Gary Lewis

Welcome. I've upgraded the Driveline/Brakes page yet again. This time I've added verbiage and part numbers for the Brake Load Proportioning Valve (BLPV) as well illustrations for both it and the Brake Pressure Differential Valve. See what you think, please. As for the reason why the heavier trucks got the BLPV, I don't know. Maybe it was the dual-pistons in the front. Or maybe it was the much heavier springs in the rear. Or a combination. And, that valve was replaced when they went to RABS, apparently in '90. I say that because I have a RABS electronic module from Huck, the '90 F250. The catalog shows that the BLPV was used through '89, so I'd say RABS appeared in '90. Last, I think an aftermarket adjustable proportioning valve may be just the thing. I believe some of the later master cylinders incorporated the pressure differential valve in them, so if you had one of those and an adjustable pro valve then you should be set.

There are probably electrolytic capacitors in there, and their fluid is very caustic and might cause the epoxy to melt. Years ago I had an inverter that took DC from a set of batteries and turned it into AC for the computers. It had 3 large electrolytic caps, each about the size of a 2 liter Coke bottle. The center one blew and took out the other two. Everything inside the cabinet, which was the size of a large refrigerator, was ruined - and the paint ran down the sides of the cabinet like paint thinner had been sprayed on it.

Great news! Hope you find something simple to fix.

I think the modules "run" from heat, but that heat can come from different sources. In David's case it came from too much current due to the wrong coil being used. But in my case, which is similar to yours, it appears to be a hot environment. The attic to my shop never gets over 100 degrees, but the module sure ran while up there.

Those numbers look good. Do you know what pistons he's using. My understanding is that the only pistons that will get more than 8:1 compression come from Tim Meyer. But to get those power numbers surely he's got more than 8:1 compression in the engine. Anyway, congrat's! That's gonna put some spunk in the truck, for sure.

Maybe something in the tailgate is slightly off? In my limited experience the NOS handles have been much sturdier than the Dorman ones.

Haha...well, that's a bit extreme now... I don't know if they still have them, but Dennis Carpenter has them in the catalog...but ONLY the RH side. I forget exactly what the prices were...something like $99 each for left or right aftermarket front fenders, and $149 each for NOS OEM, but only the RH side. Well, I actually DID something with my truck today - Dad's truck no less. I moved it onto the lift, for the first time in waaaay to long. Now I can continue the work on the front suspension parts. Here 'tis: That let me move the tranny and tool box into the open area, and here you can see the completed E4OD on the engine stand and the Tim Meyer 400 sitting on the floor: And, feeling good about things I then moved the front end parts to the work table so I can clean, blast, and paint/powder coat them (and some other things ) to get this party going: Then I added some wall art. Here's a shot of where it went, and David and Ray Cecil can point out the bits they brought. Thanks, guys!!!

Yep. By the way, have you seen the couple of recent questions regarding the dash patch?

Interesting! I'd never heard that you might have to lower the radius arms at the frame. How much did you lower them? And was that adjustable? What kit?

I like it! You have a plan, and a good one I should add, and it appears to be do-able before driving season is here again next Spring.

Ok folks, time for full disclosure: I was WRONG! Twice! First, the circuit to the Dual Brake Warning Switch, which resides on the Pressure Differential Switch, is a 2-wire arrangement as it passes through that switch and is grounded in the ignition switch. Second, the 1980 factory shop manual says: So, a bad valve, or the wrong valve, could easily cause the rear lock-up problem that both Jonathan and Jan are having. I'd thought that maybe by going hydroboost the valve was now the "wrong" valve. But if the front and rear brakes are still the original size the original valve should work perfectly regardless of how the boost is derived. Anyway, I've also updated the webpage on Brakes.

I've been wondering about that thing. On my 84 is on a bracket on the frame almost directly below the master cylinder...next to where the oil dipstick is on my 302. I'm planning on re-doing my entire braking system this winter, including ALL lines. Wasn't sure what to do with this little device...replace or re-use. I don't remember seeing any wires going to it, but I haven't looked at it closely either. My truck isn't here right now so I can't even check it. Hopefully I can just clean it up and re-use it. Last I saw the pressure differential switch was going for about $100. And since it just reports a difference in pressure, via a 1-wire hookup, I'd use it if it works.

I was aware that it existed, but that's all I knew. From Wiki below. 255 In the late 1970s an urgent need to meet EPA CAFE standards led to the creation of the 255 cu in (4.2 L) version for the 1980 car model-year, essentially a 302ci with the cylinder bores reduced to 3.68 in (93.5 mm). The 302 /5.0 L was to be phased out and the 255/4.2 L was to be an interim 'new' engine which would remain until the new V6 was in production - the 255/4.2 L was a quick fix. Rated power (SAE net) was 115-122 hp (86-91 kW), depending on year and application. Cylinder heads, which were specific to this engine, used smaller combustion chambers and valves, and the intake ports were oval whereas the others were all rectangular. The only externally visible clue was the use of an open-runner intake manifold with a stamped-steel lifter valley cover attached to its underside, reminiscent of previous-generation V8 engines, such as the Y-block and the MEL. It was optional in Fox-chassis cars including the Mustang and corporate cousin Mercury Capri, Thunderbird, Fairmont, and standard equipment in the Ford LTD. Some variants (i.e. Mercury Grand Marquis) were fitted with a variable-venturi carburetor which were capable of highway fuel economy in excess of 27 MPG. Due to its dismal overall performance the 255 was dropped at the end the 1982 car model-year with 253,000 units manufactured - 302/5.0 L V8 engine production continued and the plans to phase it out were dropped. As you can see on the Specifications tab, the HP number for the truck came in right in the middle of the range quoted - 118. And the torque was 206 lb-ft. Compared to the 302's 132 and 232 #'s, it was anemic.

