97up-list-digest V2 #277

From: owner-97up-list-digest

ford-trucks.com (97up-list-digest)
To: 97up-list-digest

ford-trucks.com
Subject: 97up-list-digest V2 #277
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 Wednesday, October 13 1999 Volume 02 : Number 277

=======================================================================
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 - Car-Driver(TNN)
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)
RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E only on CA.
RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)
Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing, Nathan
Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)
Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question
Re: FTE 97up - 2000 Expedition
Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)
Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing, Nathan
Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
Re: FTE 97up - Westin Nerf Bars
Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs
Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs
FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
Re: FTE 97up - Car-Driver(TNN)
Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
FTE 97up - 97 F250
FTE 97up - Re: Tires for 99 f150
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 04:59:53 PDT
From: "Michael Schumacher"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Car-Driver(TNN)

Hey Guys,

I currently own a 93 F-150 4x4, but I am going o be buying a "new" truck
this spring. I have a guy who is selling his in the spring, a 1997 Ext Cab
Short Box F-250, with XLT Package and the 5.4L. Does anyone have a pick-up
like this?, and if so what do you think about it?

Thanks, Mike

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:28:39 -0400
From: Dean Baruffi
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E

I just got off the phone with my dealer. He is adding these order codes
(422 and 93N) to my: 2000 F-150 4x2, SC Lariat, 5.4L. I hope this will
give me the 44E (4R100) transmisson. I will be much sad if I get the truck
with the 44U (4R70W) and California Emissions.

Hopefully there is no way to get the 44U with California Emissions. All
the documentation I read states that with California Emissions, the 44E is
the only transmisson that is available.

Thanks for you help Rob.

- -Dean Baruffi
203-432-0243

At 01:36 PM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Go ahead and order CA emissions. You'll need:
>
>422 Emission Equipment, California/Northeast States N/C N/C
>(Req'd in California) (Req'd in Northeast States When in Combo w/992 4.2L
>Engine) (Optional in Cross-Border States) (Northeast States are Connecticut,
>Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
>Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia & Washington D.C.)
>(Cross-Border States are Arizona, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, North Carolina,
>Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee & West Virginia)
>
>and...
>
>93N Emission Equipment Override, Non-CA/Northeast/Cross-Border States
>Dealers N/C N/C (Req's Emission Equipment-422)
>
>Tell the dealer that your job might be transferring you to CA in a few
>months and you don't want to pay the draconian fine (only $300, but
>still...) that CA's commie-lib government charges to register out-of-state
>cars w/o CA emissions equipment in the state.
>
>FWIW, CA emissions cars are certified to a higher standard than 49-state
>cars. Often they are made in batches. In the case of the F-series, it
>includes different catalysts and ECU calibrations. For all F-series engines,
>the power ratings are the same as for 49-state trucks, so you are not losing
>anything by getting it, but you are gaining the 4R100 trans. If you are
>keeping the engine stock, the 4R70W is probably OK with the 5.4, but if you
>plan a supercharger in the future, get the 4R100.
>
>Rob
>
>> Ok, I spoke with Ford Customer Service and this time the guy on the phone
>> confirmed what my dealer told me this morning, and what some of you have
>> said in the past, you can NOT get the 44E on an F-150 without the CA
>> emissions package. DAMN!
>>
>> Ok, Can anyone tell me what parts are added to with the CA emissions
package
>> (Nathan??) and are they simple bolt on parts that can be easily removed, or
>> are they complicated components like ECU and Cat?? Does the CA Emission
>> package detract from the truck in any way, i.e. fuel economy or power.
>>
>> Is the 4R100 that much better than the 4R70W??
>>
>> Joe
>> Austin, TX.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jmann

living.com [mailto:jmann

living.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 11:19 AM
>> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
>>
>> WOW, WRONG NUMBER!!!
>>
>> I gave you guys the wrong number to Ford Customer Service, it should be
>> 800-392-3673.
>>
>> Oops...
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> PS: My dealer just called me and said he can't order the truck with the 44E
>> unless it's with the CA. emissions package!! I'll call Ford again.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jmann

living.com [mailto:jmann

living.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:14 AM
>> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
>>
>> Call Ford Customer Service at 800-426-1283 and ask them about it. I spoke
>> with them last week and they confirmed that it was possible to order the
44E
>> on my 2000 F-150 Lariat SC Flareside 4x4. But I don't know about 4x2s.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dean Baruffi [mailto:dean.baruffi

yale.edu]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 6:36 AM
>> To: 97up-list

living.com
Subject: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)

Ok Men, I've put just about every option imaginable on my new 2000 F-150
Lariat 4x4 (5.4T), and thanks to a list member, I think I've even found a
way to get the 4R100 tranny. BUT, the final question is, 3.55 LS or the
3.73 LS diff. For me the answer boils down to MPG. How much of a
difference will the 3.73 make on gas mileage, vs. the 3.55??

