Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:45:52 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:45:52 -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 #211
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 Wed, 23 Aug 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 211

In This Issue:
Re: Mustangs vs. Trucks
Re: Stroker W's
Narrow eared T-10 ?
syncapation
Nuke GM
Flipped shackle
Re: Mustangs vs. Trucks
Re: 400M crank into 351W
Re: strokers W's
Re: Nuke GM
Re: Bolt patterns
steering locked.
Re: Mustangs vs. Trucks
bed tail pans
What "M" really stands for
Re: steering locked.
Re: steering locked.
Re: Flipped shackle
Re: steering locked.
351M distributor shear pin repair
Re: Flipped shackle
Re: 351M distributor shear pin repair
Early T-10 question
Re: Flipped shackle
Re: Flipped shackle
Re: 400M crank into 351W
Re: 400M crank into 351W
Re: 400M crank into 351W
Speaking of plates...
Re: bigger tires

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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:06:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Mustangs vs. Trucks

>Just a minor correction.  The Mustang started with year model 1964 and 1/2.


April 17th 1964, the opening of the New York World's fair to be precise ...



>:-)  On the point of selling numbers, you are very correct.  I wonder how


I guess the Mustangs must move so fast it just seems like there's just as many
... though the other thing is that there is a huge Mustang following and truck
following in this part of the country, so it seems like if you don't have a
truck you have a Mustang, sometimes you're lucky enough to have both :)

I could've sworn the Mustang production numbers were pretty darned high since
they broke tons of sales records in their first few years, but you are correct
in the 70's and early 90's sales were very low while truck sales climbed.


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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:10:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Stroker W's



>My 77 1/2t 4WD tips the scales at 5800 lbs.  My Bronco weighs somewhere
>around 5300- 5500 lbs the last time I checked, and I'm not a "big":^) boy.

>By the time you add a winch, bumpers, large tires, spare parts and tools
>(carried most of the time) and all of the extra stuff, it adds up fast.
>

Hahahaha, no offense intended, being a "flatlander" I just keep jumper cables
and a tow rope (for lack of anywhere better to put it in the summer) behind
the seat, that's about it for "emergency" equipment ... at most you'll get stuck
a mile or so from someone's house/barn, and with a Ford truck, you shouldn't
get stuck at all :)

I can see where adding the winch and all the chains and stuff will really bring
your curb weight up pretty quickly  :)

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: "Desanto, Phillip" <pdesanto Cinergy.com>
Subject: Narrow eared T-10 ?
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:06:21 -0500




From: "Alex Cook" <alexcook32 hotmail.com>
Subject: sideloader woes
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.........................Rest of "lucky
dog" story clipped. :-)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alex, I'm in the Galaxie club and another Ford club so I forwarded your
query to the other lists. I think there's "some" truth to what your friend
says, but I can't remember the details. (among other things ! )  We'll see
what turns up ??   Between these guys, and the Galaxie list, no good Ford
question goes unanswered for long. Well.... except that pesky "M" means
what? thing !
          Good luck, Phil  (64 F-100 - 63.5 Galaxie 500)

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

From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: syncapation
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:13:09 -0500


Gary writes:  >>perfect syncapation

Gary's back..  Can you guys tell it.

Welcome back Gary.  I agree with the sheared dist drive gear for the 351M that has the rotor not rotationg..

Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: Nuke GM
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:19:27 -0500


John LaG. writes:  >>Couldn't be Stu or the plates would be from Tennessee. ;-) (and on a Ford
truck, of course!)<<

Yeah!!  I knew it wasn't Stu.  I was just giging him a bit about someone else thinking as he does..Scary to say the least..


Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

From: "Nichols, Josh" <Josh.Nichols svseeds.com>
Subject: Flipped shackle
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:24:53 -0700

Anyone flipped their rear shackle's over (Like a jeep rear shackle)?  If so
care to share your experiances?

I did this a couple months ago and at first I thought I was happy with it.
Softer ride, maybe a little more flex (deffinitely more droop) But now it
seems there are many more negetive aspecs are out weighing the positive.
First off when I step on the gas going forward it fully extends the shackle
raising the back end of my truck up about three inches maybe more.

