Received: with LISTAR (v1.0.0; list 61-79-list); Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:34:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:34:01 -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 #24
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 Wed, 24 Jan 2001 Volume: 2001  Issue: 024

In This Issue:
Re: Free to a good home.....
Re: Fuel Injected.
Re: c-6
Re: Fuel Injected.
Re: The man....
Re: Which engine
Re: The man....plus 240 carbs
Re: Which engine?
Re: Which engine
Re: Which engine?
Re: Which engine?
Re: The man....
Re: Which engine
Re: Dual battery setup
Re: Which engine
Re: Fuel Injected.
Tires for 78 F150 4X4
Re: Which engine
Re: Tires for 78 F150 4X4
Re: Which engine?
Re: zoning nazis
Possible Fuel Problem?
Gettin even
Re: Possible Fuel Problem?
Re: The man...
Re: Possible Fuel Problem?
Re: Tires for 78 F150 4X4
Re: Tires for 78 F150 4X4

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

From: "Eric Washburn" <bruce9 flash.net>
Subject: Re: Free to a good home.....
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:58:44 -0600


Where are you located? Your name looks familiar, I'm pretty sure we've
chatted before even :) I could use the front brake assembly.
-Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: 61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com
[mailto:61-79-list-bounce ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Christopher Worley
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 1:59 AM
To: 61-79-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [61-79-list] Free to a good home.....


I need to get rid of some stuff in my garage so that I can walk, the first
items I have are front brake assy. including spindles from a '67 F100, this
is a drum assy., I also have the front coil springs, if anyone needs these
items let me know off list and they are yours.


Chris Worley
'67 F100


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://explorer.msn.com




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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:39:56 -0600
From: Steve Schaefer <schaefer PLASTEKGROUP.COM>
Subject: Re: Fuel Injected.


Well, I am going to throw my nickel in on the conversation.  I have, and
I am running  a bunch of different fuel injection systems on my
vehicles.

First I will start with the Holley system.  It is loosely based on a
stock GM throttle body set up.  I have run the old (before the "DI")
systems.  The first 1 was on my Supercab (400, + .030, Performer cam,
performer manifold, warmed over heads, stock compression).  Loved the
kit.  Got 14 mpg whether I was empty or towing a car.  Started right up
even in the coldest days.  Ran it for 5 years without a problem.  Then
on a trip to Kentucky (500 miles away) an injector went.  It was
squirting solid (more like dumping).  Couldn't find any parts for it,
had to switch back to a carb in an Autozone parking lot.  Replaced the
injector and could not get it to run right again.  It now has a carb on
it (soon to be an injected 460).  Second system was on a bone stock
351M.  Couldn't get it to run right from the beginning.  Ran to rich
etc.  Still has the carb on it.  Third system was a 4bbl version on a
Ch# wrecker.  It did not improve his mpg, but the driveablity is
greatly improved.  Been on for 6 years now with no problem.

Now on to some of the my other systems.  With the explosion of 5.0 parts
out there there is great support for the fuel injection systems.  The
parts could care less what motor it is on, as long as the computer knows
what the parameters of the motor are,  (after market chips are a
wonderful thing for changing these parameter).  I have a 5.0 computer
controlling a 514 in my bird (custom made intake),  I have a 5.0
computer controlling a 460 in my Crew cab (stock 96 460 injection), and
I am currently working on a system for the 400 in the Bronco. Once you
actually sit down and look at the Ford injection, it is very easy.
There is allot that can be removed.  The small problem I am running into
is that the injection system needs a single plane intake.  There are
only a couple of choices for the 400.  As for the FE series, I don't
know what is out there.  There will be some fabrication needed (injector
bungs, plenum to mount T/B to carb base) and some wiring (actually only
about 8 wires from the factory 5.0 harness need to be attached to the
truck, 2 for oil and water temp gauge, 1 for ground, 1 for  fuel pump, 2
for main power, 1 for switched power, and 1 for the starter circuit).

The only major problem I can foresee in using stock pieces is that most
injection units use a pickup in the distributor.  I have not tried to
swap the inard to another distributor, so I don't know if that will
work.

Sorry for being so long winded.

