From: owner-80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com (80-96-list-digest)
To: 80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: 80-96-list-digest V3 #175
Reply-To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


80-96-list-digest Wednesday, June 23 1999 Volume 03 : Number 175



=======================================================================
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 - input/counter shaft wear
Re; FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed
FTE 80-96 - Re: '90 F-150 startup speed
FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed
FTE 80-96 - engine question
Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear
Re: FTE 80-96 - engine question
Re: Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed
Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear
Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??
Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??
Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed
FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78
Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78
Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear
FTE 80-96 - Roller chain
Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??
Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78
FTE 80-96 - Full size ttb vs small ttb
Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78
Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??
Re: [Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a 85 F150 or 78]

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 05:27:02 -0500
From: bgarrett
Subject: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear

i recently developed a pronounced whine, esp in 1st & 2nd on
acceleration, in my 5 sp mazda trans in a '92 explorer. (i know this is
off topic, but my wife has a f-150). the truck has about 90k miles on
it, trans hasn't run low on oil, and i don't tow or off-road with it.
upon checking the gears, the input shaft gear and the counter shaft gear
that it meshes with have what appear to be stress linesand roughness
running along the outer edges of the teeth, maybe 1/16" from the outside
of the teeth. the input bearing and needle bearings where it joins with
the output shaft aren't noticeably broken or pitted, etc.and the input
shaft was snug in the bore, not loose. counter bearings seem ok too. so
i'm trying to figure out why this happened.
i hate to throw a bunch of parts at the thing and miss the cause. and
coming up with $1k for a rebuild.....arrrgh!
tia, bg

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 07:44:45 -0500
From: "David Anderson (EUS)"
Subject: Re; FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed

Danny,
I have about the same truck as yours and have had the same symptoms for a
year now. Gotten to the point that I have to keep my foot on the gas to
keep it running. The TPS is OK and cleaning the IAC and TB did not help.
One response to your question suggested the manifold air pressure sensor. I
believe this is actually a manifold air temperature sensor screwed into the
intake near the front of the vehicle. I would think the computer is open
loop when the engine is cold and this thing would not part of the equation.
Maybe he meant the fuel pressure regulator? Any way, I'd be interested in
whatever you find out on this one.
Thanks,
David Anderson


>>>90 F-150, 75K mi, 300-6 2WD E4OD trans...

Used to start up everytime at ~1500 rpms and then settle down
after 20-30 secs and I know this is normal. But lately its beginning
to start up running rough and sometimes it pulls out of it on its own
and sometimes it dies. Always restarts fine the 2nd time.

Seems like something is out of adjustment or dirty. Its not a
cranking problem, its the startup speed I'm trying to recover.

TB cleanout? IAC cleanout? TPS bad/need of adjustment?
Maybe just a plain tuneup?

Anyone run into this one?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:20:09 -0500
From: "Neff, Charles"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: '90 F-150 startup speed

The Idle speed control valve is dirty or defective... Most likely
it's dirty...

I cleaned mine with Gum-Out and a small bristle brush.

A world of difference after you clean it.

This is a very critical component when it comes to how the engine
responds to de-acceleration .

> Subject: Re: '90 F-150 startup speed
> Date sent: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:08:03 -0500

> 90 F-150, 75K mi, 300-6 2WD E4OD trans...

> Used to start up everytime at ~1500 rpms and then settle down
> after 20-30 secs and I know this is normal. But lately its beginning
> to start up running rough and sometimes it pulls out of it on its own
> and sometimes it dies. Always restarts fine the 2nd time.

> Seems like something is out of adjustment or dirty. Its not a
> cranking problem, its the startup speed I'm trying to recover.

> TB cleanout? IAC cleanout? TPS bad/need of adjustment?
> Maybe just a plain tuneup?

> Anyone run into this one?

