perf-list-digest Monday, July 27 1998 Volume 01 : Number 042



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging
Re: FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging
Re: FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging
Re: FTE Perf - Professor? NOT!
FTE Perf - Oil Related Ping
FTE Perf - Pinging 428
Re: FTE Perf - Pinging 428
Re: FTE Perf - Pinging 428
FTE Perf - Looking for recommendations on a good oil filter

=======================================================================

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 06:18:38 EDT
From: LexRex aol.com
Subject: FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging

For 1 1/2 years, I ran it on 93 octane without problem. Recently, at 35,000
miles, it has begun pinging so I took it to the dealer, who suggested I use
lower octane. I asked him twice, and he said lower octane. He said these
engines are so well tuned that anything more than 87 causes pinging. He said
it didn't ping before because I needed a tune-up, which he performed.
I also talked to the regional service rep, who said I needed to try lower
octane.
Now I've run 5 tanks of 87 through it, and it pings more and more.
Suggestions? Is there anyone at Ford I can talk to that can cut through these
stories and get it fixed?
Thanks
Jack
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 08:58:10 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging

For 1 1/2 years, I ran it on 93 octane without problem. Recently, at
35,000 miles, it has begun pinging so I took it to the dealer, who
suggested I use lower octane. I asked him twice, and he said lower
octane. He said these engines are so well tuned that anything more than
87 causes pinging. He said it didn't ping before because I needed a
tune-up, which he performed. I also talked to the regional service rep,
who said I needed to try lower octane. Now I've run 5 tanks of 87
through it, an it pings more and more. Suggestions? Is there anyone at
Ford I can talk to that can cut through these stories and get it fixed?

Sounds like your timing is advanced somehow or another. I dont
understand tehir theory on lower octane gas??? If it pings on high test
than it will ping more with lower grade gasoline.
Chris
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 06:10:46 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - 97 Explorer pinging

Get the name/address of the FoMoCo regional rep for that dealer. Write a
detailed letter of explanation; including a concern that the continued
pinging is a symptom of detonation slowly destroying your engine, how the
dealer is ignoring the problem and the dealer's stupid gasoline
recommendation. State fear of your wife and new twin babies being stranded
at dark in the middle of a large, dangerous city. Send it via registered
mail.

George Miller


For 1 1/2 years, I ran it on 93 octane without problem. Recently, at 35,000
miles, it has begun pinging so I took it to the dealer, who suggested I use
lower octane. I asked him twice, and he said lower octane. He said these
engines are so well tuned that anything more than 87 causes pinging. He
said
it didn't ping before because I needed a tune-up, which he performed.
I also talked to the regional service rep, who said I needed to try lower
octane.
Now I've run 5 tanks of 87 through it, and it pings more and more.
Suggestions? Is there anyone at Ford I can talk to that can cut through
these
stories and get it fixed?
Thanks
Jack
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 06:23:15 -0700
From: "George"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Professor? NOT!

I've also heard that multi-viscosity oils are not good for the combustion
process and since older stock Ford engine valve seals don't have the best
rep for doing their job, would you recommend going to a single viscosity
oil?

George Miller



- -> Ok Perfessor Samuel,
- -> tell the class now.....How is oil control related to engine ping???
- ->
- -> dale c
- ->
Perfessor? Perfessor? Perfessor?
Now wait just a Guarsh Darn Minute here.
If you had spelled that Azz#ole, perhappz...

"Oil" burns at a different rate then Gasoline.
"Oil" has a different # of BTU/Pound.
If we build an engine to burn Alky we crank in a bunch of compression, and
double the amount of fuel due to the BTU's in the fuel and the Burn
characteristics. We change the Design radically for Diesel, and if we wanted
to burn oil in our engines we would start out with a diesel engine.
When we introduce Lube oil into the combustion process we are bringing in a
bunch of chemicals that should not be there. And that changes the burn rate
of the air fuel mixture basically making it an uncontrolled process. I have
been told by my betters that the oil additive packages by themselves will
cause detonation/preignition problems. I have also heard from people that I
trust that the Polymers that are used to get the multi-viscosity ratings are
really strong pingers. But mostly I have observed that Oil causes ping.
I have not done the Chemistry on this for over 20 years but simply put Oil
causes detonation/preignition problems, and that is enough for me to go to
great lengths to keep it out of the Combustion Processes.

Not Professor kauz I aint got a degree from nowhere but Hard Knock U.
The only letters after my name are 'SOB'.
Just an SOB that can't afford to have other people build my toys, and tend
to get more then a little PO'd when some jurk takes my $$$ and delivers
znada for it, and I fall for it.
This "attitude" causes one to go in search of the truth to avoid the sucker
factor.
If along the way I can help another, or dispel some of the pure Bull S#it
out there, I have a self imposed obligation to do so. It's pay back to all
of the people that have helped me over the last 2 plus decades.
The saying goes:
"You never know what you know, until you try to explain it to another."
Attempting to explain some subject and not perpetuate more BS is good for
finding the limits of my knowledge and causing me to go in search of the
parts that I don't know or understand.
Please not professor.
Now I have to go and read a bunch of chemistry!
CS


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 12:40:06 -0500
From: "Dale and Donna Carmine"
Subject: FTE Perf - Oil Related Ping

>When we introduce Lube oil into the combustion process we are bringing in a
>bunch of chemicals that should not be there. And that changes the burn rate
>of the air fuel mixture basically making it an uncontrolled process.

Hmmm, food for thought. I don't think that I have ever read anything on
this subject. My assumption has always been that oil burning pingers were
caused because burning the oil left deposits in the combustion chambers
effectively raising the CR and creating hot spots. I haven't torn down
enough engines myself to know for sure one way or the other.
Regardless, the results are the same............if you are burning alot of
oil you can't expect top performance.

I thought Perfessor was an appropriate term.........after all this is the
"Perf" list! Think of it as an honorary degree earned through lots of
broken parts and skinned knuckles!

later,
dale c



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 19:35:20 -0700
From: "J.Scott Harkema"
Subject: FTE Perf - Pinging 428

When I put my 428 together the only pistons I could find were
10.5 to 1. I had them dished, but not enough.Damn thing pings,
especially when towing.My timing is at 10 int. 25 mech. 35 vac.
I was thinking of trying thicker head gaskets,or maybe some
different heads. Any ideas?
TIA Scott
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 22:43:09 -0400
From: "John Miller"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Pinging 428

recurving the dist. comes to mind. Get rid of some of the mechanical
advance or at least have it come in at a higher rpm (you didn't say when it
comes in, I am assuming early). reduce vacuum advance a little, then play
with initial timing before doing anything more major. Check to see what
your jetting is, maybe you have some improvements to make there. Just some
ideas, hope they help.

John Miller
- ----------
> From: J.Scott Harkema
>
> When I put my 428 together the only pistons I could find were
> 10.5 to 1. I had them dished, but not enough.Damn thing pings,
> especially when towing.My timing is at 10 int. 25 mech. 35 vac.
> I was thinking of trying thicker head gaskets,or maybe some
> different heads. Any ideas?
> TIA Scott

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 22:06:44 -0700
From: sdelanty sonic.net
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Pinging 428

At 07:35 PM 7/26/98 -0700, you wrote:
>When I put my 428 together the only pistons I could find were
>10.5 to 1. I had them dished, but not enough.Damn thing pings,
>especially when towing.My timing is at 10 int. 25 mech. 35 vac.
>I was thinking of trying thicker head gaskets,or maybe some
>different heads. Any ideas?

Like John said, some creative distributor recurving may help.
The stock FE distributors I've played with have *way* too much
vacuum advance, and an awfull lot of centrifugal advance also.
I'm in the process of trying to get the distributor on my FE390
dialed in better. I'm down to less than 15 degrees of mech advance
and about 10 degrees of vac advance (with about 16 degrees of initial
advance)
I just recently started fiddling with it, so I don't know what "ideal" is
yet, but so far I like it better than the stock setup.
I'm gonna cut back on the vac advance some more for my next step...

Perhaps a good water injection setup is in order?
I used to use one on high compression air-cooled motors with very
good results...

Steve
Homepage: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.sonic.net/~sdelanty

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 00:00:10 -0700
From: Andrew Chung
Subject: FTE Perf - Looking for recommendations on a good oil filter

I would like to ask people for their opinions on which oil filter is good.
I've looked at Fram, K&N, Motocraft, System 1, Oberg, Amsoil, etc. I
don't have all the stats for these filters, and many make a lot of claims
of this or that. If anyone has any stats on the Fram, K&N, and Motocraft
filters it would be appreciated. I've also looked at reusable filters and
also other oil systems which I don't have much experience with. Has anyone
tried System 1, Tattletale from Racor, or Oberg filters? I also found an
intersteing oil product at: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.trabold.com/ which claims to be
able to filter oil REALLY well. I'd like to see how reputable this company
is. Any comments will be appreciated. Thanks!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html....


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.