Good luck
Steve S.
54 F-100
76 F-350 Crew cab
77 F-250 Supercab
79 Bronco
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Shop/8663/




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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:46:50 -0600
From: Steve Schaefer <schaefer PLASTEKGROUP.COM>
Subject: Re: c-6


So far I have come across 4 different tailshafts.  A very short (splines started after the govenor) out of a 79 4x4 which had a 205 bolted to it.  2 were meduim length (1 was about 8" after the govenor 4x4 with a 205 bolted to it, the other was about 12", 2wd, both trucks and cars, but mostly 335 or 385 series), and a real long one (about 14-15" after the govenor, out of a Lincoln with a 460).   It is a pain when you need the other tailshaft in the tranny that you need to use.

Steve S.
54 F-100
76 F-350 Crew cab
77 F-250 Supercab
79 Bronco
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Shop/8663/


> Yeah, but at our age it will all be gone in a day or so.....:-)  I
> understand that there are more than just one length of tail shaft for these,
> besides the long and short I mean??  I used one that already had the adapter
> on it so didn't have to fool with finding the right tail shaft or housing.
> When the tail housing broke though I had to find another one and I used the
> first one I found and it worked.  I wonder if these variations have to do
> with the fact that the C-6 was used for so many applications, small block,
> FE and big block etc.??  Perhaps it has to do with later years using the 208
> transfer case?  Or is there a difference due to using the 203 case?  Wonder
> if there is a book on this stuff?
>
> --
> Happily Retired (but broke)
> Michigan Pot Hole Jumping,
> 78 Bronco Loving, Gary


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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:47:48 -0800 (PST)
From: James Oxley <joxenburger yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel Injected.






Now on to some of the my other systems.  With the
explosion of 5.0 parts
out there there is great support for the fuel
injection systems.  The
parts could care less what motor it is on, as long as
the computer knows
what the parameters of the motor are,  (after market
chips are a
wonderful thing for changing these parameter).

Even better than chips is this.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.iwantperformance.net/Frequently%20Asked%20Questions.htm.

Avail with datalogging now. I have not installed mine
yet, but I'm going to send it back and have it
upgraded for datalogging before I do.

                           OX





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:48:10 -0500
From: George Selby <gselby4x4 earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The man....


At 01:39 PM 1/24/01 -0500, you wrote:
>The man...

I have the following in my yard: The three cars in my sig, a Jeep Grand
Wagoneer, a Jeep Cherokee SJ, 2 Jeep CJ's, a 92 Maxima, a 91 Chevy S-10, a
85 Dodge W-150, a 85 Nissan 200SX, 87 Pontiac Sunbird,  a 60's Buick
Lesabre, a 73 T-bird, a 60's Dodge Monaco, a 85 Bronco II, a 72 VW Karmann
Ghia, a 50's Cadillac, a 92 Isuzu P'up (soon to be traded for a 70 Ford
F-100,) a 19' Boat and 2 Lawn tractors.  Of those, 7 run, 5 could run/are
being repaired, and 7 are derelict flood victims (from Floyd) and 3 are
parts cars.

Neighbors never say anything to me, but people stop by all the time to ask
about vehicles not for sale, never want the ones that are for sale.

Wow, I need to lose some cars, I didn't realize I was starting a recycling
center here!

I'm going to see if the junkyard up the street from me will trade me the
cab I need (matches the bed I already got from him,) once it gets a bit
warmer, for my truck for the 7 flood victims, he sold me the good bed for
$100, so I think that's a reasonable trade, they usually pay $75 a scrap
car around here, provided you take it to the yard (which will be no
problem, only 3/4 mile up the street, I can drag the derelicts through the
dirt if I have to.)




George Selby
78 F-150 4x4 400 4 spd
86 Nissan 300ZX
92 Subaru Legacy Wagon AWD
gselby4x4 earthlink.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.usedcarsandparts.com


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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 20:14:03 GMT
Subject: Re: Which engine


> Motor for motor, the more cubes, the less compression
>you need to make the same power. Less compression
>equals the ability to use reg gas, which is
>substantially cheaper than premium and that is a huge
>issue when your getting 10 MPG.
>

You're completely ignoring cam specs and head design in this equation, but if
all you change is displacement (not heads or anything else), then you are technically
correct.

