|
|
Return-Path: From: fordtrucks-digest-request Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 15:16:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks-digest-request Subject: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #80 X-Loop: fordtrucks-digest X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/80 To: fordtrucks-digest Reply-To: fordtrucks ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain fordtrucks-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 80 Today's Topics: RE: Motor Oil [lorraine smith Re: 360 windage tray [Daver ] Re: Motor Oil [Daver ] Re: SOHC 427 [Daver ] Re: : Re: PowerStroke Break-In [Jay Chlebowski ] Re: 4 wheel drive [Mathew Baker Re: Getting better gas mileage Re-Re [SPEEDK2 Re: Electronic or Transmission Probl [farmergeorge Re: SOHC 427 [silent.bob 1964 Wiring Diagram [John Strauss Harry's Automotive Knowledge [John Strauss Vacuum Advance [John Strauss Address per requests [PAYNK (Ken Payne) 1983 F-100 [gpierce Re: Address per requests [Steve & Rockette Re: Getting better gas mileage Re-Re [Michael & Linda Waak Re: Getting better gas mileage-again [LanceWaldn Re: 302/351w any transplant problems ["Malcolm O'Blenis" sad but true ["Jason C Wodack" Re: Address per requests -Reply [PAYNK (Ken Payne) Re: Ziiiinnnnnnnngggg (cant figure i [LA46544 Re: F-250 w/302? [LA46544 Re: 302/351w any transplant problems ["Tim and Jolee Hann" Administrivia: ____________________________________________________________________ Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-digest-request Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ____________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 21:12:44 -0600 From: lorraine smith To: "fordtrucks Subject: RE: Motor Oil Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I use 100 percent synthetic oil in my truck and to keep brands brands = out of the debate like you requested. The oil I use states on the = bottle 25000 miles or 1 year between changes which ever comes first. = They also recoment that you change your oil filter at 12500 miles to = help keep the oil clean. I know people who follow these instructions = and have had no problems. I tend to change the oil in my truck about 2 = times a year in the fall befor winter and in the spring which will be = done soon. I see no need to change every 3000 miles if the company = states that 25000 is whar they recomend. I don't feel that the cost is = that great for doing only 1 or two oil changes a year costs me about = $10.00 a quart for the oil. =20 Derrick Smith=20 1995 FORD RANGER=20 ---------- From: Stuart Varner[SMTP:varners Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 9:40 AM To: fordtrucks Subject: Motor Oil In my former days as an employee of XXXXXXX Oil, parent Company of XXXXXline motor oil, Much research was done on the effects motor oil weights had on engines. Some studies were done on various police departments who had the 4.6L Crown Vics....tried to run 10W40......owners manual calls for 5W30. The police departments almost burnt the motors up because the oil was too thick and engine tolerances were so tight, couldn't get enough oil on the top end of the motor. Other interesting/old news regarding single weight oil. Some of the studies showed multi-visc. oils do not break down as they should and did not provide adequate summer time protection on the "thicker" end of the oils. In other words, 5W 30 won't do the job as well as Super HPO 30=20 or Super HPO 40 single weigght oils in the summer. The HPO oils are high detergent oils which should be run in temps that are consttant and always over 32 degrees F. I for one run Super HPO 30 in my 71 F-100 360 and in my 89 Merc Grand Marq. (302, 130,000 trouble free tight and dry miles) in the summer months when the weather is nice. In the winter, I switch to 5W30 in the Mercury and 10W 30 in the F-100. I run full synthetic 5W 30 in my 95 Special Service Crown Victoria LX (4.6 Liter)year round.=20 There are several advantages to synthetic and some disadvantages... Advantages......better lubrication qualities, better heat disipation, Studies from "the" company showed two identical engines dynoed for 100,000 plus miles.=20 Changes were made at appropriate intervals, engines were torn down. The motor with synthetic oil provided little to no indications of wear. The other standard mineral based oil showed much greater signs of wear. Disadvantages........Cost, AND you still need to change oil every 3,000 miles or less depending on your driving situation. As far as putting modern oil in an old engine.....the more advanced, the better.... it can help with protection better than the old non-detergent oils. As far as putting new oils into an old engine with sludge build up that has been running non-detergent oil, it may braek things loose. Sounds logical to me. Make your own decisions, experiment a little, see which oil runs best in your engine. CHanging brands and oil weghts will not cause problems.....unless you run a motor oil with a high parafin base, then you can start having problems. I AM TRYING TO KEEP=20 BRANDS OUT OF THE MOTOR OIL DEBATE. We all have preferences....that is why I am in the Ford camp. Motor oils are like milk and gasoline(for the most part) They all come from basically the same place (pipeline shipments came to our terminal from other companies, barges came from other companies, and we put in our own