Now when I step on the gas in reverse it does the opposite it fully
compresses the shackles and lowers the back of my truck 3 or more inches.
Now I could probably live with this but why does my truck do this?  Do
others who have done this have this problem.  Most toyotas and jeeps have
this shackle setup and you never see them with this problem.

I guessing that as the axle want to twist up or down as I step on the gas it
either pulls the rear of the spring forward or backward with moves my
shackles which raises or lowers the back end.  Would some sort of third link
on the axle that prevented axle wrap help?

One other thing...I deffinitely would NOT do this if you have an open rear
end.  Going down the road if you step on the gas only one side of the truck
lifts up and steers you quickly into the other lane, just as you get it
corrected you let off the gas and go off the shoulder even faster.  With a
locker...ehhh spool in the rear it is not nearly as bad---it's just gettting
annoying.


Josh

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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:29:00 -0500
From: John Strauss <jstrauss inetport.com>
Subject: Re: Mustangs vs. Trucks

>>Mustangs have only been around since '66
>>
>Just a minor correction.  The Mustang started with year model 1964 and 1/2.
>
Oh, yeah, duh, what was I smoking????
  _
_| ~~.  John Strauss
\, *_}  jstrauss inetport.com
  \(    Texas Fight!


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

From: "Dave Resch" <Dave.Resch sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:34:52 -0600
Subject: Re: 400M crank into 351W

>From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
>
>The journal sizes are the same from the 400 and
>the 351W.  There is no machining needed on the
>mains.

Yo Jason:

Correct you are on the journal diameters.  Both 351W and 400 share the same
crankshaft rod and main journal diameters.

From descriptions I have read (i.e., no direct personal experience), I
understand that the counterweights on a 400 crankshaft have to be machined down
to get them to clear the 351W block.  This is in addition to the front snout
being turned down to fit the 351W damper.  Maybe it was just one of the stroker
kits that did this?

Dave R (M-block devotee)



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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:42:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Nuke GM
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> someone else thinking as he does..Scary to say the least..

Who's scary? Stu or the Mustang owner? Oh, both. Ahhh, seems like old times.
Azie and Gary both on the list at the same time. Life is good...

Nuke GM!!! That one is for Stu. ;0)

-- 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: "Alex Cook" <alexcook32 hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: strokers W's
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:44:48 GMT


 Affordable Windsor based stroker kits and crate motors can be found at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.coasthigh.com/ as well.
________________________________________________________________________
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: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" <gpeters3 visteon.com>
Subject: Re: Nuke GM
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:00:07 -0400

Yup and I already told a lie so I'm back for sure :-)  Open mouth, insert
foot.......

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>Azie and Gary both on the list at the same time. Life is good...

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

From: "Alex Cook" <alexcook32 hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bolt patterns
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:07:30 GMT

<<<<The very early('58 thru say around '63) manuals were a narrow
pattern.... Don't know their reasoning.... early T10
(side loader as you call it) that has only the narrow pattern.  All you need
is the correct bellhousing to make it work(I think).>>>>

Thanks Azie!  I knew it would work with the right housing, I was just a bit
confused by the narrow bolt pattern on the transmission.  For some reason I
thought the narrow/wide pattern was a big block/small block difference.
Threw me off when the T10 (that supposedly came from behind an FE) had the
smaller pattern.  I lerned me sumtin' knew, yep.
________________________________________________________________________
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: "Alex Cook" <alexcook32 hotmail.com>
Subject: steering locked.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:22:17 GMT

 Here's something I haven't seen.  I have among my fleet of Ford and
Mercury's a '72 Econoline w/302 (soon to be 351C).  Great van.  Last week my
steering wheel locked in the center position, no movement at all (luckily I
had just stopped for a sandwich.)  Got under it and realized that the bolts
that hold the steering box pulled right through the frame!
   Two questions.  First, is there something other than normal wear that I
should look for as being the culprit?  Second is the fix.  My plan now is to
just have a steel plate with two holes made for me, then bolt the box back
to the frame with the plate backing it.  Should I trust that?  I would
rather keep the ability to turn at highway speeds, thank you very much.
Welding the plate is maybe the obvious answer, but I'm no welder.  Okay, any
feedback is appreciated, thanks. --A.

PS: It's power steering.
________________________________________________________________________
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: Mustangs vs. Trucks
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:43:22 -0400

I don't know where you get you're  Mustang info at but it is wrong. The
Mustang has been around since  ' 64 1/2 .
-----Original Message-----
From: John Strauss <jstrauss inetport.com>
To: Ford Trucks List <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 9:21 AM
Subject: [61-79-list] Mustangs vs. Trucks


>>The other thing is there are probably
>>just as many or more Mustangs in the world than Ford Trucks, so you get
ALL
>>kinds ...
>>
>Uh, no, there is no way that is correct.  I bet Ford has sold 10 times as
>many trucks than they have Mustangs.  Mustangs have only been around since
>'66 but Ford has been making the F-Series since, what, '46?  The Ford
>F-Series has been the best selling VEHICLE IN THE WORLD for the past 10
>years or so - the Mustang is not even in the top 20.
>   _
> _| ~~.  John Strauss
> \, *_}  jstrauss inetport.com
>   \(    Texas Fight!
>
>=============================================================
>To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
>Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: "D. DiMartino" <grunon yahoo.com>
Subject: bed tail pans

i've been looking for a replacement tail pan for my bed and can
only find one for '73-79, not 67-72 for my '68.  is there much
of a difference between the model years?  my gut feeling is to
go ahead and order one but wanted to ask the list for any input
before i buy it.  the pan is out of a J.C Whitney catalog for
$14.95.  never ordered anything from them but it's damn cheap.
they also have the correct year for the bed floor!


=====
Daniel DiMartino
<grunon yahoo.com>
1968 F-250 soon to be a 4x4

__________________________________________________
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: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:17:17 -0400
From: frenz.6 osu.edu (Dale Frenz)
Subject: What "M" really stands for

In my expert opinion, I believe the 351 "M" you guys are all whining about
actually stands for "Man I wish I had a Powerstroke."

-Dale

p.s. Some nameless lister was under the mistaken impression a few years
back the 351M/400 were one and the same, with the "400" being a designation
not refering to displacement. =X



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

From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" <gpeters3 visteon.com>
Subject: Re: steering locked.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:20:29 -0400

The 72 should be a power drag link system.  If the box pulled through the
frame I would suspect rust first, loose bolts and fatigue next and a very
serious trauma to the front end last, way last.  The bolt holes have collars
or sleeves between the two sides of the frame to support the torque of the
bolts.   If they pulled through they had to pull through both sides which
doesn't sound very safe.  The box needs to be very rigid and the bolts need
to be very tight so if they go through both sides of the frame (frame is
usually boxed in that area) then you need to determine if the frame is eaten
away enough to be dangerous and any weak areas must be patched by a
competent welder/mechanic.  You cannot bolt the box to a "boxed" frame
without sleeves between the two sides or it will simply bend the frame sides
together, it must be supported by something.  Some I've seen have an "S"
shaped flat iron piece which wraps around some of the bolts creating a
bridge between the two sides......either way it needs something to resist
the bolt torque if it is, indeed, boxed.

It is possible that the bolts have been loose long enough to "wear" through
the frame too but rust is more likely the culprit.

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>had just stopped for a sandwich.)  Got under it and realized
>that the bolts
>that hold the steering box pulled right through the frame!

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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:33:12 GMT
Subject: Re: steering locked.



>If the box pulled through the
>frame I would suspect rust first, loose bolts and fatigue next and a very
>serious trauma to the front end last, way last>It is possible that the bolts
have been loose long enough to "wear" through
>the frame too but rust is more likely the culprit.
>

Ugh, I'm actually gonna say it ... I agree with Gary's conclusions here ...
though the loose bolts might be first on my list, if it's pulled through its
likely rust ...  A plate might be made to span between the rust spots, but if
the frame's really that rusty then you should think twice about the 351C swap
(or advertise it as a freak show pretzel frame after you gun it :)   ...  A
buddy had a BII that had issues with the box loosening, some loc-tite and its
all better ...  Also the factory setup on my truck used 3 bolts to hold the
box in ... is this true for 2wd as well or are they 2 bolts only ?