> How easy is 428 stuff to find? Honestly I don't know.
>I don't recall ever seeing one advertised for sale,

I have, I didn't say it was easy to find, just that I'd helped put one in before
... actually I can find the stuff I need, but my Uncle won't let me take it
;)

>can get 3-4 running 460's within a couple hours
>driving distance for 700$ or less. Anything less than
>the 428, it's hardly a fair fight, 70 cubes is huge.
>

Uhm ... I can pick up just as many 390's probably, but the running condition
is the problem, half of them will smoke, I'm sure the other half you'd have
no idea what was wrong with it, I'd guess the same to be true for 460's, lots
of people think "OOHHH 460, I can race anyone with that"

>>  If we're really that bad off, why can a 281 cu. in.
>car of today kick the crap
>> out of a 400+ cu.
>
>Not in torque and not at the same RPM.
>

Uhm ... excuse me ?  The numbers may not appear the same, but I'll bet if you
compare them all on the same scale you'd be surprised how close they are ...


> Mine's a 95 460, but hardly rated as power a house
>245 HP. I can't se how you could get less Hp ina 460,
>honestly :-)

Put a carb on it and dumb it down a bit ... remember too that's SAE Net number,
not the gross number of yesteryear ... the fuel injection has let the cams come
back up to where the motor can breathe and run cleanly at the same time, not
quite the same effect as putting a 78 460 into your truck with nothing more
than a rebuild ...

> Not exactly sure what a 95, F250, 3.55
>gear, E4OD trans, ext cab, 4X4, with 8' bed, cap, 3
>alum boxes, side steps, rubber mat and some tools
>weighs, but my G-tech'd times are at the bottom of
>this post. I'd use 1/4 mile time as I've found MPH to
>read high when I used G-tech at the track.
>

Quite a bit I'm sure, depending what's int he boxes and such.  I found a scale
around here that's just off the beaten path but you can drive over to check
the weights, looked like 5100lbs for my truck with most of a tank of gas and
my fat rear in the seat.

> What did it run, what does it weigh, what gear are
>you running, and what is done to the motor?
>

See above.  The motor has around 10:1 compression or so we're guessing (can't
run it on 89 octane without dumping some timing), its cammed, with a Galaxie
intake on it ... yes you read that right, no headers or anything on it, just
dual exhaust with super turbo's.  The carb's not tuned quite right yet and I
just got the ignition sorted out on the point's side of things ... seems like
I was a shade over 17 or 17.5 when I ran it last year without any fine tuning.


Oh yeah C6, 4x4, 3.50 gears, regular cab, long bed, one tank.

> Agree with that, probably cheapest thing to do is
>convert to 390 and 390 cubes is nothing to sneeze at
>:-).

That in itself was a huge jump for me, but no before/after numbers on it because
didn't have the g-tech before ...

Are those 95 460's roller blocks ?

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

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:39:08 -0800 (PST)
From: "D. DiMartino" <grunon yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: The man....plus 240 carbs


I can't hold back... CLEAN UP YOUR ACTS!

FTE: I'm getting ready to rebuild my stock carb on my 240 ONE
barrel.  I've never done this, what does a typical kit come
with?  Jets, gaskets instructions?

=====
Daniel DiMartino
<grunon yahoo.com>
1968 F-250 soon to be a 4x4

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Which engine?
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:42:31 -0800


Uhhhhh, seems to me I already kind of implied that?  I wasn't preaching the
460 so much as pointing out that with poor gas, more cubes is the cheaper
way to fly and I'll stand by that statement.  Yes you can do all the things
you say but at what cost?  Put that same amount of cash into a 460 and you
will simply have more motor any way you slice it :-)

I dare say also that my bronco will eat my bird for breakfast (if I could
shift the 435 fast enough that is (perhaps if it had a wide ratio C-6 in it)
:-)).  I don't play with numbers, it's not important to me.  What I feel in
my britches is what I care about and as long as it's "Adequate" it's OK by
me:-)  Numbers are just hot air most of the time.  Spout 'em all you want
but they don't impress me....mainly because they usually don't mean anything
in the real world.

