80-96-list-digest Wednesday, July 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 254



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980-1996 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure...
FTE 80-96 - RE: 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD
RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's
Re: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD
RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's
FTE 80-96 - RE: High Altitude Timing
FTE 80-96 - Re: Low oil pressure...
RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's
FTE 80-96 - RE: Low Oil Pressure
Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: High Altitude Timing
RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure...
Re: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: manual stick/rear main
FTE 80-96 - 71 - 84 Engine swap...

=======================================================================

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 08:00:57 -0500
From: "Rick Wojciechowski"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure...

Pat Daniels wrote:

> I have an 80 Ford F150 with a 302 that loses oil pressure to the point it
> is right on the "L" on the oil pressure gauge after you drive it about 20
> minutes. When you first start it the oil pressure is right in the middle
> of the gauge then goes down the longer you drive it. The truck has 76,000
> on it. Any suggestions? Thanks...

Pat, I woould first check out the oil gauge/sending unit. At 76,000
miles, you should not be having any major internal problems,
IMHO. Just check the gauge connections and you may want to
invest in a real gauge.


- --
Thanks,
Rick Wojo
'83 Fsize BRONCO,Stock I-6,"The BROWN BULL",33x12.5x15-Mud Blasters
'92 Mstng 5.0L
'95 eclipse-Wife's(For Sale)


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 08:18:57 -0600
From: "Smeins, Larry"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD

Chris,
Your mileage definitely is low. I get 16 to 17 around town and short
tripping with 4.10s and E40D in a 250 SC 4x4. I presently am looking
for the cause of reduced loaded highway mileage. I got 12 mpg with a
large camper on board on my last trip and have made as high as 16 on
earlier trips. I've seen several guys claiming considerably higher with
similar rigs on the "Ford Diesel Page" (formerly Jason's Powerstroke
page). From what I have seen on that forum is that not all Powerstrokes
are created equal. Your truck is still under warranty and I would
suggest finding a Ford dealer with a good diesel shop and have them work
on it. Ford makes no claim for mpg but they do have TSBs addressing low
mileage and low power, they usually go together. I have boost and EGT
gauges and observed an increase in EGT along with my decrease in loaded
mileage. If you haven't found the diesel page its at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.abol.com/users/jlester/.

Larry

>Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 11:18:57 -0700
>From: cfoye baynetworks.com (Chris Foye)
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD

>I have an F350 97 CC PSD (old body style) with the 4.10 rear gearing,
open
>bed. I regularly tow a 3500lb boat with it.
>Here is what I'm finding, I usually get around 12mpg around town and
>anywhere from 12 to 15 without towing on the freeway. Last weekend, I
>loaded up the truck with 5 passengers at about 600lbs, boat in tow at
>around 3500lbs, equipment accounted for about 200lbs and freeway
cruising
>was 65mph at 2300rpm with cruise control. The total trip was 350 miles
>round trip with 4 passes total and a little bit of climbing towards the
>end. Got back and filled up the tanks, and low and behold 12mpg.
>When I researched to purchase the truck I opted for the diesel because
of
>the gas mileage, I posed the mileage question to the group and most
were
>getting in the high teens,, I was expecting to get around 15 freeway
towing
>and around 17 -19 not towing. I currently have 10,500 miles on it and
it
>hasn't changed since new.
>Is there something I should look into? Could it be gas, open bed,
gearing
>to tall? What are others finding with similar trucks? I really
thought I
>would get better gas mileage with the "beast" but, I'm a little
disappointed.

>Thanks,

>Chris
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:44:16 -0500
From: Ron Madurski
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's

I think it really depends on the place. There are several Maaco's here
in Tulsa. Most of them I would not trust with a bicycle that I was
getting painted to sell, but I was talking to one of my computer
suppliers and he turned me onto one that actually did good work. I went
to look (still haven't gotten the paint job yet) and sure enough, the
place was clean, the people appeared to be enjoying themselves, and the
cars out back looked really good.

