Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:23:08 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:23:08 -0500 (EST)
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 #316
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 Sat, 28 Oct 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 316

In This Issue:
Re: slop in dana 44 front
Re: Wooden Carb Spacer
Re: Wooden Carb Spacer
about dual batteries
The MUNY PIT
Re: Wood Carb Spacers
Re: 56 F100 Project
Re: 56 F100 Project
Re: Camper specials
cast iron header manifolds for FE
Pictures
460 carb CFM
351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?

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

From: Brazzadog aol.com
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 15:45:14 EDT
Subject: Re: slop in dana 44 front


> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 08:23:15 -0700
> From: Don Grossman <duckdon mac.com>
>
> The knuckle seals are still available.  The large 8" knuckle seals
> have a ford counterpart but for the 6" they will come up not
> available most of the time.  The seals on the early jeeps are the
> exact same size.  Dana used the same dia. knuckle on almost all their
> front ends.


I've been told this as well.  I've purchased 6" knuckle seals from both JC
Whitney and Napa for about $10 per axle.  Whitney has them in the Jeep
section all the time.

Ben Williams
'71 Wagoneer
'78 F-250 4x4
'88 Bronco

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

From: Brazzadog aol.com
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:33:34 EDT
Subject: Re: Wooden Carb Spacer

Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: none <whidbeyslow yahoo.com>

 Ben:

here's my .02 cents worth on the wood spacer issue...

(snip)

> A. Use a good outdoor grade plywood. The finer the
> finish the better. Sand and seal as necessary. Go
> easy.

I used a furniture grade plywood with no voids.  It has pretty smooth finish
to start so I used it as is with no sealer.  I figured with 2 gaskets and
"crush factor" it would seal up pretty well.

B. Use a regular gasket with it on both sides but
> you'll still have to check it every so often.
> C. Experiment a little bit with the thickness of
> wood. I'd start with 3/8 except on a smaller engine.
> Then go with 1/4 to see if you get enough heat
> displacement. Go up in thickness as needed.

I had to use 3/4" for other clearances.  The stock plastic spacer was about
7/8".

> D. Make sure your mating surfaces are true(no-brainer)

This was part of the appeal of the plywood.  It stays flat pretty well.

> E. If you are unsatisfied w/the amount of time before
> an air leak, use a router with a pattern to cut a thin
> groove into the plywood. Cut the gasket way down to
> fit. This helped me out enough to where I thought it
> was worth it.
> F. Only use the wood spacer when needed. I only use
> mine during the hot months of the year. Then I take it
> out. My truck is okay in cooler weather.

I'm looking for a permanent solution.  The stock spacer is no longer
available and is not duplicated by any aftermarket source that I know of.  I
wouldn't mind making up 3 or 4 at a time and swapping them out once a year
though.

> G. DON'T USE LACQUER to seal the wood unless you let
> it fully cure first!!! A buddy of mine used lacquer
> and stuck it right on the intake the next day. When it
> started to leak and he tried to pull it off... You
> know
> what happened next. This is the reason I go with an
> outdoor grade plywood and no lacquer. I believe some
> lacquers will re-soften under heat and esp when they
> get gas splashed onto them.
> H. Don't overtighten. It won't help.

This is where I blew it.  The motorcraft spreadbore has little support
between the primary intake holes and the front mounting studs.  I over
tightened the front nuts to the point of bending the plywood down a bit in
front.  I decided to leave it unless I could find a leak cause I figured the
"crush factor" would work against me if I loosened it up.  So far, no leaks.
I don't expect any other related problems because the 2150 is sitting back
over the secondary intake holes where the plywood is still nice and flat.

> My spacers last about a year at a shot of total time
> on the engine. This usually translates to 4 years
> which is pretty good I think. Then I just make a new
> one. Some guys probably would use them longer. It's up
> to you. The less fuel that gets on it, the longer
> it'll last. A couple of guys I know have had a plywood
> spacer on an engine for over ten years but I might add
> that those rigs don't exactly get mega miles per year
> either.

