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 #239
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 Thursday, August 26 1999 Volume 03 : Number 239



=======================================================================
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 - Axel Ratios...
Re: FTE 80-96 - SOS - Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?
Re: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!
FTE 80-96 - GAS TANK PROBLEMS AGAIN...
FTE 80-96 - Mass Air Conv. Kit components?
RE: FTE 80-96 - In my own defense...
FTE 80-96 - up on jackstands
FTE 80-96 - re: Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?
FTE 80-96 - 89 F250
RE: FTE 80-96 - In my own defense...
FTE 80-96 - Re: Axle Code
FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...
RE: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...
FTE 80-96 - 2WD Ground Clearance/Capability
Re: FTE 80-96 - Axel Ratios...
FTE 80-96 - 96 F-150 300 I-6
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...
Re: FTE 80-96 - 2 cents
FTE 80-96 - US-Made Floor Jacks & Stands
Re: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!
Re: FTE 80-96 - 96 F-150 300 I-6
Re: FTE 80-96 - re: Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?
Re: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250
Re: FTE 80-96 - 96 F-150 300 I-6

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 03:56:59 PDT
From: "Michael G"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Axel Ratios...

I am going to change the axel ratio of my truck, from 2.73 to a lower
ratio. The truck is a 91' F-150 with a a 300/I6 mated to a Mazda 5sp. I know
that this transmission is a discussion within its' self, hehehe, but does
anyone have a breakdown chart of the gear ratios of this transmission?
According to my observations, it appears that my current first gear is
about the same as a 3.55 in 2nd gear. If memory serves, I believe that I
decided it would actually be about (2%?) higher. If anyone could answer or
comment on the following, I would greatly appreciate it...but before I open
a can of worms, let me say that I understand that these questions are
relative and subject to personal prefs for engine RPMs, etc.

3.31 : Is 2nd gear too high of a ratio to start out, but 1st lower
than you'd like around town? This doesn't appear to be a very
common ratio.

3.55 : Able to start out "normally" in 2nd (around town / no load)?

3.73 : RPM rate at 65/5th gear? I see the mathmatical difference from
a 3.55...but is there really that much difference between a
3.73 and 3.55?

Thanks!


_______________________________________________________________
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: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 07:04:46 -0700
From: "Steve Schmeckpeper"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - SOS - Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?

Try changin' to 50 wt and see if that helps :)
Smeck 87 F150

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Cannon
To: Ford Trucks
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 9:06 PM
Subject: FTE 80-96 - SOS - Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?


> Guys-
> I've got a buddy with a small V8 and manual transmission that has
developed
> a loud noise while the engine runs. I'm thinking it might be the rear
main.
> Any easy way to tell? The oil pressure seems to be ok. The noise is
> definitely coming from the rear of the engine. Noise does not change of
you
> step on clutch or not. (I thought at first it was the throw-out bearing,
> becasue I knew it was going bad, but it is not.) I have had engines with
> rod knock before; that is not what this is. I've been lucky enough never
to
> have a main bearing go out. I'm trying to help him get it sorted out so
> that he knows where to start: engine, transmission or clutch. What about
> the pilot bearing? Do they fail very often? What do they sound like when
> they go? That's a long way to dig to be wrong! (Of course, so is replacing
> the mains!)
>
> Any ideas? tricks? Thanks.
>
>
> Jim Cannon
> Houston, TX
> '29 Ford Model A Phaeton '63 Buick Riviera 401 V-8
> '80 Ford F-150 300 I-6 2WD
> == 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, 25 Aug 1999 07:18:55 -0700
From: "Steve Schmeckpeper"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!

My truck does this too..... I'm guessing too much spark advance, a lean
condition, or a combination of both. Pulling the codes would help to nail
things down. Been meaning to do this myself but needed to finish with
brakes/wheel bearings/other first.
Smeck 87 F150 EFI (130K)

- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!


