Gary Lewis

Hmmm, that looks rather complex, so let's see if I can simplify it a bit with some re-organization: Carburetor Adjustment training manuals for 1979/80, 1981/82, 1983/84, and 1985/86 Master Cross Reference Lists for 1980, 1985, and 1991 Factory Shop Manuals for 1981 and 1985 EVTM's for 1981, 1984, 1985, & 1987 Wiring Diagrams for 1981 and 1985 Light Truck Facts Organizer for 1981 and a portion for 1985 4x4's 1981 Special Specifications Issue of TSB's dated May 11, 1981 1985 Do-It-Yourself Service Guide 1985 Car & Truck Engine/Emission Facts Book Summary Obsolete, Supersede, Interchange books for Jan '96, Jan '99, Jan '00, and a tabbed version for June of '99

Some of you know that Bill (aka Numberdummy in another life) and Chris/ctubutis were here over the weekend. They'd shipped a box of documentation to me as they left CA, and then picked up a couple of microfiche viewers along the way. So, with that documentation as well as what I had I thought it might be interesting to tell you what I have of Ford documentation in paper format: 1979/1980 Carburetor Adjustments training guide 1980 Master Cross Reference List - converts part number to engineering number 1981/1982 Carburetor Adjustments training guide 1981 Factory Shop Manual 1981 EVTM 1981 Wiring Diagrams 1981 Light Truck Facts Organizer 1981 Special Specifications Issue of TSB's dated May 11, 1981 1983/1984 Carburetor Adjustments training guide 1984 EVTM 1985 Factory Shop Manual 1985 Do-It-Yourself Service Guide 1985 F-Series 4x4 information from that year's Light Truck Facts organizer 1985 Car & Truck Engine/Emission Facts Book Summary 1985 Wiring Diagrams 1985 EVTM 1985/1986 Carburetor Adjustments training guide 1985 Master Cross Reference List 1987 EVTM 1991 Master Cross Reference List Obsolete, Supersede, Interchange books for Jan '96, Jan '99, Jan '00, and a tabbed version for June of '99 - and I am not sure how to use them. And here's what the documentation looks like: In addition, Bill loaned me the microfiche versions of the master parts catalog for: 1980 - 89 Heavy Trucks as of Feb 92 1980 - 89 Light Trucks as of May 89 1980 Light Trucks as of Oct 91 1980 - 89 Light Trucks as of March 94 - Final Issue And here's what a viewer looks like. You can see in front of it on its "table" one page of microfiche, and that can hold 1960 individual pages.

Yes, BTS is still around and is well thought of. I talked with him about an E4OD for Dad's truck and his bottom-line tranny is good for 500 HP according to him. I haven't decided on who will build it, but it will be an E4OD.

You need to tell us a bit more as there were several different ones. A picture would help a lot. And, take a gander at this page Exterior/Exterior Trim & Moulding and then pick the tab for the type of trim you have (Upper, Lower, Wheelwell, etc) and the type of pickup (Regular, Supercab, etc.). You'll see that there were several types, and several sizes depending on the cab you have. So, if you can work through that and/or give us a picture then we may be able to help you. (I just offered a piece to Hardy in Germany, so that one is out but I have some others.)

Last first - you don't want just a "rebuilt" engine. You want one built for what you want to do with it. A rebuilt will probably have 8.0:1 compression ratio. But you can run 9.5:1 with pump gas and get better fuel economy as well as power. But, you have to couple the cam discussion with the head material and combustion chamber discussion with the piston discussion with the ............ Brandon/Bruno2 is going through this discussion as I type. His target is 9.5:1, but he's going with aluminum heads, and he's going with aluminum since building up nice cast iron ones gets costly enough that aluminum isn't that much more. In some ways that's a waste as aluminum allows you to run more like 10.5:1 on pump gas since it pulls heat out of the combustion chamber so quickly. Anyway, to calculate static compression ratio you have to know: How far down in the block the pistons set The volume of the piston's dome/dish, in cc's The thickness of the headgasket as well as the diameter of the hole The volume of the combustion chamber in the head, in cc's With cast iron heads I'd target 9.5:1, and with aluminum heads I'd go 10.5:1 - as I did with Dad's engine. And I'd get the machine shop to "zero deck" the block, meaning get the top of the piston to come to exactly the top of the block. That will require playing with the rod and piston combinations as well as the existing block to determine where each should go and how much to take off the block. Then I'd use a .039" thick head gasket. With those "givens" I'd play with piston dish and combustion chamber volumes to get the compression ratio where I wanted it. But, a good engine builder will do all of that for you if you tell him that's what you want to do. Tell him to go for either 9.5 or 10.5:1 depending on the head material, to zero deck the block to get squish/quench, and give you a cam for low-end torque. Now for the tranny, Ford had the C4, C5, C6, AOD, and E4OD autos. The C4 is a light-duty trans that can be built pretty strong, but the only reason to go with it over the C6 is that is requires a bit less power to run it. But it still has no OD and no lock-up torque converter, so it still hurts MPG. The C5 is an oddball that could have been good but wasn't developed. So I'd suggest either the AOD or the E4OD. Both effectively have a lock-up torque converter, which reduces slippage while going down the highway, and both have an overdrive gear. The AOD has to be beefed up to stand up to a 351W while the E4 came behind 460's, so started life stronger. But it takes a computer to run it. So either are fairly expensive to get set up the way you'd want them. However, they'll be much better to use on a daily basis. So, find a good trans shop and get their recommendation.

Well, we might bump into each other wandering around in the vast lostness. So watch out for me 'cause I'm there with you - some place. One thing to note is that saying "T-19C" or "T-19C" may not mean much. There are specifications within each that tell what gears each take.

Good plan, Stan. We can pick up from there once you report back.

I agree that 300 HP is enough. To put that in perspective, I got 409 HP from the Tim Meyer-built 400 for Dad's truck, and you can see what it has in my signature. In other words, it costs a lot of money to get that kind of power - especially when you understand that you really shouldn't be looking for HP but for torque. Dad's engine puts out 498 ft-lbs down low, which is where a truck needs it. Getting the torque down low means you are going to forego high HP 'cause that requires the torque to be at high RPM. HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252. So, instead of having gotten 498 ft-lbs at 3400 RPM, if we shift that up to 5000 RPM then the engine would have put out 474 HP. But that would have meant the engine would be short of torque on the bottom end and require lots of revving to make anything happen. As for EFI making a huge difference, that's not always true - unless he meant port-injection. There are basically two kinds of EFI - throttle body and port. Throttle body is just a direct replacement for a carb and can use the same intake manifold. So the only difference is you have a computer running the fuel/air mix and it can be kept much closer than with a carb. A carb can be tuned to give a fairly good air/fuel ratio, but only within a narrow range of operating conditions. However, a computer running the throttle-body injection system can get it close at all times. But note that I said "close". That's because with a throttle-body system you cannot control the fuel/air mix at each cylinder, and since the intake manifold alters the mix to each cylinder you can only find a good average. However, if you go with port injection the computer can tailor the fuel/air mix to each cylinder, and that's where the real improvements come in. But I fully agree with the comment on an OD tranny. See my earlier post, but a C6 isn't what you want. Cam: He may have been talking about a roller cam and lifters. They are more modern than the flat-tappet cams our trucks came with, and both reduce friction and allow a wider range of profiles. However, they cost more, for sure. Or, he may have been talking about how much lift and timing to use. But those are the things that move your torque peak and, therefore, determine how much horsepower you have. And the higher in the RPM range you move the torque peak the harder the engine is to live with on a daily basis.

Kristopher - We are going to have to divide and conquer these problems. Let's do the power to the fuses first - you don't have power to Fuse 5, which is the Turn/Stop/Hazard one, nor Fuse 9, which is the A/C-Heat fuse. Right? From the drawing on Page 13 of the 1981 EVTM those two fuses, and only those fuses, are fed by the gray/yellow (GY/Y) wire from the ignition switch, with nothing in between. So, you need to confirm if that wire has power on it when the key is in Run. If not, and assuming the big Yellow wires feeding the switch are hot at all times, then your ignition switch has a problem. Here's the schematic from Page 13 with some markups:

Right he is. On my page of Exterior Trim & Moulding, and on the Lower Moulding tab it says: Bodyside Lower w & w/o vinyl inserts - before 4/81 Bodyside Lower w/vinyl inserts - from 4/81

Now to do more research on the parts lists...... The plot thickens.... The input shafts have different tooth-counts, but the first gears have the same tooth-counts. And the ratio differences don't match with 6.32, 5.11, and 4.32 ratios. So, there must be another difference.

Jonathan - The catalog shows the following for T19 usage: And at Novak Conversions I found this info: Now to do more research on the parts lists......

Hmmm, 1000 lbs. And my 400 weighs 650 according to Tim. And puts out similar power - according to Tim. Said a week ago tomorrow - "I'm not 400 biased but I am Ford biased. And you can build a 400 to do anything a 460 will do." But, I have one of both so we shall see what I think when I get Dad's truck going. 😎 Bill - Even my local Ace Hardward can cut good keys for our trucks. I'd stay away from the place that makes the short ones. Jim - That's an interesting approach on the springs. Do you know how much difference in ride that makes? How about in steering? Several here have suggested that input a lift kit on the front of Big Blue to even out the stance. And that 2" lift would be about right, and would lower the drawbar height for trailers. Hmmmm....

You originally asked about Sealed Power valves. In my limited experience of buying valves those are fine. And those two need to be replaced.

Happy to help. And I think we got to the bottom of it.

Oh, ok. Thanks.

It doesn't have rubber or vinyl? Just paint? Hadn't seen it.

That's creative!

Taden/Jonathan - I don't have any of those parts. I just knew I had some, but then I realized that those parts went into Cash's Carlos, which you'll remember from Saturday, Jonathan. Sorry. Jonathan - I guess we will wait to see what you have.

Chris - Was it yesterday that Bill said there was a side trim that didn't have vinyl on it but he'd never seen it? Well, it was hiding in the attic. I think it is off Cash's Carlos 1981 F100. Here's a pic of it as well as the one w/vinyl that I'm offering to Hardy.

Ok, we will reserve your show spot for Sept of 2019. Yep, I got the inference and knew what you meant. As for the parts, it shouldn't be a problem. We will help you dream and plan.

Lol! Devcon3! Thanks for your best wishes. This has been a lot more work than I ever imagined, and it isn't over. But my wife, Janey, has been very supportive and it is all going to work out well - regardless of how many show up. However, the initial indications are that there will be plenty, which will make it all worth it. We are glad we are doing it as a show/swap meet this year as it will make next year so much easier. And better. Heretofore it has been a gathering of friends at our house, but now we can meet so many more people. So we are looking forward to next year when we get to meet you and all the others from outside the States - like maybe Christian? Hardy - Are you looking for a NOS E1TZ9929076-AA, meaning New Old Stock? I ask because I have a piece I'll let you have. It isn't perfect, but it is pretty good. It is the top of the two with rubber in this picture: And the only thing that is wrong with it is a small scrape on the rear bottom part, as shown below: If you want more pictures I can do that and either post them here or email them to you. But it is yours for the shipping if you want it. Or, I've found it online at a couple of places and have requested pricing. Otherwise, I haven't found any.

That is a piece of rubber that came out of the mold when the connector was made. Here you can see the black/pink and pink/orange hash wires for the backup light. Here's the wiring diagram from the EVTM showing the above connector and wires: And here's the wiring diagram for the starter wiring, which is a perfect fit for the harness off of Dad's truck. There is no other connector for the transmission in the harness, and the starter solenoid is directly connected to the ignition switch. So, there is no neutral start switch on a 1981 Ford light-duty truck.

I don't understand. A jumper wire on the backup light connector?

I think you need to set your sights a bit higher, on the map at least, than Broken Arrow. Make that Skiatook. 😉 But, I think I get the picture. Basically a cruiser. Good ride, lots of power, and decent economy with no, or minimal, need to tow. If you want the power with some economy then I think the 351W is a good choice. With the right transmission you should be able to get 14 - 15 MPG running at 65 MPH. But the transmission to do that won't be a C6 as it is a gas hog. The AOD wasn't ever put behind the 351 due to its lack of strength, but aftermarket builders have learned how to beef them up to easily take 400 HP. On the other hand, the E4OD was initially stronger, but needs an electronic controller that will cost you ~$800. Or, you can go with a manual tranny, but I'd shy away from the ZF5 if you want a sporty/quick truck. The ZF is a truck transmission and if you want the synchros to live you'll shift it like a truck transmission- slowly. That will kill your acceleration, which is why Dad's truck is getting an E4 and Big Blue is getting the built ZF. As for doing work vs hiring it done, I hire out my transmission and engine building as well as paint and body work. I've had more than one instance of a machine shop not doing the work correctly, and that's a huge problem on an engine. So I've learned to hire others to build the major components, and that includes differentials. But I can do the other work as well as install the components they build. That will reduce costs as well as speed up the process because you can have several vendors working at the same time. Or, you can do as you said and do the engine and tranny at one time and then move on to their parts later. Let your budget be the guideline.