1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks Discuss the Dentsides Ford Truck
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Moser

300 6cyl the good,bad and ugly

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 03-15-2014, 08:02 PM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
300 6cyl the good,bad and ugly

hello out there i have a 78 f100 swb fleetside 2wd with a 300 6cyl in it i just want to know the ups and downs of having this motor in my truck.it has a 3sp trans.i have no plans of pulling anything with it or hauling heavy loads.this is the only truck ive owned with a 6cyl in it.any comments at all will be helpful.
 
  #2  
Old 03-15-2014, 08:14 PM
Blue and White's Avatar
Blue and White
Blue and White is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,553
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
The 300 is tough, torquey and long lasting. Its best for low and medium RPM. It is not a screamer. It can handle 20k+ lb gross weight in a medium duty truck with appropriate gearing but wouldn't be fast. It does respond to power upgrades.

It should work quite well in a F100.

Do you like the truck with the 300? If so, no reason not to keep/rebuild/upgrade it.
 
  #3  
Old 03-15-2014, 08:32 PM
VocaTexas's Avatar
VocaTexas
VocaTexas is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,088
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
The Ford 300 may well be the best pick-up engine ever produced. Lots of low-end torque and they will run practically forever if properly maintained. They will also get respectable mileage when tuned, geared, and driven correctly. For engine specific questions, you can go to the 300 engine sub-forum here or go to this site:

FORDSIX PERFORMANCE • Index page
 
  #4  
Old 03-15-2014, 08:33 PM
79FordBlake's Avatar
79FordBlake
79FordBlake is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wingo, Ky
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The only downside to a 300 is it doesn't sound like a v8 lol. Its all up from there.
 
  #5  
Old 03-15-2014, 09:56 PM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blue and White
The 300 is tough, torquey and long lasting. Its best for low and medium RPM. It is not a screamer. It can handle 20k+ lb gross weight in a medium duty truck with appropriate gearing but wouldn't be fast. It does respond to power upgrades.

It should work quite well in a F100.

Do you like the truck with the 300? If so, no reason not to keep/rebuild/upgrade it.
torquey????? would 255,289,302 have more
 
  #6  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:09 PM
79FordBlake's Avatar
79FordBlake
79FordBlake is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wingo, Ky
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by returningphoenix

torquey????? would 255,289,302 have more
Nope. 300 will eat em up off the line.
 
  #7  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:10 PM
Austin J.'s Avatar
Austin J.
Austin J. is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Mount Vernon, KY
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
My dad had an 89' F-150 with the 300 Fuel Injected, and now has a 96' F-150 with the 302. He complained about the lack of power of the 89 when he owned it and especially after trading it for the 96'. I can say though, the 89 and 96 are both still on the road with minimal problems and the 89 was rode hard its whole life. I know it isn't the right years or fuel delivery system, but I assumed they would be similar in relation. I could, of course, be wrong.
 
  #8  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:17 PM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blue and White
The 300 is tough, torquey and long lasting. Its best for low and medium RPM. It is not a screamer. It can handle 20k+ lb gross weight in a medium duty truck with appropriate gearing but wouldn't be fast. It does respond to power upgrades.

It should work quite well in a F100.

Do you like the truck with the 300? If so, no reason not to keep/rebuild/upgrade it.
thanks blue i believe it has 2.73 gears but i havent driven it 10 miles since i got it.dont know if ill like it or not.
 
  #9  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:25 PM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 79FordBlake
Nope. 300 will eat em up off the line.
thanks for the help blake wasnt real sure what torquey meant.but there is no racing in my future(see my previous comment about not driving the truck)as we speak im trying to get my drivers license back.tickets,tickets,tickets.so slow is good easy to work on is great.everything ive heard about these 300s sounds really good to me it seems i couldnt go wrong by keeping it
 
  #10  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:29 PM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Austin J.
My dad had an 89' F-150 with the 300 Fuel Injected, and now has a 96' F-150 with the 302. He complained about the lack of power of the 89 when he owned it and especially after trading it for the 96'. I can say though, the 89 and 96 are both still on the road with minimal problems and the 89 was rode hard its whole life. I know it isn't the right years or fuel delivery system, but I assumed they would be similar in relation. I could, of course, be wrong.
i dont have enough mechanical knowledge to switch to E.F.I i have very little wrench time on these hands so the easier the better for me.
 
