So I just bought this old ambulance!

And I'd like some opinions.

1987 E350 chassis with a Braun drop-on aluminum ambulance body (amazingly well-made). 460, C-6, special-order Dana 70HD with limited slip. One side has exterior storage boxes, similar to what you see on a service-body on a heavy pickup. But these are better-made than the doors on the service body I owned; very well-sealed, close with an impressive thump. And the interior has a bunch of storage compartments, large and small. I'm finding that ambulance companies, like fire departments, spare no expense on their vehicles. As near as I can tell, this ambulance, ready-to-go but with none of the medical gear included, sold for about $55,000 new in '87. Astoundingly (I have to guess this is the aluminum body), it isn't nearly as heavy as I would have guessed, scale weight on the title being 4630lbs. Seller asked me what I planned on doing with an ambulance; I told him I'm starting a ghostbuster business (actually I'll probably be converting it to a camper/tow van).

I think it's pretty cool.

The downside is that this rig promises to be a gas-hog (and does anybody think the gas prices will STAY "low"??)(I put "low" in quotation marks because I am OLD, and remember seeing 15 cent gas once in 1968). As it happens, I recently bought an '88 E150 windowless work-van with an EFI 300-six (my favorite engine, when somewhat upgraded, and carbureted) and an AOD or AODE or something. That was going to be my camper/travel van until I saw this ambulance, and it (the E150) would end up about 550-600 lbs lighter and more fuel efficient. It has an 8.8" 3rd member which I would replace with the Traction-Loc 9" out of my parts-van. Of course, this standard-body E150 would be a good deal less aerodynamically "draggy" than the ambulance with its tall, square-edged box (with a bit of sheet metal rolling I could radius the front edge of the box, which would help a little, but can't help the trailing edges).

So now I'm really torn. I don't need both rigs. I could easily get back the roughly $2000 I have in the ambulance, title, and tabs if I choose to turn around and sell it.

Some personal philosophy here: other things being equal, I prefer SIMPLE in my vehicles. I like carburetors over EFI because a carb takes a lot less space in that miserably cramped and inaccessible engine-well in the old broken-nose Ford vans, and because carbs fail gradually, and because I'm OLD, and carbs are what I know how to work on, especially if I am stuck on the side of the road ten miles out of Meadow Muffin, Ohio in the middle of the night. I like the 300-six over any V-8 for the same reason of accessibility. If I need a V-8 in a Ford van, a 351W stroked to 383 makes good power while being markedly smaller (shorter deck!) than a 460 . . . I hate to think about trying to do a simple sparkplug change on a 460 in that tight space!!!

I can make the engine-well (in either vehicle, but I'm talking about the ambulance for the moment) a good deal less inaccessible by yarding out some of the emissions stuff (I have nothing against that stuff except where there's so little room). But still there's that big 460. Do I really need an engine that big? Sometimes I'll be towing a 20' boat.

If I choose to accept the size of the 460, I can make it somewhat more fuel efficient. A simple rebuild with high-sil pistons, zero-decked block, and the cleaned-up D3VE heads some guys on the 385 engine sub-forum recommend for a start, plus a good street intake and tri-Y headers should make for fewer gas-stops. And this is a LOT cheaper than building a skookum 351W/385 with good heads. Now, I already have most of the parts to build a very strong carbureted 300-six very cheaply. But it would still be just an unblown 300. It would be good enough, I think, for my lighter van, but I'm not so sure about the ambulance, even though it is not terribly heavy. I'd like to hear some opinions on this from owners of E350s at around 4600lbs and carrying only light-to-medium loads. Remember that in the case of each of the three engine possibilities, I'm NOT talking about factory-stock, but considerably-upgraded versions with all the parts and tricks you'd use to build a torquey and fuel-efficient truck motor.

(Thanks in advance for ideas. If anyone is interested, I have a post relating to the ambulance down in the transmissions sub-forum, discussing mods for the C-6 and AOD).

