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.

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 V4 #6
Reply-To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-80-96-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


80-96-list-digest Saturday, January 8 2000 Volume 04 : Number 006



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980-1996 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 80-96-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re:Bad News?
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
FTE 80-96 - U-Joint Replacement
Re: FTE 80-96 - U-Joint Replacement
FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder
FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing
RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
FTE 80-96 - Fw:CNN poll
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re:Bad News?
Re: FTE 80-96 - Headers
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers
Re: FTE 80-96 - Headers
RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
FTE 80-96 - Jasper 302.FI reman. engine
FTE 80-96 - Cummins B 2 Diesel
RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder
FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: FTE 3rd Anniversary and a chance to ask Ford!
FTE 80-96 - Rear sump pan
Re: FTE 80-96 - Cummins B 2 Diesel
Re: FTE 80-96 - C***y vs Ford
Re: FTE 80-96 - power windows and doors
Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 07:26:48 -0500
From: Martin Horne optonline.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

I have BFG 33x12.5 on my '86 Full Size and the way they follow ridges is
truly frightening. Personally I think the grip is superior with the BFG - I
haven't been able to "break loose" with them.

I have tried a heavy duty steering damper. I am thinking about new rod ends
and a dual damper system. Don't know if it will help. The BFG's on my wifes
J**p like to follow grooves as well, so it may be the depth of tread as
your tech. suggested.

Any one else have any ideas?


At 12:22 PM 1/6/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I have a 95 Bronco (full size). I just put Goodyear Wrangler AT/S tires (31
>X 10.50) on it (see a sample at
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.goodyear.li/us/tires/tirecatalog/LighttTruckLighttTruckWRLATtSTL.
>html) and the handling got very squirrelly. It pulls over ridges in the
>road, it pulls sometimes when braking, and you really have to pay attention
>when driving to make sure it stays on the road. I had the front-end aligned
>with the new tires on and the toe-in was the only spec off - which they
>fixed. The technician that did the job said the only thing he can see is
>that the tires have a deep tread pattern that may cause this poor handling.
>I was also looking at the Goodrich All-Terrain T/A tires and now wish I had
>gone with those instead. But I don't really know if the problem is the tire
>or something else. Can anyone help?
>
>Thanks in advance!
>Dave
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

Martin Horne
'86 Bronco
Long Island, NY
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 07:59:26 EST
From: BanksRVA aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re:Bad News?

I don't go through much oil at all. Oil consumption is pretty normal
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 08:16:43 -0500
From: slikness mindspring.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

> Did you feel a seat of the pants (butt dyno :-))increase in low end torque??? I really want a set of these for my 351W.

Being as I swapped in my 351W for my old tired 300 I6 at the same time, I would say there was a tremendous difference!!! But, unfortunately, I do not have anything to compare on an apples to apples basis. I highly recommend them, though. They were a good choice and even CARB approved (means they would even pass California emmissions).

Sorry,

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:31:55 -0600
From: Andy Norris allenpress.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - U-Joint Replacement

I hear a warbling sort of metallic grinding sound coming from what seems to
be the rear of the truck. My Haynes manual and a search on the FTE archives
suggest that this is probably the universal joints. The manual also
instructs that removal of the drive shaft is part of the replacement
procedure. I'd like to know what particular type of U joint my truck most
likely has, and how involved is the replacement procedure ( time- and
experience-wise ). It's an '89 F250 2WD C6 SC.

I much appreciate the list for the help it provides,

Andy Norris


p.s. Les, I meant to add "Kansas" as a parenthetical note beside "North
Oz", eh... to keep confusion down :) Thanks for your reply about lubing the
chassis. I think the former owner neglecting this is a big part of why I'm
facing replacing the U joints now.