This is also good news for me cause I don't put too many miles on mine right
now either.  I am looking for a solution that I would be comfortable with on
a cross country journey though.

> I am currently conducting tests on a new spacer made
> of solid Micarta which...  seems to be the more
> permanent solution. I'll get back to you on that one
> next year. Micarta is expensive but I've got a good
> supply for free. Let me know if you want a chunk. I'm
> also experimenting around with using stainless sleeves
> inside the bores on the spacer to keep the fuel off
> the plywood but am not sure if it'll be needed with
> the Micarta.

I'd really like to try a piece of Micarta.  I've been planning on finding a
source of phenolic or aluminum blanks if the wood works -- which it seems to.
I don't know how Micarta is to work with, but I'd like to give it a shot.

Ben Williams
'71 Wagoneer
'78 F-250 4x4
'88 Bronco

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

From: Brazzadog aol.com
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:33:40 EDT
Subject: Re: Wooden Carb Spacer

This is cool info.  One of the classic problems with the stock plastic spacer
is that they break.  I've never seen one that wasn't broken.  Laminated
canvas would seem to be the ideal candidate in that regard.

I'd be very interested in knowing more about which industries use which types
of resins and possible sources.  Or maybe even better would be knowing which
types of micarta to avoid.

I don't think anybody's gonna take you up on that "micarta spacer for a Ford
spreadbore" challenge.  : )

Alot of people have suggested just buying a spacer.  Believe me I would have
if I could have found one.  I'm pretty sure there's not one available for
this application.  To further complicate things, I needed a 2 barrel to 4
barrel adapter that would accomodate the odd configuration of the Motorcraft
4350.  I pretty much had to do my own R&D on this one.

I figured it would take alot of trial and error.  I had scraps enough to make
3 attempts without haveing to buy any wood.  I was surprised to find that I
could make the adapter and 2 gaskets in less than 2 hours (including design
time) with no mistakes and it all worked the first time.  The hardest part
was transitioning the 2150 throttle holes to the 4350 intake holes.

This was so easy, I may soon be converted from being a "buyer" to a "maker"
when it comes to spacers and adapters.   Seems they never have the thickness
or configuration I need.  The main cost objection to conventional spacers is
not the initial $30 cost of the spacer, but the $15  for the thick top gasket
used in this application that can't be re-used reliably.  All I need now is a
good source of materials.

Ben Williams
'71 Wagoneer
'78 F-250 4x4
'88 Bronco

From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 09:20:33 -0700
>
> Micarta is good for this application and in fact was made for similar
> applications in industry.  It is basically laminated canvas with resins
> designed for different purposes.   There are chemical resistant,  moisture
> resistant, expansion controlled etc..
>
> Most micarta will work well in a carb spacer application and they do have
> the desired effect of insulating the carb from the manifold.  In my opinion
> this is the best material to use for this, better than wood, better than
> plastic.
>
> Be carefull about over tightening a carb base to get a good seal.  You can
> distort the body so that you have problems with the throttle sticking among
> other things and you can actually break the ears off.  (don't ask how I know
> all this neat stuff  :-))
>
> Anyone ever see a micarta base for a Ford Spread bore? (I don't expect any
> positive feed back on this one :-))
>
> Happily Totally Retired,
> Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
> 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-)

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

From: "Garrett Nelson" <garrettnelson writeme.com>
Subject: about dual batteries
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:15:12 -0500


You don't need anything fancy to hook them up, just 2 wires long enough to go from one battery to the other one. Simply wire them up in parallel.

Maybe that's not how the factory did it, but that's how I would do it.