> This may not be a tech article, but it is a mystery.
> I have a 1993 F150 5.0,EFI that has a problem. Cruising on interstates
with
> rolling hills or slight grade sets the engine into a frenzy. The least
little
> bit of hill or grade or demand for more throttle (as in cruise control)
and
> it starts "pinging" a little at first, then progresses to a loss of power
and
> violent shaking, "ping" will subside somewhat as follows: The only way
to
> stop the actions mentioned is to release cruise and take control of
throttle
> action manually, and apply just enough pressure to accelerator to maintain
> speed and the symptoms do subside to a lesser degree. They will not stop
> completely 'til no grade or hill. I've had it on Fords shop diagnostic
> testers, paid a lot of money, only to be told "We can't see anything
> abnormal". It was bad coming back from New York state over this past
> weekend, but we did make it. I am leaning towards a new coil, all other
> ignition components have been replaced, or it may be a lack of fuel, altho
> the fuel delivery system checked OK on diagnostics. Fuel filter was
replaced
> at that time. I have the Haynes manual, and have read everything I can in
> regards to this problem. HELP!!!!!
> Bill B.
> == 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, 25 Aug 1999 11:22:00 -0400
From: LilyBLOOMS 1-800-921-0005
Subject: FTE 80-96 - GAS TANK PROBLEMS AGAIN...

I thought that I had the tanks repaired on my F250 but when I filled
them both up and selected the rear tank the front tank then leaked out
of the fill port (a lot). I think that it is the selector valve. There
is a tech service bulletin on these trucks but it doesn't say much. I
asked the service guys at the local Ford Dealer and he said 'sounds like
it could be' - typical response to anything, I think. The new selector
valve is $120 and I wanted your opinon on this before I spent the $$$.
Could there be some other reason that this could happen? Are there any
things I should check first? I don't want to spend that kind of money
and time on a part that won't fix the problem.



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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:24:31 -0400
From: Greg Carter
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Mass Air Conv. Kit components?

Hi,

I was wondering if the people who have installed one of these kits could
describe the components. Is it possible to find a wrecked Mustang and take
the mass air components from it, or are the components in mass air kit
specific to a truck?

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:41:40 -0500
From: Roy Houston
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - In my own defense...

My wife's 98 GMC Safari (yeah, I know, get it out of your system) owners
manual instructs that the tires should be rotated in this way. Backs to
front and fronts cross to back.

As I understand it, early radials could not tolerate being run in the
opposite direction. something about delamination of belts, etc?

Roy

At 07:54 PM 08/24/1999 , you wrote:
>>Why do you have to raise the whole truck to rotate the tires? Just raise one
>>side at a time. The only proper way to rotate any radial tire is
>>back-to-front, and front-to-back, leaving the wheels on the same side of the
>>truck. Swapping wheels from one side to another causes the direction the
>>tire normally rotates to reverse, and I have heard that this can
>>dramatically reduce the life of the tire.
>
>I have been told this is an outdated theory. I think now they bring the
>rears straight forward and move the fronts to the opposite rears. Can't do
>this if you have directional tires.
>
>Blake
>Little Mountain
>Concord, Ohio
>Early Oil Well Historian http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/oilwell
>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
>"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."
>"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject...."
>
>
>== 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, 25 Aug 1999 09:50:09 -0600
From: "Robert N. Deruy"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - up on jackstands

Jerry Hinkle wrote;

>Hello list dudes. to the guy who wants to put his entire truck in the air,
>start the engine and engage the tranny (in 4-wheel drive no less) I might
>suggest that this IS REAL DANGEROUS!

Getting under a 3 to 4 ton vehicle is not safe, driving up Lion's Back is
dangerous (people have been killed there) driving on the interstate is
dangerous.

Being alive is dangerous to your health. Do you out on your seatbelts? Do
you use good jackstands? It is a question of good judgement and proper
precautions.

BTW, one of my friends who does a bunch of R&P changes thinks this is the
best way to "set in" a new R&P. Get it up on stands with the tires on, put
it in 4wd, set the cruise at about 50, let run for about 10-15 minutes.
There is enough fluctuation in the cruise to give accel and deccel to the
teeth.

