Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:38:13 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:38:13 -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 #318
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 Mon, 30 Oct 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 318

In This Issue:
Q-jet carbs for fords
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: Uh-Oh! Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390?
Re: Uh-Oh! Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390?
Re: 56 F100 in the Stable
Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/ more
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
vacuum guage timing
Re: Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/ m
Re: Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
What's wrong
C/M timing set
Re: Timing
Re: 56 F100 in the Stable
slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)
Re: slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)
drive shaft
My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified
Re: 56 F100 in the Stable
72 302, unknown solenoid
For Sale:'79 F-150 S/C 4x4 & 460 kit
Steering (Again!)
Re: What's wrong
Re: drive shaft
Re: drive shaft
Re: Micarta Carb Spacer

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:28:52 -0800
From: Eric <ekdonaldson bc.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Q-jet carbs for fords

An excellent primer on Q-jet id. Thanks, Ballinger. I might try one on my
352, mainly to improve fuel economy. Can you suggest a model that will mate
to the Ford (66) std trans throttle linkage with the least difficulty?

Eric


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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:28:26 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?



Andersons wrote:
>
> Thanks for the information, guys- and the manual vs. auto question is moot,
> as the same manual trans and flywheel will be kept on this project.  The
> original balancer is very heavy, almost 2" thick, and in great condition.
>
> Looks like I dodged a bullet there.  But, now I'm getting real worried about
> this block cracking issue being discussed on the 351M/400 list- I'm sure my
> engine falls into the problem time period, but not sure yet of the casting
> origin.  Have a good thought for me....
>

What 351M/400 list??

                OX

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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: Uh-Oh! Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:49:18 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: Garrett Nelson <>
> I hope I don't fire up too much controversy, but I am considering putting
a Chevy alternator on my 390.


 I'm gonna regret admitting that I have a GM part on my truck, but I've
suited up in my best Nomex and am ready to be flamed!:-)
 Garrett and list, I have a GM alternator on my 390. I drilled out the long
mounting bolt hole (bottom of the alternator) to fit the larger Ford bolt,
and shortened the front of the mounting bolt hole about 3/4" so the Ford
bolt will engage the threads in the block properly. I re-used the aluminum
spacer from the Ford mounting system. At this point, if anyone can
understand my instructions, the alternator will bolt up to the block. Double
check to make sure the pulleys line up before moving on to the wiring. Now
for the wiring.
 Pull the voltage regulator and all the associated wiring off the truck.
There should be a factory plug in there somewhere by the horn relay. It's a
three prong with a small red, small yellow, and a large black with a yellow
stripe wire. Leave the black and yellow striped wire intact and plugged
in-this feeds the fusebox. The red and yellow wires can be cut or rolled up
and tucked away for later use with a Ford system. Now run a large
wire(6-8guage-bigger the better, up to a point)) from the output terminal on
the alternator to the positive side of the starter selonoid. Last, run a
smaller wire(14-16guage) from a fuse that is powered by the key in the "run"
position to the two prong plug that goes in the side of the alternator. This
wire activates the voltage regulator. I wired this wire to both sides of
this two prong plug. If I have explained this right, you should be done.

DISCLAIMER
Anytime you modify an electrical system, you run the risk of doing something
wrong and possibly causing more harm than good. Use the proper size wiring
and use high quality insulated wiring connectors. Black tape is not a proper
substitute, in my book. I am not responsible for any damage to anyone's
truck. If something in my instructions doesn't sound right, please feel free
to ask for clarification. I will gladly run out to my truck during a
thunderstorm or tornado to trace wiring so nobody burns their wiring harness
to smithereens.  :-)

Jason Kendrick




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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: Uh-Oh! Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:56:49 -0600

 By the way, the alternator I used was from an '85 Buick Skylark. It'll
push 85 amps. The wiring instructions in my directions are for my 1970 F100.
I imagine '67 to '72's are pretty similar, but 66 and prior, along with '73
and later trucks may have different wiring systems.
Jason Kendrick


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

From: canzus seanet.com
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:58:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: 56 F100 in the Stable

