Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 21:50:14 -0500 (EST) To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
From: digest-proc lofcom.com
Subject: fordtrucks Digest v97 n0021
Reply-To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Volume 97 Number 0021 fordtrucks Digest

Today's Topics:

Re: 9 inch third member
Fordnatics -Reply
RE: 9 inch third member
Re: Ford Truck History Question
Re: Fordnatics
Tonnage designations- question.
1978 F250 Ranger 4x4
Re: 302's
3rd member (again)
Re: Tonnage designations- question.
Powerstroke Problems
Feb 1-15 archives
Re: 3rd member (again)
Re: Tonnage designations- question.
83 Ranger Combination Valve Question
Extra Parts 460 Motor
Re: Tonnage designations- question.
Re: Tonnage designations- question.
Re: Tonnage designations- question.
>>> Nick Finney 03/14/97 01:31am >>>
voting closed
Voting Results


* PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE THE ENTIRE DIGEST IN REPLIES TO THE LIST! *

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

>From williame why.net Thu Mar 13 16:19:49 1997 From: william enox
Subject: Re: 9 inch third member
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Ken Payne wrote:

Thanks for all the replies concerning 9 inch third member
compatibility. Now I have a new set of questions:

I'm going to pull out the third member ("chunk") this weekend
from my truck (67-F100) and rebuild it. What tools and parts
do I need and what procedures do I need to follow? Am
I getting myself into a mess by taking this on myself?
Shops around here want $650 to rebuild it, way too
much. I can get a junkyard chunk for $75 to $100. However,
I replaced the entire rear end (some really heavy work for
one person) 9 months ago and I don't want yet another
ruined rear end another 9 months down the road.

If I do take the option of buying a junker one how do I know
if its any good? If that isn't my best option - how hard is
rebuilding? I picked up a Chiltons Ford truck book at the
library (the really big hard cover) and it has procedures
but it keeps saying use special tool xxxyyyzzz to do so
and so. Are there tools I can buy to do this - other than
Ford (read high $$$$) tools?

Setting up a rearend is something of an art....to get it right requires experience. I would check around and find someone else that rebuilds them. Currie Enterprises sells complete rearends narrowed and with all the right brackets to fit a Grand Nationals for 1000. I would imagine just the 3rd member would be MUCH cheaper. Thier number should be in most Hot Rod mags.
As far as tools A dial indicator with a good magnetic base is the major tool you need. Most machine shops will romove and replace the bearings on the carrier for 30 or 40. Then you get the fun job of setting up the gears. If you have the money to risk using one to learn on you might try it for the experience, a dial indicator is useful for many things.




------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Mar 13 16:32:02 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: Fordnatics -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

There is a link on the Ford Trucks web page to the Fordnatics page. Point your browser to
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks
and follow the "Items of interest" link.

The Fordnatics is a general Ford page which serves all Ford owners.
There's a good chance that if a Falcon list exists that someone on that page will know about it. One warning, you have to specifically ask for help with the Falcon or you'll never see anything posted about it. 95% of the postings have to do with Mustangs or rebuilding high end engines. I've had a lot of helpful advice from the Fordnatic list.

>>> "Don G. Buettner" 03/13/97 03:14pm >>> I would like to enquire about the "Fordnatics" I had seen mentioned yesterday. I have a coworker that has an old Ford Falcon and might be interested in getting "Fordnatics".
If you can give me an overview of what is on the Fordnatics I would muchly appreciate.

Repsectfully,
Don Buettner



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



------------------------------
>From mcat epix.net Thu Mar 13 16:36:01 1997 From: mcat epix.net
Subject: RE: 9 inch third member
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Ken
The rebuilding of the third member reqiures a couple of special tools.
Summit and Jegs both sell them but are rather expensive. You also need dial indicaters and shim packs bearing pullers and other tools. I would rather buy a third member, pull the axles and slip in the unit and be back on the road in a couple of hours. Much cheaper less time saves money.
Garry
--- On Thu, 13 Mar 1997 14:20:11 -0500 (EST) Ken Payne wrote:

