Return-Path:
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 19:00:50 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #247
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Monday, December 1 1997 Volume 01 : Number 247



=======================================================================
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: 99 F-250/350 pics???? [Shadorite aol.com]
Re: Power Rear Window [Midwest96 aol.com]
Re: Cleveland & related questions ["Dave Resch"]
Re: Legalities of side exhaust [john.doe erols.com]
bad ball joint/good tire wear 93Ranger4WD [john.doe erols.com]
Re: Chevron Gasoline [Midwest96 aol.com]
bad ball joints/good tire wear on 93Ranger4WD [john.doe erols.com]
ram air [JOUZA1 aol.com]
Cat/Chip Q's [Luke Wells ]
pictures of 1999 Ford ["Joseph L. Casey" ]
New Truck [Blest25913 aol.com]
Driving lights [Brett Gudgel ]
Re: Gasoline Prices [YEAGS15962 aol.com]
Re: Cat/Chip Q's [YEAGS15962 aol.com]
99 F-250/350 pics???? [Mitch Biarsky ]
Chip [Primusdrmr aol.com]
Missing V6? ["Andy J. Zupan" ]
Re:Gas Prices ["Andy J. Zupan" ]
Re: Missing V6? ["Joe Merchak" ]
Urgent questions ["Irvine Bruce" ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #246 [Randy ]
1989 F-450(super duty) ["michael walsh" ]
Re. Gas prices. ["The Lublin Family" ]
Re: Chevron Gasoline [Thundercraft ]
Re: 2.9 fuel lines [ILuvTruks ]
Re: 2.9L Durability [ILuvTruks ]
Re: Driving lights [YIASCA ]
Re: Urgent questions [Ken Payne ]

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

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 13:41:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Shadorite aol.com
Subject: Re: 99 F-250/350 pics????

Hey Mike!
Here ya go. It might sound weird, but I actualy like these better
than the new F150's. These have more of a truck look, not by much tho. But at
least they dont look like cars lol.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.boyerford.com/preview/FEATURES.HTM

Josh

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 13:45:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Midwest96 aol.com
Subject: Re: Power Rear Window

In a message dated 97-12-01 10:26:08 EST, you write:



I've seen Power Rear Sliding Windows in some of the conversion
packages in the Cincinnati area. Mark III and Eclipse both offer it.
I believe that C.R. Lawrence is the actual Power Rear Sliding Window
manufacturer.

Has anyone ever heard of these before and know if you can get them in
an aftermarket kit? I really don't want an entire conversion, just
the window. A SuperCab is just to far to reach!!

Thanks,
Chad >>

I know you can get them separate, let me check today, and I'll tell you who
the company is.

Craig

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 11:41:50 -0700
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: Cleveland & related questions

Yo Tyler, Jason, Gary, et al:

As an M-block devotee w/ access to a few reference books about the 335
series engine family (which includes the 351C, 351M, and 400), I can offer
a few answers to your questions about Clevelands etc. in F trucks.

>When did ford discontinue the 351M/400's in the F-Series,
>I'm guessing 81/82.
The M-block engines (351M/400) were used in F trucks and FS Broncos from
1977 through 1983.

>Maybe he's thinking of the 351M, which is very similar to the
>Cleveland except for the heads.
The M-block engine heads are similar in design to a 2V Cleveland head,
except w/ a slightly larger combustion chamber (78.4cc vs 76.2cc). The
M-block head is a unique part, though, not shared w/ any Cleveland engine.

The block of a 351M is completely different from a 351C block. The deck
height is taller on the M-block (10.297" vs 9.206") and the crankshaft main
journals are bigger (3.00" vs 2.749").

>In the years of 351 W/M (both Windsor's & M's offered), what
>were the deciding factors that put each engine in a truck?
> Was it a total Customer option, or were there diferent factors.
I do not know if it was a customer option, other than selecting the
displacement desired (i.e., 351 vs 302). Since most trucks were dealer
order packages and not customer orders anyway, the decision was most likely
based on factory availability, that is, whatever Ford had handy when the
truck went down the assembly line.

>I do not know about F Series for sure, but I think some F series
>had 4 bolt 351C's in them.

