Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 03:50:27 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #268
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Thursday, December 18 1997 Volume 01 : Number 268



=======================================================================
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:Where do i get an owners manual [WALT214 ]
Re: Where do i get an owners manual [Randy ]
Re: Clearance lights ["Dave L." ]
My Latest Ranger Service Story ["Jeffrey Hansen" ]
metric system [David ]
Re: metric system [Randy ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #266 [Paul Laughlin ]
4x4 pickups for sale? ["Steve Ford_Man" ]
Re: metric system [DUALIE ]
Re: Ford Bronco II/Ranger [HELOJMPR ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #267 [Bill Funk ]

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

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 21:51:04 EST
From: WALT214
Subject: Re:Where do i get an owners manual

When i purchased my 92 4/4 150 custom from a dealer several months ago i was
told by the salesman that he didn't have a manual but would order one for
me,costing the company(Ford) $7.00.When going back in for a minor problem a
few weeks later i asked him if he had a chance to order it for me.Sure he
did,NOT.Offered and gave him $7.00 to buy him lunch and told him how important
that manual was going to mean to me.Ten minutes later he came to the waiting
room and said he had found a copy in a place he hadn't looked before.Maybe try
a Ford Dealer.

Walt

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 23:01:51 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: Where do i get an owners manual

WALT214 wrote:
>
> When i purchased my 92 4/4 150 custom from a dealer several months ago i was
> told by the salesman that he didn't have a manual but would order one for
> me,costing the company(Ford) $7.00.When going back in for a minor problem a
> few weeks later i asked him if he had a chance to order it for me.Sure he
> did,NOT.Offered and gave him $7.00 to buy him lunch and told him how important
> that manual was going to mean to me.Ten minutes later he came to the waiting
> room and said he had found a copy in a place he hadn't looked before.Maybe try
> a Ford Dealer.
>
> Walt

Walt, a classic case of money-talks, eh?

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 22:30:52 -0500
From: "Dave L."
Subject: Re: Clearance lights

I installed a 5 light set made by Peterson....No problems yet, other than
the 'made in china' bulbs that came with the light set (they blew within one
week...all five of them). Removing the headliner was no joy either.
- ------------------- Dave Lindsley ---------------------------
- ---------------davecl superior.net-----------------------

- -----Original Message-----
From: Randy Rees
To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 1997 7:47 PM
Subject: Clearance lights


>Anybody installed aftermarket clearance lights? Has anybody had a
>leakage problem with either factory or aftermarket clearance lights? If
>so how long did it take to start having the problem?

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 22:33:29 -0500
From: "Jeffrey Hansen"
Subject: My Latest Ranger Service Story

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0091_01BD0B3B.CC75F360
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm new to this list, but have owned Fords my whole life. Guess it's a =
guy thing.

Anyway, my 88 Ranger was obviously not charging. It would run until the =
battery was used up, then start running again when the battery rested a =
bit. I put it in the driveway and got to work. First, and most obvious =
was to check the alternator/regulator. This checked out ok on the bench =
of the local parts shop. I needed to replace the power steering pump =
anyway, and that task took a day. Then I noted the state of the battery =
ground cable, and figured there was my short. Replaced that, and it was =
still only giving me 11 volts at the fuse block, less when the lights =
were on.

I finally gave up, since it's cold in Ohio this time of year, and took =
it to our local dealer. I thought I plainly related the problem of the =
charging to the "service representative". The next day, they called and =
told me the throttle body was dirty, and the air valve needed replacing. =
OK, I said, I'll give you that it's got 150,000 on it, and maybe it's =
a tad dirty, but what about the charging system? They said they'd look =
at it and get back to me.

Well, they get back to me. The "service representative" says that the =
tech said the starter was going bad. At this point, I sort of lost it. =
I told her what does the starter have to do with the battery not =
charging? After the second or two of cranking, the starter is out of =
the loop. Would you please run some sort of test to see what is wrong =
with the charging system? She seemed a bit flustered, and told me she'd =
call back.

