Received: with LISTAR (v1.0.0; list 61-79-list); Sat, 20 Jan 2001 18:18:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 18:18:20 -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 V2001 #18
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 Fri, 19 Jan 2001 Volume: 2001  Issue: 018

In This Issue:
Re: Hi -boy or not
Re: Gasket sealer
Re: Gasket sealer
1979 Supercab cabs
Re: Ford 9"
Re: 73-79 F250s
Re: Gasket sealer
Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING
Re: carburetor troubles
Re: 73-79 F250's
Re: 1979 Supercab cabs
Re: Dyno Programs etc...was, 73-79 F250s
Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING
Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING
Re: 1979 Supercab cabs
Re: 73-79 F250s
Man I love my truck!!!

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

Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 16:19:39 -0600
From: Steve Schaefer <schaefer PLASTEKGROUP.COM>
Subject: Re: Hi -boy or not


How about a 77 F-250 Supercab with a 78 F-250 Camper Special 4x4 frame, 400 (mildly warmed over), C-6, 205, 4.10's  and 39's.  The truck weighs in at 7700 lbs, the trailer weighs in at 3800 lbs empty and the car
inside weighs in at a hefty 4500 lbs.  No problem what so ever towing (even in 100 degree heat through the mountains to Carlisle).

As for the 205 part times being mostly behind 4 spds, I have 5-6 205's that were connected to autos in the garage (no one ever needs a replacement).  As far as I know, the full times were 203's.

Steve S.
54 F-100
76 F-350 Crew cab dually
77 F-250 Supercab 4x4
79 Bronco
Handful of other Blue oval cars
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Shop/8663/

> If I had to own one truck and it had to be a 4x4 I would get a
> 78-79 F-350 or a F-250 SC (not sure if they made a 350 SC) 4x4  w/ C-6
> (w/biggg cooler and a temp gauge) and 4:10 gears.
> I would then stuff a very mild 460 in it, lift it enough for 33s drop
> the camper on,hook up the trailer and hit the road.


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

From: "Serian" <serian mailandnews.com>
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 18:14:05 -0500

> I've had extremely good luck everywhere I've used the
> Hi temp(redish orange) Silicone.  3M I believe, but it
> might be permatex.

I've had good luck with the Permatex hi-temp sensor
safe silicone RTV.  Good stuff - I've even used it to
seal the joints on the stovepipe off my woodstove with
good results.




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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 19:14:00 EST
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer


In a message dated 1/19/01 3:14:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
serian mailandnews.com writes:

<< I've had good luck with the Permatex hi-temp sensor
safe silicone RTV.  Good stuff - I've even used it to
seal the joints on the stovepipe off my woodstove with
good results.
 >>

Ive used this to seal a radiator that a buddy put a screwdriver through, held
a carb together that someone had stripped all the screws out, held the door
latch mechanism on a 65 Cuda with it.......  I dont go ANYWHERE without that
stuff.  I heard rumors that this is the stuff holding space station Mir
together.....

Darrell & Tweety

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

From: "FRITZ DOWE" <fdowe danet.net>
Subject: 1979 Supercab cabs
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 18:24:47 -0600


Hi to everyone on the list.

I am coming off of lurking mode to ask a question.  I was wondering if a
SuperCab from a two wheel drive will bolt right on to a four wheel drive
frame.  I found one that is a good candidate for repair (on two wheel drive
frame) to replace the decayed one on my four wheel drive frame (original
Wisconsin truck), but if I need to modify frame mounts, I think I'll look
for a different one.

Thanks in advance for your responses.

Fritz Dowe

1979 F150 4X4 460 C6
1979 F150 SuperCab 4X4 351M C6 (this years project)


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

From: "Andersons" <robertan cfw.com>
Subject: Re: Ford 9"
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 22:20:26 -0500


Join the club- I just went thru some major (for me) repairs to a 9" rear in
my 77 F150.  Was knocking bad at ceratin speeds, and I found the pinion yoke
nut was loose, which had caused the thing to eat up teh pinion pilot bearing
at the rear of the pinion shaft, and score up teh shaft.  If not for the
kind machinists at work, it would have cost much more than teh $50 for the
parts to repair.

Now, however, it has a kinda gear whine or hum sound at 50 MPH- not real
bad, but noticeable.  I understand this happens any time you do something
that even slightly afeects the mesh of the ring and pinion.  Still, hoping
for the best.  Wanted you to be aware of the excellent article on rebuilding
the 9" onteh FTE site, at
http://www.ford-trucks.com/articles/9inch/index.html

Good luck.

Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Sullivan <trendsetter4life yahoo.com>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 9:46 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: Ford 9"


>
> Thanks all for your help... I finally got it all pulled apart and found
out there
> was no gasket between 3rd memeber and axel ara just form a gasket wich
allowed it to
> sit in deeper then should have and wore down the splines on it causing it
to give
> way on me.  So now $99 a side for axels and $36 for spider gears and $25
for the
> install kit I am waiting for it to be shipped to my door so i can
reassemble thw
> whole thing abd be back on the road with the old girl.  Now Heres anther
question
> for the group.  The bearing at the end of the axel I am assuming those are
pressed
> on?  And any other helpfull hints for setting up this axel I am pretty
mechnically
> adept to, then again my buddy is a fordmechinc, but that is nnot saying
much I knoew
> more about this 9" then he does.  GUess He only gets the new toys work
on....thanks
> in advance for the help
>
>
> Chris
> 1979 F-150 4x4
> 1992 Wrangler
>
> =====
> With His head out the Sunroof and his heart in the right place, Plan B was
fool proof he headed off to her place. He yelled out his feelings amoung
other stuff, it was to much tequila or not quite enough.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
>


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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: 73-79 F250s
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 00:00:55 -0800


The 460 simply has more iron in it than any other stock, light truck engine
and has the potential to expand to larger cubes than any other without a lot
of fuss.  It also has a good oil system and cooling system design so that it
runs efficiently without a lot of fussing, just a good all around design :-)

I agree with the gang on the compression, keep it around 9:1 unless you are
building a cruiser.  If it's going to work for a living 10:1 may be too much
and if you are planning an econo-cruiser the cam will be too "Low speed"
efficient for high compression but if you want a loping engine and don't
mind having to rev it a bit then you can up the compression and open up the
cam to avoid spark knock.  That typically means running a little more cruise
rpm to keep the cam happy and if you have an auto it may mean a higher stall
converter.  As I've said many times "There ain't no free Lunch" :-)

--
Happily Retired (but broke)
Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

> > but it's not as tough an engine as the 385 series no matter
> what you do to
> it.
> What's your reason for this?  What makes the 429/460 tougher than the 400?
> Not trying to argue anything, just want your opinion.


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

From: GMontgo930 aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 00:33:26 EST
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer

In a message dated 01/19/01 6:14:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
serian mailandnews.com writes:

If what Ive used is the same stuff, I'd agree! Added plus is it's also a nice
shade of Ford Blue ;-)!

George M in Fl.

> I've had good luck with the Permatex hi-temp sensor
> safe silicone RTV.  Good stuff - I've even used it to
> seal the joints on the stovepipe off my woodstove with
> good results.
>
>





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

From: "Keith" <a2jkeith gci.net>
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 20:56:39 -0900


Gasket sealer, the best stuff out there is some stuff that is called "The
Right Stuff" kinda pricey, but , its high temp, and it takes a crowbar to
get it off. No worrying about leaking again. ever. Also new subject. I need
some advice in a trouble shoot here. I was pulling out of a parking lot
tonight in my 71 (F250 4x4 390) and all of a sudden the steering wheel
jerked to the right and locked on me, I couldnt steer. I let it go onto the
sidewalk, almost hitting a fence, and when I was just sitting there with the
engine running, my steering wheel was jerking violently side to side about 5
inches either way. Needless to say this episode scared the bejeebers out of
me. I didnt know what else to do, and not having my tools with me (sitting
at home, where I put a new clutch in roomates 83 F250 yesterday) I took out
my handy dandy Gerber and cut the power steering belt off. No more  jerking
when I started truck back up. I have a garrison style power assist on this
truck and am wondering if the thing finally got pissed off at me for all the
dirty names I have called it and tried to get revenge or if my power
steering pump may have gone out. If you have any ideas PLEASE get back to me
asap. Thanks alot
Keith and ~Clifford~


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

Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 06:08:15 -0500
From: Bill Logan <f10067 naxs.net>
Subject: Re: carburetor troubles


I got answers to my questions elsewhere; signing off the list for
now; contact me off list with follow-ups or other business;
thanks for the help.

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

From: "John Webster" <jwebster tnt21.com>
Subject: Re: 73-79 F250's
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 08:28:48 -0500

To throw in my humble two cents, the 460 was designed to be opened up with the cubic inch wars when it came out. This allows it the beef to be bored and stroked to well. If you want a stout street motor you need look no further. I've seen built 400's and they do make power, but; I run a '77 460 (so it has the large chamber heads) with mild port work, 8.5 compression, Comp Cams 268 bump stick, Edelbrock performer intake and 750 carb and lit with a Holley Annihilator ignition. The torque converter is stock at the moment and I'm turning 4:11's and 33's. I can fill up with horse *&%$ at a filling station and still pound on this truck without complaint. You don't think it would give enough power, let me know and I'll send you some pictures of a smoke show that will change your mind. I mud with two friends, same year trucks, one with a very hot 429 and the other a very built 460. One can only run on high test the other jumped to propane for the octane. Both amazing motors but you pay for the fun. I can use fuel from anywhere and to me that versatility is the most important.
Think hard on whichever way you go. As Gary said "there is no free lunch". Think about how you drive 90 to 95% of the time and base your choices on that, not the 5 to 10% of the testosterone. I can only say "Been there, done that, got the T-shirt" and I'm allot happier with my current motor.

John
'77 F150 4X4 466/C6/4:11's/33's




The 460 simply has more iron in it than any other stock, light truck engine
and has the potential to expand to larger cubes than any other without a lot
of fuss.  It also has a good oil system and cooling system design so that it
runs efficiently without a lot of fussing, just a good all around design :-)

I agree with the gang on the compression, keep it around 9:1 unless you are
building a cruiser.  If it's going to work for a living 10:1 may be too much
and if you are planning an econo-cruiser the cam will be too "Low speed"
efficient for high compression but if you want a loping engine and don't
mind having to rev it a bit then you can up the compression and open up the
cam to avoid spark knock.  That typically means running a little more cruise
rpm to keep the cam happy and if you have an auto it may mean a higher stall
converter.  As I've said many times "There ain't no free Lunch" :-)



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

From: "Jerry Summerall" <k7yvz qsl.net>
Subject: Re: 1979 Supercab cabs
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 07:47:16 -0700


I have a 79 2x4 supercab camper special(parts truck and restoring my 79 F250
4x4. Every thing will bolt right up. I even took the midship fuel tank out
of the 2x4, after grinding off riveted mounts, and my 4x4 frame had the
holes all ready to go for me. The only difference I found is the crossmember
between the motor mounts and of coarse the steering setup.

Anyone got "trailer special" emblems?