The 4-bolt 351Cs were all high performance engines, Boss, HO, Cobra Jet,
and late model ('72-'74) 4V engines. They were used only in cars and
Rancheros. The 351C was never a factory option in an F truck.

>I know for sure there were 351C's in
>Ranchero's, and they had unique C6's behind them. The 351C
>used a different bolt pattern than the big blocks, and the C6's
>behind the Clevland's had to match. The FMX and C4's that were
>found behind most Clevlands didn't stand up nearly as good as
>the C6 did, but the C6's were very hard to find. The Clevland's in
>Ranchero's were also all 4 bolt main blocks, and most also
>came with a 9" Limited slip rear end.
Rancheros got some 351Cs because they shared the Torino platform, and many
Torinos were equipped w/ 351Cs. According to Torino buffs I know, the FMX
holds up well behind a 351C engine.

The only 351Cs w/ 4-bolt main bearing caps that were installed in Rancheros
were the later 4V engines ('72-'74). Any 2V 351C in a Ranchero would be a
2-bolt block. The C6 was not hard to find, but in a Torino/Ranchero, it
was less common than the FMX transmission. The FMX was used in the bigger
cars (Torino, Galaxie, LTD, etc.) while Mustangs w/ the 351C used the C4
and C6.

The 351C shares the bell housing bolt pattern of the 302/351W 90-degree
small block family. The 351M/400 shares the bell housing bolt pattern of
the 385 big block family (429/460).

Hope this clarifies things somewhat.

Dave R. (M-block devotee)
1980 F250 4x4 351M

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

Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 19:11:17 -0500
From: john.doe erols.com
Subject: Re: Legalities of side exhaust

>I recently added a custom (home-made) cat-back system to my 90 F150. in the
>process of being cheap and practical, I found it to be real easy to simply
>add a 90 degree turn coming out of the muffler and take the exhaust
>straight out the side like the newer F150's. My question is, how 'legal'
>is this? I know that the exhaust has to exit so many inches past the
>passenger portion of the vehicle and that the newer F150's exit as far back
>as possible without interfering with the tire. Mine exits about half way
>between the front of the rear wheel well and the front of the bed.
>
>Anyone know how far back the thing needs to exit? (I saved my old
>muffler/pipe just in case I need to route it like the original).

I would think a lot would depend on your particular state's vehicle code.
In the old days this was the standard (car) set-up on the street. Back then
all you needed to get by was something that came back far enough to clear
the door and out from the body far enough to clear the rocker panel. I
don't know if code has changed much since then but that was just about all
you saw and it seemed to be pretty legal.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 14:16:44 -0500
From: john.doe erols.com
Subject: bad ball joint/good tire wear 93Ranger4WD

I have a 1993 4WD Ranger w/2" superlift springs in front. At the time of
the spring installation the camber adjustment kit that went with the
springs was installed. Tires are Dunlop RV 11.50X32 on factory STX wheels.
Vehicle tracking and tire wear has been very good with *no* abnormal wear
patterns since doing this one year ago.

I took it in for another alignment and the rep calls and says the ball
joints are bad and the truck can't be aligned. I questioned this and noted
that the tires looked too good for the truck to have bad ball joints. He
admitted he couldn't explain why the tires looked so good but noted the
ball joints were shot and needed to be replaced.

I told him to let the ball joints go for another time.

QUESTION: Can ball joints be bad without effecting tire wear?

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 14:22:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Midwest96 aol.com
Subject: Re: Chevron Gasoline

In a message dated 97-12-01 10:45:12 EST, you write:


I'd be surprised if Chevron's claim is correct, because I don't know of
Chevron gasoline begin sold or otherwise available in the Detroit area of
Michigan. And that's where "the big three" are all located.


Tom Stoner
Ann Arbor, MI
tgstoner umich.edu
>>

I'd have to agree with Tom. I live in "Downriver" and don't recall ever
seeing Chevron stations around here. The only thing I can think of is maybe
testing center are somewhere else...

Craig

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 13:54:14 -0500
From: john.doe erols.com
Subject: bad ball joints/good tire wear on 93Ranger4WD

I have a 1993 4WD Ranger w/2" superlift springs in front. At the time of
the spring installation the camber adjustment kit that went with the
springs was installed. Tires are Dunlop RV 11.50X32 on factory STX wheels.
Vehicle tracking and tire wear has been very good with *no* abnormal wear
patterns since doing this one year ago.

I took it in for another alignment and the rep calls and says the ball
joints are bad and the truck can't be aligned. I questioned this and noted
that the tires looked too good for the truck to have bad ball joints. He
admitted he couldn't explain why the tires looked so good but noted the
ball joints were shot and needed to be replaced.

I told him to let the ball joints go for another time.

QUESTION: Can ball joints be bad without effecting tire wear?

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 14:23:28 -0500 (EST)
From: JOUZA1 aol.com
Subject: ram air

was wondering if Cold Air induction and Ram Air is basically the same thing.
if it is wich is better and were can i order one for a 93 4.0 in a ranger.
If they are the same again were can i buy one for the same truck?

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 15:12:46 -0500
From: Luke Wells
Subject: Cat/Chip Q's

I was wondering how much of a difference in HP/Torque/Sound placing a
high flow cat on my 96 Ranger
splash would make?And what would be a recommended place to get
one,price? I saw one in a Summit catalogue fr about 89 bucks. I have the
2.3L. Also was wondering what a Superchip's chip would do for me?
Gas in Charlotte, NC $1.09-$1.13 for Regular.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 14:41:19 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph L. Casey"
Subject: pictures of 1999 Ford

the following web addresses have some amount of 1999 Ford pictures:

truckworld.com
pickup truck. com
aslci.com
fordunleashed.com
boyerford.com

(all preceded with www.)

There is one other with excellent early pictures, but I cannot find it now.
When I do I will send its web addresses to the group.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 16:19:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Blest25913 aol.com
Subject: New Truck

In a message dated 11/30/97 2:24:00 PM, you wrote:


From: "Mary Kay Jacobson"
Subject: New 1998 Ford Ranger 4X4

My husband and I are about to purchase a 1998 Ford Ranger Supercab 4X4 XLT.
It has the luxury package - we're planning on adding a bed liner and the
wiring package to haul our boat. Question for all of you. Both of us have
driven manual shifts for many years, and this particular truck (which has
everything else we want on it) has 5 speed overdrive automatic. Is the
>>
I think that you're getting a good deal. I'm glad to see that you're getting
the 4.0 liter engine. I have the 3.0 liter in my '96, and it isn't powerful
enough. That transmission will work well with the 4.0 liter engine. I hear
that Ford has straightened out their automatic hub problem for the '98
models. I am going to change my automatics to manuals because of problems
that I've had with them. I can't comment on towing the boat since I've never
towed anything. Good travelling!
Ron Trampe

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 13:23:47 -0800
From: Brett Gudgel
Subject: Driving lights

I don't have the fog/driving light option on my '96 Ranger, but I'm
curious if it could be added?

see ya,
Brett
'96 supercab 4x4 4.0

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 17:26:01 -0500 (EST)
From: YEAGS15962 aol.com
Subject: Re: Gasoline Prices

in albany ny the price for regular unleaded is like 1.39 per gallon

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 17:35:43 -0500 (EST)
From: YEAGS15962 aol.com
Subject: Re: Cat/Chip Q's

I have a 93 ranger stx with a 4.0 liter. I've replaced the exhaust with a
gibson system and added a jet performance module. I would strongly recommend
that if you are going to get a chip get an exhaust first. Without a free
flowing exhaust a chip won't do much. I've gained about 30 horsepower from
the two. I also think headers or header in your case would help. I'm
looking into purchasing a set of jba headers for mine . The only drawbacks
of these items is the price. The exaust was almost 300 bucks and so was the
chip.

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 16:01:14 -0500
From: Mitch Biarsky
Subject: 99 F-250/350 pics????

> Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 09:38:40 -0500
> From: Michael Ruth
> Subject: 99 F-250/350 pics????
>
> Hey everyone!
> What happened to all the pictures coming out on the new F super duties??
> Feel free to e-mail them to me directly if you know of any new ones!!!
> For awhile there, they were popping up evrywhere. I can't wait, I need
> pictures, lots of pictures, I mean NOW. I know January is only 30 days
> away, but I can't wait!!!!!!!!!
> Mike
> xplorit erols.com
>
> 95 F-250 4X4 pwrstrk (sold, and 99 ordered) sniff,sniff I miss my truck!
> 94 Explorer E.B.4X4
> 89 Merkur Scorpio
> 88 Merkur XR4Ti
>
> ------------------------------
>

I hope this helps with your fix...

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pickup truck. com/otf/otf9707.html

Mitch

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 18:06:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Primusdrmr aol.com
Subject: Chip

I have a 2.3L 87 ranger... Does anyone know if it is too early of a model to
put a chip in to boost the HP? I am new to that, so what exactly would one of
those chips do? It is a fuel injected witha new (well, used) computer on it.
Any comments would be a great help.

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 19:18:07 -0500
From: "Andy J. Zupan"
Subject: Missing V6?

I've reached a point of frustration with my 4X4 Ranger, maybe someone
out there has experienced this problem, please help!

1988 Ranger 4X4, 2.9L, 5sp, 194K Km (~130K miles)mostly highway

Symptoms:

At steady highway speeds the truck occassionly starts chugging, feels
like the engine is missing. This persists until I goose the gas pedal or
ease off then reapply gas again. This is an intermitent problem.

What I've already done:

Though I usually do all my own repairs I broke down and took it to a
FORD dealer, what a waste of money! They put the computer on it and said
all the senors are good, fuel pressure was good, computer was good, try
replacing the catalytic and do a trottle body & injector cleaning, which
they did but to no avail.

On my own I replaced the fuel filter, ignition coil, plug, distributor,
wires and rotor. I've held off replacing the electronic ignition module
as its fairly pricey. These maintenance items have not cured the
problem.

Any Suggestions!! or similar experiences?

Please help

Andy Z.

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 19:31:38 -0500
From: "Andy J. Zupan"
Subject: Re:Gas Prices

You southern good 'ol boys got it easy:

Oshawa, Ontario -> 0.56 - 0.66 CAN$/litre (~ 1.60 - 1.85 US$/USgal)

> Andy Z.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 19:37:01 -0500
From: "Joe Merchak"
Subject: Re: Missing V6?

I had similar problems with my 93 3.0L. I had an auto start feature added to
my truck, when the truck hit crusing speeds (above 65), the truck would
start chugging. The problem was the sensor wire coming from the coil had
enough draw where it would not allow the coil to fire correctly. I would
check the connections to your coil or maybe replace your coil with the Accel
supercoil (I did and seem to run better as this coil has more power output).
My fix to my problem was to put a relay on the sensor wire to disconnected
it when not in use. Hope this helps....


- -----Original Message-----
From: Andy J. Zupan
To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Date: Monday, December 01, 1997 7:19 PM
Subject: Missing V6?


>I've reached a point of frustration with my 4X4 Ranger, maybe someone
>out there has experienced this problem, please help!
>
>1988 Ranger 4X4, 2.9L, 5sp, 194K Km (~130K miles)mostly highway
>
>Symptoms:
>
>At steady highway speeds the truck occassionly starts chugging, feels
>like the engine is missing. This persists until I goose the gas pedal or
>ease off then reapply gas again. This is an intermitent problem.
>
>What I've already done:
>
>Though I usually do all my own repairs I broke down and took it to a
>FORD dealer, what a waste of money! They put the computer on it and said
>all the senors are good, fuel pressure was good, computer was good, try
>replacing the catalytic and do a trottle body & injector cleaning, which
>they did but to no avail.
>
>On my own I replaced the fuel filter, ignition coil, plug, distributor,
>wires and rotor. I've held off replacing the electronic ignition module
>as its fairly pricey. These maintenance items have not cured the
>problem.
>
>Any Suggestions!! or similar experiences?
>
>Please help
>
>Andy Z.
>+-------------- 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: 1 Dec 1997 19:23:42 -0500
From: "Irvine Bruce"
Subject: Urgent questions

I've got a few questions for the readership:

First, ID:

I have a 1980 F100 (long bed, light duty). It has the 4.9L six, a Ford 3.03
manual transmission. It is all stock, as from the factory with the addition
of major mileage (~118K) and major oxide deposits. No AC, No power brakes,
has power steering. (As you can imagine, this is a simple vehicle to work
on, except for the buildup of almost 18 years of crud.)

