85lebaront2

First, welcome to our group of craziness! The 1985.5-1986 EFI system is a bit of a bastard system, it was Ford's first foray into port injection and as such has a number of differences from the cars and 1987 up trucks. First thing I would recommend would be to look at the EEC pinouts (Gary, I can't remember where it is hidden) to see the differences. The 302s got MAF/SAFI in 1994 for automatics, 351s in 1995, and a very few 460s in 1996. One more thing to consider, early 1985.5 EFI engines have a completely different fuel rail than later models. The fuel delivery system was used through the 1989 model year on all EFI engines, 6 cyl through the 460. If you update to a later SD system, you will need to (a) repin the EEC connector and (b) add a speed sensor unless you have a speed control, then you can use the existing sensor. Even the EEC-V box will fit in your existing mount location and the power and fuel pump relays will work with the newer systems.

It sounds like what is called a class C motorhome. If so it is on a cab and chassis E350. They were built as a cutaway, with the cab portion open at the back. First item, the year is the year the motorhome builder finished the unit, the cab and chassis may be from 1 to 2 years older. Second item, could very likely have a 460 in it as the 351W wasn't real happy with both the weight and wind drag. Many of the smaller motorhomes were severely underpowered, having Dodge 318s, Chevy 350s and Ford 351s and since many people like to take a "toad" (small car that can be towed behind) along, it needs enough power to do this also. Unfortunately, Ford was not the prime choice for the bigger (class A) units so most of them came with Chevy 454s, these barely got single digit mpg and since they were based on a P30 (think bread truck) chassis the front end was so overloaded they had air bags inside the front springs to carry the weight. I have worked on a lot of these when I had my shop.

I agree with Steve83 on the rotors, also you can paint them after turning to prevent rusting, the first time you apply the brakes it will rub off where the pads ride, it will take a couple of times to get them clean and shiny.

If you remember the Saginaw discussion we had a while back, the basic pump is the same, it is customized for specific applications by changing the reservoir, flow control valve, outlet fitting and pulley. I do have another Chrysler Saginaw along with the one for the Ford 460 with it's accompanying aluminum mount.

That brings up an interesting point that I haven't considered prior, A/C cabs vs. non-A/C cabs. My 86 was an A/C cab, however I don't intend to run A/C because I have no interest in rebuilding the HVAC system, or trying to make it work. None of my dad's numerous dentside-aeronose trucks ever had working A/C and we got along just fine without it. Heck, even in my Ranger I rarely use it unless I feel like the heat is just unbearable. I'll have to cross that bridge once I'm there because finding a non-A/C cab is unlikely. FWIW, the last cab with AC vs non AC was the 1986, 1987 up if non-AC still had the same firewall, the vent mode used the AC ducting and the evaporator core was left out and a smaller housing fitted in place of it.

Got the rest of the Saginaw pump system mounted, filled and bled (easier with the wheels off the ground), fabricated a temporary support for the exhaust pipe (it is in a ball type joint with spring clamps so the engine can move under torque load) so it won't fall all the way down and either drag or snag when moving the car. After that I set it down, cleaned off the flange where the hood seal/wiring cover goes and reinstalled it. Put the windshield washer tank in and connected the harness to it. I started working on making sure I have an emergency hood release as the original location for it is not accessible with the pusher fan system. ZF pump.

Based on what I had to do to get an Aeronose (which uses the same upper mounts as the Bricknose) it will be a bit difficult. At least the steering column mounts are similar. The Bullnose dash is essentially built up in sections, part metal and part plastic. The upper section is several pieces that bolt down with small screws in four locations just inside the windshield. The other item is the VIN location, the Bullnose is further inboard than the Bricknose or Aeronose. The other big item is the wiring, the Bullnose front end wiring is one continuous harness from the right headlight through the firewall, across the dash then back out through the firewall to the left headlight. All the later models have one or two multi pin bulkhead connectors and the only thing on the right side that penetrates the firewall is for the HVAC system.

I can get a rebuilt one for around $67, but the Saginaw and plumbing (hoses are way different) along with it's mounting bracket were here. The 1985 pump and the one from the 1986.

I have no idea, doesn't seem to be model specific. I had wanted to use the ZF as it is smaller and sits further to the right and forward than the Saginaw (remember the comparison pictures). The innards were well ground up. Got the Saginaw bracket mounted, fabricated a tensioning piece because I needed a spacer where it goes anyway. I ended up having to take the fuel lines off to get the Saginaw down in it's location, ZF came out without removing them.

Starts and runs nicely, getting all the air out of the cooling system is a royal pain. The procedure for filling these engines is to remove the plug in the top of the thermostat area, after 14 years of being in there even though I used Teflon tape, it won't move. I had a small pinhole leak in the gas line back by the filter and that was making it a little harder to start as the pressure (55 psi) would bleed down and the heat would vaporize the gas in the fuel rail. Once that was fixed it starts nicely. I know the upper plenum looks bland, first it sat outside on the engine for probably 8 years, second, since they are (a) rare and (b) I only have one I couldn't send it to be powder coated. I have actually moved it some under it's own power, but found another problem, first I had what I thought was valve train noise (2.2/2.5L Chrysler engines are a bit noisy) even though I had installed a later roller cam. Turns out it was most likely the ZF power steering pump. I had no power steering, and the pump showed no signs of actually moving fluid. Chrysler says "non repairable, replace if bad". Since I found some on-line information on rebuilding them, I figured I couldn't make it any worse, and since it is a vane type like a Saginaw, I thought it might just be stuck vanes in the rotor. Pump body is aluminum, rotor and wear portion are steel. Both front housing and rear plate are chewed up pretty badly as is the outer wear section. Noise was in the pump. At least I have two Saginaw pumps and the mounts and lines, just haven't found the small plate with the adjusting hole (1/2" square) for either one. Steering rack is the one I rebuilt on the 1985 car.

Yes it does, since it has the dual exhausts it does a passable imitation of a Porsche 911. Considering the 1965-68 Corsa 140s were called the "poor man's Porsche". it is not surprising. Nasty little snarl when you open all 4 carbs.

Couldn't get a cameraman for the Corvair carb adjustment routine. It is finished and awaiting being fetched. Here is a picture from a FB group, "longroofs, the wonderful world of station wagons" It is the Pontiac 215/230 OHC engine with a factory optional Quadrajet. Note the carburetor orientation, primaries are outboard so mixture distribution is as even as possible.

When I looked earlier, the first link worked, the second did not.

11.384 isn't too bad, Darth, heavier truck, 6 tires on the road averages a little better than 10 normally, it will go in the cellar if I get stuck in a back up on one of the James River crossings or in town tra.ffic. Long highway runs, he will get 12.5 even running 70 mph. The 460's torque peak is around 2200 rpm, with the E4OD and 3.55 gear, I am below that as I am only turning 1500 rpm at 55 mph in OD, If I drop to 3rd (direct) I am at 2200 rpm at 55 mph which is why I can haul a pretty substantial load uphill on the CBBT at 55 in 3rd.

When I installed the later housing in Darth (apparently a 1993 or early 1994) I found that instead of the 2 1/2" wide shoes on the rear brakes that came on the 1986 DRW trucks, it had 3 1/2" wide shoes which really increased the rear braking, yet generally will not lock up on hard braking. I had already installed the 1990 booster so I could use the later master cylinder with the extra port for the speed control "dump" switch. This is also where my old fashioned hydraulic trailer brake controller is plumbed in. This part is in the same vein as Jonathan's cost vs effectiveness, to even begin to approach the smoothness and ease of balance this has, an all electronic one is in the $$$$$ range. This is also one of the big reasons I do not want a newer truck, 1986 was the last year with no ABS of any kind.

I believe the van brakes as complete units would. I am reasonable sure it is a Sterling, but it could be a Dana, I have not had the rear apart on it.

I wasn't thinking about the whole axle, just the brake parts, particularly if the disc/drum portion slides off.