People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
easier to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
Bob Deruy (mailto:BobXian netutah.com)
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.calvarycedar.org
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.off -road. com /~cc4wd


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 09:56:54 -0600
From: "Robert N. Deruy"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - re: Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?

Jim Cannon wrote:

>Guys-
>I've got a buddy with a small V8 and manual transmission that has developed
>a loud noise while the engine runs. I'm thinking it might be the rear main.
>Any easy way to tell? The oil pressure seems to be ok. The noise is
>definitely coming from the rear of the engine. Noise does not change of you
>step on clutch or not. (I thought at first it was the throw-out bearing,
>becasue I knew it was going bad, but it is not.) I have had engines with
>rod knock before; that is not what this is. I've been lucky enough never to
>have a main bearing go out. I'm trying to help him get it sorted out so
>that he knows where to start: engine, transmission or clutch. What about
>the pilot bearing? Do they fail very often? What do they sound like when
>they go? That's a long way to dig to be wrong! (Of course, so is replacing
>the mains!)
>
>Any ideas? tricks? Thanks.

John Muir said to run the engine under a heavy load, like in 4th gear at
30-35 mph up a hill. Then quickly relieve the load, let off at the top of
the hill as if to keep the speed the same, don't take your foot off the
throttle completely.
If it is a main bearing you will get a significant change in the sound that
you've been hearing, like something hammering.

Not sure how well that will work with Ford trucks but it was reliable back
in my VW days and has worked for friends on AMC 6's.

HTH.

People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
easier to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
Bob Deruy (mailto:BobXian netutah.com)
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.calvarycedar.org
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.off -road. com /~cc4wd


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 12:02:11 +0000
From: whaynes co.roanoke.va.us (Wayne Haynes)
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250

Hi folks, I am relatively new to this group. I only joined a few
weeks ago but have already picked up quite a bit of useful
information. I have a HD 1989 F250 with 82,000 miles on a 5.8L 351.
I have had several problems with the truck since I bought it in 1995.
In 1996, I had to replace the clutch master cylinder (in three feet
of snow no less). In 1998, the concentric cylinder in the clutch
went out and had to be replaced. That went out in one foot of snow
and I was starting to believe that the truck was afraid of the snow.
In March of this year, I was losing all oil pressure on an
intermittent basis. After changing the filter and oil, thinking that
a piece of the filter may have come loose and was blocking the
oil intake, the problem was still occurring. Finally, my mechanic
removed the oil pan and replaced the oil intake. He said that there
was a leaf in the oil pan that would apparently float up every so
often, block the intake, and I would lose all oil pressure. I'm not
sure that I believe the leaf part, but everything worked fine for a
few months. That brings me to my current problem. The fuel gauge
has never registered correctly on the front tank but has worked
correctly on the rear. Recently, the rear one has also started to
malfunction. The oil pressure gauge is once again registering very
low, just inside the normal range. My mechanic told me that the
valve covers were leaking when I asked him about the new oil stain in
the driveway but I discovered that all the bolts holding the oil pan
were loose. I tightened them to spec and that seemed to correct the
leak problem, however the oil pressure still reads low. I am
concerned that there may be some type of electrical problem with all
the gauges. I have thought about putting a new oil pressure gauge in
it but I read a few weeks ago here that the problem with the fuel
gauges could possibly be the voltage regulator. I would appreciate
any thoughts on what the problem(s) may be and their solutions.
Sorry for such a long post. Thanks!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:05:39 -0600
From: "Giddens, Scott"
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - In my own defense...

It's true that the early (early 1980's) steel belted radials had to be
rotated so the rotation direction is always the same. Rotating them in a
cross pattern would damage them.

I accidentally did this on my very first car and not having a lot of money
to spend I drove them into the ground. What happened is the steel belts in
the tires got used to one direction and when I changed it they broke and the
sharp ends of the wires stuck out the tread of the tire. It looked really
funny having hairy tires on my car and something I will never forget.

And it is also true that the newer radials do not have this problem, they
can be rotated in the usual cross pattern and you get a better ride and new
tire traction.

But at a price. The life of the tire is reduced. It is a better trade off to
rotate front to back. You still get even wear on the edges and a little
better ride/control with a longer life. At 230 bucks a tire I chose the
latter, but that is a personal preference, the choice is yours and that is
just my opinion from years of experience.

Scott

- -----Original Message-----
From: Roy Houston [SMTP:houston1 slb.com]

My wife's 98 GMC Safari (yeah, I know, get it out of your system) owners
manual instructs that the tires should be rotated in this way. Backs to
front and fronts cross to back.

As I understand it, early radials could not tolerate being run in the
opposite direction. something about delamination of belts, etc?

Roy

At 07:54 PM 08/24/1999 , you wrote:
>>Why do you have to raise the whole truck to rotate the tires? Just raise
one
>>side at a time. The only proper way to rotate any radial tire is
>>back-to-front, and front-to-back, leaving the wheels on the same side of
the
>>truck. Swapping wheels from one side to another causes the direction the
>>tire normally rotates to reverse, and I have heard that this can
>>dramatically reduce the life of the tire.
>
>I have been told this is an outdated theory. I think now they bring the
>rears straight forward and move the fronts to the opposite rears. Can't do
>this if you have directional tires.
>
>Blake
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:52:28 -0700
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Axle Code

On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, "Dave Harmier" wrote:
>
> Greg Carter wrote:
>
> >You can find the axle code on the drivers door sticker, and if the
> >seller still has the owners manual you can look up the code in there in
> the
> >towing section, to tell you what gears the truck has. If not post to list
> >and someone will decode it for you.
>
> I looked all through the owners manual of my '92 and dads '91 and could
> find no reference to ratios. The codes are "L" or "I" (not sure) 9 on my
> '92, and H9 on dads '91. A buddy said mine is 3.55, and Dads does about the
> same RPMS/MPH as mine so all I figure is MAYBE "H" is posi????

On my manual it's in the "trailer towing" section. the first digit is
the axle type and the second is the ratio. It doesn't list the models
here, only the weight carrying capacity. As far as ratios go, here it
is:

2nd
Digit Ratio
3 4.11
4 3.00
5 4.10
6 3.50
7 3.73
8 3.08
9 3.55

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:56:17 -0700
From: Vogt Family
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...

On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Fred Moreno wrote:
>
> On Tuesday Jerry Hinkle wrote;
>
> Hello list dudes. to the guy who wants to put his entire truck in
> the air,
> start the engine and engage the tranny (in 4-wheel drive no less) I
> might
> suggest that this IS REAL DANGEROUS!
>
> No caca? Yeah I agree with you, it IS very dangerous. I have lifted the
> truck completly off the ground before in order to rotate the tires but never
> started the engine. I only turned the tires over by hand.
>
> You must have real confidence in your jackstands etc. sounds kind
> of scary to me. At least make sure the truck is not pointed toward your
> house!
>
> Nope, my driveway points into a pecan orchard - watchout for that tree! I
> have 4 really stout jackstands and a great floor jack, the last I remember
> when I had the truck completely off the ground, it felt pretty solid when
> checked.

Just a thought, I remember hearing that tires are actually partially
held together by the weight pushing on the ground. I'm sure somebody
has had a tire up to 100 mph in the air but I think the risk of
grenading is worse when there is no weight on it. So please don't turn
them too fast.

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:17:18 -0700
From: "McMahon, Todd R."
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250

You wrote:
>That brings me to my current problem. The fuel gauge
>has never registered correctly on the front tank but has worked
>correctly on the rear. Recently, the rear one has also started to
>malfunction.

Time to replace the tank sending units... It's a known problem.

Good Luck...!

