perf-list-digest Saturday, February 27 1999 Volume 02 : Number 051



=======================================================================
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:

RE: FTE Perf - Unilite
FTE Perf - leak down tester
FTE Perf - weeze boxes
Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes
RE: FTE Perf - weeze boxes
Re: FTE Perf - leak down tester
FTE Perf - RE: FTE 61-79 - strokes
Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes
Re: FTE Perf - leak down tester
Re: FTE Perf - Unilite
Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:27:22 -0600
From: "Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Unilite

Funny, I had a 383 Charger back then that I put a Mallory dual point in.
Had it in there for 8 trouble-free years. It was better than the single
point stock unit, and so much better than that joke that I had in my '69
Triumph! Don't know about Mallory's electronic systems--heard of a lot of
problems, but have no experience with them.

Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past. Guess
we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!

Dave.

- -----Original Message-----
From: Tim Turner [mailto:manic1 bellsouth.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 1999 9:10 PM
To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Unilite




Sleddog wrote:
>
> me and my friends also have had problems with mallory. but, the module in
> a MSD destributer is like less than 20 bucks, and 10 minutes of work.
>

In the early 80's when I had the Road Runner I tried a Mallory dual
point distributor... 2 weeks later I trashed it and converted to stock
Mopar electronic ignition. Maybe they've improved since then, but it
left a bad taste in my mouth to this day.

TT
== 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: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:04:49 -0800
From: "Tom Ewing"
Subject: FTE Perf - leak down tester

Could someone steer me in the direction of a site where
I might find instructions on how to use and evaluate the
results of a "leak down tester" tool? Or if you'd like
to do that yourself that would be fine too.
Thanks Tom

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:14:05 -0500
From: Sleddog
Subject: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

wheeze boxes?? 200+ horse from a 4cyl is a wheeze box? I had some fast 4
cyl mopars. early to mid 80's was taking the new mustangs and crumaros in
stoplight to stoplights. then, the 8 cyl. finally got some power....

each company has good/bad cars/trucks. i personally like them all, except
the me-too cars like any popular chevy.

sleddog

- ----------
From: Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)[SMTP:baldwin ti.com]
Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 11:27 AM
To: 'perf-list ford-trucks.com'
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Unilite

Funny, I had a 383 Charger back then that I put a Mallory dual point in.
Had it in there for 8 trouble-free years. It was better than the single
point stock unit, and so much better than that joke that I had in my '69
Triumph! Don't know about Mallory's electronic systems--heard of a lot of
problems, but have no experience with them.

Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past. Guess
we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!

Dave.


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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:54:58 -0500
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

Sleddog wrote:
>
> wheeze boxes?? 200+ horse from a 4cyl is a wheeze box? I had some fast 4
> cyl mopars. early to mid 80's was taking the new mustangs and crumaros in
> stoplight to stoplights. then, the 8 cyl. finally got some power....
>
> each company has good/bad cars/trucks. i personally like them all, except
> the me-too cars like any popular chevy.
>
> sleddog
>
> ----------
> From: Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)[SMTP:baldwin ti.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 11:27 AM
> To: 'perf-list ford-trucks.com'
> Subject: RE: FTE Perf - Unilite
>
> Funny, I had a 383 Charger back then that I put a Mallory dual point in.
> Had it in there for 8 trouble-free years. It was better than the single
> point stock unit, and so much better than that joke that I had in my '69
> Triumph! Don't know about Mallory's electronic systems--heard of a lot of
> problems, but have no experience with them.
>
> Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past. Guess
> we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
> Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!
>
> Dave.

Speaking of that me too idea. Did you hear the reviews on the
Escalade...That is exactly what was said...If Lincoln can have we can
too....and it was a sorry example...Car and Driver TV! Looks like Chevy
has another loser in the line up!
Wait until the Excursion debuts then Ford will be out selling the
Suburban also.
Chris
94 Lightning #381
NLOC #238
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:03:16 -0700
From: "Miska, Richard L (Rick)"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

Geeze guys, I go away for lunch, get back, and everybody is crabbin!!! I
have an idea, lets talk about Ford-Trucks and why we like them, not why we
dislike other makes/models. Thats not why I am here. Colorado Rick

p.s. I have New Intreped, Model t, 76 crew ford, Bronco, and a Chevelle, so
I am not stuck on any particular make, but partial to FORDS.



wheeze boxes?? 200+ horse from a 4cyl is a wheeze box? I had some fast 4
cyl mopars. early to mid 80's was taking the new mustangs and crumaros in
stoplight to stoplights. then, the 8 cyl. finally got some power....

each company has good/bad cars/trucks. i personally like them all, except
the me-too cars like any popular chevy.

sleddog


Funny, I had a 383 Charger back then that I put a Mallory dual point in.
Had it in there for 8 trouble-free years. It was better than the single
point stock unit, and so much better than that joke that I had in my '69
Triumph! Don't know about Mallory's electronic systems--heard of a lot of
problems, but have no experience with them.

Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past. Guess
we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!

Dave.


