Gary Lewis

Yes, I think it would look a lot better with the bumper guards. Then you wouldn't see the gap.

I think your turn signal issues are due to the ignition switch. As explained here (Electrical/Ignition Switch) on the Ignition Switch tab, the problem usually is that the grease in the switch is hard when cold and the switch doesn't fully come back to Run. The ignition circuit is energized, but not some of the accessories, including the turn signals, clock, etc. So, one thing you can do next time is to turn the ignition switch back gently and see if things work. If so, if that works you'll either need to wait for hot weather to drive the truck, or pull the ignition switch and lubricate it.

It would be in the top of it's class for dually turning radius...lol. And that's a class?

I think that the bumper pads are correct. We just aren't used to seeing those pads w/o the bumper guards. In the illustration below, which came from here (Exterior/Bumpers) you can see that there are two pads. And on the Part Numbers tab you can see that there's an Outer pad and a Center pad - and they don't require the bumper guards.

Any chance of finding another ZF? But, I guess you've already moved on past that?

Why? Just WHY?

Shaun - As the phrase goes, I can neither confirm nor deny that 1982 was the last year for the 6" x 9" angular mirrors. But, while the MPC says that they were used from 1980 on, the dealer fact books appear to refute that. Unfortunately while my 1983 facts book's Options & Accessories section starts at "T", the 1984 book is complete and there's no mention of the 6"x9" mirrors as an option. So, that would appear to confirm it.

We have a new page: Picture Galleries/1984 FORD F-150 XLT PICKUP. You talk about a time capsule. That thing IS!

Check out the new page: Picture Galleries/1984 FORD F-150 XLT PICKUP.

Yup, E1TZ-A should be black, and that one is.

My little mildly built 302 is perfectly fine for what I'm using it for. I technically didn't even need the power,...it all started with me taking it apart to clean up all the leaks and stuff...lol. Anyway, for a little 2wd Flareside...a 300HP 302 is more than plenty imho. I could have spent way more money that I did, but I was trying to keep it as a cheaper budget build. I even got a bit of flak for going with factory cast iron GT40 heads when there are much better aluminum options available. If for any reason I had to spend even $10 more dollars on it, I would have gone with a 351, hands down. The financial math to stroke a 302 doesn't make cents. But a strong 302 can move a light truck quite nicely as well as return decent MPG to allow it to be driven and enjoyed.

Yes, I often wonder why people pay good money for a kit to stroke a 302 to a bit less than what the factory got with the 351. If you want ~350 cubes then go buy a 351W. My "stroked 351M" comment in my signature is the same thing. I'm using the factory kit - a 400 crank. Note: I'm not saying building up a 302 like you did is crazy. Plenty of power in a strong 302. But why stroke it when 351W's are everywhere?

Looking good! Yes, the cast iron master does look "old school", but they do become an unsightly mess pretty quickly. I suppose it is possible to paint or powder coat them, but any spilled brake fluid will quickly ruin the finish, so it is hardly worth it cause you know that lid is going to leak. Given that, I'm going with the newer aluminum/plastic master every time. As for running the brake lines, yours look perfect. Nice and straight - every bit as good as the stainless lines I bought. And, thanks for the reminder on that. My plan was to finish the front suspension and driveline and then install the engine/tranny combo by raising the cab with the lift. But, somewhere along the way I need to get the brake lines run across the front and from the back to the front. And on the plastic fuel line, it is amazing how easily it goes together with a little bit of heat.

It's that pesky 302 I'm tellin' ya, nobody wants it...lol. If it had the 351 HO it would have sold. You are probably right. My brother and I were talking about that a few days ago. He had several of these trucks back in the day, and his experience was that the EFI'd 302 ran quite well in a light truck, but when you tried to tow with them they just didn't have the moxie that the 351HO had. In this case, if you weren't going to tow that Bronco might be an excellent choice.

That's a lot of truck for $2200. But why wouldn't you spend a little bit of time in your advert explaining whether it runs, what's right and wrong about it, etc?

Starts and runs nicely, getting all the air out of the cooling system is a royal pain. The procedure for filling these engines is to remove the plug in the top of the thermostat area, after 14 years of being in there even though I used Teflon tape, it won't move. I had a small pinhole leak in the gas line back by the filter and that was making it a little harder to start as the pressure (55 psi) would bleed down and the heat would vaporize the gas in the fuel rail. Once that was fixed it starts nicely. I know the upper plenum looks bland, first it sat outside on the engine for probably 8 years, second, since they are (a) rare and (b) I only have one I couldn't send it to be powder coated. I have actually moved it some under it's own power, but found another problem, first I had what I thought was valve train noise (2.2/2.5L Chrysler engines are a bit noisy) even though I had installed a later roller cam. Turns out it was most likely the ZF power steering pump. I had no power steering, and the pump showed no signs of actually moving fluid. Chrysler says "non repairable, replace if bad". Since I found some on-line information on rebuilding them, I figured I couldn't make it any worse, and since it is a vane type like a Saginaw, I thought it might just be stuck vanes in the rotor. Pump body is aluminum, rotor and wear portion are steel. Both front housing and rear plate are chewed up pretty badly as is the outer wear section. Noise was in the pump. At least I have two Saginaw pumps and the mounts and lines, just haven't found the small plate with the adjusting hole (1/2" square) for either one. Steering rack is the one I rebuilt on the 1985 car. Leaks like that a what usually cause me problems on the initial startup of a "restoration". Way too many possible problems happen. So getting to start it and move it part way through is a blessing. As for the pump, they also used a Saginaw? Why ZF on some and Sag on others? And you have all the parts but just haven't found the "small plate with the adjusting hole (1/2" square)"? Or, have never found one?

Ended at $12,650 with the reserve not met.

I think he said it is "smogged" didn't he? Wouldn't that mean it has to be a CA-spec truck to pass CA emissions testing?

Well, it has been a long time since I updated this thread. And while I don't have a lot to report, I do have some - yesterday I picked up the heads from Weingartner Racing. Eric went through them and replaced many of the valves, did a 5-angle valve job, added new guides and seals, and checked the spring pressures and heights. Speaking of the springs, he said that he got the correct spring pressures w/o shims, and that they are perfect for the lift that the Performer cam has - but not any more. Today I ran a tap through ~50 holes on the heads to ensure they are clean and ready to go. And, to check that he got the stripped ones repaired. He did, but at one point I was quite concerned since my 3/8-16 tap slipped right into one of the exhaust bolt holes. Turns out that someone tapped that one 7/16" at some point, but it is good as well. These are F3TE 6090-JA heads, which are the final iteration of 460 heads. And, they are said to be fairly good as they are a closed chamber head so you can get decent quench if the deck height is correct. I have no clue what pistons are in Big Blue nor what the deck height is, but we shall see. Anyway, they have fairly large valves (2.10/1.68") and look pretty good: Here's a shot of an intake port: And here's an exhaust port. Note that there's no thermactor bump, just a nice straight path for the gases. So, once I get a bit more done on Dad's truck I'm in a position to start on Big Blue.

You didn't find the brake pedal linkage in the Driveline/Clutches & Linkage page? I've been thinking lately that this site needs some help with organization.

Cory - That is a Plate (Brake Shoe Anchor Pin) D7TZ 2028-B. But Dave is right, it should be able to rotate. And while his picture is the best, here's the illustration from Driveline/Brakes:

Kyle - I forgot to tell you that we have a member's map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map) and I'd be happy to add you if you'll give me your town/city.

Kyle - Welcome! Yes, you e discovered the ills of a computerized system with very little in the way of diagnostics. And when something happens it locks the timing down in limp-home mode. No fun!

The brochure says: So this one just appears to be missing the bumper guards. As for the Handling Package, you can see the rear sway bar, which was part of the package, but can't tell in front. Yes, save for the bumper guards and they may have been left off for some reason, this appears to be a Free Wheelin' B.

Another REALLY nice Bullnose! It sure looks nice. And well worth the money. On that switch, I see it but don't know anything about it. And, there were auto-locking hubs, but they had problems with them - just like they still do as Blue had to have them repaired not long after I bought him.