 |
|
|
|
|
|
Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages contained in these archives without consent from the respective author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors. Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list 80-96-list); Wed, 01 Mar 2000 04:29:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 04:29:22 -0500 (EST) From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server To: 80-96-list digest users Reply-to: 80-96-list  ford-trucks.com Subject: 80-96-list Digest V2000 #21 Precedence: bulk ========================================================== Ford Truck Enthusiasts 80-96 Truck Mailing List Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the message. ========================================================== ------------------------------------ 80-96-list Digest Tue, 29 Feb 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 021 In This Issue: Re: Vacuum Re: F350 five speed tranny? Re: Vacuum and mixtures Re: Vacuum and mixtures I'm considering a Ford Van purchase Thanks et al Re: Oil pressure drop Re: Thanks et al Re: Thanks et al Re: No starts....? Gas Out 4/7-4/9 Re: Gas prices Re: Propane Option - Watch Out! Re: No starts....? Gas prices Re: Propane Option Re: Thanks et al MIleage Check on Old truck Re: Vacuum and mixtures Re: Cheap Fuel, Really??? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Serian" Subject: Re: Vacuum Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 02:12:52 -0500 > Hey folks, > Quick question here. After playing with my engine the other day (300 I-6), I > noticed if I pulled one of the vacuum caps off the intake manifold, the idle > went up. I thought the idle would go down because of the vacuum leak. Anyone > know what's up with this? > Joe A rich fuel mix will do this if there is enough fuel to compensate for the extra air getting in and still hold a good air:fuel ratio. ------------------------------ From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: Re: F350 five speed tranny? Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:01:09 -0500 The ZF is a truck transmission and has a granny low. It is used behind the diesel engine and 460 but as you say, is not expecially loved by those who actually abuse their trucks. The NV 4500 is stronger and there is a new one, the NV 5600 for larger trucks with 6 speeds that I understand can be adapted to the ford engines. -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary -- >Maybe the ZF 5 speed would fit - it should - but I doubt it would save >enough to pay for the switch. It is not as heavy duty of >tranny as what you >have now and I think it is too high geared in 1st and reverse. ------------------------------ From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: Re: Vacuum and mixtures Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:10:54 -0500 Not exactly. It does let in more air but not mixture. The fact is that engines run better on lean mixtures so when you let air in and lean it out it runs faster.....up to a point.....when it begins to missfire due to being too lean. Unloaded such as at idle we can run much leaner than under load due to temp restrictions and other factors. If you run it loaded too lean it will melt the pistons and burn the edges off the exhaust valves but until that happens it will run more efficiently :-) A certain amount of waste is necessary to make sure all air in the cylinder is used for best "power" not necessarily best "efficiency". If you wast air you waste power, if you waste fuel you wast economy by have maximum power. The additional fuel which is not burned acts as a heat sink for the piston top and valves which is one reason lean burn engines run hotter. -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary -- >With a carburetor, the vacuum itself is what holds the engine >speed down to >idle (lack of fuel/air). Opening up a vacuum leak is like opening the >throttle a little more. ------------------------------ From: MRStace84 aol.com Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:56:16 EST Subject: Re: Vacuum and mixtures While we are on the subject, what is the proper way to adjust the air/ fuel mixture, and not have it to lean or to rich, and what are some obvious indications that is running to lean or rich? If there is anything else beside missing at idle, 'loading up' and blowing raw gas out the exhaust pipe. Thanks, Stacy 84 F150 4x4 98 Ranger XLT 4x4 In a message dated 2/29/00 7:12:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, gpeters3 visteon.com writes: << Not exactly. It does let in more air but not mixture. The fact is that engines run better on lean mixtures so when you let air in and lean it out it runs faster.....up to a point.....when it begins to missfire due to being too lean. Unloaded such as at idle we can run much leaner