Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks Discuss the Bumpsides Ford Truck

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 04-06-2012, 12:31 AM
1968FordF100 1968FordF100 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 23
1968FordF100 is starting off with a positive reputation.
360 engine vs 352 or 302?

I am getting about 9 mpg with my 360 in my 68 F100.
Could I get better gas mileage from a 352 or a 302?
And, would they use the same mounting brackets?
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-06-2012, 02:06 AM
Cracker289's Avatar
Cracker289 Cracker289 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Four Oaks, NC
Posts: 456
Cracker289 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1968FordF100 View Post
I am getting about 9 mpg with my 360 in my 68 F100.
Could I get better gas mileage from a 352 or a 302?
And, would they use the same mounting brackets?
Thanks.
The 352 is the same basic engine block as the 360 so it would bolt right up in it's place. 9mpg sounds worse than I'd expect for a 360 are you sure there's not some other issue? Has it been tuned up, etc?
__________________
69 F100 351c / FMX Mean Green beater shop truck
66 Mustang 289 / C4 CandyApple Red
66 Mustang 302 / AOD "father daughter" project
55 Chevy Belair 265 / Powerglide Anniversary gold
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-06-2012, 04:27 AM
jowilker's Avatar
jowilker jowilker is online now
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Creedmoor, North Carolina
Posts: 22,871
jowilker is a splendid one to beholdjowilker is a splendid one to beholdjowilker is a splendid one to beholdjowilker is a splendid one to beholdjowilker is a splendid one to beholdjowilker is a splendid one to behold
https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn jowilker
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1968FordF100 View Post
I am getting about 9 mpg with my 360 in my 68 F100.
Could I get better gas mileage from a 352 or a 302?
And, would they use the same mounting brackets?
Thanks.
Dittos on Cracker, 360 & 352 are both FEs, big torque good truck engine. 302 small car engine while very popular will get you back & forth but is light weight.

Biggest issue is ero, these 40+ year old trucks are huge brick bats going down the road. 9-10 is very common for these old trucks.



John
__________________
In the cool still quiet hours of night, you can hear chevies rusting away.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-06-2012, 12:33 PM
Buzz44's Avatar
Buzz44 Buzz44 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: colbert washington
Posts: 2,012
Buzz44 has a good reputation on FTE.Buzz44 has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jowilker View Post
Dittos on Cracker, 360 & 352 are both FEs, big torque good truck engine. 302 small car engine while very popular will get you back & forth but is light weight.

Biggest issue is ero, these 40+ year old trucks are huge brick bats going down the road. 9-10 is very common for these old trucks.



John
Every time I see this subject come up I just have to smile. I think back to when these trucks were 10-15 years old and into the 70s series Fs and what they were used for. I and my friends and neighbors were using these trucks for hauling in firewood and certain other heavy tasks. Guess what loaded down with a full load of firewood or running empty the milage was 10 to 12 mpg for most of the Ford trucks running 352s,360s and 390s. It doesnt matter what you do to them you will not effect the gas milage that much without doing extreem modifications. These things are just square bricks going down the road with no areodynamics what so ever. Pulling the V8 and adding a 6 in place may help increase milage somewhat. The best I had was 17mpg running empty in a 66 F250 with a 300 six. All that being said if you are looking for milage you need to think about a newer truck not one of these old brick bats. I agree with John and his description of these old trucks.

MPGs.......We dont need no stinkin MPGs.... just drive them and enjoy the simplicity of the trucks that helped build America.
__________________
1965 F100 4x4 for fun. Name Gentelman Jim
1963 F250 4x4 for restore. Name Beast
1998 F150 4x4 for daily use. Name Birthday Boy
2001 Ford 4x4 Explorer Sport Trac (nice but sucks on MPG its underpowered)

Vic by the way.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-06-2012, 04:10 PM
Nighteyez's Avatar
Nighteyez Nighteyez is offline
FTE NorCal chapter LDR
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fresno, CA.
Posts: 9,921
Nighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant futureNighteyez has a brilliant future
I agree, these trucks are heavy and have the aerodynamics of a brick. You may see some mpg improvement by putting in a 302, but the truck will be underpowered, and really, not worth the hassle, or expense. The best way to increase mpg is to drive like a grandpa (or grandma). There are some things you can do to increase mileage, like adding dual exhaust if it doesn't have it already, or bumping the timing up a few degrees BTDC. making sure your air filter is clean, and not plugged up. Doing a tune up on it, make sure your tires are inflated properly, and the front end is properly aligned. If you absolutely want to replace the engine for one that gets better mpg, get the 300 six. Or even a 240 six if you can find one in decent shape.