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 11:32:20 -0600 (CST)
From: DTrowbridge webtv.net (David Trowbridge)
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - U-Joint Replacement

Andy, i just changed out my u-joints about 2 weeks ago in my 85' so here
is what i did. according to the book, you are supposed to remove the
driveshaft and use a vise to remove the u-joints. the only problem with
that is you would lose some tranny fluid, and i didn't have a vise. so
what i did is got under the truck, took the pins that keep the u-joints
in place out, and with a hammer and an old socket i tapped them out. it
took some patience, and it helps if your small like me(didn't have to
jack the truck up). i did just the oppisite for installing the new
ones. this was my first u-joint replacement for me and it took about 1
1/2 hours for the front and rear one. hope this helps.......

David
85 F-150 300 I6

p.s. Les, the OZ thing didn't throw me off.

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:46:16 -0800
From: Joan and Walt Posluszny home.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder

Don't rule out a bad valve. If you added oil in all cylinders and it all
went up 10 psi like the first, it might not be your compression [at least
not totally]. You didn't mention how many miles on the engine. But could be
a bad valve, especially an exhaust valve. Walt
>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 17:12:34 EST
> From: BanksRVA aol.com
> Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re:Bad News?
[snip]
The truck is an 82 with a 300
> six in it. My results from cylinder 1 thru 6 are: 110 170 165 180 180 180.
> I put a squirt of oil in #1 and it went up about 10psi. Also, I have oil in
the
> air filter, so blowby is occurring. I am assuming that my rings are bad, at
> least
> in the #1 cylinder. Any other possible diagnosis?
[snip]

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 12:10:03 -0600
From: Andy Norris allenpress.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing

That's good news, David. I share your advantage in the "body-style"
department. Didn't have to jack the truck up at all to replace the
starter... Was hell in grade school being short (except for hide and seek,
eh); not so bad later on.

Well, after describing the problem to another fella, he suggested it's
probably not the u-joints at all, but a wheel bearing. So I've loaded
myself down for the weekend. If I'm gonna replace the wheel bearings (on
the rear), might as well replace the brake shoes while I'm at it, eh. Brake
job will probably go pretty slow, but hopefully I'll have a way to get to
work by Monday morning! Problem is, I have to get the bearings out to take
them in to O'Reilly's, as I've no idea what kind of bearings it's got in
there now. The wife loves it when I transport greasy grimy things (such as
myself) in her car.

(Bought both sizes of brake shoes, though, so I can keep one set altogether
while working on the opposite one.)

Any advice on the bearings/brakes is appreciated. Will probably get a good
look at the u-joints soon, though. This thing has 141k on it. About time to
start replacing stuff like that... my weekends are filling up pretty quick.

Thanks for your help,

Andy Norris
'89 F250 2wd 351

At 11:32 AM 1-7-2000 -0600, you wrote:
>Andy, i just changed out my u-joints about 2 weeks ago in my 85' so here
>is what i did....



>it took some patience, and it helps if your small like me(didn't have to
>jack the truck up).

...

> took about 1 1/2 hours for the front and rear one. hope this helps.......
>
>David
>85 F-150 300 I6
>
>p.s. Les, the OZ thing didn't throw me off.

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 13:43:43 -0500
From: "Chapman, David P" unisys.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

Thanks to Martin, Brad, and Lingus0169 aol.com for responding. It sounds
like I'm not alone and that for some reason, this problem is not all that
unusual. I was going to return the tires (if possible) or sell them and go
with the BFG's. But some of you noted the same problem with those. So now
I think I'll try and pursue the mechanical aspects of improving the
steering. In all honesty, the problem did exist to a small degree when the
truck had smaller tires on it. We just ignored it because it wasn't too
bad. But I suppose the bigger tires just made the problem worse.

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: Martin Horne [mailto:flatspin optonline.net]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 7:27 AM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires


I have BFG 33x12.5 on my '86 Full Size and the way they follow ridges is
truly frightening. Personally I think the grip is superior with the BFG - I
haven't been able to "break loose" with them.

I have tried a heavy duty steering damper. I am thinking about new rod ends
and a dual damper system. Don't know if it will help. The BFG's on my wifes
J**p like to follow grooves as well, so it may be the depth of tread as
your tech. suggested.

Any one else have any ideas?