Now I'm not likely to be doing a lot of towing, and if I do, it would only
be about 3500lbs. of boat and trailer. Performance mods will include
Flowmaster 50 series muffler, K&N air filter, and ARE fiberglass Tonneau
Cover for reduced drag. Would these mods possibly make up for any loss in
mileage with the 3.73?

Yes, I know some of you are asking, why would I buy a 5.4 4x4 if I was
worried about gas mileage, especially in Austin Texas where we get snow or
ice once every two years. I just like the way the truck looks.

Thanks in advance for any and all advice.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Ajmani [mailto:AshokBAjmani

worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 7:38 PM
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - 2000 Expedition
Importance: High

Team,
Thanks to all who responded/clarified issues related to the X-plan and trade
in values for me. I truly appreciate it.
Nathan,
One question. I found out today that you cannot order a 4WD EB expedition
with a 3.73 axle ratio unless you live 4000 feet above sea level. The
dealer sounded honest about it. He said that he would have to jump through
a few hoops to request an over-ride!! He will let us know tomorrow. Is
this true? It is absolutely ridiculous if true. The reason I am adamant
about the 3.73 is because I drove the 260 hp 4WD truck with the standard
3.55 LS ratio, and found it to be quite weak. This is compared to our 1998
4WD EB with 230 hp and 3.73 axle. Our truck feels far stronger than the new
one I drove. We use premium gas in our truck. Could the combination of a
very very slightly "broken" in engine, 3.73 axle and premium gas make such a
big difference?
Thanks,
Ashok
- ------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 10:33:58 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 1. How does The X-Plan Purchase Work; 2. Trade In
Value
X plan purchasing is very easy. You pay 4% over the A-Plan price (which is
well below invoice). This plan is for Ford employees and family members,
but has recently been added for employees of companies that supply things to
Ford. This is primarily aimed at selling vehicles outright so trade in
values are wholesale. The 28K you were offered sounds very reasonable for
an
"X" plan trade.
Nathan

== 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, 12 Oct 1999 10:17:39 -0500
From: jmann

living.com
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)

Here's one for you Nathan,

The 2000 F-150 5.4L Lariat 4x4 that I'm getting MSRPs for just over $35k.
I'm getting it through the A-Plan for a little more than 28K. Then I'm
putting 7k down on it and leasing it for 3 years. The dealer says my money
factor/rate is 11 and the residual is 54%. This is what gets me, he say
it's 54% of the selling price of $28k. Which results in something like 15K.
Excuse me, BULL SH_T! You mean to tell me a truck like this in the state of
Texas is going to depreciate $20,000 in 3 years! NO F'ING WAY!!

Joe

- -----Original Message-----
From: Tony Ciarfello [mailto:tc73

nycap.rr.com]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 8:50 PM
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - end of lease question

A question for Nathan

My lease is up in Jan '00, I have a 98 f-150 reg cab 4x4 lariat long bed.
Sticker was 27,500, After 2 years i will have paid $10,000, my buy out is
17,000. I want to try to keep it for a couple more years if possible. Should
I buy it, and is the buy out price negotiable? Kelly blue book says trade in
is worth $16,500 and retail is $22,000. any help be appreciated

Thanks
Tony C

== 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, 12 Oct 1999 10:25:00 -0500
From: jmann

living.com
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E only on CA.

"the 44E is the only transmisson that is available."

Does anyone know why this is??

- -----Original Message-----
From: Dean Baruffi [mailto:dean.baruffi

yale.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 9:29 AM
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E

I just got off the phone with my dealer. He is adding these order codes
(422 and 93N) to my: 2000 F-150 4x2, SC Lariat, 5.4L. I hope this will
give me the 44E (4R100) transmisson. I will be much sad if I get the truck
with the 44U (4R70W) and California Emissions.

Hopefully there is no way to get the 44U with California Emissions. All
the documentation I read states that with California Emissions, the 44E is
the only transmisson that is available.

Thanks for you help Rob.

- -Dean Baruffi
203-432-0243

At 01:36 PM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Go ahead and order CA emissions. You'll need:
>
>422 Emission Equipment, California/Northeast States N/C N/C
>(Req'd in California) (Req'd in Northeast States When in Combo w/992 4.2L
>Engine) (Optional in Cross-Border States) (Northeast States are
Connecticut,
>Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
>Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia & Washington D.C.)
>(Cross-Border States are Arizona, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, North Carolina,
>Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee & West Virginia)
>
>and...
>
>93N Emission Equipment Override, Non-CA/Northeast/Cross-Border States
>Dealers N/C N/C (Req's Emission Equipment-422)
>
>Tell the dealer that your job might be transferring you to CA in a few
>months and you don't want to pay the draconian fine (only $300, but
>still...) that CA's commie-lib government charges to register out-of-state
>cars w/o CA emissions equipment in the state.
>
>FWIW, CA emissions cars are certified to a higher standard than 49-state
>cars. Often they are made in batches. In the case of the F-series, it
>includes different catalysts and ECU calibrations. For all F-series
engines,
>the power ratings are the same as for 49-state trucks, so you are not
losing
>anything by getting it, but you are gaining the 4R100 trans. If you are
>keeping the engine stock, the 4R70W is probably OK with the 5.4, but if you
>plan a supercharger in the future, get the 4R100.
>
>Rob
>
>> Ok, I spoke with Ford Customer Service and this time the guy on the phone
>> confirmed what my dealer told me this morning, and what some of you have
>> said in the past, you can NOT get the 44E on an F-150 without the CA
>> emissions package. DAMN!
>>
>> Ok, Can anyone tell me what parts are added to with the CA emissions
package
>> (Nathan??) and are they simple bolt on parts that can be easily removed,
or
>> are they complicated components like ECU and Cat?? Does the CA Emission
>> package detract from the truck in any way, i.e. fuel economy or power.
>>
>> Is the 4R100 that much better than the 4R70W??
>>
>> Joe
>> Austin, TX.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jmann

living.com [mailto:jmann

living.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 11:19 AM
>> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
>>
>> WOW, WRONG NUMBER!!!
>>
>> I gave you guys the wrong number to Ford Customer Service, it should be
>> 800-392-3673.
>>
>> Oops...
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> PS: My dealer just called me and said he can't order the truck with the
44E
>> unless it's with the CA. emissions package!! I'll call Ford again.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jmann

living.com [mailto:jmann

living.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:14 AM
>> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: RE: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
>>
>> Call Ford Customer Service at 800-426-1283 and ask them about it. I
spoke
>> with them last week and they confirmed that it was possible to order the
44E
>> on my 2000 F-150 Lariat SC Flareside 4x4. But I don't know about 4x2s.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dean Baruffi [mailto:dean.baruffi

yale.edu]
>> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 6:36 AM
>> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>> Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 99L/44E
>>
>> After several attemps to get the 44E transmission with my 2000 F-150
5.4L,
>> the dealer and I came up unsuccessful.
>>
>> First we tried it with an XLT SC, Sport, 2WD. But the factory said you
>> cannot have the 44E with the 17" wheels. Then I tried a Lariat SC, 2WD
but
>> the Lariat comes with 17" wheels as well. The order gets rejected at the
>> factory because of the 17" wheels (at least that's what the dealer says.)
>>
>> Any truth to this? I would like to go back and tell my dealer he is
doing
>> something wrong.
>>
>> I really don't want the 44U tranny on my order.
>>
>> -Dean Baruffi
>>
>>
>> == 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
>> == 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
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:42:09 -0500
From: "Hein, Mark"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)

If I am not mistaken, the residual is based on the sticker price and the
selling price is what determines your payment. Using your figures of $35k
on a 54%r residual means that the truck is guaranteed by Ford Motor Credit
to be worth $18,900 at the end of the of three years on a closed-end lease.
With your capital cost reduction(cash down) of 7k means that you should only
be financing $2,100

11% for the three years. ($28,000 - $7,000) -$18,900 =
$2,100. Your payment should reflect this. You may want to consider a
pre-paid lease which means that you will pay no interest by putting $9,100
down. Then the only thing you have to pay for is if you exceed the maximum
allowed mileage. The reality is that Ford Motor Credit will take you truck
to the auction after your lease turn-in and actually get less than the
$18,900! I don't think that there is any special consideration for an
A-Plan buyer.
> ----------
> From: jmann

living.com[SMTP:jmann

living.com]
> Reply To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 11:17 AM
> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject: RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)
>
> Here's one for you Nathan,
>
> The 2000 F-150 5.4L Lariat 4x4 that I'm getting MSRPs for just over $35k.
> I'm getting it through the A-Plan for a little more than 28K. Then I'm
> putting 7k down on it and leasing it for 3 years. The dealer says my
> money
> factor/rate is 11 and the residual is 54%. This is what gets me, he say
> it's 54% of the selling price of $28k. Which results in something like
> 15K.
> Excuse me, BULL SH_T! You mean to tell me a truck like this in the state
> of
> Texas is going to depreciate $20,000 in 3 years! NO F'ING WAY!!
>
> Joe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Ciarfello [mailto:tc73

nycap.rr.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 8:50 PM
> To: 97up-list

living.com wrote:
>
> Ok Men, I've put just about every option imaginable on my new 2000 F-150
> Lariat 4x4 (5.4T), and thanks to a list member, I think I've even found a
> way to get the 4R100 tranny. BUT, the final question is, 3.55 LS or the
> 3.73 LS diff. For me the answer boils down to MPG. How much of a
> difference will the 3.73 make on gas mileage, vs. the 3.55??
>
> Now I'm not likely to be doing a lot of towing, and if I do, it would only
> be about 3500lbs. of boat and trailer. Performance mods will include
> Flowmaster 50 series muffler, K&N air filter, and ARE fiberglass Tonneau
> Cover for reduced drag. Would these mods possibly make up for any loss in
> mileage with the 3.73?
>
> Yes, I know some of you are asking, why would I buy a 5.4 4x4 if I was
> worried about gas mileage, especially in Austin Texas where we get snow or
> ice once every two years. I just like the way the truck looks.
>
> Thanks in advance for any and all advice.
>

