|
|
From: owner-80-96-list-digest
To: 80-96-list-digest Subject: 80-96-list-digest V3 #302 Reply-To: 80-96-list Sender: owner-80-96-list-digest Errors-To: owner-80-96-list-digest Precedence: bulk 80-96-list-digest Thursday, October 28 1999 Volume 03 : Number 302 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980-1996 Trucks and Vans Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: majordomo with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list-digest" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild Re: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage Re: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation RE: FTE 80-96 - Codes on 88' F350 CrewCab Dually FTE 80-96 - Re: Oil Pressure and Temperature Gauges FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves FTE 80-96 - SRW to DRW FTE 80-96 - Color guard trailer FTE 80-96 - Wheels and Seat FTE 80-96 - Filters FTE 80-96 - Oily engine FTE 80-96 - Std or undersized Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: New policy Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation FTE 80-96 - Chassis CLUNK solved. FTE 80-96 - 89 3.L-V6 HARD STARTING COLD Re: FTE 80-96 - Color guard trailer Re: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters RE: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves FTE 80-96 - EGR Valve Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters FTE 80-96 - Painting and peeling/HD359 Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters FTE 80-96 - Temperature Sending Unit(s) FTE 80-96 - transmission swap FTE 80-96 - 460 Re: FTE 80-96 - EGR Valve Re: FTE 80-96 - 460 ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 20:26:42 +1000 From: les williams Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage This still has nothing to do with 460 vs. 302 mileage, again. Hi Ken, You win!! I am not going to 'fess up, or admit to anything I have done in my younger years. For the sake of the 'younger and still impressionable' members of this list, do not emulate any of these acts. Isn't it funny how the Younger think, they are the first ones to think up stunts like this. If Ken Payne started a list called, say 'Tall Tails & True Stories In, On, and About Ford Trucks' - that could be a revelation !!! although we already have 9 lists - I think every owner probably has had an experience that they would love to tell, concerning everything from how they found their truck, to the 'uses' (now doesn't that cover a multitude of sins) it's been put to, but are not sure of the right place, or the concern of wasting the time of other list members that have no interest in such percieved crap. ...and I'm still having Fun.... regards Les Lost in the Land of OZ ken haley wrote: > Les, > > This has nothing to do with 460 vs. 302 mileage, either. > > Be sure the yuppie is not driving a car with a judiciary or congressional > (or whatever your poli-biz people call themselves in head-stand land) plate > before you smoke 'em. > > My brother loaded his windshield washers with disappearing ink, twisted the > nozzles sideways, and blasted a congressman's wife right in her brand new > Lincoln. heeheehee She didn't think him a bit funny. It only cost $150 to > bail him out, and $100 for towing and impoundment. What can I say, he drives > a Chevy? > > Of course, it wasn't half as expensive as the time he used his tailpipe for > a skyrocket launcher and it went in the driver's window and out the > passenger's window of an unmarked police car on a stake out, but that's > another story. > > Are we having fun, yet? > > Ken > > The one who never forgets, and never let's his brother forget, either. > > ______________________________________________________ > > == 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, 27 Oct 1999 05:51 -0500 From: Jason D Odor Subject: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild Fellow Listers, Well, looks like I'm going to have to rebuild the 302 in my 93 F150. I've already started tearing it apart. I'm really excited, this is the first time I have taken apart a motor. By the way, I'm the guy that has no compression in cylinders 7 and 8. My question is, what do I look for and what are components that I should replace(worn or maybe not worn)? On top of all of that, what can I do while I have it apart to increase horse power? As I said, I am a virgin to rebuilds, so any and all help/suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Jason == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 05:29:38 -0700 From: "Jamie" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild I just had my 302 rebuilt (1990) I had a Sealed power speed pro cam installed. If you go with too wild a cam you will have to install a chip. you can increase the displacement by going with bigger pistons. Also inside the exhaust ports on the 302 heads there is a little bump. I had the machine shop grind these off and that gave me an extra 30hp. You have lots of options when rebuilding, you could go to performance heads, intake, rockers, but it all costs money, the cam I got was only $80 over the price of the stock cam, but the chip was expensive around $400. Jamie Cain 1990 F250 4x4 302 - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jason D Odor To: Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 3:51 AM Subject: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild > Fellow Listers, > Well, looks like I'm going to have to rebuild the 302 in my 93 F150. I've > already started tearing it apart. I'm really excited, this is the first time I > have taken apart a motor. By the way, I'm the guy that has no compression in > cylinders 7 and 8. My question is, what do I look for and what are components > that I should replace(worn or maybe not worn)? On top of all of that, what can > I do while I have it apart to increase horse power? As I said, I am a virgin > to rebuilds, so any and all help/suggestions will be greatly appreciated. > > Jason > > == 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, 27 Oct 1999 04:39:40 PDT From: "ken haley" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage HAAHAAHAAHAA Les, get ahold of your sheets, my friend. Otherwise, I'll have to down a bit of grog and fly up there and retrieve them for you. How about it, Mr. Payne? If not a list, how about room on the server for html? It might even make an interesting book. I'll be happy to edit and organize contributions for either html or print, especially if there is a buck to be made from a book. Did I ever tell you about the time we lined the bed of an F-250 with styrofoam, loaded up 8 kegs, and dumped in 500 pounds of crushed ice? Man, that was a party.... Ken ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:46:02 PDT From: "ken haley" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - 302 rebuild Jason, It takes a book to explain in text how to properly overhaul an engine and the use of the specialized tools for doing so. On top of that, every engine has special considerations, such as clearances, capacities, and torques, that are covered in another book. I strongly suggest that you study a couple of shop manuals carefully for the answers you seek. The money and time you save in the long run will be your own. You can get manuals through the mail from J.C Whitney, so no excuses there. They will even priority mail if you are in a hurry. Good luck, Ken ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 06:49:31 -0500 From: "Steve Schmeckpeper" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation , one hooter than the other, Freudian slip ? > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:00:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark F. Burgo ( Mark F. Burgo" Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Codes on 88' F350 CrewCab Dually Well, first off I would like to thank everyone for their help with this. In the KOEO status I get only a solid Check Engine light. I am beginning to think the entire problem is with the wire harness. I went back out last night and when I lifted the ECC Test connector to insert the jumper a wire just busted off of the connector and I didn't even touch that wire. I am wondering of the rest of the wires are this bad and checking into the cost of a new harness today. I also believed I should be getting an 11 but have never gotten anything from the KOEO test. Reviewed the procedure and even went as far as borrowing a SNAP-ON code checker on Tuesday morning. Was unable to read anything until I ran the engine. Same codes the egr valve not operating properly and the O2 read rich. Checked vacuum on the EGR and all seems well checked as per the Hayes manual the TPS and it reads fine. Could it all be in the copper wires, is the question i pose today. I believe that eleven year old wires are bound to go bad at some time and wonder if it would be better to replace them or if you all have another suggestion.... Thanks again, this list is a wonderful tool and I'm glad I have the ability to use it and pick your minds.... Mark On 26-Oct-99 David Anderson (EUS) wrote: > I'd first review the procedure you're using. Even with no stored faults you > should get an "11" I think, meaning all OK. Take a look at this site for a > well written procedure and code list. > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dalidesign.com/hbook/eectest.html > > David Anderson > >>>>>>Hello all, > >>>>>>>I attempted to read the KOEO codes but I get no response in this > configuration. I can get codes with the KOER status modes. Does anyone > have > an explanation as to why I get nothing with the KOEO settings....>>>>>>> > > == 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, 27 Oct 1999 08:29:14 -0500 From: "DannyF" Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Oil Pressure and Temperature Gauges Have a '90 Lariat 300-6 myself. Several friends too. The oil pressure should show in the mid range on the gauge. Maybe slightly lower/higher depending on temp/load. The gauge itself is rarely the prob unless it reads 0 or pegs to high. You could take a shot and just replace the sending unit. They can get gunked up and report low press to the guage. Or you could have a shop hook up a mechanical guage to verify the gauge/sending unit(should be I'm assuming fresh oil and maybe 5W-30 or 10W-30 for Oct in VA. The temp gauge for this vintage normally reads low. Most times it won't even hit the N in Normal. The only time I can get mine above that is running the AC in 95-100 degree heat or pulling the boat doing 65 out of OD. Danny > Subject: FTE 80-96 - Oil Pressure and Temperature Gauges > > Hi, my name is Mike. I'm rather new to the list. Recently, I bought my > first car, err, truck. Just so happens that it's an '89, F-150 XLT > Lariat, > std cab, full size bed, 2 wheel drive