Turns out, she was really flustered. Maybe I did get a bit steamed, but =
I didn't use any bad language. But in five minutes, I had the actual =
tech on the line. I explained exactly what was happening, and he said =
that right now, the truck was cold, and pushing 14.20 volts, but maybe =
it was only happening when it was hot. He'd run it awhile and see what =
happened.

Two hours later, the tech called back, and was rather happy. He had =
found a short that really was a burned up connector that was shorting as =
the truck heated up. It was shorting so badly that it was half gone. =
He replaced it, and that was the entire problem.

The best part of this long tale is that he told me that the next time, =
just call him first. He gave me his number, and told me the days work =
of tracking down the short was on the house since the "service =
technician" didn't relay the problem correctly. Of course, I got a =
cleaned up throttle body and air valve, and had to pay for that, but =
what the heck, 150,000 is a bit of a stretch without cleaning. The tech =
restored my faith in Ford service, but I'm still replacing the starter =
myself, when I think I need to.


- ------=_NextPart_000_0091_01BD0B3B.CC75F360
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable






http-equiv=3DContent-Type>



I'm new =
to this list,=20
but have owned Fords my whole life.  Guess it's a guy =
thing.

size=3D2> 
Anyway, =
my 88 Ranger=20
was obviously not charging.  It would run until the battery was =
used up,=20
then start running again when the battery rested a bit.  I put it =
in the=20
driveway and got to work.  First, and most obvious was to check the =

alternator/regulator.  This checked out ok on the bench of the =
local parts=20
shop.  I needed to replace the power steering pump anyway, and that =
task=20
took a day.  Then I noted the state of the battery ground cable, =
and=20
figured there was my short.  Replaced that, and it was still only =
giving me=20
11 volts at the fuse block, less when the lights were on.

size=3D2> 
I =
finally gave up,=20
since it's cold in Ohio this time of year, and took it to our local=20
dealer.  I thought I plainly related the problem of the charging to =
the=20
"service representative".  The next day, they called and =
told me=20
the throttle body was dirty, and the air valve needed replacing.  =
OK, I=20
said, I'll give you that it's got  150,000 on it, and maybe it's a =
tad=20
dirty, but what about the charging system?  They said they'd look =
at it and=20
get back to me.

size=3D2> 
Well, =
they get back to=20
me.  The "service representative" says that the tech said =
the=20
starter was going bad.  At this point, I sort of lost it.  I =
told her=20
what does the starter have to do with the battery not charging?  =
After the=20
second or two of cranking, the starter is out of the loop.  Would =
you=20
please run some sort of test to see what is wrong with the charging=20
system?  She seemed a bit flustered, and told me she'd call=20
back.

size=3D2> 
Turns =
out, she was=20
really flustered.  Maybe I did get a bit steamed, but I didn't use =
any bad=20
language.  But in five minutes, I had the actual tech on the =
line.  I=20
explained exactly what was happening, and he said that right now, the =
truck was=20
cold, and pushing 14.20 volts, but maybe it was only happening when it =
was=20
hot.  He'd run it awhile and see what happened.
 
Two =
hours later, the=20
tech called back, and was rather happy.  He had found a short that =
really=20
was a burned up connector that was shorting as the truck heated =
up.  It was=20
shorting so badly that it was half gone.  He replaced it, and that =
was the=20
entire problem.

size=3D2> 
The best =
part of this=20
long tale is that he told me that the next time, just call him =
first.  He=20
gave me his number, and told me the days work of tracking down the short =
was on=20
the house since the "service technician" didn't relay the =
problem=20
correctly.  Of course, I got a cleaned up throttle body and air =
valve, and=20
had to pay for that, but what the heck, 150,000 is a bit of a stretch =
without=20
cleaning.  The tech restored my faith in Ford service, but I'm =
still=20
replacing the starter myself, when I think I need to.

size=3D2> 

- ------=_NextPart_000_0091_01BD0B3B.CC75F360--

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 23:02:01 -0500
From: David
Subject: metric system

I believe the metric system is much easier than standard imperial measures.
Tell me if I'm wrong but isn't it a lot easier to count by tens than by
3,12,16,640, 4840,5280. I also dislike it when people want to convert
between the two. In all my math and science classes all we use is metric.
My physics teacher even threatens students with detention if we ask her how
much some thing is in standard measure. The metric system was made to be
easy to use.