At 12:22 PM 1/6/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I have a 95 Bronco (full size). I just put Goodyear Wrangler AT/S tires
(31
>X 10.50) on it (see a sample at
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.goodyear.li/us/tires/tirecatalog/LighttTruckLighttTruckWRLATtSTL
.
>html) and the handling got very squirrelly. It pulls over ridges in the
>road, it pulls sometimes when braking, and you really have to pay attention
>when driving to make sure it stays on the road. I had the front-end
aligned
>with the new tires on and the toe-in was the only spec off - which they
>fixed. The technician that did the job said the only thing he can see is
>that the tires have a deep tread pattern that may cause this poor handling.
>I was also looking at the Goodrich All-Terrain T/A tires and now wish I had
>gone with those instead. But I don't really know if the problem is the
tire
>or something else. Can anyone help?
>
>Thanks in advance!
>Dave
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

Martin Horne
'86 Bronco
Long Island, NY
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 14:00:48 -0500
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

Chapman, David P wrote:
>
> Thanks to Martin, Brad, and Lingus0169 aol.com for responding. It sounds
> like I'm not alone and that for some reason, this problem is not all that
> unusual. I was going to return the tires (if possible) or sell them and go
> with the BFG's. But some of you noted the same problem with those. So now
> I think I'll try and pursue the mechanical aspects of improving the
> steering. In all honesty, the problem did exist to a small degree when the
> truck had smaller tires on it. We just ignored it because it wasn't too
> bad. But I suppose the bigger tires just made the problem worse.
>

Have you guys tried the superunner steering. My friend had it on his
80 bronc with 6" lift and 36 swamper radials. Tracked/road very well. I
was very impressed with it. Might want to consider it it you have tried
all the normnal stuff.

Also, might want to swap out those caster/camber bushings and get as
much caster as you can get. Definately helps with straight line
stability.

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 14:29:37 -0500
From: "Chapman, David P" unisys.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

What is the superunner steering? And what exactly is caster in the
steering? Is there somewhere can I find out more about alignment so I can
attack this with some knowledge?

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: luxjo thecore.com [mailto:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 2:01 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires


Chapman, David P wrote:
>
> Thanks to Martin, Brad, and Lingus0169 aol.com for responding. It sounds
> like I'm not alone and that for some reason, this problem is not all that
> unusual. I was going to return the tires (if possible) or sell them and
go
> with the BFG's. But some of you noted the same problem with those. So
now
> I think I'll try and pursue the mechanical aspects of improving the
> steering. In all honesty, the problem did exist to a small degree when
the
> truck had smaller tires on it. We just ignored it because it wasn't too
> bad. But I suppose the bigger tires just made the problem worse.
>

Have you guys tried the superunner steering. My friend had it on his
80 bronc with 6" lift and 36 swamper radials. Tracked/road very well. I
was very impressed with it. Might want to consider it it you have tried
all the normnal stuff.

Also, might want to swap out those caster/camber bushings and get as
much caster as you can get. Definately helps with straight line
stability.

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 15:11:04 EST
From: Lingus0169 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

slik, about how much did they cost..if u dont mind telling me...i am also
swapping a 82 351w for my retired 85 300 i6...and i waouold like to put
headers on before i put the engine in. make it a lot easier.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 14:07:37 -0600
From: Mark E Reimers juno.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Fw:CNN poll

Guys, the paragraph after my sig is from My Early Bronco Mailing List. I
know many of you have 4x4s and I'm sure you enjoy the outdoors. Please
check this out.

- - Mark Reimers KB9ODG
'66 Bronco 170 I-6, 3-speed, 3.5" suspension lift, 3" body lift, 35"
tires ...
'87 F-150 XLT 4x2 300 I-6, 4-speed, two working fuel tanks!(finally)

- --Forwarded message--

I forgot to add that if anyone is on any other off road
list's they might post this poll location. Lets nail em' on
this one. It's down this pager http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.cnn.com/NATURE/
on the right hand side.

Roger





________________________________________________________________




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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 15:35:24 -0500
From: slikness mindspring.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

They ran about $320 if memory serves me right. But don't bother putting them on before you drop the engine in. It just won't wedge in between the firewall and the frame mounts. (Ask me how I know!!) Put the engine in first, then bring the headers up from the bottom, behind the wheel and they'll go right in. It looks like they would drop in from the top, but it works a lot better coming from the bottom. (That's where shorty headers work out nice.)

