Gary Lewis Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 I wouldn't include your time or 'incidental' items like the rotisserie... I'd bet you're approaching that just between the engine and paint & body. (twice) Wheels, tires, springs, shocks, driveshafts (twice), tranny, upolstery (twice), harness, cooling, etc. Heck, the powder alone...... You're there. Remember, the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. LOL! Yes, I have a problem. But I don't want to "fix" it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1986F150Six Posted July 1, 2019 Author Share Posted July 1, 2019 That's a good idea, David. But maybe you should drive Blue. Just swap trucks for the same drive and see what happens. Yes, I could, but then we could not converse and catch up with what's happening. You can drive and try to exceed the former test results while carrying extra weight [my friend and me]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 LOL! Yes, I have a problem. But I don't want to "fix" it. It's not a problem unless you admit it is. ETA: who said 'fix'? Most would agree there's no fixing you. And why would anyone want to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 That's a good idea, David. But maybe you should drive Blue. Just swap trucks for the same drive and see what happens. Yes, I could, but then we could not converse and catch up with what's happening. You can drive and try to exceed the former test results while carrying extra weight [my friend and me]. Sounds like a plan, Stan. Now here's where a "rimshot" emoticon would come in handy. Something like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1986F150Six Posted July 1, 2019 Author Share Posted July 1, 2019 He says in the comments that the head is not really optimized. That it was a Ford test piece for fuel efficiency. One of the reasons Ford developed the crossflow head for the 4.9L was a warranty issue. The fuel injectors were exposed to heat soak, since located above the exhaust manifolds, when the engine was cut off. A temporary fix was a cooling fan blowing across the injectors and continuing to run after the engine was cut off. There were other prototypes as well [variable displacement and turbo]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve83 Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 ...a warranty issue. The fuel injectors were exposed to heat soak, since located above the exhaust manifolds, when the engine was cut off. A temporary fix was a cooling fan blowing across the injectors and continuing to run after the engine was cut off.Are you saying the head was changed between '88.5 and '89? Because the injectors are in the same location on my '95s, and they don't heat-soak or fail. And of all the people to whom I've recommended deleting the '87-88.5 4.9L injector blower (which is probably in the low hundreds); none have mentioned any problems since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ETM Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 Why, I really like the torque at the low end, it isn't like any other car/truck I've drove. Like Gary's said in another reply. You can tow almost anything with gears. My hay dealer use to use an 73' f350 300i6, 4speed to haul hay lots of it and take his cars to the demos. Was an 5th wheel 2 car trailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 He says in the comments that the head is not really optimized. That it was a Ford test piece for fuel efficiency. One of the reasons Ford developed the crossflow head for the 4.9L was a warranty issue. The fuel injectors were exposed to heat soak, since located above the exhaust manifolds, when the engine was cut off. A temporary fix was a cooling fan blowing across the injectors and continuing to run after the engine was cut off. There were other prototypes as well [variable displacement and turbo]. I didn't make the statement, FF did. Carburetor manifolds actually need that heat in cold climates. Individual injectors probably not so much. I can see a YF bowl boiling, but the injector loop, under ~60 psi or so??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1986F150Six Posted July 1, 2019 Author Share Posted July 1, 2019 I didn't make the statement, FF did. Carburetor manifolds actually need that heat in cold climates. Individual injectors probably not so much. I can see a YF bowl boiling, but the injector loop, under ~60 psi or so??? Injectors may have been improved [?]. But, according to a Ford Engine Development Engineer, injectors were being warranted too much. Much experimental work was done to better this engine, but the decision to redesign the truck with a shorter engine bay was one nail in the coffin. Others have mentioned emissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 Injectors may have been improved [?]. But, according to a Ford Engine Development Engineer, injectors were being warranted too much. Much experimental work was done to better this engine, but the decision to redesign the truck with a shorter engine bay was one nail in the coffin. Others have mentioned emissions. I was just pointing out that the measure of the poison is in the dose. Any of the carbureted engines have air cleaner sensors to modulate the temperature. The 300 has a chamber for the exhaust to heat the manifold floor, just like the V-8's crossover. It sad if warranty issues killed this venerable engine. Ford isn't about nostalgia at the expense of their bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts