80-96-list-digest Tuesday, May 18 1999 Volume 03 : Number 139



=======================================================================
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 - Dash brake lights
FTE 80-96 - 92 ford f150
FTE 80-96 - manual lock-in hubs
RE: FTE 80-96 - Idle and code issues
FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
Re: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
Re: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
FTE 80-96 - moving
FTE 80-96 - Jacobs Ignitions - Promo sale on NOW!
RE: FTE 80-96 - Re: engine replacement?
Re: FTE 80-96 - "Shorty" headers - 5.0L F250?
FTE 80-96 - A not-quite-so-super-charger?
FTE 80-96 - RE: "Y" pipes, Cats, and JBA headers
Re: FTE 80-96 - manual lock-in hubs
Re: FTE 80-96 - Dash brake lights
Re: FTE 80-96 - A not-quite-so-super-charger?
Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: "Y" pipes, Cats, and JBA headers

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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 07:48:18 -0400
From: Paul
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Dash brake lights

I have a 91 Bronco; the 2 dash brake related lights came on randomly,
then always. Mechanic checked the system. Only problem was the
computer box for rear axle went bad, causing lights to stay on.

How do I get the lights to go off easily, without replacing this part he
says is expensive. He says that the only loss I will have is no
anti-lock brakes at rear, but regular brakes.

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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 08:59:15 EDT
From: RONEAKER aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 92 ford f150

I bought a 92 Ford f150 xlt 4x4, it has a 351 engine with
>140,000 miles. The truck runs good, but I am wondering do I need to be on
the
>lookout for anything to happen to this motor as far as head gaskets,or
>anything that may go on it. Is it a good motor. I also need a driver side
>door If anyone has one or knows of one reasonably priced. I would appreciate
>it.
>thanks.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 09:12:59 EDT
From: RONEAKER aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - manual lock-in hubs

I bought a 92 ford f150 4x4, the truck has manual lock-in hubs. I've noticed
some fords have automatic and some have manual. Does ford make them
differant? which is better? Since this truck has manual hubs, what kind of
maintenance should I be doing to take care of the hubs? The truck has 140,000
miles on it. any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
Ron Eaker
Rome,Ga

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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 09:19:18 -0700
From: Eric Sneed
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Idle and code issues

Chris,
I am far from being a good mechanic, but as far as the code 33(egr not
Responding) goes, i had the same problem. Took the Egr valve off and
cleaned it out, put it back on and was then getting code 32(egr valve
not opening completely. So I took it off again and after inspecting it,
I found that the spring that keeps the valve shut had come off its
mountings(four little tabs inside the valve). I played around with it
until it was back in position, put it back on the truck and have not had
any problems since.

Hope this helps

Eric
89 F150 L6 4x4

> -----Original Message-----
> From:Chris Philipp [SMTP:chrisp webaccess.net]
> Sent:Saturday, May 15, 1999 6:54 PM
> To:80-96-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject:FTE 80-96 - Idle and code issues
>
> Does anyone have an idea of what is going on with my
> rig?? Recently, I pulled and cleaned my throttle body
> (Put on a new TPS for good measure). I had good results
> as far as power was concerned, but it really sucked gas,
> and did appear to idle quite high. I took my truck (88'
> 302) to my mechanic to have that stupid little plastic
> clutch bearing replaced,(got tired of triple pumping the
> clutch pedal to start it) so I had him pull codes while he
> had it. He got a 45, 33, and a 13. EGR downstream, high
> idle, and something else. Anyway, when I did the throttle
> body, the negative battery terminal was off least 2
> hours.(shouldn't that reset the computer?).
> My first question is this, I was told to adjust the
> "idle linkage", and for the life of me I have no idea how
> you would adjust any part of the T.V. cable to do this.
> Second question is, would any of the above mentioned codes
> be caused by the work I did, or am I on the perrenial Ford
> troubleshooting detail for a new problem? I expected to
> have to replace the most common failing parts(EGR, TPS,
> Idle air B'pass, belts, hoses, filters, etc.), but I would
> really just like to spend the money and get the thing
> running as well as it can. I commute over 60 miles daily,
> so the gas adds up. I get anywhere from 10-14 MPG with
> Colorado mountain pass driving. Oh, the TPS checked out
> O.K. by the way. Any insight or suggestions would be
> greatly appreciated. TIA Chris
>
> == 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:41:34 EDT
From: FLR150 aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

Gang,
My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this crap.....
*** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
To: Ford U.S. employees

Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company


Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.

