Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 22:47:21 -0500 (EST) To: fordtrucks-digest lofcom.com
From: digest-proc lofcom.com
Subject: fordtrucks Digest v97 n0010
Reply-To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Volume 97 Number 0010 fordtrucks Digest

Today's Topics:

Re: Late model stuff
RE: Runnin' Hot
RE: Runnin' Hot
Re: looking for stuff
FE parts
Re: Raising My Ranger
46 pickup?
460 Fuel Economy?! -Reply
Re: Exhaust manifold removal, heater fan motor.. -Reply -Reply
Re: looking for stuff -Reply
Re: 460 Fuel Economy?! -Reply
Sorry about last post!
Late model stuff -Reply
Header Wraps
RE: Runnin' Hot
Re: fordtrucks Digest v97 n0009
Re: Exhaust manifold removal, heater fan motor.. -Reply -Reply
351W in '68 F100
Re: 351W in '68 F100
Re: looking for stuff
330 CID
Re: looking for stuff
Re: Header Wraps
Fw: Fw:Help What year ?
FE and motor sizes
Re: FE and motor sizes
FE and motor sizes -Reply
Original or easy ride


* PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE THE ENTIRE DIGEST IN REPLIES TO THE LIST! *

--------------------------------------------------

>From tyounger gulf.csc.UVic.CA Thu Feb 27 01:12:24 1997 From: Tom
Subject: Re: Late model stuff
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

At 11:37 PM 26/02/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Also has anyone bought and installed the rear disk brake set-up in the SVo
>catalog? The price seems right, but I get the feeling there's more to it
>than I might like. I've already got the monstrous rear drums that come with
>the factory towing package, along with the rear abs. I'd hate to lose that
>capability, I wonder, do Lightnings have rear disks and is/are these the
>same parts?

Although I do not know for sure, but I would imagine swapping to disks on the rear would preserve the ABS. The rear ABS sensor on my truck is in the diff on the driveshaft, so basically all it does is prevent lock-up of the driveshaft. There is nothing ABS about the brakes themselves.
___
TTTTT OO M M The sixth sick shiek's sixth sheep's sick. |~~~|
T O O MM MM o o
T O O M M M Be young, have fun, *
T OO M M and drink lots of beer!!! `-'




------------------------------
>From cwebb victor1.mscomm.com Thu Feb 27 01:39:06 1997 From: cwebb victor1.mscomm.com (Christopher E. Webb) Subject: RE: Runnin' Hot
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>You're right it sounds like you have a heater core leak for sure. You =
>can unhook and plug your heater hoses if you're losing alot of coolant =
>in your cab. Of course you won't have a heater if you do.

Well, we live in the Mojave desert, so that won't be a problem...for now.

Does your =
>engine cool if you get your truck up to speed and get some air flowing =
>across your radiator?

Yes. As long as the truck is running 40mph or faster, and not doing stop and starts, it's just fine.

I've had clutched fans that I couldn't hear real =
>well when it kicked in. Has yours ever made a loud noise when it kicked =
>in before you noticed it overheating?

Nope. Never heard it. The fan spins freely when the engine is hot, but shut off. The clutch is probably bad. The worst part is, the previous owners had it replaced about 18 months ago.

You might also want to get your =
>radiator checked and see if it's partially clogged,

I'll do that. Should I just have them drain it?



------------------------------
>From cwebb victor1.mscomm.com Thu Feb 27 01:51:35 1997 From: cwebb victor1.mscomm.com (Christopher E. Webb) Subject: RE: Runnin' Hot
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com



> Also, unless you're
>adding coolant every day, you're probably letting the level run down to a
>point where the coolant can easily create air pockets, or boil, before you
>fill it up again.

No, I haven't been adding the coolant everyday, so you're probably right there.

>2. You say it "redlines" at low speed/idle. Do this: get the engine
>nice and warm, and then get out and open the hood. Watch the fan rotating,
>and have a friend rev the engine up some. See what happens, if the fan
>rotates more and more quickly, or not. Then, once the engine is nice and
>hot, shut it off, then try to turn the fan with your hand. Since the engine
>is hot the fan clutch should still be engaged and the fan difficult if not
>impossible to turn by hand. [Do NOT try this with the engine running!!! : )
>] If it is really hard to turn by hand, then wait until the engine cools
>off (a couple hours) and then try to turn it, and see if this is easier. If
>it's stuck when hot and disengaged when cool, the fan is ok.

Watched while my fiance ran the motor with the fan going (not sure if the truck was hot at that point). I've never noticed the fan changing speed.
I _have_ tried moving the fan (after the truck was turned off) by hand with a hot engine.
It moves fairly easily.

>3. Before you do anything else let us know how you made out with the
>foregoing. You say you replaced the thermostat? Well, when thermostats
>break they tend to stick OPEN, not shut, so with a faulty thermostat the
>most usual problem is overcooling, not under. So don't replace anything
>else until the heater core is fixed.

'Kay. The local radiator/muffler shop is having a sale on heater cores. Is there a particular brand to get? How much should I pay?

>good luck!!
>
>
>marko maryniak
>vancouver, bc
>1971 f250 4x4
>
>marko helix.net

Thank you so much. This was exactly the kind of help I needed.

--Julia Bender

1977 F250 Custom 460/V8



------------------------------
>From Doug_Neely bc.sympatico.ca Thu Feb 27 02:29:30 1997 From: Doug Neely Subject: Re: looking for stuff
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

marko maryniak wrote:
>
> Hi!!
>
> I live in Vancouver, BC and have a stock turquoise 1971 F250 4x4 with a 360
> and the heavy 3/4 sus.
>
> I have put an rv cam in it, but am against headers as they may create heat
> problems in the engine compartment. I am also running a 6919 Holley (600
> cfm) 4 barrel which gives it quite a bit of snot. Other than radial tires
> and a cd player in the glove compartment, the truck is stock.
>
> Trouble is, the cab mounts are finished, as is the radiator support. I
> welded in replacement cab mounts (the aftermarket type) and they ripped out.
>
> I need a nice, old (say 67 or 68) Ford or Mercury (the latter would be
> nice!) in decent shape, any old 2wd will do, from a nice warm place with no
> road salt (and therefore no rust). Mechanics don't matter but a 390 for a
> rebuild would be very nice too.
>
> Please let me know if you got or know where I can get. Thanks, and if you
> need parts for this vintage (68-72) like interior, emblems, mirrors, etc etc
> there are tons up here, so email and I will return the favour. There are
> other vintages too so email me with your needs.
>
> thanks!!!
>
> marko maryniak
> (marko helix.net)
>
> ps to all you mileage writers (erickson et al) I get about 16 with my rv
> cam and and lead foot.
>
> Somebody said something about removing the fan. You mean, put in a clutch
> fan, or a flex fan, or an electric fan, or no fan, or what? How much mpg
> will this really add?
> Marko,
There's a 390 advertised in the times colonist (on the island)for 300 bucks
with the trans the guys number is 250-642 2779
Cheers,
Doug
P.S. My 390 gets 11 on a good day with R.V. cam,edelbrock manifold,headers,
holly 600 and 3.54 gears and no heat problems:)
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> To send mail to fordtrucks, use the address: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> For help send a message with "HELP" in the body to:list-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com


------------------------------
>From Doug_Neely bc.sympatico.ca Thu Feb 27 05:05:00 1997 From: Doug Neely Subject: FE parts
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

To all FEnatatics,
Check out Edelbrocks home page at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http:// www.edelbrock.com/ ,there's a good article on a 427 buildup with their new heads,also a new water pump available. Fluidamper also has a new damper for FEs.
Cheers
Doug


------------------------------
>From doggfarm erols.com Thu Feb 27 06:51:43 1997 From: doggfarm erols.com
Subject: Re: Raising My Ranger
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>I'm wanting to raise, (as in distance, up), my '97 Ranger XLT and put large
>wheels on it. Any information would be appreciated.


I have a 93 STX 4x4 with 2" Superlift springs in the front.
I'm running 11.50x32 Dunlop Radial Rovers on the factory STX wheel.
New bushings were installed to maintain factory spec alignment.
Tire wear has been excellent; surprising given the rims are only 7" I am *completely* satisfied. The tires don't rub at any time.
The truck looks different enough to turn heads but not so different that it attracts
those w/inspection specs in mind (policica). I wouldn't suggest much more.

John




------------------------------
>From andyrose nortel.ca Thu Feb 27 07:40:11 1997 Sender: "Andy Rose" From: "Andy Rose"
Subject: 46 pickup?
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>Mitch Miller
>mmiller dryden.net
>Dryden, ONTARIO

>Running........
>'88 Bronco
>'46 Pickup

Mitch...

