>From herbie ford-trucks.com Sat Oct 3 06:10:32 1998
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 06:10:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: owner-97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com (97up-list-digest)
To: 97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: 97up-list-digest V1 #233
Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com


97up-list-digest Saturday, October 3 1998 Volume 01 : Number 233



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1997 and Newer Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 97up-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?
Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?
Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?
Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?
FTE 97up - Why is SD $
Re: FTE 97up - Why is SD $
Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?
Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?
FTE 97up - I have to pay extra to get tires with a 5.4L?
FTE 97up - TT mirrors

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

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 08:32:04 -0400
From: Glenn Lepore
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?

At 11:41 PM 10/1/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I was a little surprised by that, too. However, that's all I've used in my
>'98, and at 9,400 miles I've had no problems.

Ditto. I have about 3100 miles on my '98 and have seen no problems
with 87 octane.

Glenn

- --
- ----------------------------------------------------
Glenn Lepore lepore nichenetworks.com
Senior Internetwork Engineer
Niche Networks L.L.C.
Phone: 703-481-0300
Mobile: 703-862-0081
- ----------------------------------------------------
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 08:00:29 -0700
From: "Alan Wilson"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?

At 08:32 AM 10/2/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 11:41 PM 10/1/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>I was a little surprised by that, too. However, that's all I've used in my
>>'98, and at 9,400 miles I've had no problems.
>
>Ditto. I have about 3100 miles on my '98 and have seen no problems
>with 87 octane.
>
>Glenn-------

I use 87 octane only...no problem here either. 6,000 miles...
Alan Wilson


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:28:14 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?

I don't know about the 4.6L but I had a 4.0L Ranger and it didn't start well
(had to crank it over instead of just bump the key) on anything over 87
Octane (especially ethanol or MTBE blends).

Nathan Bernard

- -----Original Message-----
From: Jack
To: Late-Model F-150 Mailing List ; FTE

Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 11:17 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - 87 Octane Fuel?


>Does Ford not want you to use anything but 87 octane fuel in the 4.6L v-8?
>I read it in my manual and was suprised to see that. I have always used
>Premium before and especially since its so cheap now.
>
>Any comments
>
>Jack
>
>1999 F-150 XLT SC FS 4.6L


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 11:24:55 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?

The F-250 LD S/C only comes as a shortbox.

The F-250 LD just got a special "No Charge Trailer towing or Snow Plow
Pkg.." This puts a F-250 within $600 of a F-150 (The way I normally equip
them) so that makes the F-250 a good buy. As far as ride my experience is
that the F-250 rides as good as the F-150 (If both have the same tires, this
does make a difference in ride). Another thing they just announced on the
F-250 LD is that the load leveling suspension is not available anymore. As
for Price I sell outright (NO TRADES) for $300 over invoice normally and
don't charge any Doc fees or other rig-a-marol. You should be able to find a
local dealer that will do the same (If not try different salesman at the
same dealership). I'd expect 4-8 weeks for delivery depending on where it
has to be shipped to (I get them in 4-6 weeks but add a couple for shipping
to Massachusetts).

Nathan Bernard
Union Auto, Inc.
Union, IA 50258

- -----Original Message-----
From: Dick Dorff
To: f150 ; 97up
Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 5:02 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?


