4.9L vs 5.0L discussion - Page 11 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums
 

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
Log In 


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

4.9L vs 5.0L discussion

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #151  
Old 07-24-2011, 05:46 PM
Bdox's Avatar
Bdox Bdox is offline
Iconoclast
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Posts: 28,389
Bdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputation
Is there a non-electronic five speed trans that works with an older 300 4x4?
__________________
Bruce

corporations are not persons
.
corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons.corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 07-25-2011, 10:59 AM
im2tall33's Avatar
im2tall33 im2tall33 is offline
ID CHAPTER LDR
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Coeur d alene, Id
Posts: 22,981
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
i was told there is bruce.. but i dont know for sure..sorry dont know much more than that lol
__________________
Micah Munroe BIG BSer#2and Slackmaster #19
Click to join the Idaho Chapter

2008 f250 4x4 crew cab with 35/12.50s aka. Goliath
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGKEN View Post
Micah...the man...the myth...the legend!!!

Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:05 PM
strokin'_tatsch's Avatar
strokin'_tatsch strokin'_tatsch is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,738
strokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to beholdstrokin'_tatsch is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by lew52 View Post
....Well the part about the shot bed 150 isn't going to beat a mustang is not true , i do it all the time , thats what makes it fun !!....Lew
I'm with Lew. I'm going to have to say that we are quite alike when it comes to trucks. It's wayyy too much fun to outrun sports cars and some muscle cars and have them coming up to you wondering what just happened.
__________________
Travis- Death Row Diesel Inmate #7
1995 F-250 RC PSD- because race truck
2000 F-250 SC LB 4x4 ZF6- 4" exhaust, 6637, TW and Gearhead tunes, 160/100s, Driven Diesel full fuel system, S365 FMW turbo, Irate T4 kit, Valair ceramic dual disc..
1994 F-150 4x4

Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:08 PM
quaddriver quaddriver is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cook Forest PA
Posts: 2,288
quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.
I am not reading all the pages, but will state this:

the I6 does not suffer from 2 rods connecting at each crankpin journal like a V8 does (a win) and the I6 has **7** - count them **7** main bearings AND it does not like revving over 4000rpm. (a major win)

all that being said, if you are not in a dagblasted hurry, the i6 will do the work....forever

for modifications, there are not many out there for the EFI to the point of being 'none', and there are few for the carb version. unless you know some real sickos over at fordsix.com....
__________________
QuadDriver...

Go Fast, run over sh......stuff
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:10 PM
quaddriver quaddriver is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cook Forest PA
Posts: 2,288
quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowtie_Schmowtie View Post
Ever wonder why they never put the 300 in cars? ]
I woulda said 'cuz it would have to be one heck of a long nosed car.....
__________________
QuadDriver...

Go Fast, run over sh......stuff
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:23 PM
TorqueKing's Avatar
TorqueKing TorqueKing is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,711
TorqueKing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
They sure have/do/will put I-6's in cars! I've owned 2 different BMW's that did and they were fantastically powerful cars. The break-out speed on the freeway was most impressive, and all this on a car that gets high-20's in MPG terms.

A BMW is an awful investment (glad not own them anymore!), but they sure are fun to drive. The I-6 is a very strong motor in any trim.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:29 PM
KevinGnWV's Avatar
KevinGnWV KevinGnWV is offline
The village idiot.
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Southern WV
Posts: 1,126
KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver View Post
I woulda said 'cuz it would have to be one heck of a long nosed car.....
No. Ford used a 250 or 255 (don't remember which) CID I6 in some cars including the fairlane, falcon, maverick and even the good ol mustang.
__________________
Kevin G, West Virginia

1994 Mazda B4000 ExtCab.
4X4 SE, 5 Spd.

Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:33 PM
TorqueKing's Avatar
TorqueKing TorqueKing is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,711
TorqueKing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l View Post
On the highway, and city driving...I will definantly give the 302 it's due, and hand the ball over....My truck squeaked in at 16mpg highway...Then again, that was running 70+ mph too.....So not really a precise mpg test.....

Will have to recheck everything at 55mph....

But after a long trip.....I will sadly have to yield to the 302 for the highway, general driving tip.....My dads '92 with the 302/5 speed/3.55 gears isn't NEARLY as stressed on the highway as my 300/5speed/3.08 was....

