1968 Ford F250 - The daily problem.

[Lahti35]

1 hour ago, Bloo said:

That shouldn't matter much. There is a hub sticking out on the center of the converter that aligns the converter on the crankshaft. If you want to drill the bolt hole a little bigger to make it fit better it should be OK. Why is there no drain plug in that orange hole? Is there a drain plug in the other hole? I would expect a plug in both.

 

The drain pugs are there, they're just in the two holes you can't see. If I rotated in another 90 degrees you'd see one of them. 

 

It just seems like the converter should have easily come forward through the flexplate holes and seated flush at the stud bases without needing to pull the last 1/8" in with the bolts. It should be free floating into and out of position. 

 

I know the torque converter was seated properly in the transmission, I rotated it until I got the three "clunks". I had to pull it forward 1/4" easily to get the studs into the flexplate. The converter has the correct size nose for the crankshaft. Just doesn't seem right...

[Lahti35]

2 hours ago, Laughing Coyote said:

Or option 5. Find a NOS flex plate, drill out the holes and mount. Otherwise 4 maybe your best option since the after market stuff is sketchy.  Sucks it happened.

NOS.... Ooooooffff, that might be a tough find. 

 

Here's the original:

 

 

 

That's the most significant wear. Most of it is confined to the face and I believe is the result of the wrong starter motor gear. The flexplate is the correct 184 tooth unit. When I got the truck every third of forth start attempt would grind the starter gears. The starter was one of those big box store rebuilds from a pile of parts, I never counted the teeth on the original starter gear but I made sure to get one with the right number of teeth and there has been no grinding since, not once. I measured the amount the bendix stuck out into the flexplate ring gear and there was plenty of engagement with the new starter. 

 

The holes in the flexplate are like .445", drilling them out to the Hughes TC instruction specs would get me .453 so it's not a huge difference. 

 

I think what I'm going to do is slide the transmission back enough to slip the OEM flexplate onto the TC and see how it fits before drilling any holes out or removing the the new flexplate and go from there. 

 

 

[Laughing Coyote]

Not that bad looking. The wrong starter can cause some issues for sure. I bet it will work out better for you unless Hughes got the studs off a bit. Stranger things can happen. Hope this corrects the problem and you can finally get it out on the road after all the troubles. 

[Lahti35]

1 hour ago, Laughing Coyote said:

 I bet it will work out better for you unless Hughes got the studs off a bit. Stranger things can happen.

That's the other part of this equation... I'm hoping it's a flexplate issue and not a TC issue.

 

I should be able to put some long 3/8" bolts into the block and use them as guides slide the tranny back. Unbolting the drive shaft, crossmember, shift linkage, and plumbing should be all I need to do.  

[EmTee]

I'm still bothered by the fact that you found loose TC bolts at the flexplate.  What is the explanation for that?  Since you have it opened-up, I would try to take a runout measurement on both the TC and the flexplate (if possible) before disassembling it.

[Jack Bennett]

I purposefully  sold my new Dodge 3500, 4X4, Megacab truck with the 5.9 Cummins diesel engine, I so loved, and replaced it with a bare bones, 1995 Ford F-250, and it was the best decision of my life.

The biggest difference between the Dodge and the Ford is that anything, and everything on the Dodge was going to eventually break.

But, on the Ford it had had either already broke, and been fixed, or didn’t exist to break.

The Ford has a 351 cubic inch engine which is absolutely great for towing, and even a guy of my age and skills can work on it.

Jack

[Lahti35]

Well I got the torque converter separated from the flexplate and the studs on the converter tool a beating. The FP and TC were obviously moving around... I looked into sliding the transmission back but to get it far enough I would have to remove the aux fuel tank and skid plate. Might as well just take it out... If it's out might as well rebuild it... Looks like no trucking this year, it just became a winter project. No easy days with this Ford, it just keeps on taking.

[Jack Bennett]

1 hour ago, Lahti35 said:

Well I got the torque converter separated from the flexplate and the studs on the converter tool a beating. The FP and TC were obviously moving around... I looked into sliding the transmission back but to get it far enough I would have to remove the aux fuel tank and skid plate. Might as well just take it out... If it's out might as well rebuild it... Looks like no trucking this year, it just became a winter project. No easy days with this Ford, it just keeps on taking.

Then why bother? 

I have trailered across and from stem to stern of the USA in a 1970 Chevy 3/4 ton, I drove a 1978 Ford F-150, pulling a 26’ Shasta trailer and a Brand new 1992 F-250 Super cab pulling a 24’ Komfort trailer.

Of the three the most memorable, pleasurable and ultimately economical was the 1970 Chevy and the 1978 F-150.

The most regrettable mistake I made in selection of my work vehicles was the F-250 with its prioprietorial computers, its fuel hungry, low torque 460 engine and the horrible E4OD transmission which continually reminded me that it was a mindless machine, and was a direct reflection of the idiots who designed and built it.

Sure, I had problems with the brakes, the electrical system and the fuel pump on the old Chevy and Ford. But it was nothing compared to having the rear axel seals give up and fill the rear hubs with oil before I had 300 miles on it, and having it happen on a Sunday evening somewhere on IH-5 between Oregon and California.

And, who can forget the torque converter going out and letting the transmission free wheel as we come back to Washington State from California, and stranding us half way up the Siskiyou Mountains, again late on a Sunday night. 
Or the exciting time we were ascending Snoqualmi Pass, again pulling the fifth wheel, and the calipers on both front wheels decide to bleed themselves because the ceramic pistons cracked. And the best part was when the truck was recovered to Mallon Ford, here in Tacoma, I was told the calipers would not be replaced under warranty because I had overstressed them by stopping, while pulling a trailer.

I really liked my Dodge 3500, and the 24 miles I could get on a gallon of Diesel fuel was great.

But, the $55,000.00 I paid for it, the $5000.00+ in sales tax I paid to buy it, the $400.00+ I paid every time I had the fuel filters and oil filters changed made it a little less attractive as a “keeper” truck.

I realize the annual registration fees collected to register the truck are necessary to build highways and fund the highway patrol to keep them safe. But, even if basic mathematics are used to compute the long range cost of keeping such a truck, the $500.00 plus a year becomes a major expense.

And, the time, again on a Sunday morning, pulling a 28.5’ fifth wheel trailer, as we prepared to leave Butte, Montana, enroute home from Rushmore, the power steering gear box puked its oil all over the pavement and refused to help steer the truck any more.

When your truck is finished, and one day it will be regardless of whether you do it as a hobby, or pay a professional to do it as a income, it will be a fun machine, and every nick, cut, bump and bruise you got restoring it will be a part of the memory.

If your truck gets to be unmanageable, and the fun leaves while working on it, I have a 1929 Fargo Express Panel Delivery I’d sure welcome some help working on.

Or, give the Ford to a neighbor kid to provide them a productive pass time, and buy a new Navigator with the money you’d be wasting on the Ford.

Sorry to sound like an old grouch…….but staying in character is part of the benefits of living 80+ years.

Jack

Edited August 25 by Jack Bennett (see edit history)

[Laughing Coyote]

4 hours ago, Lahti35 said:

The FP and TC were obviously moving around.

So the TC was not tight against the FP or was the nut binding and getting tight and couldn't go anymore, but left just enough slack that it could move? Can you chase the threads on the TC to make them savable? Hoping you would've been able to get it solved and get the truck on the road so you could at least enjoy the hard work you put in it.

[Lahti35]

1 hour ago, Laughing Coyote said:

So the TC was not tight against the FP or was the nut binding and getting tight and couldn't go anymore, but left just enough slack that it could move? Can you chase the threads on the TC to make them savable? Hoping you would've been able to get it solved and get the truck on the road so you could at least enjoy the hard work you put in it.

TC was tight up against the FP but you can see where the FB holes ate into the TC stud bases. The TC was in the proper position. The ongoing vibration must have loosened the nuts and allowed it to shift side to side in the FP holes. Only two were still tight, the other two were still in place but not anywhere near the torque I installed them at. I think the red Loctite I used is all that kept them from backing all the way off. These are also nts with the mushed head that keeps them tight on the stud... Supposedly!

 

The machine shop checked the balance on the new FP and it was OK. Unfortunately for me the studs on the TC don't clear the FP 100% when backed off so I can't run it with the TC disengaged. If I pull the trans I can't start it because the started bolts to the trans bell, lol. I think i'm going to have to pull the trans, pull the TC, put the trans back on and run it to see if the vibration is gone with the TC absent. That will at least isolate the engine and either eliminate it or not from the vibration question. 

 

I wish I would have checked if the nut had bottomed out before making contact with the FP but the marks on the FP from the base of the nut would suggest they did. You can be darn sure I'll be checking everything on the next go around...

Edited August 25 by Lahti35 (see edit history)

[EmTee]

Ugh....

 

Sorry to hear this.  I think you have the right attitude, though.  Maybe open the transmission and inspect before committing to a full rebuild?  How many miles are on it?  It's 'the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know'...

[Lahti35]

2 hours ago, EmTee said:

Ugh....

 

Sorry to hear this.  I think you have the right attitude, though.  Maybe open the transmission and inspect before committing to a full rebuild?  How many miles are on it?  It's 'the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know'...

Not a bad idea. I was thinking last night (dangerous I know) and before I commit to a tranny rebuild I'm going to work on the converter/flexplate area... 

 

I found a guy who makes a small plate that bolts to the block and allows you to mount the starter with the transmission removed, it's well worth the $30 not to have to hook up the transmission over and over. With that I can run the engine from the flexplate forward and further isolate the vibration, I can try it with the old flexplate also. 

 

Transmission supposedly has about 68K on it. I did replace the pump seal as well as the input and output seals when I had the transmission off. The transmission itself seems to shift fine and I found nothing terrible in the pan. I'm sure the inside seals are stiffer than original... I rebuilt a C4 a few years back with success it doesn't look like the C6 is any more difficult if/when the time comes. 

 

First thing I have to do is look at the crossmember that runs under the front of the trans (not a trans support) and see if it's bolted or riveted. I can't find much internet data that agrees what years or applications were bolted or riveted as they did both. I pray it's bolted as the fasteners are hard to get to, rivets would suck! 

 

 

Edited August 26 by Lahti35 (see edit history)

[Lahti35]

 Developments... Some good, some bad!

 

I spent some time on the truck this evening. I decided to start from scratch and double check the engine/transmission mounts for proper torque and found they were snug but not tight. The mounts to the block and transmission were tight but the nuts securing them to the mounting points were not. Oops. I guess I got busy and forgot to torque them down, they were at probably 30% of the required torque. I'll admit I was kind of excited, I had actually located something that was blatantly an issue. 

 

Then all hell broke loose when I went to torque the converter nuts down. I checked the torque specs, put some Loctite on the studs and commenced work. I torqued them all to 1/2 the spec then torqued #1 to full spec, then went 180 degrees across and brought #3 towards full spec when...

 

 

Dang, no easy days. All I can think is I used too much Loctite which acted like lube and the dry torque spec was too much for it, 50ft/lb vs 40ft/lb or the stud was junk to begin with. Ahhhrrrrgggggg.

 

The other studs were ok so I figured what the heck, start her up! The difference was instantaneous... Below is how it used to be. There would be a small vibration spike which would retreat and as the rpm's increased a much larger vibration would come on and hold steady at a certain point where it would then pulsate while underway when warm. 

 

After the engine mounts were torqed (and the TC stud was sheared off) the whole vibration pattern changed. Now there is a vibration that increases a small amount off idle but does not get worse with RPM, the second wave never materializes. 

 

 

I'm attributing this new vibration pattern to a missing 20 grams of weight no longer attached to the converter/flexplate.

 

I'm so stoked something actually had an effect on this freakin' vibration that's been driving me freakin' nuts all summer i'm not even really mad about the converter stud, go figure. The trans will have to come out anyway, no avoiding that now. 

Edited September 15 by Lahti35 (see edit history)