Gary Lewis

Welcome! That's a good project. Where's home? We have a member's map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map) and I'd be happy to add you. In fact, you might find out you are close to one of us.

That's a really good list! And, other than the Dana 50 in front, it is a perfect match for Big Blue. So, I'll be able to use that info. Thanks! So, how did you figure all of that out? Last I knew it was the carrier bearing that was elusive.

Removing the EGR and the A.I.R. systems is a debatable topic. The A.I.R. system, aka smog pump, doesn't really use enough power to cause problems, but it is controlled by the computer through the TAB and TAD relays, as shown here, so if you are removing the computer it won't work and might as well be removed. And, you can remove those relays as well. On the EGR, while it may actually be helpful in some ways, it is also controlled by the computer via the EGR On/Off Solenoid, also shown on that link. So the EGR isn't going to be coming on either, and can be removed or just blocked off. And, it can usually be blocked with a thin metal ship placed between the EGR valve and the manifold. I've used a soft drink can's metal for that. But, if I remember correctly there's also a non-EGR spacer that goes below the carb. Jonathan/FordF834 is the guru on that, having hunted and found one, so perhaps he will chime in? However, I think there were others involved in that quest? As for the DS-II module, I used to think that all Motorcraft ones had the retard feature, but the one on Big Blue that doesn't have it, or at least it doesn't work, is labeled Motorcraft. So, I can't tell you for sure. But, I've also heard that NAPA Gold units have it.

Yes, Dad's original hubs had FORD molded in, and they were red. And, selling to the aftermarket dealers is an excellent idea.

I agree with Steve. Just replace the hose with good, modern hose, but ditch the flares as you can't get the right size of hose over the flare. And, I'd double-clamp the hoses.

Or, use a real voltage regulator and solder its wires onto the circuit.

Today Trent Alexander asked me via FB if I knew whether the F250 4x4 front springs are the same as the F350 4x4 springs. I didn't but had a couple of hours before my next appointment so added the front spring information for all the trucks to the website. It is in Suspension & Steering/Front Suspension, and then the Part #'s and then Springs tabs. But, this was an eye-opener! I do this via screen grabs to get just the F-Series and Bronco (U-Series) info, and in just the 1980 and early 1981 years alone I had 26 separate screen grabs! However, in the next 5 1/2 years I only had 10 screen grabs. Why the difference? On March 13th of 1981 Ford changed the way they listed the springs. Prior to that they listed each year, truck (F100, 150, etc), drive (2wd & 4wd), and each GVW rating. And then they usually had 3 different sets of front springs - probably to go with different engine weights. And this made for a huge list, even though there weren't that many different springs used. As of March 13th 1981 they just started listing the spring codes that were put on the certification label. And since there weren't that many codes it made for a much shorter list. However, you do have to find your code and then go to the Cross Reference Chart to find the spring's rating, but that's not that difficult. Having said that, I also noticed at least one other thing - the same spring is given many different ratings in the early list. I don't know for sure which is correct, but they all had the same part number so I'd go with the rating on the Cross Reference Chart. Enjoy!

Good thinking! That could really help someone out. Those clips are really hard to solder to, so the screw probably makes a very good contact w/o heating up the printed circuit and potentially damaging it.

Ron - I like them! And, if I didn't have Mile Marker hubs for Dad's truck I'd want a set. Cool! Well done.

Jonathan - Bill may beat me to it, but EEC-V doesn't require a crank position sensor. It does have an input for it, but it will work just fine taking its cue from the distributor. Bill's running Darth w/o a crap position sensor, and Big Blue will be as well. So, it would just take the EFI head to make it truly up to snuff, and it would probably be fine with the lower compression due to the MAF sensor. And yes, you have to tell the ECU if it has an auto tranny to control and which one, but that is programmable. As for the HP and torque spec's, I found that interesting as well. So, to say the SEFI 300 had 150 hp @ 3,400rpm and 260 tq @ 2,000rpm is one thing, but to compare it to a batch fire EFI with 145/265 begs the question of which truck it was in? We know that the ratings varied significantly by truck, so it is a bit like comparing a Granny Smith to a Golden Delicious. Anyway, I think Ford's EFI on a 300 would be the bee's knees for MPG.

Bill - Dual progressive 2bbls would be ideal as you'd have tiny primaries for 3 cylinders and then quite a bit more when desired. I think this would be a good arrangement - a bit more complexity than 1 carb, but not nearly that of 3 carbs. But, I still think EFI is the way to go. Stand by to comment on my response to Jonathan - or beat me to it.