>Thanks for all the replies concerning 9 inch third member
>compatibility. Now I have a new set of questions:
>
>I'm going to pull out the third member ("chunk") this weekend
>from my truck (67-F100) and rebuild it. What tools and parts
>do I need and what procedures do I need to follow? Am
>I getting myself into a mess by taking this on myself?
>Shops around here want $650 to rebuild it, way too
>much. I can get a junkyard chunk for $75 to $100. However,
>I replaced the entire rear end (some really heavy work for
>one person) 9 months ago and I don't want yet another
>ruined rear end another 9 months down the road.
>
>If I do take the option of buying a junker one how do I know
>if its any good? If that isn't my best option - how hard is
>rebuilding? I picked up a Chiltons Ford truck book at the
>library (the really big hard cover) and it has procedures
>but it keeps saying use special tool xxxyyyzzz to do so
>and so. Are there tools I can buy to do this - other than
>Ford (read high $$$$) tools?
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
>To send mail to fordtrucks, use the address: fordtrucks lofcom.com
>For help send a message with "HELP" in the body to:list-request lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
>

-----------------End of Original Message-----------------


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Name: Garry
E-mail: mcat epix.net
Date: 3/13/97 Time: 4:27:21 PM

427 Fe powered F-100 Wild by design
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



------------------------------
>From rick adc.com Thu Mar 13 16:39:37 1997 From: rick adc.com (Rick Larson)
Subject: Re: Ford Truck History Question To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Randy writes:

> I an not able to tell you what packages contained what options but the
> designations I remember are:
> Custom
> Explorer
> XLT
>
> Maybe the custom was the work truck. The explorer was the standard trim
> package and the XLT was the loaded version.

I can tell you my '71 F100 *Custom* is very basic.
302 V8, C4, manual 4w drum brakes, manual steering, vinyl steats, rubber mats, one interior light (never has worked), and green two tone paint. It is about as stock as they come.

Even the turn signals don't automatically turn off :-).

Made just across the river in St. Paul.

rick
'66 Mustang garage shelf
'71 F100 *Custom* daily driver
--
Rick Larson rick adc.com Minneapolis


------------------------------
>From mdniz19 idt.net Thu Mar 13 16:47:50 1997 From: Mark Dinzebach
Subject: Re: Fordnatics
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Don G. Buettner wrote:
>
> I would like to enquire about the "Fordnatics" I had seen mentioned
> yesterday. I have a coworker that has an old Ford Falcon and might be
> interested in getting "Fordnatics".
> If you can give me an overview of what is on the Fordnatics I would
> muchly appreciate.
>
> Repsectfully,
> Don Buettner
>
I think he would get more out of Brian Sullivan's Falcon list. Check out his web page. www.falconclub.com

Mark


------------------------------
>From JLINETT SYSUBMC.BMC.COM Thu Mar 13 17:27:29 1997 From: JLINETT SYSUBMC.BMC.COM
Subject: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Hi All,

I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.

>From reading current specs, anyway, it is clear that this is *not* the cargo capacity, not even close. I have never heard a believable explanation of this, yet everyone "knows" that the 1/2 ton is the F-150, the 3/4 ton is the F250 HD, and the one ton is the F-350, etc.

Also, I would appreciate any pointers to info on heavy Ford trucks. I recall there are some list members who have these: F600s, 700s, etc. I am fascinated by these and would like to learn more about them, their capacities, and their running gear.

In case someone might not already know, the Ford heavy truck operation has recently been sold to Freightliner which in turn is owned by Benz.

Thanks,
Jon in Houston
'96 F-350/T444E/XLT/4x4/Regular Cab/5 spd/3.55/Ranch Hand/Rhino/Aux. PCM "The Big Red One"


------------------------------
>From muccilli rci.rutgers.edu Thu Mar 13 19:56:50 1997 From: Todd Muccilli Subject: 1978 F250 Ranger 4x4
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

I just wanted to drop a note to the list to alleviate some of my sorrows.

Tonight I sold the 1978 F-250 Ranger 4x4 that I had been driving for the last two years. The truck had a worked 400, 3 speed automatic, 4" suspension lift, 33" tires. It may not have looked as clean and refined as a newer truck, but it had that "tough" appearance and sure could move out. As happy as I am that I was able to replace it with a 1997 F-350 4x4 Powerstroke, I already miss that rumble that the exhaust used to make. My time has become constrained lately, and I am no longer able to spend countless weekend hours tinkering with an old rig to keep it in tip-top running condition. I hate to have given up on the old truck, but I'm sure it was for the best. I only hope that she's in good hands now...