Slik

> slik, about how much did they cost..if u dont mind telling me...i am also swapping a 82 351w for my retired 85 300 i6...and i waouold like to put headers on before i put the engine in. make it a lot easier.

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:05:32 EST
From: Lingus0169 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

ok..well that is out of my price range right now.....but i want to make sure
that you did not have to hammer anything to make them fit. I was looking for
headers around $120 or less... that's all i have to spend right now
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:12:09 EST
From: BanksRVA aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder

Walt, the truck has 105,000 on it. Would a bad valve cause blowby at all?
Joe 82 F100
300 I6
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:12:49 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki little-mountain.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re:Bad News?

>I don't go through much oil at all. Oil consumption is pretty normal

If you pull the pcv valve out while the engine is running, does it belch
blowby gasses out in significant volume?


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: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:38:56 -0500
From: Blake Malkamaki little-mountain.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Headers

>how much did your headman headers cost...if i may ask, and were they
>shorties, or full length?

If you live in an area with lots of salt, most of the cheapie headers will
only last a couple years.


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: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 16:45:58 -0500
From: slikness mindspring.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

> ok..well that is out of my price range right now.....but i want to make sure that you did not have to hammer anything to make them fit. I was looking for headers around $120 or less... that's all i have to spend right now

Well, you get what you pay for. And at $120, you're probably going to get exhaust leak problems and early replacement. But I understand. Also, with your swap, make sure your oil pan is a rear sump pan.

Slik

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:53:09 EST
From: Lingus0169 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 -Thorley Headers

what do you mean by a rear sump pan...???
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 17:38:29 -0500
From: john w koinski juno.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Headers

On Wed, 5 Jan 2000 22:08:16 EST Lingus0169 aol.com writes:
>well i am going to run dual exhuast throughout, and ill probably have
>cats..im just looking for an exhuast thats laud outside..but quiet
>inside...gotta hear what the lady says..and the music
>nick
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
>http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

A little advice:
I think ladies are on your mind a little too much. Make sure you think
with your other head, the one your supposed to think with. That way
you'll stay out of trouble.

________________________________________________________________




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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 19:25:23 -0400
From: "Brad Watts" nbnet.nb.ca>
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

Now, I'm not an alignment guy but here is my explanation of camber, caster
and toe.

The camber is how much the tire leans in or out. I.e. At 0 camber, the tires
would set flat on the road. Normally, there is a crown in the road that can
cause your truck to pull to the ditch so the camber is adjusted opposite the
crown on the right side tire to compensate. The further north you go, the
more the crown in the road for water run off. (helps prevent ice on the
roads) This means that a good alignment guy will increase the camber in
Canada.

The caster is the alignment of the ball joints over one-another. At 0
caster, the ball joints are aligned. This has the effect of the truck wheel
NOT trying to return to the straight position after turning a corner. I.e.
If you were to let go of the wheel 1/2 way around a corner, the truck would
continue to turn. When you have positive caster, the upper ball joint is
moved behind the bottom one (like the front forks of a bicycle). This has
the effect of the wheel always trying to return to the straight position.
(this is the adjustment I had done on mine, to make it more positive).

The toe is sometimes over looked when working with over sized tires. The toe
is how much the tires are turned in or out. I.e. / \ is towed in and \ / is
towed out and | | is 0 toe. The problem with oversized tires is that they
have more drag than smaller ones so, if the toe is set a 0, they will move
slightly towed out when you're rolling down the road due to this extra drag.
A towed out truck will follow every little crevice and crown in the road.
The idea is to toe them in slightly to compensate for this effect. Bad toe
and low caster can cause similar effects.

What the alignment guy has to realize is that the specs for your alignment
are for a stock truck! And yours is no longer stock. A good alignment guy
will have a "feel" for what it will take to make your truck ride properly
and would never use stock specs on a non stock truck (in my opinion).

