Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages
contained in these archives without consent from the respective
author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on
any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by
individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors.

Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list 97up-list); Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:23:37 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:23:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server ford-trucks.com>
To: 97up-list digest users ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: 97up-list Digest V2000 #39
Precedence: bulk

==========================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1997 and Newer Truck Mailing
List(Use the Small Chassis List for Rangers, Explorers,
Aerostars and Bronco IIs.

Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com

To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
message.
==========================================================

------------------------------------
97up-list Digest Mon, 27 Mar 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 039

In This Issue:
Re: Performance Friction Pads
Re: Truck brakes
Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG
ADMIN: Mail storage
Re: Computer Performance Chips
Re: Computer Performance Chips
Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG
Re: Superduty/camper height
Re: Truck brakes
Re: Truck brakes
Fwd: I need a non trailer tow mirror...
Re: MPG
Re: ATF change
Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG
Re: Performance Friction Pads
Re: ATF change
ADMIN: Nascar Craftsman Truck Series forum added
Off topic - FORD's customer service
Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service
Superduty/camper
Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service
Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service
Re: Superduty/camper
Superduty

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

From: ShermanPowell aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 19:34:13 EST
Subject: Re: Performance Friction Pads

Yes, I've tried Performance Friction Carbon Metallic pads, and after a year
of using them I'd have to say they're the best 50 bucks I ever put into my
truck. They'd easily be worth 3 or 4 times the price. They made a dramatic
improvement in stopping distance over the stock piece o' crap brake pads,
which were not even powerful enough to lock the front brakes on dry pavement,
with me standing on the pedal. (My 33 inch tires also have something to do
with that.)

I highly recommend them to any and all. Only problem is the ton of brake
dust they make. And they'll probably warp your rotors faster, if you use
them hard enough. But I haven't had any problems in that area.

(Original Message)

From: Hunter yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Brakes

Has anyone on the list try this product http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.performancefriction.com/
for brakes.

Hunter.

> THE BRAKES ON MY TRUCK ARE CRAP. 97, 4WD 150. THE WHOLE TRUCK SHAKES


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

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 17:37:31 -0700
From: Bill Funk uswest.net>
Subject: Re: Truck brakes

We are seeing some messages about the brakes on relatively new trucks, and about how bad they are.
Let me tell you what I learned a while ago.
While we had our '81 F-250HD, I discovered that putting tires with high tread life ratings on the truck led to poor braking, because the tires would skid easily. Replacing them with tires with lower tread life ratings, and a higher traction rating (they sort of go hand-in-hand) improved braking a LOT.
Now, with our more modern trucks with ABS, this is even more pronounced. Tires that have poor traction (but last a long time) will activate the ABS in hard braking, leading to observed long braking distances, and a shudder induced by the ABS. It's not the truck's fault, it's the tires' fault.
When we got a '91 F-250HD, it had RABS. When I put sticky tires on the truck, braking distance went down noticeably.
I have friends with what they call bad brakes, and I usually notice that they buy their tires for long life. When I suggest that they use tires with higher traction ratings, they tell me that they want longer life than those tires will give them. When I point out that this is exactly why they have poor brakes, they tell me they'd rather have the longer life, and save a few bucks.
You can't have long tread life, and superior braking.
Take your pick.

Bill


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

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 20:37:25 -0500
From: Karen Wall / Steve Offiler ici.net>
Subject: Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG

Joe:

In my opinion, that fuel economy you report is somewhat low. For example,
I drive a '97 F250HD, which is the old-style truck, with 351 (5.8 liter)
and 4.11 axles and auto trans. It is a 4x4 and weighs 5600lb empty. I do
not have a tonneau cover. In typical mixed driving, stop-n-go city plus
70mph highway and everything in between, in rolling hilly terrain, I get
14.5 mpg. Your truck is probably 1000 lb lighter and has better
aerodynamics, and you might even have a more economical axle ratio (you
didn't mention it). I think I'd expect in the ballpark of 17-18 mpg from
your truck running pure highway miles in warm, flat conditions.

Best regards,
Steve Offiler
North Scituate RI

PS: I think another post said you had 4100 miles. Some say about 5000 for
break-in, but you're most of the way there at 4100. In another few
thousand miles you might get another couple tenth's of an MPG tops.

