Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:15:42 -0600 (MDT)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #169
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Thursday, October 16 1997 Volume 01 : Number 169



=======================================================================
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 listservice.net
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: 1988 F-150 has miss [Rich Lobrovich ]
Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant) [Thom Cheney ]
Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant) ["Stephen M. Brown"
Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant) ["Stephen M. Brown"
Dual 7.3 Diesel Exhaust question ["Patrick Vanderlind"
(Fwd) Re: Drilling the front bumper [jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net]
(Fwd) Tires & Rims for sale [jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net]
piece of ____ [WALT214 aol.com]
Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant) [Bill Morgan ]
Re: piece of ____ [Bill Morgan ]
1999 Wheel base [abbott ]
Re: 1988 F-150 has miss [Filip M Gieszczykiewicz ]
Re: 1988 F-150 has miss [Filip M Gieszczykiewicz ]
Ford Trucks posting [Ken Payne ]
Brakes / Exhaust [Midwest96 aol.com]
Ken's responses to Alt.. [Bill03bt aol.com]
Re: Drilling Holes in Bumper [Midwest96 aol.com]
re:Brakes / Exhaust [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)]
Rear Disc Brake Conversions [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)]

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

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:31:29
From: Rich Lobrovich
Subject: Re: 1988 F-150 has miss

REBUILD the Carb ??? these trucks have fuel injections !!!
Was this a joke ???
Rich Lob
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>you need to check the carburetor!
>you might have to rebuild the carabao!
>
>______________________________________________________
> >+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
>| Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
>| Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
>+----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:54:00 -0500
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)

Ken Payne wrote:
>
>
> These "experiments" they conduct are jokes.

I can vouch for that... I helped build the sets for the original
Nissan Altima commercials. We conducted the "official" test of the
car on the dyno with champagne glasses stacked on the hood in our shop
before shooting the final commercial.

Yes, the car did go 100 mph on the dyno with champagne glasses
stacked. We had specially made glasses that exactly conformed to the
contour of the car's hood. We had to be sure to get that first row on
in the right order!! We secured the glasses while the stunt driver
got in & ran the car up to speed. Once the speed was "verified", we
let go of the glasses, and sure enough, they stayed put. After the
real commercial was shot on stage with background & lighting & etc. we
almost lost the glasses as the car was coming down from speed.

Nissan was claiming that the car would do 100 mph with glasses stacked
on the hood.. and it did! Nowhere did we have to state that they were
special glasses, or that the glasses had to be strapped down before
the car could reach 100 mph.

Caveat emptor!!!! IMHO, if it is too good to be true, it probably is.

Thom Cheney
'97 Ford Ranger 4X4 S-cab STX

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:50:32 -0500
From: "Stephen M. Brown"
Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)

> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 05:34:33 PDT
> From: David Hertzberg
> Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)
> Dave R.: I take it you don't believe in oil additives;-). In the
interests of
> exchanging ideas and insights and furthering the lists' knowledge about
what
> clearly is a controvesial and emotionally-charged topic, I solicit your
comments
> and observations on the following: I am by no means defending additives,
of which

> A credible and well-respected mechanic in the Washington DC area--a
fellow named
> Pat Goss--who hosts a weekend radio show and occassional television
series, runs
> workshops for the public, etc.,--also has endorsed it. This is what he
says he
> did: He added the product during his oil change, ran the car for about
100 miles.
> Then drained out all the oil and put on a new filter. He then drove the
car for 30
> minutes at highway speeds with the AC on, and it ran fine, he says. He
sells the
> product in his shop--but does not sell any of the other additives
(Slick50, etc)
> nor does he endorse any of these other products. I carry no brief for
Mr. Goss,
> but I find his experiement compelling. At the same time, will ANY engine
from
> which the oil has been drained and on which a new filter has been placed
run for 30
> minutes with just the residual oil remaining inside? (A friend of mine
who builds
> dragsters says yes.) I would appreciate your comments.

