Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list 61-79-list); Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:07:19 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:07:19 -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 #350
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 Sun, 26 Nov 2000 Volume: 2000  Issue: 350

In This Issue:
Re: D9VE- Head question
Re: 79 Bronco drive shaft Question
Re: alum welding
Re: 81 1-ton engine
Re: paint questions
Re: 351 HELP
Re: Subject: Looking for 351 info!!!
Re: Looking for 351 info!!!
re 67-72 F-100 and F-500 cabs interchange?
Re: 351 HELP
Re: Looking for 351 info!!!
Re: 65 Econoline P/U
Re: wheels
Re: 65 Econoline P/U
Re: wheels
Re: alum welding
Re: Yet another reason I drive old vehicles...
Retrospective Thanks: starter problem
Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?
Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?

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

From: "Jason and Kathy" <kendrick mddc.com>
Subject: Re: D9VE- Head question
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 21:39:54 -0600


Bob wrote:


> Because D means "seventies" right?

Yes

And you're saying the D0 is low
> compression?

No. The C9 and DO castings are high compression units. D9 heads would be low
compression units.

Jason Kendrick


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

Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 22:42:26 -0500
From: James Oxley <luxjo thecore.com>
Subject: Re: 79 Bronco drive shaft Question



Bob wrote:
>
> Anyone know if the rear drive shaft from a 79 Bronco will fit the front end,
> baring the length of course.  (I know the drive shaft will have to be
> shortened)  I'm trying to get the front drive shaft to drop down over the
> C6's cross member, and I was hoping the dual cardigan might give me the
> extra length needed before the drop down to the axle.
>

It should fit, only thing might be a 1310 joint on D44 flange. I know
78's were all 1310's for driveshafts and 79's should be all 1330, but I
seem to remember a 1310/1330 combo joint on some 79 front diff's U's,
might have been early 79's. Front shafts should be CV already though. I
got a HD shaft from six states a while ago that had very HD, small dia
tube to help with clearance.

                                       OX

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

From: canzus seanet.com
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 20:09:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: alum welding

At 07:56 AM 26:11:2000 -0700, Richard Boyce wrote:
>The process you all are refering to with the propane torch is brazing. With
>MIG andTIG welding a cover gas is required, but the original method of
>welding alum. was with plain old oxy/acet.This is still a viable method
>today if one wants to take the time to learn it.
>                         Richard

I was taught using Hydrogen, it's much cleaner burning
than acetalene, so is propane for that matter...

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: canzus seanet.com
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 20:09:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: 81 1-ton engine

At 11:32 AM 26:11:2000 -0500, Gary L. Perry wrote:
>
>Am looking at a one-ton with a 5.8  "E" engine in it. Owner says 351 C. I
was thinking they did not have this engine by 81.
>5.8 is right for 351 size. Has fairly wide valve covers. What you guys
think, is it a "C". Supposedly only 69,000 miles on it, that is what speedo
says. Good looking for 81. Has long 12ft. bed on it that has electic
hydro-dump. It won't dump with a full load owner says. I've heard the
electrics aren't that strong or fast. He's asking $5,000. No radio, basic
heater, no tilt-wheel, basic work truck. Frame-mount gas tank. Too much?
Need some opinions here.
>                               Thanks,        "G"

It's prolly an "M"...

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: Re: paint questions
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 22:08:45 -0600


IMO, engine paint should be fine on an AC compressor. I have painted a few pulleys with engine paint as well, and they held up just fine. The part of the pulley that the belt actually touches is worn away to bare metal, but the rest of it still looks nice.

Garrett www.1966ford.com



 ----- Original Message -----
 From: Negative Image
 To: CLASSIC-COUGARS egroups.com ; ford truck list
 Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 2:48 PM
 Subject: [61-79-list] paint questions


 does anyone know if you can use engine paint on air conditioner
 compressors? also, will pulleys (the metal parts) be painted with engine
 paint and actually last?