At 09:23 AM 3/27/00 -0600, jmann living.com wrote:
>Hey guys,
>
>Just got back from a trip to Ft Worth, from Austin. The truck is running a
>K&N filter, Flowmaster 50 series muffler and a hard tonneau cover on the
>bed. So, on the way home I thought I'd see what my highway MPG was in my new
>2000 5.4 4x4 Lariat. So I capped off the tank with 87 octane in Ft. Worth
>reset the trip odometer, and hit the highway. Well about 180 mile later I'm
>home. I filled up again about four lights from the highway and divided the
>total miles by the fuel it took to fill the tank and came up with 15.5 MPG.
>Here are the conditions during the drive.
>
>Avg. Temp: 83
>Avg. Humidity: ~50
>Avg. speed: 75
>Cruise was used 2/3 of the way
>A/C: OFF
>
>The sticker claimed 17MPG for Highway and with the K&N, Flowmaster and
>tonneau cover I would have thought that I would get at least that, or
>better.
>
>Any ideas? 15MPG Highway seems a bit low. Was 17MPG calculated on 55mph? I
>average 12 to 13 during the week going to work, with a mix of highway and
>city driving. A 2-3 MPG difference seems a little narrow.
>
>Thanks for any advise or input.
>
>Joe
>Austin, TX
>
>
>>From product site:
>
>K&N: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.knfilters.com/
>Flowmaster: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.flowmastermufflers.com/
>Quote from site: "I could feel the increase in power right away, and it has
>a nice, quiet, rich sound that I really like. And the gas mileage improved
>as well!"
>A.R.E. tonneau: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.4are.com/
>
>
>
>==========================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
>the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
>message.
>
>


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

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:23:28 -0500
From: Ken Payne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: ADMIN: Mail storage

Many of the people with ford-trucks.com or ford-trucks.net accounts
are either not checking their mail or in the case of ".com" addresses,
not having their mail software delete the messages after retrieval.

This situation is getting out of control, with half the mail queue
space being taken up by mail 3-9 weeks old. This weekend, I will be
installing software that will delete all mail over 3 weeks old. FTE
is not meant for online storage of mail.


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

From: DJBurry aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:43:29 EST
Subject: Re: Computer Performance Chips

Hello Gents,

I am considering installing a performance computer chip in my 2000 SD/PSD. I
have contacted Super Chip and got their sales pitch on the Super Chip. The
PSD owners that have installed Computer Chip in their trucks, please comment
on the following.

1. Did the Computer Chip improve the performance as advertised?
2. What happen to your fuel mileage? Did the mileage improve as advertised?
3. Did the exhaust on the truck release more smoke?
4. Did you install a turbo temperature or boost gauge?
5. Did the transmission shift differently?
6. Please give me your opinion of the Computer Chip and if you think it has
good value.

Thanks, Dave Burry, Denver Colorado

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

From: RSnovi aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:12:55 EST
Subject: Re: Computer Performance Chips

In a message dated 3/27/00 9:44:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, DJBurry aol.com
writes:

<<
I am considering installing a performance computer chip in my 2000 SD/PSD.
I
have contacted Super Chip and got their sales pitch on the Super Chip. The
PSD owners that have installed Computer Chip in their trucks, please comment
on the following.

1. Did the Computer Chip improve the performance as advertised? yes
2. What happen to your fuel mileage? Did the mileage improve as advertised?
yes
3. Did the exhaust on the truck release more smoke? dont know, cat delete
and 5 in cat back
4. Did you install a turbo temperature or boost gauge? no, probably will
sometime
5. Did the transmission shift differently? yes
6. Please give me your opinion of the Computer Chip and if you think it has
good value.

pretty decent , but shop around, alot of 10-25-50 $ price differences

Thanks, Dave Burry, Denver Colorado >>

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

From: jmann living.com
Subject: Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:00:51 -0600

Thanks for the input Steve (and everyone else).

The rear axle is a (LS) 3.55.

Joe


-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Wall / Steve Offiler [mailto:soffiler ici.net]
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 7:37 PM
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com; 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [97up-list] Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG

Joe:

In my opinion, that fuel economy you report is somewhat low.
For example,
I drive a '97 F250HD, which is the old-style truck, with 351
(5.8 liter)
and 4.11 axles and auto trans. It is a 4x4 and weighs
5600lb empty. I do
not have a tonneau cover. In typical mixed driving,
stop-n-go city plus
70mph highway and everything in between, in rolling hilly
terrain, I get
14.5 mpg. Your truck is probably 1000 lb lighter and has
better
aerodynamics, and you might even have a more economical axle
ratio (you
didn't mention it). I think I'd expect in the ballpark of
17-18 mpg from
your truck running pure highway miles in warm, flat
conditions.

Best regards,
Steve Offiler
North Scituate RI

PS: I think another post said you had 4100 miles. Some say
about 5000 for
break-in, but you're most of the way there at 4100. In
another few
thousand miles you might get another couple tenth's of an
MPG tops.

At 09:23 AM 3/27/00 -0600, jmann living.com wrote:
>Hey guys,
>
>Just got back from a trip to Ft Worth, from Austin. The
truck is running a
>K&N filter, Flowmaster 50 series muffler and a hard tonneau
cover on the
>bed. So, on the way home I thought I'd see what my highway
MPG was in my new
>2000 5.4 4x4 Lariat. So I capped off the tank with 87
octane in Ft. Worth
>reset the trip odometer, and hit the highway. Well about
180 mile later I'm
>home. I filled up again about four lights from the highway
and divided the
>total miles by the fuel it took to fill the tank and came
up with 15.5 MPG.
>Here are the conditions during the drive.
>
>Avg. Temp: 83
>Avg. Humidity: ~50
>Avg. speed: 75
>Cruise was used 2/3 of the way
>A/C: OFF
>
>The sticker claimed 17MPG for Highway and with the K&N,
Flowmaster and
>tonneau cover I would have thought that I would get at
least that, or
>better.
>
>Any ideas? 15MPG Highway seems a bit low. Was 17MPG
calculated on 55mph? I
>average 12 to 13 during the week going to work, with a mix
of highway and
>city driving. A 2-3 MPG difference seems a little narrow.
>
>Thanks for any advise or input.
>
>Joe
>Austin, TX
>
>
>>From product site:
>
>K&N: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.knfilters.com/
>Flowmaster: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.flowmastermufflers.com/
>Quote from site: "I could feel the increase in power right
away, and it has
>a nice, quiet, rich sound that I really like. And the gas
mileage improved
>as well!"
>A.R.E. tonneau: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.4are.com/
>
>
>
>==========================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
>the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
>message.
>
>

==========================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
message.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 20:10:46 +0100
Subject: Re: Superduty/camper height
From: Kirk Werner Werner.org>

I was wanting to know how high my garage door needs to be to fit the
camper/truck. I'm changing it from a 10 foot to a 12 foot door.

Thanks

> From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server ford-trucks.com>
> Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:15:40 -0500 (EST)
> To: 97up-list digest users ford-trucks.com>
> Subject: 97up-list Digest V2000 #38
>
> I have a 99 Lance 820 that I carry around with my 99 F350 SC short bed.
> I don't have the camper on right now, so I can't give you exact measurements.
> The floor of the camper is at 38" or so (so measure up from there).
>
> I have 265/75/16 tires, and rear airlift air bags that I use to raise the rear
> end back to stock height (and rancho 9000's to control body roll).
> I also have the lower profile AC unit on top.
> BigFoot's with Basements are even higher.
> Probably in the 10' to 11.5' height range at the top of the AC unit.
>
> Can you be more specific on what information you want?
>
> -john
>
> Kirk Werner wrote:


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

From: cakid themail.com
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 00:31:32 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Truck brakes


So it's not possible to develop a wider tread with more depth to compensate for both needs?

C.K.

****** Original Message ******
FROM: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
SENT: Mon 03/27/2000 10:27 PM
TO: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
SUBJECT: [97up-list] Re: Truck brakes

>
>We are seeing some messages about the brakes on relatively new trucks, and about how bad they are.
>Let me tell you what I learned a while ago.
>While we had our '81 F-250HD, I discovered that putting tires with high tread life ratings on the truck led to poor braking, because the tires would skid easily. Replacing them with tires with lower tread life ratings, and a higher traction rating (they sort of go hand-in-hand) improved braking a LOT.
>Now, with our more modern trucks with ABS, this is even more pronounced. Tires that have poor traction (but last a long time) will activate the ABS in hard braking, leading to observed long braking distances, and a shudder induced by the ABS. It's not the truck's fault, it's the tires' fault.
>When we got a '91 F-250HD, it had RABS. When I put sticky tires on the truck, braking distance went down noticeably.
>I have friends with what they call bad brakes, and I usually notice that they buy their tires for long life. When I suggest that they use tires with higher traction ratings, they tell me that they want longer life than those tires will give them. When I point out that this is exactly why they have poor brakes, they tell me they'd rather have the longer life, and save a few bucks.
>You can't have long tread life, and superior braking.
>Take your pick.
>
>Bill
>
>==========================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
>the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
>message.



