ArdWrknTrk

I'm not so sure, unless the radiator is severely restricted, the whole system is under 13(?)psi. The water pump is only acting as a circulator. It's input and output are always the same in a closed loop system. Liquids are close to incompressible so where is the output going to go in order for the 'suction' side to develop enough vacuum to collapse the hose? That said, my lower hose does have a spring. *Stupid autocorrect. Incomprehensible... LOL

I'm aware of the TSB for the transmission cross member popping and creaking. Ford suggests a HDPE slip sheet and controlled torque when reinstalling. I'll have to look it up. Thanks Steve!

100% with Bill here, but if using bolts I'd suggest ream to size as they will never fill the hole as a rivet would. And ANY relative motion will quickly cause damage.

Aaaand, we're back to where I said "even another Huck would do". Good for you Gary! I'm glad it's all coming together.

So I guess it would work? Looking up the part number or the Hollander interchange should give a definitive answer.

I guess a lot depends on the condition of the U-bolts (Pitting, mangled threads), and whether the guy in KS uses a torch to cut the axle out. Bolts aren't a big deal in my mind.

I didn't know that the U-bolts were TTY, but Billy at the 4x4 shop (or any spring shop) should be able to bend you up some new ones. I have reused U-bolts before seemingly without ill effects. I can't recall any other bits you might need. I imagine you have reviewed the threads and made copious notes.

I think the major difference between the Bullnose trucks and the later aero and OBS style is the crumple zone frame horns and the bumper mounting. You might look into it and include the cross member in your package deal

I'd say the $350 difference between a $800 F-350 wreck and $1150 for the parts pulled more than makes up for the time you'd have into parting a wreck and disposing of it. (Although you would probably get $350 for the husk making it a $700 difference) Just make a list and get ALL the parts while that truck is available.

T-40, 1/4" drive, 150-175 mm extension. Or the Wiha 77117 is available on Amazon for around $10 delivered here in the U.S. That 3/8" drive is skinny enough to fit.

Gary, I thought the whole point of this was to install the cross member and RSK while the engine was out? Weren't you were already set on an RSK with SD springs? Maybe I've misunderstood your intentions or misread your posts? Used springs have already settled. At any rate, $1150 lockout to lockout, with calipers +steering gear and from the spring eyes down is a lot better than $1400 for a bare axle. Though after adding $500 to go through and swap R&P, plus the $275 of a new R&P (if needed) you're back in nose bleed territory. Pretty far from "buy a rear ended or rolled F-350 for ~$800" Will the guy in KS sell you the cross member too? The 4" rear axle spacers? Why didn't your brother tell you he was friendly with the owner of a salvage yard? Soooooooo many questions

Get the '95 4.10 axle, ALL the bits and a pair of SD springs from one guy. Rather than a used 3.54 with unknown R&P and NONE of the rest. Since you'll be swapping to new style calipers check out the brake hose mounting because that may have changed. Since it's getting gone through anyhow. Either buy new or swap known good gears in. Find a place where you can actually use the truck with 4wd engaged. Fill it with cheap lube and change it often at first. Maybe 100 & 500 miles of use?

I was riffing on Archimedes, but yeah.... If we had all these vehicles pointed East and dropped the clutch at the same moment we could probably slow the Earth's rotation.

Rule #1 don't believe everything you read on the internet. Gary, you've gone to the trouble to experiment and get the data, so I have to accept it as fact. Kudos for that! Zf used to have quite a lot of data available on their site. Until they revamped it a few years back. I will say in switching from the T-19 I notice first is a little higher (not enough to cause me to use it often) third is more useful, and obviously 5th is much better on the highway. The engine is still in its sweet spot just under 3k rpm.

Check the page at Novak transmissions where they state the T-19 found in 460 4x4 250's came with the 6.32:1 gear. Since that bell pattern and tail combo is specific to ONLY this truck, I think you have 6:32 as well. Do the torque multiplication. It's pretty crazy. ETA: "We learned that the 1983 to 1986 Ford T19's, as installed behind the 460 and diesel typically had the 4.02:1 first gear in a 2wd application, or a diesel 4wd application. However, 5.11 versions are reported also for these. The 460 4wd truck got the 6.32:1 first gear, purportedly from 1983 to 1986 F250's"

Imagine what my truck was like with the deep 6.32:1 of the 460 4x4 T-19's first and 4:10's! I think it would hit red line before it hit 7mph. I'm not sure if there's a low range difference between Big Blue's 1345 and Li'l Red's 1356 but I could comfortably get out and walk alongside. Relating to Bill's comment about levers. To paraphrase: Give me enough traction and I can move the earth.

