From: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com (perf-list-digest)
To: perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: perf-list-digest V2 #189
Reply-To: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-perf-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


perf-list-digest Friday, July 30 1999 Volume 02 : Number 189



=======================================================================
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 - EFI to CARB
Re: FTE Perf - Thermostats
Re: FTE Perf - Thermostats
FTE Perf - 300 Cams
Re: FTE Perf - Performance carb tuning
Re: FTE Perf - NEW 460!--but no power?
Re: FTE Perf - Maverick Weight....
Re: FTE Perf - Looking for an Altenator
Re: FTE Perf - fuel line
Re: FTE Perf - Flywheel and Pressure Plate Heat Cracks
Re: FTE Perf - fuel line
Re: FTE Perf - EFI to CARB
FTE Perf - RE: Flywheel and Pressure Plate Heat Cracks

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:14:43 -0500
From: "ben"
Subject: FTE Perf - EFI to CARB

ben wrote:
>
> I need some info on converting a '85 f-150 efi/302 to a carburetor.

Tim wrote:
>
>No clue why you want to do so, but here's my thoughts.

I'm converting it mostly because there is hardly anything for performance
parts(that I can afford), fuel consumption is no concern, fuel injection is
so much harder to work on. Right now it will cost me $60 (or $40 for a code
scanner) just to find out why it runs like crap and more to fix it. The cost
to convert it will outweigh the tons of money I have to pay every time the
EFI goes to hell. And there is no emissions testing here, so I can do
whatever. I just want something to mess with and have fun, and fuel
injection is not my idea of fun. Anyway thanks for the info!!


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 16:21:21 -0700
From: George Miller
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Thermostats

Tim Turner wrote:
>
> George Miller wrote:
> >
> > http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.stewartcomponents.com/techtip3.htm
> >
> > This is the most comprehensive and informative site I've found on
> > performance and stock cooling systems. They recommend drilling 3 - 3/16"
> > holes in the poppet valve for maximum efficiency, especially when using
> > hi-volume water pumps. Anybody out there have any experience with that?
>
> I wouldn't myself. Basically you're increasing the bypass vcolume
> designed into the vehicle. If it's for hi-po use then what the Hell..
> go for it it'll have a lower temp at the CTS causing a richer mixture.
>
It's a Mallory 9000 w/mechanical advance, Edlebrock 750, high volume
water pump and 1/2" bypass on a 460 in the middle of the Mojave Desert.
What is a CTS?

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 19:38:23 -0400
From: "Thomas J. Teixeira"
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Thermostats

At 04:21 PM 7/29/1999 -0700, George Miller wrote:
>
>
>Tim Turner wrote:
>> I wouldn't myself. Basically you're increasing the bypass vcolume
>> designed into the vehicle. If it's for hi-po use then what the Hell..
>> go for it it'll have a lower temp at the CTS causing a richer mixture.
>>
>It's a Mallory 9000 w/mechanical advance, Edlebrock 750, high volume
>water pump and 1/2" bypass on a 460 in the middle of the Mojave Desert.
>What is a CTS?

Coolant Temperature Sensor?

Tom Teixeira mailto:tjt world.std.com
94 Taurus SHO 5-speed NESHOC/SHO Registry
'66 Mustang convertible (200 cid auto) http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://world.std.com/~tjt
'35 Ford Pickup (flathead V8)


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 20:07:00 -0500
From: "Brett L. Habben"
Subject: FTE Perf - 300 Cams

Folks,
I'm in the planning stage of a 300-6 buildup for my F100. Do any of you
folks have cam recommendations? The archives have listed people touting
the Comp Cams 260H teamed with a 390 Holley, Offy intake, and a set of
headers. But I'm looking at building more of a torque/mileage motor.
Comp Cams also makes a 252H. Would one of the Crane Cams split pattern
cams be more appropriate? Is there a Wolverine/Blue Racer cam I should
look into?
Any 300 build advice would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Brett
75 Supercab
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 22:39:19 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Performance carb tuning

"John F. Bauer III" wrote:
>
> Group, this is my first delving into performance engine modifications,
> always considered myself just a repair-it guy, so please be gentle:

I'll try to be gentle! :-)

> different and I got my hands on a 600cfm Edelbrock no egr, manual choke
> carp, Clifford 4bbl intake and a set of Clifford single output headers. I
> put them together recently and came up with a problem.