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:33:17 -0500
From: "DannyF"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed

Date sent: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:10:08 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jo blow
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed

Got a question about the startup speedwhen its cold it will rev up and
go down to a smooth idle. Its done that since it was new, is it
supposed to? It never has gave me any problems before, and it never
does that when its warm

Completely normal based on 6 Ford truck owners and 2 Ford techs

Danny


Danny
danf01 worldnet.att.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:26:16 -0700
From: Nathaniel Ingersoll
Subject: FTE 80-96 - engine question

Sorry for the slightly off-topic question, but I'm looking at a car
(a FORD, yes - '66 Galaxie 500 Convertible) which currently has a 460
in it, and apparently a 390 came with it. Are the blocks the same?
Would the engines weigh roughly the same? The reason for the question
is that I'm curious about the suspension setup for the 460, as the
suspension is fairly stock.

Supposedly, based on the 1/4mi times (~12.0), the guy thinks that the car's
pushing about 500hp...

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 14:57:17 -0400
From: "Matt Fitzsimmons"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear

- ----- Original Message -----
From: bgarrett
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 6:27 AM
Subject: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear


> i recently developed a pronounced whine, esp in 1st & 2nd on
> acceleration, in my 5 sp mazda trans in a '92 explorer. (i know this is
> off topic, but my wife has a f-150). the truck has about 90k miles on
> it, trans hasn't run low on oil, and i don't tow or off-road with it.
> upon checking the gears, the input shaft gear and the counter shaft gear
> that it meshes with have what appear to be stress linesand roughness
> running along the outer edges of the teeth, maybe 1/16" from the outside
> of the teeth. the input bearing and needle bearings where it joins with
> the output shaft aren't noticeably broken or pitted, etc.and the input
> shaft was snug in the bore, not loose. counter bearings seem ok too. so
> i'm trying to figure out why this happened.
> i hate to throw a bunch of parts at the thing and miss the cause. and
> coming up with $1k for a rebuild.....arrrgh!
> tia, bg
>


Does the whine diminish from 1st to 3rd, gone in 4th, the same as 3rd in
5th?
If so, it sounds like the input shaft bearing is going. While you have the
input shaft out, replace the bearing.
Find the number on the bearing and get a replacement at an industrial
supply, not the dealer or a tranny shop it'll be three times the price
there. Go with a well known manufacturer (Timken, FAG, NTN etc.) and get
the high load version if it's available.

Matt

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 15:02:45 -0400
From: "Matt Fitzsimmons"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - engine question

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Nathaniel Ingersoll
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 2:26 PM
Subject: FTE 80-96 - engine question


> Sorry for the slightly off-topic question, but I'm looking at a car
> (a FORD, yes - '66 Galaxie 500 Convertible) which currently has a 460
> in it, and apparently a 390 came with it. Are the blocks the same?
> Would the engines weigh roughly the same? The reason for the question
> is that I'm curious about the suspension setup for the 460, as the
> suspension is fairly stock.
>
> Supposedly, based on the 1/4mi times (~12.0), the guy thinks that the
car's
> pushing about 500hp...
>
> Thanks.
> mailto:ningersoll packetengines.com


No, the engine blocks are different. The 390 was a 'Y' block, whereas the
460 does not extend past the centre line of the main journals.
There 460 might be a little lighter than the 390. Putting a Galaxie
convertible into the low 12s takes lottsa power, how much does that thing
weigh?

Matt

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:47:06 -0700
From: Mark Ponsford
Subject: Re: Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed

The sensor is definitely a vacuum/air presure sensor but it could be that
you don't have one on your model year (I don't know exactly what all the
differences are between MassAirFlow and what ever the other one is). I've
an '88 F150 302. The sensor is a small black box mounted on the firewall
just around the heater fan. Its wired into the electical harness and also
has a vacuum line going to it. They're a tricky bugger to test because you
just can't put a volt/ohm meter on them. They put out a digital pulse train
whose frequency is dependant on the manifold vacuum (You need a frequency
counter to test these things).

