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 #350
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 Saturday, December 11 1999 Volume 03 : Number 350



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

Re: FTE 80-96 - Recommended Source for Rebuilt C-6 Tranny?
FTE 80-96 - re: off topic - Ford
Re: FTE 80-96 - Recommended Source for Rebuilt C-6 Tranny?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Cleaning an EGR Valve
FTE 80-96 - FTE 80-96 Ford but not truck
FTE 80-96 - re: Alternator
Re: FTE 80-96 - Cleaning an EGR Valve
FTE 80-96 - Acft landing lights
FTE 80-96 - Re: Ford, but not a truck
FTE 80-96 - Re: off topic - Ford but not truck
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Ford, but not a truck
Re: FTE 80-96 - Da Gas...
FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP
RE: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP
Re: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP
FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
FTE 80-96 - towing
FTE 80-96 - My Last on Clear Taillight lenses.
Re: FTE 80-96 - Is this legal?
Re: FTE 80-96 - differance between C6 and C4
Re: FTE 80-96 - Landing lights
FTE 80-96 - Here We Go Again

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:21:59 -0600
From: David Cole
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Recommended Source for Rebuilt C-6 Tranny?

>----- Original Message ----- >...wondering if there are any universally
>> recognized (i.e., "good") sources for replacement C-6 transmissions.
>Summit
>> Racing, for example, offers a rebuilt unit from TCI for about $950 plus
>$95
>> shipping.
>>

I would say to check out J.W. Performance Transmissions in Fl. They deal
mainly in hardcore drag racing parts, but they also offer heavy duty
transmissions that can handle towing duties. Service is excellent.

They have a website

Price is about the same as Summit and other mail order co.

Later,

David Cole

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:02:11 -0600
From: BAH NWC.EDU
Subject: FTE 80-96 - re: off topic - Ford

>From: Roy Houston
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - off topic - Ford but not truck

>Have a 94 Crown Vic at work that we lost the keys to
>and have no idea where this thing transferred in from.
>Now since we don't know where we bought it from we
>have to have it towed to the dealer to replace the
>ignition because they won't (or can't) give out the
>key code.

I work part-time in the service dept. of a Ford dealer,
so can respond to this problem.

In the Ford system (other manufacturers may follow a
different protocol), the ONLY record of the original
key code is in the file of the dealer who originally
sold the vehicle. It cannot be accessed in the Ford
Oasis program by looking up the VIN. And, without
the key code, you're forced to re-lock/re-key.

>Help! Anybody ever run across this. Wouldn't be a big
>deal 'cept the guy was on personal business and is
>gonna get stuck for the $150.

>How much to trouble to change the ignition switch if
>we just go buy it at the dealer??

The ignition switch (electrical component) doesn't
need to be replaced, just the ignition cylinder (and
key). Ford has used several styles of cylinders (in
some the individual components in the cylinder can be
replaced, in others they can't), not sure where this
'94 would fall. Since I see our techs struggle with
these all the time...if you can get it done for $150
(parts & labor) consider yourself lucky and have it
done.

Another option might be to try a good locksmith, but
the price might be about the same.

Bruce Hanson
Apple Valley, MN


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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:17:15 -0600
From: Andy Norris
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Recommended Source for Rebuilt C-6 Tranny?

Alan, could you please post to the list, or email me directly, when you
find a good source and what the cost is? I'm gonna be in the market for one
of those somewhere down the road a piece. O'Reilly's said they could get
one, but I can't remember the price they quoted me. My F250 with C6 just
turned 140k this morning...

Not knowing what his problem is, it may be that it's not dropping into
forward gear for a bit. That's what mine is doing now. A fellow on this
list named Steve "Smeck" suggested something called Trans-X for this
problem. I bought some, but haven't changed my trans fluid yet, so I can't
say whether it fixed my problem. (Was planning to change it, but then the
temperature dropped... my blood freezes at 55 degrees.)