 --
 --------------
 Andrew Rolfsen
 --------------
 1962 Ford F100 Flare Side  Resto-mod 351c
 1967 Plymouth Fury III   Forsale   318
 1968 Mercury Cougar   hers   302
 1978 Ford econoline 150  mine   351w




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

From: "PitStop Performance" <thepitstop hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: 351 HELP
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 22:26:27 -0600


OK, here is anonther question... I was looking through www.edelbrock.com for
intakes and heads for the 351C. No heads but several intakes. Anyway, one
intake they have listed for the 351C states that it only works on YATES
heads!?!? So, are there Yates head for the 352C AND the 351W???

Anyway, I guess I will start searching swap meets and the Internet for a set
of aluminum 351C heads. Let me know if anyone here finds a set.

Thanks!!
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://explorer.msn.com


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

Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 21:12:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Dan Lee <danlee_58 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Subject: Looking for 351 info!!!

I checked out that website. Some interesting data
there, but I have some comments to make.

The Aussie heads flow great at 3500 RPM. This is fine
for a street engine, or a tow vehicle. The downside is
the closed chamber will produce 11:1 CR with a flattop
piston. That may be OK in Australia where they can get
100 Octane gas, but here with 92 Octane, it will make
a great popcorn machine. If you are not going for
towing or RV use and you want high horsepower at 6000
RPM, then nothing beats the 4V Cleveland head. I have
'72 open chambered heads on a 400w/flattops
(10.2:1CR), w/Crane roller rockers (Milodon Chrome
covers) and a Crane H 278-2 (278i/290e) cam. I can
leave as much rubber on the line as I care to, but
above 3000 RPM when the cam and heads start to work
the power is awesome.

My recommendation for a tow/RV engine is a 400 with
stock heads (except for hardened valve seats), flattop
pistons (9:1CR), Edelbrock Performer Manifold,
Edelbrock 650 CFM carb, a mild cam, headers(hard to
find), and a decent ignition.

BTW, I just purchased Drag200 and Dyno2000 from Motion
Software(www.motionsoftware.com). When I get it, I
will try to simulate my motor and my truck to see what
it will do on the dyno and on the track.

Dan Lee
'53 F100
400C-4V


>Date: 25 Nov 00 12:23:21 PST
>from: Ryan Sturz <68classic usa.net
>Subject: Looking for 351 info!!!

>Check out this website for flow characteristics of
>different Cleveland heads:
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.waldens.com/fmotorsp.htm


>Many folks I've talked to seem to prefer the 2V head
>over the 4V head because of the alleged superiority
of >the 2V heads under 3.500 rpm where an average
>street engine will normally operate.  On the other
>hand, the burn characteristics of the closed chamber
>head are far superior to those of the 2V
>head.  That's where the 2V, closed chamber Aussie
head >comes in.  The problem with the Aussie head is
it's >availability, I've known a company in L.A. who
>used to import them but they have since gone out of
>business.  Personally, I don't think the hunt for the
>Aussie heads is worth it.  The loss of low end
>torque of the 4V is, IMHO, negligible over the 2V
port >size.  However, the even smaller port size makes
the >Windsor superior to the Cleveland in towing
>applications (read: how do you want to use your
>truck?).

>Now to the differences of the Cleveland 2V and 4V:
>the exhaust manifolds and intakes are all different.
>The push rods are the same, the rockers are a
>little different, the 2vs have an aluminum pivot, the
>4vs are steel.  I believe that some of the 4Vs were
>even adjustable from the factory. Crane
>makes a converson kit (cost about $50) to let you add
>adjustable rockers. However, with this kit and roller
>rockers the stock and many aftermarket valve
>covers will not fit.  Moroso tall covers will
>definitely work.  With flat top
>pistons, the closed chambers (1970 only) will give
you >approx. 11 to 1 CR with a 1970 motor.  Later
motors >used different pistons, some were pop-ups.
>Last year I was able to drive a 1970 Cleveland 4V -
>powered Cougar for a couple of weeks and it was hard
>to take off without chirping the tires. If the choice
>were mine I would choose the 4V over the 2V because
of >it's high-end flow capabilities, the closed
combustion >chambers, and because, with the Cougar, I
could not >confirm the sluggish response off the line
2V
>proponents claim the 4Vs have.

>Regards,

>Ryan in SoCal


                > If I use iron heads are 2V heads
better than 4V heads for a
                torque/street
                > engine? What about the Aussie 2V
heads? Where can you even find them?
                Do
                > they require special intakes?







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://shopping.yahoo.com/

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

From: "Gary" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for 351 info!!!
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:16:23 -0800

The biggest problem I had with the "Stock" 4v cleveland in my 5000#, 4x4 van
was that I was using a stock close ratio c-6 with stock converter.  The
engine had lots of guts once I got it wound up a little bit but from idle it
really had a sag in it that was irritating.  If you put that engine in a
similar vehicle with a wide ratio C-6 or 4 speed manual it would have been a
lot of fun :-)

The C-6 loads the engine right off idle so it has no chance to get up even
close to it's sweet  spot in the rpm range but if you use a higher stall
converter then you will eat more gas (which makes the wide ratio very
desireable).  You have to pick what you want to sacrifice with such a set
up.

As some have done, you can put those really cool heads on a later model 400
and put in the proper cam to make it work well and you will have a real
winner.  The stock 351 size and camming doesn't flow enough air at low
speeds to make any power but the longer stroke of the 400 is reported to
make a significant difference in the low speed perfomance.

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

> > > If I use iron heads are 2V heads better than 4V heads for a
torque/street
> > > engine?



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

From: "Jon Purut" <jcpurut earthlink.net>
Subject: re 67-72 F-100 and F-500 cabs interchange?
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:33:13 -0500

Stu, from what I have been able to see from my junk yard excursions the cabs
do not interchange. The frame rails are still 34 inches wide but the cab
floorpan is more like the pre 65 f series style.

I believe the reason for this is the f500 and f600 use the solid axle up
front. The solid axle required the use of the older style steering box. The
style where the shaft passes through the frame and the column goes up
through the floor. I will have pictures of the two styles of boxes on my web
site hopefully in the next few days.

Cab corners, doors, glass, interior pieces should interchange. Basically
anything above the floorpan but not the dash.

Also thanks for the compliments on my site. I appreciate it. I think my
little girl is going to be a gear head like her dad. She is 19 months old
now and her favorite word is "bus". She gets excited and says it over and
over when one drives by.

Jon E. Purut
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.nbci.com/Chelley



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

Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 23:28:57 -0800
From: dave Prasse <burgess4 gte.net>
Subject: Re: 351 HELP

Hey PitStop ,


PitStop Performance wrote:
>
> OK, here is anonther question... I was looking through www.edelbrock.com for
> intakes and heads for the 351C. No heads but several intakes. Anyway, one
> intake they have listed for the 351C states that it only works on YATES
> heads!?!? So, are there Yates head for the 352C AND the 351W???

The NASCAR block comes in either W or C deck heigth .
Maybe that is what they mean ... the NASCAR block w/C deck ?

Did YATES manufacture the alum. C heads Ford used to sell ?
They were full C style heads , but the ports were totally different
than stock C heads .

>
> Anyway, I guess I will start searching swap meets and the Internet for a set
> of aluminum 351C heads. Let me know if anyone here finds a set.

Sure will ... I'd like a set of cast 4v heads to add to my "to do" pile.

dave Prasse

>
> Thanks!!
> _____________________________________________________________________________________
> Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://explorer.msn.com
>
> =============================================================
> To  unsubscribe:   www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.

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

Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 23:38:14 -0800
From: dave Prasse <burgess4 gte.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for 351 info!!!

Hi Gary ,

I thought  part of this 351C project was to mate it to an AOD tranny.

That first gear ought to get a 4v up and going . My current
"farm pick up" is actually a '84 Mercury Colony Park wagon .
Kids call it the "Griswold Cruiser" It looks just like Clarks
car in Lampoons VACATION- Wally World ... any way , that car has a tired
302 under hood . I have a 351C shortblock just waiting for 4v heads ...
With the stock 3.25 gears , it should be a "fun wagon"

daveP

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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:50:47 -0500
From: Don Haring <haring fedora.net>
Subject: Re: 65 Econoline P/U

Isaiah <punkerbat vbe.com> said:
>looking at a 1965 Ford Econoline pickup that has come up for sale again
>here in town.  I went and looked at it the first time it was for sale,
>and took a ride in it...but then I could not afford it.  It has come up
>for sale again and the owner has installed a different engine (sign says
>its a "306" and there used to be a 170? in there) and a different trans
>(now a "C-4 auto tranny" used to be a 3-speed) and also a larger rear
>end (that came out of the same van the C-4 tranny came out of).  I guess
>those two came out of a mid-70s long box econoline according to the
>current owner.  The engine has 70,000 miles on it but doesn't burn any
>oil or have any leaks...neither does the tranny.  Brakes are good and
>recently redone, and the tranny works flawlessly.  Its a nice ride and
>rather quiet also....the one thing it does need is a king pin on the
>passengers side.  I haven't had to do a king pin yet (even on a VW) but
>I'm sure that I could do it....is it a hard/time consuming thing?  Where
>could I get another king pin for it?  or...are there kits of sorts for
>this kind of thing?

I assume the "306" is either a mistake or a bored-out 302. A 302 is a
common Ford V8, but I don't know what bore would make it a 306. I do know
that a 302 is a near bolt-in (for the undaunted) using the heavy duty
crossmember that some 240 I-6 trucks had.

King pins will only run you $30 a set, but they are difficult to install
yourself. If you are competant, you can drop the axle out yourself and take
it to a machine shop where a king pin job should run $200-400. That sounds
high, but only because the intial price of the whole truck is so low.


>It will also need a new tail gate as the current
>one is kind of rusty/crusty... I'll need that before I slap paint onto it.

You will probably not find another tailgate. If you do, it will likely cost
about $500 because they are in great demand with Econoline owners. Repair
what you have. Repair panels are available for many parts of the truck if
there are other rusted parts. Check all the lower panels, front and back,
for signs of rust.


>The truck can be seen at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.luckyboys.com/isaiah/65.htm  He says
>$1,000 and it can be mine.  Is this a good deal?

Yes, buy it. It's a cool truck, and assuming the owner did the conversion
correctly, you have some serious work out of the way. Buy it now and deal
with any problems as they come. :)  Looks like it currently has a
mismatched set of wheels. Those 5-lug steel wheels are easy to find in a
junkyard and there are tons of options for aftermarket wheels for that size
and bolt pattern. If you have money left over, I would like a set of chrome
reversed steel wheels for my van. Order now and they will get here by
Christmas!

PS: Remember, from the guys at "Rolls and Pleats" (a rod and custom mag
from France)-- "Primer is Finer, Beater is Neater". Also, there is an
Econoline mailing list at EGroups called "earlyeconolines". Not that the
info you get here isn't great, but it never hurts to get more input.

-don

--
Don Haring, Jr.
Design and Illustration | Philadelphia, PA
215-844-8095



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

From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: wheels
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:25:44 -0600

Ok, thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Jason Derra
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 6:21 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: wheels

The bolt pattern on the new Super Duties are slightly different.  Look at 97
and older Heavy Duty 250s and 350s.
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.



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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:24:11 -0600
Subject: Re: 429/460 genesis
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> At 08:35 PM 11/21/00 -0500, you wrote:
> I think I erred a little here. The Buick, Olds, and Pontiac V8s were new in
> 1967, but I think they were only 430 cubes then. I think the 455 versions
> and the Chevy 454 showed up in 1971 when compression dropped.
>
>
> Just a little. The 454 was definitely around in 1970 (I think that was the
> 1st year,) as that was the year of my personal favorite muscle car (sorry
> guys) the 1970 Chevelle 454 SS.
>
> Here's the scoop from my book American Supercar, by Roger Huntington, HP
> Books; beginning year is first year I could find a reference to that
> engine, displacement upgrades are the first year the engine was put in a
> mid-size car (Torino or Chevelle size)
>
> Pontiac: had 326, 389 pre 1965; 400 started in 1967 (extensively reworked
> version of 389); 455 in 71.
>
> Olds: 330 (1963-4), 400 (1965), 455 in 70
>
> Buick: old 401 (nailhead) ended 1966, new 400 started 1967; 455 in 70
>
> Chevy: 396 started 1965.5; 427 in 1968; 454 in 70
>
>        Ford: 429 (385 series) started 1968 (in 1969 model full-size cars,
> started in 1970 in Torinos)  1970 is first year 460 is listed as an option
> for  trucks in my Haynes Techbook on Ford engines.
>
>
> 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

