Re: FTE 61-79 - Brake master cylinder question

61-79-list-digest Friday, May 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 302

=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1961-1979 Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo

ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 61-79-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 61-79 - Brake master cylinder question
Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together
Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation
Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation
FTE 61-79 - Cubic inches
Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together
Re: FTE 61-79 - new engine
> Re: FTE 61-79 - 410 Merc
Re: FTE 61-79 - re:re: Carbs open plenum spacer
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: Hello
Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaky carb
Re: FTE 61-79 - Leaky carb
FTE 61-79 - Distributor problems
FTE 61-79 - Misaligned Oil holes in FE
Re: FTE 61-79 - RE: Hello
FTE 61-79 - 462
FTE 61-79 - Brazilian Fords
FTE 61-79 - Re: your truck

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:00:30 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Brake master cylinder question

Deacon wrote:

> From: Mark Goods
> >I have a new brake master cylinder to put on my 68 F100. I've been told
> to
> >"bench bleed"the cylinder before putting it on the truck. I don't own a
> >vice or anything to hold it while I bleed it. Can some of you please
> tell
> >me other ways to bleed the cylinder, perhaps while mounted on the
> truck.
>
> Install it then bleed it before connecting the lines. That's the easiest
> way IMHO.
>
> Deacon
> deconblu

gte.net
>

Basically what you do is during the installation of the MC is cut your
wrist open from here to about there making sure that the MC and lines get
covered in sticky red fluid....

Install the master cylinder as usual but not connecting the main brake
> lines yet. Run some short lines front the outlets to the reservoir and
fill with fluid. Pump away until no more air bubbles are produced then
install your main brake lines.

- --
Don Grossman
duckdon

pacific.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.pacific.net/~duckdon

63 F-100 4x4 with 3/4 ton running gear and most of the trimmings.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:04:51 -0800
From: Don Grossman
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - California get together

John Miller wrote:

> > From: Deacon
>
> >you don't put a
> > manic depressive in charge of fun Friday. It's just not a >wise thing to
> > do. They can help, but if their in charge and things go >wrong, there's a
> > good chance they'll be spotted in a high place with a high >powered
> > weapon. So that makes me a helper! :)
>
> I'm not too worried unless you convince Steve to teach you his skill of
> designing complex electronic circuits... Then I wouldn't open any packages
> as doorprizes.... :)

Can anybody say UniDeacon?
- --
Don Grossman
duckdon

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:56:59 -0700
From: "Deacon"
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation

From: John LaGrone
>Cheez and thought Texas was the only state with a screwed up
legislature.

California takes the blue ribbon for screwed up legislature. How about
Smog Check II getting put on hold. Yes, the smog nazis motherload is
having trouble. You want to see the prima donna air heads we have to put
up with? Read this http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://smogcheck.ca.gov/000154.HTM . Oops, they have
the requirements for bringing an out of state vehicle into California at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://smogcheck.ca.gov/MOVING.HTM . What a trip. Whoever it was that
said only the $300 smog impact fee was required was correct. If the
vehicles engine sticker is federally certified, no problem. Here is what
they say

- -------------- snip --------------
A federally certified vehicle may be registered in California as long as
it has all of the emissions equipment which was on the vehicle when it
was first sold. The equipment must all function correctly. If the car
has missing, disconnected or tampered emissions parts, you will not be
able to register the car here until those deficiencies are corrected.
Do not attempt to add additional emissions control equipment to your
federally certified vehicle in order to bring it to California; do not
attempt to make this vehicle conform to California standards. However,
you may wish to get a tune up if your car is running rough or has not
been adjusted to factory specifications for some time. Regular
maintenance will help you pass your Smog Check.
- ------------- paste -----------------

What a trip ay! So I stand corrected. I can't remember the details but
they said something about registering a California car out of state then
moving back to California and they were charged the $300 Smog Impact
Fee. Someone got screwed! Check it out. The $300 Smog Impact Fee is only
if the vehicle is federally certified and newer than 1975. If it's older
than 1975 or California certified there is no Smog Impact Fee.

I never said I was never wrong. :)

Deacon
deconblu

gte.net
=============================
Nuke the unborn baby whales.
=============================
Deacon's
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://home1.gte.net/deconblu/

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - Proposed legislation

Don Grossman wrote:
>
> BDIJXS wrote:
>
> > Hey John,
> >
> > I've been on the post office wall for so long already anyway.....
> >
> > Do you have any details on that proposed bill about the altered vehicles
> > (such as number, etc.)? I'll be sure to check in with my congressman......
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Colorado Jeff
>

I thought that bill was killed by the offroad groups and SEMA last
fall. I was told "we" won and that Co. was going to adopt Ca. fairly

liberal frame/body heights.

Here is a some messages I archived from last fall. Check out teh
"joke" message at the end.

OX

> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 07:28:48 -0800
> From: "Roger Brown P.E."
> Subject: Colorado Suspension legislation
> To: Offroad

off -road.

com
>
> Scott wrote:
> >>
> The new law eliminates all the garbage from the old law, as well as from
> the proposed law, and basically says that we can have frames not more
> than
> 31" off the ground (measured between the wheels, at the lowest point of
> the
> rails) and body lifts of not more than 5" (five inch body lift? Safe?)
>
>
> Sounds about like the California DMV regs:
>
> VEHICLE CODE SECTION 24008.5. (a) No person shall operate any motor
> vehicle with a frame height or body floor height greater than specified
> in subdivisions (b) and (c).
>
> (b) The maximum frame height is as follows:
>
> Vehicle Type Frame Height
>
> (1) Passenger vehicles, except
> housecars ...................... 23 inches
>
> (2) All other motor vehicles,
> including housecars, as follows:
> Up to 4,500 pounds GVWR ........ 27 inches
> 4,501 to 7,500 pounds GVWR ..... 30 inches
> 7,501 to 10,000 pounds GVWR .... 31 inches
>
> (c) The lowest portion of the body floor shall not be more than five
> inches above the top of the frame.
>
> (d) The following definitions govern the construction of this
> section:
>
> (1) "Frame" means the main longitudinal structural members of the
> chassis of the vehicle or, for vehicles with unitized body
> construction, the lowest main longitudinal structural members of the
> body of the vehicle.
>
> (2) "Frame height" means the vertical distance between the ground
> and the lowest point on the frame, measured when the vehicle is
> unladen on a level surface at the lowest point on the frame midway
> between the front axle and the second axle on the vehicle.
>
> (3) "GVWR" means the manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating, as
> defined in Section 390, whether or not the vehicle is modified by
> use of parts not originally installed by the manufacturer.
>
> - --
> Roger Brown, P.E. mailto:rogerb

sgi.com
> +1.650.933.1898 (vmail) +1.650.932.1898 (fax)
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://reality.sgi.com/rogerb/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 12:23:53 -0700
> From: "Darrell D. Murray"
> Subject: Federal Government, New Regs
> To: Offroad

off -road.

com
>
> A new law before congress is addressing the concerns the government is
> having over how well crash survivors of SUV's and Set up 4x4's have over
> the regular passenger car. They plan to ban any future modifications to
> SUV's and other 4x4's plain and simple. They also plan to require that
> SUV owners place the following warning(s) on the outside of their
> vehicles, similar to the firearms warnings stamped on modern guns and
> the like. It is rumored that this is what the warning will say.
> "Warning! If you're driving a regular compact passenger car you can
> expect the following results upon a traffic collision. Serious injury
> or even death! It is best to avoid impact with these vehicles at all
> costs! Especially avoid failing to yield, stopping short, unsafe lane
> changes or other driving behavior that would cause a collision with
> these vehicles. Also if you are a pedestrian, be advised impact with a
> steel bull bar bumper will hurt more than with the plastic foam filled
> bumpers found on most stock SUV's. So don't Jay walk! If you're
> involved with a collision with a SUV please contact this number and file
> a special government report listing your injuries or cause of death, so
> we can further show cause to regulate these SUV's making our highways a
> safer place to commute." If you haven't figured it out this is a joke
> for now. However, there are bills before congress right now that will
> ban any further OWNER MODIFICATIONS to YOUR vehicle. Check with you
> local Federal elected reps and ask where they stand and voice you
> opinion on the subject. Dead is Dead. Whether you're hit by a VW, SUV
> or a Semi. It's another way to attack our rights and freedoms. Stand
> up to them and tell them NO WAY! There are states that also have
> legislation before them as well off the top of my head Colorado and New
> Jersey, to Ban Owner Mods. It's coming in the back door so keep your
> eye's open.
> Darrell D. Murray, President
> AZ.L.R.O.C/R.R.R.
>
> ------------------------------
= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

chrysler.com
Subject: FTE 61-79 - Cubic inches

Ron writes: >>I thought the 239 V8 was the first OHV engine?

It was -

least in cars and small trucks. Introduced in 1954 239 for cars
- - 255 for trucks and Mercurys. that was identical to the previous years
flathead size if I'm not mistaken. I really don't know what the Lincoln
had that year, but it was a derivative of the Y blocks, I think. The
smoothe head design was introduced in '68 I believe as 383 for Mercury and
430 for Lincoln. This may not be exact, but is close.

Azie
Ardmore, Al.

= Ford Truck Enthusiasts ==============================================
Send posts to: 61-79-list

ford-trucks.com
Send unsubscribe requests to: majordomo

ford-trucks.com with
"unsubscribe 61-79-list" in the message body.
=======================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:35:54 -0700
From: Marko Maryniak
Subject: Re: FTE 61-79 - new engine
>
At 11:04 PM 21/05/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>Just ran across a good deal! I found a 1960 thunderbird 352 police
>Interceptor motor running in the T-Bird, the owner just backed it into a
>ditch at 90 miles an hour. A few mods and a good tear down, and Ill finally....

To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.

Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.