I believe that the only way to get the 3.73 is to order the
7700 lbs package. This in effect makes your truck an
F-250. They just don't call them that anymore. You might
loose 2-3 mpg because of the 3.73. You will be getting a
slightly heavier truck because of the larger frame. With
these trucks I find that every time you put your foot in it
your mpg goes down.

Regards

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:48:49 -0500
From: "Sven Setterdahl"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing, Nathan

> Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing
>=20
> There currently is no book on Super Duties due to the short supply of =
new
> ones. I figure there will be prices out next month. As for what it's
> worth, I've been trying to figure out the same thing. I just traded =
in a
> Crew cab Lariat PSD, and I figured with 30K miles it should be $4500 =
cheaper
> than a new one. I may be off on this though.
>=20
> Nathan Bernard

There isn't a short supply for PSD's on this lot. They have at least a =
half dozen in all configurations, including an almost identical one. =
Plus the fact that it's an earlier model, it was made before the =
mid-year upgrades. I assume you mean $4500 under invoice of a new model =
since that wouldn't even cover the difference between invoice and list?

Thanks,

Sven

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:04:37 -0400
From: Jean Marc Chartier
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)

jmann

living.com wrote:
>
> Here's one for you Nathan,
>
> The 2000 F-150 5.4L Lariat 4x4 that I'm getting MSRPs for just over $35k.
> I'm getting it through the A-Plan for a little more than 28K. Then I'm
> putting 7k down on it and leasing it for 3 years. The dealer says my money
> factor/rate is 11 and the residual is 54%. This is what gets me, he say
> it's 54% of the selling price of $28k. Which results in something like 15K.
> Excuse me, BULL SH_T! You mean to tell me a truck like this in the state of
> Texas is going to depreciate $20,000 in 3 years! NO F'ING WAY!!
>
> Joe
>
Joe,

Your residual is calculated from the selling price so your
depreciation is done the same way. $28,000.00 x 54% =
$15,120.00 so $28,000.00 - $15,120.00 = $12,880. You will
have financed $12,800 for your 3 years through the A plan.
If I were to lease, it would be $35,000.00 x 54% =
$18900.00 so $35,000.00 - $18,900.00 =
$16,100.00. I would finance $16,100.00 for 3 years. When
the lease is up I would have to pay $18,900.00 to buy it VS
your $15,100.00. Your truck will have depreciated 54% in 3
years but that is not $20,000.00.

Regards

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 13:11:50 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question

The buy out price is not negotiable. If you turn it down the dealer has
the chance to buy it (some models they can buy it at a lower price, BUT they
can't sell it to you). That sounds like a good buy out price, but it
depends on what the values due by January.

Nathan Bernard
Union Auto, Inc.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Ciarfello
To:
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 8:50 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - end of lease question

> A question for Nathan
>
> My lease is up in Jan '00, I have a 98 f-150 reg cab 4x4 lariat long bed.
> Sticker was 27,500, After 2 years i will have paid $10,000, my buy out is
> 17,000. I want to try to keep it for a couple more years if possible.
Should
> I buy it, and is the buy out price negotiable? Kelly blue book says trade
in
> is worth $16,500 and retail is $22,000. any help be appreciated
>
> Thanks
> Tony C
>
>
> == 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, 12 Oct 1999 13:16:33 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 2000 Expedition

Yes, you can now only get the 3.55. However, don't compare your 20K mile
unit to a brand new one, the brake in makes a big difference in power. The
260HP unit with 3.55's will have at least as much as your 235HP with 3.73's.

Nathan

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Ashok Ajmani
To:
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 7:37 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - 2000 Expedition

> Team,
> Thanks to all who responded/clarified issues related to the X-plan and
trade
> in values for me. I truly appreciate it.
> Nathan,
> One question. I found out today that you cannot order a 4WD EB expedition
> with a 3.73 axle ratio unless you live 4000 feet above sea level. The
> dealer sounded honest about it. He said that he would have to jump
through
> a few hoops to request an over-ride!! He will let us know tomorrow. Is
> this true? It is absolutely ridiculous if true. The reason I am adamant
> about the 3.73 is because I drove the 260 hp 4WD truck with the standard
> 3.55 LS ratio, and found it to be quite weak. This is compared to our
1998
> 4WD EB with 230 hp and 3.73 axle. Our truck feels far stronger than the
new
> one I drove. We use premium gas in our truck. Could the combination of a
> very very slightly "broken" in engine, 3.73 axle and premium gas make such
a
> big difference?
> Thanks,
> Ashok
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 10:33:58 -0500
> From: "Union Auto"
> Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 1. How does The X-Plan Purchase Work; 2. Trade
In
> Value
> X plan purchasing is very easy. You pay 4% over the A-Plan price (which
is
> well below invoice). This plan is for Ford employees and family members,
> but has recently been added for employees of companies that supply things
to
> Ford. This is primarily aimed at selling vehicles outright so trade in
> values are wholesale. The 28K you were offered sounds very reasonable for
> an
> "X" plan trade.
> Nathan
>
> == 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, 12 Oct 1999 13:13:37 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)

