85lebaront2

Gary, you just hit the head on the nail. Here on Virginia's appendix there is one Tesla running around. My concern is what you referenced, charging stations. The Centre at Salisbury has a row in one of the back corners, problem is, that is 75 miles one way from me. The other direction, to Virginia Beach, roughly 60 miles to VB, but 22 miles of it is the CBBT so if an electric vehicle became discharged there it would need to be towed to a charging station. Jim, power generation, we have a load of solar "farms" here, put up by Dominion Energy (who does not serve us!) and apparently Amazon buys their entire output. These basically take up what used to be farmland, much of which the produce from was shipped up to New England. So, for clean electricity you will ultimately pay higher food prices do to reduced supply. Wind turbines, sore subject, they want to stick a bunch of them off-shore. Not only is the Navy against it so is the tourist industry in VB. Look at the cost in energy to build one, maintain it through it's (relatively) short life span and then either replace it or scrap it. Not every area has (a) good prevailing winds (b) open areas to site one or more and © how many birds are killed by them? Power, here ours comes down form Maryland's Eastern Shore, most likely from a fossil fuel plant, Dominion Energy operates two of the safest Nuclear plants in the country, humerus part, they sell most of it up North and mid-West, and buy electricity from Duke Power, who also operates nuclear plants. Yes, they produce hazardous waste, but are pretty damn reliable and safe. We would have more in this country if it wasn't for fear mongers 40 or so years ago saying how dangerous they are and pointing to Three Mile Island as an example.

I tried it and got very little on Darth, but for Mary's Flex it delivered a pretty comprehensive set.

Looks good, color's a bit different though. Once I get the PC'd parts on mine I will get a picture.

If it gets to Virginia's appendix I will go see it.

I have probably the same one. At the time I did this, my buddy John had my large borescope as the display is removable and can be used as a small video screen. He was installing security cameras and was using it to check the aim and focus on them. The little endoscopes hadn't come out then.

Remember where my shop was, rather close to NASA Langley research center. When the Pacer came out 5 of the engineers there bought them. The things had two issues, first was heat soak and percolation of the gas in the line. The pressure would overpower the inlet needle on the Carter YF carb making hot starts damn near impossible. The second problem was with the Motorola BID ignition, the vacuum advance was a strange double paired diaphragm system, one being the advance, the other an altitude compensating chamber. The failure rate was close to 100% on these. We installed a small fuel pressure regulator in the line and replaced the advance diaphragm. They had in the best engineering practice taken a different Pacer to each of several shops, we fixed our "test vehicle" and a week later came in to 5 Pacers lined up, the test car and the other 4, we were the only shop to fix the test vehicle. AMC released a recall that involved fitting a tiny bypass line between the inlet and outlet of the fuel pump to fix the hot start problem and a note requiring checking of the vacuum advance and an improved part.

Jim, I used some heavy undercoat I bought from Lowe's. I used my phone to take before and after pictures. I have a large borescope (head just barely fits through an aircraft plug hole) and a smaller one that works with my phone. I cleaned out everything then sprayed it, checked it and re-sprayed. Before, note no sealant of any kind After, with plenty of undercoating I had the carpet out, and had gone out to the truck in a pouring rain to locate the leak, right at the junction, the first picture is looking right at that area.

A problem I found on Darth was the right side air inlet area had no seam sealer anywhere, it was just painted metal. As a result I had a water leak coming from the triple joint when the floor, firewall and cowl side meet, it would run down under the edge of the carpet and sit where the sill plate screws down over the edge of the carpet.

Not only an engineer, but probably should have worked at NASA. But that might have been a bad idea, he would probably be restoring an AMC Pacer.

Unfortunately the best one I ever found was sold by Chrysler dealers, but no more they buy it form the local parts stores. Have you tried a glass shop? I have had a similar issue with my truck, and asked the people who put the windshield in my convertible what they use, he said it was something different from the parts store kits.

Jim, the point I was trying to make was stick with the manufacturer's specified procedure if you are using aftermarket premium bolts or studs, then use what the yprescribe, if using OEM fasteners then use the OEM procedure. Lubiing the Ford bolts with something a slippery as ARP's lube may cause the bolts to be over stressed at the same torque value.

I got it and replied, I will get you some more information, part of the problem is my AllData doesn't really cover much earlier than 1984 in detail. If Gary can dig up distributor numbers for non-EEC 302 engines that will give a good starting point.

The question still is, how much stress/strain did you put on the bolts? We had a Raymond Bolt-Master that I would have loved to grab when it was decided to ditch it. The thing was an ultrasonic bolt stretch measuring device. The engineer who came in to demo and train us on it just happened to have an Oldsmobile 5.7L Diesel. He showed us some engine running data on the inside head bolt between #5 & 7 cylinders. The load on the bolt was incredible, the bolts themselves were stronger than Gr8, closest thing I saw to it was FFS-86 socket head cap screws.

