Return-Path:
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 03:50:24 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V2 #28
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Wednesday, January 21 1998 Volume 02 : Number 028



=======================================================================
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:

problem with F150 5.0 [Z1bob ]
RE: problem with F150 5.0 ["Chapman, David P" ]
Re: problem with F150 5.0 [FastRngXLT ]
underhood light ["Rob Bubala" ]
97 HD automatic trans question ["Rob Bubala" ]
Re: underhood light [Chad Royse ]
Re: problem with F150 5.0 ["David J. Baldwin" ]
Third gear slips a little!! [John Cassis ]
Re: fordtrucks 4.6l in Ranger [Iguannna ]
More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems) ["The Lublin Fam]
RE: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems) [Mike Marcum]
Re: problem with F150 5.0 [Randy ]
'97 F-150 - stock radio wiring ??? [Rex Edmiston
Re: My error [Gardner ]
Re: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems) [Randy
F-150 50th Anniversary Stickers [johnmck juno.com (John R. McKee)]
Re: Randy's wiper switch ["Mark H. Neblett" ]

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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 07:41:57 EST
From: Z1bob
Subject: problem with F150 5.0

We have a 1990 F150SC 4X4 with a 5.0 V8 & aod trans. and 4.10 gears. I am
looking for suggestions to increase the power and or gas mileage. This truck
is SLOW .......and it only gets about 11-12 mpg and drops to 7-8 when towing a
2500 lb trailer. Please only suggest what you have tried and know will help.
I have installed a Flowmaster cat-back exhaust but really didn't anything but
a nicer sound.
Thanks in advance for any help!
Bob S.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:09:24 -0500
From: "Chapman, David P"
Subject: RE: problem with F150 5.0

I had a 1995 F150 EC 4x4 with the 5.0/5-speed and had the same problem.
I think the engine is just too small for the truck although my gas
mileage was around 14 in town. I did see some time back that you could
change a chip in the computer and increase performance, but at the
expense of gas mileage. Although I didn't put it in my truck, I have
seen it done successfully. Unfortunately, I don't recall the
manufacturer (I know, that doesn't help much). Guess you could check
performance shops. It should be a fairly common item.

Dave C.

> ----------
> From: Z1bob[SMTP:Z1bob aol.com]
> Reply To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 7:41 AM
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Subject: problem with F150 5.0
>
> We have a 1990 F150SC 4X4 with a 5.0 V8 & aod trans. and 4.10
> gears. I am
> looking for suggestions to increase the power and or gas mileage. This
> truck
> is SLOW .......and it only gets about 11-12 mpg and drops to 7-8 when
> towing a
> 2500 lb trailer. Please only suggest what you have tried and know
> will help.
> I have installed a Flowmaster cat-back exhaust but really didn't
> anything but
> a nicer sound.
> Thanks in advance for any help!
> Bob S.
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer
> --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net,
> |
> | List removal instructions on the website.
> |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
> -----------------+
>

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:18:50 EST
From: FastRngXLT
Subject: Re: problem with F150 5.0

In a message dated 1/20/98 7:47:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, Z1bob aol.com
writes:


looking for suggestions to increase the power and or gas mileage. This truck
is SLOW .......and it only gets about 11-12 mpg and drops to 7-8 when towing
a
2500 lb trailer. Please only suggest what you have tried and know will
help.
I have installed a Flowmaster cat-back exhaust but really didn't anything but
a nicer sound.
Thanks in advance for any help!
Bob S. >>

A friend of mine put a set of JBA headers in his 5.0L F-150 with a nice power
increase. I would get a K&N airfilter to go along with your exuast (if you
havent done that already).

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 05:54:26 PST
From: "Rob Bubala"
Subject: underhood light

I have a 97 F250HD Powerstroke 4x4 and I have finally rememberd to ask
this question to you guys.

Is there supposed to be an underhood light on my truck? I do not have
one and I thought that maybe there is one that you can take out of
somewhere in the engine compartment but I have had no luck.

If I am supposed to have one I am going to call Ford ASAP and get one.