Put two engines on the same dyno with the same operator on the same day and
I'll take the data to mean something, as a comprison between those two runs,
but nothing more than that.  Old numbers and new numbers don't traslate to
anything meaningful so why even bother with it?  If I can pass traffic and
blow off most all idiots who want to race without sweating too much then I'm
happy.  Don't know what HP that takes and don't care....when I get the
engine to do it I will know it and  I will be quite happy :-)

Build it the way that turns you on and within your budget and let it go.
One day you will have enough experience to build it just the way you want
and may be able to come close on the first try if you do the research.  Info
from this list, including Bill's posts, is usefull for this as well :-)
Just remember that according to the "Skirvin Scale" (Ox knows what I mean
:-)) a roller block 460 is worth 500 HP even if you just bolt it in the bed
and never start it :-)

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

> preaching either
> as gospel is just stupid in my book, each situation will have to
> be considered
> individually, and you'll have to look at what you want to do.
> Weigh all the
> options and look at things for yourself.
>
> Just my $.02
> wish


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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:48:58 -0800 (PST)
From: James Oxley <joxenburger yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Which engine



> >can get 3-4 running 460's within a couple hours
> >driving distance for 700$ or less. Anything less
than
> >the 428, it's hardly a fair fight, 70 cubes is
huge.
> >
>
> Uhm ... I can pick up just as many 390's probably,
but the running condition
> is the problem, half of them will smoke, I'm sure
the other half you'd have
> no idea what was wrong with it, I'd guess the same
to be true for 460's,

No, that would be the 1-200$, 460's. :-) 700$ will buy
you a decently running motor round here.

lots
> of people think "OOHHH 460, I can race anyone with
that"

True, but not sure what that has to do with it?

> >>  If we're really that bad off, why can a 281 cu.
in.
> >car of today kick the crap
> >> out of a 400+ cu.
> >
> >Not in torque and not at the same RPM.
> >
>
> Uhm ... excuse me ?  The numbers may not appear the
same, but I'll bet if you
> compare them all on the same scale you'd be
surprised how close they are ...

281 C.I. will not make 400 ft-lb of torque 2000
RPM, no matter what scale you use.

> > Mine's a 95 460, but hardly rated as power a house

> >245 HP. I can't se how you could get less Hp ina
460,
> >honestly :-)
>
> Put a carb on it and dumb it down a bit .

A carb would free up some HP the way they tune
factory EFI. Look at the 85 and 87 mustangs (86 had
bastard heads). 85 had 215 HP and 87 has 225 HP. 87
had true duals, 85 single. No increase really.

.. remember too that's SAE Net number,
> not the gross number of yesteryear ... the fuel
injection has let the cams come
> back up to where the motor can breathe and run
cleanly at the same time,
not
> quite the same effect as putting a 78 460 into your
truck with nothing more
> than a rebuild ...

What was HP/TQ on 78 460? What were cam specs?

> > Not exactly sure what a 95, F250, 3.55
> >gear, E4OD trans, ext cab, 4X4, with 8' bed, cap, 3
> >alum boxes, side steps, rubber mat and some tools
> >weighs, but my G-tech'd times are at the bottom of
> >this post. I'd use 1/4 mile time as I've found MPH
to
> >read high when I used G-tech at the track.
> >
>
> Quite a bit I'm sure, depending what's int he boxes
and such.  I found a scale
> around here that's just off the beaten path but you
can drive over to check
> the weights, looked like 5100lbs for my truck with
most of a tank of gas and
> my fat rear in the seat.
>
> > What did it run, what does it weigh, what gear are
> >you running, and what is done to the motor?
> >
>
> See above.  The motor has around 10:1 compression or
so we're guessing (can't
> run it on 89 octane without dumping some timing),
its cammed, with a Galaxie
> intake on it ... yes you read that right, no headers
or anything on it, just
> dual exhaust with super turbo's.  The carb's not
tuned quite right yet and I
> just got the ignition sorted out on the point's side
of things ... seems like
> I was a shade over 17 or 17.5 when I ran it last
year without any fine tuning.
>

Well, thats 205 HP at the wheels.

> Oh yeah C6, 4x4, 3.50 gears, regular cab, long bed,
one tank.
>
> > Agree with that, probably cheapest thing to do is
> >convert to 390 and 390 cubes is nothing to sneeze
at
> >:-).
>
> That in itself was a huge jump for me, but no
before/after numbers on it because
> didn't have the g-tech before ...
>
> Are those 95 460's roller blocks ?

Not sure, did 460 ever go roller?

