Gary Lewis

I mis-typed - the E4OD came out in '89, and I've updated the previous post. So if you have an '89 ECU it might have the ability to control an E4OD. However, according to our documentation the E4OD wasn't used in the Bronco that year. So what did your ECU come out of? Do you have the numbers off of it so I can look it up?

He said the shortblock he built for me should be 360 - 375 HP and close to 500 lb-ft. Mine has good power, so yours should be even better.

I'm running an Innovate wideband, and it works well. But you might be interested in this thread on AFR Meter Recommends. As for a transmission, an E4OD takes a computer to control it, and the EEC-IV ECU from a Bullnose truck won't do it. The E4OD wasn't introduced until 1989 so none of the previous computers had the ability to control it. However you can get stand-alone controllers, like a Baughman, that don't rely on the EFI system. That would be the best bet for you I'd think.

I doubt changing the timing will fix the shaking, but it is worth a try as it won’t cost anything. I think what I’d do is monitor the AFR at the RPM where the shaking occurs. See if something is causing the AFR to go wonky at that point. If not then I doubt it is the throttle body. On the transmission, are you looking for a manual or automatic?

I was feeling bad on Friday a couple of weeks ago but tested negative. On Sunday I tested again and within 2 minutes I had a bright red line saying "Dude, you have COVID!" So yes, you can easily test too early. I got Paxlovid and it was a miracle drug. Worked very quickly but leaves a horrible taste in my mouth. Glad to be through with it yesterday! Hang in there and get well!

Harley Davidson oil? Ie 50W?

I would not want to "pull the guts out" of the brake pressure differential valve given the things it is intended to do. The 1980 FSM says: But there's really not very much to the valve, so you might be able to clean it if the shuttle is stuck to one end. Here's an illustration of it:

Scotty has good stuff, so that should be a beast!

The fuel systems on the Bullnose trucks were an experiment Ford was conducting to see what would work, and most of them failed. Not until several years later did they stumble on one that works and for which you can buy parts. But that system is for the EFI trucks and, while it can be made to work for a carbed engine, it is serious overkill. Been there, done that. Parts for the dual-tank system with a mechanical pump are hard to find and expensive - as well as troublesome. If I were in your shoes I'd consider the aftermarket 38 gallon rear tank and a mechanical pump.

You are now on the map.

Welcome! Glad you joined. Nice looking truck. Wow, it really looks clean! I think that will be an excellent way to get back into wrenching. So, where's home? I ask because we have map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map in the menu) and can add you with a city/state or zip.

I know we're not supposed to talk religion here, but... I became a Believer in the Church of the Front Receiver quite by accident. I had a slide-in camper for my '95 F-150 and had made a step that went in the rear receiver to make it easier to get in and out of the camper. But that meant I didn't have a place to put my receiver-mounted bike rack. I though a receiver on the front would be a good way to handle that. I was wrong. Visibility through the bikes was completely unacceptable. So I added a receiver to the back of the step and put the bikes behind the camper. But I still had the front receiver and found it to be incredibly useful. I never put one on my '08 F-250 lemon or my '02 F-350 diesel (before I got around to installing a front hitch on either of those trucks I had decided I wasn't going to keep them any longer than absolutely necessary). But I put one on Oswald as soon as I could. I was debating putting one on the Dodge, because I couldn't see getting by without one while Oswald is down. But then I realized that Pluto could fill in, so I'm not spending that money on a truck I don't expect to own for that long. My joints sure hurt remembering it! Because of my belief in the Church of the Front Receiver I can get my car hauler trailer out of the back yard. Otherwise I don't think it is possible. Not only does the front receiver allow you to see what you are doing much better, it allows far tighter turns than a rear receiver. The fact that the turning wheels are only ~3' away from the hitch really makes a huge difference. I'm constantly amazed that we get the trailer out as tight as it is. However, there's another advantage to the front receiver - the location of the winch. While my trailer is set up to take the winch off BB, I find it far easier to connect the trailer to the front receiver and reach across the gap with the winch to pull something onto the trailer. Plus I can be charging the battery while winching. But while I plan to keep Blue, the 2015 F150, I've only put a front receiver on Big Blue. It was enough work to do that, so I'm going to plan to use him for all front receiver work.

There is no true regulator. If you have a return line then you have the hot-fuel handling system which uses a small orifice to return some fuel to the tank. But those sometimes get plugged since the orifice is so small. And yes, you are supposed to have a resistance in the harness to drop voltage to the pump when in Run. It gets full voltage in Start. So if that's been bypassed then you have too much voltage. But 11 psi is about twice what you should have at the carb. I don't know what a Holley can stand, but a Carter/Edelbrock has problems above 6 psi - and the problem is high fuel level and rich running. You could put a true return-style pressure regulator in, but you should find out why you have such high pressure first.

Keep preaching on that front hitch, brother! You sold me, but surely others will convert. Seriously, my trailer storage has maybe 2" either side of the fenders to the uprights holding the roof on the car port, so it is pretty tight and SERIOUS. But I can put it in there with a spotter's help quite easily. (But low range sure makes moves a lot slower. ) As for the winch, that sure seems a lot easier than by hand. However, there is a downside when it is going to come or going to come. I owe you an answer and will get back to you soon.

It indeed looks like the O2 sensor was the problem, at least for now. I just took the truck for a drive and put about 30 miles on it, and it's working better than ever. I cleared the codes and none have returned. As for the oil soaked plug and wiring, I removed the plug and 4-wire harness and cleaned it all up with brake clean so that it was sparkling clean and dry. The wiring close to the plug was a bit sketchy so I straightened it all out and put head shrink on it, and then put some brush-on electric tape around where the wires enter the plug. So, unless the problem returns...and it could, I'm going to assume that the O2 sensor fixed it, along with cleaning and fixing up the wiring as well. Dumb question though...while I'm trying to wrap my brain around how this whole system ties together, since this truck has a MAF sensor on the intake, does that mean that it does not have a MAP sensor? In all my reading, I found loads of threads where guys had replaced the ICM, or ignition control module, and it was funny because I went and looked at the distributor and there was a mounting space for an ICM, but no ICM lol. I found it mounted on an aluminum heat sink on the insider of the driver's fender, back close to the fire wall. Interesting...it looks like the same ICM that would be mounted on the distributor on previous years, but mounted on the fender. There must have been a reason for that...too much heat or too much vibration on the engine? With its own heat sink I guess that helps it dissipate some heat, rather than trying to shed heat on a hot engine. Anyway, I plan to do all the typical maintenance stuff over the winter...plugs and wires, filters, sensors, etc. Thanks guys!! I hope that you've resolved the problem(s) and it/they don't return. But I can't answer your question about the MAP sensor as I only have the 1996 EVTM, not the 1994 version. Perhaps Bill can answer it from AllData? But speaking of the '96 EVTM, I do have bits of it online: Engine Control - 5.0L: This is an EEC-V system as the connector has 104 pins. And it has a MAF sensor, sequential firing of the injectors, and doesn't have a MAP sensor. ENGINE CONTROL - 5.8L OVER 8500 & 7.5L EEC-IV: This is an EEC-IV system with a 60-pin connector to the ECU, no MAF, but it does have a MAP sensor. Plus bank-fire injectors So at first blush I'd say if it has MAF it won't have MAP. But I really don't know that because you have the "upgraded" EEC-IV system with MAF and I don't have any documentation on that. Sorry. As for the ICM, Ford was involved in a class-action lawsuit regarding distributor-mounted TFI modules. They never admitted that they had a problem, even though they did, but they did quit installing them on the distributor around 1991 on the F-Series trucks, which explains why your distributor has a place for it but it is actually mounted remotely.

I've not seen a discussion of whether or not this is an EEC-IV or V system, but suspect it is a IV. If so disregard the following. I'm running a Vgate vLinker MC+ Bluetooth OBD2 Car Diagnostic Scan Tool for iOS, Android & Windows coupled with DashCommand software on my iPhone. Works great with my 1996 EEC-V ECU in Big Blue. The beauty of that scan tool is that it is Bluetooth as opposed to Wifi, so you don't need to disconnect from your Wifi to connect to it. And the device will automagically turn off several minutes after it doesn't detect a BT connection, so you can leave it plugged in w/o draining the vehicle's battery.

That’s a great write up. Please let us know how it goes for you.

Looking at the Rear Hub & Drum Parts Lists the Bronco falls into three parts lists and uses two different drums: 1980/83: PL #3 and E4TZ-B 1984/86: PL #18 and E4TZ-B 1987/thru at least 89: PL #29 and E7TZ-B That implies that since the drum changed in 1987 that the hole size might have changed. However, if you look at the rear axle parts lists you'll find that there were 4 different axles used in the 8.8" assemblies, and there's no information on the size of that center raised area in the catalog for any of those axles. So I can't answer your question. But if there was a change it was after the Bullnose era as all Bullnose Broncos use the same rear drums. Anyway, I'm sure glad you got the right drums! How does it drive with them?

Welcome! Glad you joined. I grew up a Chevy fan and look at me now. Let's see some pics of the truck? And, where's home? I ask because we have a map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map in the menu) and we could add you with a city/state or zip.

You are now on the map.

Welcome! Glad you joined. That's going to make a cool camper! And Jim is right, you should have all sorts of unusual things. Like a bigger alternator - or two. Aux battery. All kinds of relays and controls. Etc. Would you like to be on our map? You can see it at Bullnose Forum/Member's Map in the menu, and all we need is a city or zip.

Thanks! I realized just now that I didn't put the links in so others can research it more, but then I put in most of the detail, so I need to think through that. And yes, the illustrations are generic. At first blush you think you could build a truck from the illustrations, but then when you really start looking at things you find lots of gaps. However, they are so much better than nothing. But if we can find better I'll put them up as well. As for not understanding the base vs full part number issue, that's true of way too many people. Which is a big reason I created that page. Now we has some place to send them to.

Ok guys, I've done a major revision of the page, so please take a look and let me know what you think.

Jim - I take your point on the 4th digit of the prefix, however I'm not sure I understand what I'm seeing and reading. First, as it turns out a "Z" means a Ford service part and a "Y" means a Lincoln service part - in the part number. But there's quite a bit of confusion in my mind about the use of other letters in the part number. For the most part what I'm seeing in the MPC is that the part numbers stick with the Z or Y and it is the ID # that uses the other letters. BUT I AM VERY CONFUSED ABOUT THAT AND BEG FOR CLARIFICATION! As for odd numbers being left and even numbers right, read on... Bill - You may be right that the "Ford and Mercedes-Benz have the most logical" numbering systems. However, there are lots of variations that boggle my mind. For instance your statement that 9424 is an intake manifold. But then how can a 9425 also be an intake manifold and even replace a 9424? Then there's the "E0AZ 9424-E r/b E1SZ 9433-C".

Congratulations, Ray!!! That's a wonderful story and great pics! Well done!