I've always wondered 'bout that. Why is that?

And alot of parts books and stuff, theres alot of parts that specifie 80-82 and 83-86, or 80-82 then 83-91.


When I browse the internet, or anywhere for that matter looking for Fords, theres alot of results from the mid 70's to 1979, then 1980-81 and 82, it's dead! Then picks up again in 83 to present?


Why are 80-82 F-series so rare??

 

Back in 1980/81 we were just finishing up the Jimmy Carter years and the country was in the dumps. Gas prices had gone up, interest rates were high and the 1980 F model sales dropped from 718,158 in 1979 to 475,998 in 1980. It took a couple years to recover from that and that may be why the 1980/81 are more scarce than some others. I have an 81 and I know where your coming from. Luckily, the other years through 1986 with mostly trim changes. are about the same

 

Also we will never forget the "Swiss Cheese" frames!!!

 

and cash for clunkers got a lot of what was left

 

Oh yeah that's another thing? What is with the "Weaker" frames in these early 80's F-series?

I've heard that a couple times not to use these early frames for diesel swaps or whatnot?

And I remember reading something about a "Swiss Cheese" Frame a long time ago. Anyone can shine a light on that one?

 

Another reason we may not see as many parts listed, at least for motors is, in 1980 the only had the 300 I6, the 302 and the 351 motors. They dropped the 400 and 460 for a year or so because they were trying to get the gas mileage up to appease Uncle Sam ,who at that time was getting his nose into the auto industry. I'm sure there are other reasons but these are some that come to mind. I was around back then and things got a little tight for some people.

 

it would seem in a quest for a lighter truck they put lots and lots of holes in the frames of those trucks

 

I don't know about the Swiss cheese frame. I don't remember seeing any holes in my frame but I wasn't really looking for them. You have me curious now.

They did cut a couple inches of the overall length in 1980 and lightened the truck up by using a lot of plastic and aluminum where they could. Plastic and aluminum,,,,that may have been a reason for sales to drop for a couple years until people saw whether they would hold up. I was a Dodge guy back then and don't remember too much about Fords.

 

I've owned a swiss cheese and non swiss cheese. I still own the non swiss cheese and it's an 82, but I can't say there was a noticable difference in handling or strength (I owned both at the same time), visually there was quite a difference and I think this adds to the myth and people get sucked into thinking it's weaker. I'm pretty sure my swiss cheese was an 83 though.

Edit:
After checking, my swiss cheese F100 was an '81

 

Not true. My 80 F350 came factory equiped w a 400m

 

The swiss cheese frames were made to cut weight to help fuel milage.
As far as being weaker........... I dont believe it. I have the swiss cheese frame in my 80 F350 pulling truck. It no has a 429 ,detroit locked rear axle, and i regularly get air under all 4 tires going down the track. I have broken every component of the drive train but the frame just keeps going strong. NOW w that said i am replacing the frame w one from a 97 so i could truss the frame to keep flex out of it

 

I agree with Brad, the only real weakness of the "swiss cheese" frame is flex, and collisions.

Your swiss cheese on a sandwich has a bunch of holes in it, but it doesn't fall apart when you pick it up. It only comes apart when you exert abnormal force on it, or bend it. Same goes for the "swiss cheese" frame.

I agree with the gas mileage though. My F100 has a 300 I6 and C6 Auto, perfect combo for pulling. But she's only sporting 2.75 rear gears from factory.

 

Ouch, 2.75 that must suck!

At least you must get killer MPG with that!

I have a Fuel Injected 300-6 C6 with 3.55..... that's not even funny! Pulls like theres no stoping it, but omg.... 11mpg highway!

 

"and cash for clunkers got a lot of what was left"

Not true, the federal cfc did not include pre 85 or so vehicles, I thought about it for about half a second when they started it.

"I have a Fuel Injected 300-6 C6 with 3.55..... that's not even funny! Pulls like theres no stoping it, but omg.... 11mpg highway!"

Ouch that sucks, might as well have a 460...

I have a 300/t-18/2.75 in the rear and I get about 15 average, I think I have to do extra math because I don't have the correct spedo gear. When I am going 60, the spedo says 45, so I multiply my mileage by 1.33 to get closer to what I am actually getting. I am planning a 3.55 (and 4x) swap in the near future so that should get me in the ball park without having to fool with finding the correct spedo gear...

I see 80-81 all the time, but I think that is because I am constantly for em' when I'm looking at 80-86 trucks (kinda like window shopping) if you know what I mean...

It's >almost< like lookin at women (or men >if< your a woman)

 

My F100 also has the 2.75's with but with a 302 and they aren't too great.. I haven't figured up the mpg since fixing some problems though.

I know someone with a F150 the 300-6 and 4 speed manual. The manual is the overdrive transmission, and he has the 2.46 rear end gear