----- Original Message -----
From: FRITZ DOWE <fdowe danet.net>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 5:24 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] 1979 Supercab cabs


>
> Hi to everyone on the list.
>
> I am coming off of lurking mode to ask a question.  I was wondering if a
> SuperCab from a two wheel drive will bolt right on to a four wheel drive
> frame.  I found one that is a good candidate for repair (on two wheel
drive
> frame) to replace the decayed one on my four wheel drive frame (original
> Wisconsin truck), but if I need to modify frame mounts, I think I'll look
> for a different one.
>
> Thanks in advance for your responses.
>
> Fritz Dowe
>
> 1979 F150 4X4 460 C6
> 1979 F150 SuperCab 4X4 351M C6 (this years project)
>


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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Dyno Programs etc...was, 73-79 F250s
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 10:27:12 -0800


With the 460 you can have 400# of torque at 2000 rpm and no top end or you
can have moderatly less at 2000 and more top end but for towing I would
gladly sacrifice the top end and get all the torque at 2k you can get.  My
RV cam does this but sacrifices the top, really sacrifices it.  Some day I
will spring for a decent tach and see what it really does but just guessing
I'd say it won't budge past 4500 the way it's set up if you held it to the
floor but will spin the tires at 45 in second with 2.75 gears when it was
tuned decently.  I've let it fall apart now so it's not the brute it was but
still has plenty of punch.

Here's a little rule of thumb.....The Torque "Peak" is the point in the rpm
where the engine is running most efficiently.  Torque peak happens when the
engine is at maximum volumetric efficiency, that is where the cylinders are
being filled as much as the engine design is capabable of.  Depending on the
cam you use and other things as well (but mostly the cam) you can get this
to happen at very low rpm but it severely hampers the top end rpm range when
you do this.  Due to it's size and brute power, most opt for a more
compromising cam and still have "Enough" torque to do the job but.......the
harder it works, the lower you want to get this torqe peak for both torque
and economy.  Typically, high lift and short duraton cams are what you use
for this application.

I wouldn't trust those computer models too far, use common sense and proven
"Rules of Thumb" as a basis and the model as a way of, perhaps, learning a
little more about what those rules are.  Change one parameter in the cam for
instance and see what the model changes in the output.  The model is based
on real experience but computer tables don't always allow for all variations
so can't be completely trusted to tell the truth, at least as far as
"Actual" outputs might be.

Try this: change the lobe lift from .520 to .600 and nothing else and see
where the torque peak goes, then try changing the lobe separation from 110
to 114 or visa versa then the duration and then the overlap, each one at a
time and check the outcome.  Also compare roller cam ramp time to flat
tappet ramp time and see what just that change alone will do to the torque
curve etc....  This will give you a good over view of what to expect with
this or that cam comfiguration, again, because the tables are based on real
life experience and will reflect these traits fairly accurately.  Look for
the trend rather than the actual numbers.  Does it go here or go there when
I change this etc....

Most people who use these programs believe they will have the engine it says
but in reality, if you use them wisely, you will have a good tool to get you
in the "Range" that you want with the "Characteristics" that you want but
not necessarily with the exact power specs you expected.  Only tedious dyno
testing and adjusting can do that :-)

--
Happily Retired (but broke)
Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

> With an estimated almost 15,000lbs combined weight, its
> definetely going to
> be worked :^)
>
> simulation on the DynoJet with a mild setup (9:1), it shows a flat torque
> curve from about 1500 to 3500 (500 lb/ft).  At about 4500, it drops off
> considerably.  Horsepower peaks at about 4500 with 375 hp.


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

From: Aeroape82 aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 10:28:24 EST
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING

In a message dated 1/19/01 11:58:57 PM Central Standard Time,
a2jkeith gci.net writes:


> I have a garrison style power assist on this
> truck and am wondering if the thing finally got pissed off at me for all the
> dirty names I have called it and tried to get revenge or if my power
>

I would say this is probably the culprit I was a little luckier when mine
went.  Mine just ratched real bad in either direction.

Glenn NY

78 F250 (talk about projects and headaches)



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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Gasket sealer and POWER STEERING
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 10:35:05 -0800


The pump isn't likely to cause this but bad valving in the drag link or
steering box might and if it's a 4x4 the sudden lurch could be from locked
hubs and 4x4 etc..  The heavier the vehicle, especially in front the more
this will be apparent.  I notice on my 8600 gvw with plow on the front I
can't got 2 feet on pavement without serious feed back where the bronco was
noticeable but not as violent.

