From: owner-97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com (97up-list-digest)
To: 97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: 97up-list-digest V2 #255
Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-97up-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


97up-list-digest Tuesday, September 21 1999 Volume 02 : Number 255



=======================================================================
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:

FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks
FTE 97up - Lemon Law in GA
FTE 97up - Re:XLT Door Lights
FTE 97up - Drive shaft Lube
FTE 97up - pace-edwards bed-rug and roll-top?
FTE 97up - Supercharge?
FTE 97up - Drive shaft Lube
FTE 97up - Re: Door cracks
Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks
Re: FTE 97up - Re:XLT Door Lights
Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks
Re: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue
Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks
RE: FTE 97up - Flowmaster Exhaust Sounds
RE: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
Re: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue
Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks
Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford
Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford
Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford
Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
Re: FTE 97up - Re: Door cracks
FTE 97up - Door Crack - Temp Repair
Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
RE: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado comparedwith ford

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 06:28:33 PDT
From: "Scott Matus"
Subject: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks

Now that we have established that the problem is real and affects both
doors, lets get this planned/coordinated. I would be willing to make and
distribute fliers on the problem. We must first use this medium to
determine the direction of the complaints. I mean what entity will have the
largest impact in the customer compliant campaign.

Is it Ford directly (there will be zero press on this route)?

Government agency (I suspect that we would need LARGE numbers here to get
impact)?

Press directly (It may be difficult to get initial press, secondary press is
possible)?

Independent Agency ( This would involve some $ - anyone willing to open
pockets?)?

We need to have each of these mediums (or others I've missed) investigated.
I think that with our large readership, we should have very good coverage.

I propose to anyone with experience dealing with the methods listed above,
Investigate it now! Then report back to the list with answers to the
following questions:

What complaint numbers are required to get this agency/medium to assist?

What specifically can they offer in engineering, spreading the word,
government assistance, or applying pressure to Ford?

Once we have the agency/medium(s) online, then we can begin to distribute
fliers to all F150s that ALL FTE membership may come in contact. We must
make tis a coordinated effort, or it will fail.

Please send the scathing e-mails if I'm off base here. We can make the
fliers into a one page "crack.pdf" file to distribute to the redership that
wants to help out.

Scott.

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:41:30 -0400
From: Doug Moore
Subject: FTE 97up - Lemon Law in GA

> Does anyone know where I can get information about Lemon Law in
Georgia?
>
Yes,
First the dealer of a new car is required by law to give you a copy when you
buy a car. Look at your paperwork they gave you.
The Attorney General at 404-656-3300 would be a good first stop.
Remember the count of times the car is fixed does not start until the
certified letter is gotten by Dodge etc.
The company I believe has one last fix after a fixed number of fixes
happened. Different things have different counts. IE Brakes count is low
and other minor items have a large number.
If the certified letter is not sent the counting does NOT start.

Zone Representatives can also be a great help before it get to the Lemon Law
State.



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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:13:50 EDT
From: MadPoodle aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Re:XLT Door Lights

Were the sockets just loose behind panel? I looked mine, none in hole,
not quite ready to pull panel off....

Thanks!

Scott

99 250 PSDSC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:24:39 EDT
From: FOSSIL50 aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Drive shaft Lube

I have a 31' Motorhome on an E-350 Chassis (97) and see that the service
calls for periodic lubricating of the 'slip yoke". I find a boot there. On
my Toyota i have a grease nipple there. How do I lube the ford yoke? Also on
the universals there's only one grease fitting on the one closest to the
transmission, all others are sealed. Leave them alone?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:34:35 -0400
From: Norm Hurst
Subject: FTE 97up - pace-edwards bed-rug and roll-top?

Hi-

I need to install a bedliner in my shortbed 97 F150 SC. I'm thinking about
getting the Pace-Edwards Bed Rug (marine carpeting held on my velcro -- see
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pace-edwards.com/bedrug.htm) and their roll-top cover
(http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pace-edwards.com/faq.htm).

Anyone have thoughts about these one way or the other?

- -Norm


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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 07:49:17 -0700
From: "Robert Benne"
Subject: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

Looks like one of the changes to the new SD's is a 35 HP increase for the
V-10. I have an early 99 F350 LB SRW 4X4 and use it for a daily driver and
do heavy towing on the weekends running from 1500 ft elevation to 7000 ft
then part way back down the hill to 5400 and then do it again all on the way
home. My only complaint is that for all the cubic inches I would have
thought the engine would perform better pulling the hills. I spend a lot of
time at full throttle and 4200-4400 RPM and the extra horses for '00 are in
my opinion much needed. Bottom line - I love the truck but would like to
see it have a little more power.

I see Paxton has a supercharger kit that claims a 60% increase in rear wheel
HP and a gain of approx 125 horses as well as a substantial gain in torque.
Sounds almost too good to be true. The question: Has anyone installed one
of these yet? What type of performance increase do you have? What do you
like most and what disappointments/concerns/problems? Would appreciate any
comments.