So my consensus is: THe 302 is a better engine to do daily driving, grocery getting, etc. with....But I like the 300 for lugging around an farm work....
I should also qualify my 20-21 MPG's is done by a motor with Mass Air fuel injection. I can see how the older EFI's or the carbureted versions wouldn't do quite as well. I think 94-96 had it. It's a really solid system though, except that the lack of an OBD-II computer means that I have to roll on the dyno with the sniffer for my annual emissions test, but that's not the truck's fault!
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:50 PM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
FTE Chapter Leader
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,576
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.
Wesley R. Cole
TK-Mine will easily pull 18-19mpg on the highway @ 55.....The 70 mph is where it just can't keep up....
__________________
Wesley-KY Chapter Leader
1992 F-150 Michelle-300I6 w/ 5 Speed
Hurst Short Throw Shifter & Not enough gear!

19.31 E/T @ 68.78mph in a 1/4 mile
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 07-25-2011, 03:02 PM
quaddriver quaddriver is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cook Forest PA
Posts: 2,288
quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinGnWV View Post
No. Ford used a 250 or 255 (don't remember which) CID I6 in some cars including the fairlane, falcon, maverick and even the good ol mustang.

ford had 170, 200 and 250 inch small block I-6s which were quite smaller and lighter than the 240/300. Sometimes, size does matter.
__________________
QuadDriver...

Go Fast, run over sh......stuff
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:21 PM
KevinGnWV's Avatar
KevinGnWV KevinGnWV is offline
The village idiot.
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Southern WV
Posts: 1,126
KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.KevinGnWV has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver View Post
ford had 170, 200 and 250 inch small block I-6s which were quite smaller and lighter than the 240/300. Sometimes, size does matter.
Your right. My point was, there were I6s in cars. Period The 250 isn't much smaller than a 300. I'd say there might be problems with engine mount locations and fan clearance trying to fit one in an old car now, (not sure why someone would want to) but Ford could have easily engineered the cars to fit a 300. They just didn't because it was an industrial engine and would have been overkill in a car chassis.

Then again, a turbo'd 300 in a old Maverick body might be the perfect sleeper....
__________________
Kevin G, West Virginia

1994 Mazda B4000 ExtCab.
4X4 SE, 5 Spd.

Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:41 PM
Bdox's Avatar
Bdox Bdox is offline
Iconoclast
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Posts: 28,389
Bdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputation
The 144, 170, 200 and 250 all had the intake manifold cast into the head, with was very limiting to the performance. A turbo could largely overcome that problem.

I don't know what the weight of the 300 vs the 250 is, but I think it is considerable.
__________________
Bruce

corporations are not persons
.
corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons.corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons. corporations are not persons.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:50 PM
TorqueKing's Avatar
TorqueKing TorqueKing is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,711
TorqueKing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l View Post
TK-Mine will easily pull 18-19mpg on the highway @ 55.....The 70 mph is where it just can't keep up....
That's still really good for 70 MPH. I have an E40D and 3.08's and get best milage at 55 also but I drive it 70-75 most everywhere. Here on the island there's about 2 places where I could even go that fast but the traffic won't let me! I miss the mainland sometimes! -TK
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 07-26-2011, 09:53 AM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
FTE Chapter Leader
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,576
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.
Wesley R. Cole
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdox View Post
The 144, 170, 200 and 250 all had the intake manifold cast into the head, with was very limiting to the performance. A turbo could largely overcome that problem.

I don't know what the weight of the 300 vs the 250 is, but I think it is considerable.

Same block....Different head.....Weight will be very comparable....
__________________
Wesley-KY Chapter Leader
1992 F-150 Michelle-300I6 w/ 5 Speed
Hurst Short Throw Shifter & Not enough gear!

19.31 E/T @ 68.78mph in a 1/4 mile
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 07-26-2011, 10:16 AM
quaddriver quaddriver is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cook Forest PA
Posts: 2,288
quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.quaddriver has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SideWinder4.9l View Post
Same block....Different head.....Weight will be very comparable....
nuh uh, he is referring to the 'small block' 6 vs the big one, there are such animals. the 144/170/200/250 had a 4" or less bore spacing and a short deck (7.something inches) while the 240/300 had a 4+" spacing and a 10.1" deck, making it longer, way taller and about 200+lbs heavier.
__________________
QuadDriver...

Go Fast, run over sh......stuff
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone driven a 5.0 and 3.5 back to back? zimm 2015+ F150 117 06-14-2015 02:48 PM
97 4.6 converted to PI intake and maybe heads question and suggestions chloichina 1997 - 2003 F150 5 06-26-2013 03:28 PM
why not a 5.8l quincyj34 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 7 12-13-2012 11:50 PM
Performance: 3.5L vs 5.0L seminaryranger EcoBoost (all engine sizes) 63 11-06-2012 08:54 AM
Let's talk some some gearing vs. MPG ratios DBGrif91 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 29 09-26-2010 09:12 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks

Tags
1988, 300, 49, 49l, 50, downshifting, engine, f150, ford, hits, inline, lariat, powerband, straight, swap, truck

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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:51 AM.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - 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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup