Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:34:45 -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 #266
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 Thu, 28 Sep 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 266

In This Issue:
Re: ADMIN: All new 2001 Ford trucks
Mud Racing in Longview, WA
Turbos
Re: 383s
Pwr steering stiffness
Re: Manuals
Off topic infor needed
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: PHD
Re: 76 4x4 radius arm and axle bushings
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: 383s, 396s and V10s
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Re: D0VE heads
Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
1967 F-Series Registry (Window Sticker)
Re: life is too short.... I need diesel fuel filters
Turbo vs. Supercharged
Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Re: life is too short.... I need diesel fuel filters
I need diesel fuel filters
Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Re: I need diesel fuel filters
Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged

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

From: "Southerland, Rich" <rsouther alldata.com>
Subject: Re: ADMIN: All new 2001 Ford trucks
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 08:39:02 -0700

That old saying is appropriate here:
"If you have to ask..."

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Finn [mailto:ecfinn yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 8:35 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: ADMIN: All new 2001 Ford trucks


--- Ken Payne <kpayne ford-trucks.com> wrote:
> Only 1,000 will be made for 2001.  My guess is that they're
> testing the waters....  Its definitely a cool rig.  Total
> carrying capacity is 9,000lbs on/in the truck and plus
> total GVWR with tailor is 48,000lbs!

Ok, but what is the MSRP?  I didn't see that in the press release for some
strange reason.  ;-)

Later,
Eric



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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:44:46 -0500
Subject: Re: 383s, 396s and V10s
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> What I'm saying is that the 396 was race bred and should have been pretty
> awesome.  Did I miss something?

Like our favorite FORD 460, there were several versions of the 396, some of
which were actually 402 and marketed as 400. How it performed would depend
on where it was destined. I know in 1969 there were at least 3 hp ratings
available. 2 were low compression (ran on regular) and one was high
compression (required premium).

I heard that the 383s were barely keeping up, then about halfway through,
they suddenly came alive. It turned out they had glued restrictors between
the carb and the intake manifold to meet the rules, then after the engine
had been running awhile, they dropped down in the intake opening up the
intake runners.

I was also under the impression that the big block Mark IV Chevy engines, I
think 368 was the first, were originally designed as a truck engine. This is
one reason they tend to be torquey, but don't wind up as fast as a small
block. IMHO, the Mark IV is the worst possible choice of engine due to
longevity. They are notorious for wearing out within 80K miles regardless of
care and use.

-- 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: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 21:24:28 -0700
From: Tim Bowman <tkbowman uswest.net>
Subject: Mud Racing in Longview, WA

FYI, this weekend is a mud racing and car show event at the Cowlitz
County Fairgrounds in Longview, Washington Fri - Sun (9/30 - 10/1).
There might be some 4 wheelers on this list in the Puget Sound /
Portland, OR area who might be interested.  There's a $20 entry fee.
Contact Steve 503-254-8041 for more info.  They're expecting 400 cars
for the car show according to the publicity.

There's also a car show in Marysville WA at Exit 199 off I-5 at the
Water Tower Park on Saturday.

These are among the last show events in the Pacific Northwest for this
year other than a few swap meets.

I have no financial or other interest in the events other than to keep
others informed about events in the Pacific Northwest.

--
Tim Bowman
Burien, WA
tkbowman uswest.net
Website: www.users.uswest.net/~tkbowman
  (Pacific NW Carshow Information & more)



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

From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: Turbos
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:46:09 -0500


Wish writes:  >>Nope, someone apparently found some as an "upgrade" but originally
the excessive heat and fluctuations caused most roller/ball bearings to weld themselves
together and generally act very poorly, instead it rides on a cusion of oil, since its
spinning so fast they usually use the shaft to maintain the oil itself I think
(as opposed to forced oiling) ... most of what I picked up on turbo's is in
a book that's about 10 or so years old and deals mostly with ag applications
since that was my major and all ... the ag approach is sometimes very much the
KISS principle which means the fewer moving parts the better ... also material
technology has changed quite a bit over the last bunch of years.<<

Never been in one, but I do know this.  M*PAR's small 4 cyl's(2.2 & 2.5) turbos are
both oil fed from the crankcase(oil pump) and coolant fed by the water pump..
I also own an old Ford Tractor (7000 series) that has a 4 cyl turbo.  The operators
manual says in very bold print right up front to never shut it down immediately after
a hard pull.  Always let it fast idle (1000 - 1200 rpms) for 3 minutes prior to shutdown.
Also in the maintenance section, it recommends to change oil every 100 hrs.  I've
always tried to follow these simple rules of operation and maintenance and have never
had a turbo problem.  The tractor has well over 10,000 hrs on it and has never had
any engine problems except one rebuild of the injector pump and one injector replaced.
10,000 hrs on a tractor is roughly equivelant to 300,000 miles on an over-the-road
tractor.  I think that is acceptable.. The tractor does not have water coolant to the turbo.

Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
Subject: Re: 383s
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:03:07 -0700


> I just saw a show on this very subject and the 396 was actually GM's way
to
> beat Ford and Chrysler in the NASCAR races. They developed this engine for
3
> years secretly and then popped the proposal to NASCAR that they were
getting
> way too fast for the tracks so they should reduce the cubes allowed.  This
> tactic knocked the Ford 427 and Chrysler 426 hemi out of the competition
and
> left GM with the only viable "Under 400" race engine for several years
which
> regained GM the supremecy they wanted to boost car sales.
Chevy went from the 409 to the 427, to a small block based engine, and never
used a 396 "successfully" in NASCAR.  The cubic inch ruling didn't come
about until after the 396 was gone (about 1974).  Remember, Ford was using
the Boss 429 in the early '70's which was built especially for NASCAR, not
the 427.
Jason
'69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
'96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke E4OD
Happiness is a handful of warm deer guts


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

From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: Pwr steering stiffness
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:53:23 -0500


John W. writes:  >>Over the last few months the power steering assist was gradually
getting less. I knew the pump was leaking so I replaced it and the high pressure
hose. I bleed the pig for close to an hour (up on jack stands and lock to
lock) and it appears to be bubble free in the reservoir. The problem is that
it didn't help at all. The steering is the same. It feels as though it wants
to help but it takes a good tug to get the wheel moving. It's not just when
at the center position and trying to move, its wherever the wheel is and you
want to move it<<

Disconnect the sterring shaft from the sector at the splined joint and then try turning
the steering wheel.  If it is still "stiff", then the problem is in the cloumn.  If not then
try taking the pitman arm off and turning the steering wheel.  Isolate the "stiffness" to
a particular section is, I guess, what I'm saying..

Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 21:15:18 -0700
From: Tim Bowman <tkbowman uswest.net>
Subject: Re: Manuals

Ken:

Glad to hear you're stocking the manuals on CD.  I believe I'm the one
who suggested it to you after acquiring my '63 Galaxie manual.  I'll
keep it in mind for future reference.


--
Tim Bowman
Burien, WA
tkbowman uswest.net
Website: www.users.uswest.net/~tkbowman
  (Pacific NW Carshow Information & more)



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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:48:56 -0500
Subject: Re: ADMIN: All new 2001 Ford trucks
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> That old saying is appropriate here:
> "If you have to ask..."
>snip<
> Ok, but what is the MSRP?  I didn't see that in the press release for some
> strange reason.  ;-)

I was thinking that unless you won the Texas lottery (19 mil) last night, it
doesn't matter.

-- 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: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: Off topic infor needed
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:41:42 -0500


Some time back there was something posted concerning engines that
had rotating shafts with holes in it "something on the ballvalve principle"
in lieu of the valve trains we know about and are familiar with.
There was a WWW site posted and I looked and read this with much
interest, but failed to make notes and save the data.
Would someone in the know please post that site again???

Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

From: "Nichols, Josh" <Josh.Nichols svseeds.com>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:34:02 -0700

How much did 5 gal of STP cost ya?


Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: G & J Boling [mailto:flash1 alltel.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:21 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize


So Slick 50, WD 40, STP Oil Treatment,
> etc. are scams but synthetics aren't.
===================================================
i had a semi truck lose darn near ALL the oil pressure 1000 miles from home
once i drained 5 gallon of oil out and stuck in 5 gallons of STP it was
about 100 degrees out then to and drove it home then when i pulled the pan
the cranks was still smooth as a babys butt i stuck new bearings and oil
pump in her and she ran another 300,000 miles before breaking a wrist pin
i,m a firm beleiver in STP on certain things like this
gordon


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

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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:36:29 -0700
From: Clare Waterman-Storer <waterman scripps.edu>
Subject: Re: PHD

Here I am!  hiding in the lab and writing grants, as usual.  also thinking more about my new
toy-  my 69 mustang fastback 302, toploader, 9" 3.90, lowered, etc...  the truck's still as
faithful as ever, though

glad to know you haven't forgotten me

clare

"Azie L. Magnusson" wrote:

> Tom H. writes:  >>I thought we had a lady who had a PHD in English.  Where is Clare anyway?<<
>
> And I thought Clare's degree was in Biology..  See how we all read
>  the same things and get different perspectives/understandings from it.....
>
> Oh well!!!!
>
> Azie Magnusson
> Ardmore, Al.
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.


-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: text/x-vcard
-- File: waterman.vcf
-- Desc: Card for Clare Waterman-Storer



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

From: "Nichols, Josh" <Josh.Nichols svseeds.com>
Subject: Re: 76 4x4 radius arm and axle bushings
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:40:37 -0700

The 78/79 F150's I've seen all had the radius arm brackets bolted on.

Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: James Oxley [mailto:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 6:45 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 76 4x4 radius arm and axle bushings


Gary wrote:
>
> AFAIK the 78's came with bolted brackets.

They did??, never seen factory bolted brackets (on any of my 6, 78/79
broncs I've had). Later model broncs/150's had bolts, but only on pass
side due to cataclizmic contorter heat eating up that side radius arm
bushing :-).

                                     OX

--
78 Bronco Custom, 400, T-18, 14 bolt/detroit/4.56, D60/detroit/4.56, 44
boggers, 9" lift
79 Bronco XLT, 351M, C6, D60/detroit/4.10, D448lug/Lokrite/4.10, 38.5
SX's, 4"lift
79 Bronc XLT, 351M, C6, 35 BFG AT's, 2" lift
86 Capri, turbo 5.0 (13.4 107)
90 Talon AWD turbo (12.7 104)
95 F250-460,4WD (16.9 82)
=============================================================
To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
Please remove this footer when replying.

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

From: "Southerland, Rich" <rsouther alldata.com>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:45:58 -0700

Probably a heck of a lot less than a tow bill for that monster!

-----Original Message-----
From: Nichols, Josh [mailto:Josh.Nichols svseeds.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 10:34 AM
To: '61-79-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize


How much did 5 gal of STP cost ya?


Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: G & J Boling [mailto:flash1 alltel.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:21 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize


So Slick 50, WD 40, STP Oil Treatment,
> etc. are scams but synthetics aren't.
===================================================
i had a semi truck lose darn near ALL the oil pressure 1000 miles from home
once i drained 5 gallon of oil out and stuck in 5 gallons of STP it was
about 100 degrees out then to and drove it home then when i pulled the pan
the cranks was still smooth as a babys butt i stuck new bearings and oil
pump in her and she ran another 300,000 miles before breaking a wrist pin
i,m a firm beleiver in STP on certain things like this
gordon

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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:28:29 GMT
Subject: Re: 383s, 396s and V10s


>It turned out they had glued restrictors between
>the carb and the intake manifold to meet the rules, then after the engine
>had been running awhile, they dropped down in the intake opening up the
>intake runners.


That would explain the "No moveable intake pieces" that someone got busted for
last year ...

And I'm glad someone else had that impression that the 396 was a truck line
of engines ...

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: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:31:06 -0400
From: George Selby <gselby4x4 earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize

At 10:38 AM 9/28/00 -0400, Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server wrote:
> > Its amazing that people are still buying Slick 50 even AFTER
> > the Federal Trade Commission fined them for false advertising.
> > Read the snake oil article in the web site and you'll run to
> > you truck to drain out the Snake 50.
> >

First, I have no personal affiliation with Slick 50, or anyone related to
them, but here's why I still buy.

I had an Isuzu 4x4 truck.  I purchased it with 20k miles.  At the first oil
change, I added Slick 50.  About 10k miles later (2 oil changes) I removed
the oil, put on a new filter, started up the truck, and walked away for
about 10 minutes with the truck running.  I forget to put in oil.  That's
right, no oil at all in the truck.  Well I got back 10 mins later (and
realized what I had done) and the truck wasn't overheating, and not making
any funny noises I was pretty happy.  I drove the truck for another 100k
miles after that, and it never had any oil/bearing type problems.  In fact
the truck didn't burn/leak any oil at all.h

Now, my good fortune may have been due to Slick 50, it may have been
because I didn't put a load on the engine while it was idling, or it may
have been the incredible quality of Isuzu, or it may have been
luck.  However, $30 for 50k miles I'm willing to gamble that Slick 50 had
at least a little bit to do with it, and obviously didn't hurt.

I owned the Isuzu for 8 (7 years after my little faux pas) years, and only
sold it because a tree fell on it, and caused enough damage for me to get a
big check, while still getting a good price for the truck (broken
windshield was worst, other than that it just had a small dent on every
body panel, which was enough for the insurance company to have to replace
and repaint the hood, both front quarter panels, and both doors, and fix
the dents/repaint on the cab parts you couldn't take off,) which I used to
buy my 78 F-150 4x4(Ford content)

George Selby
78 F-150 4x4 400 4 spd
86 Nissan 300ZX
gselby4x4 earthlink.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.usedcarsandparts.com


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

Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:27:14 -0400
From: Ken Payne <kpayne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize

At 02:31 PM 9/28/00, you wrote:
>At 10:38 AM 9/28/00 -0400, Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server wrote:
>>> Its amazing that people are still buying Slick 50 even AFTER
>>> the Federal Trade Commission fined them for false advertising.
>>> Read the snake oil article in the web site and you'll run to
>>> you truck to drain out the Snake 50.
>>>
>
>First, I have no personal affiliation with Slick 50, or anyone related to them, but here's why I still buy.
>
>I had an Isuzu 4x4 truck.  I purchased it with 20k miles.  At the first oil change, I added Slick 50.  About 10k miles later (2 oil changes) I removed the oil, put on a new filter, started up the truck, and walked away for about 10 minutes with the truck running.  I forget to put in oil.  That's right, no oil at all in the truck.  Well I got back 10 mins later (and realized what I had done) and the truck wasn't overheating, and not making any funny noises I was pretty happy.  I drove the truck for another 100k miles after that, and it never had any oil/bearing type problems.  In fact the truck didn't burn/leak any oil at all.h

Its called Zinc.  Its added to motor oil to protect against the very thing you did.

>Now, my good fortune may have been due to Slick 50, it may have been because I didn't put a load on the engine while it was idling, or it may have been the incredible quality of Isuzu, or it may have been luck.  However, $30 for 50k miles I'm willing to gamble that Slick 50 had at least a little bit to do with it, and obviously didn't hurt.

You've been given the link to the article on the web site which details investigation into Slick 50 and been told that Slick 50 got in trouble with the government for false claims.  Teflon is a solid, it gets caught in oil filters, plugs them up, it creates acids in engines, DuPont told Slick 50 that their own tests showed no benefits and in many cases damage due to Slick 50.  Teflon can't even bond to metal unless the engine got so hot and under so much pressure that it would spin a bearing.  Its amazing that people still buy this stuff, like the Chlorophyll scams of the 50s. Ever hear of PT Barnum?

Later,
Ken






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

From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:32:01 -0400

back then it was about 12.00 a gallon at the truck stops in metal cans
gordon


> How much did 5 gal of STP cost ya?
>
>
> Josh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: G & J Boling [mailto:flash1 alltel.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:21 PM
> To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
>
>
> So Slick 50, WD 40, STP Oil Treatment,
> > etc. are scams but synthetics aren't.
> ===================================================
> i had a semi truck lose darn near ALL the oil pressure 1000 miles from
home
> once i drained 5 gallon of oil out and stuck in 5 gallons of STP it was
> about 100 degrees out then to and drove it home then when i pulled the pan
> the cranks was still smooth as a babys butt i stuck new bearings and oil
> pump in her and she ran another 300,000 miles before breaking a wrist pin
> i,m a firm beleiver in STP on certain things like this
> gordon
>
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
>



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

From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:35:46 -0400

it sure was seeing as how even then wreckers got 2 bucks a mile
gordon


> Probably a heck of a lot less than a tow bill for that monster!