Good choices on the 'brock and Clifford stuff. Good that you didn't opt
for the 750 CFM job; without serious changes it'd be too much. (Wish
they had a 390-450 available for us I-4 & V-6 guys on the 'small' list
though.)

>
> Taking Tony Marino's configuration as a guide, I immediately dropped the
> Edelbrock's stock jet and rod sizes two stages lean. I adjusted the accel.
> pump to enguage as soon as the pedal is depressed to squirt gas sooner
> rather than later when depressing the pedal.

I might have opted for starting out of the box and tuning from there,
but that's a minor quibble.

> With the choke enguaged, engine will fire up and start running a little
> rough at about 2,500 rpm. RPMs with begin to decrease fairly rapidly and
> if any slight releasing of the choke, the engine revs to 4000 rpm and then
> wants to die. If I keep pumping the pedal, the engine will keep running
> but if I hold the pedal steadily depressed or stop pumping the pedal, the
> engine wants to die.
>
> Before I start messing with jetting richer or guessing on the timing,
> anyone have any suggestions on where to go next?

The question is whether it's too much fuel or not enough.. grab some
carb cleaner and when you stop pumping the gas give it a squirt down the
throat and note if it helps or hinders the running. (start with a light
spray you dont want to drown it.. if it seems to help work up to a
heavier shot.) What you're doing is adding extra fuel (the cleaner), if
it will run with the added then double check for vacuum leaks by
spraying the cleaner at the intake ports, base of the carb etc. (Fire
extinguisher handy of course!) If the extra makes it worse then I'd
start looking at leaning things out more. I assume you didn't do
anything with the distributor since it's on the opposite side of the
engine from the manifolds.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:05:37 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - NEW 460!--but no power?

Jeremy Taylor wrote:
>
> I just finished overhauling the 460 (FI) in my 88 F-250. (wow that's a big
> engine to pull!)

It's a hoss alright! I dont see many in the shop so my help may be
limited but I'll try

> not getting full throttle. The butterfly only opens 1/4 of the way when the
> pedal is to the floor. I never checked it before the rebuild but it is
> supposed to open all the way, right?

VERY correct, at least close to all the way.

> What could cause this? Routing of the
> cable?

Probably so, possibly mounted on the wrong side of something, or the
hold down mounted in the wrong place? Of course the easy solution is to
eyeball a similar truck but being uncommon that might not be so easy!
You might also want to look at the cable as someone depresses the pedal
to look for movement somewhere of the outside cable (should be
stationary). Not trying to insult or anything, but could the cable have
gotten stretched during the engine removal? I've trashed a few varying
cables/wires/etc. over the years with the hoist. (See
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.thebigshow.com/BITPAGES/nascartools.html and examine the
entry for engine hoist.. too true!) Might also want to see how much
slack there is at the pedal end; for a short term solution you *might*
be able to shim things there to achieve WOT. (be sure not to have idle
become redline though!)

I can move it open all the way by hand but not with the pedal.
> Thanx in advance for all the help you guys can offer.
>

I can remember having to order a cable for my old Road Runner (due to
engine swap with aforementioned hoist), and being my only car I made do
with a small rope to the linkage and the rear window crank.. worked OK
until I hot footed around a left hand turn and the lean of my body was
giving it ever MORE gas... Funny now, but scared me pretty good 18
years ago. ;-) Some 3 years later I was waiting for a cable on my
Dodge van and just left the dog house off and worked that Carter AVS by
hand; bad part there was that it was the dead of summer and my trip to
work was 20+ miles each way... my own portable sauna. (Sounded real
good when I kicked the secondaries in though!) :-) :-)


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:13:34 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Maverick Weight....

William S Hart wrote:
>

> >My first car was a 70 Maverick and as I recall from the few times I had to
> >push
> >it it sure FELT like two tons :)

True.. but I bet it was easier than my old 200 series Van! My scrawny
140 Lbs. was way overmatched when it broke down!

>
> trust me though I've pushed both and a truck is much heavier.

Yep! Working at a shop we probably average having to push at LEAST one
vehicle around every day. You should hear the grumbling when it's a
full size or a conversion van! Of course whenever possible I'll
use my jump start box or tow strap rather than push (especially during
this time of year)!

