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 #359
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 Monday, December 20 1999 Volume 03 : Number 359



=======================================================================
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 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start
Re: FTE 80-96 - Sometimes Hard To Start
FTE 80-96 - RE: Starting Trouble
Re: FTE 80-96 - re: 302 knock
FTE 80-96 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start
FTE 80-96 - FTE 80-96-hard to start/smell
Re: FTE 80-96 - re: 302 knock
FTE 80-96 - Hard Clutch
Re: FTE 80-96 - Coupla questions re: 300/6
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start
Re: FTE 80-96 - Coupla questions re: 300/6
Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
FTE 80-96 - Turn signals
FTE 80-96 - Emission Contorls/Air Pump Problem
Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold
FTE 80-96 - Bronco hesitates
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Water Injection

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:37:38 -0500
From: "Serian"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start

>What's going on...The truck is a '95 F-150, 300 I6, 5spd.,
> will have owned 5 years in May..so the battery (OEM) is
> at least 5 years old and has probably been on-line that long
> as well.
>
> Is it the battery? Starter?

5 years is getting on the edge of old for a battery ... if putting a
new one in doesn't solve the problem, I would suspect the
ignition module of being bad ...


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:50:11 -0500
From: "Theodore D. Mills"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Sometimes Hard To Start

Check out the ground cable from the engine block to the battery.
I had the same trouble on my 85 Ranger last year...

Try to start it and Click...Click....
Jump it no problem, battery less than 2 years old and recent alternator too.

The ground was bad, and jumping it you put the ground cable on the engine
like you're supposed to....right??

If the ground cable is good, I suspect the selonoid or starter.




At 16:46 12/18/1999 -0600, you wrote:
>Folks,
>
>Got in the truck yesterday, everything started fine. Stopped to get donuts
>about a block away and when I got back in the truck wouldn't start. I had
>to
>get the clerk to give me a jump (always have cables). It started right up
>on the
>first try while connected to the jumper cables...OK the battery is finally
>shot I thought.
>
>Went to work (had a presentation or would have gone to get battery then) and
>sure
>enough had to be jumped again after work (expected that).
>
>This morning, hoped in and it started right up. Soooo, I took the battery to
>Monkey
>Wards and had them test it...OK under the regular test and the load test
>(gotta
>love Motorcraft). Cleaned cables, connectors, posts, top of battery (looks
>good!).
>Corrosion wasn't that bad, I try to keep an eye on it, but there was some
>build up.
>Put battery back in, truck started right up. Went out an hour ago to go to
>the store,
>and what do you know...click, click, click and finally it started. I none
>the less took
>the wife's car.
>
>What's going on...The truck is a '95 F-150, 300 I6, 5spd., will have owned 5
>years
>in May..so the battery (OEM) is at least 5 years old and has probably been
>on-line that long
>as well.
>
>Is it the battery? Starter?
>
>I have never had a problem with my truck and I don't want to get stuck
>because of a damn
>maintenance item.
>
>Any help greatly appreciated.
>
>Justen Noakes
>San Antonio
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>
"This message brought to you with 100% recycled electrons"
"Just the latest in environmentally friendly technology!"


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:14:38 -0600
From: "Dave Harmier"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - RE: Starting Trouble

Justen, I just had to do the starter in my '92 for similar symptoms. (Why
do the little gear reduction starters cost so much?) The main reason I
knew, is the starter started dragging. Tested battery, OK a couple hours
later... no start. Starter made it ok again.

Your Mileage may Vary GREATLY!!!!!

Dave H.
Houston

From: "Justen Noakes"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Sometimes Hard To Start

Folks,

Got in the truck yesterday, everything started fine. Stopped to get donuts
about a block away and when I got back in the truck wouldn't start. I had
to get the clerk to give me a jump (always have cables). It started right
up on the first try while connected to the jumper cables...OK the battery
is finally shot I thought.


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:39:01 -0600
From: "DannyF"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - re: 302 knock

> The problem with the 302 in the PU is that if you run the
> number 7 and 8 plugs wires side by side for any length
> you wil get an induction firing in the #8 hole when the #7
> fires because of the consecutive firing order of these two
> cyl's. this will cause a preignition of #8 and will lead to
> detonation if allowed to continue , results are piston
> damage and in my case pounded out the rod bearing in
> #8. years ago in the 351m/400 era they had the same
> problem. reroute your plug wires, and fix the knock. as far
> as everyone guessing about what the knock is it could be
> monkey in your oil pan with a big hammer... you wont
> know UNTIL you take it apart! Also on EFI versions the
> pcv hose draws on the number 8 cyl due to where it is
> located in the plenum, unscrew the elbow , put a pipe
> plug in it and relocate the connector to the center of the
> plenum above the support bracket. you need to remove
> the plenum to do this to keep metal chips out of your
> engine. any AERA affiliated machine shop should have
> tech bulletins on both of these problems and yes Ford did
> machine the two rear cyl's a little looser than the other 6

What improvement will be gained from relocating the PVC
connection away from #8 cyl? I notice a lot of PVC connections
located towards 1 or 2 cyls on many different makes.

Rich, not trying to get testy but how do you deduce that Ford
machined the 7 & 8 cyls looser? Are you speaking of cyl
wall/piston clearances or crank/bearing clearances also?

Have you heard/theorize as to why Ford would do this?

Just curious,

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:08:43 -0500
From: "Mark Salvetti"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start

I clipped out the details, but basically Justen's truck sometimes starts,
sometimes doesn't. Battery load tests OK, but sometimes the truck will just
sit with a clicking solenoid.

Justen, one thing not to overlook is your positive battery cable. Not sure
how your year is set up, but my 1986 with a 5.0L has a short positive cable
from the battery to the solenoid. It's bent about double to fit. Twice now
I've had to replace it, internal corrosion I assume.

Early symptoms were like yours. No start, and then suddenly for no reason,
it would turn over. I think that the internal resistance was just enough to
prevent a start, but even a slight jiggle (like when attaching jumper
cables) can be enough to make a connection.

This fall I ended up replacing a battery and a starter, not believing it
could be the cable again. Both needed replacement anyway, but after they
were in, it still would sometimes not start. Replaced the cable, and it's
been fine.

Hope this helps,

Mark Salvetti
1986 F150 5.0L

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:03:46 EST
From: RobWaz316 aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - FTE 80-96-hard to start/smell

Hey Guys,
I am new to the list and loved it after the first time I read it. It is
great to see others who like the 300 I-6. I am a huge advocate of this
engine, and seem to be the only one around here where everyone seems to think
that V8 means better. I love the look on guys faces when my 6 beats out
their V8 rat motors. My truck is an '89 F150 4X4 with the I-6, a 5 speed,
183,000 miles, and lots of pep even after taking multiple severe beatings on
and off road.

Justen,
I had the same starting problem and the culprit was the ground cable. Mine
was frayed where it bolts to the frame (about 2 feet along the cable towards
the starter), and there are 2 other little wires coming off the negative
terminal to a connection right next to the radiator cap (I am embarrassed to
say I don't know what it is for). The wires came loose in the connection,
and the combination of an old battery kept the truck from starting. The
extra juice from a jump would start the truck though. I found the cable only
available through Ford, and it only cost about $30 if I remember correctly.

Max,
I also had the gas smell problem on both of my tanks and the source of the
leak was just a bad gasket where the sending unit goes into the tank.
AlsoThe nipple coming off the sending unit had cracked and was leaking a bit.
Both problems had no visible leak. Just make sure if you fix it not to make
the mistake I almost made, and forget to disconnect the battery cables before
removing the tank.

Rob Waz
89 F150
Ct
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:21:39 -0700
From: "Jim"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - re: 302 knock

From: "DannyF"
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Date sent: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 09:39:01 -0600
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - re: 302 knock
Send reply to: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com

> The problem with the 302 in the PU is that if you run the
> number 7 and 8 plugs wires side by side for any length
> you wil get an induction firing in the #8 hole when the #7
> fires because of the consecutive firing order of these two
> cyl's. this will cause a preignition of #8 and will lead to
> detonation if allowed to continue , results are piston
> damage and in my case pounded out the rod bearing in
> #8. years ago in the 351m/400 era they had the same
> problem. reroute your plug wires, and fix the knock. as far
> as everyone guessing about what the knock is it could be
> monkey in your oil pan with a big hammer... you wont
> know UNTIL you take it apart! Also on EFI versions the
> pcv hose draws on the number 8 cyl due to where it is
> located in the plenum, unscrew the elbow , put a pipe
> plug in it and relocate the connector to the center of the
> plenum above the support bracket. you need to remove
> the plenum to do this to keep metal chips out of your
> engine. any AERA affiliated machine shop should have
> tech bulletins on both of these problems and yes Ford did
> machine the two rear cyl's a little looser than the other 6

What improvement will be gained from relocating the PVC
connection away from #8 cyl? I notice a lot of PVC connections
located towards 1 or 2 cyls on many different makes.

