....


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.


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, 20 May 2000 07:19:36 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 07:19:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server ford-trucks.com>
To: 80-96-list digest users ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: 80-96-list Digest V2000 #91
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, 18 May 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 091

In This Issue:
Re: Seat Interchangeability
Oil Pressure Sender
Re: Seat Interchangeability
Re: Poor Running - Fixed!
Re: Oil Pressure Sender
Re: droopy front end-measurement
Re: Seat Interchangeability
1995 Questions
HO or NO?(351W)
Re: 1995 Questions
Re: Corporate Rear-End
TEST
80 Ford F250 351 M - Choke Heater - Question
87 5.0 Oil Pan Removal

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

From: Awfanning aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 21:13:54 EDT
Subject: Re: Seat Interchangeability

In a message dated 5/18/00 Chuck wrote:

< < Am looking to install either bucket seats or a 64/40 seat> >

Have you considered shrinking the truck ? Well, seriously, you might
consider the approach I used on my '82 (when it was new) after discovering my
kneecaps were in the glovebox when my wife drove. That was to fab a support
structure that let me mount a set of BMW buskets in the cab. It's not all
that hard to do using the existing bench seat brackets, a riser section of 1"
x 2" rectangular tubing running fore-aft ontop of the OEM bracket, and a
front and rear piece of 1" x 1" square tubing running transversely (i.e.,
side-to-side).

Contact me off list for more details. I do make it to the LA and Orange Co.
areas from time to time, if that helps.

Alan
San Jose
'82 F-150 S'Cab

I fab'd a set of mounts for bucket

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

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 18:16:09 -0700
From: Marv & Marge lafn.org>
Subject: Oil Pressure Sender

OK, so I discover the Mickey-Mouse way they "digitize" an analog oil
pressure guage using a 20 ohm resistor. Has anybody found a suitable
sender that allows one to bypass the resistor and get a real analog
oil pressure relative reading using the stock guage?
^^^^^
-Marv-

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

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 19:10:31 -0700
From: chuck sanborn deltanet.com>
Subject: Re: Seat Interchangeability

At 09:13 PM 5/18/00 -0400, you wrote:
>. That was to fab a support
>structure that let me mount a set of BMW buskets in the cab

Thanks Alan....I was pretty sure I could use any seats I wanted
to dig up and have no trouble fabbing the tracks. I appreciate
the comeback on this. How do those BMW seats look/feel
anyway?
Chuck



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

From: "Mark Salvetti" mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Poor Running - Fixed!
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 23:18:00 -0400

Well, I'm back. Haven't had time to check email for a couple of days.

Tuesday the truck left me at work again. Didn't get back there to remove
the throttle until around midnight. The Phillips-head machine screws that
held in my TPS were so badly rusted I had to take the throttle home and cut
them off with a Dremel. A little tip: When you're standing in the hardware
aisle of Home Depot at 1AM with a throttle in one hand and you're unable to
find any replacement machine screws that fit the TPS threads, it's because
they're METRIC (M4)! Figured that out Wed AM with the help of the dealer's
parts fiche. Replaced the screws with bolts so I can get them off with a
box wrench if I ever have to go at this again.

Anyway, replaced the TPS and now the truck runs great.

Oh, as for checking the TPS output voltage, these are the wire colors per
the Haynes. There are three wires coming off the connector where the TPS
connects to the wiring harness. This test is done with the connector
together and the engine not running (but the ignition on):

Pre-1991: Neg voltmeter probe to the black/white wire, pos probe to the
dark green/light green wire.
1991 and later: Neg probe to grey/red wire, pos probe to the grey/white
wire.

Rather than pierce the wires, I pushed sewing needles into the connector
where the wires went in. Then connected the probes to the needles using
alligator clips. I was able to vary the throttle-closed output voltage of
the new TPS from about 1.0 to 1.2 volts (I went with 1.0) by shifting it
around, but as Bob Kennedy mentioned it would have been easy to elongate the
mounting holes a bit and get a greater range.

