Return-Path:
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 03:50:19 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V2 #40
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Saturday, January 31 1998 Volume 02 : Number 040



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 And Newer Trucks Digest
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
fordtrucks80up-digest-request listservice.net
with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send
email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

RE: '99 Superduty Article ["Chapman, David P" ]
Alldata CD-ROM [David Chapman ]
302-6 EGR tube problem [Floyd J Hagen ]
Axle Ratios [Sean Winters ]
Re: 302-6 EGR tube problem [Chad Royse ]
Re: 302-6 EGR tube problem [Chad Royse ]
Fuel Economy, Ford 6.8 V-10 ["Bond R. Milton" ]
Re: Alldata CD-ROM [Thundercraft ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V2 #38 [PSLDAVE aol.com]
TSBs? [Midwest96 aol.com]
Re: TSBs? [Thundercraft ]

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

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 08:18:07 -0500
From: "Chapman, David P"
Subject: RE: '99 Superduty Article

I've been trying to look at this web site for weeks, but I always get a
message that the server is not responding. Anyone else having problems
with it.

Dave C.

> ----------
> From: Mitch Biarsky[SMTP:mitch.biarsky mci2000.com]
> Reply To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 1998 7:37 PM
> To: fordtrucks80up-digest
> Subject: '99 Superduty Article
>
> FourWheeler has a new article on the '99 Superduty's
>
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fourwheeler.com/newtrucks/roadtest/1999/index.html
>
> Mitch
>
> +-------------- 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: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 08:48:20 -0500
From: David Chapman
Subject: Alldata CD-ROM

In Russ's "Happy Story" he mentions the alldata.com web site. I was
wondering if anyone has purchased their automotive CD-ROM. If so, is it
any good?

Dave C.

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 09:28:19 -0700 (MST)
From: Floyd J Hagen
Subject: 302-6 EGR tube problem

Greetings from Montana.
I own an 86 Fullsize Bronco with the 300 straight 6 engine. Recently the
EGR tube that runs from the exhaust manifold to the EGR assembly under the
carb cracked. It cracked right at the first bend coming from the
manifold. I cut the pipe and replaced the cracked section with a silicone
preheater tubing, but since the tube is so close to the exhaust manifold
it eventually dries out and either slips off or cracks. Ford wants 85
bucks for a new one. I refuse to pay that much for a metal pipe.
Numerous phone calls and trips to salvage yards have failed to locate a
replacement.

My solution was to pinch the pipe at the manifold and cut the smog pump
belt (No emmissions in Montana). Even with the exhaust leak (I'm waiting
till a freinds gets back in town to weld up and completely plug the pinch
job) it seems to run better.

With only cold air going to the valves I wonder how could this fix is.
I'd appreciate any opinions on this, since the engine was designed to work
with the EGR pipe intact. Eventually I'll come across a viable
replacement and I wonder if I shouldn't just leave the engine the way it
is now (minus the EGR pipe) since it appears to be running better.

thanks

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 11:17:44 -0600
From: Sean Winters
Subject: Axle Ratios

I know this has been beat to death, but does anyone know what axle
ratios were available on 82 F-100 6 cyls with the 3sp on the column? The
axle tag has been removed and I need to know what the options were so I
can guesstimate mine to buy a speedometer gear.

Thanks!!!

Sean Winters

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:21:54 -0800
From: Chad Royse
Subject: Re: 302-6 EGR tube problem

Get on the net and look up parts locators and parts finders. I needed to
replace my friend's Ranger's turnsignal assembly (backed into it with my F250,
oops!). A place in New York had it in stock and for $27. All the dealers
around here wanted $58 and higher.