Rich, not trying to get testy but how do you deduce that Ford
machined the 7 & 8 cyls looser? Are you speaking of cyl
wall/piston clearances or crank/bearing clearances also?

Have you heard/theorize as to why Ford would do this?

Just curious,

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

the reason they did this (only the piston clearance) is
beause the rear of the engine runs hotter than the front so
they decided it needed a bit more clearence . The right
person at the ford store will tell you this although a lot are
reluctant to admit it. main /rod bearing clearance are
normal
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:28:14 GMT
From: "Hummer Luvver"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Hard Clutch

I have an '88 F-150 XLT Lariat, with a 5-speed and the 300 I-6. It's been
well taken care of, and served me very well. At 212k my dad and I replaced
the clutch and the mastercilider, because the clutch itself had become
really hard to push down...not unbearable, just abnormally difficult. Also,
we figured it was time to replace it before an actual problem developed.
For some reason, this did nothing for the 'hard clutch'. I'm now at 236k,
and still experiencing the same 'hard clutch'. I've gotten used to it, and
it's not a problem or anything, I was just wondering if anyone has
experienced anything simular, and how to fix it...if possible. The fluid is
fine. It's checked and maintained, so I wouldn't think it would be some
kind of leak in the mastercylinder. I don't know. Thanks for your comments
in advance.---Nathan
______________________________________________________

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:28:30 -0700
From: "Jim"
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Coupla questions re: 300/6

From: "Tom Humphreys"
To:
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Coupla questions re: 300/6
Date sent: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 00:36:26 -0800
Send reply to: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com

Hi,

I just recently bought an 83 F250 with the 300 inline 6. I have not had
previous experience with this motor. I was intrigued by the bolt-on panel
on the driver's side of the engine, below the head, on the side of the
cylinders. I bought the Chilton's for the truck and from the exploded view
it looks like it simply covers a cavity which the pushrods run through. Is
this accurate? If so, why did they design it this way? Is there some
maintenance job that can be done through this accessway? If it is simply a
void space and the want to keep oil in, why wouldn't they just cast it into
the cylinders?

Question 2: The Chilton's manual describes a system for adjusting the
valves which essentially says: Bring the cylinder to TDC. Tighten the
adjusting srew on the rocker until you can no longer spin the pushrod, then
tighten it one full turn more. OK so, my experience with adjustable valves
is all air-cooled; Japanese bikes and VW's. On those you are trying to
adjust for small (.006 mm) GAPS between the rocker and the valve stem. Does
this motor have solid lifters, or hydraulic? Is this an accurate valve
adjustment method? I basically trust the good folks at Chilton's but my
instincts are screaming, "run away, run away!"

Thanks for any help you can give,
Tom Humphreys, West Seattle
'71 Westy "Mach Schnell"
'67 Beetle
'83 F250

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

Tom,
the reason for the side cover is simple, it is the only
way to get the lifters installed in the engine!

# 2. valve adjustment you described is the proper
procedure if you have an adjustable valve train. your lifters
are hydraulic but in that year may or may not be
adjustable this is determined by the type of rocker stud
installed in the head, If it has a shoulder on it below the
threads they are non- adjustable, just run the rocker nut
down against the shoulder and torque to specs( 25ftlbs?)
if no shoulder on the stud , then adjust as you described.
The 300 is a great engine good for towing because of the
long rod stroke configuration. They do not like to be
lugged down though, hard on rod bearings good luck

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:28:33 -0600
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Sometimes Hard To Start

At 09:37 19/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>What's going on...The truck is a '95 F-150, 300 I6, 5spd.,
>> will have owned 5 years in May..so the battery (OEM) is
>> at least 5 years old and has probably been on-line that long
>> as well.
>>
>> Is it the battery? Starter?
>
>5 years is getting on the edge of old for a battery ... if putting a
>new one in doesn't solve the problem, I would suspect the
>ignition module of being bad ...

