From: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com (small-list-digest)
To: small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: small-list-digest V3 #211
Reply-To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


small-list-digest Wednesday, August 18 1999 Volume 03 : Number 211



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer, Bronco 2 and Aerostar
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe small-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

FTE Small - BII Headers
FTE Small - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!
RE: FTE Small - high compression 302
RE: FTE Small - Need driveshaft info
Re: FTE Small - BII Headers
RE: FTE Small - 99 Ranger 4l litre
RE: FTE Small - 99 Ranger 4l litre

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 17:12:07 GMT
From: 88biixlt fncool.com
Subject: FTE Small - BII Headers

I was wondering if anyone knew where I could get headers for my '88
BII. Price is a huge concern, but so is performance...
Thanks!

JC
'88 BII XLT

- ---------------------------------------------------------------
This Message was Powered by Xcel Communications
Sign up for your FREE EMAIL account today at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.mailroom.com
Give your FAX machine an email address http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.faxroom.com

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 15:19:03 -0400
From: kpayne ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE Small - ADMIN: Submit your technical articles!

Hi gang,

This is the web site admin for Ford Truck Enthusiasts. As many of
you know, we have a technical article section on the web site. Its
been a while since an article has been submitted and that section of
the site is a little stale. We like to have a lot of fun stuff for
our visitors. If you'd like to submit an article which describes a
project you've undertake, even a simple project such as installing a
K&N kit, please feel free to submit it to kpayne ford-trucks.com.
We'll publish it on the web site, along with full credit to you and
you retain the copyright.

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 13:14:35 -0500
From: Mike Harms
Subject: RE: FTE Small - high compression 302

I'm assuming that the starter from the mustang is one of the older coil type
starters. You may want to shop around and see if you can find a permanent
magnet replacement starter. These starters used a magnet called Magnequench
that is lighter, smaller and much more powerful than the old coil type
starters. I know AMDelco has them in their line but I really haven't
followed it enough to know what all retrofits are available.

If you can find one, you'll probably be able to fit a fairly powerful
starter in a much smaller space than your old one required.


>Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 16:00:24 CDT
>From: "Bad Brian"
>Subject: FTE Small - high compression 302

>I have recently dropped in a new 302 in my Bronco II. I had to use a
>starter off a 85 mustang GT (new) because of the size and available >space.

>It is the smallest i could find that would fit in between the headers >and
>bellhousing. Now I am having a problem turning the engine over. even
>with
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 12:52:03 -0700
From: "Ryan Miller"
Subject: RE: FTE Small - Need driveshaft info

I had real good luck with Dick's Driveshafts
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.dicksdriveshaft.com ). I bought a replacement
u-joint style driveshaft from them about 4 months ago for my
'87 BII and it cost about $185.

Ryan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-small-list ford-trucks.com
> [mailto:owner-small-list ford-trucks.com]On
> Behalf Of Harry T.
> Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 2:07 PM
> To: Ford list
> Subject: FTE Small - Need driveshaft info
>
>
>
> A while back, there was a discussion about
> getting a driveshaft that has been
> converted to normal u-joints. Would anyone that
> has info on this operation
> please post the details?
> I need info like: Who?, Where?, Web Site?, Phone?
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 21:42:16 CDT
From: "Bad Brian"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - BII Headers

if you are concerned with price that much then you might better stop
looking. you should be able to contact Total Performance in Clinton
Township, MI and get them to hook you up.
look at spending 250 though. But they are done right. none of this maybe
stuff. mine worked perfect.
>
>I was wondering if anyone knew where I could get headers for my '88
>BII. Price is a huge concern, but so is performance...
>Thanks!
>
>JC
>'88 BII XLT
>


Bad Brian
Southeastern Electronics
kf4obc
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://southeastern.webjump.com


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 23:32:33 -0500
From: Jordan Dean
Subject: RE: FTE Small - 99 Ranger 4l litre

>You can have duals, as there is room for 2 mufflers side by side in the
>stock mufflers location, then run both tailpipes together and out... they
>will stick out right next to each other, but they work.
of course you can, but it doesn't look cool that way.

>not smoke, steam.
I know, I was looking for the proper term and didn't feel like pausing to
actually think :)

>No... not the way it works... if that was the case, Ford would have had to
>run .75-1" pipe from the manifold to the Y on each side.
>On the 4L V6, you can run a single 2.5" system, or dual 2" with great
>results. I ran dual 3" on a 3.8L V6 and still had over 330 lb/ft torque at
>2400 RPM. (Also had about 450 HP!)