What makes me think this might be the problem is the fact that mine slowly
went dead over a period of time and it eventually got to the point where I
had to ride the gas pedal in order to keep the thing running.

After much testing of this and that, I finally decided to let a real
mechanic look at it. I took it to a small, independant operator and he knew
what the problem was right away. (Didn't even bother to test anything)
Which leads me to believe this is probably a common problem.

Mark


>Danny,
>I have about the same truck as yours and have had the same symptoms for a
>year now. Gotten to the point that I have to keep my foot on the gas to
>keep it running. The TPS is OK and cleaning the IAC and TB did not help.
>One response to your question suggested the manifold air pressure sensor. I
>believe this is actually a manifold air temperature sensor screwed into the
>intake near the front of the vehicle. I would think the computer is open
>loop when the engine is cold and this thing would not part of the equation.
>Maybe he meant the fuel pressure regulator? Any way, I'd be interested in
>whatever you find out on this one.
>Thanks,
>David Anderson
>
>
>>>>90 F-150, 75K mi, 300-6 2WD E4OD trans...
>
>Used to start up everytime at ~1500 rpms and then settle down
>after 20-30 secs and I know this is normal. But lately its beginning
>to start up running rough and sometimes it pulls out of it on its own
>and sometimes it dies. Always restarts fine the 2nd time.
>
>Seems like something is out of adjustment or dirty. Its not a
>cranking problem, its the startup speed I'm trying to recover.
>
>TB cleanout? IAC cleanout? TPS bad/need of adjustment?
>Maybe just a plain tuneup?


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 13:19:31 -0500
From: bgarrett
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear

yes, that just about describes it prefectly. i think i'll take your advice and
try motion industries for the bearing.
thanks again, bg

Matt Fitzsimmons wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: bgarrett
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 6:27 AM
> Subject: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear
>
> > i recently developed a pronounced whine, esp in 1st & 2nd on
> > acceleration, in my 5 sp mazda trans in a '92 explorer. (i know this is
> > off topic, but my wife has a f-150). the truck has about 90k miles on
> > it, trans hasn't run low on oil, and i don't tow or off-road with it.
> > upon checking the gears, the input shaft gear and the counter shaft gear
> > that it meshes with have what appear to be stress linesand roughness
> > running along the outer edges of the teeth, maybe 1/16" from the outside
> > of the teeth. the input bearing and needle bearings where it joins with
> > the output shaft aren't noticeably broken or pitted, etc.and the input
> > shaft was snug in the bore, not loose. counter bearings seem ok too. so
> > i'm trying to figure out why this happened.
> > i hate to throw a bunch of parts at the thing and miss the cause. and
> > coming up with $1k for a rebuild.....arrrgh!
> > tia, bg
> >
>
> Does the whine diminish from 1st to 3rd, gone in 4th, the same as 3rd in
> 5th?
> If so, it sounds like the input shaft bearing is going. While you have the
> input shaft out, replace the bearing.
> Find the number on the bearing and get a replacement at an industrial
> supply, not the dealer or a tranny shop it'll be three times the price
> there. Go with a well known manufacturer (Timken, FAG, NTN etc.) and get
> the high load version if it's available.
>
> Matt
>
> == 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: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 18:11:09 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??

>Did you notice any problems with balding the center of the tread out?
>What brand were they? Do you drive it on the highway a lot? BFG said
>they were dangerous as the could slip off the bead or something on
>anything narrower than 8" and they recommend even wider. I can't
>understand this since the new BFG All Terrain T/A KO's come with a huge
>bead guard/rim protector that lips over the edge of the rim and also
>makes the tire way thicker there. Common sense told me that .5" (1/4"
>on each side) couldn't hurt much. Maybe they have some kind of
>insurance problem or something and can't say it's "okay".
>

I don't think you will have any trouble whatsoever with the narrower rims.
I did not with the 11.5's. My 12.5's are on 8 inch rims and they say to use
10" -- no problem.


