Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 02:31:53 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #107
X-Loop: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/107
To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 107

Today's Topics:

Re: King pins, disc brakes (was Merc [Ken Payne ]
that 4V intake ... [sidereal epix.net ]
Where's my PCV valve [John Strauss
Re: Build Sheet? [Gerald & Lisa Hoel
Re: '77 F-150 gear ratio [LanceWaldn aol.com ]
RE: King pins, disc brakes (was Merc [DC Beatty
RE: King pins, disc brakes (was Merc [Ken Payne ]
Disc brakes for rear? ["Jim '73 F 100 302"
Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir. [Chris North ]
Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir. ["C.D. Mutch"
Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir. ["C.D. Mutch"
RE: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !! ["Jesse Marcellus"
RE: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !! ["Jason K. Schechner" ]
Re: 1955 Ford f-500 [Dan Wentz ]
Re: 1955 Ford f-500 [Dan Wentz ]
disc brake convertion [Daver ]
Re: rear ends [Daver ]
RE: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir [Chris North ]
Re: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !! [Daver ]
Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir. ["Jim '73 F 100 302"
OLF, Plugs, Wires..... ["Alexander M. Siu"

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 lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
____________________________________________________________________


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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 16:09:40 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: King pins, disc brakes (was Mercury trucks?)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

-snip-

> > >>
> Well, I must have missed the original post about greasing kingpins, but I
>have a tidbit anyway. Even if the rotating part of the kingpin is kept
>lubricated, you still may need a press to get the pin through the stationary
>section where it goes through the axle. Greasing regularly sure helps,
>though, because it usually keeps moisture out of the aforementioned
>stationary section.

I had to use a huge C-clamp borrowed from my brother's father-in-law (he's
a steel plant manager). The clamp is as thick as your arm. Between
my brother and I and a big pipe as a "cheater bar" on the clamp we were
able to force it out on the right. The left side was not well greased and I
had a shop force it out. I used small, round metal knobs slightly smaller
in diameter than the kingpins as a pressure point for the clamp. Once
it started moving it got easier. A torch to heat it up first helped.

> Disc brakes! On the original axle? Can you give a reference, or

Yes! A 67-72 F100 will take front disc brakes right off a 73-79 F100 (150?).
The splindles are bolt-on compatible. Use the master cylinder off the
same vehicle that was the spindle donor, as well as the porportioning
valve. It really is a fairly simple job.

>supplier, or personal info? Like what master cylinder, the whole enchilada.
> Thanks in advance.

Your best bet is a junk yard. Try and find a truck that looked like
it was babied before it was wrecked, the newer the better. Remember,
73-79.... Use the master cylinder off the same vehicle that was the
spindle donor, as well as the porportioning valve. It really is a
fairly simple job.

Hope this helps!

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 17:55:51 -0400
From: sidereal epix.net
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: that 4V intake ...
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>P.S. I have one in my garage... what's it worth to anyone....
>I also have a 302 4bbl intake taht I will not use

There were two others that asked about other engines that this might fit
on ... here's the best info I remember on it ...
If I remember that series of engines correctly, the intake from a 302 will
also fit a 289, but the one for a 351W is bigger, except for engines built
after 1976. (I'm not exactly certain of that on the 351, though ... )

How much would you want for this intake ?
(I have a 302 that I wouldn't mind making a 4V for my 83 F150)

== Serian

1983 F150 4x4 Short Box; 300-1V
1979 Bronco 4x4; 351M-2V
1976 F250 4x2 Super Cab; 360-2V

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

Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 16:52:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: John Strauss
To: Ford Trucks List
Subject: Where's my PCV valve
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>A 1972 Ford F100 pickup I just purchased has a 1988 ford thunderbird 5.0
>fuel injected V8 complete engine with all 1988 EPA polution equipment
still >hooked up on the engine,the question I have is "where is the PCV
valve,its >not on the valve cover,and I have not been able to find it"
PLEASE HELP ME >!!!!
>
It's on the passenger side valve cover at the back. It is underneath the
upper intake manifold that folds over that valve cover so you cannot see
it. Just reach under there with your hand and you'll feel it - the vac hose
plugs in the rear of the upper intake manifold.

John

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 18:15:12 -0700
From: Gerald & Lisa Hoel
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Build Sheet?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jim, we just received our build sheet on our '77 F-150 Flareside. Email
FoMoCo at the address below with your name, address etc. and they will
send you one.

cacinfo ford.com

Or you could call to request at 1-800-392-FORD.


