Year-To-Year Differences?

[Gary Lewis]

First, please take a look at the Engine & Driveline tab on Year-To-Year Differences page. I've gotten a start on the engine availability table - and what a headache that is!

I started using brochures, and realized that the dealer fact books have MUCH more detail. So I spent quite a bit of time working through the three I have - '81, '2, & '3. I think I got them translated correctly, but I need y'all to see if you can understand it. PLEASE!

And, along the way I learned something that has been a long-lasting "discussion point". Turns out the 351W was introduced in the pickups and Broncos in California in '81, but only on the light-duty trucks below 8500# GVWR. Over 8500# in CA the 351M was used. And, in '81 the 351M was available in 49-State applications from the F150 through the F350, except for the short-bed regular-cab truck.

Anyway, please take a look at the table and see if it works for you. If not, what needs to change. I don't want to go further until I know this works. And, in order for this to really be accurate I'll have to find the other dealer facts books. (Calling David!)

Grumpin - I'll try to run the chime/buzzer thing to ground in a bit.

Bill - The kingpin thing may have to wait a while as I KNOW that's complex.

All - I'll try to capture the thoughts/ideas on that page and then get back to it as I can to run them to ground. So keep those cards and letters coming in!

Grumpin - I think the brochure is mistaken. It really boils down to which Ford publication you want to believe, but I'll put my money on the Master Parts Catalog instead of a sales brochure. (There are errors in the MPC, but don't try to tell Numberdummy that. )

Anyway, the MPC has this listing for the headlight warning buzzer. There was only one used for the 1980 - 89 trucks according to this.

And this is from the 1986 EVTM showing the headlight warning buzzer was a one-piece unit with the key and seat belt buzzer.

So from what I can see there was only one unit from 1980 through '89, and it didn't chime. But I wouldn't stake my life on it.

[Rembrant]

Grumpin - I think the brochure is mistaken. It really boils down to which Ford publication you want to believe, but I'll put my money on the Master Parts Catalog instead of a sales brochure. (There are errors in the MPC, but don't try to tell Numberdummy that. )

Anyway, the MPC has this listing for the headlight warning buzzer. There was only one used for the 1980 - 89 trucks according to this.

And this is from the 1986 EVTM showing the headlight warning buzzer was a one-piece unit with the key and seat belt buzzer.

So from what I can see there was only one unit from 1980 through '89, and it didn't chime. But I wouldn't stake my life on it.

Out of curiosity, another change I was wondering about was the smaller wheel bolt pattern...

Was that just the very early trucks? 1980-1981? And what dictated the difference? Was it manual and power brake differences?

Where's Fuzzface??...lol.

 

[Gary Lewis]

Out of curiosity, another change I was wondering about was the smaller wheel bolt pattern...

Was that just the very early trucks? 1980-1981? And what dictated the difference? Was it manual and power brake differences?

Where's Fuzzface??...lol.

We did a lot of research on that issue back on FTE. And the upshot is that F100's with:

• Manual brakes: 5 1/2" bolt pattern regardless of GVW

• Power brakes from 4600 to 4700 GVW had a 4 1/2 bolt pattern

• Power brakes from 5000 to 5100 GVW had a 5 1/2" bolt pattern

But this doesn't appear to be a year-to-year difference. Instead it is an oddity. In any event it needs to be documented better than we have it at this point. But I'm not sure where to put that. On the Bullnose FAQ's page on a tab for F100's?

On another topic, but closely associated to y2y, are engine specs. The dealer fact books usually, but not always, have horsepower and torque specs. And, the power numbers differ by application even within a year. So, what I'm thinking of doing is scanning the relevant info and creating a page for each engine to contain those pages. And, then in the spreadsheet each engine's entry will be a hotlink to the appropriate page.

And I'm sure that there are other things in the dealer fact books that could be pulled out the same way. Like transmission info. Colors? Etc?

Thoughts?

[Steve83]

So from what I can see there was only one unit from 1980 through '89, and it didn't chime.

I've found at least 4, but I'd call them all buzzers - not chimes. They're at the top L & bottom R of this pic:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/233590/thumbnail/chimes.jpg

I probably still have those.

[Gary Lewis]

So from what I can see there was only one unit from 1980 through '89, and it didn't chime.

I've found at least 4, but I'd call them all buzzers - not chimes. They're at the top L & bottom R of this pic:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/233590/thumbnail/chimes.jpg

I probably still have those.

Interesting. While there was only one part number, which says to me that they operate the same, there may have been different manufacturers. Perhaps that accounts for the different look?

