fordtrucks61-79-digest Friday, February 6 1998 Volume 02 : Number 074

Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks Digest
Visit our web site:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send
email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the
In this issue:

Re: Dead at 55mph []
Re: Y-Block Question []
Re: Vent windows. [marko ]
Re: Vent windows. ["Michael Connor" ]
Re: Brakes, bleeding, pressure...... []
Re: 1972 ranger! []
Re: greasable throw bearing/tranny/transfer question [marko
Re: 66 67 Ford 7 liters ["Greg Charney" ]



Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 21:26:03 -0800
Subject: Re: Dead at 55mph

The KISS principal still applies!


Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 20:15:53 -0800
Subject: Re: Y-Block Question


I called my friend today and he is going to look for the tubes. He siad
it may take a couple of days, so hang in there.
I'll get back to you on Saturday or Sunday and let you know if he has


On Thu, 5 Feb 1998 07:55:59 -0600 (CST) Jesus Cardoso
>Neil (as well as anyone else that would like to help),
> The concern that I have about my engine is that I put 600
>into it (400 at highway speeds). The engine was "knocking" louder
>normal, but I just thought that the valves needed adjusting. I took
>back to get them (the shop that put the engine in for me) to get
>the valves readjusted, it did not help. Then I took it back again and
>that is when they found the head so dry that it was starting to rust.
>had to replace the rocker assembly and four rocker arms and that is
>they noticed that there was only one tube on the other head.
> It looks like the machine shop is going to replace the tube
>with a
>piece of regular old copper tubing. Is this a good idea?
>What are the chances that other parts of the engine are damaged? The
>truck was also hesitating pretty bad, I am not sure if it was because
>the bad rocker assembly or some other problem.
> Thats for your help,
> Jesus Cardoso
>On Wed, 4 Feb 1998 wrote:
>> Jesus,
>> It's me again (Neil). I wasn't able to call my friend today
>> the tubes but will for sure tomorrow. In answer to this question,
>> is one on each head. It would seem a little strange if there was
>> one needed. The reason for the tubes is that there is not
>sufficient oil
>> ports in the heads to get the oil to the rockers, therefore, the
>> provide the needed oil to lubricate the valve springs, rockers and
>> pushrods. My engine has the tube on both heads. When I rebuilt my
>> engine the first time, I made the mistake of placing the tube on
>> backwards on one of the heads. Needless to say, I ended up buying a
>> rocker arm and two rockers because they froze up due to the lack of
>> If you are missing the one, I would be very careful driving and
>> drive very far or for very long. Sounds like the guy at the machine
>> is trying to cover his butt, unless it was missing in the first
>> Neil G. von Koehe
> Jesus Cardoso, a.k.a. Chuy
> Graduate Research Assistant (Power System Automation Lab)
> Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University
> College Station, TX 77843-3128
> w: 409-845-4623, h: 409-775-0737, fax: 845-6259
> Personal Address: P.O. Box 2214, College Station, TX
> e-mail:, url:

>+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979
>| Send posts to,
>| List removal information is on the web site.
>+---------- Visit Our Web Site:

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]


Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 22:23:13 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: Vent windows.

At 11:20 PM 2/5/98 EST, you wrote:
>I would be interested in reading how to take it apart, is there a place to buy
>the closers, it seems the plastic piece attached to the closer or latch is
>worn out, its about 1/2" in length with a slope from wear
>Mike in Seattle

To take them out, first you take the door panel off, then take out the
window regulator and let the glass slide gently to the bottom of the door.
Then take out the bolt for the division bar and the screws in the front and
top of the door holding the vent window frame in.

But wait, what am I saying? There must be a way to take the handle out and
even the glass without disassembling the door, cause glass guys do it all
the time.

And I don't know how to do this.

I also know what you mean by the plastic things. Lemme check my Obsolete
Ford Parts book....

Oh boy.

Vent window handles, chrome plated, each for 73-77, 1979, and 1977, and
1978 (are you sitting down) different part numbers but the price is the same

$32.95 each!!!!


If you want em, I can fax you the page from the catalog.

marko in vancouver


Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 22:26:51 -0700
From: "Michael Connor"
Subject: Re: Vent windows.

Had the same problem with mine.

The wind would whistle around it and drive me nuts.
I went to the auto parts store and got a set of those
wing window locks. They have a piece that fits around
the edge of the window and a bar that goes across the
window frame. There is a knob that you can snug it up
with. Worked good- still have them on there, in fact.

Hope this helps,
Phoenix, AZ.
77 F250 4WD 460/C6

>Can anyone tell me how to fix vent window leak's?
>I have a 79 250 supercab. With about a half a note pad of paper holding the
>vent lock's shut on both the pass and driver side! And it's not getting
>any better...
>How can I fix this without replacing the whole window? Also how can I
>prevent this from happening again..
> Thank's to the group.....
>+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
>| Send posts to, |
>| List removal information is on the web site. |
>+---------- Visit Our Web Site: ----------+


Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 21:38:52 -0800
Subject: Re: Brakes, bleeding, pressure......

Gary, 78 BBB wrote:

> Last night I realized that since I have the double flare tools now I
> can put the original master cylinder fittings back on without having
> to use adapters etc. so I replaced one of them (only one I had lying
> around) and took all the loops out of the line at the MC

The loops were there to keep the lines from fatiguing and braking, when the body
flexes relative to the frame. I hope you don't have problems in the future!

to ensure no
> air could be trapped in there and now I have slightly better brakes
> and that's with just gravity bleeding by opening all the bleeders and
> just letting it run for a few minutes (one refill). Still have to
> fix the rear line and put the new driver side caliper on and then
> we'll bleed it agian with my new toy and see what happens :-)
> I'm really excited about this new toy since I won't have to wait for
> the kids to get home to help me bleed the brakes, ever again and it's
> got adapters for bleeding the master cylinder as well :-)
> BTW, double flaring is very easy once you get a couple of good ones
> and see how much pressure to use etc.. I'm no longer constrained by
> "standard" lengths and bulky adapters and my lines are tucked away
> and nicely bent with my tubing bender as well. It really make a neat
> installation. I've been told by experts tho that double flaring
> won't work with stainless tubing so be warned :-(
> If anyone's interested the number is 888-749-7977 and I talked to
> Rich (I think)
> Where's Murphy when
> you really need him??
> -- Gary --
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
> | Send posts to, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: ----------+


Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 00:46:08 EST
Subject: Re: 1972 ranger!

The only place to find the right stuff for the trim is obsolete FORD. I'm
in the process of restoring a 69' F-100 4X4 and this is where i found
everything i needed for a reasonable price. PLUS IT'S ORIGINAL FORD


Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 22:08:43 -0800
From: marko
Subject: Re: greasable throw bearing/tranny/transfer question

At 11:30 PM 2/5/98 -0500, you wrote:
>marko wrote:
>> Hey , OX
>> The greasable throw bearing, which shud work on your NP 435 (I forget if you
>> have a 390 or not) is a CR Services N1439.
> I have 351M, 2bbl, stock in my 78 Bronc. Still the same number.

I think so. the input shafts shud all be the same. But check to see, or
was that a question or a statement? I am thinking not of input shaft size
but of how the bearing mounts on the yoke of the "thrower".

>Speakin of this. Does the NP435/NP205 have different input/main/output
>shafts between 1/2 ton and 3/4 or 1 ton??
Input shafts are the same for all the np435's. I have a divorced 205 so I
dunno about such things.


> OX
>> marko in vancouver
>> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
>> | Send posts to, |
>> | List removal information is on the web site. |
>> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: ----------+
>+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961 thru 1979 --------------+
>| Send posts to, |
>| List removal information is on the web site. |
>+---------- Visit Our Web Site: ----------+


Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 13:57:37 -0600
From: "Greg Charney"
Subject: Re: 66 67 Ford 7 liters

Rocker cover sticker on my 6.6 liter says 400 cubic inches. ;-)
Greg Charney
'78 Ranger 400 auto Blue and Silver...

- -----Original Message-----

>In a message dated 98-02-04 11:00:24 EST, you write:
> which came out in 68 as I recall?? 406 was earlier and 410....??
> >>
>As I figure it, 7 liters is 'roughly' 427.1636 cubic inches. 61.02
>5.0 is 305.1, so Ch*vy has it about right - Ford's a little optomistic with
>the 302.
>5.2 is 317.3 - isn't that what Chr*sler calls a 318?
>Let me see, a Ford Flathead is .... 3.9 liters. 'Course a Merc flathead
>be 4.2.
>Marco, what's your 410 up there in liter land?
>I think the original Mercury Cougar XR7s were so-called because they had
>-7 liters.


End of fordtrucks61-79-digest V2 #74

Ford Truck Enthusiasts 1961-1979
Visit our web site:
ENDTAG; } ?>