I ran across an article on the web regarding this experiment. It seems
that a few years back, an engine builder ran the experiment described
above. Two engines were run for a while with full crankcases of oil. Oil
was drained. The control engine had a regular oil change. The
experimental engine had a quart of Teflon (PTFE) type oil additive added
into it's change. Engines were run for a while, then drained. Engines
restarted and run for a while. Then using sophisticated tests for wear
they found that the PTFE engine had suffered a lot more damage!!! It
appears that in the absence of fresh oil, the PTFE was displacing the oil &
INCREASING WEAR! So these types of tests prove NOTHING. I didn't use any
exact numbers there cuz I don't have the article anymore, but a quick web
search should find it.

I think PTFE has been put to bed, as have some other methods. However,
there are some die-hard Tribotech and DuraLube users who don't seem to have
any bias other than they bought it (which can be a strong bias!...I bought
it, it dang well better work, and I can convince myself that it does).

I got interested again in oil additives because of PROLONG's patent. They
use the chlorinated paraffins, but use an additive to prevent wear.
Chlorinated paraffins are UNBELIEVABLE lubricants, but under high heat &
pressure, they break down & release the Cl-. You quickly get an acidic
system that will eat away metal. PROLONG claims to add a buffer that must
(but the patent doesn't specify) scavenge the Cl- as it forms. That seems
to be why you must add some additional PROLONG every oil change.

I continue to be interested to see if there are any unbiased PROLONG users
out there. A lot of local rod-shops are carrying it already. Their
marketing methods are the same old song & dance...infomercials,
endorsements by racers, an internet order system (smells like MLM!). Their
product intrigues me, but their marketing puts me WAY OFF.

I use Mobil 1 every 3000 miles in the engine, and synthetic gear oil in my
Supercharger.

I would love to hear others' opinions of PROLONG (but please state if you
sell the stuff...nobody wins if the truth is obscured).

steve

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:50:32 -0500
From: "Stephen M. Brown"
Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)

> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 05:34:33 PDT
> From: David Hertzberg
> Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)
> Dave R.: I take it you don't believe in oil additives;-). In the
interests of
> exchanging ideas and insights and furthering the lists' knowledge about
what
> clearly is a controvesial and emotionally-charged topic, I solicit your
comments
> and observations on the following: I am by no means defending additives,
of which

> A credible and well-respected mechanic in the Washington DC area--a
fellow named
> Pat Goss--who hosts a weekend radio show and occassional television
series, runs
> workshops for the public, etc.,--also has endorsed it. This is what he
says he
> did: He added the product during his oil change, ran the car for about
100 miles.
> Then drained out all the oil and put on a new filter. He then drove the
car for 30
> minutes at highway speeds with the AC on, and it ran fine, he says. He
sells the
> product in his shop--but does not sell any of the other additives
(Slick50, etc)
> nor does he endorse any of these other products. I carry no brief for
Mr. Goss,
> but I find his experiement compelling. At the same time, will ANY engine
from
> which the oil has been drained and on which a new filter has been placed
run for 30
> minutes with just the residual oil remaining inside? (A friend of mine
who builds
> dragsters says yes.) I would appreciate your comments.

I ran across an article on the web regarding this experiment. It seems
that a few years back, an engine builder ran the experiment described
above. Two engines were run for a while with full crankcases of oil. Oil
was drained. The control engine had a regular oil change. The
experimental engine had a quart of Teflon (PTFE) type oil additive added
into it's change. Engines were run for a while, then drained. Engines
restarted and run for a while. Then using sophisticated tests for wear
they found that the PTFE engine had suffered a lot more damage!!! It
appears that in the absence of fresh oil, the PTFE was displacing the oil &
INCREASING WEAR! So these types of tests prove NOTHING. I didn't use any
exact numbers there cuz I don't have the article anymore, but a quick web
search should find it.

I think PTFE has been put to bed, as have some other methods. However,
there are some die-hard Tribotech and DuraLube users who don't seem to have
any bias other than they bought it (which can be a strong bias!...I bought
it, it dang well better work, and I can convince myself that it does).