Todd

- -----Original Message-----
From: whaynes co.roanoke.va.us [mailto:whaynes co.roanoke.va.us]
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 1999 5:02 AM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250


Hi folks, I am relatively new to this group. I only joined a few
weeks ago but have already picked up quite a bit of useful
information. I have a HD 1989 F250 with 82,000 miles on a 5.8L 351.
I have had several problems with the truck since I bought it in 1995.
In 1996, I had to replace the clutch master cylinder (in three feet
of snow no less). In 1998, the concentric cylinder in the clutch
went out and had to be replaced. That went out in one foot of snow
and I was starting to believe that the truck was afraid of the snow.
In March of this year, I was losing all oil pressure on an
intermittent basis. After changing the filter and oil, thinking that
a piece of the filter may have come loose and was blocking the
oil intake, the problem was still occurring. Finally, my mechanic
removed the oil pan and replaced the oil intake. He said that there
was a leaf in the oil pan that would apparently float up every so
often, block the intake, and I would lose all oil pressure. I'm not
sure that I believe the leaf part, but everything worked fine for a
few months. That brings me to my current problem. The fuel gauge
has never registered correctly on the front tank but has worked
correctly on the rear. Recently, the rear one has also started to
malfunction. The oil pressure gauge is once again registering very
low, just inside the normal range. My mechanic told me that the
valve covers were leaking when I asked him about the new oil stain in
the driveway but I discovered that all the bolts holding the oil pan
were loose. I tightened them to spec and that seemed to correct the
leak problem, however the oil pressure still reads low. I am
concerned that there may be some type of electrical problem with all
the gauges. I have thought about putting a new oil pressure gauge in
it but I read a few weeks ago here that the problem with the fuel
gauges could possibly be the voltage regulator. I would appreciate
any thoughts on what the problem(s) may be and their solutions.
Sorry for such a long post. Thanks!
== 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, 25 Aug 1999 14:16:06 -0400
From: Mike Sloane
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...

I doubt that. We used to balance tires by spinning them up pretty fast, and they
never came apart. I cannot imagine how the weight of the vehicle on 5% of the tire
would do much to keep them together. Of course, if it were badly unbalanced, THAT
could cause some interesting problems.

Mike

Mike

Vogt Family wrote:

> Just a thought, I remember hearing that tires are actually partially
> held together by the weight pushing on the ground. I'm sure somebody
> has had a tire up to 100 mph in the air but I think the risk of
> grenading is worse when there is no weight on it. So please don't turn
> them too fast.
>
> Birken
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

- --

- ------------
Mike Sloane
Allamuchy NJ
(msloane att.net)



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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 12:18:36 PDT
From: 2insane excite.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 2WD Ground Clearance/Capability

First off, should have got a 4x4.

Now. If your getting where your going with your truck now, why throw on some
more stuff? Unless your driving over stumps and trees i wouldn't worry about
a lift. LS would be nice to get through some "spinning" spots and with BFG
31X10.5 ATs (heard to work great) you shouldn't have much trouble getting
around.
in my opinion.




________________________________________________________________
Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://voicemail.excite.com
Talk online at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://voicechat.excite.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 13:13:57 -0700
From: Mark Ponsford
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Axel Ratios...

> I am going to change the axel ratio of my truck, from 2.73 to a lower
>ratio. The truck is a 91' F-150 with a a 300/I6 mated to a Mazda 5sp. I know
>that this transmission is a discussion within its' self, hehehe, but does
>anyone have a breakdown chart of the gear ratios of this transmission?
> According to my observations, it appears that my current first gear is
>about the same as a 3.55 in 2nd gear. If memory serves, I believe that I
>decided it would actually be about (2%?) higher. If anyone could answer or
>comment on the following, I would greatly appreciate it...but before I open
>a can of worms, let me say that I understand that these questions are
>relative and subject to personal prefs for engine RPMs, etc.
>
>3.31 : Is 2nd gear too high of a ratio to start out, but 1st lower
> than you'd like around town? This doesn't appear to be a very
> common ratio.
>
>3.55 : Able to start out "normally" in 2nd (around town / no load)?
>
>3.73 : RPM rate at 65/5th gear? I see the mathmatical difference from
> a 3.55...but is there really that much difference between a
> 3.73 and 3.55?
>
> Thanks!

