Gary Lewis

Well, if that was Plan S, for Starlite, we are now to Plan T, for Turn & Burn. 😳 Yesterday I got a call from a guy I’d previously been trying to reach because he has an aluminum trailer that I thought I wanted. But he wasn’t returning calls, and a week went by and I realized the aluminum trailer was pretty, but not what I wanted as it just didn’t have the GVWR I think I need. As it turns out he was out of the country and without cell coverage, but did call yesterday. I explained that the trailer wasn’t what I wanted, and he asked what my plans are and I told him. He said he recently had a Starlite but it just didn’t work the way he wanted, so had one built by Turn & Burn and loves it. So I called them and now my plans have changed. The trailer is essentially the same as shown above, but with a few changes: The tongue is 1’ longer, which gives extra clearance for the tailgate to open without hitting the jack, allows for tighter turns, and should cause it to trail better. The wiring is done using shrink tubing over the butt connectors, and the lights plug into the harness. The D-rings will be welded to the crossmember as well as the deck rather than just to the deck. And, there will be an extra one in the center of the dovetail for that one more chain for safety, and for attaching a snatchblock if you have to winch something off the trailer. The width between fenders will be increased to 83” from the standard 82”. That is significant as Big Blue’s tires are 81” at the contact patch, and one more inch should allow it to drive on w/o problems. We’ll go see some of his trailers in the morning and put money down on mine if we like what we see. 😉

Yes, I think it is your home computer as I tried IE11 and it works fine - as does Chrome. I have a suggestion though that I think will help, but I need everyone's input. If you look at the menu by clicking on it you'll see that the top level text is bigger than the lower levels. In other words, the text circled in red, below, is bigger (15-point font) than the text circled in green (12-point font.) And the reason for that is because some things are nested so deeply that even at the smaller font when viewed on a mobile device the last links aren't visible. The main culprit is the 1986 EVTM, shown circled in blue. But, if I were to hide all of the things circled in blue from the menu then I could increase the size of the font significantly. And, by clicking on "1986 EVTM" you'd still get to the EVTM's index, which has links to all of those pages. In fact, that's exactly how I use the EVTM's as that page has the description of what is in each of the lower pages, so I can tell what I want. Further, it is FAR easier to go to another page by backing up to the index than going back through the menu. So, what do y'all think? I can try it just by clicking "Hide from menu" and if we don't like it I can unclick. Further, any links anyone has saved will still go right to the lower level page.

LOL! Yes, that is slag-bagging at its finest. And I do need to get the engine in. But I need a front suspension and transmission in order to easily carry out my plans. The suspension needs several more parts powder coated or painted, and the transmission needs to be ordered. I’m doing the powder work and have gotten sidetracked with the show, this forum and website, a perceived health issue, and now a trailer quest. (Not to mention just enjoying life with my wife.) As for the tranny, I need to commission someone to build an E4OD. Anyone have any recommendations? And the plans are to mate the engine and tranny and install them as a unit into the rolling chassis. To do that w/o damaging the cab I’ll pull the 4 bolts holding the cab on and pick it off the frame with the lift. If I chock the truck so it won’t move while doing the engine/tranny installation the cab should come right back down where it was, or at least close enough to make re-installation easy. But, as I’m thinking about this again, it occurs to me that it might be advantageous to go ahead and raise the lift up into the ceiling as I’ve planned to do for some time. That would give me another 11” of clearance between the engine hoist and the cab. Hmmmmm......

Yes! All of the above! But, let’s address the lubricant part of that this round, and will save the lighting and engine assembly parts for another day. (It hasn’t been a week since I tried to explain why you don’t put an engine together w/o assembly lube.). Anyway, would you mind drafting a page on lubricants? If I remember correctly, I mentioned you in the very first post in this thread as I knew you’d be the guy to have involved. I can do the formatting on the page if you want, but don’t know the details well enough to actually write it nor realize what needs to be said and what doesn’t. My thought is that the resulting writeup would have a tab or two on the Specifications/Recommended Lubricants page. In fact, it might replace or augment the Evolving Specifications tab. And, while you are there please take a look at the first tab. Last night I added another column to the table and started filling it in with “modern specifications”. Boy is that a pain! Or maybe I don’t know what I’m doing or how to do it. My initial thought was to find the latest specification for a given lube type and give the reader that as well as the newest Ford product that meets it. But that isn’t easy. Do you have a suggestion? My intention is that the Recommended Lubricants tab will be as if Ford revised the owner’s manual for a 1980’s truck and used the latest lubricants for each of the uses. And that would include the specification so someone could go to the parts store and buy tube of grease or bottle of oil from someone else and know that what they are getting meets the needs of the part being lubricated. 😳

That would call into question what transfer cases were used in 1976, and that's answered by these snips from the 1973 - 79 master parts catalog, which say both the NP203 and NP205 were used that year. So, I think we can answer Scott's question. Agree? Here's the chart and writeup I was remembering. This is from Doolittle Oil: I'm thinking this needs to be part of the lubricants resource. One reason is that on another forum I saw post after post debating the SAE 50 that the owner's manual calls for vs 80W90 gear lube, which some said was way too thick for a transmission or transfer case. But, looking at the chart 80W90 is actually slightly thinner than SAE 50. On the other hand, and as said above, viscosity is not the only aspect of a lubricant recommendation. So I tend to rely on the manufacturer's recommendation.

Jonathan - The 1976 manual came today. Thanks! On Page 120 it says: That would call into question what transfer cases were used in 1976, and that's answered by these snips from the 1973 - 79 master parts catalog, which say both the NP203 and NP205 were used that year. So, I think we can answer Scott's question. Agree?

Those who were here for the show will know the story about getting the truck on the trailer. But today it came off of the trailer, finally. It is a delicate operation since the rails and fenders of the trailer make it tedious to get the lift's arms in to the frame w/o hitting anything. However, I finally got there today. Now to get the front powder-coated or painted and installed!

Oberursel! I had an American friend that lived there while working for DuPont in Bad Homburg. And I’ve been to Bad Homburg and Wiesbaden many times on business. Used to know Bad Homburg quite well, and Frankfurt fairly well. I’m glad Anna Maria wasn’t hit too hard. It is a very fun place. As for the show & swap meet, it will be on 15th September in Skiatook, OK. That’s a suburb of Tulsa, and as you know Lufthansa codeshares with United, which does fly here. So please plan on it. 👍 Hardy says he’s in “the far west of germany, near the dutch border. the city is Hattingen and sits right in the middle of the RUHR aerea, near Dortmund”. Quite a ways from you. But he says he will be here next year, so you could meet him here. 😉 A “very original” truck with the 5.8L HO is good since you appear to have to pass rigorous inspections from what Hardy has said. As said, the HO doesn’t have a computer, which means it is easier to maintain - especially in a country where parts aren’t readily accessible. With a computer everything has to be perfect or it gets its knickers in a twist. So, since you’ll sure have questions, why not start a thread/topic about your truck? It would be in the main part of the forum, and this one can be just an introduction of yourself? And, you can decode the VIN here: http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/vin-decoding.html. That will take you to other pages on this site where you can learn about the axles, transmission, exterior paint, etc.

Heinz - Welcome! I just asked you to do this via email and you beat me to it. Where are you in Germany? I ask for two reasons. First, because we have another member, Hardy, that is from there. Second, because I’ve spent a lot of time there and am curious. As for Anna Maria Island, we were there 2 years ago and loved it! Hopefully there will have been minimal damage from the hurricane, but there will have been some. And, speaking of being in the States, any chance you can come back next September? I host a Ford truck show & swap meet, and next year’s show is going to have a number of folks from other countries In fact, Hardy has said he’s coming. Anyway, on your 1986 F150 4wd, does the 5.8L have a 2bbl or a 4bbl carb? Assuming it is the original carb, that tells whether the engine was the base 351W or the 351HO. The latter had a 4bbl carb and no computer, where the base 351W had a 2bbl and a computer running the ignition and probably the carb. Last, you know far more English than I know German, so I’m in awe of your language skills. We can work through any difficulties.

I missed that it has 4x4 on both sides. I’ve never seen that, but I’ve never looked closely at a 1980 bezel. I think both Cash and Paul have 1980 trucks, but neither are 4x4’s. I’ll ask them what their bezels have there.

Did I make the menu worse or better?

CB - I've read a bunch of the posts on that forum. Thanks. Lots of opinions and experience in there. But nothing that counters my decision. And, that decision is to order a 20' 82-206DOF car-hauler from Starlite. Here are the spec's: 14,000 LB GVW 2 5/16" ADJUSTABLE COUPLER (15,000 LB) 102" DECK WIDTH 1/8" TREAD PLATE DECK 4' DOVETAIL w/ 1/8" TREAD PLATE 60" X 3" CHANNEL UNDER-MOUNTED RAMPS 2 - 7,000 LB ELECTRIC AXLE w/brakes on both axles 5 NEW 235/80 R16 TIRES 10 PLY w/spare mount 6" CHANNEL IRON WRAP TONGUE & FRAME 3" CHANNEL CROSS MEMBERS ON 16" CENTERS FRONT BUMP BAR TREAD PLATE DRIVE OVER FENDERS 10,000 LB DROP LEG JACK STAKE POCKETS & RUB RAIL LED LIGHTS 6-D RINGS ON THE DECK WINCH STAND And, here's a picture of roughly what I'm ordering. But it won't have the stand-up ramps and it will have the winch stand. But, it is the best pic I have at the moment. We'll go order it on Thursday and it'll take about 4 weeks to make.

Moved. Can you change the title to delete the " - meant to post in eBay forum." This may be another one to document?

Welcome back, Kotter! Yes, the website changed. The menus down the left got cumbersome and caused a lot of problems with various people's devices, particularly the mobile ones. So we played around with some options and settled on this one. As it turns out, the menu you are seeing on a laptop or desktop is now the same menu that mobile users see all the time. My research tells me that many websites are going to the mobile approach, so apparently we won't be alone. But that isn't to say we can't make what we have better. I can try some different "themes" with Weebly to see if they are better, and will report back. Thanks for the input.

Hmmmm, do we have that one documented?

I'll bet that's a 1980 bezel. Dad's, which was made in late 1980 as a 1981 truck, has the 4x4 on the opposite end, as do all of the other bezels I have, which includes 1982, 1985, and 1986. But, it has the fog light bezel.

Ouch! I thought it would be expensive, but that’s more than I expected. Guess BBF heads are heavy.

Yep. Someone we all know was just initiated into the too-little-tongue-weight club. The pics I saw of the tow truck had it sitting nice and level, in spite of it having coils in the rear. He heeded the warning and reported that 20 MPH was all he dared go. 🙈 Here’s a video on what happens:

Prashant - You are making progress, even though it may be two steps forward and one backward. So keep on keeping on and you’ll get there. And good luck on the transfer case rebuild. Jim - Having parts coming in is a fun stage of projects. But getting hung up looking for a necessary, but elusive, part is a pain. I assume shipping costs on heads would be exorbitant?

Lots of quests going on right now. Good luck on yours. 👍

At this point in my life I’ve come to the realization that I need to get things done faster rather than cheaper. So, I want to buy it the way I want it rather than buy a trailer and modify it. Given that, I’ve been talking with the manufacturers to get them to modify their basic trailer for what I want. As it turns out, what I want and what they’ve done are in alignment in many cases. The biggest changes from the base trailer are the raised winch stand and the battery box, but most of the manufacturers have done those things before. However, it looks like there is one thing I’m going to have to change - wiring. There are at least two levels of finished trailers around here - which I’ll call “basic” and “fancy”. The fancy trailers have nice aluminum trim here and there, smoother paint, and wiring harnesses with gel-filled shrink tubing protecting the connections. But the basic trailers have bare crimped butt connectors. 🙈 However, otherwise the trailers are what I want with the same material being used and a much less expensive price tag. So I’m highly likely to buy a basic trailer and immediately cut out the butt connectors, slip a piece of adhesive-lined heat shrink on, solder the wires, and shrink the tubing. I think I can do that on a clean trailer with new wires up on the lift for the $1000 or so it will save me, and probably won’t take me more than a couple of days.

A wider trailer or drive-over fenders would have allowed driving the truck on forward, thereby giving the needed tongue weight. 😉

I’m not doing much, Jonathan is doing all the heavy lifting. But don’t consider it done just yet. My guess is that you’ll have a few questions when you get the parts and start putting them together. And we will be here to answer them. 😉

You found a complete OMC 460?

My brother and I talked about loading backwards just today. That was in the midst of the conversation about drive-over fenders. Turns out that Big Blue’s front tires measure 81” outside where they meet the pavement, and probably closer to 83” at max width. And the distance between fenders on most of the trailers is 82”. So it is going to be close with the front tires, but the back track is less so backing on might work better. However, one dream I have is building a Bronco with big tires and that wouldn’t fit between the fenders. So I’m considering drive-over fenders so I can put anything on it. Yesterday I talked with a couple of guys with a big-tired late model Jeep on a trailer and they said everyone is going for drive-overs as nothing with big tires fits.