1. Rear axle/differential: I think I have the least expensive type (Ford).
I think the model is "integral carrier." Anyway, I just bought the truck and
I REALLY doubt the fluid had ever been changed. So I went through my Helm
manual and saw that the Ford axle doesn't have a drain plug OR a removable
cover. Everything is supposed to be done through the fill port. So I get my
sucker gun into the port and I find that about 1/4 inch in I meet solid steel.
I couldn't snake any tube larger than "fish tank PVC" into what I thought was
the bottom of the housing. So anyway, it takes forever and I finally get out
about 2 pints of this black viscous old lubricant. The Helm manual says this
thing holds 6.5 pints. How the heck can I get any more out of this thing. (I
have already heated the housing, trying to make the lube thinner). I am
thinking that if I only change out 2 pints, I really haven't done much of any
good, especially since the stuff I am removing looks REALLY bad. Does anyone
have any suggestions? I tried removing one of the bottom studs on the front
of the housing that holds in the carrier, but I couldn't back out the stud.

2. I remember reading in the digest about the fan clutch wars. I have the
third option; a solid coupling with a fan with flexible blades (stock).
(Don't have a fan cowling either.) Apparently the blades flatten with
increased RPM. I was wondering what would happen if I removed this fan and
coupling completely and installed an electric fan on the back or front of the
radiator? The reason why I am worried about this is because the flex fan is
really odd looking. It has 5 blades but they are spaced almost at random
around the fan. I am thinking that this does something to balance the
waterpump or something. The Helm manual doesn't mention this type of fan at
all. The closest thing they show is a 4 bladed fan with a solid coupling just
like mine. The four bladed fan spaces its blades each 90 degrees apart. The
truck appears to cool just fine, so maybe I just ought to leave it alone, but
I am curious about how an electric fan would affect performance/MPG.

3. The truck still has the stock oil-filled ignition coil mounted on the left
of the block. It looks like a cylinder of rust. I would like to replace it
with an ACCEL "Super-Stock" coil that is supposed to fit it, but the stock
coil has a connector at the top that doesn't look like anything I have ever
seen. Looking though my manuals it looks like this truck has the earliest,
most basic EEC system. It has a module on the top of the driver's side wheel
well, a pointless vacuum advance distributor and the coil I mentioned earlier.


This isn't a question but an observation; what the heck is it with the
fasteners on this truck? It seems like it is about 10% metric and 90% SAE.
I'll find a brake line on one side of the vehicle SAE and on the other side it
is metric. Weird.

I would appreciate any assistance.

BSI

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 21:08:34 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #246

*****
>Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 06:05:29 -0800
> From: rockinghorse webtv.net (Randall Goolsby)
> Subject: Re: gasoline prices
>
> does anybody have any experience with adding delay wipers on
> their truck? I've got an 85 F-250 that I think had them as an option.I'm
> not interested in the aftermarket junk.I want to add the factory delay
> switch.Are there enough elec. conductors present to do this?anybody?
> RG 94 Bronco EB 85 F-250 4X4
>

Randall, I guess we think alike (must be the name?). I, too, have
thought about installing a delay switch onto my truck but haven't looked
into it very far...
yet. I have an '87 F-250. I will say that the wiring harness in the
trucks are 'almost' always the same no matter what options you did/did
not get on your vehicle because the factory will install only one
complete wiring harness. There will just be open connectors that don't
go to anything. So I guess what I'm trying to say is the connections
SHOULD be already on the truck. You would also have to install the fuse
into the correct slot in the box. Hope I helped a little, please let me
know how it goes. Randy

> ------------------------------

> Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 08:44:01 -0700
> From: Bill Funk
> Subject: Re: '84 F-SERIES
>
> > From: Shadorite aol.com
> > Subject: '84 F-SERIES
> >
So heres the question: Do I go
> > with the
> > 351 or with the 460?


Ok, Josh, my first question is do you intend on racing this truck?
Probably not. I agree with Bill. I can assume low gas comsumption is
not your top priority. I see that Summit (summit.com) sells a GT-40
with 346 horses. But at $3,250, ouch!! That's for the long block only
(no induction system, pulleys, etc.). Since you must own a gas station
I would strongly recommend the 460, especially considering the cost
difference. But if you intend to use the truck for what it is meant
for, don't go crazy w/engine mods. Use the induction system Bill
mentioned: Performer (or other dual-plane manifold with a peak torque
range starting at idle). Don't use too much cam. A mild lift and peak
range about 1500 to 4000 rpm is better for torque. Also, keep the
compression ratio around 9.0:1. My Jeg's (jegs.com) catalog also lists
an Edelbrock Carb/Manifold/Cam & lifters package for both of those
engines (non-EGR only). The 351W package is $495 and the 460 is $550,
if you call (800-345-4545) make sure to tell them it's for a truck
motor, not a street or race car. That will make a difference in the
type of cam you'll get.
Take care, Randy

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

> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 08:36:00 -0800
> From: Brett Gudgel
> Subject: fm modulator

I would have had more of your message Brett, but me mail would only
return to this point.

You are correct. There is a box involved. It is in fact, the modulator
itself. A cable runs from the CD changer into this box which is hidden
(under the seat, for example). The wired control panel also runs to
this box (some also have wireless). That's how you control the changer
from the driver's seat. Now, the modulator has an input for your am/fm
antenna and an output that plugs into your receiver. The receiver works
just like it always has except when you tune to a selected station
(usually you have two choices w/the unit: 88.7 or 91 something or
other, I can't remember the frequencies now). When you tune to this
station you can hear the CD changer. For more information you can
contact Crutchfield (crutchfield.com) or call at 800-955-3000. They are
a mail-order company and have very friendly and knowledgable salespeople
(p.c.). And best of all, they wont try to push you into buying
something bigger and better like the local electronic store salespeople
we all know and love. Later, Randy

******

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 20:15:36 -0500
From: "michael walsh"
Subject: 1989 F-450(super duty)

I have a 1989 F-super duty with a 460 ci gas engine. The puppy has been
burning oil since I drove off the lot. At first it was 1 Quart every
800-900 miles and it's continued to get worse. Currently, I have 70,000
miles on it and it sucks a quart every 100 miles.I've had the compression
checked and it's fine, power seems fine.The local dealerships all recomend
replacing motor with a new longblock. Could the problem be in the top end.
Do the 460's have a history of oil consumption.By the way the truck is just
fine in every other aspect. Anyboby have any advice. Much appreciated.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 17:38:31 -0500
From: "The Lublin Family"
Subject: Re. Gas prices.

We pay $1.07/gal up here in Lapeer MI. We are just an hour north of
Detroit where gas is $.98/Gal

Chris "Lube" Lublin

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 17:39:42 -0800
From: Thundercraft
Subject: Re: Chevron Gasoline

Midwest96 aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 97-12-01 10:45:12 EST, you write:
>
>
> I'd be surprised if Chevron's claim is correct, because I don't know
> of
> Chevron gasoline begin sold or otherwise available in the Detroit
> area of
> Michigan. And that's where "the big three" are all located.
>
>
> Tom Stoner
> Ann Arbor, MI
> tgstoner umich.edu
> >>
>
> I'd have to agree with Tom. I live in "Downriver" and don't recall
> ever
> seeing Chevron stations around here. The only thing I can think of is
> maybe
> testing center are somewhere else...
>

Absolutlely correct. Chevron does not market fuel in Michigan. The
fuel is trucked from Kentucky.

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 20:48:04 EST
From: ILuvTruks
Subject: Re: 2.9 fuel lines

Hey, Sam,
Yeah, I have the quick connect fuel lines. I'm assuming you're talking about
on the fuel rail. I also had to put a new high pressure fuel pump on, the
lines there were held in by the clips. Anyway, the tool I bought from the
local auto parts store for the rail lines was something like $5. That gave me
a strip with six or seven different size tools. All it is is a piece of
plastic that slides into the line and you twist. Takes about 3 seconds a line
to pull apart. real easy to do. I can't remember what you said, are you going
to re-build, or go with a short block, or long block replacement?
Clay

In a message dated 97-11-30 03:17:46 EST, you write:

> -Clay, I'm glad to offer any help I can with your Bronco II
> I hope it goes well for you, I have a question for you:
> Does your Bronc have the quick release fuel lines? If yes
> did you have the tool needed? -I don't have it and these lines
> are holding up progress! I'll be checking my mail every other day
> now so my replies won't take so long and I'll be on a better machine
> so I won't get the stutters this mail has. Thanks again to all for the
> help,
>
> -Sam H.
>
> (shall nmsu.edu)
> (1987 Ranger XLT 4X4 Supercab)

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 20:46:27 EST
From: ILuvTruks
Subject: Re: 2.9L Durability

Hey, Gamer,
I don't know how long the 2.9 can last, nor do I know about any head problems.
All I know is that my engine(1986 2.9) has well over 150,000 miles on it, and
I am only doing the re-build because I want to take care of it now, while I
have the time, money, and patience, instead of when something major goes wrong
at the worst possible time. I would have still given my engine another 30,000
miles minimum if I still had it under the hood.
Clay

In a message dated 97-12-01 00:58:07 EST, you write:

> I was looking for some information on the 2.9L V-6 engine durability and
> figered this would be the place to go. I have heard of problems with the
> heads on certain engines
> My ranger was made in 9-86 and has 113,000 miles on it, as far as I can
tell
> its all original except the transmission which I had rebuilt at 111,500
> miles. I was wondering when head problems surface with the engine if it has
> any. The engine in my ranger burns no oil and leaks little or no oil, it
> leaks some antifreeze from the radiator but Im fairly sure theres none from
> the engine. how many miles do these engines go before needing major work?
> Thanks
> Gamer2000 aol.com
> 87 Ford Ranger 2.9L V-6 5spd. 113,800 miles

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

Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 20:45:14 EST
From: YIASCA
Subject: Re: Driving lights

yeah i added the fog/light option to my truck also ( 96 kick ass ranger) i
sell the fog lights and all--also i own a car audio shop for any of your
needs! FORD OWNERS get major cheap price deals

dave

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

Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 20:59:14 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Urgent questions

At 07:23 PM 12/1/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I've got a few questions for the readership:
>
>First, ID:
>
>I have a 1980 F100 (long bed, light duty). It has the 4.9L six, a Ford 3.03
>manual transmission. It is all stock, as from the factory with the addition
>of major mileage (~118K) and major oxide deposits. No AC, No power brakes,
>has power steering. (As you can imagine, this is a simple vehicle to work
>on, except for the buildup of almost 18 years of crud.)
>
>1. Rear axle/differential: I think I have the least expensive type (Ford).
>I think the model is "integral carrier." Anyway, I just bought the truck and
>I REALLY doubt the fluid had ever been changed. So I went through my Helm
>manual and saw that the Ford axle doesn't have a drain plug OR a removable
>cover. Everything is supposed to be done through the fill port. So I get my
>sucker gun into the port and I find that about 1/4 inch in I meet solid steel.
>I couldn't snake any tube larger than "fish tank PVC" into what I thought was
>the bottom of the housing. So anyway, it takes forever and I finally get out
>about 2 pints of this black viscous old lubricant. The Helm manual says this
>thing holds 6.5 pints. How the heck can I get any more out of this thing. (I
>have already heated the housing, trying to make the lube thinner). I am
>thinking that if I only change out 2 pints, I really haven't done much of any
>good, especially since the stuff I am removing looks REALLY bad. Does anyone
>have any suggestions? I tried removing one of the bottom studs on the front
>of the housing that holds in the carrier, but I couldn't back out the stud.

You have to back out all the nuts on the carrier and pry the sucker
open about 1/16th. Sorry but there really isn't any other way. And,
not its not a cheap rear end. Ford axles are notoriously strong!

>
>2. I remember reading in the digest about the fan clutch wars. I have the
>third option; a solid coupling with a fan with flexible blades (stock).
>(Don't have a fan cowling either.) Apparently the blades flatten with
>increased RPM. I was wondering what would happen if I removed this fan and
>coupling completely and installed an electric fan on the back or front of the
>radiator? The reason why I am worried about this is because the flex fan is
>really odd looking. It has 5 blades but they are spaced almost at random
>around the fan. I am thinking that this does something to balance the
>waterpump or something. The Helm manual doesn't mention this type of fan at....

---

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.