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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:55:10 EDT
From: FOSSIL50 aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Drive shaft Lube

have a 31' Motorhome on an E-350 Chassis (97) and see that the service calls
for periodic lubricating of the 'slip yoke". I find a boot there. On my
Toyota i have a grease nipple there. How do I lube the ford yoke? Also on the
universals there's only one grease fitting on the one closest to the
transmission, all others are sealed. Leave them alone?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:24:24 EDT
From: BFunk33 aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Re: Door cracks

I can see a definite problem with this approach.
Let's say you lease the truck. When you return it, will you get docked for
the crack that's Ford's fault?
Bill

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:


Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F150 Sheetmetal Cracks

Myself, after reading all of the stuff about the cracks, and then the stuff
about the torsion bars, Would be far more upset about the torsion bar
problem...

Lets face it folks, the "1997" F150 Came out in January 1996. It will
probably be replaced in the next 18 mos to two years....Ford will quietly
admit they had a problem, Fix the ones that catch them in Warranty, and Brag
about the "totally redisigned" F150 for 2002

The public will love them....26 cupholders, and a 36 disk CD changer as
standard equipment.

Fatigue cracks or stress cracks...Neither is a new thing.

Accept the fact that your vehicle "WILL NOT" last forever, and use it until
the wheels fall off. Or trade it every 2 Years...
>>
=====================================================
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:56:27 -0400
From: Rob
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks

i would think that a well placed ad in the sports section of a major
newspaper in all the big cities would spread the word real quick...

Scott Matus wrote:
>
> Now that we have established that the problem is real and affects both
> doors, lets get this planned/coordinated. I would be willing to make and
> distribute fliers on the problem. We must first use this medium to
> determine the direction of the complaints. I mean what entity will have the
> largest impact in the customer compliant campaign.
>
> Is it Ford directly (there will be zero press on this route)?
>
> Government agency (I suspect that we would need LARGE numbers here to get
> impact)?
>
> Press directly (It may be difficult to get initial press, secondary press is
> possible)?
>
> Independent Agency ( This would involve some $ - anyone willing to open
> pockets?)?
>
> We need to have each of these mediums (or others I've missed) investigated.
> I think that with our large readership, we should have very good coverage.
>
> I propose to anyone with experience dealing with the methods listed above,
> Investigate it now! Then report back to the list with answers to the
> following questions:
>
> What complaint numbers are required to get this agency/medium to assist?
>
> What specifically can they offer in engineering, spreading the word,
> government assistance, or applying pressure to Ford?
>
> Once we have the agency/medium(s) online, then we can begin to distribute
> fliers to all F150s that ALL FTE membership may come in contact. We must
> make tis a coordinated effort, or it will fail.
>
> Please send the scathing e-mails if I'm off base here. We can make the
> fliers into a one page "crack.pdf" file to distribute to the redership that
> wants to help out.
>
> Scott.
>
> ______________________________________________________
> > == 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:10:36 -0500
From: Stan Wright
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Re:XLT Door Lights

No. Mine were installed behind the red reflectors in the door. My truck is a
crew cab. Don't know if that makes a difference.

MadPoodle aol.com wrote:

> Were the sockets just loose behind panel? I looked mine, none in hole,
> not quite ready to pull panel off....
>
> Thanks!
>
> Scott
>
> 99 250 PSDSC
> == 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 12:31:28 -0400
From: "Kenneth J. Nagy"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks

Newspaper ads can get VERY pricey...be prepared to shell out some $$$

Ken

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Rob
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 11:56
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks


> i would think that a well placed ad in the sports section of a major
> newspaper in all the big cities would spread the word real quick...
>


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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:58:23 -0400
From: "Larry Hackler"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue

Just in case anyone that has the crack wishes to report it to the
feds, you can do it online at f150list mindspring.com

Larry
1999 F150 XLT V8 5.4 L Automatic, Ext. Cab, no crack yet!
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.net/~hacklerl
- -----Original Message-----
From: Allemand, Andre'
To: '97up-list ford-trucks.com'
Date: Sunday, September 19, 1999 9:22 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue


>The crack we are all talking about IS a safety issue as well as a
cosmetic
>one. Any compromise in structural integrity could leave the
occupants prone
>to additional injury. As we travel down the highway the "safety
cage" is
>the only barrier protection between us and other vehicles. For an
example,
>take an empty aluminum soda can. Grab it on the top and bottom and
twist.
>The can should crumple evenly into a smaller cylinder. Now take
another can
>and cut or create a small "crack" in it. Do the same twisting
motion, the
>can will tear. Take these findings and relate them back to a
multiforce
>accident in your truck. Get the picture..?
>
>Boomer


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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 13:15:55 -0400
From: "Larry Hackler"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks

For those who are interested in reporting the defect to the government
the NHSTA has a form to fill out on the web.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/oscripts/IVOQ/VOQ/voq1.cfm

Larry
1999 F150 XLT V8 5.4 L Automatic, Ext. Cab, no crack yet
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.net/~hacklerl
- -----Original Message-----
From: Scott Matus
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:38 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks


>
>Now that we have established that the problem is real and affects
both
>doors, lets get this planned/coordinated. I would be willing to make
and
>distribute fliers on the problem. We must first use this medium to
>determine the direction of the complaints. I mean what entity will
have the
>largest impact in the customer compliant campaign.
>
>Is it Ford directly (there will be zero press on this route)?
>
>Government agency (I suspect that we would need LARGE numbers here to
get
>impact)?
>
>Press directly (It may be difficult to get initial press, secondary
press is
>possible)?
>
>Independent Agency ( This would involve some $ - anyone willing to
open
>pockets?)?
>
>We need to have each of these mediums (or others I've missed)
investigated.
>I think that with our large readership, we should have very good
coverage.
>
>I propose to anyone with experience dealing with the methods listed
above,
>Investigate it now! Then report back to the list with answers to the
>following questions:
>
>What complaint numbers are required to get this agency/medium to
assist?
>
>What specifically can they offer in engineering, spreading the word,
>government assistance, or applying pressure to Ford?
>
>Once we have the agency/medium(s) online, then we can begin to
distribute
>fliers to all F150s that ALL FTE membership may come in contact. We
must
>make tis a coordinated effort, or it will fail.
>
>Please send the scathing e-mails if I'm off base here. We can make
the
>fliers into a one page "crack.pdf" file to distribute to the
redership that
>wants to help out.
>
>Scott.
>
>______________________________________________________


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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:04:18 -0500
From: jmann living.com
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Flowmaster Exhaust Sounds

Call them and ask for Tech Support. I've spoken to them several times and
they have always been very helpful and friendly. They have recommended the
"new" 50, and 70, series for my 2000 F150 5.4T, don't have it quite yet.
They said the 70 has a bit better sound than the factory but improves
performance and the 50 series ands a nice sound with little, if any, cab
resonance.

OH, by the way, if you are replacing the standard single out the side 99
exhaust, the kit number they gave me for the new 40 series is 17222, and the
muffler buy itself is 525562. The kit is a single-in with dual-outs and is
basically a cat-back system.

Give them a call 800-544-4761

Joe


- -----Original Message-----
From: Landen Stoker [mailto:KC5QDZ tcac.net]
Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 10:26 AM
To: Late-Model F-150 Mailing List Digest v2; 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Flowmaster Exhaust Sounds

I am looking into replacing my exhaust with a Flowmaster dual exhaust. After
looking at Flowmaster's catalog I realized how many different series and
associated sounds they have. I was wondering if
anyone has recorded what there setup sounds like. If you have done this or
can do this, please send it to me along with what size engine you have. If
I get several I will be glad to post them on my
page, so hopefully it can help others make a decision. Also has anyone
bought a complete Flowmaster exhaust kit for a '99? If so where did you get
it and what is the part number.

Thanks
Landen
KC5QDZ TCAC.NET

== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:14:33 -0500
From: jmann living.com
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

It may negatively affect your engines longevity. But, I've had the idea
myself for my 2000 F150. Vortex makes great blowers as well. I'll see if I
can find a link to their site.

Joe


- -----Original Message-----
From: Robert Benne [mailto:Benne-Scottsdale worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:49 AM
To: Trucks Ford
Subject: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

Looks like one of the changes to the new SD's is a 35 HP increase for the
V-10. I have an early 99 F350 LB SRW 4X4 and use it for a daily driver and
do heavy towing on the weekends running from 1500 ft elevation to 7000 ft
then part way back down the hill to 5400 and then do it again all on the way
home. My only complaint is that for all the cubic inches I would have
thought the engine would perform better pulling the hills. I spend a lot of
time at full throttle and 4200-4400 RPM and the extra horses for '00 are in
my opinion much needed. Bottom line - I love the truck but would like to
see it have a little more power.

I see Paxton has a supercharger kit that claims a 60% increase in rear wheel
HP and a gain of approx 125 horses as well as a substantial gain in torque.
Sounds almost too good to be true. The question: Has anyone installed one
of these yet? What type of performance increase do you have? What do you
like most and what disappointments/concerns/problems? Would appreciate any
comments.


== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:34:35 -0500
From: Stan Wright
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.vortecheng.com/

Didn't see anything for a V10 yet.

jmann living.com wrote:

> It may negatively affect your engines longevity. But, I've had the idea
> myself for my 2000 F150. Vortex makes great blowers as well. I'll see if I
> can find a link to their site.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Benne [mailto:Benne-Scottsdale worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:49 AM
> To: Trucks Ford
> Subject: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
>
> Looks like one of the changes to the new SD's is a 35 HP increase for the
> V-10. I have an early 99 F350 LB SRW 4X4 and use it for a daily driver and
> do heavy towing on the weekends running from 1500 ft elevation to 7000 ft
> then part way back down the hill to 5400 and then do it again all on the way
> home. My only complaint is that for all the cubic inches I would have
> thought the engine would perform better pulling the hills. I spend a lot of
> time at full throttle and 4200-4400 RPM and the extra horses for '00 are in
> my opinion much needed. Bottom line - I love the truck but would like to
> see it have a little more power.
>
> I see Paxton has a supercharger kit that claims a 60% increase in rear wheel
> HP and a gain of approx 125 horses as well as a substantial gain in torque.
> Sounds almost too good to be true. The question: Has anyone installed one
> of these yet? What type of performance increase do you have? What do you
> like most and what disappointments/concerns/problems? Would appreciate any
> comments.
>
> == 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:25:45 -0400
From: "Larry Hackler"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue

Sorry, messed up the URL!! Big Time!! The correct one is in a
message with title sheetmetal cracks
- -----Original Message-----
From: Larry Hackler
To: F150 List ; 97up-list ford-trucks.com

Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Crack is a safety issue


>Just in case anyone that has the crack wishes to report it to the
>feds, you can do it online at f150list mindspring.com
>
>Larry
>1999 F150 XLT V8 5.4 L Automatic, Ext. Cab, no crack yet!
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.net/~hacklerl
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Allemand, Andre'
>To: '97up-list ford-trucks.com'
>Date: Sunday, September 19, 1999 9:22 AM

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:02:02 -0400
From: "Larry Hackler"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks

For those who are interested in reporting the defect to the government
the NHSTA has a form to fill out on the web.

