Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


GypsyR last won the day on September 17 2018

GypsyR had the most liked content!

About GypsyR

  • Rank
    Mustang Owner
  • Birthday 03/02/1963

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Kind of odd choices there. "Posi" is Chevrolet rear and "Danas" tend to be found under Dodges. What exactly do you want the car to do? What engine and transmission are in it (or will be in it?)
  2. Thanks. I have not noticed those during my recreational catalog browsings and didn't know they existed.
  3. I've seen the electric modification done here and there but never one with the turn signals too. Nice! Is that a modified original glass, a trimmed other-brand glass or what?
  4. I have no doubt, many people report they like their Nu-Relics just fine. However "modern" GM window motor caught my eye and tickled me. That motor design GM started using way back in 1982. 37 years ago, modern indeed. :) No worries about the actual design, though. They are very robust and reliable motors. Very much more durable (and more compact) than the Ford motors of the same era.
  5. I see a lot of people adding coolers apparently because they think it's a good idea or they've read advertising from the people who sell add-on aftermarket coolers but I often wonder how many people actually have used a temperature gauges to determine that they actually need one. Not many I expect. Lots of people seem to be concerned with cooling but hardly any seem interested into taking into account that a transmission also needs to come up to operating temperature. Mostly because if it doesn't then the condensation buildup in it isn't vaporized. And moisture is a mortal enemy of clutch material. If you insist on running a cooler without actually knowing whether you need one or not, at least install a thermostatic bypass. They essentially work the same as the engine coolant thermostat, only allowing cooling as needed. Bargain hunters can find them on 2000 up F150's and Taurus's (that I know of, probably others too.) If you can flare tubing, they are easy to fit. Such bypasses work great on engine oil coolers too but I don't know of any OEM ones practical for retrofitting.
  6. Interesting take on that part. My first thought on duplicating one was some round mild steel stock combined with some blacksmithing.
  7. I've been fooling with cars for a few years now. I've come to feel I'd very much prefer modification/repair work done by someone who actually CARES about what he is doing along with having the skills. There's a pretty big difference between a workman and a craftsman and their end products. The reason factories do spot welding is that's it cheap and fast. Basically the minimum necessary to produce parts quickly. People that work in such situations tend to take the same mindset, don't do what's best, do what keeps the production numbers up and keeps the bosses happy with the least effort on their part. Due to my unscientific and anecdotal observations of what happens in crashes and from taking stuff apart, I'm not personally terribly impressed by "factory spot welds".
  8. I kind of like to make my own but if I were going to buy some they'd be the Spintechs. They are the only ones that truly integrate into the unibody of the car and look like the factory might have done them to the uninformed eye. Never been a fan of the "piece of pipe stuck under the car" look. https://spintechmufflers.com/mustang-1965-1970-sub-frame-connectors/
  9. I've become sold on the teflon versions. Any engine I've had a chance to look at some time after installing one has been bone dry. Only a couple I've seen but one was a driver for a couple of years and that one alone was about enough to sell me on the things.Teflon rear seals seem to be mandatory on later diesel pickup engines for some reason. For whatever that's worth.
  10. I like what rwcstang has linked pictures to for race tow purposes. Many a late model vehicle these days has such an eyebolt that could be used, especially the Euro cars. Properly inserted into the correct reinforced frame holes meant for their use, an issue with tearing a frame hole or even scratching frame paint is rare. The main problem is that lazy tow drivers don't bother with the Ford hooks and use the much easier and quicker mini j-hooks. THOSE can and do tear sheet metal, especially if the operator overly tightens the car down on the bed with the winch. And very much so when used in non reinforced holes and when not used in pairs. Lately I've been favoring using tire straps to tie down with. With those used properly none of what's securing the car to the bed or trailer has to contact any painted surface. Basically you can successfully pull, load, and tie a car down about any way mentioned in this thread as long as you do it with care and a bit of sense. IMHO.
  11. I'd be pissed if a truck driver slung j-hooks around my lower control arms. Default tow truck chains these days have "Ford" hooks like Grabber70mach illustrated above. It's too easy to hook a pair of those into the oval holes in the frame and pull a car up on to the truck. If a car can drive itself onto the truck then all you need is the tire straps. When you use tire straps (correctly) no one has to worry about paint chips anywhere on their concours restored underside. OK mine is nothing like concours, restored, or even worth a crap but I still wouldn't use those big old hooks. Here I'm using exactly those frame hooks to load and secure my alleged car. I didn't feel I needed to use those paint-saving tire straps at the time.
  12. Years ago the Ford additive from the dealership parts counter was considered so good in the '70's and '80's the GM and Dodge guys would slip in to buy it. Seriously. These days they now have their own additives that work very well. But I know of no others, period. The LubeGard stuff and/or whatever else is at the parts store is crap. Some oils say they have the additive added already. They probably do. But like two drops per 55 gallon drum or whatever the minimum is for them to not get charged with false advertising like they should be. Rebuild a Trac-Lok rear. Add the fluid that has the additive already in it.(Flat out lie) Do figure eights. Enjoy the rear chirping the tires and chattering like nobody's business. Next. Try parts store additive. Repeat. Be annoyed. Add a second bottle. Try again and be disgusted at the wasted money. Wait for Monday when the dealer is open and score a bottle of Ford/Mopar/GM additive. Make a single figure eight and thereafter enjoy a chatter-free rear end. That's what I did anyway. I kind of prefer the Ford stuff. Because I do Fords and it has a history of being the best. I've also used Mopar and GM bottles and found them to work just as well as far as I can tell. If you just change the oil and your clutches already have a bunch of miles on them you can probably get away with using whatever, for a while at least. Rebuild with clutches a little on the snug side (like I prefer) and you'll shortly find out what does and does not work the same as I and many others have over the years. I don't know if GM had an additive back in the '70's and '80's. But if they didn't that would help explain why the Camaro guys were in the Ford parts department all the time.
  13. If that's all that doesn't feel right, I'd say not. I've grown very fond of Sonnax's replacement "Boost valve kits" that help raise line pressure in older/high mileage transmissions. You want to be sure if you have a '76 and earlier unit or not and also make sure don't get the diesel version. They also sell an "elevated pressure regulator" spring that you might like. Both are drop-ins IIRC, requiring you only drop the pan to install. They also sell a pressure regulator valve that will tone up your 2-3 shift for sure but it requires you buy an ungodly high priced ream kit to install and it is no way worth it unless you know somebody who might already have the tools. I suspect Superior or somebody may have that spring and valve included in one of their shift "improver" kits which would probably be easier to source and be a little easier on the wallet but I haven't looked into those myself.
  14. All the 1994 up F4TE 5.8's are roller cam engines. Ford chose not to equip their F150 Lightnings with roller cams and used flat cams in them instead. If you found one of those all you'd have to is swap in the roller cam bits. But actual Lightning engines for sale are such very rare birds we don't even have to think about them. I got an F4TE as a "core" for almost nothing. Found it was freshly rebuilt but someone used a wrong or bad injector which leaked enough fuel the engine hydrolocked and cracked one cylinder. Pushed it to the side with an idea of using its good parts in another engine. Got around to scoring one from a PIck-n-pull on sale day for about $120. Out of a 1996 Econoline. After a bit of checking I decided it seemed to be a good engine. Freshened up a few gaskets and put it in my driver truck (pulled the 5.0). That was like three years ago and it it still runs so nicely I've stopped trying to blow it up. Found another core, $50. This one got water in the oil. Wiped out some bearings but the pistons and cylinders are OK. Finally got to use that crank I've been sitting on so long. Assembling a "fun" engine for the '69 while it waits for its numbers-correct '69 351W (in progress). If it were me and I were in Livemore I guess I'd hit up car-part.com and check out that engine at Manteca Dismantlers for $500. Or maybe that one at United for $325 but it has a lot of miles and they say a "lifter tick".
  15. Unsubstantiated internet rumor, it's all over the place and won't die. Such 5.0 blocks have less wear in the bores simply because they use "low tension" rings.
  • Create New...