78 F150 Chassis - need confirmation

mrcando_66F100 · Post by **mrcando_66F100** » August 23, 2007, 11:49 pm

Here is my Idea...or should I say Truckrat brought it to my attention. I am looking to add power disk brakes, power steering, and gas tank under frame(I want more room and the space in the cab). I found a 78 F150 in the paper without a front grill and bed. (Don't need need them anyway). I was looking to buy the truck and strip it for the parts when Truckrat mentioned that I should just use the chassis from the F150(everything is already done for me). I am currently enrolled in a votech autobody night class were I am restoring my 66 slick from the frame up. The 78 F150 owner told me that the 78 F150 is in good shape with very little rust and is not a truck you want to run across the scales. I will be looking at it tomorrow or Saturday and if it is good then I will buy it. Question - Did ford make any changes to the lug patterns from 66 to 78?? I already invested in new rims and want to make sure there weren't multiple lug patterns. Also, is there anything else I can use from the 78 F150 that I am overlooking? I would hate to not take full advantage of my donor truck. Thanks for the help!

PS...working on my truck in this votech class Rocks!!! :dancing:

Oh yeah. The F150 has a 302 - Would I be able to use it's radiator with my Straight 6 banger?

MrEvil · Post by **MrEvil** » August 23, 2007, 11:57 pm

To be honest, I don't think Ford changed the 5 lug pattern between '78 and '66. They didn't change it between '49 and '61 because the set of rims I have for my uni came off my dad's Effie. However, some more experienced Ford guys here might be able to give you a better answer since I can't ask my dad right at this moment.

Alan Mclennan · Post by **Alan Mclennan** » August 24, 2007, 12:39 am

mrcando,I installed the complete front subaxles and discs from a 79 and everything fitted ok,as long as you stay over 15" rims to fit the calipers in.

.

Alan

DV65CustomCab · Post by **DV65CustomCab** » August 24, 2007, 5:51 am

Bolt pattern will be the same, if it's 5 lug.
Moving everything to the frame, with all the changes you want, is the most sensible. Note that the frame length behind the cab is slightly longer, so you will have a bit larger gap between the cab and bed with the bed centered over the rear wheels. If you're really ambitious, you can shorten the frame to fix it, but it's only a couple inches IIRC.

Johnny Canuck · Post by **Johnny Canuck** » August 24, 2007, 8:06 am

Or, lengthen the cab. the cab mounts are in the same position as a 65-66 2wd cab I think. but since you want a bigger cab you could do it behind the mounts. would get you 4", since the wheelbase diff is 129" to 133". check this
http://www.mustangandfords.com/featured ... index.html
longer cab AND a BBW!

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » August 24, 2007, 10:28 am

The cab will move right over, as noted above. You can get power brakes, disks, power steering, whatever engine the 78 has, etc.

Assuming the 66 has a 240 or 300 six, you can bring that over to the 78 frame as well, if you desire (300 is a better truck motor than a 302). The motor mounts and bell housing pattern are the same. Or keep the 302 if you are V8 fan.

You can choose between the two trannies as well.

The problem is behind the cab -- the frame rails are wider and obviously 4 inches longer in the 78.

This means that the bed bolts will not be in the same location on your bed. That can be fixed -- just mig them shut and re-drill in the right place for the 78.

More troublesome is that the wheels will not be in the right location. I have seen this "fudged" by making the space between the bed and cab wider and allowing the rear wheels to be 2" too far forward. However, if I were doing it, I would look to either cut the frame and shorten it by 4" or see if the spring shackles and shock mounts can be relocated and then just cut 4" off the rear end of the frame.

Both scenarios will require shortening the drive shaft as well, unless you get lucky and the 66 is correct.

Of course, there will be various sundry other challenges, like that the bumper mounts possibly need to be refabbed --- certainly the 66 will no longer work.

Also -- if you want to keep the original 66 steering wheel, be warned it will not fit on the 78 column. But if you can live with the 78 steering wheel (or find an acceptable aftermarket one), then you can re-use the 78 steering column as well. Is it a tilt column? Those are desireable, of course.

This all sounds like a lot of work, HOWEVER -- geting PS, disk brakes, a new drive train, heavier rear end, dual chamber master cylinder, and a relocated gas tank would take even MORE work to do piece by peice on a 66.

Ask me how I know......

I wish I had found a donor truck orignally and went the full swap over route.