Anyway, I hope this helps.

PS: I also had a problem with pulling to the right because of a lifted front
end made it impossible to get the proper camber. (common with TTB front
ends.) The fix was to increase the right side caster to compensate for the
pull. In other words, my alignment is no where's close to stock but it
drives like a stock truck!


Brad Watts / AMT
E-mail wattsb nbnet.nb.ca
Web www.amt.nb.ca


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com] On Behalf Of Chapman, David P
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 3:30 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

What is the superunner steering? And what exactly is caster in the
steering? Is there somewhere can I find out more about alignment so I can
attack this with some knowledge?

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: luxjo thecore.com [mailto:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 2:01 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires


Chapman, David P wrote:
>
> Thanks to Martin, Brad, and Lingus0169 aol.com for responding. It sounds
> like I'm not alone and that for some reason, this problem is not all that
> unusual. I was going to return the tires (if possible) or sell them and
go
> with the BFG's. But some of you noted the same problem with those. So
now
> I think I'll try and pursue the mechanical aspects of improving the
> steering. In all honesty, the problem did exist to a small degree when
the
> truck had smaller tires on it. We just ignored it because it wasn't too
> bad. But I suppose the bigger tires just made the problem worse.
>

Have you guys tried the superunner steering. My friend had it on his
80 bronc with 6" lift and 36 swamper radials. Tracked/road very well. I
was very impressed with it. Might want to consider it it you have tried
all the normnal stuff.

Also, might want to swap out those caster/camber bushings and get as
much caster as you can get. Definately helps with straight line
stability.

OX
== 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

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 19:24:40 EST
From: Spruce1495 aol.com
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Jasper 302.FI reman. engine

To all,
Just a note to say I'm pretty satisfied with the performance of this
new engine. We had a problem in the beginning, but it turned out to be the
existing TPS sensor. I had no idea how much that unit controls so many other
things under the hood.

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 18:47:07 -0600
From: Tom Wiggins earthlink.net>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Cummins B 2 Diesel

Hey Blake, Are these cummins engines used in something other than Dodge
trucks? Are they turbos?

Thanks Tom Wiggins

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 19:53:05 -0500
From: "Chapman, David P" unisys.com>
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

Thanks for the explanation Brad! I'm going to check into the alignment and
see what can be done. I have the specs from the last alignment, so I'll see
if I can make any sense of them.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Brad Watts [mailto:wattsb nbnet.nb.ca]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 6:25 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires


Now, I'm not an alignment guy but here is my explanation of camber, caster
and toe.

The camber is how much the tire leans in or out. I.e. At 0 camber, the tires
would set flat on the road. Normally, there is a crown in the road that can
cause your truck to pull to the ditch so the camber is adjusted opposite the
crown on the right side tire to compensate. The further north you go, the
more the crown in the road for water run off. (helps prevent ice on the
roads) This means that a good alignment guy will increase the camber in
Canada.

The caster is the alignment of the ball joints over one-another. At 0
caster, the ball joints are aligned. This has the effect of the truck wheel
NOT trying to return to the straight position after turning a corner. I.e.
If you were to let go of the wheel 1/2 way around a corner, the truck would
continue to turn. When you have positive caster, the upper ball joint is
moved behind the bottom one (like the front forks of a bicycle). This has
the effect of the wheel always trying to return to the straight position.
(this is the adjustment I had done on mine, to make it more positive).

The toe is sometimes over looked when working with over sized tires. The toe
is how much the tires are turned in or out. I.e. / \ is towed in and \ / is
towed out and | | is 0 toe. The problem with oversized tires is that they
have more drag than smaller ones so, if the toe is set a 0, they will move
slightly towed out when you're rolling down the road due to this extra drag.
A towed out truck will follow every little crevice and crown in the road.
The idea is to toe them in slightly to compensate for this effect. Bad toe
and low caster can cause similar effects.

What the alignment guy has to realize is that the specs for your alignment
are for a stock truck! And yours is no longer stock. A good alignment guy
will have a "feel" for what it will take to make your truck ride properly
and would never use stock specs on a non stock truck (in my opinion).

Anyway, I hope this helps.

PS: I also had a problem with pulling to the right because of a lifted front
end made it impossible to get the proper camber. (common with TTB front
ends.) The fix was to increase the right side caster to compensate for the
pull. In other words, my alignment is no where's close to stock but it
drives like a stock truck!


Brad Watts / AMT
E-mail wattsb nbnet.nb.ca
Web www.amt.nb.ca


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-80-96-list ford-trucks.com] On Behalf Of Chapman, David P
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 3:30 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires

What is the superunner steering? And what exactly is caster in the
steering? Is there somewhere can I find out more about alignment so I can
attack this with some knowledge?

Dave

- -----Original Message-----
From: luxjo thecore.com [mailto:luxjo thecore.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 2:01 PM
To: 80-96-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Help With Tires


Chapman, David P wrote:
>
> Thanks to Martin, Brad, and Lingus0169 aol.com for responding. It sounds
> like I'm not alone and that for some reason, this problem is not all that
> unusual. I was going to return the tires (if possible) or sell them and
go
> with the BFG's. But some of you noted the same problem with those. So
now
> I think I'll try and pursue the mechanical aspects of improving the
> steering. In all honesty, the problem did exist to a small degree when
the
> truck had smaller tires on it. We just ignored it because it wasn't too
> bad. But I suppose the bigger tires just made the problem worse.
>

Have you guys tried the superunner steering. My friend had it on his
80 bronc with 6" lift and 36 swamper radials. Tracked/road very well. I
was very impressed with it. Might want to consider it it you have tried
all the normnal stuff.

Also, might want to swap out those caster/camber bushings and get as
much caster as you can get. Definately helps with straight line
stability.

OX
== 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

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 20:59:51 -0600
From: Jim Cannon gtalumni.org>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing

Andy-
Rear bearings are not a trivial job. They don't fail that often either,
though, so I would not jump right in there and start replacing them until
you know for sure.

At 12:10 07/01/00 -0600, Andy wrote:
>Well, after describing the problem to another fella, he suggested it's
>probably not the u-joints at all, but a wheel bearing. So I've loaded
>myself down for the weekend. If I'm gonna replace the wheel bearings (on
>the rear), might as well replace the brake shoes while I'm at it, eh. Brake
>job will probably go pretty slow, but hopefully I'll have a way to get to
>work by Monday morning! Problem is, I have to get the bearings out to take
>them in to O'Reilly's, as I've no idea what kind of bearings it's got in
>there now. The wife loves it when I transport greasy grimy things (such as
>myself) in her car.
>
>(Bought both sizes of brake shoes, though, so I can keep one set altogether
>while working on the opposite one.)
>
>Any advice on the bearings/brakes is appreciated. Will probably get a good
>look at the u-joints soon, though. This thing has 141k on it. About time to
>start replacing stuff like that... my weekends are filling up pretty quick.

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: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 20:45:25 -0600
From: Jim Cannon gtalumni.org>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: 300 w/a bad cylinder

I agree with Walt.

At 09:46 07/01/00 -0800, you wrote:
>Don't rule out a bad valve. If you added oil in all cylinders and it all
>went up 10 psi like the first, it might not be your compression [at least
>not totally]. You didn't mention how many miles on the engine. But could be
>a bad valve, especially an exhaust valve. Walt

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: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 22:44:13 -0500
From: Ken Payne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - ADMIN: FTE 3rd Anniversary and a chance to ask Ford!

FTE will soon be celebrating its 3rd Anniversary as a web site.
(It was just a mailing list prior to that).

We have several things planned for this. Among them is an
opportunity for you, the FTE user, to have your questions
answered by Bob Masone, F150 Product Manger for Ford Motor
Company!

Post the question(s) you would like to have asked, and we'll
hash them out here. I'm going to present 5-10 questions to
Bob in an interview and post the transcripts on the web site
and to the mailing lists.

There are a few minor guidelines....

1. No questions about unannounced future products.
2. Keep in mind that this isn't a mechanic's chit-chat.
3. It may be best to use this as an opportunity to discuss
Ford's involvement with the enthusiast community.

Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 23:01:53 -0500
From: "slik" mindspring.com>
Subject: FTE 80-96 - Rear sump pan

> what do you mean by a rear sump pan...???
Most Ford engines, because the distributor is in the front of the engine,
have the sump or hump of the pan on the front. The oil pump sits in the oil
pan directly below the distributor (it's driven off the distributor shaft)
and requires only a short pickup tube in the front. The front sump works
great for most cars, but, the trucks have a cross member across the front
that doesn't allow the use of a front sump pan on the '80s and newer trucks.
The solution is a fox-body rear sump (sometimes called a double sump because
of the appearance of a sump in front that houses the oil pump) with a long
pickup tube. You can get them from Jegs, Summitt, Ford Motorsports, or PAW.
The entire kit will run about $130 for the new pan, pickup tube, and main
bolt to attach the tube.

Slik

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

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

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 20:40:46 -0800
From: "Pinson" speakeasy.org>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Cummins B 2 Diesel

They are commonly used in large generators and such. As far as I know, they
are all turbo versions, but they come in different Horse Power ratings.
I suggest looking for the 230HP version. Complete kits are available from
Cummins Northwest and they start about $8000.00 . Installation is also
available but it is expensive.

Britt Pinson
pinson speakeasy.org


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

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

Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 17:29:00 +1100
From: les williams cyber.net.au>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - C***y vs Ford

Hi Bill,
I appreciate you reply, and although it doesn't make your decision any easier, ALL
of the trucks listed below, even if the motor is shot, would be worth a min. 45k and
Up, on the road, down under. It's always amazed me how the odometer, regardless of
what it may have been in the USA, will start at about 20,000 on the road in OZ.

If you have a few spare moments, visit www.tradingpost.com.au -and go to trucks
and look at the prices we are hit down here.


regards
Les
Lost in the Land of OZ

Bill G wrote:

> '96 Cheyenne 1500 w/50K miles $11k; '94 F-250 w/125k miles $7k; '94 GMC 2500
> 6.5L w/64k $ 10k.
>
> les williams wrote:
>
> > Hi Bill,
> > I note with interest, it was 'She' who found the C***Y. After some of the
> > comments that have preceded me, I guess you are now going to have to take
> > her aside for a little 're-education' concerning her, and the horses' future
> > mode of transport. ;-))
> > OK jokes aside, would you be offended if I inquired how much money was
> > involved ?
> > Purchase price of the C***y ? Purchase price of the F250 ?
> >
> > Regards
> > Les
> > Lost in the Land of OZ
> >
> > "a b" wrote:
> >
> > > My wife's F-150 didn't make the millennial change-over I think due to a
> > > rod not being Y2k compatible. Anyhow, she has found a '96 C***y 1500
> > > with 350 5speed and 3:42 rear, as well as '94 125k mile F-250 diesel.
> > > I'm trying to figure out if the C***y will pull her horse/trailer at
> > > 2500lbs and can't remember what the rear ratio was in the F-150 (3:73
> > > maybe), and/or trying to find out what the final ratios are for the
> > > F-150 vs 1500. Somebody posted a link for ratio info once. I'm kinda
> > > leery of the F-250 'cause of the miles. Somebody once told me they last
> > > forever. I know the suspension would be better, but she puts probably
> > > 35k a year on a vehicle so it wouldn't be long till it was up to where
> > > the F-150 gave up (230,000). Which truck would you get?
> > > thanks,
> > > Bill
> > >
> > > == 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
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 22:33:57 PST
From: "Jared Templin" hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - power windows and doors

Well whoever asked about the power window and door lock conversion it is
your lucky day. I just got done doing this conversion on my 1981 Bronco and
did this writeup for the BigBroncos list. Keep in mind some of this was in
response to other people's questions.

I actually had to get the whole wiring harness and everything. There don't
seem to be many extra wires already there for accessories at least on my
Bronco.