== 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: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:42:06 -0600
From: "Robert F. Davis"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - leak down tester

At 08:04 AM 02/26/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Could someone steer me in the direction of a site where
>I might find instructions on how to use and evaluate the
>results of a "leak down tester" tool? Or if you'd like
>to do that yourself that would be fine too.
>Thanks Tom

Tom,
Leak down tester is so much better than a compression gauge. Glad you're
using one.
*Generally anything less than 25%-30% leakage is "tunable", that is you can
make that cylinder
contribute to the engine's power output.
**Personally when my engines approach 20% I start looking at doing repairs
(valve job, overhaul, etc)
***A good engine will stay in the realm of 8%-12%.
****Racers (most ) look for less than 5%.
*****Serious (big buck)racers look for 1%-2%(practically umobtainable on a
street engine)
I put a 460 together once with used (but still good) set of rings on one
bank & NEW rings on the other bank.
After firing it up and warming it, the used set had 6%-10% leakage, the
new set had 5%-6% leakage.
After about a thousand miles on the engine, both banks were the SAME, about
5%-7% leakage.
Don't misinterpret that as a recommendation for used rings because it
ain't. The used rings had only a few hours of drag racing on them. I still
have that 460 today and it has almost 40K mi. on it.

For what it's worth,
"Beater" Bob Davis


>== 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: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:51:42 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE Perf - RE: FTE 61-79 - strokes

>400M goes take a good look at the configuration of that motor, you have:
>1. The longest stroke of any readily available Ford.


Well I finally broke down after having seen this claimed about several
engines and power from the new ones and all that jazz. At any rate, here's
what I found for stroke length of Ford Motors, some from www.wrljet.com
some from carpoint.msn.com

Here's what I got from wrljet.com
335series4.00, 3.50(400, 351M/C)
FE3.98, 3.78, 3.50, 3.30(410/428, 390, 360/352, 332)
385series3.85, 3.59(460, 429)
Windsor SB3.50, 3.00, 2.87(351, 302, 289/260)

And for the new motors we come up with :

4.63.54
5.44.16
6.8(V10)4.16
PSD4.18

In the end we whine about low torque numbers from the modular motors ...
its not because of the stroke!


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 16:40:33 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

>Speaking of that me too idea. Did you hear the reviews on the
>Escalade...That is exactly what was said...If Lincoln can have we can
>too....and it was a sorry example...Car and Driver TV! Looks like Chevy
>has another loser in the line up

Yeah I was laughin pretty hard when I saw the specs, seems like its a touch
longer than the Navigator and costs a bit more, other than that, its lesser
in every dept ... that its supposed to be, greater in those its not
(weight, speed ...)

>Wait until the Excursion debuts then Ford will be out selling the
>Suburban also.

That was today! Should be out there on the web somewhere, just didn't have
time to look for it !


Just my 2cents

wish

Links http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/links.html
'73 1/2 ton 4x4 Ford http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/truck.html
'96 Mustang GT http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/mustang.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 99 16:43:10 PST
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - leak down tester

> Leak down tester is so much better than a compression gauge. Glad you're
> using one.

What exactly is a leak-down tester? How does it work and how is it used?

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 23:07:02 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Unilite

"Baldwin, Dave (CPCP Design)" wrote:
>
> Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past.

But we were all Non *G*reat *M*istake people. Brothers under the skin.

> Guess we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
> Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!

My thoughts exactly. After Mopar pulled the 'super bird' outta NASCAR it
went down hill. Lee might have saved 'em from going bust but there was
no favors done to the enthusiasts beyond the hot-rodded Omnis.
Woo-Hoo! A kick in the pants, but an old service writer I worked with
has a nylon skull thanks to a 120+MPH crash with a GLH. Still have a
down vest with Mopar/Road Runner patches all over it but it's more a
closet hanger than anything else now. Thankfully Ford has maintained
some touch with racing and that's why I'm now proud to be blue.
(Arrgh! Cool T-shirt at the dealer about racing blue Fords but only in
XL and my 145 Lb frame cant support that!.. Shouldnt have been surprised
though; if they never have the parts I need in stock then why would they
have any clothing I might want in stock?)

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:22:06 -0800 (PST)
From: canzus seanet.com
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - weeze boxes

At 03:14 PM 26:2:99 -0500, you wrote:
>wheeze boxes?? 200+ horse from a 4cyl is a wheeze box? I had some fast 4
>cyl mopars. early to mid 80's was taking the new mustangs and crumaros in
>stoplight to stoplights. then, the 8 cyl. finally got some power....
>
>each company has good/bad cars/trucks. i personally like them all, except
>the me-too cars like any popular chevy.
>
>sleddog
>
8

>Noticed that a few people on this list have had mopars in the past. Guess
>we had to move to Ford when Chrysler started making wheeze-boxes.
>Personally, I'd rather have anything than a Chevy!
>
>Dave.

Dave man, havent you been to the digs lately? When you see "wheeze box"
1.8L engines running in the mid 10's, your attitude tends to change, as a side
note, I built my wife (she was the girlfriend at the time) a 2L Ford engine for
her '73 Capri, it dynoed in at 135HP, before I bolted the turbo to it. She used
to go out hunting the "Stop Light Racers", and more often than not, beat them....

---

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.