Received: with LISTAR (v0.129a; list perf-list); Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:25:21 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:25:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server <listar ford-trucks.com>
To: perf-list digest users <listar ford-trucks.com>
Reply-to: perf-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: perf-list Digest V2000 #126
Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck Mailing List
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
To unsubscribe, send email to: listar ford-trucks.com with
the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the
From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
Subject: Revving a 390
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 16:14:50 -0500
I rebuilt my 390 with a reconditioned crankshaft, Clevite 77 bearings, had the stock rods reconditioned, Badger hypereutectic aluminum pistons, mild Melling cam w/ Melling lifters, Melling high volume oil pump, Edelbrock Performer intake, 600 Holley carb.
I had the engine professionally balanced before I put it together.
How high is it safe to rev this thing? It is still pulling hard at 5 grand, but I haven't pushed it much higher than that.
I know I'm late, but I have an input that I think is worthy.. If you did not modify the
oil passages, and in particularly the line-up of the oil holes with the bearing holes in
the #1 and the #4 main bearing cups, then you will starve those rods that feed from
those mains any higher RPMs than 5 Grand... BTDT.. When that happens you
get rod knock immediately and very shortly thereafter something will break loose..
This is the only fault I have ever had with the FE.. The high volume oil pump only
tends to make this more of a problem IMHO. If you have modified the oil passages
and the oilhole line-up thing, and as Wish states have good rods the engine will live
7500 RPMs, provided it doesn't starve for oil. At these RPMs you really need a
larger oil pan. I ran 8 Quarts on mine. I sucked a stock 5 quart pan completely
empty on two seperate occasions and that cost me BIG $ both times..
From: "Jeff Keahey" <Jeff airboatfanatics.com>
Subject: Re: Bronco II
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 06:45:26 -0500
The ranger had a 2.8 or 2.9L v6 (cant remember) but it was surprisingly
powerful. It was also a very reliable engine and could and did take much
abuse. I have seen alot of v6 rangers in tuff-truck competitions I would
imagine because they are cheap and reliable. As for the trans I do not know.
There is a kit to put a 302 in a ranger and WOW is that fast once you get
the wheels to stop spinning. I would assume you could do the same with the
BII. The one thing I would be careful with is the transfer case. If you put
a 302 in a BII and got crazy in 4x4 something expensive would break. The 302
kit is for speed not towing power. If you want to pull get a full-size.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Azie L. Magnusson" <maggie11 HiWAAY.net>
To: <perf-list ford-trucks.com>; <61-79-list ford-trucks.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 3:54 PM
Subject: [perf-list] Bronco II
> Does the Bronco II and the Rangers of same years share drive trains??
> Are any of the front body parts interchangeable as with the F series and
> Fullsize Broncos of same years??
> Are the gearboxes and transfer cases strong enough to accept a stock
> I'm looking at an '87 BII 4X4 with V6. What is the cuin of the V6 and is
it a reliable eng. ??
> I haven't opened the hood yet. (didn't want to show too much interest) Is
it EFI?? or Carb??
> Azie Magnusson
> Ardmore, Al.
> To unsubscribe: www.ford-trucks.com/mailinglist.html#item3
> Please remove this footer when replying.
From: "wish" <wish ford-trucks.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 13:24:39 GMT
Subject: Re: [61-79-list] Re: Bronco II
Looks like a few on the 61-79 list have posted already, dunno about the perf
list as I haven't made it that far yet, but here's my $.02 ...
>Bronco II's and Rangers share drivetrain parts. The front clips are
Sort of. Eddie Bauer editions are a whole nuther ball game though, they have
different interiors, different fenders (believe it or not) and every electrical
option in the book. A friend of mine has one and hates trying to find parts
for it. Its been wrecked a couple of times and the wrong front fenders are
on it. Also some of the aftermarket sheet metal you can get is too small, ie
it fits inside the original pieces so that can cause fitment issues...
>I don't think the drivetrain would hold up well to a 351.
> The later ones
>used an 8.8 in the rear (same as the mustang and full size pickups) and a
>Dana 35 in the front.
I think this was post 88 or so, seems like that was a cutoff year for a lot
of the stuff on the BII's.
>The 87 should have an EFI 2.9, a couple of options with transmissions,
The auto WILL NOT take anywhere near a 351, heck they have trouble holding 2.9's
and 2.3L 4's (anyone want a blown one cheap ?) The 5spd is better, but not
great at high torque loads.
Some have had problems with cracked heads, which is a new one for me, all the
ones around here have oiling issues, lots of clicks from valves/lifters that
shouldn't be there, but they seem to keep running for quite some time with these
The 2.9L reminds me of a sbc missing its front two cylinders, but then I haven't
played with a sbc in probably 10 years or so.
Swapping a 351 will increase the weight as someone mentioned. It is also a
big space hog, if you look at the heater box that protrudes into the engine
compartment you can see space issues galore. Its been done, and since you're
retired with lots of time ... ;)
>BW13-45 transfer case, 7.5" in the rear, and a Dana 28 in the front.
The 7.5" rear will not take the torque for very long, the transfer case might,
but the tranny of course is a problem.
>> Are any of the front body parts interchangeable as with the F series and
>> Fullsize Broncos of same years??
No, they're on about a 3/4 scale I think, they look similar but are a smaller
size for sure.
All that said, the people who have them love them, I've got at least 3 friends
with them (86, 87, 88 ironically) and they love them. I worked on the 86 for
a while and drove it around and they are a blast to drive, though you do have
to watch the corners a bit, they aren't as bad as most would have you believe,
but a full size pickup can easily out corner one with a decent driver.
My truck rides rough!!
I have a friend with a 86 bronco that rides very good
just rolls over the bumps mine feels like it slams into them.
I know the bronco would ride better in the back because of the extra wieght. but the front rides 200% better than mine
are there things I can do.
can someone look at the door sticker and see the load capacity of thier front springs.
mine is over 3500lbs on the front and I know that it is a HDversion. but it just rides awfull?
Joel Thomas treefort prodigy.net
1984 Ford F-150HD,351W,T-18,
>I have a friend with a 86 bronco that rides very good
>just rolls over the bumps mine feels like it slams into them.
>I know the bronco would ride better in the back because of the extra wieght.
but the front rides 200% better than mine
>are there things I can do.
>can someone look at the door sticker and see the load capacity of thier front
>mine is over 3500lbs on the front and I know that it is a HDversion. but it
just rides awfull?
Checking the front springs is a good idea, but I'll bet the problem lies elsewhere
... have you checked to see if the front end is sagging at all ? ie does the
nose sit lower than the tail by a lot ? I replaced my front springs and it
rides tons better even with "stock replacement" coil springs ...
what could be happening is you could be hitting the bump stops after only a
little bit of suspension travel, this will effectively make the rubber in the
stops the entire suspension and it will ride rough ... you might also check
the shocks, if one or both of them are locked up or extremely stiff in compression
then that would make it ride rough as well ...
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.