On a normal lease the residual is from the MSRP (not sticker but the price
before discounts). However, Texas has different leasing laws than most
other states (we had a customer come in that had leased a vehicle in Texas
and it was the biggest mess I'd ever seen). So you might check with another
dealer and see.

Nathan Bernard
Union Auto, Inc.

- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - end of lease question (residuals)

> Here's one for you Nathan,
>
> The 2000 F-150 5.4L Lariat 4x4 that I'm getting MSRPs for just over $35k.
> I'm getting it through the A-Plan for a little more than 28K. Then I'm
> putting 7k down on it and leasing it for 3 years. The dealer says my
money
> factor/rate is 11 and the residual is 54%. This is what gets me, he say
> it's 54% of the selling price of $28k. Which results in something like
15K.
> Excuse me, BULL SH_T! You mean to tell me a truck like this in the state
of
> Texas is going to depreciate $20,000 in 3 years! NO F'ING WAY!!
>
> Joe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Ciarfello [mailto:tc73

nycap.rr.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 8:50 PM
> To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE 97up - end of lease question
>
> A question for Nathan
>
> My lease is up in Jan '00, I have a 98 f-150 reg cab 4x4 lariat long bed.
> Sticker was 27,500, After 2 years i will have paid $10,000, my buy out is
> 17,000. I want to try to keep it for a couple more years if possible.
Should
> I buy it, and is the buy out price negotiable? Kelly blue book says trade
in
> is worth $16,500 and retail is $22,000. any help be appreciated
>
> Thanks
> Tony C
>
>
> == 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, 12 Oct 1999 13:25:33 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing, Nathan

I figure $4500 actual purchase price, whether you work off of retail or
invoice shouldn't matter. It's the difference between what you can buy an
equivalent new one for (or trading diffence). As for the early '99 vs late
'99 this makes absolutely no difference in price 90% of the people could
care less about the changes that were made. As a general rule don't expect
to find any bargains on used Super Duty trucks. At the program sales Ford
is getting with in $900 of invoice on 20K miles Super Dutys. Dealers want
them on the lot just to get customers to come in and look. Then they can
sell a new truck by showing how small the price diffence is.

Nathan

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Sven Setterdahl
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Used '99 Super Duty pricing, Nathan

There isn't a short supply for PSD's on this lot. They have at least a half
dozen in all configurations, including an almost identical one. Plus the
fact that it's an earlier model, it was made before the mid-year upgrades.
I assume you mean $4500 under invoice of a new model since that wouldn't
even cover the difference between invoice and list?

Thanks,

Sven

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:45:54 EDT
From: CERESJohnG

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)

As a starter, figure about a 5% loss on mileage from the 3.55. That's just
the ratio change. If you have to go to a 7700 lb package and the frame gets
upgraded that might be a bit worse.

Question though and it's just my ignorance . Would the frame be changed or
would there just be heavier springs , shocks and maybe upgraded running gear?

Putting in a heavier frame just sort of goes against the (bolt on) option
philosophy that the manufacturers have followed in the past.

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:57:24 EDT
From: RSnovi

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Westin Nerf Bars

In a message dated 8/18/99 1:49:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SMDamelio

cvs.com writes:

no regrets

RS

Date: 8/18/99 1:49:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: SMDamelio

cvs.com (D'Amelio, Stephen M.)
Sender: owner-97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Reply-to:
HREF="mailto:97up-list

ford-trucks.com">97up-list

ford-trucks.com
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com ('97up-list

ford-trucks.com')

> In a message dated 8/18/99 11:51:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Robby.Owens

okc.boeing.com writes:
>
> really dont even need instructions(they are provided) theres 3 bolt holes
> that it mounts to and all you can screw up on is haveing it left to right
> and
> the front and rear brackets are slightly different.
>
> RS
>
>
This brings up another question I had.

Years ago I put nerf bars on my wife's Rodeo.
They attached to the frame as well as the body.

This introduced a "connection" from the frame
to body that is normally cushioned by rubber
bushings. It also introduced terrible noises and
vibrations. We ended up scrapping them.

Have you noticed any negative effects like
this with adding nerf/step bars?