> How much did 5 gal of STP cost ya?
>
>
> Josh




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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:26:26 -0400
From: j arnold <stoney ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Re: D0VE heads


 They are fairly High Compression for todays fuels, but I really
>like mine.  If you are going to pull or haul heavy loads over long
distances,
>then I would not recommend them, but for daily commuting, they are A OK.
>Not as good as Police or CJ, but the next best..
>
>
>Azie Magnusson
>Ardmore, Al.
>
>
Hey Azie,

I've used these pre-71 460's for years pulling trailers around the country
and swear by them. Not disagreeing with you, but, rather find out what your
experience has been and what set-up you've had better luck with under those
conditions. I've got one 460 due for a rebuild now so maybe I'll find a
better way to skin the cat.

stoney


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

From: "Rob Hutson" <tx4wheeler cs.com>
Subject: Re: Syntehtic vs. Dino Oil was Anti-Seize
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:02:50 -0500

The colsest I ever had was a 77 F150 2WD with a factory 460

John LaGrone wrote:

> I agree with all that has been said about synthetic oil and turbos and the
> properties of synthetic oil. But...
>
> Does anyone have a stock, factory original or properly restored 61-79 F
> series truck with a factory turbo on it? I didn't think so.

Hmmm...., does anyone have a 61-79, 4WD ford truck with a factory 460 in
it? Didn't think so, guess it doesn't apply :-)

                         OX

PS, yeah, yeah, I've heard ford did make some 4WD, 460's, but I'm not
convinced, doubt I will be,  LOL!!!

--
78 Bronco Custom, 400, T-18, 14 bolt/detroit/4.56, D60/detroit/4.56, 44
boggers, 9" lift
79 Bronco XLT, 351M, C6, D60/detroit/4.10, D448lug/Lokrite/4.10, 38.5
SX's, 4"lift
79 Bronc XLT, 351M, C6, 35 BFG AT's, 2" lift
86 Capri, turbo 5.0 (13.4 107)
90 Talon AWD turbo (12.7 104)
95 F250-460,4WD (16.9 82)


Robert Hutson (TX4Wheeler)
1978 Ford Bronco
2BigBroncos South Chapter
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.xoom.com/hutsonr


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

From: TBeeee aol.com
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:39:33 EDT
Subject: 1967 F-Series Registry (Window Sticker)

Hi all:

 I am trying to locate an original window sticker for a 1967 F-Series Truck.
I'd like to get my hands on an original if possible.  If anyone has one or
can give me any leads, please let me know.  Thanks in advance for your help.
Please contact me off-list.

Thom
1967 F-Series Registry
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hometown.aol.com/tbeeee

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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:44:04 -0400
From: frenz.6 osu.edu (Dale Frenz)
Subject: Re: life is too short.... I need diesel fuel filters

What's annoying is how some of you 'listers can't create a new mail piece
or become familiar with the delete key instead of replying to the reply of
the reply to a reply to the reply of a post. Some of us don't want/need a
recap of the last four lengthy thoughts on an idea, plus it just loads up
the list with spam.

On another note, can anybody suggest the best (cheapest) place to get
Powerstroke fuel filters? The brite boys at International don't carry them
and the Ford dealers want claim to your first-born child.

Thanks.
-Dale



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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:44:05 -0400
From: frenz.6 osu.edu (Dale Frenz)
Subject: Turbo vs. Supercharged

Somebody mentioned that they'd never own a turbo'd vehicle and instead
would go the supercharger route. As an experienced owner of a supercharged
Ford Lightning, let me just say that the s/c is totally over-rated for
having "no turbo lag." That is a collective load of horse manure. S/C's
have to be spooled up just like a turbo charger. If your engine RPM's are
low, there's still a delay from the time you put your foot down until the
time your supercharger comes into play..... just like a turbo.

The upshot? There is oh-so-sweet performance when using either. Whether
it's the whistle of a turbo or the inhaling whine of a supercharger.... its
all beautiful horsepower making music.