than under load due to temp restrictions and other factors. If you run it loaded too lean it will melt the pistons and burn the edges off the exhaust valves but until that happens it will run more efficiently :-) >> ------------------------------ From: "QUARLES, ROB (FLORIDA)" Subject: I'm considering a Ford Van purchase Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:43:06 -0600 I was thinking of buying an older Ford van under $3000. My Ford Explorer while nice, is a little undersized for my towing and cargo space requirements (car hauling and swap meets). I was considering an E-150, but I'd really like an E-250 or E-350 with a 6.9 diesel or the 460 gas engine. Is the 6.9 diesel reliable or troublesome? A guy I knew who was a shop foreman for Overnight told me that the "small" Ford diesels in their fleet leaked oil, ate starters and flywheels, etc. Are there any appreciable gas mileage and torque advantages with the 6.9 diesel vs. the 351 or 460 gas engines? Any suggestions on what to look out for (service issues, problems with particular models, etc.) would be appreciated. Rob Quarles Sales Technician Halkey-Roberts Corporation 11600 9th St. N. St. Petersburg, FL 33716 727-577-1300 X227 727-578-0450 FAX mailto:rquarles halkey-roberts.com http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.halkey-roberts.com ------------------------------ From: "Latham, Wayne M" Subject: Thanks et al Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:30:00 -0600 Thanks to Stacy for the easy fix advice on the heater core replacement for my '88 I-6. Since that was so easy, I've got some other aggravations that have been driving me nuts: 1) "Check Engine" Light flashes on/off randomly - seems worse in extreme cold weather. 2) Random "no starts" when turning ignition key (ignition switch and starter solenoid have been replaced, but I'm thinking maybe there is not good contact between the ignition switch and the steering column?) 3) I saved the biggest aggravation for last - engine periodically and randomly "cuts off" while driving (either no fuel or no spark and absence of backfire upon restart would suggest no fuel; maybe fuel injectors need replacing? Thanks in advance, Wayne in VA ------------------------------ From: "DannyF" Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:58:55 -0600 Subject: Re: Oil pressure drop > I have an '88 Ford F-150, 4.9L, I-6. Just had the oil changed, and as I > was > driving down the freeway, the oil pressure dropped to nothing, according > to > the gauge. I heard a ticking noise from the top end of the motor. That > sounded to me like sticky lifters. I checked, and the motor is full of > oil. > I put in a can of Rislone, and the noise stopped. I drove down the road > some > more, and the oil pressure dropped, the motor starts ticking, I'm back > to > square one again. Any suggestions on what this could be? Could it be the > oil > pump? \ > If so, how hard is it to fix, and is it fixable without pulling the > motor? > Any help would be appreciated. > Isaac (Godzilla) First, the ticking/clacking from the lifters/rockers WITH the 0 pressure tells me the sender is not the problem. It IS a true oil pressure problem. Lifter/rocker noise is the 1st warning signal of low or 0 oil pressure. This sure sounds like junk is getting sucked up from the bottom of the pan then after you turn the engine off its liquid enough to drop off the pickup screen and reaccumulate to the bottom of the pan. Then restarting and running(may take a while) eventually gets to the point of blocking the screen again. All you have to do is clean out the pan and pickup(maybe change the oil pump while your there). You'll have to lift the engine ~3" till the int. plenum hits the firewall. Watch out for anything hitting/stretching. The fan WILL hit the shroud if you don't loosen the shroud 1st. This will be enough for you to drop the pan about 4-5" and clean out the pan and change the pump. The pan does not need to come all the way off(it won't anyway). Danny fitz011 ev1.net------------------------------ From: "Mahaffey, Chris M" Subject: Re: Thanks et al Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:08:58 -0500 > 1) "Check Engine" Light flashes on/off randomly - seems worse in extreme >cold weather. My Dad's truck had a similar problem and it turned out to be the EGR position sensor. I'd imagine it could be one of many sensors. Checking the codes in the computer is probably the best place to start for this problem. > 2) Random "no starts" when turning ignition key (ignition switch and >starter solenoid have been replaced, but I'm thinking maybe there is not good >contact between the ignition switch and the steering column?) I hate to answer a question with a question, but maybe someone else can jump in. I understand there is a rod which connects the lock cylinder to