Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 18:46:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #113
X-Loop: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/113
To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 113

Today's Topics:

Web site now on new server! [Ken Payne ]
Re: F150 Hesitation ?? [JIM HURD ]
Gasket and seal replacement [sidereal epix.net ]
R/R Oil pan and Rear Seal ["Alexander M. Siu"
Re: Web site now on new server! ["Larry Coffman"
Re: Web site now on new server! [Ken Payne ]
Re: somethings not right [sdelanty sonoma.net ]
Re: 100mpg How-To [rlr ]
1968 truck info snafu [John Strauss
Re: Daring you to Flame me! ["Harry Jennings"
Re: 100mpg How-To ["C.D. Mutch"
Re: 100mpg How-To [rlr ]
Re: 100mpg How-To [Don Grossman ]
Re: 100mpg How-To ["C.D. Mutch"
Re: 100mpg How-To ["C.D. Mutch"
Re: 100mpg How-To [rlr ]

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: Tue, 13 May 1997 23:33:06 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Web site now on new server!
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The web pages are now on a new server!!! Instead of 10meg of
space with 10meg of daily bandwidth we now have a 25 meg of
space (a huge amount as far as web pages are concerned, currently
the entire site takes less than 2 meg) with 100meg of daily
bandwidth! The new location is:
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dragonfire.com/~site/fordtrucks

If you point your browser to the old site you will get
"pulled" to the new site. You may have to hit "reload" the
first time for this to take effect. Note, not all browsers
support the pull feature. If yours doesn't there is a link
you can press.

Now that we have the much needed space and bandwidth I
am requesting that you send me your truck pics with descriptions
if you want them on the web pages. In addition, send me your
links, suggestions and anything else you can think of that would
make good use of our bandwitdth. We have it, might as well
use it.

We have this site thanks to the generousity of one of our
list members! It really is appreciated!

-Ken Payne
1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
Visit the Ford Truck Enthusiast List Web Page (unsubscribe
form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 00:03:06 -0500 (EST)
From: JIM HURD
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: F150 Hesitation ??
Message-id:
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Phil,

If you had a bad EVP sensor I would think you would have found a code:

328 = EGR closed valve voltage lower than expected or
334 = EGR closed valve voltage higher than expected.

Jim in Central NY
'79 F-150 (302!)
'92 Topaz (3.0l)

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 00:13:50 -0400
From: sidereal epix.net
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Cc: goods vaxrb.niehs.nih.gov
Subject: Gasket and seal replacement
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>What are some suggestions on replacing the oil pan gasket and the rear main
>seal on a 1968 F100 that has a 351C 4V in it? I have access to an engine
>hoist and I will buy and engine stand if I have to. I was told that these
>repairs can be done without removing the engine. Is that so?

Yeop, but it is a hell of a lot easier if you remove the engine entirely.
In theory, though, you can do it by unbolting the engine at the motor
mounts and raising it up just enough to be able to make the oil pan make it
through the space between the rest of the engine and the frame (resting it
on wood blocks between the engine mounts and the frame). This involves
reaching into the oil pan half blindly and taking off the oil pump pickup
tube (and half blindly putting it back on when you are done).

>Also, I would like to keep the cost down on repairs to this truck
>until I get it running pretty good.
>If I had to take the engine out, then I would want to redo it
>completely which cost more money that I have to spend on that right now.

Trying to change the rear seal and oil pan gasket with the engine still in
the truck might cost more patience than you have to spend on it too ;-)
"Redo it completely" equals complete rebuild ?
Perhaps the thing to do is go to a salvage yard and get a used engine to
put in your truck, and rebuild your 351-4V as you have the time and money.
That way, you have it all (sort of) .. a functional truck, an engine that
gets rebuilt, and no need to get it done before the Monday workday ...
plus, when you get the 351-4V done, and put it back in your F100, you have
a spare engine (the one from the salvage yard) to rebuild if you feel like
it, or to use as a temp again (or replacement) in another vehicle, if you
get one.

>Any suggestions are welcome.

Howzat for an idea ?

== Serian

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 00:53:30 -0500 (EST)
From: "Alexander M. Siu"
To: Ford List
Subject: R/R Oil pan and Rear Seal
Message-id:
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Mark:


OK, If you have all of the following, you should be able to do this.
I am not familiar with the 68 F100, if it is anything like a newer PU this
should work,

If you want to Replace the Oil pan only, you can do so without picking the
engine out, however, if you are replacing the rear seal also, you will be
better off picking the engine out. If you are replacing only the rear
seal, you can also do it without picking the engine out.