Sorry to sound like I've put a faithful pet to sleep or something.

For the obligatory question, though: Does anyone know how to remove the hubcaps on the Alcoa aluminum wheels that come as part of the XLT package on the 1997 (and a few years prior) F-250s and F-350s? I used a big screwdriver and I managet to gouge the wheels. I refuse to put them back on until I know I can get them off without damaging them again. Any ideas? Also, does anyone know of a source for cheap replacement lug nuts (Alcoa insists I use only their two-piece system) for these wheels if I decide to keep the hub caps off? Alcoa wants $3 a piece for the lug nuts and covers which totals somehwere near $190.
Seems a little outrageous to me.

Todd
muccilli rci.rutgers.edu


------------------------------
>From kpayne mindspring.com Thu Mar 13 19:58:14 1997 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: 302's
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 10:28 PM 3/12/97 -0500, you wrote:
> RANDY ZEILINGER (USFMDSPR)'s questions about his tall tired 96 4x with a
>302 got me to thinking about my 302's (Randy, you gotta go back to stock
>tires or put lower gears in both ends!).
>
>Since all of us late model guys are probably too inexperienced in
>maintenance issues (damn EFI 302's run for 300,000 miles I'm told!), we
>don't contribute to the list, just sit back and smirk, er, lurk! So thought
>I would stirr some do-do before Ken kicks us 'kids' off the future rust
>reparations list!
>

Not me! If I kicked anyone off they would probably end up being the only guy for miles around on the highway as I try to fix a flat tire 40 miles from any city at 2am in the pouring rain (what a mouthful, huff, huff). You'd probably drive by screaming "reap it!"


>So here's the question that no one on Fordnatics could (or would) answer:
>how does the 302 in my F150 differ from the 302 in my Mustang--other than
>the obvious different air intake (twin snorkel or twin MAF's or something)
>and the speed density FI system still retained on the trucks while all cars
>went to Mass Air in 87 or 88. So are the block/cam/heads the same as the
>Mustang 302 thru 94??? Any experts or opinions out there?
>
>Dave Lampert--Arroyo Grande CA
>95 F150, 86 GT
>
>
>

-Ken Payne
1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
Visit the Ford Trucks List Web Page (unsubscribe form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks



------------------------------
>From kpayne mindspring.com Thu Mar 13 20:12:46 1997 From: Ken Payne Subject: 3rd member (again)
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Well, after reviewing the replies to my last inquiry and hearing my wife say "remember the last time you spent $$$$$ on tools you only used once" I've decided to get a third member from the junk yard and put one it this weekend. How do I visually inspect it to make sure its not a piece of Ch*vy, err I mean junk?

Thanks to everyone for the help!


-Ken Payne
1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
Visit the Ford Trucks List Web Page (unsubscribe form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks



------------------------------
>From kpayne mindspring.com Thu Mar 13 20:14:43 1997 From: Ken Payne Subject: Re: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 05:27 PM 3/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup
>designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.
>
>>From reading current specs, anyway, it is clear that this is *not* the
>cargo capacity, not even close. I have never heard a believable explanation
>of this, yet everyone "knows" that the 1/2 ton is the F-150, the 3/4 ton
>is the F250 HD, and the one ton is the F-350, etc.
>
>Also, I would appreciate any pointers to info on heavy Ford trucks. I recall
>there are some list members who have these: F600s, 700s, etc. I am fascinated
>by these and would like to learn more about them, their capacities, and their
>running gear.
>
>In case someone might not already know, the Ford heavy truck operation has
>recently been sold to Freightliner which in turn is owned by Benz.
>
>Thanks,
>Jon in Houston


Just a guess, maybe tongue weight for towing?

-Ken Payne
1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
Visit the Ford Trucks List Web Page (unsubscribe form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks



------------------------------
>From xdougho ssimicro.com Thu Mar 13 21:31:52 1997 From: "Douglas J. Howard" Subject: Powerstroke Problems
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

I am driving a 1995 powerstroke with about 20,000 miles on it in very cold climate conditions. It did not come equipped with the idle-up kit.