At 02:47 PM 30:10:2000 GMT, wish wrote:
>> I wouldn't use a Mustang II front clip if I were you, I've never understood
>
>>why everyone is enamoured with the M II front end components,
>
>'Cause they're cheap, easy to find, easy to find parts for, did I mention cheap
>?  They have a decent and compact SLA design instead of the strut front ends
>that most vehicles are using these days ... and the street rodders that have
>the light vehicles really took to them,

The operative word being "light"

> that means LOTS of aftermarket support
>from that side of things, and some pretty beefy components are available ...
>besides I don't think many of them are using the brakes from the II,

I'd hope not, even the Mustangs of that era were marginal when it
came down to braking performance...

>just the front sub frame and suspension components ... (not actually the
clip as the
>clip is fenders and such too and who wants that ? :)

No one would want *that*

>Aerostar front ends ?  that's the first I've heard of anyone using those ...

They aren't, but I will be, my '63 is going in the weeds...

>do they use a strut in the front, or the more traditional shock/control arm
>arrangement ?

Upper and lower control arms, rack and pinion steering, and a really beefy
anti-sway bar, plus, they're about the right width right out of the box...

Plus, decent braking...

Steve & the Rockette
68 F100, 390cid, FMX
63 F100, 292cid, 3speed
72 Capri 2000, hers
73 Capri 2600, terminal cancer...
73 MGB GT, Our Toy
94 SHO, SWMBO's
98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine....


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

From: "Garrett Nelson" <garrettnelson writeme.com>
Subject: Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/ more
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:05:28 -0600


Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess I should have been more specific. I am not getting an actual GM alternator, but rather a brand new aftermarket alternator made by a third company, designed for a Chevy engine. Should I look for an alternator designed for a specific year of GM vehicle? The alternator type I am looking at has a built in regulator that is self-energizing. The alternator only has 1 terminal on it. I will be running some large (4 gauge or so) wire from that terminal to the + battery terminal. Simple as can be!

Simple is good!

---Garrett www.1966ford.com




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

From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:18:39 -0800

The message board on the web site.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Oxley" <luxjo thecore.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:28 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?


>
>
> Andersons wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the information, guys- and the manual vs. auto question is
moot,
> > as the same manual trans and flywheel will be kept on this project.  The
> > original balancer is very heavy, almost 2" thick, and in great
condition.
> >
> > Looks like I dodged a bullet there.  But, now I'm getting real worried
about
> > this block cracking issue being discussed on the 351M/400 list- I'm sure
my
> > engine falls into the problem time period, but not sure yet of the
casting
> > origin.  Have a good thought for me....
> >
>
> What 351M/400 list??
>
>                  OX




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

From: Dlkiehl aol.com
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:18:23 EST
Subject: vacuum guage timing

I saw a note on the list about timing with a vacuum gauge.  I have had
several Ford products on which the timing marks have slipped when the
harmonic balancer aged.

Would someone give me a step by step quick-course?  I have a '65 F-100 with a
352 & 3 spd., a '59 Lincoln 430 (automatic), and a '66 427 Ford (Chris
Craft), and I have trouble getting the timing right on all of them.

Thanks,
Darryl in Atlanta

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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/ m
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:25:13 -0600

I think in my last Summit cataloge, I saw a self-exciting voltage regulator
that will eliminate the smaller wire. This way, when you hack up a factory
production (inexpensive) alternator, you will feel better than when you hack
up an expensive third party specialized alternator. Plus, replacements are
cheaper.
Jason Kendrick
----- Original Message -----
From: Garrett Nelson <garrettnelson writeme.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 7:05 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/
more info


>
> Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess I should have been more specific.
I am not getting an actual GM alternator, but rather a brand new aftermarket
alternator made by a third company, designed for a Chevy engine. Should I
look for an alternator designed for a specific year of GM vehicle? The
alternator type I am looking at has a built in regulator that is
self-energizing. The alternator only has 1 terminal on it. I will be running
some large (4 gauge or so) wire from that terminal to the + battery
terminal. Simple as can be!
>
> Simple is good!
>
> ---Garrett www.1966ford.com
>
>
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:28:31 -0800
From: Greg <greg gregster.com>
Subject: Re: Putting a Chevy alternator on a 390... continued w/



Garrett Nelson wrote:

> Thanks for the replies everyone. I guess I should have been more specific. I am not getting an actual GM alternator, but rather a brand new aftermarket alternator made by a third company, designed for a Chevy engine. Should I look for an alternator designed for a specific year of GM vehicle? The alternator type I am looking at has a built in regulator that is self-energizing. The alternator only has 1 terminal on it. I will be running some large (4 gauge or so) wire from that terminal to the + battery terminal. Simple as can be!
>
> Simple is good!
>
> ---Garrett www.1966ford.com

Napa sells the "one wire" alternator which is what I use on my heavy equipment. They work great ... you gotta rev 'em a little on start-up to get  them to start charging and I've had some that needed to be polarized when first installed. One word of advice ... on diesel engines, the 5/16 tensioning bolt will break from vibration. This may not happen on a smooth running Ford engine, but drilling and tapping it to 3/8 cures that problem.

Greg

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


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

From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:21:49 -0500

Sorry, I meant "Message Board"- the one at
http://www.ford-trucks.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForum
ID12&conf=DCConfID1

----- Original Message -----
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 6:28 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?


>
>
> Andersons wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the information, guys- and the manual vs. auto question is
moot,
> > as the same manual trans and flywheel will be kept on this project.  The
> > original balancer is very heavy, almost 2" thick, and in great
condition.
> >
> > Looks like I dodged a bullet there.  But, now I'm getting real worried
about
> > this block cracking issue being discussed on the 351M/400 list- I'm sure
my
> > engine falls into the problem time period, but not sure yet of the
casting
> > origin.  Have a good thought for me....
> >
>
> What 351M/400 list??
>
>                  OX
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
>
>


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

From: tomzaddr webtv.net (Tom Bartz)
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:33:18 -0600 (CST)
Subject: What's wrong

Been searching for bed caps to fit 1969 F100 .   When I look at
FORD-TRUCKS online store there is no description or price????
Tom B


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

From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: C/M timing set
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:34:10 -0600


Dav R.(M block devotee) writes:  >>Yes.  The M-block has the same crank-to-cam
spacing as the 351C.<<

Thanks.  That ought to be the way to be sure you get straight up timing on the M.
Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al.


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

From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:44:38 EST
Subject: Re: Timing

Thanks Dave. Kinda confirmed mu suspishioons / hunches. Now to convince the
SWMBO (that aught to be a cold day in hell)!

George M in Fl.

In a message dated 10/30/00 12:41:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Dave.Resch sybase.com writes:


> Yo George:
>
> The low rpm power improvement is noticeable, but not dramatic.  The more
> you use
> low rpm (particularly towing or climbing hills), the more you'll notice it.
>  If
> you have over 50K miles on the original timing set and you need to replace
> it
> anyway, I'd recommend it.
>
> >The first I had a RV style of cam with a double
> >roller gear & chain set. It ran nice though I
> >dont remember any reall big or dramatic
> >change once I was done (many moons
> >ago). The newer one I know was a shop
> >rebuilt with Im assuming stock parts
> >(hey, I needed one and the price was
> >right). Even though Ive got a new
> >manifold, 4bbl, & headers on the new
> >motor, it still doesnt feel as good or
> >strong as the origional one without all
> >that stuff.
>
> The bottom line is that a better cam goes farther in producing power from
> the
> M-block than all the external goodies.  Of course, all the external goodies
> will
> bring a lot more out of a good cam.
>
> If you're thinking about getting in there for the timing set, I'd recommend
> upgrading the cam and really taking advantage of the carb and headers you
> have
> now.
>
> Dave R (M-block devotee)
>



George

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:07:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Dan Lee <danlee_58 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 56 F100 in the Stable

I have a TCI coil-over shock (MII type) on my '53
F100.
It has 11" Rotors and GM calipers. These MII
suspensions are easy to install and have lots of extra
features. Stronger coil springs are available for
bigger engines. They can be purchased in all polished
stainless for shows.
You should go on the pre61 list, there are lots of
trucks with these suspensions and others there.
I have a 400 and C6 in mine. It also has PS and PDB.
They only problem that you may have is the ride
height. I actually had mine raised by 2" when it was
installed, so it would clear speed bumps and curbs.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
400C-4V

>Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:46:10 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: 56 F100 in the Stable

>I just found and purchased a '56 F100 to add to my
>FOMOCO stable.  Using a 78 F250 (FTE content) with a
>friend to go pick it up tomorrow morning.  Have a
>Mustang II front clip and have other non-stock plans
>(which is very unlike me!).

>I wouldn't use a Mustang II front clip if I were you,
>I've never understood why everyone is enamoured with
>the M II front end components,  you should check out
>the Aerostar front ends, at least the brakes are
rated
>for more than 3K lbs...





__________________________________________________
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/

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

From: "Don Jones" <twistedhand hotmail.com>
Subject: slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 05:17:33 GMT

       I finally got a chance to work on my truck on Sunday.
what started as one silly little bearing is going to be a complete steering
rebuild.   Looks like things started with a bent tie-rod that
threw the toe-in out of whack and that peeled a tire..
I got the tie-rod off, have to make a trip to my parts truck for a straight
one, ordered two new tie-rods, drag link, 4 steering bearings, and a pair of
wiper seals.  Wiper seals were listed under Jeep in the Moog parts book.

      It looks like the load on the steering bearings is set with shims.
Is there a method for setting this up, or do i just shim it so all the free
play is out?

      While i am on the topic of bearings, its been a while since i have
had wheel bearings off, these run in oil, not grease and have funny slotted
nuts that looks like its going to be hard to get adjusted right.

     I am guessing that the toe-in should be about 1/16th of an inch,
but i have never set it on a 4 wheel drive before.


Don Jones
1970 f-250 ~Fordzilllla~
_________________________________________________________________________
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: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:28:01 -0700
From: Dave Oneal <dave davesmonsterpit.com>
Subject: Re: slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)

the bearings in the front end of my `75 were gone and I replaced them, I
set the preload with some shims I made out of sheet metal, just till you
cant move it up and down (as the book said). I dont know how you set the
toe in. you can get a wrench for those nuts at any parts store.

At 05:17 AM 10/31/00 +0000, you wrote:
>        I finally got a chance to work on my truck on Sunday.
>what started as one silly little bearing is going to be a complete
>steering rebuild.   Looks like things started with a bent tie-rod that
>threw the toe-in out of whack and that peeled a tire..
>I got the tie-rod off, have to make a trip to my parts truck for a
>straight one, ordered two new tie-rods, drag link, 4 steering bearings,
>and a pair of wiper seals.  Wiper seals were listed under Jeep in the Moog
>parts book.
>
>       It looks like the load on the steering bearings is set with shims.
>Is there a method for setting this up, or do i just shim it so all the
>free play is out?
>
>       While i am on the topic of bearings, its been a while since i have
> had wheel bearings off, these run in oil, not grease and have funny
> slotted nuts that looks like its going to be hard to get adjusted right.
>
>      I am guessing that the toe-in should be about 1/16th of an inch,
>but i have never set it on a 4 wheel drive before.
>
>
>Don Jones
>1970 f-250 ~Fordzilllla~
>_________________________________________________________________________

Dave
Davesmonsterpit
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.davesmonsterpit.com


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

From: "Bob" <xavetarx home.com>
Subject: drive shaft
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:26:45 -0500

Anyone know where I could purchase a drive shaft for my 79 Bronco?  The
truck's just a little higher than the slip joint in the shaft will allow.
Should I find a longer axle in a yard and have someone cut it, or is there a
nice place on the web that will sell me a good product at a reasonable
(cheap) price?

many thanks,

-bob-



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

From: "Dawn Chere" <dawnchere ados.com>
Subject: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:00:58 -0800

I might have a chance to get a used 400 modified engine for a couple hundred
dollars the question is:  What years would be compatible with our 78 v8 460?
Is it possible to just drop and bolt it right in?  Or do we have to do any
modifications to the tranny, bell housing, exhaust, or anything else we
might not have thought of?

Owner says that it has low oil pressure, so needs a new oil pump.  Is there
anyway to verify that its the oil pump without the expense of changing it?
Is there anything else with the 400 modified that could cause low oil
pressure that we haven't thought of?

We are moving to Colorado by the way in Dec or Jan so I need to get the
truck running as cheaply as possible.

Dawn Chere
dawnchere ados.com
St. Helens, OR
78 Ford F250 XLT 460
78 Ford F100 Straight 6 ($500 OBO)
90 Plym Voyager SE V6 ($1000 OBO)
91 Dodge Shadow ES Convertible ($2000 OBO)
86 Shelby Charger Turbo
79 Porsche 931
Reach me by ICQ.  My ICQ # is 36500512 or, send me E-mail Express directly
to my computer screen 36500512 pager.icq.com


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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:03:55 -0800
From: Tim Bowman <tkbowman qwest.net>
Subject: Re: 56 F100 in the Stable

Wish:

You hit the proverbial nail on the head.  I'll be doing exactly what you
described (increasing the rotor size & calipers etc.)  The other beauty
of this conversion is that one doesn't have to cut the frame like with
the Nova or Volare clip installations.  Besides this will be a truck
that will no longer be a hauler because I have a 71 F100 for that duty.
If this is a weak alteration, why do the Fatman's etc. of the world
promote it?

Re: the Aerostar I believe it is a strut type suspension which won't
work in my installation.

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

Wish wrote:


'Cause they're cheap, easy to find, easy to find parts for, did I
mention cheap
?  They have a decent and compact SLA design instead of the strut front
ends
that most vehicles are using these days ... and the street rodders that
have
the light vehicles really took to them, that means LOTS of aftermarket
support
from that side of things, and some pretty beefy components are available
...
besides I don't think many of them are using the brakes from the II,
just the
front sub frame and suspension components ... (not actually the clip as
the
clip is fenders and such too and who wants that ? :)

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

From: "InkDezJim" <inkdezjim email.msn.com>
Subject: 72 302, unknown solenoid
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 05:37:50 -0600

Hey guys. Yes, still alive and reading as much as I can, just busy with
life. I have a stumper here.
I bought a 72 F-100 2WD a few months ago. I bought it for the solidness of
the body and to use as a general truck while I finish my 69. It is an
Explorer with a 302 C4, AC, PS. After much hassle getting it running, I
drove it back from Greensboro, NC to Nashville, TN. Upon getting back, I was
going to invest in a quick valve job. The inside of the rocker valley was so
caked up with dried, hard crud, not goo, that I pulled the engine. I tore
down the bottom, and all the bearings were down to copper. All oil passages
were plugged. It took 5 times in the parts washer plus several cans of carb
cleaner, some gun cleaning brushes and about 2 hours with a pressure washer
to open them all up.

Well, it is all rebuilt and back together, and here is the real question.
When dismantling it, there was some form of unknown solenoid for vacuum that
no one has been able to identify for me. It appears to be factory. It was
mounted to the back, top corner of the passenger-side valve cover, on a nice
special little stud that replaces the normal valve cover bolt. It has a
simple in and out fitting for vacuum, neither of which was hooked to
anything. The power for the solenoid uses a brown wire that comes from the
fire wall, which is switched power. I have traced this into the wiring
harness and it appears to be a factory wire, but I have not determined
anything further about what circuit it is tied to. the ground side of the
solenoid had a long wire that was dangling free down around the
transmission, and ends in a round molded rubber plug about an inch in
diameter that has a single-post femal socket inside. The outside of the wire
for about 6 inches from the plug is insulated with woven material like it is
normally in a hot environment.

Can anyone tell me anything about what this is, its purpose, or anything? I
have not been able to find any reference to it anywhere so far. I am curious
because everything appears to be a factory installation on it.

Jim Elliott
'69 F-100 2WD (the eternal project)
'72 F-100 2WD (hopefully NOT an eternal project)




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

From: Ford4WDSuprCab79 aol.com
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 07:48:10 EST
Subject: For Sale:'79 F-150 S/C 4x4 & 460 kit

For Sale:

1979 F-150 XLT Supercab 4x4
Approx: 109,000 Miles

Body is decent for a 20  year old truck. Not "spotless" by any means, but
good. Bed floor is the usual. (Appears underbody had been treated with
"Z-bart" undercoating at some point).

351M V-8
New main bearing installed, new oil pump, new fuel pump.
Runs strong.

C-6 Automatic

Front and Rear leaf springs

31" tires, 70% tread

New brake pads, shoes, front calipers, and rear wheel cylinders

(Misc. extra parts to go too. Sliding rear window, tail lights, etc.)

460 conversion "KIT" for your installation project Includes:

- NOS Ford 460 bare block
- '77 460 (complete)
- rear sump oil pan, pick-up, support bolt
- 460 "van" alternator bracket
- 460 "truck" exhaust manifolds
- L&L 460 motor mounts

Price: $2200.00

Interested parties should email me privately. I intend to list it locally if
no one here is interested.

Dale Frenz
Columbus OH

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

From: "Dave Emerick" <djemerick hotmail.com>
Subject: Steering (Again!)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:32:41 EST

Hi all.....

I asked over the weekend, but received no response....so I'll ask again !

Does anyone have any diagrams of the '78/79 F250 4x4 steering set-up?
My two Ford truck manuals show nothing...

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.


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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:32:20 -0600
Subject: Re: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> Owner says that it has low oil pressure, so needs a new oil pump.  Is there
> anyway to verify that its the oil pump without the expense of changing it?
> Is there anything else with the 400 modified that could cause low oil
> pressure that we haven't thought of?

Any engine: worn out main bearings can cause low oil pressure. Water in the
oil can cause low oil pressure. Low viscosity oil can cause low oil
pressure.

-- John
jlagrone ford-trucks.com     <]:-) <]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)<]:-)
1979 F150 Custom, Long Wide Bed, Regular Cab, 351M, C6 (Henry)
http://www.ford-trucks.com/jlagrone/henry.home.htm
Dearborn iron rules!!!!


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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:26:15 -0500
From: Ken Payne <kpayne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Re: What's wrong

At 10:33 PM 10/30/00, you wrote:
>Been searching for bed caps to fit 1969 F100 .   When I look at
>FORD-TRUCKS online store there is no description or price????
>Tom B

We temporarily removed a couple of product sections because
the distributor who was supplying those parts was having
problems fulfilling some of our orders.  Rather than have
any more problems or upset customers, I dropped them until
I can find a replacement.  Right now, only items we can keep
in stock are listed.

Ken Payne



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

From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
Subject: Re: drive shaft
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:30:01 -0800

Have one built at a driveline shop.   Measure from the front axle yoke to
the transfer case yoke at a normal loaded height.   This will give them an
idea of where to start.
Jason
'69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
'96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke
"As fast as necessary, as slow as possible"



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

From: "Don Thurlow" <don.thurlow greenbaynet.com>
Subject: Re: drive shaft
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:26:18 -0600

I think if you get a drive shaft from a f-150/250 long bed a drive line shop
can cut it for you for your size.  It will probably be cheaper then getting
one made.

-Don Thurlow

> Have one built at a driveline shop.   Measure from the front axle yoke to
> the transfer case yoke at a normal loaded height.   This will give them an
> idea of where to start.
> Jason
> '69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
> '96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke
> "As fast as necessary, as slow as possible"
>
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

From: Brazzadog aol.com
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:32:42 EST
Subject: Re: Micarta Carb Spacer

Great info, thanks.

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

> From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
>  Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:29:02 -0800
>
>  Micarta is used for all manner of applications but most are where a solid,
>  stable base is needed for spacers or non conductive forms for holding
parts.
>  They are all pretty stable but there are special types for special jobs.
>  For a carb spacer I would venture that almost any that you find will be
>  adequate.  They vary in density, number of layers per inch etc. and also
the
>  type of resin used to give them less porosity etc..  BTW, porosity as
>  defined here is extremely low in all cases but some applications require
>  extremely stable material and it can be found in one of the Micarta types ....


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.