A friend of mine took his truck there and they made a few mistakes, but
they also took care of them with no hassles.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Andrew [mailto:showork mail.gwi.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 1998 5:12 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's


I had a relative who was very pleased with his $199.99 Maaco
paint
job. They did get the car all one color. I would have for myself
preferred
they washed the car before the painted it. It had leaves, two match
heads
and bird dropping's under the paint. That actually turned out ok
because
two years later on their next $ 199.99paint job on the same car, the
bumps
actually looked smoothe and not noticable. Better still when it went to
a
car wash most of the paint stayed on! Three years (total of five) went
by
and almost all the first layer of paint was still on the car, also
preserved were the leaves and match heads. Good work those Maaco
people.

You get what you pay for. This is true in painting auto's more
than
most things. There is a lot of time and effort in a good auto paint job.
Even the chains can do a good job. Unfortunately very often the
individuals
are not given the time or the pay to care about doing a good job. Ask
around, word of mouth and a clear understanding of what you want and
expect
from your painter will get you a good deal and good job. This is one
area
to avoid pinching your pennys to hard. Auto paint takes a heck of a
beating.

Best of luck,
Andrew


>Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 00:00:08 EDT
>From: Ardy2 aol.com
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - Paint Job
>
>I have a 1989 tan Ranger (80,000 miles) that is in need of a new paint
job.
>The paint on the cab and the hood are really beginning to deteriorate
and look
>bad. Otherwise the truck is in very good condition.
>
>Has anyone ever used any of the National Chains like MAACO for a paint
job?
>How much can I expect to have to pay for a good paint job?


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:12:29 -0400
From: "Doug Tinsman"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD

I have owned three Ford diesels and know many people who own them.

Your problem is the 4:10 gears. I have seen this over and over! I do not
know why Ford isn't more informative about the mileage and how gear ratio
REALLY affects it with these trucks.

My brother traded a 96 F250 with only 10,000 miles because of the bad
mileage. His situation was similar. He towed loads like yours and was
getting mileage like yours. He now has a 97 F350 CC PSD 4X4(old body and
better looking) with 3:55 gears and is getting 17 -20 mpg.

The PSD, in most applications and including yours, would perform much better
across the board with 3:55 ratio.

Ford sales people are, for the most part, ignorant about the practical use
of their products. I have seen more 4:10 ratios on the dealer lots then any
other axle, even in the V-10 engine trucks, gimme a break! Our local dealer
learned from his customer's complaints and stared ordering the trucks with
3:55 ratios.

>From my experience, the old Ford diesels engines will get the same
mileage(what ever it is) towing or with the A/C on or with a load in the bed
etc. etc. I don't know if it is the same with all diesels. I know it makes
no difference what the load is, they get the same mileage for the most part.
Don't expect to make a large mpg difference by the little things you do.


- -----Original Message-----
From: Chris Foye
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 1998 2:24 PM
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD


>I have an F350 97 CC PSD (old body style) with the 4.10 rear gearing, open
>bed. I regularly tow a 3500lb boat with it.
>Here is what I'm finding, I usually get around 12mpg around town and
>anywhere from 12 to 15 without towing on the freeway. Last weekend, I
>loaded up the truck with 5 passengers at about 600lbs, boat in tow at
>around 3500lbs, equipment accounted for about 200lbs and freeway cruising
>was 65mph at 2300rpm with cruise control. The total trip was 350 miles
>round trip with 4 passes total and a little bit of climbing towards the
>end. Got back and filled up the tanks, and low and behold 12mpg.
>When I researched to purchase the truck I opted for the diesel because of
>the gas mileage, I posed the mileage question to the group and most were
>getting in the high teens,, I was expecting to get around 15 freeway towing
>and around 17 -19 not towing. I currently have 10,500 miles on it and it
>hasn't changed since new.
>Is there something I should look into? Could it be gas, open bed, gearing
>to tall? What are others finding with similar trucks? I really thought I
>would get better gas mileage with the "beast" but, I'm a little
disappointed.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Chris
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:14:59 -0700
From: cassis
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's

In my opinion, if you choose to go the "cheeper" route like maco you should
be prepared to do a little prep work yourself. Take off your bumbers,
grill, tail lights, head light grills, remove any emblems on the truck (if
not they will just tape them off. Anything you dont want them to just tape
off you should take off. A paint job is only as good as the prep-work. If
you do a little work yourself you could probly get a half-way decent job
for a cheep price.But if you just let them paint it with no real prep work,
well you get what you pay for. Do a little work yourself and you will get a
much better job. There are several books on automotive painting and body
repair. They can be very helpful. Anyway just my 2 cents worth.