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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:40:47 GMT
Subject: Re: Flipped shackle

>Anyone flipped their rear shackle's over (Like a jeep rear shackle)?  If so

>care to share your experiances?
>

Nope, but been thinkin about it ...


>I did this a couple months ago and at first I thought I was happy with it.

>Softer ride, maybe a little more flex (deffinitely more droop)

Cool, things I like to hear about a mod :)


> But now it
>seems there are many more negetive aspecs are out weighing the positive.
>First off when I step on the gas going forward it fully extends the shackle

>raising the back end of my truck up about three inches maybe more.
>

Hahahaha, sounds like an old Chrysler with its torsion bar rear suspension ...
take off hard and the back lifts instead of lowering ...

What's happening is I'm guessing you left your blocks on the axle when you reversed
the shackles so the truck sits a bit higher now ?   You've increased your leverage
on the spring and you're "wrapping" the spring up ... it causes it to flatten
out when you step on it, and coil up when you put it in reverse (or let off)
... Some stronger springs might be in order (there goes the smooth ride), or
double check to be sure the spring retainers are still there to hold the leaves
together, otherwise they could be separating and accentuating the problem.
Ever watch a Toy or any of those take off from a stoplight ?  You can actually
see spring wrap in action ... I about died the first time I noticed it, I could
actually see between the leaves on the back of the spring ...

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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 13:41:13 -0500
Subject: Re: What "M" really stands for
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> In my expert opinion, I believe the 351 "M" you guys are all whining about
> actually stands for "Man I wish I had a Powerstroke."
>
> -Dale

Diesels? We don't need no steenking Diesels..........

-- 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: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" <gpeters3 visteon.com>
Subject: Re: steering locked.
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:43:21 -0400

I've never seen less than 3 bolts?  Seems like I had one with 4 once.....

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>all better ...  Also the factory setup on my truck used 3
>bolts to hold the
>box in ... is this true for 2wd as well or are they 2 bolts only ?

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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:46:29 -0400
From: George Selby <digiman cegi.net>
Subject: 351M distributor shear pin repair

At 10:59 AM 8/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Gary affirmatively diagnosed:
>  <<Sheared Gear roll pin. >>

My diagnosis, too.  Here'e more on the COMPLETE repair, as I see it.

I bought my truck, drove it about a month, and bam, dies while driving down
the road.  Took a week to figure out the dist roll pin was
sheared.  Replaced it, drove about a week, happened again.  Dropped the oil
pan, examined the oil pump, and there was a piece of valve stem seal stuck
in the oil pump, causing it to lock up, and consequently shear the pin on
the dist drive gear.  Sometimes you can spin the gear by hand to diagnose,
but usually you have to put dist in vise (loosely)and grab the gear with a
pair of pliers to spin it.  So I replaced the oil pump, and fixed the dist,
and put it back together.  'Bout a week later, it did it again.  So this
time I replaced the valve stem seals, put the oil pump back in (was new
from the previous week) and put in a new dist (Zone model $30) with a gear
already attached.  Has been running for a year now with no return of the
problem.

So here's my suggested procedure.

Remove the oil pan, distributor and valve covers.  Check/replace the oil
pump, oil pump driveshaft, and the valve stem seals.  All can be replaced
w/o a engine rebuild.  It took me about 4 hours to replace all the valve
stem seals using the rope in the cylinder trick and a valve spring
compressor that works with the head still on the block.  The oil pump
driveshaft is a bugger, its a hex and has to be lined up right so you can
get the timing set, and it likes to pull up with the distributor when you
remove it, only to fall back into the block (and on to the bottom of the
oil pan) just as the distributor bottom clears the block.  I think there is
a clip the fits on the oil pump driveshaft that is supposed to prevent this
but mine was not there.