If the problem were simply "Not" steering when you apply pressure then the
pump or slipping belt may be the cause but jerking and moving under power
without any imput has to be in the valving I would say.

--
Happily Retired (but broke)
Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
78 Bronco Loving, Gary
--

> some advice in a trouble shoot here. I was pulling out of a parking lot
> tonight in my 71 (F250 4x4 390) and all of a sudden the steering wheel
> jerked to the right and locked on me, I couldnt steer. I let it


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

From: "Bob" <xavetarx home.com>
Subject: Re: 1979 Supercab cabs
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 15:23:51 -0500


I have two rectangular ones (about 1 1/2 inches by 3-4 inches).  They're not
in that great of a condition (painted over), but I don't have a need for
them really...

-bob-
79 Bronco 460 44's T18
79 Bronco 400 40's C6

-----Original Message-----
From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Summerall
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 9:47 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 1979 Supercab cabs



I have a 79 2x4 supercab camper special(parts truck and restoring my 79 F250
4x4. Every thing will bolt right up. I even took the midship fuel tank out
of the 2x4, after grinding off riveted mounts, and my 4x4 frame had the
holes all ready to go for me. The only difference I found is the crossmember
between the motor mounts and of coarse the steering setup.

Anyone got "trailer special" emblems?

----- Original Message -----
From: FRITZ DOWE <fdowe danet.net>
To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 5:24 PM
Subject: [61-79-list] 1979 Supercab cabs


>
> Hi to everyone on the list.
>
> I am coming off of lurking mode to ask a question.  I was wondering if a
> SuperCab from a two wheel drive will bolt right on to a four wheel drive
> frame.  I found one that is a good candidate for repair (on two wheel
drive
> frame) to replace the decayed one on my four wheel drive frame (original
> Wisconsin truck), but if I need to modify frame mounts, I think I'll look
> for a different one.
>
> Thanks in advance for your responses.
>
> Fritz Dowe
>
> 1979 F150 4X4 460 C6
> 1979 F150 SuperCab 4X4 351M C6 (this years project)
>



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

From: "Hogan, Tom (Portland)" <Tom.Hogan kla-tencor.com>
Subject: Re: 73-79 F250s
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 14:13:08 -0800


Is that why they added oxygenators to the gasoline? ;-)

Tom H.

>
> Less oxygen? If that were the case shouldn't we all be
> suffering from acute
> hypoxia?
>
>  /// Friends help you move...Real friends help you move bodies \\
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael" <danger csolutions.net>
> To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 12:18 AM
> Subject: [61-79-list] Re: 73-79 F250s
>
>
> >     I'd suggest sticking with 9:1 and avoid 10:1
> compression unless you
> will
> > never use the engine to pull a heavy load up a steep grade
> during the
> summer
> > heat. Not only does todays fuel contain a lower octane
> rating, but there
> is
> > less oxygen in the atmosphere compared to 30 years ago. You
> may, or may
> not
> > have troubles with 10:1, but is it really worth the risk
> when 9:1 is known
> > to be safe?
>
>
>
>

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

From: "Hogan, Tom (Portland)" <Tom.Hogan kla-tencor.com>
Subject: Man I love my truck!!!
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 14:13:09 -0800


I had to get the old green monster running today.  I had it parked for the
winter but we ran out of firewood here.  SWMBO found an and for some local
and we decided to get the truck going.  Dug it out of the snow bank, charged
up the battery for an hour, 3 spins on the starter and it roared to life!!!
AARR!! AARR!! AARR!!   MAN! it felt GOOD driving the old girl again!!  Makes
me want to get going on the resto on it.

Tom H.

------------------------------ ....


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.