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

From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 20:02:15 -0400

the turbo is cheaper to replace tho than the blower is and can be set up to
eliminate that lag your speaking of if done right
gordon



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

From: "G & J Boling" <flash1 alltel.net>
Subject: Re: life is too short.... I need diesel fuel filters
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:18:18 -0400

On another note, can anybody suggest the best (cheapest) place to get
> Powerstroke fuel filters? The brite boys at International don't carry them
> and the Ford dealers want claim to your first-born child.
>
> Thanks.
> -Dale
=========================================================
i am not sure what ype they have BUT if it was mine i would convert to the
spin on type semi trucks use if possible go to a truck junk yard and get one
of the spin on type filter bases then you can get the filters just about
anywheres then for them for about 5.00 bucks is all or less NAPA even
carries them as well as other parts stores do
gordon



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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject:  I need diesel fuel filters
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 20:30:16 -0500

carparts.com has them for $29.86. Seems a bit pricey, but when I only have
to pay $3.65 for a fuel filter for my '78... Just another good reason to
drive old iron-parts are cheap.

ps-please note-this reply has been trimmed, and subject line modified to fit
the contents of the reply.
Later!
Jason Kendrick


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

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:29:07 -0400
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged



Dale Frenz wrote:
>
> Somebody mentioned that they'd never own a turbo'd vehicle and instead
> would go the supercharger route. As an experienced owner of a supercharged
> Ford Lightning, let me just say that the s/c is totally over-rated for
> having "no turbo lag." That is a collective load of horse manure. S/C's
> have to be spooled up just like a turbo charger. If your engine RPM's are
> low, there's still a delay from the time you put your foot down until the
> time your supercharger comes into play..... just like a turbo.
>

Very true. with the right setup, many turbos can achieve full boost at
2000 RPM, where as blowers achieve full boost only at max RPM. I do
believe that blowers can reach max boost quicker once you get to that
high RPM, but the actual torque curve of a turbo over a blower is going
to be much greater due to a constant boost curve and very litle crank HP
loss.

                                        OX

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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 20:44:22 -0500


Dale Frenz wrote;
the s/c is totally over-rated for
> having "no turbo lag." S/C's have to be spooled up just like a turbo
charger. If your engine RPM's are
> low, there's still a delay from the time you put your foot down until the
> time your supercharger comes into play..... just like a turbo.

Yeah, but with a s/c, you can perform a simple pulley and belt swap-provided
your fuel system will supply adequate fuel volume and pressure-and eliminate
this lag. Factory systems are set up for longetivity more so than for
performance, hence the lag you feel. Factory systems are also meant to be
played with...:-)
Jason Kendrick


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

From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: I need diesel fuel filters
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:52:30 -0500

Except when they get too old or came out one year only =P Try finding the
F100 plates that go on the sides of the hood for a '67 F100 =) Glad I still
have the ones that came with the truck though.

-----Original Message-----
From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Jason and Kathy
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 8:30 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] I need diesel fuel filters


carparts.com has them for $29.86. Seems a bit pricey, but when I only have
to pay $3.65 for a fuel filter for my '78... Just another good reason to
drive old iron-parts are cheap.

ps-please note-this reply has been trimmed, and subject line modified to fit
the contents of the reply.
Later!
Jason Kendrick

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



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

From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Turbo vs. Supercharged
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 23:27:21 -0700

Ok, Ok, Ok already.....you guys are talking drags and I'm talking street.
That stupid Cougar couldn't hold a steady 60 mph if your life depended on
it.  The engine was too small to pull the car by itself and the turbo was
just beginning to work at 60 so it was a throttle wiggle game everywhere I
went with the stupid thing.  Touch the throtlte and you get more
exhaust.....more exhaust means more boost.....more boost means more
power.....more power means you have to let off the gas......let off the gas
and the boost drops......and  you slow down.......A LOT!!  Darn it!  It took
me a long time to figure out what was happening and once I did I decided I
would never, ever make that mistake again.

Now if I were pulling heavy trailers and running through 15 gears the turbo
would be a wonderful thing.  I enjoyed the power on the diesels I've driven
but.....not in that stupid Cougar!

Or.....if I were running it strictly at the drag strip or only cruising the
streets looking for a street drag then Ya......Lots of fun but........

Now, take that same stupid Cougar, stick a decent super charger on it and,
yes it will take off the line a little slower and the power will come on a
little slower but much more predictably and  more smoothly, over a broader
power band and at 60 mph, once the engine has reached that rpm the blower
will also have reached that rpm and it will all be very nicely syncronized
and will maintain a steady power output which is easily controlled.

Don't misunderstand, I loved to feel it kick in, but I hated to go anywere
on the highway for any distance because I was exhausted by the time I got ....


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.