By the way, I'm not sure how you are inserting your icon pics, but you may be able to make them bigger by inserting this code in that generated: width="100%"

Here's the code generated for a pic, but I've removed the "<" and ">" from the front and back.

You can see the code I mentioned: nabble_img src="11215_Header.jpg" border="0"width="100%"/

As said, I don't know how you are doing it or if that will work. And you can play with the % to make them whatever you want.

[Steve83]

...I'm not sure how you are inserting your icon pics...

I'm using the code beside the pics on the SMN pages, but I prefer to change it to show the thumbnail instead of a fullsize pic so your page loads faster, and it uses less of your bandwidth, and people only see the fullsize image if they want (by clicking the thumb), and so SMN counts those views.

This is a thumb:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/thumbnail/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

This is FS:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/fullsize/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

This is original-size (which might be the same as FS for small pics):

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/original/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

You should see the codes beside the pic on the SMN page. For this BBS, I use the "Tag" text; for all others, I use the "Thumb" text.

[Gary Lewis]

...I'm not sure how you are inserting your icon pics...

I'm using the code beside the pics on the SMN pages, but I prefer to change it to show the thumbnail instead of a fullsize pic so your page loads faster, and it uses less of your bandwidth, and people only see the fullsize image if they want (by clicking the thumb), and so SMN counts those views.

This is a thumb:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/thumbnail/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

This is FS:

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/fullsize/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

This is original-size (which might be the same as FS for small pics):

https://supermotors.net/getfile/174142/original/cat-in-a-glass.jpg

You should see the codes beside the pic on the SMN page. For this BBS, I use the "Tag" text; for all others, I use the "Thumb" text.

Ok, you really know what you are doing so I'll leave you alone.

[Gary Lewis]

Ok, you really know what you are doing so I'll leave you alone.

Guys, I need some feedback. PLEASE!

I now have the engine table on the Engine & Driveline tab on the Year-To-Year Differences page fleshed out enough that you can tell what my plans are. And while I probably have half of the work done, I'd sure like to know that the way I'm doing it is the best way we, collectively, can come up with.

So here are the things I'd like you to look at and,on which to provide feedback:

• Engine hot links: All of the engines (left edge), except the 351HO, are hot-linked to the respective pages. Does that seem reasonable to you?

• Readability: With a lot of experimentation I finally settled on scanning the pages from the books at high res (600 dpi) into a pdf. As you'll see, each page has some really small print and that was the only way I could make it legible for you. (And, like Dad used to say, the large print giveth and the small print taketh away.) They take a while to load, but that's the only way I can find to make them usable. But, are they?

• Windsor: I've had the Windsor engines grouped together on one page for some time, but that may be an issue. Thoughts?

• 400: I'm not getting the spec's to load on this computer unless I click the popout/full page button, and then they come up. However, it works fine on my iPhone. (And, I can read everything quite well on it.) Are you getting the 400 spec's to load properly?

Anyway, PLEASE take a look and give me some feedback.

And, you'll see what I've been struggling with in regard to the notes, and why I had to resort to them on the table. But, I'd be ever so grateful if some of you would take the time to work through some (all?) of the notes vs my table and see if I did it correctly. I really would like to get this right, and it isn't the most straightforward thing.

THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!

 

[85lebaront2]

Guys, I need some feedback. PLEASE!

I now have the engine table on the Engine & Driveline tab on the Year-To-Year Differences page fleshed out enough that you can tell what my plans are. And while I probably have half of the work done, I'd sure like to know that the way I'm doing it is the best way we, collectively, can come up with.

So here are the things I'd like you to look at and,on which to provide feedback:

• Engine hot links: All of the engines (left edge), except the 351HO, are hot-linked to the respective pages. Does that seem reasonable to you?

• Readability: With a lot of experimentation I finally settled on scanning the pages from the books at high res (600 dpi) into a pdf. As you'll see, each page has some really small print and that was the only way I could make it legible for you. (And, like Dad used to say, the large print giveth and the small print taketh away.) They take a while to load, but that's the only way I can find to make them usable. But, are they?

• Windsor: I've had the Windsor engines grouped together on one page for some time, but that may be an issue. Thoughts?

• 400: I'm not getting the spec's to load on this computer unless I click the popout/full page button, and then they come up. However, it works fine on my iPhone. (And, I can read everything quite well on it.) Are you getting the 400 spec's to load properly?

Anyway, PLEASE take a look and give me some feedback.