Jim
__________________
90 F350 Centurion, XLT Lariat, CC, dually,460/auto, Sold
Proud to be a veteran
Click Here To Join The Nor-Cal Chapter
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:25 PM
rustywheel68 rustywheel68 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,088
rustywheel68 is starting off with a positive reputation.
what carb/intake are you running? if gas mileage is your goal, you should be using a 2-barrel.
__________________
'65 Galaxie 500, 390 auto
'65 F100, 300 straight 6
'79 F250, 460 C6
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-06-2012, 08:33 PM
Joeseph's Avatar
Joeseph Joeseph is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 330
Joeseph is starting off with a positive reputation.
Provided your truck is 2wd and you putt it around and drive mellow, you can drop in a smaller engine and improve it. My 300 with a 4 bbl and efi manifolds/exhaust averages 15.4 city and thats with 3:73s and a t18 while cruising around at 45mph.
I'd imagine you could probably get similar with a 302 and the right driving habits. However my engine makes all of its power below 3000rpm and even when I drive it like I mean it I seldom ever go above that so maybe not.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-06-2012, 10:59 PM
Ford_Six's Avatar
Ford_Six Ford_Six is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington
Posts: 16,700
Ford_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputationFord_Six has a superb reputation
I used to get mid teens from a 300 with 4.10s and automatic, 7.5 towing and 12@65 empty from a built 360 with 3.73s and four speed, now 17@75mph with a 7.3 IDI, ZF 5speed, and 3.73s.
Ethanol gas will hurt the mileage a fair bit, you may want to search out ethanol free. Also make sure you don't have any leaks.
__________________
Jared
Real trucks have the key on the left
FTE Guidelines
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjc transport
but i can't tell you where i am, i don't want the nice men in the white suits and hug me jackets finding me
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-22-2012, 01:43 PM
69F-250CS's Avatar
69F-250CS 69F-250CS is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 44
69F-250CS is starting off with a positive reputation.
Here's one of the few phrases that elevates my soul....and I need this kind of input from time to time: "We dont need no stinkin MPGs.... just drive them and enjoy the simplicity of the trucks that helped build America".

Amen to this.!
GOD BLESS AMERICA.....damn!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-22-2012, 02:00 PM
elgemcdlf's Avatar
elgemcdlf elgemcdlf is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Alton, MO
Posts: 1,799
elgemcdlf is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I just pulled a 302/C6 out of our '70 SWB F100. No idea what the rear gears were as the 9" was swapped out for a MN12 IRS. I didn't get anything I would call great out of the 302. I spent $15 to go 60 miles. I guess that put me out in the 15 mpg range if fuel was $4.00 gal. You can adjust from there. I had plenty of go fast with the 302. I do not & have never used this truck for hauling anything other than a$$. If it were me I would move to a 302 with an AOD. Move into gears closer to 3:00. That should get you out around 17/18 mpg.

As to aerodynamics. It is the same basic shape as my '90 4x4. The '90 is a bit softer around the edges. I run a 4.9 EFI with a 5 spd. Has lockouts up front & I can coax 17/18 out of it around town. Just all depends on what you intend on using the truck for. Lowering the truck will also help. The less air you have tumbling around the bottom of the truck the better you will do. I have seen a thread somewhere where the owner was adapting a later model air dam (very slight spoiler looking item) under his bump. Again this helps route air. You have 3 basic ways to improve mileage. Drivetrain, air flow & driving habits.