the switch. Is there any kind of adjustment in that rod so maybe the switch isn't being engaged fully? >3) I saved the biggest aggravation for last - engine periodically and randomly >"cuts off" while driving (either no fuel or no spark and absence of backfire >upon restart would suggest no fuel; maybe fuel injectors need replacing? Could this be that TFI module starting to go bad? My Dad had problems with the one in his truck. There would be spark when cranking the engine but no spark when the ignition was in run mode. I've mentioned my Dad's truck twice in this post, so I might as well give you all a little history about it. It's an 88 F150 2wd with 5.0L and Mazda 5 spd. It has 165,000 miles on it. Other than a few small things (TFI, valve cover gaskets, clutch, EGR position sensor) the only major problem he had was when the keeper pin came out of the carrier in the differential. Once that happened it allowed the shaft which holds the spider gears to slide out and catch on the differential housing. Thankfully he was making a turn on a country road when it happened so he was going rather slow and there wasn't anyone directly behind him. That seemed to be an odd failure to me since the pin has locktite on it from the factory, and he never had it apart. But, I'll let this be a warning to everyone to check that pin anytime you have the differential cover off, and be sure to use locktite (or some form of thread lock) on it if you ever take it out. ------------------------------ From: "Steve Schmeckpeper" Subject: Re: Thanks et al Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 11:18:11 -0600 Wayne, Check the Fuel Pump Inertia Switch. My 87 was exhibiting the same symptoms you describe. One of the connectors on my switch was not making good contact and my fuel pumps would cut off intermittantly. Replaced the connectors and checked the switch...............end of problem 8^> Smeck 87 F150-302EFI-T18 P.S. In the event of a collision or rollover, the Fuel Pump Inertia Switch 'trips' and disconnects power to the pumps. It can be reset just like a circuitbreaker. (Mine is on the firewall to the left of the steering wheel) ----- Original Message ----- From: Latham, Wayne M > 1) "Check Engine" Light flashes on/off randomly - seems worse in > extreme > cold weather. > 2) Random "no starts" when turning ignition key (ignition switch and > starter solenoid have been replaced, but I'm thinking maybe there is not > good > contact between the ignition switch and the steering column?) > 3) I saved the biggest aggravation for last - engine periodically and > randomly > "cuts off" while driving (either no fuel or no spark and absence of > backfire > upon restart would suggest no fuel; maybe fuel injectors need replacing? > > Thanks in advance, > Wayne in VA > ------------------------------ From: "Peters, Gary (G.R.)" Subject: Re: No starts....? Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:54:33 -0500 Saaaaaaaay! Will a 94 starter energize if the fuel pump shock or impact switch is messed up? My bird just simply refuses to engage the starter sometimes for no reason I've been able to determine? -- Michigan, Pot Hole Jumping, 78 Bronco Loving, Gary -- > 2) Random "no starts" when turning ignition key (ignition >switch and >starter solenoid have been replaced, but I'm thinking maybe >there is not >good >contact between the ignition switch and the steering column?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:46:25 -0600 From: Andy Norris Subject: Gas Out 4/7-4/9 Sorry if some of you are getting this thing left and right, but this has a lot to do with the angst we're feeling over the gas prices right now... I'm on the digest, so apologies if this is not the first appearance of this on the list. >> As you may have heard, gas prices are skyrocketing beginning this week >>(they are thinking around $2.00/gallon for premium here in Columbus, OH), >>and speculation has it the price will not be going down until the end of >>summer. I will be planning on participating in the gas out mentioned below, >>whether or not it works, we'll see. >> >> Anytime we can stick it to them it's a good day. received this today... >>Last year on April 30,1999, a gas out was staged across Canada and the U.S. >>to bring the price of gas down, and it worked. It's time to do something >>about it again. >> >> This time, lets make it for three days instead of just one. The oil cartel >>decided to slow production to drive up gasoline prices. Lets see how many >>Canadian\American people we can get to ban together for a three day period >>in April, NOT TO BUY ANY GASOLINE, during those three days. LETS HAVE A GAS >>OUT. >> >> Do not buy any gasoline from APRIL 7, 2000, THROUGH APRIL 9, 2000. Buy >>what you need before the dates listed above, or after, but try not to buy >>any during the GAS OUT. If you