Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 12:56:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #112
X-Loop: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/112
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks-digest DigestVolume 97 : Issue 112

Today's Topics:

Re: Edelbrock swap question [Daver ]
Re: Max torque rating of 3 spd trann [Daver ]
Re: 390 Intake manifold [Daver ]
Re: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #11 [TwoPaw ]
Re: Ford Camper van [TwoPaw ]
You misunderstood me.... [gusinks ruraltel.net (Clark Gustafs]
Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, Cab M ["Jim Strigas"
Re: Ford Falcon Camper Van ["Jim Strigas"
Re: Ford Camper van [Ken Payne ]
Re: Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, C [Ken Payne ]
Re: Ford Falcon Camper Van [Ken Payne ]
Cab swaping Help! ["Edward Dunmyre" ]
Re: Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, C [Daver ]
Big Block? ["Dave & Syd Murray"
Re: 72 & 76 SHOP Manuals ["Terry R Sherman"
Holley on a 360 ["Chris Le Roy"
Re: Big Block? [Chris James ]
Re: 72 & 76 SHOP Manuals [SHOman ]
Intake Manifold [reedg ns2.cetlink.net ]
Re: Intake Manifold [Don Grossman ]
Re: Intake Manifold ["Tim and Jolee Hann"
RE: Intake Manifold [Kevin Kemmerer ]

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, 11 Jul 1997 14:29:17 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Edelbrock swap question
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Don you do not have to pull the heads to change intakes; however, you do
have to pull both valve covers and a very good friend is required if the
original intake is cast iron becuase it weights about 80 Lbs (no ----).

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 14:51:10 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Max torque rating of 3 spd tranny
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mike Schwall wrote:
>
> Does anyone know the max torque rating of the stock 3 speed manual that was
> available on the '78 F150 w/302 as a column shift? It's cast iron. Came
> on a truck with a 9" rear with 3.00:1 gears.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike

Good question no answer. I can tell you at around 350 ft lbs a 3 spd
top loader will make a substantial mess.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 14:54:38 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 390 Intake manifold
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Donald R. Screen wrote:
>
> Would the 4V 390 FE manifold be considered a spread bore
> or square bore manifold. Anybody care to enlighten me
> on the finer points (differences)? All I know is that the
> Quadrajet and Carter Thermoquad carbs are considered to be
> spread bore. What if any Motorcraft carbs were spread bore?
>
> Don
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 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

Spread bore means that 70% of the carb flow is on the secondaries +/-.
A squar bore is typically equal secondaries and primaries.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 04:28:07 -0400
From: TwoPaw
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: fordtrucks-digest Digest V97 #111
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>
> I know it seems weird, but actually the Falcon van is covered
> in this group, as are Rancheros (we even have an Austrailian
> member with an Aussie 68? Falcon UTE Ranchero). I was kinda
> "bunchy" when we started the list and didn't include mini-vans,
> I know it seems bass ackwards. Anyways, what type of information
> are you looking for?
>

Well Is there anyone who could correctly I.D. my van if I were to send a
video or pictures? I am told that it is a very rear van, and that ford
did the conversion as a after market thing, sold through the
dealership. I have looked in the local book stores and in the
librerys(sp?) and cant find any pitcures with the conversion. I really
want to know if its a ford conversion or some clever guy did it.

any help would be grately apreciateed(sp?)

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 04:31:18 -0400
From: TwoPaw
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Ford Camper van
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> I know it seems weird, but actually the Falcon van is covered
> in this group, as are Rancheros (we even have an Austrailian
> member with an Aussie 68? Falcon UTE Ranchero). I was kinda
> "bunchy" when we started the list and didn't include mini-vans,
> I know it seems bass ackwards. Anyways, what type of information
> are you looking for?
>

Well Is there anyone who could correctly I.D. my van if I were to send a
video or pictures? I am told that it is a very rear van, and that ford
did the conversion as a after market thing, sold through the
dealership. I have looked in the local book stores and in the
librerys(sp?) and cant find any pitcures with the conversion. I really
want to know if its a ford conversion or some clever guy did it.

any help would be grately apreciateed(sp?)>

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 04:08:19 -0500
From: gusinks ruraltel.net (Clark Gustafson)
To: "Ford Truck Mailing List"
Subject: You misunderstood me....
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I was not talking about installing a Manual four-speed, I ment an automatic
4-speed. I hope that this helps. Also do I need to install a ballast
resistor in the wiring when I hook up that EI on my truck? Thanks for the
info. Griz

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 04:32:33 -0700
From: "Jim Strigas"
To:
Subject: Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, Cab Mounts
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Jim Jim Jim you are confusing the newbies again aren't
you. 250 is a
> fair price just tie it down before letting them have the
truck and hold
> thier feet to the fire when you pick it up.
>
> Molater
>
> Daver

Aah Daver, I just funnin' a little! I learned along time
ago, when a man asks a question and gets an answer. Only to
turn around and ask the same question again, Well it maybe
he ain't lookin' for an answer at all! But confirmation he
made the right decision! When the cheapest thing in the
whole Dang gum deal is so astronomical that it throws the
whole "Do it yourself" kittincaboodal in the cra... (can't
say that)... shi... (can't say that neither)... Trash! Bet
the Farm!
I'm just having a little fun with the person who posted on
the cab mounts. I would have done some of the work myself
then took it to a weld shop and had the welding done. But
that's me!

Yo, Yo, Yo! Cooling experts, Yes Daver!
A little repost here. My '73 according to the build sheet
(I don't want to hear it, just don't what to!) has extra
cooling. I have a radiator from a '94 5.0 Mustang. T5 trans.
I want to add an external Trans filter and cooler in the
future, with or without the switch. Would the modern
radiator cool more efficiently than the old technology?

Jim Strigas
jstrigas worldnet.att.net

'73 F100
'83 XJ900RK
'86 GL1200 Custom


----------
> From: Daver
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> Subject: Re: '76 ford Highboy, Cab Mounts
> Date: Friday, July 11, 1997 12:14 PM
>
> Jim Strigas wrote:
> >
> > $250.00 to call 715? Where the hell's that fishin' hole
Boy!
> > Bangladesh? Why do you already have the parts an
appointment
> > at a body shop! Don't sound like your looking for
> > information on how to install them so I'll go with...
> >
> > Hey Sherm! I don't think that's a do it yourself kind of
> > job! I'd take it to a body shop if I was you!
> >
> > Jim Strigas
>
> Jim Jim Jim you are confusing the newbies again aren't
you. 250 is a
> fair price just tie it down before letting them have the
truck and hold
> thier feet to the fire when you pick it up.
>
> 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 lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use:
kpayne mindspring.com

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

Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 23:06:28 -0700
From: "Jim Strigas"
To:
Subject: Re: Ford Falcon Camper Van
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Oh! Sure, I suppose they have frames! La De Da, guess I
still can't talk about my Aerostar! I know, it's newer than
1980, This is the wrong List!
Wait, I don't want to see post on how many 12 year old
soccer players you can fit in one! Never mind! Jumped the My
Rights thing a little to fast! Carry on! Sorry! My Bad! I'll
just go back, doing this, other thing here! Oops!

Jim Strigas
jstrigas worldnet.att.net


'73 F100
'83 XJ900RK
'86 GL1200 Custom
'89 Aerostar
'77 Buick Estate Wagon


----------
> From: Ken Payne
> To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> Subject: Re: Ford Falcon Camper Van
> Date: Friday, July 11, 1997 5:59 PM
>
> At 02:25 PM 7/11/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hi I know this is not realy the right group but I hope
you can help.
> >I have a 63 Falcon Van. It looks like a EconoLine except
it has a
> >raised roof(about 2 feet) and extended ass end(about 3
Ft.). It has
> >propane hook ups with a refridgerator and fernice. It
also has a bed
> >and bunk bed, and has a sink. Does any one know any
thing about this?
> >BTW it runs and I drive it often, it has 62,000 origanal
miles on it.
> >
> >thanks
> >
> >twopaw vgernet.net
> >
>
> I know it seems weird, but actually the Falcon van is
covered
> in this group, as are Rancheros (we even have an
Austrailian
> member with an Aussie 68? Falcon UTE Ranchero). I was
kinda
> "bunchy" when we started the list and didn't include
mini-vans,
> I know it seems bass ackwards. Anyways, what type of
information
> are you looking for?
>
> -Ken
> List Administrator, 1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
> Our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
> (subscribe/unsubscribe forms on the web site)
> fordtrucks lofcom.com is the 1979 and older truck list,
> fordtrucks80up lofcom.com is the 1980 and newer truck
list..
> (Email me if you're on the wrong list)
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________
_______
> 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: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 09:18:35 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Ford Camper van
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 04:31 AM 7/12/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> I know it seems weird, but actually the Falcon van is covered
>> in this group, as are Rancheros (we even have an Austrailian
>> member with an Aussie 68? Falcon UTE Ranchero). I was kinda
>> "bunchy" when we started the list and didn't include mini-vans,
>> I know it seems bass ackwards. Anyways, what type of information
>> are you looking for?
>>
>
>Well Is there anyone who could correctly I.D. my van if I were to send a
>video or pictures? I am told that it is a very rear van, and that ford
>did the conversion as a after market thing, sold through the
>dealership. I have looked in the local book stores and in the
>librerys(sp?) and cant find any pitcures with the conversion. I really
>want to know if its a ford conversion or some clever guy did it.
>
>any help would be grately apreciateed(sp?)>
>