Gerald & Lisa
'77 F-150 Flareside 351M

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

Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 20:08:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: LanceWaldn aol.com
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: '77 F-150 gear ratio
Message-ID:

Uh.........

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

Date: 09 May 97 20:51:08 EDT
From: DC Beatty
To: "'INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: King pins, disc brakes (was Mercury trucks?)
Message-ID:

Hey Ken, did you use the two-piston calipers? Or are these only for the 250?
Also, did you have to swap flexible brake lines too?

I would like to do this someday, but I would definitely try to talk a shop into
changing the kingpins. I've heard they can be pretty nasty to pull
sometimes--get out the torch and the "big thumper."

Thanks,
DC Beatty
1967 F100 352
1974 Maverick 302
----------
From: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
Sent: Friday, May 09, 1997 2:05 PM
To: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: King pins, disc brakes (was Mercury trucks?)

-snip-

I had to use a huge C-clamp borrowed from my brother's father-in-law (he's
a steel plant manager). The clamp is as thick as your arm. Between
my brother and I and a big pipe as a "cheater bar" on the clamp we were
able to force it out on the right. The left side was not well greased and I
had a shop force it out. I used small, round metal knobs slightly smaller
in diameter than the kingpins as a pressure point for the clamp. Once
it started moving it got easier. A torch to heat it up first helped.

> Disc brakes! On the original axle? Can you give a reference, or

Yes! A 67-72 F100 will take front disc brakes right off a 73-79 F100 (150?).
The splindles are bolt-on compatible. Use the master cylinder off the
same vehicle that was the spindle donor, as well as the porportioning
valve. It really is a fairly simple job.

>supplier, or personal info? Like what master cylinder, the whole enchilada.
> Thanks in advance.

Your best bet is a junk yard. Try and find a truck that looked like
it was babied before it was wrecked, the newer the better. Remember,
73-79.... Use the master cylinder off the same vehicle that was the
spindle donor, as well as the porportioning valve. It really is a
fairly simple job.

Hope this helps!


____________________________________________________________________
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 lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 21:23:16 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: RE: King pins, disc brakes (was Mercury trucks?)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 08:51 PM 5/9/97 EDT, you wrote:
>Hey Ken, did you use the two-piston calipers? Or are these only for the 250?
>Also, did you have to swap flexible brake lines too?
>

I used single piston calipers. It has one very large piston on
it. Work great, much better in alot of stop and go traffic than
drums. Really nice when you come around a curve on the freeway doing
65 and suddenly traffic is at a complete stop. My drums used to get
really hot (you could smell them!) after that kind of braking! I don't
really know about the 250s. I changed all the brake lines (steel and flex)
on the front as they were 29 years old at the time. The rear lines were
changed out when I had the back axle off. As to whether the flexible
lines had to be changed, I think so. I'm not sure, it was a while ago
when I did this, but it would be a good idea anyways. The lines that
were on the discs were cut in half anyways (junkyard boneheads) so it
wasnt an option.

>I would like to do this someday, but I would definitely try to talk a shop into
>changing the kingpins. I've heard they can be pretty nasty to pull
>sometimes--get out the torch and the "big thumper."
>
>Thanks,
>DC Beatty
>1967 F100 352
>1974 Maverick 302
>----------
>From: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
>Sent: Friday, May 09, 1997 2:05 PM
>To: INTERNET:fordtrucks lofcom.com
>Subject: Re: King pins, disc brakes (was Mercury trucks?)
>
>-snip-
>
>I had to use a huge C-clamp borrowed from my brother's father-in-law (he's
>a steel plant manager). The clamp is as thick as your arm. Between
>my brother and I and a big pipe as a "cheater bar" on the clamp we were
>able to force it out on the right. The left side was not well greased and I
>had a shop force it out. I used small, round metal knobs slightly smaller
>in diameter than the kingpins as a pressure point for the clamp. Once
>it started moving it got easier. A torch to heat it up first helped.
>
>> Disc brakes! On the original axle? Can you give a reference, or
>
>Yes! A 67-72 F100 will take front disc brakes right off a 73-79 F100 (150?).
>The splindles are bolt-on compatible. Use the master cylinder off the
>same vehicle that was the spindle donor, as well as the porportioning
>valve. It really is a fairly simple job.
>
>>supplier, or personal info? Like what master cylinder, the whole enchilada.
>> Thanks in advance.
>
>Your best bet is a junk yard. Try and find a truck that looked like
>it was babied before it was wrecked, the newer the better. Remember,
>73-79.... Use the master cylinder off the same vehicle that was the
>spindle donor, as well as the porportioning valve. It really is a
>fairly simple job.
>
>Hope this helps!
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>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 lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>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 lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
>

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

Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 18:42:51 -0700
From: "Jim '73 F 100 302"
To: "Ford Trucks"
Subject: Disc brakes for rear?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Is there a Ford with a 9" rear axle that had Disc brakes? I
really hate doing drum brakes, if I can put a set of junk
yard rear disc's on my '73 I could all 4 of my brakes in
less than an hour. I don't even like inspecting my rear
drums, it makes a mess, and adjust to remove, adjust when
your finished. It's a real pain in the lower back!




