Return-Path:
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:59:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #179
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Tuesday, October 21 1997 Volume 01 : Number 179



=======================================================================
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: Dual tank question [David Hertzberg ]
Re: Off-Road Equipment [BigDogF250 aol.com]
RE: F350 w/ two batteries [David Hertzberg ]
Re: Tornado [JAMES ]
Sports car interior [BigDogF250 aol.com]
non-painted big block [dean etgn14.webo.dg.com (Baruffi)]
Re: Gas mileage [Bill Funk ]
Re: Tornado [Geoffrey Hoffman ]
Re: Tornado [Todd Metzger ]
Re: Tornado [Ken Payne ]
Re: 4 cylinder Ranger needs more h.p. [silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)]
Re: Tornado [KSMIKE ]
Re: F350 w/ two batteries ["David J. Baldwin" ]
Re: Exhaust ["Dave Resch"]
Re: Gas mileage... ["David J. Baldwin" ]
RE: RE: Dual Tank Problem. [Tony Rio ]
Re: Tornado [Thom Cheney ]
Re: Tornado [Thom Cheney ]
RE: FELP. No power up hill and doesn't stay running ["Dave Resch"
Re: Tornado ["David J. Baldwin" ]
Re: 10W-30 for diesels [Jay Chlebowski ]
Re: Tornado [Geoffrey Hoffman ]
Re: Tornado [Ken Payne ]
none [James Forrest ]
RE: FELP. Bad bearings?? - was-No power up hill and doesn't stay running [Michael Wray

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 97 05:18:52 PDT
From: David Hertzberg
Subject: RE: Dual tank question

Tony:

You wrote that you "have always been extremly careful to never switch tanks unless
the truck was off." Why is that? I only switch tanks when I am driving; my
assumption has been (and please tell me if I am wrong!) that the switch to go from
one tank to the other will not function unless the engine (and by extention, the
voltage to power the switch) Could it be that the source of your problem with the
front tank is that you should be switching tanks when driving?? David
>

David and Leila Hertzberg
Greystoke Farm
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-482-0016
ACdhertz us-state.osis.gov


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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 06:46:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: BigDogF250 aol.com
Subject: Re: Off-Road Equipment

I have Air lockers on my F-250 and rather than spend the time learning how to
do axle work i just had a shop install them. I did find however that they
are less expensive to install when you do a gear swap along with it, cost of
the unit w/o installation is around $800-900 depending on the truck.
Matt

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 97 05:41:21 PDT
From: David Hertzberg
Subject: RE: F350 w/ two batteries

On my f250 diesel there is a warning sticker not to use the battery on the driver's
side to jump start the vehicle. apparently doing so will destroy the electrical
system. the cigarette lighter sounds a little odd to me. good luck





>I have a friend with an F350/PowerStroke (Deisel) Crew Cab who is
>having trouble figuring out how to jump-start another vehicle given the t=
>wo
>battery setup. (Doesn't seem to be anything in the manual and he's not
>heard back from Customer support at his dealership.)
>
> The questions are: Does anyone know the proper hookup for jumping? Wil=
>l
>one of those Cigarette-Lighter to C-L hookups work? Any worries on the
>current running down the line to the target battery?
>
> Any other info, tips, or caveats would be very helpful.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
> + Steve Field 20-Oct-1997 18:38:03 PT
> email: Scionyx Compuserve.com
>+-------------- 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 -----------------+


David and Leila Hertzberg
Greystoke Farm
Gaithersburg, Maryland
301-482-0016
ACdhertz us-state.osis.gov


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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 06:57:48 -0400
From: JAMES
Subject: Re: Tornado

Looks like a thinly disguised piece of spam

- --
WARNING!All unsolicited commercial e-mail will be charged a $500 U.S.
proofreading fee.Failure to pay within 5 days of receipt of such billing
will result in legal actions.The sending of such e-mail constitutes
acceptance of these terms.

