Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Ford Inline Six, 200, 250, 4.9L / 300
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


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
  #1  
Old 03-25-2014, 11:05 PM
defiantoutlaw defiantoutlaw is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 101
defiantoutlaw is starting off with a positive reputation.
300 6 for a severely worked 1 ton 4x4?

78 supercab F-250 4x4 that's being converted to 1 ton. Soon to have 4:56 gears, currently at like, 4:10. Im not thrilled with the factory 351M: Its big block thirsty and grossly underpowered in the torque dept. I don't wanna dump money into building up a V8 that's only going to get 10 MPG when im done.

Ive seen 240s and 300s in 1/2 ton pickups run forever and pull down respectable mileage.

BUT WOULD YOU USE AN I-6 IN A ONE TON DUMP THAT HAULS STONE, PLOWS SNOW AND PULLS A HEAVY TRAILER?

Im trying to avoid the "gotta have a 460" mentality, I want a little fuel mileage, longevity and ease of maintenance. I need LOTS of torque way down low. Im prepared to BUILD a 300 6......... but only if its up to the task of extreme abuse daily.

Thoughts/opinions?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-26-2014, 04:39 AM
trozei's Avatar
trozei trozei is online now
Canadian, eh?
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,495
trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.
Ford used the 300 in their dump trucks. Nothing more needs to be said.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-26-2014, 10:27 AM
defiantoutlaw defiantoutlaw is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 101
defiantoutlaw is starting off with a positive reputation.
Yes, so was the 351M/400, and Im not too impressed with that.

Will it hold up to being pegged to redline all day when plowing or have enough low end grunt to haul a ton of manure while pulling a trailer?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-26-2014, 02:26 PM
trozei's Avatar
trozei trozei is online now
Canadian, eh?
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,495
trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.
The 300 was used for 41 years. It's reliability is about as good as you'll ever get. It's one of those engines you'll hear guys joke about how they went out on a weekend with their buds and tried to blow it up, only to fail. Will it hold up? I'd say yes, but I can't guarantee it. What I will say though is that if there is any engine that will be able to handle that job, it's the 300. It's always been a torquey towing and hauling engine. That's what it was designed for. Ever see a Tug at an airport? That's got a 300 in it.

If I had extra money and time though, I'd throw in a diesel.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-26-2014, 05:14 PM
bill06447 bill06447 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Marlborough, CT
Posts: 318
bill06447 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I had several Fords from the 70s with 400s, never was impressed with their (lack of) performance. ~Bill
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-26-2014, 05:19 PM
trozei's Avatar
trozei trozei is online now
Canadian, eh?
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 1,495
trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.trozei has a good reputation on FTE.
I don't think anyone ever has been impressed by the 400. It's great for being pulled out and turned into a table though!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-26-2014, 05:51 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 4,883
AbandonedBronco has a great reputation on FTE.AbandonedBronco has a great reputation on FTE.AbandonedBronco has a great reputation on FTE.AbandonedBronco has a great reputation on FTE.AbandonedBronco has a great reputation on FTE.
The 300 was used for decades for lots of applications where it ran all day long at high RPM. Almost all UPS trucks had them for many years. Wood chippers, ski lifts, irrigation pumps, etc. etc. It's not going to be fast, but it's made to work.
__________________
1981 Ford Bronco. 300I6 Offenhauser DP Intake Holley 600 4bbl, 31" BFG A/T, NP435, 3.00 rear 9" EFI Manifolds. 2.5" high flow cat/muffler.
1984 Ford Bronco. 300I6 Offenhauser C Intake Holley 600 4bbl, 31" BFG A/T, NP435, 3.55 rear 8.8" EFI Manifolds. 2.5" high flow cat/muffler.
Supermotors Pics
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-26-2014, 06:02 PM
BaronVonAutomatc's Avatar
BaronVonAutomatc BaronVonAutomatc is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,503
BaronVonAutomatc is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
IIRC the 351M and 300 have the exact same peak torque at the same rpm. I don't think even a built 300 would be stronger than a built 400 - i.e. your current block and 400 crank/rods/pistons.

Or build a 429. A 1 ton cries out for a diesel, mostly.
__________________
1986 Bronco w/300 I6 & ZF 5-Speed
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-01-2014, 12:50 PM
624WD 624WD is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Shelburne, NH
Posts: 39
624WD is starting off with a positive reputation.
The 300 will provide plenty of power and torque. You can't go wrong.
__________________
Tom Moore
1962 F100 4WD
1950 Chevy Suburban
1941 GMC 1/2 ton
1949 Chevy 1 ton lift bed
1951 GMC 1/2 t.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-05-2014, 04:42 PM
greyghost85's Avatar
greyghost85 greyghost85 is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: St Louis
Posts: 3,694
greyghost85 has a good reputation on FTE.greyghost85 has a good reputation on FTE.
I have seen 6 bangers in 1 1/2 ton trucks. I drove one back in my air force days
__________________
Darrell 86 F250 flatbed Zombie Survivor Force: Supply
dont wrap yourself in the flag, cling to the Cross
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-05-2014, 05:52 PM
85e150six4mtod 85e150six4mtod is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,078
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
Your 351M suffers many indignities, low compression being the primary and a lousy cam being a close second.

Put an RV type cam in it. You may have to change the springs with a cam that actually opens the valves, but that's not a big deal compared to an engine swap.

Check out the first one up here, the H-192:

http://www.cranecams.com/230-233.pdf

More propaganda about the 351m/400, including the cam thing.

M-Block 351M/400 Performance

Anyway, that should give you a bump in torque and HP even using the stock 2bbl and exhaust manifolds. And that bump will be more than a stock carb'd 300.

As far as durability, unless you get the HD 300, the 300 is going to suffer just a much as the 351m and probably last no longer.

As for MPGs, a 300 with those gears and that load is going to drink fuel with the best of them.

JMO, but I would not fool around with an engine swap, especially to an engine that makes about the same power as your stocker.

You can cam that 351m into a little better performer and run it 'till you can swap over to a bigger oil burner for this kind of work.

Good luck with it.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-06-2014, 06:28 AM
greyghost85's Avatar
greyghost85 greyghost85 is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: St Louis
Posts: 3,694
greyghost85 has a good reputation on FTE.greyghost85 has a good reputation on FTE.
I rebuilt my 400M with an RV cam. I had awesome power. I had awful gas mileage. My neighbor had a 300 six and his wife drove the family 351. The guy was always complaining about the 351's gas mileage. just sayin'
__________________
Darrell 86 F250 flatbed Zombie Survivor Force: Supply
dont wrap yourself in the flag, cling to the Cross
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-06-2014, 11:24 PM
TheDudeAbides's Avatar
TheDudeAbides TheDudeAbides is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 210
TheDudeAbides is starting off with a positive reputation.
Like several have mentioned before...the 300 was built to work. Its easily maintained, easy to tear down and build, and will outlast most anything running. There is a reason it lasted from 1965 thru 1996. Lets be honest, mileage simply isnt a primary variable when hauling huge loads like described above unless you apply forced induction and/or diesel power. However, the 4.9L will keep going when most will leave you stranded. Seven main bearings, long stroke with inherent low end torque, and as long as you're not building a hot rod...fair mpg with careful maintenance and a good tune. Cant go wrong with an inline for a work truck man. Hope you're as happy with yours as we are if/when you do the swap.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2014, 11:24 PM
 
 
 
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Ford Inline Six, 200, 250, 4.9L / 300

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
300 torque potential, reliability, gas mileage resto-mod Ford Inline Six, 200, 250, 4.9L / 300 19 08-30-2013 10:19 PM
Just bought a 1993 F350 4x4 with 26k miles!! oneill300 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 10 01-21-2010 08:53 AM
a few 400 tips? mad scientist:p 335 Series- 5.8/351M, 6.6/400, 351 Cleveland 48 02-08-2006 10:11 PM
building for torque vs. hp MontanaFord Performance & General Engine Building 4 09-09-2004 06:19 PM
building for torque vs. horsepower MontanaFord Ford Inline Six, 200, 250, 4.9L / 300 18 09-03-2004 10:27 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24 PM.


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