C-4 vs C-6
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
Likes: 1
C-4 vs C-6
I have a 1950 F-1 running a 302 with a two barrel carb. I am currently changing the rear end to a Ford 9" with a ratio of 3.5:1 and 15" tires. I want to use an automatic transmission and have received all kinds of advice on the pros and cons of the C-4 vs a C-6. The truck will not be used for towing or anything heavy duty, just driving. Does anyone have experience or some good advice?
Thanks
Thanks
Laughing Gas
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 913
Likes: 2
From: Pensacola, FL
i have had both, and if you are not doing any towing or major hot rodding, the c4 should be fine...i never had trouble with mine and i used to beat the crap out of it.
the c6 i have now is great too.
the c6 i have now is great too.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,119
Likes: 2
From: Southern New Hampshire
The C4 can be built for just about anything you want and it is cheap. A good shift kit for starters from Summit, etc.
The C6 weighs almost twice a C4 and is also a HP hog. Fine behind a FE or 429/460.
The C6 weighs almost twice a C4 and is also a HP hog. Fine behind a FE or 429/460.
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
From: High Park, Toronto
Originally Posted by ferguson777
Additionally, the C4 consumes about 60 less HP than the C6, so if you don't plan to beat the heck out of it, then put the extra 60 HP to the wheels.
Where do you get this info?
Thanks for all the good 411 guys
GW
Post Fiend
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,328
Likes: 124
From: Iowa
Originally Posted by 53Merc
Fergie,
Where do you get this info?
Thanks for all the good 411 guys
GW
Where do you get this info?
Thanks for all the good 411 guys
GW
PS, you aren't going to hurt a properly rebuilt C-4 with the average 302. A lot of guys race with them for the weight savings. And RMFs reasoning too no doubt.
Trending Topics
Elder User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 785
Likes: 6
From: Columbus, Ohio
If anyone's interested, I've got a freshly rebuilt C6 w/a B & M shift kit in it. I rebuilt it and midway through, got the chance to change my truck back to a Y-block w/4 spd on the floor.
So....I don't need the C6 any longer.....
So....I don't need the C6 any longer.....
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,070
Likes: 2
From: Boise, Idaho
The 60hp that Bob is referring to is probably the power losses in a big-block application. The losses would be proportional to the power of the engine. A 460 would lose more through the transmission than a 302 due to the different torque converters and the incremental internal drag of the internal parts.
I've heard of similar differences between a TH-350 and a TH-400. It's related to the mass of the rotating parts in the transmission.
-Paul
Hey Sixoh, did you put a 292/T-18 in there?
If it's nae Scottish, it's crrraap!
I've heard of similar differences between a TH-350 and a TH-400. It's related to the mass of the rotating parts in the transmission.
-Paul
Hey Sixoh, did you put a 292/T-18 in there?
If it's nae Scottish, it's crrraap!
Elder User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 785
Likes: 6
From: Columbus, Ohio
Nah, not yet. I've got the 4 spd., and will get the 292 next year, but there's plenty of them out here. The 4spd that I have is the T-98 w/Granny 1st. I figure it's better than nothing. Right now I have a 351M/Cruise-o-matic, but I want to go the Y route w/period speed goodies. So now I've got 1 trans too many!
AirForceVet
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 602
Likes: 125
From: Spotsylvania,Virginia
I have a 1955 F250, the first engine swap I had a 1969 302 with a C4, never had any problems, the second engine swap was a 1972 351C with a C4, I was never very nice to either one, but now I'm much older and wiser, I'm working on the next swap, a 1976 460 with a C6. I'll be much nicer to this, hehehe...
Post Fiend
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,493
Likes: 7
From: Erie, pa
Somewhere out there in the vast wasteland of the internet I ran across an article comparing the automatic transmission from the early versions to the more current.
Basics where
Think of the automatic transmission as a motor - it requires a certain amount of horsepower to make it operate when the factors of design, friction, weight of the parts, and mass of the parts are factored in.
The amount of horsepower required beyond that stated above included weight of the vehicle and the wear on the transmission (Given a perfect build when new.).
New and or newly rebuilt transmissions were compared against a given load and their effeciency, as a percentage, was stated in the amount of Horsepower required to operate the transmission.
The most effecient, i.e. the least horsepower required, was for the Chevy Powergluide.
For the purpose of this discussion the Ford C4 was far more effecient then the C6.
Basics where
Think of the automatic transmission as a motor - it requires a certain amount of horsepower to make it operate when the factors of design, friction, weight of the parts, and mass of the parts are factored in.
The amount of horsepower required beyond that stated above included weight of the vehicle and the wear on the transmission (Given a perfect build when new.).
New and or newly rebuilt transmissions were compared against a given load and their effeciency, as a percentage, was stated in the amount of Horsepower required to operate the transmission.
The most effecient, i.e. the least horsepower required, was for the Chevy Powergluide.
For the purpose of this discussion the Ford C4 was far more effecient then the C6.
Posting Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 1
"RMF - where do you get this stuff? "
As you know - Up here in the great white north, we have 6 ft of snow for approx. 8 mths of the year. The other 4 mths are referred to as bad skiing days. Since I've been married (to this one) for 20 or 21 yrs, we don't have sex much, so I read a lot.
As you know - Up here in the great white north, we have 6 ft of snow for approx. 8 mths of the year. The other 4 mths are referred to as bad skiing days. Since I've been married (to this one) for 20 or 21 yrs, we don't have sex much, so I read a lot.
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
From: High Park, Toronto
Originally Posted by 4tl8ford
New and or newly rebuilt transmissions were compared against a given load and their effeciency, as a percentage, was stated in the amount of Horsepower required to operate the transmission.
The most effecient, i.e. the least horsepower required, was for the Chevy Powergluide.
For the purpose of this discussion the Ford C4 was far more effecient then the C6.
The most effecient, i.e. the least horsepower required, was for the Chevy Powergluide.
For the purpose of this discussion the Ford C4 was far more effecient then the C6.
Do you happen to know where the AOD fits in here? I'm running the 5.0L + AOD out of an '86 Lincoln Mk.VII.
GW... also in the Great White North and boy is the cold north wind blowing through here today
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 1
From: Everett, Wa
You can get a C4 built to handle 500hp or more so I don't think you will have to much problem. You can get a wide ratio build that will give you more bottom end kick. Another option you have is to put a AOD in it. Check out the following sites. You have many options with the 302.
http://www.broaderperformance.com/index.html
http://www.transmissioncenter.net/highperflist.htm
http://www.broaderperformance.com/index.html
http://www.transmissioncenter.net/highperflist.htm
Last edited by tmyers; Apr 4, 2004 at 11:17 AM.