perf-list-digest Saturday, March 27 1999 Volume 02 : Number 068



=======================================================================
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 - 429 Headers
RE: FTE Perf - 429 Headers
Re: FTE Perf - Re: 4.6 suggestions
FTE Perf - 390 buidup
FTE Perf - Installing a 5.0 V8 in a 1986 Bronco II 4WD
Re: FTE Perf - Installing a 5.0 V8 in a 1986 Bronco II 4WD
FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.
Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 06:58:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Chuck Stephens
Subject: FTE Perf - 429 Headers

When you get a chance will you post the part number for the headers? The
last I talked to Summit they just told me about some for a 69-73 2wd
Pickup. I didnt think that I could make them work. When I put in the
subframe I built up motor mount "towers" onto the Camaro crossmember. If
they would clear them I could make them work. Oh, and they must drop
down low enough to make it under the truck! How much do yours drop from
where they bolt to the heads and how far back do they run?
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 07:44:25 -0800
From: "O'Connell, Dennis M"
Subject: RE: FTE Perf - 429 Headers

I'll measure the drop and get back to you when I return to work on
Wednesday.

Denny

> ----------
> From: perf-list ford-trucks.com[SMTP:perf-list ford-trucks.com]
> Reply To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 1999 6:58 AM
> To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
> Subject: FTE Perf - 429 Headers
>
>
> When you get a chance will you post the part number for the headers? The
> last I talked to Summit they just told me about some for a 69-73 2wd
> Pickup. I didnt think that I could make them work. When I put in the
> subframe I built up motor mount "towers" onto the Camaro crossmember. If
> they would clear them I could make them work. Oh, and they must drop
> down low enough to make it under the truck! How much do yours drop from
> where they bolt to the heads and how far back do they run?
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> >
> == 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 Mar 1999 08:15:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Ryan Reinke
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Re: 4.6 suggestions

I realize the limitations the 4.6 has. I mentioned in
my first note that I was in a bind and purchased the
truck by sight only. In its defense it is a GREAT
engine... once the RPMs reach a grand or higher!

I am headed back to the farm this weekend and will
weigh it to see how heavy the truck is. It doesn't
feel/handle like the heavier old trucks, but that could
be due to better design and suspension.




- --- Garr&Pam wrote:
> Ryan Reinke wrote:
> Does anyone else on the list have a 4.6 engine? I
> seem
> to be coming up short on finding bolt-on performance
> parts.
>
> A cherry bomb, exhaust tips and a K & N have helped
a
> lot, but it drags getting off the line. I want to
be
> careful with my mods since I don't want to sacrifice
> my
> mpg - currently anywhere from 15 to 18!
>
>
> Dont take this personally but get a pushrod
> motor!!!!!!!!
>
> Check with some of the Mustang aftermarket companies
> they should be able
> to help you. But if you looking for off the line
> power(torque) you are
> going to need considerable mods for that little
> engine in that heavy
> truck!
> Chris
> 94 Lightning #381
> NLOC #238
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
> http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?

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

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 16:18:30 -0600
From: William S Hart
Subject: FTE Perf - 390 buidup

Well, I know a few people have been interested in my rebuild. I"m sorry to
say there are no pictures on the page yet (haven't used up all the film
yet, maybe this weekend), but I have LOTS of text, and have a bunch of
information about the parts found and just generally what has happened in
putting it together. Was hopin you guys could look over it and offer
suggestions for other stuff to include, or things you want more info on.
If I've done something totall wrong and its gonna blow up, I wanna know
that before I break it.

Oh, I suppose you need the link too since I don't have any off of my main
pages yet ...
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~wish/rebuild.html


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 Mar 1999 19:55:29 PST
From: "Thomas Caswell"
Subject: FTE Perf - Installing a 5.0 V8 in a 1986 Bronco II 4WD

I have a 1986 Bronco II 4WD which has over 150,000 miles on the
odometer. It still runs pretty well, but I think that I may be living on
borrowed time. Because the body and frame are still in such excellent
condition, I am considering installing a 5.0 V8 in it when this engine
finally dies.

I have a few questions about this procedure, and if you have any
experience with this swap or a similar one, I look forward to your
feedback!

1. Is it worthwhile to seek out a late-model 5.0 with EFI and emissions
components, or is the added complexity more trouble than it's worth?

2. From what I have read, I will need to replace my stock automatic
(w/OD) transmission, with a C4 which will need some aftermarket
modifications in the area of the bell housing, tail housing, flywheel,
and possibly the torque convertor. What is the optimal automatic
transmission set-up for this application?

3. My Bronco II has the electronic 4WD system. Will the front and rear
axles and the stock transfer case hold up under the additional stress of
a V8? If not, what are some viable alternatives?

4. How much easier does a 2 inch body lift make the V8 installation? Is
it far more difficult to do the swap without it? If I were to install
the lift, what additional changes would be required to the suspension?

5. Is there anything that I'm forgetting? The idea of this project has
really got me excited so any information that you could share would be
extremely valuable!

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

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 01:48:29 -0500
From: Bryan G Sheffler
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Installing a 5.0 V8 in a 1986 Bronco II 4WD

Thom,
I had an '83 Ranger with a 351 W in it. I know it is not a four
wheel drive Bronco II but they have a lot in common. To answer your
first question, yes the late model 5.0 EFI with all the emissions
equipment would not only make the swap easier (the B II already has
emissions equipment on it any way) but also emissions compliant. However
the EFI may be a pain in the butt to hook up if you don't get all the
factory stuff. I would lean towards building a motor similar to the
83-85 302 HO motors.
I can't help much with the four wheel drive models, but I will share
what I know about doing it on the two wheel drive models. A C4 works
just fine. I got the engine and tranny out of a '75 Torino, so it came
as a package. Yes the tranny tunnel had to be clearance with a hammer.
I also had to clearance the heater box cover under the hood. There was
so little room (actually no room) that the engine would not sit on the
motor mounts. I went with an electric fuel pump since there was no room
for the mechanical pump, the steering box would have been in the way.
Fortunately the truck I had did not come with power steering, that might
have been a chore to hook up. Really didn't need power steering since I
could steer with the gas pedal, LOL!!! I also used a remote mount oil
filter system since there was little room for the oil filter mounting
base. The stock exhaust manifolds didn't work (circa 1975 2 1/4 inch)
either. The exhaust manifolds rested the engine on the frame!!!! I had
to use late model exhaust manifolds ('79 up 302 2 inch). The 302
shortys, especially the '85 and up would fit and flow better (2 1/2 inch
collector) than the cast iron logs!!!!! The clearance between the water
pump and the radiator was tight. I used the stock V6 radiator (didn't
really do the job in the summer) until I found a three core unit from
Total Performance in Michigan (I think I got it from them, will have to
check the receipt). The have a radiator that is designed to mount much
more forward into the grill. The radiator mounts in the shelf behind the
grill. This opened up much needed room for the fan. I ran an electric
fan because I didn't have enough room for the belt driven one. By the
way, I used regular serpentine pulleys since I was to lazy to change the
alternator pulley. SVO now makes a shorter water pump that will make
this kind of installation much easier. As far as the body lift kit goes,
I know that it would have been easier to fit the engine/tranny in the
truck if the body was raised a little. I did this conversion before
there was the aftermarket support that there is now. I found the stock
7.5 inch rear end to hold up just fine. The only thing that the rear end
lack was posi. I use to really load the bed of the truck up from time
to time, and it performed well. It is a lot of work to do the swap, but
once done, you will not believe the difference!!!! Once you've had a V8
in a Ranger, you will wonder how you ever put up with the V6!!!!!!! One
of the greatest thrills I had was some one trying to pass me up on the
freeway. I just drop the pedal and went!!! Ford is really missing the
boat by not offering the Ranger with a V8. The torque and all around
drive ability is incredible!!!! But then they probably wouldn't sell any
Mustangs!!!!!!! Bottom line is DO IT, you will not be
disappointed!!!!!!! I miss mine!!!!

Bryan

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 23:28:48 -0800
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.

Recently on the Off Road list (I think) there was a posting as to the innate
stupidity of our elected representatives and their simple minded fear of our
Automotive passions/hobbies.
In checking out this latest example of stupidity; not only do they want to
restrict all bumper heights to 29 inches... I found this little jewel:

Oregon House Bill 3217
Sponsored by Representative DEVLIN
SUMMARY:
Prohibits Department of Transportation from registering totaled vehicle if
it was manufactured prior to 1981. Specifies exceptions. Beginning January
1, 2010, prohibits department from registering any motor vehicle
manufactured before 1981 unless it is antique or vehicle of special interest
or meets certain emission standards.


Ladies and gentlemen.
My state government has too much of my money, and no constructive out let
for its enthusiastic wasting of same.
If this kind of law is proposed in this once great state what is going on in
YOUR state!
I urge you to get involved before it is too late!
Me?
I shall spend some time contacting these poor misguided folks that We/I
elected and give them some much needed input.
Perhaps it is not yet to late.

Chris Samuel
All projects on hold.
I got-ta write some letters!


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

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 00:00:47 -0800
From: JJ Thomas
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.

Define "totaled" "antique" or "vehicle of special interest" under the law.

The law seems to make sense to me. I purchased a brand new car in the
state of Oregon and later discovered that it had been totaled prior to
being sold to me.

I do not see why one would be driving a total vehicle. Personally I would
not want to own, much less drive, anything that had sustained major damage
to the frame or the body. i.e. totaled.

I do agree that our (your?) elected officials could be making better use of
their time.

- -Julian

At 11:28 PM 3/26/99 -0800, you wrote (edited for brevity):
>
>Oregon House Bill 3217
>Sponsored by Representative DEVLIN
>SUMMARY:
>Prohibits Department of Transportation from registering totaled vehicle if
>it was manufactured prior to 1981. Specifies exceptions. Beginning January
>1, 2010, prohibits department from registering any motor vehicle
>manufactured before 1981 unless it is antique or vehicle of special interest....


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.