Battle of the Engines - Page 2 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums



1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks

Battle of the Engines

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #16  
Old 05-05-2011, 11:57 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 23,535
Conanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud of
Quote:
Originally Posted by IDIDieselJohn View Post
I wouldn't bother with a 351, pretty useless engine if you ask me, unless you want an engine that hauls like a 302, and gets the fuel economy of a 460......
You're doing something wrong, my 5.8 was 3 seconds faster 0-60 than the current 5.0 and got 2-3 better mpg.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-06-2011, 12:05 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 23,535
Conanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud of
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasg4 View Post
the 302 is choked up by the heads.
Not really.. it's more the stock truck cams, with a better suited bumpstick the motor hauls really well to 5000rpm

Quote:
Originally Posted by lasg4 View Post
Would you use the 351 or 302?
351 every time, it makes more TQ at 2000rm than the 5.0 makes anywhere. The stock heads certainly do become restrictive early on the 351.. like at about 4000rpm, but there are lots of options out there to fix that problem.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-06-2011, 12:06 AM
Jimbo302's Avatar
Jimbo302 Jimbo302 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 677
Jimbo302 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
lol @ swap to a 300 I-6.

Rebuild the shortblock, use a nice head cam combo and add full exhaust. It will run well with the factory intake and efi and you will add tons of torque and power.
There are other options for all out power, but that route will make a nice powerful driver without breaking the bank.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-06-2011, 12:08 AM
Jimbo302's Avatar
Jimbo302 Jimbo302 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 677
Jimbo302 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conanski View Post
You're doing something wrong, my 5.8 was 3 seconds faster 0-60 than the current 5.0 and got 2-3 better mpg.
I'm not sure how anyone would accurately gauge 0-60, but my 5000+lb 5.8 truck ran 10.3 1/8th mile and got 15mpg.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-06-2011, 02:52 AM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
FTE Chapter Leader
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,609
SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.
ColFlashman has a carbed 300.....Turns out 300 odd ponies.....GRANTED, that he has went over darn near every inch of the engine, its just the fact he has a Inline, running better hp than a 302....
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-06-2011, 04:27 AM
Jimbo302's Avatar
Jimbo302 Jimbo302 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 677
Jimbo302 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l View Post
ColFlashman has a carbed 300.....Turns out 300 odd ponies.....GRANTED, that he has went over darn near every inch of the engine, its just the fact he has a Inline, running better hp than a 302....
I'm a big fan of I6's, but how is 300fwhp from a modified 4.9, "better hp than a 302"?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-06-2011, 05:36 AM
lew52's Avatar
lew52 lew52 is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,558
lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.
But the 302 is just getting started at 300HP , thats easy to do and theres so much more...Lew
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-06-2011, 06:01 AM
lew52's Avatar
lew52 lew52 is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,558
lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.lew52 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conanski View Post
You're doing something wrong, my 5.8 was 3 seconds faster 0-60 than the current 5.0 and got 2-3 better mpg.
....Thats alot of difference , i think there is something not right with your 302 , my 302 is a good 2 sec faster in the 1/4 mile than a lightning , it may be the timing curve ?? , my truck did not have alot of low end untill i had a chip burned for it , but what a difference that made , i don't think the 302 with a decent cam and heads runs very well with the stock computer settings , thats been my experiance with them....Lew
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-06-2011, 09:03 AM
CJM8515 CJM8515 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Freehold
Posts: 871
CJM8515 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Problem is and will always be where the 302 makes power, you can play with it and modify it to a degree and it helps-but it will never be a low revving torquey engine like the 300, 351 or 460. It likes rpms, nothing much you can do about it. Problem is those who drive a truck dont want it to scream usually.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-06-2011, 09:41 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 23,535
Conanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud of
Quote:
Originally Posted by lew52 View Post
....Thats alot of difference , i think there is something not right with your 302
Nothing wrong with the 302.. it makes loads of HP on the top end.. kind of surprised me actually with how well it responded to a simple cam change.. hint hint.. nudge nudge, and I did a lot of playing with the tuner to see what more I could squeeze out of it, but torque is what moves the load and the 5.8 generates more of it so the truck accelerates faster with it. This is a direct comparison of engines with literally nothing else changed, same truck, same tires, same axle gearing, same trasnmission, so it really shines the light on the differences in these engines. Certainly there are ways to make the 5.0 perform better in this vehicle.. like add more gearing, but then it's no longer a fair comparison.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-06-2011, 09:54 AM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 23,535
Conanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud of
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
I'm a big fan of I6's, but how is 300fwhp from a modified 4.9, "better hp than a 302"?
Exactly, you can take any stock 5.0EFI truck engine and by simply swapping out the stock cam for something like the Comp XE264HR you have a 275-280hp motor.. assuming the truck has an exhaust system with headers already. Pushing it over the 300hp barrier involves a little porting or a swap to GT40 heads, and like Lew said that's just getting started thanks to the extensive aftermarket catalog these engines have.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-06-2011, 10:40 AM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
FTE Chapter Leader
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,609
SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.
Let me rephrase....

I would love 300 hp on a I6, merely because all the power is in the lower rpm's, where it's readily available......WITHOUT having to rev like a SOB....Just my .02....But then again, I'm partial to I6's....
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-06-2011, 11:49 AM
punkandpissed138's Avatar
punkandpissed138 punkandpissed138 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Albany, Georgia
Posts: 357
punkandpissed138 is starting off with a positive reputation.
im just gonna say..1969-1970s mustang trans-am stock cars used tuned 302's. sure they wre built up with boss parts and modified haha, point being. its still a 302. i love 300i6's for their reliability and towing, i love 351's for their added power over a stock 302, but i do also love my 302 in my truck. having experienced a 460 yet but plan on it. anyways...id stick with a 302 since you wouldnt have to modify the engine mounts and this way you could just build that puppy up. the 302 was based off of a 427, just miniaturized (im reading this from V8TVshow.com) so i mean,,its modeled after some power.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-06-2011, 03:40 PM
85e150six4mtod 85e150six4mtod is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,735
85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l View Post
Let me rephrase....

I would love 300 hp on a I6, merely because all the power is in the lower rpm's, where it's readily available......WITHOUT having to rev like a SOB....Just my .02....But then again, I'm partial to I6's....
A 300 horse 300 six is going to rev to make that power. At least 4000 maybe 5000 for that hp figure.

Also, the 302 is not a small scale 427.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-06-2011, 04:04 PM
im2tall33's Avatar
im2tall33 im2tall33 is offline
ID CHAPTER LDR
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Coeur d alene, Id
Posts: 23,606
im2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputationim2tall33 has a superb reputation
put a 300 in it..its the best truck engine! if you want a go fast engine then by a car..just my .02 cents
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Time for a new engine need help deciding ss27gogeta 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 58 06-21-2016 07:10 PM
Wiring Harness Issues With 302 to 351 Swap GA_Forester 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1 10-02-2014 09:55 PM
78 302 engine swap Undertheoaks Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W) 3 03-30-2014 10:48 PM
Converting fuel injected 302 to carb Colton Yordy Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W) 6 04-29-2012 07:19 PM
302 swap in 79 F150 4x4 82ford302 Engine Swaps 8 01-14-2010 11:40 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums >

Tags
1990, 1995, 50, 73l, build, consumption, diesel, engine, engines, f150, f250, ford, horsepower, llm, strong, torque

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 AM.


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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.