want to help, just send this to everyone you >>know and ask them to do the same. >> >> We brought the prices down once before, and we can do it again! Come on >>North America lets stand together. >> >> WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. >> Even if you receive this 100 times keep passing it around, this way you >>know everyone is being informed and no one will forget!!!!!!!! ------------------------------ From: Eric Sneed Subject: Re: Gas prices Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:51:11 -0800 Lower last year? Where is this, the price was around $1.70 a gallon in the Bay Area. They are going in that direction again this year. There are other factors that determine the price of gas, such as a local oil refinery having problems. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Blake Malkamaki [SMTP:blake little-mountain.com]Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 4:49 PM To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.comSubject: [80-96-list] Re: Gas prices >Gas prices are ridiculous in Oklahoma City! This time last year, I was >paying 69-70 cents per gallon, and that's NO JOKE! It cost me around $25 to >fill BOTH tanks. Last week I filled up at the herendous price of $1.27 and >it cost me $46 to fill both tanks! I am having to budget my money even more >now! Those idiots that control the price need to come up off it! I get >around 12-13 in town and around 16-18 on the highway, but still! My truck >has 217,000 miles on it, and still going! The prices are not controlled. They go by supply and demand. I am certain the price will come down in the near future. The A-rabs certainly don't want to keep the price up long enough for all the American oilfields to go back into big production - that would mean big competition for them. Prices last year were exceptionally low - considering inflation, cheaper than anytime since the great depression. So you can't compare prices right now with last year. 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...." ========================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com withthe words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the body of the message. ------------------------------ From: Fred Moreno Subject: Re: Propane Option - Watch Out! Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:23:17 -0700 Here you go Les, a real attitude towards propane right here in my own back yard (or at least one tank full of propane away LOL!!). Al wrote: I worked for years in Texas...and the grand and benevolent state decided a few years back that all state vehicles MUST be equipped with propane option. No choice, you had to pay for the vehicle and another $1200 or more for the conversion. Yeah I agree with you on that one, but this was spawned because Texas decided to take a proactive approach instead of a reactive approach to our Federal government EPA's ruling. Many other states in the Union are still way behind. Al wrote: The result was a vehicle which could be driven on gasoline or on propane by flipping a switch on the dashboard. So the conversion is available, it does work, and it's not a one-way street. You preserve your fuel options. Hey consider yourself lucky, you had experience with State vehicles that worked! In the State of Texas infinite wisdom of accepting the lowest bid for vehicle conversions, many were done by people that should of been hung for the quality of work they generated at tax payers expense. Not to mention endangering lives. Al wrote: BUT - who wants to spend $1200 to $1500 on this? That would buy a whole lot of gas. Propane is terribly hard to find, is less energy efficient than gas and as a result won't take you very far on a tank, and it costs money too. I haven't run the numbers but I'd bet that the break-even point for this conversion is many tens of thousands of miles down the road. Well you missed the point why Texas did this. They did it because of something called "non-attainment areas". EPA would rule if a the air quality in metropolitan areas were able to meet the air quality standards somebody in some government office/lab came up with. Too many Texas cities (and other cities nation wide) were falling into that classification, and with it came the EPA's fine book. If the State did not implement plans to get the cities out of such a classification much bigger fines were going to be levied and then the cost of $1200 to $1500 a conversion for each State vehicle was going to be a bargain. And by the way, since the mid 90's, the State had to incorporate 10% of their fleet, then the following year something like 25 %, then 50%. I am not sure of the exact increment but it was a gradual plan. I think that was called EPACT. I try to stay out of the political hoops. This plan also did benefit a lot of Texas born companies