 

As fr as the motor, I am not too familiar with the 460. Mine is a 7.3 IDI. I would recommend you taking it to a scale to get weighed. The 4600lb number you listed seems extremely light. My '88 e250 weighed in at about 6200lbs with a full fuel tank and just me in it.

I know the 300 I-6 is an excellent motor and has quite a bit of torque. They were used in many heavier vehicles than your van, but were geared accordingly. Without proper gearing I would think the ambulance would be a real dog with it. The 300 I-6 wasn't really known for mileage, but may do better than the 460.

With the right combination you may be able to make the 460 halfway decent on mileage depending on your driving style. Upgrading the trans to one with an O/D and locking torque converter would help.

If it were me I would keep the 460 and look at upgrading it for mileage. I would put the 300 I-6 in the e150. Just my 2 cents.

 

And I'm inclined to think you are right. And I, too, wondered about that scale weight on the title . . . . could it possibly have been the weight of the E350 chassis and cab with that heavy-duty axle and other stuff (massive radiator, dual batteries, etc.) WITHOUT the drop-on ambulance body ???

 

That is what I was thinking as far as the weight. It was probably purchased from Ford without the ambulance body and then sent to a 3rd party outfitter for finishing.

I am, also, always looking for ways to improve my fuel efficiency. I know my e260 will never be a TDI that gets 50mpg, but it is fun to try different things to see the result. I have consistently gotten in the 17-19mpg range on the hwy. If I swapped my c6 w/OD set up for an e4od I could probably get 1-2 mpg better on the hwy, but I like the c6 setup I have.

Bottom line is that if I was REALLY concerned about mileage I wouldn't be driving a 6000lb barn on wheels.....and your Ambulance is even more of a barn than mine..

People tell me about the mileage there Prius gets and I say "Yeah, but mine fits all 5 in my family plus the dog with room to spare and if I get tired of driving I have a full size bed in back that I can take a nap in." Not to mention the DVD player I installed for movies.

 

I have a thread on this ambulance going in the Transmission forum. For the C-6, look at Level 10's rolling-element thrust bearing, which a writer said actually gave him a small but detectable improvement in fuel-burn. If you have to rebuild and freshen-up a C-6 anyway, might as well find all the upgrades. www.levelten.com

 

Roller bearings would be a good idea. Weather it would give you an improvement, I don't know. When I asked a transmission engineer about it he said that using roller bearings is thinking in the correct direction, but probably wouldn't be noticeable. If you decide to stay with the c6 instead of an e4od swap, I would look for an over drive unit. Gearvendor, US Gear and Doug Nash are a few that have been made. As far as I know the Gear Vendor is the only one still in production. I found a used Doug Nash to install on mine. It does great for drivability at hwy speeds since the c6 is a 3 speed.

You could also look into the torque converter to attempt to limit the slip. With 460 I am not sure how low of a stall you could go with, but you would probably want it as low as is functional to give minimal slip while cruising. I went with a Hughes Low stall Diesel towing converter. They also have a Fuel Miser version, but I wanted the extra towing durability over the mileage.

There are positives and negatives to both the c6 and the e4od. If straight efficiency is the goal the e4od is going to be more efficient.

 

Jay, I've been thinking all day that you have to be right about the actual weight of this beast, and am falling out of love with it, alas. I'm coming to see that even with all of the engine and transmission upgrades I could do, it still would be an expensive thing to drive across the countryside. The smart, frugal choice has to be that E150 with the six-banger. Well, the ambulance was pretty cool for a couple of days, LOL.

 

forget the ambulance. if you are thinking of driving across the country, stick with the EFI inline 6. they are cabable of some amazing fuel economy numbers with an OD trans as long as your lockup TC is working. no reason the EFI 6 cyl couldn't break 20 mpg on the highway. less than half that with the 460 ambulance, maybe 6-8mpg would be closer . I'm guessing but you are probably closer to 7000lbs than 6000 . your numbers probably weight of the cutaway chassis before ambulance body and other mods.


you will have trouble improving on the EFI 300 by switching to carb, you will need an offy 4barrel intake and a header. the multiport on it will outperform a carb setup . power and fuel economy.