I've not seen one either, but they were an option in '81 and '82 in the 49-state F100's, only, as shown on the Engine & Driveline tab in Year To Year Differences. The engine is the bottom end of the Windsor clan and had a 3.68" bore and 3.00" stroke, as opposed to the 4" x 3" stroke of the 302.

I was in Conoco's first corporate class that studied Covey. He, Covey, sent his right-hand people and we had 4 one-week classes. It was wonderful, but Conoco soon decided that it was too expensive to have the whole corporation take 4 weeks off, so they changed it to a 1 week class thereafter. The back of his book says that he got many of the ideas from the Bible. And I taught a lesson (sermon?) using his book back in the 90's.

Sorry, I misunderstood. At this point I like Vinny's idea - check the headlight grounds.

Rocks in the jar?! Have you studied Covey? That's where I came across that analogy.

There's something wrong with regard to the voltage going to the ignition module. As you can see here, in Run you should have battery voltage to the module. So something is wrong if you have 14.2 volts at the battery and 12.2v at the module. But, the voltage you are seeing at the coil is what I expected since there's a resistor in the circuit that drops the battery voltage to the coil. I think the low voltage at the ignition module may well be what is causing the miss. I suspect that the module isn't always triggering the coil, either at the appropriate time or every time, and that causes the engine to miss. You could prove that by running a jumper, preferably fused, from the battery to the ignition module and then taking the truck for a drive and turning the lights on. To fix it we need to know where the voltage loss is. As you can see in the page linked to above, it is a fairly simple circuit: A fuse link is attached to the solenoid, and that leads to the yellow wire that goes to the ignition switch, then from there it goes directly to the ignition module. I guess it is possible that the ignition switch is failing, but that's rare. And given the age of the wiring it is possible there's a bad connection. But the first thing I'd check is the fuse link. A fuse link is a smaller sized wire with a heat-resistant insulation. I'd pull on that link to see if it appears to be compromised. If not, then I'd start checking voltages down the line from the solenoid, and you may have to use a pin to probe into the wire. While I don't like to do that, it is going to be difficult or impossible to determine where the problem is w/o doing that.

We've been recording our sermons, but have been asked to do Facebook Live so people can see as well as hear. However, we don't seem to have the bandwidth needed, so are still working on it. Anyway, I didn't get the bumper measured nor pics taken today. Sorry. But the weather was nice so the grands and I spent a little bit of time to put up some Christmas lights. Perhaps tomorrow.

Jonathan/FordF834 and I've been emailing back and forth about master cylinders, hydroboost, proportioning valves, etc. He said he'll start a thread after while, but I've done some reading, measuring, etc and want to get started. One of the issues we discussed is that Jan's rear brakes lock up early and Jonathan's front brakes lock up early. So the question was what difference does a larger or smaller master cylinder make. So I did some reading and found that this article on How Master Cylinders & Combination Valves Work is informative. But the key sentence to me is "If the brakes are operating properly, the pressure will be the same in both circuits." And that seems to say that a different master cylinder won't make one end or the other slide before the other. Further reading says that too small of pistons in a master cylinder will cause a soft-feeling pedal with a lot of travel because you have such a small volume of fluid displaced with each 1" of pedal movement. On the other hand, too large of master cylinder pistons cause a very hard pedal with a very quick application of the brakes with a small movement of the pedal. But, in neither case will it cause one end or the other to apply first. And that lead to a question was about the valve in the system down below the driver's feet, and what it does. Some call it a "proportioning valve", but Ford calls it a "pressure differential switch". And that's all it does - turn the light on if the pressure in one circuit or the other, meaning front or rear, gets far higher than the other. In that case a shuttle gets pushed one way or another and causes a connection to be made to ground, which turns on a warning light. But it doesn't change the pressure in either circuit - it just reports that there is a differential in pressure. Another thing we talked about is the bolt spacing where the master bolts on. I just happen to have the old master off of Dad's F150, the one off of the '90 F250 called Huck, and the 90's F450 that Jim parted out and that had hydroboost. Turns out that the lighter trucks have a bolt spacing of 3.2" where the master bolts to the booster, and the big truck with hydroboost has a spacing of 3.44". Ok, those are my understandings. What am I missing? What did I state incorrectly? Where am I wrong?

I'm sure that would be the case. I've rarely found that someone who has already started to drop his/her price will balk at crisp green dollars slightly below their recent price.

Glad you are feeling better and can get some things done, and maybe even make the meeting tonight? As for winch projects, are you thinking of building a front bumper? If so I could make some measurements on this Warn for you to potentially duplicate. On the air cleaner, I think I understand what you are planning to do, but I think you meant you won't plug off the crankcase vent. If so, that seems a reasonable approach.

Yep, the catalog says that's the 1985 and '86 part. But experience says it is an early '85 only part.

That is cheap - especially if you read the text - it is now down to $600.

Glad you are home, safely. As David said, it was really good to meet the two of you. Boy, that Mustang looks great! I'll bet Anita loves it. And, glad you found another job. That had to be worrying on that long holiday here. As for the roof, that's ugly looking inside! I didn't look truly inside the one we cut - did you?