I got interested again in oil additives because of PROLONG's patent. They
use the chlorinated paraffins, but use an additive to prevent wear.
Chlorinated paraffins are UNBELIEVABLE lubricants, but under high heat &
pressure, they break down & release the Cl-. You quickly get an acidic
system that will eat away metal. PROLONG claims to add a buffer that must
(but the patent doesn't specify) scavenge the Cl- as it forms. That seems
to be why you must add some additional PROLONG every oil change.

I continue to be interested to see if there are any unbiased PROLONG users
out there. A lot of local rod-shops are carrying it already. Their
marketing methods are the same old song & dance...infomercials,
endorsements by racers, an internet order system (smells like MLM!). Their
product intrigues me, but their marketing puts me WAY OFF.

I use Mobil 1 every 3000 miles in the engine, and synthetic gear oil in my
Supercharger.

I would love to hear others' opinions of PROLONG (but please state if you
sell the stuff...nobody wins if the truth is obscured).

steve

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:53:11 -6000
From: "Patrick Vanderlind"
Subject: Dual 7.3 Diesel Exhaust question

Why is it if you put dual exahaust on this engine you actually
decrease the performance? (Dual apposed to 3" single)


Confused....


Patrick Vanderlind
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
'93 F250 xcab XLT 4x4 red/red Diesel

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:35:21 +0000
From: jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Subject: (Fwd) Re: Drilling the front bumper

Forwarded message:
From: Self
To: fordtrucks80up listservice.net
Subject: Re: Drilling the front bumper
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 12:14:21

James ,
I also have a 96 ranger . I bought a Pro Comp Pre Runner light bar
from NTW for $112.95 . I got the gray powder coat one , because it
matches the fender flares perfectly ! This bar will hold 6 lights
easily and looks awesome !

JR RANGER







From: James Forrest
To: fordtrucks80up listservice.net
Reply-to: fordtrucks80up listservice.net
Subject: Re: Drilling the front bumper
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 16:05:04 +0000

I have a 96 Ranger with four 165 watt kc lights mounted up top and to 55
watt driving lights mounted on the bottom. I never have had a problem
with my voltage dropping. My alternator is 95 amps. Have you
considered a light bar for the lights, they are fairly inexpensive


+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
| Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
| Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
+----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:35:46 +0000
From: jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Subject: (Fwd) Tires & Rims for sale

Forwarded message:
From: Self
To: Ford List
Subject: Tires & Rims for sale
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 09:53:34

Can anybody use some very new tires & rims ?

32x11.50x15 Bridgestone Dueler MT'S on a 15x8 Superior Laser Aluminum
rims 5on4.5 bolt pattern set of four tires & rims for $750+shipping .
This price includes center caps and lug nuts . The set was bought in
June and have approximately 4000 miles on them . E-mail direct if
interested jsruss worldnet.att.net

JR RANGER

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:49:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: WALT214 aol.com
Subject: piece of ____

I have owned older chevys and fords(1970,s) and have always had reasonable
amount of luck.The newest truck i ever owned was a 1976 chevy which i got rid
of to purchase a 1992 F-150 custom 4x4 this last august,which for me was
almost a dream truck.Purchased at a dealer since then it has had to have 1)
u-joint,2) battery,3) alternator,4) L & R front ball joints,5) oxygen
intake,and now it wont start(no noise).Having it towed tonight and will have
to wait and see.Yes i did get the extended warranty,but with all that my bill
was still around 300.00.Not being optimistic i can see them squeezing
more(min a deductible).If this would not ruin my credit i would tell them to
just KEEP IT.
Please don't tell me i'm stupid for believing the
salesman when he told me they check the vehicles out,i already know i
am.Please don't tell me i'm stupid for believing the office person who told
me the service department will word things so when things go wrong it will be
covered,i already know i am.I could go on but feeling pretty stupid right
now.
To all of you who have good running Fords,appreciate it,for
me it will be back to the old beater one's,probably sooner than later.

Had to tell someone Walt

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:55:33 -0500
From: Bill Morgan
Subject: Re: OIL (Synthetic + Rant)

Stephen M. Brown wrote:
> there are some die-hard Tribotech and DuraLube users who don't seem to have
> any bias other than they bought it (which can be a strong bias!...I bought
> it, it dang well better work, and I can convince myself that it does).

Amen to that statement, and if you don't beleive it's true, look at all
those Chevy drivers claiming to have "superior" vehicles....;)

Bill Morgan
94 F150 Mark V Conversion

- --
MZ

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:07:01 -0500
From: Bill Morgan
Subject: Re: piece of ____

WALT214 aol.com wrote:
>
> I have owned older chevys and fords(1970,s) and have always had reasonable
> amount of luck.The newest truck i ever owned was a 1976 chevy which i got rid
> of to purchase a 1992 F-150 custom 4x4 this last august,which for me was
> almost a dream truck.

Sorry that it happened and its a shame that so many dealerships operate
this way, but from personal experience, I know that not all do. Maybe
and hopefully these folks will get your ride in good order and you'll
change your mind about it.

Bill Morgan
94 F150 Mark V Conversion

- --
MZ

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:37:02 -0700
From: abbott
Subject: 1999 Wheel base

What wheel bases are avalable in the 450 550 range(F350-133,155,168/
SuperDuty-137,161,185")? Are any chassis cab models going to be available?
Is the true "F-SuperDuty" still available or is this replaced by the 450? As
well, are only reg. & crew cab available, what about super cabs; I heard
FORD was making a four door super cab, is this true (like the Do^ge Quad Cab)?
Thanks Again.
- -Tyler-

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:11:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Filip M Gieszczykiewicz
Subject: Re: 1988 F-150 has miss

You (Ryan Penner) wrote:
> >truck has 186,000 miles
> >and it has had a stumble or miss for the last 110,000 miles. The miss is
> >worse in damp or cold weather
> > but it is present all most all of the time.
[zap]
> >garage. I drove with a vaccuum gage connected for a while and it behaved
> >as you would expect except during a steady cruise (where the miss occurs)
> >it seemed to have a slight vibration. This truck has duel tanks, and it
[zap]
>
> I have the EXACT same problem, I have replaced quite a few of the
> same parts with not luck. The TPS did make it not as bad, but it is still
> there. I also have a I6 with 170,000 miles on it.

Greetings. Seems like you have nailed all the likely culprits. With low
RPMs and increased vibration, I would suspect some sort of contact
problem due to vibration. I'd put a scope on the critical power systems
(CPU, coil, etc.) and watch for glitches. If no scope handy, try something
a simple as a big-scale ANALOG volt meter. If you see the needle deflect
when it's missing - you got bad power buss. Something as simple as a
2000uF 35VDC cap across the computer's power supply would probably nick
that source of problems (you'd need much heftier filtering to make any
difference with other components like coil etc.)

Can be related to a harness problem... bad wires/connectors downed a
few Boeing 747's so it's NOT a far stretch (alas). #$& ! to track down!

Take care.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:16:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Filip M Gieszczykiewicz
Subject: Re: 1988 F-150 has miss

You (Terry D Parker) wrote:
[zap]
> engine. The miss occurs between 1500 and 2000 RPM and will go away if I
> increase the throttle. The fuel
[zap]

Greetings. One more thing... if the problem IS a bad harness/connector,
the RPM of the engine translates into a possible constructive
interference scenario where the wire(s) in question ONLY vibrate
to the point where they open AT some SPECIFIC frequency RANGE.
Is the miss more pronounced on rough roads? Does it change the
miss pattern or is it pretty much the "same"? Take it for a ride and
see if the road has any influence on missing. If yes, it's more
likely that it's a harness/connector problem in which case...
uhmm..... from experience.... "May the Force be with you" ;-)

Take care.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 97 01:54:40 +0000
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Ford Trucks posting

The list server bounced your post because it could not
find jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net in its subscriber
list.