additives). Oils (been to a plant that was bottling oil for Companies a, b, c, d, e, etc. including there own branded oil from the same spout!) and gasolines have different additives which make them slightly different. NO Flame wars here please! I know from experience on the pipelines and barges gas is all the same, except for the additives ( I recommend buying 89 or 92-94 octane, they have a greater percentage of additives and detergents which help keep modern injectors and fuel systems cleaner than 87 octane) Sorry this was so lengthy! Hope it helps someone. ____________________________________________________________________ Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:31:05 -0500 From: Daver To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: 360 windage tray Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Doug Neely wrote: > > Daver, > The 428 windage tray is still available at the Ford dealers > the part # is c9ZZ-6687-A I paid $50 (CDN) for mine, also if > you use a 390 crank you should change the pistons to the same, > the 360 pistons are taller.I put 360 rods and pistons on a 390 > crank and it pinged like crazy,had to knock the timing back to > 4 deg BTDC and run premium . > Cheers, > Doug You are correct the words you a looking for are top of piston to center line of pin. I do not support this idea if a person wants a 390 there are plenty of them to be had; I suggested the use of a 352 HiPro crank and rod as they fit the 360 and will enable it to turn 6500 RPM. The 360 was a gas crunch engine and Ford's attempt to lighten up the FE weakened the crank and rods to the point that the constant abuse of any performance at all would cause the crank to break in front of the second main from the back or #4 I believe and provided the crank survived the rods had a nasty habit of turning loose of pistons at the rist pins. If a rod turns loose at the pin the ammount of mass swinging and the leangth of it will break the block through the web (I have seen this happen. Molater Daver > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ > For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request > Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:38:41 -0500 From: Daver To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Motor Oil Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I find that a low ash no parifin 20w50 works best for me medium detergent. Molater Daver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:49:50 -0500 From: Daver To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: SOHC 427 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Ted (FMM) has a Website too. I don't work for him, just bought parts > from him off and on over 10 years. Knows his Fords. > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fordmanted.com/ > fyi, rlg Yeh and he has great stuff; but you've got to keep yer eye on yer wallet because Ted will get in it. A lot of the stuff he has is rare and he knows it. You are correct though he Knows his stuff and if you ever go into his shop you'll huh huh huh well huh it's imbarasing that is all I'll say. Molater Daver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:48:44 -0500 From: Jay Chlebowski To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: : Re: PowerStroke Break-In Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> I have a 93 F350 Crew Cab 4x4 with the 7.3L. I didn't do anything to break >> it in and I have no problems with it. I burn about one quart of oil >> between oil changes which is not enough to bother adding oil. The owners >> manual said it would get away with about that so I consider it normal. >> >> Good luck with the truck, I really like mine! >> >> Larry > > > >I concur. I also have a 93 7.3l. Now has 95,000 miles on it. I >installed a Banks Sidewinder Turbo on it at about 8,000. It has always >burned about 1 quart between oil changes, not enough to have to add any >and the service manual says this is normal oil consumption. I use 3 >gal. of Mobil Delvac 1, and an FL-1995 synthetic media filter ever >5000 miles. The FL-1995 is a direct replacement for the FL-784 >originally specified. Hope you enjoy your new truck. If I may ask, >what happend to your Dodge so soon? > >James Thorne So far, lots of good advice on the PowerStroke from a number of list members -- it seems these things have a passionate following around here & I'd love to hear more from all the owners. Anyways, as for the Dodge...the Cummins is a wonderful engine (I miss that turbo whistling all the time like the big rigs), but the truck is still a Chrsyler product. Horrible brake problems, with days on end spent trying to stop the pulling problems. They finally got it so it pulled right instead of left, and was told that was acceptable according to Dodge -- truth is, they've got a design flaw they can't seem to isolate, or therefore fix. It also had wierd rubbing noises from the front end, a host of minor problems, and I only put 16500 miles on it. The brakes problems qualified me for Lemon Law pursuit, but then Chrysler charges you $.15-.25 for miles driven, and you still have to pay for MSRP differences in the new truck. That is through the arbitration process. I could have sued, but lawyers ain't free either. So, I said f Dodge said it was OK), and got me a handsome, dependable, we've built 'em for years so we know they're solid, tough as nails F350. .....'nuff