80-96-list-digest Sunday, April 25 1999 Volume 03 : Number 116



=======================================================================
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:

FTE 80-96 - I know we covered this once before but...
Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE
FTE 80-96 - A similar note to kingpins......
Re: FTE 80-96 - A similar note to kingpins......
FTE 80-96 - RE: vacuum
FTE 80-96 - Re: stake bed
Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement
Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement
Re: [FTE 80-96 - RE: vacuum]
Re: FTE 80-96 - Power Steering
Re: FTE 80-96 - 84 F-150, Where's the power?
Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE
Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement
Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE

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

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:37:29 EDT
From: ROlson1039 aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - I know we covered this once before but...

Ok guys my question revolves around strut bar bushings. I know we covered
this a few weeks ago, but ya gotta remember Im past thirty now and the mind
is the first thing to go so...
I recall that at least one of y'all were talking about the bracket which the
strut bar bushings seal against, and that some of you had taken chisels and
hammers and removed the rivets to make the job easier.Some of you said the
bracket was loose.If I take mine apart and the bracket does not move by hand
is it safe to assume that this is tight enough?
My next question is if I do have to remove the bracket from the chassis is
it advisable to use an air-powered chisel to remove the rivets?
To replace the rivets to reassemble the bracket to the chassis.. one of
you suggested a certain size and grade.. Could I please have that size/grade
again?
Now I also recall you all extolling the polyurethane bushings. Im seeing in
JC Whitney that they have a set of four bushings for $13.95 to me that seems
awful cheap..Is that about right for the bushings? Also this kit does not
come with the washers and the nut that goes onto the strut bar.. do these
need to be replaced while doing this job, or will the ones removed with the
old bushings suffice?
Finally is there any adivce that you have.. hints or tips that you may have
to make this job any easier?
Now just for the heck of it.. I just got a catalogue from JC Whhitney that is
exclusively for Ford Truck Accessories and parts. I dont know how many of
you all suscribe, but in case you dont and would like this free catalogue, it
is Catalogue 410-3J and program number GDCR3. you can order it by going to
www.jcwhitney.com or you can call 312-431-6102. They have parts from the
50's to the 90's including the new styles. I live in NYC and the prices are
as good or better than what Ive been hearing at the local parts stores,
Sears, and the big parts chains.
Thank you all for your time and anticipated help with my questions
Regards
Bob
ROlson1039 aol.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:55:29 GMT
From: herbs mail.west.net (Herb Smith)
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE

I have a '89 E-350 with a 36 gallon rear tank (Class C RV). Fuel
gauge indicates it is never full (only registers 3/4), and then drops
fast. Does the same float replacement sequence apply to this 36
gallon tank.

Thanks in advance,

Herb


On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 01:40:15 EDT, you wrote:

>The fuel gauge needle is probably dropping faster because that brass =
float=20
>that snaps in at the end of the fuel level arm is filling up with fuel =
and=20
>giving you a false reading.
>the solder seam on those floats open up after many years, and lose thier=
=20
>bouyancy.
>I have an 89 E-250 and I just changed the float in the front tank. Job=20
>completed and working fine.=20
>
>Now its time for the rear tank. You can buy the fuel arm floats at a =
ford=20
>dealer. they cost about 4 bucks each. One for each tank. Just run the =
tank=20
>dry, disconnect all fuel lines to the tank, drop the tank, tap out the =
round=20
>sleeve that holds the fuel float assembly, pull it out unsnap the old =
float=20
>from the arm , snap on the new one and repeat the installation. I =
finally got=20
>tired of guessing how much fuel was left in the tank. good luck.
>
> Joe www.flashwax.com
>=3D=3D 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: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:53:06 -0500
From: "Dave Harmier"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - A similar note to kingpins......

Just wondering....is it at all possible to transplant the I-Beams and
radius rods out of a late model truck with ball joints, into an early
Kingpin equipped truck????

It is a swap that would seemingly have great benefits!

Any thoughts?

Dave H.
Houston (Hotter than heck) Texas
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:06:01 -0400
From: Andre Roy
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - A similar note to kingpins......

Dave Harmier wrote:
>
> Just wondering....is it at all possible to transplant the I-Beams and
> radius rods out of a late model truck with ball joints, into an early
> Kingpin equipped truck????
>
> It is a swap that would seemingly have great benefits!
>
Bet it would be good. I've been thinking about it. Problem is, the
truck's my only wheels right now. Once contract concilliation is done,
I'll get a car to go along with the truck. I just don't like doing major
surgery on a vehicle when there's no other way to get around (That would
be the
"oh-oh---need-the-part-and-all-the-stores-are-closed-til-monday-and-I-have-to-get-to-work-too"
syndrome)

It all looks quite doable, I suppose. It would have been really foolish
of Ford to do the two front ends so dissimilarly that it would be
impossible. Unless they let that PCV Valve engineer loose in the
suspension.

Then there's the cost. :-( Even used parts aren't going to be cheap.

> Houston (Hotter than heck) Texas
>

- --
Andre, (Around freezing here) Somewhere ...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:54:56 -0700
From: "Posluszny, Walt (POSL)"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: vacuum

Bill said......

Date:23 Apr 99 15:13:34 PDT
From:William Berninghausen
>
Subject:FTE 80-96 - Vacuum Peculiarities

Here's one for the compulsive puzzle-solvers. After a top-end rebuild, f
rom the lifters up, I spent several hundred miles getting the vacuum
connecti ons back to their original configuration. At least I think they're
right. M y new vacuum gauge works as advertised:
idle-rock steady at 23 psi
acceleration-drops to bottom and climbs back up
coasting-whips right up into the 18-25 area
part throttle cruise-varies with throttle and load in the 10-20 area
and here's the puzzle: it 'ticks' about 1-2 psi in cruise mode.
The ticking is less when the engine is cold, and it doesn't do it in
acceleration or coasting mode, or at idle. I suspect the valves in the
vacuum lines or possibly minute intake leaks in
the manifold gaskets, but those are just hunches.
Oh, yeah, still working on the choke, so it's wired open.
Anybody got an idea?
Bill

Walt's .02.... Bill, do you have the vacuum gauge connected to an
unobstructed manifold source? Not in any individual runner but closest to
the main plenum of the intake manifold below the carb. Everything except
for the 'tick' you describe[whatever that means] sounds fairly normal.
Albeit, a little high on the idle vacuum reading as compared to my 85 351.
Make sure there are no valves or kinks in the lines either. P.S. vacuum in
this case is measured in inches of mercury and not pounds per square inch
which would be positive pressure and just the opposite of vacuum
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 14:54:30 PDT
From: "Scottie Schmidt"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: stake bed

Hi,
The reason I post these messages againis because out of the two, I
only got one or two replies, and they were for the same message
(ladder racks)!!!!!! This was only my second time posting the
message!! I posted it a day or two ago and about a week ago!! What
is your point on saying haven't I posted these messages before???
What is the point in makeing sucha comment?????
Scottie



Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:19:42 -0400
From: Chris Hedemark
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - stake bed

Scottie Schmidt wrote:

> I hope these are not to many questions, but you guys are wonderful
and
> I appreciate all the info you give me!

Scottie,

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you ask all of these questions
before, not too long ago? If so, I know there were many answers
posted
already. Why ask them again?

- - --

Chris Hedemark
Work: IBM eNetwork Dispatcher
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.software.ibm.com/enetwork/dispatcher
Personal: Yonder Way http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.yonderway.com
"Earl Svein! thou now wilt know
That our lads can make blood flow --
That the Hedemarkers hale
Can do more than tap good ale." - Saga of Olaf Haraldson: Part II
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:39:46 -0500
From: "Kevin Reed"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - stake bed

Actually, Scottie has asked these questions a few times already. They
weren't even worded differently.

Kevin Reed



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> [mailto:owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Chris Hedemark
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 10:20 AM
> To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - stake bed
>
>
> Scottie Schmidt wrote:
>
> > I hope these are not to many questions, but you guys are wonderful
and
> > I appreciate all the info you give me!
>
> Scottie,
>
> Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you ask all of these questions
> before, not too long ago? If so, I know there were many answers
posted
> already. Why ask them again?
>
> --
>
> Chris Hedemark
> Work: IBM eNetwork Dispatcher
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.software.ibm.com/enetwork/dispatcher
> Personal: Yonder Way http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.yonderway.com
> "Earl Svein! thou now wilt know
> That our lads can make blood flow --
> That the Hedemarkers hale
> Can do more than tap good ale." - Saga of Olaf Haraldson: Part



_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 18:24:28 -0400
From: Daniel Maxwell
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement

Taking off the EFI runners isnt hard. There is a torx, dont remember the
size offhand, on the right side, in the middle. I bought a loooong torx
driver made for this, made the job really easy. Replace the pcv while you
are there, its the easiest it will ever be
>Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:02:16 -0500
>From: "Brent McNabb"
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement
>
>I am about to attempt replacing the valve cover gaskets on my '86 F-150
with a 302, EFI. Looks like I'll have to take off the upper manifold to
get to the passenger side cover,
>is there anything else to watch out for, any tips,especially for the
manifold? Any help would be appreciated.
>
>
>== 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: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 18:39:38 -0500
From: "Brent McNabb"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement

Actually, after looking at one of my repair manuals, it alluded to the fact that you do not have to take out the upper EFI manifold. Maybe a better question would be, do you
have to take the upper EFI manifold out, do change the gaskets?


