Dad's Truck Build

[Rembrant]

Hadn't thought of that. But there's no need for 389117 when you put the sway bar bracket in there. It is roughly as thick and, therefore, will spread the load as well as a washer.

You don't happen to have a 389117 laying around that you could measure and photograph?

That particular swaybar bracket was only on the early kingpin trucks. On the later versions with ball joints, the sway bar "bracket" was part of the spring seat casting.

I'll check the 85 4x4 frame/front end tomorrow and see if that washer is there. I don't think it is, but I'll check. It has the brackets that are similar to the quad shock set-up, but without the quad shocks. Not sure if that is factory or not...it may have been changed.

 

[Gary Lewis]

Hadn't thought of that. But there's no need for 389117 when you put the sway bar bracket in there. It is roughly as thick and, therefore, will spread the load as well as a washer.

You don't happen to have a 389117 laying around that you could measure and photograph?

That particular swaybar bracket was only on the early kingpin trucks. On the later versions with ball joints, the sway bar "bracket" was part of the spring seat casting.

I'll check the 85 4x4 frame/front end tomorrow and see if that washer is there. I don't think it is, but I'll check. It has the brackets that are similar to the quad shock set-up, but without the quad shocks. Not sure if that is factory or not...it may have been changed.

Dad's truck is an '81 F150 with ball joints. And according to this page it looks like it (5486) was used from '81 to '86: Suspension & Steering/Sway Bar. Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying?

[85lebaront2]

Dad's truck is an '81 F150 with ball joints. And according to this page it looks like it (5486) was used from '81 to '86: Suspension & Steering/Sway Bar. Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying?

FWIW, Gary, remember when I was looking for the information on the front sway bar for Darth, who is late kingpin truck (1986) the brackets needed were stamped as in the drawing. The 1990 F250 parts truck had the cast ones that were part of the lower spring seat.

[Gary Lewis]

FWIW, Gary, remember when I was looking for the information on the front sway bar for Darth, who is late kingpin truck (1986) the brackets needed were stamped as in the drawing. The 1990 F250 parts truck had the cast ones that were part of the lower spring seat.

I'd forgotten that, Bill. But now that you mention it I do remember. That certainly does look like the same part, which fits what the catalog says.

[Rembrant]

Dad's truck is an '81 F150 with ball joints. And according to this page it looks like it (5486) was used from '81 to '86: Suspension & Steering/Sway Bar. Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying?

Ooops, sorry Gary. My bad, I stand corrected. I was confused between what was on the 80-86, and 87+.

[Gary Lewis]

Dad's truck is an '81 F150 with ball joints. And according to this page it looks like it (5486) was used from '81 to '86: Suspension & Steering/Sway Bar. Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying?

Ooops, sorry Gary. My bad, I stand corrected. I was confused between what was on the 80-86, and 87+.

No problem. I was confused that you were confused.

Seriously though, it looks like all Bullnose trucks used:

EOTZ 5486-D Front-R.H.-bracket-link assy, to radius arm

EOTZ 5486-E Front-L.H.-bracket-link assy, to radius arm

However, Ford did a really good job making it difficult to figure that out. All the brackets, both front and rear as well as for the axle and to the frame are 5486-BRACKET (STABILIZER BAR). And the applications aren't neatly ordered. And, they do a mean little trick of having right and left in different orders.

Someone could spend a lifetime re-ordering things to make it easy to find them. But, it isn't worth it. And there's the potential for errors. Plus, it is good to be able to tell people "That's Ford's documentation."

[85lebaront2]

No problem. I was confused that you were confused.

Seriously though, it looks like all Bullnose trucks used:

EOTZ 5486-D Front-R.H.-bracket-link assy, to radius arm

EOTZ 5486-E Front-L.H.-bracket-link assy, to radius arm

However, Ford did a really good job making it difficult to figure that out. All the brackets, both front and rear as well as for the axle and to the frame are 5486-BRACKET (STABILIZER BAR). And the applications aren't neatly ordered. And, they do a mean little trick of having right and left in different orders.

Someone could spend a lifetime re-ordering things to make it easy to find them. But, it isn't worth it. And there's the potential for errors. Plus, it is good to be able to tell people "That's Ford's documentation."

I even have an extra, don't remember if it is left or right. When I ordered them from Green Sales, they sent two of the same as one was mislabeled. When I called them, they sent a replacement and told me to keep the wrong one.

[Gary Lewis]

I even have an extra, don't remember if it is left or right. When I ordered them from Green Sales, they sent two of the same as one was mislabeled. When I called them, they sent a replacement and told me to keep the wrong one.

Today's report: The left suspension is together and torqued, with the exception of some of the shock fasteners, which hadn't been blasted nor powder coated. And here the culprits are. You'll notice that there are extra parts as I'm trying an experiment.

But wait! There's more! Along the way I scanned in the 4wd front suspension instructions from the FSM and put them up on the website as I wanted to be able to easily refer to them. But, they looked lonely so I put up the Twin I-Beam ones as well. You'll find them on the Instructions tab here: Suspension & Steering/Front Suspension.

Then, as I started using the 4wd instructions I ran across lots and LOTS of anomalies. Try these:

• Page 4 says the rear shock bolt should be installed "with the bolt head installed towards the tire". But the illustration on Page 5 says the bolt "Must be installed in the direction shown" and shows the head on the outside.

• The illustration on Page 5 shows the nut holding the lower spring retainer on as being torqued to 30 - 70 while the specifications on Page 10 says 70 - 100 ft-lbs. It is a large nut so I torqued it to 85 ft-lbs, right in the middle of the range I suspect is correct.

That's just two examples of the many I found. I originally thought I'd correct things as I found them but with as many as I found I'm not sure I have the time to do it. Plus it is hard to tell what is correct. Who knows on the shock bolt?

But the torque specs are fairly easy to figure out as you can find similar, if not the same fasteners elsewhere and determine what the torque probably should be. However, I think I'll just strike through the ones I'm pretty sure are wrong and let the reader find the spec in the table at the back.

EDIT: I WAS WRONG! The first point about the bolt head was right and I was wrong.

 

[Steve83]

Page 4 says the rear shock bolt should be installed "with the bolt head installed towards the tire". But the illustration on Page 5 says the bolt "Must be installed in the direction shown" and shows the head on the outside.

Uuuuhhh... Isn't the tire on the outside? Sounds like the same direction to me.

...the specifications on Page 10 says 70 - 100 ft-lbs.

That's correct.

[Gary Lewis]

Page 4 says the rear shock bolt should be installed "with the bolt head installed towards the tire". But the illustration on Page 5 says the bolt "Must be installed in the direction shown" and shows the head on the outside.

Uuuuhhh... Isn't the tire on the outside? Sounds like the same direction to me.

...the specifications on Page 10 says 70 - 100 ft-lbs.

That's correct.

Yes, the same direction. That came to me later, which is why I edited the post.

But, one out of two?