---Garrett www.1966ford.com


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

From: "Jeffery Hansen" <billybobjoehansen hotmail.com>
Subject: The MUNY PIT
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:27:53 GMT

Hey, just wanted to thank everyone for thier responses to the ongoing saga
of my achiles heel.  Ya know - went to Rich's there the first of the month,
we set everything right - it ran prety good there that day or two before we
got underway - except the knocking when getting on the gas uphill.  Then I
came home yesterday - fired her up, drove across base - went to shut it off
- it deiseled, backfired.  Liked to never got it fired back up that time.
It's never backfired before.  I only need it to get me around here another
couple weeks until I park her for six months to go on a Persian Excertion.
Will save all my nickle and dimes for the Edelbrock cal kit, and fuel gage
setup/new electric fuel pump, and either the Pertronix or Unilte system for
this stock FOMOCO distributor (plus the new headers).  Doubt the timing mark
has slipped like some suggest - we had conciderd that - but timeing by ear -
then putting the lite on her - she's right on the muny.
_________________________________________________________________________
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.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://profiles.msn.com.


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

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: none <whidbeyslow yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Wood Carb Spacers

From: "John Webster" <jwebster tnt21.com>
Re: carb spacers

> I would have to agree with Garrett on this, I
installed a laminated canvas 1" four hole spacer
between a Edelbrock 750 and Performer manifold. I lost
no bottom end and it cleaned up the mid-range and top
end. No leakage and its been through two years of
weather and my usual motor abuse. Save yourself some
time with the pre-made, there's probably lots of other
things to tinker with. John

 John...
Congratulations on your success using your spacer.
Sounds like you scored a big TD. As for saving myself
the time, I like to tinker in the garage and play with
my tools. Good therapy and gets me away from the
girlie in the house. Not that I try to stay away from
her much ;)


Gary wrote-
>  Be careful about over tightening a carb base to
get a good seal. You can distort the body so that you
have problems with the throttle sticking among other
things and you can actually break the ears off. (don't
ask how I know all this neat stuff  :-) Anyone ever
see a micarta base for a Ford Spread bore? (I don't
expect any positive feed back on this one :-)) Gary

 Gary...

Good tips. Seen the carb ear broken off syndrome
firsthand. Fortunately it wasn't mine. Old friend w/a
69 Firebird. Sucker...

 My biggest problem in going to an aftermarket outfit
would be to find a pre-made spacer for a dual 1V
intake that resides on a 240. Find one of those and
I'll double your money. (Maybe I should have looked
around before making that offer. Ooops...) Sorry I
can't help you out on your request Gary but I'll keep
my eyes open. Thanks to all for input. Regards, Scott


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com/

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

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:34:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Edelbrock Carb
From: Brett L Habben <bhabben juno.com>

Tom,
Besides the AFB clone, Edelbrock markets brand new Quadrajets.
That's probably what you're thinking of.
Brett
PS.  AFB's are a whole lot more maintenance free than the Q-Jets.
>
>Is the edelbrock the equivalent of the rochester?
>Tom H
>
>> Used one or two years on the Bird or Torino, 68 or there
>> abouts.  Makes it a
>> legal carb for Fords In my book :-)
>> The main advantage the Rochester has over the competition is
>> they deemed it
>> a good thing to make the primaries very, very small.  Ford, Holley and
>> Carter spread bores have much larger primaries so don't carry off the
>> "Efficiency" thing as well.  I've seen a couple of Ford's
>> with pretty small
>> ones but still larger than the Rochester.  I used the
>> smallest one of the
>> batch I had lying around but the Ford versions are not
>> tunable so I can't
>> get the most out of it.  Rochesters are tunable from idle all
>> the way up to
>> WOT but you do have to know what you are doing.  A poorly
>> tuned Rochester is
>> a lot more headache than a Holley or Ford because they are
>> somewhat more
>> complex.
>> Happily Totally Retired,
>> Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
>> 78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-)
> > A super tuned Rochester,
> > ======================================================
>> > A What
>> > i didnt know they even made such a critter for a ford
>> > thats a G.M. carb


