When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
How would the 6 not fit in our trucks if a 302 does?
No worries, but I will disagree with your chart. Both the 300-6 and the 302 V8 have a 4" cylinder bore. Assuming similar bore spacing, it stands to reason a straight 6 has to be ~35-40% longer than a V8. Here's some light reading for you. Just to be clear, I never said it couldn't be done, and if you have your heart set on it, go for it. But guys that have done it have had to make firewall mods, move the radiator way far forward beyond the norm, or both, in the 48-52 trucks. There are far easier engine swaps. But as I said, if it's your dream engine, share your adventure with us.
Thanks. I just found that on line of course. I don’t want to mod the fire wall and I’m not set on a 6 I just thought it’s a good engine and it’d be cool to something different than most. But you seem to have good arguments against it.
My 51 M3 came with 18 leafs per side ,concerning rear springs, I bought new 3/4 ton springs for her,took out 7 leafs per side.
just sayin
good luck
Greg
I had a 300 six cylinder in an early 1980s pickup. It was a great running engine, but the fuel mileage was horrible. I think it would look awesome in an old truck, if it would fit, but I think there are better options.
If gas mileage does not matter than it would have a cool factor to it.
There are modern, low mileage engines that can be bought for reasonable prices out of wrecks. I was able to get my low mileage Coyote F-150 engine and transmission for about the same price as a rebuilt 302 and AOD transmission. I still have to buy a control pack, which is another 2 grand, but it has all the accessories. I am not recommending it for a pre 1953 truck, because of its size, but there are deals out there.
How would the 6 not fit in our trucks if a 302 does?
LIke a lot of things we find online, it's not quite accurate. I just checked the carburated 300 six outside my shop. It measures 33" from bellhousing mating face to the front of the water pump pulley bolts. 34" or so to the front of the fan. Just about equal to the measurement of a 226 flathead six. The biggest challenge would be new motor mounts as they sit back farther than those on the front-mounted flathead.
I ran a 300 six for 175,000 in a 77 F100 I bought new. Economy was always 14-17 mpg but again, you're pushing a brick thru the air. I got as high as 22 mpg once with a strong tail wind.
A straight 6 can look cool and does fill out an engine bay just fine too:
I was able to have this engine rebored and completely rebuilt for apparently about what a "control pack" costs for a fancy modern engine. My advice would be to not overlook the option of going back to a stock drivetrain. Just because your truck is missing its engine and transmission doesn't automatically mean you have to go with something newer. A stock drivetrain can get the job done for you--and with some style too--and your truck will be back to the way Henry intended it to be. You may even save some money.
Good Luck.
Jim
P.S. I forgot. I get about 15 mpg--not great but maybe better than some.
If you are changing the engine and transmission anyway, I would suggest finding the most reliable, and reasonably priced combination that would work in the truck.
A 302 with a C-4 is a good choice or even an AOD transmission if it is built right.
Ford made some good modular engines that would also work.
Originally Posted by 52 Merc
I'm sure it would fit ok, albeit a bit on the tiny side and not look very impressive under the hood, imho, if that matters to you. It's a small car engine designed for Falcons, Mustangs and Mavericks, and you're going to be using it to push a 3600 pound truck plus payload with the aerodynamics of a brick wall. Also consider support for the engine. You can find all kinds of engine mounts, headers, accessories for the 302/351 to help with fitment where none of this, or a limited amount at the very best, is available for the small Ford 6. The expense will be the same, labor wise, to fit either engine, so choose carefully to get the best bang for your buck. My 2c.
OK so it sounds like a 302 is going to be my best option for several reasons, there's a ranger not far away with a 302 and a "brand new" c6 for a real good price but I don't want all the crazy stuff o the engine. Can that engine be converted to carb? What's the difference between putting in a c4 or a c6? Thanks guys, you have already saved me tones of time and even a bit of money.
LIke a lot of things we find online, it's not quite accurate. I just checked the carburated 300 six outside my shop. It measures 33" from bellhousing mating face to the front of the water pump pulley bolts. 34" or so to the front of the fan. Just about equal to the measurement of a 226 flathead six. The biggest challenge would be new motor mounts as they sit back farther than those on the front-mounted flathead.
That's interesting info, Tim. I wonder if this is one of those things where the tape measure doesn't tell the whole story. I will admit I have no direct experience putting a 300 into a 48-52 truck, just read the handful of accounts on this forum over the years from guys that did it and/or attempt to make the swap and gave up. A couple things I do know; to make a 302 fit into the engine compartment without hassle, the radiator and support needs to be moved forward from the V8 position the 3" that Ford setup on the chassis to use the 226/215 6 cylinder engine. There's not a lot more room to go farther forward without surgery and you're getting close to the hood latch. If the 300 is longer than the 302, that means one needs to make still more room forward, backward into the firewall, or both. Whether or not the people here that have done the deed did it the best way possible, I have no idea. Everybody's build is going to be different as it's all custom, as-built work.
The 300 measurements found in the link I provided above was a factory Ford document, so those are Ford's measurements.
OK so it sounds like a 302 is going to be my best option for several reasons, there's a ranger not far away with a 302 and a "brand new" c6 for a real good price but I don't want all the crazy stuff o the engine. Can that engine be converted to carb? What's the difference between putting in a c4 or a c6? Thanks guys, you have already saved me tones of time and even a bit of money.
Is that a Ranger V8 conversion project that was never finished? If you can get that cheap, and the engine is good, that might be a good deal. You can make it a carb'd engine by changing the intake and adding a carb, and swapping the computer distributor with an older style stand alone type. If it has a roller cam, you'll need a steel gear on the dizzy. The best way to fix that is to use a distributor from an 85 Mustang HO 5.0 5 speed application. It's the first use of a factory roller cam, and the last year of carburetors. It's a Duraspark II type set up for electronic ignition. That dizzy with an Edelbrock performer and 600 carb would work great.
Either trans would be fine. The C4 has way better packaging as it's much smaller than a C6. It also has less parasidic horsepower loss. You're fortunate that you have an F3 as it has a larger trans crossmember and the larger C6 trans should fit better. In an F1, the trans crossmember has a small opening that will fit the C4 fine, but needs to be modified heavily to fit the C6.
