Gary Lewis

You didn't notice in the pic the absence of a steering column, pedal box, et al? The "other monstrosity" is going in. In fact, it is in place and I just have to mark and drill the holes, which I hope to do tomorrow. But I don't want to glue it in. Instead I want to seal it. I'll see what I have to-hand.

Not sure I have seam sealer, but I'll check. However, the purpose is to keep water from getting under the backing plates and then through the holes in the cowl and tranny hump. There are two backing plates that have nutserts in them, and they go on the other side of the cowl and tranny hump so the bolts that go through the holes you can see in the brace don't leak. I'll use thread sealer on the bolts, but want to keep water from going under the backing plates and through the holes beside the bolts.

Me? A simple idea???? MARK ONE UP FOR ME!!!!!

What about foam tape? Pull off the protective strip, fold it over the linkage, and stick it to itself.

I'm really just debating which of the two pumps to use. Or, if I need to swap parts from one to the other. I have to keep the outlet fitting, but could put that in the E350's pump. That would then use the E350's flow control valve and spring. And, the stud for the brace would be there. Actually, since I like the return's angle and location on the Lincoln's Sag I should just swap the reservoir covers. That keeps the internals the same but gives me the outlet fitting I need as well as the return I want. Yes?

Jim - I don't understand the comment about disassembly. But, I'm pretty sure the firewall isn't delaminated yet. And I might as well use the bigger brace as I have it. But, no comment about sealant? You are the chemicals guru. RTV? Blackjack? The Right Stuff? Forma-A-Gasket?

Bill - I have to keep the outlet fitting (pressure union) as that's what mates with this hose. But looking at the exploded view, below, that doesn't appear to have anything to do with the pressure or flow. Is it the control valve that determines the pressure? It may be directly behind the fitting. So, are you saying I should swap the ham can, inc the fitting to the E-series pump?

I haven't been very diligent updating the check list, but I just did. Feels very good to tick off several boxes, but there are several more that are poised to be checked soon. Like the brake system, the hydroboost system, and the Saginaw power steering pump. And, speaking of the Saginaw pump, as posted in the Hydroboost Planning thread, I think I got the last issue sorted today, which was the pump-to-booster hose. After that, I moved on to the firewall brace. Got the truck back far enough that I could get in fairly easily and looked up under the dash and found this. Note that the bolt holes to the side aren't being used. In fact, the only fasteners being used are those of the clutch master cylinder. Here's a comparison on that brace to the Terrapin one that is going in. Which is stronger? And here's the Terrapin brace in place. Note that there are tabs on the top and side which have backing plates to go on the other side of the cowl and transmission hump. I'll use them, but wonder what the best sealant is for the plates? I'll use Loctite on the threads, but what is best between the plates and the body?

Absolutely! Jonathan got me that Sag out of an E-Series van. I've changed the post to reflect that, I hope. My bad. Thanks!

The good news is that I have a hose that fits from the Sag output fitting to the hydroboost's input fitting. The less-than-good news is that it fits the Sag that was intended for Dad's truck. So, I'm going to ask a couple of questions up front and then get into a long dialog about how this transpired. First, the Sag that works is the one Kyle/First Today got for me from a '77 - 79 Lincoln Town Car w/a 400. It is completely rebuilt and ready to go. The other Sag is the one Jonathan got me from an E350. It was working, so isn't rebuilt and probably doesn't need it. Q1: Is there any reason why one Saginaw pump is better than the other? Q2: If not and I use the Lincoln Sag then is there a reason to add the brace fitting in back? And now for the background. I went to Ameriflex, but as I got there Brandon/Bruno2 said "Kims International is a better option. Nathan down there is pretty good with hoses. That is where I get all of mine made." Well, I was at Ameriflex and Janey was waiting on me, so I went on in. Turns out the van Sag uses a "14MM bump tube" fitting and all they could do for me was to sell me a fitting that converted that to JIC #6 and then use a hose fitting. But my hose wasn't going to be long enough, and anyway that would have had the hose running right at the back of the pump, placing it near the exhaust, instead of over near the fender liner as far as it can get from the exhaust. However, they could put the flared fitting that I showed in previous posts onto my hose and it would fit the Lincoln Sag. So we went that way, and it fits nicely. The flared fitting they grafted on is on the left, and on the right you can see the new hose with it grafted on, and you can also see the old hose and the fitting that was cut off the new hose. Here's an overall view of how it all goes together using the Lincoln Sag. If there is nothing in the way as it all goes together I'll massage the bend out of the hose from the Sag to the booster, which is the one on the left at the firewall, and keep it closer to the other two hoses. And here is a shot from above showing the routing at the back of the pump, inc where the tee will go in the return: And now for shots of the two pumps - and I think you can tell which has been rebuilt and powder coated. But, a few things to point out. First, the mounting bolts are different, with the Lincoln pump having 3/8-16 bolts and the SD pump having 10 x 1.5MM bolts. Second, the return tubes are at different points and angles, and the one on the Lincoln pump has a better angle and location to use the SD return line. Last, the Lincoln pump doesn't have the brace stud, but has a bolt there, so it is possible that I could put the stud on there. But I'd bet it is metric and would need to be SAE.