If you decided that you only want to replace the oil pan here's what you
do. First, can you lift your truck up to a reasonable height, safely, so
that you can put tranny jack and supporting jack under the engine and
tranny. If not don't try this at home. If you do have access to a lift,
first you can support the tranny and engine with tranny jacks. and unbolt
the motor mounts. this will give you room to move the engine up. Jack
the engine and tranny up so that you can remove the oil pan. that's it.
If you don't have the two jacks and a lift, you would be better off
picking the engine out. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS OPERATION WITHOUT THE
PROPOR EQUIPMENT.

If you want to replace the rear seal only, you can just drop the tranny.

Since you mention that you want to replace both the rear seal and Oil pan,
just pick the engine out and do it from there.


-=ALEX Siu=-

ASIU UBMail.UBalt.EDU

VOICE: (410)828-0273

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 05:24:18 -0400
From: "Larry Coffman"
To:
Subject: Re: Web site now on new server!
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ken,

tried this address, and it didn`t work, so I went to the old address, and
got sent to " www.ford-trucks.com/index.html "

also wanted to thank whoever sent something last week about greasing
kingpins, finally got around to it yesterday, WOW, I think i`ve got a new
truck! well, except for that rust.

Larry
66 F-100

----------
> From: Ken Payne
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> Subject: Web site now on new server!
> Date: Tuesday, May 13, 1997 11:33 PM
>
> The web pages are now on a new server!!! Instead of 10meg of
> space with 10meg of daily bandwidth we now have a 25 meg of
> space (a huge amount as far as web pages are concerned, currently
> the entire site takes less than 2 meg) with 100meg of daily
> bandwidth! The new location is:
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dragonfire.com/~site/fordtrucks
>
> If you point your browser to the old site you will get
> "pulled" to the new site. You may have to hit "reload" the
> first time for this to take effect. Note, not all browsers
> support the pull feature. If yours doesn't there is a link
> you can press.
>
> Now that we have the much needed space and bandwidth I
> am requesting that you send me your truck pics with descriptions
> if you want them on the web pages. In addition, send me your
> links, suggestions and anything else you can think of that would
> make good use of our bandwitdth. We have it, might as well
> use it.
>
> We have this site thanks to the generousity of one of our
> list members! It really is appreciated!
>
> -Ken Payne
> 1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
> List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
> Visit the Ford Truck Enthusiast List Web Page (unsubscribe
> form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.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: Wed, 14 May 1997 08:25:04 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Web site now on new server!
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Thanks for the correction! I'm so used to dealing with .com sites
that the fact that its a .net site keeps tripping me up!

>Ken,
>
> tried this address, and it didn`t work, so I went to the old address, and
>got sent to " www.ford-trucks.com/index.html "
>
>also wanted to thank whoever sent something last week about greasing
>kingpins, finally got around to it yesterday, WOW, I think i`ve got a new
>truck! well, except for that rust.
>
>Larry
>66 F-100
>
>----------
>> From: Ken Payne
>> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
>> Subject: Web site now on new server!
>> Date: Tuesday, May 13, 1997 11:33 PM
>>
>> The web pages are now on a new server!!! Instead of 10meg of
>> space with 10meg of daily bandwidth we now have a 25 meg of
>> space (a huge amount as far as web pages are concerned, currently
>> the entire site takes less than 2 meg) with 100meg of daily
>> bandwidth! The new location is:
>> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dragonfire.com/~site/fordtrucks
>>
>> If you point your browser to the old site you will get
>> "pulled" to the new site. You may have to hit "reload" the
>> first time for this to take effect. Note, not all browsers
>> support the pull feature. If yours doesn't there is a link
>> you can press.
>>
>> Now that we have the much needed space and bandwidth I
>> am requesting that you send me your truck pics with descriptions
>> if you want them on the web pages. In addition, send me your
>> links, suggestions and anything else you can think of that would
>> make good use of our bandwitdth. We have it, might as well
>> use it.
>>
>> We have this site thanks to the generousity of one of our
>> list members! It really is appreciated!
>>
>> -Ken Payne
>> 1967 Ford F100 Custom Cab, 390 FE V8
>> List maintainer, send me comments and suggestions.
>> Visit the Ford Truck Enthusiast List Web Page (unsubscribe
>> form is there): http://www.ford-trucks.com
>>

