perf-list-digest Friday, January 8 1999 Volume 02 : Number 003



=======================================================================
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 - Re: 302 or 351?
Re: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
RE: FTE Perf - 385 Series Factory Pushrods
FTE Perf - Pushrods
RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
Re: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:21:38 EST
From: FLR150 AOL.COM
Subject: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

William Hart wrote: My sister's truck lost oil pressure, and by the time I
shut it down the lifters were clicking. A dealership restarted it and claimed
that the motor was "hammering" .
Well, William I'll put it to you this way. I know there is no substitute for
cubic inches, BUT on a truck that has all the emission controls and
computer...doing a swap is a PITA. I had the idea to do a change to a 5.7
myself in my '94 F150 but after finding out that you need that harnesses,
computer, oil pan, and a few other things, its just not worth it. I have spent
the money that I would have invested on the engine swap and put it into my
5.0. After a little under 2k investment I am kicking out almost 330 hp on the
dyno at 4800 rpm. I am a putting out 318 ftlb torque at 2400 rpm. Sorry but I
would have to say don't do the swap if you have to keep emissions.
JMHO,
Wayne Foy
'94 F150 Flareside Supercab
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.aol.com/index.htm
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 08:52:33 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

>dyno at 4800 rpm. I am a putting out 318 ftlb torque at 2400 rpm. Sorry but I
>would have to say don't do the swap if you have to keep emissions.


Sounds like you're making some great numbers. We are in the interest of
time and cost putting a 5.0 back into it. Also since her exhaust manifolds
are cracked I think I've talked my dad into some shortie headers as long as
I can get them to last quite a while so she doesn't have to worry about
them, so any suggestions on brands with lifetime garauntee's or ideas for
sealing them up to the motor will be appreciated. I rarely get to drive
this truck (only when its broke or after I've fixed it and am delivering it
back), so I don't get/have to put any money into the mods for it, just as
things break I try to recommend something a little nicer to replace it with.

Thanks again for hte response.

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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 07:35:01 -0800
From: "O'Connell, Dennis M"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - 385 Series Factory Pushrods

George,

I have to give you a whole hearted I AGREE here. I rebuilt my first 429
last year and had the head machined and installed big block Chevy(excuse the
term) rocker arm studs. After 4 sets of pushrods, 4 sets of rockers, and
two sets of stainless steel valves, guides, dollars, etc.. I learned my
lesson. I obviously learn slow, but I learn.

1. If someone does your valves, if your using rail rockers make sure they
clear the retainers. Check the pushrod length carefully.
2. If you go with Big Block stamped magnum roller rockers, even though they
say they fit both ford and chevy, check the push rod length carefully.
According to comp cams there is a specific way of adusting the rocker to
make these fit correctly. Two sets of pushrods here, one chrome molly.
3. Last, take the time to check valve wear after you've run it for a while.
Even though my geometry looked good initially, After running for a few
thousand miles, the stamped roller rockers were rolling onto the end of the
tips and rounded them. New valves, rockers pushrods, guides and lots of
dollars here.

So as you can see after a trail of stupidity and dollars I got it right.
Talked to
to Ford Power Train in Puyallup Washington ((253) 848-9503) and they knew
right away what my problem was. They are big block specialists and they
were extremely helpful. Final solution, Crane Gold Race roller rockers,
pushrod checker, custom pushrods from comp cams, gobs more torque and
horsepower.

Dennis(much poorer but wiser)
55 F100

P.S. This is before I joined the list!
> ----------
> From: perf-list ford-trucks.com[SMTP:perf-list ford-trucks.com]
> Reply To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 7:24 PM
> To: Ford Truck Performance List (E-mail)
> Subject: FTE Perf - 385 Series Factory Pushrods
>
> Tom Monroe's Book
>
> 68-69 8.70
> 69-72 8.67
> 73-80 8.62
>
> CJ, SCJ, Police, 460 Police
>
> 70-72 8.55
>
> 73-74 8.55
> 75-78 8.67
>
> Deck height and CC changes dictated the valve geometry. When I rebuilt my
>
> first 429 with parts from PAW, I used the wrong length and shorted the cam
>
> lift and it's durations. I knew the block's deck height, piston stroke and
>
> head CC. Like most back yard mechanics, my primary goal was to get it
> together so I could stand on it. Took me awhile to discover the valve
> train
> is the most important consideration in a quest for easy HP. Thanks to the
>
> lists and some further experience, I won't put any more money into a
> performance engine without using a measurable pushrod and ordering them
> cut
> to size.
>
> George Miller
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 11:15:23 -0500
From: am14 daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: FTE Perf - Pushrods

George Miller: Thank you very much. Dave's comment makes sense, but
something else must play a part. Also, you list the SCJ and CJ as having
the same length pushrods, and I have no doubt that they very well could be
the same length, but wasn't the 429SCJ a solid lifter setup??? I've been
led to believe that this is correct, but have no personal knowledge.

