fordtrucks80up-digest Wednesday, April 1 1998 Volume 02 : Number 118



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 - 1996 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:

5.o roller lifters [yhtlines surfari.net]
Re: Alarm System Suggestions [Run351 ]
Re: Intake question [Randy ]
RE-R12 ["David Krasko" ]
R12 vs. R134A [Hawk sktc.net]
r-12 [Vance ]
Re: Roller lifters [Randy ]
Re: Late model 351W or 5.8 HO motors, info [Randy ]
Intake manifold ["Casey Vandor" ]
Re: R12 vs R134 [JSCF250 ]
r-12 [Hawk sktc.net]
Re: Alarm System Suggestions [ALBERT DANIELS ]
Re: R12 vs R134 [Bill Funk ]

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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:13:30
From: yhtlines surfari.net
Subject: 5.o roller lifters

jgalbert global2000.net wrote asking if his 90 f150 302 had a roller cam.
From my conversations with SVO, the 88 truck 302 was the change over year,
when Ford used up all the old truck blocks and started using the HO roller
302 blocks in trucks. My son's 88 is a tappet cam 302.

Dave Lampert

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 22:00:42 EST
From: Run351
Subject: Re: Alarm System Suggestions

Viper makes a good alarm..and installed w/power locks about $400.00..
also Jacobs electonics has a good item.."Stop action" just flick the
switch..and vehicle won't start..even if they remove it...Check it out..
Run351..

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:09:13 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: Intake question

Gary,
Clue me in on this one, I thought that Cleveland heads didn't fit the
Windsor block? What's up?
Later,
Randy

Gary Spradley wrote:
>
> Anyone know if the intake manifold is still being produced or available for
> the 351 Windsor using Cleveland heads?
>
> Thanks
> Gary Spradley 84 F150 4X4 359 Windsor (yes 359)

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:13:04 -0700
From: "David Krasko"
Subject: RE-R12

There is a new product called Duracool ( HC-12 ) that will replace R-12 test
are being done as we speak.

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

Date: 31 Mar 1998 21:18:38 EDT
From: Hawk sktc.net
Subject: R12 vs. R134A

John,
Gosh, you sound so defensive, we are having a discussion, not a fight.
I agree, it does get real hot in Texas. I disagree, a properly
functioning 134 system will not give 20 degree warmer air than a
properly functioning R12 system. My wife and I drove through Oklahoma
City on July 5, 1996. Local radio said it was 106, a bank sign said
108. Oveheated cars everywhere along side I35. We crusied through in
our 95 F150 (R134A) with the thermostat about 1/3 of the way from the
coldest setting and the fan on low hum. Very comfortable.

BTW, I do keep a thermometer in the dash vent on the Ranger year round.
I had an 89 Ranger, Charged The AC the last part of June 1997 with 12
(I did it, Walmart didn't) Yes, I am licensed and can buy the stuff.
Yes, I can and do all of my AC work. Yes, the Ranger AC was up to snuff,
good pressures, clean condenser, good air over the coils, etc. Anyway,
I totaled that Ranger on July 11. Bought a 94 Ranger on July 28, put
my trusty thermometer in the vent and guess what, a 2 degree difference
in favor of the 12. If you don't want to give up 2 degrees because of
price now, you will soon, trust me.

Last point, You can squeeze down the expansion valve in a 134 system,
(or any system) and get much colder air, but the evaporater will freeze
up rather quickly. A friend got a Dodge mini van in his shop (134) last
summer with the customer complaining that the AC was getting too cold.
Twenty two degree air and blowing frost out of the vents. A new
expansion valve fixed it.

Well John, as I said before, we will have to agree to disagree on this
issue. I respect your opinion and wish you the best of luck with your
R12. If I ever need any of it, I'm sure gonna come to Houston and buy
it at a Walmart. Sounds like you got a bargain. BTW, did you know that
they have stopped making R12, (or are going to stop shortly) and that
the only R12 that you will be able to buy is stuff taken out of other
cars? Recycled. Presumedly, these vehicles were being converted to 134.
Sorry to be so long winded.
Keep Fordin'

Buck Shoff

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:36:58 -0600
From: Vance
Subject: r-12

> BTW, did you know that
> they have stopped making R12, (or are going to stop shortly) and that
> the only R12 that you will be able to buy is stuff taken out of other
> cars? Recycled.

I have 2 cases of r-12 I need to get rid of. Both my 94 F-150 and my
wifes van (made by the other guys...shudder) use r-134a. Anybody
interested let me know

My Ford air (r-12 or r-134) gets colder than any other manufacuters air
ANYDAY. You may fault a ford for other things, but they have good cold
AC

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:43:55 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: Roller lifters

According to an atricle I recently read in 4x4 Power, Fords' 5.0 was a
roller lifter motor from '92 on, so I'm assuming after reading yht's
post that '91 would be the absolute last year you may find any flat
tappet lifter 5.0's in trucks (since he had a 90 F-150 roller). They
did this mostly to met CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Econony)
requirements, although I don't know how much of an increase there is,
when I talked to the guy at Jeg's he said gas mileage increase would
be the first thing I'd notice. Now, how many miles would I have to
drive to justify the 400 bucks? hehe
Later,
Randy

JGA wrote:
>
> Just cought a couple of posts regarding roller lifters and increased fuel
> mileage. I'm having a valve job done on my 90 5.0L. and was just
> wondering...does this engine have rollers and if not would it be to any
> advantage to replace the standard ones with rollers?
>
> JGA
> +--------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 - 1996 ----------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:49:46 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: Late model 351W or 5.8 HO motors, info

Ok Dave, thanks you made me do it! I just HAD to call the local
service dept. to find out for sure. I asked if my (fictional, of
course) 1994 F-250 5.8l had roller lifters in it. The guy came back
on the phone a few minutes later and said 'Yep, sure does". Just to
dbl check I made sure and stressed 5.8l, not 5.0 and he said yes. So
whether or not he knows whats up has yet to be determined....hehe. As
for the switch over year, I have no idea. I also dbl checked the
article that I was pulling my info from (from my lacking memory) and
it was on a 5.0 liter, which is why I had to call the dealer to check.
Later,
Randy

Dave Resch wrote:
>
> >From: Randy
> >Subject: Re: Late model 351W or 5.8 HO motors, info
> >
> >First, I do believe the FI later model 5.8's did have roller
> >cams and in fact you can by a retrofit roller cam/lifter set
> >for the 5.8 motor. I called Jegs on info for my '87 351 H.O.
> >and I think it was Crane Cams and the cam and lifters were
> >just over 400 bucks. All the mfgs. that now use roller cams
> >do so because of gas mileage increases. I have an article
> >on that retrofit cam if you want more info and I also may
>
> Yo Randy:
>
> I may be wrong, but I don't think Ford ever provided roller cams in the
> 351W/5.8 engine from the factory. The only exception I know of is the 5.8
> SVO engine in the limited production 1995 Cobra R Mustangs.

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 19:09:58 -0900
From: "Casey Vandor"
Subject: Intake manifold

I finally ordered a new manifold for my motor and need to know about the new
fuel line. The two fuel inlets don't line up, so I need to modify the line
a bit. Should I cut the old line and attach a rubber line, or is it
possible to cut and thread the end and attach one of those cool looking
braided lines on there?

Casey

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:58:17 EST
From: JSCF250
Subject: Re: R12 vs R134

r-134 works just fine. do you think they would put it in new vehicles if it
were not good.you must have another problem with your ac.mine is retrofitted
and my truck is so cold that you can hang meat in the cab.
joe

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

Date: 31 Mar 1998 23:04:56 EDT
From: Hawk sktc.net
Subject: r-12

FO>I have 2 cases of r-12 I need to get rid of. Both my 94 F-150 and my
FO>wifes van (made by the other guys...shudder) use r-134a. Anybody
FO>interested let me know


I'd listen to a price. You can E-mail me privately at Hawk SKTC.net.
Buck Shoff

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

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:16:34 -0800 (PST)
From: ALBERT DANIELS
Subject: Re: Alarm System Suggestions

I only say that DEI alarms are crap from word of mouth from many people
that have purchased them. One guy told me he replaced his three times,
and it still doesn't work properly, and it was installed by an authorized
dealer. Another person told me their's was fine for six months and
stopped working. Then no more than a week later I went out with a
girlfriend of mine and her battery died, so we replaced it two days later
dead again. Three days after that the whole alarm stopped working, thank
god for valet switched, so I can bypass it. I am MECP certified, and I
talked to DEI, they are a great company and stand by their products, but
who wants the hassel of re-installing their alarms because they broke.
Hope this helps. DEI mass produces their alarms, sure some are going to
be faulty, but more that a couple I have seen have.

Albert Daniels

On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Jim Lujan wrote:

> It really depends on your requirements of an alarm. What are you trying
> to prevent from happening (car-jacking, towing, vandelism)?
>
> A shock sensor (or two might help you). It won't false trigger when a cat
> jumps on the truck, or someone walks by too closely like a doppler unit.
> Also, it is my understanding that the doppler field changes as temperatures
> fluctuate. As it warms up the field expands, and as it gets colder the
> field contracts so that you get more or less coverage than you originally
> anticipated. (Of course, this may have been the pitch for shock sensor).
> If the field is covering more area than it should, your rate of false
> triggers is higher. If it is smaller, than you not being covered where
> you need it.
>
> I have had alarms with a combination of voltage sensing, pin switches,
> and shock sensors. The number of false triggers has been few.
>
> Albert, I'm curious why dump on DEI products? What evidence do you
> have to support your opinion? I have had DEI products for several
> vehicles, and have had no complaints. Of course, I live in virtually
> a no crime area. Last car stolen in my area was probably 10 years ago.
> I use it mostly for the convenience features, remote start on my diesel,
> vent the windows in the summer, remote trunk release, etc. So,
> I can't say DEI sucks or Alpine sucks. Just curious why you think
> DEI products are crap.
>
> No alarm will keep your car from being stolen if the thief *really*
> wants it, especially if it was a poor installation.
>
> One final thought. Ignition kill switches are becoming illegal in
> some states (not starter kills). If the fuel cut off engages or the
> ignition is killed (either advertently or not) and you get stuck on
> a train track or something, you're screwed. If it is the thief, who
> cares, but they might sue you. Crazy huh... Starter kills are
> becoming the norm. If you really prize your vehicle. Put a tracking
> system on it.
>
>
> At 03:50 PM 3/31/98 -0800, you wrote:
> >I have a ALPINE 8049 it has a radar sensor to detect motion, but not if a
> >cat jumps on your truck. You can set the sensitivity from the remote. It
> >has door lock/unlock and is wonderful. Whatever you do, do not buy a DEI
> >Alarm they are crap. My alarm also has starter kill, and you can wire up
> >the fuel pump is need be. It is great and would recommend it to anyone.
> >The key to alarms is the installation. Also ask for a backup battery and
> >siren. Hope this helps.
> >
> >Albert Daniels
> >danielsa nevada.edu
> >
> >On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Sheldon Belinkoff wrote:
> >
> >> Tomorrow I'm supposed to pick up my "new" truck to replace one which was
> >> recently stolen. I never thought I needed an alarm system or some sort
> >> of
> >> protection. While I know this topic has come up before, I've not paid
> >> much
> >> attention to it, so I'd like some "expert" opinions.
> >>
> >> I'm planning on a fuel shut off switch and a battery/starter
> >> disconnect.
> >> However, these things won't prevent a break in or stop the truck from
> >> being
> >> towed away. I'd like an alarm system that can be installed in such a
> >> way
> >> that it's virtually inaccessible - so it can't be bypassed. I'd also
> >> like
> >> something that would page me as well as making an incredible racket when
> >> the
> >> truck was disturbed, perhaps something with motion sensors, and where I
> >> can
> >> se the degree of sensitivity.
> >>
> >> Any sugestions? What's worked for you? Any better ideas than mine?
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> SCB
> >> belinkoff earthlink.net
> >>
> >> +--------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 - 1996 ----------------+
> >> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> >> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> >> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+
> >>
> >
> >+--------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 - 1996 ----------------+
> >| Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> >| List removal instructions on the website. |
> >+----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+
> >
> >
> >
> +--------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 - 1996 ----------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+
>

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

Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 03:57:27 -0700
From: Bill Funk
Subject: Re: R12 vs R134

> From: John Cassis
> Subject: R12 vs R134
>
> Oh I almost forgot, Walmart charged my AC with R12 for $65. That was =
>
> from completely dry when I had to rebuild my system. So for those of
> you =
> out their with R12 that need a re-charge check them out. They were
> half =
> the price of some local shops. I called around Houston and priced it
> out =
> before I ended up taking it to them.
>
> John Cassis

R12 isn't nearly as scarce as many would have us believe. With
recycling, there's enough to last for many years.
Remember, though, the Feds have a vested interest in making R12 out to
be a villain, so any means they can use to raise it's cost is seem by....


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.