From a personal perspective. If you want good fuel economy sell the truck and buy something else. These never were designed with fuel economy in mind. I put a 460 in mine. For the most part these old trucks are used for either tough work trucks (economy doesn't matter) or toys (economy doesn't matter). Gotta sacrifice something. Either you get good mileage or you look cool Can't have both.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-23-2012, 08:32 PM
Fungus232's Avatar
Fungus232 Fungus232 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kaneohe Bay, Oahu
Posts: 312
Fungus232 is starting off with a positive reputation.
My suggestion for an engine swap would be a later model 5.0 or 5.8L with the factory EFI setup. Should put you in the 12-15 mpg range even with the "brick". I've got a 5.0 in my '95 F-150 & it's pretty decent. Sometimes I wish it had the power of the 5.8 but rarely. Driving habits and gearing will make a huge difference too. Later model EFI engine with an overdrive tranny behind it would make a pretty nice improvement. HOWEVER, when you actually sit down and figure out the increase in MPGs you'll get with a swap + the COST of the actual swap you can buy and awful lot of gas for that 360! I agree that what you're seeing now is on the low side and I'd start checking some of the tuneup items. A swap to electronic ignition will help you out too! Should be able to convert it on the cheap with junkyard parts from a later '70s FE donor (Duraspark ignition setup).

My '71 Crew cab has the 390/ C6 in it, about 8" of lift and 35x 12.5" tires. I haven't even looked at MPG cause it SUCKS. Plans for me are to drop about 4" of lift out of it, go to electronic ignition, drop the tire size to around a 33x 10.5" tire & put my good running Quadrajet carb on it in place of the gas guzzlin' Holley that's on it now. Oh yeah, and replace the missing saddle tank to increase fuel capacity so I can atleast pass up ONE gas station... Hopin' to see some decent improvement out of it.
__________________
'95 F-150 4x4 Ext Cab Flareside 5.8, Auto
'71 F-250 4x4 CC SB 390, C6
'69 Bronco w/ some custom crap
'68 Bronco crawler in the works...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-02-2012, 12:32 AM
1968FordF100 1968FordF100 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 23
1968FordF100 is starting off with a positive reputation.
360 engine vs 352 or 302?

Thanks for the advice guys. I just did a tune-up (with new plugs and wires), and I bought some new tires. I also bought a new fuel pump.
It sure is running better. I filled up the tank, and we'll see how the MPG is now. I do love to drive my truck, and I am going to go to a two barrel, with the original intake manifold. That should make an even bigger
difference in mileage. I appreciate all the input.
By the way, I like "looking cool." Thanks, Dan.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-02-2013, 07:11 PM
Duche400 Duche400 is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gladstone, MI
Posts: 39
Duche400 is starting off with a positive reputation.
My '67 352 3 on the tree managed 15 hyw. I never went over 65, and she sang at 60. I'm very satisfied with that for what it is!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-03-2013, 09:04 PM
busy161 busy161 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 9
busy161 is starting off with a positive reputation.
My 410 I built for my 70 2wd long bed with 750 holley and headers got 12-13 mpg with bunch more power than the 10-11 mpg 2 barrel 360
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-04-2013, 09:58 AM
MIKES 68 F100's Avatar
MIKES 68 F100 MIKES 68 F100 is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Antelope Valley ,CA
Posts: 2,845
MIKES 68 F100 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.MIKES 68 F100 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
If you want mpg get a Honda,Kia or similar . These trucks are bricks .
My daily driver is a Kia Optima , yeah i know but i drive 100+ miles a day so 31mpg on average is what i need . on weekends i find any excuse to drive the truck .
__________________
390
10:1 C/R
Lunati 62001 cam kit
home ported heads/Flotech headers
Edelbrock performer intake /Holley 750
22 Gallon mustang gas tank Mod
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2013, 09:58 AM
 
 
 
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
352 to 360 Countryford83 FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428) 16 10-10-2013 09:10 AM
do I have a 352 or 360? mpo414 1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks 12 06-23-2010 12:54 PM
76 engine ID Watry 1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks 4 10-17-2007 04:37 AM
Dizzy 352 blue FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428) 3 04-06-2005 09:13 PM
428 crank in a 352? hjm3inpa FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428) 11 08-02-2003 09:35 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks

Tags
1966, 1998, 352, 360, 68, dose, engine, f100, ford, gas, milage, motor, mpg, nascar, reviews

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


Participate In The Forums

Create new posts and participate in discussions. It's free!

Sign Up »





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 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. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup