Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:46:45 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:46:45 -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 #319
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, 31 Oct 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 319

In This Issue:
Subject: Re: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified/low oil press
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Bottom tabs on 78 Bumper
Re: Steering (Again!)
Q-jet carbs for fords
Re: slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: drive shaft
Re: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified
Re: E-Brake cable for '78
Re: Antifreeze in Cab
Re: Trailer Special or not?
Re: cast iron header manifolds for FE
Re: 56 Ford in the Stable
Re: drive shaft
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Re: drive shaft/universal
Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
oil spitting exhaust
SWMBO
Re: oil spitting exhaust

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:07:16 -0600
From: "Don Yerhot" <DYERHOT nwhealth.edu>
Subject: Subject: Re: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified/low oil press

Cam bearings can also cause low oil pressure and are a mucher bigger PITA to change.

DonY
1965 F250 351W
1974 F100 351W

<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!!!!:>


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

From: "Dave Resch" <Dave.Resch sybase.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:47:49 -0700
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?

>From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
>
>Bill Beyer wrote:
>> Well I know that the manual takes a flywheel and
>> the auto takes a flexplate but I don't think there's
>> any difference on the other end of the crankshaft
>> where the balancer is. Never seen different
>> part #s for auto versus manual dampers.
>
>The one that came stock on my manual is about
>twice as thick and 3 times the weight of all the auto
>one's I've seen. Couldn't find any part numbers
>on any balancer of all the one's I've looked at. I
>assumed the balancer was bigger due to
>flywheel. I reused "man trans??" 351M
>balancer on my 400.

Yo Ox:

According to my local Ford dealer parts department, the 351M and 400 have
different balancers, but the balancers are not different for automatic or manual
transmission applications of the same engine.  The current 400 balancer part
number is D2AZ-6316-C and the 351M balancer part number is D5AZ-6316-A.

Ford lists the same flywheel and flex plate part numbers for both 351M and 400.
The flywheel part number is E5TZ-6375-H and the flex plate part number is
D1AZ-6375-A.  (Apparently the flywheel part was revised even after M-block
production ended in 1982.)

Dave R (M-block devotee)



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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:58:36 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?



Dave Resch wrote:
>
> >From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
> >
> >Bill Beyer wrote:
> >> Well I know that the manual takes a flywheel and
> >> the auto takes a flexplate but I don't think there's
> >> any difference on the other end of the crankshaft
> >> where the balancer is. Never seen different
> >> part #s for auto versus manual dampers.
> >
> >The one that came stock on my manual is about
> >twice as thick and 3 times the weight of all the auto
> >one's I've seen. Couldn't find any part numbers
> >on any balancer of all the one's I've looked at. I
> >assumed the balancer was bigger due to
> >flywheel. I reused "man trans??" 351M
> >balancer on my 400.
>
> Yo Ox:
>
> According to my local Ford dealer parts department, the 351M and 400 have
> different balancers, but the balancers are not different for automatic or manual
> transmission applications of the same engine.  The current 400 balancer part
> number is D2AZ-6316-C and the 351M balancer part number is D5AZ-6316-A.

So I guess my 400 is not very balanced right now :-)

                                     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)

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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 16:30:59 EST
Subject: Bottom tabs on 78 Bumper

I remember awhile back, someone asked what the holed tabs were for on the
bottom of their front bumper.  While tearing apart a 78 F-250, I stumbled on
the answer.  There are small strut braces that go from these hole to the
frame.  On this truck, its at the forward sway bar mounting hole.  Just
thought Id pass this along.

Darrell & Tweety

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:38:21 -0500
From: David Wadson <wadsond air.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Steering (Again!)

>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...

Which manuals are you referring to? The Ford factory shop manuals? Also,
what exactly are you interested in. I skimmed through my manual but it
doesn't have one complete diagram of an F250 4x4 setup - tends to have
multiple diagrams showing different areas  but no one complete diagram
showing the entire front end...


David Wadson - wadsond air.on.ca
"PS1" - 79 F100 ...ground into a million pieces.
"PS2" - 78 F100 ...currently alive and kicking.
"PS3" - 79 F150 4x4 ...now what have I gotten myself into...
Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada



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

From: "Ballinger" <ballingr sbmu.net>
Subject: Q-jet carbs for fords
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:02:33 -0600

>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
You will need an adapter, Mr Gasket makes one, it's open in the middle.  Get
about any pre '75 carb and put a kit in it(even a Ch*vy) I like the BCOP
carbs  because they are set up closer to what a Ford needs.  Manual trans is
no biggie, autos are a little more problematic.



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

From: SHill48337 aol.com
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:06:44 EST
Subject: Re: slop in front end  (this is getting expensive)

In a message dated 10/30/00 9:18:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
twistedhand hotmail.com writes:

<<     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.
 >>
Gear oil can get to the bearing area.  But you really need to pack those
bearings with grease.  I learned this in the school of hard knocks.  You can
pick up the socket at your local parts store for those nuts (some places rent
it).  Adjusting is easy, use the first nut to take out the excess clearance,
then use the spacer which has a pin in it and a tab to lock the first nut in
position.  Install the second nut to lock and immobilize the whole assembly.
Burt Hill Kennewick WA 1972 F-250 4x4 460

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

From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:41:36 -0500

Unfortunately, looks like Dave is right again on this balancer swap
question.  I guess I'll have to start looking around the "yardes" for one.
I was digging thru the enthusiasts site for more confirmation on the
non-interchangeability, and found plenty of supporting opinions.  Here's one
of the more disturbing ones:

"RE: 351m & 400m harmonic balancer"
As I have read before in these threads, there is no mixing the balancers on
these motors. All kinds of problems will get you. The 400 will run with the
351m balancer, the crank is much bigger and needs a counter weight that is
almost twice as big. You will shear distributor pins from backlash, you
won't idle well, the motor will not be easily set up,it will lope, some will
think it is the cam. But no cam gives this lope. Eventually the crank will
fail from the constant stress of backlash. If you are lucky and it doesn't
pull a distributor pin shard through the pump stressing the crank for even
earlier failure you'll get about 30,000 on it. Been there done that,
unfortunately.



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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:43:42 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?



Andersons wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, looks like Dave is right again on this balancer swap
> question.  I guess I'll have to start looking around the "yardes" for one.
> I was digging thru the enthusiasts site for more confirmation on the
> non-interchangeability, and found plenty of supporting opinions.  Here's one
> of the more disturbing ones:
>
> "RE: 351m & 400m harmonic balancer"
> As I have read before in these threads, there is no mixing the balancers on
> these motors. All kinds of problems will get you. The 400 will run with the
> 351m balancer, the crank is much bigger and needs a counter weight that is
> almost twice as big. You will shear distributor pins from backlash, you
> won't idle well, the motor will not be easily set up,it will lope, some will
> think it is the cam. But no cam gives this lope. Eventually the crank will
> fail from the constant stress of backlash. If you are lucky and it doesn't
> pull a distributor pin shard through the pump stressing the crank for even
> earlier failure you'll get about 30,000 on it. Been there done that,
> unfortunately.
>

What about 400 balancer on a 351M? I know I have the big one on my 400
now, but it was the stock one on my 351M. I know the guy who owned it
before me and he did not change anything on the truck. Guess I have to
start pulling PN's off all my M balancers.


                              OX

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

From: "Bob" <xavetarx home.com>
Subject: Re: drive shaft
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:55:56 -0500

I went to a local truck repair shop (Florig) and dropped off the duel
cardigan drive shaft to be lengthened 4 inches.  I also stopped at their
parts store, and picked up a pretty expensive spicer universal.  They had
(in stock) a universal that fit the 79 Bronco shaft, and a GM 14 bolt rear.
I'm looking to spend around $150 for both of these... not too bad

-bob-

a couple 79 Bronco's



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

From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: My F250 XLT 460 >>400 Modified
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:53:35 -0800

The 400 will bolt to the transmission and use the same starter but the flex
plate or flywheel is different as well as the engine mounts and most of the
peripheral gear, brackets and exhaust system.

This is one of the 335 series of engines and has this problem with many
miles on it as do many other engines due to bearing wear primarily.  In this
case though we also have the problem of valve seal break down and varnish
build up in the oil passages which can get into the pump and cause it to
sieze.  Since it runs and there is "some" pressure the pump is not seized
and is probably not the pressure problem either.  I personally have never
replaced a pump due to this, it is virtually always the bearing wear that
causes it.