                      OX


--
78 Bronco Custom, 400, T-18, 14 bolt/detroit/4.56,
D60/detroit/4.56, 44
boggers, 9" lift (27 54.5678498576476596875869
(street), 17 56 (4"
mud), never 0 (17" mud)).
79 Bronco XLT, 351M, C6, D60/detroit/4.10,
D448lug/Lokrite/4.10, 38.5
SX's, 4"lift (It's so fast, I tore the axles right out
of it).
79 Bronc XLT, 351M, C6, 35 BFG AT's, 2" lift (19.3
40, pulling boat,
19.3 40, not puling boat)
86 Capri, turbo 5.0 (13.4 107)
90 Talon AWD turbo (12.7 104)
95 F250-460,4WD (16.9 82)


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Which engine?
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:59:44 -0800


Ok, I see the problem.....I said "a little more power".  That is all
relative.  Obviously you can get considerably more power from a 390 than a
360 without going to a lot of trouble but.....you can get a lot more power
from the same investment in a 460.....that was the point.  Subtract the cost
of the swap, including the tranny and you may break even at some point but
once the swap is done the potential will aways be there for later mods where
the 390 will already be pretty much tapped out without going to exotic stuff
like fuel additives etc...

I'm not "Preaching" either method, just pointing out the potentials.  I like
to build on things slowly, setting up a platform to work from.  I don't like
to throw anything away or start over from scratch for the next upgrade.  If
I, personally, wanted more power and the platform was viable I would opt for
the "Stock" 460 swap in my first budget bash and build on it afterward which
is what I've done with my pickup.  You can do the same thing by building the
ultimate 390, probably for about the same amount of cash but you will always
be working with technology that is trying to fly away and it will only get
harder to get parts as time goes on so you have to make choices based on
your own situation and personality.  I'm lazy and don't want to hunt for
parts so I did it that way.  Bill has more energy so he does it his way.  To
each his own, eh?  Who knows, the flat head had come back so you can buy the
whole engine now........:-) (course they aren't cheap :-))

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

> If, OTOH, you just want a "Little" more power then the cheapest way might
> well be to rebuild the 360 into a 390.


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

From: "Michael" <danger csolutions.net>
Subject: Re: Which engine?
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:32:28 -0800


> My wife just gave me the go ahead to get a new (rebuilt) engine for
> my '71 F250 . It currently has the stock 360 , but I want something
bigger. I use the truck for daily
> driving and an occasional burnout...or two..;-)
>  My question is,  Would it be worth the added cost of switching everything
over to accommodate a 460
> or should I build my 360 into a HP 390 ?   Would there be a noticeable
difference between the two
> engines during normal driving conditions?
>
> Your expert opinions on this would be great....Thanks.
>
> Stephen Brown
>
> 71' F250   "Baby"
> 68' F100  (project)
> 94' Ranger Supercab 4.0
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   From your discription of how you will be using the truck, I'd have to
suggest that you rebuild your stock 360 into a HP 390. If you're not going
to need the strength of a 460, then why trouble yourself with the extra cost
and time required to build & install it into your 71 F250? Converting your
360 into a  HP 390 would be simple, inexpensive, and should provide you with
plenty of power for the "daily driving & occasional burnout or two".
   I've recently done a 360 2v into 390 4v conversion and can honestly say
there was a noticeable difference. It was about 1,000 miles after the
rebuild/conversion when I removed the entire stock exhaust system and
replaced it with full length Hooker Comp headers with high flow exhaust.
There was another noticeable difference after the exhaust improvements.


Michael
69 F250 390 4V, T18, 3.54 LS
69 F250 390 4V, C6, 4.11
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.csolutions.net/myth/ford/



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

From: "Randy Cannon" <rcannon ussynthetic.com>
Subject: Re: The man....
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:05:01 -0700


-----Original Message-----
Subject: [61-79-list] Re: The man....

Sometimes it's not so much complaints from the neighbors as it is from the
wife.  When I got married nearly 6 years ago I had three VW buses ('56, '63,
& '70), two bugs ('68, & '72), a '65 Cadillac, and a ski boat (sorry- wasn't
into fords yet).  6 months after the wedding, we were down to only my wife's
'86 Plymouth Horizon (man, I hated that car - what a POS).  The things some
people (read I) will do for a woman.  Since then, she's been somewhat more
understanding- I've gone through a number of different projects (cars,
trucks, boats) since that time, and I'm currently trying to find an
acceptable location for my 'new' '64 Cadillac convertible (SWMBO hates this
one more than all the others).  FTE content- She won't admit it, but she
does like the '79 f250 supercab- having a hard time keeping her right foot
out of that 460.  Sorry for the rambling.

