80-96-list-digest Thursday, December 3 1998 Volume 02 : Number 404



=======================================================================
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 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
FTE 80-96 - 97 F250 HD turbo diesel for sale
FTE 80-96 - re. door hinge
RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply -Reply
FTE 80-96 - FIPK???
Re: FTE 80-96 - door hinge
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
Re: FTE 80-96 - FIPK???
FTE 80-96 - Trans ID
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID
Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure
RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
RE: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
RE: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure
Re: FTE 80-96 - door hinge
RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure
Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID
Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID
Re: FTE 80-96 - Ford 460's
Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
FTE 80-96 - Gearing and blowby
FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302
FTE 80-96 - Bed size
FTE 80-96 - update(from Alot of Questions)
Re: FTE 80-96 - Ford 460's
Re: FTE 80-96 - Bed size
Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302
Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302
Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302
Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302
FTE 80-96 - Lincoln Floor Jack
Re: FTE 80-96 - White smoke/antifreeze odor
Re: FTE 80-96 - FIPK???

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 07:32:14 -0500
From: "Mark Edwards"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 07:34:27 -0500
From: "Mark Edwards"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 07:34:41 EST
From: FLR150 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

Mike,
Having been a massair knowledge hunter myself over the past couple of months
I can feel safe to say that I can help you identify whether or not you have
massair on your truck. I have a '94 F150 5.0L with the AODE trans. I went
round and round with Ford and other so called mechanics and I was told
strictly that I had the speed density system like the Lightning's. WRONG!!! In
94 the only way we as consumers were able to get massair on the F150's were to
have bought the trucks in California or to have purchased a conversion package
truck from the dealer, mine so happened to have been a conversion (Mark III)
and so had the massair. Now to your '95. The massair system was more widely
available in 95 and completely available in 96 except that 95 was the last
year (I believe) to have totally used the adaptable EEC-IV computer, 96 has
the OBDII and is tougher to modify. If you need more help identifying whether
or not you have massair I have a complete diagram of the airbox to throttle
body system for you to check your with. Email me off the list and I will Email
it to you.
OH and by the way, I have had those heads checked out by a friend and they are
good GT40 heads and the price was definitely right. I also found out that this
guy has a pretty good Internet business going by selling used parts out of his
machine shop and most references checked have shown for them to be great
parts. Once I found out about his business, I wrote him a scathing Email
including the fact that I am a member of one of the webs largest post and
information sites in FTE. I then explained that if he didn't honor his
original deal with me then I would make his name mud on the Internet. Long
story short....the heads are in the possession of UPS and should be here by
Friday. Thanks for all the backup...I appreciate it
Wayne Foy
'94 F150 Flareside Supercab
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 07:38:03 EST
From: FLR150 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

Mike,
Having been a massair knowledge hunter myself over the past couple of months
I can feel safe to say that I can help you identify whether or not you have
massair on your truck. I have a '94 F150 5.0L with the AODE trans. I went
round and round with Ford and other so called mechanics and I was told
strictly that I had the speed density system like the Lightning's. WRONG!!! In
94 the only way we as consumers were able to get massair on the F150's were to
have bought the trucks in California or to have purchased a conversion package
truck from the dealer, mine so happened to have been a conversion (Mark III)
and so had the massair. Now to your '95. The massair system was more widely
available in 95 and completely available in 96 except that 95 was the last
year (I believe) to have totally used the adaptable EEC-IV computer, 96 has
the OBDII and is tougher to modify. If you need more help identifying whether
or not you have massair I have a complete diagram of the airbox to throttle
body system for you to check your with. Email me off the list and I will Email
it to you.
OH and by the way, I have had those heads checked out by a friend and they are
good GT40 heads and the price was definitely right. I also found out that this
guy has a pretty good Internet business going by selling used parts out of his
machine shop and most references checked have shown for them to be great
parts. Once I found out about his business, I wrote him a scathing Email
including the fact that I am a member of one of the webs largest post and
information sites in FTE. I then explained that if he didn't honor his
original deal with me then I would make his name mud on the Internet. Long
story short....the heads are in the possession of UPS and should be here by
Friday. Thanks for all the backup...I appreciate it
Wayne Foy
'94 F150 Flareside Supercab

- ----Original Message-----
> From: Michael J. Pasznik, Jr. [SMTP:mjp globespan.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 2:49 PM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
>
> Scott,
>
> From the appearance descriptions I've gotten off of this list, I
> believe
> my '95 F150 302 has mass air. I haven't done any performance enhancements
> yet, but I checked it out of curiosity and was pleased to see that it was
> there for future mods.
>
> -Mike
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 06:19:32 PST
From: "Rob Bubala"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 97 F250 HD turbo diesel for sale

Hello

If anyone knows of someone who is looking for a turbo diesel truck,
please send them my way. The truck is located in the Chicago area, and I
need to sell it. Here is the info. I am willing to deal, and would
consider a partial trade for a Jeep Cherokee or Grand Cherokee.

1997 Ford F250 HD 4x4
turbo diesel
automatic
XLT
air
tilt
cruise
power windows
power locks
cassette
cap
alarm
manual hubs
heavy duty front and rear springs
limited slip diff
camper package
off road package
clearance lights
chrome front and rear bumpers
hitch
bug shield
K & N filter
Banks transcommand module
sliding rear window
40/20/40 seat
aluminum rims
Rhino lined bed
31k miles

I am asking $25k or best offer, but I AM WILLING TO DEAL, so either
email me at jeep_cj8 hotmail.com or call me at 219-473-9102.

Thank you,

Robert Bubala

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 11:10:19 -0330
From: "T.Gill"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - re. door hinge

On Tue, 01 Dec 1998 18:50:43 -0600 Joe wrote:


slighty....."

Joe,
You could try adjusting the door before buying any parts. Put a pencil mark
around the body side of both hinges so you can mark their present location.
Get a buddy to Hold the door and loosen the body side hinge bolts. You may
need to move the door to different positions to get them all i.e. open and
closed, I had to use a universal on the socket to reach some of the bolts on
my 1993 f-150. Your buddy can then almost close the door and pivot the door
higher. Then tighten a couple of bolts and try the door. If you door is only
dropping slightly there should be more than enough adjustment there.

Trevor Gill

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 09:37:41 -0700
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

BTW, All of the different angled camber bushings for our trucks are
available at NAPA for $11.40. You can take your truck to a alignment shop
and have them do an inspection on it and print out the measurements for
free. If you take the time to understand what the measurements are telling
you and find the correct measurements you can pick up and install the
bushings yourself by dropping the ball joints. Then you take it down for
another free alignment test at someplace else and see if your calculations
were correct and how far off they are and either rotate the bushing or
remove it and exchange it for a different angled bushing at NAPA. I got
lucky and had a brother in law whose father did alignments and he looked at
the readout, compared it to the specifications given to me over the phone by
a reputable 4x4 alignment shop, and told me what bushing to buy. I only
needed the right side done and dropped the right ball joint on a Saturday
morning, installed it, put it back together and went to the alignment shop
and had them inspect it again. It was not perfect, but still within spec,
but it was exactly what it needed, the truck handles like a dream now and I
saved 135 bucks and because I did it myself it got done right the first
time. I was originally quoted 350 bucks to do it at the local Goodyear tire
shop. I called around and found that some discount shop like Midis would do
it for 150 bucks if it needed bushings replaced on both sides. I called
Goodyear back and they offered to match it. But after I had a alignment guy
look at it, my bother in laws father, he said I only needed the right
bushing because the left will correct itself when the right is in the proper
position. So Goodyear would have charged me for the left when I didn't need
it. I know it was a lot of trouble to do it that way and if I had to do it
again I would just paid the 150 bucks and had them do it. I know this
though. I did it right, it works, and I am happy with it. No one is going to
take the time to do it right like you yourself would and it is fixed
permanently.

Your choices are to pay someone 350 bucks to do it right, 150 bucks and
maybe it's right, or do it yourself for $11.40 and have it done right.

The toe in adjustment is the easiest thing in the world to do yourself and
now that I know how to do it, I can adjust it the way I like it and the
steering wheel is centered and the new tires I put on it are not wearing at
all.

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:06:30 -0500
From: "Mark Edwards"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply -Reply

Thanks Scott,
I appreciate your help.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 11:07:11 -0800
From: "Matt and Deidre"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - FIPK???

Has anyone ever used the K&N Filtercharger Injection Performance Kits? Can
you tell a change in performance? I have a 93' F150 with the 302 and a 5
speed. Is there anyway to make that 5 speed change gears like in a car?
I've heard that cutting the shifter down some will help. Any help is
appreciated.

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:10:48 -0500 (EST)
From: STHIBODE spf.fairchildsemi.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - door hinge

Hi,

Just rebuilt both hinges on my 85 f-250, cheaper than buying the whole
hinge assembly, approx. $60 for each hinge complete vs. $20 for parts
for all 4 hinges.

Bushings 8 $1.00 ford part # d90z-6522841-c

pins 4 $2.18 ford part # b9a-5943030-aa

I believe the bushings will fit the earlier (70's) f-series trucks as well, but
I believe the pins are of different length....

I was replacing both doors so it was easy to replace at that time. I unbolted
the door from the hinge and left the hinges on the lower a-pillar. Grind the
head of the pin off and drive the pin through with a punch. Push the bushings
out and tap in new ones, drive new pins from the top of the hinge until the
spline on the pin seats into the hinge, done...repeat 3 more times, bolt and
align up doors.

regards,
Steve T.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:28:42 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

Giddens, Scott wrote:
>
> Chris,
> These numbers sound too round but I show 200 bhp on the output of the motor
> 300 ft/lbs torque per the manual. I like your numbers better though. : ) I
> figure you would deduct 15% H.P. loss for a standard and 20% for a automatic
> at the wheels. My '95 does not have a mass air flow sensor and I don't know
> about the roller motor. That sounds like the spec's for a '95 Lightning. I
> wish my '95 did have mass air and a roller motor. I think the mass air came
> out in '96 didn't it?
> Scott

I was sure...I will check this evening...but I thought all 95(might be
just the 96s then) and up got mass air...94 and up in California! The 95
Lightning didn't get a roller motor or mass air! A roller motor has a
roller can, lifters, and rockers. frees up more power and better mileage
tha the non rollers! I will also check the power figures tonight in the
book I have and double check...I was recalling from memory and I
remember the non roller motors were making 210(I thought) and about 15
more for the roller motors!

Is it the E4OD? The Lightnings lose about 45hp though the drivetrain and
alot of it goes into huge chunk of transmission!
Chris
94 Lightning #381
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:43:20 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

BigRed wrote:
>
> It makes since that the 5.0 L would have a single bore throttle
> >body because of the smaller motor. Someone please correct me if I am
> >assuming too much.
> >
> The truck 5.0's have dual throttle body's, but the cars only have one. You
> have mass air if you have an aluminum "thingy" between either the hose and
> the air box or the hose and the T.B. The sensor will be mounted on that.
> Someone tell me if I'm wrong, but I believe that to be true.
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

This cant be true either because mine is set up let that and it is speed
density!
Chris
94 Lightning
( Wish I had that damn book with me right now!)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:45:48 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

> Mike,
> Having been a massair knowledge hunter myself over the past couple of months
> I can feel safe to say that I can help you identify whether or not you have
> massair on your truck. I have a '94 F150 5.0L with the AODE trans. I went
> round and round with Ford and other so called mechanics and I was told
> strictly that I had the speed density system like the Lightning's. WRONG!!! In
> 94 the only way we as consumers were able to get massair on the F150's were to
> have bought the trucks in California or to have purchased a conversion package
> truck from the dealer, mine so happened to have been a conversion (Mark III)
> and so had the massair. Now to your '95. The massair system was more widely
> available in 95 and completely available in 96 except that 95 was the last
> year (I believe) to have totally used the adaptable EEC-IV computer, 96 has
> the OBDII and is tougher to modify. If you need more help identifying whether
> or not you have massair I have a complete diagram of the airbox to throttle
> body system for you to check your with. Email me off the list and I will Email
> it to you.
> OH and by the way, I have had those heads checked out by a friend and they are
> good GT40 heads and the price was definitely right. I also found out that this
> guy has a pretty good Internet business going by selling used parts out of his
> machine shop and most references checked have shown for them to be great
> parts. Once I found out about his business, I wrote him a scathing Email
> including the fact that I am a member of one of the webs largest post and
> information sites in FTE. I then explained that if he didn't honor his
> original deal with me then I would make his name mud on the Internet. Long
> story short....the heads are in the possession of UPS and should be here by
> Friday. Thanks for all the backup...I appreciate it
> Wayne Foy


Are you going to have the GT40s ported...I was thinking about having
mine done...or buy some after market ones!
Chris
94 Lightning#381
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:08:53 EST
From: ACMERCG aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - FIPK???

In a message dated 98-12-02 12:27:59 EST, you write:


you tell a change in performance? I have a 93' F150 with the 302 and a 5
speed. Is there anyway to make that 5 speed change gears like in a car?
I've heard that cutting the shifter down some will help. Any help is
appreciated. >>
Are we talking about the filtercharger replacement or the kit that replaces
the airbox? I have the replacement filter and I don't notice much of a
diffrence except that the engine seems louder and the ease of cleaning the
filter and putting it back in.

Joe
Lost in Jersey
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:18:12 EST
From: ACMERCG aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID

How do you ID a Ford Trans? I have a 92 F-150 with the 302, 4x4 and the
shift on the ffly t case. The trans pan is square with a sump in the middle.
Any Ideas?

Joe
Lost in Jersey
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:20:26 -0500
From: "Michael J. Pasznik, Jr."
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

Hey all,

With a little help from Wayne I was able to confirm that my '95 F150 4x4
302 has mass air. I picked it up used in Jersey, so I doubt it's a
California model. I guess Ford decided to start including this setup
sometime during the production year.
In any event, I'm pleased, and can't wait to get my hands on the K&N
tomorrow to see what everybody's been talking about.
As always, thanks for the info!

- -Mike

- -----Original Message-----
From: Garr&Pam
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?


Giddens, Scott wrote:
>
> Chris,
> These numbers sound too round but I show 200 bhp on the output of the
motor
> 300 ft/lbs torque per the manual. I like your numbers better though. : )
I
> figure you would deduct 15% H.P. loss for a standard and 20% for a
automatic
> at the wheels. My '95 does not have a mass air flow sensor and I don't
know
> about the roller motor. That sounds like the spec's for a '95 Lightning. I
> wish my '95 did have mass air and a roller motor. I think the mass air
came
> out in '96 didn't it?
> Scott

I was sure...I will check this evening...but I thought all 95(might be
just the 96s then) and up got mass air...94 and up in California! The 95
Lightning didn't get a roller motor or mass air! A roller motor has a
roller can, lifters, and rockers. frees up more power and better mileage
tha the non rollers! I will also check the power figures tonight in the
book I have and double check...I was recalling from memory and I
remember the non roller motors were making 210(I thought) and about 15
more for the roller motors!

