No more shoveling out chips!

[topnotchtree]

For the past year and a half I have been chipping into my pickup that has a four foot plywood chip box I built on it.But recently I came upon a great deal on an f350 stake truck with a dump hoist.I am now in the planning stages as to building a chip box for it. I am thinking of building 2 foot permenant sides with a swing out tailgate. Then some kind of modular box to set on the sides that can easily be taken off for loading dirt or other loads.I am also looking for under bed tool boxes.

 

[NeTree]

Having been there, and done that, may I say CONGRATULATIONS!!!

 

[topnotchtree]

Today was the first day I got to tinker with my new truck. As it turns out the motor is a 400, not the 302. I think a woulda been happier with a 302. The truck is a 1980. I put gas in it last night and found the filler tube goes almost parallel with the ground. I had to gas up painfully slowly. Is this common with the older stake bodies? I am gonna have to come up with a solution.

 

[NeTree]

I dunno, but I'd rather have a big engine than a small one. It'll be better for it in the long run, won't have to work as hard.

My '91 F-150 has the dual tanks, and the front one's a PITA... have to go real slow or it clicks off every coupla seconds. Don't know about the SB.

Are you SURE you wouldn't rather shovel?

 

[topnotchtree]

trying to post pics. bear with me

 

[topnotchtree]

try again?

 

[NeTree]

now that's what I call groundies.... LMAO

Best of all, it's a FORD.

 

[topnotchtree]

sorry they are so big. some day I will learn!

 

[topnotchtree]

Thats my equipment theft prevention system!

 

[NeTree]

With a pair of pliers in the right spot you could have a back up beeper, too...





j/k

 

[Pacific]

I had a old 1980 F-350 it was the lwb version with a 12x8 flatdeck on it I used to carry 6000lbs ocasionally I had 7000lbs on it which was pretty heavy. My truck had 351m power with a 4spd it was slow as mollassis the truck was under powered climbing hills dead slow wasn't uncommon.

I had to use the gears alot the braking power on these old 1980 trucks is pretty poor you had to keep the back brakes adjusted up so you have some stopping power.

The overload tips in the one picture is no where near worn out I have seen them worn down to 3/16s thick my old 80 350 was the same as in the picture.

You don't want to beef the suspension up because you will end up overloading the truck and running out of braking power.

Like I said I have carried up to 7000lb loads on the same suspension.

For a chip truck you will never get enough weight on the truck to overload it.

As for the fill hose for the gas tank you are gonna have to live with it or shorten it so you get it closer to the frame of the truck to give you a better angle. The easiest solution of them all is carry a wood block to drive the back wheels up on to give you enough angle. I had todo that with my 80 I have todo it with my 89 F-Superduty when I'am filling up at another gas station beside our local one.

The other thing you may want todo is change the rear drive tires I assume those are LT-235/85R-16s the problem is you have traction problems in dirt. What happens is there isn't enough space bettween the tires so the rear duals become one wide tire that spins on the surface instead of dig.

What you do is run a 7.50R-16 which is the same height as a 235 but it is narrower so you have clearance bettween each tire. You also get better traction now because each tire works on its own from the added contact patch pressure.

Finding 7.50R-16s might be tough they come in 8-12 or 14ply tread rating if you get 8plys it will give you 8560lbs of tire capacity.

If you don't mind a lower profile tire (3/4s of a inch shorter) you can go with 215/85-R16 you still have the clearance bettween the tires. 215s are factory issue on the newer Ford trucks you can find them pretty much anywhere the 10plys will give you 9880lbs capacity.

It all depends on where you run if you are working in slippery conditions or in snow you need narrow tires on the back that will dig.

 

[Stump Man]

I have build a chip canopy with plywood and angle metal frame. Found balance point in top and could take it off and on with loader, Worked out real good
Worked out real good.

 

[topnotchtree]

Thanks for the tips pacific. I know what you mean about the brakes. They felt awful spongy just driving it home. I was gonna have them checked out, but maybe thats just the way they are. This truck is gonna definately need some work, but hopefully I can work it as I work on it. Little by little. I just have been warned by quite a few people that ford had alot of problems with the 400 motors. And most guys wound up swapping the 400's for a 351. It seems to run good though. Time will tell. Using a loader to pull the chip box on and off would work great if I had a loader!

 

[Pacific]

The 400 engines were not that bad they have more grunt than the 351M the 400 is a square engine which means it has a 4" bore and 4" stroke. I had no real problems with the 351 it was gutless but you couldn't kill it.

If you really wanted more power a 460 has the same bellhousing pattern. If the truck has a 4spd in it you run a externally balanced 460 then you get a flywheel off of a 390 use a 11" clutch and the 351's bellhousing. You will have to make a 1/2" thick adaptor plate to go between the transmission and bellhousing.

I don't think you are after big power or lots of speed so the cheapest route would be keep the 400 if it blows up rebuild it.

As for the brakes your better of buying factory reman parts its not worth rebuilding brake parts yourself you can get master cylinders cheap same with wheel cylinders.

I wouldn't buy Bendix brake parts anymore they are pretty much crap look at Rabestos or Wagner.

 

[NeTree]

I dunno, I have the 351M in both my '78 Bronco and my '75 F350. Same block... great motors, bigger bearings that a 351W.

I agree, might as well go all the way round with the brakes.

Here's a cool place to ask questions on Fords, I'm a member there, too.

www.ford-trucks.com/forums