 |
|
|
|
|
|
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); Sat, 06 May 2000 03:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 03:24:08 -0400 (EDT) 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 #79 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 Thu, 04 May 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 079 In This Issue: Re: general ? Oil pan repair Re: general ? Re: Brake Light switch Re: general ? Re: general ? Re: general ? SEMA Action Network Legislative Alert - U.S. House of Re: general ? Re: Bell sound at front wheel. f250 diesel Re: EFI 460 restrictor testing High-Beam switch ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Serian" Subject: Re: general ? Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 14:39:03 -0400 > i have a 351w and i am looking on getting a 4bbl intake for it. > ..will the 302 intake fit on it, or is it too different? nope ... the intake for the 351W is wider than the 302 ... you would need to look for a 85-86 era F-series with a 351W if yer looking for a stock 4V, otherwise there are a number of aftermarket manufacturers that you can get a 351W-4V from. Edelbrock seems to be the most popular. ------------------------------ From: "Navarra, Anthony" Subject: Oil pan repair Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 17:09:13 -0400 Thanks to "Serian" and "Joe; Lost in Jersey" for their tip on using epoxy to plug the rust induced hole in the oil pan on my '89 F250. I bought gas tank patch kit that came complete with sandpaper, fiberglass patch, epoxy and applicator for $16 at the local CarQuest. I cleaned off the heavy grease with a mixture of ammonia, bleach and water. The whole job took only 30 minutes. I'm going to replace the oil pan soon and would appreciate any advice on that job. TIA A.J Navarra '89 F250 4x4 w/210k miles ------------------------------ From: Lingus0169 aol.com Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 19:02:30 EDT Subject: Re: general ? ok, thankx for clearing that up, 302 intake on a 351w, and i will prolly look into a kit that includes a edelbrock intake, 600 cfm carb, air cleaner and gaskets for round $350 nick ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 00 15:59:16 -0800 From: Todd Mueller Subject: Re: Brake Light switch One switch is the stoplamp switch and the other is the vacuum dump valve switch (round w/white plunger). The troubleshoot chart is pretty short. It has you... 1.apply brakes and observe stop lamps 2.Check dump valve 3.Check servo operation 4.Perform amplifier test Since the stoplamps don't work you get stuck at step 1. You're then supposed to check the stoplamp switch, supply circuit, fuses or bulbs. Once you get the stoplamps working the next test is to measure the battery voltage at the white-purple stripe lead at the cruise control amplifier connector and then apply the brakes activating the stoplamps and measure the voltage of the light green wire on that same connector. The difference should not exceed 1.5 volts. If it does there's high resistance in the stoplamp circuit and it must be corrected. Check for a burned out/corroded bulb or socket or any suspect previous owner trailer wiring etc. The RearABS is not mentioned as effecting the speed control circuit but RABS does have the stoplamps in its circuit so they could share a common problem. There is a RABS test connector under the dash. It's a black-orange stripe lead with a male spade housed in a black plastic connector bundled in all those wires that pass through the driver-side firewall. With the truck running and the RABS light on if you ground momentarily the RABS test connector you're supposed to be able to obtain a flashout code from the RABS light. Flashout 11 is Stop Lamp Switch Circuit Defective. I've got the '90 Truck Shop Manuals so ask if none of that worked. Todd W. M. '87 Bronco ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 16:45:55 -0700 From: chuck sanborn Subject: Re: general ? Uhh, NOPE, NOPE, NOPE... A 302 intake WILL NOT FIT ON A 351W!!!! At 07:02 PM 5/4/00 -0400, you wrote: >ok, thankx for clearing that up, 302 intake on a 351w, and i will prolly look >into a kit that includes a edelbrock intake, 600 cfm carb, air cleaner and >gaskets for round $350 >nick >========================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the >message. ------------------------------ From: Lingus0169 aol.com Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 19:54:01 EDT Subject: Re: general ? i know that the 302 wont fit...thats why im glad ur fellas cleared it up.. nick ------------------------------ From: "Mike Persell" Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 19:29:35 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: general ? That would be a tough vacuum leak to seal... Mike On Thu, 04 May 2000 16:45:55 -0700, chuck sanborn wrote: >Uhh, NOPE, NOPE, NOPE... >A 302 intake WILL NOT FIT ON A 351W!!!! > >At 07:02 PM 5/4/00 -0400, you wrote: >>ok, thankx for clearing that up, 302 intake on a 351w, and i will prolly look >>into a kit that includes a edelbrock intake, 600 cfm carb, air cleaner and >>gaskets for round $350 >>nick >>========================================================== >>To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >>the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the >>message. > >========================================================== >To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with >the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the >message. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 20:58:26 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: SEMA Action Network Legislative Alert - U.S. House of As some of you may have noticed by the main page of the Ford Truck Enthusiasts web site, we recently joined SEMA. Just as FTE got SEMA alerts as a club, it now received additional alerts as a member. Following is an alert concerning CAFE Standards: LEGISLATIVE ALERT U.S. House of Representatives to Consider Stricter Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards CAFE mandates that all manufacturers meet fuel economy targets for their vehicle fleet. For the last several years, the automotive industry has successfully fought to freeze the fleet fuel economy average at 27.5 mpg for cars and 20.7 mpg for light trucks (SUV’s, pickups, minivans). Now, a few members of the U.S. House of Representatives, in a misguided attempt to reduce pollution, gas prices and U.S. dependence on foreign oil, are actively seeking to end the current freeze on CAFE standards. If they are successful, the effects on consumer choice, not to mention vehicle