Is it the E4OD? The Lightnings lose about 45hp though the drivetrain and
alot of it goes into huge chunk of transmission!
Chris
94 Lightning #381
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:49:27 -0600
From: "Rick Wojciechowski"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID

ACMERCG aol.com wrote:

> How do you ID a Ford Trans? I have a 92 F-150 with the 302, 4x4 and the
> shift on the ffly t case. The trans pan is square with a sump in the middle.
> Any Ideas?


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


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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:57:10 -0600
From: "Rick Wojciechowski"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

Giddens, Scott wrote:

> BTW, All of the different angled camber bushings for our trucks are
> available at NAPA for $11.40. You can take your truck to a alignment shop
> and have them do an inspection on it and print out the measurements for
> free. If you take the time to understand what the measurements are telling
> you and find the correct measurements you can pick up and install the

Scott,
Thanks for all the good info. Just one question. How many notches
of adjustment are on those camber adjusters.
- --
Thanks,
Rick Wojo
'83 Fsize BRONCO,Stock I-6,"The BROWN BULL",33x12.5x15-Mud Terrains
'92 Mstng 5.0L
'95 eclipse-Wife's(For Sale)


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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 12:37:41 PST
From: "joseph virga"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure

I first want to state that this site is invaluable!. I recently joined
and have learned so much about Broncos from reading the Q&A that are
posted.

Now I would like to share my problem. I own a 87 Bronco with a 351. The
truck has 175,000 miles and runs great (The oil has been changed every
3000 miles religiously!. Recently the truck has developed a problem with
the oil pressure gauge indicating low pressure. When the condition first
occurred, the indicator of the gauge would swing completely to the left
and the engine light would illuminate. I replaced the sender unit and it
seemed to solve the problem for about a week. Now the condition occurs
only after the truck is warmed-up and after driven at highway speeds.
The indicator of the gauge swings to the extreme left whenever I come to
a stop and then swings back to the normal position (indicator is between
the N and O) when I accelerate. When I place the truck in park, it also
reverts back to the normal position. I have changed the oil three times
in the past 400 miles - hoping to remove any sludge in the oil pan.
Throughout this condition, the truck idles and runs smoothly. My only
guess is that the oil pump is failing. Has anyone experienced this with
their truck?.

I would appreciate your input and any information / experiences on this
condition.

Joe Virga

87' Eddie Bauer Bronco "My Home Depot Companion"
94' T-Bird

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 13:37:42 -0700
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

Rick,

That is a very good question. I don't know the number of notches, but the
NAPA bushings did not have as many notches as the Ford stock bushings or the
ones you get from the alignment shops. I remember thinking about obtaining
the bushings from the same source the alignment shops get them but I did not
need to. I think I was more worried about the degrees of adjustment on the
angles. NAPA only carries them in the sizes, 1/2, 1, 1-1/2, and 2, if I
remember correctly. I think I was worried about the lift I was going to do
and the fact it screws up the camber.

The lift kit I purchased from J.C. Whitney to raise my suspension ~2 inches
came with a 2-1/2 degree camber bushing in it and has a lot more notches in
it so I know they must be out there somewhere. I am waiting to find some 16"
wheels to put on it before I install the lift and have to deal with the
camber adjustment all over again. BTW, I was surprised the J.C. Whitney lift
kit came with the bushing, I just hope it will be enough to correct the
change in the lift after I had to put a 1-1/2 degree bushing in it already
on only the right side. How the hell am I going to correct this when I lift
it now? I am pretty certain the 2-1/2 degree bushing will not be enough on
the right and I will have to find a 3 degree bushing? I am not sure they
even make them. Something to think about for those of you planning to do a
suspension lift instead of a body lift. There are a lot of things to worry
about for a suspension lift. But I guess the body lifts are just as bad with
the steering box problem.

Scott
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Wojciechowski [SMTP:wojciecr nichols.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 11:57 AM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
>
> Giddens, Scott wrote:
>
> > BTW, All of the different angled camber bushings for our trucks are
> > available at NAPA for $11.40. You can take your truck to a alignment
> shop
> > and have them do an inspection on it and print out the measurements for
> > free. If you take the time to understand what the measurements are
> telling
> > you and find the correct measurements you can pick up and install the
>
> Scott,
> Thanks for all the good info. Just one question. How many notches
> of adjustment are on those camber adjusters.
> --
> Thanks,
> Rick Wojo
> '83 Fsize BRONCO,Stock I-6,"The BROWN BULL",33x12.5x15-Mud Terrains
> '92 Mstng 5.0L
> '95 eclipse-Wife's(For Sale)
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 15:07:58 -0600
From: "Rick Wojciechowski"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

Giddens, Scott wrote:

> Rick,
>
> That is a very good question. I don't know the number of notches, but the
> NAPA bushings did not have as many notches as the Ford stock bushings or the

Thats funny. When I put my ball-joints in a couple of months agoand screwed up
the drivers side camber getting it out I went to Ford
and all they had were adjusters with two notches on them(one across
from the other). So in effect there is no real adjustment except
180 degrees. This was also true of the one I screwed up. And
they wanted $25.00 from Ford for it.


