Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 15:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #31
X-Loop: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/31
To: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks80up-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 31

Today's Topics:

Major facelift on website [Ken Payne ]
Re: Stock Tachometer ["chita" ]
Re: Stock Tachometer ["J. Martin"
1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manifold [Jim Cannon ]
Re: 1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manif [Ken Payne ]
Re: 1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manif ["J. Martin"
Ford F350 PowerStroke [Jan Campbell
Re: killing battery problem [Jay Chlebowski ]
Re: Aux Idle Control Was -> Stock Ta [Jay Chlebowski ]
Re: Ford F350 PowerStroke [Jay Chlebowski ]
June archives are on the web site [Ken Payne ]
Air Conditioner blowing white smoke ["D S Morgan" ]
RE: Ford F350 PowerStroke ["DAVID MUMMERY"
1981 F-100 A/C ["MARC NIRENBERG"
Re: Air Conditioner blowing white sm [CRock21 aol.com ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 [Bill Funk ]
302 CID Heads [Barry Price
Re: 302 CID Heads ["S. Spaulding"
85 ford bronco II how to install 302 [Peter & Sarah Bridge
Re: killing battery problem [Husk77 aol.com ]
RE: 302 CID Heads [pharrell bae.uga.edu (Graphics & Re]

Administrivia:

____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
____________________________________________________________________


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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 14:12:34 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Major facelift on website
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The web site has temporarily moved back to its old location
(http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks) until Dragonfire
Internet Services can get their performance problems resolved.

Additionally, I've done a major rework of the web pages.
They should look alot more professional now and navigation
should be extremely easy. The same information is provided
but in an easier to use format. Let me know what you guys/gals
think (kpayne mindspring.com). I think you'll like it.

Lastly, a couple people have sent me logos. If you would like
to submit a logo, I'm working on a method to rotate logos on
the main page until we can vote of which to use.

-Ken
1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
List Maintainer, send comments or suggestions to: kpayne mindspring.com
Visit our web site (subscribe/unsubscribe forms are there):
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~site/fordtrucks

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 11:14:06 -0700
From: "chita"
To:
Subject: Re: Stock Tachometer
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Did anybody answer Radu's querstion from June 7? Did I miss it?


----------
> From: Radu Lykan
> To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
> Subject: Stock Tachometer
> Date: Saturday, June 07, 1997 2:08 AM
>
> Does anybody know what the stock tach for an '82 F-250, or even if it had
a
> stock tach? The guy I bought the truck from had a Summit brand bolt-on
tach
> sticking off the steering column. I was wondering if there was a stock
one
> because there's a spot in my dash with what looks like a filler panel in
it.

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

Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 13:57:14 -0800
From: "J. Martin"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Stock Tachometer
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't recall seeing anyone answer that Q about the tach...????
Was there anything you wanted to know? All I know, is that the tach was
an option. If you didn't order the tach, you still got the
"indicatorless" tach face on your gauge panel. You could always stick an
aftermarket tach in it's place...but I don't know of any that would look
good, fit-and-form-wise.

Josh --> '88 FDR

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:18:42 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
To: Ford Trucks
Subject: 1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manifold
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello, all-

As you can tell from the Subject, I have a question about the exhaust
manifold on this vehicle. It sounds like I am developing an exhaust leak
near cyl #1 or 2 (hard to tell, but I can hear it leaking down there).

Engine was rebuilt at 90k miles; truck has 132k miles on it now.

Looking through the shop manual, it appears they used no exhaust
manifold gasket, only an intake manifold gasket. Is that right? If I
pull these manifolds off as a set and clean them up, is there an
aftermarket gasket set available to get it to seal when I put it back
on?

Any other suggestions on how to tackle this? I have not pulled it off
yet; just started looking at it today to try to find the source of the
recent added exhaust noise.

Performance has also been going down lately (last month or so). I don't
know if it is related to the exhaust leak. Possibility of a clogged (or
clogging) cat converter? Added back pressure making what used to be a
minor leak become more noticable... What do you think?

