Part Identification - What are these?

[Vic Roma]

Would something like this work? You can click on the blue box to be taken to info about that item.

 

This is from our page at Documentation/Interior/Interior Trim and then the Bronco tab as the Regular Cab tab appears to be broken. Anyway, is something like that what you had in mind?

 

I think so.

[Vic Roma]

I think so.

A real-world example would help too.

The photo of the part on the physical truck could be necessary as parts change over the years, either from the factory or previous owners, or the part could be missing and real-world photo would show the surrounding area.

All this *in addition* to the MPC picture.

[Gary Lewis]

The photo of the part on the physical truck could be necessary as parts change over the years, either from the factory or previous owners, or the part could be missing and real-world photo would show the surrounding area.

Now you are getting into the complexity thereof. Each year is different; each engine w/in the year is different and some years have two different engines, like the 302 carb'd and EFI'd and the 351W w/a 2bbl and 4bbl; two different GVWR's - above and below 8500; and then there are at least three versions - California, 49-state, and Canada. And that is assuming there aren't differences between manual and auto transmissions, and there are.

So, 7 years, 10 different engines, 2 different GVWR's, and 3 different government emission standards. At first blush you are talking 420 different combinations w/o the transmission difference. But it isn't quite that bad since not all of the 10 different engines were offered across the 7 years, but there are still a huge number of combinations.

I'm not saying no, but I'm asking if we can't just answer the questions one-off as we go rather than trying to answer all of them up front?

Am I thinking incorrectly?

[Jordanlogo]

But, the thing next to it on the left is probably the auxiliary battery relay. Do you have an aux battery?

Yes, I actually do. I don’t run a battery in the tray, but it’s there:nabble_smiley_happy:

 

[ArdWrknTrk]

I think #5 is a trailer relay. It isn't shown in the '81 EVTM so it may be an '82 and later thing. But this is how it is shown in the '85 EVTM:

But, the thing next to it on the left is probably the auxiliary battery relay. Do you have an aux battery?

As for an page on everything under the hood, we don't have one. There are soooooo many different options depending on the year, the engine, which carb or EFI, and then if it is a CA/49-State/Canada truck that it would be next to impossible to create that page.

I looked and looked at the towing and trailer diagrams in '81.....

But the only relay I could find close to there was the speed control horn relay.

I knew the heavy duty one was the auxiliary battery relay.

But Jordan didn't ask, so I didn't bother posting that diagram.

[Vic Roma]

The photo of the part on the physical truck could be necessary as parts change over the years, either from the factory or previous owners, or the part could be missing and real-world photo would show the surrounding area.

Now you are getting into the complexity thereof. Each year is different; each engine w/in the year is different and some years have two different engines, like the 302 carb'd and EFI'd and the 351W w/a 2bbl and 4bbl; two different GVWR's - above and below 8500; and then there are at least three versions - California, 49-state, and Canada. And that is assuming there aren't differences between manual and auto transmissions, and there are.

So, 7 years, 10 different engines, 2 different GVWR's, and 3 different government emission standards. At first blush you are talking 420 different combinations w/o the transmission difference. But it isn't quite that bad since not all of the 10 different engines were offered across the 7 years, but there are still a huge number of combinations.

I'm not saying no, but I'm asking if we can't just answer the questions one-off as we go rather than trying to answer all of them up front?

Am I thinking incorrectly?

In short, yes.

In long, you beat me to it. Since the suggestion will take a long time to execute, especially since we don’t have a full-time team of researchers and programmers to do the tedious work.

Still, this information needs to be organized. An alternative suggestion is to create a dedicated folder entitled “What is this part (WITP)” or something to the effect. Then inside this folder create a form that requires the user to standardize the question using keywords and phrases. The folder either functions as one long page of new topics, or you could break it down into sub folders with headings such as engine, transmission, axles, etc.

Either way, the posts would be searchable based on a standardized title format e.g. using the post that was referenced further up this message chain, the entry would appear as “Engine Bay, relay” then follow up with a clear “medium” sized photo, “float left” so it looks presentable, etc.

Then those who know reply with the detailed description.

That way, as you wrote, everyone answers only the questions asked.

[Gary Lewis]

I looked and looked at the towing and trailer diagrams in '81.....

But the only relay I could find close to there was the speed control horn relay.

I knew the heavy duty one was the auxiliary battery relay.

But Jordan didn't ask, so I didn't bother posting that diagram.

Jim - Yes, apparently that wasn't an option in '81. But I recognized it from Big Blue so looked at the '85 EVTM.

Jordan - Make sure you don't have the positive aux battery cable floating around as it'll be hot when the key is turned on.

And now we see one of those elusive options that it would be good to be able to ID. Maybe I can pull pages from several EVTMs to get a start?

 

[Vic Roma]

In short, yes.

In long, you beat me to it. Since the suggestion will take a long time to execute, especially since we don’t have a full-time team of researchers and programmers to do the tedious work.

Still, this information needs to be organized. An alternative suggestion is to create a dedicated folder entitled “What is this part (WITP)” or something to the effect. Then inside this folder create a form that requires the user to standardize the question using keywords and phrases. The folder either functions as one long page of new topics, or you could break it down into sub folders with headings such as engine, transmission, axles, etc.

Either way, the posts would be searchable based on a standardized title format e.g. using the post that was referenced further up this message chain, the entry would appear as “Engine Bay, relay” then follow up with a clear “medium” sized photo, “float left” so it looks presentable, etc.

Then those who know reply with the detailed description.

That way, as you wrote, everyone answers only the questions asked.

And pin at the top a folder containing detailed information on “how to use this (form/page/section)”. The aim is to help standardize how to ask the question/present the information.

[Gary Lewis]

In short, yes.

In long, you beat me to it. Since the suggestion will take a long time to execute, especially since we don’t have a full-time team of researchers and programmers to do the tedious work.

Still, this information needs to be organized. An alternative suggestion is to create a dedicated folder entitled “What is this part (WITP)” or something to the effect. Then inside this folder create a form that requires the user to standardize the question using keywords and phrases. The folder either functions as one long page of new topics, or you could break it down into sub folders with headings such as engine, transmission, axles, etc.

Either way, the posts would be searchable based on a standardized title format e.g. using the post that was referenced further up this message chain, the entry would appear as “Engine Bay, relay” then follow up with a clear “medium” sized photo, “float left” so it looks presentable, etc.

Then those who know reply with the detailed description.

That way, as you wrote, everyone answers only the questions asked.

Vic - I think I like this approach, but confess I don't fully understand it. Could you explain again? Or provide an example?

[ArdWrknTrk]

Vic - I think I like this approach, but confess I don't fully understand it. Could you explain again? Or provide an example?

I think Vic's volunteered to re-write the FSM drawings and descriptions, then do all the links in the background for you Gary!