Many people replace them hoping to improve the pressure and see a couple of
pounds improvement, others go to a high volume pump to make up for the
leakage around the bearings but now the crank is being scored by the hard
metals in the bearing backing because it still makes metal to metal contact
due to looseness etc...

Many on the list dissagree with me but I've salvaged several engines of this
type by installing new bearings on an old crank by hand polishing the crank
in the engine with engine in the truck.  If you can do it yourself you're
out about $60 for the effort plus another $20 for the pickup tube to the oil
pump.  I generally figure another 40-50k miles from such a repair but it
depends on the general condition of the engine so could be less but for a
day's work and less than $100 you get several more months of use out of it
and perhaps more.

If you are replacing a tired 460 I would go with another 460 or patch up the
one you have.  The work you are looking at with the 400 could be applied to
the 460 and give you a better deal with less side issues, many less side
issues and the 460 is a better all around truck engine as well anyway.
Going to the 400 is a demotion and the truck may reject the transplant :-)

Happily Totally Retired,
Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary :-)

> 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



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

From: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam williams-net.com>
Subject: Re: E-Brake cable for '78
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:25:09 -0500

I put a  cable on my 78 2X2 about 3 months ago.I got it at my local auto
parts store.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Sanders <ssand77 hotmail.com>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 10:56 AM
Subject: [61-79-list] E-Brake cable for '78


>I've been looking for quite some time now for a new E-Brake cable for my
'78
>F-150 4x4.  No one I've found carries a new cable from the pedal downward.
>Does anyone on the list know where I might find this animal?  I've tried
>Dennis Carpenter.  I thought that would be my best shot but they don't have
>that part available.  Of course it's discontinued at Ford.  Can anyone help
>me.
>
>Scott Sanders
>1978 F-150 4x4 Custom SWB
>ssand77 hotmail.com
>_________________________________________________________________________
>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.
>
>=============================================================
>To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
>Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

From: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam williams-net.com>
Subject: Re: Antifreeze in Cab
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:28:17 -0500

sounds like you have a leaky heater core.does the windshield also fog up
when you turn the defroster on ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary K. Tomas <puffknit hotmail.com>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 3:23 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Antifreeze in Cab


>First, thanks to all of you who responded to my question about the starter
>solenoid.  I ended up getting a new battery (the old battery was from
>Louisiana, and the problem started the very first night the temperature
>dropped into the 30's here in our new home in New Jersey, not enough CCAs I
>guess).
>
>Next, I offer my apologies to those of you who might view my questions as
>painfully boring and uninformed.  Usually I consult my old shop manuals
>first, but they're in storage.  And while I love my old truck, I'm cheap to
>a fault and don't trust most of the mechanics I've met (the Ragusas in
Baton
>Rouge were great, as well as Cesar from Auto Haus in Humble, TX).  So, you
>see, I value your guidance.
>
>Okay, it's a '65 F-100 and when I'm driving, antifreeze leaks onto the
floor
>of the cab.  What is it, and is it something I can fix myself?
>
>Thank you.
>_________________________________________________________________________
>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.
>
>=============================================================
>To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
>Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

From: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam williams-net.com>
Subject: Re: Trailer Special or not?
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:42:53 -0500

I have a 78 F-150 that is a trailer special & all it has to identify it is a
emblem on the tailgate that says trailer special.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Washburn <bruce9 flash.net>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Thursday, October 26, 2000 8:48 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Trailer Special or not?


>I have no idea, but I have a '70 F250 and would like to verify that it's a
>Camper Special. I'm assuming so since it doesn't have Ranger emblems and it
>has the compartment in the bed, 2 gas tanks, big engine, and all of that
>nice stuff
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
>[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Brian Johns
>Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 8:08 PM
>To: Truck List
>Subject: [61-79-list] Trailer Special or not?
>
>
>
>I am looking at a '76 F150 extended cab to buy.  The owner says it's a
>trailer special and pointed out where the emblem use to be on the tailgate.
>It has a 390 and auto transmission (guessing a C6).  I'm wondering, what is
>different about a trailer special and how do you verify it is one.
>
>Thanks,
>Brian
>
>
>=============================================================
>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: "Tim and Pam Allgire" <tim-pam williams-net.com>
Subject: Re: cast iron header manifolds for FE
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:51:14 -0500

if those headers are in good condition--they usually go for around $500.
-----Original Message-----
From: prices <prices mciworld.com>
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Saturday, October 28, 2000 10:30 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] 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
>=============================================================
>To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
>Please remove this footer when replying.
>