John Cassis
93' STX 4x4 3.0/5-speed

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ron Madurski [SMTP:rmadurski drd.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 7:44 AM
To: '80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's


I think it really depends on the place. There are several Maaco's here
in Tulsa. Most of them I would not trust with a bicycle that I was
getting painted to sell, but I was talking to one of my computer
suppliers and he turned me onto one that actually did good work. I went
to look (still haven't gotten the paint job yet) and sure enough, the
place was clean, the people appeared to be enjoying themselves, and the
cars out back looked really good.

A friend of mine took his truck there and they made a few mistakes, but
they also took care of them with no hassles.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Andrew [mailto:showork mail.gwi.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 1998 5:12 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's


I had a relative who was very pleased with his $199.99 Maaco
paint
job. They did get the car all one color. I would have for myself
preferred
they washed the car before the painted it. It had leaves, two match
heads
and bird dropping's under the paint. That actually turned out ok
because
two years later on their next $ 199.99paint job on the same car, the
bumps
actually looked smoothe and not noticable. Better still when it went to
a
car wash most of the paint stayed on! Three years (total of five) went
by
and almost all the first layer of paint was still on the car, also
preserved were the leaves and match heads. Good work those Maaco
people.

You get what you pay for. This is true in painting auto's more
than
most things. There is a lot of time and effort in a good auto paint job.
Even the chains can do a good job. Unfortunately very often the
individuals
are not given the time or the pay to care about doing a good job. Ask
around, word of mouth and a clear understanding of what you want and
expect
from your painter will get you a good deal and good job. This is one
area
to avoid pinching your pennys to hard. Auto paint takes a heck of a
beating.

Best of luck,
Andrew


>Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 00:00:08 EDT
>From: Ardy2 aol.com
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - Paint Job
>
>I have a 1989 tan Ranger (80,000 miles) that is in need of a new paint
job.
>The paint on the cab and the hood are really beginning to deteriorate
and look
>bad. Otherwise the truck is in very good condition.
>
>Has anyone ever used any of the National Chains like MAACO for a paint
job?
>How much can I expect to have to pay for a good paint job?


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 08:33:19 -0700
From: "Posluszny, Walt (POSL)"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: High Altitude Timing

I agree with Fred here...... The higher elevation you live the more
timing you should put into your engine. Within reason of course.
Because there's less oxygen, the fuel mixture burns more slowly. If you
leave your timing the same(as sea level) the peak efficiency will occur
latter in the power stroke, result.........less hp, tq and mpg.
Advancing the timing brings that peak burn timing back to where it
should be. Most newer vehicles automatically do this(the computer that
is). Older rigs that don't have computers can't and don't adjust for
altitude. As has been said here before, (as long as your in a state
that doesn't check the ign. timing as part of the emissions test, some
do...), advance the timing a couple degrees at a time and drive it good,
keep doing this until it pings and then back off a couple of degrees.
You'd be surprised at how much better the engine will run. I'm running
18 degrees BTDC on a 78 351M on reg gas and it doesn't ping at all.
Walt
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 11:05:03 -0600
From: Fred Moreno
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Rolling Idle Situation

Hello Jere,
[snip]
BTW, an easy way to lower your mileage is to retard your timing. I do
not understand why those who did your recall work retarded your timing
(except maybe to meet a certain emission criteria of course!). My truck
specifies 10 degrees and living at 3500-4000 and often traveling to
higher grounds I advanced my timing to 12 degrees. Somewhere long ago
(in a galaxy far, far away...) I remember a lecture on Internal
Combustion engines, volumetric efficiency, timing, etc... and the point
is if you live at higher altitudes a SLIGHT amount of ignition timing is
only beneficial because most specifications are designed for near sea
level environments. Ignore that last statement if your emissions decal
specifies "High Altitude emissions".
You being at 7000 feet in elevation can certainly only benefit from a
couple of degrees of timing advance IF your vehicle is not equipped for
High Altitude emissions. I have not read your particular recall you
mentioned. Sorry, but work has me swamped.
God I hope this does not ignite a flaming war - that's one of the
reason I have been an observer/reader for so long.