>Hi all,
>
>I'd like to solicit thoughts on various items regarding our
>upcoming (soon) placing of an order for a new, '99 F250 LD.
>We'll be towing a small (20-22') 5th wheel for summer camping
>trips, often through hills or small mountain ranges (MA, NH, VT,
>ME, etc). I'd basically like it heavy duty enough for that even
>though it's a small percentage of the time the truck is used.
>Other than that, it's just 'round the house usage; the
>occasional hualing of lumber, dirt, or mulch, or, more
>frequently, kids and groceries. It'll be mainly my wife's
>vehicle; I'll bike or drive a car to work.
>
>I'd posted many of these questions to the various message boards,
>and received some very helpful comments; thanks much! I
>apologize if some are seeing these twice, but thought I'd make a
>final effort to get any input, mainly on the reliability of the
>E40D, from those who don't frequent the boards but do participate
>in the email forum.
>
>Currently planning: F250 LD, XLT, SC, SB, 5.4l, E40D, 3.73, 4x4,
>Tow Pkg, Block Htr ($30 - what the heck), Sliding Rr Window,
>Floor Mats, and tentatively Harvest Gold.
>
>1) F150 vs F250 LD?
>We're pretty sure we'll opt for the F250 LD. Though bouncier,
>the ride is tolerable, and what we expected from truck. The F150
>had a sweet ride, thoroughly unexpected (except that I'd read
>most of the reviews), but I feel the small 5th wheel calls for
>something a little heavier (rear disc brakes, heavier frame (acc.
>to brochure), springs, and shocks, and the E40D). Seems somewhat
>worth the extra $1400 for our config.
>
>2) E40D vs new 4R70W?
>I've seen some scary stories of E40Ds in the various archives,
>but it looks like some were attributed to pre-/1997s
>trannys. Are they improved since then? It still seems like it
>must be a heavier-duty tranny just 'cause that's all they offer
>in the F250 LD. The 4R70W was enhanced to handle the 5.4l in
>F150s for '99, but it still seems that it'd be less-heavy duty,
>and that the E40D might be a safer bet for towing. Longevity is
>the main concern. Any experiences?
>
>Test driving each: the E40D shifted slightly less disgustingly
>than the 4R70W. (Note, I'm still bent on the Ford, but those
>automatic transmissions pick strange times to shift. Shift kit
>might be in order. I know there's lots of info in the archives
>and I'll start there.)
>
>Why on earth don't they offer a real manual gearbox for the Light
>Duty series. The current LD manual causes a trailer weight
>rating of minus 700lb or something (slight exageration). They
>trucks otherwise still have decent towing capabilities. I'd
>rather tow with the manual and replace a clutch once in a while,
>than do the inevitable burn-out and replace of the automatic.
>Guess I'm still bitter over our current '87 Bronco II's auto
>tranny frying at 130k, with regular fluid/filter changes, and
>only occasional towing of a tiny tent trailer. Oh, I didn't mean
>to rant now. Better do that another time.
>
>3) 3.31 vs. 3.73 - mileage vs. towing?
>Pretty obvious from comments received already that any serious
>towing, even if a small 5th wheeler, through un-flat terrain,
>calls for the 3.73 for power and shifting. I guess it was more
>of a real question when I was considering the F150, with either
>the 3.55 or the 3.73. Just wondering if anyone has tried the
>3.31 with towing, or can comment on it's gas mileage vs. the
>3.73? I think I've heard some comment on no appreciable
>difference in mpgs. I calculated that even if a 2mpg difference,
>over 100k miles, it's about $600 difference at todays (MA) gas
>prices. I'm conscious of the environment, and cost savings, but
>it seems extremely secondary when $600 is spread out over 8-10
>years, and the easier load on the gears, tranny, and engine seems
>the foremost concern (hence the 3.73).
>
>4) Pricing.
>I plan on getting an estimate from Invoice or Less, and have the
>Kelley BB '99 pricings, and the Edmunds and CarPoint '98 pricings
>(no '99 info there yet, bummer). I'm leaning on trying the
>dealer first though and see if one will sell for 1% over. Seems
>safer to order one from a human to which you can complain if the
>order gets goofed up. I've got preliminary estimates of 2-3%
>over. In case none bite at 1% (~$260 over), can Invoice or Less,
>or some other on-line purchase places be trusted? What if the
>order gets screwed up? I've never bought a new vehicle before;
>do you pay all up front, a deposit, or all at the end? I assume
>a deposit.
>
>5) Delivery Lead Times:
>For those who read this far, and are the least interested, I've
>been quoted 6-8 wks and 8-10 wks from two different dealers, but
>this is for an LD 250, no leather (cloth).
>
>6) Towing a 5th wheel in a shortbed.
>Someone tipped me off to some concerns there, and suggested
>checking out the October issue of Trailer Life. Haven't done
>that yet, but will. I think this is just one thing we'll have to
>make work, because a Long Bed SC won't fit in the garage, and the
>three children won't fit in a regular cab. I'm guessing the
>hitch can be mounted far enough back in the bed. Even though
>optimal weight distribution is probably over the rear wheels, the
>F250 LD should help make up the less optimal weight placing.
>Sliding hitches another alternative perhaps, but haven't looked
>into this yet.
>
>7) Bed height and 5th wheel vertical clearance.
>I saw in archives or message boards that the SD 250 bed heights
>might not provide enough clearance between the bed rails and the
>underside of the 5th wheel. No mention of the F250 LD though. I
>did see a spacer block between the rear springs and the axle that
>ought to be removable (replacing U bolts with shorter ones
>perhaps) if neccessary. The F250 LD bed seemed roughly 4" higher
>than an F150, but I'm guessing this can be worked around if
>neccessary.
>
>Way too much, I know. I just don't want to leave too much to
>chance before ordering our first new vehicle. If you have any
>thoughts on any of the above, they're more than welcome. You'll
>probably want to remove the questions that you're not replying to
>though, in your reply, so that the whole list doesn't have to
>re-read all my other drudgery. Feel free to email privately and
>I'll summarize and organize the interesting responses and post
>that in return. Either way.
>
>Thanks in advance. Looking forward to officially joining the
>club.
>
>Dick Dorff
>Massachusetts
>dick_dorff baynetworks.com


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 14:42:32 -0400
From: Dick_Dorff baynetworks.com (Dick Dorff)
Subject: FTE 97up - Why is SD $

Out of curiosity, anyone know why the Super Duty is less
expensive than a Light Duty? Case in point: F250, SC, SB, XLT,
4WD, no options, Dealer Invoice. In both cases, the SD is about
$1,400 less than the LD.