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

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

Date: 24 Apr 99 17:52:22 PDT
From: William Berninghausen
Subject: Re: [FTE 80-96 - RE: vacuum]

"Posluszny, Walt (POSL)" wrote:
> Bill said......
> =

> Date:23 Apr 99 15:13:34 PDT
> From:William Berninghausen
> >
> Subject:FTE 80-96 - Vacuum Peculiarities
> =

> Here's one for the compulsive puzzle-solvers. After a top-end rebuild,=
f
> rom the lifters up, I spent several hundred miles getting the vacuum
> connecti ons back to their original configuration. At least I think th=
ey're
> right. M y new vacuum gauge works as advertised:
> idle-rock steady at 23 psi
> acceleration-drops to bottom and climbs back up
> coasting-whips right up into the 18-25 area
> part throttle cruise-varies with throttle and load in the 10-20 area
> and here's the puzzle: it 'ticks' about 1-2 psi in cruise mode.
> The ticking is less when the engine is cold, and it doesn't do it in
> acceleration or coasting mode, or at idle. I suspect the valves in the
> vacuum lines or possibly minute intake leaks in
> the manifold gaskets, but those are just hunches. =

> Oh, yeah, still working on the choke, so it's wired open.
> Anybody got an idea?
> Bill
> =

> Walt's .02.... Bill, do you have the vacuum gauge connected to an
> unobstructed manifold source? Not in any individual runner but closest =
to
> the main plenum of the intake manifold below the carb. Everything exce=
pt
> for the 'tick' you describe[whatever that means] sounds fairly normal.
> Albeit, a little high on the idle vacuum reading as compared to my 85 3=
51.
> Make sure there are no valves or kinks in the lines either. P.S. vacuu=
m in
> this case is measured in inches of mercury and not pounds per square in=
ch
> which would be positive pressure and just the opposite of vacuum
> =3D=3D FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq=
=2Ehtml
Walt:

Of course it's inHg--just a brain fart. =


The 'tick' is a sharp fluctuation of 1 to 2 inches, like the pulse you wo=
uld
see if a valve is burned, but it doesn't seem to depend on any other fact=
ors
and only occurs in part-throttle cruise operation.

The vacuum gauge is T'd into the aftermarket cruise control line which co=
mes
directly from the 'tree' below the carb. The only devices in the vacuum =
lines
are the delay and check valve that Ford put there.

Help any?

Bill

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webm=
ail.netscape.com.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:39:20 -0400
From: S Spaulding
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Power Steering

I decided to start at the bottom and took off the nut, which came loose
easily. Now I can't get the damned pitman arm off. The puller is on
there, and I tightened it with a 15" adjustable wrench and about two
feet of pipe, until I didn't dare go any further. I even clamped the
puller with a C-clamp so it couldn't bend (much). I tried whacking it
sideways with a big hammer. I wish I still had the welder that got
stolen last year. It would be off now. Of course, I'd lose the core
charge...

I left it in tension. Maybe I'll hear a big snap during the night.

Any ideas???

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

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 01:00:50 EDT
From: BigFords1 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 84 F-150, Where's the power?

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

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 01:02:30 EDT
From: BigFords1 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE

My gauge is screwed too. My rear tank is empty when the gauge shows half.
How do I fix it?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 22:38:16 -0700
From: Bob Kennedy
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '86 302 Valve Cover Gasket Replacement

Well, I think your reference missed the top center bolts on the passenger side valve cover (under the upper intake manifold). Oooooohhhhhh those are some ugly bolts!

Bob


Brent McNabb wrote:

> Actually, after looking at one of my repair manuals, it alluded to the fact that you do not have to take out the upper EFI manifold. Maybe a better question would be, do you
> have to take the upper EFI manifold out, do change the gaskets?
>
> == 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: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 22:44:54 -0700
From: "Mike"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - FUEL GAUGE NOT ACCURATE

Take the wire off the sending unit. Ground it threw a 12 volt test light.
With the key on the gauge should move slowly to full. With a ohm meter check
the continuity between the sending unit and tank and or ground wire. Also
make sure there is a good ground between tank and the frame. If that checks
OK , Remove sending unit and with ohm meter. The higher the float the less
the resistance......Mike

- -----Original Message-----
From: BigFords1 aol.com
To: 80-96-list ....

---

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.