Jim Strigas jstrigas worldnet.att.net
'73 Ford F100 (302 2bbl C4 Auto Ford 9" 3.25
. Daily
driver)
'83 Yamaha XJ900RK (Best Gift of my life! From my best
friends! RSCL)
'77 Buick EstateWagon (Beast of Immense Magnitude!)

These are "The Good Old Days"!
Be Cool Daddy-O B-)>

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

Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 20:58:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Chris North
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir.
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I realize that this is getting just a little bit off-topic, but...

I am not sure what Charlie Sr. is beggin to differ on. Electric cars that
get 150 miles between charges are not exactly unheard of. This is an
emerging technology, and as such, a great deal of speculation has, and is,
going on. As such, there is great potential for exploitation (profits) in
this area. It would not be unusual for a large energy concern (ARCO) to
invest in this technology (many have and are). What you say this guy has
bought could probably be had for $150,000. Let's say $250,000, a quater
mill. It would take an engineering group easily ten times this much and
several years to develop 17 patents and 3 prototypes (heck, the 3
prototypes could run $250,000 alone). And even with that, there are no
guarantees. All this anecedote shows is that the free market works.
Technology that started in a garage has been purchased by a large
coporation that has the means to develop it. I see no conspiracy here,
just a speculative business venture by a corporation that can afford some
risk.

Like I said before, this 80 MPG carburetor is a scam. Has been for over 60
years. The US goverment couldn't hide an 'invisible' aircraft for 10
years, but has been allowing the US economy to be controlled by foreign
intrests by keeping a 60 year old secret? Yeah, that's plausible (not!).
And these unnamed conspiracists not only control the US automakers, but
those in Japan, Italy, Germany, Korea, Russia, China, etc...? No, if it
would work, the cat would have gotten out of the bag at least once in 60
years.

Chris North

_________________________________________________________________________
> Hi,
> Jumpin' into the fray, couldn't help it. Although this seems far
>fetched,
>and I am not a consriracy theorist, it does sound plausible.Please indulge
>me for a minute. I have personal knoledge of a man 10 miles from me that
>was involved in something like this. He designed and built 3 electric cars
>(from scratch).
> They had 17 patented devices/mechanisms and were a practical,
>economical
>design going in excess of 150 miles between charges. Now remember I know
>this man personally. The Atlantic Richfield Co. (ARCO) had a rep. attending
>an experimental car show at the Kingdome in Seattle,WA. Through a series of
>negoiations, this man, his patents, and all but 1 of his cars, were
>purchased. A covenant of non-competition was signed and he was paid
>handsomley, by ARCO, to never produce this car.
> I used to hang out at his garage when I was first getting into cars and
>knew him to be of modest means. After the purchase, he bought a 70,000
>motorhome,2 new cars and 5000 acres in Montana. This stuff happens even
>though we don't want to believe it. And as far as the government hiding
>things, well remember 10 years ago there was "no such thing as a Stealth
>Bomber "
> Thanks for your time,
> Charlie Sr. 1965 F-250
> "Not Stealth technology, but definitly more dependable"
>
>----------
>> From: Chris North
>> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
>> Subject: 80 MPG????
>> Date: Thursday, May 08, 1997 9:35 PM
>>
>> I just read the aritcle supplied by the URL that started this thread.
>I've
>> seen it, heard it, and been through it all before. In short, it'a a
>scam.
>>
>> If anybody believes that there is a device that will produce these
>results
>> (80 MPG and exhaust so clean you can breathe it!), but it is being kept
>> from the public to provide bigger profits to the oil companies (with
>> support from the US gov't, none the less), please send me your $10. It
>may
>> not improve my mileage, but it will definately lower my out of pocket
>fuel
>> expenses!
>>
>> One thing in the article has something I can believe. This scam has been
>> around since the 1930's. This guy is just another con man looking for
>> investors (want to buy into a gold mine in Borneo?). Believe me, if such
>a
>> device was technologically feasible, it would be exploited. And in a big
>> way.
>>
>> Or maybe I'm just a crazy old man. What we should really do is connect
>our
>> PCV systems to our gas tanks and send our kids to college on the savings
>> that will soon start pouring in.
>>
>> chris north
>>

chris north

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 21:53:05 -0700
From: "C.D. Mutch"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir.
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Every time a cat gets out of the bag he's either put back in with treat$
or killed.
Any of you guys wanna know how to replace your 4spd 4X4 351M or 400 with
a 429 using the 351/400 bellhousing?
--
Friends may come and go, but enemies accumulate.