and kept a lot of business going. Now with stricter EPA rulings and standards all that is gone and so are the jobs. For more information on this do a search using the words "Clean Cities". Al wrote: In the meantime you have more parts to break, and you have to figure out WHERE to put the propane tank. Want it in the bed? Kiss your cargo room goodbye, especially if you have a short bed. Want it under the truck? Kiss driving off roads goodbye. As far as your argument about more parts to break, well you have exposed your level of knowledge there again, because most of these devices have very few moving parts if any. Sure diaphragms were out, and residue builds up, and parts do wear, but most would agree that this would fall under a 'maintenance program'. Oh I forgot, the infinite wisdom of the State of Texas (and New Mexico, Oklahoma, etc...) when they accepted the lowest bid, forgot to include a budget for a maintenance program. The standard one year warranty Texas has is a joke. Most conversions when done right don't have problems within the first year if standard tune-ups are done as they should be. I have a short bed Ford with the Manchester manifold tank (12" X 12" X 60") because I NEED my bed to haul stuff. My tank selection was critical because I wanted my cake and to eat it too. OH, but here we are again with the State wanting the lowest bids, and my tank style cost a little more than your typical propane tank. Sorry forgot. With my tank mounted in the bed, you cannot see it unless you look inside the bed. As a matter of fact if I needed to install a tool box in the bed, this tank is perfect for just that. The tool box will need to be lifted one or two inches off the rails to clear the tank, but what's two inches. But I have no toolbox, so no problem, I end up stacking stuff on top of the tank, scratches the paint and all, but its a work/farm truck. I still managed to haul just under one cord of pecan wood last night, so what if my springs were flat. I have no problem arranging 32 bales of alfalfa and then driving to the other side of town for its delivery. And yes, you bet its tied down. Your argument about loosing bed space is sort of weak IMHO, besides that, I can't seem to recall ever seeing a State truck haul much in the first place anyways. Al wrote: As for me, I really resented being forced to drive vehicles with propane tanks installed in places I didn't want. In passenger vehicles and vans, most were under the vehicle in the back. Maybe the TANKS are stout, but what about the fittings??? I figured on good rear-ender and I could end up with a free trip to the moon. I have NEVER seen a crash test on a vehicle with a propane tank involved. I will believe they're safe when a manufacturer equips the vehicle with propane and does a thorough series of crash tests with direct impact on the tank. Until then, I feel that the only result of having a propane tank on board - anywhere at all - is that I have made the vehicle less safe. Well I can agree with you here, I don't want anyone, especially some government official dictating what I drive and how I drive. Regarding the tank fittings, well you are exposing your level of knowledge once more, earlier (last week?)this was discussed. The fittings on all tanks installed in the US (and most of the world) are designed to break off with minimum fuel escaping into the environment. If you would like to be enlighten on the subject of safety and propane tanks, and also would like to see the video tape of crash simulations using propane tanks, please call Lon Holloway at Northwest Butane (Dallas (800) 274-6121). Or call Franz Hofmann at AFRED in Austin (512)463-8501 he is the lead instructor for the State of Texas Railroad Commission, and a very good friend. Franz sould have or know where a copy of the tape can be found and is real good at dispelling most myths in Texas. Tell either one of them you are a State of Texas employee and would like to see such a tape, I think Manchester Tank did the video. Maybe they can send you a copy. Have you any idea how expensive a crash study test would cost? I mean we are talking several identical vehicles crashed just to get one certification. And who would pay for such testing? The conversion facility? The government (read tax payers)- State, Fed, local? As far as making the vehicle safer or not, well all that falls under the heading of "is your conversion a quality conversion or not?". Many conversions have actually made the vehicle less safe because the conversion facility did poor quality work and here again we need a rope and a tree... Blame it on lack of training, poor management, insufficient budgeting, bid specs, high tide, full moon, take your pick. But a quality conversion leaves me no doubt that it is just as safe than prior to its conversion. Do you think you could take a screw driver with a normal hammer and punch a hole in a OEM gas tank? Oh - by the way - in Texas, we drove the state cars on propane once only, till the tank was empty. Then we drove it on gas the rest of its service life. (An empty propane tank weighs less and has less potentially explosive material, and no one ever wanted to hunt the boondocks for a filling site.) Total d**n waste of money. Think of it - TX spends $1200 (per conversion) times thousands and thousands of state-purchased vehicles a year! And it's money straight down the tubes. Oh boy, you are doing a good job of exposing your level of knowledge today Al. Let's put some gray matter to use here; Okay so propane systems have no fuel pump, so it must use pressure to circulate fuel, is there any other method? When the vehicle stops running on propane, that must mean the pressure is insufficient to make it past the regulator, so the tank is empty??? Not quite, its full of vapors, SURPRISE!!! And are vapor easier or harder to ignite than liquid?...me thinks vapors is much easier to go boom. Try opening the 80% valve (aka spitter valve) on one of these 'empty' vehicles, and don't smoke while doing it, you will most likely get vapor coming out by way of pressure. As a matter of fact, there is enough pressure/fuel left in that tank to run your BBQ for a couple of hours easy. So by your logic, you've actually made the vehicle un-safer. Way to go AL!!! You are a State employee, right? Should I forward your email to some of the higher-ups so they can see and confirm how well their programs and taxpayers money is being used? I believe that this year (or was it last year?), in order for the States to get it's EPA non-attainment credits, they have to show fuel consumption instead of just owning propane burners. Probably because too many people like you Al. So I sure wouldn't recommend pursuing the propane option too far unless you have a "point of honor" to make. Please take Al's argument based on his experiences and compare mine based on facts. I am sure others will back me up with more facts and some will probably side with Al. As Les would say, 'still having fun in my Ford.' Phred KD5AQB 1995 F-150 4X4 5.0L burning that 'nasty smelling' stuff made in Texas. __ ++++++++++++++++++++WSU-CSU+++++++++++++++++ Al Powell Apowell EZlink.com1958 Fiat 1200 Spyder "Transformabile" 1983 Datsun 280ZXT 1990 Audi 200 http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ezlink.com/~powells/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:53:23 -0500 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: No starts....? Peters, Gary (G.R.) wrote: > > Saaaaaaaay! Will a 94 starter energize if the fuel pump shock or impact > switch is messed up? My bird just simply refuses to engage the starter > sometimes for no reason I've been able to determine? > From what I remember, I don't think the inertia switch is tied into the starting circuit. I think there is a fuel pump power check going back to the computer and if the fuel pump is not getting power it shuts off the injectors. Wouldn't affect starting though. OX ------------------------------ From: "Jerry Hinkle Jr., CPA" <2hinkles sprynet.com>Subject: Gas prices Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 14:53:39 -0700 How can you whine about paying $1.27 a gallon for low grade unleaded when I am now paying $1.49 a gallon here in the deserts of Arizona? Each time I fill both tanks in my crew cab they can here me whine as far east as the Mississippi River! And yes I would like a little cheese with this whine! Jerry Hinkle Jr. CPA 1994 F-350 Crew Cab, 4x4 "Playa Bum" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 09:00:58 +1100 From: les williams Subject: Re: Propane Option Hi Al, I was going to let this go through to the 'keeper, but unfortunately some of you comments cannot go unchallenged. This is the sort of thing you heard in OZ, 20 years ago, sitting around the Pub...The times have moved on.....However I do respect & defend you right to express an opinion, it helps other list members to formulate an opinion and to answer the questions that they probably haven't thought of yet, but you must expect a robust challenge in return. apowell ezlink.com wrote:> I worked for years in Texas... > BUT - who wants to spend $1200 to $1500 on this? That would buy a whole > lot of gas. Propane is terribly hard to find, is less energy efficient than gas The BTU rating suggests a 30% reduction in fuel efficiency, this is the basis of suggesting that it useless. I do believe it is a perpetrated story to cover for slack installs and not doing anything about the ignition side of the install. The easy answer is to tell the customer that this is as good as it gets. Wrong Answer. Propane actually develops MORE torque down low. That just happens to be what we as Effie drivers need. OK