Ken



At 06:25 PM 10/15/97 -0600, you wrote:
>>From kpayne mindspring.com Wed Oct 15 18:25:45 1997
>Received: from mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net (mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.33]) by listservice.net (8.8.5) id SAA10649; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:25:44 -0600 (MDT)
>From: jsruss postoffice.worldnet.att.net
>Received: from LOCALNAME ([12.69.64.68]) by mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net
> (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA26685
> for ;
> Thu, 16 Oct 1997 00:25:07 +0000
>Comments: Authenticated sender is
>To: fordtrucks80up listservice.net
>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 20:21:47 +0000
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>Subject: Tires & axles
>Priority: normal
>X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.54)
>Message-ID:
>
>Can anybody say whether or not 35" tires can be put on a Dana 35 and
>the Ford 8.8 rear end ? I am currently running 32x11.50x15 on a 15x8
>rim on a 96 lifted Ford Ranger . I have the room for larger meats and
>was wondering the pro's & con's with the 35"ers . If this helps I
>have the 3:73 gears with the 4spd automatic . I am particularly
>interested in knowing whether or not these tires , gears, and axles
>will be very trail worthy .
>
>JR RANGER
>

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:18:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Midwest96 aol.com
Subject: Brakes / Exhaust

I have '96 F150 I6 shortbed. When it is damp or if the brakes get wet they
squeak. Dealer said they are "semi-metallic" and nothing I do can make this
go away? What are semi-metallic brakes, and is this true?

Also, doesn't adding dual exhaust give more power / less performance because
it reduce the back pressure on the engine?

Thanx,
Craig

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:21:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bill03bt aol.com
Subject: Ken's responses to Alt..

Hi fordtruck list members,
Just a quick note.
I'm sure that I am not the only one who follows the newsgroup rec.autos.tech,
but I ran across another of Ken Payne's responses to Altovoz. I think that
Ken's responses to that "jerk" are about the best I've seen on that
newsgroup. Keep up the good work Ken!

Bill

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:25:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Midwest96 aol.com
Subject: Re: Drilling Holes in Bumper

Be very, very careful about mounting lights under the bumper. Not only have
some of us planted more than a pair, but if they get submerged too much...
















Craig

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:10:08, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)
Subject: re:Brakes / Exhaust

Craig,
Many people think adding dual exhaust adds performance. This is NOT
always the case. If a truck has dual cat converters off the exhaust
manifolds, and after the cats it goes into a "Y" pipe and into one
muffler and pipe, then adding duals would help. The "Y" pipe must be
removed and exhaust pipes must be connected to each cat, of course.
Other trucks, like my 4.0L Ranger, have the exhaust manifolds
connected to a "Y" pipe and then comes the Cat, muffler, and exhaust
pipe. Adding duals to a system like this normally doesn't help. Why?

1) some dual systems have the same diameter as stock, which is too
small
2) the dual pipes have to go through too many bends so gases can
escape freely
3) the dual system may have to large diameter, so it kills
performance

On a single cat system, like mine, I would (and WILL soon) add a cat
back system and headers. This system MUST have a slightly larger
pipe diameter than stock. The damn stock systems are just too small.


On dual cat systems, like '97 F150s for example, would get great
performance if the dual exhaust system was built correctly.

Your system, with the I-6, has a single cat system and would get
greater performance out of a larger-diameter-than-stock cat back
system.

I don't have a clue about your brake problem. Sounds like the dealer
was too busy to worry about your problem and was giving ya B.S. Take
your truck to a brake specialist and see what they say.

I hope this helps. Sorry I wasn't totally clear in writing. If you
have more questions, please write back.
To get an experts opinion, talk to an exhaust specialy shop. I just
wrote things that I heard and things that I logically feel is better.
I am not an exhaust expert, but I do try to help out fellow list-
users.

Josh
KNBD87D prodigy.com

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

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:15:34, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)....


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.