Gary Lewis

This is an awesome write up I have both parts on order via eBay Temp sensor and the black thing on the snorkel that connects to the sensor and the flap I'm glad it is helping y'all!

I agree, Shaun! Those hubs sticking out look "mean"! Good progress, and as Jim says, progress is good.

Jim - That's what I thought as well, but apparently not. Here are the results, in the order we tested: .105": Much improved over not having a restriction, but still some roughness .068": Too small. The speed control overshot on acceleration and then shut off abruptly, then overshot on deceleration, then... It didn't really go into oscillation, but it was obviously not the right answer. .093": Better than the little one but not as good as the big one. Still seemed to overshoot a bit and then go the other way. .105": Stopped to install a bigger jet, but don't appear to have anything bigger than .105. So I put the .105 back in. It was better than the .093, but still may be too small. I may run a drill bit through one that I have several off and try again in a few days. But right now I'm happy that it helped. And, I'm thinking of installing the VSS and running the wires from there to see if that might help as well as the throttle changes on bumps.

Well, while y'all debate creature comforts, lipstick on pigs, exhausts, EMP, etc I've been working. I'll let the pictures tell the story, with the exception that the jet is a .105. Now we are going to take the pig for a ride.

Bob - My 2015 is a Caddy. Most of the bells and whistles they offered. And it is EASY to drive. Smooth, powerful, roomy, capable. And my daughter and family LOVE it. But I don't want to take Blue on anything like Black Bear. He's too pretty and I sure don't want to scratch or bend him. Enter Big Blue. Bill - I don't know that I agree that there isn't a gas engine equal to the 460. I honestly think the 3.5L EB is. When the twin turbos come in it has every bit of the torque of Big Blue's 460, and it is a pleasure to tow with. Ok, now I'm off to the shop to play RESTRICTOR! (Not as in restrictor plate racing.)

Here's hoping it fits nicely! As for contributing, you already have. You contributed greatly on making my days on Wednesday and Thursday. Finding out you are "family" was a hoot! What you probably don't know is that we are really good friends with Joe and Ann. Joe worked on Fords for years and has forgotten more than I'll ever know about them. Ann is heavily into quilting, as is my wife, Janey. So we've bonded with them very strongly.

Well, I think it is going to work. The ID of that hose on the speed control's servo is .328". So it'll be a snug fit on a 3/8" bolt's shank which measures .369". A Holley jet measures .375" OD, so that's not going to work. But a Carterbrock jet is .303" OD and uses 5/16-24 threads. And the ID of the various vacuum ports on the servo measure from .200 on the vacuum inlet to .222 on the control outlet. That means I can use a 3/8" bolt's shank and drill it through .250", which won't be a restriction to the flow. Then I'll drill the last 3/8" or so .272 ("I" drill bit), and tap it 5/16-24. Run a jet in it and put it in the middle of the hose.

I think that's your best bet. Tell them what's up and that if it is the same then it won't fit and you don't want it. But if it is bent correctly it'll solve the problem and you will certainly want it.

I wasn't aware of that, Bill. Thanks!

Oh! You figured out how to post here on the forum. Nice and clean post. I'm going to look this afternoon to see if I have a horn pad w/o speed control. If I do I can take pics and show you what I'm talking about. And even if I don't I can take pics of one with speed control and point out which bits need to connect in order to honk the horn. Meanwhile, check this thread out: Steering Column Groun. There's a picture in there of the brushes and a discussion about grounds and testing to make the horn honk.

I'll see what I can do. But "bubbles" aren't easy on a lathe. Barbs aren't easy, but are much easier than bubbles. All of this reminds me of the Dana cruise control I put on something, probably the Audi 100 LS, way back when. It was vacuum operated much like this one and had orifices to allow you dial in how aggressive you wanted it to be. Was the best cruise control I've ever had. But, I think making this mod this one can be tamed as well. The only other thing I'm thinking about doing is to put the VSS whatchamacallit at the transducer and running wires up to the connector to the speed control, thereby bypassing the long speedometer cable and the speed sensor. I'm still thinking there is some roughness in the speedo cable and wondering if that is inducing some speed variations. Maybe being gear-driven would smooth it out?

Nice truck, save for the rust. Shame about that, but it seems to be par for the course in NY.

