Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 00:23:14 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #63
X-Loop: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/63
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
To: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks80up-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 63

Today's Topics:

Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 [JAMES ]
ADMIN: Read please [Ken Payne ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 ["Alan Heaberlin" ]
Re: Bronco II [ILuvTruks aol.com ]
FW: 1998 Ranger [Brian Pynn ]
Re: ford 4.0 exhaust sound [ir002129 mindspring.com (Dave & Kir]
Re: Powerstroke oil changes [Bill Funk ]
Increasing Gas Mileage ["Bradford S. Generous"
lightning wheels [ksbdj00 tamuk.edu (Johnson Bradford]
Re: '92 F-150 - Flowmaster Exhaust W ["S. Spaulding"
Re: ["Shawn & Jennifer Clark"
Re: Increasing Gas Mileage [JAMES ]
Bronco II Stuff... ["Lou Guerriero"

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
Unsubscribe: http://www.ford-trucks.com/unsubscribe.html
____________________________________________________________________


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

Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 19:39:18 -0500
From: JAMES
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #59
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Please do not send unsubsribe messages to the group or quote the digest
when making a reply. Thank you in advance. JAMES

--
WARNING!All unsolicited commercial e-mail will be charged a $500 U.S.
proofreading fee.Failure to pay within 5 days of receipt of such billing
will result in legal actions.The sending of such e-mail constitutes
acceptance of these terms.

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

Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 20:07:09 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: ADMIN: Read please
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 05:49 PM 8/6/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Please unsubscribe me.
>
>Thanks
>

I normally wouldn't say this but its getting really old...
It wouldn't bother me in the least if everyone tells marcusn mastnet.net
(privately, not through the list) what they think of people who post
71k unsubscribe replies to the list - be nice though. Our list server
filters out most bozos who post unsubscribes to the wrong address but
lately some of them have proven the rule that its impossible to make
something idiot proof because idiots are so damned ingenious. Folks,
this is getting old, it you want to unsubscribe, follow the directions
you received when you joined (everyone gets a copy of our FAQ via email
upon joining) or use the unsubscribe form on the website. I don't have
the time to hold all the hands of the world's boneheads.

Sorry to the 99% percent of you who have to put up with this garbage,
thanks for "truck speak" - it makes it all worth it.

-Ken
List Administrator, 1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
Our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
(subscribe/unsubscribe forms on the web site)

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

Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 18:38:44 -0700
From: "Alan Heaberlin"
To:
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #61
Message-Id:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BCA297.F8270740"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BCA297.F8270740
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 21:23:01 -0500
> From: silent.bob juno.com
> To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
> Subject: Re: 97 Ranger mileage
> Message-ID:
>
> On Tue, 05 Aug 1997 14:06:40 -0400 Chris Kelly
> writes:
> >Bob Leifer wrote:
>
> >> One more thing: I went under the truck and noticed that the spare,
> >although
> >> it was not a emergency donut, was only a P205 70R14, not a 225. I
> >went to
> >> the dealer, and was told that the 225 would not fit in the spare
> >wheel well
> >> underneath. I will call Ford today on that. Anybody else no about
> >this?
> ___________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >My 2.3 has plenty of zip in my splash, of course I have the 5 speed,
> >helps quite a bit. It's just as quick as my buddy's 92 Ranger 3.0
> >auto.
> >
> >Anyway the spare tire bit. My truck has 235/60/15 on it and the spare
> >is
> >the same size and fits in the tire holder. I think someone at Ford is
> >full of sh**! Good luck!
> >
> >
> >____________________________________________________________________
>
>
> huh?!? thats what i say.. my spare is the same as all the rest of my
> tires on my truck as well, and i have 14's just like you.
>
>
> .---. .-----------
> / \ __ / ------
> / / \(..)/ ----- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordManTed.com (Mustang Shop)
> ////// ' \/ ` --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com (Ranger Site)
> //// / // : : ---
> // / / /` '--
> // //..\
> =======UU====UU===[95 Ranger XLT 2.3L]=[silent.bob juno.com]===
> '//||\`
Many car dealers will install spiffy looking tire/wheel combinations or
just add RWL tires with a more agressive tread (esp on 4X4s) to improve
buyer interest. They will not however, go to the trouble of changing the
spare to match.
That's probably OK though, since All terrain radials (or any others) should
be rotated front/back so rotation stays the same (oh-oh...controversial
statement).
For jack height problems on another related post...I always carry a 4X4
block to support the jack on my Explorer or Ranger since I generally
experience tire problems (or other underneath catastrophe) when off-road. A
wood block is a good safety adjunct on uneven or sandy ground. Hope I
helped.

Buffalo Al
1994 Explorer Sport
1986 Ranger 4X4
------=_NextPart_000_01BCA297.F8270740
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">> > > =
------------------------------> > Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 =
21:23:01 -0500> From:
color=3D"#0000FF">silent.bob juno.com
color=3D"#000000">> To:
color=3D"#0000FF">fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
color=3D"#000000">> Subject: Re: 97 Ranger mileage> =
Message-ID: <
color=3D"#0000FF">19970805.213907.13390.0.silent.bob juno.com
color=3D"#000000">>> > On Tue, 05 Aug 1997 14:06:40 =
-0400 Chris Kelly <
color=3D"#0000FF">cdkelly netgsi.com
color=3D"#000000">>> writes:> >Bob Leifer =
wrote:> > >> One more thing: I went under the truck =
and noticed that the spare, > >although> >> it =
was not a emergency donut, was only a P205 70R14, not a 225. I > =
>went to> >> the dealer, and was told that the 225 would =
not fit in the spare > >wheel well> >> =
underneath. I will call Ford today on that. Anybody else no about =
> >this?> =
___________________________________________________________________&g=
t; >> >> >My 2.3 has plenty of zip in my splash, =
of course I have the 5 speed, > >helps quite a bit. It's just =
as quick as my buddy's 92 Ranger 3.0 > >auto.> =
>> >Anyway the spare tire bit. My truck has 235/60/15 on it =
and the spare > >is > >the same size and fits in the =
tire holder. I think someone at Ford is > >full of sh**! Good =
luck!> >> >> =
>____________________________________________________________________
br>> > > huh?!? thats what i say.. my spare is the same =
as all the rest of my> tires on my truck as well, and i have 14's =
just like you.> > > =
       .---. =
       .-----------> =
      /     \  __ =
 /    ------ > =
     / /     \(..)/ =
   -----
color=3D"#0000FF">http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordManTed.com
color=3D"#000000"> (Mustang Shop)  > =
    //////   ' \/ `   --- =
  
color=3D"#0000FF">http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com
color=3D"#000000"> (Ranger Site)>    //// / // : =
   : ---   >   // / =
  /  /`    '-- =
     >  // =
         //..\ =
        > =
     =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DUU=3D=3D=3D=3DUU=3D=3D=
=3D[95 Ranger XLT 2.3L]=3D[
color=3D"#0000FF">silent.bob juno.com
color=3D"#000000">]=3D=3D=3D> =
            '=
//||\`      Many car dealers will install =
spiffy looking tire/wheel combinations or just add RWL tires with a more =
agressive tread (esp on 4X4s) to improve buyer interest. They will not =
however, go to the trouble of changing the spare to match. That's =
probably OK though, since All terrain radials (or any others) should be =
rotated front/back so rotation stays the same (oh-oh...controversial =
statement).For jack height problems on another related post...I =
always carry a 4X4 block to support the jack on my Explorer or Ranger =
since I generally experience tire problems (or other underneath =
catastrophe) when off-road. A wood block is a good safety adjunct on =
uneven or sandy ground. Hope I helped.Buffalo Al1994 =
Explorer Sport1986 Ranger 4X4

ont>
------=_NextPart_000_01BCA297.F8270740--

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 00:29:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: ILuvTruks aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
cc: ILuvTruks aol.com
Subject: Re: Bronco II
Message-ID:

