after reading most of this thread what have i gathered


if you have a 300 straight 6 there is no way in hell a 302 is or will ever be better


if you own a 302 you like it plenty but each engine has its own niche

 

I had a straight 6 and everything under the sun was better, including 302's. A 302 in a bigger truck would run away and leave me from a stop and running down the highway whether there was a load or no load. Plain and simple, the 300-6 is an ok engine as far as reliability goes.. They don't have enough power to tear themselves up. They will get the job done, just get it done slower. Sorry, but my truck would lose speed going uphill without a load and it's a regular cab, 5 speed, and at the time had 3.55s. I can't stand having to floor it just to make it up a hill.

 

If you were having problems like that you had something wrong with it. I have one in my '96 and when it's running right (not right now) it will run as well as any 302 I've ever owned, and that's with the 2.73:1 rear end.

 

Back when I drove concrete mixers (before I decided to start my pump business) I used to work for a readymix company.

When I first started work there I was assigned the "new guy mixer" It was an old piece of **** powered by a 300 i6. It was a single axle mixer that could hold 8 yards legally. (they always threw in 9 yards anyway). I was amazed the 300 i6 could move the 20k lb truck empty not to mention the 9 yards of concrete (36k lbs).

No question though, when it was loaded up and weighed in around 56-58k... I had trouble on some of the hills leading to the job sites. Must have been some crazy gears in that old truck but I was mightily impressed with the 300 i6

 

Mine will pass traffic in 5th very easy but I love my 300 after swapping 3.55 in it

 

You must have had an anemic 300. As you can see from my sig, I have experience with the 300, 302, 351W. I loved my 302, but I spent money on it to whoop on the 351w rig. I like my 351w rig but its stock and good cruiser. Airplane gears in the rear and my 300 I6 F160 with 31s was fun. 20 mpg, had plenty of power and we have a couple STEEP mountains that would require a downshift but the big one right in the middle of town requires you to do a sharp 180 turn so you are forced to slow down to a least 25mph and I still chug up their fine in 4th.

My 89 Bronco had a carbed 300 and it pushed 40s around all day with 3:08 gears. I just put the EFI 300 in it and I could have just as easily put a 351w in for all the work I did but I prefer a 300 I6 for a truck motor. If you want a truck, then might as well get a truck motor.

 

So I understand that if I wanted to crawl over a steep hill the 4.9l is what you want. It produces almost the same torque as the 5.0l but it does it at 400 less rpm. So wheel spin is really not an issue when you need traction. Now, if I am in a deep mud hole sporting some big super swampers, is the 4.9l going to have the hp (for wheel spin)to clean out the treads and get me out of the hole. The reason I ask is because I had a Jeep with the infamous 4.2l torque monster in it. I never met a hill that I couldn't crawl over, but in a mude hole, it acted kind of like the little engine that could. I even had 456 gears w 33/12.50 procomp tires. My new toy is a 89 150 4x4 on 35/12.50's with the 5.0l in it. I love it because its standard with that super low 1st gear. Putting a crank kit in it right now but I got a 351w in the barn that will eventually be a stroked power plant. I want to try my hand at tractor pulling.

 

Hi CS and welcome aboard.

You sort of answer your own question. You can't really just compare the 4.9 and the 5.0, you need to compare the vehicles. Tires, gear ratios, transmissions, vehicle weights and any individual problems and/or modifications all have to be considered. Generalizing does not always give you the answer.

I do know that a lot of these older trucks are driving around, perhaps just in occasional use so the owners are not so fussy about how well they are running. Or worse they don't even realize that the truck is not running right. Then they form their opinion about that "engine" based on their old shabby "plow truck" or trash hauler. So I think it is best to try out the vehicle you are considering and determine if it will do what you want it to.

 

I've had both, and I always get a kick out of guys that put down the 302 as not being a good truck engine. I had no issues pulling a 6k flybridge boat and trailer combo with my '93 Bronco EB through the hills of NH. But would it have been suitable in my '69 F600 dump truck (10k empty, 22.6k legal)? No. Was the 300/6 suitable? Absolutely. The lower RPM torque peak (and flatter curve) of the long-stroke 300 is what separates the two. Which is why Ford used the 300 in many trucks up through the medium duty lines and industrial applications, not to mention the usually longer service life of the inline 6 configuration. The 302 is a fine light-duty (originally car) motor for a truck, the 300 is a truck engine.

 

Bump--enjoying the thread!

 

4.9l is a solid little engine. I've owned one and boy could it work!

I've never owned a 5.0, currently own a 5.8, and though these engines are pretty similar I technically can't say anything about the 5.0.

 

Funny I'm in the market for a new ( to me ) truck and there are currently 5 near me on craigslist in my price range. One is a 351....then there are two 4.9 and 2 5.0.

I read every post ...all 14 pages.

Thanks ......I think Muddy waters...

Leaning towards the 4.9 atm based on sheer durability and possibly slightly better MPG. 5.0 is a super close second since this truck will be a daily driver and I will basically treat it like a car 95 percent of the time and 5 percent will be snow days, Depo runs , times I just need to move sheit around and 3 or 4 times a year Ill be filling it up with computers to recycle from my job. The 351 is prolly no longer in the discussion due to lower MPG.

However If I can financially swing keeping my POS Sentra on the road as well as a truck then that opens up a buttload of other options.

Bleh

 

Forgot to mention my criteria above...

4X4
Automatic....to my shame I've never learned standard and i'm an old dog now
8ft bed

Be nice to find and ext cab but apparently they are rare in these parts. I found 2 and both were rusted to sheit.

 

None of those options are famous for gas mileage.

 

True.

Good thing my day job is only 3 miles away and my night job is 8 miles away. I've read here and a few other places of the 4.9 getting a steady 16 combined....and some cases even better. I can live with that.