 |
|
|
|
|
|
Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:06:52 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:06:52 -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 #241 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, 12 Sep 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 241 In This Issue: Re: 61 flareside questions Re: power window kit Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners ? for C6 guru's Re: 400 Dyno Results Re: ? for C6 guru's Re: 400 Dyno Results Re: Amp discharge and lost electrical on 65 F-100 Saftey Tip of the Week 4 wheel article Re: 400 Dyno Results Re: motor mounts Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Re: Cheater Bars Re: Amp discharge and lost electrical on 65 F-100 Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Re: Saftey Tip of the Week ADMIN: New site feature Re: F-E's rule- Petersen's 4wd? & Ford PS boxes Re: anyone have a website about how awesome 390's are? 1967 Data Plate (Body Code) Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question Re: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question Re: Cheater Bars Re: 1967 Data Plate (Body Code) Re: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: 61 flareside questions Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:56:47 -0400 ----- > >did all Ford Flaresides(6ft box) in 61 Have the tire mounted on the side > >over the > >wheel well(it ruins the wheel well) in my eyes becuase it has the indent > >for the tire... ======================================================= I THINK that about all the fenders were the same from about the 50s to mid 60s on these trucks if so couldnt you just buy a fender WITHOUT the tire well on it and stick it on the truck gordon ------------------------------ From: Matt Senn <msenn avistacom.net>
Subject: Re: power window kit Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:47:08 -0700 oh, my bad, you are right . . . $149.95 for the power window kit (with switches) LMC part # 47-1105 too much ASP coding today, i'm going blind -----Original Message----- LMC's price is $149.95 ... I think you was looking at the price of the keyless remote door locks just below the window kits. At least that's what my catalog tells me! ------------------------------ From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:41:02 -0500 I can help you out there =) 81=Conventional Cab 84=Cowl and Chassis 85=Cown and Windshield 91=Tilt Cab ----- Original Message ----- From: <TBeeee aol.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 1:22 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Call for help from 1967 Owners > I need a little help on a research question on 67 models or on other years through 72 for that matter. I have been trying to determine if Ford ever stamped anything other than "81" for the last two digits of the "body" code as found on the door tag. I would really appreciate if anyone who owns one of these or has access to one would check and share their findings. Thanks so much. > > Thom > 1967 F-Series Registry > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee > ============================================================= > To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 > Please remove this footer when replying. > > ------------------------------ From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: ? for C6 guru's Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:41:42 -0500 I have a '78 F150 with a minor tranny glitch. When I put the truck into first gear, it stays there. By opening up the pan(must install drain plug!!), I can manually insert the rod back into position and regain the rest of the gears. I don't know the proper term of this rod, but it runs from the shifter arm back to the tailhousing area. It's got a "knob" that guides? the rod through a passage way at the main case/tailshaft area. I've tried adjusting the shifter rod that comes down from the column to no avail. It seems to me that either something is broke/missing, or something is really out of adjustment. Any ideas? Thanks, Jason Kendrick ------------------------------ From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: 400 Dyno Results Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:51:09 -0700 I take it this is the magazine engine everyone is talking about? With 4v cleveland heads that 415# at 2k rpm is questionable IMHO. It's a known fact that dyno results can be badly skewed by a poor operator. I would question these numbers myself...... The engine parts list is impressive and certainly would make a powerful package but I can't see it starting at the same level as a WOT 460??? I've been passing up the roller cams in the 460 because they don't start making power until 2500 rpm and was concerned that there would be a bog with an auto but at 415# there is no concern for a bog for sure :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-) > RPM HP TQ > 2000 158 415 > 2500 212 445 > 351C 4V heads, ported, 2.19/1.76 SS valves, 11:1 CR ------------------------------ From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: ? for C6 guru's Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:55:11 -0700 My guess, and it is just a guess, is that the tranny needs some repairs. The location of the shift lever should not cause this. I've forced my trannys at both ends with misadjusted linkage many times and never had this problem. Unfortunately I can't remember enough of the internals of the C-6 to be of much help :-( Michigan Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-) plug!!), I can manually insert the rod back into position and regain the rest of the gears. I don't know the proper term of this rod, but it runs from the shifter arm back to the tailhousing area. It's got a "knob" that guides? the rod through a passage way at the main case/tailshaft area. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:03:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Scott Hall <sch8489 garnet.acns.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: 400 Dyno Results On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Gary wrote: > I take it this is the magazine engine everyone is talking about? With 4v > cleveland heads that 415# at 2k rpm is questionable IMHO. It's a known fact > that dyno results can be badly skewed by a poor operator. I would question > these numbers myself...... this engine is a few years old afaIk, and wasn't anybody's magazine engine, again, afaIk. I don't know about the dyno operator, but the guy who posted 'em is pretty into fes and 400s, so I'd buy it. scott ------------------------------ From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Amp discharge and lost electrical on 65 F-100 Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:08:12 -0700 My Guess (again with the guesses :-)) is blown diodes. A shorted feed back switch or diode would cause a short when shut off and an open field in the regulator should cause zero charge but not a discharge I would think but blown diodes would not be readable by the ammeter and would be unpredictable as to the reading, again I would think.....a full battery might hide this for a short time but eventually will lose any mitigating influence as the charge goes down. Just some random thoughts off the top of my retired head :-) Michigan Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-) > showing a 15 amp discharge and my instrument panels and headlights all went > very dim. ------------------------------ From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Saftey Tip of the Week Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:57:04 -0500 Never work on a transmission and brakes at the same time. Especially on a downhill slope with a garage at the bottom. Now I get to practice my carpentry skills!:-) Jason Kendrick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:57:31 -0700 From: scott <scott ford-trucks.com>
Subject: 4 wheel article I have that new issue of 4 wheel and off road. Got it from a friend who subs*cribes,so thankfully no money out of my pocket. Anyhow there is a article on exhaust and they use a staffers vehicle for the test. Guess what brand it is? And a beat up POS ch*vy at that. They even admit it crapped out between 3000 and 3600 rpm. They also have article with a staffer's junk ramcharger and another article on a cj that cost them over $30,000 in parts to build because they could not use any je*p parts in it!! BTW they admitted the ch*vy in the jeep over heats!!!!!! $30,000 handbuilt rig!!!!!!!! And they have the nerve to knock FEs............... ------------------------------ From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: 400 Dyno Results Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:46:50 -0400 with the money that fella spent on building that 400 he should have better spent it on a 427 and really made some power with it gordon ------------------------------ From: SHill48337 aol.com
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:58:10 EDT Subject: Re: motor mounts In a message dated 9/10/00 9:08:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, amador1 volcano.net writes:
<< Hi all, got a question! What is the difference between the motor mounts of a 429 and those of a 460 engine? I've been punnishing 385 series engines for the past 30 yr's and never realized there was a difference. G.E.P. (calif.) >> Like whise and I have never observed a difference in the block lay out for the attachment of the mounts. However, almost every vehicle that had them installed uses from mildly to wildly different mounts that attach the engine to the frame. Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:54:34 -0700 (PDT) From: "D. DiMartino" <grunon yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Ha! the only thing beige in that all steel interior is the seat everything else was painted white including the door panels (hard to tell it was all painted green a few times) with a black dash pad, funny how the simple things on an old vehicle were "options". i don't see the code in my '68 service manual, there is a 4,43 that is for black ladder & crush vinyl. Medium beige and woven plastic & crush vinyl is 33,C. i wasn't sure i was reading it right. where are you reading this from?? --- TBeeee aol.com wrote:
> No big guy...the "4" in front of the "81" is the interior trim > color which should be a medium beige vinyl in your case. > __________________________________________________ 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/ ------------------------------ From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:35:12 EDT Subject: Re: Cheater Bars In a message dated 9/12/2000 1:44:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ae722 lafn.org
writes: << > Just dont use one (4' anyway) with a ratchet drive wrench. I totally > shattered teh head of my good 3/8" ratchet one day. Parts of it flew over 80'. Yea. I'll bet that's not what you told your Snap-On guy. But no matter, they WANT to believe you that you were only unbolting front seat brackets. Yea. ;-) Now, the new kid in the Sears tool department, he'll believe ANYTHING. But any more, even Home Depot's Husky line is fully guarenteed against Godzilla. I try not to abuse my rachets, but let me break a breaker bar, and some tool truck driver is gonna' catch H&\! That's what they're MADE for! Abuse, not breakage. >> Yea, I dont do that anymore with ratchets, left that in my younger and less brillent days. I got some good trajectory on teh flying pieces though! FWIW - I was pulling some stuck lug nuts from my Bronco. The #$# sears tire man
used an air wrench to install em. Well, I went back on down complained to the dept manager, and got them (and him, the mechanic) to replace all the lugs on the front axle, and those that bronk on the rear (twas 1/2 of em). At the time, I didnt have the spindle nut socket to pull the front hubs so couldnt replace the studs. Done it lots onthe rear! I ws smiling all the way home (on my last set of sears tires) George M in Fl. ------------------------------ From: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam williams-net.com>
Subject: Re: Amp discharge and lost electrical on 65 F-100 Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 00:05:02 -0400 sounds like the alternator is taking a dump on you. A quick way to check to see if the alternator is charging is to start the truck up &use an open end wrench(or something that is NOT magnetised) & touch it to the back of the center of the alternator where the metal cap is for the inside bushing. if it has a strong magnetic pull then your alternator is charging o.k. ---if it has a weak magnetic pull then you will need to rebuild the alternator or buy another one. -----Original Message----- From: Bird Sandi M CNFB <BirdSM mcpd.navy.mil>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 2:33 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Amp discharge and lost electrical on 65 F-100 >Help! > >last night my very dependable 65 F-100 (original 240 engine), started >showing a 15 amp discharge and my instrument panels and headlights all went >very dim. I still had 15 miles to home, and he made it. > >I parked him, got my flashlight and checked the belts, everything was good >and tight. > >I re-started him, and he started right up, but still with hardly no lights >and still showing a 15 amp discharge on the Ampmeter. > >I know it has to be either the Alternator or the Voltage regulator. Any >ideas how I can figure out which one, without replacing them both? > >Oddly, he also overheated a little...usually maintains at 160 degrees, but >during all this was running at 190 degrees and did smell hot, but not >dangerously so. I'm guessing this was coincidence. > >Any advice would be greatly appreciated. > >thanks, >Sandi & Hank(65 F-100) > > >============================================================= >To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 >Please remove this footer when replying. > ------------------------------ From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 23:39:31 -0500 Probably the Ford Truck Preliminary Shop Manual, it's an interesting book, found one for 1967 off Ebay for 4 bucks, couldn't pass that up =) ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. DiMartino" <grunon yahoo.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 9:54 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners > Ha! the only thing beige in that all steel interior is the seat > everything else was painted white including the door panels > (hard to tell it was all painted green a few times) with a black > dash pad, funny how the simple things on an old vehicle were > "options". i don't see the code in my '68 service manual, there > is a 4,43 that is for black ladder & crush vinyl. Medium beige > and woven plastic & crush vinyl is 33,C. i wasn't sure i was > reading it right. where are you reading this from?? > > --- TBeeee aol.com wrote:
> > No big guy...the "4" in front of the "81" is the interior trim > > color which should be a medium beige vinyl in your case. > > > > > __________________________________________________ > 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. > > ------------------------------ From: "Garrett Nelson" <garrettnelson writeme.com>
Subject: Re: Saftey Tip of the Week Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:47:45 -0500 LOL! That sucks, but it's funny! Nobody was hurt though, right? ---Garrett www.1966ford.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Jason and Kathy To: Ford 61-79 list Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 7:57 PM Subject: [61-79-list] Saftey Tip of the Week Never work on a transmission and brakes at the same time. Especially on a downhill slope with a garage at the bottom. Now I get to practice my carpentry skills!:-) Jason Kendrick ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:14:50 -0400 From: Ken Payne <kpayne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: ADMIN: New site feature On the left hand side of the main page of the Ford Truck Enthusiasts web site there is now a list of the 3 most recent message board threads. Different forums will rotate out of this spot each day. Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts ------------------------------ From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
Subject: Re: F-E's rule- Petersen's 4wd? & Ford PS boxes Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 23:14:16 -0700 The only problem with '77 on Ford steering boxes is the long pitman shafts. They have a tendency to break under severe use. I've never had one break on my own, but I've seen it happen a few times before. Jason '69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435 '96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke E4OD ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer99 home.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 11:42 AM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: F-E's rule- Petersen's 4wd? & Ford PS boxes > See that's what's misleading about the article. The power steering system > they're trashing is the pre-77 hydraulic ram system which frankly is crap > (leak prone, expensive to fix, hard to find parts for, etc.) The newer style > 77 & up system closely resembles the Saginaw boxes and is quite reliable. > The pumps are pretty iffy IMNSHO but the boxes are fine. > > "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets" > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Wadson" <wadsond air.on.ca>
> To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 11:19 AM > Subject: [61-79-list] Re: F-E's rule- Petersen's 4wd? & Ford PS boxes > > > > >Now for the worst products article, well they say in the beginning that > they > > >know they're gonna piss a bunch of people off so what did you expect? In > > >addition to the FE they also trash the old style Ford power steering > which > > >is absolutely correct, not another one of Henry's "better ideas." (On a > side > > > > I pretty well bougth that issue just for the nice pictures for inspiration > > as to what I'd like my truck to look like. :-) Having just had my steering > > box rebuilt, I was kind of interested in that snippet about the Ford power > > steering boxes being crap. Is there a better box, aftermarket or whatnot > > that is better and usable without extensive modification? > > > > ============================================================= > To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 > Please remove this footer when replying. > > ------------------------------ From: "Keith" <A2JKEITH GCI.NET>
Subject: Re: anyone have a website about how awesome 390's are? Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:21:30 -0800 -----Original Message----- From: Matt Senn <msenn avistacom.net>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 7:34 AM Subject: [61-79-list] Re: anyone have a website about how awesome 390's are? >well, i don't know if mine is pushing as much HP as it could, but it sure >looks good . . . http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.chaoticdelusions.com > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tim and Pam Allgire [mailto:tim-pam williams-net.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 6:21 AM >To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
>Subject: [61-79-list] Re: anyone have a website about how awesome 390's >are? > > >just have that Chevy guy get in here & we will all tell him how AWESOME they >are !!!! HE-HE- HE !!!! >-----Original Message----- >From: Garrett Nelson <garrettnelson writeme.com>
>To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
>Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 12:53 AM >Subject: [61-79-list] anyone have a website about how awesome 390's are? > CHECK OUT WWW.ODOA.COM ------------------------------ From: TBeeee aol.com
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:51:45 EDT Subject: 1967 Data Plate (Body Code) Thanks for the response Eric. I do have the decode part of the data. I'm curious what Ford actually stamped on the data plate for trucks manufactured with one of these various body styles. I have a hunch that they always stamped 81 on the tag. I don't profess to have seen them all, but consistently I "see" an "81" on each and every tag. Anybody have a data plate that shows one of these other codes on it? Thom 1967 F-Series Registry http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee In a message dated 9/12/2000 6:52:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bruce9 flash.net writes:
> I can help you out there =) > 81=Conventional Cab > 84=Cowl and Chassis > 85=Cown and Windshield > 91=Tilt Cab ------------------------------ From: TBeeee aol.com
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:55:24 EDT Subject: Re: Call for help from 1967 Owners Jason: Could that be a "284" That would help and I would just be curious what the truck's body configuration is? Thom 1967 F-Series Registry http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee In a message dated 9/12/2000 4:55:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kendrick mddc.com writes:
> Thom, I just checked my '70 F100 Custom and the body code is 234. Any help? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:58:00 -0800 From: Raymond Christensen <rchristn ptialaska.net>
Subject: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question In the 'October 4-Whl&Off-Rd' issue, the 'Winter Preparedness' article states, "Many people install a 180- or 160-degree thermostat to improve performance. However, in cold weather your radiator won't be able to retain enough heat to allow the engine to come up to temperature, let alone work the heater. . . ." I'm a bit flummoxed. Are they saying to put in a colder thermostat to get the engine temperature up? This might be obvious to you experts, but I haven't got a clue. Anyone know the recommended thermostat for my truck? I purchased my 79 F150 with 300 I-6 two years ago and have froze both Fairbanks winters. I run a 195-degree thermostat as did the previous owner. I have had the system flushed, switched heater hoses (they were backwards in the beginning), and tested/changed the thermostat four times during my ownership. The heater works just fine down to say zero to +10F degrees keeping the cab plenty warm. However, get below zero degrees (remember, I'm in Fairbanks) and it is a different story. If it gets to -25 or lower the heater is blowing luke warm air and the engine temperature doesn't even get up to the "normal" range. Ray ------------------------------ From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 04:35:19 -0400 If it gets to -25 or lower the > heater is blowing luke warm air and the engine temperature doesn't even > get up to the "normal" range. > > Ray ============================================================= hi ray i have a 79 also and mine was doing the same thing BEFORE i installed a clutch fan on it i drive semi trucks and we used to have that problem to but when we stick what they call a WINTER FRONT on them it cures them of it usually tho all it is is a cover that keeps so much cold air from entering the radiator is all you might need a new heater core to tho they do a can get plugged up in those tiny little passages IF you install a new core try and get a BIGGER one to get more heat out of it to gordon ------------------------------ From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Cheater Bars Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 08:33:41 -0700 Gentlemen, when installing lug nuts you should use Anti-Seize on the threads. I've been preaching this for years against entities as fearsome as the Federal Government and now have been vindicated. It is being taught in Auto Mechanic Schools now. Trust me, they absolutely will not fall off if you lube them, the lube actually allows you to attain the actual benefit of the torque you apply in stretching the lug to "Retain" the nut which is the principle by which all nuts are retained. Old timers will tell you "NEVER USE LUBE ON LUG NUTS, THEY WILL COME OFF AND CAUSE A HORRIBLE ACCIDENT!!" But it just aint so. Most of them never experience this themselves, they heard it somewhere, the same place the other guy heard it......from someone else who didn't have a clue...... Ralph Nader probably had a great grandfather somewhere who stared the myth..... OTOH, if you don't install them correctly they certainly could come off, lubed or not :-( If they broke taking the nuts off then they were rusted on, it had nothing to do with the impact installation unless he used a 3/4" and over tightened them so that they were actually already cracked etc... I like tight and in all my excitement to get stuff tight I've broken bolts but never broken a lug on a wheel except to get it off when rusted on. Michigan Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-) > I was pulling some stuck lug nuts from my Bronco. The #$# sears tire man
> used an air wrench to install em. Well, I went back on down complained to the > dept manager, and got them (and him, the mechanic) to replace all the lugs on > the front axle, and those that bronk on the rear (twas 1/2 of em). At ------------------------------ From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: 1967 Data Plate (Body Code) Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 08:12:12 -0500 I have seen another one. Several months ago, an old F-?00(Big truck) was for sale, it looked like one of them ones Roadway uses(The Orange and Blue trucks). It was an over-the-cab wheel design, so the cab tilted forward so that you can check engine stuff(like an Isuzu). I do remember it having a code of 91. Not sure what the others came on. ----- Original Message ----- From: <TBeeee aol.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 1:51 AM Subject: [61-79-list] 1967 Data Plate (Body Code) > Thanks for the response Eric. I do have the decode part of the data. I'm > curious what Ford actually stamped on the data plate for trucks manufactured > with one of these various body styles. I have a hunch that they always > stamped 81 on the tag. I don't profess to have seen them all, but > consistently I "see" an "81" on each and every tag. Anybody have a data > plate that shows one of these other codes on it? > > Thom > 1967 F-Series Registry > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee > > In a message dated 9/12/2000 6:52:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > bruce9 flash.net writes:
> > > I can help you out there =) > > 81=Conventional Cab > > 84=Cowl and Chassis > > 85=Cown and Windshield > > 91=Tilt Cab > ============================================================= > To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3 > Please remove this footer when replying. > > ------------------------------ From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 12:38:43 GMT Subject: Re: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question >In the 'October 4-Whl&Off-Rd' issue, the 'Winter Preparedness' article >states, "Many people install a 180- or 160-degree thermostat to improve >performance. However, in cold weather your radiator won't be able to >retain enough heat to allow the engine to come up to temperature, let >alone work the heater. . . ." I'm a bit flummoxed. Are they saying to >put in a colder thermostat to get the engine temperature up? No, they're saying your motor won't heat up at all if you do this. I've done this myself a few times, actually fighting overheating problems that were usually the result of a stuck thermostat. I actually had the car drop clear back down to the peg and sit there when I turned into a cold Northern wind one time ... not a pleasant feeling, the saving grace was that it was a black car and fairly well sealed, so it was still "comfortable" (if you count the winter coat and gloves).. the truck on the other hand got unbearably cold when the heater was on even with the 160 in it ... swapped to a 180 and its much toastier (though still not exactly "hot") ... part of this I think is the lack of A/C ducts so I ether get hot headed (defrost) or hot fot (floor) ... hard to get good heat distribution when its pointed at a cold windshield or a cold floorboard. > This might >be obvious to you experts, but I haven't got a clue. Anyone know the >recommended thermostat for my truck? > Almost all the recommended thermostats are in the 195-205 range ... the parts store will have it in their book (its the bold one usually :) >The heater works just fine down to say zero to +10F degrees keeping the >cab plenty warm. However, get below zero degrees (remember, I'm in >Fairbanks) and it is a different story. If it gets to -25 or lower the >heater is blowing luke warm air and the engine temperature doesn't even >get up to the "normal" range. > As someone else suggested, blocking off part of the radiator and switching to a clutch fan should let you control the heat better, just dont' forget to un-block the radiator when it warms up ... I've seen kits for most of the newer trucks like the semi's have where they can snap a complete cover, or leave certain parts open ... not sure if they'd work or be available for an older truck, but its worth a shot I'd think. 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, 13 Sep 2000 09:02:46 -0500 Subject: Re: October 4-Whl&Off-Rd, Thermostat question From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>
This ought to be interesting. We do this thread regularly. > In the 'October 4-Whl&Off-Rd' issue, the 'Winter Preparedness' article > states, "Many people install a 180- or 160-degree thermostat to improve > performance. However, in cold weather your radiator won't be able to > retain enough heat to allow the engine to come up to temperature, let > alone work the heater. . . ." Your radiator doesn't retain heat, it radiates or dissipates heat. If it retained heat it would be called a retainer, which would confuse your dentist. > I'm a bit flummoxed. Are they saying to > put in a colder thermostat to get the engine temperature up? This might > be obvious to you experts, but I haven't got a clue. Anyone know the > recommended thermostat for my truck? Someone has already posted a good answer to this. > > I purchased my 79 F150 with 300 I-6 two years ago and have froze both > Fairbanks winters. I run a 195-degree thermostat as did the previous > owner. I have had the system flushed, switched heater hoses (they were > backwards in the beginning), and tested/changed the thermostat four > times during my ownership. > > The heater works just fine down to say zero to +10F degrees keeping the > cab plenty warm. However, get below zero degrees (remember, I'm in > Fairbanks) and it is a different story. If it gets to -25 or lower the > heater is blowing luke warm air and the engine temperature doesn't even > get up to the "normal" range. > > Ray Part of the problem is outside air temperature. The colder it is outside, the quicker heat from your engine is radiated directly to the atmosphere. The entire point of your water based cooling system is to carry heat away from around the combustion chamber so that you don't literally melt down the engine. If that heat is radiating away on its own, your coolant will never warm sufficiently to open the thermostat. If the engine isn't opening a 160 thermostat, it won't open a 205 either. You might want to invest in an electric heater for your cab. That will keep you warm, but it won't prevent the damage to your engine of running it cold all of the time. That, I don't have a good solution to as it hardly ever gets that cold in my part of Texas. It did get to -10 one time, but I stayed in the house that day. Our .... 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. 
|