The ratios for the Mazda 5spd are 3.41 : 3.90 2.25 1.45 1.00 0.80 (R:12345)

I've got 3.08 gears in my 5spd. Been toying with the idea of going with
3.55 but not sure if it's worth the difference. Very rarely do I tow
anything. As far as general driveability, I would imagine one would
probably have to start out in 2nd as 1st would wind out rather quickly.



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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 17:02:40 -0500
From: "Nathan A. Goins"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - 96 F-150 300 I-6

Couple questions for you fellas,

Has anyone tried an aftermarket performance chip for the I-6? Any
better mileage or noticeable performance increases? I just purchased
this truck and so far I'm averaging 15.2 mpg. I just put in a new Ford
Motorsport air filter (the one that K&N makes for ford), and I'm hoping
for some improvement.

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:47:35 EDT
From: FLR150 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: In my own defense...

Guys,
On the tires up in the air rolling, Being as I compete in the Fun Ford
Weekend series and hang out with guys that run Street Ford all the way up to
Pro 5.0, I can tell you that I have seen a LOT of the racers have their cars
up on nothing more than a huge floor jack with the motor running and the car
in gear. These guys run their motors up to tremendous RPM's to check timing
and such. I have never seen one fall or the tires grenade...but then again
these are full slicks they run on, not regular street radials.
My .02,
Wayne Foy
'94 Flareside SC
Wayne's Page

In a message dated 8/25/99 1:58:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vogt oro.net
writes:


held together by the weight pushing on the ground. I'm sure somebody
has had a tire up to 100 mph in the air but I think the risk of
grenading is worse when there is no weight on it. So please don't turn
them too fast. >>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:21:27 -0400
From: "Troy"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 2 cents

On 24 Aug 99, at 4:29, Christopher Tirone wrote:

>IMHO, the occasional off-subject post is a good thing
>for this list. The subject is Ford trucks, but where
>else can we gather Ford truck owners together so
>easily and share what's on our minds BESIDES our
>obsession with our trucks. The fact that you're a Ford
>truck owner says something about who you are, so when
>an event happens that strikes a nerve and you need to
>vent, why not amongst friends? As long as it doesn't
>take over, I'm all for it...

I agree. Makes the list a more friendly place. Then we also know
a little bit about the other person rather than where they are located
and what style pickup they drive (either a Ranger, Explorer, F-
Series, etc).

>P.S. If your idea of "loading the dishwasher" is
>getting your wife drunk, you might be a redneck...

Hehehehehe, another one posting the redneck jokes around here.
Looks like I'm starting a new trend. :)

You might be a redneck if... You won't go to the family Christmas
party unarmed. - Jeff Foxworthy


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 20:55:19 -0400
From: "Mark Salvetti"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - US-Made Floor Jacks & Stands

If you're looking for US-made stuff, check out
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hyjacks.com/index.html

They have NORCO pin-type stands made in the US, but be prepared for sticker
shock: $238 for the smallest pair (10" to 17" range). But they hold 10
tons.

The ratchet-type NORCO line is made in Taiwan, but those prices (and weight
capacities) are more like we'd need.

This web site is also a source for Lincoln floor jacks. They have a really
nice one for $300. I found a similar, probably slightly lighter duty
Lincoln (also made in US) at Costco for about $125. I bought it, and I'm
really pleased with the quality.

Mark Salvetti
1986 F150

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 20:59:25 EDT
From: Spruce1495 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!