Sorry, George, there are still some errors. We owned a 1966 Buick Wildcat
with a 401. It was not the biggest engine available that year. The biggest
was a 425. It was the same engine as the 401 with a bigger bore. 455 in a 70
Olds is correct. My uncle owns one still, though it burned in a house fire.
I think your book may be referring to muscle car engines, not luxury cars
where the big cubes lived.

-- 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: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:34:43 -0600
Subject: Re: Timing belt
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> If you guys tell me the new modular engines actually do have muffler
> bearings I'm going to scream....:-) (wouldn't surprise me in the
> least...timing belts, plastic intakes, Engine oil pumps driven by the
> transmission...but only in drive.... :-))

I guess when I can''t get parts for my current transportation, I'll either
walk or take the bus. Too much plastic....

-- 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: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:46:36 -0600
Subject: Re: paint questions
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> does anyone know if you can use engine paint on air conditioner
> compressors?

Sure.

also, will pulleys (the metal parts) be painted with engine
> paint and actually last?

Not where the belts run. Otherwise it should stay on just fine. All of my
pulleys are painted....

-- 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: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:49:42 -0600
Subject: Re: alum welding
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

>  I was taught using Hydrogen, it's much cleaner burning
> than acetalene, so is propane for that matter...

Hydrogen is the most explosive gas in the universe. Remember the Hindenberg.
Be careful kiddies...

-- 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: "Southerland, Rich" <rsouther alldata.com>
Subject: Re: 65 Econoline P/U
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 07:06:04 -0800

It has come up
>for sale again and the owner has installed a different engine (sign says
>its a "306" and there used to be a 170? in there) and a different trans
>(now a "C-4 auto tranny" used to be a 3-speed) and also a larger rear
>end (that came out of the same van the C-4 tranny came out of).  I guess
>those two came out of a mid-70s long box econoline according to the
>current owner.

Could be a 300-6 cylinder?  Sounds like a cool truck!

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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 07:26:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Kordik <skordik yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: wheels

The 99 and older E250 and E350s should work also.


> The bolt pattern on the new Super Duties are
> slightly different.  Look at 97
> and older Heavy Duty 250s and 350s.
> Jason
> '69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
> '96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke
> "As fast as necessary, as slow as possible"
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://shopping.yahoo.com/

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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:15:14 EST
Subject: Re: alum welding


In a message dated 11/27/2000 6:51:24 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jlagrone ford-trucks.com writes:


>

Actually the hindinberg exploded do to the fact that they used an aluminum
powder on the surface for weather proofing ( I think, coulda been for making
the bags air tight, this part is hazy) Any how, aluminum powder is rocket
fuel, and being metallic, was extremely susceptible to static electricity,
AKA St. Elmos Fire.  Also, Hydrogen burns VERY fast, most of the flames in
that disaster were from the diesel engines used to drive the propellers.

Darrell & Tweety



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

From: "Southerland, Rich" <rsouther alldata.com>
Subject: Re: Yet another reason I drive old vehicles...
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:28:27 -0800

I am one of the poster children for being thrifty, so don't think for a
minute I didn't try to buy the pads elsewhere.  There was a design change
for '99 and the only source at the present time is OEM.  Most parts store
have listings for '99, but they are incorrect.

Problem is that someone (parts) assumes that '99 must be the same as '98 and
while that may usually be true, it isn't here. Couple that with the fact
that there isn't a parts store within 50 miles of her house, we couldn't
afford for them to not be the right ones.

I did find out our company has a wholesale account with the dealer, so I got
a $67 "rebate" on the pair.

Her friend also has a '99 and she has already racked up 55K on hers (she's a
realtor) and she paid $700 at the dealer for front and rear pads and turn 4
rotors!

FTE content: Paid $30 each for new rear drums for my '77 E150!

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim and Pam Allgire [mailto:tim-pam williams-net.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:07 PM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Yet another reason I drive old vehicles...


that was your first mistake- going to the  dealership for parts. the local
parts store could have got you out cheaper & got just as  good  qaulity of
parts.
-----Original Message-----
From: Southerland, Rich <rsouther alldata.com>
To: 'ford list' <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Date: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 1:22 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Yet another reason I drive old vehicles...


>Goin' to Grandmas house for the holiday.  She has a '99 Jeep Grand
Cherokee.
>Uses it for business and lives in the hills, so at 35K, it's time for
>brakes.  Just got back from a visit with my smiling Daimler/Chrysler
>counterperson and after plunking down $254.29, I walked (limped, really)
>away with TWO sets of brake pads.  That's it.  $250 just for pads.  Glad
>it's not me paying for it!
>
>FTE content: Drove my '77 E150 (which I could replace practically every
>brake component on the truck for that $250) to pick up the parts
>
>=============================================================
>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.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:33:27 -0800
From: Clare Waterman-Storer <waterman scripps.edu>
Subject: Retrospective Thanks: starter problem

Well the starter died on ol "Bigheavy" (71 f250) last Wed when I was picking up
a load of firewood.  After taking a look at it,  I realized that the header was
going to have to come off in order for me to replace the starter.  I went
straight to the parts store and got some PB-Blaster and started spraying and
tapping on the bolts.  Had it towed home (a heck of a way to get your firewood
delivered!!), and did this spraying and tapping ritual twice a day for four days
straight.  Lo and behold all eight bolts loosened right up without a fight or a
crack and I had the starter swapped in less than an hour and a half yesterday!
I never would have known to engage in this ritual had it not been for the
previous discussions on this list!

Moral of the story-  read the list even when it doesn't apply to your current
problem because you never know when the knowledge of the gurus might come in
handy!

Thanks again!

Clare


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



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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 16:58:47 GMT
Subject: Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?

>I once put a Ch*** together when I was a kid with no knowledge but lots of
>enthusiasm and used a 3' pipe to "torque" those rod bolts so the dang things

>wouldn't come off, ever, by golley! :-)
>

But Gary, isn't that what the book lists ?

"Tighten it up til it twists off, then back it off a half a turn" ?

;)
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

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

From: "Bill Beyer" <bbeyer pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 09:04:25 -0800

I always heard it was tighten it up 'til it strips then back it off half a
turn but I'm sure either way works.

/// Friends help you move...Real friends help you move bodies \\

----- Original Message -----
From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 8:58 AM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?


>
> But Gary, isn't that what the book lists ?
>
> "Tighten it up til it twists off, then back it off a half a turn" ?
>




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

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:56:38 -0600
Subject: Re: alum welding/Hindenburg
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> Actually the hindinberg exploded do to the fact that they used an aluminum
> powder on the surface for weather proofing ( I think, coulda been for making
> the bags air tight, this part is hazy) Any how, aluminum powder is rocket
> fuel, and being metallic, was extremely susceptible to static electricity,
> AKA St. Elmos Fire.  Also, Hydrogen burns VERY fast, most of the flames in
> that disaster were from the diesel engines used to drive the propellers.

The initial explosion was from the Hydrogen. They always used Helium after
that. A little more expensive, but totally inert. Ever do the electrolysis
experiment to capture a couple of cc's of H in a test tube, then ignite it?
Big pop for a small amount of gas. Over do it and you will explode the test
tube. Trust me, if you aren't trained to use Hydrogen, leave it alone.

A cigarette or any other open flame above a charging battery will do the
same thing due to Hydrogen gas emission. Hello plastic surgery...

-- 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: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:00:45 -0600
Subject: Re: Engine Assembly Problems- Advice?
From: "John LaGrone" <jlagrone ford-trucks.com>

> But Gary, isn't that what the book lists ?
>
> "Tighten it up til it twists off, then back it off a half a turn" ? ....


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.