ARGH!!!

No, a bad ignition module will not prevent the starter from spinning. It
will only prevent an engine that is turning over from actually firing and
running.

I am willing to bet it is the battery. If you want to rule all other
components out first, can get a good voltmeter, put the leads across each
component in the starting system one at a time and have someone turn the
key. Normal drop is under 1 volt. When you find the piece that drops more
than that, replace it. If you don't find ANY, replace the battery.

Jim Cannon
Houston, TX "A Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech
'29 Ford Model A Phaeton and a helluva' engineer!"
'80 Ford F-150 300 I-6 2WD '63 Buick Riviera 401 V-8
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 12:41:38 -0600
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Coupla questions re: 300/6

At 00:36 19/12/99 -0800, Tom Humphreys pecked out the following:
>I just recently bought an 83 F250 with the 300 inline 6. I have not had
>previous experience with this motor. I was intrigued by the bolt-on panel
>on the driver's side of the engine, below the head, on the side of the
>cylinders. I bought the Chilton's for the truck and from the exploded view
>it looks like it simply covers a cavity which the pushrods run through. Is
>this accurate? If so, why did they design it this way? Is there some
>maintenance job that can be done through this accessway? If it is simply a
>void space and the want to keep oil in, why wouldn't they just cast it into
>the cylinders?

This is classic design for any inline engine without over-head cam (OHC)
going back to the Ford Model T. You need to be able to remove the cover
because the lifters are down in there riding on the cam, and push rods come
up from there. You could not get to the lifters otherwise.

In the T and Model A engine, the valves were in the block, not in the head
(like your engine) so the lifters (called tappets then, I don't know why)
literally lifted up the bottom of the valve stem. No rocker arms on the A
or T. Solid lifters that had to be adjusted on a hot engine behind the hot
exhaust manifold and pipe. Youch!!!

>Question 2: The Chilton's manual describes a system for adjusting the
>valves which essentially says: Bring the cylinder to TDC. Tighten the
>adjusting srew on the rocker until you can no longer spin the pushrod, then
>tighten it one full turn more. OK so, my experience with adjustable valves
>is all air-cooled; Japanese bikes and VW's. On those you are trying to
>adjust for small (.006 mm) GAPS between the rocker and the valve stem. Does
>this motor have solid lifters, or hydraulic? Is this an accurate valve
>adjustment method? I basically trust the good folks at Chilton's but my
>instincts are screaming, "run away, run away!"

Hydraulic lifters. This is the correct valve adjustment procedure. If you
are serious about working on this truck, I suggest you get a factory shop
manual.


Jim Cannon
Houston, TX "A Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech
'29 Ford Model A Phaeton and a helluva' engineer!"
'80 Ford F-150 300 I-6 2WD '63 Buick Riviera 401 V-8
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 06:54:52 +1100
From: les williams
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

Hi Alex,
Well you had to ask - The first thing to do was get that God Damn 'OLD Grandma's
handbag' smell outa the car!!!
I know Blue Paint can cover a multitude of sins, but even that won't hide a
Chrysler!
OK Alex, you have got me again - Who is Walter P. ??


regards

Les
Lost in the Land of OZ


FULSZBRONC aol.com wrote:

> lesw cyber.net.au writes:
>
> > the second thing you did after
> > buying it (deceased estate sales, Hmmm), was rip out the stock system,
> > replace
> > with extractors and a free flow system, and pick up about 30% increase in
> > performance to boot.
>
> OK Les, what was the FIRST thing you did when you bought a Walter P.
> Chrysler? (paint a Blue Oval on it?)
> == 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: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 16:12:49 -0600
From: Jim Cannon
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

At 06:54 20/12/99 +1100, you wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>Well you had to ask - The first thing to do was get that God Damn 'OLD
Grandma's
>handbag' smell outa the car!!!
>I know Blue Paint can cover a multitude of sins, but even that won't hide a
>Chrysler!
>OK Alex, you have got me again - Who is Walter P. ??

Walter P. Chrysler was the founder of the company.