-Randy
'79 F250 Supercab, 460


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

From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:20:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Which engine


>No, that would be the 1-200$, 460's. :-) 700$ will buy
>you a decently running motor round here.
>

Must be nice ... sheesh, you'd think things like that were made out of gold
around here ... they wanted $500+ for a 360 that smoked from the savlage yard
here, don't even bother asking about anything bigger than that, the dirt trackers
have grabbed it already.

>lots
>> of people think "OOHHH 460, I can race anyone with
>that"
>
>True, but not sure what that has to do with it?
>

That most of them are beat on and not really in that great of condition even
if they do run ...

> A carb would free up some HP the way they tune
>factory EFI.

Only if you tune the carb exactly right ... that's the advantage of EFI, throw
a chip on it to compare it with a perfectly tuned carb ... EFI isn't tuned for
peak performance because of the fuel quality issues, and the tendancy of people
to beat on things harder than they realize, so they keep a factor of safety
built into it.  Lots of guys are getting bit by getting the factor too small
on their aftermarket chip, it warms up a bit and suddenly they've got detonation
and pretty soon they've

>Look at the 85 and 87 mustangs (86 had
>bastard heads). 85 had 215 HP and 87 has 225 HP. 87
>had true duals, 85 single. No increase really.
>

Speed density and batchfire injection, don't even start that one ... there was
also a change in the way they calculated those numbers as the years went on,
I find it hard to believe that changing to Mass-air and SEFI didn't net any
horsepower, nor did any of the 4 cam changes they went through ... they just
stuck that 225 on there 'cause it sounded good.

>What was HP/TQ on 78 460? What were cam specs?
>

No clue, I just randomly picked an emissions 460 ...

>Well, thats 205 HP at the wheels.
>

Not bad for a C6 i suppose, seems like that's about what we calculated it out
to be ... it seems stronger now, but like I said I didn't tune it up for that
run.

>> Are those 95 460's roller blocks ?
>
>Not sure, did 460 ever go roller?
>

Dunno, that's why I asked ...



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

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:29:19 -0700
From: "William Whited (Tony)" <f10074 ford-trucks.com>
Subject: Re: Dual battery setup


I haven't traced the cables yet, the head back towards the master cylinder.
I'm on the road now, so I will check when I get back.  Thanks for the info and
any more that you have.

David Lindenmayer wrote:

> does  the place for the other battery have a solenoid  that the battery
> cable hot goes to,like the starter solenoid  but on the fender or firewall,
> if so then it is for the camper and charges when the truck is running but
> not for starting the truck.  I have a 77 e350  motor home and that is the
> way it is set up  hope this helps
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William Whited (Tony)" <f10074 ford-trucks.com>
> To: <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>; "perf-list" <perf-list ford-trucks.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 8:41 PM
> Subject: [61-79-list] Dual battery setup
>
> >
> > On my Super Camper Special, it has the set-up for dual battery's the
> > left battery is not in it, it has the the terminals and cables, mounts
> > and brackets for it I was wondering is that battery is just for the
> > Camper or will it be charged and used like a 2nd battery?  Thanks
> >
> > --
> > William (Tony) Whited
> > 74 F350 Ranger XLT Super Camper Special 460
> > 77 F150 Custom 460
> > El Paso, TX
> > Semper Fi
> >
> >

--
William (Tony) Whited
74 F350 Ranger XLT Super Camper Special 460
77 F150 Custom 460
El Paso, TX
Semper Fi



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

From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
Subject: Re: Which engine
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:11:14 -0800



> Speed density and batchfire injection, don't even start that one ... ,
> I find it hard to believe that changing to Mass-air and SEFI

86 5.0 HO's were SEFI with speed density.  The change from Speed Density to
Mass Air didn't do anything for power, because it really didn't change any
of the running characteristics of the motor, just the way it monitored air
flow, mass, and temperature.


> >Not sure, did 460 ever go roller?
The 460 never had a roller cam from the factory.

Jason
'69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
'96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke
'77 F150 4WD 429
"As fast as necessary, as slow as possible"



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

From: "Jason Derra" <derrar internetcds.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel Injected.
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:19:27 -0800


> Now on to some of the my other systems.  With the explosion of 5.0 parts
> out there there is great support for the fuel injection systems.  The
> parts could care less what motor it is on, as long as the computer knows
> what the parameters of the motor are,  (after market chips are a
> wonderful thing for changing these parameter).

The stock Mustang Mass Air system is very flexible as far as modifications,
and adding cubic inches.
Even without computer changes they work pretty well.  Although, with a chip
or EEC-Tuner they can be made even better.


