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 ford-trucks.com>
To: 61-79-list digest users <listar ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
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 ford-trucks.com with
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 hotmail.com>
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 williams-net.com>
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 yahoo.com>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
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 excite.com>
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 kla-tencor.com>
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 ford-trucks.com>
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 ford-trucks.com
deconblu earthlink.net
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 p3.net>
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 ford-trucks.com
> deconblu earthlink.net
> 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 yahoo.com>
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 williams-net.com> wrote:
> check with Hooker Headers  or Edelbrock  Exhaust systems.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Finn <ecfinn yahoo.com>
>
> >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 ford-trucks.com>

> 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 ford-trucks.com     <]:-) <]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)
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 ford-trucks.com>
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 ford-trucks.com
deconblu earthlink.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/



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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
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 ford-trucks.net>
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 hotmail.com>
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 ford-trucks.net>
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 cegi.net>
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 cegi.net
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 cegi.net>
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 cegi.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.usedcarsandparts.com


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

From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer99 home.com>
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 cegi.net>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
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 home.com>
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 ford-trucks.net>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
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 ford-trucks.com>
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 ford-trucks.com
deconblu earthlink.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home.earthlink.net/~deconblu/



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

From: TBeeee aol.com
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 nortelnetworks.com writes:

> 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 yahoo.com>
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 cegi.net> wrote:
> 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 raex.com>
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 mac.com
>
>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 ford-trucks.com>
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 ford-trucks.com>

> 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 ford-trucks.com     <]:-) <]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)
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 ford-trucks.com>
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 cs.com
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 ford-trucks.com>
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 alltel.net>
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 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.