Could someone also list the various deck heights by year/type as George
listed the pushrods???
From '80 up in the trucks, are all the block heights and pushrod lengths
the same???
I know I'm full of questions, but I really need this info!!!

TIA.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.





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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:14:34 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

have them coated, something like jethot coatings. expensive - yes, but
they will last ALOT longer...wish i could afford it for my custom headers
in my pulltruck.

sleddog

- ----------
From: William S Hart[SMTP:wish iastate.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 9:52 AM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

>dyno at 4800 rpm. I am a putting out 318 ftlb torque at 2400 rpm. Sorry
but I
>would have to say don't do the swap if you have to keep emissions.


Sounds like you're making some great numbers. We are in the interest of
time and cost putting a 5.0 back into it. Also since her exhaust manifolds
are cracked I think I've talked my dad into some shortie headers as long as
I can get them to last quite a while so she doesn't have to worry about
them, so any suggestions on brands with lifetime garauntee's or ideas for
sealing them up to the motor will be appreciated. I rarely get to drive
this truck (only when its broke or after I've fixed it and am delivering it
back), so I don't get/have to put any money into the mods for it, just as
things break I try to recommend something a little nicer to replace it
with.

Thanks again for hte response.

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




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

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:16:58 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

>have them coated, something like jethot coatings. expensive - yes, but
>they will last ALOT longer...wish i could afford it for my custom headers
>in my pulltruck.
>
Any companies that do this sort of stuff ? My dad really wants to get his
manifolds for his Olds done so that they don't rust ... its kind of a show
car, so he'd like to have them looking nice, even after he drives it ...

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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 15:04:21 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

yes, lots.

jethnot is the one i know of now, but i have no address or T#.

mags are full of adds, and a net search will net results i am sure.

DIY things are available from places like jegs, summit, etc.

sleddog

- ----------
From: William S Hart[SMTP:wish iastate.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 2:16 PM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

>have them coated, something like jethot coatings. expensive - yes, but
>they will last ALOT longer...wish i could afford it for my custom headers
>in my pulltruck.
>
Any companies that do this sort of stuff ? My dad really wants to get his
manifolds for his Olds done so that they don't rust ... its kind of a show
car, so he'd like to have them looking nice, even after he drives it ...

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



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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:54:58 -0800
From: "O'Connell, Dennis M"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

Bill,

there are several companies out there that do performance coatings. The two
that I know of have websites;

Jet Hot is at WWW.Jet-Hot.com.

Another is HPC or High Performance Coatings at HPCoatings.com. I've used
HPC on an intake manifold and plan to use them for my headers. One of their
plants is in Salt Lake City.

Dennis
55F100

> ----------
> From: perf-list ford-trucks.com[SMTP:perf-list ford-trucks.com]
> Reply To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 11:16 AM
> To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?
>
> >have them coated, something like jethot coatings. expensive - yes, but
> >they will last ALOT longer...wish i could afford it for my custom headers
>
> >in my pulltruck.
> >
> Any companies that do this sort of stuff ? My dad really wants to get his
> manifolds for his Olds done so that they don't rust ... its kind of a show
> car, so he'd like to have them looking nice, even after he drives it ...
>
> Bill
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:01:27 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Re: 302 or 351?

FLR150 AOL.COM wrote:
>
> Well, William I'll put it to you this way. I know there is no substitute for
> cubic inches, BUT on a truck that has all the emission controls and
> computer...doing a swap is a PITA. I had the idea to do a change to a 5.7
> myself in my '94 F150 but after finding out that you need that harnesses,
> computer, oil pan, and a few other things, its just not worth it.

In NC there must have been that engine available and all emission
controls in place etc. I could swap my '85 2.8 carb'd engine for a much
cleaner 5.0 with FI and it would NOT pass an inspection even in a County
that doesnt require 'sniffing'.. Oddly enough I could add a 4-BBL
manifold and as long as I tapped two holes to mount an EGR valve that
wasnt functional it'd pass even though there was no longer a 'feedback'
carb or a 'real' EGR.. My only option would be to RE-title the truck as
a home-built and be exempt.. Even were I to put converters on headers
and run all the AIR tubes I'd still fail since the B-II never had dual
exhaust.

> I have spent
> the money that I would have invested on the engine swap and put it into my
> 5.0. After a little under 2k investment I am kicking out almost 330 hp on the
> dyno at 4800 rpm. I am a putting out 318 ftlb torque at 2400 rpm. Sorry but I
> would have to say don't do the swap if you have to keep emissions.

Unfortunately without lots of 'pull' somewhere that's now the only
option for vehicles built since '67 or so. Even 'approved' parts will
still cause inspectors to deny you as most dont know what's approved or
not.


There needs to be a way for the enthusiast to get a waiver; in general
we keep our vehicles in a good state of tune and I doubt our emissions
exceed those of the general idiot that drives 10,000 miles with a bad
plug wire or covers the 'check engine' light with black tape......

---

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.