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 07:19:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: BigDogF250 aol.com
Subject: Sports car interior

Does anybody else think it would be really neat to convert a sports car
interior so it can be fitted in a truck? Before you tell me im nuts just let
me say... I know i am but sometimes good ideas come out. I was looking at a
98 c****tte the other day and thought that this would be a great interior for
cruisin the trails, just let me know what you think,
Matt
92 F 250 4x4 5.8L

PS Dont be afraid to tell me im nuts

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 07:42:24 -0400
From: dean etgn14.webo.dg.com (Baruffi)
Subject: non-painted big block

John Miller wrote:

One other point which I had presented to
the list members and did not receive much response, my truck is equiped with
the 460 and the block was never painted from the factory. Please if anyone
out there has a '96 with a 460 look at it and tell me if they have the same.
I really want to go at Ford about this, but if all are like this... What can
I do? I am a U.S Marine and it was no small thing for me or anybody in my
opinion to purchase an F-350, these two items are really discouraging.


John, my 1997 F-250 HD 4x4 with a 460 does not have a painted block either.
I checked after a list member discussed it a few weeks back (it might have been you).
I took delivery 9/97 if that helps. I was going to mention it to the service department
when I bring it in next Monday for an oil leak and a bad tachometer.

I'll let you know what comes of it.

1997 F-250HD 4x4 Super cab, short bed, 460/5-spd :

Mods: K&N air filter, synthetic fluid (front/rear diff,
transmission, transfer case, engine), drain plug on
rear diff cover, Radio Shack CB (callsign: Cool-Aid).

Dean Baruffi mailto: dean etgn14.webo.dg.com
Holland, MA. Work: 508-898-7369



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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 05:01:25 -0700
From: Bill Funk
Subject: Re: Gas mileage

> From: LarryAll aol.com
> Subject: Gas mileage...
>
> I'm looking to improve the gas mileage on my F-250 351W. I have a K&N
> filter
> charger on it and I'm looking to add headers at a later time. I was
> basically looking at adding a high performance coil and 8.8 Accel plug
> wires,
> but I was told at SuperShops that the engine was designed to burn at
> 100%
> already. Now I know that this couldn't be true, but I am wondering
> what good
> the coil/ignition system would do for my gas mileage. I don't really
> want to
> spend more than about 200 bucks on the coil/ignition system. I know I
> can
> get a cleaner and more thurough burn with this, but I am kinda
> wondering why
> this guy told me not to bother. BTW, he tried to sell me a
> performance chip
> and then backed down when I told him I wanted fuel economy. He said I
> would
> have to sacrifice gas mileage for performance. This I understand, but
> I'm
> looking to burn it all in the fire for eficiency and not waste
> anything.
> Could someone clarify what that guy talked me out of? I would really
>
> appreciate it...
> Larry...

Well, Larry, it's like this...If the cylinder fires, using a bigger
spark won't help it much. It makes no difference if the spark comes from
a D-cell or the Hoover Dam - once that cylinder fires, the spark has
done it's job.
So, why all the high-end ignition systems? Because stock systems degrade
over time, and that's a fact. If your engine is missing due to a weak
ignition system, then replacing it with a good one will solve the
problem. If there's no problem, what will a better system do?
High performance engines *do* require a high performance ignition
system. Especially at high RPMs, the stock system can be a little short
on oomph in a high-compression engine.
Here's a thought: when it comes to "performance" add-ons, ask yourself
this: "What symptom will this item cure?" If, like high-dollar ignition
wires, the answer is "nothing", why bother, except for bragging rights?
Now, if you need new wires, get whatever you want, realizing that the
low-buck set will probably do just as good. So what if that fancy red
ceramic, wire-wound, water-cooled, fully-automatic wire set for $350
will operate when the temp under the hood reaches two thousand
degrees... your engine won't be running! ;-)
Bill Funk

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:43:35 -0400
From: Geoffrey Hoffman
Subject: Re: Tornado

At 6:57 AM -0400 10/21/97, JAMES wrote:
>Looks like a thinly disguised piece of spam

i doubt it, i was curious about this as well. I was looking at it, and it
seems a bit sketchy, but there are some people who say that it is cool.