Thanks again everyone. This list is great!

Mark Salvetti
1986 F150 5.0L


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

Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 01:28:22 -0400
From: Harold Norman att.net>
Subject: Re: Oil Pressure Sender

hi-

Marv & Marge wrote:
>
> OK, so I discover the Mickey-Mouse way they "digitize" an analog oil
> pressure guage using a 20 ohm resistor. Has anybody found a suitable
> sender that allows one to bypass the resistor and get a real analog
> oil pressure relative reading using the stock guage?
> ^^^^^
> -Marv-

here's some info. i posted elsewhere... gathered from other
folks.

HTH

-- hn



----- % cut here % -----

On a '91 the stock gauge is nothing more than a glorified
idiot light. The sender is a light sender that just goes
to ground when there is 7 lbs. of pressure [ other posts
suggest 4.5 lbs. ] and the gauge is set to swing into the
"normal" range when the sender grounds. Before you do
anything mechanical, you can convert the gauge to a "real"
gauge by replacing the sender with one from an '87 Bronco.
You will need an adaptor because the sender is too big and
will hit the block. Get this from your Ford dealer. Check
the archives, I have detailed this procedure before and it
will give you a part number for that piece. Then just pull
the instrument cluster out and jump the 20 ohm resistor on
the back of the oil pressure gauge and then you will have a
"real" gauge. Chances are you do not have a pressure problem.
_
_| ~~. John Strauss
\, *_} jstrauss inetport.com
\( Texas Fight!

----- % cut here % -----

----- % cut here % -----

P/N referred to above is: D1UZ-9B339-A .

This ought fix ought to work for vehicles up through '91.
I haven't looked at the gauge schematics to compare the '88-'91
oil pressure gauge setup to a '92-'96 configuration.

----- % cut here % -----

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

Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 19:55:44 +1000
From: les williams cyber.net.au>
Subject: Re: droopy front end-measurement

Hi Paul

The usual disclaimers apply: No responsibility taken etc, and assumes that the truck has no chassis
twists, smash damage, etc. and as Phred would say, you know which end sissors cut ...


I assume you are referring to a 2X4 ? Still the normal twin 'I' beam front end ?

If so my understanding of the front end is that the ride height is mission critical, to the
alignment figures. The more the truck sags in the springs the worst the camber will be. This isn't
rocket science. Since ford officially frown upon the modification of the 'I' beam (heating, bending,
twisting, yes, I have seen it all done), I quite fail to see the point in bending a $500 'I' beam to
save a $90 spring replacement. Remember Mrs Murphy's Rules ? A $300 TV 'tube blowing to save a 10c
fuse .....
A block of wood 5 inches long, placed under the chassis rail, next to the bump stop and the top of
the 'I' beam should be used. I'm not sure how many years the 5 inch block works for. Obviously if
the gap is too small, then the springs have sagged. Park the truck on a level floor - I mean spirit
level, level. Lift the front of the chassis, one side at a time and place the 5" block as described
above and ease the load back of the jack. When both sides are done, This is what your truck front
ride height should have been when it rolled of the assembly line. Use the spirit level on the
underside of the chassis rail just foward of the front of the rear leaf spring hanger. If the 'bum'
reads high, your lucky, but more than likley it will indicate sagged rear springs also. Once again
lift the rear of the chassis, with a floor jack till the spirit level is level, stand back and that
should be close to original level and pre-load ride height. Like I said, it aint rocket science, but
time consuming. If you are lucky enough to talk a friendly wheel aligner type person into doing this
on a wheel alignment equipment, check the castor before the 5" blocks go in, and compare with the
after.
When you have finished mucking around and have convinced youself that new springs are/are not
required, don't forget to remove the wooden blocks ....it's going to be one of a hell of a firm ride
till something lets go.
After close examination of the front end like this, you will realize that there is no user
caster/camber adjustment, and to try and lower or raise the ride height from stock by cutting or
spacing the coil springs, & not chop out tyres, is bloody difficult.

