Ford F-100/F-150/F-250/F-350 Pickup Truck Plastic Gas/Fuel Tank Rear Mount 19 Gal w/o EMS Hole 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

Not sure if it's the exact one for your truck but something like that.


Yeah, the 205 is more robust (cast iron and gear-to-gear), but I think that comes down to what kind of off-roading you do. You're not going to break a 208 going up some dusty old trails, but you might if you're rock crawling and come down on a big boulder.
If I was building some indestructible off-road "tank", I'd probably take the 205, but I've never once felt my 208 is a weak point by any means!

But yeah, I do have a spare 208. There's probably half a million miles on it. The chain stretched on it (they're about $100 a pop), but it looked brand new inside when I opened it up.

 

Well I have a cafe racer, Fordman. But not the point
nope. dropp'n the weight form my awesome 4x4 dd. I do want seats.. and a heater and tunes lol.
I did find a company that supposedly makes aluminum 300 blocks and heads.. but the price is insane. Not a 'change' in being a truck, just a 4x4 that's lighter and that is just awesome.

That is not a bad price! Maybe I'll go that rout with a new filler. I think mine is rusted and there is a leak at the very top anyways.
Looking around, the only references I can find is that the plastic ones are 20-30% lighter than steel. Which isn't bad and I should probably have a fresh one anyways.. 79 was a while ago.

 

What are you doing, Fordman, trying to talk him out of it? Come on, Burke's got a cool project going! How does a guy with mechanical abilities express himself but by a project that is unusual, maybe even weird, that showcases his talents and knowledge? Of all the people I'd expect to relate to this, it surely would be YOU, Fordman, with all of the stuff you've done!! Sure, he could get 60mpg by doing his thing with a Geo Metro or whatever, but so what?

Anyway, tell me about that Crown Vic front suspension, first I've heard about it. If you've already done a write-up on that, do you remember when/where/what forum/what title? Is this a swap for the twin I-beam in the broken-nose vans?

Waynaferd, what's a "roll pan"?

 

I'm not trying to talk anybody out of anything. I've got no problem with guys removing weight from the there trucks. As long as they don't take to an extreme where they start removing the few safety items these old trucks have. Like wipers, horns, seat belts, etc.

I was just pointing out if he is really worried about gas mileage, an old 4x4 is not the best option to start with. I wasn't saying he shouldn't do it.

And by the way I can't stand geo's!!

Oh believe me I've had my share of people telling me I'm nuts for trying that, my projects are stupid, that'll never work, etc. etc. etc.



The 2003+ Crown Vics came with a bolt in aluminum front suspension crossmember. It's like a more modern Mustang II suspension designed for a heavier vehicle. And people have found out they swap into 53-96 Ford trucks pretty easily. They lower the truck, dump some weight, give it better ride, handling, huge front disc brakes and rack and pinion steering. And you can get the whole set up for less then $500.00. Sometimes less then $200.00.

Do a search in the different forums here for the Crown vic front suspension swap.

Here's a couple topics that show the swap.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...irs-build.html

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...sion-swap.html



I don't know if it would work in the Econolines or not. The Econolines have a whole different frame set up. It would take some measuring & checking to know for sure. I don't own any half ton vans so I can't be a whole lot of help there.

 

WOW, Fordman, that second link, Dave Wild's build thread, is a wonderful resource for that swap. Nineteen pages, photos, wonderful!

Personally, I'm not into lowered pickups. I'm so old, I automatically think that has to be part of a two-word term: "pickup TRUCK," which to me means hard riding, plain, utilitarian WORK vehicles, and not shiny, low-stance "road-graders." But to each his own; variety is part of what keeps motorsports interesting. And I used to have (and should have kept) a '67 El Camino, which is kind of the same thing as those guys are building.

I don't know that I'd want to take already-scarce time to make that alteration to my van. But I also have a '41 Lincoln Continental coupe that I'm thinking about doing as a resto-rod (close to stock appearance, but with modern brakes, suspension, etc.) rather than a restoration. I'd have to check the wheelbase dim for both the Connie and that Crown Victoria . . .

One quibble I have with what I saw in the photos (Page 5 of that thread) was the frame doublers they made. I do a lot of doublers when repairing broken components of heavy equipment, such as broken booms and crowd-arms on excavators. When professional welders make doublers, they make what we call "fish-plates," which are doublers that have both ends tapering out. The usual advice is to have the length of the tapered ends each about (minimum) twice the width of the doubler. The idea of course is to dissipate the loads on the part, rather than having a stress-concentrator, which is what you get whenever you weld straight or nearly straight across a frame member, as Wild did. Yes, I know the factory sometimes welds nearly straight across frame members, but presumably they only do it where they know its not an issue. In other cases they use rivets instead of making welds, which always leave a heat-affected zone that constitutes a metallurgical disuniformity in the frame rail. Many who read this will now protest that they have welded across frame rails lots of times and never had a problem yet. Me, I prefer to err on the side of caution and best practices. I've spent enough time around aircraft to have seen how they make repairs in welded tubing structures, and also around racing, that the automatic impulse to avoid stress-concentrators is strong in me. Just sayin'.