> I have a 5.0
> computer controlling a 460 in my Crew cab (stock 96 460 injection)
I'd like to hear more about this.  With the difficulty of finding Mass Air
460's in wrecking yards around here (and the abundance of 5.0 system parts
that I have), this could work good for what I want to do.

Jason
'69 Bronco 5.0 HO EFI, NP435
'96 F250 Ext Cab 4WD Powerstroke
'77 F150 4WD 429
"As fast as necessary, as slow as possible"



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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:02:35 -0600
From: Kirk Baillie <kbaillie home.com>
Subject: Tires for 78 F150 4X4


What are the largest size of tires I can put on a 78 F150 4X4 (stock), I
currently have 31's on there now, are 33's possible???

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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Which engine
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 19:58:02 -0800


Which remindes me....the 460 has stock heads that already flow pretty well
except for the exhaust bumps and as someone else said "Flat ports" but it
has something most other designs don't seem to have.  The wedge head design
happens to work very well in the 460 for some reason and you can push it
further than most engines before running into spark knock problems so it
lends itself to more compression rather easily.  Now throw in a cam designed
to just keep it puring well at 1500 rpm but really come on the pipe at
say.....4500 instead of 3000 rpm and you can run even more static
compression for better low end performance.  You still get gobs of low end
torque because the engine is simply a brute, it has the cubes to get it done
even when the cam isn't quite on the pipe which makes it an ideal engine to
play with in a heavy vehicle like our trucks.  I know of at least one fellow
who is running 12:1 with no knocking but he is also running a higher stall
converter and it idles higher than normal due to the cam he's using but he
claim it pulls pretty well even down low.  What "Pretty Well" is I guess is
up to each person but I know that a 351C does not, in my opinion, pull well
down low, nor does a sick 460 (mis-tuned, stupid Holley) with too much load
and tall gearing (close ratio C-6) so it's all relative.

I have no idea where it will wind up but my next cam will be a roller with
something over .600 lift and more duration than my current one, which is a
.520 lift and rather tame duration, and I will be shooting for some
compression as well.  Since I'm no expert on this I will do some research
and talk to some cam people about how the cam will mitigate the static
compression at low rpms under load to reduce spark knock and go from there
but I've decided that it will be a roller in any case......just because :-)
Before I die I want to build a really nice roller 460 just to get Jerry's
500 hp gain :-)  When I get down to FL I'll have to show it off :-) (Private
joke)

BTW, Ox....I haven't seen Jerry's posts?  I'm off the bronco list right now
due to my IP using ORBS and Moab being on their spam list but before Jason
cut me off, when I got a little mail I didn't see any of his?  Is he OK?

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

> > Motor for motor, the more cubes, the less compression
> >you need
>
> You're completely ignoring cam specs and head design in this
> equation, but if
> all you change is displacement (not heads or anything else), then
> you are technically
> correct.


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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Tires for 78 F150 4X4
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 19:59:57 -0800


33's fit broncos easily with no rubbing.  I believe the 150's have the same
front end?  On my 2wd I had to lift it because of the width, not the
diameter in the rear.

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

> What are the largest size of tires I can put on a 78 F150 4X4 (stock), I
> currently have 31's on there now, are 33's possible???


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

From: "GaryBBB" <gpeters3 lni.net>
Subject: Re: Which engine?
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 20:16:02 -0800


Let me rephrase that:

I was refering to the compression issue which would require fuel additives
or exotic fuels to over come as being prohibitively expensive for every day
driving:-)  Blowers and turbos both may not be as finicky about knocking
due to the fact that they typically don't produce a lot of boost at low rpms
under loads etc..so may not really be much of an issue but most builders do
make blower engines with lower compression too.  Again I have little
experience in that area, only research and reading and comments from various
ones who do have experience.

What's really tricky about it is that two engines can use identical
components and one will knock and the other won't so you have to allow some
margin to be sure.....Maybe this one is using a stick and that one an auto
etc..  It all plays into the picture somewhere which is what makes it kind
of fun to figure out :-)  That's why my truck won't be exactly like yours,
nor should it be :-)  Even when we use the same words to describe what we
want in a truck we may actually have different pictures in our heads which I
think is still pretty cool :-)

I think we all agree that today's pump gas requires some serious
consideration when building a daily driver engine, eh?  That's my "Opinion"
in any case :-)

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

> >the low octane of today's fuels.  Any other approach becomes too
> expensive
>
> >to drive every day.
> >
>
> Gee no opinions in there ...