Jim Cannon
Houston, TX "A Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech
'29 Ford Model A Phaeton and a helluva' engineer!"
'80 Ford F-150 300 I-6 2WD '63 Buick Riviera 401 V-8
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 16:25:03 -0800
From: Doug Arnold
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Turn signals

The turn signals on my 88 3500 extended died without warning. I replaced
the signal unit and checked the fuses and they are ok. Any ideas? Have
you been there and done that?
Doug
arnold snowline.net

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 16:37:33 -0800
From: "Dave Jones"
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Emission Contorls/Air Pump Problem

I've got a '87 F-250 with a 351 Automatic. There are two Pumps on the rh
side of the engine that the manual lists as Thermactor air pumps. One of
the pumps (the lower) is seized.

The question is: does anyone know if removing these two units will cause any
problems?

I've run the engine without them installed and everything appeared to be OK.

Dave

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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:02:28 EST
From: FULSZBRONC aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

In a message dated 12/19/1999 12:49:25 PM Mountain Standard Time,
lesw cyber.net.au writes:

> Hi Alex,
> Well you had to ask - The first thing to do was get that God Damn 'OLD
> Grandma's
> handbag' smell outa the car!!!
> I know Blue Paint can cover a multitude of sins, but even that won't hide a
> Chrysler!
> OK Alex, you have got me again - Who is Walter P. ??
>
>
> regards
>
> Les
> Lost in the Land of OZ

Hi Les,
Walter P. was the founder of Chrysler.... I discovered his boyhood home had
been preserved in a little town in Kansas (the other OZ) when I was out
cruising the back roads for antique Ford Tractors. Amongst my friends that
are considered Ford fans, anything coming out of Chrysler Corp. (Dodge,
Chrysler and the late Plymouths and DeSoto's) is referred to as either a
''Walter P.'' or a ''Weed Eater''.... (theory being they MUST be consuming
vegetation, since they're are so often spotted along side the road grazing.)
Alex

(with apologies to MoPar sympathizers)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:32:12 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

>I do not dispute the advantage of replacing the stock manifold system with
>extractors, but the discussions in the past has never really explained why the
>Stock manifolds crack in the first place, and saying 'they just crack' is what
>the local Ford dealer will tell you, it is not a valid reason on this forum.

I put JBC headers on my truck and am very happy with them. Only thing is, I
had to use an original Y-pipe, which I did not have. The nice thing about
these is that the headers are short enough that they should stay out of the
slop and not rust out so fast as standard headers.

In regard to manifolds... are the cast iron manifolds on the 80s style 302s
different from the 70s? I never had a bit of problems with the 302 manifold
in my 78 F-150 or my Bronco.


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: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:27:52 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Exhaust Manifold

> Walter P. was the founder of Chrysler.... I discovered his boyhood home had
>been preserved in a little town in Kansas (the other OZ) when I was out
>cruising the back roads for antique Ford Tractors. Amongst my friends that
>are considered Ford fans, anything coming out of Chrysler Corp. (Dodge,
>Chrysler and the late Plymouths and DeSoto's) is referred to as either a
>''Walter P.'' or a ''Weed Eater''.... (theory being they MUST be consuming
>vegetation, since they're are so often spotted along side the road grazing.)
>Alex

Ironic how the Germans now own Chrysler, who built the Dodge Power Wagons,
and Jeep, who's predessor Willys (along with Ford), built the MB army
jeeps. ...all used to fight the Germans and Japs.


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: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 23:27:35 -0500
From: Jim B
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Bronco hesitates

I have a 86 Ford Bronco with a 302 EFI
at idle or easy pressure on the throttle it is fine but if i jump on it
hesitates and bucks real bad this just started

I have all new cap rotor wires and plugs

Could this be a computer problem?

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

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:26:03 +1100
From: les williams
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: Water Injection

Hi Phil,
Thanks for the info. With the aircraft industry using water injection so
much, I
guess that makes it more than a seasonal fad thing. I would guess the
only reason
the auto industry hasn't used it is convincing people to refill the
water tank.
God only knows how hard it is to convince the owners to fill the
w/washer tank!!

Regards

Les
Lost in the Land of OZ


PSales264 aol.com wrote:

> that was a check done on the gasoline burning recip engines, they didn't use
> coils for spark they used magnetos each engine had 2 complete sets of mags
> and ignitions. they would run on both at once. the check was to make sure
> each system was working fully, so the engines were advanced to a set r.p.m.
> and one at a time one side was shut off, the back on .any more than 150
> r.p.m. drop and it was bad then the other side was checked the same way.If a....


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.