Hey, Y'all,
I have some good news and bad news. First, I fixed the problem with it
dying, and second, I have another problem. First thing today I decided to
get a new Throttle Position Sensor. I took the old one off to check it, and
it was bad. I used an Ohm meter to check it and got some really funky
numbers. I called every junkyard and even the dealers :-( The dealer wanted
to charge me $60 plus tax for the sensor. But only one junkyard had a B2.
Of corse, not only was the sensor gone, so was the engine, and everything
else except the frame. I took a chance, and for only two dollars took it off
of the same year, 6 cylindar Aerostar('86) Put it on and it worked like new
:-) So as a note to people with Bronco II's, not only will ranger parts
work for the Bronco II, but certain ( Be real careful, though) Parts from
same year and similar size, same cylindar engine Aerostars will work as
well.(obviously not manifolds, etc. but sensors and such....my oil light bulb
in the dash is off and aerostar, and now my TPS ) Like I say, Ford is Ford,
Except when they change stuff. I would only use it as a last resort but it
may work for you if you need parts that aren't engine/interior specific.
That's the good news....

The bad news is that I found at least two wires that are supposed to be
grounded that aren't. Though Dan said his ground for the fuel pump is at the
battery, when I grounded the wire(it was only held to the chassis by a screw
and two of the wire fibers) I could hear the fuel pump going on and off :-(
There was another similarly un-ground wire too but I havn't figured it out
what it's for. I don't know if I should just crimp an eyelet and ground it
properly or make sure that it's not someone's idea of monkey riggin'
somethin' himself without knowing what he's doing. The engine is still
un-steady at idle, but the gas pedal works now. I hope that the idle is just
the computer re-figuring itself for good parts.

My truck is an '86 Bronco II with the 2.9L EFI. If anyone has that year and
engine (Ranger too) let me know if your fuel pump shuts off a second or two
when you just turn it to on. A friend of mine has the same car and engine,
but a 1988, his pump shuts off and I would assume that mine is supposed to
too. That may not be true though because I have noticed many minor wiring
changes between the two years. Being from color changes to routing
differrences, and relays and such.

To Cap'n Nimo, you didn't insult my inteleejance, but what I said is that it
doesn't shut off in the on position...before you start it. I think most
people realize that the fuel pump is on when the car is running :-)

Does anyone know how to lower the idle any more when the adjuster screw isn't
even touching anymore? I noticed that my idle is up towards 2k rpm :-(
I also noticed that when I give it gas, until it shifts (auto) I am redlining
at around 6k rpm. On the highway it stays at about 4.5k rpm which I know is
bad for cruising. I will have to consult some books first, but I want to
check the computer ASAP.

The truck does have 150,000 miles and is 12 years old, but does anyone know
in what direction to take this high idle problem? Any Idea's on the fuel pump
speciffically on the 86? Or has anyone had experiance with checking the code
for an 86 B2?

Any Help is welcomed,
Thanks,
Clay

:-) Don't BS yerself, 'cause then you just have to smell it :-(

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 06:06:16 -0700
From: Brian Pynn
To: "'fordtrucks80up lofcom.com'"
Subject: FW: 1998 Ranger
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain

> ----------
> From: Brian Pynn
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 1997 9:04 AM
> To: 'fordnatics lists.best.com'
> Subject: 1998 Ranger
>
> Any of you had the opportunity to actually see the new Ford Ranger
> (i.e. Auto Show somewhere in the US)? If so, what did you think of
> the new grille and hood? Haven't been any on display here in
> beautiful BC. I saw a picture on the internet but hard to make a
> judgment based on one static photo. I had a factory order in for a 97
> but my dealer missed the deadline and I was S.O.L. (or is that
> S.O.T.?). If I like the 98's I will likely purchase one...I
> understand they have mucho improved stability, torque, comfort and
> reliability on top of the cosmetic changes.
>

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 10:48:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: ir002129 mindspring.com (Dave & Kirsten)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: ford 4.0 exhaust sound
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Those 3 chambers might be...a catalytic converter, muffler, and ????
>maybe another cat before the muffler? or a resonator after the muffler?
>> sounding though. I notice the current exhaust pipe has 3 chambers is
>> this
>> really neccessary?