Andy Norris

At 10:23 PM 12/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>... wondering if there are any universally recognized (i.e., "good")
>sources for replacement C-6 transmissions.
>
> Alan Fanning
> San Jose
> '91 Taurus SHO, '89 Sable, and '82 F-150

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:28:29 -0600
From: "DannyF"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Cleaning an EGR Valve

> I need to remove and clean my EGR valve. Are there any pointers or
> quick
> tips that anyone can pass on? As in: any difficulty removing the valve,
> what type of cleaner can be used?
> I would also like to pass on some information. Recently my fuel mileage
> went to crap (from 14 to 9 mpg), I also had some pinging that I had
> never
> heard before. My computer codes told me the MAP sensor was reading out
> of
> range. (Code 22) I swapped in a different MAP sensor and all seems to
> be
> well. No more pinging, I won't know about the fuel mileage until I fill
> the
> tank, and no more code 22. Now I just have a code 52, EVP sensor not
> functioning right. So I thought I would clean the EGR valve and see if
> it
> would help. Any information that I can get from the infinite wisdom of
> this
> group would be greatly appreciated (blatently sucking up to get some
> info).
> By the way, I'm working on a '89 F250 4x4 w/ 5.0l.
> TIA
> Roger

Are you sure thats a 52 code? 52 indicates an open PS pressure
switch on a KOER test. The PS pressure switch senses steering
load and will advance the timing a little to increase idle a tad to
compensate for PS load.

Did you move the steering wheel during the KOER test?
Danny
danf01 worldnet.att.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:45:02 -0600
From: "PHILLIP P. GUIDRY"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - FTE 80-96 Ford but not truck

>From: Roy Houston
>Subject: FTE 80-96 - off topic - Ford but not truck
>How much to trouble to change the ignition switch if we just go buy it >at
>the dealer??

>Tks, Roy

Roy,the only places that I know where the key code is marked is (1) the
original keys (2) the dealer's invoice. By chance,did you guys perform a
thorough search of the car for a "key holder" ,or possibly a spare key
tied to the frame with a bread tie? Also,look for any papers in the
glove box that came from the dealer or even the tab that came with the
keys.Have you tried other FORD keys readily available from other FORD
drivers ? You see, if you don't have the ign. key,you will damage the
lock cyl. bore when you have to forcibly remove the lock cyl. with a
dent puller screwed into the slot that the key slides into,but, the new
lock cyl. will fit back in but it will be sloppy in the hole.Without a
dent puller, you could cut the head of the cyl. off with a Rotary Tool
and get busy removing the tumblers and pins until you can rotate the
barrel to the unlock position and insert a small rod into the release
hole directly underneath the lock cyl. bore to release the rest of the
mangled lock. cyl.This way prevents the small amount of damage to the
column.
Phillip
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 10:49:56 -0500
From: Rich
Subject: FTE 80-96 - re: Alternator

I have a 96 F150,302,auto,4x4. What was the option for the alternator
that year? I am guessing i have the 95 amp, but the dealer doesn't show
a H.D (130 amp?) one. Not even for th 5.8L.
Rich
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 08:37:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Roger Lane
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Cleaning an EGR Valve

You are right. I get the 52 code also. Previous owner removed the PSP and
I have not replaced it. What I meant was code 32. Thank you for pointing
that out.
Roger


On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:28:29 -0600, 80-96-list ford-trucks.com wrote:

> > I need to remove and clean my EGR valve. Are there any pointers or
> > quick
> > tips that anyone can pass on? As in: any difficulty removing the
valve,
> > what type of cleaner can be used?
> > I would also like to pass on some information. Recently my fuel
mileage
> > went to crap (from 14 to 9 mpg), I also had some pinging that I had
> > never
> > heard before. My computer codes told me the MAP sensor was reading out
> > of
> > range. (Code 22) I swapped in a different MAP sensor and all seems to
> > be
> > well. No more pinging, I won't know about the fuel mileage until I
fill
> > the
> > tank, and no more code 22. Now I just have a code 52, EVP sensor not
> > functioning right. So I thought I would clean the EGR valve and see if
> > it
> > would help. Any information that I can get from the infinite wisdom of
> > this
> > group would be greatly appreciated (blatently sucking up to get some
> > info).
> > By the way, I'm working on a '89 F250 4x4 w/ 5.0l.
> > TIA
> > Roger
>
> Are you sure thats a 52 code? 52 indicates an open PS pressure
> switch on a KOER test. The PS pressure switch senses steering
> load and will advance the timing a little to increase idle a tad to
> compensate for PS load.
>
> Did you move the steering wheel during the KOER test?
> Danny
> danf01 worldnet.att.net
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


"Accomplishing the impossible only means the boss will add it to your
regular duties."





_______________________________________________________
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: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:19:57 -0600
From: Allen Stearns
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Acft landing lights

A few years back, I replaced the High Beam bulbs on a 64 C***y Im**** SS
with Aircraft landing lights. Size-wise they were directly
interchangable, with no modifications. They were GE 100W, 13V. I ran
with them on several cross-country trips. They did put a drag on the
battery but I had no problems using them. They were VERY bright.
Don't know about the legality of them, but I was never bothered by the
bears, probably because I only used them on long open stretches of road,
never in heavy traffic. Also, I don't recommend them for driving in
foggy weather. The reflection will hamper your vision. One other
observation. They should be aimed lower than standard high beams. In
summation, I wouldn't recommend running them. If you blind the
on-coming driver, it just might cause you and them bodily harm.

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:10:05 EST
From: BRIGANDBAR aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Ford, but not a truck

In a message dated 99-12-10 06:37:52 EST, you write:


where
this thing transferred in from. Now since we don't know where we bought it
from we have to have it towed to the dealer to replace the ignition because
they won't (or can't) give out the key code. >>

Read the L.P. or VIN number and then go the computer. Pay the relatively
small fee charged by any of the title search companies to get the ownership
history. A lot cheaper than $150.

Also, by getting the correct key, you don't have to worry about changing the
door locks as well as the ignition to make the car "correct". I would never
buy a car with mismatched keying (it invites too many questions as to its
provenance and history), nor would anyone that I know do that either.

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:48:36 -0500
From: "Serian"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: off topic - Ford but not truck

> Help! Anybody ever run across this. Wouldn't be a big deal 'cept the guy
> was on personal business and is gonna get stuck for the $150.
>
> How much to trouble to change the ignition switch if we just go buy it at
> the dealer??

Yeop ... done it in a '76 LTD
Ford vehicles are relatively easy to do this with ... just remove
the steering wheel and drill out the lock pin in the cylinder.
(dont drill that aluminum casing around the lock pin !!!)

then pull it straight out. Slide the new one right back in the same
place. (You may need to use a screwdriver to move the ignition
switch into the "on" position to get the new one in place ... I
don't remember exactly ... Instructions can be found in a
Chilton's manual for this procedure.)

If you change the ignition lock cylinder, you may need to also
change the door locks ... on many Ford vehicles, the door
locks and ignition lock cylinder use the same key.

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:09:33 -0600
From: Roy Houston
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Ford, but not a truck

Thanks for the help guys. she's at the dealer.

so much for saving a nickel...

Roy

At 02:10 PM 12/10/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 99-12-10 06:37:52 EST, you write:
>
>
>where
> this thing transferred in from. Now since we don't know where we bought it
> from we have to have it towed to the dealer to replace the ignition because
> they won't (or can't) give out the key code. >>
>
>Read the L.P. or VIN number and then go the computer. Pay the relatively
>small fee charged by any of the title search companies to get the ownership
>history. A lot cheaper than $150.
>
>Also, by getting the correct key, you don't have to worry about changing the
>door locks as well as the ignition to make the car "correct". I would never
>buy a car with mismatched keying (it invites too many questions as to its
>provenance and history), nor would anyone that I know do that either.
>
>Steve
>== 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: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:22:32 PST
From: "ken haley"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Da Gas...

Phred KD5AQB
a;slfjfkoaief'lekdseei'

Gee, Phred, I know what you mean, having just survived 4 upper division
psych and education finals. (All 4-credit lab-based courses. Talk about
B.S.!!!) Of course, I got to give a physics phinal.
*warlock-like evil laughter*

Anywho, I seem to remember reading that compression ratios can be bumped a
bit with propane because of its higher octane rating. Back in the 70s, when
pump gasoline octane ratings dropped from 106 to 93, several fellas switched
their street machines to propane, added pressurized water injection with a
vacumn-controlled regulator (less vacumn=more water). These fellas ran
compression ratios in the 11:1 to 12.5:1 range. If I remember correctly
these guys ran within a tenth or two on propane what they did with Sunoco
260. I'm sure they recurved their ignition to appeal to the propane. I'm not
sure what additives were dumped in the water injection systems, either, but
I remember heated discussions about the corrosion resistance of various
electric fuel pumps when used with water.

Oh, if you know any bootleggers, moonshine is a good alternative fuel if you
plan for the corrosive effects it may have on some plastics and run a good
water separator. Then you can run compression ratios of 14: 1 and up. My
Grampa ran an old Ford tractor on moonshine for decades.

Hope this info contributes to the alternative fuel understandings.

Ken


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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:16:45 EST
From: Awfanning aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP


185 rwhp ...>>

Boy, I can only wish my 300 ci six produced 185 rwhp. According to a spec
sheet I'm looking at from the September '83 issue of "Pickup, Van & 4WD"
(RIP), the engine choices at that time were:

Engine Net HP RPM Net T RPM
- ------ ------------ -----------
300ci six 120 3200 230 2000
5.0l v-8 119 3400 250 2000
5.8l v-8 147 3200 278 2000
7.5l v-8 202 4000 331 2200

I assume that "net HP" is at the flywheel, not the rear wheels. And allthough
it's my recollection that the factory numbers for model year '82 (my year)
varied slightly from above, it wasn't much different. Now, with 190,000
miles on the clock, I'd be surprised if there's 100 rwhp (I hate it when I'm
passed by VW microbuses going up hill!).

This spec sheet has some transmission ratios I'll share with you guys another
day.

Alan Fanning
San Jose, CA
'91 SHO, '89 Sable, '82 F-150 S'Cab w/300 ci six, 4spd OD trans. etc.

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:28:17 -0800
From: Eric Sneed
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP

I hear ya on that one my 89 FI 300 is rated at 145 rhp. I would love to have
an additional 40-50 rhp! By the way I think that net hp is a rated at the
rear wheels and gross hp is rated at the flywheel. This would be due to the
tranny and rear end taking their share of hp.

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: Awfanning aol.com [SMTP:Awfanning aol.com]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 4:17 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP


line with
185 rwhp ...>>

Boy, I can only wish my 300 ci six produced 185 rwhp. According to
a spec
sheet I'm looking at from the September '83 issue of "Pickup, Van &
4WD"
(RIP), the engine choices at that time were:

Engine Net HP RPM Net T RPM
------ ------------ -----------
300ci six 120 3200 230 2000
5.0l v-8 119 3400 250 2000
5.8l v-8 147 3200 278 2000
7.5l v-8 202 4000 331 2200

I assume that "net HP" is at the flywheel, not the rear wheels. And
allthough
it's my recollection that the factory numbers for model year '82 (my
year)
varied slightly from above, it wasn't much different. Now, with
190,000
miles on the clock, I'd be surprised if there's 100 rwhp (I hate it
when I'm
passed by VW microbuses going up hill!).

This spec sheet has some transmission ratios I'll share with you
guys another
day.

Alan Fanning
San Jose, CA
'91 SHO, '89 Sable, '82 F-150 S'Cab w/300 ci six, 4spd OD trans.
etc.

== 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: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 16:46:20 -0800
From: Rob Bryan
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Rear Wheel HP

That assumption is wrong. Net horsepower is hp produced at the crank "as
installed" in the vehicle...that means that it has a complete stock intake
and exhaust system and the belt driven accessories are driven. Gross hp is
hp measured at the crank without an exhaust system, an air cleaner, and the
belt driven accessories are disconnected. Manufacturers made the switch from
gross to net hp around 1973. This is why cars from say the 60's have such
wildly inflated hp numbers looked at today.

FWIW, an EFI 4.9 circa 1989 puts out 145hp at the crank, not at the rear
wheels.

Rob

> I hear ya on that one my 89 FI 300 is rated at 145 rhp. I would love to have
> an additional 40-50 rhp! By the way I think that net hp is a rated at the
> rear wheels and gross hp is rated at the flywheel. This would be due to the
> tranny and rear end taking their share of hp.

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:49:18 -0800
From: "Kevin Moore"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

I am having a heck of a time finding a good exhaust manifold for my 87 302
here in Boise Idaho. Does anybody live in this are that may have one for
sale.