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 06:06:12 -0700
From: sdelanty sonoma.net
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: Re: somethings not right
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



>>Yes there is spent exhaust gas. But much less than You might think. A very
>>large percentage is still unburnt gases.
>
>I do have a problem with the idea that the gasses being vented are "HOT".
>(Although Steve mentions this) By the time the blowby gets to the PCV
>valve, these gasses are nowhere near the 1200+ Deg F of the exhaust. They
>are more like the 180 deg F oil/coolant temp. Lower than that since they
>have been diluted with fresh air.
>

That's correct Chris.
"Hot" is a relative term.
I didn't mean to imply that the gases were extremely hot, only that they
were probably hotter than the normal intake air. (although not
necessarily..) and *might* be the only dispute for lost HP with PCV.(however
minimal)

I would guess around 180-220F might be about right for crankcase gases under
load.
But the percentage of this "hot" air is small, and underhood(and carb
inlet)temps may not be much less than that anyway, so it may not even be any
issue.
Worst case is probably fractions of a percent HP loss.
Just ducting the air cleaner inlet to the outside world so that hot under
the hood air is not picked up would add many more HP than PCV could ever
take away...

>
>The only other thing I want to add is that PCV systems pre-date auto
>emissions control. Positive Crackcase Ventilation was introduced to
>improve the life of the motor oil (and, consequently the engine) and was
>used extensively when there were no emission control requriements. The
>fact that it reduces emissions is a 'freebie'.

Yes, Many motors used PCV before "smog" equipment was required.
It's a happy thing for Your oil...

I'm glad You like Your PCV as much as I do... (-:

Steve Delanty (sdelanty sonoma.net)

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 09:15:50 -0400
From: rlr
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I refuse to get involved in a long-winded discussion about this
subject, but there are a few assertions that really must be examined
further.

C.D. Mutch wrote:

> using the exhaust manifolds as heat exchangers. The boiled fuel can then
> be stored in a primary vapour chamber. The fuel which either does not
> boil or condenses in the primary chamber can be returned to the fuel
> tank via fuel return line.

No problem, though I'd love to see the plumbing.

> The fuel vapour from the primary chamber is
> then sent to a secondary chamber made of iron (the iron acts as the
> catalyst) where it is heated electrically to 500 degrees Celsius and
> mixed with steam.

500degC ain't no walk in the park. How many amps is it going to take
to continually heat the secondary chamber? Will it require a special
alternator? This increased power requirement has to be accounted for,
especially if you still want to run your lights, radio, etc.

This chamber will have to be fairly isolated in order to not thermally
disrupt the rest of the engine compartment (in other words, you don't
want to burn your wiring harness or other equipment that doesn't deal
so well with 500degC up there near your intake).

Does this chamber need to operate under pressure or intake vacuum?

> The chemical process taking place in the catalytic
> chamber is best explained in the words of Bruce McBurney
> "When the steam and gasoline vapour enter the iron chamber the water is
> broken down, and the oxygen forms with the carbon, creating methanol.
> The hydrogen forms with the hydrocarbon, cracking it into the finer
> form, natural gas."

I won't question the chemical process described. Don't forget the
extremely corrosive properties of methanol? 100mpg ain't no great
shakes if you have to rebuild your aluminum intake and/or heads every
20K.

> Its extremely efficient

In industrial applications, I've no doubt. In automotive
applications, we shall see.

What sort of power can be expected with this sort of vapor carb?
You can't get 100mpg for free.

Ron

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 08:17:17 -0500
From: John Strauss
To: Ford Trucks List
Subject: 1968 truck info snafu
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>>middle row:
>>
>>WB - 131
>131" wheelbase - 6.5' bed, commonly referred to as SWB (Short Wheelbase)
>
I can't believe I got away with that. It dawned on me this morning while I
was laying in bed I got this wrong. 131" is a LWB (Long Wheelbase) pickup
with an 8' bed. I think the SWB is somewhere in the 115-120" range.

