97up-list-digest Thursday, May 20 1999 Volume 02 : Number 134



=======================================================================
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 - Noisy leaf springs
Re: FTE 97up - info on the mazda tranny in the f-150
RE: FTE 97up - info on the mazda tranny in the f-150
FTE 97up - Check Engine
Re: FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration
Re: FTE 97up - Check Engine
FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration
RE: FTE 97up - Check Engine
Re: FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration
Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
FTE 97up - First Impression / Help -Reply
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - Rear window removal - all yall with '98's better read this
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - Rear window removal - all yall with '98's better read this
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - a suggestion was (engines and EPA bashers)
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Re: Re: FTE 97up - snowplow package
RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (apology)
FTE 97up - Re: FTE 97up Dodge Rumor modification
Re: FTE 97up - Check Engine
Re: FTE 97up - Factory Dent
Re: FTE 97up - Rear window removal

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 06:41:45 -0500
From: "Strukel, Mike"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Noisy leaf springs

Kent,

Was it the heat that finally lessened the noise? I tried grease, WD40, and
silicon, but it only lasts a few days.


As far as the speedo goes, I just left it alone. There were a few reasons
for not changing it:

1. I measured the circumference of the stock and new tires. The new ones
are 10% bigger,
therefore the speedo will be off by 10%. So I know how fast I am
going.

2. Since BFG Mud Terrains are horrible in the winter, I will be swapping
back to the stock one in
Dec - Feb.

Mike Strukel

- -----Original Message-----
From: Kent Tombs [mailto:ktombs direct.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 9:36 PM
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Noisy leaf springs


"Strukel, Mike" wrote:
>
> I called my dealer this morning and talked to him about the problem I was
> having with the squeaky spring eye bushings on the front leafs on my
> superduty. He has seen a number of trucks with this problem and said
that
> Ford has told them that a fix should be available in mid June. He
> suggested that I remove the bolt and grease it. Has anyone had any luck
> with this? i have already tried WD40 and Silcon spray, but that only
lasts
> a couple days.
>
> Nathan: Any temp fixes for this? It is driving me crazy!
>
> Mike Strukel
> 99 F250SD 4x4, 2" Superlift, 35x12.50 BFG Mud terrains
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

Well I to put WD-40, Slick 50 spray, Silicone, Graphite, Teflon, removed
top and bottom bolts and covered every thing with antiseize compound,
Sprayed oil on using compressed air gun (lasted two weeks) even heated
around the spring where bushing is with propane torch. The noise is a
very minute slight popping sound now but still noticeable.
You would think for $40,000 Canadian that I would NOT get a squeaky
,piston slapper that I can`t even use cruise control in. Almost wonder
if this truck is a big mistake.

Interested in knowing what Keith Veren`s suspension is like seens as he
put in an after market lift that came with its own new bushings, maybe
FORD can offer these bushings as a retrofit if they are not noisy. Also
what did either of you do in respect to recalibrating your
speedometers.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:37:23 -0400
From: Jean Marc Chartier
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - info on the mazda tranny in the f-150

Ccdolf aol.com wrote:
>
> I spoke to the ford dealer in oklahoma city yesterday, and he said that only
> the rangers come with the mazda tranny. the 150 has it's own ford made
> tranny. he said he would show me where the info is if i wanted proof.
>
> Bill
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



Bill,

Please ask him to do so.

Kindest regards

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:01:18 -0500
From: "Chris Patrick"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - info on the mazda tranny in the f-150

> Ccdolf aol.com wrote:
> >
> > I spoke to the ford dealer in oklahoma city yesterday, and
> he said that only
> > the rangers come with the mazda tranny. the 150 has it's
> own ford made
> > tranny. he said he would show me where the info is if i
> wanted proof.
> >
> > Bill
>
> Bill,
>
> Please ask
> him to do so.
>
> Kindest regards

Bill,

I dont know about the '99's.. but if your dealer is talking about the
'98 f-150's.. hes
on a better grade of crack than I have..... MY f-150 has the mazda 5 speed..
and i can show you where
the info is.. just crawl under my truck!!!

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:52:01 -0400
From: "Marue, Mike"
Subject: FTE 97up - Check Engine

I have a 1997 F-150 V6 short bed.
I have 35,000 miles on it.
Now all of a sudden the Check Engine Light came on.
I disconnected the negative on the battery to re-set the computer and it
didn't work.
I heard that it is set to go on around 30,000 miles so you have to take it
back to the dealer.
Is this True?
Also does anyone know how the re-set the computer so the light goes off.
If not, I will just take the bulb out.
Thanks

Michael Marue
Maruemi pbworld.com



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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:09:13 -0600
From: Alan Bowes
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration

Kent, here's a little more information on speedometer calibration for the 1999
model Super Duty series:

In 1999, Ford apparently did away with the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) and went
with the following scenarios:

If you have 4-wheel ABS, the rear ABS sensor sends wheel rotation rate
information to the 4W ABS control module, which then distributes vehicle speed
information to whatever systems happen to use it, such as the speedometer, speed
control, PCM, etc.

If you have 2-wheel ABS, the rear axle speed sensor sends rotation rate
information to the GEM (generic electronic module), which then distributes the
speed information to the speedometer, etc.

In the case of the 4-wheel ABS system, it's my understanding that the 4W ABS
control module can be reprogrammed (recalibrated) by your Ford dealer with a
testing tool (NGS--New Generation Star tester) . I'm not sure about the 2-wheel
ABS system, but I suspect that the same thing might apply.

One thing, though: I've been told that there is a limited calibration range, so
if one happens to be installing huge tires, they may or may not fall within the
allowable range. If they're out of range, I'm not sure if there is a different
module available. You'd have to check with Ford. I'd suggest talking with your
local Ford service manager.

