|
|
Return-Path: From: fordtrucks80up-digest-request Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 15:12:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks80up-digest-request Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #31 X-Loop: fordtrucks80up-digest X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/31 To: fordtrucks80up-digest Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain fordtrucks80up-digest DigestVolume 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 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 RE: 302 CID Heads [pharrell 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 Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ____________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 14:12:34 -0400 From: Ken Payne To: fordtrucks80up 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 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 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 > 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 >> 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 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 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 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 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 Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 97 21:09:19 CDT From: "MARC NIRENBERG" To: fordtrucks80up 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 To: fordtrucks80up 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 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 > To: fordtrucks80up > 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 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 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 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 > Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 16:37:01 -0400 From: Peter & Sarah Bridge To: fordtrucks80up 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 17:04:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Husk77 To: fordtrucks80up 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 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.
|