Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums - 64 F100/94 350 4x4 Frame Swap/Upgrade and Restoration

Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/index.php)

- 1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/forum40/)

- - 64 F100/94 350 4x4 Frame Swap/Upgrade and Restoration (https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1130408-64-f100-94-350-4x4-frame-swap-upgrade-and-restoration.html)

64 F100/94 350 4x4 Frame Swap/Upgrade and Restoration

Howdy all,

I have been a long time reader of this forum and you guys have really helped me out in the past with most of my decisions thus far with this build. I am a senior in college and a few summers back I purchased an old 4x4 and began to plan. So, over the last few summers, I have been collecting parts and pieces to build my dream truck. I have done R.O.T.C. and have been saving my money for this build for the last four years. This summer I plan to dedicate all of my time to finishing it.

I want to create this to show others what I have done and to encourage them to continue. In addition, I would love input and suggestions as to what might improve upon my plans.

I plan to make a daily driver for when I am not on my motorcycle. It will be a classic looking old truck with updated/upgraded parts to make it the most dependable for daily driving. I will be driving across the country with it, multiple times; to the various places that I will be going for the Army. I will also be hauling a trailer the entire time. I will be placing a large displacement “torque monster” into it and back it with gears able to allow it to cruse at a comfortable RPM and capitalize on the torque of the engine. I have experience building flat beds for trucks and will be building myself one for it.

What I have:

Truck = 64 Ford F100, Wimbledon white, stock drive train, T98 four speed, Spicer 44 up front, and Spicer in the back. The bearings in the back are destroyed and it currently, reluctantly roles on the axles. Two aftermarket gas tanks up near the rear fender wells they look to be home made, but well done. Other than that everything was stock and ran when I took it apart. It had the usual rust in the floor pan, the end of the bed under the lights, and on the fender wells. I discovered it one day on the side of the road for 2000, talked the owner down to $1300, it was his daily driver at the time.

Engine = “mirror 105” 361 Block. The Block had the FT “front single point” style mount, no mounts on the side or towers on the frame rails. I believe the engine started as a FT motor but it has been molested and I believe it was rebuilt as a 360. I have taken apart the top end but not the bottom end. After quick measurements, I believe it has not been bored over at all. It has D2TE-AA heads on it from my measurements. Not the five holes of the FT crossover setup with ten manifold bolts.

Transmission = I bought a Clark 285v33 that I believe has the following ratios. 1st-6.99, 2nd -4.09, 3rd -2.24, 4th -1.47 and fifth is direct. I got this pulled from the junkyard with the clutch assembly and fork, flywheel, pressure plate, and starter for $450. It came out of a 76 F800.

Rolling donor chassis= A 94 F350, solid un molested frame, Dana 60 Front axle with disk brakes, Sterling 10 Bolt rear with drum brakes. 410 gear ratios with 160000 on them and a BW 1345 Transfer case. Comes with fuel system and tanks, breaks hooked up, steering still attached up to the steering box. Previous owners make custom trucks professionally (currently working on, and almost done with a F350 Ranger/Bronco, Cummings turbo, King ranch interior, with custom lifted suspension) literally left just pulled the body and engine/transmission out and were going to use it as there next base frame but needed cash so decided to sell it to me for $1300

Other ends and pieces = Edelbrock Performer RPM $120, Used dual 3” offset Magnaflow Super 40’s off of an indoor dyno machine $110. Brute II swinging, spring loaded bumper, 4 point tow mirrors, set of brand new all terrain tires studded, brand new dual tank fuel hoses/pump/switches, Drive lines, all off of a truck I parted out.

What I plan to do

Engine = Use the block as the base for a the stoker motor. Bore .030 over and stroke it to 4.250 for a total of 445 cubes with the kit from the guys at survival motor sports. Have the D2TE-AA valves replaced with CJ sized valves. 2.09 intakes and 1.65 exhaust. Then port the exhaust bowls. Mainly in the roof to flow a bit more air. A cam that the stroke kit suggests. A High volume oil pump and Milodon stock replacement FE pan, along with the oiling modifications that are common to increase oil flow to the bearing mains. Edelbrock Performer Intake, Edelbrock Performer 750 Carb, Dynomax Ceramic coated headers, K&N air filter, dual 3 inc h exhaust exiting at a 45 in front of the rear wheels.

Drive train = the Clark 285v33 placed into the 94 fords frame. DET-225SL-29(A/B) Detroit lockers in the front and the rear, with 3.54 ring and pinion sets or smaller ratio, can I get smaller??? 37” BFGoodrich All-Terrain T/A KO, or comparable tires.

Body = Sand blast it myself, do the body work, to cut out the rust in the body, primer, paint, undercoating. Classic Red/off-white two tone paint scheme. The fender wells will be over sprayed with undercoating to the outsides of the fenders to keep rust down. This will be similar to the look/shape of fender flares. I would like it to appear as original as possible from the outside. Possibly install newer, fully adjustable seats/bench from late model King Ranch. I will have to move/fabricate body mounts for the frame to fit the body. Possible two-inch body lift. New “ezwire” wiring harness.restoration

Bed = custom flat bed with headache rack and detachable lumber rack. Tool boxes along the sides to form an enclosable bed. Extra gas tanks on the sides hanging from the bed along with more lockable toolboxes. Topper placed over the toolboxes that is lockable. Small, built in, hidden air compressor and tank. rear bumper “Brute 2”

I will post pics of what i have done already later

Thanks

well it sounds like you have been doing your research and it sounds like an awesome build. Why not but put the axles from the 94 under the 64 frame. This would be faster as you would not have to do motor mounts or body mounts, trust me they are time consuming. Also do not underestimate the amount of time it takes to do the body work. It takes a long freaking time when you start rebuilding the whole floor.

Should look good go for it. Waiting on those pics.:-wink

sounds like a great build, and judging by how low that transmisssion is geared and how much torque that motor will be making, i would say you probably could go smaller than 3.54 for the ring and pinion, but you'll have to look into that. good luck.

I have several reasons why I would like to use the 94 350 frame down as one solid piece.

1) The frame itself is a very good frame. It has a good reputation and is a desirable one for the aftermarket/mud bogging/custom crowd. It is what a lot of people look for as a start for a build. It is a strong frame, which has not been boxed and allows it to twist and flex without any problems. Not that I really plan on going bogging or crawling with it, although off road uses is always possible.

2) Why mess with a good thing if there is no reason to? This frame has all the steering assembly, break lines and components, gas tanks and fuel lines, attached to it already. The symmetry of the suspension and drive train is all figured out and thought through by the Ford people, who are MUCH smarter than I am. I cannot see replacing everything frame down on the 64 being less involved then putting the cab on a new chassis and only having to fabricate/modify new body mounts.

3) The 94 is the heavier duty of the two and is in absolutely, great condition. The 64’s frame on the other hand is coming up on 50 years old and though it is in great condition for its age (had some rather rubberized under coating), it will undoubtedly have problems of its own. I would like the more modern frame. In addition, I won’t need to chop/shorten the frame because it is not a big deal if I have another 20 ish (not sure of the difference) inches to work with due to the longer wheel base of the 94 frame vs. that of the stock 64. The longer frame will give me more room to play with on the design of the bed. The longer wheelbase will also be nice for towing

The engine mounts should not be a real problem, there is only one on the front of the block and it is attached to the forward most cross member. I plan to start there and then working my way back placing the cab on the frame rails. If needed I can make a specialized cross member but I don’t foresee the need. There is no need to worry about the rear limits of the cab because I am going to make the bed.

As far as the bodywork, the body as a whole is in great condition replacing the floorboards and some supports and dealing with surface rust on the front fenders is all I will have to do. Is not that much of a worry to me. My father has lots of experience doing body work and will be able to give me plenty of advice.

The engine will put out 450hp and 550ft lbs, which is not uncommon from what I have read, especially with the other parts I will be putting into it. It is not that big of a cost jump to go to the 445 stroke vs. the 410 that i had originally planned, so why not!?!

Here is an example: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...t-stroker.html

And here is their website: FE Stroker Kit Tech

Does anyone have a good source for prefabricated patch panels for this year? My Truck Parts Magazine does not have all the floor panels that i might need.

Also a good place to buy Ring and Pinion sets that are a lower ratio than 3.54? I have tried looking on the web and forums but with no luck.

Thanks

This is the day i picked it up on the side of the road

http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/...8/100_4176.jpg

http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/...8/100_4175.jpg

http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/...8/100_4174.jpg

Also, on the note of trying to find lower ratio ring and pinions i answered my own question. Answer is No... It is possible to get sets that go as low as 3.07 for the rear end but finding matching ones for the front will not work, it would require ALOT of work and fabrication and is not worth it.

Here is a link about the rear end gears and about halfway down there is someone with my same situation, the forum walks through possible solutions.

The 10.25 Sterling Axles 3.07 Ratio Thread

This means that 3.54 is the lowest ratio that can be put in a Dana 60? Front and Back?

Thanks

Howdy 'WFB64,'

"As far as the bodywork, the body as a whole is in great condition replacing the floorboards and some supports and dealing with surface rust on the front fenders is all I will have to do. Is not that much of a worry to me. My father has lots of experience doing body work and will be able to give me plenty of advice."

Looking forward to helping son, honestly if my '69 Highboy' wasn't in such good condition, I'd be looking to do the same 'swap.'

I told you 'Levi' responded to the photos I sent him, and said once again "Let him know if you need any help or get stuck on something and need advice. As if there isn't enough here!

Sincerely,

Dad, sorefeet

One thing that might not have crossed your mind yet is that it is very possible that the tires will stick a good bit out past the front fenders. Im not 100% sure but im guessing that the 94 axles will be wider leading you to have to use back set wheels or have tires that stick out. Not a big deal but something that might come up. Also why would you want gears higher than 3.54s?? Im running a 64 F250 with 265/75R16 tires and a wore out 352 with a 4 speed. It runs 65 on the highway just fine and it has 4.11s. Even with the built up motor by the time you get 37s on there i think you are going to want to stay with the 4.11s or higher. I guess it depends on whether it is going to spend 99 percent of the time on the interstate at 75 or most of the time below 55. Even with that much power and a low first gear you might want the 4.11s to help get started if you ever hook onto a pretty heavy load thats why most of these trucks came with 4.54 gears.

Oh and by the way i don't think the rear axle is a spicer. It should be a ford 9in. Ford used the spicer rear for a while but i think they phased them out sometime in the 50s in favor of the 9in.

Howdy,

I have started another thread on the Gears/Trans/T-case Forum for just the issue you raised about over driving my engine "too much"... I will be using it to drive across the country towing an inclosed "toy hauler" trailer or a 19ft camp trailer, so it won't be massively heavy stuff. The VAST majority of its driving will be on the highway/freeway, so yes i would like it to be able to get up and go if needed.

There is a very good chance that i will also be putting a overdrive into it from Gear Vendor. Which will be at 22% drop in final drive ratio. I am thinking that i will hold off on the ring and pinion gear changes until i test drive all of this with the gears that are in in and see how it goes. I can always pull it back into the shop afterwards for another round.

I may end up going with the 35s in the end. I am not sure how it will all look with the new frame and its stance, i have however, seen several of these trucks with a body lift(such as 2") and larger tires on them and they just look SEXY...

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...l#post11298433

The engine will be making ballpark 400 LBS torque during daily driving situations of under 3000 RPM, up to 500-550 at 5000+RPM. It is going to have lots of grunt to get up and going. I will admit that I am not too experienced as to what the HP and TQ of this means in real world use. I have read TONS of online forums and truck builds though. My only experience with an FE is my father's 69 high boy with a run of the mill 390, which had headers, a 4 speed and 4.10 gears.

As for the body and the tires fitting with the body. Yes, the newer axles are wider by several inches. The body lift should help the situation some i believe? I would be OK with the tires protruding a bit from the body. Running fender flares is also an option if needed to keep flying debris to a minimum (i like the idea of that anyway).

You are probably right about the rear end not being a "Spicer". I focused mainly on the front end and figuring out what i had there. I knew from the beginning that i was going to want an updated drive train for this truck. The bearings in the rear end from the 64 had completely destroyed themselves and i had had several of my older friends tell me that they had had problems with the bearings (flat, roller style vs. newer tapered bearings) coming apart and the wheels/axles falling off under extreme hauling conditions.

I will probably try and sell the 64 frame and drive train to someone on the cheap who wants to do a more original restoration or conversion.

Well if like you say in your other thread you dont want/need to run 75 i think the 4.11s will be fine. According to the calculator online with 35s at 65mph you will be right around 2500 rpm. That is pretty comfortable even in my truck which has no interior and a old 352. I recently drove my truck 300miles back to college and i held it at about 2800 rpm with 31in tires,a 4 speed,and 4.11s. Im figuring it was about 65-70 mph and it was a little noisy because my truck in unrestored but it had no problem doing it. A freshly rebuilt motor should run 2500 rpm all day long as long as it is a quality rebuild and is broken in right. If you add in the overdrive i think it would be silly to change the gears because that is going to lower your rpms enough at highway speed that you might have to shift out of overdrive to pass or climb hills. I say get it put together with the 4.11s and see what you think and if you want the 3.54s it a weekend job to put them in.

Just chiming in to support your decision to do the body swap. The later F350 has so many advantages. I am in the process of doing it the other way. Upgrading my 59 F350 to be more modern one piece at a time. It will never be a match for my 92. I'm a pretty good shade tree engineer, but I'm afraid the guys at Ford are light years ahead.......

Quote:

Originally Posted by 59flatbedford (Post 11302975)

Even with the built up motor by the time you get 37s on there i think you are going to want to stay with the 4.11s or higher. I guess it depends on whether it is going to spend 99 percent of the time on the interstate at 75 or most of the time below 55. Even with that much power and a low first gear you might want the 4.11s to help get started if you ever hook onto a pretty heavy load thats why most of these trucks came with 4.54 gears.

My fathers truck and the 4 speed with the 4.10 and we never used the first gear to start unless hauling a load/trailer. The T18 first gear was impractical to use for daily start and stop traffic. When up to highway speed you could put it in forth and know that it could handle more gears. there were always times when the driver would try and hit a "5th" gear just to find an empty space in the pattern. The entire time you felt as if the cruising RPMs were excessive. It was basically a three speed daily driver, and then had huge jumps for hauling that made it tough to get up to speed or pull an incline. I believe that the T18/T19/T98 were all very similar so far as driving characteristics.

The T18 gear spread was like this: 4.02/2.41/1.41/1.00. Between shifts it jumps 40%/41%/29%.

The Clark 285v33 has 6.99/4.09/2.24/1.46/1.00 gears which are jumps of 42%/45%/34%/32%.

In effect the Clark is basically the same as the T18, each transmission having the same final drive of 1:1

With a 4.10 rear end, the T18 turns into 16.428/9.881/5.781/4.10 and the Clark 285v33 into 28.659/16.769/9.184/5.986/4.10. This situation is an exact copy what was in my fathers truck except the Clark has an absolute "wall climbing" first gear.

With a 3.54 rear end the T18 turns into 14.23/8.531/4.991/3.54 and the Clark 285v33 into 24.745/14.479/7.930/5.168/3.54. In this situation the Gears in the Clark are more spread out from that of the T18. The Clark's first gear would not be used other than in hauling extreme loads. Second would be an improvement over the T18's for use as an actual day to day driving. From there on it just gets closer and closer with each gear.

The Gear Vendor over drive I want to use will be attached to the back half of the T-case. The larger differences between transmition gears caused by the 3.54 rear end will make the use of this overdrive even more useable and practical. It has a 22% overdrive which will perfectly split the Clark's jumps of 42%/45%/34%/32% almost in half. As for the finnal overdrive of the Gear Vendor's "6th" gear it will be 0.88. This is still not as much as an over drive as the ZF5 or the NV5600 which are both down around 0.78

On top of all this I would like to increase tire size. I have been playing with the idea of different sizes and the effect it would have. The larger diameter tire has the same effect of the numerically lower gear ratio of the 3.54 rear end.

· Tire 1 - 37x12.50R17 = Diameter Difference: 14.34%, Revs per Mile:561.7
· Tire 2 - 315/70R17 = Diameter Difference: 7.69%, Revs per Mile:605.3
· Tire 3 - 315/75R16 = Diameter Difference: 8.33%, Revs per Mile:601.1

Tire 1 & 2 & 3 would drop the final drive ratio to.75/.82/.81 respectively. This simulates the same as having the .78 of the ZF5 or the NV5600.

Does all this sound right? Any objections? Did i do the math wrong or overlook anything? If all this is right then i am more than confidant about this combo being with the overdrive and the ability to gear split if/when needed.

Also, does anyone know if it is possible to get 15" wheels with an 8-6.5 bolt pattern? Because i can get a good deal on a set of 35x12.50R15 = Diameter Difference: 9.45%, Revs per Mile:593.7

Thanks

Howdy,

So i am doing more research and i have come across the idea of using larger fenders from a 60's F-600. This way i will not need to design or build fender flairs, plus i kinda like the look of them and the idea of built in running boards is interesting.

Here is a link for cross reference

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...d-fenders.html

Thoughts?

Thanks,

Whitefishboy64

As one of the rednecks here at FTE I say ditch the gas motor and throw in a diesel. Just my honest opinion.