________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

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

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:30:23 -0700
From: Tim Bowman <tkbowman qwest.net>
Subject: Re: 56 F100 Project

If you go to my website below and select the link for the 56 F100
Project, you can view some first pictures of the project.  More will
come as the project unfolds.
--
Tim Bowman
Burien, WA
tkbowman qwest.net
Website: www.users.qwest.net/~tkbowman
  (Pacific NW Carshow Information & more)

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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: 56 F100 Project
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:44:10 -0500

Tim, looks like a great project truck, and will look great when it's
finished. By the way, your '63 1/2 Fastback is sweet!(drool!!) Honda door
handles??? Oh well, it is your truck... :-)
Jason Kendrick



> If you go to my website below and select the link for the 56 F100
> Project
> Tim Bowman
> Burien, WA



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

From: WEDIVE247 aol.com
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:55:39 EDT
Subject: Re: Camper specials

In a message dated 10/28/2000 1:27:45 PM EST, bigred connect.ab.ca writes:

<<  extra tool compartment, >>
Anybody know where I might find the gasket for my tool compartment door ? I
also need the oval retaining ring that holds the gasket in place . Thanks all
.

Steve       64 F-100     429 ci

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

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:27:43 -0500
From: prices <prices mciworld.com>
Subject: cast iron header manifolds for FE

Anyone looking for alternative to headers, I have posted a pair of FE cast
iron headers (early 60's style) on ebay.  Not sure if these will fit the
trucks without some minor modifications, but they'll probably never burn
out.

bkp in NC

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

From: "Dave Emerick" <djemerick hotmail.com>
Subject: Pictures
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 00:04:07 EST

Does anyone have any diagrams/pictures of the stock steering set-up for a
78-79 F250 4x4?  I'd appreciate the help !

Dave
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://profiles.msn.com.


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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:13:40 EDT
Subject: 460 carb CFM

Hey, anyone know what cfm the square bore motorcraft for a 460 is?  Its the
only carb for a 460 in 74, but I dont have any part #'s right now.  If
someone could help I appreciate it.  Thanks

Darrell & Tweety

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

From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
Subject: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:29:53 -0500

I fear I already know the answer to this one- I'm going to have to find
another balancer to go on the new 400 crank of my rebuild.  Didn't think of
it until just today.  Still, I have faint hope that one of you will write
and say the old 351 balancer will work just fine on the new
400..........yeah, right!

Bob


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

From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 09:53:42 -0800

Hate to be the bearer of good news but the 351M and 400 take the same
flywheel and damper. Just check the old one out good to make sure the outer
and inner pieces are still bonded by the rubber.

/// Smith & Wesson...the Original point & click interface \\

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 9:29 AM
Subject: [61-79-list] 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?


> I fear I already know the answer to this one- I'm going to have to find
> another balancer to go on the new 400 crank of my rebuild.  Didn't think
of
> it until just today.  Still, I have faint hope that one of you will write
> and say the old 351 balancer will work just fine on the new
> 400..........yeah, right!




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

Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:11:26 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?



Bill Beyer wrote:
>
> Hate to be the bearer of good news but the 351M and 400 take the same
> flywheel and damper. Just check the old one out good to make sure the outer
> and inner pieces are still bonded by the rubber.
>

The manual and auto trans balancer are different though.

                          OX

> /// Smith & Wesson...the Original point & click interface \\
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
> To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 9:29 AM
> Subject: [61-79-list] 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
>
> > I fear I already know the answer to this one- I'm going to have to find
> > another balancer to go on the new 400 crank of my rebuild.  Didn't think
> of
> > it until just today.  Still, I have faint hope that one of you will write
> > and say the old 351 balancer will work just fine on the new
> > 400..........yeah, right!
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.

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

End of 61-79-list Digest V2000 #316
***********************************
<><><><><><> Serious Help Finding That Part! <><><><><><> ....


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.