The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.

It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
about it on television or radio. For more information on our
position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.

The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
we will keep you updated.

If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).

Regards,

John Rintamaki
Vice President and General Counsel

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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:48:41 -0700
From: Eric Sneed
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

If the end result of this lawsuit is that Ford redesigns this poorly
designed ignition system then I think it is a good idea. My TFI module
went out recently and everyone I called including two Ford Dealerships
said " Oh yeah these things go out all the time". At $62.00 a pop, this
IS a poor design.

this is only my opinion

Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From:FLR150 aol.com [SMTP:FLR150 aol.com]
> Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 9:42 AM
> To:80-96-list ford-trucks.com; LIGHTNING-L american.edu;
> Loweguy aol.com; perf-list ford-trucks.com; Musttanguy aol.com
> Subject:FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
> Gang,
> My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this
> crap.....
> *** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
> To: Ford U.S. employees
>
> Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company
>
>
> Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
> Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
> Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
> behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
> original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
> 1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
> distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.
>
> The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
> the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
> economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
> possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.
>
> It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
> particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
> read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
> about it on television or radio. For more information on our
> position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.
>
> The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
> we will keep you updated.
>
> If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
> of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).
>
> Regards,
>
> John Rintamaki
> Vice President and General Counsel
>
> == 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:13:40 -0500
From: Brent McNabb
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

On Mon, 17 May 1999 12:41:34 EDT, FLR150 aol.com wrote:

>My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this crap.....
>*** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
>To: Ford U.S. employees
>
>Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company
>
>
>Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
>Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
>Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
>behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
>original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
>1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
>distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.
>
>The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
>the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
>economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
>possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.
>
>It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
>particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
>read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
>about it on television or radio. For more information on our
>position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.
>
>The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
>we will keep you updated.
>
>If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
>of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).
>
>Regards,
>
>John Rintamaki
>Vice President and General Counsel

I saw a person in the newsgroups suggesting this a while back, when he had a TFI module fail on a Grand Marquis.

I haven't had a major problem with the TFI-IV module on my 302 EFI, on my second one, and the engine has 220,000 miles. My father's truck has the original Ford module, and is going on 180,000 miles. I think a
lot of the failures stem from the non-application, or mis-application of the silicone grease onto the heatsink on the module.


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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 15:25:39 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

FLR150 aol.com wrote:
>
> Gang,
> My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this crap.....
> *** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
> To: Ford U.S. employees
>

- -snip-

Its taboo to forward someone's email to a public forum without
their permission. There is a principle (and sometimes contract)
involved called "non-disclosure." Your buddy may have voilated
Ford's non-disclosure and you gave public notice that he did it.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:20:53 -0700
From: "McMahon, Todd R."
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

All the more reason to install a Jacob's Ignition System...!

- -----Original Message-----
From: Eric Sneed [mailto:ESneed reil.com]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 10:49 AM
To: '80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit


If the end result of this lawsuit is that Ford redesigns this poorly
designed ignition system then I think it is a good idea. My TFI module
went out recently and everyone I called including two Ford Dealerships
said " Oh yeah these things go out all the time". At $62.00 a pop, this
IS a poor design.

this is only my opinion

Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From:FLR150 aol.com [SMTP:FLR150 aol.com]
> Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 9:42 AM
> To:80-96-list ford-trucks.com; LIGHTNING-L american.edu;
> Loweguy aol.com; perf-list ford-trucks.com; Musttanguy aol.com
> Subject:FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
> Gang,
> My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this
> crap.....
> *** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
> To: Ford U.S. employees
>
> Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company
>
>
> Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
> Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
> Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
> behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
> original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
> 1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
> distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.
>
> The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
> the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
> economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
> possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.
>
> It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
> particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
> read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
> about it on television or radio. For more information on our
> position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.
>
> The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
> we will keep you updated.
>
> If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
> of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).
>
> Regards,
>
> John Rintamaki
> Vice President and General Counsel
>
> == 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:42:17 -0700
From: Eric Sneed
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit

Good Idea, I have been thinking about an after market ignition. Does the
Jacobs do away with the TFI module? I could of sworn that I heard on
this group that the Jacobs was overkill(cost) and didn't perform that
much better than say for instance a Crane or MSD system.