safety, will be dramatic. Contact Your Federal Representatives to Oppose Lifting the CAFE Freeze Higher CAFE Standards will… Limit consumer choice in purchasing vehicles. Manufacturers will be forced to make SUVs, light trucks and minivans more expensive, smaller, less powerful, and less useful in terms of hauling and towing capacity. Result in less vehicle availability and higher prices. Light trucks and SUV ’s, noted as “gas guzzlers,” will inevitably be phased out in order for manufacturers to meet increasing government-mandated fuel economy standards. In addition, CAFE increases in the light truck market will cost consumers up to $2,750 in higher vehicle prices. Lead to more deaths on our nation’s highways. Increased CAFE standards for larger vehicles will force consumers into smaller cars with higher accident fatality rates. A USA Today analysis found that “46,000 people have died in crashes they would have survived in bigger heavier cars.” This works out to “roughly 7,700 deaths for every mile per gallon gained” by driving smaller cars (USA Today, July 2, 1999). Higher CAFE Standards will not… Improve on pollution. CAFE was enacted in 1975 to conserve fuel, not to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The idea that manmade CO2 emissions will drastically reduce through higher CAFE standards is inaccurate. Even doubling the fuel economy of new cars in the U.S. would reduce manmade CO2 emissions less than one percent worldwide. Reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. To date, CAFE and small cars have done little to reduce gasoline consumption and the U.S. imports more foreign oil today than when CAFE standards were first imposed. Save the consumer money at the gas pump with more fuel efficient vehicles. Total gas consumption depends on factors such as total miles traveled, the make-up of the overall vehicle fleet and gasoline prices, NOT simply on new vehicle mileage standards. Contact your Member of the U.S. House of Representatives to oppose any raising of CAFE standards. If you need assistance in determining who your legislators are, this information can be obtained by calling the SEMA Washington, D.C. office at 202/783-6007 or you can access this information via the internet at www.sema.org/fedleg/legislatorrequest. For assistance in turning this alert into a letter to a legislator, go to http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sema.org/consumer/fedleg/ and choose SEMA's link on "How to Lobby Elected Officials." Please fax a copy of your letters to us at 202/783-6024 or mail to: SEMA Washington Office, 1317 F St., NW, Ste. 500, Washington, D.C. 20004, Attn: Brian Caudill ------------------------------ From: slikness mindspring.com Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 22:43:52 -0400 Subject: Re: general ? That's the setup I've got and it runs great! 80-96-list ford-trucks.com wrote: > ok, thankx for clearing that up, 302 intake on a 351w, and i will prolly look into a kit that includes a edelbrock intake, 600 cfm carb, air cleaner and gaskets for round $350 nick ========================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the message. ------------------------------ From: "Obert, Scott AT3" Subject: Re: Bell sound at front wheel. Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 18:48:53 -0700 Thanks Dave! That was it! I guess you were right too Wayne, I guess I needed that extra specific description from Dave to overcome my lack of mechanical knowledge. Boy I feel dumb now. LOL Thanks, Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Harmier [SMTP:dharmier pdq.net] > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 8:30 PM > To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com > Subject: [80-96-list] Re: Bell sound at front wheel. > > I can speak from absolute experience. It was a booger to find, but the > washer that holds the bottom of the spring (as well as the radius rod to > the I beam!) was quite loose. I think it was a 1 1/8" wrench, tightened > it, > and definitely felt and heard a difference. CHECK THAT BOLT!!!! > > Dave H. > Houston > > ========================================================== > To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with > the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the > message. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:35:41 -0600 From: Mike Hand Subject: f250 diesel I'm looking at a '90 f250 4x4 XLT extended cab (135k miles) with the diesel engine and automatic transmission. The thing needs two new batteries, but other than that, it appears to be in good shape with no real problems. HOWEVER, I'm not as familiar with some other vehicles. What should I look for? Look out for? I don't believe mileage is an issue with the diesel engine, but what else is? Does this list have a checklist I can read? Thanks in advance. Mike '94 Taurus SHO '84 Jeep Grand Wagoneer '69 Cessna 182. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 09:37:20 -0400 From: James Oxley Subject: Re: EFI 460 restrictor testing Fred Moreno wrote: > > I'm familiar with the restrictor you mention, and have really enjoyed > reading about your experiments. I'm jealous. BUT, you really ought to double > check the idle speed setting when you remove the restrictor. I bring this > up because you mentioned on one posting that it appeared to you the truck > idled a little better, implying that something did change. Actually it was suggested that another list memeber heard it would idle really poorly with the restritor removed. I was just stating that I could not really see any difference and that if anything, it felt a little better. It was by no means a huge change and probably more in my head than anything else, but it did not create and idle problem. Idle speed could not have changed as the computer would just put it back to normal anyway through the IAC valve. > And check the ignition timing, not that I suspect it should change but I > have been wrong before. No way it would change since it's computer controlled unless you created a huge vac leak (possible affecting MAP) and/or changed TPS setting taking you out of idle voltage. OX ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 01:21:38 -0700 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: High-Beam switch How does one go about changing the floor high-beam switch? Mine cuts the high beams to mothing once and a while but a good boot to the side of the switch fixes it. This is somewhat un-nerving while driving down a dark, lonely back road. Chris '84 F150 w/ original rust! 351W on propane NP 435 .... 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. 
|