said... Best Regards, Jay ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 00:24:43 -0600 From: Mathew Baker To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: 4 wheel drive Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sam Rule wrote: > > I have a 170 inline 6, with a 3.03 speed transmission, and I would like to know which transfercase to use. It is in a 1965 ford van, so I would also like to know which front axel to use, steering modifications etc. Is it even possible for this year of van? > It would be a major conversion, but you would need a divorced Dana 20 (or similar) transfer case and a Dana 44 front axle to match it. Steering and springs wuld be the biggest problems, especially if you have a twin I-beam front suspension. It would be easier to drop your body on a 4X4 chassis. Mat Baker '64 F-250 4X4, 292 Thunderbird Y-block ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 19:52:33 -0400 (EDT) From: SPEEDK2 To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Getting better gas mileage Re-Re-Re Message-ID: please disconnec me from your mailing list. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 07:36:17 -0700 From: farmergeorge To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Electronic or Transmission Problem - 1989 F350 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Still working on 89 Ford F350 with electonic/transmission problems in E40D transmission. Have replaced "FIPL" switch 3 times in 2 weeks, 1st one installed "backwards?!" by Ford Dealership, still not running right. Solenoid has been discussed, maybe new wiring harness. Jerry at Mr. Transmission in Owen Sound (519-371-1110) very knowledgeable on Ford transmissions. He has reset "FIPL" couple of times. Thinks problem is wiring harness origin rather than the internal valve solenoid body. Anybody with any other thoughts on this? George ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:31:30 EDT From: silent.bob To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: SOHC 427 Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:49:50 -0500 Daver writes: >> Ted (FMM) has a Website too. I don't work for him, just bought parts >> from him off and on over 10 years. Knows his Fords. >> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fordmanted.com/ >> fyi, rlg > >Yeh and he has great stuff; but you've got to keep yer eye on yer >wallet >because Ted will get in it. A lot of the stuff he has is rare and he >knows it. > >You are correct though he Knows his stuff and if you ever go into his >shop you'll huh huh huh well huh it's imbarasing that is all I'll say. > >Molater > >Daver Ted isn't that bad, he quoted me $1200 in labor for the 302 swap in my truck, and told my friend that works for him off and on that he would install a rebuilt T5 for his stang for $1200 in whatever payment he wanted to make. Knowing my friend, he will just work it off. .---. .----------- / \ __ / ------ fox / / \(..)/ ----- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.fordmanted.com (Mustang Shop) ////// ' \/ ` --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.icso.net/ranger (Ranger Site) //// / // : : --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com (Coming Soon) // / / /` '-- // //..\ =======UU====UU===[95 Ranger XLT 2.3L]=[silent.bob '//||\` ''`` ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 09:24:31 -0500 (CDT) From: John Strauss To: Ford Trucks List Subject: 1964 Wiring Diagram Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I work for the public library in Knoxville, TN and we are frequently asked >questions about 1964 Ford trucks. We have never been able to find >adequate information on them to help the persons that are restoring them. >Specifically, the current question deals with a 1964 F-100, 292 V8 and >they need a wiring diagram. It would be helpful for us if someone could >recommend a good source for restoring and repairing these trucks. Thank >you for your help. > I have an original 1964 Ford wiring diagram. If you tell me specifically what you are looking for I could fax it to you. John ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 09:24:35 -0500 (CDT) From: John Strauss To: Ford Trucks List Subject: Harry's Automotive Knowledge Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >If you have any questions about hooking up an electronic ignition let me >know. I bought a point type dist. for my 351M when I first swapped it in. >I knew nothing about cars and one shop said they couldn't hook up the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >electronic ignition and another said it would take more time than it was >worth. They were brain dead. I did it in about 1/2 hour and so could you. > >I am still learning, too!!! > You apparantly know a heck of a lot more than me 'cause your getting 17MPG out of a 351M when I can't coax my 302 over 15MPG downhill with a tailwind. John ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 09:24:33 -0500 (CDT) From: John Strauss To: Ford Trucks List Subject: Vacuum Advance Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >First of all lets talk about that vacume line to the dist. That is an >ADVANCE line not a retard line. Hook it back up! Most requre an inline >delay. If your does (check a manual such as Chiltons) make sure you have the >right color towards the dist. (again, check the manual). > Au contrair! 