>> I just bought a new set of 7" rims and 33x9.5 tires and they fit just fine.
>
>BFG makes a new 33X10.5 in the A/T KO and this looks interesting.

I like these Kellys better than BFG and they are cheaper.

>
>> I was a little worried and tried the front ones first, but they fit great
>> and look great. I got Kelly-Springfield MSR radials and they have a nice
>> aggressive tread and are quiet. They ride nice too.
>
>I talked to a shop today that told me they will mount a 33X9.5 and
>install it on my truck front and then rear to check for clearance at no
>cost!! I was amazed. That's pretty nice of them to do. They assure me
>they will fit. The tire they recommended?? Kelly-Springfield Trailmark
>M/S Radials. Is that the same tire? He said they are awesome. Not
>something I have seen around much, and don't know the tread, but I'll
>check them out. They certainly are cheaper - about $40CDN cheaper - and
>come with a road hazard, mileage and workmanship warranty. Price is not
>the first factor for me though.

These are just called Kelly Safari MSR's. I am not sure what the Trailmarks
are. See if they are at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.kelly-springfield.com/ The MSR's are
pretty impressive- there used to be an old-style MSR (that is in some old
4x4 magazines), but they are completely different and less agressive. The
MSR's I got were $119 each (US)

>
>> I am sure they will be great in snow. My 32x11.5 were the Wild Country's
>> and they were great in snow too, but very noisy.
>
>I'm not concerned as much about noise as about getting the max
>performance off road when I need it, provided they still will keep me
>out of the ditch when winter driving on the highway.
>
>> My 77 Bronco has 35x12.5s and they are wonderful in snow and for plowing.
>> They will actually ride in deep snow and just sink in 12". They are General
>> Grabber APs. I recommend them too.

I got sick of the noise. I figure if I can have a great tire without the
noise, all the better.

>
>I have heard of a few guys who swear by them but I know one guy who has
>some in the 235 range and he has had lots of chunks come out his
>sidewalls. He is not happy with his. I guess there are bad ones in
>every batch. Apparently it's from sliding in and out of hard ruts which
>cut them up bad.

I should clarify this... General Grabber AP that are smaller than 33" have
a much smaller, less agressive tread pattern that is not very good. I had
some 235's on my half ton 2wd and I was very unhappy with them. I got them
because I loved the 35's on the Bronco so well. Make sure you get LT tires
and not P tires.

Well I hope that helps.


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
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 17:39:08 -0500
From: Edward Saunders
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??

I had a set of 32X11.50's on 7 inch rims, and the only way I could prevent the
center from wearing prematurely, was to run the pressure at about 25 PSI, which
was pretty "squishy" on the highway. I just ended up buying 15X10's, and have
enjoyed a much better ride as well as awesome handling.
Ed Saunders 86 F-150 302

Blake Malkamaki wrote:

> >Did you notice any problems with balding the center of the tread out?
> >What brand were they? Do you drive it on the highway a lot? BFG said
> >they were dangerous as the could slip off the bead or something on
> >anything narrower than 8" and they recommend even wider. I can't
> >understand this since the new BFG All Terrain T/A KO's come with a huge
> >bead guard/rim protector that lips over the edge of the rim and also
> >makes the tire way thicker there. Common sense told me that .5" (1/4"
> >on each side) couldn't hurt much. Maybe they have some kind of
> >insurance problem or something and can't say it's "okay".
> >
>
> I don't think you will have any trouble whatsoever with the narrower rims.
> I did not with the 11.5's. My 12.5's are on 8 inch rims and they say to use
> 10" -- no problem.
>
> >> I just bought a new set of 7" rims and 33x9.5 tires and they fit just fine.
> >
> >BFG makes a new 33X10.5 in the A/T KO and this looks interesting.
>
> I like these Kellys better than BFG and they are cheaper.
>
> >
> >> I was a little worried and tried the front ones first, but they fit great
> >> and look great. I got Kelly-Springfield MSR radials and they have a nice
> >> aggressive tread and are quiet. They ride nice too.
> >
> >I talked to a shop today that told me they will mount a 33X9.5 and
> >install it on my truck front and then rear to check for clearance at no
> >cost!! I was amazed. That's pretty nice of them to do. They assure me
> >they will fit. The tire they recommended?? Kelly-Springfield Trailmark
> >M/S Radials. Is that the same tire? He said they are awesome. Not
> >something I have seen around much, and don't know the tread, but I'll
> >check them out. They certainly are cheaper - about $40CDN cheaper - and
> >come with a road hazard, mileage and workmanship warranty. Price is not
> >the first factor for me though.
>
> These are just called Kelly Safari MSR's. I am not sure what the Trailmarks
> are. See if they are at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.kelly-springfield.com/ The MSR's are
> pretty impressive- there used to be an old-style MSR (that is in some old
> 4x4 magazines), but they are completely different and less agressive. The
> MSR's I got were $119 each (US)
>
> >
> >> I am sure they will be great in snow. My 32x11.5 were the Wild Country's
> >> and they were great in snow too, but very noisy.
> >
> >I'm not concerned as much about noise as about getting the max
> >performance off road when I need it, provided they still will keep me
> >out of the ditch when winter driving on the highway.
> >
> >> My 77 Bronco has 35x12.5s and they are wonderful in snow and for plowing.
> >> They will actually ride in deep snow and just sink in 12". They are General
> >> Grabber APs. I recommend them too.
>
> I got sick of the noise. I figure if I can have a great tire without the
> noise, all the better.
>
> >
> >I have heard of a few guys who swear by them but I know one guy who has
> >some in the 235 range and he has had lots of chunks come out his
> >sidewalls. He is not happy with his. I guess there are bad ones in
> >every batch. Apparently it's from sliding in and out of hard ruts which
> >cut them up bad.
>
> I should clarify this... General Grabber AP that are smaller than 33" have
> a much smaller, less agressive tread pattern that is not very good. I had
> some 235's on my half ton 2wd and I was very unhappy with them. I got them
> because I loved the 35's on the Bronco so well. Make sure you get LT tires
> and not P tires.
>
> Well I hope that helps.
>
> 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
> Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
> Desktop Publishing service
> "Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."
>
> == 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: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 16:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jo blow
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed

good Load off my mind
- --- DannyF wrote:
> Date sent: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:10:08 -0400
> (EDT)
> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jo blow
> Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - '90 F-150 startup speed
>
> Got a question about the startup speedwhen its cold
> it will rev up and
> go down to a smooth idle. Its done that since it was
> new, is it
> supposed to? It never has gave me any problems
> before, and it never
> does that when its warm
>
> Completely normal based on 6 Ford truck owners and 2
> Ford techs
>
> Danny
>
>
> Danny
> danf01 worldnet.att.net
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
> http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:34:13 -0400
From: Tom Crowe
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78

I need a truck! Can't afford a new or newer one, so I'm currently looking
at two older ones.

One is a '85 6 cyl 4 spd. It's in Dallas, I'm in Cincinnati, (a friend of
mine has it there). It hasn't been running for about two years and the
last time it was running, it appeared to have carburetor problems (black
smoke, running real rough). The price is right, but I would have to get
out there, get it running and then drive it home (~ 1000 miles) in 4 days.
Of course, I could tow it home, but I don't have a tow vehicle. Would it
be worth it if I can get the truck for cheap?

The other one is a '78 6 cyl 3 spd that runs (barely). A friend has this
locally. It would require major restoration. It could probably be kept
running with a valve job, trans overhaul, all new steering components, new
brake system, new tires and a new gas tank, but it would still be rusty and
otherwise very worn. Would it be worth it if I can get the truck for next
to nothing?

