Well time to start a thread to document the tranformation of our "shop" project, making this into a car hauler.



I've been collecting parts for getting the cab and chassis ready for a ramp bed, and unfortunate to the truck's heritage, the tandem axles don't work well with a ramp bed (nor do the 8.50:1 gear ratios) So here are some other goodies collected, plans for air ride front and rear, air brakes all around....should stop on a dime!







Recently though, I had been having trouble with the old girl running rough, just falling on it's face. Kinda takes the wind out of your sails as far as project enthusiasm goes. I was leaning toward a fuel pump issue, and when I pulled the inlet line to the fuel pump, the slight trickle was a good indicator of some sediment in the tank behind the seat. As the factory tank size limited your range anyhow, time to upgrade. We (the VP of ATHS and myself) went on a road trip today to RLJackson truck salvage in Port Tobacco MD, and picked up a nice 33 gallon saddle tank version. That should about double the effective capacity/range.



The truck's past history as a fire truck in the mountains of Oregon was evident as some reminders of the old body still remains on the frame, so first order of business is to clean those off .....





Test fitting....







Hope to get it bolted on tomorrow and hooked up for a test run.

 

couple questions,,whats wrong with a tandom car carrier. I picture a nice
alum. rollback on it. Question 2 does your auxiliary have overdrive. I
solved that by a 5sp OD main so I have double OD. My 5 trucks all have
Clark 5ODs ill tell ya that it took a long time to find them. What I would do
is look for a tandom cut off bud wheels with air and air ride if you want,
but I think being in the 4's should work good for a gas job and a lot of
trucks around dont even run front brakes, or even a air tag axle so there
is six brakes. The big problem being the front axle being narrow 1948-52.
The last one my son did although a 53 F900 air backing plates from the
60s&70's bolt right on. Nice to start with a nice straight truck !!!!!!!sam

 

Oh I forgot, just click on my garage, then I think click on more pics thats a life story
there.

 

There's nothing wrong with a tandem car carrier but with this truck having a 279 powerplant, it is rather underpowered for turning all that mass of twin Rockwells by themselves, much less add a bed of any kind. I personally prefer a ramp bed as to me it looks more period correct. The dovetail on a ramp bed can't start until it clears the last axle, so you just added another 2-3 feet in length and now it won't fit in my shop. It won't pull hills now, so a double overdrive won't fix anything. This truck is being purpose built as a car hauler with a ramp bed. Tandems don't fit in the equation, sorry. It's a shame to lose the truck's tandem "heritage", but it also has been listed in the classifieds in hopes of a trade for a similar condition COE (that would better fit in my shop) for anyone wishing to preserve the tandems on this truck. Having heard nothing from anyone, I need to proceed so I can get this truck where it is useable for the purpose I bought it for.

 

So the truck has had a motor transplant already? Do you plan to upgrade? 279 is the same block as a 332, you could go to one of those, or bore it out to the lincoln size of 368. I have a 332 on an engine stand right now, it ran when pulled from an F750 last year. It is a 63, so it has the newer intake with a holley 4 barrell, and air compressor on it.

 

Nice project! Can't wait to see how it turns out.

Are you running a duplicate thread at ATHS?

 

Not a member at ATHS, just have the VP that lives about 3 miles down the street.

The 279 Lincoln is stock, 52 is first year for the OHV engine. F7 got the 279, F8 got the 317. Already had a 368 sitting here for it, sold it last spring. The 279 will likely be good for about 7 mpg. Install a 368, sure it can now pull all the hills you want, but the 4 barrel carb will have you down around 4-5 mpg. I'll likely find a 7.3 or 5.9 for it, should make it more dependable, about 10 mpg or so, and will be more able to find parts if I decide to take off across country.

 

You'll be very happy with the 5.9 cummins. I put one in a 56 f600 ... 6sp main + 4sp aux, 3.31 ratio ... 10k lb truck 18mpg

 

18 mpg would be the ticket, but my new rear ratio is 6.143:1, so I don't think I'll make that...

I did wind up moving the tank up a bit more, the top of the brackets are 3" above the frame. The frame on this is three thicknesses from the front cab mount back, and as the outer one was installed circa 1953 when the fire truck conversion was done, they aren't tempered. Even though the 18v Milwaukee was going through 3/4" or so, it was rather easy drilling.




Drained the old tank and thought I'd use some paint strainers to keep from having the fuel flow issues with this tank. I think we may have found the problem...



Got the old tank drained and removed, it will be a good time to vacuum out all the crevices back there behind the seat to keep the lower cab corners rust free.... Here it is after the test run (and fuel fill up)



One item crossed off the list, next will be to get started on the rear(s) swap.

 

So,YOU'RE going to be USING THIS AS a tow truck for business or is this just for your personal use? Thanks i'll be following this thread.

 

Personal use, not for hire

 

Post as many pics as you can!!

 

Looks great!

 

That is going to be an awesome truck.

Does that front axle match the spread on the frame rails? If it does whats it off of?

Ive had a tough time finding a front axle for my 66 f800. Like to get some outboard drums and some tighter pins... But the frame on the truck spreads out unlike most trucks. Maybe they didnt do that back in the 50s??

 

That is going to be an awesome truck.

Does that front axle match the spread on the frame rails? If it does whats it off of?

Ive had a tough time finding a front axle for my 66 f800. Like to get some outboard drums and some tighter pins... But the frame on the truck spreads out unlike most trucks. Maybe they didnt do that back in the 50s??