I have begun to have serious problems. Since the New Year, the truck has been back to the dealer three times for push-rod replacements. The dealer's and Ford Canada's story is that the tolerance between the valve stems and the valve guides is so tight that under extremely cold conditions (-35 to -45 degrees fahrenheit) the valve stems are actually in contact with the walls of the guides and do not move when the rocker arms try to activate them. This puts pressure on the push rods which then bend. The contact between the valve stems and the guides is really quite apparent at start-up with the very loud clatter of the moving parts (much louder than the normal deisel engine start-up clatter).

During the last trip to the garage, the dealer replaced all 16 push rods and says if that does not do the trick, the heads will have to be replaced. Through all of this process, the dealer has replaced an injector, several sensors and at least two glow plugs. The dealer has also said all along that I need the idle-up kit so that the vehicle generates enough heat at idle to prevent the problem. I don't buy it because the problem occurs at start-up not after the engine has warmed up and after it is warm. I am also told by the dealer that all powerstrokes sold in cold climate areas must be purchased with the idle-up kit option.

Since virtually all of the past posts to this list have nothing but good to say about the powerstroke I wonder if anyone else is having the problem and whether a solution has been found.

BTW, the truck is equipped with a 1000w block heater, an oil pan heater a belly tarp and a cold front over the grill.

On a more positive note, until this most recent experience, I was very pleased with this engine. I pull a 32 foot fifth wheel at about 11,000 lbs and the engine has rarely had to work hard. In fact, the only time it has been out of 3rd gear (automatic) was over three or 4 short 17% and 18% grades on Vancouver Island starting at the bottom at low speed. Fuel mileage has been in the range of 14 to 21/22 MPG depending on terrain, road conditions and whether the trailer is behind. I too change the oils and filter every 3000 miles - with the trailer behind in mountain driving I have had to add up to a quart between changes. That is neither surprising nor unusual.

I'll appreciate advice, info and sympathy as it comes back.

djh in Canada's frozen north.


------------------------------
>From kpayne mindspring.com Thu Mar 13 22:10:15 1997 From: Ken Payne Subject: Feb 1-15 archives
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Archives for Feb 1-15, 1997 are up. Sorry it took so long.
There appears to be a few messages missing. I'll try and track them down when I do the January archives (this is from before we were "officially on the air").

-Ken Payne
1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
Visit the Ford Trucks List Web Page (unsubscribe form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks



------------------------------
>From nfinney earthlink.net Thu Mar 13 22:37:23 1997 From: Nick Finney Subject: Re: 3rd member (again)
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> Well, after reviewing the replies to my last inquiry and hearing
> my wife say "remember the last time you spent $$$$$ on tools you
> only used once" I've decided to get a third member from the junk
> yard and put one it this weekend. How do I visually inspect it to
> make sure its not a piece of Ch*vy, err I mean junk?
>
> Thanks to everyone for the help!


Look for chipped gears or destroyed bearings. Look for metal particles
in the sediment at the bottom of the thirdmember. See if there is an
(Although I can usually determine the approx backlash by feel,the only
reliable method is to use a dial indicator) excessive amount of backlash
(this can be adjusted/fixed however), look at the gear teeth on the
pinion and ring gear and look for an excessive wear pattern (hard to
describe what to look for) - you want the wear to be as equally
distributed across the tooth surface as possible. Don't use a third
member with rough,noisy worn gears. Check the bearing races for rust,
brinneling, pitting etc... Check for excssive (or any) endplay on the
pinion gear. Look at the differental side gears and look for backlash.

Ring to pinion gear backlash (Ford 9') is ideally .008 to .012 try for
less than .017, backlash can be measured by mounting a dial indicator
on the thirdmember assembly and mounting it so the plunger contacts
one of the gear teeth on a tangent to the ring gear.
Preload the dial indictor approx 1/4' and zero it then just rock the
ring gear back and forth and use the difference between the min/max
as the backlash.

If you remove the ring gear/diff from third member put a dab of paint
on the spot where the pinion and ring gear teeth match up. This is very
important for certain gear ratios. You need to put them back together so
the same teeth match up.

Also inspect the splines that the axle shafts fit into and make sure it
will fit the axles your truck has.

--
Nick Finney
nfinney earthlink.net

69 F100 390 FE
Formerly:
66 Ford Mustang FASTback 289.

First On Race Day!