Email me the pictures, perferrably JPG (Jpeg) format (don't use 100%
quality as it makes it huge) and I'll post it to the web site. Then
any of the membership who may be able to ID it can help. Also, what
year did you say it was again? If its 67(65?)-85 Ford may be able
to give you a build sheet which would tell you what it came from
the factory with. Let me know if you need the info for a build sheet.

-Ken
List Administrator, 1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
Our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
(subscribe/unsubscribe forms on the web site)
fordtrucks lofcom.com is the 1979 and older truck list,
fordtrucks80up lofcom.com is the 1980 and newer truck list..
(Email me if you're on the wrong list)

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 09:22:02 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, Cab Mounts
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

-snip-
>
>Yo, Yo, Yo! Cooling experts, Yes Daver!
>A little repost here. My '73 according to the build sheet
>(I don't want to hear it, just don't what to!) has extra
>cooling. I have a radiator from a '94 5.0 Mustang. T5 trans.
>I want to add an external Trans filter and cooler in the
>future, with or without the switch. Would the modern
>radiator cool more efficiently than the old technology?
>
>Jim Strigas
>jstrigas worldnet.att.net
>

Modern radiators generally (though not always) have more
fins per inch than older ones, translating to better
cooling. Also, when buying a replacement, you can sometimes
specify a higher fin/inch unit. Count the fins per inch
on both to know if there's a difference. Are they the
same physical size?

-Ken
List Administrator, 1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
Our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
(subscribe/unsubscribe forms on the web site)
fordtrucks lofcom.com is the 1979 and older truck list,
fordtrucks80up lofcom.com is the 1980 and newer truck list..
(Email me if you're on the wrong list)

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 10:26:37 -0400
From: Ken Payne
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Ford Falcon Camper Van
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 11:06 PM 7/11/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Oh! Sure, I suppose they have frames! La De Da, guess I
>still can't talk about my Aerostar! I know, it's newer than
>1980, This is the wrong List!
>Wait, I don't want to see post on how many 12 year old
>soccer players you can fit in one! Never mind! Jumped the My
>Rights thing a little to fast! Carry on! Sorry! My Bad! I'll
>just go back, doing this, other thing here! Oops!
>
>Jim Strigas
>jstrigas worldnet.att.net
>

If someone was willing to administer it, I wouldn't mind
hosting a mini-van web site (we have more than enough web
space to do it) and I'd help them setup a Ford mini-van
emailing list.

Jim, I think you hit the nail on the head. Its not that
I have anything against mini-vans (just the women who drive
them with 10 screaming kids and aren't paying attention to
the road) but the topics would definately be different than
what we see on this list. I suppose one could always say
"my Ranger is giving me problems" rather than "my mini-van"!

-Ken
List Administrator, 1967 Ford F100, 390FE V8
Our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
(subscribe/unsubscribe forms on the web site)
fordtrucks lofcom.com is the 1979 and older truck list,
fordtrucks80up lofcom.com is the 1980 and newer truck list..
(Email me if you're on the wrong list)

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 13:57:37 -0400
From: "Edward Dunmyre"
To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
Subject: Cab swaping Help!
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Edd Dee wrote:
>
> I am tring to put a 1978 F 150 crew cab, onto a 1975 F 250 standard
> frame. The crew cab was off of F-150 with 351 M engine and C 400 auto.
> tranny, the frame was SHOT "rusted beyond repair". THe cab is in great
> shape, and off the frame. The 1975 F 250 has a 351 C engine 4x4 standard
> tranny, a rolling chassie. Can this be done ??? I have a standard
> steering wheel,the clutch linkage has been changed under the dash for
> the clutch peddle, brake & linkage. A hole has been cut in the floor for the gear shifts. The front cab mounts look like they will match up fine, the rear mounts are a way off.
> Any advise would be welcomed, Thank You
> E M D
>
> Hang on tight, lifes a bumpy ride. E.M.D.

