Notices
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

White Lightnin' Build thread (88 F150 4x4)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #196  
Old 04-21-2015, 04:54 PM
Bob Gervais's Avatar
Bob Gervais
Bob Gervais is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Charlestown, RI
Posts: 2,403
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I think clear would probably yellow after a while.
 
  #197  
Old 04-21-2015, 05:04 PM
rugermack's Avatar
rugermack
rugermack is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sonoita Hills, AZ
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Those valve covers would look great, I was actually looking at them too.
 
  #198  
Old 04-21-2015, 05:28 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts











Some pics I don't think I got uploaded because of the computer going into retard state.

Last pic is a edit I did for the paint scheme I plan without any tinted lenses. Think instead of getting the smoked LED tails I might go for the regular LED tails. I think it looks pretty good really. I think I might add a overhead visor like diesel brad has on his blue and white crew cab and add a soft tonna and it should be looking pretty good.


Bob your right I didn't think about it yellowing.
Rugger I have wanted those valve covers ever since Nick with the orange jacked up 2wd truck got them on his truck just wasn't sure if it would look right with everything else but it sounds like it will.
Trav
 
  #199  
Old 04-22-2015, 07:41 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Well put oil in her today and went to turn it over by hand on the harmonic balancer bolt and nothing.
Pretty sure I stabbed the engine wrong. Going to play with it a bit this weekend and see if I can get it right. Won't be able to get the parts I need till next Friday but I at least need the thing to turn over. A little ticked off but hey I can't get everything 100% everytime right?
Will get it figured out no matter what.
Trav
 
  #200  
Old 04-29-2015, 10:43 AM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Pulled the engine out and restabbed it and it turns great now!


Now just need the helicoils, fluids, and thermostat gasket. Also going to order the speedometer gear in the t-case.


I removed the driveshaft already and taped off the rear t-case so it is easier in the future.
Once I get it all together I should be good. Only thing is is next week I am going to be jam packed but I guess we shall see.


Trav
 
  #201  
Old 04-29-2015, 06:15 PM
Bob Gervais's Avatar
Bob Gervais
Bob Gervais is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Charlestown, RI
Posts: 2,403
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Glad to hear it turns now! What was the issue?
 
  #202  
Old 04-30-2015, 04:28 AM
fnfast88's Avatar
fnfast88
fnfast88 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Redneckfordf2502002







Would upload more photos but computer is going into retard state like usual.


Engine is looking just like the pic above just with the powersteering and ac bracket on.


Dad removed the dent from when it fell in the fire pit on the bed.


Hopefully tomorrow will get it more wrapped up. Either next pay day or the following pay day will get the few more parts I need. Right now driving the GMC since the explorer blew up (runs but overheats). I should have her running by may and registered and insured. This will be my permanent daily driver instead of my original thoughts of the explorer being it.


Once I get a few more things done on her that are cheap and will make her more reliable I plan to start saving money for:
trick flow 170cc aluminum heads
1.7 or 1.72 roller rockers
headers
aftermarket valve covers
4.10 or 4.56 gears
dual exhaust system
and electric fan


Then after that going to start with exterior work including:
paint job
HID projector headlights *will be making my own of these and paint the chrome black then put the clear corner lens on unless I decided I mine as well just buy them from him* click here for example: Teaser....87-91 headlights - FSB Forums
these smoked tail lights: Retrofitted LED taillights - FSB Forums
soft bed cover
moog cc844s
33s
and start adding my lights.


I may venture a bit away from the plan every once in a while but going to try to stick to the plan.
Trying to get as many hours in at work so that I can be able to pay for it.
Decided I am not going to go hot rod build (the 408) with this truck as I am planning after I get the above plan plus a little more to get a 66 or 67 mercury comet convertible, ford fairlane convertible, or Ranchero with a 514 stroker lowered 2 inches front IFS, 4 linked rear, c6, and custom candy apple red paint job!
Trav
You might look into a different head choice don't get me wrong I love trick flow stuff for my mustang but they don't have a ton of port velocity at low lift like you will need in a 4x4 truck. The performer heads may work better and at a lower price point. Also the 1.72 rockers might put you in piston to valve clearance issues. Did you check this measurement before you assembled the heads. If so take cam lift with stock rocker ÷1.6 then ×1.72
So if stock lift were
.444÷1.6=actual lift is .2775×1.72=.4773 lift with 1.72 if your piston to valve clearance was within .040 you would be in trouble even at .010 its too close. A slight loft of yhe valve at the wrong time and bang. you buy the pedistall mount rockers now you will need stud mount later for the aftermarket heads.
 
  #203  
Old 04-30-2015, 02:30 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Gervais
Glad to hear it turns now! What was the issue?
Torque convertor wasn't seated properly causing it to bind in the trans making me not be able to turn the engine over.

Originally Posted by fnfast88
You might look into a different head choice don't get me wrong I love trick flow stuff for my mustang but they don't have a ton of port velocity at low lift like you will need in a 4x4 truck. The performer heads may work better and at a lower price point. Also the 1.72 rockers might put you in piston to valve clearance issues. Did you check this measurement before you assembled the heads. If so take cam lift with stock rocker ÷1.6 then ×1.72
So if stock lift were
.444÷1.6=actual lift is .2775×1.72=.4773 lift with 1.72 if your piston to valve clearance was within .040 you would be in trouble even at .010 its too close. A slight loft of yhe valve at the wrong time and bang. you buy the pedistall mount rockers now you will need stud mount later for the aftermarket heads.
The edelbrock performer and trick flow twisted wedge both have 170cc intake runners which I figured was the best. The reason I was looking at trick flows were they had 61 and 58 cc option and eldebrock has 60 and 58. I am afraid the 60 and 58 may put my compression ratio to high. I still want to run on 87 octane. Only thing smaller was the AFR 165ccs and I am not sure how those will do.


Ya I ruled out 1.72 rockers. I am looking at 1.7 roller rockers.
With 1.7 roller rockers and the comp 31-255-5 cam that I have it will have a lift of 0.503625 on the exhaust which is the highest. The cam with 1.6 rockers are .474 on exhaust.


Also I wouldn't buy the rocker arms till I got the heads.


Pretty much I just want a little more power (if I can torque) while still being daily driver friendly.
Trav
 
  #204  
Old 04-30-2015, 04:12 PM
Bob Gervais's Avatar
Bob Gervais
Bob Gervais is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Charlestown, RI
Posts: 2,403
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Redneckfordf2502002
Torque convertor wasn't seated properly causing it to bind in the trans making me not be able to turn the engine over.

Good to know, in case I ever run into that problem.

Also looking forward to what you do with the heads. I'm on the fence about what I want to do when I refresh the 351 in mine.
 
  #205  
Old 04-30-2015, 04:30 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Gervais
Good to know, in case I ever run into that problem.

Also looking forward to what you do with the heads. I'm on the fence about what I want to do when I refresh the 351 in mine.
not sure if it is worse on the E4OD but just make sure you stick the torque convertor on the trans all the way then you will know your good more then likely.
The heads are a ways out unless my wages and hours go up but want to start planning now.
The 92 F250 351 I have to rebuild, much later on I might rebuild the 95 F250s 351 and upgrade it, then if I can't get the 300 I6 running cheap in the 91 F150 4x4 I might stick a carbed 351W either way with ZF5.
All I know is my other brother is extremely lucky he has a 91 F250 4x4 with 460 EFI ported heads and soon 34-255-5 cam and soon 3" exhaust system (not sure if I should make a build thread on the two 91s).




Trav
 
  #206  
Old 04-30-2015, 05:18 PM
fnfast88's Avatar
fnfast88
fnfast88 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
58cc will put you between 9.3 and 9.4 to 1. 61cc Will be between 9.05 and 9.1 to 1. Go 58 cc and never look back. The added compression will just make it sound better and have a bit more torque. Look at flow numbers at .500 lift. That's where your cam and rocker combo are at. Make sure when you look at flow numbers you look to see how many inches of water they are tested at. 28 is standard. If it is a different number the measurement will need to be converted. With a margin for error.
 
  #207  
Old 04-30-2015, 05:33 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by fnfast88
58cc will put you between 9.3 and 9.4 to 1. 61cc Will be between 9.05 and 9.1 to 1. Go 58 cc and never look back. The added compression will just make it sound better and have a bit more torque. Look at flow numbers at .500 lift. That's where your cam and rocker combo are at. Make sure when you look at flow numbers you look to see how many inches of water they are tested at. 28 is standard. If it is a different number the measurement will need to be converted. With a margin for error.
If I can get torque for the same price then I am going for the 58ccs. By the way I am running H606P40 pistons not the original pistons. They are supposedly for a HO engine.
How do I know what the flow numbers are @ .500 lift? I am using Comps website and summit to find out on the cam and on the heads trick flow, eldebrock and summits site and I don't see anything about flow numbers.
Also on trick flow has the 58 ccs. Eldebrock has 60ccs.
Also Trick flow only has 2.020 intake valve and Edelbrock has 2.020 and 1.9 intake valves which ones should I run?
In the notes for edelbrock it says use 1.9" for stock pistons.
Trav
 
  #208  
Old 04-30-2015, 05:47 PM
fnfast88's Avatar
fnfast88
fnfast88 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That will be with the heads you buy
 
  #209  
Old 04-30-2015, 05:57 PM
Redneckfordf2502002's Avatar
Redneckfordf2502002
Redneckfordf2502002 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Backwoods of Snowflake AZ
Posts: 10,080
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Ok so I did find the flow numbers:
Eldelbrock 60cc performer heads:
60379 with 1.9" valves has 223/168
60399 with 2.02" valves has 229/172


Trick Flow fast as cast 170cc 58cc heads:
TFS-51410010-M58 with 2.02" valves has 257/187


So I am guess I should go with the edelbrock 60379s since I won't have piston problems.
However does this mean I can run 1.7 rocker arms with my 31-255-5 comp cam making 0.503625 (with the 1.7s) on the exhaust side?
Trav


Edited as I got the wrong specs at first.
 
  #210  
Old 05-01-2015, 04:54 AM
krooser's Avatar
krooser
krooser is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you want torque swallow your pride and use the smaller valves. You need port velocity at lower rpm's not peak horsepower.

You can get some additional good advice from pro engine builders, racers, etc @ Speed Talk: Interviews - Racing Books - Racing Forum and find the engine tech forum. There are several good Ford engine builders on there.
 


Quick Reply: White Lightnin' Build thread (88 F150 4x4)



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:34 PM.