Jim - You've come up with essentially the same solution I did later last night, although with different material. My thought was to measure the hose and select a metal rod that is slightly bigger. Drill it as you suggested, assuming the hose is bigger than the OD of the jet, and if not drill it to create an orifice. And since we are dealing with vacuum I'm not sure that much in the way of barbs is needed. For long term use maybe some, but for testing I'm thinking that a smooth surface will seal well enough to find out if it is going to work and get close on the orifice. In fact, looking at the pic again Ford didn't put barbs on the fittings on the black plastic part. Not sure I have any plastic rod that big, so will see what I have in the way of rod and either tap one for a jet or make some of various sizes this afternoon and go for a test.

You are right, the only bypass on the 300 is through the heater core.

I second Jim's recommendations. I'm using Loctite 56747 PST 50ml High Temperature Thread Sealant for Stainless Steel Fittings. It is expensive, but really works. I've had no leaks and no seizing of the bolts. And, I drilled a small hole in my thermostat. But, maybe mine wasn't big enough as it didn't seem to help with the initial fill as I still had some air in the system. However, it sure didn't hurt.

This one is hardly a "survivor". Save for the body it comes closer to being a '95 than an '85. And yes, that piece of aluminum would be clunky, but a V-REST is similar. And once you drill it out you can't go back. I'm not saying I'll make that, but it is what came to mind to allow tuning the speed control. Perhaps I'll get lucky and nail it on an early try, but I'm doubting it. As for buying a 2020, I have a 2015 and there's not enough difference to make it worthwhile to change. But, Big Blue is "close" and dialing in the speed control will bring it that much closer. Besides, the vacuum restriction was your idea!

Dane - An auto, like your C6, softens things quite a bit, but with a manual you feel it more. So, while it may be normal I don't like it. Jim - It doesn't take but a few inches of vacuum to make the system work. I saw 3" of vacuum today and it was still pulling strong. But the system ties into the manifold vacuum on the firewall and there is no restriction at all, so whatever the engine has the speed control sees. What I don't know is how much restriction will tame it. The size of that hose suggests that a V-REST might be too small, but I don't know. However, tomorrow I'll see what I have in the way of those devices, see if I can rig up some adapters, and give it a test to prove the concept. Jim & Shaun (and whomever else chimes in before I get this posted) - Yes, it is the engineer in me. I'm ALWAYS trying to improve things. And watching the vacuum gauge twist back and forth tells me that a lot of improvement can be had. And here's what I'm thinking for a restriction, assuming that a V-REST is too restrictive, like I think it will be. This is a piece of aluminum bored through with hose barbs screwed in from either end and a Holley jet below the right one. I believe I have the correct tap for those jets as I'd planned to use one in my leak-down tester - but didn't.

Actually, I think I may be making this a whole lot harder than it needs to be. (What else is new?) In the illustration below there's a wye in the vacuum line between the valves and the servo, which is where the vacuum line to the dump valve attaches. I'm pretty sure that this is that wye as I know for sure that the open port goes to the dump valve. So, why not put a restriction in the hose where the X is? The downside to this approach vs the previous one is that the same restriction is used for both accelerate as well as decelerate. But there's no drilling, taping, etc. Just cut the hose and insert a restriction. But, aren't most of the restrictions Ford used restrictions one way and a check valve the other? Or were there just restrictions? And, won't they be too restrictive? Look at the size of that hose! Hmmm, I think I have a small valve that could be used as a variable restriction to test this out.

Hmmm, maybe! It would be easy to put a restriction in the vacuum supply by making a fitting that accepts a carb jet and has hose barbs on either end. But not so easy in the vent as I think it is just a hole in the housing. But, maybe I can drill and tap it to take a little hose barb, and then play with carb jets on it as well. I'll look tomorrow, but that may be a much better way of smoothing things than doing it electrically. http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/uploads/6/5/8/7/65879365/thinking-26_orig.jpg

Speaking of copying things to the other thread, I'm copying these things from the other thread... Well, the FSM section on Speed control says "Speed control system tests should be performed using the Rotunda Tester Model 007-00013 or equivalent. If the Model 007-00013 Tester is not available, use the Following procedures." And then it has you testing for voltage here, resistance there, ect. So, I tested components as best I could and assembled a system out of the best of the pieces. And then I followed the instructions for testing, and found nothing. NADA. Everything checked out. But, knowing that there's a potentiometer buried in the electronic "amplifier" I drilled a hole in the housing to allow access, as you can see in the pic. And, I marked the case where the current setting is. But when it came time to "install" the amplifier I realized that the access to the hole wouldn't be easy, so I held it in place w/a zip tie in a position where I could tweak it when stopped. Then we took the truck for a drive. You'll remember that the last time I had it out there were two problems - a 6 MPH surge when you hit Set, and an aggressiveness to holding the speed that caused it to overcompensate on throttle settings. Well, when I hit Set the set point was spot-on with the speed we were going. Yippee! But, it was still too aggressive. So I pulled over and turned the pot counterclockwise a bit. And after that set point was a little lower. Then I turned it clockwise quite a bit and when you hit Set the speed jumped 3 MPH up. Last, I turned it all the way counterclockwise and the set point was 3 MPH low. But, there didn't seem to be any change in how aggressive the speed control is. So apparently that pot only controls where the set point is and not the sensitivity. I'll put it back to the marks and expect the set point to be just right. However, I'm not happy with how aggressive it is and will be thinking about how to change that to smooth things out.