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ivoq/oscripts/IVOQ/VOQ/voq1.cfm

Larry
1999 F150 XLT V8 5.4 L Automatic, Ext. Cab, no crack yet
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.net/~hacklerl

- -----Original Message-----
From: Scott Matus
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:38 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Sheetmetal Cracks


>
>Now that we have established that the problem is real and affects
both
>doors, lets get this planned/coordinated. I would be willing to make
and
>distribute fliers on the problem. We must first use this medium to
>determine the direction of the complaints. I mean what entity will
have the
>largest impact in the customer compliant campaign.
>
>Is it Ford directly (there will be zero press on this route)?
>
>Government agency (I suspect that we would need LARGE numbers here to
get
>impact)?
>
>Press directly (It may be difficult to get initial press, secondary
press is
>possible)?
>
>Independent Agency ( This would involve some $ - anyone willing to
open
>pockets?)?
>
>We need to have each of these mediums (or others I've missed)
investigated.
>I think that with our large readership, we should have very good
coverage.
>
>I propose to anyone with experience dealing with the methods listed
above,
>Investigate it now! Then report back to the list with answers to the
>following questions:
>
>What complaint numbers are required to get this agency/medium to
assist?
>
>What specifically can they offer in engineering, spreading the word,
>government assistance, or applying pressure to Ford?
>
>Once we have the agency/medium(s) online, then we can begin to
distribute
>fliers to all F150s that ALL FTE membership may come in contact. We
must
>make tis a coordinated effort, or it will fail.
>
>Please send the scathing e-mails if I'm off base here. We can make
the
>fliers into a one page "crack.pdf" file to distribute to the
redership that
>wants to help out.
>
>Scott.
>
>______________________________________________________
> >== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 17:35:37 -0400
From: CnC
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions

Thanks for an excellent rendition of what makes up a 5th wheel. I
thoroughly understand it now, except for the relative advantages of using
what seems to me to be a bulky, expensive and space-consuming fifth wheel
over a simple Class III or IV hitch on the backend. Can you clarify
further? Thanks. Chris

At 07:49 PM 9/19/99 -0400, Bill Wood wrote:
>The term "fith wheel" dates back to the horse and buggy days.
>There was a pivot pin and bearing in the center which was hard bolted
>together.
>Then there was a circle shaped load bearing ring (or plate) located on the
>wagon frame.
>Below this , on the axle was another ring (or wheel), which the load rested
>on.
>This permited the front axle to turn under the wagon ,provide the draw point
>and support the load. As most wagons had four wheels on the ground, this
>was refered to as the
>"fith wheel". As autos replaced horses, adapter plates were bolted to the
>frames of
>early trucks, in place of the wagon axle. A very good example of this can
>be seen
>in antique fire apparatus. Many steam pumpers and ladders were converted
>from
>horse drawn to auto drawn. Even early "semi" trucks were permanent mount.
> Then a quick detach system was devloped to enable one "horse" to haul many
>different wagons (today's fith wheel).
>Over time, many different plate/pin and ball/hitch systems which are usually
>mounted
>over the truck axle are refered to as "fith wheel hitches for this reason.
>Trailers which
>use these methods of attachment are refered to as "fith wheel" to tell them
>apart from
>"bumper bangers".
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>To:
>Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 11:55 PM
>Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
>
>
>> i know where it hooks up to. but why is it called a fifth wheel trailer?
>> that's what i wanna know
>>
>>
>> Bill
>> == 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
>




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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:04:16 EDT
From: TRITON46L aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford

has anyone here test drove the 99 gmc or silverado trucks, light duty or
whichever. i keep hearing that these trucks are far superior to ford in
every way.
i just wanna know what the truth here is, i know it's a lot of opinion
too.
the cab of the chevys and gmc does "look" bigger. but I'm 6'6" i don't
think an inch or two or three in the ext Cab would matter much with my
height.
But I guess small children or average height people would have more room
back there.
But aside from the cab b.s. what about these new engines? they make
their torque at such a high rpm. i am not the best mechanic in the world,
but i would think that in a truck u would want your peak torque at a low rpm,
like 1500-3000. or somewhere in that range.
i';ve also heard that torque at a high rpm is better because u can take
advantage of gearing. i don't know what the hell to believe. if anyone has
any answers to clarify this, please help!!!
all i know is that i have a 99 f-150 supercab 4.6L triton v-8 4 spd
auto. 3.55 reg axle. 4x2. without a towing package.
On Monday i towed a 7,000 LB trailer out to lake eufaula in eastern
Oklahoma.
true Oklahoma is flat. much flatter than my home state of Pennsylvania. but
out I-40 east bound in okla it does get kind hilly.
i towed this trailer with my bumper, rated at 5,000lbs. i towed it no
problem at all. eng temp remained normal, my tach read between 2800-3200
rpms. i averaged between 75-85 mph. it didn't get the best gas mileage, but
i didn't expect that it would.
oh by the way, my overdrive was obviously off.
i talked to a guy last night who told me he tows his bass boat with his
98 gmc 2500 vortech 454 at 4000 rpm with overdrive on. he said his redline
was 6000 rpm and he got about 16 miles per gallon. i told him i thought he
was full of horse poo (pardon my foul language :)).
then again i may be wrong.
so if anyone on this list who tows a lot can educate me on this stuff, i
would appreciate your time.

sorry for writing a book.
Thanks Bill
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:11:14 EDT
From: RSnovi aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

In a message dated 99-09-21 16:43:21 EDT, you write:


paxton and vortech both have kits availible for V10.