FWIW, the E-series have rear disc brakes with internal drum parking brakes. A good friend has a 2003 E250 with the 4 wheel disc brakes. I am pretty sure he has the Sterling under it and for an SRW it should work, 8 bolt pattern, but don't know if it is the same or metric.

Jim, that shot of the cover with the interesting brake line routing makes me wonder. It could be that someone swapped in a 1980-1984 rear, or if the truck was an early production 1985 it could have still had the Dana in it. I don't know, maybe someone has the information if there is a "before" and "after" date on the rear axles in 1985. There were so many running changes in Ford trucks 1980-1996/7 that it gets interesting. It wouldn't be the first time Ford did running updates, my 1964 Falcon with the 260 V8 and three speed column shift was built July 27th 1964 and had a lot of anomalies like 289 heads, Mustang PNs (C5ZZ-) on the instruments, larger lower ball joints, tie rod ends etc. break date was June 10th I think on a lot of it.

I had to go into a few of them, I had two cars and a truck with the tilt wheel columns, a 1970 LTD Brougham, a 1971 Colony Park and Darth, all had the same style column. The LTD and Colony Park had the rim blow horn steering wheel. They are much worse than a Saginaw column to work on, however do not seem to suffer the same problem the Saginaw ones had, where the 4 bolts that hold the tilt collar (bottom section) to the tube loosen resulting in a steering wheel that literally flops around. The tilt wheel in Darth is the 1992-96/7 one, which is a lot sturdier, but still is not recommended that you pull on it getting in or out. The Chrysler has a Saginaw tilt column with a key release lever (floor shift).

Gary, that is why Darth (who is shorter than Big Blue by the height of the spacer blocks for 4WD) is tall enough that even using the very solid DeeZee running boards it is still a hoist yourself job to get in. I salvaged a very sturdy set of assist handles from a conversion van and have one over each door opening.

Next was the left knuckle. Using the above procedure I got the bottom nut tightened but the eccentric on the top ball joint didn't want to come down as it should. So, off came the knuckle and I found some powder in the bore. Cleaned that up, re-installed the knuckle, and then tightened the top nut. Sure enough, the bottom nut wouldn't tighten down. After trying several things, including smacking the bottom of the bottom ball joint with a dead-blow hammer, nothing worked. And by then it was quitting time. Tomorrow I'll start over and tighten the lower nut first. Then I'm taking the press kit back to O'Reilly's and also taking the brake rotors in to have them check them out and/or turn them. Meanwhile I'll install the front diff. Dad always said that two steps forward and one back is still progress. And Jim says progress is good. So, it was a good day. I don't know which is a bigger pain, ball joints on a 4WD or king pins in a 2WD. I do have a king pin press, bought it when I had the 1958 F100.

One must be cautious to obtain the correct silencer so as to prevent exhaust titter. The preceding from one of the first V8 Rolls-Royce workshop manuals. Another gem was from my sister's 1959 MGA workshop manual, commenting that later cars were equipt with (I forget the number designation) Lucas distributor which is fitted with a pre-tilted breaker plate. I guess this was to properly supply the high tension wires to the sparking plugs. You haven't really appreciated England's refusal to be rushed into things until you have done the rear brake rods on a 1952 Bentley, yes, they still had mechanical rear drum brakes in 1952, the fronts were hydraulic, 1940 Ford wheel cylinders. Rears were a mechanical power assist system by a friction clutch on the gearbox driven by the output shaft. Considering our 1953 Chrysler Custom Imperial had power steering and power hydraulic brakes, a semi-automatic transmission and a 331 Hemi, the Bentley was an anachronism. F head in-line 6, manual 4 speed transmission, manual steering and power assisted mechanical rear wheel brakes, manual hydraulic front brakes.

By jove, sir I have a set of Whitworth, or maybe English Standard combination wrenches, I'll have to look at the designation for sizing. Remember when using same, to "take spanner twixt thumb and forefinger" in order to properly use them. Reading a British workshop manual is quite interesting.

I missed one, Jack Legg.