Skip to main content
Recent Posts
1
User Rides / Re: My 85 TBird
Last post by bodyman -
Just a progress photo, quarters, rockers, and jambs painted and buffed.  Working on some window trim and interior stuff. Things have slowed a little but still digging.

3
Engine Tech / Re: 1988 V6 Running Rich / Rough Idle
Last post by 88Slowbird -
No codes?
Since you checked so many other things already i would check for possible failing TFI module since you have problem with warm start up.

That’s a possibility but that wouldn’t explain why my MPGs are getting worse and why it’s running rich

It’s always started for me warm and it’s never died on me so I don’t suspect it’s the TFI
5
Engine Tech / 1988 V6 Running Rich / Rough Idle
Last post by 88Slowbird -
over the past few months my V6 has been getting noticeably worse MPG and is harder to start up when warm
(it always starts up when it's warm but it'll take a couple tries)

on a cold start it fires right up and runs good until it gets warmed up

I've checked all over for vacuum leaks and can't find any, I've also sprayed brake clean on every vacuum line and around the intake but none made a difference

I checked the fuel pressure with the vac line on and off the FPR and it's in spec and I don't smell gas from the FPR vac line

tested the coolant temp sensor resistance when it's cold and hot and it's in spec as well

would a partially stuck open EGR cause it to run rich and idle rough?

I don't believe the 88 V6 has an air temp sensor so I'm not sure what else to check that would cause this other than the ECU possibly going bad
6
User Rides / Re: My 85 TBird
Last post by bodyman -
It cooled right down below 0 a couple days after I sprayed and stayed there,  just today getting back to normal with some above normal temps again next week.

My friend that did the instrument cluster milled those coil covers and powder coated everything for me. First time I saw them I told him I was afraid I wouldn’t be able to make the rest of the car worthy of them.
7
User Rides / Re: My 85 TBird
Last post by Mikey97D -
Those valve covers look phenomenal with the Thunderbird on them.

Hope it stays warm for you.  We've been in a deep freeze in the northeast.
8
Suspension/Steering / Re: Another spring/lowering question
Last post by Chuck W -
I would use SN-95 struts, mainly due to the extended length.
I picked up a set of the Koni non-adjustable orange struts(STR.T) for the LTS, which is the same as your 85 TBird. Decent choice for a driver. I've used KYBs as well, but they don't last too long.

On the rear, you really have no choice, if you want something decent. All of the 79-04 Mustang shocks are too short to use as-is. Either make yourself a set of my old lower shock brackets (I have the old drawings linked here on the forum) or get a set from 23Parts.com, as they've put them into production and should have them on their website.
10
Suspension/Steering / Re: Another spring/lowering question
Last post by Chuck W -
Are you talking "base" V6 convertible, or V8 convertible?

On the GT and Cobra springs, there isn't a whole lot of difference. The Cobra spring rates are a slightly lower at first glance, but the progressive rate is different and get more aggressive as you compress the springs more. They might feel "softer". The load rating is about the same.
The V6 springs have a linear rate (on all 4 corners IIRC, but for sure on the rear). They also have a lower load rating. Not recommended.

Somewhere I have the specs for all of the standard 96-98 springs based on the 3-letter codes. It has been over 25 years since I was digging around in these. If I have a look, I might find the paper with the details.

In '99, Ford changed the way the values on the springs were listed on the tags.
Before that, you would have the 3-letter code and the spring and load ratings listed (Metric).  Such as "RRR" which was a '96-98 Cobra rear spring had "28.9/3470" which is the spring rate in N/mm and load rating in N. Converting that to lbs/in and lbs is 28.9x5.7 lbs/in and 3470/4.44 lbs. Or 165 lbs/in and 780lbs.
As an example, the stock rear springs in my old '84 XR 7 were "JAD" "33/4200" (185 lbs/in and 944 lbs)

In the end, the main difference in the springs is the load rating, as they changed what springs were in the cars based on options, etc. The V8 convertible springs were always the highest load rating, which is what I tended to use on the rear of my cars. (I have always tried to use Motorsport C-Kits on the front). You can see in the example above, the rear springs on our cars are kind of beefy.

Anyway, probably a lot more than you asked for, but it does remind me to try and find that info, for posterity sake.