Got any pictures of the '46 in gif or jpeg? My Pops is rebuilding/restoring a 46 pickup. Is yours fully restored? Any ideas where Pops can find the waterfall grill and/or the dash? The truck he is restoring is complete and solid except for the missing grill and dash. He has the 6 banger rebuilt and ready to drop in (he had to have a couple of parts made for the engine .. but he had a guy in Salt Lake rebuild it for him and he's pretty happy with the overall rebuild).

Andy


------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Feb 27 08:30:47 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: 460 Fuel Economy?! -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>>> "Kevin Lindstedt" 02/26/97 06:47am >>>
>Hi all,
>
>I've got a 1978 F150 Ranger Lariat with a 460 and C6 transmission. I
>recently put a new Holley 600CFM 4 barrel carb on in place of the
>original
>Motorcraft unit. I'm averaging about 10 mpg. Now... I realize this is not
>Consumer Reports first choice for a fuel efficient vehicle, but what can
>I do to improve fuel economy (I don't know what rearend is in it), and
>what is the absolute best MPG that anyone out there has achieved? I
> could replace the 460 (123,000 mi with no rebuild) with a 300, but I've
>kind of gotten use to that "kick in the seat" from a big V8 :)

New intake manifold, headers and low restriction mufflers. Should improve economy ***if*** you can resist the temptation to gun it with the extra power you'll get. I've heard as high as 16 mpg with the 460.




------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Feb 27 08:46:43 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: Exhaust manifold removal, heater fan motor.. -Reply -Reply To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>>> Robert J Schreiner 02/26/97 10:05am >>> -snip-

>What about the 330 truck motor used in the mid 70's? was this a FE
>block?

>Just curious.
>RJ.

Don't know. I've heard mention of this engine, heard some call it an FE, others say its not. I don't have it listed in my rebuild book as an FE - matter of fact its not even listed. I'd like to know the answer too. I'll ask the Fordnatics list.




------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Feb 27 09:12:56 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: looking for stuff -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>>> 02/26/97 05:08pm >>>
>
>Actually, wouldn't headers decrease the amount of heat since your
>engine would be operating more efficiently?

Most of the time headers tend to increase underhood temperatures quite a bit. They have 10-30 times more surface area to radiate heat with compare to stock manifolds. Stock manifolds send most of the heat out under the vehicle and also out the pipe. This is why racers wrap their headers with header insulating wrap.
Stuff works really good to protect your fuel line from vapor lock too!

I've heard that ceramic coated headers to have as much heat disappation but I don't have any experience with them.





------------------------------
>From rs6l+ andrew.cmu.edu Thu Feb 27 09:21:15 1997 From: Robert J Schreiner Subject: Re: 460 Fuel Economy?! -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Hey there Bill, I'm going thru this right now on my '70 and even the same fender! What I did was gently bent IN the lip on the fenders where the bolts go thru,tried the fender and the bead was still a little loose, but not as bad. So I bent the lip OUT between the bolt holes, stuck the fender back on... tight as can be!
Be gentle... It really doesn't take much to hold that bead.

RJ.



------------------------------
>From rs6l+ andrew.cmu.edu Thu Feb 27 09:30:39 1997 From: Robert J Schreiner Subject: Sorry about last post!
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

You guys really didn't want to haer about a VW fender anyway ;)


RJ.


------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Feb 27 09:47:54 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: Late model stuff -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>>> 02/26/97 10:37pm >>>
>I've been using my 95 F150 with a 302 (no five.oh for me!) on
>weekends to
>get to my boat, about 120 miles one way. As you might imagine, I drive a
>little faster going than coming home on Sunday night. Going, I may be
>doing
>75 or so, and needless to say, the gas mileage seems to drop off,
>probably
>radically about 68mph. Coming home I keep it to 65 or so, and I get a
>whole
>lot bettah mileage. Also above 80, the second air inlet starts opening
>and
>starts its moan like the fully opened secondaries on an old Dodge Cop
>440.
>Any comments on the mileage habits of these rolling boxes?

Consider yourself lucky! If I don't let the 4 bbl open up I get 10 mpg uphill, downhill, loaded, unloaded 55 or 85!