David - I'm not so sure it is just a V8 issue on the kick-back. You had yours kicking back before we started working on it - right? But, it certainly is an issue of higher-compression issues with lots of initial lead. And, the push-button idea would probably work well - get the flywheel turning and hit it with spark. As for the carb, that one gives excellent MPG. That's what I'd get.

I think the retard feature covers a bunch of initial advance on the timing. So if you run something close to stock timing then it probably isn't required. But, I'm running something like 14 degrees BTDC on Big Blue, and that causes it to kick back when trying to start w/o the retard feature.

Ok, I apparently have the calculator perfected and no one can find anything whatsoever to suggest. That being the case, now let's go back to the 300 six intake discussion. I've been thinking about the multi-carb setup with a progressive linkage. It seems to me that if you are trying to fine tune the AFR, and if the loooong intake is causing cylinder-to-cylinder differences, then the best way to fix that would be with two or three smaller carbs - but not with progressive linkage. I say that because progressive linkage runs off the center carb until more power is needed. But that puts you right back where you started from with one carb and a long manifold. So, it would seem to me that several little carbs with a linear linkage would be better. In other words, run two 3-cylinder engines or three 2-cylinder engines, each with their own carb. But, having said all of that, why not go with the later EFI setup? However, I don't know if the 300 ever came with EEC-V, mass air flow, and SEFI. If it didn't it wouldn't be that difficult to convert it.

Regardless of cost; I don't think the adhesive alone will keep it on the bumper for long. I'd countersink a few little screws, which would obviate the adhesive, so why spend the extra $$ for it? I bought the sheet linked in this caption several years ago, used it on several projects, and still have most of it left: https://supermotors.net/getfile/1132395/thumbnail/20180426_162452.jpg I think you are right. Simple sheet, countersunk screws, done. And, since I plan on facing the jack stop, which is the piece of angle on the bottom end of the angled part of the swing arm, with UHMW, I could use the same 1/8" sheet as the source and the same batch of screws to secure it. Hmmm, as I think about it, if I have them trim the right hand stop, which is a solid chunk of steel, by 1/8" I could face it with UHMW as well. That would slightly cushion things as well as prevent the finish from chipping.

Is it listed here: Cooling Systems/Shroud Part #'s?

Gary, It's a constant struggle...lol. I have good days and bad days with this stuff. Standing over a pile of rust and dirt looking at holes and bolts that need to be drilled out, it's easy to get discouraged and ask myself what was I thinking???...lol. But, looking at some nice dry glossy paint renews my enthusiasm...at least a little bit...lol. Trust me - I understand that in SPADES! With Dad's truck in a million pieces it is questionable whether not I was thinking.

I understand the excitement on the cleanup. On the '82 I had I did the research and learned that all of the wires associated with the computer could be removed and did so, making a huge difference under the hood. But, again, you need to confirm that to be the case with yours. I'm pretty sure it is, but just check to make sure. The way I wound up removing things was by cutting the wiring near the computer in the cab, with the battery disconnected, and then gently pulling those wires, a few at a time, into the engine compartment. Then I unwrapped whatever bundles had to be unwrapped to get those wires exposed - all the way to whatever sending unit or actuator they went to. Then I removed the actuator or sending unit, plugged any holes, and put the stuff in a tote. When I was done I had a large tote full. On the ignition system, the easiest way in my opinion is to go with a DS-II setup. You'll need to find a DS-II wiring harness off a truck in the salvage, or buy one off the internet. And, while I'm on that, all the DS-II harnesses are electrically the same, regardless of engine. However, each engine family has the sending units and distributor in different places, so the wires to them are different lengths. So, it would be best to find one for your engine, but if not you can lengthen or shorten the wires as needed. And, if you find a truck with the DS-II distributor and module at the same time, you'll have a "kit" and it'll go right together. On the distributor, there were surely minor differences in the advance curve for different setups, like gear ratio, automatic vs manual transmission, etc. But the major difference is whether or not the truck had EGR. EGR requires a lot more advance due to the slow burn speed of the air/fuel mix with the inert gas mixed in, so if you are going to retain the EGR setup you should find a dizzy for a truck with EGR. But if you are going to delete or block off the EGR then you want a dizzy from a truck w/o EGR so you get an advance curve that will be close to what you need. On the other hand, there are two HEI approaches. One is as Pete suggested - going with an HEI module either in a Ford or Ford-looking distributor or mounted externally - all of which will then use the stock coil. The other is to go with a one-wire distributor, which has both the HEI module as well as the coil mounted inside the distributor. The tip-off is a GM looking distributor, meaning a much larger cap. But, the wiring is easier - you run a large wire from the battery through a fuse to a relay, and pull the relay in with the ignition switch, probably with the wire that would have gone to the DS-II module for power. There's no need to find the DS-II harness, and no need for the DS-II module. And, in this approach you can probably specify the advance curve you want - with or without EGR. We can help you with whatever approach you chose to take, but I just wanted you to be aware of the options.