Floyd J Hagen wrote:

> Greetings from Montana.
> I own an 86 Fullsize Bronco with the 300 straight 6 engine. Recently the
> EGR tube that runs from the exhaust manifold to the EGR assembly under the
> carb cracked. It cracked right at the first bend coming from the
> manifold. I cut the pipe and replaced the cracked section with a silicone
> preheater tubing, but since the tube is so close to the exhaust manifold
> it eventually dries out and either slips off or cracks. Ford wants 85
> bucks for a new one. I refuse to pay that much for a metal pipe.
> Numerous phone calls and trips to salvage yards have failed to locate a
> replacement.
>
> My solution was to pinch the pipe at the manifold and cut the smog pump
> belt (No emmissions in Montana). Even with the exhaust leak (I'm waiting
> till a freinds gets back in town to weld up and completely plug the pinch
> job) it seems to run better.
>
> With only cold air going to the valves I wonder how could this fix is.
> I'd appreciate any opinions on this, since the engine was designed to work
> with the EGR pipe intact. Eventually I'll come across a viable
> replacement and I wonder if I shouldn't just leave the engine the way it
> is now (minus the EGR pipe) since it appears to be running better.
>
> thanks
>
> +-------------- 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: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:29:45 -0800
From: Chad Royse
Subject: Re: 302-6 EGR tube problem

Me again. The site that did me the most good was http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.directauto.com.
Good Luck!

Floyd J Hagen wrote:

> Greetings from Montana.
> I own an 86 Fullsize Bronco with the 300 straight 6 engine. Recently the
> EGR tube that runs from the exhaust manifold to the EGR assembly under the
> carb cracked. It cracked right at the first bend coming from the
> manifold. I cut the pipe and replaced the cracked section with a silicone
> preheater tubing, but since the tube is so close to the exhaust manifold
> it eventually dries out and either slips off or cracks. Ford wants 85
> bucks for a new one. I refuse to pay that much for a metal pipe.
> Numerous phone calls and trips to salvage yards have failed to locate a
> replacement.
>
> My solution was to pinch the pipe at the manifold and cut the smog pump
> belt (No emmissions in Montana). Even with the exhaust leak (I'm waiting
> till a freinds gets back in town to weld up and completely plug the pinch
> job) it seems to run better.
>
> With only cold air going to the valves I wonder how could this fix is.
> I'd appreciate any opinions on this, since the engine was designed to work
> with the EGR pipe intact. Eventually I'll come across a viable
> replacement and I wonder if I shouldn't just leave the engine the way it
> is now (minus the EGR pipe) since it appears to be running better.
>
> thanks
>
> +-------------- 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: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:28:33 -0800
From: "Bond R. Milton"
Subject: Fuel Economy, Ford 6.8 V-10

Trailer Boats magazine had an article comparing large vans as boat tow
vehicles (February 1998, page 74). The following partial table is
copied from page 76:

1998 TOW VEHICLE OF THE YEAR CHARTS

Fuel Economy (mpg)
Highway Mountain Flatland
Non-Towing Towing Towing Average

Ford Diesel 21.0 10.7 10.5 14.1
GMC Savana 18.7 9.2 10.2 12.7
Ford 6.8 V-10 16.6 9.2 9.4 11.8
Chevrolet Express 14.8 9.3 9.0 11.0

Acceleration (seconds)
0-55 40-60 0-55 40-60
Non-towing Non-towing Towing
Towing Average
Ford 6.8 V-10 9.6 6.2 16.9
12.3 11.25
Chevrolet Express 10.7 5.8 20.5
10.8 11.95
Ford Diesel 11.7 7.1 20.4
13.6 13.20
GMC Savana 12.5 7.2 20.9
14.0 13.65

In this article the Ford Club Wagon HD 6.8 V-10 was ranked first and the
Ford Club Wagon HD 7.3 V-8 diesel was second. The V-10 had a 3.73:1
axle ratio and the diesel 3.55:1. The boat and trailer weighed 6020
lbs. "One surprise was how well the Ford 6.8 V-10 managed its fuel,
especially when not towing. It had a non-towing fuel-economy figure of
16.6 mpg which is more than 3-mpg better than the same type of van could
get with the old 7.5 V-8." The GMC Savana had a 6.5 turbodiesel and the
Chevrolet Express a 7.4 V-8. Trailer Boats E-Mail: tbmeditors aol.com.
Subscription information: (800) 877-5251.

> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 11:10:50 -0800
> From: John Yee
> Subject: Re: V10 mileage
>
> There was an article in trailer life back a few months ago. It had the v10 with
> 3:73 gearing and the auto in a long wheel base van. Unfortunately I don't
> remember the exact numbers. I look and report back if it doesn't get posted.
>
> One number I do remember reading is that the v10 is about 20% increase from the
> 460.
>
> >From some of the earlier v10 articles...
>
> "We didn't have an opportunity to check fuel economy, but a Ford spokesman
> claimed the V-10 engine has been delivering from 13 to 25 percent
> improvements, with about a 19.8 percent average overall, compared to the old
> 7.5-liter V-8. Those figures are from fleet testing under real world
> conditions, as opposed to dynamometer testing in a lab."
>
> As Josh said, It's not much. Maybe 1-2 mpg better than the 460.
>
>
> - -john
>
> At 01:19 PM 1/29/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >I don't have any info on V10 mileage for ya. Ford hasn't told us,
> >and I don't want to guess. They claim to be better than the 460, but
> >not by much.
> >
> >Josh
> >KNBD87D prodigy.com

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:15:51 -0800
From: Thundercraft
Subject: Re: Alldata CD-ROM

David Chapman wrote:
>
> In Russ's "Happy Story" he mentions the alldata.com web site. I was
> wondering if anyone has purchased their automotive CD-ROM. If so, is it
> any good?
>
> Dave C.

I have their disk. The manual side of it is probably on par with
Chiltons or similar manuals. It is not as complete as say a genuine
Ford factory shop manual.

I also got all the tsb's with mine and that was very helpful as that is
information straight from Ford. Nice to know that there are some real
answers to some common problems. Too bad these problems are still built
into the vehicles year after year, or worse yet, introduced into new
models. If a thingamajig works, why redesign it.

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 21:29:11 EST
From: PSLDAVE aol.com
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V2 #38

DO NOT USE FIRST GEAR. PULL AWAY IN SECOND WITH A GOOD DOSE OF THE RIGHT
FOOT. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEMS. THE AFORESAID MAY HELP OVERCOME
YOUR PROBLEMS. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO USE FIRST GEAR ANYWay? i regularly pull
away from the lights in third cos i didnt notice or i forgot what i was doing
and FEED IN THE CLUTCH APPROPRIATELY. INCIDENTALLY, IS YOUR TRUCK PETROL OR
DEISEL FIRED. MINE BUIRNS OIL AND PULLS LIKE A LOCOMOTIVE HAVING JUST BEEN
RUN IN AFTER 120000 MILES.

YOUR PROBLEM HAS BEEN CALLED CLUTCH MANGLE AND RESULTS IN A JERKY TAKEAWAY.
HIT THE GO PEDAL AND DROP IN THE CLUTCH A LITTLE FASTER. IF THIS DOES NOT
WORK OR IF I HAVE COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR PROBLEM PLEASE CALL BACK. IT
IS ENTIRELY POSSINBLE THAT, DUE TO THE FACT THAT I HAVE JUST RETURENED FROM A
BURNS' SUPPER AT A NEARBYE VILLAGE HERE IN AYRSHIRE SCOTLAND, MY JUDGEMENT AND
MEMORY MAY BE LETTING ME DOWN SOMEWHAT

MT ONLY QUALIFING ATTRIBUTES ARE OWNERSHIP OF A F350 DOUBLE DUALLY DIESDEL
MONSTER WHICH I LOVE, MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN OF MY LONHG SUFFERING AND MUCH MORE
ADMIRABLE LIFE PARTNER, JOKINGLY REFERRED TO, AS, THE WIFE.

I NOW HAVEW TO STOP PUNCHING MY KEY BOARD SINCE OI AM SHORTLY ABOUT TO LOSE
THEW POWER OF REASON LET ALONE COORDINATION DUE TO TJHE LARGE QUANTITIES OF
STRONG DRIONKL WHICH I APPEAR TO HAVE IMBIBED .

GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR SNATCHIONG THINGY. I HOPE YOURN FIUTURE PROGRESS IS
SMOOTHER.

BEST REGARDS, THROUGFH A BRANDY HAZE,



DAVE

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

Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 00:59:00 EST
From: Midwest96 aol.com
Subject: TSBs?

I'm sure this has been asked a miilion times before, but what does TSB stand
for?

Craig

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

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 22:48:35 -0800
From: Thundercraft
Subject: Re: TSBs?

Midwest96 aol.com wrote:
>
> I'm sure this has been asked a miilion times before, but what does TSB stand
> for?
>
> Craig

....


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.