I'd appreciate your experienced perspective. Thanks! Tom
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:37:29 EDT
From: ROlson1039 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78

if i were you i would bide time and wait im sure something better will come
along closer to you. if i HAD to choose between one of these two trucks I
would definately go for the 1985 a carb is reasonably cheap ( $100 or so) and
i would change the oil and make the trip.. the other alternative is to rent a
UHaul or something one way to tow it back with but youre talking a few bucks
there...
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:23:36 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - input/counter shaft wear

>Does the whine diminish from 1st to 3rd, gone in 4th, the same as 3rd in
>5th?
>If so, it sounds like the input shaft bearing is going. While you have the
>input shaft out, replace the bearing.
>Find the number on the bearing and get a replacement at an industrial
>supply, not the dealer or a tranny shop it'll be three times the price
>there. Go with a well known manufacturer (Timken, FAG, NTN etc.) and get
>the high load version if it's available.
>
>Matt
>

Does the bearing whine when the tranny is in nuetral and then stop when the
clutch is put in?

Mine does that and is a little bit noisy all the time. Plus it leaks oil
bad. Using 40 weight oil instead of the red stuff helps, but I am gonna
have to tear this thing apart pretty soon. I am first gonna look for a ZF -
I believe they are lower geared and don't have that crazy high first and
reverse.

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
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:19:21 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Roller chain

Well I got down to the front cover on my 302 today and found it has a Ford
roller chain part number E3AE-A3A. I was expecting a silent-type chain with
a plastic fiber sprocket. This is an 88 302 with fuel injection. There was
even a cam for a fuel pump on the timing sprocket. Were roller chains
standard on these?

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
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:25:00 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??

I generally only run about 25 psi when empty anyway.

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
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 23:21:27 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78

>if i were you i would bide time and wait im sure something better will come
>along closer to you. if i HAD to choose between one of these two trucks I
>would definately go for the 1985 a carb is reasonably cheap ( $100 or so) and
>i would change the oil and make the trip.. the other alternative is to rent a
>UHaul or something one way to tow it back with but youre talking a few bucks
>there...

I agree that you should wait for a better deal.

Personally I don't like those early 80s trucks- before fuel injection came
along some of those trucks had problems. Plus the bodies do not hold up
well here in northern Ohio. After 87 they are better.

A 78 is a much better built truck in all ways except no fuel injection. The
bodies held up better and were much tougher trucks with a nice steel dash
to mount things to. Not full of plastic like the newer stuff. If you are
going with a 4x4 these trucks have solid axles and are the choice of most
serious 4 wheelers.

You can probably get a nice 80s truck cheaper than a same condition 70s truck.

I would suggest look south for no rust.

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
Web site design http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://hitechdesign.com
Desktop Publishing service
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."


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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 21:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Casey Vandor
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Full size ttb vs small ttb

Well I can't afford my F-250 anymore :-( I am looking at letting (ahh
I hate to think of getting rid of it) go of my 3/4 ton and looking for
a ranger, but I am wondering if they eat tires as bad as the ttb and
leaf setup on the full size Fords? Mine always did fine, but I have
seen so many that eat tires in 5,000 miles that it makes me sick. I
just don't want to end up with a front end nightmare like so many other
fords.

Thanks
===
Casey Vandor
"That's the whole problem with science. You've got a bunch of empiricists trying to describe things of unimaginable wonder." - Calvin (& Hobbes)
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.tripod.com/CaseyV/
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 21:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jo blow
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a '85 F150 or '78

i kinda have to side with Blake. The 85's arn't really that tough. If
its in dallas though it not have much rust, but probably poor paint.
The insurance on a 78 most likely would be cheaper too.