------------------------------
>From rcollins micron.net Thu Feb 27 10:04:52 1997 From: Randy Collins Subject: Header Wraps
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Recently Steve & Rockette wrote that header wraps would control under = hood temperatures. I also understand that they tend to increase = performance by increasing exhaust gas temperature. I understand that = the disadvantage to header wraps was that they promoted corrosion by = allowing moisture to collect in the wraps. Of course this wouldn't be a = problem if the vehicle was left running, since the corrosion only occurs = when the vehicle is left sitting. =20

Has anyone used header wraps for an extended period of time in a damp = climate? =20
Randy Collins
Boise Idaho
(Dry in the summer =3D wet in the winter)



------------------------------
>From marko helix.net Thu Feb 27 11:17:52 1997 From: marko helix.net (marko maryniak)
Subject: RE: Runnin' Hot
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>'Kay. The local radiator/muffler shop is having a sale on heater cores. Is
>there a particular brand to get? How much should I pay?
>
>
Not really, they pretty much all come out of the same factory. BUT!!! Be careful, sales by repair shops mean one thing: LOSS LEADERS. They will get you in to change the heater core and try to sell you a water pump, radiator, muffler, etc etc. I once went to SEARS of all places cause I didn't have tools with me and needed a heater hose changed cause it was leaking slightly. They tried to sell me a new water pump! (And I had replaced it not 2 months before).

So, forewarned is fore-armed. Do NOT fall for this, every shop does it.
The motto is: ain't broken, don't fix.

Any luck finding the Haynes book?
>>
>>marko maryniak
>>vancouver, bc
>>1971 f250 4x4
>>
>>marko helix.net



------------------------------
>From canzus techline.com Thu Feb 27 12:35:36 1997 From: Steve & Rockette Subject: Re: fordtrucks Digest v97 n0009 To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>
>In the Edsels they also had the 332 and 410. Some of the bigger
>trucks used the 361 and 391,

I have rebuilt a ton of 391's, They have forged steel cranks in them, but the balancer snout is the wrong size to use on a 390.
If you can get a machine shop to turn the snout to the right size, then have the crank high speed balanced, it will drop right into a 390 or 427.
I remember paying about $400.00 for a reman 391 crank from Ford.


Steve & Rockette...Lifes a beach
'57 F100 Shorty
'63 F100 Longbox



------------------------------
>From mcat epix.net Thu Feb 27 12:39:03 1997 From: mcat epix.net
Subject: Re: Exhaust manifold removal, heater fan motor.. -Reply -Reply To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Yes the 330 is an Fe Ft motor. Difference between Fe-Ft is clyinder heads front timing cover water pump crank snount and harmonic balancer intakemanfold and exhaust manifolds are unique for Ft heads. Need more specs. e-mail me. I` worked on these combos for 20+ yrs. You can get some intresting motors from combining parts.
Garry
--- On Thu, 27 Feb 1997 08:46:43 -0500 (EST) Ken Payne wrote:

>>>> Robert J Schreiner 02/26/97 10:05am >>>
>-snip-
>
>>What about the 330 truck motor used in the mid 70's? was this a FE
>>block?
>
>>Just curious.
>>RJ.
>
>Don't know. I've heard mention of this engine, heard some call
>it an FE, others say its not. I don't have it listed in my rebuild
>book as an FE - matter of fact its not even listed. I'd like to know
>the answer too. I'll ask the Fordnatics list.
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
>To send mail to fordtrucks, use the address: fordtrucks lofcom.com
>For help send a message with "HELP" in the body to:list-request lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
>

-----------------End of Original Message-----------------


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Name: Garry
E-mail: mcat epix.net
Date: 2/27/97 Time: 12:29:17 PM

427 Fe powered F-100 Wild by design
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



------------------------------
>From mvaugh acxiom.com Thu Feb 27 12:43:42 1997 From: mvaugh - Mark Vaught Subject: 351W in '68 F100
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Has anyone installed a 351W in a 67-72 F100? None of the header manufacturers seem to have a part number for headers for this application. I ordered 302 headers hoping they might work. I haven't received them yet, so I still don't know. I figured there was enough room in the engine compartment to get by with the 302 headers, but I'll just have to wait and see.

-Mark


------------------------------
>From mdniz19 idt.net Thu Feb 27 14:13:54 1997 From: Mark Dinzebach
Subject: Re: 351W in '68 F100
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

mvaugh - Mark Vaught wrote:
>
> Has anyone installed a 351W in a 67-72 F100? None of the header
> manufacturers seem to have a part number for headers for this
> application. I ordered 302 headers hoping they might work. I haven't
> received them yet, so I still don't know. I figured there was enough
> room in the engine compartment to get by with the 302 headers, but I'll
> just have to wait and see.
>
> -Mark
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> To send mail to fordtrucks, use the address: fordtrucks lofcom.com
> For help send a message with "HELP" in the body to:list-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com I installed a 351W in a 65. Used 70 302 stands, mounts and headers.
Everything bolted in and worked like a charm.