Kelley Blue Book: LD = $24,228, SD = $22,760
: LD = $23,558, SD = $22,120

A bit confused,

Dick Dorff.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 12:14:45 -0700
From: johny
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Why is SD $

Mostly, because they can. Supply and demand issues mostly.
In general, the LD trucks appeal to the consumer market, more
so than the commercial market. Different fit/finish/color issues/ride.


Back in the 97-98 model year, I was looking at the 97 LD trucks, and
noticed a big price (> $3,000) difference between the 97 HD trucks.
I was comparing F250 SC 4x4's. I ended up with a 99 F350 XLT SC
4x4. I havn't done the price comparison to a F250 LD Lariat, but if I were
to delete the Power Stoke option, I bet the prices would be in favor of
the SD. The SD on the other hand has a whole set of capabilities, that
the LD doesn't even begin to address. (for my purposes)

Dick Dorff wrote:

> Out of curiosity, anyone know why the Super Duty is less
> expensive than a Light Duty? Case in point: F250, SC, SB, XLT,
> 4WD, no options, Dealer Invoice. In both cases, the SD is about
> $1,400 less than the LD.
>
> Kelley Blue Book: LD = $24,228, SD = $22,760
> : LD = $23,558, SD = $22,120
>
> A bit confused,
>
> Dick Dorff.
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:36:50 -0700
From: STEPHEN_WITTE hp-sandiego-om2.om.hp.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?



Hi Dick,

I replying to your letter about "...our upcoming (soon) placing of an
order for a new '99 F250..."

I had many of the same concerns as you have about towing capacity of
manual tranny vs automatic tranny in ford's trucks. In my case I
bought an '97 F350 crew cab w 4x4 460 and 3.55 ratios, (5 speed
manual) new about 6 months ago. (I got a "good deal" off the lot, an
even $25K)

My truck has an "official" towing capacity of 5,900 lbs when most
other F350's have a capacity of 10000 lbs +.

I compared the manual against the auto, and yes there is a substantial
increase in towing capacity for the auto (at least 2000 - 3000 lbs
more). However, I have friends that own ford automatic transmissions.
It is far too common to hear "I'm on my third transmission at only 80K
miles on my F250". Until we start to see large numbers of new trucks
actually making it to 100K or better yet 150K miles with no tranny
overhauls, I say the manual is going to hold up better. Even with
overloading it...

Rear end ratios: I'd probably opt for the 3.73 because it will
actually reduce the reflected load back at the tranny. I probably
should have bought 4:10's for my truck, but that is all hindsight
now...

Regarding the kids in the back of an extended cab: Putting car seats
in the back sideways is probably not a good idea. I suspect that any
kids with car seats will have to go in the front seat, disable the
airbags, and put the adults and larger kids in the back. Not a
comfortable situation for any involved. That is why I insisted on a
crew cab.

- my 2 cents...

- Stephen Witte


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 19:22:04 EDT
From: DAS1544 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - '99 F250 LD Purchase - Thoughts?

you can order the truck with the towing wieght you need

Dennis
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 18:56:57 PDT
From: "Jordan Rautiola"
Subject: FTE 97up - I have to pay extra to get tires with a 5.4L?

This one takes the cake! I am ready to order an XLT 4x4 SC long bed,
but the dealer tells me that T65, which is P255/70-16 tires, is required
with 5.4L engine, and it will cost an extra $400 (list)! If I go with
the 4.6L, there is no extra charge for tires, I get the standard
235/70-16 for free. There's got to be something wrong here. I would
greatly appreciate hearing from someone ASAP who knows about this. All
I want is plain jane, no frills tires with a 5.4L engine on the truck,
but apparently I can't get them, at least not without paying extra (I
plan to put on 285/75-16s as soon as the truck is delivered). HELP!!!

______________________________________________________
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 19:54:21 -0700
From: "Jeigh Cee"
Subject: FTE 97up - TT mirrors

I suspect that not very many people have to check their blind spot to see if their left rear wheel is going to clear a curb. But, perhaps some do!

I pull a 33' 5th wheel, and would like to be able to see any vehicle in my blind spot before it reaches the rear tire on my truck!

- ---
Happy Trails, Roy and Gene!


>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 98 06:50:41 PDT
>From: "Jeff"
>Subject: FTE 97up - TT mirrors
>
>I think what you all need to keep in mind is that the objective of the =
>convex lower mirror (wide angle) is to see the blind spot
>you can't see with the normal upper mirror. So of course, that means you=
> should be able to see you rear wheel. I want to be able to see, for exa=
>mple, if my rear wheel is going to hit the curb as I go around a turn, =
>yet I can still see the big picture. Actually though, I don't think I =
>could see enough of my rear wheel from the lower wide angle portion of =....


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.