 

Ranger, I have both a Clifford single 4bbl manifold and an Offy Dual-Port to try, along with a variety of carbs. I know the best carbed set-up will likely be a little less fuel-efficient than the EFI, but that's what I'm going with. I don't like trying to trace faults in computer-controlled electronic devices that fail without warning late Sunday night miles from nowhere. Carbs are simple and dumb like me, and fail gradually and with warning symptoms (like me).

I don't like a fixed manifold that wraps over the valve cover and has a bunch of ducts and boxes filling up the extremely limited and inaccessible space in a Ford van of this type (my old '66 with 240 was great; I replaced the fixed hinges to the lid on the doghouse with pull-pins so the whole lid could be taken off and out of the way in half a minute). The air cleaner on a carb can be taken off and out with one wingnut in the middle and one or two snap-clamps on the snorkel.

I'll replace the ignition with DuraSpark 2 and put a better curve in it. I'll get rid of any emissions devices (and their hoses and wires and loom tape and crap) that are in my way (though not the PCV system, which has real benefits and cuts total emissions by about a third all by itself). I'll weld up a header designed for a efficiency in a truck motor rather than a race motor.

And I'll rip out the computer, which by this point will have nothing to do: "Dave, what are you doing?" "Don't worry about it, Hal, heh heh." "Dave, will I dream?" Could be, Hal, could be . . . HAH HAH HAH!!!!"

 

well if you are going to do it anyway, use the dual plane intake and save the exhaust manifolds off the efi. they breathe very well, and make up a nice dual exhaust system with a crossover pipe between the 3 into 1s.


I've had both 300 6 w/1 barrel carb and log manifolds and EFI 4.9 and there was no comparison! EFI basically doubled the fuel economy under same conditions. tuneups were about 4 times as many without the efi, trying to keep the carb from freezing up , vapour locks etc.etc. etc.


I'm a mechanic , Truck and coach ,but I hate constantly farting around with my vehicle to keep it running right. if its gonna have a carb it should have cubes too.


can't you get a custom crank grind on a 300 6 for more ?


EFI was the best thing to happen to the 300/4.9 six, woke the sleeping giant! but hey, as soon as I went to a diesel I never went back.
compression ignition rules

 

You are right that the ambulance would not be efficient to drive cross country. It could be very comfotable though. As far as the 460, I have no first hand experience with one but others have said they could get in the 10-15mpg range with them. Biggest isssue with the ambulance is the lack of aero....same as my van. You may be able to do some aero mods on it, but the thing that will make the biggest difference is your cruising speed. I did a little speed vs mileage experiment in mine ans saw a 25% increase in mileage when dropping from the 75-80mph range to the 60-65mph range. Others that have tried it said I could get another mpg or 2 by dropping to 55mph (what my van was built for), but I could bring myself to do it. I guess in alot of areas in Canada the limit is still 55-60mph so it works out......here it is 70mph with most people going 75mph.

 

Yeah, Jay, aside from fabricating rounded edges for the front of The Brick, I could make up some stuff like panels to cover the rear wheel openings, and a front air-dam, but the best aero improvement would be to tailgate the big rigs at every opportunity, a practice which also has its downsides. Meanwhile, you sure are right about driving with your head instead of your right foot; drag goes way up with speed.

Ranger, as a mechanic don't you cringe when you have to work on one of these vans with an engine that is encased in the firewall and surrounded by a steering wheel and the dashboard and the heater, and ALSO has all the STUFF that drapes over and around any modern engine?!! Go to a local hot rod show/cruise, and watch the old men like me as they stare into the engine wells of the cars of the Fifties or earlier, and mourn the passing of simple, accessible engines.