--
Hang on tight, lifes a bumpy ride. E.M.D.

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 01:15:30 -0500
From: Daver
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Cooling was; '76 ford Highboy, Cab Mounts
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Yo, Yo, Yo! Cooling experts, Yes Daver!
> A little repost here. My '73 according to the build sheet
> (I don't want to hear it, just don't what to!) has extra
> cooling. I have a radiator from a '94 5.0 Mustang. T5 trans.
> I want to add an external Trans filter and cooler in the
> future, with or without the switch. Would the modern
> radiator cool more efficiently than the old technology?
>
> Jim Strigas
> jstrigas worldnet.att.net

I liked the ol honey comb style radiators the best, these used the tubes
as fins and were very densly packed. The problem is they are hard to
find and even harder to get worked on, They quit making these when high
production on the assembly lines became important.

I have a dump truck radiator on my truck and my cooling system holds
just shy of 7 gallons of coolant.

to answer the question I personally do not feel old or new matters as
long as you make sure you have enough to cool adiquitly.

Molater

Daver

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 14:59:39 -0700
From: "Dave & Syd Murray"
To:
Subject: Big Block?
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi there.
I'm new here so don't know if this will work but here goes.
So a 390 is a big block of the Y config. and is in the family FE, and a 460
is just a big block. So what is the 351M?

79, 3/4 Super Cab. 351M

It is socially and morally unacceptable to allow fools to keep their money

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 17:10:39 -0500
From: "Terry R Sherman"
To:
Subject: Re: 72 & 76 SHOP Manuals
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Does this set include the 76 pickup? Do you still have the 76 set? I need
it, 54701 is my zip code. Thanks!!

'76 Ford Highboy, red /w white wagon wheels...

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 97 17:13:38 PDT
From: "Chris Le Roy"
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
Subject: Holley on a 360
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have a '69 360 with a Holley 4150, 600CFM. It has never run real good,
always rich. Can anyone recommend primary and secondary jet sizes? It is
basically stock (cam, crank, ign.) except for an Edelbrock Performer RPM
intake (the stock manifold makes a pretty good anchor). What about spring
for the vacuum secondaries?
If anyone has some wiring schematics for the 69 F 100, I would also be
interested.
Thanks, Chris

"69 F-100, 360-spd

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 17:41:59 -0700
From: Chris James
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Big Block?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave & Syd Murray wrote:
>
> Hi there.
> I'm new here so don't know if this will work but here goes.
> So a 390 is a big block of the Y config. and is in the family FE, and a 460
> is just a big block. So what is the 351M?

The 460 is a "385 series" big block.
The 351M is a "335 series" small block

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

Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 22:36:20 -0500
From: SHOman
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 72 & 76 SHOP Manuals
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Terry R Sherman wrote:
>
> Does this set include the 76 pickup? Do you still have the 76 set? I need
> it, 54701 is my zip code. Thanks!!
>
> '76 Ford Highboy, red /w white wagon wheels...
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 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
Terry,
yes it covers the trucks..Bronco F150 etc
Joe

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

Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 00:26:10 +0000
From: reedg ns2.cetlink.net
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Intake Manifold
Message-Id:
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

I am trying to find parts to increase performance for a '78 351M
engine. Carb, intake manifold, heads and camshaft. To be honest I
haven't worked on alot of ford engines. And I haven't been able to
find much info on the 351M. Any help would he HIGHLY appreciated.

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 21:09:16 +0000
From: Don Grossman
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
CC: reedg ns2.cetlink.net
Subject: Re: Intake Manifold
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

reedg ns2.cetlink.net wrote:
>
> I am trying to find parts to increase performance for a '78 351M
> engine. Carb, intake manifold, heads and camshaft. To be honest I
> haven't worked on alot of ford engines. And I haven't been able to
> find much info on the 351M. Any help would he HIGHLY appreciated.

Why, Edelbrock.com of course!

--
Don Grossman
duckdon pacific.net

The scene;

Bunch of NASA guys looking at TV monitor.

"Look, A ROCK!"


63 Ford F-250 4x4 67' 390, t-98, Spicer 24, Dana 60, Dana 44

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

Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 01:19:54 -0700
From: "Tim and Jolee Hann"
To:
Subject: Re: Intake Manifold
Message-Id:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BC8F2A.DEB2F600"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01BC8F2A.DEB2F600
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dont waste your money on a 351M, it is a slug and that is all there is =
to it. It is a Gas hog that cannot make horse power. The 400 is not much =
better. If your going to spend on something, find a pre 72 429 or 460. A =
2v 429 had over 400 ftlbs of torque. These engines will bolt up to your =
trans too. If you have allready built your 351M then Edelbrock makes a =
Performer Manifold for the 351M/400. I had a 400 with this manifold and =
a 650 dbl pumper Holly on it, and it ran very good. But when my friend =
in his stock 1970 LTD Country Squire with a 100,000 mile plus 429 blew =
the doors off my 72 Ranch with a 400 with the 4V manifold and dbl pumper =
carb and the 290 duration Cam, it was time for a change. DONT WASTE YOUR =
MONEY!!!!!!!!=20
----
From: reedg ns2.cetlink.net
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Date: Saturday, July 12, 1997 9:33 PM
Subject: Intake Manifold

I am trying to find parts to increase performance for a '78 351M
engine. Carb, intake manifold, heads and camshaft. To be honest I
haven't worked on alot of ford engines. And I haven't been able to
find much info on the 351M. Any help would he HIGHLY appreciated.


____________________________________________________________________
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



------=_NextPart_000_01BC8F2A.DEB2F600
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable





http-equiv=3DContent-Type>




Dont waste your money on a 351M, it is a slug and that is all there =
is to it.=20
It is a Gas hog that cannot make horse power. The 400 is not much =
better. If=20
your going to spend on something, find a pre 72 429 or 460. A 2v 429 had =
over=20
400 ftlbs of torque. These engines will bolt up to your trans too. If =
you have=20
allready built your 351M then Edelbrock makes a Performer Manifold for =
the=20
351M/400. I had a 400 with this manifold and a 650 dbl pumper Holly on =
it, and=20
it ran very good. But when my friend in his stock 1970 LTD Country =
Squire with a=20
100,000 mile plus 429 blew the doors off my 72 Ranch with a 400 with the =
4V=20
manifold and dbl pumper carb and the 290 duration Cam, it was time for a =
change.=20
DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!
----
From: reedg ns2.cetlink.net
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Date: Saturday, July 12, 1997 9:33 PM
Subject: Intake Manifold

I am trying to find parts to increase =
performance for a=20
'78 351M
engine. Carb, intake manifold, heads and camshaft. To be honest I
haven't worked on alot of ford engines. And I haven't been able to
find much info on the 351M. Any help would he HIGHLY appreciated.


____________________________________________________________________
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/
For help send mail with subject "HELP" to:
href=3D"mailto:fordtrucks-request lofcom.com">fordtrucks-request lofcom.c=
om
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use:
href=3D"mailto:kpayne mindspring.com">kpayne mindspring.com




------=_NextPart_000_01BC8F2A.DEB2F600--

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

Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 11:12:12 -0400
From: Kevin Kemmerer
To: "'fordtrucks lofcom.com'"
Subject: RE: Intake Manifold
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

i agree, if you want performance the 351M is a waste of time and money. =
the 400 is better. or go to a windser stroked to over 400 cubes if you =
want small block, go 460 for bigblock.

if you want to spend a little more, want a small block and want more top =
end power then supercharge a late model windser motor or build a 400 =
with a set of early 351C heads. te aftermarket supports this swap and =
it will make good bottom with a top end rush most small blocks would be =
jelous of. i know a local guy who has a set of heads for sale, but they =
aint cheap. they are however better then aftermarket windser heads and =
there really isn't anything else available for the 351M/400 motor in the =
head dept. if u want info on going this route let me know. ( i have =
bench raced this combo several times but continue to build 460s as i =
have most parts already to keep the price down.)

sleddog

ps - don't get me wrong the 351m is not a bad motor, but it really isn't =
a good platform for building 400hp or more. that is the reason the 351m =
is not supported by the aftermarket performance companies very much.

----------
From: Tim and Jolee Hann[SMTP:tjgk pacifier.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 1997 4:19 AM
To: fordtrucks lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Intake Manifold


Dont waste your money on a 351M, it is a slug and that is all there is =
to it. It is a Gas hog that cannot make horse power. The 400 is not much =
better. If your going to spend on something, find a pre 72 429 or 460. A =
2v 429 had over 400 ftlbs of torque. These engines will bolt up to your =....

---

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.