Hope that helps a bit.

Alan

Alan Bowes wrote:

> Kent,
>
> I don't have the shop manual in front of me just now, but I believe that the
> calibration is handled by ordering a chip that is pre-programmed for the new
> tire size that you plan to use. If you don't have a definite answer by this
> evening, send me an e-mail and I'll look it up when I get home.
>
> Alan
>
> Kent Tombs wrote:
>
> > Does anybody know what is involved in re-calibrating the speedometer on
> > a 99 Superduty. Any info greatly appreciated.
> > Thanks Kent

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:29:06 -0400
From: "Kenneth J. Nagy"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Check Engine

I have a '96 Explorer that has had alot of check engine light occurances.
It took four times in two months going back to the dealer to correct (or at
least turn off) the light. The dealer told me not to leave any electrical
accessory on while re-fueling;ie. radio, headlights... Apparently the
computer does some kind of checking while fueling, and detects some current
draw and then complains about it with the check engine light coming on.
I've been careful at the gas station, and it's been about 9 months now,
considering it would go on and off around the time I gassed up.

Ken

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Marue, Mike
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 11:52 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Check Engine


> I have a 1997 F-150 V6 short bed.
> I have 35,000 miles on it.
> Now all of a sudden the Check Engine Light came on.
> I disconnected the negative on the battery to re-set the computer and it
> didn't work.
> I heard that it is set to go on around 30,000 miles so you have to take it
> back to the dealer.
> Is this True?
> Also does anyone know how the re-set the computer so the light goes off.
> If not, I will just take the bulb out.
> Thanks
>
> Michael Marue
> Maruemi pbworld.com
>
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:32:50 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration

Alan,

That is why I posted this link, please check it out. I have no interest in
this company other than they seem to have a solution to the speedometer
problem the big three have stuck us with. Mine should be here today after
3:00 PM, so I'll have some first hand information for anyone who's interested
soon. I got mine because my GearVendors overdrive uses GM speedo gears and
there is not a proper gear for my 19.5 wheel and tire combo. They advised
using a certain number of teeth gear with a 1.1:1 ratio adapter box. My
generally poor experience with speedometer shops led me in this direction, as
well as the ability to dial it in exactly vs. getting within a fraction of a
percentage with the speedo gears.

Best Regards,
Robert

Click here: Electronic Ratio
Adapter (ERA)

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.abbott-tach.com/era.htm

>In 1999, Ford apparently did away with the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) and
went
>with the following scenarios:
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:50:00 -0700
From: "Larry Drum"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Check Engine

Mike,

Usually (Don't hold me to it) when the check engine light comes on it is
because the O-2 Sensor needs replaced. I had this happen several times on
my '96 over the 150,000 mile period I had it... If the truck is still under
warranty, the dealer will replace the Sensor under the warranty,

Hope this Helps.

Larry Drum
Captain, CHP Explorer Post #834
Needles Area
Webmaster - www.chpexplorer.org

'99 F-150 XL, Bright Red, 2WD, 4.2 V-6, 5 Spd. 3.55 LS, BugFlector II, Vent
Visors, Rhino Lining Bed Liner. Maxon 40 Channel W/10 Channel Weather CB.
Maxon "Through the Glass" CB Antenna (Awesome Performance) W/Weather Band.
(Lowering Kit Coming Soon :o).

Sound System :o) -

Alpine In Dish 6 Disk Changer/Receiver Head Unit (Alpine Model # MDA-W890).
4 Infinity Kappa Series 5 X 7 Door and Rear Panel Speakers. 2 Cerwin Vega
Stealth Series 12" Sub Woofers in a Custom Enclosure Behind the Seat
(Regular Cab). 1 - Sherwood 250 Watt x 4 Channel Amplifier Bridged to 500
Watts X 2 Channels Pushing the Subs, 1 - Pioneer 75 Watt X 4 Channel
Amplifier Pushing the Infinitiy's. All Cable and Wiring by Monster Cable.
Power Distribution Blocks by Monster Cable.


- -----Original Message-----
From:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com] On Behalf Of Marue, Mike
Sent:Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:52 AM
To:'97up-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject:FTE 97up - Check Engine

I have a 1997 F-150 V6 short bed.
I have 35,000 miles on it.
Now all of a sudden the Check Engine Light came on.
I disconnected the negative on the battery to re-set the computer and it
didn't work.
I heard that it is set to go on around 30,000 miles so you have to take it
back to the dealer.
Is this True?
Also does anyone know how the re-set the computer so the light goes off.
If not, I will just take the bulb out.
Thanks

Michael Marue
Maruemi pbworld.com



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


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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:47:36 -0600
From: Alan Bowes
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Speedo Re-calibration

Hi Robert,
The Abbot ERA product sounds like a good solution if the vehicle modification
(tire size, gears) goes beyond the calibration range of the stock electronic
module(s). Let us know how it works out for you.
Thanks,
Alan


RAMWORKER aol.com wrote:

> Alan,
> That is why I posted this link, please check it out. I have no interest in
> this company other than they seem to have a solution to the speedometer
> problem the big three have stuck us with. Mine should be here today after
> 3:00 PM, so I'll have some first hand information for anyone who's interested
> soon. I got mine because my GearVendors overdrive uses GM speedo gears and
> there is not a proper gear for my 19.5 wheel and tire combo. They advised
> using a certain number of teeth gear with a 1.1:1 ratio adapter box. My
> generally poor experience with speedometer shops led me in this direction, as
> well as the ability to dial it in exactly vs. getting within a fraction of a
> percentage with the speedo gears.
> Best Regards,
> Robert
>
> Click here: Electronic Ratio
> Adapter (ERA)
>
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.abbott-tach.com/era.htm
>
> >In 1999, Ford apparently did away with the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) and
> went
> >with the following scenarios:
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:58:52 -0400
From: GEORGE CROLL
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

Snip
>There is no substitute for cubes... I just
> wish you could go to the Dealer and order what you (not Ford
> or the EPA) want in your truck. I think your emissions
> statement is right on the mark.

Two comments. Ford V-10 415 cubic inches, not that small a motor and it gets decent mileage to boot. Dodge V-10
488 cubic inches, Bigger than a 454 chevy and the old 460 ford. You can get the big engine if you really make it your
priority, thats why I have a SD V-10.

Second the EPA is right now changing the rules again to put more restrictive emissions controls on all trucks and is
also proposing to lower sulfur in diesel fuel which will raise the cost of diesel fuel in the future. Despite the fact that
I posted where to go and see what is happening not one of the EPA bashers on this site responded. If you give a
d&%$, do something about it don't just whine about it. On the following site is a place to register a comment which
EPA must respond to before it can finalize the changes. Here is one of the comments I made on this rule.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.epa.gov/oms/tr2home.htm#Documents

comment # 1. EPA should allow exemptions to the emissions controls for special groups of vehicle owners in rural
air quality attainment areas. Farmers, minimg operations and other rural activities require high power vehicles
capable of performing heavy towing and hauling activities. The new emission limits are not justified for these
vehicles as the emission controls limit the size and power output of these vehicles. Under the exception proposed
vehicle manufacturers would be allowed to manufacture for sale special high power vehicles with limited emission
controls. There are several reasonms for this including.

1. these vehicles are used for long periods of time where maintenance considerations become important.
Maintaining complex emission systems is an unfair burden on the owners of these vehicles who often perform their
own maintenance and need simple reliable vehicles. Manufacturers should be encouraged to develop simple
effective controls weighing the benifits of simple design and service against meeting the most stringent emission limit.
It is much more likely that a simple and inexpensive emissions control sytem will be properly maintained by the
owners.

2. Vehicles used in very harsh conditions such as farming mining or heavy constructions in rural areas are not
resold to the general public but are oftern used as spare parts vehicles when their useful life is done. there is little
danger of these vehicles becoming widley used in non attainment areas.

3. The users of these vehicles will buy larger vehicles such as heavy duty diesel trucks which will increase overall
emissions to perform the required work if the new standards limit the towing and hauling capacity of future light and
medium duty trucks. For example if in the future the towing capacity of 3/4 and 1 tom trucks falls below 10,000 lbs I
will personally buy a 2 1/2 ton truck to tow my 5th wheel trailer. Currently a 1 ton truck is adequate for this purpose.

Other comments included stuff about exceptions for owners of RV's. Perhaps specisl "towing" vehicles coudl be
allowed.

Take an hour of your time and do something. If anyone wants help in posting a comment on the website let me know
I will help you out. Remember just because I work for EPA does not mean I agree with everythiing we do here. I also
strongly believe in the publics right to participate in this process and will help anyone understand what the issues are
and how to properly determine what EPA's answer to your comment was. If you put in a comment and you do not
think EPA responded appropriatly you can do something about it, (sue EPA or join a suit against EPA, it always
happens) I can tell you for a fact no one at EPA other than myself cares a hoot about people who need working and
towing vehicles for their livelyhood or for recreation and vehicle manufacturers only care about added cost not
practicality. No one is giving EPA your side of the story except me and one comment won't cut it.
George Croll
EPA-OAR-ARD
(202)564-0162
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:46:03 -0500
From: "Chris Patrick"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

> 2. Vehicles used in very harsh conditions such as farming
> mining or heavy constructions in rural areas are not
> resold to the general public but are oftern used as spare
> parts vehicles when their useful life is done. there is little
> danger of these vehicles becoming widley used in non
> attainment areas.

the other side of the story....

most mining vehciles, farm implements, construction vehicles, etc are
special purpose vehicles, and should not be liscened for the street.
vehicles used in these environments should be towed to the site, and then
employees should commute to and from the site in smaller more economical
vehicles. there is just no intelligent reason to commute with a 1 ton
truck, deisel or gas. just like a combine, or a bulldozer, these vehicles
are not ment for the street. i came from a rural community.. the loophole of
"farm implement" was used by almost any inbred,lazy,
do-nothing-but-let-carter-pay-him-to-NOT-plant-his-fields farmer, who wanted
to keep his oil burning 1962 rustbucket chevy on the road. it was just sick
to watch people create 1/2 mile long smokescreens down rural roads, and when
you finally catch up with these people, the "truck" is liscensed "farm
implement". if you end up following them into town, they are heading to the
movie rental place, or the grocery, or the bank...NOT for farming business.

vehicles used for these purposes SHOULD NOT EVER be on the highway, or in
citys, and should be designed and titled so as to make the use of them in
these areas difficult or impossible (a combine in McDonalds drive through,
for example..)

by all means, increase the quality of our fuels, regardless of the cost. the
oil companys have too long fought to keep thier profits high.. dont put the
burden on the car manufacturers to burn crappy feuls.. but on the fuel
companys. by increasing the price of fuel considerably, you will reduce
number of miles driven, increase car-pooling, and reduce traffic in general.