some of us are more er... greedy and want it all. > > and as a result won't take you very far on a tank, and it costs money too. I > haven't run the numbers but I'd bet that the break-even point for this > conversion is many tens of thousands of miles down the road. This is the first step, do you do the mileage to justify the costs. In OZ, Caltex/Texaco admit about 2 yrs for the average motorist. Propane is about 45% of the petrol price and down here That's about $4.20 per US gallon. Geez, send down some of that cheep 1.50 stuff... I'm sure that if you were to pay 3X what you presently do, you would do a revisit of the problem. > > In the meantime you have more parts to break, and you have to figure out > WHERE to put the propane tank. Want it in the bed? Kiss your cargo room > goodbye, especially if you have a short bed. Want it under the truck? Kiss > driving off roads goodbye. > > As for me, I really resented being forced to drive vehicles with propane tanks > installed in places I didn't want. In passenger vehicles and vans, most were > under the vehicle in the back. Since this is the Ford Truck Site, my comments on Propane Usage concern Ford Trucks only. One of the things to negotiate at the install time is that Very Important Question. If they won't talk, go to someone else. I have always advocated a single fuel policy IF you have a Reliable Supply Available. This very much simplifies the truck and it's operational costs. So what's left to break? > Maybe the TANKS are stout, but what about the > fittings??? I figured on good rear-ender and I could end up with a free trip to > the moon. No such luck. You have about the same chance as breaking wind over a lighted candle. Tonight on OZ TV a Falcon cab was rear ended by Korean rice burner of some description, so hard the the rice burner 'submarined' under the cab lifting it of the road and left sitting on the top of the rice burner. No points for guessing where the propane tank was. NOT one comment was made by the Media, to the fact that there was a propane vehicle involved. If this was 20 years ago, yes, this would have been the lead story. It's just not an issue anymore. > I have NEVER seen a crash test on a vehicle with a propane tank > involved. I will believe they're safe when a manufacturer equips the vehicle > with propane and does a thorough series of crash tests with direct impact on > the tank. Until then, I feel that the only result of having a propane tank on > board - anywhere at all - is that I have made the vehicle less safe. The crash tests have been done, I believe some work has been done in California. A lot of work has been done in Holland crashing both trucks, cars and tanks only. As part of the ADRules for new cars both Ford & GM have been involved. You may not be aware but the ADR's have to be done in OZ for OZ vehicles, the data from the US is invalid. The real interesting thing is, ask GM & Ford, how much burst plastic petrol tanks and the ensuing fires and litigation have cost them. I can't speak for the US propane tanks, cause I'm still learning new things daily, on this list, but in OZ by all means take you best hit with a 7lb hammer at the ' T-ee' fitting. The only LPG loss will be the gas in the line. The tank's check valve should do it's job and seal the tank. This same feature is not in petrol tanks for general road use. Cut or shear the line from the tank to vaporizer and the check valve kicks in again. The petrol tank has no internal pressure, so it deforms, and splits easily and leaks. If this list is a good representation of the quality of 'Effie' petrol tanks, then all you have to do is stand around and wait for it to rust, leak and fall out. A Propane tank has an internal pressure just under 200psi. This makes deformation a lot more difficult. If the impact is great enough to actually deform the tank and seriously increase internal pressure, the relief valve should release enough gas to the atmosphere, back to a safe level. There is no expense in cleaning up after an accident, cause the fuel just disperses, no sand bagging to stop petrol running into drains etc. No fire truck call out. This fact has not been lost on the Insurance Co., If they thought they could get away and increase premiums cause it's Propane, don't you think they would have done it ? The numbers are just not there. > > Oh - by the way - in Texas, we drove the state cars on propane once only, till > the tank was empty. Then we drove it on gas the rest of its service life. (An > empty propane tank weighs less and has less potentially explosive material, I wouldn't bet on that..... an empty Propane OR petrol tank is More dangerous. Less liquid and more vapours. When I was doing my time, a teacher at the tech school would scare the the living day-lights out of us young students by walking into the class room