__________________________________________________________________
Make A Buck Or Two TheMail.com - Free Internet Email
Sign-up today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.themail.com/ref.htm?ref=229716





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

From: sseeplane juno.com
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 23:55:03 -0600
Subject: Re: Truck brakes

>>So it's not possible to develop a wider tread with more depth to
compensate for both needs?<<

Traction and Tread life are a function of tire hardness as much as or
more so than tread design. The harder the "rubber" the better the wear
resistance, but the less "grip" the tire will have. The softer the
"rubber" the better the "grip" but the lower the wear resistance. Indy
and Nascar pit crew chiefs are always jockeying tires with the better
feature depending on the track conditions.

Steve

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

From: DJBurry aol.com
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 01:04:54 EST
Subject: Fwd: I need a non trailer tow mirror...


In a message dated 03/24/2000 9:15:15 AM Mountain Standard Time,
DJBurry aol.com writes:

<< 97up-list ford-trucks.com >>



-- Attached file included as plaintext by Listar --

Return-Path: <97up-list-bounce ford-trucks.com>
Received: from rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by
air-zc03.mail.aol.com (v70.20) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:15:15
-0500
Received: from ford-trucks.com (ford-trucks.com [209.50.251.152]) by
rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v70.21) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:14:59
-0500
Received: from ford-trucks.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ford-trucks.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA01197;
Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:13:10 -0500
Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list 97up-list); Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:13:10
-0500 (EST)
Received: from imo21.mx.aol.com (imo21.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.65])
by ford-trucks.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA01192
for <97up-list ford-trucks.com>; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:13:09 -0500
From: DJBurry aol.com
Received: from DJBurry aol.com
by imo21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v25.3.) id s.74.23d1402 (4470)
for <97up-list ford-trucks.com>; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:13:53 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <74.23d1402.260cee41aol.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:13:53 EST
Subject: [97up-list] I need a non trailer tow mirror...
To: 97up-listford-trucks.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14
X-listar-version: Listar v0.128a
Sender: 97up-list-bounceford-trucks.com
Errors-to: 97up-list-bounceford-trucks.com
X-original-sender: DJBurryaol.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: 97up-listford-trucks.com
X-list: 97up-list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Super Duty Owners,
I have a 2000 SD PSD and I need a non-trailer tow, small size, passenger side
mirrow housing assembly. I only need the housing and dont need the mirror.
( I hit the mirror backing into the garage and cracked the mirror housing,
but not the
mirror..:<(..) Please e-mail back or call me ...Thanks ...Dave Burry -
Denver 1-888-711-6384
==========================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to: listarford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of the
message.




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

From: "Jason Meadows" iol7.com>
Subject: Re: MPG
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:55:02 -0800


Joe,

My mileage on my 2000 4.6L didn't reach the sticker level until after about 6000 miles. I recently went on a trip where I used cruise all the time at 65-70 mph and got 20.7mpg. In city driving I now get 16-17mpg. While you probably won't get that high (although a lady named Rosemary got above 20mpg with a 5.4L on the MMPT site), you might want to try and slow down 5-10 mph, especially on such a short trip. It would add at most 15-20 minutes to your trip and could really increase your mileage. William was right, it is mostly wind resistance that hurts at the higher speeds, and it is geometric. Hope this helps!

Jason

JEM's Gem: 2000 Amazon Green Ext Cab F150 XLT, 4.6L, auto, 3.55:1, K&N,Pendaliner SR, AMSOIL synthetic

Future: AMSOIL remote bypass filter, Gibson Swept Side, Gibson headers,Pace Edwards roll-top,TracRac, Bed Extender, Brush "Deer" Bar


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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 05:10:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Hunter yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ATF change

Steve,
Do you have the F150-97? and how long did it take you to do the whole job?