Cool script! Yes, that was the bridge. Came in from the north, but went west to Houston when we left so didn’t get to experience the smoother road.

I hadn't noticed that. Those things are long and need to be protected, but that's a bit much. Total cost is ~$250 and you are getting a used dash pad that may break by the time you get it. I think it was Shaun that years ago found a perfect dash pad at the salvage, bought it and stored it blocked up to be level and not in a bind. And it cracked just sitting there. If I'm going to pay more than ~$150, which gets you a new dash cover, I'll go whole hog and pay $450 for a new dash pad. I'm not going to risk half of that on a used one.

I'll be sure to use plenty of my favorite uckumpucky.

Ozzie - You are now on the map. Do you know Kyle Avants/First Today? He is a good friend of mine and is down there somewhere. And speaking of there, Janey and I were almost there about 3 months ago. We came across a looooooong bridge that went thrump, thrump, thrump, thrump for the longest time and then hung a left into The Big Easy. Anyway, nice truck. Glad you are here.

Welcome. I remember how confusing it was for me trying to put the front dress on that 351W. They couldn't have made it harder had they tried. So I understand your need. Happy to help.

Shaun - A man's got to know his limitations. (That was originally intended in response to "At some point enough is too much." But then I realized that in the course of the conversation it applies better to myself and the Bronco. )

I hate problems that go away mysteriously. They always come back - the same way. Anyway, you are going to be so pleased when you get the sound deadening in. Makes a huge difference.

Thanks, Bill. But are you saying that 304 (18-8) would work on headers? Or do I need to find 316? And passivated 316 at that? By the way, shouldn't I move this discussion to the Big Blue's Transformation thread? And, back to hydroboost, the new Superduty Sag pump/hydroboost line came in today. In the morn I'll put it in place and mark the top side of the hose/fitting and ensure I have good pics of the arrangement. Then we are headed to town and I'll visit Ameriflex and, hopefully, get a fitting crimped on.

Good score, Jonathan. Those things are getting scarce. But, what about an IDI'd Bronco? Won't you need another core support for that? Wasn't that you talking about looking at a Bronco earlier today? Seriously though, half way home Janey said "I thought we were going to stop and look at a Bronco."

Well, see what you think of that. (An evil grin is on that page in the pdf, but doesn't seem to come through on the webpage. Anyway, I've read so many IBM documents that said THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK that I just HAD to do that. I've been waiting for that opportunity for decades!)

You could use a later model 40/20/40 seat that has a fold-down center. There's some info about bolting them in here: Documentation/Interior/Seat Interchangeability.

Yes, David, it will be sans catalyst. But, it'll have EFI so the only thing the decal would do would be to tell the emissions police that it wasn't supposed to have a cat. Hmmmm..... Thanks!

Jim - I don't like that idea because it may make people think they've gotten the wrong thing, but I tried it just to prove it'll work. Go take a look: http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/1982-bronco.html And, it does work. So, that pretty much proves it is something to do with a first page scanned at too high of resolution. And the easy solution it to only scan at 300 dpi. But once we've looked at this one long enough I'll see if I can compress it a bit. Maybe that will solve the problem.