Eric
89 F150 L6 4x4

> -----Original Message-----
> From:McMahon, Todd R. [SMTP:TMcMahon anacomp.com]
> Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 12:21 PM
> To:'80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
> Subject:RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
> All the more reason to install a Jacob's Ignition System...!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Sneed [mailto:ESneed reil.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 10:49 AM
> To: '80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
> Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
>
> If the end result of this lawsuit is that Ford redesigns this poorly
> designed ignition system then I think it is a good idea. My TFI module
> went out recently and everyone I called including two Ford Dealerships
> said " Oh yeah these things go out all the time". At $62.00 a pop,
> this
> IS a poor design.
>
> this is only my opinion
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:FLR150 aol.com [SMTP:FLR150 aol.com]
> > Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 9:42 AM
> > To:80-96-list ford-trucks.com; LIGHTNING-L american.edu;
> > Loweguy aol.com; perf-list ford-trucks.com; Musttanguy aol.com
> > Subject:FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
> >
> > Gang,
> > My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this
> > crap.....
> > *** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
> > To: Ford U.S. employees
> >
> > Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company
> >
> >
> > Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
> > Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
> > Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
> > behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
> > original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
> > 1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
> > distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.
> >
> > The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
> > the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
> > economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
> > possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.
> >
> > It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
> > particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
> > read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
> > about it on television or radio. For more information on our
> > position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
> > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.
> >
> > The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
> > we will keep you updated.
> >
> > If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
> > of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John Rintamaki
> > Vice President and General Counsel
> >
> > == 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 14:04:46 PDT
From: "Scottie Schmidt"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - moving

Hi,
Will be moving in 4 days. You may still e-mail me, but I might be a little late replying. Sorry for any inconveinence.
Thanks,
Scottie Schmidt JR.



_______________________________________________________________
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: Mon, 17 May 1999 15:03:17 -0700
From: "McMahon, Todd R."
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Jacobs Ignitions - Promo sale on NOW!

Jacobs = Overkill? perhaps... but do you really care?
It's the end-result VS initial-cost that is important.

About the TFI module, (which reads the ignition pulse from the distributer,
and amplifies it for the spark) YES it can be eliminated, depending on which
ignition system you choose. Call one of their technicians (Steve:
1-800-627-8800) ask for a catalog, and then ask some questions about your
truck (He drives an 89 F150 too). They've got a promotion going on now by
the way - so you can save some bucks, too.

I based my comment on past experience with their products, which has always
been great. To be fair though, I have "NO" experience with any other after
market ignition systems (only OEM and Jacobs). I was swayed by the book
that Dr. Jacobs wrote on ignition systems - after reading it, it was the
main reason that I chose Jacob's system over any other (well written, and
they obviously know what their doing).

Check out their web site at: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.jacobselectronics.com/

Todd

- -----Original Message-----
From: Eric Sneed [mailto:ESneed reil.com]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 1:42 PM
To: '80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit


Good Idea, I have been thinking about an after market ignition. Does the
Jacobs do away with the TFI module? I could of sworn that I heard on
this group that the Jacobs was overkill(cost) and didn't perform that
much better than say for instance a Crane or MSD system.

Eric
89 F150 L6 4x4

> -----Original Message-----
> From:McMahon, Todd R. [SMTP:TMcMahon anacomp.com]
> Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 12:21 PM
> To:'80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
> Subject:RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
> All the more reason to install a Jacob's Ignition System...!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Sneed [mailto:ESneed reil.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 10:49 AM
> To: '80-96-list ford-trucks.com'
> Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
>
>
> If the end result of this lawsuit is that Ford redesigns this poorly
> designed ignition system then I think it is a good idea. My TFI module
> went out recently and everyone I called including two Ford Dealerships
> said " Oh yeah these things go out all the time". At $62.00 a pop,
> this
> IS a poor design.
>
> this is only my opinion
>
> Eric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:FLR150 aol.com [SMTP:FLR150 aol.com]
> > Sent:Monday, May 17, 1999 9:42 AM
> > To:80-96-list ford-trucks.com; LIGHTNING-L american.edu;
> > Loweguy aol.com; perf-list ford-trucks.com; Musttanguy aol.com
> > Subject:FTE 80-96 - Class action lawsuit
> >
> > Gang,
> > My buddy at Ford sent me this interoffice memorandum. Check out this
> > crap.....
> > *** Forwarding note from JRINTAM2--DRBN006 05/17/99 07:55 ***
> > To: Ford U.S. employees
> >
> > Subject: (I) Howard v. Ford Motor Company
> >
> >
> > Tomorrow, opening statements will be made in a state court in
> > Oakland, California, in the class action lawsuit Howard v. Ford
> > Motor Company. This class action complaint is being argued on
> > behalf of more than three million California residents who are the
> > original or current owners of Ford vehicles built between 1983 and
> > 1995 with a thick film ignition or "TFI" module mounted on the
> > distributor. A TFI module is an ignition system component.
> >
> > The Howard suit is a relatively new kind of class action -- none of
> > the plaintiffs are claiming a personal injury, property damage or
> > economic loss. Rather, the complaint is for damages based on the
> > possibility that the TFI module might fail in the future.
> >
> > It's very rare for a class action lawsuit to actually go to trial,
> > particularly one of this size. Because of this, you can expect to
> > read about the trial from time to time in the newspapers, or hear
> > about it on television or radio. For more information on our
> > position in the suit, please see the FCN Online website homepage at
> > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fcn.ford.com.
> >
> > The trial will likely last into the summer. We expect to win, and
> > we will keep you updated.
> >
> > If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact Jim Cain
> > of Public Affairs via Outlook (jcain1 ford.com) or PROFS (JCAIN1).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John Rintamaki
> > Vice President and General Counsel
> >
> > == 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
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 19:10:40 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Re: engine replacement?

>You must be doing something wrong if you only get 13mpg. I have a F150Sc LB
>with a 351 and I get a consistant 16mpg. The only time my milage drops to
>around 10mpg is when I tow the 26FT fifth wheel camper.
>

I get about 15 mpg with my 88 4x4, w/302 and 5 speed OD. The exhausts run
sooty black like a diesel all the time, so maybe an O2 sensor will improve
it.


Blake
Little Mountain
Concord, Ohio
Early Oil Well Historian
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/blake
See my new site dedicated to preserving the Big Muskie,
the largest moving land machine on earth!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/bigmuskie
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service


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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 19:34:19 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - "Shorty" headers - 5.0L F250?

>I would definately try Bassani. They make the only equal-length shorty
>header available for the F-150s and their quality is superior to MAC.
>I've owned both.
>
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.bassani.com
>
>Steve Randa
>'84 F150

Well my JBA headers were supposed to arrive Thursday, but are still not
here as of Monday. I never heard of the Macs before, but they are about
$100 bucks cheaper. And the Bassani are $293. Never heard of them either.

Wow, the Y-pipe is the hard part. Ford uses some crazy, expensive,
catalytic built into the Y-pipe that makes it hard and expesive to replace.

Blake
Little Mountain
Concord, Ohio
Early Oil Well Historian
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/blake
See my new site dedicated to preserving the Big Muskie,
the largest moving land machine on earth!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/bigmuskie
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service


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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 16:52:35 -0700
From: "McMahon, Todd R."
Subject: FTE 80-96 - A not-quite-so-super-charger?

This might be a stupid question, but:

Is there any reason why I shouldn't
put a 12 volt, high-output blower
motor in-line with my air intake
pipe? Rather than letting the engine
have to "suck" it's air in, the blower
could increase air pressure slightly.
Would this not increase compression?
I realize that it wouldn't be anything
close to a real "super-charger"...
But what if?

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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 16:57:57 -0700
From: "McMahon, Todd R."
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: "Y" pipes, Cats, and JBA headers

Can't you use a standard "Y" pipe instead of the Ford Cat? Then you could
place a 3'rd party high-volume cat downstream of the "Y"...

just a thought...

Contact JBA directly at 1-800-830-3377, and ask what their availability on
your style of headers is... if they're back-ordered, you might get some
idea as to how long you'll have to wait.

Todd
========

Well my JBA headers were supposed to arrive Thursday, but are still not
here as of Monday. I never heard of the Macs before, but they are about
$100 bucks cheaper. And the Bassani are $293. Never heard of them either.

Wow, the Y-pipe is the hard part. Ford uses some crazy, expensive,
catalytic built into the Y-pipe that makes it hard and expesive to replace.

Blake
Little Mountain
Concord, Ohio
Early Oil Well Historian
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/blake
See my new site dedicated to preserving the Big Muskie,
the largest moving land machine on earth!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/bigmuskie
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service


== 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 20:26:54 -0400
From: S Spaulding
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - manual lock-in hubs

Manual hubs were an option that gave you a $60 discount. They were a
mandatory option if the truck was equipped with the heavy duty front
suspension, so maybe your truck has that.

Manual hubs really don't require any additional maintenance; normally
they would be cleaned and lubricated whenever the bearings are serviced,
such as when the brakes are done. The hubs are pretty foolproof, and
you are fortunate to have them.

steve S.



RONEAKER aol.com wrote:
>
> I bought a 92 ford f150 4x4, the truck has manual lock-in hubs. I've noticed
> some fords have automatic and some have manual. Does ford make them
> differant? which is better? Since this truck has manual hubs, what kind of
> maintenance should I be doing to take care of the hubs? The truck has 140,000
> miles on it. any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks
> Ron Eaker
> Rome,Ga
>
> == 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 20:44:29 -0400
From: "Jeff Fairbairn"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Dash brake lights

I disconnected the brake module (located behind the glovebox) on my '96
F-150 and lights went out. I do not have rear ABS anymore but I did not have
it when that box was bad either, at least this way I do not have to look at
that light.

Jeff
- -----Original Message-----
From: Paul
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Monday, May 17, 1999 7:55 AM
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Dash brake lights


>I have a 91 Bronco; the 2 dash brake related lights came on randomly,
>then always. Mechanic checked the system. Only problem was the
>computer box for rear axle went bad, causing lights to stay on.
>
>How do I get the lights to go off easily, without replacing this part he
>says is expensive. He says that the only loss I will have is no
>anti-lock brakes at rear, but regular brakes.
>
>Paul Gayda
>== 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 22:15:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ken Woods
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - A not-quite-so-super-charger?

On Mon, 17 May 1999, McMahon, Todd R. wrote:

> This might be a stupid question, but:
>
> Is there any reason why I shouldn't put a 12 volt, high-output blower
> motor in-line with my air intake pipe? Rather than letting the engine
> have to "suck" it's air in, the blower could increase air pressure
> slightly. Would this not increase compression? I realize that it
> wouldn't be anything close to a real "super-charger"...

Let's assume that you've a 302. (just becuase the math is easy...)
1 cubic foot = 1728 cubic inches
It takes 2 crankshaft revolutions to consume the displacement of an
engine At 5000 rpm, the engine consumes (((302*5000)/2)/1728)=437 cfm at
100%ve.
The largest motor that I could find that produce that volume consumes
270 amps at 24.5 volts = 6615 watts.

So, 6615 watts to do what you want it to do. (acutally, you'll need
more...but you get the point.)


- --
Ken Woods
kwoods kens.com


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

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

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 22:42:56 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: "Y" pipes, Cats, and JBA headers

>Can't you use a standard "Y" pipe instead of the Ford Cat? Then you could
>place a 3'rd party high-volume cat downstream of the "Y"...
>
>just a thought...
>
>Contact JBA directly at 1-800-830-3377, and ask what their availability on
>your style of headers is... if they're back-ordered, you might get some....


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.