BTW, if you chose to merely put the drive gear back on the distributor, get
a Genuine Ford Roll Pin. The ones I found at NAPA and Advance and The Zone
were all very weak and not hardened.  Guaranteed to break soon.

Hope this helps.


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: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" <gpeters3 visteon.com>
Subject: Re: Flipped shackle
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:50:45 -0400

I've not investigated doing this with a truck but I did it on an old 54
Ch*** once and you have to figure out a way to keep it there once you do it.
In that case it kept flipping back over on big bumps and usually only one
side at  a time so that the car was way lopsided......real uncomfortable at
speed.....I used chunks of 2x4 stuck in the shackles to prevent it flipping
back....I was also only 16 at the time.

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>>Anyone flipped their rear shackle's over (Like a jeep rear
>shackle)?  If so
>
>>care to share your experiances?

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

From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" <gpeters3 visteon.com>
Subject: Re: 351M distributor shear pin repair
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:01:53 -0400

The best way to check for a spun gear is to attempt to remove the pin with a
proper sized punch.  It should drive out easily, if not it is probably
sheared and the stub end is hitting on solid shaft instead of a hole.  Since
the pins are typically fairly soft you can actually damage them by twisting
the gear with pliers and damage the gear as well.  Test the pin first and go
from there.....:-)

One caution not mentioned here is that the actual culprit is usually the
pickup tube.  When this happens, always replace the pickup tube and
screen......ALWAYS!  I inspected one that had built up varnish inside the
tube so that it came loose in the form of thin, onion skin like material and
got loged between the rotor and housing of the pump locking it up solid.  In
the case of valve stem seal debris, it should never have gotten to the pump
if the screen was doing it's job........

Never put in a new pump without a new screen and pickup tube, ever.....

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>but usually you have to put dist in vise (loosely)and grab the
>gear with a
>pair of pliers to spin it.  So I replaced the oil pump, and

>Check/replace the oil
>pump, oil pump driveshaft, and the valve stem seals.  All can

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

From: "Desanto, Phillip" <pdesanto Cinergy.com>
Subject: Early T-10 question
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 14:12:53 -0500

<<Forwarded from the Galaxie list>>
The 63 and 64 had the small bolt pattern on the T-10 , AND  the toploader
only for those two years.  If you can hookup with the bellhousing for those
years it
should work. They also used the 1 1/16" shaft unless its a 427, then it
would have the 1 3/8" shaft.    Hope this helps,  Barry  FGCoA # 2132


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

From: "Nichols, Josh" <Josh.Nichols svseeds.com>
Subject: Re: Flipped shackle
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:26:14 -0700

I agree with way you say about a toy, especially when they but big tires
they have horrible axle wrap because of their weak springs.  But the rear
end of their truck still doesn't raise and lower that much with varied
amount of throttle. I have a little axle wrap but I have certainly seen much
worse.  It's hard to avoid axle wrap with lotsa lift, 38.5 swampers, 4 speed
and a 460.

They springs are skyjacker softride's and fairly new.  I didn't use any lift
blocks, but I did keep the stock blocks that were on the 93 F-350 that I got
my rear end from.

Think that maybe different mounting technique for the shackles would help?

Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: wish [mailto:wish ford-trucks.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 10:41 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Flipped shackle


>Anyone flipped their rear shackle's over (Like a jeep rear shackle)?  If so

>care to share your experiances?
>

Nope, but been thinkin about it ...


>I did this a couple months ago and at first I thought I was happy with it.

>Softer ride, maybe a little more flex (deffinitely more droop)

Cool, things I like to hear about a mod :)


> But now it
>seems there are many more negetive aspecs are out weighing the positive.
>First off when I step on the gas going forward it fully extends the shackle

>raising the back end of my truck up about three inches maybe more.
>

Hahahaha, sounds like an old Chrysler with its torsion bar rear suspension
...
take off hard and the back lifts instead of lowering ...