>WARNING!All unsolicited commercial e-mail will be charged a $500 U.S.
>proofreading fee.Failure to pay within 5 days of receipt of such billing
>will result in legal actions.The sending of such e-mail constitutes
>acceptance of these terms.

huh? and where does it say this?

I hate spam too, but chill out. I really doubt this was....

- --
Geoffrey Hoffman gch2 cornell.edu
Cornell University http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pobox.com/~hoffy

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:02:21 +0000
From: Todd Metzger
Subject: Re: Tornado

> >WARNING!All unsolicited commercial e-mail will be charged a $500 U.S.
> >proofreading fee.Failure to pay within 5 days of receipt of such billing
> >will result in legal actions.The sending of such e-mail constitutes
> >acceptance of these terms.
>
> huh? and where does it say this?

I am not sure if you are talking about the unsolicited commercial e-mail or
the actual US code that this pertains to. Here is a copy of the numbers and
the rest of the official stuff. This is not to start any sort of war. I just
wanted to show everyone out there that you can be protected.


Pursuant to US Code Title 47, Ch.5, Sub-ch.II, Sect.227(a)(2)(B), a
computer/modem meet the definition of a telephone fax machine. Pursuant
to Sect.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual
monetary loss or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation. Any
unsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a fee
in the amount of $500US per occurance. E-mailing denotes acceptance of
these terms.

As for my opinion on the air tornado, I have heard that it is a ripoff.
Several people in the explorer newsgroup had complained about the
ineffectiveness of the air tornado a little while ago. I have had no personal
experience with it, that is just what I heard.

Todd Metzger

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:40:21 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Tornado

At 10:26 PM 10/20/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Has anyone had any experience with the Tornado air management system?
>The following article was on the newswire:
>
>SANTA FE SPRINGS, Calif.--(AutomotiveWire)--Oct. 13, 1997--
>New Automotive Device Will Improve MPG!
>
>Got a gas-guzzler in the garage?
>

- -But WAIT!!! THERE'S MORE!!! Useless JC Whitney style advertising
snipped out-

How will putting anything in the intake, which causes resistance,
increase efficiency?

I can get those same "gains" simply by letting the car warm up.
The air coming through an intake system is sufficiently fast
enough to have thorough mixture of the fuel. Car companies
design the intake tract to have the least amount of turbulence
which results in less intake friction. That's what performance
intake manifolds are all about and its what polishing and porting
is all about.

This "Tornado" sounds more like a wind bag. Its not new and the
claims of some unknown and unnamed "emissions" station mean
nothing. Heck, "Billy-Bob's Gas and Grub" could have an emissions
test station.

Slick 50, Splitfires, Tornado, Duralube, fuel line magnets....
why do people think they're going to get something for nothing?
There's no magic in engines. There's no magic device or formula.
Proven techniques, such as manifolds, headers, low restrictive
exhaust, etc work. The secret to performance lies in one thing
only: reducing friction (or you can force air through the system
to help negate friction somewhat). Nothing is going to make your
gas burn "more completely." The fuel mixture is very precise and
the burn is near perfect with todays vehicles. Heck, with properly
tuned cars of 30 years ago it wasn't bad (key word: properly).

Friction in the engine occurs two ways: friction of metal pushing
oil past metal and the friction of air. An IC engine is nothing
more than an "air pump". Making it easier to move that air is
the single best performance improver.

You want to increase efficiency? Take off the air box, make your
own bigger air box and put a large filter in. This will give
you an increase in surface area that the same amount of air has
to get by - reducing friction. K&N filters? I'm skeptical.
I've seen dyno results showing 1-2 hp increases with them. In
other words, virtually no increase (less than 1%). I can get
exactly the same increases by changing out my old air filter
with a new one.

You can try your $20-$50 gimmicks if you want to. I'm going to
stick with cams, intakes, headers, polishing ports, low resistance
dual exhausts, chips, underdrive pulleys, aluminum drive shafts,
etc. All these cost money.... like I said earlier: you can't
get something for nothing.

Just my two cents (or ten in this case)....
Ken

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:13:19 EDT
From: silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)
Subject: Re: 4 cylinder Ranger needs more h.p.

On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 02:18:23 -0500 Jake Morvant
writes:
>I own a 1994 Ranger with a 2.3L I-4 engine and I need more h.p.! I
>don't
>want to spend a lot of money on modifications (no more than $100 or
>so) and
>I would like to increase power by about 10 h.p.
>Buying a K&N air filter or a Tornado air management system have been
>suggested. Does anyone have any other suggestions?
>
>Thanks!
>Jake

For less than $100, the K&N is your best bet, but don't expect 10hp.
Maybe 1 or 2 at most for the 2.3L motors. Plus its cheaper cleaning it
rather than paying $6 bucks or more for a new one. I wish I would have
bought a K&N the day I bought the truck.
It would have saved me a bunch of money. As for the Tornado air
management, I think its a gimmick.

.---. .-----------
/ \ __ / ------
/ / \(..)/ -----
////// ' \/ ` --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordManTed.com (Mustang Shop)
//// / // : : --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com (Ranger Site)
// / / /` '--
// //..\
=======UU====UU===[silent.bob juno.com]=[95 Ranger SOHC 2.3L]=
'//||\`
''``

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:15:30 EDT
From: KSMIKE
Subject: Re: Tornado

I have a Tornado in my 94 Explorer. Does it help? Who knows. I wouldnt believe
anything except independent, controlled dyno or dragstrip tests. And I haven't
seen any of those. I think my fuel line magnets gave me more power (sarcasm).
:-)


Mike

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:07:32 -0500
From: "David J. Baldwin"
Subject: Re: F350 w/ two batteries

Steve Field wrote:
> The questions are: Does anyone know the proper hookup for jumping? Will
> one of those Cigarette-Lighter to C-L hookups work? Any worries on the
> current running down the line to the target battery?

Personally, I wouldn't even think of attempting to jump a vehicle
through the cigarette lighter socket. Lighters take a few amps,
starters (especially cranking diesels) can take hundreds. The lighter
socket wasn't designed for this, and if you try it, you could end up
smoking something...and I don't mean cigarettes!

Now you could probably run the jumper between two lighter sockets and
wait a few hours for the one with a good charge to replentish the one
that's flat. Then you could remove the jumper and see if it starts. Of
course you could run down the good one if something's really screwed up,
and then you might have two vehicles that don't start.

I'd stick to jumper cables--they're made for this, and work well.

- --
Best Regards,

Dave Baldwin
Dallas, TX
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:38:05 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: Re: Exhaust

>From: Bill Funk
>Subject: Re: Exhaust
>
>> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:40:24 -0500
>> From: silent.bob juno.com
>> Subject: Re: Exhaust
>snippage
>> Ummm... You need back pressure or you can damage the valves.
>
>I don't think that's true.
>I think you need a way to prevent cold air from hitting the hot valves,
>which means you need some sort of exhaust pipe to hold in some hot
>exhaust.
>I can't think of a way no back pressure itself can damage an exhaust
>valve.
>Bill Funk

Hmmm... Seems like cold air would hit that valve on every intake stroke,
and the hottest part, too.

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:43:42 -0500
From: "David J. Baldwin"
Subject: Re: Gas mileage...

LarryAll aol.com wrote:
> I'm looking to improve the gas mileage on my F-250 351W. I have a K&N filter
> charger on it and I'm looking to add headers at a later time. I was
> basically looking at adding a high performance coil and 8.8 Accel plug wires,
> but I was told at SuperShops that the engine was designed to burn at 100%
> already. Now I know that this couldn't be true, but I am wondering what good
> the coil/ignition system would do for my gas mileage. I don't really want to
> spend more than about 200 bucks on the coil/ignition system. I know I can
> get a cleaner and more thurough burn with this, but I am kinda wondering why
> this guy told me not to bother. BTW, he tried to sell me a performance chip
> and then backed down when I told him I wanted fuel economy. He said I would
> have to sacrifice gas mileage for performance. This I understand, but I'm
> looking to burn it all in the fire for eficiency and not waste anything.
> Could someone clarify what that guy talked me out of? I would really
> appreciate it...

Larry,

You didn't mention what year your truck was, or whether you drive mostly
city or highway.

I have an F-150 with 302 (5.0L). I am mostly on the highway, and seem
to get about 16MPG. If I try to wean it, I might get 18MPG on a long
road trip. I've come to the conclusion that if you want milage, you'll
drive something besides a truck. Here's why:

In city driving, you must accelerate and decelerate continuously. Stop
and go driving. Everytime you accelerate, you take the potential energy
stored in the fuel and convert it into kinetic energy when you're in
motion. When you brake the energy is converted to heat and lost. The
more massive the vehicle is, the more energy it takes to accelerate it
to a given speed. Since trucks are about as massive as you get, what
options do you have to reduce weight?

On the highway, aerodynamic losses dominate. What affects this? Frontal
area, and a shape that determines a coefficient of drag. Trucks are big
= high area. Trucks are boxy = high Cd. What can you do to improve
this? Lower the truck, put an air dam on the front to minimize drag
from the bottom, and put a bed cover or shell on the back. If you don't
want to cover the bed, maybe remove the tailgate.

Then you can try to improve engine efficiency. Diesels have an
advantage here. You can try a cat-back system and maybe some headers.
Got to watch the legality of the modifications though.

Most everyone that I've known or heard of gets 10-20 MPG with their
trucks, no matter whether they're running a 460 ci V8 or a 250 ci
straight 6. They're just not built for efficiency, and although there
are a few things you can do to improve things (reduce weight, lowering,
etc.) those things compromise the utility of the vehicle.

By the way, a friend of mine has a Ford Cougar with the same engine
(except his is an HO) as my truck, with a cat-back exhaust. He gets
28MPG on the highway at reasonable speeds. Note that this is about
double what I can manage.

Only one thing will radically improve milage with a truck: trading it in
on a little sub-compact wheeze-box!

- --
Best Regards,

Dave Baldwin
Dallas, TX
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:48:56 -0600
From: Tony Rio
Subject: RE: RE: Dual Tank Problem.

John...

To answer your question, my father had a company owned F250 (think it
was a '90 or '91) that one of his apprentices drove around all the time.
The apprentice would always just flip the tank switch as the truck was
running, and after about 40K miles, the fuel injectors got screwed up.
When they took it to the dealer to have them fixed, they said the tank
switch while running was the reason. When I bought my truck, the
dealer that I bought it from also warned me about this, and said that I
should only switch when the truck was off. When I moved to another
part of the state, my new local dealer said the same thing.


>From: FOMOCONUT aol.com
>Subject: Re: Dual tank question
>
>sorry no help.. but a question.. Why do you feel it so important to only
>switch the tanks when the truck is not running? I do it all the time and
>have
>never had any problems...IMHO though I think you just expierienced
>some type
>of relay logic failure in getting the tanks to switch. Maybe never happen
>again.
>John L. Miller

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:33:59 -0500
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: Tornado

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> You can try your $20-$50 gimmicks if you want to. I'm going to
> stick with cams, intakes, headers, polishing ports, low resistance
> dual exhausts, chips, underdrive pulleys, aluminum drive shafts,
> etc. All these cost money.... like I said earlier: you can't
> get something for nothing.
>

okay...you brought it up. What is the list's opinion of the
underdrive pulleys? Parts guy at Ford says the alternator will turn
too slowly to do its job. Any experiences out there?