Thanks
Kevin

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

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 22:15:22 -0500
From: "Max W. Cottrell"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - towing

Does anyone know if I need to do anything special to the
drivetrain of a manual trans F150 for towing?

'89, 5.0L, 4 spd OD, 3.55 rear, split drive shaft. The clutch
and rear end are new.

Already have a frame hitch on it.

Max Cottrell

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

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 01:03:30 -0600
From: "Dave Harmier"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - My Last on Clear Taillight lenses.

Today, a Honda Accord with clear lenses, and red bulbs was in the left
lane, an Olds Cutlass with similar sized taillight lenses as GM intended in
the right. The Cutlass was at least 100% easier to tell when its brakes
were applied. Might not be that big a deal, but remember the person
following you, may be Drunk, Stupid, Very Old, Using a Cell Phone, or ALL
of the above!

If you put a gun to my head and told me to run clears, you'd HAVE to
shoot!!!

Dave H.
Houston, TX
92 F-150 5.0/E4OD, at 198,2xx and counting!!!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 03:00:58 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Is this legal?

>In a message dated 12/7/99 9:16:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>blake little-mountain.com writes:
>
>
> week if anyone wants it.
>
>
> Blake >>
>Blake,
>I would like those numbers if you don't mind.

OK Wayne, let me see if I can dig them up.


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: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 03:04:22 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - differance between C6 and C4

>At 22:08 07/12/99 -0600, you wrote:
>>does anyone know the differance between a C6 and a C4 auto tranny? i
>>just found out that my F-150 has a C4 and not a C6 like i was told by
>>the original owner. thanx.....
>>
>>David
>>85 F-150 300 I-6
>
>The C6 is a bit beefier. They are both 3-speed autos. The C4 is probably
>adequate behind the I-6 engine if you do not tow things very often. I would
>not put it behind anything with a lot of HP. For example, I think Ford put
>them on the '65 Mustang with a 289 V8; my '73 LTD with the 400 CID V8 had
>the C6.

Early Broncos with automatics were all C4s and some of them (including
mine) put out a lot of power. My C4 was the only automatic I ever rebuilt
and it came out perfect. I like them because they are small and compact and
easy to work on.

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: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 03:15:38 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Landing lights

>Some part numbers for GE landing lights...
>
>GE-4509 13v/100w PAR-36 (5-1/4") $ 10.40
>GE-4522 13v/250w PAR-46 (7") 21.50
>GE-4313 13v/250w PAR-46 17.00
>
>No idea the difference between the last two...maybe filament
>position...GE will not make drawings available. Source is Aircraft
>Spruce, 800-824-1930; good people and fast shipment. These also ought
>to be gettable at most small airports...probably more money.
>
>Any of these need 10 or 12 awg wiring to both sides of the bulb, and the
>wiring has to run off a good quality relay. Look for a 30 amp relay,
>and use one relay per light. Mount the relays as close to the battery
>as possible, and run power to the relay directly from the + battery
>terminal. Put a 30 amp fuse in-line with the relay supply wire
>
>I've got a line on housings & will get back to the list with a source
>when I know they're available.
>
>Local NAPA stores (N.Texas) have not heard of landing lights...all they
>have are tractor lights. If anybody finds landing lights at NAPA, I'd
>appreciate hearing about it.

Yes, I get mine from NAPA. There are smaller ones too, that are also 100w
that will fit into the snap-in rubber tractor housings. This kills two
birds with one stone.... they don't rust and they adsorb shock, which is a
fillament killer.

Those 250w will not last long if used at low speeds.


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: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 06:02:14 -0500
From: "Michael McCarthy"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Here We Go Again

OK, folks, the cold weather is upon us up North here and my '85 F-150 I6-300
becomes a different truck. I screwed with the thing all summer and got it
running very nicely. Now the cold weather comes and I have a "new" truck.
Unfortunately, not a very well running "new" truck. I fact it runs
like.....never mind. Here are some of the characteristics.

1) A loss of power. (can't afford a loss of power on an I-6 300 as you all
know)
2) Very rough idle when first started. (sounds, and feels, like it is
running on 2-3 cylinders)
3) Can't be running correctly after warm up. (I can't identify anything....


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.