Hunter.


> I just changed the automatic transmission fluid in my truck. It took 14
> quarts. The shop manual says that the system capacity is 16 1/2 quarts. That
> means that there are 2 1/2 quarts of old fluid still in the system. Not too
> bad, if you ask me. I filled it up with Valvoline Durablend synthetic blend
> ATF. It cost about a buck more per quart than the regular stuff but I am
> told that the synthetic blend holds up much better.
>
> While I had the pan off, I installed a drain plug (it required drilling a
> 1/2" hole in the pan and installing a drain plug). The next time I have to
> do this chore, I can drain the torque converter and transmission pan from
> the two drain holes and not make such a mess.
>
> I have the E40D tranny (4x4) with the HD cooling package. With the filter
> and synthetic blend fluid, this job cost me just over $50. Not too bad. I'm
> sure the dealer would have reamed me and I'd have "regular" fluid. Lots of
> people say that the dealer will flush the system. Well, I'm sure that's
> true. But, mixing the 2 1/2 quarts of the old stuff with 14 quarts of the
> new stuff gives me an 85% fluid change. As long as I change the fluid at
> regular intervals I think I'll be OK.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com

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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 05:15:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Hunter yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 2000 F150 5.4 4x4 MPG

Joe,
I get 12 MPG highway on my 4.6L and around 10-11 MPG going to work (mostly highway as
well). I have the K&N and bedcover.

Hunter.

> Just got back from a trip to Ft Worth, from Austin. The truck is running a
> K&N filter, Flowmaster 50 series muffler and a hard tonneau cover on the
> bed. So, on the way home I thought I'd see what my highway MPG was in my new
> 2000 5.4 4x4 Lariat. So I capped off the tank with 87 octane in Ft. Worth
> reset the trip odometer, and hit the highway. Well about 180 mile later I'm
> home. I filled up again about four lights from the highway and divided the
> total miles by the fuel it took to fill the tank and came up with 15.5 MPG.
> Here are the conditions during the drive.
>
> Avg. Temp: 83
> Avg. Humidity: ~50
> Avg. speed: 75
> Cruise was used 2/3 of the way
> A/C: OFF
>
> The sticker claimed 17MPG for Highway and with the K&N, Flowmaster and
> tonneau cover I would have thought that I would get at least that, or
> better.
>
> Any ideas? 15MPG Highway seems a bit low. Was 17MPG calculated on 55mph? I
> average 12 to 13 during the week going to work, with a mix of highway and


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com

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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 05:28:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Hunter yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Performance Friction Pads

Sherman,

I was thinking about going to MIDES and getting the lifetime warranty brake bad, but
now I think I'll get the Carbon metallic pads. I was thinking about changing my rotors
as well anyhow.

Hunter.


> Yes, I've tried Performance Friction Carbon Metallic pads, and after a year
> of using them I'd have to say they're the best 50 bucks I ever put into my
> truck. They'd easily be worth 3 or 4 times the price. They made a dramatic
> improvement in stopping distance over the stock piece o' crap brake pads,
> which were not even powerful enough to lock the front brakes on dry pavement,
> with me standing on the pedal. (My 33 inch tires also have something to do
> with that.)
>
> I highly recommend them to any and all. Only problem is the ton of brake
> dust they make. And they'll probably warp your rotors faster, if you use
> them hard enough. But I haven't had any problems in that area.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com

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

From: "Zinski, Steve" richmond.edu>
Subject: Re: ATF change
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:48:02 -0500

Start to finish, I'd have to estimate that it took about an 1 1/2 hours. I
went slow, this was my first time doing the job. Plus I didn't buy enough
fluid and I had to run out and buy more. I found that if you drain the
torque converter first, it gets most of the fluid out of the tranny. That
way, when you drop the pan, not much fluid is left in the system. I had a
minimal mess doing it that way.

--Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: Hunter [mailto:f150_97yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 8:10 AM
To: 97up-listford-trucks.com
Subject: [97up-list] Re: ATF change


Steve,
Do you have the F150-97? and how long did it take you to do the whole job?

Hunter.

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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:00:49 -0500
From: Ken Payne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: ADMIN: Nascar Craftsman Truck Series forum added

A "Nascar Craftsman Truck Series" forum has been added to
the web site message boards. In addition being a place for
you to discuss the races, I'll also be posting Ford truck
series press releases there.

Ken Payne
Admin




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

From: "Frank Bures" chem.toronto.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:28:39 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Off topic - FORD's customer service

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This post does not concern FORD trucks directly, bus it does concern FORD
customer service which in turn does concern owners of FORD trucks, so I
thought I might post it here.

Your comments will be appreciated.

This is a letter I wrote to FORD customer service:

- -----Letter to FORD begins-------

Two weeks ago my son leased 2000 Mercury Cougar V6 from a FORD dealership.
Shortly after the delivery, the car developed a stalling problem, which in
my opinion greatly influences the driver's safety. If, for instance, the
car stalls during a left hand turn in an intersection, a serious accident
can easily occur.

The situation was recognized by FORD as an intermittent problem occurring on
engines manufactured after May 1999 (according to FORD Special Service
Message 13830).
However, my dealer refuses to accept any responsibility for this
disfunctional vehicle and claims that I have to wait till FORD comes up with
a solution to this problem. Considering the fact, that the problem has been
known for 10 months now, I am afraid the solution might not be forthcoming
soon.

As the malfunction has been officially acknowledged by FORD, I believe I
have grounds to insist that the dealer exchanges this vehicle for a fully
functional one.

Therefore I called the FORD customer representative on March 10. The
representative was very cooperative and he told me that he will get in touch
with my dealer and that the dealer will call me in 48 hours with a proposal
how to solve this problem. As there has been no such call from the dealer,
I called the FORD customer service again this morning. I spoke to Primrose,
who denied, there was any such agreement, who basically accused me of being
a liar and who said, that there is simply nothing that FORD is supposed to
do until the repair solution is found.

I do not feel Primrose's attitude serves her employer well. I also do not
think that this kind of "responsibility" on the part of FORD is acceptable.

- -----End of the letter to FORD-------


- -----Reply from FORD begins----------


Dear Mr. Bures,

Thank you for your message of 03/15/00 regarding your son's 2000 Mercury
Cougar. We appreciate the time you have taken to let us know about your
frustration with the situation surrounding the vehicle's stalling
concerns.

We pride ourselves on becoming the world's leading consumer company for
automotive products and services. We regret the circumstances which
prompted you to contact us. Your feedback is highly valued by all
divisions within Ford of Canada, and serves to provide us with insight
into areas where we may need improvement. We appreciate your concerns
and have documented them for future reference.

If you have not already done so, we would also recommend you provide
feedback to the Management Team at the dealership, as we believe they
would also appreciate knowing the details of your dissatisfaction.

Mr. Bures, we value you as a customer, and should you have any other
questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us again as we would
be happy to assist you.

Thank you for contacting Ford of Canada.

Sincerely,
Gabrielle
Ford Motor Company of Canada Ltd.
Customer Assistance Centre


- -----End of the reply from FORD------


Is this a joke or do they really mean it?


Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, M5S 3H6
fbureschem.toronto.edu
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://frank.chem.utoronto.ca/electronics
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use
Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2
Charset: cp850

wj8DBQE44LOH5kszaG0XLB4RAm6BAKDzSyofKfmEP81FIP8gk8z6jP9yMgCg1s9T
svNuLcME1JbTPS9GATaeNfI=
=BimK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 07:07:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Hunter yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service

This is really crab.
Now if a lawyer wrote this letter on his behalf this would've been a different. It's
really hard to believe that a big automaker will do such thing. I wonder what would
they do, if his sun really had an accident.


