|
|
Return-Path: Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:50:23 -0600 (MDT) From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest To: fordtrucks80up-digest Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #158 Reply-To: fordtrucks80up Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest fordtrucks80up-digest Saturday, October 11 1997 Volume 01 : Number 158 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 And Newer Trucks Digest Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: fordtrucks80up-digest-request with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: Gasoline odor when cold ["J. Scott Gaines" ] ADMIN: Missing 155 and 156 digests [Ken Payne ] Re: Trans Command [Jim Lujan ] OUCH ["Stephen M. Brown" ] Re: OUCH [Ken Payne ] Re: OUCH [Thom Cheney ] ADMIN: Does anyone have digests 155 or 156 [Ken Payne need more power! [JOUZA1 Four Speed Trans. [abbott ] fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #155 [zeb F-250 Build time?? [JJ/RAE ] The 99 F-250,350,450 and 550 [FOMOCONUT Overheating! [burl Re: Overheating! [zeb Re: Overheating! [burl ======================================================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:54:08 -0400 From: "J. Scott Gaines" Subject: Gasoline odor when cold HELP! Now that the mornings are getting cooler, I have noticed a strong gasoline odor coming from my '89 Bronco II during the first few minutes of driving when it's cool (below 70 - this is cool for mid-Florida) outside. It seems to go away once she's warmed up, but it's pretty strong for a while. My only thought was a bad vapor cannister - does anyone know if this could cause the smell. I believe this model has an electric fuel pump, or I would suspect a bad mechanical one. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, J. Scott Gaines 1989 Bronco II 4WD 103,000 miles. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:47:48 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: ADMIN: Missing 155 and 156 digests Esosoft's mail server suffered a drive crash yesterday and their system went down for a couple of hours while they replaced the drive. Two digests to this list were not delivered as a result of this. I've contacted them about it and hopefully they'll be able to send them out. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:15:18 -0600 From: Jim Lujan Subject: Re: Trans Command To my knowledge the TransCommand does *not* change the shift points. What it does do is alter the input for the clutch pressure. Consequently, the pressure increases when the tranny does shift under load. The result is a quicker (firmer) shift. Take a look at the following info at Diesel Injection Services (great prices BTW). http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dieselpage.com/transcmd.htm -Jim- '97 F-350 PS 4x4 CCab LB (Banks Stage II enhanced) >Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:09:21 -0400 >From: "Mike Jones" >Subject: Trans Command > >Recently, I've seen postings related to how well the Trans Command (and the >other one on the market, which name escapes me) works. This really piqued >my interest, since I HATE the way my Expedition (5.4L w/E40D) shifts at >full throttle. One question: Does the Trans Command (or the other one) >raise the full-throttle shift points? As it is now, full-throttle shifts >are at 4500 rpms. Silly. That wonderful OHC engine, and it shifts like a >clapped out '77 LTD. > >Thanks, Mike J. > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 12:05:08 -0500 From: "Stephen M. Brown" Subject: OUCH Well, I just rode in a 5.7 vortec C***Y tow truck (don't ask me why...I am still smokin' mad at a certain person who cut me off). Anyway...That vortec engine is awesome. Ford has missed out with its OHC 4.6 and 5.4. Those c***y's are putting out TONS of low end hp and torque, and the new Fords are like twinkie eatin', ballet shoe wearin', tortoise chasin' excuses for trucks at low RPM. The vortec 454 is supposed to be even MORE powerful. I wish FORD had put a little more thought into what people use trucks for. Plus the C***Y transmission (700-R4, i think) has a much better reputation in work truck circles than the E4OD. Oh well, I'll just stick with the OLD SCHOOL 5.8 Bronco til FORD gets its act together. Still haven't seen the stats on the V-10 OHC. Can't imagine that it's gonna get good mileage, even if it does put some decent low end torque down. Geez. It used to be that you could get good performance outta the FORD motors & with some work, get awesome performance (and end up with a cost similar to a stock C***Y), but now you pay just as much (sometimes more) and get less. It hurts. I love my truck. Even if it looks like its meeting with a C***Y corsica wasn't mutually beneficial. I'm gonna write a letter. steve ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:46:17 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: OUCH At 12:05 PM 10/10/97 -0500, you wrote: >Well, I just rode in a 5.7 vortec C***Y tow truck (don't ask me why...I am >still smokin' mad at a certain person who cut me off). >Anyway...That vortec engine is awesome. Ford has missed out with its OHC >4.6 and 5.4. Those c***y's are putting out TONS of low end hp and torque, >and the new Fords are like twinkie eatin', ballet shoe wearin', tortoise >chasin' excuses for trucks at low RPM. >The vortec 454 is supposed to be even MORE powerful. I wish FORD had put a >little more thought into what people use trucks for. Plus the C***Y >transmission (700-R4, i think) has a much better reputation in work truck >circles than the E4OD. >Oh well, I'll just stick with the OLD SCHOOL 5.8 Bronco til FORD gets its >act together. Still haven't seen the stats on the V-10 OHC. Can't imagine >that it's gonna get good mileage, even if it does put some decent low end >torque down. >Geez. It used to be that you could get good performance outta the FORD >motors & with some work, get awesome performance (and end up with a cost >similar to a stock C***Y), but now you pay just as much (sometimes more) >and get less. >It hurts. I love my truck. Even if it looks like its meeting with a C***Y >corsica wasn't mutually beneficial. > >I'm gonna write a letter. > >steve Some personal observations.... While Ch*vy does seem to put out more HP in some of their stock engines the vehicles are poorly put together overall. Stock C*maros generally beat stock Mustangs, but they also have a reputation for becoming rattle cages within a year. Everytime I get into a Ch*vy (I try to avoid it!) or look under the hood I always walk away with one thought: GM has cornered the market on cheap fasteners and workers who show up drunk.... Pull away interior door panels are a GM speciality. Along with missing weld points. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 13:11:05 -0500 From: Thom Cheney Subject: Re: OUCH > > Some personal observations.... > > While Ch*vy does seem to put out more HP in some of their > stock engines the vehicles are poorly put together overall. > Stock C*maros generally beat stock Mustangs, but they also > have a reputation for becoming rattle cages within a year. > > Everytime I get into a Ch*vy (I try to avoid it!) or look > under the hood I always walk away with one thought: > > GM has cornered the market on cheap fasteners and workers > who show up drunk.... > > Pull away interior door panels are a GM speciality. Along > with missing weld points. Well put. I am absolutely not brand loyal. I buy the best brand for my money. I too considered the Ch*vy because of the 190 hp vortec motor. I was not impressed with the build quality or even the design of the truck. My last Ch*v had problems ON THE WAY HOME FROM BUYING IT AT THE DEALER!!!! not only that, it took 3 trips back to fix it. I bought Hondas & Toyotas for the next 3 vehicles I purchased!!!!! Crossing my fingers til they are Ford Blue, TC ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:44:50 -0400 From: Ken Payne Subject: ADMIN: Does anyone have digests 155 or 156 If you go either of these two, please forward a copy to me for our archives. The server crashed and I didn't get copies (they're distributed in alphabetical order). kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 17:35:58 -0400 (EDT) From: JOUZA1 Subject: need more power! I am a 18 year old college student with a 93 Ranger. It has the 4.0 and 5 speed trans. I am looking for some power upgrades in the 300-400 dollar range. They have to be boltons. Somthing local mechanics can put on or easier. I already have a K&N and Hypertech Power Module. I am saving to put true duals on. Other than those few options what else could I purchase? I am looking for a total of around 300 horspower when all done. Thanks for all your time to those who reply. Sincerly Josh Jouza ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:29:50 -0700 From: abbott Subject: Four Speed Trans. After 1980 FORD still used a four speed manual until about 93. I think that is a T-18/NP435 for the early ones and a T-19 for the later rigs. What can be said about the T-19, is it like the Np435 (no first syncro)? This mailing list has been great. A big thanks goes out to everyone. - -Tyler- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:34:42 -0600 (MDT) From: zeb Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #155 