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


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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 14:05:43 -0700
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

I did some research and found references to the mass air sensors being put
on some '95 5.0 L like you say.
I did not find anything on mass air for the '95 5.8 L engines. Why they
would put them on the 5.0 L and not the 5.8 L in the same year is a mystery
to me.

BTW, the K&N p/n for the FPIK with out mass air is 57-2503 for both the 5.0
and the 5.8, with mass air the number is 57-2510 for the 5.0 L only, there
is no listing of the 5.8 L in '95 having mass air.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael J. Pasznik, Jr. [SMTP:mjp globespan.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 11:20 AM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
>
> Hey all,
>
> With a little help from Wayne I was able to confirm that my '95 F150
> 4x4
> 302 has mass air. I picked it up used in Jersey, so I doubt it's a
> California model. I guess Ford decided to start including this setup
> sometime during the production year.
> In any event, I'm pleased, and can't wait to get my hands on the K&N
> tomorrow to see what everybody's been talking about.
> As always, thanks for the info!
>
> -Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Garr&Pam
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 12:53 PM
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
>
>
> Giddens, Scott wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> > These numbers sound too round but I show 200 bhp on the output of the
> motor
> > 300 ft/lbs torque per the manual. I like your numbers better though. :
> )
> I
> > figure you would deduct 15% H.P. loss for a standard and 20% for a
> automatic
> > at the wheels. My '95 does not have a mass air flow sensor and I don't
> know
> > about the roller motor. That sounds like the spec's for a '95 Lightning.
> I
> > wish my '95 did have mass air and a roller motor. I think the mass air
> came
> > out in '96 didn't it?
> > Scott
>
> I was sure...I will check this evening...but I thought all 95(might be
> just the 96s then) and up got mass air...94 and up in California! The 95
> Lightning didn't get a roller motor or mass air! A roller motor has a
> roller can, lifters, and rockers. frees up more power and better mileage
> tha the non rollers! I will also check the power figures tonight in the
> book I have and double check...I was recalling from memory and I
> remember the non roller motors were making 210(I thought) and about 15
> more for the roller motors!
>
> Is it the E4OD? The Lightnings lose about 45hp though the drivetrain and
> alot of it goes into huge chunk of transmission!
> Chris
> 94 Lightning #381
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 14:45:57 -0700
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply

Sounds to me like the one I pulled out must have been from an
alignment shop then. That would mean the stock ford camber bushings are
non-adjustable or non-ratable. That would explain why they have so many
different angle sizes.

Scott


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Wojciechowski [SMTP:wojciecr nichols.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:08 PM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - F250 4x4 camber problems -Reply
>
> Giddens, Scott wrote:
>
> > Rick,
> >
> > That is a very good question. I don't know the number of notches, but
> the
> > NAPA bushings did not have as many notches as the Ford stock bushings or
> the
>
> Thats funny. When I put my ball-joints in a couple of months agoand
> screwed up
> the drivers side camber getting it out I went to Ford
> and all they had were adjusters with two notches on them(one across
> from the other). So in effect there is no real adjustment except
> 180 degrees. This was also true of the one I screwed up. And
> they wanted $25.00 from Ford for it.
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Rick Wojo
> '83 Fsize BRONCO,Stock I-6,"The BROWN BULL",33x12.5x15-Mud Terrains
> '92 Mstng 5.0L
> '95 eclipse-Wife's(For Sale)
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 14:20:09 -0800
From: Rob Bryan
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

K&N is wrong on this one. Mass air comes on 4.9, 5.0, and 5.8 liter engines
with CA or Northeastern state emissions packages from I believe 1994 and
up. I have a full set of 1995 F-series service manuals and both
speed-sensity, bank-fire and mass-air, sequential systems are described for
these 3 engines. Also, it seems that CA-spec 7.5L engines have
speed-density, sequential injection. Also, my mom currently has a '96 F-150
with a 5.8 and CA emissions and it has mass air.

Rob


At 2:05 PM -0700 12/02/98, Giddens, Scott wrote:
>I did some research and found references to the mass air sensors being put
>on some '95 5.0 L like you say.
>I did not find anything on mass air for the '95 5.8 L engines. Why they
>would put them on the 5.0 L and not the 5.8 L in the same year is a mystery
>to me.
>
>BTW, the K&N p/n for the FPIK with out mass air is 57-2503 for both the 5.0
>and the 5.8, with mass air the number is 57-2510 for the 5.0 L only, there
>is no listing of the 5.8 L in '95 having mass air.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael J. Pasznik, Jr. [SMTP:mjp globespan.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 11:20 AM
>> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> With a little help from Wayne I was able to confirm that my '95 F150
>> 4x4
>> 302 has mass air. I picked it up used in Jersey, so I doubt it's a
>> California model. I guess Ford decided to start including this setup
>> sometime during the production year.
>> In any event, I'm pleased, and can't wait to get my hands on the K&N
>> tomorrow to see what everybody's been talking about.
>> As always, thanks for the info!
>>
>> -Mike
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Garr&Pam
>> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
>> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 12:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?
>>
>>
>> Giddens, Scott wrote:
>> >
>> > Chris,
>> > These numbers sound too round but I show 200 bhp on the output of the
>> motor
>> > 300 ft/lbs torque per the manual. I like your numbers better though. :
>> )
>> I
>> > figure you would deduct 15% H.P. loss for a standard and 20% for a
>> automatic
>> > at the wheels. My '95 does not have a mass air flow sensor and I don't
>> know
>> > about the roller motor. That sounds like the spec's for a '95 Lightning.
>> I
>> > wish my '95 did have mass air and a roller motor. I think the mass air
>> came
>> > out in '96 didn't it?
>> > Scott
>>
>> I was sure...I will check this evening...but I thought all 95(might be
>> just the 96s then) and up got mass air...94 and up in California! The 95
>> Lightning didn't get a roller motor or mass air! A roller motor has a
>> roller can, lifters, and rockers. frees up more power and better mileage
>> tha the non rollers! I will also check the power figures tonight in the
>> book I have and double check...I was recalling from memory and I
>> remember the non roller motors were making 210(I thought) and about 15
>> more for the roller motors!
>>
>> Is it the E4OD? The Lightnings lose about 45hp though the drivetrain and
>> alot of it goes into huge chunk of transmission!
>> Chris
>> 94 Lightning #381
>> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>>
>>
>> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:22:43 -0700
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure

Joe,

I have heard of a bad instrument panel voltage regulator causing the
gauge to react like that and I have heard of the gauges going bad also. But
since you have a lot of miles on it I would wonder about the oil pump in
this case just to be safe.

The fact that changing the sending unit made some change to the
operation of the gauge makes me suspect the electrical aspects of the system
and not the mechanical components though.

Scott

> -----Original Message-----
> From: joseph virga [SMTP:jpvirga hotmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 1:38 PM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure
>
> I first want to state that this site is invaluable!. I recently joined
> and have learned so much about Broncos from reading the Q&A that are
> posted.
>
> Now I would like to share my problem. I own a 87 Bronco with a 351. The
> truck has 175,000 miles and runs great (The oil has been changed every
> 3000 miles religiously!. Recently the truck has developed a problem with
> the oil pressure gauge indicating low pressure. When the condition first
> occurred, the indicator of the gauge would swing completely to the left
> and the engine light would illuminate. I replaced the sender unit and it
> seemed to solve the problem for about a week. Now the condition occurs
> only after the truck is warmed-up and after driven at highway speeds.
> The indicator of the gauge swings to the extreme left whenever I come to
> a stop and then swings back to the normal position (indicator is between
> the N and O) when I accelerate. When I place the truck in park, it also
> reverts back to the normal position. I have changed the oil three times
> in the past 400 miles - hoping to remove any sludge in the oil pan.
> Throughout this condition, the truck idles and runs smoothly. My only
> guess is that the oil pump is failing. Has anyone experienced this with
> their truck?.
>
> I would appreciate your input and any information / experiences on this
> condition.
>
> Joe Virga
>
> 87' Eddie Bauer Bronco "My Home Depot Companion"
> 94' T-Bird
>
> ______________________________________________________
> > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:21:56 EST
From: ROlson1039 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - door hinge

on my 1989 its the upper but if you have someone move the door you will
actually see the play in them I looked in a junkyard and found em there for
$5 each
Just be careful those used ones are good
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:24:01 -0600
From: "Baldwin, Dave"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Low oil pressure

Joe,

The factory instrumentation is questionable at best. Ford's been known to
do all kinds of things. In some cases they have summed an engine speed
signal with oil pressure sensor output (which was just a switch). This
yielded an oil pressure indication that would go higher with increasing
engine speed. Other times, they have used sensors which are actually
switches to indicate whether you have oil pressure or not--it either reads
normal, or zero! No better than an indicator light. Most are set up that
way. Yours is probably that way.

My bet is that you have lots of miles on your engine, and the pressure drops
very low at idle in gear--not zero, but just below the threshold where the
switch trips. Now if you remove the load from the engine (park or neutral),
the engine speed moves up just enough to allow the switch to open and read
normal.

The only way to know for sure is to put a real gauge on it (aftermarket) and
see what it is doing. I don't know where you live, but if it's a warm
climate, you might try increasing your oil viscosity to the higher range
recommended for warm climates. If bearing wear is allowing oil pressure to
drop, a change in viscosity will improve things for a while. Nothing lasts
forever, and eventually you'll have to "freshen up" that engine. You've had
a good run. For what it's worth, I've had some really tired engines which
displayed almost no oil pressure (less than 10psi indicated) at idle--but
they just kept running. My personal theory is that as they wear their power
output and compression also decreases to the point that, even though there
is minimal oil pressure, the loading on the bearings is so light that even
miniscule oil pressure is enough to prevent damage. This is just a guess--I
have no quantitative data.

Good luck. Let us know what you find.