Fred Moreno
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 98 08:35:45 PDT
From: "Mike Mueller"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Low oil pressure...

Hey all-
A while back I had a friend in CO who had his oil pressure drop (89 Bronc=
o, 351).
I asked the list what it could be and got many answers. I suggested the =
usual stuff. Check the sender, check the guage, check the wiring. He =
replaced the guage with a mechanical and still had the problem. As for =
my friends motor, he ended up rebuilding it.
BTW: Someone said the sender wasn't a sender at all but just a switch (ie=
. off and on only). One person in particular said he keeps changing his =
oil on regular basis and so far the motor has lasted for the last couple =
of years.

BUT, I have a friend, who has friend, who is a Ford Regional Service Rep.=
Talked to him the other night and he said they had a problem with crack=
s at the bottom of the oil pickup tube in the sump. Best way to check =
if this is it - add another quart of oil. The motor can handle it, and =
if the problem goes away- you know exactly what it is! If it doesn't, =
keep searching. Hopefully this is it.

In the meantime I'll continue driving while keeping an eye on the oil pre=
ssure guage (er, I mean switch) ; )

'89 F-150 XLT, S/C, 4X4, 351, A/T, Longbed, bad brakes, peeling paint, =
good oil pressure!

Thanks!

Mike Mueller
The Leasing Dept.
Equipment Leasing and Funding
www.leasingdept.com
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Grandfather,
not screaming in terror like his passengers".


> 80-96-list-digest Wednesday, July 22 1998 Volume 02 : Numbe=
r 253

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 22:23:44 -0800
> From: "Pat Daniels"
> Subject: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure...
>
> I have an 80 Ford F150 with a 302 that loses oil pressure to the point =
it
> is right on the "L" on the oil pressure gauge after you drive it about =
20
> minutes. When you first start it the oil pressure is right in the midd=
le
> of the gauge then goes down the longer you drive it. The truck has 76,=
000
> on it. Any suggestions? Thanks...

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:12:58 -0400
From: D Robertson
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Paint Chain's

Also check out if there are any Vo-tech schools around. I have had two cars
painted by two different schools. They did all right work and the cost is
for supplies only. One school was real fast the other rather long but the
price was right.

Dave


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:25:26 -0700
From: Steve Faust
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: Low Oil Pressure

Pat Daniels Wrote:
I have an 80 Ford F150 with a 302 that loses oil pressure to the point
it is right on the "L" on the oil pressure gauge after you drive it
about 20 minutes. When you first start it the oil pressure is right in
the middle of the gauge then goes down the longer you drive it. The
truck has 76,000 on it. Any suggestions? Thanks...


Pat:
Just a thought -- You didn't mention for how long you've had this
problem, but if you've recently had the oil changed check to make sure
that it wasn't over filled. My understanding is that if there is too
much oil in the crankcase that it starts to foam up, thus it isn't able
to flow well (or at all) and you will experience an oil pressure drop
and little or no engine lubrication -- I had this happen in a Daytona I
used to own. Check the oil level if too high (when it is happening you
can also sometimes see bubbly oil on the dip stick) drain it off the
right level and then run it.

Good Luck!

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:38:13 -0700
From: Rick Hunt
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: High Altitude Timing

Out here in the mountain west we definitely add more advance for the altitude.
I grew up with a Dad that was a mechanic - the "rule of thumb" we used was ADD
1/2 DEGREE ADVANCE FOR EACH 1,000 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. For example, we're at
about 5,000 ft. here, so we always ADD 2-1/2 DEGREES advance to the (sea level)
factory specs.