Mine has two catalytic converters, one right after another, and a single
muffler about two feet back.

>> P.S. anything I do to it must be legal, thankfully I don't live in
>> CA
>> and I don't have to worry about legallity too much.
>>

I think it's OK with the EPA types to switch cat-back (assuming it passes
any local loudness laws). But, as far as converters, I know you can
replace bad ones and they do make "high flow" replacement converters (big
bucks, too) you can put on, and it obviously illegal to run without if the
vehicle came with them orignally. I have also heard that it is illegal to
remove a converter that is still in working order, but haven't verified
that.

It really doesn't matter much where you live anymore, most stuff is 50
state legal anyway. Manufacturers make it legal in CA, then it is almost
guaranteed to pass the other 49. When you shop around, you also need to be
sure that the product you are looking at is designed for on-road licensed
vehicles, a bunch of the things in Summit are for off-road vehicles, which
means race cars and drag cars, not 4x4 trucks.

Dave
'97 Ranger S/C 4x4 4.0L

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

Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 02:57:32 -0700
From: Bill Funk
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
CC: robert.bubala rrd.com
Subject: Re: Powerstroke oil changes
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> From: ROBERT.BUBALA rrd.com
> Subject: Powerstoke oil changes
>
> Hello
>
> I am picking up my new F250 Powerstroke tonight, and Ford offered me a
> maintenance package that revolves around oil changes. The price they
> want for a 2 year 30,000 package which includes oil changes every 3k,
> and tire rotations evevery 6k, and 1 trans fluid change as well as
> fluid inspections and brake inspections is $495. I am not sure how
> much an oil change would be on this truck, but I would like to know if
> this would be worth it. They also guarantee 29 minute service on this
> too. They are going to check this morning to see if diesels are
> exluded but the girl looked through 2 books and the diesel was not
> excluded.
> Please let me know by private email so I would find out faster.
> Thanks
>
> Rob Bubala
WOW! Those Powerstrokes must take a *LOT* of oil!
I have a lifetime oil change for my F-250/460 I got a few years ago for
$80, with the shop that does most of my work. My tire rotations are free
from the store I bought my tires from. Tranny service costs about $50 a
pop, and the fluid levels are checked with the oil changes.
Ford seems extremely proud of that service! I'd check around. The dealer
is not the only place that can do this, and is certainly one of the more
expensive.
I realize the Powerstroke oil change will cost more, but that does seem
out of line to me.
--
Bill Funk
President, ASCII User Group
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.starlink.com/~ascii

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 12:05:15 -0500
From: "Bradford S. Generous"
To: "Ford Truck Mailing List"
Subject: Increasing Gas Mileage
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Just purchased a 95' F-150 Ext. Cab with a 5.8 and love it. It is used
mainly as a get to work and back vehicle and I don't tow anything on a
regular basis. My question is, is there anything I can do to it to increase
the gas mileage? Mind you I know its a truck and I'm not looking for 25 mpg
or anything but 17 or 18 mpg would be nice. It has a 3.55 gear and I was
considering replacing it with a 3.08 but can't get a definitive answer on
whether that would help or not. Any information would be a great help.

Sincerely,

Brad

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

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 12:31:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: ksbdj00 tamuk.edu (Johnson Bradford Durkee)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: lightning wheels
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text

Hi Guys,
Does anybody know of a source for used lightning wheels. the dealer will
bend me over for $350.00 each. (OUCH)I like the wheels but not that much.
Brad Johnson
Houston, Texas------ksbdj00 tamuk.edu

Texas A& I Kingsville, Texas

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

Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 19:16:36 -0700
From: "S. Spaulding"
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: '92 F-150 - Flowmaster Exhaust Worthwhile? Rear U-Joint Torque Setting?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The flange bolt spec is 70-95 ft-lbs, based on the '91 manual. They use
Loctite from the factory, but I haven't been using it on reassembly.
The manual doesn't mention it.

