Gary Lewis

54" is correct, but I'm not sure how critical that is. Erik said something about getting the shackle to hang down straight with no load, and I'm thinking that a little more or less won't be an issue. So, I'm wondering if you can rotate the bottom of the front bracket forward to bring the rear bolt hole down. I can't really see in the pic, but it does look pretty close to the top of the frame. Maybe drill the hole where you can and put it in place there? Can you bring the rear bracket forward any?

Yep, I agree there shouldn't be problems. As for the battery running low, my plan is to use the relay that currently parallels the two batteries to power the inverter since it is getting replaced with the Smart Isolator. I could leave it wired such that it comes on in either Acc or Run, or I could wire it to the switch on the dash and just not power the inverter until I want it.

Jim - Having the regular 110v outlets and a USB charging port certainly will be icing on the cake. But that has me re-thinking where to mount the inverter. Perhaps behind the seat would be a good place. That way I could run the USB power to a port on the dash, maybe replacing the ash tray, and could lean the seat forward to access 110 volts. That would minimize the big 12v cables to run it, although I may not run cables big enough to provide the full 3000 watts when I don't need that much power. But I'm on the fence on that. And, as we've discussed, I may utilize the remote port by having a switch in the row of them above the radio to switch the inverter on and off. It only pulls 1.2 amps while idling, so that's not an issue, but it might be handy to bring the compressor on that way.

Bob - Thanks! I understand the constraints on where to put things in a Bronco, especially an early one. But as Jim said, I plan to put the compressor, and maybe the inverter, in the tool box where there is both room and protection from the elements. So I have the room. As for why others aren't doing it, part of that may be the fairly recent advent of these smaller 120v compressors with decent spec's. When Jim first proposed this solution I did some checking on the older style compressors and the running and in-rush spec's were so high it would take a really big inverter to run them. But when he pointed me at the California Air unit he runs on his inverter it was a whole different world. The HF compressor pulls only 7 amps while running and 16 amps on in-rush which equates to 840 & 1920 watts, respectively. Easily doable on the 3000 watt inverter I'm going to use. But my main reason for asking you to weigh in was in the airing-up issue as you are the one that does that on a frequent basis. Would this be enough air to make that exercise reasonably short in your estimation? And it appears that it will be. Great! And I understand about the email and computer situation. Janey now has her own email address 'cause I get so much "Ford stuff". Anyway, I'm glad you are following along. You've helped so much many times and I value your input. So thanks!

I agree with Jim. But you can test your units by connecting a DVM on the low resistance scale to one, place it in a small pan filled with water, and turn on the heat. The reading should be of higher resistance than 72 ohms when the water is cold, and should then go to 10 or 12 ohms when the water approaches boiling. On the transmission, make sure your shift linkage is stopping in the detents on the transmission for each gear. If that's ok then there are a couple of other suggestions. First, a bottle of Sea Foam transmission treatment worked for me. Apparently things get gummed up when transmission sit, and something like Sea Foam helps clean the gum out. And others have said that a quick blast in reverse helped theirs. They got out where no one else would be, like maybe a parking lot after hours, and went backwards as fast as they could - safely.

Added a new advert: The 18-MPG Ford. It is a 1981 advert so it is in Documentation/Literature/1981 Literature.

I'd have to agree.

Yes, I'll need to make sure the driveshaft isn't too long.

Don't miss that the one listed is New/Old Stock, meaning it has never been mounted.

That's a good buy! Looks very nice.

Yes, that is cool!

Michael - Welcome! Glad you joined. What part of Germany? We've been all over Germany, and maybe to your place? We have a map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map in the menu) and I'd be happy to add you. How about pics of your truck? An F250 Supercab would be rather large over there. Happy New Year!!!

By golly, you are right. So that has to be an 80/81 bezel. Right?

Oh yeah, I forgot the engine. My '72 had the 390 w/a 4bbl (QJet). Dad's had the 351M w/a 2bbl. Absolutely NO comparison. Don't think I ever towed w/the '72, but we had a 9 1/2' self-contained camper on it, and it handled it fine. Dad's wouldn't have shifted into 3rd gear.

Good question. And as one of the OLDer guys on here, I'll attempt to answer it. I don't remember thinking about the new trucks when they came out. But I do remember when Dad got his '81, albeit used. It had been several years since I'd had my '72 F250 and I was amazed at how much more modern the '81 seemed. But the body styling wasn't that much different than the Bumps and Dents, so it seemed like just a natural progression. It wasn't until '87 that the styling changed radically and, at least from the front, there was a big break from the styling of the earlier trucks. And inside as well.

What would Numberdummy say? "Another clueless ebay seller!" That is not part # E0TZ-10045-A. It is a radio bezel, and those are base part number 10044. But they have 10045 as an ID # on them. This one appears to say E6TB 10045A98 Custom, but it is clearly the early style with a shaft-mounted radio. So maybe that is really E0TB 10045A98 Custom, and our handy dandy decoder says that would be an 82/83 with radio and w/o clock and mesh weave.

You sure do a good job of that, David.

Ok, so I just did a little test, and I put the end of a 1" wide straight edge very close to the center tread on each tire. I left a very small gap...almost touching the tire. All four tires have low spots...or flat spots. None of them have any high spots. On the worst one...the right rear tire, the flat spot is exactly where the tire was sitting on the floor. They right rear is the worst, but the right front actually has what appears to be two low spots. It was a bit hard to measure...it wasn't as even as the other three at least. Maybe that one has a broken belt. I marked each low spot with a paint pen, and then rotated the spot to the top before sitting it back on the floor. I'll leave it for a few days, and then check it again and see how they measure. I might take the two worst offenders to the tire shop and get them to check them on a road force machine and see what they see. A fresh set of eyes on a different machine. A broken belt can drive you bananas. Been there, done that, replaced both the engine and transmission trying to find it - to no avail. Had relatively new Michelins with multiple broken belts. Haven't had Michelins since.

Christopher - I understand being confused with calibration codes and parts lists. So let me walk you, and anyone else following along, through it. The first thing you want to do is to go to this page: Documentation/Calibration Info & Part #'s, and then click on the Applications To Parts List tab. Then scroll down in the 33-page document until you find your application. In your case that's on Page 16, and I see three possible parts lists: 95; 147; & 149. (If you look at #122 you'll find it is a 351W, so that's not for your truck.) Now, here's where the confusion starts. Which of those parts lists is correct for your truck? I've put those parts lists way below (I can't seem to get them all side-by-side) so we can see what is in them. And the first question that comes up is "Which item is the EGR valve?" As it turns out, that's either 9D475 or 9D448, as shown in the illustration of an EGR valve below. In your parts lists you only have the 9D448, so that's it. But, the listings give: #95 EOAZ 9D448-C (CX-452) Valve assy, (integral E.G.R. and back pressure—transducer) #E0AE 9D448-C1A.C2A #147: EOUZ 9D448-J (CX-482) Valve assy, (integral E.G.R. and back pressure—transducer) #E0UE 9D448-J1A.J2A #149: EOAZ 9D448-C (CX-452) Valve assy, (integral E.G.R. and back pressure—transducer) #E0AE 9D448-C1A.C2A So, two of them use the same EGR valve, but which is yours? You may find a sticker or ID# on yours that tells you what it is. But if not, I'd go with the one that fits two of the three codes. Hope that helps.

Probably true. And the tiny port is part of what keeps it so quiet - sound can't get out for the air coming in.

Scott - Thanks. I think the rest of you are lost in the FOG.

Yep, I agree. Saying it another way, the air in the tank behaves according the gas law, but the pump's efficiency is something that has to be measured rather than calculated for us mortal men.

Been thinking about this and just looked at the California Air Tools 2010A specs, which are 3.10 CFM @ 40 PSI & 2.20 CFM @ 90 PSI. And I remember lots of other compressors I've looked at over time didn't have neatly proportional spec's, meaning that CFM x PSI didn't equal the same constant. I've looked a bit on why this is but haven't found anything.

Which is why my dual-snorkel air cleaner was going to say "400HO" or somesuch in the same font as the 351HO's used. Wanted to see people scratch their heads as they looked over the factory cold air ducting on both snorkels.

Sean - Welcome! You may be the first person to join and be on the map before posting. (He contacted me directly and asked to be added to the map.) That's quite a story on the trucks. But 4,000 vehicles?!?!? Wow! That's a bunch! Is flipping vehicles what you do? Or? On your pics, they are really small. There are some suggestions on how to post pics on the Bullnose Forum/Forum FAQ's page that might help get them bigger so's we can see then better. Or, just ask questions. You'll want to start a thread in the main section on your efforts on the '86. That area gets the most attention so more people will see your posts and questions.