And, you'll see what I've been struggling with in regard to the notes, and why I had to resort to them on the table. But, I'd be ever so grateful if some of you would take the time to work through some (all?) of the notes vs my table and see if I did it correctly. I really would like to get this right, and it isn't the most straightforward thing.

THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!

Same here, the 400 tab shows nothing unless I full screen it.

On you comments on the 400, I fully agree, if Ford had offered it with say 8.5:1 compression and a moderate size 4 barrel (anything except a 4300D) it would have been a great engine. I had a neighbor who had a 1977 F150 with the 351M, did everything except say "oink" when you stood on it.

351 engines, original 351 was the Windsor block, and it was built in 2 barrel versions in most cars and 4 barrel in Mustangs, Cougars, Torinos and Montegos. In 1970, the 351C was introduced as a replacement for the 4 barrel Windsor plant engine, at which time that engine had a W appended. I had always heard the large bell housing 351 called a Modified as it was the same block as the 400 and was able to use the same large transmissions as the 385 series engines (429/460). It also allowed the same perches to be used. Specific example, 1971 full size Ford, base engine 300 6cyl. optional, 302, 351W all of which used a common flywheel housing. Move up to the 351M, 400 and 429, again same flywheel housing and same perches. In the full size Mercury line, no 6 cyl but 302, 351W or 351M, 400 and 429. this allowed almost as much interchangeability as brand C, and a whole lot more than Chrysler or the rest of GM. GM did come out with some "universal" case Hydra-matics, drilled for both the Chevy and BOP patterns (dowel pins are the same for both).

The early 70s were not a good time for Ford engines, in order to meet the emission standards, the 351M/400 engines were jetted so lean they barely ran, and still got Ford in hot water over suspicious test methods. The super lean mixture does not necessarily help gas mileage, in fact it can hurt it if it is so lean it misfires or the vacuum is so weak the advance will not pull in or drops out with very small throttle additions.

[Gary Lewis]

Same here, the 400 tab shows nothing unless I full screen it.

On you comments on the 400, I fully agree, if Ford had offered it with say 8.5:1 compression and a moderate size 4 barrel (anything except a 4300D) it would have been a great engine. I had a neighbor who had a 1977 F150 with the 351M, did everything except say "oink" when you stood on it.

351 engines, original 351 was the Windsor block, and it was built in 2 barrel versions in most cars and 4 barrel in Mustangs, Cougars, Torinos and Montegos. In 1970, the 351C was introduced as a replacement for the 4 barrel Windsor plant engine, at which time that engine had a W appended. I had always heard the large bell housing 351 called a Modified as it was the same block as the 400 and was able to use the same large transmissions as the 385 series engines (429/460). It also allowed the same perches to be used. Specific example, 1971 full size Ford, base engine 300 6cyl. optional, 302, 351W all of which used a common flywheel housing. Move up to the 351M, 400 and 429, again same flywheel housing and same perches. In the full size Mercury line, no 6 cyl but 302, 351W or 351M, 400 and 429. this allowed almost as much interchangeability as brand C, and a whole lot more than Chrysler or the rest of GM. GM did come out with some "universal" case Hydra-matics, drilled for both the Chevy and BOP patterns (dowel pins are the same for both).

The early 70s were not a good time for Ford engines, in order to meet the emission standards, the 351M/400 engines were jetted so lean they barely ran, and still got Ford in hot water over suspicious test methods. The super lean mixture does not necessarily help gas mileage, in fact it can hurt it if it is so lean it misfires or the vacuum is so weak the advance will not pull in or drops out with very small throttle additions.

Ok, I'll upload the files again tomorrow for the 400. Really strange that it works on my phone but not my Windows devices.

As for the 400's power, or lack thereof, when you saddle it with the same size 2bbl as the 351W and M had, there's no way it can perform. Then consider the 8.0 compression ratio. Even the 351W had 8.3.

Brandon's friend James has an '80 F350 w/a 400. He was replacing the timing set on it and added an Eddy intake and just a 600 CFM carb. Said it fully doubled the power.

But I'm not sure I agree with you on the 351M. Instead of a pig I think Dad's was more like a dead toad. When you step on a pig at least you'll get a squeal. But if you step on a dead toad nothing happens. I was used to Dad's engine and then I bought Rusty. Forged pistons with more like 9:1 compression and some RV cam. Huge difference, both in power as well as economy. Dad's truck got 10.5 MPG with the C6, and Rusty got about 12.5 MPG. Essentially same truck, exactly the same tranny (I swapped it), but a well built engine.