Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


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

Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #61  
Old 07-17-2011, 03:31 PM
slow3v's Avatar
slow3v slow3v is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Endwell, NY
Posts: 46
slow3v is starting off with a positive reputation.
I just bought a 96 F-150 w/the i6-300 and 118k mi on it. It's got the M5OD and 3.55's and IMO it gets up and goes just fine. Didn't even notice a small 3k load behind me when I was towing some stuff through a buddies field. I mostly drive it on the street or through woods to go fishing at a buddies pond and its got more than enough oomph. Even buried the speedo once or twice . It's not the fastest thing out there but if you really gotta get going you can romp her up to about 3800rpm in each gear and you will accelerate pretty fast.

I can't imagine it with an automatic though...

For reference, I also drive a 05 Mustang GT with some minor boltons so I know what fast & slow are haha.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-17-2011, 09:48 PM
big-ugly's Avatar
big-ugly big-ugly is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,126
big-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant future
I would avoid 3800rpm like it was the plague with a 300 six cylinder...
__________________
Brandon - A.K.A Bman, Ace, and Shadow
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67nukeford View Post
I am dainty, you know.
The highboy project - http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/11...y-project.html
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-17-2011, 10:46 PM
slow3v's Avatar
slow3v slow3v is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Endwell, NY
Posts: 46
slow3v is starting off with a positive reputation.
That's about the highest I'll ever go with her, she sounds like a locomotive at that RPM haha. I don't even want to know where limiter/redline is on this sucker.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:05 PM
Duct Tape Racing's Avatar
Duct Tape Racing Duct Tape Racing is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Saint Charles, Missouri
Posts: 958
Duct Tape Racing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
^^^^^agreed!

i always shift at 3k rpm if im gettin on it...even then it sounds like the ole' girl is at 5k lol.

i CURRENTLY own both.
1988 f150 lariat 4x4 5 speed 302 5.0l
1994 f150 xl 2x4 5 speed 300/6 4.9L

I can honestly say that the 94 is my dd. It gets me where i need to go, gets good mileage....for a truck (around 17 mpg). It can haul small loads and not complain. And it seems that no matter if im driving around town, on the highway or hauling a load..The mileage stays exactly the same. Its a gutless wonder but its reliable, cheap to fix, easy on gas, and can haul an average sized load. What else do you need in a daily driver truck.

On the other hand, the 5.0l is a great motor. It has a little less *** from the start but it will pull just as much, if not more than my 300/6. The only difference is, the gas mileage drops fairly quick when you put it to work with the same sized load. That being said, the 302 is about the same on gas as the 300 just daily driving. The 302 has a HUGE market of aftermarket parts if you wanna make a few extra horses for cheap where as the 300 only has a select few vendors for aftermarket items at a slick price.

In conclusion, MY opinion is this:
If you want a good, reliable truck that you can putt around town in, not have to worry about if someone elses truck is faster or has that glorious v8 sound or one that will cruise down the highway at 65 comfortably....Grab yourself a 300/6 ford

If you want a truck that can be used as a DD or a toy but can run with most stock trucks, have that v8 sound everyone longs for, something you can build up and gear out to make some good horses, lift up with some big tires and wheel around at 4k rpm's with no problem, then go out and find you a ford with a 5.0l!

im sure some will not agree but this is an OPEN discussion to ALL opinions and thats just my theory!
__________________
Duct Tape Racing: 1994 F150 reg cab long bed 300/6.
Beauty: 1978 f250 ranger reg. cab long bed, dana 60/70 lockers f&r, 400m with mild build, 4 speed granny low, 4" lift on 35's
Current Project: 1972 f250 4x4 360v8 4 speed.
Daily Driver: 93 f250 4x4 5 speed 351W
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:20 PM
big-ugly's Avatar
big-ugly big-ugly is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,126
big-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant future
^^^ My 300-six is my lifted truck. It cruises down gravel roads going 50 at around 1700rpm and still gets me 15mpg. Can't ask much more out of a lifted pickup.
__________________
Brandon - A.K.A Bman, Ace, and Shadow
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67nukeford View Post
I am dainty, you know.
The highboy project - http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/11...y-project.html
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:26 PM
BIGskinny BIGskinny is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 403
BIGskinny is starting off with a positive reputation.
Wish I could see a decent mpg out of my 5.0 best iv got so far is 11
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:42 PM
GoinBoarding GoinBoarding is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Laramie, WY
Posts: 625
GoinBoarding is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I noticed a couple mentions of 5.8s. Everything I've read about the 300, pulling hills at 1500rpm or whatever, a 351 will do just fine, then pull away from both a 5.0 or 4.9 at higher speed. Anyway, I have a 5.8 and love it, good torque and more power than either 4.9 or 5.0 at a very good compromise of rpm. 70mph and its at 2000, and it'll do that with a 5k trailer. Click overdrive off and it will accelerate up a hill with that same trailer. No bs, I consistently get 17mpg empty (235/75R15 with 3.55:1.