Ok, here's where I have to dissagree, at least with your math. see, they
can run what appears to me to be about a 1.5" pipe from the manifold b/c on
the inherent backup in the y pipe and in the dual cats. And on a highly
modified engine of course you can run larger pipes, but I HIGHLY doubt that
your headers were 3" on the "out" side, in which case we have the whole
thing of it doesn't matter (as much) what size the pipes are b/c the
"weakest link" is smaller (I realize it matters some, but not as much). and
you could not possibly tell me that a 3.8l (unless turbocharged or
supercharged... and even then) could even begin to need that size of pipes
ALL THE WAY OUT, if it wasn't that size all the way out, then your point is
moot. and anyway on the math thing, lets look at the actual area that is
available to flow on different size pipes:

2" single 3.14" flow area
2.5" single 4.9" flow area
2" dual 6.28" flow area
3" single 7.06" flow area
2.5" dual 9.8" flow area
3" dual 14.12" flow area

See the thing you have to remember when dealing with pipes is that what
seems like a small increase in size yields a very large increase in actual
flow area that is available, and I also hope that you see, that having a
true 3" dual system seems obsurd for a smaller engine unless it was totally
decked out (at 450hp it must be). My point was that when you begin to run
a true dual system you increase the chances of "out pipeing" your vehicle's
engine. unless of course you just want the look of dual in which case you
run a single in double out muffler and don't worry about the size as much
b/c it has already come into one smaller pipe.


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

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

Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 01:13:59 -0400
From: "David A. Cooley"
Subject: RE: FTE Small - 99 Ranger 4l litre

At 11:32 PM 8/17/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >You can have duals, as there is room for 2 mufflers side by side in the
> >stock mufflers location, then run both tailpipes together and out... they
> >will stick out right next to each other, but they work.
>of course you can, but it doesn't look cool that way.


Everyone has their own tastes... I prefer what's functional and less
"flashy"... I try to hide exhaust tips etc.




>Ok, here's where I have to dissagree, at least with your math. see, they
>can run what appears to me to be about a 1.5" pipe from the manifold b/c on
>the inherent backup in the y pipe and in the dual cats. And on a highly


The pipe size from the manifold to the cats is actually 2"... Each cylinder
(If the pipes were round as they exit) are somewhere between 1.25" and
1.5"... Good headers for the 4.0 are 1.625" primaries.


>modified engine of course you can run larger pipes, but I HIGHLY doubt that
>your headers were 3" on the "out" side, in which case we have the whole
>thing of it doesn't matter (as much) what size the pipes are b/c the


My 3.8L buick with the 3" duals was turbo'd... Manifolds came to a 2.5"
pipe to the turbo, and 3" down, thru the cat and split into dual 3"... I
agree it wasn't necessary, but a friend with a muffler shop offered and the
price was right.


>"weakest link" is smaller (I realize it matters some, but not as much). and
>you could not possibly tell me that a 3.8l (unless turbocharged or
>supercharged... and even then) could even begin to need that size of pipes
>ALL THE WAY OUT, if it wasn't that size all the way out, then your point is
>moot. and anyway on the math thing, lets look at the actual area that is
>available to flow on different size pipes:
>
>2" single 3.14" flow area
>2.5" single 4.9" flow area
>2" dual 6.28" flow area
>3" single 7.06" flow area
>2.5" dual 9.8" flow area
>3" dual 14.12" flow area
>
>See the thing you have to remember when dealing with pipes is that what
>seems like a small increase in size yields a very large increase in actual
>flow area that is available, and I also hope that you see, that having a
>true 3" dual system seems obsurd for a smaller engine unless it was totally
>decked out (at 450hp it must be). My point was that when you begin to run
>a true dual system you increase the chances of "out pipeing" your vehicle's
>engine. unless of course you just want the look of dual in which case you
>run a single in double out muffler and don't worry about the size as much
>b/c it has already come into one smaller pipe.


The biggest problem with most exhaust isn't so much the size of the pipe,
but the restriction afforded at the bends... they may look smooth on the
outside, but using double wall pipe like the OEM's do, the inside of the
pipe is kinked and restricted down... Reducing the back pressure to zero
is the ideal condition, and the header/manifold runners length/dia are what
tune the torque of the motor. The only engines that "HAVE" to have
backpressure are 2 stroke engines. The catch 22 here is that if the
manufacturer has the engine running lean stock, and the computer doesn't
compensate with more fuel now that the flow increases, the engine runs
leaner and loses power... a MAF system is ideal, as it compensates for flow
changes such as headers, exhaust, intake, cam etc to the limitations of the
factory programming. With proper fueling (IE MAF or aftermarket chipped
computer), running the largest exhaust you can fit on the vehicle increases
the HP the most.
Another factor is the longer the vehicle, and the longer the exhaust, the
larger diameter... Friction losses and turbulence add to restriction as well.

===========================================================
David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT bellsouth.net
Packet: N5XMT KQ4LO.#INT.NC.USA.NA T.A.P.R. Member #7068
Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't?!
===========================================================....


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.