------------------------------
>From canzus techline.com Thu Mar 13 23:07:32 1997 From: Steve & Rockette Subject: Re: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 05:27 PM 3/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup
>designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.

If you add a zero to each of the designations, you get the load carrying capacity...

Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach
'57 F100 Shorty
'63 F100 Longbox



------------------------------
>From dwentz ix.netcom.com Thu Mar 13 23:53:03 1997 From: Dan Wentz
Subject: 83 Ranger Combination Valve Question To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Hi all

I'm converting my 50 F1 to front disk brakes. To handle the residual valve and distribution issues I got the combination valve from an 83 Ranger (I chose that because of the similarity in weight distribution between the 2 vehicles). Anyway, I have a quick question about the ports on that valve--There are 2 inlet ports on top of the valve, one has smaller diameter than the other with the larger one directly on top of the outlet for the front brakes. The odd thing is that the line to that larger port comes from the rear reservoir on the master cylinder. On the combination valves I've seen before, the inlet port fed to the outlets directly below it--in this case it appears that there is a crossover inside the combination valve. Is there really a crossover, or was I not paying attention somewhere? I need to know because I'm planning on plumbing my system this weekend. Thanks.

~Dan



------------------------------
>From rcollins micron.net Fri Mar 14 00:29:22 1997 From: Randy Collins Subject: Extra Parts 460 Motor
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Hello all,

I hope some of you can help me. =20

In August of last year I decided to tackle a project. I decided I = needed another 4WD Ford. I already had a 1977 F150 2WD (460 automatic) = so I decided to buy a 4WD donor vehicle to build one complete truck. I = bought a beat up 1977 1/2 F250 4WD. After I had the 4WD for a week or = to I got this crazy idea that I needed a Supercab pickup. So a few = weeks later I bought a 1975 F250 2WD Supercab longbed. Now I have three = trucks. Because the 2WD that I owned before I started this crazy = project had a virtually new 460, I pulled it. (It's on my engine stand = in the garage). Next I installed the 460 out of the Supercab in the = 1977 2WD truck. I will sell it. So now I have one Ford 2WD that I will = eventually sell, a Supercab that is the project and a 1977 1/2 4WD that = is the donor for the project. Somewhere along the line I got another = crazy idea...A new stock 460 just won't do for my project. So I bought = another motor. A used "hot rodded" 460. My problem is that I don't = have room
turn around. I have no idea what I will do will all the extra = parts I have laying around. Lots of the parts are useless to me but I = hate to just junk them and I don't have anywhere to store things that I = might eventually need. =20

If anyone needs anything in the way parts from trucks of these years = please drop me a note. Prices are cheap...to bad we just couldn't trade = a six-pack. :) The only thing I have of significant value to me is the = 460. I purchased a complete long block from one of the auto = distributors and it only has a few thousand miles on it. If anyone has = an interest, I still have the crate that my new motor came on so I could = ship it. =20

The cab I have isn't really worth anything...but there is no rust. (It = seldom rains in Idaho). If anyone needs any parts "torched" from the = cab I would be interested in hacking it up. =20

Randy Collins
2 many Fords to count (mostly pieces anyway) :) =20



------------------------------
>From nfinney earthlink.net Fri Mar 14 02:31:16 1997 From: Nick Finney Subject: Re: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Steve & Rockette wrote:
>
> At 05:27 PM 3/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup
> >designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.
>
> If you add a zero to each of the designations, you get the
> load carrying capacity...
>
120,340,10?

Isn't it just the rated load carrying capacity? 1/2 ton = 1000 pounds...


--
Nick Finney
nfinney earthlink.net

69 F100 390 FE
Formerly:
66 Ford Mustang FASTback 289.

First On Race Day!


------------------------------
>From wiandt vnet.net Fri Mar 14 05:26:29 1997 X-Authentication-Warning: elvis.vnet.net: ACCS-AS18-DP04.ATLN.grid.net [206.80.183.197] didn't use HELO protocol From: Larry Wiandt
Subject: Re: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 02:31 AM 1997/03/14 -0500, you wrote:
>Steve & Rockette wrote:
>>
>> At 05:27 PM 3/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Hi All,
>> >
>> >I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup
>> >designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.
>>
>> If you add a zero to each of the designations, you get the
>> load carrying capacity...
>>
>120,340,10?
>
>Isn't it just the rated load carrying capacity? 1/2 ton = 1000 pounds...
>

I think he means, F150 = 1500, F250 = 2500, F350 = 350. This sounds reasonable since my F350 has a maximum payload of 3540 lbs according to Ford specs. The F250 has a payload of 2250 and the F150 has a capacity of 1350. All of these are in the ballpark.



------------------------------
>From canzus techline.com Fri Mar 14 12:03:40 1997 From: Steve & Rockette Subject: Re: Tonnage designations- question.
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 02:31 AM 3/14/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Steve & Rockette wrote:
>>
>> At 05:27 PM 3/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Hi All,
>> >
>> >I wonder if anyone on this list can explain what the various pickup
>> >designations mean, such as 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton, 1 ton, etc.
>>
>> If you add a zero to each of the designations, you get the
>> load carrying capacity...
>>
>120,340,10?
>
>Isn't it just the rated load carrying capacity? 1/2 ton = 1000 pounds...
>
>
>--
>Nick Finney

Try it this way... F100 = 1000lbs
F150 = 1500lbs or "Heavy Half Ton"
F250 = 2500lbs
That includes the load in the bed + passengers...

Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach
'57 F100 Shorty
'63 F100 Longbox



------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Fri Mar 14 12:20:50 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: >>> Nick Finney 03/14/97 01:31am >>> To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>>> Nick Finney 03/14/97 01:31am >>>
>120,340,10?
>
>Isn't it just the rated load carrying capacity? 1/2 ton = 1000
>pounds...

Maybe he means 1/2 = .5 = 5,000 lbs towing
3/4 = .75 = 7,500 lbs towing
1 = 1.0 = 10,000 lbs towing

Just like "how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop" the world may never know.




------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Fri Mar 14 17:04:12 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: voting closed
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

The Polls Are Closed
--------------------
Votes for whether or not we should split the list into two lists are no longer
accepted.

Results will be published later tonight.



------------------------------
>From kpayne mindspring.com Fri Mar 14 19:26:50 1997 From: Ken Payne Subject: Voting Results
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Vote results:
================================================================ Let me begin by saying thanks to everyone for being very civil about this whole matter. That was why at one point I asked for private email, I was afraid that a flame war would errupt. No flame war came about. Next time we have a vote I believe it would be a good idea to have a public, civil debate since this issue went so well. The voting process in the future will be via the web page form again - it made things on this end much easier to deal with.

I'm heading out for the evening so I won't be available to respond to comments until tomorrow. Everyone have a good one.

The issue voted on was whether or not we should split the list into two lists:
1. 1979 and earlier trucks
2. 1980 and later trucks

In brief:
---------
For Split: 23 = 38.33%
Against Split: 37 = 61.66%

At this point we are keeping the list whole. The votes where not split along new and old truck owners but spread out pretty evenly amoung both groups.

Detailed opinions of members: Some of these were posted to the list, some arrived via private email. Some editing was required in order to keep members anonymous. I took out year models of vehicles, makes and number of vehicles in order to keep members from being identified. Editing was done regardless of whether or not the email was privately sent. Also, the text was formated to 65 columns (most readers are ok with this value).

AGAINST SPLIT
-------------

1. Hey Ken,

> Should we split the list into two seperate lists?
> Specifically, pre-1980 trucks and 1980+ trucks?

FWIW, I think we should take that wait and see approach....
The wide range of truck discussions has not become overly
burdensome to my email account.....yet. Maybe it could be
re-evaluated once we get a few more signups....As for the
years you chose for the breaking point...I think that
would work okay for me.

Just my opinion. BTW, the list is really great!

This one was publicly posted:
2. I like it the way it is now.

This one was a public reply to the previous one: 3. >I like it the way it is now.
>

I agree

4. I personally would object to splitting the group in two, as
I would have interests in both groups. I own a 198x xxxxxx
and a 195x xxxxxx.

My 2 cents

This one was posted publicly:
5. I'm NOT in favor of it....I enjoy seeing post on everything.
I can get ideas from any year.


This one was a public reply to the previous one: 6. No, do not seperate the list.
I aggree with the reply.
Thats my vote.


7. First I'd like to thank you for your time and efforts in
setting up this list. I'm in favor of not splitting the
list. Even though I gather the most information from the
pre '80s posts, I enjoy reading the post '80s too. Also,
the mail archiving service sounds O.K.

