Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages
contained in these archives without consent from the respective
author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on
any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by
individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors.

Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list perf-list); Thu, 27 Apr 2000 23:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 23:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server ford-trucks.com>
To: perf-list digest users ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: perf-list Digest V2000 #55
Precedence: bulk

==========================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck Mailing List

Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com

To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
message.
==========================================================

------------------------------------
perf-list Digest Wed, 26 Apr 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 055

In This Issue:
Re: [Re: Uncle Jesse]
Re: FE Heads
Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
Re: Smoking dirt (Not drug related! )
Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
Re: Moonshine
Re: [C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)]
Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
Re: Moonshine
Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
Re: Moonshine
Re: [Moonshine & brewing
Re: Moonshine
Re: [C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)]
Re: [Re: Moonshine]
Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
ADMIN: Server problems
E4OD
I need your Wisdom!

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

From: Greg Carter entrust.com>
Subject: Re: [Re: Uncle Jesse]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:53:59 -0400

Well if you read the article you will see that each point he made is either
already made on the page or he has misinterpreted the reason for adding the
chemical. Diesel fuel was suggested as a substitute for a 'cleaner', not as
an octane booster, and at 1.5 oz per TANK full of gas. As already noted on
the page Methanol is corrosive. He has over simplified the energy ratings
of gas and alcohol. Alcohol has other properties that allow it to work
better in higher compression engines. If you want to read more go to
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.turbofast.com.au/racefuel.html .

BTW I haven't tried these myself, and make no claim. If anyone is going to
try it I would try to do a little more research into the ingredients of
common octane boosters.

Greg Carter
Entrust Technologies - http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.entrust.com
http://www.ford-trucks.com/articles/buildup/dana60.html


-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Dean [mailto:jordansdean yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 1:02 PM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [perf-list] Re: [Re: Uncle Jesse]


Ok, I forwarded that link to the octane stuff to a different list and
here's a VERY knowledgable response.
I'll go a little bit further, and say that a bunch of stuff this page lists
is bad advice...
-If you wanna add Toluene (or especially Xylene) to your gas as an octane
booster- hey great, nothing wrong with that. In fact, when the chemical
prices get crappy, refiners will often blend Xylene into 93 Premium.
-Adding methanol to your gas would be a really bad idea for many reasons,
not the least of which is its corrosive nature on fuel system parts.
-Adding ethanol wouldn't hurt much, but it wouldn't be really smart either.
Where the "energy content" of gasoline runs 45-47 MJ/kg, ethanol is ~25
MJ/kg. You figure the rest out ;)
-Ditto for MTBE, but not quite as bad.
-I would not add any kerosene to my gas. Anybody wanna guess the octane
ratings of the components that make up kerosene? How about -40 to -90...
Other than that, it seemed OK ;) ;)
Later
Keith





At 09:56 PM 4/25/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>"Brad DeFore" computerlogic.com> wrote:
> > Any out there that could verify if and what problems might develop and
or
> > parts that would tend to deteriorate when using the mixtures as
suggested
>at
> > this site.
>
>Other than the MTBE I wouldn't. Re-read the disclaimer at the top of the
>page. Most if not all of the chemicals mentioned aren't really compatible
>with the fuel system in the long run. I may be mistaken but didn't the EPA
>recently decide MTBE should be removed from gasoline also? Isopropyl
alcohol
>is usually diluted with water so be sure you get it 'pure' as well.
>
>
> > I have most of this stuff lying round the house already and
> > thought I'd mix up a batch.
>
>You have MTBE lying around? Wow! :-)
>
> > I'm wondering about the ox sensor and the other
> > "sensitive" things on it. Will they be adversely affected? Long term
> > problems?
>
>Corrosivity of the components would be the long term problem; for a few
blasts
>down the strip go for it, but I wouldn't suggest a regular diet of it. If
you
>wanted to run it often I'd suggest changing the components over to 'alcohol
>racing' parts. Also during the right conditions MTBE can glaze a plug's
>insulator nose (oops.. that's MMT.. could be wrong here. hard to keep
track
>of all the changes to gas lately.)
>
>Tim
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webmail.netscape.com.
>==========================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
>the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
>message.


==========================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
message.

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

From: "wish" ford-trucks.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 19:17:57 GMT
Subject: Re: FE Heads

>Tracy, I looked in Steve Christs' book and according to him those are the
>std. 360-390 head for 68; but also used on 428's with air injection. That
>428 application may be why they have the dual bolt pattern ?

The dual bolt pattern is for the Fairlane/Mustang/Cougar bodies, they couldn't
use the full size manifolds and had issues with clearance on the inner fenders,
so they put the off-set bolt pattern on there and when full size cars got the
GT motor, they got the dual pattern head still

Just my $.02
wish

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish

Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com

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

From: Sleddog epix.net>
Subject: Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 16:17:20 -0400

It might seem that way, but the more a converter slips, the more heat it
generates. That heat has to come from someplace - the engine's crank.
More power=more slip. more slip=more heat. therefore, more power in=more
power lost. It is a percentage of input power, and therefore the total
will be different for different levels of power.
Kevin

----------
From: shane san miguel[SMTP:v8pinto yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 7:35 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: [perf-list] Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)

I don't believe the power level of the motor has
anything to do with the consumption of the trans.
Friction is friction, no matter what is spinning it.
The % consumption would be less with a higher output
motor though...

Shane





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

Date: 26 Apr 00 18:59:02 EDT
From: Tim Turner netscape.net>
Subject: Re: Smoking dirt (Not drug related! )

Sleddog epix.net> wrote:
> Trust me, you can squeal tires on dirt. not as much as they did, but I have
done it many times.

True.. and if there's enough rock/root content you can get a pretty good smoke
cloud; done it quite a few times after a bad day at work. But I cheat and
hold the brake when I'm doing it... I don't get much squeal out of the cheap
tires though. (About as noisy as being stuck on ice.)

Tim

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webmail.netscape.com.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 01:33:11 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)



> It might seem that way, but the more a converter slips, the more heat it
> generates. That heat has to come from someplace - the engine's crank.
> More power=more slip. more slip=more heat. therefore, more power in=more
> power lost. It is a percentage of input power, and therefore the total
> will be different for different levels of power.

My thoughts exactly, if you have brute torque you can make the converter
slip much more, hence more heat. Also the rpm matters, the slower you
turn the TC the more it slips. That's why it doesn't make too much sense
putting a huge overdrive on a auto with no lock. You'll loose in the TC
instead of in the motor.

Also 63 hp = 40 kW .. that is a tremendous amount of heat generated! It's
like having 20 electric heaters on. Then
again I can attest to the fact that the C6 DOES generate a lot of heat..


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

From: "James Steele" hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Moonshine
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:27:03 CDT


>
>Heh, I've got a friend whose an officer in another county, I'll ask her :)
>
>

Don't forget to check with your regional office of the Bureau of ALCOHOL,
Tobacco and Firearms (the friendly folks who brought us WACO).
________________________________________________________________________


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

From: "James Steele" hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:35:07 CDT




>
>Or you could come up with a way of using a C-6 and a standard clutch. Now
>THAT would be something cool. I think this is actually possible with
>chrysler, never seen it myself, but my uncle said its a drag racing system
>they nicknamed "ClutchFlite" Id sure like to see it, but man, talk about
>a
>nasty tranny. Seemless shifts, but instant power on demand with the
>clutch.
>

There used to be a company which offered this conversion on some GM
transmissions. Can't remember the name, but I distinctly remember seeing an
El Camino in one of the hot rod magazines, probably either Super Chevy or
Popular Hot Rodding, which gave some information. As I recall, you had to
use the clutch to downshift, but upshifts were done automatically. If I can
find more info, I post it later.
________________________________________________________________________


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

From: JUMPINFORD aol.com
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 19:36:11 EDT
Subject: Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)

In a message dated 4/26/00 3:33:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, yl dds.nl writes:

<< Also 63 hp = 40 kW .. that is a tremendous amount of heat generated! It's
like having 20 electric heaters on. Then
again I can attest to the fact that the C6 DOES generate a lot of heat.. >>

I watched a pastic Gojo tub melt to the floor pan of an F-350 at work thats
used for haulin a backhoe. True Testament to synthetic trans fluid.

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety"

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

From: "James Steele" hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Moonshine
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:37:02 CDT




>>Careful, I've heard that this can lead to probable cause, which means they
>can book ya right there till they find out you dont even own one.
>
No, that's not probable cause to arrest you, but you can expect to come
under some scrutiny and "investigation".
________________________________________________________________________


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

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 01:47:41 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Bas van der Veer dds.nl>
Subject: Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)

>
> I watched a pastic Gojo tub melt to the floor pan of an F-350 at work thats
> used for haulin a backhoe. True Testament to synthetic trans fluid.

I put a huge cooler on my tranny. Now the stock tranny cooler inside the
radiator helps cooling the engine :-) not recommendable when you live in
a real cold climate though, you'd need a thermostat.



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

From: "James Steele" hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Moonshine
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:22:48 CDT

No, you can't. Manufacturing corn whiskey (moonshine)is illegal under state
and federal law. The basis is failure to pay the tax, hence prosecution by
Revenue Agents, hence "revenoors".

IF, and only AFTER, you get a permit, you may be able to manufacture, IF you
render the alcohol useless for human consumption (which requires specific
mixtures of toxic additives, all described and prescribed by regulations)
you may be able to produce it for use as fuel. But you can expect to be
under observation and subject to periodic inspections of the manufacturing
premises. It's not worth the trouble for an individual.

Remember, this is what got the Dukes in trouble in the beginning. That's
why they were on probation, which was obtained at the cost of Uncle Jesse's
solemn promise to the Feds that he would never again make 'shine.

>
>I'm not absolutely sure of this, but I think I'm right. You can make
>moonshine in any amount you want to, you just can't sell it.. I may be off
>in left field someplace, but I seem to remember that. Check with your
>local law enforcememt agencies.. Ask them point blank if you can
>own/operate a still without breaking the law...
>
>Azie Magnusson
>Ardmore, Al
>
>
>==========================================================
>To unsubscribe, send email to: listarford-trucks.com with
>the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
>message.
>

________________________________________________________________________


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

Date: 26 Apr 00 19:19:25 EDT
From: Tim Turner netscape.net>
Subject: Re: [Moonshine & brewing

am14daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
> Wish writes: >> Stop that, 'cause I would also think I could make it
> undrinkable and not be
> violating any laws .....<<
>
> I'm not absolutely sure of this, but I think I'm right. You can make
> moonshine in any amount you want to, you just can't sell it.. I may be off
> in left field someplace, but I seem to remember that. Check with your
> local law enforcememt agencies.. Ask them point blank if you can
> own/operate a still without breaking the law...

It's been a number of years now but when I was brewing my own beer there was a
finite amount per year that one could make. As I recall it was high enough to
keep all but the total sot happy. The biggest thing is DO NOT sell what you
make especially if that product is liquor.

Just a couple pointers about distillation.. All equipment is readily available
from places like Edmund's scientific, if you have ANY intent to 'sample' your
product avoid using rubber stoppers as it imparts a very unpleasant taste and
with close monitoring of temperature expect about 140-160 Proof. There are
ways to increase the content such as chilling to 32F and dropping in ice to
freeze out more water etc. etc.

Good beer is easy to make at home, but my results for vodka and whiskey did
not fare as well.. Not much demand for rubber liquors. ;-)

Tim

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webmail.netscape.com.

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

From: canzusseanet.com
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Moonshine

At 08:56 AM 26:04:2000 -0400, am14daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
>Wish writes: >> Stop that, 'cause I would also think I could make it
>undrinkable and not be
>violating any laws .....<<
>
>I'm not absolutely sure of this, but I think I'm right. You can make
>moonshine in any amount you want to, you just can't sell it.. I may be off
>in left field someplace, but I seem to remember that.

I maybe wrong, but I remember there being a Federal Law that
states that you can produce a certian amount of moonshine for
use as fuel, I also remember that there was (is?) a group in CA
that produced such a mix for their own vehicles. They were (are?)
called Alcoholics Unanimous...

>Check with your
>local law enforcememt agencies.. Ask them point blank if you can
>own/operate a still without breaking the law...

Very good advice none-the-less...

Steve & the Rockette
68 F100, 390cid, FMX
63 F100, 292cid, 3speed
72 Capri 2000, hers
73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in.....
73 MGB GT, Our Toy
94 SHO, SWMBO's
98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine....


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

From: canzusseanet.com
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)]

At 10:36 AM 26:04:2000 EDT, JUMPINFORDaol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 4/25/00 5:36:22 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>
>Or you could come up with a way of using a C-6 and a standard clutch. Now
>THAT would be something cool. I think this is actually possible with
>chrysler, never seen it myself, but my uncle said its a drag racing system
>they nicknamed "ClutchFlite" Id sure like to see it, but man, talk about a
>nasty tranny. Seemless shifts, but instant power on demand with the clutch.

I don't know about seemless shifts with a ClutchFlight, last one I rode
in seemed to shift really brutally...Just think about a strip kitted C6
shifted at 6500rpm, thats what a ClutchFlight shifts like....

Steve & the Rockette
68 F100, 390cid, FMX
63 F100, 292cid, 3speed
72 Capri 2000, hers
73 Capri 2600,tube frame going in.....
73 MGB GT, Our Toy
94 SHO, SWMBO's
98 Contour SVT, Mine, Mine, All Mine....


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

Date: 26 Apr 00 22:57:53 EDT
From: Tim Turner netscape.net>
Subject: Re: [Re: Moonshine]


Poked around a bunch and didn't find the laws concerning 'personal use'; you
can try your luck on the BATF website at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.atf.treas.gov/ lots of
fascinating stuff there if you like legaleese... I sent an e-mail with the
direct question of how much an individual was allowed to make; hopefully will
be replied to in a timely manner. If I disappear... well I guess they came
here and found things they didn't like. (Honest Ms Reno; that pack of Camel
Wides had a NC tax stamp on it when I bought it!.. Noooooo dont bring in the
SWAT team! Oh &*%(! that's the guy that grabbed Elian.. I'll be good! I
promise!)

Tim

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://webmail.netscape.com.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 11:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: shane san miguel yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: C6 with locking torque converter? (fwd)

True. I hadn't looked at it that way.

Let's see, something about lies, lies, and statistics?

har har har.
Shane


--- Sleddog epix.net> wrote:
> It might seem that way, but the more a converter
> slips, the more heat it
> generates. That heat has to come from someplace -
> the engine's crank.
> More power=more slip. more slip=more heat.
> therefore, more power in=more
> power lost. It is a percentage of input power, and
> therefore the total
> will be different for different levels of power.
> Kevin
>
> ----------
> From: shane san miguel[SMTP:v8pintoyahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 7:35 AM
> To: perf-listford-trucks.com
> Subject: [perf-list] Re: C6 with locking torque
> converter? (fwd)
>
> I don't believe the power level of the motor has
> anything to do with the consumption of the trans.
> Friction is friction, no matter what is spinning it.
> The % consumption would be less with a higher output
> motor though...
>
> Shane
>
>
>
>
>
==========================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to:
> listarford-trucks.com with
> the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject
> of the
> message.
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online and get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://im.yahoo.com/

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

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 15:05:58 -0400
From: Ken Payne ford-trucks.com>
Subject: ADMIN: Server problems

The server was down for an undetermined period of time. The log
directory filled up on the system and caused all services which
use log files to stop (mail, web, ftp, etc.). The situation has
been corrected and safeguards put into place to prevent future
occurances. I've been out of commission with a stomach flu for
the past two days and was not aware of the problem until this
afternoon.

Ken Payne
Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts



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

From: am14daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: E4OD
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 09:12:34 -0400

Bas writes: >>Also, do they have the same bellhousing as the 351M? Do the
late model
460's still have the same bellhousing? Are they much different than the
earlier ones?<<

The 460's of today have the same bellhousing bolt pattern as the 1st
460/429 and the 351M/400. The very 1st year of production of the 400 had
the smallblock(302) bolt pattern I'm told, but I've never actually seen one
of them.

I am not sure of what engines the E4OD is offered behind, but if it is from
a 460, then it will bolt to your 351M. If it is from anyother engine
family, I do not know.

Azie Magnusson
Ardmore, Al


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

From: JUMPINFORDaol.com
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 00:03:33 EDT
Subject: I need your Wisdom!

Ok folks, here it is. I just finished searching the archives, and EVERY
SINGLE person that has done a 460 4speed combo has done it differently. Some
machine down 460 flywheels to fit in 400 bellhousings, some have flywheels
redrilled to work with different pressure plates, some have done stuff that
seems to wierd even for me. So here it is. the C-6 in Tweety died today,
dumped all its oil out the bellhousing. I have acquired the parts I thought
necessary, they list as follows:

Pedal assembly & clutch linkage from a 78 Bronco
Bellhousing for a 400 from said Bronco
360 Flywheel, freshly surfaced, with a new ring gear.
360 pressure plate and clutch disk
Warn T-18
the long forward driveshaft
manual tranny steering column
floor pan for a manual

I dont have the pilot bushing, or the throwout bearing yet. I assume a 400
T/O bushing will work, but I am lost as to the pilot bushing, and whether or
not I'll even be able to bolt it all together. Im lookin in your direction
Azie, but anyone else with the right info, I need ya. If I cant make this
work, Im afraid to say Tweety is going to have to be sold for parts, so I can
get something that goes. I cant have this truck down, as it is how I get to
work and back. I dont wanna think about that, as Ive put a lot of hard work
into it, and I do NOT want something so stupid as a pilot bushing problem to
get in the way.

Thanks

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety" VERY SICK

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

End of perf-list Digest V2000 #55
*********************************
----------------------------------------------------------
Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck List

Send posts to perf-listford-trucks.com

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing
list, send an email to:

listarford-trucks.com

with the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of
the message.

Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.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 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.