Steve S.

Neidinger_Robert_J bns.att.com wrote:
>
> I have a '92 F-150; 4.9L Six; 5-speed manual. It's time for a new
> exhaust system. Wondering if the Flowmaster (at $240) is worth the
> money. Opinions??
>
> Second question - I need to replace the rear U-joint. Chilton's shows
> the attachment to the pinion flange via U-bolts; I have a disc with 4
> bolts. Anyone know the appropriate torque setting for these bolts?
> Good idea to use Thread-Lok, or not?
>
> TIA for the help.
>
> Bob Neidinger
> '92 F-150; 90k miles; starting to act its age!
>
> Name: WINMAIL.DAT
> Part 1.2 Type: zz-application/zz-winassoc-dat
> Encoding: x-uuencode
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 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: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 00:53:23 -0500
From: "Shawn & Jennifer Clark"
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re:
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Erik Ketchum wrote:

>> I have a 91 F150 5.0 and have been having some crappy starts
lately.
The tuck starts out okay, but after 3-5 sec, it starts to die, and will if
I
don't feed her a little gas. It almost acts like it has water in the
engine, but this only happens when she has been sitting for 12+ hours. I
am
perplexed - I have changed all the filters, plugs, wires, and even that
pain
in the but computer under the distributer cap. Does anyone have any ideas
on what it may be? I am living in South Texas, where it gets down to 80
degrees at night with 90% humidity - so I don't think the truck is cold.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.



Hi Erik,

I have the EXACT same problem, same model, same engine. I am in Northeast
Texas and have only had the truck for about 1500 miles. The previous owner
had a fairly thorough tune up done about 12,000 miles ago: EGR position
sensor (they got a code on it), distributor & rotor, plug wires, plugs, air
& fuel filter, injector flush and such. On start-up it does just as you
describe--without a fairly liberal application of throttle in a few seconds
it will die. It only does it when the engine is cold and usually is OK or
at least better upon restart if it does die. The mix on start-up seems
FUBAR, but I am not sure if it is rich or lean. I am not seeing black
smoke or smelling a lot of unburned fuel so lean seems more probable, but I
admit that I have not checked that closely yet. I saw the other posts
about losing fuel line pressure while sitting, but I don't understand how
this would cause this particular problem. If the pressure was already low
I wouldn't expect it to start, period, until the pressure was restored, but
the truck fires quickly. If the fuel pressure was low then opening the
throttle would seem more likely to kill it since it would already be
starved for fuel. Still, it seems to be a problem in the mix at start-up
so some sort of fuel line problem makes some sense...I am not sure how I
will test it though.

I am leaning (pun intended) toward the possibility of a weakening O2
sensor. The truck has 94,000 on it now and the O2 sensor was apparently
replaced at 27,000 due to "staying lean" according to the warranty report.
Probably needs a new one since I keep hearing that the Ford O2 sensors are
pretty sorry (a friend of mine just replaced the second one on his 93 or 94
Explorer.) I have not checked for stored EEC codes yet, but will when I
get some time. My mileage on a 1,000 mile round trip at 75 mph was 13.3
mpg both ways. Granted the truck has the aerodynamics of a brick and I did
a fair bit of passing on the two lane portions of the trip, but I really
expected to get at least 15+ mpg anyway.

Please let me know if you find the cause (I will do likewise),

Shawn Clark

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

Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 21:05:03 -0500
From: JAMES
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Increasing Gas Mileage
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have 96 F-150 with the 5.8 EOD and 3.08 rear and can get 18 mpg if I
keep it under 70 and it has plenty of get up and go.Turns about1800 rpm
at 70.It would probably do better with the bug shield removed and a
tonnau cover over the bed .
Good luck JAMES
--
WARNING!All unsolicited commercial e-mail will be charged a $500 U.S.....


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.