I got all the stuff I needed from a wrecking yard..there are pretty good
wrecking yards that I have access to for the size of the area. What I did
was got the gray interior door panels from a 1990 or so Bronco that were
already setup for the openings for the power window and lock switches. I
also got the door latch assembly with all the rods etc. going to it...I
don't think this would normally be needed for the conversion, but I had to
convert from the crappy slide type lock setup (used on a limited basis in
about 80-82 models) to the lock rods that protrude from the top of the door.
The doors were already drilled for the rods to come through though. There
is a slight difference in the way the lock rod attaches to the latch that
necessitates using the new door latch. I also got the door lock actuaters
(power lock/unlock setup) and door harnesses from an 87-91 style Bronco. I
got a crossover harness from a Bronco of the same vintage. This is a big
wire harness that goes across over the dash and has plugs that hook into
each door harness. It also has a power wire for the locks and one for the
windows coming from it. These need to be wired into the factory locations
in the fuse block, but it should already be setup to do this. If I remember
correctly the power door lock switch power is wired to the same as the key
cylinder for the rear window so you can lock/unlock with the ignition off.
The power windows pull power from a seperate circuit that should be shown in
the owners manual. Besides this just plug all the connectors together and
hook up the respective grounds to a grounding point. It is pretty easy to
run the wiring as it is all in a prewired harness. There was already a hole
in the side of the door near the bottom that the door lock actuator mounts
to. I used a 1/4 bolt with lock nut here as well as to mount the power
window motors. The factory uses rivets, but they can be replaced by the
bolts. I then unbolted the manual window crank mechanism and bolted the
window motor in its place (be sure to support the window while you do this)
The motor mounted sideways as opposed to the manual crank that was upright,
but it still lined up with factory drilled holes at least in my door. If
not you can always drill a couple of new holes as long as you keep the arm
to the window in the correct arc. I actually used motors out of a 94 Bronco
or F150, but many years would probably work. I also need to move the
armrest supports back slightly for support on the 87-91 panels vs. the 80-86
panels, but this only require measuring and drilling a couple of holes as
wells as making a metal bar to mount the bottom of the armrest support
bracket to. If you get the mounting brackets used on newer models the may
work easier (I didn't think about needing these at the time).

Overall I didn't think it was all that difficult of a swap...I guess that
depends on your experience, but there really wasn't much fabricating or
anything involved. The important part is to try to get all the parts,
harnesses, motors, panels etc. together and make sure they will be
compatible. I got all of the stuff at once and I think it was a lot easier
this way. It ended up costing me about $175 or so for all of the hardware,
but this could vary a lot. Also note that the motors I got were pretty new
and were a majority of the cost and most people probably wouldn't need the
new door latch assembly if they don't have to convert to the newer style
locks.

Jared



snip---

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 08:22:02 -0500
From: "Mark F. Burgo" surfshop.net>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - power windows and doors

Kits are available from JC Whitney. I used them once, took a little while
to
get everything installed and working properly but all went pretty smooth...


Mark

______________________________________________________

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

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

Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 21:17:37 +1100
From: les williams cyber.net.au>
Subject: Re: FTE 80-96 - Re: U-Joint Replacement / wheel bearing

Hi Andy,
The uni joints replacement will be a 'walk in the park', compared to rear wheel
bearings. Being an F250, it's more likely to be Dana rear end, so proceed with
caution and I hope your manual has some very clear exploded diagrams of the
territory into which you are about to venture.

Check the Uni's first.
Before you remove, use a crayon or chalk and mark the flanges so you can replace
in the same place. Undo 4 nuts and it's out, no more than 5 mins tops. Not unless
the 'Better Half' is serving a 3 course meal under there as well! ;-))
Since you have indicated you have no need to lift the truck to do a lot of
things, this is no exception. It will be far easier to park and chock the truck,
front pointing down hill. When you remove the tailshaft, 'Park' or '1st gear'
don't work real good. When you pull the slip yoke out of the back of the trans,
oil loss will be a minimum. Have a catch tray ready.
This next part is a problem to me, cause how do you describe in a few words 20
yrs of experience.
The easy part is if they fall apart in a cloud of red dust and crap then you know
there buggered.
....


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.