Maybe a cab swap on a rotten 250? Otherwise,.

I work at a tire and service shop, and I don't understand... Other than maybe "what a good deal on these mud tires," but to go through a lift to support said tires baffles me. Are they planning to convert to 4wd? Not trying to ridicule, but honestly discussing my feelings about it; I feel that a thing should be used in the way it was designed. I have had to swallow that feeling many times at work while putting M/T or A/T tires on a 2wd vehicle. Duallie's are are often used to haul stock, hay or water trailers around. They have a hard time moving even on damp grass, let alone cow slop. I can understand the want for any traction available in a farm vehicle. If it's used for a car or travel trailer then the owner is compensating for an endowment issue. (Just want to clarify that that was in NO way meant as a dig at Steve, just an explanation as to why some of your customers may want AT or MT tires on a dually.)

Whether the F-250 spring rate is linear or progressive isn't easy to see at first glance. By the look of it it would seem to be not nearly as progressive as the F-350 spring. But keep in mind the strange contortions the TTB geometry make it go through. As it moves it not only flexes like a normal leaf spring, but it also gets pulled sideways, a direction in which it is VERY stiff. I don't have any equations to support this (thankfully!!!), but I think the effective spring rate has to get a lot higher as it gets pulled around. (Which probably explains why the stiffness I calculated seemed too high. I was thinking about the stiffness in the normal bending direction which is likely lower than I calculated. It's the actual stiffness that I calculated, and as I just hand-waved here, that must be significantly higher than the "normal" stiffness. So using an F-250 spring on a solid axle probably isn't as completely stupid as my first calculation indicated. But it's still likely significantly stiffer than an F-350 spring, just not 2.5 times stiffer.) I have to agree with Steve here. The springs are trying to twist but because of the thicker (relation to the 350) leafs, rubber bushings at each end of the spring and the pivot I doubt there is enough to enter the equation. This is why I discounted it before.

I'm not any expert and Shaun or Jonathan would have better answers. (so a lot of conjecture here) I think you mean the distance between the axle housing and the snubber on the frame rail? Well, the D60 is smaller in diameter than the TTB box and you would be measuring to axle centerline. So half of the difference in chord. Then you have the arch of the F-350 spring when loaded vs the negative arch of the 250 spring. On top of this you will have the shackle in the rear pointing down vs the spring eye centered in that perch. You can see some of that on SORD'S instruction page. I don't know where their front perch places the front spring eye in relation to the stock Ford shackle. I assume their page is correct in saying that you will see a 2" lift over stock 350 springs, so there is that. IDK how much more arch SD springs have (if any) over 350 springs, or what their sack height is since they are said to be "softer" The axle obviously is not centered on the SD spring if the same rear mount was used and the bumper needs to be cut for the front. The SD spring is 4" longer?? But if the LoPro mounts 2" rear of stock the axle would be centered. I just don't know these details of the SROD SD kit because I never looked into it.

IDK I'm a simple man who never got to college. Because of my differences I did well at geometry and trig, but not so well in calculus. If I want to figure out something like this graphically I'll draw it out and factor the difference proportionally. This (seems to me) a simple enough question that I won't get caught out and I can leave things like friction and the sideways bending moment on the spring alone. Also, just at a glance I'd say the F-350 stack is far more progressive than the F-250's leafs. But I'm interested, and always like to learn, so please continue.

The small bearing is no problem. The large ring bearing is pricey. I went to eBay, but don't recall what it cost.

Maybe he is thinking of springs for a LD 250 with a Windsor and 5 lug hubs? Sure as hell the 3560# gawr front end in my truck has stiffer springs than a 350's stack. Maybe Billy is more about hardcore four wheeling and doesn't get the overlanding thing?

I want to be clear. I don't think $500 is an unreasonable fee to go though and recondition a drive axle. (seals, bad bushings/bearings, etc..) But (edit) $1900 for a fully functional D60 seems too much to me. Hang in there. My last glance at the NWS doppler looked like OKC and west of Tulsa were getting hammered.

The springs are mounted in rubber at both ends. An oscillation that becomes harmonic can get out of hand quickly. Not something I want to deal with, let alone pass on to my kids.