  #11  
Old 03-15-2014, 11:44 PM
79FordBlake's Avatar
79FordBlake
79FordBlake is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wingo, Ky
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by returningphoenix
thanks for the help blake wasnt real sure what torquey meant.but there is no racing in my future(see my previous comment about not driving the truck)as we speak im trying to get my drivers license back.tickets,tickets,tickets.so slow is good easy to work on is great.everything ive heard about these 300s sounds really good to me it seems i couldnt go wrong by keeping it
Nope can't go wrong. They are a great little engine.
 
  #12  
Old 03-16-2014, 01:49 AM
trozei's Avatar
trozei
trozei is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Langley, BC
Posts: 2,806
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
The 300 was used in dump trucks, so there's no doubt about its torque. The 300 was used from 1965 to 1996. How many other engines have gone that long with only updating emissions and EFI? I think only the Ford 302 and Chevrolet 350 can compete with that. The 300 was only dumped because engine bays at the time were getting smaller and smaller and diesels were becoming the new thing for torque. The 300 is one of those engines you'll hear people say, "Yeah one time me and my buddies took out an old beater with a 300, ran it dry of oil, and couldn't kill it no matter how hard we tried!" You can have that engine at half a million miles with bad rod knock and it'll keep on going.

It's been said that when properly tuned, the engine is capable of 30mpg. I've yet to see a confirmation on this, but the point is that it can be far more economical than a similarly-sized V8.

It's can be quiet, it can be loud. Properly muffled, you won't hear a thing. Open header and it literally sounds like a NASCAR race truck (with Hedman split headers), but ear plugs are not required.

When balanced properly, a marble will remain stationary on the valve cover.

There's some aftermarket for it. Classic Inlines claims to be working on a cylinder head for it, but right now you can buy intakes, exhausts, carburetors, roller rockers, valve covers, pushrod covers, and things like pistons from a 351W can be swapped for better performance.
 
  #13  
Old 03-16-2014, 03:09 AM
fordman75's Avatar
fordman75
fordman75 is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: South central, Minnesota
Posts: 5,824
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Originally Posted by trozei
It's been said that when properly tuned, the engine is capable of 30mpg. I've yet to see a confirmation on this, but the point is that it can be far more economical than a similarly-sized V8.
I love the 300's but 30mpg's is never going to happen. With the right tuning, gearing and driving style 21 or 22 mpg is possible. But 15-19 mpg is more realistic.

With a poor tune and beating on it it'll get the same as a 460, 8-10 mpg!





And to the original poster, if you are going to have a 6cyl truck this is the 6 you want. It's nearly bullet proof, easy to work on and it has fewer parts then a V8. So it's cheaper to maintain and repair.

It's also pretty easy to modify if you ever do want some more power out of it.
 
  #14  
Old 03-16-2014, 05:02 AM
gatorfor88's Avatar
gatorfor88
gatorfor88 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Panama City
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
300/6 is a great engine. If it were mine I would think about finding a 4 speed to swap out the 3 before I did anything else to it. It will pull about anything you need to pull with a 1/2 ton truck. My Dad had an 86 with 300 and what they called 3 speed w/od. Pulled like an Ox. And would go about anywhere in the sand. And knocked down about 18 mpg. Hard to argue with that.
 
  #15  
Old 03-16-2014, 06:19 AM
returningphoenix's Avatar
returningphoenix
returningphoenix is offline
Junior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
8-10 WTF! your killing me.for that kinda mpg id get the 460 it would look better.it has a 1 barrel carb.2.73 gears and the heaviest thing im gonna put in it is about 230lbs but im working on that too lol.
 


Quick Reply: 300 6cyl the good,bad and ugly



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:41 PM.