My contention is that with ordinary hot-rodding techniques you can dramatically improve the inefficiency of those old engines with their log-type exhausts and their intakes that force the air from a single carb to make square turns out to the end cylinders of a long skinny six. Either a modern swirl head (like the 300efi has) OR an older pre-smog closed-chamber head with proper squish (Harry Ricardo's gift to us all) and a small (!) compression increase, is better than the old engines, but still doesn't require you to hire an eleven year old girl with small arms and hands and the body flexibility of a yoga master to work on it. Do a port/bowl clean up, get the cam and spark timing right, and you have gone most of the way from the old simple-but-crude engine to your computer-driven efi motor in terms of power and fuel efficiency, but without sacrificing engine accessibility. For me, that's a good compromise.

And I don't doubt that diesel power would be particularly effective for a big tub like this ambulance. Trouble is, the best diesel for getting the lowest fuel burn would be a small one . . . turbocharged . . . which defeats my hope to clear out some space in my engine compartment.

 

EFI 6 is pretty easy to work on in a Van, any others are difficult. diesels are tight but take less tinkering.


I remember doing headgaskets under warranty on 89/90 E350s with the 7.3 at the ford dealer, now those were tight, had to tie up a few headbolts and several pushrods just to lift out the head. and only 1 chance to put it back in and not destroy the new head gasket.


I love simplicity because I work on all my own stuff too, but I love reliability even more.
don't overlook the OEM efi exhaust manifolds.


too bad Ford didn't take the inline 6 further in development, there was still lots of potential untapped.

 

I have one new and one used pair of efi exhaust manifolds. There's an experiment I'd like to try as well.

I don't see simplicity and reliability as mutually exclusive. But I should add that a system that fails one third as often, but is three times more likely to fail without noticeable warning, and is three times less easy to get at, and three times as difficult to troubleshoot, and three times as expensive to fix, . . . well, you can say that such a system is three times as "reliable," but I don't want anything to do with it.

 

I'll chime in here.

First I can almost guarantee that your ambulance weighs much more then 4600 pounds. My very rusty daily driver 96 E250 5.8L/E4OD van weighs in at around 7300-7500 pounds with my tools in it. So a one ton dually ambulance with a 460 is going to weigh more then that.

I've owned a 460 powered ambulance. Good power and torque. Horrible mileage, a nightmare to do almost any work on it. And just horrible if you ever have to pull the engine! I actually had to cut the motor mounts in half to get my 460 out. Now I like the 460 engine but not in a van!! Hell even the 351W is a pain to put spark plugs in!

Now I'm a huge fan of the 300. And a huge fan of simplicity. I also like the simplicity of the carbed set up. EFI is more efficient and better over all. But it can be much more difficult to diagnose the problem when it acts up. And if the computer fails you are just plain screwed. If you have an issue with the carb it's much easier to figure it out and repair it on the side of the road. If I have a problem with a carb I can usually get it fixed good enough to get me where I'm going with just some simple hand tools. And I've had plenty of carbed vehicles that started just as good as any efi vehicle.

I also own an 89 E350 extended Club Wagon that I'm building to use as my main tow and work vehicle. It has the EFI 351W/C6 in it. And I'm seriously considering swapping out the 351W for a modified carbed 300. But no matter what engine I run I'm swapping in a NP435 grany low manual 4spd transmission and also a NP205 transfercase ( the van is staying 2wd ) . I am going to be using this van to haul scrap metal and tow my 20 foot car trailers.

As far as your choices go. Your ambulance is going to weigh much more, have more aero drag and get worse mileage no matter what engine you run. It's a better choice if you plan to do a lot of heavy hauling/towing.

The E150 would be a better choice for an all around driver. Now I'm not a boat guy so I have no clue how heavy your 20 foot boat is. But I have towed a loaded 20 foot car trailer with a half ton. It will do it but it can get sketchy at times. If it was me I would find a nice E250 and swap a modded carbed 300 with a 4 spd manual in it.

And if you are serious about wanting to build/convert one into a camper. I think a old U-haul cube van is a better choice then an ambulance. The box on the ambulance is just too short. The U-haul cube van with the cab over hang gives you much more room to work with.

Sorry about writing a novel.