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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:11:56 -0800
From: Tim Bowman <tkbowman qwest.net>
Subject: Re: 56 Ford in the Stable

Steve:

Thanks for your input on the Aerostar option for a front end.  I stand
corrected on my observation about the strut assembly.  Given that I've
got a free Mustang II front end, am planning to upgrade the brakes, and
the enormous popularity of the conversion, I'll probably continue on
this path.  I'll keep my ear to the ground for a wrecked Aerostar that I
might pickup cheap as I'm certainly open to options.


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

Steve wrote:

>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...

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 08:05:47 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: drive shaft



Bob wrote:
>
> I went to a local truck repair shop (Florig) and dropped off the duel
> cardigan drive shaft to be lengthened 4 inches.  I also stopped at their
> parts store, and picked up a pretty expensive spicer universal.  They had
> (in stock) a universal that fit the 79 Bronco shaft, and a GM 14 bolt rear.
> I'm looking to spend around $150 for both of these... not too bad
>

I was told that Spicer does NOT make this joint even though they box it
and have a PN for it (1330/1350 combo joint I assume). I paid 50$ for
one also, but found this info out later. Sure enough the joint I bought
has none of the usual spicer markings in the end cap or cross. I was
told the Neapco would be a better choice since the spicer was an unkown.
I normally run spicer solids n everything, but the Neapco has held up
well so far.

                                            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)

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 08:11:36 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?

OK

Here is the PN I pulled off my 79, 351M auto balancer last night.
D5AE-AA. Not sure which one it is, but it is the smaller of the two. I
did not see the 6316 on it anywhere, but it sorta matches the
D5AZ-6316-A. Any comments dave??

                               OX

PS, still wondering why my 78 351M had 400 balancer on it for 10 years
with no problems and how it got on there??


--
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)

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

From: "Bob" <xavetarx home.com>
Subject: Re: drive shaft/universal
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:11:21 -0500

I put the joint in yesterday, and it was a little tight.  It didn't want to
squeeze into the ford's yolk so I sanded off a few thousandths from the
retaining clips.  The other end went into the rear perfectly.  If you want,
I can get the number off the box for you.  Same price as for the one you
purchased.
-bob-



I was told that Spicer does NOT make this joint even though they box it
and have a PN for it (1330/1350 combo joint I assume). I paid 50$ for
one also, but found this info out later. Sure enough the joint I bought
has none of the usual spicer markings in the end cap or cross. I was
told the Neapco would be a better choice since the spicer was an unkown.
I normally run spicer solids n everything, but the Neapco has held up
well so far.

                                            OX



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

From: "Dave Resch" <Dave.Resch sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:56:29 -0700
Subject: Re: 351M vs. 400- Same Harmonic Balancer?

>James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com> on 11/01/2000 06:11:36 AM
>
>Here is the PN I pulled off my 79, 351M
>auto balancer last night. D5AE-AA. Not
>sure which one it is, but it is the smaller
>of the two. I did not see the 6316 on it
>anywhere, but it sorta matches the
>D5AZ-6316-A. Any comments dave??

Yo Ox:

I've done a little more research on this.  Apparently, there was a truck
balancer part # D7TE-A or D7TE-BA used on M-blocks in trucks, but I haven't been
able to nail down the specific (351M or 400) engine application.  The D7TZ
replacement truck part was obsoleted on 03/18/99 and it doesn't cross-reference
to either of the other M-block balancer numbers (D2AZ or D5AZ).  It is possible
that the truck engines had some minor crankshaft balance modification that
allows either 351M or 400 to use a single truck balancer D7TE-A,BA.  This is
just a guess.

(BTW, the fourth character Z indicates a replacement part, where the fourth
character E represents the original production Engine engineering group part #.
Even though a Z part and an E part are functionally interchangeable, there may
be some revision present in the Z part that makes it slightly different from the
original E part.)

I also discovered that the 400 balancer part # D2AZ-C was obsoleted on 08/23/00.
The 351M balancer D5AZ-A is still in current production.

The part number you got from your 351M is from a car 351M (maybe the original
part on that engine), and based on the number, equivalent to the current
production replacement D5AZ-A part.