Hi Ken, Here is 155, I could go thru my mail and compile 156 if you want. Zeb ================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 03:50:23 -0600 (MDT) From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest To: fordtrucks80up-digest Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #155 Reply-To: fordtrucks80up Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest fordtrucks80up-digest Thursday, October 9 1997 Volume 01 : Number 155 ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 And Newer Trucks Digest Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe, send email to: fordtrucks80up-digest-request with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the message. ======================================================================= In this issue: Re: F350 general questions [alanh Re: Limited Slip Stuff... [PhilDyson 1988 FLOOR MATS [Rich Lobrovich ] Re: F350 general questions ["Ryan Penner" ] Re: A Tale Of Rusty Trucks [Ducks4jim Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #153 [Randy Kindler ] Re: 1988 FLOOR MATS [Midwest96 Re: K&N KIT FOR 4.0L 93 RANGER ["Jerry Dean" ] Re: Limited Slip Stuff... [Calvin Ford ] Re: Mazda B4000 ["Jim Bielecki" ] ADMIN: Sticker design ready, now goes to press. [Ken Payne Re: 98 Rangers...and then some ["Jim Bielecki" Price? [Dinga15 Re: Price? [helotie Re: Price? [Todd Metzger ] resetting odometer [Michael Ruth ] Re: vanir throttle body [KSMIKE Power Stroke Defined [Ken Miller ] E4OD automatic transmission ["Harold P. Balitski" ======================================================================= - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 15:12:13 -0700 From: alanh Subject: Re: F350 general questions > I've been watching the mailing list archives for a while, but decided > I'd have to actually post to find answers to some of my VERY-NOVICE > questions. Please gimmie a hand! I need to pull a 40' 5th, and my > toyota just ain't gonna cut it. How much would you expect a trailer > like this to weigh? That's hard to say; definitely over 10,000 lb, and somewhere between there and 20,000 lb depending on a lot of factors. > I'm looking in the 1988 to 92 range, because I understand 88 is when the > Powerstroke 7.3 was introduced, right? Actually I think '88 is when the Navistar engine went from 6.9L up to 7.3L. The Powerstroke didn't happen until '94 or so. Between then there was a "pseudo-Powerstroke" which was a non-turbo version, but it was only offered until the Powerstroke came up. > I'd prefer a crew cab, which means I'm looking at an F350 no matter what > (in that year range), right? Right; I don't think Ford made the Crew Cab available in the F250 line. > My questions are: when people are talking about axles, what does HD mean? > Is this the abbv. for a solid axle, rather than an "independant suspension" > type axle? Do all F350s have a solid axle? And for the 4x4 models, were > manually locking hubs available / standard? I think all F350's came with full floating rear axles; the front was either a live axle for 4WD or twin I beam for 2WD. I'm not sure what is meant by HD, but it's probably Heavy Duty. > Also, I'd prefer not to get the "doolie" type setup. But this increases > my towing weight capacity, right? By how much? Actually, the duallie option will lower the towing capacity, by the weight of the extra wheels. And duallies weren't available with 4WD anyway. > Another: I've owned diesels before, and love them! the 7.3 Power Stroke > is a must. Do they all have turbo, or was that an option? And I've heard > nightmare stories about cavitation. Is there a way to test for this? > What are good things to look at when considering purchasing a ford with > the navistar engine? Well, there was a period of about 2 years when a non-turbo "Powerstroke" was available, but once Navistar released the real thing, that's all that was available. For the '99 models, they're adding an aftercooler. Cavitation doesn't need to be a nightmare. If the owner did his job right and kept the wetting agent in the coolant, then cavitation erosion won't be a problem. To check for that, you can get test materials from Navistar which are similar to litmus paper. So long as the concentration of wetting agent is correct, then there shouldn't be a problem. > And: if I tow a 5th, I assume I'll want the "towing package" additions? > What are those? Just a larger radiator, or is it something more? The towing package I think is just the wiring pigtails. The F350 already has the big cooling system and stuff. Someone more knowledgeable will be able to jump in here. Alan Hepburn | | National Semiconductor | DON'T TREAD ON ME | Santa Clara, Ca | | alanh - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 18:43:58 -0400 (EDT) From: PhilDyson Subject: Re: Limited Slip Stuff... In a message dated 97-10-08 11:29:46 Pianofxr Vincitore) wrote: >Wait a minute... I thought a limited slip rear would move power to the >wheel with traction ESPECIALLY when one wheel was stuck. Would'nt that be >the whole point? If it does'nt then I won't be investing in a changeover. >Can anyone clarify this? Is the Detroit locker type the only kind that will >do this? What are the disadvantages of something like that? I guess there >is alot of misconceptions out there ( or maybe just here)! >Thanks, >Andrew >92 F-250 2WD Piano truck There is a limit to the amount of power that a limited slip diff. can move over to the wheel with the greatest traction. I can't remeber what it is but it is different from the posi-track units. The detroit locker is niether, it mechanically connects the wheels like a spool so that one wheel can't turn without the other. It will only disconnect a wheel when going around a corner, when the outside wheel takes the longer path and spins faster than the inner wheel. The over-running wheel unlocks from the drive train and makes a clicking noise untill the inner wheel catches up with it. Here is the problem, when coming out of a turn the outer wheel is still unlocked, when power is applied it only goes to the inner wheel and the vehicle will pull to the outside untill the over-running wheel locks back in, sometime violently. This undesireable "steering" effect is more pronounced in a short wheel base truck. I had to take it out of my full size Bronco because I felt it was too dangerous. Lockers are also sensitive to tire diameter and to set them up properly you forget about tire pressure. You air them up using a yard stick to measure their diameter. Unequal tire diameters will fool the diff into believing it is in a turn and will be partially unlocked all the time. This will be more troublesome in a vehicle with a stick shift. It might steer to the ditch everytime you up or down shift. Lockers are best off road and if you want to ride around town, stick to a long wheel base truckEnd of fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #155************************************ ======================================================================= Ford Truck Enthusiasts Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ======================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 18:19:50 -0700 From: JJ/RAE Subject: F-250 Build time?? I just found out our F-250 will be built on 20 Oct, (so the theory goes) and the dealer is expecting it to arrive by 3 Nov (I hope). How long does it take to build one once it hits the assembly line? What plant will it be built at and whit kind of a quality controll program do they have. I have herd that Monday and Friday are the worst days of the week to have a vehicle built. Old wives tale or true???? JJ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:35:44 -0400 (EDT) From: FOMOCONUT Subject: The 99 F-250,350,450 and 550 Hey Gang.. Just a note to tell you I saw many photos today. They were taken by a Dealership owner at Ford's Wingding introducing the new trucks.. Hey I was relieved.. the truck does not look at all like a D$%^GE , yes it has a different grill than we are used to but is no copy cat. Almost good enough to make me reconsider ordering one of the last "HardTrucks" ..... NOT... However to me they appear as they will quickly grow on us.. either way... We are FORD Fans... not wimpy fair weather Brand x and y guys.. and all you have to do is drive one of the new Vans with the V-10 to feel assured about power against the other guys.. John L. Miller 96 F-350 4X4, 460 68 F-250 4X4 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:04:24 -0500 From: burl Subject: Overheating! First of all Thanks to everone who has made this list possible. I have a 1981 ford courier ( I know it's a hybrrid ) but I really need some help! For some reason it keeps overheating, I have replaced the water pump, thermostat and flushed the cooling system. Their are no visable signs of leaking and there is no water in the oil. I have done everthing I know any suggestions? Thanks in advance Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:04:05 -0600 (MDT) From: zeb Subject: Re: Overheating! At 12:04 AM 10/11/97 -0500, fordtrucks80up >First of all Thanks to everone who has made this list possible. I have a >1981 ford >courier ( I know it's a hybrrid ) but I really need some help! For some.... 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.
|