Any ideas or suggestions anyone has would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Jim Cannon
Houston, TX

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 19:31:30 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manifold
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 06:18 PM 6/28/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Hello, all-
>
>As you can tell from the Subject, I have a question about the exhaust
>manifold on this vehicle. It sounds like I am developing an exhaust leak
>near cyl #1 or 2 (hard to tell, but I can hear it leaking down there).
>
>Engine was rebuilt at 90k miles; truck has 132k miles on it now.
>
>Looking through the shop manual, it appears they used no exhaust
>manifold gasket, only an intake manifold gasket. Is that right? If I
>pull these manifolds off as a set and clean them up, is there an
>aftermarket gasket set available to get it to seal when I put it back
>on?
>
>Any other suggestions on how to tackle this? I have not pulled it off
>yet; just started looking at it today to try to find the source of the
>recent added exhaust noise.
>
>Performance has also been going down lately (last month or so). I don't
>know if it is related to the exhaust leak. Possibility of a clogged (or
>clogging) cat converter? Added back pressure making what used to be a
>minor leak become more noticable... What do you think?
>
>Any ideas or suggestions anyone has would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Regards,
>Jim Cannon
>Houston, TX
>

It should have a metal "crush" style exhaust manifold.
If you don't take care of it soon you can burn an exhaust
valve. Make sure you torque the manifold down according
to specs or you'll end up replacing the new gasket real
quickly. Also, re-torque the manifold after about 1000
miles.

-Ken
1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
List Maintainer, send comments or suggestions to: kpayne mindspring.com
Visit our web site (subscribe/unsubscribe forms are there):
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~site/fordtrucks

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

Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:49:56 -0800
From: "J. Martin"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 1980 F-150 300 CID exhaust manifold
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Jim,

Nice to see a fellow Houstonian on the list...I wonder how many others
there are out there...ANYWAY,
A clogged cat WILL SIGNIFICANTLY reduce your performance. Once upon a
time, a co-worker of mine (Chubby Blazer, 2.8L V6) noticed a significant
decrease in his mpg average. He couldn't find the problem--eventually he
drained the "BB's" out of his catalytic converter (illegal, really), and
instantly got his 9mpg back. His type of converter is NOT very
efficient, performance-wise. The monolithic (honeycomb-style) ones are
better for performance, and they cost more, too.
That could be part of your problem, but if it's just started within the
last month, or so, you'd almost think it was something else--like a plug
wire going bad, spark plugs, etc. How about a tune-up? ;) That might
help you find the culprit...

Josh --> '88 FDR


> clogging) cat converter? Added back pressure making what used to be a
> minor leak become more noticable... What do you think?
>
> Any ideas or suggestions anyone has would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Jim Cannon
> Houston, TX

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 19:45:36 -0700
From: Jan Campbell
To: Ford Trucks
Subject: Ford F350 PowerStroke
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have been told by one dealer that there will be no 1998 model. I am
considering buying a new truck, but I wasn't planning on a 1997 model;
any input regarding this would be greatly appreciated.

Matt

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 20:03:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jay Chlebowski
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: killing battery problem
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



>Or you could be fighting a
>bad starter. Try the few items mentioned first and if still no success
>write us back and we'll keep going.
>
>G. E. Pierce.

Just a small comment here. Not that I've had any related problems but
comments like the above make me smile and remind why I like lists like
these so much -- people are always willing to work through a problem with
ya'.

We're all just one small town community connected through miles of cables
and bunches of 1's and 0's.

Take care & happy trucking - and keep the questions and answers coming!

Best Regards,
Jay

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 20:20:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jay Chlebowski
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Aux Idle Control Was -> Stock Tachometer
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Did anybody answer Radu's querstion from June 7? Did I miss it?
>
>
>----------
>> From: Radu Lykan
>> To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
>> Subject: Stock Tachometer
>> Date: Saturday, June 07, 1997 2:08 AM
>>
>> Does anybody know what the stock tach for an '82 F-250, or even if it had
>a
>> stock tach? The guy I bought the truck from had a Summit brand bolt-on
>tach
>> sticking off the steering column. I was wondering if there was a stock
>one
>> because there's a spot in my dash with what looks like a filler panel in
>it.

I can't answer the above comment, but I do have a tachometer comment that
might be interesting to some of the newer truck owners.

About two months ago I took delivery of my '97 F350 Crew Cab 4WD SRW
PowerStroke, with which I ordered the "Auxilary Idle Control" option. It
wasn't listed in the Ford sales literature, and barely mentioned in the
(dealer-only) Tech Manuals, but I found it on the Kelly Blue Book Site when
I was pricing the beast. i thought it would come in handy with our PTO
operations as well as with warmup on cold mornings.

Anyway, it amounts to a digital control box with lighted buttons that sits
near the floor smack dab in the middle of the dash near the tranny hump.
It provides all kinds of cool functions such as customizable idle points
and the abilty to vary idle RPM to keep the charging system at or above
14.1 volts.

Additionally, when it's just sitting there, it functions as a digital tach.
I've found with the digital tach that my dash-mounted tach is pretty
optimistic. I was towing uphill with a large load and watching the
dash-mounted tach climb to about 3200, and the digital tach was still just
below 3000. According to my Ford tech guy, the digital tach is tied into
the PowerStroke PCM, and is as accurate as the computers the shop uses, so
that means that our dash-mounted ones are pretty imprecise, and you may not
be shifting or revving where you should be. Also, you'd be amazed how much
the PowerStroke's idle can vary while just sitting there and the
dash-mounted tach doesn't move!

Just some food for thought. Anyways, I've had quite a few questions on the
thing form newsgroup readers as to what it looks like and how it functions.
I've got a QuickTake camera and will snap a few picks if we can somehow
find some space to stick them on our homepage.

Best Regards,
Jay

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 20:25:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jay Chlebowski
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Ford F350 PowerStroke
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>I have been told by one dealer that there will be no 1998 model. I am
>considering buying a new truck, but I wasn't planning on a 1997 model;
>any input regarding this would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Matt

According to my dealer, they will introduce next years F250HD & F350 trucks
as completely redesigned 1999 models, much like they did with the F150
trucks when they introduced the new (yuck!) design (just my opinion folks,
don't fret). We're all waiting to see if they kept the F350 as strong as
the current trucks, or if they succumbed to IFS madness.

Best Regards,
Jay

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 21:32:31 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: June archives are on the web site
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Since I promised someone I would get the archives on the
web site ASAP I've put the June archives up 2 days in
advance.

-Ken
1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
List Maintainer, send comments or suggestions to: kpayne mindspring.com
Visit our web site (subscribe/unsubscribe forms are there):
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~site/fordtrucks

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 20:58:35 -0500
From: "D S Morgan"
To: "Fordnatics" ,
Subject: Air Conditioner blowing white smoke
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have a 1981 Ford F100. The air conditioner blows 48 degree air but blows
white smoke immediately when turned on. At first I thought it may be
freezing up but it does it immediately.

Any help would be greatly appreciated

Baking in Louisiana sun,

David

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 97 02:12:25 UT
From: "DAVID MUMMERY"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: RE: Ford F350 PowerStroke
Message-Id:

Matt, your dealer is telling the truth. Ford is going to introduce the 1999
F350 in 1998. Some what like what they did with the F150. So if you like this
body(1997) they are going to make them until December 31 or around then. The
motors are going to be different from what I was told also.

----------
From: Jan Campbell
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 1997 9:45 PM
To: Ford Trucks
Subject: Ford F350 PowerStroke

I have been told by one dealer that there will be no 1998 model. I am
considering buying a new truck, but I wasn't planning on a 1997 model;
any input regarding this would be greatly appreciated.

Matt


____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 97 21:09:19 CDT
From: "MARC NIRENBERG"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: 1981 F-100 A/C
Message-Id:

dear white smoke...

I have a 1981 F-100 and about a year ago my A/C blew white smoke.
It turned out to be a leak in my heater core. A little anti-freeze
was getting into the ducts. You may want to check into this. Try
smelling the smoke...If it smells like anti-freeze then you know for sure
to check the core. (very simple task). If not, then maybe someone else
may know.
Marc. 1981 F-100 (237k and still going
strong WITH A/C all orig.)
1996 Taurus (wife's POS 23k and
barely going)

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 22:24:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: CRock21 aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Air Conditioner blowing white smoke
Message-ID:

The white smoke is not a problem. I think it is a good indication that your
A/C is kicking ass. I had a mustang that blew white smoke and it was the
best a/c i ever had. I am also an aircraft technician and aircraft A/C blows
the white smoke all the time. I'm not sure what causes it, but as long as its
cold, i wouldnt worry about it.

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

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 19:43:58 -0700
From: Bill Funk
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #30
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 97 16:34:33 EDT
> From: pharrell bae.uga.edu (Graphics & Research Fabrication)
> To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
> Subject: RV cams for 4WD(and free software)
> Message-Id:
>
> Sorry for the length of this post, but some of you are really trying to be
> helpful, and I needed to put in some of the information.
>
> Josh said:
> -----------------------
> >I don't know what kind of cam you got there...RV/Tow cams are LOW REV
> >cams. They're made to maximize torque, to get the heavier rigs moving--
> >and to help keep them moving, efficiently. 7mpg is ABSOLUTELY
> >unacceptable...I would expect better performance (Mileage) from a "hi
> >perf" cam. There are a couple of things that can cause your
> >mileage/performance to take a nose dive, like that.
> ------------------------
> I've checked compression, it's 130 psi on every cylinder. I installed the
> cam dot to dot at #1 TDC. I'm getting around 18" of manifold vacuum at
> idle.
...

> Josh, you or Jim (or anybody else) got any ideas other than changing
> gearing on my 4wd? It looks like my truck could be geared too high to even
> use an RV camshaft. That just doesn't make any sense to me.
>
> Still scratching my head,
> Pat
> pharrell bae.uga.edu

As with the others here, I can't see what's wrong. Hwoever, there are
several things *you* can check.
Have you tried pullung the plugs after a run at speed? You want to try
this after running at normal RPMs, without idling; to do this, you shut
the engine off, pull off to a safe place, and pull the plugs to check
for indications of running too rich.
Check the ignition timing to *MAKE SURE* it's advancing properly. Don't
just assume it is.
If your carb has a power circuit, make sure it's only opening at the
proper vacuum level.

The fact that you are pulling 18" of vacuum at idle is a good indication
the cam's in right, and the valves are right; the compression check
verifies this. This makes me think there's a problem with the carb, to
make the mileage that low; it's simply feeding in too much fuel. Do the
plug check; I think you'll find signs of rich running.

Several years ago, I rebuilt a 400M for low end grunt; a NAPA RV cam, an
Edlebrock Performer manifold, stock exhaust manifolds, dual exhaust, and
a Holly progressive 650 4V carb. It had more pull off the line than my
prersent 460 has (although it couldn't keep it up!).
Good luck!
--
Bill Funk
President, ASCII User Group
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.starlink.com/~ascii

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 08:23:23 -0700
From: Barry Price
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: 302 CID Heads
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am currently rebuilding a 1980 302 CID engine out of my 1980 Ford
Ranger. My questions is that the heads have port on the rear next to the
firewall that has a crossover tube bolted in place. The problem is that
who ever had the truck before me had cut the pipe and bent it over to
seal it. My Haynes and Chilton manual do not say anything about this
pipe. Does anyone know what it was originaly used for (I assume it's for
recirulation of the gases) and where it should correctly be terminated
on the engine? I want it put back right.
Any help would be appreciated.

1965 F100 Stepside
1980 Ford F150 Ranger

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 15:00:51 -0700
From: "S. Spaulding"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 302 CID Heads
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Barry,

On my '91, The air comes from the air pump into a control valve that
splits it between the catalytic converter and a check valve on the tube
that you are talking about. I don't know if the '81 is the same or not,
but the tube should probably at least hook up to the air pump.

Steve S.

Barry Price wrote:
>
> I am currently rebuilding a 1980 302 CID engine out of my 1980 Ford
> Ranger. My questions is that the heads have port on the rear next to the
> firewall that has a crossover tube bolted in place. The problem is that
> who ever had the truck before me had cut the pipe and bent it over to
> seal it. My Haynes and Chilton manual do not say anything about this
> pipe. Does anyone know what it was originaly used for (I assume it's for
> recirulation of the gases) and where it should correctly be terminated
> on the engine? I want it put back right.
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> 1965 F100 Stepside
> 1980 Ford F150 Ranger
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 16:37:01 -0400
From: Peter & Sarah Bridge
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: 85 ford bronco II how to install 302
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What does it take to be able to install a 302 into a 85 Bronco II??..I
was told that it would only take Mustang motor mounts and stock 74
fairlane exaust manifold is a straight bolt in switch..is it really this
easy or is there more to it???

thank you....
Peter Bridge
blue global2000.net

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

Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 17:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Husk77 aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: killing battery problem
Message-ID:

It sounds like you have a bad connection in the starting circuit to start
with.
I had a similar problem with my 86 F250 6.9L diesel and it turned out to be
the coneetions at the solonoid. The bolts were brass but the nuts and
lockwashers were steel which were rusted and caused big time resistance. I
actually saw the lockwashers get red hot while trying to crank the engine.
Isolate the starting circuit and then search out the problem. The problem
might be internal to the relay, solonoid or the starter itself. Pull the....


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.