The middle numeric string (6316) is Ford's code for the part.  The prefix (D5AE)
and the suffix (AA) identify the application and engineering revision of the
part.  Often when marking parts, Ford omits the middle numeric code that
identifies what the part is and marks only the application-specific and revision
codes.

>PS, still wondering why my 78 351M had
>400 balancer on it for 10 years with no
>problems and how it got on there??

It may have been replaced by a PO who didn't know better.  Also, if you have the
rotating assembly balanced (which I'd recommend for any engine rebuild), any
variations in the dampers should be compensated for.

Offhand, and pending more research on this, I'd speculate that the 351M and 400
crankshafts had slightly different balance, but since they both use the same
flywheel and flex plate, the difference was apparently small enough to make it
up with the balancer alone.  I'd bet there are a lot of M-blocks out there w/
the wrong balancers on the front (especially 351Ms rebuilt as 400s) and their
integrity is probably only slightly compromised.  The difference might be small
enough to not have much adverse effect in the rpm range most of these engines
operate.

Dave R (M-block devotee)



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

From: "Randy Cannon" <rcannon ussynthetic.com>
Subject: oil spitting exhaust
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:09:19 -0700


Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Glacier
Hello-

I've noticed oily splatter marks on the sidewalk next to where I my park my
'79 f250 supercab 460.  It's obviously coming from the exhaust.  I'm curious
what the possible causes of this phenomenon might be?

Randy

PS- On a side note, I've learned a lot from subscribing to this list the
last few weeks- thanks.  I've also figured out most of the acronyms (IMHO,
POS, TIA, etc...), however I'm stumped as to the translation of SWMBO.



-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- File: Glacier Bkgrd.jpg



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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:18:52 EST
Subject: SWMBO


In a message dated 11/1/00 9:13:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
rcannon ussynthetic.com writes:


> however I'm stumped as to the translation of SWMBO.
>
>
>
>

That one had me too, its She who must be Obeyed, AKA, the Wife, AKA, the
girlfriend, and in some instances, I Imagine even mom would fit.

Darrell & Tweety



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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:30:38 -0600
Subject: Re: oil spitting exhaust
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> I've noticed oily splatter marks on the sidewalk next to where I my park my
> '79 f250 supercab 460.  It's obviously coming from the exhaust.  I'm curious
> what the possible causes of this phenomenon might be?
Randy,

When you run your engine, it produces water. With unleaded gasoline, your
exhaust pipes will get a black coating of soot (for lack of a better term).
As your engine warms up and in turn warms up the exhaust system, the water
turns to steam (actually stays steam). Some engines will run a stream of
water out the tail pipe, some don't. If your carb is too rich, the black
deposits will be heavier in your exhaust system. The water will wash these
deposits out, some will be picked up in the exhaust stream and sputtered
out. If your exhaust exits straight out at horizontal, the dispersion rate
probably scatters the spots so that you don't notice. But if your exhaust
turns down and you are on concrete, you will almost always get a black
splatter spot on your drive where you first crank the cold engine.

In short, some splatter is normal IMHO. Hope this helps.

-- 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: "Randy Cannon" <rcannon ussynthetic.com>
Subject: Re: oil spitting exhaust
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:40:17 -0700

thanks- I was worried it might be worse news than that.

-----Original Message-----
From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of John LaGrone
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 10:31 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: oil spitting exhaust


> I've noticed oily splatter marks on the sidewalk next to where I my park
my
> '79 f250 supercab 460.  It's obviously coming from the exhaust.  I'm
curious
> what the possible causes of this phenomenon might be?
Randy,

When you run your engine, it produces water. With unleaded gasoline, your
exhaust pipes will get a black coating of soot (for lack of a better term).
As your engine warms up and in turn warms up the exhaust system, the water
turns to steam (actually stays steam). Some engines will run a stream of
water out the tail pipe, some don't. If your carb is too rich, the black
deposits will be heavier in your exhaust system. The water will wash these
deposits out, some will be picked up in the exhaust stream and sputtered
out. If your exhaust exits straight out at horizontal, the dispersion rate
probably scatters the spots so that you don't notice. But if your exhaust
turns down and you are on concrete, you will almost always get a black
splatter spot on your drive where you first crank the cold engine.

In short, some splatter is normal IMHO. Hope this helps.

-- John
jlagrone ....


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.