Its the stroke of the motor that really makes the torque, gives the piston more of a moment arm on the crankshaft. The 4.9 has a 3.98" stroke with 4.0" bore, but has just the 6 cylinders, makes its pk torque pretty low. The 5.0 has a measly 3.0" stroke with a 4.0" bore, makes its pk torque relatively high (relative to these 3 motors). The 5.8 sits in the middle of these two motors, 3.5" stroke and 4.0" bore, and makes more torque at 2000RPM than either the 4.9 or 5.0 do at any RPM.

Anyway, I know the 5.8 isn't really in the OP's ?, just like talking about it.

Oh, doesn't the 300 have 7 main bearings? Instead of the V8's that just have 5? Could be entirely wrong here, just thinking of longevity.
__________________
96' F150 5.8/E4OD 3.55 SCSB stockish
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:52 PM
Bowtie_Schmowtie's Avatar
Bowtie_Schmowtie Bowtie_Schmowtie is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Western N.C.
Posts: 738
Bowtie_Schmowtie is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryito1122334455 View Post
wow, i really learned allot, ferrari had a straight 8....interesting that the 6 is way more reliable tho, due to vibrations from "crankshaft whip" on the 8's
Quite a few manufacturers made straight 8 flatheads back in the day. Buick, Chrysler, Lincoln, Packard, Deusenberg, Cord, etc. I don't think there is a single American car company that hasn't made a straight six at some point in its history.

I've always wondered how one would perform in one of our trucks...not to mention how it would SOUND... if it could even be shoehorned in, that is... those suckers are looong. Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon to have hoods that were longer than the passenger compartments.

I know where I can get several of them, but the cost of rebuilding them would be prohibitive. I have to say, though...the thought of an old '30s straight 8 crackling through straight pipe stacks is tantalizing...

Anyway, as far as reliability goes, someone made a comment earlier about the cylinder orientation of a straight six contributing less to wear than a V engine. I believe this to be absolutely true. In a V engine, there is more friction between the pistons and outboard cylinder walls because the pistons are constantly "laying down" in the cylinders. Basically they are resting their weight on one part of the cylinders more than anywhere else. In a "true" straight six ("true" meaning 90 degrees to the ground), the pistons are standing up in the cylinders and not tending to rest themselves on any one surface of the cylinders themselves. I think there is inherently more balance in an inline six as well, which aids in longevity.

Of course, there are many things that contribute to the overall reliability of an engine other than its cylinder arrangement. Make no mistake... there have been some crummy sixes made over the years. Some, like the Jeep OHC 230 Tornado, were too advanced for their time and didn't fare well as a result. But consider this...why has the inline six been the overwhelming configuration in the OTR truck industry for decades upon decades?

There must be something to that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Gervais View Post
Wes, don't judge man. My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.


'78 John "Icepick"...'73 F100 Custom "Eddie" 360 2V, 3 in the floor...'90 F150 XLT Lariat "Bruce" 4.9 EFI, 5 in the floor
North Carolina Chapter Member
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:54 PM
TexasGuy001 TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 9,381
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Growl60 View Post
Ive owned my 302 for close to two years now in my 94 with 142k on it. It had 119 when I got it. I take 50 mile trips on the highway with it twice a week. I love how smooth it is and it definately has no problem keeping up on the highway. It gets great mileage for a full size truck. It will out run a 318 or a 305 any day of the week. The only con with the motor I have is the pulling power. Ive pulled trucks bigger than mine on trailers with this truck. Ive had zero problems, its just the low end torque isnt that great but thats to be expected with the 302. I am not complaining, it still got the job done with no problems.
I agree with you. Mine will pull whatever I want. I just wish it had more low end torque. Thats why I am swapping to a 351W at some point. My truck with its high mileage 302 will out run my friends 2001 Dodge regular cab short bed with a 318 everytime, even if he leaves before I do. Mine is also a long bed.
__________________
2002 Ford Ranger Extended Cab Flareside 3.0 V6 Automatic 3.73
1965 Mustang 302 T5
Fix It Up Don't %$@# It Up
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:55 PM
TexasGuy001 TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 9,381
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieseltruckjunkie View Post
good point, the 4.9 is best with a 5sd
I will agree with this. My friend has a 95 with that setup and its a great truck.
__________________
2002 Ford Ranger Extended Cab Flareside 3.0 V6 Automatic 3.73
1965 Mustang 302 T5
Fix It Up Don't %$@# It Up
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:02 AM
TexasGuy001 TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 9,381
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
The only thing I really don't like about the 302 in a truck is that fact that it often looses speed on hills or needs to down shift to passing gear at highway speed around 60-70 mph. If your going faster than 70 its usually not an issue. This is because of the power band.
__________________
2002 Ford Ranger Extended Cab Flareside 3.0 V6 Automatic 3.73
1965 Mustang 302 T5
Fix It Up Don't %$@# It Up
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:05 AM
Duct Tape Racing's Avatar
Duct Tape Racing Duct Tape Racing is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Saint Charles, Missouri
Posts: 958
Duct Tape Racing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by big-ugly View Post
^^^ My 300-six is my lifted truck. It cruises down gravel roads going 50 at around 1700rpm and still gets me 15mpg. Can't ask much more out of a lifted pickup.
whats the specs of your truck?

i do agree that a lifted 300 is a beast. Hell, i wanna do it to mine.
__________________
Duct Tape Racing: 1994 F150 reg cab long bed 300/6.
Beauty: 1978 f250 ranger reg. cab long bed, dana 60/70 lockers f&r, 400m with mild build, 4 speed granny low, 4" lift on 35's
Current Project: 1972 f250 4x4 360v8 4 speed.
Daily Driver: 93 f250 4x4 5 speed 351W
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:23 AM
big-ugly's Avatar
big-ugly big-ugly is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,126
big-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant futurebig-ugly has a brilliant future
1995 f150 supercab shorty 4x4. 4.9l Inline 6 cylinder w/ m5od mazda trans. 4 inch rough country lift with 33" goodyear duratracs.

4-low in second gear all day long, she'll go through anything. My friends all laughed at me for buying a 6 cylinder, until we went mudding. Now they don't laugh anymore, but they do like to give me crap for having 6 instead of 8.
__________________
Brandon - A.K.A Bman, Ace, and Shadow
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67nukeford View Post
I am dainty, you know.
The highboy project - http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/11...y-project.html
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:59 AM
strokin'_tatsch's Avatar
strokin'_tatsch strokin'_tatsch is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,452
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
I drove a 300/6 yesterday. 1989 f-150 2wd regular cab short bed 5 speed and around 190k miles. It reminded me why I swapped to the 5.0.... With the same 3.08 gears my donor truck had, the 300 seems lazy. We have a lot of hills around here and even on the smaller hills I was flooring it or downshifting to try to go the speed limit. That doesn't work for me.

So most of you that say the 4.9 is better, it's only because of where the torque is? I don't feel like this is a reasonable arguement... We can make a 10hp Briggs lug around whatever we want if we have enough gearing. For this of you with 5.0s saying it has no low end, how about gearing it properly? Many of us have said that over and over. A properly geared 302 is a whole different animal to drive.

IMO a 300 will never out perform a 302 for me and my needs. I drive my truck on the road. It doesn't sit at home at putt around a farm. I get annoyed very quickly if I can't accelerate up hill or if I have to downshift to hold speed. I guess most of you making the 4.9 seem like it's some kind of beast dont have many hills or pull much in hills..

The 300s are really reliable engines and run fair, but I think the hype has gotten out hand..
__________________
Travis- Death Row Diesel Inmate #7
1995 F-250 RC 2wd PSD ZF5- because race truck
2000 F-250 SC LB 4x4 ZF6- 4" TB, 6637, TW and Gearhead tunes, 160/100s, Driven Diesel full fuel system, S365..
1994 F-150 4x4

Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 07-18-2011, 01:09 AM
Duct Tape Racing's Avatar
Duct Tape Racing Duct Tape Racing is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Saint Charles, Missouri
Posts: 958
Duct Tape Racing is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
as a firm beleiver and lover of the 300, ill have to agree with you strokin_tatsch.

If my 300 was worn out, id most likely swap in a 5.0 but it would be stupid to tear out a perfectly good motor right??
__________________
Duct Tape Racing: 1994 F150 reg cab long bed 300/6.
Beauty: 1978 f250 ranger reg. cab long bed, dana 60/70 lockers f&r, 400m with mild build, 4 speed granny low, 4" lift on 35's
Current Project: 1972 f250 4x4 360v8 4 speed.
Daily Driver: 93 f250 4x4 5 speed 351W
Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2011, 01:09 AM
 
 
 
Reply

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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 (3.5L, 2.0L) 63 11-06-2012 08:54 AM
Got to drive all the 2011 F-150 engines and this is my review! 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2009+ F150 38 01-18-2011 04:53 PM
Food for thoughts: 4.9 vs other motors? shop.keeper 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 63 10-15-2009 10:51 PM
Best place to buy rebuilt engines? Proxymatic Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W) 4 07-01-2008 11:08 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - 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