Thanks,

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

----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (rly-zc05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.5]) by
air-zc03.mail.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:49:05 -0400
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [192.41.63.203]) by
rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (v60.25) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:48:48 -0400
Received: (fordtruc

localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id NAA15367; Wed,
18 Aug 1999 13:47:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cvsex001.cvs.com ([12.15.136.27]) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5)
id NAA15337; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:47:10 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: ford-trucks.com: Host [12.15.136.27] claimed to be
cvsex001.cvs.com
Received: by cvsex001.cvs.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
id ; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:46:36 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "D'Amelio, Stephen M."
To: "'97up-list

ford-trucks.com'"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Westin Nerf Bars
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:48:45 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
Content-Type: text/plain
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, 12 Oct 1999 16:30:03 -0400
From: Jean Marc Chartier
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)

CERESJohnG

aol.com wrote:
>
> As a starter, figure about a 5% loss on mileage from the 3.55. That's just
> the ratio change. If you have to go to a 7700 lb package and the frame gets
> upgraded that might be a bit worse.
>
> Question though and it's just my ignorance . Would the frame be changed or
> would there just be heavier springs , shocks and maybe upgraded running gear?
>
> Putting in a heavier frame just sort of goes against the (bolt on) option
> philosophy that the manufacturers have followed in the past.
>
> John G.
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

John,

You get the 10.25" differential with floating Axle in back
in lieu of the 9.75" with the 5.4L or the 8.8" with the
4.6L. That is a heavier axle. The front Torsion bars are a
higher rating but I am not sure if they weigh more or not.

Regards

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:41:57 -0700
From: "Steve J. Hodson"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs

Has anyone out there logged many miles on either LT285/75 R-16's or LT295/75
R-16's on the stock 7 inch X 16 inch rims? I'm going to need a set of tires
soon and the sources I've looked at say that 7.5 or 8.0 inch rims or wider
are needed for 285' or 295's. I would like to know if I can get decent
tread life with a slightly larger tire than what is recommended for the
stock rims.
- -----Original Message-----
From: RSnovi

aol.com
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 11:21 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs

>i researched high and low on priceing on mud terrains, a place in AZ
called
>desert rat. com had a price i could not beat locally or nationally w/
>shipping included. 734. I have had all terrains in the past and i decided
>w. the weight of the truck i need some extra grip for the SD 4x4.
>
>will let ya'll know how they do down here in Fla.
>
>RS
>== 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, 12 Oct 1999 16:36:53 EDT
From: RSnovi

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)

In a message dated 10/12/99 11:24:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jmann

living.com writes:

3.73 , i have had them in almost all my fomoco trucks and cars. I don't
think a 3.55 would give you a good cruising speed or especially with a rev
happy mod motor. The powerband is in the upper range on a mod motor vs. a
conventional pushrod.

hope this helps.

RS

Date: 10/12/99 11:24:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: jmann

living.com
Sender: owner-97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Reply-to: 97up-list

ford-trucks.c
om
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com

Ok Men, I've put just about every option imaginable on my new 2000 F-150
Lariat 4x4 (5.4T), and thanks to a list member, I think I've even found a
way to get the 4R100 tranny. BUT, the final question is, 3.55 LS or the
3.73 LS diff. For me the answer boils down to MPG. How much of a
difference will the 3.73 make on gas mileage, vs. the 3.55??

Now I'm not likely to be doing a lot of towing, and if I do, it would only
be about 3500lbs. of boat and trailer. Performance mods will include
Flowmaster 50 series muffler, K&N air filter, and ARE fiberglass Tonneau
Cover for reduced drag. Would these mods possibly make up for any loss in
mileage with the 3.73?

Yes, I know some of you are asking, why would I buy a 5.4 4x4 if I was
worried about gas mileage, especially in Austin Texas where we get snow or
ice once every two years. I just like the way the truck looks.

Thanks in advance for any and all advice.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Ajmani [mailto:AshokBAjmani

worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 7:38 PM
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - 2000 Expedition
Importance: High

Team,
Thanks to all who responded/clarified issues related to the X-plan and trade
in values for me. I truly appreciate it.
Nathan,
One question. I found out today that you cannot order a 4WD EB expedition
with a 3.73 axle ratio unless you live 4000 feet above sea level. The
dealer sounded honest about it. He said that he would have to jump through
a few hoops to request an over-ride!! He will let us know tomorrow. Is
this true? It is absolutely ridiculous if true. The reason I am adamant
about the 3.73 is because I drove the 260 hp 4WD truck with the standard
3.55 LS ratio, and found it to be quite weak. This is compared to our 1998
4WD EB with 230 hp and 3.73 axle. Our truck feels far stronger than the new
one I drove. We use premium gas in our truck. Could the combination of a
very very slightly "broken" in engine, 3.73 axle and premium gas make such a
big difference?
Thanks,
Ashok
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 10:33:58 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 1. How does The X-Plan Purchase Work; 2. Trade In
Value
X plan purchasing is very easy. You pay 4% over the A-Plan price (which is
well below invoice). This plan is for Ford employees and family members,
but has recently been added for employees of companies that supply things to
Ford. This is primarily aimed at selling vehicles outright so trade in
values are wholesale. The 28K you were offered sounds very reasonable for
an
"X" plan trade.
Nathan

== 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-zc04.mx.aol.com (rly-zc04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.4]) by
air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v62.10) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:24:25 -0400
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [192.41.63.203]) by
rly-zc04.mx.aol.com (v61.13) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:24:07 -0400
Received: (fordtruc

localhost) by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id KAA26171; Tue,
12 Oct 1999 10:37:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mercury.livingcorp.com (hq-vba.livingcorp.com [208.178.60.8])
by ford-trucks.com (8.8.5) id KAA26137; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:37:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: jmann

living.com
X-Authentication-Warning: ford-trucks.com: Host hq-vba.livingcorp.com
[208.178.60.8] claimed to be mercury.livingcorp.com
Received: by MERCURY with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10)
id ; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:39:22 -0500
Message-ID:
To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - 3.55 vs 3.73 (was 2000 Expedition)
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:39:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
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, 12 Oct 1999 14:01:45 -0700
From: johny
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs

Steve J. Hodson wrote:

> Has anyone out there logged many miles on either LT285/75 R-16's or LT295/75
> R-16's on the stock 7 inch X 16 inch rims? I'm going to need a set of tires
> soon and the sources I've looked at say that 7.5 or 8.0 inch rims or wider
> are needed for 285' or 295's. I would like to know if I can get decent
> tread life with a slightly larger tire than what is recommended for the
> stock rims.

When I asked a similar question last week or so. I got little response other
than RS's excitement for getting an answer too :-).

I was interested in the same things you are but at full GVWR of near 10,000 lbs
While I didn't get an answer here, a buddy responded with this.
(it doesn't fully answer your durability question, but unloaded, it may not be
too much of an issue.) Also keep in mind, this question is in regards to a
99 F350 SD 4x4 carrying a Lance 820. (and going from a 8" foot print
to a 9.5" footprint per tire.)

>If you mount a tire rated for a wheel of 7.5" - 9.5" wide, and mount it
>on a 7" wide wheel what is the risk?

Shouldn't be a problem.

>Do you lose stability or weight carrying capability?

I don't think that you will ose any weight carrying capability, but in
theory you might lose a slight bit of stability, but I don't think it would
be noticable. A 1/2 inch difference in width is not a problem. This
question comes up on the Off Road list from time to time when someone wants
to mount a tire that's 14" or so wide on a stock rim. The end result is
that the tire ends up being slightly taller due to the tire being squeezed
onto the rim. The converse also happens - when you mount a narrow tire on
a wide wheel the overall diameter gets smaller. A problem arises with the
narrow tire on the wide rim, and that is where if you don't use enough air
pressure the tire runs the risk of coming off the bead. This is more an
issue in Off Road situations, though.

- -john

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:19:27 -0300
From: Mark MacDonald
Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

I noticed the other day on my 98 F-150, that when I grab hold of the top of
the tire, and give it a good yank, I can hear a loud "CLUNK"... It does
this worst on the drivers side, however the passenger side does it as well.
I thought it may be a ball joint or something gone bad, or a tie rod end,
but checking these while yanking on these wheels, the balljoint and tierod
seem to be fine... It sounds like its coming from the hub of the wheel..
This truck only has a little over 20,000km on it.. Would it be possible
that the bearings need to be tightened up this early? Can anyone else shed
some light on what may be happening here?

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:28:37 EDT
From: Ford4x4

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Car-Driver(TNN)

To answer my own question, the Oct issue of Motor trend they compare the
F350SD 4x4, Gmc Sierra 2500, Ram15004x4 & the Toyota Tundra. As far as rear
seat Interior room the SD super cab was larger in all areas except it gave up
an 1.3" in leg room to the Gmc. The trucks in the article were from different
weight classes and two of the truck were 4X4s not giving a fair comparison on
performance, ride and handling.

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:38:19 EDT
From: RSnovi

aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - orderd 285 75 16s today / bfgs

In a message dated 99-10-12 17:05:21 EDT, you write:

hey guy i should have them here by next week sometime , from what i gather
most don't really recommend a 295. I on the BFG site it says 7.5 but i spoke
to a rep and he told me that "should" be ok. the just don't recommend for
legality reasons.

Ross S.

When I asked a similar question last week or so. I got little response other
than RS's excitement for getting an answer too :-).

I was interested in the same things you are but at full GVWR of near 10,000
lbs
While I didn't get an answer here, a buddy responded with this.
(it doesn't fully answer your durability question, but unloaded, it may not
be
too much of an issue.) Also keep in mind, this question is in regards to a
99 F350 SD 4x4 carrying a Lance 820. (and going from a 8" foot print
to a 9.5" footprint per tire.)