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 22:01:25 -0700
From: "C.D. Mutch"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir.
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Somebody has yet to come up with some substantial PROOF as to why this
vapor carb technology will not work. Political rhetoric will not change
my mind, I want some scientific evidence to prove this idea wrong.
--
Friends may come and go, but enemies accumulate.

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

Date: Sat, 10 May 97 03:43:02 UT
From: "Jesse Marcellus"
To: Fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: RE: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!! (fwd)
Message-Id:

----------
From: Joe Sivak
Sent: May 9, 1997 8:45 AM
To: Jesse Marcellus
Subject: Fwd: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!! (fwd)

>Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 11:45:53 -0400 (EST)
>From: Tom Bacolini
>To: Joe Sivak
>Subject: Fwd: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!! (fwd)
>X-UIDL: 5434517174a7bc41b61449f4d03ca53b
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 00:30:30 -0400 (EST)
>From: Garry Lambright
>To: Tom Bacolini
>Cc: Garry Lambright
>Subject: Fwd: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!!
>
>-------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 21:25:14 -0500 (EST)
>>
>> This information was received this morning from IBM, please share it
>> with anyone that might access the Internet:
>>
>> If anyone receives mail entitled; PENPAL GREETINGS! please delete it
>> WITHOUT reading it!! This is a warning for all Internet users - there
>> is a dangerous virus propagating across the Internet through an e-mail
>> message entitled
>>
>> "PENPAL GREETINGS!".
>>
>> DO NOT DOWNLOAD ANY MESSAGE ENTITLED "PENPAL GREETINGS"!!
>>
>> This message appears to be a friendly letter asking you if you are
>> interested in a penpal, but by the time you read this letter, it is
>> too late. The trojan horse" virus will have already infected the boot
>> sector of your hard drive, destroying all of the data present. It is
>> a self-replicating virus, and once the message is read, it will
>> AUTOMATICALLY forward itself to anyone who's e-mail address is present
>> in YOUR mailbox!
>>
>> This virus will DESTROY your hard drive, and holds the potential to
>> DESTROY the hard drive of anyone whose mail is in your in box, and
>> who's mail is in their in box and so on. If this virus keeps getting
>> passed, it has the potential to do a great deal of DAMAGE to computer
>> networks worldwide!!!!
>>
>> Please, delete the message entitled "PENPAL GREETINGS!" as soon as you
>> see it! And pass this message along to all of your friends,
>> relatives and the other readers of the newsgroups and mailing
>> lists which you are on so that they are not hurt by this dangerous
>> virus!!!!
>>
>> Please pass this along to everyone you know so this can be stopped.
>>
>> Let's keep the Cyberspace clean and profitable.

>--------------45037F0F607A--


Got this message tonight downloading my e-mail from a friend who programs
computers here, so I"ve sent it to the list. Sounds nasty...

Kristen

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

Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:28:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jason K. Schechner"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: RE: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!! (fwd)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hoax. The "penpal" virus is a hoax, just like the "good times"
virus. Please don't pass this message along any more. The message itself
is the virus. Nothing more.

-Jason

-----
Jason K. Schechner - Unix Sysadmin - Oracle Corp

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 21:31:56 -0700
From: Dan Wentz
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 1955 Ford f-500
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Slight correction.....'53 (not '52!) was the last year for the flathead V-8
>in Ford cars.

Right. 52 was a typo. I should have caught that error.

~Dan

1992 Ford Mustang LX
1950 Ford F1, 351C-2V
Check out my F1 page: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.GeoCities.com/MotorCity/3623

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 21:39:07 -0700
From: Dan Wentz
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 1955 Ford f-500
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

> My first thought was that it would be a 53, because I thought 53 was the
>last year for flatheads. 52 was the last year for flatheads in cars, the
>trucks had them at least up to 53. However, I consulted my now-suspect
>"Catalog of Ford Truck ID Numbers 1946-1972," and it lists 239ci V8 engines
>in F-series up through 55,

There was an ohv 239 cu in for a while.

