So I got to find another truck. I recently inherited a 2000 F250 7.3 Powerstroke Diesel V8, Automatic, 4x4, Crew Cab, 8ft Bed XL from my grandfather. It needs a new bed, new rockers inside and outside, new cab corner on Driver's side inside and outside and a section if the driver's side A Pillar patched. While that truck is getting fixed I need something else to drive. I am too big for a Ranger (6'4" 215lbs) so I am looking at 1/2 ton F150s. I figured since I wont have the F250 to 7 months to a year I dont need another F250... lol. I found a guy selling a 1997 F150 about 20 miles from me. Its a 1997 F150, 4x4 , 4.2V6, 5 speed Manual, Regular Cab and 8ft bed. Has power windows and locks and A/C works. It also has 221,861 miles on the dash. Rust free for the most part. I was wondering what the tow rating is for this truck ? I have a small single axle trailer I load with fire wood for the farm to sell and haul a small 16ft skiff boat down to the river. I dont wanna tow anything heavy lol... I have also heard the 1997 4.2V6s have gasket issues and that the Mazda 5 speed is a glass transmission. Anyone have any input ? I have also been looking at a 1985 F150, 1990 F150 and a 1995 F150 all have 6 cyl 300s, the 85 has a 4spd T18 and the rest have 5 speeds all 4x4. Is the 1997 better than the others or should I look away from the 1997 ?

 

I have never driven a 4.2, but I am always not a fan off first year vehicles. The M5OD is fine if not trying to powershift at 6000rpm and pulling 10,000lbs

Now, I do own a '92 4.9/M5OD. It drives more like a Diesel, albeit gas powered. Not fast but is adequate with a pretty flat powerband. New cats, roller rockers, and it rolls out decent enough. I would go with the '95 of your choices

Reference is I own an 01 Screw and an 01 Mexpedition, both 5.4.

 

Pick your poison.

Those 5-speeds aren’t rated for much. With 3.08 gears, 2,000#. With 3.31/3.55 gears, about 3,500#.

The ‘97 isn’t “first year” by any stretch and all the bugs should have been worked out of it by now.

The ‘97 is a more civilized driver, as well. The 300 starts gasping for air by the time the IMRC butterflies open on the 4.2. No contest.

 

So, when did the 10th gen with a 4.2 come out if not 1997?

 

Maybe he was talking about the M5OD, not the 97 truck. The M5OD has been around since 1988 apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_M5OD_transmission

The OP asks questions that can't really be answered. Don't know the terrain he lives in or how much his boat weights. There are towing charts out there. The 5 speed lowers the rating. Gear ratio is the other factor. As far as the one he's looking at, you'd think that the problems would have been addressed at 222,000 miles.

I'm not so sure a 6' 4" guy wouldn't be comfortable in a Ranger. I talked to a big guy once who loved his.

 

I think the OP is fixated on the price and “rust free”



the 4.2/ mazda 5 speed combo is a less trust worthy tow rig than 3.0 / mazda 5 speed of the same year


the 4.2/4r70w on the other hand is a decent trailer mover on level ground with minimal starts and stops

 

So in overall quality and reliability is the 4.9L (300) a better engine than the 4.2L ? I see that the 300 is gear timed while the 4.2 is chain timed. The 1997 4.2 V6 with 4x4 and 5spd online says 16mpg combined and a 1995 4.9L 4x4 with 5spd gets 15mpg combined. So fuel mileage is the same I guess. The 1995 is said on paper to have 150hp and 260lbs of torque while the 1997 has 202hp and 252lbs of torque. I have never owned a Ford truck so I dont know which has a better build quality. I feel like the 300 is better but then again the 4.2V6 is supposed to be a better daily driver. I really dont know which one is better the 300 or the 4.2 lol. Some many conflicting opinions and points of view.

 

If memory serves me right the 4.2L V6 was an Essex engine. I believe it was just a bored out 3.8L V6 that was found in the cars. I had a 1988 Mercury Cougar that had the 3.8L V6 when I was in high school that my grandmother gave me and it was a terrible engine. It blew two headgaskets and I finally had to have the heads machined to fix the constant issue of leaking and burning coolant. After that the oil pump took a dive and ruined the engine. I wouldnt put my cards in on an engine that is just a bored out car engine but thats just me. I would go for the 300 Inline. Granted you lose about 50hp but you gain 10ft lbs of torque and the 300 is very reliable. I have the 300 in my 1982 F350 and its great.

 

Your memory seems to be incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_E...gine_(Canadian)

4.2 L[edit]

4.2 L Essex V6 in a 1998 F-150The largest displacement version of the Essex V6 appeared in the 1997 model year as a replacement for the Ford 300 straight six in the F-150. This engine kept the 3.8 L's bore, but featured a stroke lengthened to 95 mm (3.74 in), bringing its displacement up to 4,195 cc (256.0 cu in). Power output of the 4.2 L V6 in the 1997 F-150 was 205 hp (153 kW) at 4750 rpm, and torque was 260 lb⋅ft (353 N⋅m) at 3000 rpm.

The 4.2 L Essex has been described as one of the more reliable engines offered in the F-150 at the time, although the early engines did encounter some well-known problems.[11] All 1997–1998 engines made at the Canadian Essex plant received a bad front cover gasket.[12] Ford initially addressed this problem by using a thicker gasket for the 1999 model year and five years later, in 2004, replaced the earlier gasket with a completely redesigned part. The lower-intake manifold also had a reputation for cracking at relatively low miles