8. I have only been a member for slightly over a week now.
But have gained much knowledge in that short period.

I do not think that a split is necessary at this but in
the future might be required as number of members grow.
Now, each member could be more discriminate in the messages
that are read. It takes me approxiamtely one minute to
read the crux of a message. If not required information
I delete it and move on to the next.

I have a xxxxx, xxxxx and in the process of acquiring a
xxxxx.

9. I vote no. Don't split the group. I like reading about all
the Ford trucks.


10. I own a xxxx 4x4, and I tune into the list in order to keep
current on what's happening with late-model trucks, and still
keep up with problems/solutions on older trucks.

Just because you don't hear much from "us newer model owners"
doesn't mean we're not out here.

As Ford sells more '97's with the modular engine family, I
expect that the list will begin to see more questions about
performance, safety, and handling concerns.

Keep the list whole.

11. NO SPLIT
I enjoy reading about both groups, I may buy a new ford
truck and this will tell me what trucks to avoid and which
ones are good. Also I may decide to put a new engine in
my 19xx F100 and I will need the help with the wiring. If
the new truck owners start making alot of post to were
it's warranted maybe then.

12. If the owners of newer trucks are not posting...why split?

I like to see the old truck stuff and the new truck stuff
(maybe someday I'll replace the 19xx Fxxx). It is nice
to see the discussions on what parts will work on my old
truck while collecting information on the newer trucks.


13. *** Don't know if this one should count ***
I believe that there is too much valuable information
that can be gained for each group to split up the mailing
list. Although, both years can vary dramastically, there is
still alot of common knowledge that can be gained from each
other.

One last note, I am not a subscriber YET, but I do bleed Ford
Blue and look for as many avenues as possible to solve a
problem or just gain valuable Ford info.

Good Luck...

14. Even though I've got a newer truck I still like reading
about the older ones. Besides, there probably wouldn't be
much traffic on the 1980 and newer list, so I vote to keep
one list.

15. I like getting information on the newer truck's, and seeing
what might fit on my old truck as well.I vote no split.

16. NO SPLIT
Even though I have a 'xx I enjoy reading about the older
trucks as I have had a 'xx,'xx and a 'xx!

17. The traffic is really not that great to force a split.
I will probably not be using the group *that* much other than
when I have questions to pose to the list. I think some
things are relative to both sides of the list, (info about
gear ratios for example, and maybe talk of people projects
will lead new truck owners to start their own "project"
truck. Or vice versa. Since the digest is available, if
people don't want the traffic, use the digest.

18. I vote no split. I have trucks on both sides of the this
wall and although most of my postings are about the older
trucks, I pickup (no pun intended) ideas and helpful hints
for the newer truck also.

19. Keep the group together. As long as folks are clear in the
subject area I maintain my ability to ignore messages I
think I wouldn't want to read.

20. I am currently interested only in the newer trucks, however
the information passed about tricks and tips that cover the
older trucks interest me.

Keep it together.

21. I'm looking for an early V8 1/2 ton (19xxs or xxs. I know
when I find it, it will need work, and I will need help.
From my reading of the list it seems as though the owners
of the newer trucks have a generously given knowledge about
all years and so I see no reason from my end to limit any
answers to questions I might post. If I don't want to read
something posted I just skip over it. Whats the big deal.
THANK YOU for the list Ken.

22. I do not think we need to split. I own trucks from 19xx to
19xx and enjoy comments from all Ford owners.

23. NO SPLIT (This is from the web form vote with no comment)

24. NO SPLIT (This is from the web form vote with no comment)

25. NO SPLIT
I have only been subscribed a few days but it doesn't seem to
me to be necessary. There isn't so much traffic that it is
overwhelming to review and many subjects have some relevance
to both groups. If the group gets much bigger then consider
splitting, but not now.

26. I like the list the way it is. And thanks for getting it
started!

27. My vote is no - although I don't read all the mail that comes
my way (if I can't help or has no interest) I want the chance
to make that choice. Some things in all years can be
beneficial if you are doing the street rod thing like I am...

28. Keep it the same, all information is good information

29. I vote to keep the list as one group all years.

30. I'd just as soon keep it one list.

31. I vote not to split the group. Someday I just maybe able to
afford one of those nice new powerstroke Fords. My old one
does the job right now. I would like to know what to look for
in the new.