~Dan

1992 Ford Mustang LX
1950 Ford F1, 351C-2V
Check out my F1 page: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.GeoCities.com/MotorCity/3623

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

Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 23:57:19 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: disc brake convertion
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Converting to disc is easy. You can go one of two ways A) manual disc
B) power disc. I went power on the Beast (1967 Ranger) I hate stomp and
prey stuff.

The conversion is easy find a '73 F-100 w/ disc brakes get the spindals,
the proportioning valve and the disc if they are good. I bought new
kingpins I do not remember which but either the I-beam or the spindal
section is just a hair larger (like .001 or .002) so I got the pins for
the smaller of the two (this worked find the assemblies have about
90,000+ miles on them no problem). You'll also need a set of junk tires
that are mounted (more on this later). Go to the local parts store and
buy 2 new calipers for a '73 (also get the alum. wedge and lock bolt), 2
new brake hoses and a set of pads these misc parts cost me +/- 100.00.
If you have to get new rotors/disc Auto Zone has them for 35.00 each.

Remove the old drum assembly's disconnecting the tie rod ends and remove
the old hoses. to remove the king pin if you have a torch get a good
hot rase bud type flame then heat the I-beam evenly at the point that
the king pin goes through then using a large punch knock it out you may
have to heat it a couple times while driving it out the heat causes the
I-beam to expand and if you are carful the pin doesn't. after you have
the old assembly off install the new spindals and parts after this is
done hook up the steering you'll find that your toe in is bad off once
you have done both sides adjust the toe in as best you can put the junk
wheels we mentioned earlier on the front and go find a good front end
man.

Now for the next question. Daver what about the master cylinder?
Remember 2 trains of thought which did you choose?
A) manual You are finished. the old perportioning valve will work
because you are running a manual setup and the volume is greater through
the old proportioning valve.
B) This is a different creature. You will need to change out the
perportioning valve the regulate flow or you will get into one fine
afternoon and colapse the rotor. As for the booster and master cylender
there are a number of different units out there I used a 73 booster and
cylender and modified the peddle rod. if you have manual brakes you'll
have to drill 4 holes into the firewall. I suggest that anyone here
doing this convertion go to a newer model booster/cylinder say 80 to 85
because I think these will mount without the rod modification.

Do not for get befor it moves bleed the brakes starting from the
passenger side rear goto drivers side rear then passenger side front and
finally drivers side front.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:03:54 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: rear ends
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Limited slip will work fine with 350+ HP it is acually a prefered
rearend.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:10:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: Chris North
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: RE: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

> Hoax. The "penpal" virus is a hoax, just like the "good times"
>virus. Please don't pass this message along any more. The message itself
>is the virus. Nothing more.
>

Somebody has yet to come up with some substantial PROOF as to why this
"penpal" virus is a hoax. Political rhetoric will not change
my mind, I want some scientific evidence to prove this idea wrong.

chris north

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

Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:22:08 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: WARNING FOR VIRUS ON INTERNET !!!!!! (fwd)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yea this message has floated around since I first got on the net in
early 1994 and has been proven a hoax. E-mail is a text format with no
command quality to a dos/windows machine if you recieve a e-mail with
unsolicted or unknown attachments that are ziped or exe type files that
you are unsure of deleat it do invite it in. Remember that bug that
infect the net cannot hurt you and bugs transfered over the net have to
come to you Via Zip or exe downloads as the net is Unix and we are
emulators.

Ford truck contents of this e-mail:

The last time I hauled this computer it road in the cab of my '67
Ranger. The F-100 seems to bee a good truck to haul it in.

Did this qualify mom.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 22:33:08 -0700
From: "Jim '73 F 100 302"
To:
Subject: Re: 80 MPG???? Beg to differ Sir.
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The idea is not to prove it will not work, but to prove it
will! How would one go about proving it not to work! There
is only one way to do that, put out the money to construct
the prototype. A skeptic would cut corners use conditions
less than acceptable, at best give it a small chance for
success!
To say something is impossible made way for America, from
starting blocks forming in 1492 when a coarse was set do
west for China and India. After being at sea from Aug 3
until Oct 12, Columbus proved the skeptics were right. He
failed to prove his claim that the voyage to China and India
would be shorter heading west than south around the Cape of
Good Hope or east over land. But is that to say no good came
out of it? Just ask the Sioux, Blackfeet...
If you believe so strongly that this system will work, make
it and then people will listen! By the way in my opinion
nothing of this nature is impossible. but what is the
probability?
Post your progress to the list, ask for suggestions when
the answer isn't clear. Your success would be to the benefit
of all of us! But unsubstantiated theory is such a bore!....

---

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.