John

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 08:10:26 PDT
From: "Harry Jennings"
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Daring you to Flame me!
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain

>From hjennings hotmail.com Wed May 14 07:42:16 1997
>Received: from base ([207.147.208.117]) by mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net
> (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with ESMTP id AAA9622
> for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 14:42:13 +0000
>From: "Harry Jennings"
>To:
>Subject: Daring you to Flame me!
>Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 07:40:54 -0700
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Priority: 3
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Two things I hate. Being lied to and people who post child
>porn!
>Can't talk now, I have a lot of posting to do!
>Can you view newsgroups? alt.becp?
>
>
>Goin' 170mph and 40mpg with a big block,

Two problems:
1)I didn't write this, yet it has my name on it.
2)I NEVER said anything about 170MPH of 40MPG with my truck!! I DID say my '92
ZX-600 Ninja gets 43MPG and has a top speed of 172MPH. Is it possible that
somebody is not fully reading the post?

Harry.


---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 11:18:35 -0700
From: "C.D. Mutch"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Finally, somebody smart enough to ask some intelligent questions, and
bring up some valid points.
First off... Mr. RLR wrote
> No problem, though I'd love to see the plumbing.

Use your imagination, heat exchangers are not complex things.

> 500degC ain't no walk in the park. How many amps is it going to take
> to continually heat the secondary chamber? Will it require a special
> alternator? This increased power requirement has to be accounted for,
> especially if you still want to run your lights, radio, etc.

Yes an additional alternator will be required. In order to determine how
many amps the additional alternator should crank out you'll have to do a
little math. How many amps you require will depend on the size of the
catalytic chamber, and the draw of your heating elements you're using.
As far as your lights,radio etc. goes.... if your original alternator
has enough juice to power your truck/car now, it'll have enough power to
run these items after you've installed the vapour carb.

> This chamber will have to be fairly isolated in order to not thermally
> disrupt the rest of the engine compartment (in other words, you don't
> want to burn your wiring harness or other equipment that doesn't deal
> so well with 500degC up there near your intake).

Yes this is just common sense. Every engine compartement is different
and it all depends on where you believe the best spot is. From the
diagrams of Mr. McBurney's design, both his primary and secondary
chambers are an integral part of the whole "carburetor". The whole thing
sits on top of the intake the same as your carburetor would. It's quite
hard to explain, and as I said, my explaination here is simplified so
you can get a basic understanding. For a better and more in depth
explaination go to http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.inett.com/himac/supercarb2.html#process

> Does this chamber need to operate under pressure or intake vacuum?
>
Both chambers will obviously be running under pressure. Whenever you
boil a liquid in a sealed container it creates pressure. Again this is
where one of the I've run into problems. How do you meter the fuel and
the steam in the correct proportions? You can't keep feeding boiled fuel
into the primary chamber because the pressure buildup would become too
great and thus back up the fuel system. Any suggestions?

> I won't question the chemical process described. Don't forget the
> extremely corrosive properties of methanol? 100mpg ain't no great
> shakes if you have to rebuild your aluminum intake and/or heads every
> 20K.

Don't use aluminum.

> What sort of power can be expected with this sort of vapor carb?
> You can't get 100mpg for free.

Fact: Whenever you increase the efficiency of an internal combustion
engine, there is always an increase in power. From what I understand,
during tests on these so-called HOAX prototypes, the additional HP
generated more than compensated for any additional power required by an
additional alternator.

And no you can't get 100mpg for free. Hundreds of people have spent
thousands of hours coming up with similar systems that have WORKED, and
many of them paid for it with their lives. No other statement could be
more true.
Thanks for questioning me on this Ron. If I've sparked any interest on
this subject at all, I've done some good.

C.D. Mutch
--
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 15:44:50 -0400
From: rlr
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Use your imagination, heat exchangers are not complex things.

No imagination necessary, I'll just expect you to post pictures
after you get it working. ;)

> > 500degC ain't no walk in the park.

> How many amps you require will depend on the size of the
> catalytic chamber, and the draw of your heating elements you're using.

Yup. Like I said, 500degC isn't anything to shake a stick at. What
kind of secondary chamber volume are you talking about? I think it
is safe to say that in order to maintain 500degC for any period of
time, you're going to need a lot of juice.

> As far as your lights,radio etc. goes.... if your original alternator
> has enough juice to power your truck/car now, it'll have enough power to
> run these items after you've installed the vapour carb.

A very heavy duty automotive alternator puts out 110A or so (most
alternators put out 50-60A). 110A translates into roughly 1320W
of power available.