Thanks for the followup and thoroughness. That should definitely help others in the future. Your installation looks good. You are going to like that setup.

Cory - Thanks! Your work looks excellent. I think you'll be really pleased with what you've done. It is a lot of work, but the truck is going to last so much longer, and be really nice looking. You are closing in on having it rolling. Good luck!

Since what the ignition module is doing is to take the negative side of the coil to ground and then letting it go to cause the spark, unless you change out the positive wiring to the coil and/or the coil itself it isn't likely that you'll get better spark. Let's go back to the schematic you shared. As long as the same coil and ballast resistor is used you'll get essentially the same spark regardless of what module you use to trigger it. But, if the HEI module can handle more current w/o overheating as the DS-II module does, then you could change out the coil and ballast to get a stronger spark. However, I don't know how much current an HEI module can take, so don't know what is possible.

The hook can go anywhere along the top of the bumper, wherever it's out-of-the-way of everything else. This shows it mounted to the bumper catching the arm, but it can just as effectively mount to the arm & catch the bumper: https://supermotors.net/getfile/479248/thumbnail/swingawaylatch.jpg The actual point of the hook needs to be wide, for the reasons I mentioned before. Easier said than done! UHMW is very low-friction, which means glues don't stick very well. I'd plan on screwing the plastic to the bumper. Steve - Thanks. Now I understand. I could have used a spring-loaded hook like that to capture the front of the bumper. But, I found the pop-pin shown below, which is commercially available, and it will work well for the "in camp" latch. However, I still want something that will pull the arm down and ensure it cannot go anywhere when I'm on the road. And for that I'm using the 1/2-13 bolt into a nut welded to the top of the bumper. As for the UHMW, perhaps I shouldn't have said "glue". Instead, what I should have said is adhesive-backed UHMW. I've found what I'm looking for in a 1/8" thick strip in a roll, but they want $250 for the roll. So I'm still looking for sheets with an adhesive backing for a reasonable price. I can find 1/32" rolls reasonably-priced, but so far not the 1/8". Anyway, I give Ben, the fabricator, the drawings today. He'll look them over and give me a call to work out any issues he sees, and then get started.

Cory - There was only one clamp per spring on Dad's truck's springs. Here's a pic where you can see the clamp on the front of each spring:

There are advantages to the HEI module, but there are also disadvantages. One is the lack of ignition retard when cranking. Not all DS-II modules have that feature - it was designed in by Ford, but not all manufacturers have included it. In fact, I have two blue-grommet modules on Big Blue and only one of them has it, and the engine struggles to crank when it is the one in service, but cranks easily when the other is being used. Another disadvantage is because the HEI module pulls more current than the DS-II module does, so it needs to have new wiring run instead of using the small factory wiring. In fact, it really should have at least a #12 wire, and my reading says that GM used #10 wire to it from the factory. And that will require a relay as the wiring to the ignition switch on a Ford isn't nearly that large.

And that's an issue in and of itself. Most places will not ship anything like that across the border. I ended up painting it today with a heavy duty rust paint. I would have liked to use the product you suggested, but something has come up in the shop at work, and I need to move my truck quicker than I had planned to. After hours of grinding and sanding on Saturday, I did the Ospho treatment last night. You can see how it turns kind of white when applied. I primed it early this morning... And then painted this afternoon: Hopefully I can get the leaf springs mounted this week, and the rear-end back under it. I'm going to have it flat-decked to my home garage where I can take my time working on replacing all of the brake lines and fuel line, etc. Going to pull the rear end apart as well...and do wheel bearings and seals at the least. Next big step will be to finish disassembling the Flareside box, and see what needs to be done with all of that stuff once it's all laid out on the floor;). Sure looks good! The Ospho treatment gives a good "tooth" for the primer to grab, so that should make a very good paint job.