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:22:43 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Looking for an Altenator

ACMERCG AOL.COM wrote:
>
> I am looking for a heavy duty/ high output altenator for my 92 F-150.
> Anyone have any suggestions? With 101k on the motor, the electric fans in,
> and a few more sets of lights to add, I'm afraid my alt can't hack it.
> Anyone know what the original output should be? At idle I only have 12.2
> volts, and if I remember correctly, when I put the new battery in last year,
> I had 14.4. Maybe it could be the battery? Hmmm... Optima here I come....

Just a thought.. go to the local super car stereo store; you know, the
one that sells all the ear splitting' units in your area. I know at
first this sounds strange, but there's a method to my madness.. these
guys need awesome amounts of Amperage to make the Kilowatt(s) of power
they want; two alternators isn't uncommon on full competition units. Of
course to pick these guys brains you might need to shout so they can
hear you.... ;-)

Tim
>
> Joe
> Lost in Jersey
> == 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, 29 Jul 1999 23:29:28 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - fuel line

William S Hart wrote:
>

> How many bends do you need? Could you consider
> using rubber in the really bad bending areas, and then long sections of
> straight pipe?

Sensible solution.. Just want to point out to *NOT* use copper for
lines; it will over time 'work harden' and crack. The ideal is still
all steel, with rubber only between the frame and the engine though.
(Steel doesn't like the engine jumping around on it's rubber mounts very
much!)

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:36:00 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Flywheel and Pressure Plate Heat Cracks

Danger wrote:
>
> Tim wrote...
>
> > How deep were the cracks? I'd base my worrying on that.. little tiny
> > surface cracks I'd ignore, but major cracks I'd think about.
> ........
>
> It seems difficult to tell just how deep the cracks go below the surface
> of the flywheel

Only way to tell would to have it turned, but since you have a
replacement... use it for a door stop or make a clock out of it. (Be
sure to use a HD peg to hang it on though!)

> Danger
> (playing it safe)

Even with your handle I don't blame you one bit.. nobody needs metal
flying into the passenger compartment at high velocity. I think the
bell housing was a smart move too. If you're STILL worried get a bell
housing blanket and wrap it around the housing as well.

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 20:45:01 -0700
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - fuel line

>
> Sensible solution.. Just want to point out to *NOT* use copper for
> lines; it will over time 'work harden' and crack.
>
> Tim

Hmm. I was going to use copper tubing for my oil pressure guage because
I was worried about the nylon tubing being near the exhaust. Would the
nylon be better, with careful routing?

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:56:02 -0400
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - EFI to CARB

ben wrote:

>
> I'm converting it mostly because there is hardly anything for performance
> parts(that I can afford), fuel consumption is no concern, fuel injection is
> so much harder to work on. Right now it will cost me $60 (or $40 for a code
> scanner) just to find out why it runs like crap and more to fix it.

Actually all you need is a good ol' voltmeter and a jumper wire to
extract codes; after that you post 'em here and ask for info. ;-)
Seriously though I understand the situation.

> The cost
> to convert it will outweigh the tons of money I have to pay every time the
> EFI goes to hell.

Too true.. not so much on your vehicle, but it's easy to crack $500 even
1K on repairs on the later model vehicles. :-( (Can you guess why my
vehicles are '79 '85 and '86?)

> And there is no emissions testing here, so I can do
> whatever. I just want something to mess with and have fun,

That's what it's all about! If I could get away with it in my state
there'd soon be a FI 302 in my B-II instead of the upcoming slightly
modified carb'd 2.8.

> and fuel
> injection is not my idea of fun.

It's part of mine (except for the really tough ones, but it's a good
feeling some hours later when it's finally solved). Of course
drivability is one of my specialties so I'm sorta biased. ;-)

Anyway thanks for the info!!

Feel free to post/e-mail if you need help!

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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 23:31:33 -0500
From: Paul M Radecki
Subject: FTE Perf - RE: Flywheel and Pressure Plate Heat Cracks

>>How much better is a "Lakewood Blowproof Bellhousing" than a stock
>>FoMoCo housing?

If it carries a National Hot Rod Association approval, it's literally
bulletproof. According to Summit Racing Equipment, the NHRA testing
procedure for bellhousings is to spin a flywheel at high (drag race
motor) RPMs in a bellhousing, mounted on a lathe. The lathe cuts into
the flywheel until it grenades, and if any fragments get past the
bellhousing, it fails. I doubt whether a stock bellhousing would pass
this test (though it might be adequate for a moderate RPM motor). The
Lakewood housing in the Summit catalog is NHRA approved to 7000 RPM.

lordjanusz juno.com
'94 F150 300ci....

---

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.