>If you mount a tire rated for a wheel of 7.5" - 9.5" wide, and mount it
>on a 7" wide wheel what is the risk?

Shouldn't be a problem.

>Do you lose stability or weight carrying capability?

I don't think that you will ose any weight carrying capability, but in
theory you might lose a slight bit of stability, but I don't think it would
be noticable. A 1/2 inch difference in width is not a problem. This
question comes up on the Off Road list from time to time when someone wants
to mount a tire that's 14" or so wide on a stock rim. The end result is
that the tire ends up being slightly taller due to the tire being squeezed
onto the rim. The converse also happens - when you mount a narrow tire on
a wide wheel the overall diameter gets smaller. A problem arises with the
narrow tire on the wide rim, and that is where if you don't use enough air
pressure the tire runs the risk of coming off the bead. This is more an
issue in Off Road situations, though.

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:01:28 -0700
From: "BIGDOG"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

What about the lugnut recall?

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark MacDonald
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 2:19 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

> I noticed the other day on my 98 F-150, that when I grab hold of the top
of
> the tire, and give it a good yank, I can hear a loud "CLUNK"... It does
> this worst on the drivers side, however the passenger side does it as
well.
> I thought it may be a ball joint or something gone bad, or a tie rod end,
> but checking these while yanking on these wheels, the balljoint and tierod
> seem to be fine... It sounds like its coming from the hub of the wheel..
> This truck only has a little over 20,000km on it.. Would it be possible
> that the bearings need to be tightened up this early? Can anyone else shed
> some light on what may be happening here?
>
>
> Thanks a lot...
> == 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, 12 Oct 1999 21:02:54 -0300
From: Mark MacDonald
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

I had the lugnuts changed some time ago as per the recall...

At 05:01 PM 10/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
>What about the lugnut recall?
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Mark MacDonald
>To:
>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 2:19 PM
>Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:18:48 -0500
From: DJ Viney
Subject: FTE 97up - 97 F250

Hi..I need a different truck..a long bed. Does anyone know who might be
able to use a good truck? It's a beautiful red, 1997 F250 Powerstroke
Diesel. It has an extended cab..short bed. It is ready for a smaller 5th
wheel. It has 24K miles with about 12,000 miles or June 2,000 deadline
on the warranty. It has a few of the "bells and whistles" we like: rear
sliding window..PW, PL..auto..cruise..AM/FM radio/cassett..asking
$23,500. Dick Viney - Branson, MO - djviney

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:36:29 -0400
From: "Freddy Favela"
Subject: FTE 97up - Re: Tires for 99 f150

I would like to know what is the widest and tallest tire that will fit on a
ford f150 99 with stock 16's? (4x2)
- -----Original Message-----
From: Freddy Favela
To: Freddy Favela ; 97up-list

ford-trucks.com

Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 11:34 PM
Subject: Tires for 99 f150

>has anybody tried 33x10x16 tires on a 99 f150? will they fit without any
>modification on a 4x2? What is the biggest and widest tire that will fit
>without mod?
>
>thanks in advance!
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Freddy Favela
>To: 97up-list

ford-trucks.com
>Date: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 4:06 PM
>Subject: Crack ON DOOR!!
>
>
>>I thought that the Crack on the door was not supposed to effect the 1999
>>trucks!? Is this true or not? And if so is it all the trucks or just
>>the ones from a certain plant?? Mine does not have the crack.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Allemand, Andre'
>>To: '97up-list

ford-trucks.com'
>>Date: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 7:43 AM
>>Subject: FTE 97up - TINT ON DOOR WINDOW
>>
>>
>>>I to have the famous crack on the door and am in the same boat your in
>with
>>>the tint and visors. I believe when the door is replaced, they will use
>>all
>>>the "guts from the old door such as the window and accessories. Also,
>does
>>>anyone know how much an extended cab 4x2 weighs....?
>>>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>>>
>>
>
>

__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:26:36 -0700
From: "BIGDOG"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

Well, so much for grabbing the low hanging fruit. I hope you figure it out
soon, and don't have to pay for it !!!!

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark MacDonald
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

> I had the lugnuts changed some time ago as per the recall...
>
>
> At 05:01 PM 10/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >What about the lugnut recall?
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Mark MacDonald
> >To:
> >Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 2:19 PM
> >Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???
>
> == 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, 12 Oct 1999 21:33:23 -0500
From: "Mike Fairleigh"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

The pittman arm had to be replaced on my '98 at less than 13,000 miles. It
was so badly worn that the suspension had a good 1/2" of play in it. You
might want to make sure you don't have the same problem.

Mike Fairleigh
mikef

sky.net
...Always remembering our veterans.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark MacDonald
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 4:19 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - F-150 wheelbearings already???

....

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.