FORDBOYpete · Post by **FORDBOYpete** » August 24, 2007, 11:05 am

Cando, yes you cando it. . . . . ! :lol:

My 66 CC SWB SS sits proudly on a 79 F-150 chassis and all I had to "fudge a tad" is the bed positioning & then create the new mounting holes as 73-79 style frames have the same front & rear track width. They'rs equal, or "square" as in both are same width. That req's a wider frame width in CA area behind the cab. All to an advantage :roll:

One of the advantages to that wider "foot print, along with the installation of front & rear anti sway bars, and progressive suspension components is the truck handles & corners much much better. :idea:

I'll not do a parts swap again ever. Too much grunt work for me. There are so many absolute positives to the later type frames, I can't begin to think of them all, let alone list them here. :hm:

I've done several slicks as far as retro upgrades go,and once I figured out I could put the Sweet Slick Bodies on the "nastier" later frames, I developed a whole new philosophy about doing great upgrades, and building just what I wanted. . . . :thumright:

If the 78 body & parts are any good there is a market for them, and they will help to reduce your burden costs so in the end I'd tell you the chassis swap upgrade is the most bang for the time & $$$$ that I can think of.

And yes what bolts in the front (engine bay) of a 65 thru 79 chassis will interchange across that entire spectrum of years. I-6 is really close to 302 (5.0L) ans 351 (5.7L) as far as the hook ups and stuff. :2cents:

Besides, if y'all get stuck, :hm:

ask there's help here to be had for the asking.

FBp

Johnny Canuck · Post by **Johnny Canuck** » August 24, 2007, 11:09 am

Pete. Mark the Hoofbeatracer and I were just discussing this on the weekend, how you could "Fudge" 4". :!:

do you have a pic of your truck, or is it a shortbox (which explains it, since the difference is only 2")

jwh f-100 · Post by **jwh f-100** » August 24, 2007, 12:04 pm

The motor mounts and bell housing pattern are the same.

Great info in this post! Is is definatly good to know the mounts will work up through '79. The PO of my truck fabricated engine and tranny mounts for my truck and I would like to replace them with OEM stuff.

I would agree shortening the frame would be the easiest route... Mark the frame well on the side and bottom with long "front to back" lines that can be used for reallingment.

Here is some "food for thought" but maybe impossible ? --- Leave the front hangers in place ( to keep things alligned), Install Shorter leaf springs and just move the rear hangers forward. :dontknow:

Maybe I just need a good wack on the head. :bangin:

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » August 24, 2007, 6:09 pm

I don't know what or how the 78 spring hangers are attached, but if you have the know how and equipement to move one, then you may as well move the other one as well.

A shorter spring would need to be some custom job and then the shocks would be different too.

I say, pick a spot on the frame where loosing 4" wont be the end of the world, find a good metal shop and have them remove 4", then weld it all back up with some 1/4" plate on each side and box the frame in that area for good measure.

But, I've not seen how a 78 looks (curves?). At least on a 65-66 there are plenty of spots along the frame that you could lose 4" with no problems.

What do you think Pete? You've done it with a SWB, and "fudged", but I am unsure that 4" can be fudged the 2" can. Is there a flat, straight area on the frame?

FORDBOYpete · Post by **FORDBOYpete** » August 24, 2007, 7:40 pm

I have a SWB @ 117" for a 65-72 and 119" for a 73-79. Plus the teardrop of the "Slick's" rear
wheel opening is MOL teardrop. It doesn't really define a wheel opening with a geometric center.
At least not like a radiused opening does.
I have a 79 short SS Box with a "gimp" & a "Pucker" in one side and I'm considering cutting
the 79 1/4s off and adding a set of 66 Style Side 1/4 skins to the 79 style 2 piece bed system.
It would give me best of both worlds. I've long thought of Slick's bed as unfinished looking.
The 79 is smoothe and one piece without seams or leaks or ????

Remember that Maroon FlareSide on "evil buy" with the bed that didn't look right?
Well that's a later bed/ box on a earlier, shorter chassis. That's the opposite effect
of what an earlier body on a later chassis has to deal with.
In the "E-B" Slick the wheel was too far forward in the radiused wheel opening, and it is the
geometric symmetry that causes the problem. I have not done a LWB Chassis swap. Altho I've
used LWB cabs on later frames, but all cabs are relatively same except for Super Cabs & Crew's.

As far as there being flat, straight, parts along the frame rails that are well suited to be
cut & spliced on 73-79's, there are. There's also a place where frame rails splay out 1.5".
That's because the 73-79's are +3" wider as well as +2" longer.

I am not in favor of spliced frame rails myself. Most OEMs are quite picky about welding
"C" sections or "Channel Sections"of the frame rail. Flexion gets compromised when
plate steel is laminated and welded back together. Both the additional thickness & plys, as well as
how heat of welding affects face lattice of metal structure itself. All comes into play when that
sort of critical, structural type, of work takes place. Adding a angle flange or a clip or "X"member
is one thing. Splicing a beam is totally another. When a frame rail is cut & spliced it's a modified beam.

While I'm on a roll here, I also disagree with the notion of altering leaf spring lengths/ locations.
And re designing OEM suspensions to non OEM spec's doesn't see too keen of an idea either.
Before I "rework OEM style suspension to create a "make do Fit" I believe I'd opt for different suspension.
4 link with a goos coil over or maybr some king of torsion bar set up, but not shortened leaf springs.
It might ride like a truck, ya Know?

FBp :roll:

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » August 24, 2007, 8:09 pm

Hmmmm...

FBp's thoughts should be highly valued, though there an awful lot of various hotrods out there with sectioned frames. I suppose it also would have something to do with what you intend to do with the truck when you are done. If you are just using it as a driver, then I still think that shortening the frame is an option.

If its going to see rough service or heavy loads, then Pete is right, best to avoid I guess.

Pete, why not move the springs forward? I mean, its 4" and still longer than a SWB. Furthermore, by now the 78 springs are not acting likc OEM 78 springs anyhow -- doubtless a little soft if you know what I mean.

Just my thoughts....

Alan Mclennan · Post by **Alan Mclennan** » August 25, 2007, 11:55 pm

When you have finished putting your slick body on the 78 chassis do you then have to re-register it or what?,if we do a swap like that we then have to register it as a rebodied 78, some what losing its charm.

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » August 26, 2007, 7:21 am

Strickly speaking, most localities would require it to be registered as a 78.

I think that a lot of times you *could* register it as the 66, based on the VIN tag. But there could be trouble down the road at time of resale etc. If that route is chosen, would be best to hold on to the original 78 title and/or report the 78 as scrapped.

But why does it lose and more "charm" being registered as a 78? If you want PS PB, discs, etc. then you already have made a decision to depart from orignal. I am headed that route and indeed, I will miss the old floor shift and uncluttered engine bay.

But charm gets you only so far... No one ever has to know that the registration in the glove box says 78.

dotcentral · Post by **dotcentral** » August 26, 2007, 4:56 pm

I think a "Step notch" is considered pretty safe when shortening or lengthening a frame.

Alan Mclennan · Post by **Alan Mclennan** » August 26, 2007, 6:44 pm

cdherman,I take your point,but here your rego isn`t hidden in your glove box its on your windscreen as below,

[albumimg]2630[/albumimg]

which gives everything away!

Hoofbeat Racer · Post by **Hoofbeat Racer** » August 27, 2007, 7:39 am

I guess its time to add my 2 bits in. I have built a 66 Ranger LWB on a 76 F150 chassis. I decided upon some heavy thought to axe the frame 4". I took it to a trusted welding shop that specializes in building and altering frames for logging trucks. They charged me $300 cash under the table. I agree with Pete and altering the integrity of the frame, however in my case it was a question of risk or reality. Reality tells me that a 40 ton log truck probably sees a little more torsional strain than my puny 500 pony slick.

Pardon the lack of pics, they are coming. Troubles you will face are the curvature of the newer style frame. Once I found a suitable stance on for the body, my little hotrod slick looked like a monster 4x4 thanks to the 3" lift I had to add to the cab. I then installed 3" DJM drop beams in the front and it improved 100%. Yes, my slick is lifted and lowered at the same time. LOL :oops:

I now have installed the box and it has a wild rake to it. Almost too much for my hillbilly liking. As promised I will post some pics after I return from the bush.

mrcando_66F100 · Post by **mrcando_66F100** » August 29, 2007, 3:40 pm

Just wanted to tell everyone thank you very much for the information. I have always wanted to keep my slick as original as possible except for a few upgrades like new wheels, disc brakes, PS, new paint, leather seats...etc. If it was an easy fit I would have loved to use the 78 F150 chassis (it would save me a lot of work) but it looks like I am going to stick with the original frame(I'm just not comfortable in cutting a frame). I already have it stripped down to a rolling chassis and have restored most of the frame.....just need to lift the engine out to finish. It's going to be a beauty and everyone in this forum will have aided in the restoration.
Thanks.