Well, the FSM section on Speed control says "Speed control system tests should be performed using the Rotunda Tester Model 007-00013 or equivalent. If the Model 007-00013 Tester is not available, use the Following procedures." And then it has you testing for voltage here, resistance there, ect. So, I tested components as best I could and assembled a system out of the best of the pieces. And then I followed the instructions for testing, and found nothing. NADA. Everything checked out. But, knowing that there's a potentiometer buried in the electronic "amplifier" I drilled a hole in the housing to allow access, as you can see in the pic. And, I marked the case where the current setting is. But when it came time to "install" the amplifier I realized that the access to the hole wouldn't be easy, so I held it in place w/a zip tie in a position where I could tweak it when stopped. Then we took the truck for a drive. You'll remember that the last time I had it out there were two problems - a 6 MPH surge when you hit Set, and an aggressiveness to holding the speed that caused it to overcompensate on throttle settings. Well, when I hit Set the set point was spot-on with the speed we were going. Yippee! But, it was still too aggressive. So I pulled over and turned the pot counterclockwise a bit. And after that set point was a little lower. Then I turned it clockwise quite a bit and when you hit Set the speed jumped 3 MPH up. Last, I turned it all the way counterclockwise and the set point was 3 MPH low. But, there didn't seem to be any change in how aggressive the speed control is. So apparently that pot only controls where the set point is and not the sensitivity. I'll put it back to the marks and expect the set point to be just right. However, I'm not happy with how aggressive it is and will be thinking about how to change that to smooth things out.

Oh! I completely misunderstood. You are going back in with a stock column and can't get the horn to work. http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/uploads/6/5/8/7/65879365/head-slap-23_orig.gif I don't think I have a non-speed control horn pad to look at, but in the wheel there is a button that is a wiper that runs on a track in the column. If you have the wheel off you can short that track to ground and the horn should honk. Then with the wheel on you should have either one terminals sticking up or two. And a hole in the steering column where you'd put a stud to pull the wheel. The horn pad will have a connector that goes on that terminal and a spring clip that goes in the hole. And when you push the horn button it just shorts that terminal to ground. You can see the wiring on the page at Documentation/Electrical/EVTM/1985 EVTM and then go to the Horn & Cigar lighter. As for replying via the forum, it takes two steps. First, I've copied in the email I got, and then circled in red the link you need to click. That will take you to the post on the forum. And while looking at the post on the forum there's a "Reply" link to the upper right. Click on that and a window will open up, into which you type your reply. Then just click "Post Message" below that window on the left.

Ok, you are just trying to put a horn button on a non-speed control truck using an aftermarket steering wheel. I know others have done this, although I haven't. So let's let them comment.

Dennis - This is your call, but you are replying via email rather than logging onto the forum. That works, sorta, but it copies in a lot of the previous message so the posts start looking pretty ugly. You replied "no sir", just two words, but see below what that creates. Instead, if you clicked the link below the words "If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:" you'd be taken to the forum itself and you can post w/o the extra baggage. As said, that's your call. But some people won't bother to read such a messy thread, so you limit the help you'll get.

Do you have speed control? That makes a big difference. And, by the way D9HZ-13A805-B is not a part number. The "H" in the prefix of D9HZ says it is an ID #. For these trucks that character is normally a "T" for a part number. As silly as it sounds, any # on a part is not a part number. From the mid-60's Ford had a "better idea" and put ID #'s, sometimes called engineering #'s, on the parts. And then they printed a cross reference between part numbers and ID #'s. Unfortunately I can't find D9HZ-13A805-B as an ID # in my cross ref. But you can see the horn pad part numbers at the page here: Documentation/Interior/Horn Pads. Anyway, tell us more about what you are doing so we can figure this out.