> Two weeks ago my son leased 2000 Mercury Cougar V6 from a FORD dealership.
> Shortly after the delivery, the car developed a stalling problem, which in
> my opinion greatly influences the driver's safety. If, for instance, the
> car stalls during a left hand turn in an intersection, a serious accident
> can easily occur.
>
> The situation was recognized by FORD as an intermittent problem occurring on
> engines manufactured after May 1999 (according to FORD Special Service
> Message 13830).
> However, my dealer refuses to accept any responsibility for this
> disfunctional vehicle and claims that I have to wait till FORD comes up with
> a solution to this problem. Considering the fact, that the problem has been
> known for 10 months now, I am afraid the solution might not be forthcoming
> soon.
>
> As the malfunction has been officially acknowledged by FORD, I believe I
> have grounds to insist that the dealer exchanges this vehicle for a fully
> functional one.
>
> Therefore I called the FORD customer representative on March 10. The
> representative was very cooperative and he told me that he will get in touch
> with my dealer and that the dealer will call me in 48 hours with a proposal
> how to solve this problem. As there has been no such call from the dealer,
> I called the FORD customer service again this morning. I spoke to Primrose,
> who denied, there was any such agreement, who basically accused me of being
> a liar and who said, that there is simply nothing that FORD is supposed to
> do until the repair solution is found.
>
> I do not feel Primrose's attitude serves her employer well. I also do not
> think that this kind of "responsibility" on the part of FORD is acceptable.

> - -----Reply from FORD begins----------
>
> Thank you for your message of 03/15/00 regarding your son's 2000 Mercury
> Cougar. We appreciate the time you have taken to let us know about your
> frustration with the situation surrounding the vehicle's stalling
> concerns.
>
> We pride ourselves on becoming the world's leading consumer company for
> automotive products and services. We regret the circumstances which
> prompted you to contact us. Your feedback is highly valued by all
> divisions within Ford of Canada, and serves to provide us with insight
> into areas where we may need improvement. We appreciate your concerns
> and have documented them for future reference.
>
> If you have not already done so, we would also recommend you provide
> feedback to the Management Team at the dealership, as we believe they
> would also appreciate knowing the details of your dissatisfaction.
>
> Mr. Bures, we value you as a customer, and should you have any other
> questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us again as we would
> be happy to assist you.
>
> Thank you for contacting Ford of Canada.
>
> Sincerely,
> Gabrielle
> Ford Motor Company of Canada Ltd.
> Customer Assistance Centre
>
> - -----End of the reply from FORD------


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com

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

From: "Sandy Swallow" orionre.com>
Subject: Superduty/camper
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 07:58:15 -0800


Johny

You wrote you run a rancho 9000 shock on your Superduty. Does the shock work well on the truck? Is most of your driving on the highway?

Sandy


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

From: jmannliving.com
Subject: Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:07:28 -0600

All I can say is, if a known problem existed like this one with my new 2000
truck and the dealer treated me like that, the truck would be sitting in the
middle of the show room floor, and not by way of the damn door!

If the car is leased through ford, stop the payments on the car until they
resolve the problem. I'm not sure what the consumer laws are in Canada. But
basically they've sold you a defective product and the have to correct the
problem, replace the vehicle or refund your money. In almost any other
circumstance you could return a defective product. Why does the auto
industry have to be so different? So screwed up?



-----Original Message-----
From: Hunter [mailto:f150_97yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 9:07 AM
To: 97up-listford-trucks.com
Subject: [97up-list] Re: Off topic - FORD's customer
service

This is really crab.
Now if a lawyer wrote this letter on his behalf this
would've been a different. It's
really hard to believe that a big automaker will do such
thing. I wonder what would
they do, if his sun really had an accident.



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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:06:30 -0700
From: Jay Murphy asu.edu>
Subject: Re: Off topic - FORD's customer service

If you can't get immediate satisfaction, try the Dispute Settlement Board.
It's a Ford sponsored board for unresolved problems like yours. Even though
it is Ford sponsored, they are very independent minded (at least they were
when I dealt with them) and will hear your case within 30 days. Get a
brochure from your dealer.

By the way, my experience with Ford Customer Service is much like everyone
else's. All talk and no action. Use them only to help document your
problems.

Good luck.


-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Bures [mailto:fbureschem.toronto.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 7:29 AM
To: 97up-listford-trucks.com
Subject: [97up-list] Off topic - FORD's customer service


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This post does not concern FORD trucks directly, bus it does concern FORD
customer service which in turn does concern owners of FORD trucks, so I
thought I might post it here.

Your comments will be appreciated.

This is a letter I wrote to FORD customer service:

- -----Letter to FORD begins-------

Two weeks ago my son leased 2000 Mercury Cougar V6 from a FORD dealership.
Shortly after the delivery, the car developed a stalling problem, which in
my opinion greatly influences the driver's safety. If, for instance, the
car stalls during a left hand turn in an intersection, a serious accident
can easily occur.