1970s Ford distributors commonly had TWO vacuum lines to the advance mechanism - one was advance and one was retard. The retard line was supposed to be for decelleration only but it was an emissions-related add-on. John ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 10:45:31 -0500 From: PAYNK (Ken Payne) To: fordtrucks Subject: Address per requests Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Three people requested my address for donations. Rather than send out 3 emails I'm posting it to the group. Sorry we don't have the April archives up yet as they would have it in them. On the 15th of this month I'll publish total donations received. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Oh, voting is going well and the survey is great! I had no idea how many different trucks are represented - us old truck guys may post more often but there are alot of new (and diesel) owners on the list. April archives will be up as soon as we have new web space. Voting results will be published late Sunday evening or Monday - voting activity is much higher than I expected so tallying them will take some time. Ken "List Mom" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 11:44:51 -0400 From: gpierce To: FORDTRUCKS Subject: 1983 F-100 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gentlemen Can someone please advise where I can get some online assistance with questions RE: my F-100 1983 I have installed a new 300cid engine new carb (single bbl Carter yf series) in an attempt to keep the truck original. But will stray from original is necessary. My question HOW DO I IMPROVE GAS MILEAGE...... besides not driving it. I've preformed every setup procedure from every book around and still no luck. I'd like to keep the truck without buying a gas station for it. any suggustions will be welcome thank you Gary Pierce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:50:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve & Rockette To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Address per requests Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:45 AM 1/5/97 -0500, you wrote: 8 >Oh, voting is going well and the survey is great! I had no >idea how many different trucks are represented - us old truck >guys may post more often but there are alot of new (and diesel) >owners on the list. 8 Could you run the address for the survey/vote again? She Who Must Be Obeyed cleaned up the hard drive, and I didn't write it down, I know, my fault... Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach '57 F100 Shorty '63 F100 Longbox ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:51:58 -0800 From: Michael & Linda Waak To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Getting better gas mileage Re-Re-Re Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Well you didn't say what size your engine is so I will guess it is a 302. And >what about your tranny? > (Slice) > >All emisions are unhooked (no EGR and no PCV valces) and everything is >pluged. >Remember to still use the vacume advance mentioned earlier. DO NOT remove the PCV valve from your engine it sucks the pressure out of the crankcase. This is bad advise. >I also use to LOWEST thermostat made for my engine. If the thermostat setting is too low the emmision switches for the vacume (sp?) will not open and your milage will be crap. Emgines must run at a certain temp for max. efficiency. M Primerica Financial Services > Yesterday is a cancelled check, Michael D. Waak "The Crusaders" > Today is cash, USE IT WISELY!! mikewaak ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 12:12:57 -0400 (EDT) From: LanceWaldn To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Getting better gas mileage-again Message-ID: Here's a way you can have electronic ignition without changing the distributor. There is a company in central California called Pertronix. (They advortise in all of the perfomance mags.) For under $100 they will sell you a devise that replaces the points and hooks to the coil. That's it. No changing the distributor. Lance ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 14:23:11 -0300 From: "Malcolm O'Blenis" To: Subject: Re: 302/351w any transplant problems? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello!, I'm installing a 351W in my 1979 F150 and I was told I didn't have to change hardly anything for the swap from the stock 302 presently there. I was wondering about motor mounts. Do I have to get new motor mounts or just use the same ones????? Any help will be appreciated. Mac 1979 F150 Custom ---------- > From: Douglas Minnick, Television Engr. WD4BSB > To: fordtrucks > Subject: 302/351w any transplant problems? > Date: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 12:35 PM > > 1980 Ford f150 pickup w/288 (302?) w/automatic, want to install 351w. What > problems may I be running into, if any? I have compleat 351w w/flex plate. > > Douglas Minnick, WD4BSB > Television Engineer > Va Tech University > 204 Saunders Hall > Blacksburg, Va. > 24061-0307 > cableeng > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ > For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request > Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 13:28:25 +0000 From: "Jason C Wodack" To: fordtrucks Subject: sad but true Message-Id: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Well All, I hate to say it, but it must be done. yup I unsubscribing from the list. unfortunately I