RS


Date: 99-09-21 16:43:21 EDT
From: swright hpcisp.com (Stan Wright)
Sender: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
Reply-to: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.vortecheng.com/

Didn't see anything for a V10 yet.

jmann living.com wrote:

> It may negatively affect your engines longevity. But, I've had the idea
> myself for my 2000 F150. Vortex makes great blowers as well. I'll see if I
> can find a link to their site.
>
> Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Benne [mailto:Benne-Scottsdale worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:49 AM
> To: Trucks Ford
> Subject: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
>
> Looks like one of the changes to the new SD's is a 35 HP increase for the
> V-10. I have an early 99 F350 LB SRW 4X4 and use it for a daily driver and
> do heavy towing on the weekends running from 1500 ft elevation to 7000 ft
> then part way back down the hill to 5400 and then do it again all on the
way
> home. My only complaint is that for all the cubic inches I would have
> thought the engine would perform better pulling the hills. I spend a lot
of
> time at full throttle and 4200-4400 RPM and the extra horses for '00 are in
> my opinion much needed. Bottom line - I love the truck but would like to
> see it have a little more power.
>
> I see Paxton has a supercharger kit that claims a 60% increase in rear
wheel
> HP and a gain of approx 125 horses as well as a substantial gain in torque.
> Sounds almost too good to be true. The question: Has anyone installed one
> of these yet? What type of performance increase do you have? What do you
> like most and what disappointments/concerns/problems? Would appreciate any
> comments.
>
> == 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


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37])
by air-yh04.mail.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:43:21 -0400
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [192.41.63.203]) by
rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v61.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:43:01 -0400
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id QAA24851; Tue,
21 Sep 1999 16:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cninexchsrv05.crane.navy.mil (cninexchsrv05.crane.navy.mil
[164.227.4.56]) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id QAA24824; Tue, 21 Sep 1999
16:34:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hpcisp.com (a240-208.c802.crane.navy.mil [164.227.240.208])
by cninexchsrv05.crane.navy.mil with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail
Service Version 5.5.2448.0)
id Q0873YXM; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:34:33 -0500
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:34:35 -0500
From: Stan Wright
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:25:59 -0700
From: "Steve J. Hodson"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford

There is no simple correct answer to any question about which truck is
better. The only way to decide is to try any truck your interested in at
the tasks you plan to use it for and see what the results are. I like Ford
but honestly Chevy, Dodge and even Toyota make some real nice trucks. If
you plan to drop some dollars on a new one you owe it to yourself to find
some buddies who own the exact trucks (transmission, engine, GVW package etc
the same) that your interested in and swap trucks for a day of test driving.
Include towing and enough miles to get an accurate read of mileage.
Good Luck! Say! at 6'6 maybe you should consider an F-650!
- -----Original Message-----
From: TRITON46L aol.com
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 3:05 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with
ford


>has anyone here test drove the 99 gmc or silverado trucks, light duty or
>whichever. i keep hearing that these trucks are far superior to ford in
>every way.
> i just wanna know what the truth here is, i know it's a lot of opinion
>too.
>the cab of the chevys and gmc does "look" bigger. but I'm 6'6" i don't
>think an inch or two or three in the ext Cab would matter much with my
>height.
> But I guess small children or average height people would have more
room
>back there.
> But aside from the cab b.s. what about these new engines? they make
>their torque at such a high rpm. i am not the best mechanic in the world,
>but i would think that in a truck u would want your peak torque at a low
rpm,
>like 1500-3000. or somewhere in that range.
> i';ve also heard that torque at a high rpm is better because u can take
>advantage of gearing. i don't know what the hell to believe. if anyone
has
>any answers to clarify this, please help!!!
> all i know is that i have a 99 f-150 supercab 4.6L triton v-8 4 spd
>auto. 3.55 reg axle. 4x2. without a towing package.
> On Monday i towed a 7,000 LB trailer out to lake eufaula in eastern
>Oklahoma.
>true Oklahoma is flat. much flatter than my home state of Pennsylvania.
but
>out I-40 east bound in okla it does get kind hilly.
> i towed this trailer with my bumper, rated at 5,000lbs. i towed it no
>problem at all. eng temp remained normal, my tach read between 2800-3200
>rpms. i averaged between 75-85 mph. it didn't get the best gas mileage,
but
>i didn't expect that it would.
> oh by the way, my overdrive was obviously off.
> i talked to a guy last night who told me he tows his bass boat with his
>98 gmc 2500 vortech 454 at 4000 rpm with overdrive on. he said his
redline
>was 6000 rpm and he got about 16 miles per gallon. i told him i thought he
>was full of horse poo (pardon my foul language :)).
> then again i may be wrong.
> so if anyone on this list who tows a lot can educate me on this stuff,
i
>would appreciate your time.
>
>sorry for writing a book.
>Thanks Bill
>== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:28:26 EDT
From: RSnovi aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with ford

In a message dated 99-09-21 18:08:04 EDT, you write:


your looks aint deciving, I have a F250SD s/c 4x4. I have ridden in the back
of my friends new Z 71 1500 4x4, 5.3, and it might have a tad more room on
the seat and its a bit more comfortable than my SD, but mine seems to be
wider because we fit 6 people in mine because i have 60/40 front bench and he
has capt. chairs in the Chevy. I think the only thing its lacking is 4 door.
I like the all the creature comforts better in the Chevy though, its got
enough cup holders to have a party.
I think the bigger s/c window makes it look huge, but it reality its not
that much bigger the height is definatly less than mine. I guess with the
1500 or 2500 pretty much has the F150 whipped unless you have the 5.4. I
know we towed the ski boat 75-80 and its about 3500-4000 total lbs.

I wonder how long it will take for others to change it almost the same.

RS


with ford
Date: 99-09-21 18:08:04 EDT
From: TRITON46L aol.com
Sender: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
Reply-to: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com

has anyone here test drove the 99 gmc or silverado trucks, light duty or
whichever. i keep hearing that these trucks are far superior to ford in
every way.
i just wanna know what the truth here is, i know it's a lot of opinion
too.
the cab of the chevys and gmc does "look" bigger. but I'm 6'6" i don't
think an inch or two or three in the ext Cab would matter much with my
height.
But I guess small children or average height people would have more room
back there.
But aside from the cab b.s. what about these new engines? they make
their torque at such a high rpm. i am not the best mechanic in the world,
but i would think that in a truck u would want your peak torque at a low
rpm,
like 1500-3000. or somewhere in that range.
i';ve also heard that torque at a high rpm is better because u can take
advantage of gearing. i don't know what the hell to believe. if anyone has
any answers to clarify this, please help!!!
all i know is that i have a 99 f-150 supercab 4.6L triton v-8 4 spd
auto. 3.55 reg axle. 4x2. without a towing package.
On Monday i towed a 7,000 LB trailer out to lake eufaula in eastern
Oklahoma.
true Oklahoma is flat. much flatter than my home state of Pennsylvania.
but
out I-40 east bound in okla it does get kind hilly.
i towed this trailer with my bumper, rated at 5,000lbs. i towed it no
problem at all. eng temp remained normal, my tach read between 2800-3200
rpms. i averaged between 75-85 mph. it didn't get the best gas mileage,
but
i didn't expect that it would.
oh by the way, my overdrive was obviously off.
i talked to a guy last night who told me he tows his bass boat with his
98 gmc 2500 vortech 454 at 4000 rpm with overdrive on. he said his
redline
was 6000 rpm and he got about 16 miles per gallon. i told him i thought he
was full of horse poo (pardon my foul language :)).
then again i may be wrong.
so if anyone on this list who tows a lot can educate me on this stuff, i
would appreciate your time.

sorry for writing a book.
Thanks Bill
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (rly-yh01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.33])
by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:08:04 -0400
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [192.41.63.203]) by
rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (v61.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:07:53 -0400
Received: (fordtruc localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id SAA12715; Tue,
21 Sep 1999 18:05:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imo19.mx.aol.com (imo19.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.9]) by
ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id SAA12633; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:04:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: TRITON46L aol.com
Received: from TRITON46L aol.com
by imo19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v22.4.) id sVHSa12344 (4187)
for ; Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:04:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:04:16 EDT
Subject: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado compared with
ford
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 26
Sender: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:35:22 -0700
From: "Steve J. Hodson"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions

Since the pivot point is over the rear axle of the truck with a fifth wheel,
forces that act on the trailer have a very small effect on the truck. With
a bumper hitch behind the rear axle the distance between the bumper hitch
and the truck axle acts as a lever arm and small forces on the trailer act
to push the truck off of it's axis of travel. If you tow a bumper pull
trailer with your truck and then pull the same weight and length trailer set
up on a fifth wheel in your truck the difference is amazing. There is much
less tendency for the rig to wander in wind or on cambered roads. Bumps that
would overcome your shock absorbers with a bumper pull have little effect
with a fifth wheel because the same difference in lever arm length works
vertically also. In most states it is illegal to ride in a hitch pulled
trailer because of the rather frail connection, but riding in a fifth wheel
pulled trailer is legal because the connection between the trailer and truck
is much stronger.
- -----Original Message-----
From: CnC
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com ;
97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions


>Thanks for an excellent rendition of what makes up a 5th wheel. I
>thoroughly understand it now, except for the relative advantages of using
>what seems to me to be a bulky, expensive and space-consuming fifth wheel
>over a simple Class III or IV hitch on the backend. Can you clarify
>further? Thanks. Chris
>
>At 07:49 PM 9/19/99 -0400, Bill Wood wrote:
>>The term "fith wheel" dates back to the horse and buggy days.
>>There was a pivot pin and bearing in the center which was hard bolted
>>together.
>>Then there was a circle shaped load bearing ring (or plate) located on the
>>wagon frame.
>>Below this , on the axle was another ring (or wheel), which the load
rested
>>on.
>>This permited the front axle to turn under the wagon ,provide the draw
point
>>and support the load. As most wagons had four wheels on the ground, this
>>was refered to as the
>>"fith wheel". As autos replaced horses, adapter plates were bolted to the
>>frames of
>>early trucks, in place of the wagon axle. A very good example of this can
>>be seen
>>in antique fire apparatus. Many steam pumpers and ladders were converted
>>from
>>horse drawn to auto drawn. Even early "semi" trucks were permanent
mount.
>> Then a quick detach system was devloped to enable one "horse" to haul
many
>>different wagons (today's fith wheel).
>>Over time, many different plate/pin and ball/hitch systems which are
usually
>>mounted
>>over the truck axle are refered to as "fith wheel hitches for this reason.
>>Trailers which
>>use these methods of attachment are refered to as "fith wheel" to tell
them
>>apart from
>>"bumper bangers".
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From:
>>To:
>>Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 11:55 PM
>>Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
>>
>>
>>> i know where it hooks up to. but why is it called a fifth wheel
trailer?
>>> that's what i wanna know
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill
>>> == 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
>>
>
>
>
>
>-cnc-
>== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 18:53:50 -0400
From: "Ron,Marge,Ted"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Re: Door cracks

HI,
Did I miss something about the torsion bars?? Don't remember seeing any
posts about torsion bars.
Ron
- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 11:24 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Re: Door cracks


> I can see a definite problem with this approach.
> Let's say you lease the truck. When you return it, will you get docked for
> the crack that's Ford's fault?
> Bill
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
>
> Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F150 Sheetmetal Cracks
>
> Myself, after reading all of the stuff about the cracks, and then the
stuff
> about the torsion bars, Would be far more upset about the torsion bar
> problem...
>
> Lets face it folks, the "1997" F150 Came out in January 1996. It will
> probably be replaced in the next 18 mos to two years....Ford will quietly
> admit they had a problem, Fix the ones that catch them in Warranty, and
Brag
> about the "totally redisigned" F150 for 2002
>
> The public will love them....26 cupholders, and a 36 disk CD changer as
> standard equipment.
>
> Fatigue cracks or stress cracks...Neither is a new thing.
>
> Accept the fact that your vehicle "WILL NOT" last forever, and use it
until
> the wheels fall off. Or trade it every 2 Years...
> >>
> =====================================================
> == 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:45:58 EDT
From: JDavis1277 aol.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Door Crack - Temp Repair

Having seen the crack on The Crack Page (here comes the DEA, look out;=))
it's easy to understand how owners are pretty upset.

I'm very hopeful Ford will do the right thing on the issue. Meanwhile, to
encourage them to do the right thing, publicize the problem.

OK, the temporary fix. Because it may be months before Ford takes care of
the problem, it may be a good idea to do something to stop the cracks from
becoming worse. Cracks like the ones in the pictures tend to grow until
something is done to stop them. Generally, the best way to stop the growth
of a fatigue crack is to drill a small hole at the end of the crack. To stop
water from leaking in and doing further damage a little RTV should do the
trick. Wax on the finish may discourage the RTV from sticking, but if the
surface is well cleaned it will stick. If the door is flexing the RTV may
have to be reapplied now and then. I also recommend curtailing off road fun
until a permanent fix is accomplished.

Good luck,

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 21:09:54 -0400
From: "Keith Veren"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Supercharge?

I know someone on the Expedition news group installed a Paxton on his 5.4L
V-8 (which shares the "modular" functioning with the V-10) and he was quite
impressed with the result. On the V-10, the results of adding a
SuperCharger should be even more significant due to the increased air volume
required by the V-10 over the V-8 and the similar sized air-box
restrictions. I already put the Borla dual exhaust rear exit cat-back on my
F-350 V-10, that helped some. Have you thought about adding a chip? I just
purchased one and am going to add it this weekend. The chip is supposed to
add 30 to 40 hp. We will see!

Keith


- ----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Benne
To: Trucks Ford
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 10:49 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - Supercharge?


> Looks like one of the changes to the new SD's is a 35 HP increase for the
> V-10. I have an early 99 F350 LB SRW 4X4 and use it for a daily driver
and
> do heavy towing on the weekends running from 1500 ft elevation to 7000 ft
> then part way back down the hill to 5400 and then do it again all on the
way
> home. My only complaint is that for all the cubic inches I would have
> thought the engine would perform better pulling the hills. I spend a lot
of
> time at full throttle and 4200-4400 RPM and the extra horses for '00 are
in
> my opinion much needed. Bottom line - I love the truck but would like to
> see it have a little more power.
>
> I see Paxton has a supercharger kit that claims a 60% increase in rear
wheel
> HP and a gain of approx 125 horses as well as a substantial gain in
torque.
> Sounds almost too good to be true. The question: Has anyone installed
one
> of these yet? What type of performance increase do you have? What do you
> like most and what disappointments/concerns/problems? Would appreciate
any
> comments.
>
>
> == 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 21:13:27 -0400
From: "William Suarez"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions

All you need do is tow same length/weight units with both types of hitches
for a sample run and you won't ask that question again.

The dynamics of towing with a fifth wheel are too numerous to mention. In
short, it's more stable, easier to control, easier to brake, the overall
length (for an equal length rig) is shorter because the first 5 or 6 feet of
the fifth wheel is over your truck bed.