Thom Cheney
'97 Ranger 4X4 S-cab STX

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 08:37:04 -0500
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: Tornado

KSMIKE wrote:
>
> I have a Tornado in my 94 Explorer. Does it help? Who knows. I wouldnt believe
> anything except independent, controlled dyno or dragstrip tests. And I haven't
> seen any of those. I think my fuel line magnets gave me more power (sarcasm).
> :-)
>


I got a crystal while visiting Sedona, AZ. I hang it in the "vortex"
of my truck. Results are amazing. I can't really explain how it
works, but I'm sure I must be getting a bazillion miles per gallon and
unlimited hp.

gotta run, it's time for my diet pill (damn I look good).

TC

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:58:19 -0600
From: "Dave Resch"
Subject: RE: FELP. No power up hill and doesn't stay running

>From: Michael Wray
>Subject: RE: FELP. No power up hill and doesn't stay running
>
>I was there when they were trying to adjust the timing. They were
>unable to move the distributor. They tried and tried... But no luck.
> From what they said, it was at 12 deg BTDC when it should be at 10
>deg. I would not think that 2 deg would throw it off that much... But
>I am used to non-emission vehicles since my '68 Firebird does not have
>any of that stuff. :)

Yo mike:

Timing advanced 2 degrees should not have such a dramatic negative effect
on your truck's performance. Based on the symptoms you described in your
earlier post, I would speculate that the timing set (crank or cam gear) is
one tooth or so off.

BTW: A few years back, when I went to adjust the timing on my 1980 351M, I
couldn't get the distributor to move for anything (even after loosening the
hold down bolt and clamp:-). I took it in to my favorite shop (the only
one I trusted) and the guy there had to put a pipe wrench on the
distributor body trunk (below all the workin's at the top) to get it to
move. Good thing, too, since it was set at 0 degrees TDC (supposed to be
10 degrees BTDC). Turns out that it was rusted/corroded/fused to the
intake manifold after years of neglect by the previous owner. I haven't
had any trouble since.

Good luck

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 11:05:50 -0500
From: "David J. Baldwin"
Subject: Re: Tornado

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> At 10:26 PM 10/20/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Has anyone had any experience with the Tornado air management system?
> >The following article was on the newswire:
> >
> >SANTA FE SPRINGS, Calif.--(AutomotiveWire)--Oct. 13, 1997--
> >New Automotive Device Will Improve MPG!
> >
> >Got a gas-guzzler in the garage?
> >
>
> -But WAIT!!! THERE'S MORE!!! Useless JC Whitney style advertising
> snipped out-
>
> You can try your $20-$50 gimmicks if you want to. I'm going to
> stick with cams, intakes, headers, polishing ports, low resistance
> dual exhausts, chips, underdrive pulleys, aluminum drive shafts,
> etc. All these cost money.... like I said earlier: you can't
> get something for nothing.

Thanks, Ken. You're absolutely correct. Also, to accomplish a
significant gain, you frequently must employ a proper combination of the
above components. And to find the best combination, you must either (a)
try them, if you have LOTS of time and money, or (b) use a proven
combination that has been previously published.

Then there's simulation, which allows you to find better combinations
without wasting a lot of money. But then you have to ask how good the
simulation software is. They're not cheap, either.

You're right, Ken. You can't get something for nothing. No free lunch
here. Have you or anyone else out there ever used simulation software
for powertrain development? Any recommendations?

- --
Best Regards,

Dave Baldwin
Dallas, TX
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 97 11:19:37 -0000
From: Jay Chlebowski
Subject: Re: 10W-30 for diesels

On 10/20/97 6:52 PM , David Hertzberg wrote:

>Does anybody on the list know of a brand of 10W-30 oil that is ok to use
>in a
>diesel?? The local parts stores around here used to sell a 10W-30 that
>was API
>approved for both gas and diesel applications, but the oil appears to have
>disappeared from the market. Now the 10W-30 that is sold is only for gas
>engines. I know Valvoline makes a synthetic blend that is CD/CF approved.
>But I don't really want to go to a synthetic, since I've used conventional
>for
>the last four years and really don't want to mess with oil leaks, etc. I
>would
>be grateful if someone could share with me what they know about this.
>Thanks

Just hop on over to www.shell-lubricants.com and post a question to them.
They'll get back to you right quick, and if I remember correctly, will
let you know that Rotella T comes in a 10w-30 weight. Great oil, just be
careful not to run the engine too hot as the 30W cannot protect as well
when the turbo gets hot and the shear forces increase.

Best Regards,
Jay

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:08:25 -0400
From: Geoffrey Hoffman
Subject: Re: Tornado

At 10:15 AM -0400 10/21/97, KSMIKE wrote:
>I have a Tornado in my 94 Explorer. Does it help? Who knows. I wouldnt believe
>anything except independent, controlled dyno or dragstrip tests. And I haven't
>seen any of those. I think my fuel line magnets gave me more power (sarcasm).

by the way, what is the deal with those magnets? i know that they don't
really do anything, but are they supposed to be doing? seems like a weird
concept....


- --
Geoffrey Hoffman gch2 cornell.edu
Cornell University http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pobox.com/~hoffy

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:55:34 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Tornado

At 08:33 AM 10/21/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Ken Payne wrote:
>>
>> You can try your $20-$50 gimmicks if you want to. I'm going to
>> stick with cams, intakes, headers, polishing ports, low resistance
>> dual exhausts, chips, underdrive pulleys, aluminum drive shafts,
>> etc. All these cost money.... like I said earlier: you can't
>> get something for nothing.
>>
>
>okay...you brought it up. What is the list's opinion of the
>underdrive pulleys? Parts guy at Ford says the alternator will turn
>too slowly to do its job. Any experiences out there?
>
>Thom Cheney
>'97 Ranger 4X4 S-cab STX
>

If you do a lot of city driving I wouldn't use them. Also, water
flow through the cooling system is dramatically decreased. There
are (expensive) high volume water pumps designed for under-drive
pulleys but the alternator is still an issue. Its a trade-off,
battery life -vs- some extra performance. Most practical item
instead (IMHO) of underdrive pulleys is one of those special fans
that "flatten out" as they speed up. When you're move at 55 they
don't pull any air, hence slightly less load on the engine. At
55 you've got more than enough air moving through the radiator
without help from the fan.

So in closing, I tend to agree with the parts counter guy. If
you don't keep the vehicle moving you're eating the battery.

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 11:55:56 -0500
From: James Forrest
Subject: none

i have a 96 ranger 4x4 with 2 1/2 rancho susp. lift. Currently I am
running 31x10.50 goodyears on 15x7 American Racing Wheels. I am
experiencing wheel rubbing on the extended radius arms. I have taken it
to many different shops thinking they could fix my problem. They
suggested welding the end of a bolt on to where the steering is at full
turn, so as to reduce my turning radius. I failed three different
safety inspection places. I finally decided to let them try to weld
something, but it wouldn't work, after I drove there. I do want to put
32 by 11.50 inch tires on. I know i would need new wheels. Should I
go with 15x8 or 15x10? Also, does anyone know how to fix the problem if
the tires still rub after they are installed?

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

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:52:21 -0700
From: Michael Wray
Subject: RE: FELP. Bad bearings?? - was-No power up hill and doesn't stay running

OK guys..... Here is what the shop is saying.

At first they thought it was the control module, then after
connecting a manual oil pressure gauge they found that the pressure
was nil after warming up. They explained that the bearings need to be
changed. They explained that they can do this while the engine is
....


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.