1996 5.0 desirability

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #16  
Old 09-14-2014, 09:24 AM
The other Joe's Avatar
The other Joe
The other Joe is offline
Tuned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kennedy, NY 14747
Posts: 344
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Beanscoot
"I didn't state a price in the add.(sic)"

I think that we found the problem. Buyers will be much more likely to contact a seller who states a price, even if they want to offer less, because they at least have a ball park range for the price.

Also, you can post a link to your ad so we can look at it from the viewpoint of a buyer, and possibly give constructive suggestions.

Slightly different wording can make a sale. A few years ago a friend was selling a car hoist and had no interest for several months. A mutual friend of ours who is a former head-shrinker looked at the ad, made a few seeming trivial changes, and the item then quickly sold.
Oh good, a fu€#£n Internet grammar ****. I hope you get over your sickness that I cause by adding a extra d and not proof reading my Internet post.
It must suck to be so sensitive.

On to the subject.

You may have a good point on the no price thing. I normally do price stuff. But sometimes I just play it out and see what happens. I am usually low on my prices.

My next ad, (hope you feel better now) will have a price.

Thanks,
Joe
 
  #17  
Old 09-14-2014, 12:54 PM
baddad457's Avatar
baddad457
baddad457 is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: May 2003
Location: south louisiana
Posts: 11,122
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by The other Joe
Again, great info.

The Ranger sounds like a fun little truck to raise hell with. I bet it was very "traction limited".
I see you wrote the power band goes to 5500. Does it run out of air there? Or is it valve train parts that limit it to 5500?

I have a barn full of old Oldsmobile big blocks. They run up to 5500-6000 rpm.
I would expect a small block to go much higher.

Thanks for all this Ford education!

Joe W
It was likely the stock roller lifters that limited it. I had new springs on the heads, but nothing fancy to allow it to rev higher. Also had ported E7's (instead of GT40's) with the stock E7 valves on it. The stock F4TE cam is basically a mild RV grind, certainly not a high rpm cam. Running it with 1.7 Cobra rockers, it's about equal to the HO grind (.445/.473 lift, 256/266* duration, the HO is .445/.445 with a 276/266 duration, or 276/276 depending on what book you get the specs from)
 
  #18  
Old 09-15-2014, 10:12 AM
The other Joe's Avatar
The other Joe
The other Joe is offline
Tuned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kennedy, NY 14747
Posts: 344
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by baddad457
It was likely the stock roller lifters that limited it. I had new springs on the heads, but nothing fancy to allow it to rev higher. Also had ported E7's (instead of GT40's) with the stock E7 valves on it. The stock F4TE cam is basically a mild RV grind, certainly not a high rpm cam. Running it with 1.7 Cobra rockers, it's about equal to the HO grind (.445/.473 lift, 256/266* duration, the HO is .445/.445 with a 276/266 duration, or 276/276 depending on what book you get the specs from)

Thanks,
that cam sounds decent for a small 302.sounds like a fun ride. I like anything that goes fast. Especially if it's not to expensive to put together.
I need to find a lightweight body. If I only had time and money.

Joe W
 
  #19  
Old 09-15-2014, 02:20 PM
baddad457's Avatar
baddad457
baddad457 is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: May 2003
Location: south louisiana
Posts: 11,122
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Well the Ranger I had wasn't exactly light (3550 lbs with me in it, this was an ext cab 89) But it was a joy to drive running around town with the 4 speed. That cam generates more vacuum at idle, making the carb more responsive I think. It's also a torquey grind, frying the 275/60's on the rear axle was easy to do, even with traction loc. That cam was used in all the 94-97 pickup, van and Explorer/Mountaineers (96-2001) in the 5.0's and in the roller 351W as well.
 
  #20  
Old 09-15-2014, 02:31 PM
Beanscoot's Avatar
Beanscoot
Beanscoot is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: May 2007
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 2,030
Received 24 Likes on 20 Posts
The other Joe:

I apologize for the offending post.
I didn't mean to imply that a misspelled word was the problem with your ad, rather that it was the lack of a price.
I removed the offending post.
 
  #21  
Old 09-16-2014, 07:35 AM
The other Joe's Avatar
The other Joe
The other Joe is offline
Tuned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kennedy, NY 14747
Posts: 344
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by Beanscoot
The other Joe:

I apologize for the offending post.
I didn't mean to imply that a misspelled word was the problem with your ad, rather that it was the lack of a price.
I removed the offending post.

That's cool,

I just think that people who point out minor typing mistakes, especially by using that "sic" thing should find something better to do.

No problem.

Thanks,

Joe
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Chumpy
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
10
11-20-2014 10:07 AM
falcon5spd
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
1
12-24-2006 11:35 AM
poolpro51
1948 - 1956 F1, F100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
10
06-14-2006 04:01 PM
mtwright
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
4
07-07-2003 05:19 PM
Killzzz1
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
4
01-15-2002 06:09 AM



Quick Reply: 1996 5.0 desirability



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:39 AM.