The standard electrical space heater draws 1500W, as does a typical
hair dryer. The secondary carb chamber will heat a much smaller
volume of gas, but to a much higher temperature.

Any extra electrical power must come from somewhere, and in this
case the vapor carb secondary chamber heater will directly translate
into increased engine load. Just something to factor for when you
build the prototype.

> > burn your wiring harness or other equipment that doesn't deal
> > so well with 500degC up there near your intake).

> Yes this is just common sense. Every engine compartement is different

To give some context, the shell on a typical automotive catalytic
converter might reach 500degC on a long highway trip. This is some
serious heat under your hood.

> explaination go to http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.inett.com/himac/supercarb2.html#process

Thanks. I checked it out, but these pages were mostly testimonials
and supposition.

> How do you meter the fuel and
> the steam in the correct proportions? You can't keep feeding boiled fuel
> into the primary chamber because the pressure buildup would become too
> great and thus back up the fuel system. Any suggestions?

Mechanical check valve? Servo mechanism coupled to a chamber
pressure sensor?

> > Don't forget the
> > extremely corrosive properties of methanol? 100mpg ain't no great
> > shakes if you have to rebuild your aluminum intake and/or heads every
> > 20K.

> Don't use aluminum.

So the vapor carb can only be used in engines that won't be adversely
affected by the stream of converted methanol fuel? That pretty much
eliminates almost every engine built since the late 1970s.

> And no you can't get 100mpg for free. Hundreds of people have spent
> thousands of hours coming up with similar systems that have WORKED, and
> many of them paid for it with their lives.

I mistrust Big Gummint and Big Business as much as the next paranoiac,
but this conspiracy theory stuff is better at selling books about
vapor carburetors than it is at explaining why we all aren't using
vapor carburetors.

Ron

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 12:25:19 +0000
From: Don Grossman
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What do you use for fire suppression when you blow a gasket or
something?

You were talking gas at 500degC, it just got me thinking...

Long live the N.W.O.!
--
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

It's hard to do 90 on a speed limit budget.......

65 Ford F-150 4x4 (soon to be 72 Mustang)
63 Ford F-250 4x4

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 15:50:01 -0700
From: "C.D. Mutch"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

RLR Wrote:
> To give some context, the shell on a typical automotive catalytic
> converter might reach 500degC on a long highway trip. This is some
> serious heat under your hood.

YES!! If this is your estimate as to the temp. of a catalytic converter
shell, what do you estimate the temp of the exhaust manifolds themselves
are??
New idea... for those of you who don't find an imagination necessary RON
;) , to build a simple heat exchanger, try winding the fuel line around
the exhaust pipe and wrapping it in non-flammable insulating material.
Run it into your first chamber. Your second chamber can be built and
attached (bolted) directly to the exhaust manifold and insulated as
well. Surely if the catalytic converter gets this hot, the exhaust
manifolds should be the same temp. if not hotter. This idea for a
catalytic chamber shouldn't need any additional electric heating because
it will be working off of othwerwise wasted heat energy.

> Mechanical check valve? Servo mechanism coupled to a chamber
> pressure sensor?
>

Already thought of that, I guess it'll work under a steady highway
drive, but I'm still having trouble coming up with a solution to varying
engine load. (without using an on-board computer)

> So the vapor carb can only be used in engines that won't be adversely
> affected by the stream of converted methanol fuel? That pretty much
> eliminates almost every engine built since the late 1970s.

As I understood, I thought this mail list was for owners of '79 and down
ford trucks... do you wanna learn to get better mileage or not?? At this
time the aluminum factor has no significance in my plans. You wanna
worry about aluminum?... you figure it out. :)

> I mistrust Big Gummint and Big Business as much as the next paranoiac,
> but this conspiracy theory stuff is better at selling books about
> vapor carburetors than it is at explaining why we all aren't using
> vapor carburetors.

Each to his own. I thought it did a very good job of explaining why we
weren't using vapor carbs.


--
Friends may come and go, but enemies accumulate.

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

Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 16:11:10 -0700
From: "C.D. Mutch"
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 100mpg How-To
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As we all know, fuel will only ignite by an open flame or a spark etc. A
pressure relief valve would be used in both chambers as a safety
precaution, and anyway, wouldn't the flow of steam being introduced into....


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.