don't have email except through school, and now that summers here I won't be at school any more. I'd like to thank Ken and everyone who's contributed and helped me with my questions. It's beet a great ride. I'll see you all again in the fall. And hopefully I'll have some money to contribute to the FORD TRUCK FUND by then. Thanks for the memories Jason Wodack '84 Bronco II ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 14:31:05 -0500 From: PAYNK (Ken Payne) To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Address per requests -Reply Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Here you go..... http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mindspring.com/~fordtrucks/survey.html So that everyone gets a chance to participate in the vote and survey I'll post this information daily. >>> Steve & Rockette 05/01/97 10:50am >>> >At 10:45 AM 1/5/97 -0500, you wrote: >8 >Oh, voting is going well and the survey is great! I had no >idea how many different trucks are represented - us old truck >guys may post more often but there are alot of new (and diesel) >owners on the list. >8 > Could you run the address for the survey/vote again? >She Who Must Be Obeyed cleaned up the hard drive, and >I didn't write it down, I know, my fault... >Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach >'57 F100 Shorty >'63 F100 Longbox ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 14:40:37 -0400 (EDT) From: LA46544 To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: Ziiiinnnnnnnngggg (cant figure it out) Message-ID: How about a loose catalitic converter shield. The spot welds rust through in no time. Marty F-350 4x4 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 14:40:41 -0400 (EDT) From: LA46544 To: fordtrucks Subject: Re: F-250 w/302? Message-ID: The 302 is available in the LIGHT DUTY model. Marty F-350 4x4 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 12:10:08 -0700 From: "Tim and Jolee Hann" To: Subject: Re: 302/351w any transplant problems? Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BC5628.9C9321E0" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BC5628.9C9321E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I dont think you will have a prob except for the exh mounting. The deck = height on a 351w is taller than that of the 302 so the outlets of the = manifolds maybe at a different angle. Other than that It should be a = good install ---- From: Malcolm O'Blenis To: fordtrucks Date: Thursday, May 01, 1997 10:35 AM Subject: Re: 302/351w any transplant problems? Hello!, I'm installing a 351W in my 1979 F150 and I was told I didn't = have to change hardly anything for the swap from the stock 302 presently = there. I was wondering about motor mounts. Do I have to get new motor mounts = or just use the same ones????? Any help will be appreciated. Mac 1979 F150 Custom ---------- > From: Douglas Minnick, Television Engr. WD4BSB > To: fordtrucks > Subject: 302/351w any transplant problems? > Date: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 12:35 PM > > 1980 Ford f150 pickup w/288 (302?) w/automatic, want to install 351w. What > problems may I be running into, if any? I have compleat 351w w/flex plate. > > Douglas Minnick, WD4BSB > Television Engineer > Va Tech University > 204 Saunders Hall > Blacksburg, Va. > 24061-0307 > cableeng > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ > For help send mail with subject "HELP" = to:fordtrucks-request > Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ____________________________________________________________________ Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/ For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks-request Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne ------=_NextPart_000_01BC5628.9C9321E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http-equiv=3DContent-Type> I dont think you will have a prob except for the exh mounting. The = deck=20 height on a 351w is taller than that of the 302 so the outlets of the = manifolds=20 maybe at a different angle. Other than that It should be a good = install ---- From: Malcolm O'Blenis <ezra To: fordtrucks Date: Thursday, May 01, 1997 10:35 AM Subject: Re: 302/351w any transplant problems? Hello!, I'm installing a 351W in my 1979 F150 = and I was=20 told I didn't have to change hardly anything for the swap from the stock 302 presently = there. I was wondering about motor mounts. Do I have to get new motor = mounts=20 or just use the same ones????? Any help will be appreciated. Mac 1979 F150 Custom ---------- > From: Douglas Minnick, Television Engr. WD4BSB < href=3D"mailto:cableeng > To: href=3D"mailto:fordtrucks > Subject: 302/351w any transplant problems? > Date: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 12:35 PM > > 1980 Ford f150 pickup w/288 (302?) w/automatic, want to install = 351w. What > problems may I be running into, if any? I have compleat 351w = w/flex plate. > > Douglas Minnick, WD4BSB > Television Engineer > Va Tech University > 204 Saunders Hall > Blacksburg, Va. > 24061-0307 > cableeng > > > > = ____________________________________________________________________ > Message distributed via href=3D"http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/">http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.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 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.
|