> 3. The users of these vehicles will buy larger vehicles such
> as heavy duty diesel trucks which will increase overall
> emissions to perform the required work if the new standards
> limit the towing and hauling capacity of future light and
> medium duty trucks. For example if in the future the towing
> capacity of 3/4 and 1 tom trucks falls below 10,000 lbs I
> will personally buy a 2 1/2 ton truck to tow my 5th wheel
> trailer. Currently a 1 ton truck is adequate for this purpose.

fantastic!.. by forcing people to buy specialized vehicles for specialized
tasks, you will probably
reduce the number of vehicles on the road at any given time, and increase
the servicable life of said vehicles, and keep the
idiots out of the city with thier dually 1 ton fifth wheel towing crew cab
rigs, who do nothing but tie up traffic, and use too much gas. I cant tell
you the number of times ive seen these huge vehicles, bed completely empty,
parked taking up two spots in such non construction, non mining, non
farming, and non towing uses as getting groceries, driving the kids to
school, dropping off mail, running to the hardware store to get a drill
bit... etc etc etc.. just sillyness.
if you need a rig to tow something, fantastic, buy one... but leave it
parked under the trailer, and drive something sensible to do the family
running. if your going to pick up a gallon of milk, you dont need 488 Ci, 6
seats, 8 foot bed and 10000# towing capacity....


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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:01:19 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

George,

I did go there, I simply didn't have time to read the tome online, so I
printed it out, 40 pages! I read a lot, but c'mon, most of us don't have that
much time to try to decipher legalese. The writing resembles the O.S.H.A. and
D.O.T. handbooks, I've been forced to read those and haven't yet had a bad
enough case of insomnia to read that information, let alone study or analyze
it. Nobody that I know has enough time to follow the government on every
issue that they care about, hence, the smaller government movement. Because
Carol Browner endorses it, I have serious doubts about the validity of any
part of the document, but I'll hold my judgment until after I've read it. I
know that after the first round of Diesel fuel sulfur reductions went into
effect in 1993, the yellowish/brownish haze over the D/FW area diminished
rapidly. I doubt that this proposal will have any thing close to such a
dramatic impact, and the result will likely be at a greatly increased
cost/benefit ratio over the previous regulation.

Absolutely no offense is meant to you George, I do appreciate the heads up
on the regulation, I wouldn't be aware of it if you hadn't posted on it. I
know that there are people working at the EPA who care about our environment
and don't have any hidden agendas (This part applies to you George, it's much
more difficult to get a hidden agenda passed if it receives wide public
attention which you are trying to give it).

I'll try to give it the attention it needs this weekend and see if I can
discern any useful information from it. If I can make heads or tails of it,
I'll join you in your public comments to the EPA.

Best Regards,
Robert

In a message dated 5/20/99 9:56:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
CROLL.GEORGE epamail.epa.gov writes:

> Despite the fact that
> I posted where to go and see what is happening not one of the EPA bashers
on
> this site responded. If you give a
> d&%$, do something about it don't just whine about it. On the following
> site is a place to register a comment which
> EPA must respond to before it can finalize the changes.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:16:59 -0400
From: GEORGE CROLL
Subject: FTE 97up - First Impression / Help -Reply

I ran my truck in 4 wheel
high for about 20 miles to lube the axle.

On dirt or on the pavement. I think I have been told that running in 4 wheel drive on pavement with no tire slip is really
bad on the whole drivetrain due to binding problems. You should only do so in trucks with full time 4 wheel dirve
systems.
George Croll
EPA-OAR-ARD
(202)564-0162
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:36:43 -0500
From: "Don Marsee HOME"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

Hmm... You think I should have to pay more money for gas if I want to drive
the vehicle of my choice which happens to be a big truck. I respectfully
disagree. I hope you don't mind if I decide what I drive to the corner
market to get a gallon of milk. To keep this short I'll just say that I
cherish the freedom I have to make such decisions.

Don in Nashville, TN

- -----Original Message-----
From:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com] On Behalf Of Chris Patrick
Sent:Thursday, May 20, 1999 12:46 PM
To:97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject:RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Importance:High


> 2. Vehicles used in very harsh conditions such as farming
> mining or heavy constructions in rural areas are not
> resold to the general public but are oftern used as spare
> parts vehicles when their useful life is done. there is little
> danger of these vehicles becoming widley used in non
> attainment areas.

the other side of the story....

most mining vehciles, farm implements, construction vehicles, etc are
special purpose vehicles, and should not be liscened for the street.
vehicles used in these environments should be towed to the site, and then
employees should commute to and from the site in smaller more economical
vehicles. there is just no intelligent reason to commute with a 1 ton
truck, deisel or gas. just like a combine, or a bulldozer, these vehicles
are not ment for the street. i came from a rural community.. the loophole of
"farm implement" was used by almost any inbred,lazy,
do-nothing-but-let-carter-pay-him-to-NOT-plant-his-fields farmer, who wanted
to keep his oil burning 1962 rustbucket chevy on the road. it was just sick
to watch people create 1/2 mile long smokescreens down rural roads, and when
you finally catch up with these people, the "truck" is liscensed "farm
implement". if you end up following them into town, they are heading to the
movie rental place, or the grocery, or the bank...NOT for farming business.

vehicles used for these purposes SHOULD NOT EVER be on the highway, or in
citys, and should be designed and titled so as to make the use of them in
these areas difficult or impossible (a combine in McDonalds drive through,
for example..)

by all means, increase the quality of our fuels, regardless of the cost. the
oil companys have too long fought to keep thier profits high.. dont put the
burden on the car manufacturers to burn crappy feuls.. but on the fuel
companys. by increasing the price of fuel considerably, you will reduce
number of miles driven, increase car-pooling, and reduce traffic in general.

> 3. The users of these vehicles will buy larger vehicles such
> as heavy duty diesel trucks which will increase overall
> emissions to perform the required work if the new standards
> limit the towing and hauling capacity of future light and
> medium duty trucks. For example if in the future the towing
> capacity of 3/4 and 1 tom trucks falls below 10,000 lbs I
> will personally buy a 2 1/2 ton truck to tow my 5th wheel
> trailer. Currently a 1 ton truck is adequate for this purpose.

fantastic!.. by forcing people to buy specialized vehicles for specialized
tasks, you will probably
reduce the number of vehicles on the road at any given time, and increase
the servicable life of said vehicles, and keep the
idiots out of the city with thier dually 1 ton fifth wheel towing crew cab
rigs, who do nothing but tie up traffic, and use too much gas. I cant tell
you the number of times ive seen these huge vehicles, bed completely empty,
parked taking up two spots in such non construction, non mining, non
farming, and non towing uses as getting groceries, driving the kids to
school, dropping off mail, running to the hardware store to get a drill
bit... etc etc etc.. just sillyness.
if you need a rig to tow something, fantastic, buy one... but leave it
parked under the trailer, and drive something sensible to do the family
running. if your going to pick up a gallon of milk, you dont need 488 Ci, 6
seats, 8 foot bed and 10000# towing capacity....


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

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:31:18 -0500
From: "Mike Fairleigh"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Rear window removal - all yall with '98's better read this

I took my '98 F-150 SC in to the dealer today to officially get the process
started of getting my rear window leak fixed. I'd first found out that they
have all their glass work done by a local glass company, so I'd taken the
truck over to them for an evaluation. I did everything I felt I could do to
prepare for this being a complicated mess.

Surprise. I pulled in to the dealer's garage, got out, and told the writer
my rear window was leaking water. "What year is this?" "98." "OK, let's
get you a new glass unit ordered." "You mean the whole unit?" "Yep."
"Don't you want to see where the water is coming in? Don't you want to try
to take a guess as to what the problem is? Don't you want to try to
convince me I damaged the truck somehow?" (Well, I didn't say THAT, but you
know what I mean...) He didn't even look at the back of the cab, or inside,
other than to take the odometer reading.

His response was that Ford is now replacing the rear windshields on '98
F-150's "...left and right." While there is no recall (yet), they've
acknowledged that many of them leak. There has been a design change in the
replacement part, and they're replacing them basically without asking
questions. I neglected to ask whether this only effects sliders (mine is),
but my sense was that it applies to sliders and non-sliders. He also said
they haven't had problems with '97's or '99's, just '98's.

Mike Fairleigh
mikef sky.net
...Always remembering our veterans.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Peter Taylor
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 9:15 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Rear window removal - Leaking Roof.


>That's funny. My '98 F-150 SC just did the same thing to me. Again, we
>were going through the car wash and noticed water on the back seat, coming
>from the roof about 2-4 inches on either side of the sliding window. I
>haven't called my dealer yet either.
>
>
>Peter Taylor
>Long-time lurker, first time post'er.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
>[mailto:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of Mike Fairleigh
>Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 6:19 PM
>To: 97 & Up Ford Trucks Mailing List
>Subject: FTE 97up - Rear window removal
>
>
>I took my '98 F-150 SC through the car wash today, and noticed a leak - a
>fast drip dripping off the rear edge of the headliner. It must have just
>started, because in the year and a half since I bought the truck new, I've
>checked frequently for leaks and found none.
>
>I've got the sliding rear window, but the leak is coming in higher and to
>the side of that, so I don't think the slider has anything to do with it.
I
>suspect the seal between the truck body and the window unit itself. Does
>anyone know what's involved in removing the whole window? I don't plan to
>do it myself, but I'd like to know so I can be prepared to check for damage
>my dealer does when repairing it. Thanks.
>
>Mike Fairleigh
>mikef sky.net
>...Always remembering our veterans.
>
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>


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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:38:51 -0500
From: "Jeff Schapker"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

Thanks for your opinion Chris. I remember this the next time I take up two
parking places at Wal-Mart in my 1999 Ford 7.3L Diesel, Crew Cab, Long
Bed,Dually,4x4. I say we pass a law that says we must eat oatmeal for lunch
everyday. Now I see why all of your messages are of such High Importance.

- -----Original Message-----
From:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com] On Behalf Of Chris Patrick
Sent:Thursday, May 20, 1999 12:46 PM
To:97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject:RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)
Importance:High


> 2. Vehicles used in very harsh conditions such as farming
> mining or heavy constructions in rural areas are not
> resold to the general public but are oftern used as spare
> parts vehicles when their useful life is done. there is little
> danger of these vehicles becoming widley used in non
> attainment areas.

the other side of the story....

most mining vehciles, farm implements, construction vehicles, etc are
special purpose vehicles, and should not be liscened for the street.
vehicles used in these environments should be towed to the site, and then
employees should commute to and from the site in smaller more economical
vehicles. there is just no intelligent reason to commute with a 1 ton
truck, deisel or gas. just like a combine, or a bulldozer, these vehicles
are not ment for the street. i came from a rural community.. the loophole of
"farm implement" was used by almost any inbred,lazy,
do-nothing-but-let-carter-pay-him-to-NOT-plant-his-fields farmer, who wanted
to keep his oil burning 1962 rustbucket chevy on the road. it was just sick
to watch people create 1/2 mile long smokescreens down rural roads, and when
you finally catch up with these people, the "truck" is liscensed "farm
implement". if you end up following them into town, they are heading to the
movie rental place, or the grocery, or the bank...NOT for farming business.

vehicles used for these purposes SHOULD NOT EVER be on the highway, or in
citys, and should be designed and titled so as to make the use of them in
these areas difficult or impossible (a combine in McDonalds drive through,
for example..)

by all means, increase the quality of our fuels, regardless of the cost. the
oil companys have too long fought to keep thier profits high.. dont put the
burden on the car manufacturers to burn crappy feuls.. but on the fuel
companys. by increasing the price of fuel considerably, you will reduce
number of miles driven, increase car-pooling, and reduce traffic in general.

> 3. The users of these vehicles will buy larger vehicles such
> as heavy duty diesel trucks which will increase overall
> emissions to perform the required work if the new standards
> limit the towing and hauling capacity of future light and
> medium duty trucks. For example if in the future the towing
> capacity of 3/4 and 1 tom trucks falls below 10,000 lbs I
> will personally buy a 2 1/2 ton truck to tow my 5th wheel
> trailer. Currently a 1 ton truck is adequate for this purpose.

fantastic!.. by forcing people to buy specialized vehicles for specialized
tasks, you will probably
reduce the number of vehicles on the road at any given time, and increase
the servicable life of said vehicles, and keep the
idiots out of the city with thier dually 1 ton fifth wheel towing crew cab
rigs, who do nothing but tie up traffic, and use too much gas. I cant tell
you the number of times ive seen these huge vehicles, bed completely empty,
parked taking up two spots in such non construction, non mining, non
farming, and non towing uses as getting groceries, driving the kids to
school, dropping off mail, running to the hardware store to get a drill
bit... etc etc etc.. just sillyness.
if you need a rig to tow something, fantastic, buy one... but leave it
parked under the trailer, and drive something sensible to do the family
running. if your going to pick up a gallon of milk, you dont need 488 Ci, 6
seats, 8 foot bed and 10000# towing capacity....


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

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:44:57 EDT
From: ATUMLAW aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Rear window removal - all yall with '98's better read this

In a message dated 5/20/99 3:34:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mikef sky.net
writes:


they haven't had problems with '97's or '99's, just '98' >>

I had a problem with my 97, had a slider.

VTY

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:02:11 -0500
From: "Strukel, Mike"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

if you need a rig to tow something, fantastic, buy one... but leave it
parked under the trailer, and drive something sensible to do the family
running. if your going to pick up a gallon of milk, you dont need 488 Ci, 6
seats, 8 foot bed and 10000# towing capacity....


****************************
Hmmm, let's see. We shouldn't drive those big trucks (like my superduty
V10) on the road, so therefore tractor/trailer rigs should probably not be
on the road either, since we all know that they are slow at times and cause
congestion. Not to mention pollution Of course, we should also ban
minivans from the road cause the darn things are always going slow in the
left hand lane. Then there are the SUVs that in an accident cause too much
damage to the inferior vehicles, so they should be banned. oh yes,
There are garbage tucks too. Might as well get rid of those too.
The Geo metro size cars are death traps, so those should go too. geez,
What does that leave us?

Maybe we should all drive Chevy Corsica's in an earth tone color ony(no
offence to anyone)!
We could pick them up at our local government center!

Mike Strukel
99 SD 4x4 V10
68 Bronco
98 Explorer




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

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:50:57 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

To everyone here, our comments are our own opinion, we should all be careful
to keep our opinions tasteful and if we disagree, we should use care not to
insult in our effort to show our disagreement.

Personally I don't think the size of the vehicle is the problem when taking
the two parking spaces up, I think the problem resides with the parking lot
owner who has made the spaces as small as possible so as to get as many cars
parked on the lot as possible during rush times, to push more volume
business out the door. I've noted alot of the disabled parking places have
recently shrank in size considerably. Now take a full size van and put in
the same spot as last years spot only note the black paint covering the
wider spot from last year. Now try lowering the lift for your son's
wheelchair while the little Toyota, Chevy, Ford Escort, whatever, is parked
in the next spot and since that spot is small they pulled in at an angle
that causes the little car to cover the yellow striped unloading area. Now,
take into consideration, our family can't afford a new shiny Windstar Van

the kids>...we are stuck. Now lets get back to the clean fuel stuff. Why
should our fuel go up? Why not simply have the US take over fuel operations
all together. Why let one or two men own the oil and gas that comes from
the ground and continue to fleece the American public and the world for that
matter on the price of gasoline? Personally I think we should have taken
over Iraq a few years back
it over> and simply had all the oil we wanted. As far as the over crowded
cities go, if you want to limit what types of vehicles are allowed and not
allowed then you come back to a uniform code that only allows small cars
and ultimately the city looks like a Shriners parade
all day long. Parts are easier to find, Insurance might go down, though I
doubt it, and all big trucks must be unloaded on the edge of town and
shipped in via the Festiva sized trucks. After awhile people are gonna get
tired of eating oatmeal for lunch, besides MacDonalds does a lousy job
fixing it on a bun, and everyone is gonna get tired of the lack of choice.
As much as the environmentalist yawp about how terrible things are on the
planet, with the exception of some various animal breeds, we have yet to tap
the earth's resources to an extent that warrants the kind of complaining we
here on the nightly news. This all comes down to someone with a good heart,
and someone in the government with money in mind and costs vs. ecological
benefit. Not all the people will be happy all the time. I do think the
emissions laws are often a very limiting factor to vehicle performance, but
that said, there are always gonna be people who get around it. I want a new
Ford Truck so bad right now I can taste it, but my old full size van is
acting up again, and I can't find a decent mechanic in Saint Louis to work
on it honestly without trying to screw me blind. If I have to buy another
van, it'll have to be a full sized van, that is my family's need. I would
have no choice. And I can tell you will not be happy because I know all to
well how 'slow those vans drive in the left hand lane!'....

C.K.

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:46:36 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - a suggestion was (engines and EPA bashers)

To the list, please allow me to make a suggestion. Let's take the EPA and
government discussion off the list and discuss amongst those of us who are
interested. While the subject is relevant, it is not directly related to Ford
trucks. Many on this list are apolitical and would like to see this
discussion go away. I'm not picking on CK here, I've already made one post on
the subject and there has been one tirade so far. I feel that the topic will
continue to become more heated if it continues here. Maybe someone would like
to coordinate an E-mail discussion list for this purpose, while I have plenty
of time this week, next week it's back to work and out of town quite a bit so
I cannot.

Best Regards,
Robert

In a message dated 5/20/99 1:20:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ca-kid swbell.net writes:

> To everyone here, our comments are our own opinion, we should all be careful
> to keep our opinions tasteful and if we disagree, we should use care not to
> insult in our effort to show our disagreement.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:01:37 -0500
From: "Chris Patrick"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

> but my old full
> size van is
> acting up again, and I can't find a decent mechanic in Saint
> Louis to work
> on it honestly without trying to screw me blind. If I have
> to buy another
> van, it'll have to be a full sized van, that is my family's
> need.

if you need a good fair mechanic in the st. louis area, check out Volz
Automotive, in Cedar Hill. its
about 20 minutes south of 270 on hwy 30.. but he does great work, and doesnt
screw you blind.

his number is 314-285-2886, and if you tell him I sent you, he will probably
tell you go go away!!!

Good luck...


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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:57:49 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - a question about towing (engines and EPA bashers)

Chris,

Thanks for the mechanic recommendation. I drove three hours to get the
transmission fixed. So driving down to Cedar Hill would be no problem for
me. I may stop in tomorrow and give the guy a holler...the nice thing about
being retired at 34, you can get all the errands done during the day. I may
end up with a Ford Truck yet!

C.K.

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 17:28:15 -0400
From: "Karaus, Dick"
Subject: Re: Re: FTE 97up - snowplow package

Thanks for the info, Keith.
>
>Still, before you put the lift kit on, how was the ride, handling, etc.
>Around here (Cincinnati), I would probably have the plow on only a couple
>months out of the year. The rest of the time, I will have to tolerate
>whatever the snowplow springs do to the ride. I probably won't add the
lift
>kit...I won't mind the truck looking like its going downhill all the time
>(who knows, though. Once I actually see it like that.......now where's
that
>Tuff-Country number....). You do remind me of another point. The truck,
>without the plow, is not level. Will the snowplow package (without the
plow
>on it) level it up? Does the package raise only the front of the truck, or
>the back, too?
>
>Thanks in advance.
>Can't wait for that truck!
>Dick.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 19:15:46 -0400
>From: "Keith Veren"
>Subject: Re: FTE 97up - snowplow package
>
>I did get the snowplow package for my '99 F-350 SuperDuty / 6.8L V-10 / 4X4
>/ XLT / SuperCab / Longbed / Factory Snow-Plow Package / Tow / Class V /
>4-Wheel OTF / Cloth Captains 1-power / Off-Road / SRW / Power TT Mirrors /
>Automatic w/Power-Take-off. However, it only comes with the standard
2-leaf
>springs on each side up front. I asked the dealer "where's the spring-pack
>for my snowplow package?" he said all they do for the package is use
>basically the same springs with a higher load rating (5,800 # I think).
>Well, after I added my 8' Fisher Plow (875 lbs.) and drove around a
little,
>it was obvious to me that the truck needed more beef in the front to carry
>the plow so it would not looklike a dog sniffing the ground with it's tail
>high in the air. So I checked around, did some research, and added the
>Tuff-Country 3.5" Lift Kit to the front with the 8,000 series high-pressure
>gas shocks all around (4). What a difference! Now the truck sits way up
>high but dead level (remember, my '99F-350 was built before Feb. 15, 1999
so
>it has the 4-inch rear blocks whereas all the ones built since then have
the
>2-inch blocks and sit lower in the rear). Now when I put on the plow, the
>truck still sits practially level, may losing an inch in height up front
>when I lift the plow off the ground. Driving with the lift-kit is great,
>yes it is stiffer than stock, but the new shocks seem well tuned to dampen
>out any potential harshness that you might expect with a 6-leaf spring pack
>up front.
>
>All in all, I could not be happier with the truck, the V-10 is smooth as
>silk - power is strong and starts way down low around 800 RPMs and just
>builds. If you take it up to 3,500 RPMs just cruising (e.g., at 1/4
>throttle in 2nd gear w/Automatic Trans) and you punch it WOW! You can very
>quickly get it wound and it really comes on the pipe at about 3,800 RPM and
>just screams to about 4,500 RPMs (where you should really shift it up to
>Drive). On the open highway, the ride is strong a steady, will go 78+ all
>day without even breathing, also, less "wandering" than my '98 expedition.
>Much better (tighter) steering than I would have expected.
>
>Keith
>
>'99 F-350 SuperDuty / 6.8L V-10 / 4X4 / XLT / SuperCab / Longbed / Factory
>Snow-Plow Package / Tuff-Country 3.5" Lift / 8' Fisher Plow w/FishStik /
Tow
>/ Class V / 4-Wheel OTF / Cloth Captains 1-power / Off-Road / SRW / Power
TT
>Mirrors / Automatic w/Power-Take-off
>
>'98 Expedition 5.4L V-8 / 4X4 / XLT / Tow / Off-Road / Rear Air / 3rd Seat
/
>17" / 3.73LS
>
>'98 Explorer 5/0L V-8 / All Wheel Drive / XLT / Mach / MoonRoof / 3.73LS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>'98 Expedition 5.4L V-8 / 4X4 / XLT / Tow / Off-Road / Rear Air / 3rd Seat
/
>17" / 3.73LS
>
>'98 Explorer 5/0L V-8 / All Wheel Drive / XLT / Mach / MoonRoof / 3.73LS

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:41:43 -0500
From: "Chris Patrick"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - a question about towing (apology)

> Hmm... You think I should have to pay more money for gas if
> I want to drive
> the vehicle of my choice which happens to be a big truck. I
> respectfully
> disagree. I hope you don't mind if I decide what I drive to
> the corner
> market to get a gallon of milk. To keep this short I'll just
> say that I
> cherish the freedom I have to make such decisions.
>
> Don in Nashville, TN

i know i went out on wierd (and offensive) tangent.. but...

My point was that people were bitching about the EPA and how they dont make
old inefficient
big blocks anymore.

dispite what we might want to believe, we live in a society with limited
resources.. to include oil, and clean air. the problem is that the oil
companys(including the one my father was vice president of, and I did untill
i graduated from school), have a lot of clout when it comes to making clean
burning fuel. it will raise prices, reduce volume sales, and consequently
corporate profits. the oil companys have been fighting clean fuels since
the 60's..

my point on the large vehicles, and i LOVE the looks of the super dutys, is
that they are VERY impracticle as transportation, unless your hauling
something.

whoever mentioned the spaces being smaller, well your right.. in an effort
to allow more customers to shop thier shops, and in light of the size of the
average vehicle today, i think thats great. i dont have to circle the lot to
find a place to park in lots that have increased thier capacity by 20%

as to freedom.. its simple.. we live in a democratic republic. vote for
people who support your views. unfortunately there are more people who are
voting for clean air than there are for big blocks. thats the nature of a
"free" government, in that your right to more power isnt any more valid than
someone elses right for clean air.

now to the people who buy f-250's and 350s, and the chevy and dodge variants
because they like them, and use them as a daily driver, not for any real
purpose that requires the needs of the vehicle, such as hauling or towing..
thats your right to spend your money as you see fit, but realize that you
are in the minority, and the manufacturers cater to the majority, and to the
requirements of the Federal EPA.. the days of the grossly inefficient big
block are gone.. we are living with fuel injected motors that run cleaner,
produce power at a higher rpm range than in the past, and are computer
controlled...
life goes on.

My intention was not to insult anyone, but to wake people up, and tell them
to quit living in the past. I drive an F-150, because i needed a compromise
between a vehicle that towed less than 3000 pounds every weekend, towed
6000# twice a year, and was driven daily 30 miles round trip. even thought
i would have liked an extended cab long bed f-250, it would neither fit in
my garage, nor the parking spots at my office, and i saw no point in using
$60 dollars in gas a week when i can use $25, especially considering that i
need to keep gas in my v-8 Jeep which gets 5-6 MPG off road, and my boat
which burns about $100 of fuel in a good weekend...



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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 17:37:01 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Re: FTE 97up Dodge Rumor modification

Earlier, I speculated that Dodge would offer the Allison 1000 series
automatic behind the Cummins for 2000. The horsepower ratings I've got would
indicate that this is not the case. While the rating for the auto Cummins is
up to 235hp/460lb/ft, there is a footnote, "TM" stands for "Torque Managed"
that means that the computer will only allow that power rating when it thinks
the transmission can handle it. The nominal rating will remain 215/420 for
the auto trucks. The five speed rating will remain at 235/460 and the six
speed rating will go to 245/505, Gee, I wonder how they arrived at that
target rating? :) This means that the auto Cummins trucks are still going to
be PowerStroke fodder.

I still believe that the Allison is coming and that it will also be in the
Chevy trucks, but I don't know what application Chevy has in mind for it.
Despite my admiration for the GM 4L80E and the 4R100, my local shop tells me
that both of these transmissions have their share of troubles, different
kinds of problems, maybe not as severe or as numerous as the Dodge problems,
but problems nonetheless. He may just be an old curmudgeon, I don't know for
sure.

I'll hope that the bean counters haven't been after the Allison 1000 series
the way that they've worked over the A618 Dodge transmission, but then,
that's a pretty forlorn hope.

Best Regards,
Robert


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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:57:42 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Check Engine

To reset the computer without the scan tool you have to unhook the battery
for about 36 hours. The light is turned on by an emmsions problem. It can
be anything from an O2 sensor, to a misfire in the engine, or even a loose
gas cap. The scan tool tells what is turning it on. It shouldn't come on
just because you've reached a certain mileage.

Nathan Bernard
Union Auto, inc.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Marue, Mike
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:52 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Check Engine


> I have a 1997 F-150 V6 short bed.
> I have 35,000 miles on it.
> Now all of a sudden the Check Engine Light came on.
> I disconnected the negative on the battery to re-set the computer and it
> didn't work.
> I heard that it is set to go on around 30,000 miles so you have to take it
> back to the dealer.
> Is this True?
> Also does anyone know how the re-set the computer so the light goes off.
> If not, I will just take the bulb out.
> Thanks
>
> Michael Marue
> Maruemi pbworld.com
>
>
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:13:01 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Factory Dent

I looked at 3 different SD's and couldn't find a dent like this. I'd look
at the other SD's on the dealers lot and compare to see how they look.

Nathan

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Becks2
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 1999 11:41 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Factory Dent


>
> Hey,
>
>
> I got a 99 F-350,Crew Cab, Duallie, and there is a dent on the drivers
side front panel. It is about on top of the F-350 logo were it meets the
hood. It has been there ever since I picked it up from the dealer the day it
got there. The built date is December 98. They told me it was a factory....


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.