If anyone else has anything to add, then please feel free to jump right on in, I don't claim to know
it all. I am aware that ford do supply c/camber figures for variations of ride heights right down to
3" (as the spring saggs) but I don't feel this is the answer in this case.

.... But I'm still having fun in a Ford ....yes, with a matching set of saggy springs .....

regards
Les
Lost in the Land of OZ


Paul Rozell wrote:

> What is the best way to check the front end on a truck to see if it is indeed the springs. Are
> there any points on the frame that I should measure from. I am considering changing the springs
> just because I don't like the diving front end on my truck. Several places here have the springs
> ranging from 70 to 85 bucks. Any help would be highly appreciated.
>
> Paul Rozell
> 65 F100 460 C6
> 96 F150 5.0 SC
>


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

Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 19:56:17 +1000
From: les williams cyber.net.au>
Subject: Re: Seat Interchangeability

Hi Chuck,

The XE-XF Falcon, and Sheel Falcon bucket seats fit real good.
The falcon seats were fitted as an ambo option, using a fabric woven
with Stainless Steel fibres, I'm sure, almost wear proof, and blood &
chunder just wipes clean off. ;-)) That leaves you with a space between
the seats to fit a fridge big enough for a couple of slabs of beer ...
er sorry, fizzy pop!!

Of course, there is only one thing wrong, I have no idea if you falcons
are anything like ours down here in OZ, but then a locally assembled
F100, of our vintage, has a lot of falcon parts.

Can the gearstick be worked over with the gasaxe (I love the the gasaxe
!!) and bent foward, a la 'R' series manual floorshift Valiant/Dodge
sedans ?

regards
Les
Lost in the land of OZ

Chuck Sanborn wrote:

> Subject truck: 86 F150 w/bench seat
> Wife is 5'4"
> Her truck
> I have built "training blocks" for the clutch and she still has
> trouble reaching the damn thing. I just installed a floor
> shifter so the seat cannot go any further forward and still
> us 1st and 3rd (three speed)
> Am looking to install either bucket seats or a 64/40 seat.
> My question is (finally), what year seats will ingterchange
> to the 86? Probably kind of a no brainer question as I think
> I can probably use any seat I want but if any of you have done
> this I'm lookin for suggestions as junkyard trucks are in short
> supply out here in So. Cal.
> Thanks,
> Chuck
>
> ==========================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
> the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of the
> message.


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

From: bennettr hiwaay.net
Subject: 1995 Questions
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 06:53:18 -0500

Ok I just traded my old 87 F150 for a 1995 F150 SC 4X4 and I have a couple
of questions. This truck has a 5.0L with mass air and I was wandering if
the mass air engine also had SEFI or if it still uses bank fired injection?
Also someone mentioned a while back about being able to get factory manuals
or copies of factory manuals, the Haynes manual doesn't reference the fact
that some of these trucks came with mass air and has no electrical diagrams
for a mass air equipped truck. One last thing does anyone have any
information on checking the EEC codes on this truck, it apparently uses a
different set of codes because I got a stored code of 452 or at least that
what I think it is the 3 digit code thew me. I cleared it and it hasn't
come back but I wanted to know what it was.

Rex


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

From: "Joel Thomas" prodigy.net>
Subject: HO or NO?(351W)
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 22:10:31 -0500


I have a 1987 351W in my 1984 F-150.
it is a fuel injected engine with all fuel injected and computer parts taken off.
it has a edelbrock600,mallory ignition and distributor,K and N filter.
would this engine be an HO with the slightly proted heads or what since it was an
fuel injected engine. WAIT, i just though of something didn't the injected 351Ws not come out till later?? i know the 302 were in 84 i think but when were the windsors and would a 87 be an HO becuase this motor will fly it had an
84 351W 2V that was good but nothing like this motor. i tore that one up with water LONNNGGG southern 4wheeling story, with a thunder storm thrown in.