Regards,
Dave Baldwin
Dallas, TX

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

I own a 87 Bronco with a 351. The
truck has 175,000 miles and runs great (The oil has been changed every
3000 miles religiously!. Recently the truck has developed a problem with
the oil pressure gauge indicating low pressure. Now the condition occurs
only after the truck is warmed-up and after driven at highway speeds.
The indicator of the gauge swings to the extreme left whenever I come to
a stop and then swings back to the normal position (indicator is between
the N and O) when I accelerate.
Joe Virga
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:23:08 EST
From: ACMERCG aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID

In a message dated 98-12-02 13:56:51 EST, you write:

How do you ID a Ford Trans? I have a 92 F-150 with the 302, 4x4 and
the
> shift on the ffly t case. The trans pan is square with a sump in the
middle.
> Any Ideas?


manual ? Auto ?
--
Thanks,
Rick Wojo
'83 Fsize BRONCO,Stock I-6,"The BROWN BULL",33x12.5x15-Mud Terrains
'92 Mstng 5.0L
'95 eclipse-Wife's(For Sale)
>>
Auto w/OD

Joe
Lost in Jersey
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:25:36 EST
From: ROlson1039 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Trans ID

you could go to the autoparts store with a pic of the shape of the pan and the
number of bolts in the pan ( automatics anyway )and that should tell you by
the shape of the pan and the number of bolts
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:28:43 EST
From: Kbeverwein aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Ford 460's

KerryS,

My Dad has a 86 F250 with the 460 in it. I believe 83 and up had the 460 in
it.
Hope this helps.

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 19:19:22 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Anyone Know about 95 f-150?

Giddens, Scott wrote:
>
> I did some research and found references to the mass air sensors being put
> on some '95 5.0 L like you say.
> I did not find anything on mass air for the '95 5.8 L engines. Why they
> would put them on the 5.0 L and not the 5.8 L in the same year is a mystery
> to me.
>
> BTW, the K&N p/n for the FPIK with out mass air is 57-2503 for both the 5.0
> and the 5.8, with mass air the number is 57-2510 for the 5.0 L only, there
> is no listing of the 5.8 L in '95 having mass air.

Din't see a listing for the Lightning did you?
Chris
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 17:51:28 -0700
From: "delquattro"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Gearing and blowby

Hello Guys,
I own an '83 F150 Stepside 4x4. Its got a 351W, 4speed w/od, 3:55 gears
turning 33x12.5x15's. Are the gears wrong for the tire? I'm thinking of
getting 35's next time around and I'm not sure of rim size yet, 15 or 16's,
either.
I saw someone post a message about blowback through the breather into the
air cleaner as being "typical" and "unexplainable". I'm not quite ready to
accept this. Do any of you experienced Ford wrenchers know something about
this phenomenon. To tell you the truth, I'm not too psyched about the
performance of the 351w so far. Its got an Edelbrock 600cfm and performer
manifold and Jacobs ignition. I guess for 10 mpg I expected more
performance, I might as well have a 460 for that kind of mileage. Thanks
for your help.
Del

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 19:38:24 EST
From: CphgnCwby1 aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302

I have a couple of questions:

1) I am looking at an '81 F-150 (LONG-BED) and the guy told me that it had a
351W in it. Weren't the only 351's in a TRUCK were the 351C & 351M?

2) In my look for truck, i've found many diff. trucks(ALL FORD!) that I would
like, most had the 302, so which has more HP, the 302 or the 351?

3) What are the advantages of each, the 302, the 351 (C, W, and M), and what
are the disadvatages?

THANKS

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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 16:52:47 PST
From: "Scottie Schmidt"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Bed size

Hi,
Not sure if everybody got his message last time i sent it so here it
goes again, am really interested in reply's so please reply!!

Was wondering what the size difference is with the following trucks.
This is saying they are between 87's and 96's.

- - Ranger Reg Cab
- - Ranger Ext. Cab
- - F-150 reg. cab
- - F-150 ext. cab
- - F-150 crew cab (is their suck a thing?)
- - F-150 reg cab longbed
- - F-150 ext. cab longbed
- - F-250 reg cab
- - F-250 reg cab longbed
- - F-250 ext. cab
- - F-250 ext. cab longbed
- - F-250 crew cab
- - F-250 crew cab longbed
and the F-350's

IF it is a 4x4 does it have an affect on bed size??


Scottie Schmidt


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

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

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 16:55:39 PST
From: "Scottie Schmidt"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - update(from Alot of Questions)

Hi,
Bad news, somebody came along and said that a F-150 would be fine
for plowing one driveway. The problem is, is that I do not know if they
are aware of what they will be doing on the farm. Once again I want
your wonderful advice once again, and I want your thoughts. Here is
what they want: a used truck with low miles, 4x4, under $15,000, good
condition, possibly with a snowplow.
I keep telling them that Ford trucks last forever if well maintained. Is
it possible for them to get a F-250 with everything I told you they
wanted above?? Just in case you forgot they will be raising alpacka's,
baby doll sheep(i think that's what they are called), will be plowing
their driveway only, will be doing tons of work to the house(needs lots
of work), and they love doing yard work.
IF they get a F-150 what will happen to it when doing all of this work??
My dad has a F-150 I6, and he loves it, but he can't see it doing farm
work, especially what they are planning on doing. With your guys help I
think we can convince them in getting a F-250(hopefully).

Scottie Schmidt


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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 21:09:30 -0500
From: "Kerry Struble"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Ford 460's

Thanks,
I went to a dealer and I think they're ordering me the p/s bracket set-up
from an '80 f-350. I guess the 350's had 460's in 1980.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Kbeverwein aol.com
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Ford 460's


>KerryS,
>
>My Dad has a 86 F250 with the 460 in it. I believe 83 and up had the 460
in
>it.
>Hope this helps.
>
>Brian
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 22:07:35 EST
From: GLMPILOT aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Bed size

no
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:07:06 -0500
From: Lord_Xaenon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302

At 07:38 PM 12/2/98 EST, you wrote:
>I have a couple of questions:
>
>1) I am looking at an '81 F-150 (LONG-BED) and the guy told me that it had a
>351W in it. Weren't the only 351's in a TRUCK were the 351C & 351M?

No, the 351C was NEVER used in a truck (disregarding the Ranchero for the
moment). The 351W and 351M were available in the F-series beginning 1977;
the 351M was discontinued in 1983 or 1984.
>
>2) In my look for truck, i've found many diff. trucks(ALL FORD!) that I would
>like, most had the 302, so which has more HP, the 302 or the 351?

All other things being equal, the 351 will have more torque and power. Of
course, you can hop up a 302 to make decent power (then again, the same could
be said of the 351). Bottom line, build the largest engine you can afford
to screw together and run....nobody ever complained about an engine being
"too" powerful.

Personal advice: don't worry too much about which engine you have in the
truck...choose the one you think is the best deal.

>3) What are the advantages of each, the 302, the 351 (C, W, and M), and what
>are the disadvatages?

The 302 is a tad on the small side for a large truck. It has lots of support
from the aftermarket, and even a simple bolt-on hop up like manifold, headers,
4-bbl, and a mild cam can get one of these things running great. It has
been in production practically since Moses and is a reliable, fairly
efficient little
engine.

The 351C was probably the "hottest" engine of them all in 4-bbl form, but the
newest example of one would be 25 years old today....it was last produced in
a 4-bbl model in 1973, and in a 2-bbl model in 1974. A genuine Cleveland
would hook up to the exising 302/351W engine mounts and most everything
else, though if you have a C4 auto in there now you might want to consider
a C6). It's nearly a dead issue, and honestly, unless you REALLY like the
idea of a Cleveland in there, look at the Windsor or 351M.

The 351M is similar to the Cleveland in design (they're technically the same
engine family), but it is taller, wider, and has larger main bearings. It
requires unique 351M/400 mounts, and (assuming an automatic) a C6 with a 429/460
bellhousing bolt pattern. Incidentally, a 400 would be almost identical to this
engine, the only difference being stroke. The advantage of these engines are
that they are dirt cheap, and has been pointed out to me in recent weeks, can
be made to produce over 350 horsepower (400ci).

The 351W, overall, is probably the best engine, since:

A) It's a little better suited than the 302 for a big truck's power
requirements.
B) there's tons of aftermarket support for it.
C) It was in continuous production for nearly 30 years.

Incidentally, you can tell a 351W from a 302 by looking at the lower bolt of the
water outlet. If you can get to that bolt with a regular ratchet and
socket, it's
a 351W; if it's kind of crammed down behind the water pump (necessitating an
open-
end wrench), it's a 302. There's other methods, but that's probably the easiest
to describe. The 351M was also used that year, and the best way to check for a
351M or 400 is to count rocker cover bolts. The 302 and 351W have six bolts on
each cover; the 351M/400 has eight for each cover.

If you get a truck with a 302, a 351W can replace it without too many
changes. One
area of concern MIGHT be the automatic trans; the 302s often were hooked to
C4s and
that might be questionable behind a 351. If there's a C6 behind the 302, it
will
hook the 351W, no problem. The C4 will also hook the the 351W, but it's a
lighter-
duty trans.

Hope this helps....Talk atcha later.

Mark







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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:28:04 EST
From: CphgnCwby1 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302

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

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

Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 23:30:55 EST
From: CphgnCwby1 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302

ALSO,

Do you think that it would be worth the money, say $300-$400, to get a 4-bbl
and put it on the 351, or will i just flood it out with too much gas?

THANKS

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 01:22:12 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 351W vs. 302

Bart (Aren't you and your dad on my Simpsons page?)
My 351 has a 4 bbl and I'd recommend it, just don't go hog-wild w/say
an 800 cfm, 600 or 650 cfm should do you just fine. And I think you
can get them for less than you quoted, check Jegs or Summit
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.jegs.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.summit.com

Later,
Brew

CphgnCwby1 aol.com wrote:
>
> ALSO,
>
> Do you think that it would be worth the money, say $300-$400, to get a 4-bbl
> and put it on the 351, or will i just flood it out with too much gas?
>
> THANKS
>
> -BART-
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 00:29:41 -0500
From: "msalvetti"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Lincoln Floor Jack

I just got back from our local Costco, where I found a Lincoln 2-ton floor
jack for only $149. This isn't the model W93642 that usually runs about
$300. The Costco version seems to have a lighter frame, has a round pad
instead of square, and is all-blue instead of blue with yellow wheels and
jack pad.

Anyone know anything about this model? I'm thinking of buying it.

Thanks!

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

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

Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 00:28:04 -0600
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - White smoke/antifreeze odor....


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.