Big Blue's Transformation

[Gary Lewis]

.... Let me try again:

• F150's have been built right through the decades

• LD F250's were built through 1998, but in 1999 that GVWR became F150's so the LD F250 ceased to exist in '99

• HD F250's and 350's ceased to exist at the end of '97. But in '99 that range of GVWR's came out as SuperDuty trucks

Does that capture it?

Close. Let me try it this way:

1996:

F-150, F-250, F-250HD, F-350 and F-Superduty: all old body style

1997:

F-150 and F-250: both new F-150 body style

F-250HD, F-350 and F-Superduty: all old body style

1998:

F-150 and F-250: both new F-150 body style

No F-250HD, F-350 or F-Superduty

1999:

F-150: new F-150 body style

F-250: rebadged as F-150 and also new F-150 body style

F-250HD: loses the "HD" and becomes part of the new SuperDuty

F-350: also part of the new SuperDuty

F-Superduty: rebadged as F-450 & F-550 and becomes part of new SuperDuty

And for what it's worth, there was never a "light duty" F-250.

• There was an F-250 3/4 ton truck just like there was an F-100 1/2 ton truck

• Then there was a heavy duty 3/4 ton truck just like there was a heavy duty 1/2 ton truck. But while the heavy duty 1/2 ton truck was badged differently (F-150) from the 1/2 ton (still F-100), the heavy duty 3/4 ton was badged "F-250" just like the 3/4 ton. The "F-250HD" only showed up on the order sheet (until 1997 when it was put on a badge on the tail gate)

• Unlike the 1/2 ton (F-100) which was discontinued, the 3/4 ton continues to be made. But starting in 1999 it was badged "F-150" and was only differentiated on the order form where it was called "F-150 7700" or something like that (7700 being the GVWR of the 3/4 ton truck that now had the name of a heavy duty 1/2 ton)

• Like the heavy duty 1/2 ton (F-150), the "heavy duty" part of the name pretty much fell away from the heavy duty 3/4 ton. So now we call an F-150 a "1/2 ton" even though it's really the successor to the heavy duty 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton trucks. And we call the F-250 a "3/4 ton" even though it's the successor to the heavy duty 3/4 ton trucks

Ford never does anything the simple way!

Good way to explain it. Thanks, Bob.

As for there not being a "light duty" F250, maybe not in name. But, if it wasn't an F250HD then it must have been a ?????

[85lebaront2]

Good way to explain it. Thanks, Bob.

As for there not being a "light duty" F250, maybe not in name. But, if it wasn't an F250HD then it must have been a ?????

Let's go back to the 70s, in 1975 Catalytic converters became pretty much mandatory for cars and light trucks, there were some exceptions. my daughter owned one, a 1975 Pinto Pony MPG. Ford used some old hot rodder's tricks, bigger carb, low restriction exhaust and got it 49 state certified with non catalytic converter.

Pickup trucks had a weight break that put 1/2 ton and smaller in the same emission class as cars, the manufacturers decided to introduce a truck between a 1/2 and 3/4 ton. Ford had the F150, GM the "heavy half" Dodge the D150. Ford simply put roller bearings in the 9" rear wheel bearings, F250 I-beams on the 2WD models and used a heavier frame, Dodge was similar, essentially downrated 3/4 ton models, GM put heavier springs on the C10 and 1500 to increase the capacity. According my trailer guy, Ford did it right, Dodge close and (he is a GM guy) GM took the cheap way. On my 1977, the only thing about it that should have been heavier where the brakes.

[Angelo Voltura]

Good way to explain it. Thanks, Bob.

As for there not being a "light duty" F250, maybe not in name. But, if it wasn't an F250HD then it must have been a ?????

I've always considered the low GVWR F250s light duty and the higher ones the HD's. Especially ones that had semi float axles in the rear, including on 4x4 trucks.

That said, the 1998 F250s that had the new F150 body style were 7700 gvwr and nicknamed just that. They also ahd 7 lug axles and the twin I beam up front...as far as I know they are the only year that body had an I beam.

[ArdWrknTrk]

I've always considered the low GVWR F250s light duty and the higher ones the HD's. Especially ones that had semi float axles in the rear, including on 4x4 trucks.

That said, the 1998 F250s that had the new F150 body style were 7700 gvwr and nicknamed just that. They also ahd 7 lug axles and the twin I beam up front...as far as I know they are the only year that body had an I beam.

