|
|
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 To: perf-list digest users Reply-to: perf-list 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 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 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 Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 1:02 PM To: perf-list 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" > > 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 >the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the >message. ========================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to: listar the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the message. ------------------------------ From: "wish" 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 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 Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 7:35 AM To: perf-list 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 Subject: Re: Smoking dirt (Not drug related! Sleddog > 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 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" 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" 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 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 << 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" 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 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" 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: listar >the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the >message. > ________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 00 19:19:25 EDT From: Tim Turner Subject: Re: [Moonshine & brewing am14 > 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: canzus Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 18:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Moonshine At 08:56 AM 26:04:2000 -0400, am14 >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: canzus 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, JUMPINFORD >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 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 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 > 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 > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 7:35 AM > To: perf-list > 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: > listar > 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 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: am14 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: JUMPINFORD 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-list If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send an email to: listar 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 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.
|