32. Keep the list together.

I own a newer model but am looking for an older one.

Thanks.

33. NO SPLIT (This is from the web form vote with no comment)

34. Ken, for now I vote for one combined list. I've got new,
and feel that alist for newer vehicles would have little. So
I get to listen to these 'old' guys rattle on.

Beats Seinfeld, fer sure....

36. NO SPLIT
Although it makes for a lot of reading, I like the
information received on all trucks as there are some topics
that can't be divided into years. In the end my truck will
look stock but definitely won't be mechanically (a sleeper
in the truest sense!)

37. NO SPLIT
i have ford trucks on both sides of
those dates and im always looking for
others, so all information is important
for now and possibly in the future.
i feel that all ford trucks are related
and it would be bad to forget about
where you came from.




FOR SPLIT
---------

1. I'm for 2 lists; 80 up & 79 back. For us older truck owners
it is hard to get interested in, for example, diesel engine
questions or parts for an 88 pickup. I'm sure the later group
would feel the same. Thanks.

2. Ken:
Why not offer the split?

I have new and old iron and will subscribe to both but I am
sure that there are some that only check mail every few days
and those people would benefit from the reduction of mail.

Anyway, I enjoy the list and the informative advice that I
have received from you and others.

3. I am in favor of splitting the group. I'm mostly interested
in the older stuff, but I enjoy the newer too. The only
problem is that I don't always have time to read all the
messages every day as it is, and the traffic is increasing.
So I might get both for a while, and if it gets to be too
much, drop the newer list.

One problem is that there maybe someone with a rather
generic question and can't send it to both lists. One
solution I've seen on other lists is to have separate topics.
That is, have people include in their subject line the words
"NEW" or "OLD" and the list server would keep track of what
each subscriber wants to see and only send pertinent messages
out. If someone has a generic question or if someone
forgets, they leave out the NEW or OLD and it goes to
everyone. This might work up to a point. You can alwaysadd
more topics too.

Note From Ken: I don't think our list server software can
do that!

This was the public post that started it all: 4. Has there been any thought of splitting the digest format of
this group into smaller groups? I am all for it. I would
suggest that you split the newsgroup into two groups 1)
1970's and earlier trucks and 2) 1980's and newer. I am
having a problem with my mail system getting all of the
digest version. The messages are too long. The standard
version has too many messages. Those that respond to
this, do not reply and copy the whole message, take some
time and snip it.

5. Rather than split along 1980s and later lines, how about
breaking the list up into two groups: resto issues vs
non-resto issues.
That seems to me to be what the real differences are...

6. I suggest that we split it as you indicated in your message.
Hopefully we can still keep the digest format

7. As long as I have access to both groups,
I am for the split. It makes it easier
to orgainze everything.

8. 1. I think we should still have the option of receiving both
if at all possible.
2. Please don't get rid of the 1980 and newer list.
(Note from Ken: We will not exclude any year models)

9. I think the list should split. Information has been coming
to my box about really old trucks. This is fine. However,
my truck is not old and thus just wastes my time. Thank you.

10. I'd like to see a split group. as growth continues e-mail may
become unmanable on both ends.

11. Too much e-mail to read on older vehicles
that, although interesting, I do not
have the time to read.

Also, since I do this at work - in my free
time - it loads down the mail server with
mail not related to "business use."

12. Split list.

13. Split the list, "old and new"

14. I think that we should keep post '80 trucks out in fear of
letting electronics questions run rampant. If it breaks
down in the middle of nowhere and you need a guy with a
computer science degree to fix it again, it is not much of
a work vehicle is it? Sorry I'm just a bit prejudiced.
The newest truck we own is a 19xx Fxxx Camper Special

15. My truck is a xx Fxxx.
I think we ought to split the group.

16. Split it! I'm mainly looking for talks about new trucks

17. Yes, I vote to split the list pre-80, post-80.

Everyone will be served by this move.

18. My vote as you could probably already tell is to split the
digest group into the following:

Classic trucks 1970's and earlier
Newer trucks 1980's and newer

19. Yes, I would like to see the split.

Should be the same date Ford stopped using carburetors.

Alternatively, you could split it pre-and post- electronic
ignition : )....


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.