7 lug?

That's odd!

But probably no odder that a 250LD with five lug wheels and a rear without removable axles.

Leave it to Ford to use up ALL the parts.

[Nothing Special]

.... Pickup trucks had a weight break that put 1/2 ton and smaller in the same emission class as cars, the manufacturers decided to introduce a truck between a 1/2 and 3/4 ton....

Yep. And then a few years later the same thing happened with the EPA putting 3/4 ton trucks into the "needs a cat" category and the big three coming out with a 7/8 ton... er, heavy duty 3/4 ton.

I've always considered the low GVWR F250s light duty and the higher ones the HD's. Especially ones that had semi float axles in the rear, including on 4x4 trucks.

Lots of people consider them that way. But Ford didn't. Ford had an F-250 and an F-250HD. No light duty officially.

And all 3/4 ton trucks had semi-floating axles at one time. After there were heavy duty 3/4 tons there were "3/4 tons" that had full floaters. Then people forgot that 3/4 tons were supposed to have semi-floaters and started thinking that the F-250s were "nothing more than a glorified 1/2 ton". But no, they were truly 3/4 ton trucks, just not heavy duty versions of 3/4 ton trucks.

That said, the 1998 F250s that had the new F150 body style were 7700 gvwr and nicknamed just that. They also ahd 7 lug axles and the twin I beam up front...as far as I know they are the only year that body had an I beam.

The '97 and '98 F-250s may have been nicknamed F-150 7700. But Ford called the '99 version F-150 7700. So I'm guessing that the "nickname" for the '97 and '98s came later, from the actual name of the truck previously known as F-250.

And yes, 7 lug wheels. I didn't know about the Twin I-Beam front end (I didn't pay much attention to the 2WDs). But the 4WDs had an IFS similar to the F-150s of the same years.

[Gary Lewis]

.... Pickup trucks had a weight break that put 1/2 ton and smaller in the same emission class as cars, the manufacturers decided to introduce a truck between a 1/2 and 3/4 ton....

Yep. And then a few years later the same thing happened with the EPA putting 3/4 ton trucks into the "needs a cat" category and the big three coming out with a 7/8 ton... er, heavy duty 3/4 ton.

I've always considered the low GVWR F250s light duty and the higher ones the HD's. Especially ones that had semi float axles in the rear, including on 4x4 trucks.

Lots of people consider them that way. But Ford didn't. Ford had an F-250 and an F-250HD. No light duty officially.

And all 3/4 ton trucks had semi-floating axles at one time. After there were heavy duty 3/4 tons there were "3/4 tons" that had full floaters. Then people forgot that 3/4 tons were supposed to have semi-floaters and started thinking that the F-250s were "nothing more than a glorified 1/2 ton". But no, they were truly 3/4 ton trucks, just not heavy duty versions of 3/4 ton trucks.

That said, the 1998 F250s that had the new F150 body style were 7700 gvwr and nicknamed just that. They also ahd 7 lug axles and the twin I beam up front...as far as I know they are the only year that body had an I beam.

The '97 and '98 F-250s may have been nicknamed F-150 7700. But Ford called the '99 version F-150 7700. So I'm guessing that the "nickname" for the '97 and '98s came later, from the actual name of the truck previously known as F-250.

And yes, 7 lug wheels. I didn't know about the Twin I-Beam front end (I didn't pay much attention to the 2WDs). But the 4WDs had an IFS similar to the F-150s of the same years.

Did a bunch of prep work on Big Blue's wiring. Y'all may have forgotten, but I have a thread in Projects called Upgrades For Big Blue, which is locked by the way, wherein I'm doing my thinking and documenting of my plans. And the last post in that thread has an embedded spreadsheet that is becoming my bible for this effort.

Heretofore that s/s has had but one tab, EEC Pinouts, which shows all of the circuits a 1996 CA-spec 7.5L's EEC would have connected to it. And it shows which of those I intend to use.

But today I added a tab called Bulkhead - C202, which shows all of the pins in the bulkhead connector, aka C202. And, like on the EEC tab, this one shows what circuit goes to each of the pins and what I plan to do with it.

There will be at least one other tab - one for all of the connectors on the wiring harness. And on this tab I'll figure out what I'll do with each connector, meaning whether I remove it or use it.

Hopefully with all of this effort it will be easy to see what needs to be done. But one thing is starting to become clear - for the most part it won't be hard to integrate the '96 harness into a Bullnose truck. And I think it breaks down this way:

• Engine: The engine controls will all be from the '96. But starting circuitry will be from the '85 and a signal fed to the '96 ECU to tell it that the engine is cranking. And, the speed control (cruise) will be the '85 version, not the '96 one.

• Body: All of the body functions, such as HVAC, lighting, wipers, and radio will be from the '85 - except that the headlight relays may be in the '96 power distribution box. And, the brake on/off signal will be fed to the ECU.

• Fuel: This area will be a bit more complex. The ECU appears to control the fuel pump relay, and from there the circuit goes to the inertia switch. I'm hoping to do the integration there, meaning connect the '96 fuel pump relay's output to the '85 inertia switch and from there go through the rest of the 85's wiring to the fuel delivery modules. And then the fuel senders will feed back through the '85 wiring to the Arduino, which will drive the Bullnose gauges.

• Charging: There will be another interface here. The '85 fuselinks will attach to the starter relay, just like in Bullnose trucks. But the '96 harness will also connect to the starter relay and feed across the radiator support to the '96 power distribution box. And this will then power the ECU. But the aux battery will be charged from the PDB, so there's another interface there.

So, what am I missing? What should change?

[Gary Lewis]

Did a bunch of prep work on Big Blue's wiring. Y'all may have forgotten, but I have a thread in Projects called Upgrades For Big Blue, which is locked by the way, wherein I'm doing my thinking and documenting of my plans. And the last post in that thread has an embedded spreadsheet that is becoming my bible for this effort.

Heretofore that s/s has had but one tab, EEC Pinouts, which shows all of the circuits a 1996 CA-spec 7.5L's EEC would have connected to it. And it shows which of those I intend to use.

But today I added a tab called Bulkhead - C202, which shows all of the pins in the bulkhead connector, aka C202. And, like on the EEC tab, this one shows what circuit goes to each of the pins and what I plan to do with it.

There will be at least one other tab - one for all of the connectors on the wiring harness. And on this tab I'll figure out what I'll do with each connector, meaning whether I remove it or use it.

Hopefully with all of this effort it will be easy to see what needs to be done. But one thing is starting to become clear - for the most part it won't be hard to integrate the '96 harness into a Bullnose truck. And I think it breaks down this way:

• Engine: The engine controls will all be from the '96. But starting circuitry will be from the '85 and a signal fed to the '96 ECU to tell it that the engine is cranking. And, the speed control (cruise) will be the '85 version, not the '96 one.

• Body: All of the body functions, such as HVAC, lighting, wipers, and radio will be from the '85 - except that the headlight relays may be in the '96 power distribution box. And, the brake on/off signal will be fed to the ECU.

• Fuel: This area will be a bit more complex. The ECU appears to control the fuel pump relay, and from there the circuit goes to the inertia switch. I'm hoping to do the integration there, meaning connect the '96 fuel pump relay's output to the '85 inertia switch and from there go through the rest of the 85's wiring to the fuel delivery modules. And then the fuel senders will feed back through the '85 wiring to the Arduino, which will drive the Bullnose gauges.

• Charging: There will be another interface here. The '85 fuselinks will attach to the starter relay, just like in Bullnose trucks. But the '96 harness will also connect to the starter relay and feed across the radiator support to the '96 power distribution box. And this will then power the ECU. But the aux battery will be charged from the PDB, so there's another interface there.

So, what am I missing? What should change?

Well, I guess I either stumped the chumps or, more likely, confused everyone.

Let's move on. I've come to the realization that I need to revise the order of assembly. I'd been thinking I'd need to stand in the engine compartment and do the wiring, but now I'm thinking the there won't be all that much that needs to be done on the truck.

I say that because I think I can do the vast majority of the wiring on the work table. Things like soldering the ECU wires together, which will be a chore, will be much easier on the table. And stripping out the un-needed wires from the bulkhead connector will be also. Ditto the PDB. Besides, the wiring goes across the radiator support, and that can't happen until after the engine is in.

So, I decided I'd install the axle today and get it down on all fours. And, I did get the D60 as well as the axle shafts installed, as shown below. (Yes, Shaun, the axle shafts went right in. )

And then I installed the needle bearings and seal in the left spindle and the seal on the left axle shaft, and put the spindle in place, as shown below. But, I didn't find the nuts immediately so haven't installed them.

