Notices
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks

ford 302 to inline six conversion

 
  #31  
Old 03-04-2011, 11:14 AM
Bdox's Avatar
Bdox
Bdox is offline
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Posts: 28,525
Bdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by jas88 View Post

I've owned both the 300 and the 302, put 175K on the 300 and 225K on the 302. IMO the 302 was the better motor, more guts, better driveablity, got worse MPG tho. The 300 is fine but it's hyped on this site and others as the be-all end-all of Ford truck motors and that was not my experience.

It's not clear what it is that you dont' like about the 300. "guts" and "driveability" are pretty vague terms. I have had both also and though I could easily tell the difference (302 was an automatic) I didn't have a strong preference except that the 300 was a lot better off road. The 302 was more comfortable at higher speeds. (Mine were both short 150s)
 
  #32  
Old 03-04-2011, 12:54 PM
nstueve's Avatar
nstueve
nstueve is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 2,705
nstueve has a great reputation on FTE.nstueve has a great reputation on FTE.nstueve has a great reputation on FTE.nstueve has a great reputation on FTE.
well since everybody else feels the need to add their 2cents... My 2cents if you read back... The 302 is better at high rpms and good at top speeds on the hwy... Hmmm... Maybe there is a short in my head but when I think "TRUCK" I think hauling/towing something and 4x4 to get around off-road... I don't think: Hey I need to rev up my truck and race it down the hwy... That's what mustangs are for IMHO... Not to mention if you are using a truck for what they were built for... You want low end grunt and torque.

All in all IMO... 302's should be left in cars and 300's and 351w should be run in trucks!
 
  #33  
Old 03-04-2011, 01:04 PM
6CylBill's Avatar
6CylBill
6CylBill is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Almost Heaven
Posts: 7,021
6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.
I just hate that every thread where the 300 and 302 are even mentioned it turns into a 300 vs 302.

Man, it just shouldn't be that way.

I'm not pointing a finger at anyone. So far we're having a decent conversation. But if we're going to continue hi-jacking this poor fellow's thread, let's be sure to keep the comments intelligent and civil.

I for one wouldn't want to go toe to toe against a 302 in a pulling contest. I think even if I did win it wouldn't be by much. I certinally wouldn't want to race a 302. It's a great engine, one of Ford's best, just like the 300 is one of Ford's best. They're just not built or made or thought up for the same things.

I love the 300 and I wish I had a built one in my truck. Some days I do wish I had more horsepower. The added ability to easily get somewhere in a hurry would be nice. But I'm happy with the 300 as long as it's healthy.

The biggest thing is gearing. Do it wrong and you'll turn your 300 into a dog like I did. I can pull a house down now at 1,000 RPM - but don't expect me to get anywhere in a hurry past 30 miles an hour!
 
  #34  
Old 03-04-2011, 07:55 PM
IDIDieselJohn's Avatar
IDIDieselJohn
IDIDieselJohn is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 8,005
IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by 6CylBill View Post
302's last a long time if treated with respect. The 300 and 302 can also get the same fuel milage. The 302 actually makes more torque, just at a slightly higher RPM.

I do love the 300 though. It's one of my top five favorite engines. It's bullet proof and can pull a house down if it gets enough traction.

Good luck with your swap! I'll be keeping up with it!
300 = 265ft. Torque.

302 = 210ft. Torque.
 
  #35  
Old 03-04-2011, 08:02 PM
frenchy107's Avatar
frenchy107
frenchy107 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 82
frenchy107 is starting off with a positive reputation.
the six is a little torque monster!! love it but ive had a few too many problems with mine so im looking to go the reverse of what your doing 300 to 302
 
  #36  
Old 03-04-2011, 08:04 PM
IDIDieselJohn's Avatar
IDIDieselJohn
IDIDieselJohn is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 8,005
IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.
What problems did you have with your 300 other than burning a crap load of gas for no reason?
 
  #37  
Old 03-04-2011, 08:11 PM
frenchy107's Avatar
frenchy107
frenchy107 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 82
frenchy107 is starting off with a positive reputation.
cracked a valve, then cracked the head, now i think the piston rings are going
 
  #38  
Old 03-04-2011, 08:44 PM
strokin'_tatsch's Avatar
strokin'_tatsch
strokin'_tatsch is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,971
strokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud of
Since when did torque over rule horsepower???? Just throwing that out there to see who can give the correct response.. :-)
 
  #39  
Old 03-04-2011, 08:46 PM
IDIDieselJohn's Avatar
IDIDieselJohn
IDIDieselJohn is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 8,005
IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.
Torque is what gets loads moving....

The 300 just does a better job at that than the 302.
 
  #40  
Old 03-04-2011, 09:27 PM
strokin'_tatsch's Avatar
strokin'_tatsch
strokin'_tatsch is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,971
strokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud of
Originally Posted by Chillin View Post
Okay, say I've got a T-800 Kenworth with a C-15 Cat in it. Now also say I've got a 50 Ton Witzco tri-axle lowboy with an SK-200 Kobelco Track-hoe on it. Okay....

Now I hit the base of Mont-Eagle and I've got a choice to make... If I run the hwy gear it puts me at 1100rpm. If I gear down, I'm at 2000rpm.

Here's the actual engine output:



So which gear will pull hardest at this speed with all this weight? The one that places the engine at 1100rpm (Red Mark), or the one that places it at 2000rpm (Blue Mark)?

Which puts the most torque TO THE GROUND?

How about this.... If you go by this, the 302 will pull better at highway speed, just not from a complete stop. Same thing your saying right?
 
  #41  
Old 03-04-2011, 09:34 PM
IDIDieselJohn's Avatar
IDIDieselJohn
IDIDieselJohn is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 8,005
IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.IDIDieselJohn has a great reputation on FTE.
That moves...
 
  #42  
Old 03-04-2011, 09:40 PM
strokin'_tatsch's Avatar
strokin'_tatsch
strokin'_tatsch is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,971
strokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud ofstrokin'_tatsch has much to be proud of
Mustangtj02, have you already found an engine, wiring harness, computer, etc. to do this swap? What's your location?
 
  #43  
Old 03-04-2011, 10:51 PM
Bdox's Avatar
Bdox
Bdox is offline
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Posts: 28,525
Bdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputationBdox has a superb reputation
Comparing to nothing else, my experience with my 300, in low range, four wheel drive, with the NP435 in granny low can move just about anything at a low rate of speed. Boulders, other trucks and now I guess I have to try a house... (someone is going to be pissed.)
 
  #44  
Old 03-04-2011, 11:32 PM
Kapusta's Avatar
Kapusta
Kapusta is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nuts & Bolts, Mostly Nuts
Posts: 1,778
Kapusta is a splendid one to beholdKapusta is a splendid one to beholdKapusta is a splendid one to beholdKapusta is a splendid one to beholdKapusta is a splendid one to beholdKapusta is a splendid one to behold
Originally Posted by IDIDieselJohn View Post

300 = 265ft. Torque.

302 = 210ft. Torque.
???, don't know where you got that figure but I'm used to seeing the 302 with 270 ft/lbs of torque at 2400 rpms, at least for my '92 engine. I could see earlier engines with slightly less torque than 270 but no way 210.
 
  #45  
Old 03-04-2011, 11:54 PM
85e150
85e150 is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 21,966
85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation85e150 has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
???, don't know where you got that figure but I'm used to seeing the 302 with 270 ft/lbs of torque at 2400 rpms, at least for my '92 engine. I could see earlier engines with slightly less torque than 270 but no way 210.
x2, there were dark days when the 302 couldn't pull grandma off the crapper, but for the most part, it nearly matched or outdid the 300. Not sure this is 100% but read it and weep:

Engine_Specifications

BUT BACK TO THE OP:

You have emissions testing in CT, right?

CT Emissions Program - Publications

I can't find and don't care to spend more time researching how picky they are on the inspection. Out here, an engine swap like this is going to get the red flags up and subject you to an even more detailed inspection and approval process. On the other side, if you don't get everything hooked up right, or don't match the OEM emissions specs, you may not pass.

FWIW, get another 302 and put it back the way it was. I'd tell you the same thing if you had a 300.

Good luck with whatever you decide, but watch yourself, you don't want to end up parked without registration or having to spend more money on this than necessary.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: ford 302 to inline six conversion


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.