The situation was recognized by FORD as an intermittent problem occurring on
engines manufactured after May 1999 (according to FORD Special Service
Message 13830).
However, my dealer refuses to accept any responsibility for this
disfunctional vehicle and claims that I have to wait till FORD comes up with
a solution to this problem. Considering the fact, that the problem has been
known for 10 months now, I am afraid the solution might not be forthcoming
soon.

As the malfunction has been officially acknowledged by FORD, I believe I
have grounds to insist that the dealer exchanges this vehicle for a fully
functional one.

Therefore I called the FORD customer representative on March 10. The
representative was very cooperative and he told me that he will get in touch
with my dealer and that the dealer will call me in 48 hours with a proposal
how to solve this problem. As there has been no such call from the dealer,
I called the FORD customer service again this morning. I spoke to Primrose,
who denied, there was any such agreement, who basically accused me of being
a liar and who said, that there is simply nothing that FORD is supposed to
do until the repair solution is found.

I do not feel Primrose's attitude serves her employer well. I also do not
think that this kind of "responsibility" on the part of FORD is acceptable.

- -----End of the letter to FORD-------


- -----Reply from FORD begins----------


Dear Mr. Bures,

Thank you for your message of 03/15/00 regarding your son's 2000 Mercury
Cougar. We appreciate the time you have taken to let us know about your
frustration with the situation surrounding the vehicle's stalling
concerns.

We pride ourselves on becoming the world's leading consumer company for
automotive products and services. We regret the circumstances which
prompted you to contact us. Your feedback is highly valued by all
divisions within Ford of Canada, and serves to provide us with insight
into areas where we may need improvement. We appreciate your concerns
and have documented them for future reference.

If you have not already done so, we would also recommend you provide
feedback to the Management Team at the dealership, as we believe they
would also appreciate knowing the details of your dissatisfaction.

Mr. Bures, we value you as a customer, and should you have any other
questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us again as we would
be happy to assist you.

Thank you for contacting Ford of Canada.

Sincerely,
Gabrielle
Ford Motor Company of Canada Ltd.
Customer Assistance Centre


- -----End of the reply from FORD------


Is this a joke or do they really mean it?


Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, M5S 3H6
fbureschem.toronto.edu
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://frank.chem.utoronto.ca/electronics







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

Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:49:01 -0800
From: johny netapp.com>
Subject: Re: Superduty/camper

With a top heavy load on an already high 4x4, the rancho's can't be beat.
I had a friend that tried the Edelbrock IAS shocks on a 99 CC short
bed 4x4 , with a lance 820. Couldn't cut it with the camper on.
He swapped for Rancho 9000's. (and duals in front using a procomp
dual shock bracket)

The IAS shocks were a nice ride unloaded though.
We both have PSD's.

Stock setting is comparable to 2. I run 3 in the front 2 rear unloaded.
Loaded with the camper 5 rear and 4 or 5 front depending on
how twisty the roads are. Air lift rear air bags too.

With the camper on, I do highway/twisty stuff. Sierra Nevada's, California
highway 1. If you are swapping from Full GVW to unloaded on a regular
basis, the 9000's are the only way to go.

Rancho usually starts running a 4 shock for the price of 3 promotion about
this time of year, so keeps your eyes open. That what I got.

Sandy Swallow wrote:

> Johny
>
> You wrote you run a rancho 9000 shock on your Superduty. Does the shock work well on the truck? Is most of your driving on the highway?




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

From: "Sandy Swallow" orionre.com>
Subject: Superduty
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:23:22 -0800


Johny,

Thanks for the reply on the shocks.
Did you level you truck out at all?
You mentioned you run air bags. I have been looking at the Firestone units.
I plan to run 35" tires, so I need to raise the front about 2.5"-3" to get the all body work to clear. Then once that is done the ride will also be level. Next issue is when loaded. To avoid a rear end squat I think the Firestone air bag would retain the level ride and hence handling of the truck.
I tow a 7500# TAG trailer.

Regards
Sandy


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

End of 97up-list Digest V2000 #39
*********************************
----------------------------------------------------------
Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1997 and Newer Truck List

Send posts to 97up-listford-trucks.com

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing
list, send an email to:

listarford-trucks.com

with the words "unsubscribe 97up-list" in the subject of
the message.

Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
----------------------------------------------------------

....


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.