------------------------------
>From HURDJ VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU Thu Feb 27 17:06:54 1997 From: JIM HURD Subject: Re: looking for stuff
X-VMS-To: IN%"FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com"
X-VMS-Cc: HURDJ
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

Marko,
I mentioned that I removed my fan. I installed an electric fan, primarily to cut down on the fan "roar" at lower speeds, but found that I only needed the fan if I get caught in a traffic jam in the heat of summer. If it idles for more than about 10 minutes in 75 + degree weather, the gauge starts to climb toward straight up and down (center scale), and I have to turn the fan on. I guess that I am lucky that I don't have the heating problems that so many talk about.

I would like to run something like the Holly #0-4548 (450 CFM) four barrel on my 302 but when I talked the the Holley tech guys they reccommended the 0-80452 (600 CFM). I see they reccommend their #0-80453 for you '71 360 CID, so how much tweeking did you have to do to your #0-6919 to get it to run at its best?

Jim in Central NY
'79 F-150 (302!)
'92 Topaz (3.0l)


------------------------------
>From HURDJ VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU Thu Feb 27 17:20:53 1997 From: JIM HURD Subject: 330 CID
X-VMS-To: IN%"fordtrucks lofcom.com"
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

From: SSYRV1::HURDJ "JIM HURD" 26-FEB-1997 12:38:47.65 To: IN%"FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com"
CC: HURDJ
Subj: RE: Exhaust manifold removal, heater fan motor.. -Reply


The 330 truck motor came in 330MD and 330HD and are (I believe) FT blocks.

Jim in Central NY
'79 F-150 (302!)
'92 Topaz (3.0l)


------------------------------
>From marko helix.net Thu Feb 27 17:34:14 1997 From: marko helix.net (marko maryniak)
Subject: Re: looking for stuff
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>Marko,
> I mentioned that I removed my fan. I installed an electric fan, primarily
>to cut down on the fan "roar" at lower speeds, but found that I only needed
>the fan if I get caught in a traffic jam in the heat of summer. If it idles
>for more than about 10 minutes in 75 + degree weather, the gauge starts to
>climb toward straight up and down (center scale), and I have to turn the fan
>on. I guess that I am lucky that I don't have the heating problems that so
>many talk about.

INteresting. I still think I'd rather have a clutch fan than electric, one more thing to go wrong....

>
> I would like to run something like the Holly #0-4548 (450 CFM) four barrel
>on my 302 but when I talked the the Holley tech guys they reccommended the
>0-80452 (600 CFM). I see they reccommend their #0-80453 for you '71 360 CID,
>so how much tweeking did you have to do to your #0-6919 to get it to run at
>its best?

The 80453 may be the model with the center hung floats. What I got is the one with the side-hung floats, known as the performance/emission or "RV" carburetor, which works super with my RV cam. As for tweaking, none was required other than setting the accelerator pump, idle mixture screws, and automatic choke. Worked like a charm straight out of the box. Now, if only I could do something about my sore neck.... : )

marko helix.net

1971 f250 4x4



------------------------------
>From HURDJ VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU Thu Feb 27 17:45:06 1997 From: JIM HURD Subject: Re: Header Wraps
X-VMS-To: IN%"FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com"
X-VMS-Cc: HURDJ
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

I have used headers on my '79 F-150 (302!) for most ten years now..I haven't *noticed* what I would call excessive underhood temperature...
of course there is lots of open space in there with the 302 :)

Jim in Central NY
'79 F-150 (302!)
'92 Topaz (3.0l)


------------------------------
>From ccwhite somtel.com Thu Feb 27 20:30:42 1997 From: "Collin White" Subject: Fw: Fw:Help What year ?
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

----------
> From: Collin White
> To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
> Subject: Fw:Help What year ?
> Date: Thursday, February 27, 1997 6:36 PM
>
>
>
> ----------
> > From: Collin White
> > To:FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com
> > Subject: Help, What Year ?
> > Date: Thursday Feb.27 1997 8:37 PM
> >
> > I have recently aquired a 1 1/2 ton Ford Truck. Locals disagree as to its
> > year. 38-42 are the ranges of guess. The speedometer and gauges are all
> in
> > one rectangular area. It says 85 in the crome just above the lift handle
> > for the hood. The distributor is located between the water pumps. I only
> > has on wiper motor.
> > Two peice windshield . Headlights are attached to the fenders. The
> parking
> > lights are very small and installed just below the headlamps. I have
> > replaced the master cylinder and axle grease seals with parts for a 46
> but
> > I know some parts are interchangeable from 34-53. Any guess will be
> > appreciated.
> >


------------------------------
>From tyounger gulf.csc.UVic.CA Thu Feb 27 21:09:31 1997 From: Tom
Subject: FE and motor sizes
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

I have a question about Fuel Economy and engine sizes.