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

From: DWeaver232 aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:12:36 EST
Subject: Re: zoning nazis


I go through this about every two years. Someone new moves into the
neighborhood and decides that they need to clean it up. Now granted most of
the houses in my hood were built by the owner himself with leftover packing
crates when Remington geared up its Denver plant for WWII. A nice poor white
trash hood where most people have piles of building materials laying around
and non-running cars. The guy across the street from me had a 302 hanging
from a tree that he pulled from a Maveric. My kind of neighbors, I'll fit
right in, let's buy this house honey. That engine sat in that tree for 3
years before he put it into his early Bronco halfcab. So the object here is
to get even. These people have to much free time on their hands. Give them
something to do. Besides jogging in their spandex running outfits. Start
collecting weed seeds and throw them into their yards. Dandelion seeds are
one of the best since they come up first in the spring and have such nice
yellow flowers. Others types will add variety and increase methods required
for that anal-retentive front yard. Rolling seeds into snowballs, then
delivering in a spring storm is most effective. If your significant other
gardens you can tell them that the dandelions are needed for the wild
honeybees. So remember don't get mad get even.

I don't care what you do in your yard except for a few things: Try not to use
the air tools all the time after 10 pm with the garage door open, I do
understand that sometimes you need to fix the race car, give me a call I'll
lend a hand. DO NOT dump your toxic chemicals onto the ground, some of us
have wells. If you are running a speed lab, keep it small so when it goes
boom it takes out only your place. If you have a dog, take care of it, if it
gets loose if I don't shoot someone else around here that has chickens will.

Terry Weaver
with a coffee can fill of weedseeds

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

From: huston kudzumedia.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:27:46 -0500
Subject: Possible Fuel Problem?


I am getting ready to go pick up the 66 F-100 I recently bought,
which is about 160 miles away. Although it needs some work, from
what I can tell, I should have no problem driving it home. It runs
good, brakes are working, etc. It has been sitting for some time
and I am concerned about old fuel and possibly condensation.
Does the fact that it ran OK for the short time I checked it out
mean I should have no problem? Or, could I have an unexpected
problem down the road? Is there an additive I can put in the tank
just in case or something else I could do?

Thanks,
Virgil


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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:16:37 EST
Subject: Gettin even


Just a tip I picked up.  If said neighbor causin trouble is any bit of
mechanically inclined, a small amount of used oil, dribbled on the spot they
usually park (right after they leave is best)  I watched a guy tear the whole
front end of his 350 off tryin to find "the leak,"  Ended up goin to the shop
cuz tardo broke some bolts off in the block.  If anyone wants to know why I
felt this guy deserved this, email me off list, I'm more than happy to
explain it.

Darrell & Tweety

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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:18:03 EST
Subject: Re: Possible Fuel Problem?


Id siphon out the old gas, and put fresh stuff in, along with a bottle of
carb cleaner.  But if it runs for the first 15 min, I dont forsee much goin
nutso after that.

Darrell & Tweety

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

From: Aeroape82 aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:25:38 EST
Subject: Re: The man...

In a message dated 1/23/01 12:11:42 PM Central Standard Time,
herbie ford-trucks.com writes:


> Your not alone.  I have to play stupid little games with the Police
> Department and the City Zoning Jerks.  Even  though my trucks are Insured,
> License and Running, I have to move them around at least  once a week to
> keep the police and neighbors from thinking they are "abandoned".  If I try
> to park any of them along the side of my house in the yard, I get a nice
> letter from the Zoning Jerks telling me they have to be parked on an
>
Like Virgil said I guess you have to live in the country or live in a small
town in up state NY wher thier is no one really to complain.  Niceties of
living in a real small town.


Glenn  NY

78 F-250 (talk about projects and headaches)



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

From: Aeroape82 aol.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:09:42 EST
Subject: Re: Possible Fuel Problem?

Just my thoughts but if I was going to drive that distance and every thing
else checked out allright I would bring along 3-4 fuel filters (inline of
course)               couse you dont know what's going to be stirred up when
the truck starts bouncing down the road.   Good luck on your trip Virgil


Glenn  NY

78 F-250 (talk about projects and headaches)



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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 20:14:30 -0800 ....


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.