Hope this gives you a good starting point; like Fred & Walt are suggesting, you
can fine tune it from there...

rh
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 13:03:45 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure...

Pat-
I suggest you have a real pressure guage attached to the engine at a shop
and see what the pressures are when cold and after 20 minutes. It could be
that your "oil pressure guage" is not reading right. They are notorious for
false readings. Sender could be failing, instrument voltage regulator could
be whack-o, etc.

What weight oil are you using?

Jim

Pat wrote:
"I have an 80 Ford F150 with a 302 that loses oil pressure to the point it
is right on the "L" on the oil pressure gauge after you drive it about 20
minutes. When you first start it the oil pressure is right in the middle
of the gauge then goes down the longer you drive it. The truck has 76,000
on it. Any suggestions? Thanks..."

Jim Cannon
Houston, TX

"When you starve with a tiger, the tiger starves last."
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 15:42:23 -0400
From: "David Butts"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD

What size tires are needed to give an effective ratio of 3.55? When you
have 4.10 gears.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Doug Tinsman
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD


>I have owned three Ford diesels and know many people who own them.
>
>Your problem is the 4:10 gears. I have seen this over and over! I do not
>know why Ford isn't more informative about the mileage and how gear ratio
>REALLY affects it with these trucks.
>
>My brother traded a 96 F250 with only 10,000 miles because of the bad
>mileage. His situation was similar. He towed loads like yours and was
>getting mileage like yours. He now has a 97 F350 CC PSD 4X4(old body and
>better looking) with 3:55 gears and is getting 17 -20 mpg.
>
>The PSD, in most applications and including yours, would perform much
better
>across the board with 3:55 ratio.
>
>Ford sales people are, for the most part, ignorant about the practical use
>of their products. I have seen more 4:10 ratios on the dealer lots then any
>other axle, even in the V-10 engine trucks, gimme a break! Our local dealer
>learned from his customer's complaints and stared ordering the trucks with
>3:55 ratios.
>
>>From my experience, the old Ford diesels engines will get the same
>mileage(what ever it is) towing or with the A/C on or with a load in the
bed
>etc. etc. I don't know if it is the same with all diesels. I know it makes
>no difference what the load is, they get the same mileage for the most
part.
>Don't expect to make a large mpg difference by the little things you do.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Chris Foye
>To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
>Date: Tuesday, July 21, 1998 2:24 PM
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - Poor gas mileage on PSD
>
>
>>I have an F350 97 CC PSD (old body style) with the 4.10 rear gearing, open
>>bed. I regularly tow a 3500lb boat with it.
>>Here is what I'm finding, I usually get around 12mpg around town and
>>anywhere from 12 to 15 without towing on the freeway. Last weekend, I
>>loaded up the truck with 5 passengers at about 600lbs, boat in tow at
>>around 3500lbs, equipment accounted for about 200lbs and freeway cruising
>>was 65mph at 2300rpm with cruise control. The total trip was 350 miles
>>round trip with 4 passes total and a little bit of climbing towards the
>>end. Got back and filled up the tanks, and low and behold 12mpg.
>>When I researched to purchase the truck I opted for the diesel because of
>>the gas mileage, I posed the mileage question to the group and most were
>>getting in the high teens,, I was expecting to get around 15 freeway
towing
>>and around 17 -19 not towing. I currently have 10,500 miles on it and it
>>hasn't changed since new.
>>Is there something I should look into? Could it be gas, open bed, gearing
>>to tall? What are others finding with similar trucks? I really thought I
>>would get better gas mileage with the "beast" but, I'm a little
>disappointed.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Chris
>>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 14:58:15 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: manual stick/rear main

>From: Casey Vandor
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: manual stick/rear main
>
>I did get the stick out after all. You can't fit the tranny and
>crossmember out at the same time, and I cant break the
>bolts loose holding the tranny. I have tried WD 40 and
>others, but still no luck.

