my dad's 98 Regal, 3800 N/A gets 20/30 mpg, the S/Ced ones get about 2 less. and they mod like the Cobras and Lightnings. intake, blower pully, and exhaust puts the Regals and GTPs in the low 14s (14.9s stock). them Regals are real sleepers.

 

True True. The Regal GS (supercharged) is a extremely quick car stock. My only gripe about the Regal is the interior materials are kinda cheesy and once the car is over 3 years old the interior seems to get kind of a greasy feel to it (hard to explain). Though very well treated Regals were always nice.

 

Have a 2.8 in a 84 Ranger with about 100,000 miles on it. Still going strong, thanks for the tip on over heating and cracking heads. No problem yet but never heated it up.

 

i think the 302 is a worse motor than the 300. The 300 is the best 6cylinder offered in a truck (closely followed by the 4.3L GM). And when mildly built the 300 makes enough power to put 351s to shame...

 

The 4.2L V6 is a very good engine. It has had resentment and a bad reputation because of faulty head and manifold gaskets which would leak,causing hydro lock and destroyed engines. No doubt, Ford is at fault for this, and the fact that they did get the problem solved still offers no consolation to those who have had to shell out for replacement engines. Be this as it may, I absolutely love this little windsor engine. It has the distinction of being the only OHV engine offered in any Ford truck for the last 5+ years.
Mine has been almost flawless in the 103,000 miles I've put on it.
With gear oil in place of ATF, my 4.2L V6 / M5OD has been a decent pulling combo up to 4000+ lbs. It is sad to see it go.

The Dodge 3.9L is, well....laughable. I like Dodge engines for sure-esp the 318, but that 3.9L is simply too small, and especially too weak for a full sized pickup truck.

No experience with the GM 4.3.

The 4.9L 300 I6 was great. The M5OD with it was crap(with ATF).
This is the only 6 cylinder gas engine I would be ok with in a 3/4 ton truck.

If GM ever decides to put that 4200 I6 in to their Sierra/Silverado pickups - they'd have a winner on their hands. It makes alot of torque at low RPM, and has a very wide and flat torque curve to boot. I-6/manual transmission....hmmm.

 

The 4.2 is based off the 3.8 right? Headgasket problems have been around 10 + years.

 

A buddy of mine has a 4.3L in a silverado and its not a great performer but it does the job. Though i would upgrade the motor to the 5.3L, better performance and same mpg if i could...

 

Their both good engines especaily the 302! I have had 6 different vehicles from Mustangs, 1/2 tons, 3/4 tons, Torinos etc, with the 302. Decent power and fuel economy, run for ever and simple to repair. A mildly built 351 will still put out more power that mildly built 300 . Depends on prefference, Ford V8 or 6 cylinder, there is a place for both. As you can tell I am a big fan of the 302, love the 5.0 in my 88 Cobra Mustang.

 

I think that the old carburated 302 motors were pretty good, but the EFI 302s are a different story. I do not know anyone who can get better than a 12-14 mpg average with theirs, me included. That would not be too bad, but the 302s do not have very much power either. It is kind of a lose-lose situation with them.

 

MJD,

I agree. How can my roller-cam, MAF sequential EFI, computerized electronic ignition 5.0 seem so underpowered in a half ton truck? The 4.3 V-6 in a Chevy felt more powerful with simple TBI.

The answer is torque at rpm. Torque peak on the 5.0 is at 2500 rpm and it is 1900 (more diesel-like) in the 4.3. Unless gearing is changed, the 5.0 is a dog. The E4OD is programmed to keep the rpm's too low. When it shifts at part throttle, it feels like the engine fell into a hole.

Jim

 

By far the worst engine ever made was the Ford 3.8 V6. The problem wasn't necessarily fixed till 98 or 99 when the Essex engine (3.8SC engine) became the standard naturally aspirated block used from base Mustangs to minivans to the F-150 (with a stroker crank and a couple other mods - the 4.2). Much better, better torque and everything.

Though it may be unreliable and prone to death...it's a nice motor when its new (before it blows). I took my friend's Cougar for prom last year, and the 3.8 in it managed 34 mpg somehow some way. I ran it hard a few times, and that's what it came out to when I filled it again before returning it. It made good power...but that damn head gasket. If you have a 3.8 or a 4.2...go out this weekend, get the new gaskets, and replace it while the engine isn't gone. Lol lot easier now =P.

The Chevy 3.1 is the same way...damn head gasket - lucky to get 60k out of them.

Good engines? Any chevy 350, Ford 302/351, Ford 3.0 Vulcan, Ford 2.5/3.0 Duratec V6's, and of course the modulars. The 4.3 has some go to it as well - and as mentioned, that torque starts low.

Engines are ok...but its the transmission that often brings vehicles down...

 

The one thing that I don't like about the GM 4.3 and I have heard that a lot of the V-8's had the same problem is the valve guides leaking. Every morning when my brother started his 93 Chevy from the time it had 10,000 on it the thing would smoke and fog but the rest of the day it was fine. Another fine motor was the 3.4 those things were known to blow without any provocation. But I've never owned a ford V-6. I did have a 93 F-150 and it had the 300-I6 and that was a good truck other than the 2.73 gearing really made it a dog but it got almost 20mpg. But I would rather have power than economy.

 

I would have to disagree with you both. Maybe Im the exception rather than the rule. My 302 im my 96 f-150 gets 16 to 18 consistently. Plenty of power for my needs. Swear I have a 351 under the hood. I wish you could take my pickup for a day and you could tell me what you think. Ive had 3 302 trucks. Always had plenty of power for me. The carbureated 302s were a dog however. With E.F.I. however they were a strong performer. My two favorite ford motors were the 302 and 300 six. As far as G.M. is concerned the 305 was a joke. The 302 would run circles around it. The only motor you would want in an older chevy pickup would be a 350.Just my thoughts. Thanks

 

I do not know why people bash the 305 so badly. It was not the best engine, but could make decent mileage and had a fair amount of power. The 302 has a little more power, but the 305 generally makes better gas mileage. I think that your pickup is definitely an exception. I do not think that mine could beat 17 in ideal conditions, which are virtually nonehxistent. If the motor goes on my pickup, I would put a 300 six in it long before spending my money on another 302. Then again, I do not care for the pickup either, so I would probably set it on fire and roll it down a hill. Then I would go buy a Coupe Deville. Just joking!!!

 

_______________________

I'll take your word on the 4.3L SDJ, trust me though the Ford 4.2L is a very good engine- I have worked mine pretty hard and I am impressed. Never had a 6 that would go like this one will. Part of it is the 3.55 rear axle no doubt, another part is having gear oil in my trans.

I also know what you mean about the 2.73 - I have had the very same powertrain, and nothing has caused me so much aggravation as owning a truck with an engine that will pull like a small locomotive(for a 6 cylinder gasser), and a rear axle ratio too insufficient to move a toy wagon. Sucks to have to slip the clutch in first gear to get moving! Of course I did'int know then what I know now, and if I had, 3.73's would have gone in there, along with a clutch upgrade, and gear oil in my transmission - would have been a great truck then. Maybe even a ZF 5 speed if I could have afforded it. Too bad we can't still get that I6 now.