Getting back to the original question. I once asked a neighbor why he outfitted his forestry crews with V6 powered full size 4x4's: The underpowered engines keep his guys from launching themselves over cliffs and so on.

Answering a question from above: The Ford 2.8 and 2.9 share almost no parts, though they are in same design family.

The 2.8 is a fine engine. However, the computer carb on it is very finicky. If it isn't operating just perfect, the engine won't run right. Also, a carb problem will eventually kill the engine. Most (all?) shops don't have time to fidget with the carb - hence lots of 2.8's die (died) early.

I've got nearly 50K on my 2.8 rebuild. With some porting an polishing, it runs real strong. I love charging up mountain grades. Unfortunately, there are usually too many slow pokes in my way.

 

It all boils down to experiences I guess. My experience with the 2.8 and the 85 B2 in general have been bad. Underpowered - yes, finicky carb - yes (not to mentioin expensive to have re-built) and as I said before the heads are more prone to crack than Bobby Brown. I know there are those that share my frustration with that motor, and the lack of good replacement heads that are available, instead of reviving and old v-6 like the 2.8 and putting it in the B2 they should have fitted it with one of the smaller I-6's that ford made and just modernized the fuel delivery and ignition a bit. That matched with a good trans (I think the C-5 in the 84's was better than the A4LD) and the B2 would have been a stiff competitor to the 4.0L Jeep Cherokee and there would still be a lot more of them on the road too. I did like some of the things about the 2.8, the gear drive was bullet proof...but that's about it.

BTW - I've heard that the 84 b2's were offered with a 4cyl diesel... but I've never seen one. Anyone else heard of this? Was it any good or another t.u.r.d. motor?

 

A friend of my Dad's had one of those diesels. He was a irrigation water master and put many many miles on it daily. It wasn't very powerful, but it was a good motor for him. It got about 30mpg, IIRC, and never gave any trouble. He's passed on a few years now, and he was great old guy. Your mention of that diesel B2 reminded me of him. Thanks.

 

Hey, glad it brought back a good memory man. I wouldn't mind finding one of those myself, my wife makes soaps and I was doing some research recently and ran across some recipes for bio-diesel (seems the by-product of the process is well... what we use for our liquid hand soaps) . If I could find an old rig like that I would like to give it a shot and see if I could make it run off old used vegetable oil.

 

In response to the worst engine, I would have to say the 255 cid Ford and the high deck 302 ar high on the list. The 351M was a bad idea, but seemed to last with it's powerless self.

I am also not a big fan of the GM 4 bangers (Vega anyone?).

Best engines; the flatty Ford, the Windsor Ford, FE Ford, 385 series Ford, 335 series Ford (Clevelands from 70 to 74), the new modulars (I loved my 5.4, but this V-10 rocks) 225 slant 6 Mopar, 318 Mopar, Buick 350.

I have mixed emotions about the SBC. I have built some that would run like a scalded dog but they always seemed to break.

As for cross breeding cars. The original idea with putting a SBC in an old Ford came about when the change to the OHV Ford V-8's happened. The flathead cars were "front steer" and Ford went to "rear steer" in the mid 50's. That idea esculated until it was fashionable to put the Chebbie in a Ford.

In the early 80's, I decided there should be more Ford powered vehicles that were not Ford. The first victim was a '68 Dodge van that recieved a 351C 2V and a FMX. It was just too easy. Next up was a '76 Datsun 260Z that I got for 500 dollars. It received a 302 4 speed from a 78 Mustang II. We hopped the 302 up and it was very fast. Then I came across a '66 Mustang that had a 350 SBC in it. I got PO'ed and contracted a plan to install a Ford motor in the sacred 69 Camaro. You should have seen the look on the Chebbie boys face when the hood of that Camaro went up and there was a 400 Cleveland sitting there. My final cross-breed was a 73 Chebbie pickup that received a 500 Caddy. Even though it was a GM, that was one bad truck. Fuel mileage was horrendous, but it would haul a load of wood (3.73 gears) and other things.

Just my $.02 (and then some)

 

Ahh dont be so rough on the 351/M its lifespan was entirely during the smog mod crap of the 70's. Its not my favorite, but its a Ford! My worst motors would be Chevy 302, Pontiac 305, Dodge(really dont care for any, Slant Six would last forever).

 

What years have the computer carbs?I have a 84 2.8 Ranger and it is running quite rich most of the time. Suspect the choke is not right.

 

I will agree that most if not all I-6 engines are very durable and torquey

I'd love to see an I-6 supercharged in a Bronco....talk about popping wheelies.

 

I have always wondered who buys an inline 6 in a 3/4 ton pick up. Now I know, thanks Johnboy Boomersooner.

 

Sounds like my friend, he won`t buy any thing but a 300-6 with a standard tranmission.

 

MadMedic20, Cummins fans buy an I6 in a 3/4 ton.

 

Cummins aside.

 

Well, at the time I was looking for something to pull my bassboat. It was right after I lifted my Bronco and it was having some serious braking issues with the 35" tires and that big boat pushing it when it was trying to stop. I stopped by a used car lot that I had delt with before and he had 2 pick-ups that caught my eye... a 95 chevy 1/2 ton with the 4.3L and the 95 F-250 with the 4.9L. They were both fleet trucks, well maintained, similair options, millaige, etc. But after driving both of them the F250 was by far the better truck, I wish it had the granny gear instead of the OD, but it's never given me any problems really, and with the 3/4 ton chasis I got a lot more stopping power, dual piston front calipers, and the drums on the rear are much larger too. It was perfect for what I needed it for, if I was dragging a 30' gooseneck all the time I would have bought a diesel, or a big V-8. Yeah I'm still a little dissapointed that Ford dropped the 4.9L... but I have the 5.4L in my 99 and it's a great engine, my beef is that they don't offer a 1/2 ton truck with a V-8 and a manual tranny and I'm tired of fixing the one I've got. My only choice on a new truck is either another F250 with the 5.4 and a 6 speed or a Dodge 1500 with the (non-Hemi) magnum V-8 and a 5 speed. After looking at both... I think I'll keep my 99 for a while, it's almost payed off... and I can fix up my old 95 a bit and use it for my TRUCK, which is a shame but it beats a new truck payment every month.

 

I've owned two of those 6.2L in the past, if you got 230,000 out of it consider yourself lucky. I got rid of my Silverado's because of blown head gaskets and injection pumps. I'd be willing to bet that if you tore that 6.2 down you'd find more than a few cracks in the block webbing and maybe even a few glow plug tips floating around in there. Other bad engines I've either worked on or owned:

Oldsmobile Diesel V6 and 350-V8; Olds and Diesel need I say more
Ford 4.2L V-8 (255 ci); Remember the Baby-8 made from 1980-1982
Ford 2.8L V-6; Cracked Heads and/or Blown head gaskets
GM 3.1L V-6 1997 Model Year; Main bearing caps weren't properly torqued from the factory
Anything else with a variable venturi carb.