Bolt torque can be an elusive value. I learned that and demonstrated in graphically using our Skidmore-Wilhelm bolt stress tester (for those who haven't seen one, it is a hollow center hydraulic load cell which I calibrated on one of our universal test machines. I was tasked with verifying that the proper load was being applied to some 5/8-11 CRES bolt/nut pairs on our DI water piping running almost the entire length of the yard. The contractor was using soap and water (tap water which is chlorinated and not a good idea on 300 series CRES). The preferred per our Nuclear inspection department (QID) is Neolube, graphite in isopropyl alcohol, the correct procedure per QID instructions is to coat the fastener parts, allow coat to dry and repeat. The shocker came when I left the Neolube wet, I think I got around 70 ft-lbs and the bolt just stretched apart. We did motor oil, several types of grease, the soap and water and Neolube. The result variance was a real eye opener. This is why I read the manufacturer's procedure and adhere to it religiously even if it doesn't seem right. It is also the reason that with the "torque to yield" bolts and angle of rotation is the preferred method. One other interesting gem, we had a high pressure accumulator, just a 3' length of some extremely heavy wall pipe, two end rings welded to it with an O-ring groove in each, two end plates of 3" thick HY-80 steel. Each end was held on with 16 3/4" B-7 studs with hardened flat washers and high strength nuts. We were having a problem with it blowing out the O-rings on one very high pressure test. Our lab mechanical engineer was pulling his hair out over it, he was having the technician torque the nuts to 80% of yield. I was sitting in his office and we were discussing this issue, I asked had he run the static load value per stud for the pressure and area involved. Answer was no, should I? I suggested it might be an idea, result load (PSI X area) was high enough to more than exceed 70% yield, which meant we were at 150% yield. He backed the torque level down, and no more problems.

Yes they do, beasts are stiff enough that installing the E4OD in Darth wasn't too difficult, worst part was the pan configuration wanted to roll on my transmission jack. Once I got it on my guide pins it went together easily.

Jim. it might. Pay close attention to the plugs, their spring contacts and the areas on the printed circuit they go into I have been dealing with similar issues on my konvertible, difference is Chrysler used a hard circuit board and a pair of round 11 pin (not all used) plugs that were never available as repair parts (parts lists say "replace harness assembly". I cleaned and soldered the pins to the printed strips, got everything working reliably except the tachometer. I believe that 1987 and 1988 are the same, possibly 1989, after that Ford went to the "oil pressure indicator", but that can be resolved with a jumper across the cut area and deleting the resistor to ground.

In addition to the codes (be sure your code reader can pull them) you really need to be able to read live data when it is acting up. You also need to take a good look at the transmission, by 1992 and definitely by 1995, Ford went to electronic speedometers in the trucks. This means no cable, early E4ODs used a cable with a speed sensor at the transmission end, later ones don't even have a hole for it. His issues could, believe it or not be caused by the speedometer PSOM as it generates the speed signal for the EEC and speed control systems. If you can add a speed sensor, the speed control one will work as far as I know, if not 1988-1991 models had the in-line one at the transmission. Once that is done you need a computer to control it, this means either convert your truck to EFI, or purchase a stand alone transmission controller from a company like Baumann, their Optishift seems to be quite nice. I'm not trying to rain on your parade, just warning you of some of the issues that I ran into.

One of the small 12V pumps that the mechanical pump can easily pull through with a "priming" button that is wired to an ignition power source so it won't work with the key off. I used to jump the cranking power wire for the in-tank pumps on Darth when he sat, saved a lot of cranking waiting for the Holley float bowls to fill. Since I was doing it with the hood open, I would just listen to the "hiss" in the return line telling me the bowls were full.

Gary, Jim, "krinkle kut" was only on the light duty Aeronose to my knowledge. My friend's 1995 F350 does not have it, frame looks almost the same as Darth, difference being the bumper mounts. 1980-86 the bumper bolts directly to the front of the frame, 1987-91 on the sides, 1992-97 HD still the same mount system, 1992-96 LD has the krinkle kut in front just behind the bumper mounts.

Here is what was on Darth when I first got him. It was strong enough to roll the back bumper on a Chevy 2500 under with only some scuffing on one of the rubber pads (too bad it won't fit a 1987 Jim). I have no idea who made it. Darth is an XL model, so no rub strip on the bumper. Bad thing on that, changing a headlight was a royal pain as you had to work through the opening.

You are welcome sir!

The FE, Ford actually said to cut the tube on the intake and had a special tool to install it with the pump on.

Stick it on the intake before you drop it on, it will not be too difficult to guide it over the pump nipple. Be glad it's not an FE or 385 series, those can be a real PITA to install, even with an aluminum intake.

That is one of the problems with U haul, their computer doesn't go back far enough. When my daughter was moving from one part of Chesapeake VA to another, she had stored a lot of stuff at a storage lot in Virginia Beach. When I went over to help her move it to their new place, the U haul site I went to gave me the "well we need to inspect your truck to see if it can pull the trailer". The kid (probably around 20) who went out with said where is it, I pointed to Darth and said "right there, and I guaranty it will pull anything on your lot including that low boy." he took one look and said, I think you're right. I did buy a plug-in adapter from them because I didn't want them cutting into my wiring and the truck had a factory trailer package with the harness. Trying to get their system to understand that, yes, it's a 33 year old truck, but was built for towing and spent the first part of it's life pulling horse trailers from Suffolk VA and has a V5 receiver built into the rear bumper.

Ok, quick information on E series vans. EEC may be under the inside HVAC casing on the passenger side, PDC may be underhood, driver's side with a relay bank separate from it. Engine harness will connect at the top of the opening through the firewall to the inside, it will be a 42 way square bolt together unit and will have all the engine wiring except the alternator. Transmission will probably be another 16 way snap together connector near the 42 way one. We dismantled a 1995 E150 conversion van with a very tired 302, worst engine choice possible for the weight.