with an I-6 under the hood. I > picked > it up fairly cheap from a family member in Richmond, Virginia. Aside > from > some very minor surface rust here and there, it's in great condition. I > have > plans within the next year to fix the any typical dings, scratches and > such, > and repaint it hopefully by July. So, for now, it gets me from point A to > B > while I do minor modifications and tweaks between classes. > > I believe the two of the issues I'm facing have been posted before, > however > I haven't been able to find the responses. > > A) The oil pressure guage shows very low pressure (if any). I know the > pump > isn't bad, as it was replaced shortly before I purchased the truck, and > because I had to drive it up from Virginia. The engine runs great (even > with 155,000 miles), so I figure if I had low pressure, I wouldn't have > gotten as far as I did. > > B) The temperature guage is fairly low. I'm not sure if it is working at > all, or if it is simply due to the semi-cold temperatures we've been > experiencing here in Vermont. > > Any insight on the matters would be greatly appreciated. Although it's > my > first truck, I'm not entirely worthless when it comes to under-the-hood > work, all I need is some help to get pointed in the right direction. > And > I'll ask for forgivance early if I ask multiple questions that > would/should > be common knowledge. As for an owner's manual, I don't have one, as it > apparently walked away from the previous owner. As for a repair book, I'm > in > the middle of no-where, and the only nearby bookstores or auto stores > don't > have a book in stock. As I said, I'm kinda new to this, but I'm not > entirely > helpless, any help would be great. Thanks. > > Danny danf01 == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:40:56 -0500 From: BAH Subject: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves Thanks to all who responded to my query...I just might try one. By the way, JCWhitney (of all places) carries the Shelf-It piece for something like $49.99 (plus S&H). Bruce Hanson Apple Valley, MN '86 F-150 '66 Bronco == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:27:05 -0400 From: am14 Subject: FTE 80-96 - SRW to DRW Jim Cross writes: >> I'm a new list member with an 89 F350 crew cab single rear wheel under rebuild It has an industrial bush box on it ( it's an ex-logging company unit) 2) Are dual wheels a bolt on or are there major brake changes etc to convert from a single wheels setup? Don't know about your particular model, but I'll share my experiences with a '79 F350 4X4 SRW that my son and I converted to DRW. The inner wheel(actually the tire) touched the leaf spring and we had to make a spacer. We did this out of 1/2" aluminum stock. Countersunk the bolt holes on both sides. Bought new lug bolts and installed in the axle and purchased the larger nuts required for DRW's. This gave us just enough clearence for the inner wheel. We're still running it this way and it was 4 years or so that we did this. No problems so far, but I must say the truck never is really loaded. Has a 10' flatbed on it. I think it really looks good and could be used for heavy hauling, but it has never been truly tested. If we had it to do over we would try to purchase a complete rear from a C&C that came with the DRW's. Brakes seem to be adequate for the job, but again it hasn't been truly tested. We are running the 16" rims not the 16.5"'s Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 08:54:07 -0400 From: Subject: FTE 80-96 - Color guard trailer >It's main uses are to tow the high school color gaurd trailer Hey, just wanted to mention that I pull the band trailer for our school behind my '82 F150. It's a real hoot going to those competitions! Slik == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:30:54 PDT From: "Christopher Worley" Subject: FTE 80-96 - Wheels and Seat Does any one know of I place that might sell a bench seat to fit the extended cab of a '93 F150 SC, I am also looking for a set of wheels, the factory type that came on the XL the ones I have now have the "dish" type hup caps and really make my truck look bad. Chris '93 F150 SC 351 ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:50:51 -0400 From: am14 Subject: FTE 80-96 - Filters Theodore M. writes: >>Use quality filters. Fram or.... "Fram" and quality do not belong in the same structure.... Have you ever seen a cutaway of a Fram filter????? I don't think so, because if you had, I do not believe you would use the two terms in the same relationship. JMHO. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:17:50 -0400 From: am14 Subject: FTE 80-96 - Oily engine Gary writes: >>Does the 302 like blowing oil up the dipstick ? Any advice gratefully received. Is the oil pressure gauge one of those that reads on startup, then swithes itself off - or is this another problem in the making. Sounds like excessive pressure in the crankcase. Ie. blowby or PCV valve not functioning properly. Low oil pressure after ewngine warm up is indicative of worn bearings -mains and rods. How many miles on this engine??????? Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 16:25:50 -0400 From: am14 Subject: FTE 80-96 - Std or undersized Several are pondering this: >> I bought std and plastigauged them. Got lucky and they were all within tolerence. To be sure guess you could get one of each size and check them before you bought the whole lot. Anyone have any ideas? If you know the engine to be std before you tear into it, then I would replace with std. If you don't know, then remove one each of the mains and rods and look on the back of each. They will be marked with .010 /.020/.030 or such. Sometimes this is the last digits of a P/N stamped into the back and sometimes it is just the #'s. Make sure the crank journals are nice and smoothe and have a mirrow like finish before you insert the bearings and most likely you will be OK witrh this method. You can special order most bearings in .001" and .002", also, but this is mostly for professional racers, or those that claim to be experts in overhauling engines. Azie Ardmore, Al. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 07:42:12 +1000 From: les williams Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation Ken Payne wrote: > Forward for Fred Moreno > > Acquaintance shows up asking for help because his ratted out '83 (?) Ford > truck takes too long to warm up and overheats and/or boils over when sitting > at a light. This truck should be shot and buried because it has been so > abused by the and previous owners. Hey, Slow up here, I just happen to be one that believes, there is no such thing as a bad truck, but plenty of bad owners, bad engineering of parts, bad repairs or just maybe No longer Economical to Repair!!! However, there IS such a thing as a bad car - anybody for '59 Edsel, low milage. just kidding :-)) ....Arn't you allowed to just Shoot the Abusive Previous Owners, and have them buried ? Regards Les Lost In The Land of OZ Phred, are you having email problems ? They are being returned 'Local Config Error' - les == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 07:42:40 +1000 From: les williams Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - RE: 460 vs. 302 mileage This has even less to do with 460 v's 302 milage than the last !! Hi Blake, As a kid I can remember dad turning off the ignition, rolling down a particular steep hill in gear, near home, and 5 or 10 sec later turning the ignition back on, and waiting for the explosion in the exhaust system. That was gang's of FUN. Every so often we would have to go back and pick-up bits of hot muffler pieces that didn't survive this treatment. That was the days of 15-20 amp generators. Then the alternators came and that stopped that. Blown alternators are expensive. This is what originally started me on this thread, being approached to install an after fuel ignition devise and would the O2 sensor fitting a suitable point ? I can only imagine what the message back to the computer would be if the O2 sensor was actually wetted with fuel !! Let alone the potential damage to the cat converter - Yes, you are right, we are being outsmarted by our own technology....but as with this computer technology, we will learn to use & modify the Auto computers for our own ends. Regards Les Lost In the Land of OZ > ...Yep...I'm havin' so much FUN..... > > Drill and tap a hole into the side of your exhaust pipe just in from the > exit and thread a spark plug in. Hook it to a Model T coil that is wired to > a switch inside. With a carbureted engine, you could leave it in gear and > shut the ignition off so the gasoline vapors would collect in the exhaust. > Hit the coil button and WAMMM! it throughs a nice flame out the back. > Probably wouldn't work with a cat converter either. Oh well, technology > takes the fun out. > > 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, 27 Oct 1999 19:36:16 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: New policy ADMIN: New policy ---- Please read! As many of our old-timers may remember, we started a policy of filtering out all special character formatting and HTML in emails posted to the list. This policy was put in place over 2 years ago because many people where using email software that could not handle such items correctly (mostly Unix email software). This made life easier for those users but there was and continues to be a tremendous burden on the list admins and many users who post for first time. There are many reasons for these burdens: 1. Many first time posters have font and/or color settings in their email software. Their first post gets rejected by our list server and they receive an email detailing how to change the settings in their software. 2. For each of the instances of item 1, either Keith Srb (admin of three of the lists) or I have to ****manually**** send the instruction email. 3. Some users are unable to correct their settings, either because they are unfamiliar with their email software or our standard mailing does not software their particular software (there is no way we can possibly cover all email software titles). This is not something that occurs occasionally, but happens many times each day. FTE has grown well beyond the size it was when the policy was started. At that time, we had less than 1,000 subscribers. We now have over 5,000 and the lists continue to grow. FTE has always been something that I care deeply about and I've continued to offer more free services to our users as funds have allowed. While our funding has increased and we're no longer losing thousands of $$$ per year on this hobby gone amuck, my available time has remained constant. As some of my friends that I've made through the lists know, FTE has been cutting into my family life for a LONG time. 90% of this time is administering the lists. The demographics of email users has changed considerably since we first instated the policy. Fewer than 1% of our visitors are using Unix software as opposed to 15% 2 years ago. Most new releases of Unix email software now supports HTML and character formatting. The policy is obsolete. Beginning sometime next week we will be removing the filters. Rest assured that users who abuse this by using loud fonts, huge characters, etc, will be warned to tone it down. Additionally, since the current filters block out any possibility of viruses getting posted to the lists, when the filters are removed, new filters will be put in place which will block out file attachments such as: JPGs, GIFs, DOCs, COM, DLL, EXE, etc... This will prevent email viruses getting posted. Regards, Ken Payne Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:05:33 PDT From: "ken haley" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Lazy Heater Situation Obviously. He drives a Ford, doesn't he? Ken ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:04:37 -0500 From: "Steve Dyer" Subject: FTE 80-96 - Chassis CLUNK solved. Some may remember my complaint about not being able to find the source of a clunk in the chassis of my '94 F150 extended cab 4WD. Pertinent information from the original post is attached below. In desperation I dropped off the truck at a frame/alignment shop to see if they could track down the clunk and change the radius arm bushings if they turned out to be the culprit. They beat on everything in the steering and suspension but found nothing loose or worn. Then (this is embarrassing) they spotted the bent steel brush/rock guard plate that protects the transfer case. It was bent upwards from a past hi-center episode. I knew it was bent but when examining the chassis in a static situation there appeared to be plenty of clearance between the transfer case and this guard so I gave it little thought. 'Ah,' says the frame dude, 'but when you roll over the bumps, the rubber mounted drive train allows the bottom of the transfer case to knock against the guard plate. We took off the plate, hammered it out and put it back on. No more clunking'. DUH. Anyway, $24 later the problem is totally solved and while a little red-faced, I'm in love with my truck again. Steve Dyer - ---------original posting -------- There is a serious 'CLUNK' from under the cab that started some months ago and sounds/behaves a lot like a loose shock absorber. It is easily summoned by driving over irregular pavement at low speeds, as it doesn't take much wheel or chassis movement to produce the clunking. After it began I installed new Monroe shocks all the way around and I've since checked the shock bushings and mounts - everything is tight. A friend suspects the radius arm bushings might be worn but I don't know how to tell for sure. They 'look' OK, the nuts are tight and I can't move them myself, but this probably doesn't prove anything. Engine mounts look good and I can't find a loose transmission mount or anything unsual about the front springs. Have any of you have experienced something similar? Any ideas what to check next? Thanks for any assistance. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:35:49 -0500 From: Allen Stearns Subject: FTE 80-96 - 89 3.L-V6 HARD STARTING COLD I have replaced the fuel pump, fuel pressure regulator, IAC valve and temp sensor on my 89 Aerostar 3L-V6. I have checked the the MAP (it has proper freq output using hand vacuum pump and freq meter), checked the ACT using ohm-meter and heat gun and it's within specs specified by NIEHOF. Checked the fuel pressure (42psi KOEO, 31 running with vacuum applied to regulator), Checked and/or replaced vacuum hoses. Vacuum checks O.K. The engine will not start cold unless I remove the IAC electrical connector, otherwise the IAC solenoid energizes at KOEO instead of after the engine starts. When warm the engine runs great and IAC appears to work correctly. Does ANYONE have any suggestions on where I go next? (Other than to a shop, which I'm about ready to do). BTW, the computer codes give me a 11 every time. I receive an occasional 41, but according to a TSB on my vehicle, this can usually be ignored. BTW, this version of 3L-V6 has two identical temp sensors. One is for the electronic temp guage and the other is for the computer input. This is not mentioned in any manual I can find. ANY info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Al alpau == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:27:14 PDT From: "ken haley" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Color guard trailer Slik, Band parents don't get paid enough. ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:44:20 -0500 From: "Ed Mount" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves I looked it up at Cabela's web site. They have the standard model at $49.95 and a "deluxe" model for $69.95. From the description, you can't tell what the difference is in the two. - -----Original Message----- From: Steve Dyer To: 80-96-list Date: Tuesday, October 26, 1999 9:47 PM Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves |Steve |Did you find it in a catalog, web page, or what? How much was it? |Ed | | | |I ordered it from Cabela's, 800-237-4444, www.cabelas.com, and it was on |sale for $49 at the time. Don't have a catalog in front of me but they may |still offer these shelves. I've also seen them in local truck accessory |shops for about the same price. | |Steve == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:56:30 -0500 From: "Ed Mount" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters I don't know much about filter construction, but a leading testing magazine who doesn't like to be quoted commercially did tests a couple or more years ago and said Fram was the one of the best off-the-shelf filters then available. Just reporting what I read. Maybe someone can elaborate. - -----Original Message----- From: am14 To: 80-96-list Date: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 3:07 PM Subject: FTE 80-96 - Filters | | |Theodore M. writes: >>Use quality filters. Fram or.... | |"Fram" and quality do not belong in the same structure.... Have you ever seen a |cutaway of a Fram filter????? I don't think so, because if you had, I do not |believe you would use the two terms in the same relationship. | |JMHO. | |Azie |Ardmore, Al. | | |== 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, 27 Oct 1999 20:53:28 -0400 From: "Michael R. Dunbar" Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - above-windshield shelves The picture clearly shows the difference. The deluxe model has an enclosed console/coin dispenser (In my opinion, a waste, but a perfect enclosure for various electronic devices, 6" LCD for DVD or GPS, etc), you'll also note a quaint tissue dispenser when the passenger-side visor is flipped down. Michael R. Dunbar Technical Director, WVTC 90.7 FM Vermont Technical College Randolph Center, VT 05061 > I looked it up at Cabela's web site. They have the standard > model at $49.95 > and a "deluxe" model for $69.95. From the description, you can't > tell what > the difference is in the two. == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:08:08 -0400 From: flagship Subject: FTE 80-96 - EGR Valve Can the solonoid on top of the egr valve be purchased separately? The 94 F-150 (302) started having problems recently trying to start. It usually takes 4 or 5 secs to start and then it has a very "loping" idle until you drive off. The codes I've pulled include insufficient egr flow and EGR valve position sensor below min voltage. If I apply an alternate vacuum source I can see and hear the EGR valve open and when I remove it, the valve snaps closed. Will replacing this top portion of the egr solve this problem w/o having to replace the whole egr valve?? Emil 94 F150 Flareside == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:24:27 PDT From: "ken haley" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters I've used Fram filters exclusively for over 30 years in everything from lawnmowers to 6 000 horsepower offshore racing boats, Honda Z-50s to Caterpillar quad turboed V-12s, 2.3 liter Rangers to 530 cid 10X10s, and never had a filter failure or filter-related equipment failure. What I have seen is that some of the filters that claim to trap submicron particles actually stop up in about 1500-2000 miles, forcing the bypass to open and allowing unfiltered oil to circulate until the next change. When working as a service mechanic one of my regulars was a sandblasting company with diesel compressors. Engine wear was a constant problem due to the often dusty nature of sandblasting. The owner decided to try submicron filters, and engine wear increased by about 20%. We devised a system to check backpressure on used cartridges and found that the filters were stopped up. We checked filters at regular intervals and found that submicrons will stop up in less than 1/2 the time standard filters did, so we installed dual filters in series, with the standard filter first and the submicrons second. We also installed pressure gauges before, after, and between each filter to monitor pressure drop. Only under the most severe conditions did we need a filter change before the standard severe duty service interval. Net result of all this worry about filters? 8-12% longer run time between rebuilds, not enough to pay for the increased cost of the submicron cartridges, which cost double and then some what standard cartridges cost. Strangely, going to 2 standard cartridges plumbed parallel did not decrease engine life from the series setup. There seems to be a trade-off between service interval and minimum particle size--the smaller the particles trapped, the quicker the filter stops up. Net, if you want to run submicron filters, invest in a dual filter mount. That way, they can go 4 times longer without stopping up than a single filter. Or change the filter every 1500 miles. If you get the submicron filters for the same price as standard filters, fine, you may get a bit more engine life. But don't pay extra for them. I believe dual filters are a good investment, not so much for the increased filter capacity but for the increased oil volume. All my vehicles are fitted with a dual filter system and thermostat-controlled oil cooler. This yields a 1.9 quart increase in oil capacity. Net: each quart of my oil only does about 2/3s the work oil in a stock system does. I believe THAT is the main reason dual filters promote longevity. Ken ______________________________________________________ == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:34:18 -0700 From: "J.S.H" Subject: FTE 80-96 - Painting and peeling/HD359 >Most of these guys actually use the VIN to determine what it's supposed >to have so you can change out anything you like and they will just make >you put it back on. If they are inept and try to wing it without the >VIN then maybe some of these tricks would work......:-) We swapped a 6.9 diesil for a 460 in my dads 84. We peeled the diesel stickers off the gas doors,painted over the diesel portion of the F-350 emblem and the diesel fuel only lettering on the instrument cluster. He has been smogging it w/460 in Nevada for at least five years. It probably will not work in every case but it worked for us. >First, yes the HD359 is listed in parts books Learn something every day on this list. >Does anyone know if all the front parts from a p-up FE engine It's a FE so it has to be good,right Gary...:) >will bolt on to my HD eng so I can have smaller water pump, only one thermostat, Don't know but my Fe is partially disassembled and I would be glad to measure some parts if you like. >and smaller rad. hoses? Awhile back someone mentioned using hoses that are different sizes on each end in a radiator swap....... >Fan is bigger bolt pattern on pump and sticks >out farther. May have trouble clearing rad.Any ideas? Have the fan spacer shortened on a lathe? >Shoulda put a C***y in it! HA! My sentiments exactly....... == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:18:48 -0500 (CDT) From: "Mike Persell" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Filters On Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:24:27 PDT, ken haley wrote: >I've used Fram filters exclusively for over 30 years in everything from >lawnmowers to 6 000 horsepower offshore racing boashore raa Z-50s to >Caterpillar quad turboed V-12s, 2.3 liter Rangers to 530 cid 10X10s, and >never had a filter failure or filter-related equipment failure. ipment fu ever seen an Oberg oil filter? I used them on several aluminum supercharged dr superch superchafter having used Fram racing filters. I was shocked to see what was left in the engines after each pass so I tried an experiment on my own street vehicle and Kendall motor oil. After running the Oberg and the Kendall for 5000 miles I had the oil tested by Analysts Inc in Oakland. The oil read similar to a vehicle with 500 miles on the oil. The quality of most filters is a wierd issue. 90% of the filters you buy in a parts store today bypass at anything over 25lbs oil pressure anyway. They discovered that if they bypass their liability goes way down and there aren't any more filter warranty problems. Fram doesn't make filters anymore, as like most other filter manufacturers. There are several companies around the country that make filters for Fram, Purolator, Motorcraft, etc. One of them is Facet filter in Utah. Net statement...filters don't mean that much anymore because of the quality of the oil and newer metallurgy. They more or less just pick up the big stuff at hot idle. Mike == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:19:23 -0700 From: Joan and Walt Posluszny Subject: FTE 80-96 - Temperature Sending Unit(s) Anyone know if the temperature sending unit used with the dashboard temperature gauge is the same temp sending unit that the EEC-4 computer gets it's temperature information from to adjust the timing, etc... on my 85 351-2v? Thanks Walt == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:42:16 -0500 From: "Phil Paulson" Subject: FTE 80-96 - transmission swap Ok, I'll try to make this brief. 1988 Ford F150, 300 I-6, 5 speed Mazda tranny, 4x4. 5 speed is toast. Have C-6 from a 1989 Bronco. I need a kickdown cable and brackets from the engine and transmission. I have an idea as far as the shifter goes, should be able to make a B&M or Hurst shifter work on the floor. Has anyone done this swap? I guess I could use some ideas and tips on how to get the job done, and done right. I'm not so much concerned with putting the trans in, it's getting everything hooked up.....the tranny cooler will be no big deal, but the shift linkage and kickdown linkage will be, especially if I can't locate it around here anywhere....I've called the yards, no luck. I called the dealer, they can get a cable, but not the brackets... Thanks Phil == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:22:58 -0600 (MDT) From: trophyguy Subject: FTE 80-96 - 460 were 460's available in the usa in 1989??? == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:45:22 -0700 From: "Radoje Spasojevic" Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - EGR Valve AFAIK the EGR solenoid is not mounted to the top of the EGR valve it should be mounted on hte drivers side of the intake manifold next to the Thermactor solenoid and the ignition coil. I think the device on top of the EGR valve is the EGR valve position sensor. Rade Spasojevic -- rspasoje http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.2bigbroncos.org/ http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thewowfactor.com/bigbroncos/detail.cfm?detailid=194 - -Rubicon Tested- - -----Original Message----- From: flagship To: 80-96-list Date: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 6:07 PM Subject: FTE 80-96 - EGR Valve >Can the solonoid on top of the egr valve be purchased separately? The >94 F-150 (302) started having problems recently trying to start. It.... 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 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.
|