But, things kinda stalled after that. I got the needle bearings in the right spindle, but broke the seal while installing it, as shown below. Just went back to Amazon and ordered another, which will be in on Monday. So, I'll go back to the electrical work in the interim.

[85lebaront2]

Did a bunch of prep work on Big Blue's wiring. Y'all may have forgotten, but I have a thread in Projects called Upgrades For Big Blue, which is locked by the way, wherein I'm doing my thinking and documenting of my plans. And the last post in that thread has an embedded spreadsheet that is becoming my bible for this effort.

Heretofore that s/s has had but one tab, EEC Pinouts, which shows all of the circuits a 1996 CA-spec 7.5L's EEC would have connected to it. And it shows which of those I intend to use.

But today I added a tab called Bulkhead - C202, which shows all of the pins in the bulkhead connector, aka C202. And, like on the EEC tab, this one shows what circuit goes to each of the pins and what I plan to do with it.

There will be at least one other tab - one for all of the connectors on the wiring harness. And on this tab I'll figure out what I'll do with each connector, meaning whether I remove it or use it.

Hopefully with all of this effort it will be easy to see what needs to be done. But one thing is starting to become clear - for the most part it won't be hard to integrate the '96 harness into a Bullnose truck. And I think it breaks down this way:

• Engine: The engine controls will all be from the '96. But starting circuitry will be from the '85 and a signal fed to the '96 ECU to tell it that the engine is cranking. And, the speed control (cruise) will be the '85 version, not the '96 one.

• Body: All of the body functions, such as HVAC, lighting, wipers, and radio will be from the '85 - except that the headlight relays may be in the '96 power distribution box. And, the brake on/off signal will be fed to the ECU.

• Fuel: This area will be a bit more complex. The ECU appears to control the fuel pump relay, and from there the circuit goes to the inertia switch. I'm hoping to do the integration there, meaning connect the '96 fuel pump relay's output to the '85 inertia switch and from there go through the rest of the 85's wiring to the fuel delivery modules. And then the fuel senders will feed back through the '85 wiring to the Arduino, which will drive the Bullnose gauges.

• Charging: There will be another interface here. The '85 fuselinks will attach to the starter relay, just like in Bullnose trucks. But the '96 harness will also connect to the starter relay and feed across the radiator support to the '96 power distribution box. And this will then power the ECU. But the aux battery will be charged from the PDB, so there's another interface there.

So, what am I missing? What should change?

Gary, the 1985 vacuum cruise servo will not need the deactivation switch on the master cylinder, that was only for the 1993 up electronic cruise control. The vacuum dump valves (you should have two on a manual transmission, one for each pedal) serve the same function. On the tanks, I am pretty sure the power for the pumps is the same as the 96 with one exception, the 1985 ground was inside the cab on the inner firewall brace. It still comes up front, but grounds on the radiator support.

[Gary Lewis]

Gary, the 1985 vacuum cruise servo will not need the deactivation switch on the master cylinder, that was only for the 1993 up electronic cruise control. The vacuum dump valves (you should have two on a manual transmission, one for each pedal) serve the same function. On the tanks, I am pretty sure the power for the pumps is the same as the 96 with one exception, the 1985 ground was inside the cab on the inner firewall brace. It still comes up front, but grounds on the radiator support.

Bill - That's one of the many reasons I'm going to use the '85 speed control system.

But I don't have a vacuum switch on the clutch. And, the 1985 EVTM says the brake pedal has one but not the clutch. However, the clutch pedal is supposed to have a switch that both deactivates the speed control as well as prevents you from starting the truck with the clutch engaged. Big Blue doesn't currently have that switch, although he certainly will as a consequence of the "transformation".

On the tanks, 'tanks. Good to know both that the wiring is the same and about the ground. But as long as there is a ground I don't think it'll matter from whence it comes. I'll be using the rear harness from the '85, so it'll be the in-cab ground.

[salans7]

So, I decided I'd install the axle today and get it down on all fours. And, I did get the D60 as well as the axle shafts installed, as shown below. (Yes, Shaun, the axle shafts went right in. )

Shame about the seal, but what's another few days?

Side note, I brought home a hopefully suitable box for some literature. Gotta personalize it this weekend, but I hope to send it to Oklahoma early next week.