The conservative side is beginning to take over again - especially when I start plugging numbers into the rebuild plan. When I saw the price of the Paxton, I about fell out of my chair. It's more than my budget for the entire engine rebuild. I guess the main thing is to build a good, reliable new engine with the best combination of compression ratio, cam grind, intake & exhaust. A good ignition system certainly wouldn't hurt, either. Not exactly rocket science.
Keep
It
Simple
Stupid

But I have been hearing good things about going with a manual transmission rather than the stock C-6.

 

So who here can help me to pick the right cam/carb/intake manifold/ignition system/rear end ratio/headers & exhaust system?
I'm thinking a 600 CFM 4Bbl carb should so the trick. Coupled with a medium rise aluminum (Edelbrock) intake, a MSD 6.
I'm still trying to figure out how to get a 'cold air intake'. Ram air was OK on the '71-'73 Mach I, but we have better technology today, right?

What kind of options do I have for the rear end? 3.75:1?

Tire diameter will surely come into play, but remember I need to be carrying a 1700+ pound camper. I say 1700, but by the time you get food and blankets and everything else into it, I'm guessing it's more like 2000 lbs. The boat and trailer are 1100 pounds easily. By the time you put rods & reels, lunch & other things in there - probably closer to 1350 pounds.

31x10.5 tires are out. That's what I had originally planned. I need tires rated for a heavy load (camper) and plan on using helper springs in the rear along with front & rear stabilizer bars. OK - it's just a plan for now.

I would greatly appreciate any feedback from anyone who has already dealt with this. I know just enough to be dangerous. It's time to make good decisions and make this project a success. I have had multiple bad experiences with air shocks, so that's just out of the picture for this project.
I'm thinking HD coils and helpers even if that means the rear end rides high without the camper. At least when she's loaded, she'll sit level, right?

 

For maximum mileage, I would go with a stock style cam advanced 2-4degrees, an Edelbrock intake and a Quadrajet or other spreadbore carb. A 3.73 rear end will probably be ok, but if you're using a four speed with low first gear then a 3.55 gearset will work as well. I would (and do) run 235/85R16 load range E tires. A narrower profile will help with wandering and fuel economy, and the load range E tires are more rigid also helping with rolling resistance and fuel economy.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So when you say stock style cam, do you mean 'not an RV type cam'?

Why spreadbore?

I'm looking at the Edelbrock intakes that claim more torque and better efficiency. I'm still trying to figure out if dual plane makes a difference when it comes to economy. I know a lot of guys run them for higher performance, but...?

Good thinking on the tires. The truck will be hauling a load from time to time and I don't want to be popping tires, LOL.

 

A spreadbore carb has smaller primaries allowing better throttle response and economical cruising while still having large secondaries to breathe when needed.
A dual plane will help with economy.

 

A 360 with turbos for good MPG's????

This sounds backwards to me! I would start with a smaller engine and add enough HP to it to do what you need.

Water injection slows the burn in the cylinders. This is great to prevent knocking in high compression. You aren't going to get the 22mpg range you are looking for with a big low compression engine.

Here is what I would suggest. Start with a 300 straight six. Build it for high compression. For ignition use a Ford EDIS. Use the stock Fuel Injection intake and tune it with something like a MegaSquirt computer. Go to a larger throttle body if needed for power and re-tune the computer for the larger TB. Spray water in an attempt to run 87 octane with a decent advance without knocking. With enough torque and power you should be able to run a relatively tall gear in the rear diff to get the mileage you are seeking and still pull the hills with your load.

An alternate approach is to start with the same 300. Build it with the stock low compression and add a turbo or super charger. You are still going to need a computer to keep everything on the line between efficient, good power and not blowing up.

 

First of all - thank you for all the comments & suggestions.
I will NOT be going with a 300 straight 6 on this project.
For now, I am thinking that if I make the good choices, I can build a strong 360 that will be much better than Ford built in 1969. With new pistons, rings, bearings, seals, aluminum intake manifold, spreadbore carb, headers & exhaust, air filter, breakerless electronic ignition, MSD, proper cooling, and possibly a manual transmission with the right choice of rear end ratio, I should be able to maximize power with economy.

For the past week or so I have been seriously considering converting to the 390. My thinking was that ford discontinued the 360 and kept on producing the 390 for a while. Those guys weren't dummies. They had a reason for doing that.

But then I thought about how the truck would be used. For a daily driver and weekend workhorse, I think the 360 will do just fine. Now I am just questioning the C-6 and thinking about all the mods in order to change over to a manual 4 or 5-speed. If it was easier to change over, the decision would be much easier for me. But, it seems that changing to a manual transmission (probably with hydraulic clutch) is not so simple.

As I said in the beginning of my first post, this project is just getting started. If it takes 2 or 3 years to complete then that's jut the way things go. I'll probably start the '67 Fairlane before I get the F-100 completed, so I'm kinda hoping to learn from the F-100 in order to build a really nice 390 for the Fairlane. OK, OK - that's a whole nuther topic. I didn't mean to get off track.

Once I get the block into the machine shop I'm going to have to make a decision as to the cylinder bore of the engine. Obviously, if there's any damage to the cylinder walls, it will have to be bored. I'm just trying to think if there's any advantage to just going with a .020 - .030 overbore while I'm right there. I'm not going to order the pistons & rings until I find out the condition of the cylinder walls, but I can't help but wonder if there will be any advantage to just committing to the overbore right now?

After looking at the 360 vs the 390, I really can't justify going with the 390 on this project unless I just want to have a little more power and torque on hand for the fun of it.

I had a 300-6 in my '85 F-150 and have no complaints about it, but that was a whole different truck with a whole different life.

Ultimately, I hope to wind up with a 1969 F-100 that costs less than buying a new 2011 truck, is just as capable as a new truck, costs less to register & maintain than a new truck, and is not as common as a new truck. It needs to function as a daily driver, haul a load of dirt, sand, or camper on weekends. If it catches a few eyes and turns a few heads along the way, so much the better. It's not a show vehicle, just a nice old 1969 truck still doing what it was build for a long time ago.

I am the second generation owner. I can easily see passing it on to one of our sons who could likely pass it on to one of his sons. At that point, the truck would have been in the family for four generations and still going strong. I am hoping to take our grandkids camping & hunting & fishing in this truck. I'll bet my wife's dad never even thought about such things.

Again, I thank you all for your input/feedback/comments and suggestions.