Please let me know,

Thanks

Rob Bubala
jeep_cj8 hotmail.com

______________________________________________________

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 05:57:40 PST
From: "Rob Bubala"
Subject: 97 HD automatic trans question

Hello

I have begun to notice on my automatic trans in my 97 HD Powerstroke
F250 that it will sometimes shift hard, enough to where the truck will
actually jump a little. First gear is ok, second is alright, and third
is where this happens. I know that people have complained about this
trans but is this common? If it is, will the Banks trans module help
this out? I was planning to buy one this upcoming spring for it. The
truck has 10,800 miles and has been doing this pretty much the whole
time. I still need to modify my air deflector because ever since then I
have noticed that my gas mileage has gone down and some of the
acceleration is gone. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

Any info is apprecited.

Robert Bubala
jeep_cj8 hotmail.com

______________________________________________________

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:04:04 -0800
From: Chad Royse
Subject: Re: underhood light

I believe you get the under hood light with the 'Convenience Package'. I
also think the 'Convenience Package' came standard on XLT's. I'll look at
the invoice of mine tonight, if no one else has answered the question by
then. BTW, mine is a '97 250HD SC 7.5 4x4 XLT, and it has the light.

Chad

Rob Bubala wrote:

> I have a 97 F250HD Powerstroke 4x4 and I have finally rememberd to ask
> this question to you guys.
>
> Is there supposed to be an underhood light on my truck? I do not have
> one and I thought that maybe there is one that you can take out of
> somewhere in the engine compartment but I have had no luck.
>
> If I am supposed to have one I am going to call Ford ASAP and get one.
>
> Please let me know,
>
> Thanks
>
> Rob Bubala
> jeep_cj8 hotmail.com
>
> ______________________________________________________
> > +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 14:01:01 -0600
From: "David J. Baldwin"
Subject: Re: problem with F150 5.0

Z1bob wrote:

> We have a 1990 F150SC 4X4 with a 5.0 V8 & aod trans. and 4.10 gears. I am
> looking for suggestions to increase the power and or gas mileage. This truck
> is SLOW .......and it only gets about 11-12 mpg and drops to 7-8 when towing a
> 2500 lb trailer. Please only suggest what you have tried and know will help.
> I have installed a Flowmaster cat-back exhaust but really didn't anything but
> a nicer sound.
> Thanks in advance for any help!



Bob,

I've got the same truck, but without 4WD, and a later model ('95). I never
expected to do 12 second 1/4 miles, but I have to admit, it's pretty slow. I do
get 16 MPG in mixed, mostly highway, driving, though.

I've been surfing to find things that could be done to improve the performance.
I have not made any changes yet (still under warranty), so I can't vouch
personally. There's plenty of info available for Mustangs (which shared the same
engine/trans with few differences). The problem is the difference in vehicle
weight. Personally, I think that the best way to improve performance in a truck
is to increase low-end torque--it's the only way to get a heavy vehicle off the
line. I don't think the 302 will ever crank enought torque out to do this well,
since it has such a short stroke. This engine likes to rev. You could drop a
351W in there, or find an old 400M--there's a few people on the list who have
worked with these engines. I think they're better for truck applications.

People may take issue with what I say here, but the primary goal should be an
increase in low-end torque. Here's some common-sense ideas:

(1) Reduce parasitic loads on the engine: these are water-pump, alternator, AC
compressor, PS pump. Underdrive pulleys help here. You might get another 5 to
10 lb*ft of torque, and this is across the speed range.

(2) Take that ridiculous air-intake snorkel thing off! I got rid of mine last
weekend. It comes up above and to the right of the radiator (facing the engine)
like it's some sort of cool air intake. That's what I thought it was until I
noticed that there's no opening in the hood for it to draw air through. You
won't get much, but it's free! Might put a K&N filter in while you're at it.

(3) Stay away from stuff like headers and X-pipes. These things are for
Mustangs--light cars that wind. These can actually DECREASE low-end torque.

(4) Exhaust mods don't have much effect on this engine--I think you already found
this out. The exhaust port on the stock head is very restrictive, and is the
logjam in the flow stream.

(5) Intake: most you see for Mustang applications. Edelbrock makes one
specifically for 302/5.0L truck applications that supposedly increases low-end
torque. I want to see dyno results, but have not found any to date. If anyone
has one of these, let us know how it worked out.

(6) Throttle bodies and mass-airflow sensors: until you coax about 250-300 HP out
of that motor, you don't have enough airflow loss to bother with these. Even
then, they won't help your low-end.

(7) 1.7:1 roller rockers: getting a little more lift out of those valves will
help alleviate the exhaust port flow problem. I wouldn't blindly make this mod,
though. Check valve / piston clearance first, and also for spring binding.

(8) Heads: the GT-40 heads are supposed to be a bolt-on, and help the flow
situation remarkably. In a test on a Mustang I read, they got a whopping 24 HP /
17 lb*ft torque increase (peak) just changing the heads. Since they didn't
publish the dyno curve (just the peak), I don't know if there is a low-end
advantage or disadvantage. As long as the port volume is not significantly
larger, a low-end improvement should come as well. There are other heads out
there, from motorsport, Edelbrock , and TFS, but most, if not all, of these
require valve relief in the pistons. Obviously not a bolt-on.

(9) If you do heads / rockers / intake / underdrive pulleys / with your exhaust,
you might be pushing 250HP / 300 lb*ft torque. You might start playing with MAF
sensors and throttle bodies then for improvements. K&N filter might buy 4 HP or
so at this level. A performance chip might as well, but you will be buying more
expensive fuel because they add spark advance.

(10) Now, how long will your AOD last with the extra power? The transmission guy
(thanks to whoever posted the website address for the drivetrain page in the past
few days) says he sees a lot of AODE (what I've got) failures in the 40K to 60K
mile range. He says the E4OD isn't too much better.

Other stuff:

Add a supercharger? There are some on the list running them, but now you're
talking big bucks. Don't expect milage improvements!

High-stall speed torque converter? Let that 302 build some revs and get into its
power band. I don't know if you can find a high stall with a lockup clutch. You
could really screw up your drivability here, and the stall speed is related to
your engine output, so make this selection after you've done all your engine
mods. Milage will be adversely affected.

I'm surprised that it's that bad with 4.10 gears (I've got 3:55s). Do you have
oversized tires? That'll kill your low-end torque for sure--and your milage.

Body lifted? Makes more frontal area = more aerodynamic drag. A bed cover can
help milage slightly.

Sorry for the ramblings. Keep us posted on your changes.

- --
Best Regards,

Dave Baldwin

Dallas, TX 75243
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 14:58:52 -0600
From: John Cassis
Subject: Third gear slips a little!!

I agree with you Tom, could'nt he try putting it in forth or fifth at a =
low RPM and put it to the floor? I had an 81' To%$# that when the =
clutch went out in it it always started slipping in 5th gear. Anyway =
like Tom said sounds like the clutch is going, going, GONE!!! If you =
dont have a 4x4 its pretty easy. I did mine on my 4x4 and it was a major =
pain. Had to pull the T-case just to have room to pull the trany. Took =
almost all day. I was on my back in the garage by myself, so with some =
help you could do it little quicker. Anyway good luck.

John Cassis
The Danger Ranger
93, STX 4x4 3.0/5-speed

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:23:32 EST
From: Iguannna
Subject: Re: fordtrucks 4.6l in Ranger

In a message dated 1/20/98 2:31:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, owner-
fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net writes:

> chadlyr ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>
> small
> V-8.
> The 4.6L maybe.
>
> Chad

If you can get an overhead cam 90 degree V8 into a ranger go for it, and good
luck, it won't fit cause it is way too wide! Same goes for the 4.2l V-6. The
5.0l cam in block barley fits as it is!

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 18:22:41 -0500
From: "The Lublin Family"
Subject: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems)

Hi all:

Just as I think that the '81 will actually get me through the winter it starts pulling more crap on me! About 2 hours ago, I
pulled the battery off it and stuck it on my '85 so I could fire it up, as it has not been started since December. Well I stuck
the batter back on the '81 and all the accessories work, but I am not getting any juice to the starter. It has had the starter
relay replaced about a month ago, so I highly doubt it could be that. I replaced one of the battery terminals and that still did
not help. Could the battery cables be corroded or maybe the cable going from the relay to the starter be corroded? What else
could it be?

Frustrated,

Chris "Lube" Lublin.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:34:47 -0800
From: Mike Marcum
Subject: RE: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems)

Chris,

I've had problems with corroded battery cables in the past. They
looked OK from the outside, but they were corroded on the inside. Go
ahead and bend them a bit, if you hear crackling sounds, then they're
probably shot.

- - Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Lublin Family [SMTP:lublin tir.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 3:23 PM
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Subject: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems)
>
> Hi all:
>
> Just as I think that the '81 will actually get me through the winter
> it starts pulling more crap on me! About 2 hours ago, I
> pulled the battery off it and stuck it on my '85 so I could fire it
> up, as it has not been started since December. Well I stuck
> the batter back on the '81 and all the accessories work, but I am not
> getting any juice to the starter. It has had the starter
> relay replaced about a month ago, so I highly doubt it could be that.
> I replaced one of the battery terminals and that still did
> not help. Could the battery cables be corroded or maybe the cable
> going from the relay to the starter be corroded? What else
> could it be?
>
> Frustrated,
>
> Chris "Lube" Lublin.
>
>
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer
> --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net,
> |
> | List removal instructions on the website.
> |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
> -----------------+

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 19:40:22 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: problem with F150 5.0

David J. Baldwin wrote:

> People may take issue with what I say here, but the primary goal should be an
> increase in low-end torque. Here's some common-sense ideas:
>

Dave, I wholeheartedly agree with you here. Don't build for hp and then expect alot
of torque, the hp will come as a direct result of building for torque.

> (3) Stay away from stuff like headers and X-pipes. These things are for
> Mustangs--light cars that wind. These can actually DECREASE low-end torque.

> Contrarily, I wholeheartedly DISagree with this statement. Although, it is
> possible to buy the WRONG type of headers for this. When searching for headers,
> specify to dealers you want them for low-end torque. Things like primary tube
> length/diameter, collector diameter/length, whether or not it's a tri-Y can make a
> big difference in the powerband of the headers. As for crossover pipes, they
> actually can INCREASE low-end torque if they are the same diameter as the dual
> exhaust and placed as close to the header collectors as is possible (some trucks
> have too many underside interference problems here). Also, don't put on some mondo
> huge diameter dual exhaust, this is definitely for hp and you will loose torque.
> But the size depends on the hp/torque range of the modified motor. You wouldn't
> put dual 2" exhaust on a 400hp motor, that would be far too restrictive, on the
> other hand, a dual 3" is a little big for a 180 hp motor.
>
> (5) Intake: most you see for Mustang applications. Edelbrock makes one
> specifically for 302/5.0L truck applications that supposedly increases low-end
> torque. I want to see dyno results, but have not found any to date. If anyone
> has one of these, let us know how it worked out.

The Edelbrock Performer has its' peak range from idle to 5500 rpm, perfect for a
truck, whereas the Performer RPM ranges from 1500 to 6500 RPM, more suited to a
Mustang. On manifolds, things like dual or single plane alone tell you the peak
range it was built for. Single plan manifolds are built for racing and the highrise
are even moreso.

>
>
> (7) 1.7:1 roller rockers: getting a little more lift out of those valves will
> help alleviate the exhaust port flow problem. I wouldn't blindly make this mod,
> though. Check valve / piston clearance first, and also for spring binding.
>

I'd look at 1.6:1 ratios first. But I do agree w/research before this is done, too
large of lift can certainly add to the hp curve, but if you loose all low end torque,
what's the sense.

Hope you don't think I'm picking on ya here Dave, these are just some things that I
know to be true about engines. I also agree w/you about the longer stroke of the
351W, in fact some say this motor was built specifically for trucks and that makes
sense, then increased deck high/longer stroke make it a perfect torque motor. The
302 however is limited here with the shorter stroke.
Later,
Randy

>
>

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 16:40:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Rex Edmiston
Subject: '97 F-150 - stock radio wiring ???

Hi all,

My son just bought above truck - I had to co-sign :(

He installed an aftermarket stereo and CD changer and I took the
stock unit - AM/FM w/cassette. I'm sticking this thing in a '76
D *ge W200 4X4. It fits believe it or not. So the question...

There are 3 Orange wires designated for Dimmer, Dimmer Ground
and Dimmer something. What are these things and what do they
connect with? Do they even need to be connected?

Also, the engine is a 4.2 V6. What family is this from or...is it
brand new?

Thanks....rex

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 17:23:35 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: My error

Ryan Penner wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Royse
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Date: Monday, January 19, 1998 12:10 AM
> Subject: Re: My error
>
> >It's too bad really. I think the Ranger could benefit greatly from a small
> V-8.
> >The 4.6L maybe.
> >
> >Chad
>
> I think they should add the 4.2l v-6 to the ranger, its got to have more
> power than the 4.0l.
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

I would image more mid and high end power but doubt it has any extra
torque down low!

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 19:56:50 -0800
From: Randy
Subject: Re: More Ford electrical problems (starting system problems)

Yes, Chris, if most certainly can be the wiring. You cannot always see the corrosion, fray or break either since it may be somewhere
under any point of the insulation. When you hooked up the battery, did you hear any noises? Pop, zap? You probably didn't, but
thought I'd ask. It sounds to me like the only thing you moved on the truck while doing this was the cables, so I'd most certainly
start there. Remember the starter pulls a ton of amperage from the battery, up to 250 amps if my memory serves me correctly, so
anything wrong w/the cable and you can see that it wouldn't be able to draw what it needs. The accessories pull much smaller loads,
maybe 20 for lights, 5-7 for radio, stuff like that, so it's possible to run all these w/o the starter getting juice. I would start
disconnecting cables and check them. This will not be a waste of time even if they are all good, because this will give you a chance
to clean ALL the contact points. The starter, the selenoid, the battery, do not let ANY contact points go uncleaned, since
corrosion/dirt can cause a major restriction in your lines. If you find a wire to be bad, they're rather inexpensive at your local
parts store. Remove the cables one at a time, so you don't get confused or reassemble incorrectly. If you think you're having trouble
now, try messing them up!! Heat can also be an enemy to the wiring, do any cables run too close to the exhaust? This could be a place
to start. I know this stuff sounds kinda lame, but I once had a buddy whos' car wouldn't start. By simply cleaning all the contact
points (his battery checked out ok) he started it right away and had no further problems for years. Also, did the battery get drained
starting the other car? That's about all I've got for ya, except to say the baking soda (I think that's it, whatever the stuff is you
put in the fridge so food doesn't stink it up) is a fantastic corrosion cleaner.
Later,
Randy

The Lublin Family wrote:

> Hi all:
>
> Just as I think that the '81 will actually get me through the winter it starts pulling more crap on me! About 2 hours ago, I
> pulled the battery off it and stuck it on my '85 so I could fire it up, as it has not been started since December. Well I stuck
> the batter back on the '81 and all the accessories work, but I am not getting any juice to the starter. It has had the starter
> relay replaced about a month ago, so I highly doubt it could be that. I replaced one of the battery terminals and that still did
> not help. Could the battery cables be corroded or maybe the cable going from the relay to the starter be corroded? What else
> could it be?
>
> Frustrated,
>
> Chris "Lube" Lublin.
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | List removal instructions on the website. |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 23:25:44 EST
From: johnmck juno.com (John R. McKee)
Subject: F-150 50th Anniversary Stickers

They look great! Does anyone know where can we get one?

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

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 22:59:06 -0500
From: "Mark H. Neblett"
Subject: Re: Randy's wiper switch

I'm the guy who wrote about the wiper switch; sorry to hear it didn't work
out (did I forget the part about getting a wife/significant other with tiny
fingers to do the dirty work?) Oh well, they wouldn't appreciate the
mechanical adventure a new experiment brings. . .

The switch is not available by itself, you have to pick up the entire stalk
assembly, $86 w/tax at my local FoMoCo outlet.

Removal/installation is straightforward, although working around the plastic
steering column covers is a bit of a pain. I removed the lower cover on the
steering column (and the panel across the bottom of the dash for a little
extra clearance), unscrewed/removed the tilt wheel handle (_very tight_),
then used a fair amount of force to get the upper cover pulled/twisted up
enough to get to the screws holding the stalk assembly to the steering
column. Remove the 3 or 4 T-20 (?) torx screws and then two fair-sized
electrical connectors on the back of the assembly. The only really annoying
part is the wiring harness has almost no slack in it, so you have to work in
cramped quarters to get the connectors off. The new switch just
plugs/screws back in. I started with the steering wheel in the
straight-ahead position and made sure the new switch went on in the center
position (not signaling a left or right turn); I don't know whether it made
a difference, but I thought it would minimize the chances of screwing the
reassembly up.

>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 07:56:16 -0800
>From: rockinghorse webtv.net (Randall Goolsby)
>Subject: Re: Laura's comments,delay wipers on 94 Bronco....


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.