- --- Tom Crowe wrote:
> I need a truck! Can't afford a new or newer one, so
> I'm currently looking
> at two older ones.
>
> One is a '85 6 cyl 4 spd. It's in Dallas, I'm in
> Cincinnati, (a friend of
> mine has it there). It hasn't been running for
> about two years and the
> last time it was running, it appeared to have
> carburetor problems (black
> smoke, running real rough). The price is right, but
> I would have to get
> out there, get it running and then drive it home (~
> 1000 miles) in 4 days.
> Of course, I could tow it home, but I don't have a
> tow vehicle. Would it
> be worth it if I can get the truck for cheap?
>
> The other one is a '78 6 cyl 3 spd that runs
> (barely). A friend has this
> locally. It would require major restoration. It
> could probably be kept
> running with a valve job, trans overhaul, all new
> steering components, new
> brake system, new tires and a new gas tank, but it
> would still be rusty and
> otherwise very worn. Would it be worth it if I can
> get the truck for next
> to nothing?
>
> I'd appreciate your experienced perspective.
> Thanks! Tom
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
> http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 21:57:42 -0700
From: redmist mb.sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Biggest Tires for my stock '94 F150 4X4??

Edward Saunders wrote:
>
> I had a set of 32X11.50's on 7 inch rims, and the only way I could prevent the
> center from wearing prematurely, was to run the pressure at about 25 PSI, which
> was pretty "squishy" on the highway. I just ended up buying 15X10's, and have
> enjoyed a much better ride as well as awesome handling.
> Ed Saunders 86 F-150 302

That's interesting. Now I am really confused. I knew I should have
left the computer once I got the news I *wanted* to hear. I don't want
to run these as closet daily drivers with 25 PSI in them. I wonder if
it makes a difference what tread pattern you use. ie. The BFG A/T is a
very flat tread in the contact area. Perhaps the M/T is a little more
rounded to begin with and it wont be so bad...then again , I'm probably
dreaming. Maybe I can sell my aluminum rims to someone and buy some
8-10" rims instead. Just the thought time is adding up to well over the
cost of rims. Yikes!

Blake Malkamaki Wrote:

> > I don't think you will have any trouble whatsoever with the narrower rims.
> > I did not with the 11.5's. My 12.5's are on 8 inch rims and they say to use
> > 10" -- no problem.

Well according to the specs, they want 8.5" as a minimum for 12.5's. So
you are .5" under with the 8" rims, just like I would be if I ran 7.5"
for the 32X11.5's which they want 8" as a minimum. All the same, I like
that you didn't have any trouble with the 12.5's. That is positive.

> > >> I just bought a new set of 7" rims and 33x9.5 tires and they fit just fine.

Spec for these says minimum 6.5".

> > >BFG makes a new 33X10.5 in the A/T KO and this looks interesting.

Spec for these is minimum of 7.0"

Rules were made to be broken I suppose. Fun, fun, fun. Maybe I'll
mount them, try them, and if I run into problems, get rims and swap the
tires to the new rims later. Hmmm...now about that body lift...

Sheldon Charron,
Manitoba, Canada
'94 F150 XLT SC/SB 4X4 302


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

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

Date: 22 Jun 99 21:21:42 PDT
From: William Berninghausen
Subject: Re: [Re: FTE 80-96 - Buy a 85 F150 or 78]

I just did a top half rebuild on an 82 I6 that ran like you're talking
about--a good shop here will get a little less than $2k. But if the runn=
ing
gear is solid, the engine work is worth it because there are NO COMPUTERS=
=2E =

Were I you, I'd wait for one you could eyeball before buying--there's no
substitute for checking out the pig in the poke.

Bill in Portland
- -------------
Jo blow wrote:
> i kinda have to side with Blake. The 85's arn't really that tough. If=

> its in dallas though it not have much rust, but probably poor paint. =

> The insurance on a 78 most likely would be cheaper too.
> =

> --- Tom Crowe wrote:
> > I need a truck! Can't afford a new or newer one, so
> > I'm currently looking
> > at two older ones.
> > =

> > One is a '85 6 cyl 4 spd. It's in Dallas, I'm in
> > Cincinnati, (a friend of
> > mine has it there). It hasn't been running for
> > about two years and the
> > last time it was running, it appeared to have
> > carburetor problems (black
> > smoke, running real rough). The price is right, but
> > I would have to get
> > out there, get it running and then drive it home (~....


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.