can anyone help my dilemma??


thanks
Joel Thomas


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

From: FLR150 aol.com
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 11:16:18 EDT
Subject: Re: 1995 Questions

In a message dated 5/19/00 7:54:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
bennettr hiwaay.net writes:

<< This truck has a 5.0L with mass air and I was wandering if
the mass air engine also had SEFI or if it still uses bank fired injection?
Also someone mentioned a while back about being able to get factory manuals
or copies of factory manuals, the Haynes manual doesn't reference the fact
that some of these trucks came with mass air and has no electrical diagrams
for a mass air equipped truck. One last thing does anyone have any
information on checking the EEC codes on this truck, it apparently uses a
different set of codes because I got a stored code of 452 or at least that
what I think it is the 3 digit code threw me. I cleared it and it hasn't
come back but I wanted to know what it was. >>

Rex,
Yes it has SEFI. I am also the one that can get you the manual on CD. Email
me off list and we'll chat. These trucks have the 3 digit codes. The 452 is a
PSOM failure. That is probably due to the fact that the person you bought it
from pulled the battery cable with the key on. Did it throw any other codes?
If not than it is a "ghost" code, as long as the truck is running good.
Later,
Wayne Foy
94 Flareside SC
1999 Fun Ford Weekend
Racing series
#2 Top Truck
Atlanta GA

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

From: Greg Carter entrust.com>
Subject: Re: Corporate Rear-End
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 11:19:33 -0400

See http://www.ford-trucks.com/articles/buildup/dana60.html

then follow the link to the rear axle.

Greg Carter
Entrust Technologies - http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.entrust.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Marv & Marge [mailto:ae722lafn.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 8:32 PM
To: 80-96-listford-trucks.com
Subject: [80-96-list] Re: Corporate Rear-End


And then said:
> I converted it to disks at the same time so never had to worry about
drums.

Wanna' tell me more? Costs? Rear ABS deletion?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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

From: "droptopgt" email.msn.com>
Subject: TEST
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 10:58:01 -0500


TEST
Craig Staggs



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

Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 16:42:17 -0400
From: Dick Hughes magi.com>
Subject: 80 Ford F250 351 M - Choke Heater - Question

Hello:

Truck is equipped with a thermostatic spring housing
which controls the choke action.

Choke plate is not opening fully.

Removed the Choke Heater. The inlet tube
to the choke had a small hole in it.

Replaced that portion of the assembly.

Question:

How is the air drawn into the choke heater
inlet tube? Is is done by vacumn? The inlet
tube of the choke heater attaches to the main
body of the carb.

I am assuming that the air is drawn into the
heater through the passageway in the body of the
carb. (Asses like u-an- me assume.)(smile)

There is a picture of the Choke Heater at
the following url:

> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://infoweb.magi.com/~tedwyn/index.html

Scroll down to "Testing Area", then scroll down
a bit further and click" "Go to Frame".

I aplogize for the screwed up text! I tried, Lord
God, I tried, but I am not too swift.

My thanks for your help.

Regards,

Dick

Please remove (spam) from my mail address to
reply directly.
--


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

From: MRStace84aol.com
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 08:18:42 EDT
Subject: 87 5.0 Oil Pan Removal

Hello List,

I'm trying to remove the oil pan on an 87 5.0 2WD without pulling the engine.
I unbolted the motor mounts, and transmission mounts and jacked the motor
and tranny up against the firewall, but I still don't seem to have enough
clearance to get the pan out. I was wanting to know if anyone else had tried
doing this with any success... or lack of success?

Thanks
Stacy Fisher
84 F150 4x4
98 Ranger XLT 4x4

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

End of 80-96-list Digest V2000 #91
**********************************
----------------------------------------------------------
Ford Truck Enthusiasts 80-96 Truck Mailing List

Send posts to 80-96-listford-trucks.com

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing
list, send an email to:

listarford-trucks.com

with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list" in the subject of
the message.

Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
----------------------------------------------------------