Say hypothetically, that I have two trucks -- one with a 300 straight 6 and one with a 460. A friend and I drive from point A to point B, driving exactly the same. So, the 300 would be averaging, say 40% power the whole way, and the 460 would be I guess about 20% power the whole way.

Which one would use more gas? The small engine, at a relatively high power output, or the big engine at a relatively low power output? They both, of course, produce the same amount of power, but the question is which is more efficient?

I've heard people say the 300 would do better, and I've heard people say the 460 would do better. I tend to think the 300 would do better, but I don't know.

Thoughts?

___
TTTTT OO M M The sixth sick shiek's sixth sheep's sick. |~~~|
T O O MM MM o o
T O O M M M Be young, have fun, *
T OO M M and drink lots of beer!!! `-'




------------------------------
>From cdkelly juno.com Thu Feb 27 21:31:55 1997 From: cdkelly juno.com
Subject: Re: FE and motor sizes
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

I just thought I would write and tell you the way I've heard it! I have been told by almost any one I talk to in an older ganeration that the smaller motor will get better gas mileage just driving around! But in return if you use your truck for work the smaller motor will use about the same about or more than the V-8. Plus it feels good to have the extra power of the 460 when you have a heavy load, to merge in traffic or whatever!
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997 21:09:31 -0500 (EST) Tom writes:
>I have a question about Fuel Economy and engine sizes.
>
>Say hypothetically, that I have two trucks -- one with a 300 straight
>6
>and one with a 460. A friend and I drive from point A to point B,
>driving
>exactly the same. So, the 300 would be averaging, say 40% power the
>whole
>way, and the 460 would be I guess about 20% power the whole way.
>
>Which one would use more gas? The small engine, at a relatively high
>power
>output, or the big engine at a relatively low power output? They
>both, of
>course, produce the same amount of power, but the question is which is
>more
>efficient?
>
>I've heard people say the 300 would do better, and I've heard people
>say the
>460 would do better. I tend to think the 300 would do better, but I
>don't
>know.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>___
>TTTTT OO M M The sixth sick shiek's sixth sheep's sick.
> |~~~|
> T O O MM MM
> o o
> T O O M M M Be young, have fun,
> *
> T OO M M and drink lots of beer!!!
> `-'
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
>To send mail to fordtrucks, use the address: fordtrucks lofcom.com
>For help send a message with "HELP" in the body
>to:list-request lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
>


------------------------------
>From payne platinum.com Thu Feb 27 22:15:51 1997 From: Ken Payne
Subject: FE and motor sizes -Reply
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com

>From a purely physical point of view the 460 is heavier, has a larger crank, flywheel, pistons, cam, etc to move. I'd say that in the case of the 460 a greater amount of energy is spent overcoming weight and inertia. Of course the reality isn't always like this.
I don't know what the 460 weighs but the 390 is 670 lbs, alot of metal to haul!


>>> Tom 02/27/97 08:09pm >>> I have a question about Fuel Economy and engine sizes.

Say hypothetically, that I have two trucks -- one with a 300 straight 6 and one with a 460. A friend and I drive from point A to point B, driving exactly the same. So, the 300 would be averaging, say 40% power the whole
way, and the 460 would be I guess about 20% power the whole way.

Which one would use more gas? The small engine, at a relatively high power
output, or the big engine at a relatively low power output? They both, of course, produce the same amount of power, but the question is which is more
efficient?

I've heard people say the 300 would do better, and I've heard people say the
460 would do better. I tend to think the 300 would do better, but I don't know.

Thoughts?

___
TTTTT OO M M The sixth sick shiek's sixth sheep's sick. |~~~|
T O O MM MM o o
T O O M M M Be young, have fun, *
T OO M M and drink lots of beer!!! `-'




------------------------------



------------------------------
>From rmeier connect.net Thu Feb 27 22:42:31 1997 From: rmeier connect.net (Roger Meier)
Subject: Original or easy ride
To: FORDTRUCKS lofcom.com....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.