with a steel bucket near full of petrol and a box of matches. He would throw a lighted match at the bucket full of petrol and naturally it would go 'Wooof' and burn fairly harmlessly. He would empty the bucket, turn it upside down and place it back on the floor. When a match was now thrown at the bucket, the fumes only ignited and would launch that bucket and bounce it of the ceiling. It impressed the S*it out of me. You may think it was very dramatic demo, but whenever I have had to do anything with petrol tanks and oxy-acetelene, I have never forgotten that lesson. Make sure it's full of petrol first! No, no, no - just kidding. testing to see if you are still with it !! ;-)) > > and no one ever wanted to hunt the boondocks for a filling site.) Total d**n > waste of money. Think of it - TX spends $1200 (per conversion) times > thousands and thousands of state-purchased vehicles a year! And it's money > straight down the tubes. And no-doubt questionable installs, just like the $99.99 truck respray ........ the use of masking tape is an option...... > > So I sure wouldn't recommend pursuing the propane option too far unless you > have a "point of honor" to make. I am in OZ and 70% of Effie owners, I am only 1, and the entire Sydney Cab fleet (all marques represented here) all can't be wrong. So I'm not sure what you mean by the Point of Honour? Paying more to the fuel cartels than is necessary? I don't think So....... > __ > ++++++++++++++++++++WSU-CSU+++++++++++++++++ > Al Powell > Apowell EZlink.com> 1958 Fiat 1200 Spyder "Transformabile" > 1983 Datsun 280ZXT > 1990 Audi 200 ....... But I'm still havin' Fun In a Ford on LPG ....... regards Les Lost in the Land of OZ ------------------------------ From: Bakend aol.comDate: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 19:27:32 EST Subject: Re: Thanks et al In a message dated 02/29/2000 10:22:04 AM Mountain Standard Time, eeschm sol.ee.lsu.edu writes:> P.S. In the event of a collision or rollover, the Fuel Pump Inertia Switch > 'trips' and disconnects power to the pumps. It can be reset just like a > circuitbreaker. > (Mine is on the firewall to the left of the steering wheel) > > Had the same problem on my 87. The switch was found on the passenger side under the top of the carpet. The terminals were black from poor connection. Dennis Baken ------------------------------ From: LGRanch aol.comDate: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 19:42:12 EST Subject: MIleage Check on Old truck I decided that with all of the talk about mileage I decided that I'd check. I run a 90 full size Bronco with a 302 and an AOD. I run 31x10.50 and 3.55 gears. The truck has 125,000 miles. I run back and forth to work every day 75 miles at 65mph. The mileage has is running 14.6mpg. I think that this is pretty good for a vehicle that has the aerodynamic of a cinder block. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 19:50:52 -0500 From: Blake Malkamaki Subject: Re: Vacuum and mixtures >Not exactly. It does let in more air but not mixture. The fact is that That's what I meant. It is like opening the butterflies a little, but not giving it more fuel. 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...." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 20:36:14 +1100 From: les williams Subject: Re: Cheap Fuel, Really??? Hi All, Well, it's finally happened, the continuing rise in the cost of fuel has brought the entrepreneurial best in fuel reselling. It's now official, lead story on the evening tv news, the petrol is being 'cut' with tax free toluene up to 50%, somewhere after it leaves the refinery and getting to the destination drop. This practice has always been of suspicious nature for some time now, but to the end consumer, difficult to prove. To make matters worst there is no way of telling which servo's are doing it. Oh, they sell the petrol at the normal high price, it's their bottom line profit that's benefiting. Hmmm, is this yet another advantage of LPG?? Very difficult to 'cut', but not impossible .... O.K now the question: How much damage does this blend cause to the fuel system? We have already found out that it makes damn fine paint stripper. regards Les Lost in the Land of OZ ------------------------------ End of 80-96-list Digest V2000 #21 ********************************** ---------------------------------------------------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts 80-96 Truck Mailing List Send posts to 80-96-list ford-trucks.comIf you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send an email to: listar ford-trucks.comwith the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the message. Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com ---------------------------------------------------------- .... 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. 
|