What's happening is I'm guessing you left your blocks on the axle when you
reversed
the shackles so the truck sits a bit higher now ?   You've increased your
leverage
on the spring and you're "wrapping" the spring up ... it causes it to
flatten
out when you step on it, and coil up when you put it in reverse (or let off)
... Some stronger springs might be in order (there goes the smooth ride), or
double check to be sure the spring retainers are still there to hold the
leaves
together, otherwise they could be separating and accentuating the problem.
Ever watch a Toy or any of those take off from a stoplight ?  You can
actually
see spring wrap in action ... I about died the first time I noticed it, I
could
actually see between the leaves on the back of the spring ...

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
=============================================================
To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
Please remove this footer when replying.

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

From: "Nichols, Josh" <Josh.Nichols svseeds.com>
Subject: Re: Flipped shackle
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:30:45 -0700

I'm only 19 but I haven't stuck a 2X4 in it yet...Maybe a couple more days
of this and I will.
If I get what you mean by flipping back  wouldn't this be caused by the the
spring perch mounted to far back.  Letting the shackle be angled to far
toward the front on the vehicle when the suspensions droops?

Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: Peters, Gary (G.R.) [mailto:gpeters3 visteon.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 11:51 AM
To: '61-79-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Flipped shackle


I've not investigated doing this with a truck but I did it on an old 54
Ch*** once and you have to figure out a way to keep it there once you do it.
In that case it kept flipping back over on big bumps and usually only one
side at  a time so that the car was way lopsided......real uncomfortable at
speed.....I used chunks of 2x4 stuck in the shackles to prevent it flipping
back....I was also only 16 at the time.

--
Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

>>Anyone flipped their rear shackle's over (Like a jeep rear
>shackle)?  If so
>
>>care to share your experiances?
=============================================================
To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
Please remove this footer when replying.

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

From: SevnD2 aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:36:39 EDT
Subject: Re: 400M crank into 351W

In a message dated 08/23/2000 10:57:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
biertest-r excite.com writes:

<< The 400M crank is based off of the Cleveland design, and the
mains are Huge compared to the 351W. I think almost .25" has to be removed,
if not more to make the main fit.  >>

Didn't someone mention the problem of the oil holes in the crankshaft moving
towards the edges of the bearing faces when such drastic machining is done?
Supposedly causing too much oil to be lost there or something like that. May
not be a problem mostly, but it does seem like a relevant point to be
mentioned.

Rollie H. Hunt

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

From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer99 home.com>
Subject: Re: 400M crank into 351W
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:41:07 -0700

The material would only have to be removed if you were trying to put a 400
(no M) crank into a 351C.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets"

----- Original Message -----
From: <SevnD2 aol.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 12:36 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 400M crank into 351W


> In a message dated 08/23/2000 10:57:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> biertest-r excite.com writes:
>
> << The 400M crank is based off of the Cleveland design, and the
>  mains are Huge compared to the 351W. I think almost .25" has to be
removed,
>  if not more to make the main fit.  >>
>
> Didn't someone mention the problem of the oil holes in the crankshaft
moving
> towards the edges of the bearing faces when such drastic machining is
done?
> Supposedly causing too much oil to be lost there or something like that.
May
> not be a problem mostly, but it does seem like a relevant point to be
> mentioned.




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

From: SevnD2 aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:44:31 EDT
Subject: Re: 400M crank into 351W

Ok, I am not familiar with the 351W and 351M or 400 journal sizes. I am a 351
Cleveland guy myself. I know now where to get a stroker crank for the
Cleveland.

Rollie H. Hunt

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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:55:11 -0700
From: Jeff Harsha <bigjeff ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Speaking of plates...

check the plate on my '69:

-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: image/gif
-- File: dads truck1.gif



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

From: "MARTY COLMAN" <colman76 hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: bigger tires
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:42:17 GMT

Garrett wrote:
>on my 66 I have P275/60R15's

Are those street tires or mud/snow?
What size rims do you have?  Do you know the offset?

I have 15X7 chrome rims and 2 local tire shops have told me that the widest
tire I can put on it is a 235/75/15, I don't agree with them.  I run Wild
Country RVT (mud/snow tire) and I want more tread - without buying new rims.

So what size tire would be about the same diameter but wider tread?  Or are ....


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.