I am not sure if the EGR valve was checked. Do not know if there is a "knock
sensor" on engine. The problem did start after I changed the original spark
plugs and replaced them with Bosch Plats. Also changed rotor, cap and wires.
TWICE. Ford garage took out Bosch's and replaced with Motorcraft stock
plugs. At that time they ran all tests and codes. Nothing realy showed up
except for a slightly low vacuum reading. Yes the plug wires are separated
and are in the same looms as stock configuration. The engine has 87,400 miles
on it. None of this started 'til I changed the plugs at 85,500. I'm wondering
if the fuel delivery system could be at fault. The pressure when tested was
at 35-40psi. This was at idle. Even though the pressure was good, could it be
the volume of fuel at throttle demand is inadequate?? When the engine gets
over its little fits of rage and smooths back out, it runs as smooth as can
be. It has great acceleration from standing start, but as I say, don't ask
it to pull a grade or slight hill.
I'm listening in Kentucky.
Bill B.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:23:51 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 96 F-150 300 I-6

>Couple questions for you fellas,
>
>Has anyone tried an aftermarket performance chip for the I-6? Any
>better mileage or noticeable performance increases? I just purchased
>this truck and so far I'm averaging 15.2 mpg. I just put in a new Ford
>Motorsport air filter (the one that K&N makes for ford), and I'm hoping
>for some improvement.
>

That sounds like pretty normal milage for that kind of truck, especially if
it is a 4 wheel drive.


Blake
Little Mountain
Concord, Ohio
Early Oil Well Historian http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://little-mountain.com/oilwell
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
"Society is safest when the criminals don't know who's armed."
"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject...."


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:45:55 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - re: Any easy way to diagnose bad rear main bearing?

The problem, much to my surprise, was that the flywheel inspection plate
onthe front of the bell housing was being rubbed against (hit) by the
rotating crankshaft! I straightened it out and ground a bit off and all is
quiet now. This one really stumped me, but we figured it out. Thanks to all
for the replies.

Jim

At 09:56 25/08/99 -0600, you wrote:
>Jim Cannon wrote:
>
>>Guys-
>>I've got a buddy with a small V8 and manual transmission that has developed
>>a loud noise while the engine runs. I'm thinking it might be the rear main.
>>Any easy way to tell? The oil pressure seems to be ok. The noise is
>>definitely coming from the rear of the engine. Noise does not change of you
>>step on clutch or not. (I thought at first it was the throw-out bearing,
>>becasue I knew it was going bad, but it is not.) I have had engines with
>>rod knock before; that is not what this is. I've been lucky enough never to
>>have a main bearing go out. I'm trying to help him get it sorted out so
>>that he knows where to start: engine, transmission or clutch. What about
>>the pilot bearing? Do they fail very often? What do they sound like when
>>they go? That's a long way to dig to be wrong! (Of course, so is replacing
>>the mains!)
>>
>>Any ideas? tricks? Thanks.
>
>John Muir said to run the engine under a heavy load, like in 4th gear at
>30-35 mph up a hill. Then quickly relieve the load, let off at the top of
>the hill as if to keep the speed the same, don't take your foot off the
>throttle completely.
>If it is a main bearing you will get a significant change in the sound that
>you've been hearing, like something hammering.
>
>Not sure how well that will work with Ford trucks but it was reliable back
>in my VW days and has worked for friends on AMC 6's.
>
>HTH.


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:43:49 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 89 F250

There is a small Instrument Voltage Regulator behind the instruments that
is supposed to give you a constant 5 volts to the guages. If it
malfunctions you will see three of the guages (fuel, temp, oil pressure,
NOT amps) all swing together either higher than they usually go, or lower.
Mine tends to run higher. You look down and it appears the engine is
overheating. Then you notice that you have 1.4 tank more gas than you did
30 minutes ago and the oil pressure is really high. At that point you know
that the IVR is acting up.

The only way to know for sure is to put a mechanical guage on the oil
pressure and get some real readings at normal operating temperature and
several RPMs.

If one fuel guage reads low and the other reads normal when you fill up the
tank, then it is not the IVR. If they read low it could be that the sender
is going bad or there is excess resistance in the wire going back to the
tank, due to corrosion, for example, that is giveing a false lower reading.

When you use the selector switch to change the active fuel tank, you are
also changing which tank sender is feeding into the fuel guage. If that
selector switch has dirty contacts on one side, that tank will read low.

Your oil pressure sender will also slowly fail with time and not read as
high as it used to. What does the temp guage seem to be doing all this time?....


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.