Will be driving it in Brooklyn, NY. Sea Level and esentially level. Lots of stop lights. Regular load 1000lbs. Occasional load 2000lbs. TomBrooklyn

 

Last weekend I drove my 4.2 to Michigan w/a Case 446 16 horse
tractor in the back...probably around 800 lbs...truck got 21-22
mpg at 70; to my surprise I didn't really notice a difference in
performance from empty, or very minor.

Regards,

George H.

 

Hi George:
Would that truck be an E or an F150 or 250? TomBrooklyn

 

I'm looking at the same issues with the 4.2l in a E250 or E350 van. Want the best fuel economy. I don't need a fast van, just enough power to move around 1000 - 1500 lbs. occasionally. For fuel economy, my only choices are 4.2l v6, 4.6 v8 or powerstroke diesel. So for the 4.2 how about:

1) Turbo, much harder to plum compared 4.9L I-6.
2) Supercharger, too expensive


Anybody have any thoughts on small Ford engines, like 4.2 or 4.6 in big trucks or vans (GVW 9000 - 15000)?

In South America, loads of transportation companies swap Ford F150/F250/E250 stock engines for Japanese I-4 diesels for economy. They suck on hills, but get high mileage and last 400K or longer before rebuild.

 

My 4.2L F150 moves heavy trailers with no problems at all. My usual load is an 1100# trailer that can carry up to 2200# for a total of 3300#. Not legal, but the truck doesn't struggle until the light turns red.

What I have noticed is that the truck "pulls" no differently with the trailer empty or full. This corresponds to the previous post about not noticing if the horse was in the trailer or not. Almost as if the 4.2L is meant for the 4800# truck it is in and NOTHING ELSE.

Aside from the head gasket/bent rods issue, it is a good driving engine that would probably have no problems with your E150.

Good luck!
/Kris