Yo Casey:

I would have chimed in earlier, but I've been on vacation a few days. Last
fall, I replaced the clutch on my 1980 F250 4x4, 351M/NP435. I had no
trouble getting the transmission mount bolts loose, but I had to drop the
crossmember to get the tranny out, and the crossmember nuts/bolts were some
funky metric size and frozen solid.

Since I didn't have a 19mm deep well socket, I just used a pipe wrench w/
about a four foot section of heavy steel pipe as a cheater bar and those
nasty metric nuts came right off. Broke off one of the bolts, too.
Anyway, after I cleaned up all the parts and got the tranny back in place,
I replaced all those #% #! metric doodads w/ brand new Grade 8 SAE nuts
and bolts.

The actual tranny mounting point on my truck was at the back of the
extension between the tranny and transfer case. I just had to disconnect
the front and rear drive shafts and disconnect it from the extension to
drop the transfer case. To get out the tranny and extension, I had to take
out the crossmember.

As for resurfacing the flywheel, I would always recommend doing that when
changing a worn out clutch. I can guarantee you that there are "hot" spots
and grooves on your flywheel from wearing out a clutch disk. Those can be
removed and the balance of the flywheel maintained by a simple resurfacing
on a lathe. I know you pay more for goods and services up there in Alaska,
but the cost of resurfacing the flywheel should be pretty reasonable.
Consider it to be an insurance payment that will double the life of the new
clutch disk. Also, many clutch manufacturers will void their warranty if
you don't resurface the flywheel.

When you take the flywheel off the back of the crankshaft, use a metal
stamp to mark the alignment of the flywheel relative to the crank so you
don't screw up the engine's balance. I don't know if your 351W is
externally balanced or not, but my 351M is, and the flywheel is part of the
balance so its position on the crankshaft is critical.

>I am leary about changing the rear
>main becasue of the fact you have to loosen the rod caps
>and drop the crank a hare. It leaks, but in the 3,000 between
>changes, it has never used more than 1/4 cup. Now
>antifreeze on the other hand, well it was about 1 quart a
>week before unplugging the core..... I will be sure to check
>out the spindle needle bearings, thanks for letting me in on
>that one.

Not fixing a leaking rear main is kind of risky. On one hand, the rate of
leakage you have experienced is not much to worry about, especially if the
old clutch components show NO signs of oil contamination. On the other
hand, a leaky seal almost always gets worse over time and never gets better
on its own.

While the transmission is out of the truck, the rear main seal is more
accessible now than ever. Replacing the seal now will guarantee you tens
of thousands of trouble-free miles. If your engine has less than 150K
miles on it, I would replace the seal, knowing it will be worthwhile. If
you already have well over 150K miles on the engine, you could chance it
and plan to rebuild the engine when the leak gets really bad or sooner.

Good luck w/ your truck.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 21:25:46 -0600
From: Jeff fisher
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 71 - 84 Engine swap...

Hello All,

I'm new to the list and have a question (or two or three). I am considering buying a
72 F-250 2WD w/1971 460 so I can place that motor into my 84 F-250
4WD...

I know the 71 motor is the last year of the higher compression so it
should be a good performer. It has 11k on the rebuild. My plan is
to swap out the engines and resell the 72 with my well worn 84 460
in it. Seems like a sound plan to me..

My questions/concerns are:

Any problem with swapping out the 84 electronic ignition with the
71s point type system?

I may want to just buy a better electronic ignition system to place on the
71 anyway but haven't thought that far yet. If I choose this route
then can I retain the electronic system in the 84 engine when I put
it in the 72 chassis?

Are there special "knock" sensors on my 84 that I need to be concerned
with?

I need to maintain emissions compliance, swapping the exh
headers and intake system solve that?

Are the oil pans identical between the 71 2wd and the 84 4wd? More
importantly the oil pickup location?
(I haven't had a chance to look at the 71 engine yet.)

Has anybody seen a good set of "Tri Y" type headers for a 84 4wd
460?

Money is obviously a factor, just trying to do the best I can with
what I got. Any thoughts, comments, suggestions, warnings?

Thanks in advance...

Best regards,
Jeff Fisher mailto:jrfish ....


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.