METRIC
10mm = 1cm
100cm = 1m
1000m = 1km
1cc = 1ml
1000ml = 1L
1g = 1000mg
1000 g = 1kg
1L =1kg(H20 0 C)
water boils 100 water freezes 0

STANDARD
12in = 1ft
3ft = 1yd
1760 yd = 1mi
1mi = 5280ft
8oz = 1cup
2cu = 1pint
32 oz = 1quart
128 0z = 1gal
16oz = 1bs.
2000 lbs = 1 ton
water boils 212'F water freezes 32' F


Tell me which one looks easier to use standard or metric???
My .02 cents (one thing that actually makes "CENTS"!)
100 pennys = 1 Dollar

D. Metcalfe
94 RANGER XLT

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

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 00:26:47 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: metric system

David wrote:
>
> I believe the metric system is much easier than standard imperial measures.
> Tell me if I'm wrong but isn't it a lot easier to count by tens than by
> 3,12,16,640, 4840,5280. I also dislike it when people want to convert
> between the two. In all my math and science classes all we use is metric.
> My physics teacher even threatens students with detention if we ask her how
> much some thing is in standard measure. The metric system was made to be
> easy to use.
>
> METRIC
> 10mm = 1cm
> 100cm = 1m
> 1000m = 1km
> 1cc = 1ml
> 1000ml = 1L
> 1g = 1000mg
> 1000 g = 1kg
> 1L =1kg(H20 0 C)
> water boils 100 water freezes 0
>
> STANDARD
> 12in = 1ft
> 3ft = 1yd
> 1760 yd = 1mi
> 1mi = 5280ft
> 8oz = 1cup
> 2cu = 1pint
> 32 oz = 1quart
> 128 0z = 1gal
> 16oz = 1bs.
> 2000 lbs = 1 ton
> water boils 212'F water freezes 32' F
>
> Tell me which one looks easier to use standard or metric???
> My .02 cents (one thing that actually makes "CENTS"!)
> 100 pennys = 1 Dollar
>
> D. Metcalfe
> 94 RANGER XLT
>

I had no idea that saying 'we thought we kicked that metric system all
the way back across the ocean' would freak people out. Face it folks,
we DON'T USE THE METRIC SYSTEM IN THE U.S.!! Only for stuff like
2-liter Cokes or tires and stuff. I'm not here to debate which is
easier to use or which is better. I've been using Standard Automotive
Engineering numbers all my life, so No, it isn't very difficult to
convert or use it. I can relate 10" better than I can 254mm. Yes, the
Metric system is easier, wasn't that the whole point of it? The only
thing I said about it was it is sometimes difficult to convert between
metric and SAE in my head, like when working on a truck. I do this ALL
the time at work w/my calculator and then add a percentage of 'shrink'
to that number, too. Can you tell me, right off the bat, what the o.d.
is of a 265/75R16 tire? All I was saying is that 'wheelers want to
know, bottom line, what is the diameter of these tires! It can be
converted, sure 265mm is section width 265 x .75 = 199mm (rounded). So
the tire sidewall is 199mm from the rim edge to the tread. Convert that
199mm/25.4 (25.4mm=1", but I'm sure you all knew that) = 7.83", so
double that = 15.66" + the 15" tire diameter is about 31" (rounded).
Could you do that in your head w/o my help? Wouldn't be easy, would
it. As long as we have both SAE and Metric in the U.S. we'll have to do
conversions like that. So whether someone likes or dislikes converting
between them, it is a fact of life here. When I hear a Canadian radio
station say that it's 7 degrees, I shiver, whew, then I remember to
convert, oh, that' not so bad, now is it. So, I hope no one else gets
all bent-out-of-shape about it.

That's all the flaming moes' I have, later
Randy

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 20:58:20 -0800
From: Paul Laughlin
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #266

Lou Guerriero wrote:

> Life would be easier with metric. Imagine, everything based
> on 10. Here
> in Canada, we converted over in the early 70's, and I was in a
> progressive
> school that used it from day one. ---- And your right, you are the
> last on earth.

We, in the states, were scheduled to convert in the early 70's also.
However the housewives and mechanics raised so much hell (worried about
converting between the two systems) that the whole thing was acrapped.
BIG mistake in my humble opinion.Paul in Portland OR

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

Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 21:52:26 PST
From: "Steve Ford_Man"
Subject: 4x4 pickups for sale?

I desperately need a truck right now and I would prefer a full size
Ford 4x4 truck. A used supercab shortbed would be awesome, but anything
will do. Please send me info on where I can get a Ford pickup. Thank
you for your time.

______________________________________________________

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

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 01:17:22 EST
From: DUALIE
Subject: Re: metric system

In a message dated 97-12-17 23:28:41 EST, you write:


the way back across the ocean' would freak people out. Face it folks,
we DON'T USE THE METRIC SYSTEM IN THE U.S.!! Only for stuff like
2-liter Cokes or tires and stuff. I'm not here to debate which is
easier to use or which is better. I've been using Standard Automotive
Engineering numbers all my life, so No, it isn't very difficult to
convert or use it. I can relate 10" better than I can 254mm. Yes, the
Metric system is easier, wasn't that the whole point of it? The only
thing I said about it was it is sometimes difficult to convert between
metric and SAE in my head, like when working on a truck. I do this ALL
the time at work w/my calculator and then add a percentage of 'shrink'
to that number, too. Can you tell me, right off the bat, what the o.d.
is of a 265/75R16 tire? All I was saying is that 'wheelers want to
know, bottom line, what is the diameter of these tires! It can be
converted, sure 265mm is section width 265 x .75 = 199mm (rounded). So
the tire sidewall is 199mm from the rim edge to the tread. Convert that
199mm/25.4 (25.4mm=1", but I'm sure you all knew that) = 7.83", so
double that = 15.66" + the 15" tire diameter is about 31" (rounded).
Could you do that in your head w/o my help? Wouldn't be easy, would
it. As long as we have both SAE and Metric in the U.S. we'll have to do
conversions like that. So whether someone likes or dislikes converting
between them, it is a fact of life here. When I hear a Canadian radio
station say that it's 7 degrees, I shiver, whew, then I remember to
convert, oh, that' not so bad, now is it. So, I hope no one else gets
all bent-out-of-shape about it.

That's all the flaming moes' I have, later
Randy >>
AMEN!!!!!!!

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

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 02:43:30 EST
From: HELOJMPR
Subject: Re: Ford Bronco II/Ranger

Two words may solve your front end allignment problems..."ball joints". Had
the same problem on my '85 Ranger. Replacing the old ball joints and wheel
bearings THEN getting a front end allignment, cured it.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 03:51:37 -0700
From: Bill Funk
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #267

> From: "Alan Heaberlin"
> Subject: Metric system vs ???
>
> If you think mixing metric and SAE on a vehicle is bad...I used to
> have =
> a British sports car which had a mix of metric, SAE, and get =
> this...Whitworth. The Brits had supposedly quit using Whitworth (or
> BSF) =
> in the early 60s. The one that will really make a machinist cry
> himself =
> to sleep at night is a metric head on an SAE bolt. You will find that
> on =
> American built heavy-duty trucks and equipment made for export...It 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.