spd 86 Nissan 300ZX digiman http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.usedcarsandparts.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:16:45 -0400 From: George Selby <digiman Subject: Headers At 09:30 AM 8/22/00 -0400, you wrote: >What do you all have >for headers on your '78-'79 Broncos with 351M/400 engines? TIA! I got a set of Hedman's on my truck. The only other set of headers I've seen for our trucks is a set of Dynomax headers. I saw them in a new Jeg's catalog. As a added benefit, you can get them COATED in the aluminum looking heat stuff. I messed up my headers (hit them on a big rock, then had to drag myself off with the winch, messed up collector flange, ) so I think I'm going to get a set of the Dynomaxs myself. Wouldn't headers from any 78-79 F-150 work on a Bronco, too (no not a Bronco II.) The cab is the same, and the undercarriage is, also, at least as far back as the headers go. Only difference is the pipes after the headers. George Selby 78 F-150 4x4 400 4 spd 86 Nissan 300ZX digiman http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.usedcarsandparts.com ------------------------------ From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer99 Subject: Re: Where socks go! Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:26:41 -0700 Well that blows the theory of the rogue underwear gnomes all to hell... OK we've gone waaay off topic here so now back to you're regularly scheduled FTE discussions. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Selby" <digiman To: <61-79-list Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 11:07 AM Subject: [61-79-list] Where socks go! > At 12:03 PM 8/22/00 -0400, you wrote: > >Someday I'll clue you in on > >my theory about where all those socks go... > > They go down the dryer vent tube. If you've ever had the opportunity of > changing or cleaning one of these, there are always socks in it. If you > are ever having trouble with your dryer drying, clean the socks and lint > out of your vent tube. > > Kinda off topic, but it answers one of life's little mysteries. ------------------------------ From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer99 Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:29:57 -0700 I think you're mistaken about there being more Mustangs than trucks. It just seems like it cause 1 a**hole in a Mustang goes a long way...and yes I have owned a Mustang before. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" ----- Original Message ----- From: "wish" <wish To: <61-79-list Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 10:19 AM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Tweety's gettin parked > > > >> I have a '66 Stang. I have it looking kewl. Only bad thing I can say > >> about Stang's is that most of the people that own them are... Lets just > >> say their not like Ford truck owners. ;] > > > >I think what the Deacster is trying to say is that a lot of people (no way > > >all) who own Mustangs don't appreciate their Fordness, but rather are > >looking for lost youth or maybe you could say they are in their 2nd or 3rd > > >childhood. Ford truck owners OTOH have their feet solidly on the ground > >(except when they are flying over dunes) and have excellent cognizance of > >their environment. Ford truck owners know what needs to be done and then > >they do it. Was that it Deacon or did I miss something? > > > > John, I think you hit the nail on the head ... I've got a newer Mustang and > notice that some people are really friendly, others are really stuck on themselves, > and yet others just resent me ... there's a woman who drives a white V6 that > looks very similar to mine (white GT w/Cobra parts on it), she waves every time > we pass each other, others sneer at me with their older Mustangs, and still > others won't even acknowledge that I exsist. The other thing is there are probably > just as many or more Mustangs in the world than Ford Trucks, so you get ALL > kinds ... > > > The funny part is that no one in the housing addition I live in will acknowledge > that they know me (except my immediate neighbor) when I'm in my truck ... when > I'm in my car, they're all my best friends, unless I'm blocking them 'cause > I'm only driving 20 on the gravel, then they're mad ... funny how they can never > seem to get around me on the pavement though ... ------------------------------ From: "Deacon" <deconblu Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:15:20 -0700 From: "John LaGrone" > Was that it Deacon or did I miss something? Yea, what ever. :~/ Oops, sorry. That was Deacon the stuck up Mustang owner. :-} I forgot, on this list I'm Deacon the happy, helpful Ford truck owner. 8~) > Ford truck owners OTOH have their feet solidly on the ground > (except when they are flying over dunes) and have excellent cognizance of > their environment. Ford truck owners know what needs to be done and then > they do it. Yea, what ever. :~/ Later! Deacon deconblu deconblu http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/ ------------------------------ From: TBeeee Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:58:21 EDT Subject: Re: Brake lines I don't know exactly when double flaring came into vogue but it most assuredly was prior to 1968. Your truck should have double flared fittings. A wheel cylinder which accepts a double flare will also accept single flares, but it's just not recommended from a safety standpoint. Stock Man http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee In a message dated 8/22/2000 12:19:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, pauljohn > So my question is, which > type of flaring was originally used on this year of truck? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:59:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Finn <ecfinn Subject: Re: Headers George, It makes sense to me that they'd fit both 4WD bronco and F-150 but that doesn't mean the manufacturer will support the headers in that application if they don't spec 'em that way. I'm just trying to CYA in case they don't fit. Thanks for the tip on Jegs. I just found the Dynomax ones you're talking about. They're only $206 for a ceramic coated header. Sounds too good to be true though. Maybe I'll post the final summary when I get all the info in. I've got emails out still on a bunch of different places so we'll see what I get back. Would there be any interest in this "research"? Later, Eric --- George Selby <digiman > At 09:30 AM 8/22/00 -0400, you wrote: > >What do you all have > >for headers on your '78-'79 Broncos with 351M/400 engines? TIA! > > I got a set of Hedman's on my truck. The only other set of headers I've > > seen for our trucks is a set of Dynomax headers. I saw them in a new > Jeg's > catalog. As a added benefit, you can get them COATED in the aluminum > looking heat stuff. I messed up my headers (hit them on a big rock, > then > had to drag myself off with the winch, messed up collector flange, ) so > I > think I'm going to get a set of the Dynomaxs myself. > > Wouldn't headers from any 78-79 F-150 work on a Bronco, too (no not a > Bronco II.) The cab is the same, and the undercarriage is, also, at > least > as far back as the headers go. Only difference is the pipes after the > headers. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:03:10 -0400 From: Tony Marino <redneck Subject: Re: 300 six rear mail seal. Hey Don, Only got a second- but it's a one piece rubber seal- you'll have to pull the clutch- but it's a piece of cake to do after that- don't have to take oil pan off, or anything-- just use two small screws to screw into old seal to extract it, and just tap the new one into place. 8-) Tony At 07:40 8/22/2000 -0700, you wrote: >Hey all > > Quick question here about a Rear Mail seal. The seal decided to > not do it's job anymore( at the rate of about 4 quarts to a tank full) in > my 77 F250. Is it a 2 piece seal and do I need to remove the clutch, ect > to change it out? I know it would be easier with the clutch out and all > but I would rather just change the seal if I could. > >Thanks all > >-- >Don Grossman >duckdon > >43 GPW >63 F-100 4x4 >77 F250 >99 Contour >============================================================= >To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 >Please remove this footer when replying. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:04:16 -0400 From: Ken Payne <kpayne Subject: Re: Tweety's gettin parked At 12:23 PM 8/22/00, you wrote: >> Can we all have a moment of silence, Tweety deserves it I think. > >Consider it done. > >Ford just got another convert from the general. My mom told me over the >phone last night that she traded her Buick Century for a 99 Taurus. I guess >children do influence their parents after all. Down, back!! That was a >generic statement not intended to start a new war!! Please , no flames, it's >hot enough down here in Texas already. ;-) The little girl down the street who hangs out with our daughter has started telling her mom that their Chevy station wagon stinks and she should have gotten a Ford. Her dream car is now a Mustang. Ken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:08:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Headers From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone > It makes sense to me that they'd fit both 4WD bronco and F-150 but that > doesn't mean the manufacturer will support the headers in that application > if they don't spec 'em that way. This is a good point. Going the other way, something might fit a 2wd that is advertised for a 4x4, but can't be advertised for a 2wd because of emission laws. That's usually where the little "For off road use only" tag sneaks in. -- John jlagrone 1979 F150 Custom, Long Wide Bed, Regular Cab, 351M, C6 (Henry) http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm Dearborn iron rules!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:06:32 -0400 From: Ken Payne <kpayne Subject: Re: List Replying At 02:10 PM 8/22/00, you wrote: >Ok....I know I've read this in the past, but seem to forget the proper method for replying back on the list. Some instructions would be most appreciated... > >Dave Errrrr...... never mind? Heh heh. Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts ------------------------------ From: SpeedyFords Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:17:15 EDT Subject: 460 4X4 Hi all, I'm in the midst of trying to replace the 400 in my 78 F-250 4X4 with a 460 and can't find any engine-to-frame mounting brackets. We have slim pickings for salvage yards up here in Alaska, and all of the good 4X4 stuff gets rebuilt or snatched up quick. Does anyone on the list have a surplus set or place where they might find some for me? Does anyone know if there is a conversion kit that will allow a 460 to sit on the 400's supports? Help, I'm stuck! Thanks for anything you can tell me, Tim in Anchorage '67 F-100 '78/'79 F-250 ------------------------------ From: "Ted and Sarah Freeman" <oldparts Subject: Re: Engine Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 19:01:20 -0400 >>were used in 360's. The tin can style piston is mainly found on older >>360's. Later they went to the 390 and after that they started using the >>surplus 410's to decrease compression. >> > >That doesn't sound quite right, if they did share a pin height, then the compression >ratio's would stay the same ... unless you're talking maybe height from the >crank centerline to the wrist pin ... but the compression heights are definitely >different ... a 360 piston in a 390 is bad news, a 390 piston in a 360 is low >compression ... Oooppss....you're right. The 360 and 390 are different. The '70 390 is close 1.775 vs. 1.776 for the 360. Other than that they vary greatly for the different compression ratios. >>The 352 and 360 share the crank and long rods (to me these are small and >>weak) the bore was the difference. >> > >Pull them out and check their numbers, you never know what Ford was trying to >get rid of in some of those later model motors... Check the numbers on what?? The rods or the crank?? I know the 352 and 360 share the same rod and crank. > >>The 360 and 390 share the piston. The crank and rods are different. >> > >I know this isn't true ... the crank and rods and pistons are all different >... the compression height for a 360 and 390 are quite a bit different, of course >I forgot my book to show the numbers > Again, my oversite. Sorry. > >I suppose another question begging to be asked is what are you considering early >and late ? I've been considering most of the 70's stuff late, but thinking >about it, there's probably about 3 gen's of 390's, the pre 64 style, the 64-71/2, >and then the emissions fun of the 73-76 ... The motor's I've worked with are >both 73/4 style (D4TE blocks with mirror 105's on them), so they are definitely >"late run" motors, one of them was even out of a 76, but is happy in my 73, >making it more ish than 73 :) I used a D3TE block reverse 105 for my rebuild and the original '68 360 will be next and will become a 390. The 70's stuff is what I consider late and my disclaimer was there were variations in each instance. Basically what I was trying to do was to give an overview of what can and can't be changed. Every part of the exchange can be debated individually and research must be done to insure that the rotating mass will fit and work in any particular rebuild situation. Good catch on the 360 and 390 piston compression heights. -Ted P.S.-both of my 360's have slipper skirts on the pistons. Both are original bores so I'm assuming they are original to the engine. ------------------------------ From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 Subject: Re: Brake lines .... 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.
|