I have a 36 foot, 9,500 pound, 11 1/2 foot high fifth wheel that I tow with
a 99.5 F250SD PSD short bed and in wind, rain up and down hills I have yet
to feel that I'm not totally in control of the entire setup.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
[mailto:owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com]On Behalf Of CnC
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 5:36 PM
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com; 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions


Thanks for an excellent rendition of what makes up a 5th wheel. I
thoroughly understand it now, except for the relative advantages of using
what seems to me to be a bulky, expensive and space-consuming fifth wheel
over a simple Class III or IV hitch on the backend. Can you clarify
further? Thanks. Chris

At 07:49 PM 9/19/99 -0400, Bill Wood wrote:
>The term "fith wheel" dates back to the horse and buggy days.
>There was a pivot pin and bearing in the center which was hard bolted
>together.
>Then there was a circle shaped load bearing ring (or plate) located on the
>wagon frame.
>Below this , on the axle was another ring (or wheel), which the load rested
>on.
>This permited the front axle to turn under the wagon ,provide the draw
point
>and support the load. As most wagons had four wheels on the ground, this
>was refered to as the
>"fith wheel". As autos replaced horses, adapter plates were bolted to the
>frames of
>early trucks, in place of the wagon axle. A very good example of this can
>be seen
>in antique fire apparatus. Many steam pumpers and ladders were converted
>from
>horse drawn to auto drawn. Even early "semi" trucks were permanent mount.
> Then a quick detach system was devloped to enable one "horse" to haul many
>different wagons (today's fith wheel).
>Over time, many different plate/pin and ball/hitch systems which are
usually
>mounted
>over the truck axle are refered to as "fith wheel hitches for this reason.
>Trailers which
>use these methods of attachment are refered to as "fith wheel" to tell them
>apart from
>"bumper bangers".
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>To:
>Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 11:55 PM
>Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 5 th wheel trailer questions
>
>
>> i know where it hooks up to. but why is it called a fifth wheel trailer?
>> that's what i wanna know
>>
>>
>> Bill
>> == 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
>




- -cnc-
== 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: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 23:23:29 -0400
From: "Keith Veren"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado comparedwith ford

Why do you compare a Chevy 2500 with an F-150? You should be comparing to a
SuperDuty! (or at least an F-250 "non-SuperDuty").

Keith


- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - question about the new gmc and silverado
comparedwith ford


> In a message dated 99-09-21 18:08:04 EDT, you write:
>
>
> your looks aint deciving, I have a F250SD s/c 4x4. I have ridden in the
back
> of my friends new Z 71 1500 4x4, 5.3, and it might have a tad more room
on
> the seat and its a bit more comfortable than my SD, but mine seems to be
> wider because we fit 6 people in mine because i have 60/40 front bench and
he
> has capt. chairs in the Chevy. I think the only thing its lacking is 4
door.
> I like the all the creature comforts better in the Chevy though, its got
> enough cup holders to have a party.
> I think the bigger s/c window makes it look huge, but it reality its not
> that much bigger the height is definatly less than mine. I guess with the
> 1500 or 2500 pretty much has the F150 whipped unless you have the 5.4. I
> know we towed the ski boat 75-80 and its about 3500-4000 total lbs.
>
> I wonder how long it will take for others to change it almost the same.
>
> RS
>
>
> with ford
> Date: 99-09-21 18:08:04 EDT
> From: TRITON46L aol.com
> Sender: owner-97up-list ford-trucks.com
> Reply-to: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
> To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
>
> has anyone here test drove the 99 gmc or silverado trucks, light duty or
> whichever. i keep hearing that these trucks are far superior to ford in
> every way.
> i just wanna know what the truth here is, i know it's a lot of
opinion
> too.
> the cab of the chevys and gmc does "look" bigger. but I'm 6'6" i don't
> think an inch or two or three in the ext Cab would matter much with my
> height.
> But I guess small children or average height people would have more
room
> back there.
> But aside from the cab b.s. what about these new engines? they make
> their torque at such a high rpm. i am not the best mechanic in the
world,
> but i would think that in a truck u would want your peak torque at a low
> rpm,
> like 1500-3000. or somewhere in that range.
> i';ve also heard that torque at a high rpm is better because u can
take
> advantage of gearing. i don't know what the hell to believe. if anyone
has
> any answers to clarify this, please help!!!
> all i know is that i have a 99 f-150 supercab 4.6L triton v-8 4
spd
> auto. 3.55 reg axle. 4x2. without a towing package.
> On Monday i towed a 7,000 LB trailer out to lake eufaula in eastern
> Oklahoma.
> true Oklahoma is flat. much flatter than my home state of Pennsylvania.
> but
> out I-40 east bound in okla it does get kind hilly.
> i towed this trailer with my bumper, rated at 5,000lbs. i towed it
no
> problem at all. eng temp remained normal, my tach read between 2800-3200
> rpms. i averaged between 75-85 mph. it didn't get the best gas mileage,
> but
> i didn't expect that it would.
> oh by the way, my overdrive was obviously off.
> i talked to a guy last night who told me he tows his bass boat with
his
> 98 gmc 2500 vortech 454 at 4000 rpm with overdrive on. he said his....


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.