Hey

Have a great christmas too. I will do alot of "interstate" driving or highway driving for me same stuff eh. Ya I like torque that's why i'm going for a 351 instead of a 302. It's awsome living in Canada mercurys are so plentiful. The AOD be nice but will it hold up in such a heavy truck. I'm using hp as a relative term of output. I want around 300 hp and 350 lbs pf torque. If you want torque drive my dad's 7.3 diesel. The stock engine only has 150 hp and like 280 lbs of torque. The engine is carburated so I think it has a C-4 but if it has AOD I couldn't put on a diffrent carb. What do you think the approximate cost of an engine with 300 hp and 350 lbs of torque would be? Thanks

 

I am not sure what you mean that you can't put that AOD behind your engine. I have an AOD behind a 351C (I'll bet at least 300 hp). and we put a 302 and AOD from a 86 van in my son's 63. We removed the EFI and used an Edelbrock intake and a Holley 600. That conversion van had to weigh in over 5000 pounds. So, I am not worried if it will handle the weight. We had to use Lokar's kickdown cable to make it work correctly.

 

Just a quick note- My '60 F-100 with the 223 I-6 (and no overdrive) got 16 MPG before a recent valve job.

 

Yeah, you can put an AOD behind it, but just don't punish it at the drag strip, or riding around town in O/D is my point. And If I was going to use and AOD, I'd use one from an 87 to 89 Car, like Grand Marq', Crown Vic, 5.0L Lincoln etc.

The earlier ones, pre 87s' are oil "short" into the planetaries, and hard to get shift points right with set ups other than the CFI induction set up. 87 - 89 can be adapetd to shift with switches instead of the ECM & speed sensor deal control. . .

Later ones [maybe 93 & up?] "A4ODE" "EA4OD" or something like it are notoriously unreliable. Plus the sucker costs humongous bucks to repair when it woofs itself.
IOW, . . .If it's from a vehicle with a "modular" engine pass on it!

FBp

 

if you are worried about strength go with the c-6 and an overddrive from some place like : http://www.gearvendors.com/
http://www.usgear.com/

 

Hey

I'm starting to believe this transmission is a FMX. Opinions on this transmission? It is a 84' engine so it has an early AOD transmission of thats what it is. What about the kickdown linkage. I couldn't technicaly install a aftermarket carburator than right? Anyways just trying to figure out the transmission. Merry Christmas and happy New Years. Bye

 

Please! More info on your Cleveland/AOD set up. What rear gear? Hows your mileage? Would you go with the same set up again? More info the better! Thanks in advance.

Tom-

 

Please don't throw rocks at me, but I hate a 302 in a truck. I've tried it, and it just doesn't work for me. I know guys that it works very well for, but not me. I would like to offer one more suggestion. I have a friend with a 67 model truck with a 300, C4, and 3:25 gears. He gets around 18 mpg and runs a 13 second quarter mile. I'm not sure what the internals of the engine are, but I know what it has for externals. He has a header, aluminum intake, a 4 barrel holley, a duraspark distribututor, and msd ignition module. An inline 6 would make a good starter engine for a young guy because they are so simple. An inline 6 is also just about bullet proof. I run a 460 in mine, and it's great, but only gets about 12 mpg. I did have a 390 that got 14 mpg, but Haaser is looking for at least 15. I would also highly recomend that you pay atention to Ford boy Pete. He has a very good point about 351m/400's and building for torque. My 460 is just a stock engine that I pulled from an 83 model van and put in my truck. When I get ready to rebuild, I will definately be building for torque. In a big heavy squared off street driven truck, horse power is basicly useless. Put all of your research and more importantly dollars in to torque. As i said earlier, I'm getting 12 mpg out of mine and that's just throwing it in and mashing the gas like it's free. If I were to build and drive it right, I have no doubts that I could get 15 mpg. One other thing to listen to that Ford boy Pete said is build your torque down low in the RPM range, and use good quality name brand components to assemble your engine. One thing that I would like to add to what he said is make sure all your components work together. For example, don't use a cam designed for RV use, with a single plain intake. Do your home work and make sure every part that you install compliments the rest of the parts that you use. Next, don't lay down a single penny on parts until you read every single piece of information that you can find on your chosen engine. Make sure to do your home work.

 

I have to agree on do your research before you ever spend a penny on it.
I am very pleased with Cleveland/AOD. I was happy with it when it had a C6. The down side is that they only produced the 351C during 71-74. They are hard to come by. Mine has an Edelbrock Performer intake with a Holley 600 carb. It runs 2 barrel heads and a Comp Cams 268H cam and a double roller timing chain. This cam works in the lower RPM's and has a slight "rump" to its idle. I am currently running 3.25 gears but am going to change them to 3.50 when I get working on it again. It has plenty of power to move my 56 panel truck.
My panel gets 17-18 mpg now. It used to get 15-16 mpg with the C6 (with a shift kit). The biggest advantage is that at 70 mph, it used to run 3200 rpms. It now runs at 2200 rpms at 70 mph. I like the fact that my engine should live longer now.

 

TruckfarmerThanks for the info on the 351C/AOD. Everyone is negative about the Cleveland. It's been a long time since I've known anyone running one I can't remember what is the negetives are.

 

one place to research all your engine choices is right here at FTE. Look in the different engine forums to learn more about each series.

 

Hey

I recently rebuilt a I-300 with headers and a small two barrel and intake. The guy let me drive it. It was ok but it didnt have huge power and the fuel economy was only 14-15. Although the bottom end power was great. I just wasn't impressed enough to use one. The engine has to keep up to 350 chebbies. That's all I care about. A cleveland would be great but they are expensive to buy and use. Very good engines though. If I could find a 351 cleveland I would put it in. But finding them. I went and looked at the 351 windsor engine it isn't a high out put. Still couldn't find out what transmission. Do you think the 351 cleveland would be worth the effort?

 

I installed a semi-built 302 with a 90 Towncar AOD in a 65 F100. After installing 3.50 gears in place of the 3.25, I had great power, and upwards of 20mpg. Briefly I had 3.70 in it, and the mileage seemed to be even better. It's all about keeping the engine in it's optimum rpm range while cruising. The lowest rpm possible is not always the key to getting the best mileage. Contrary to what some people have said, there are no electrical switches or whatever to make it shift. None. I used the stock TV cable from the Towncar, and used the plate off the throttle body that the other end of the TV cable connected to. A carb opens 90 degrees, as does a throttle body, so I simply bolted the throttle body cable plate onto the carb. Once adjusted right, it works great. No problems riding around town in OD either, since these transmissions don't shift into OD until 50 or 55 mph anyway. I would also only use an AOD from a Town Car or a T-Bird SuperCoupe. They have a lower 1st gear, and the strongest overdrive servo. There were 3 strengths of these made. Light, medium, and heavy duty. Until buying my Bronco, I drove the 65 at least 600 miles a week to and from work. At first, the 13.5 to 14.5 mpg I get with the Bronco was a shock. I ended up talking my employer into paying for my gas. Say what you like about the 302. I know for a fact that it is a very capable engine. I didn't get beat very often leaving a light, had great top speed, and great mileage. Also towed a boat and triple axle trailer on weekends that weighs over 7000 lbs dry. Over what the truck is rated for? Yes. Any problems doing so? Only in a panic stop situation. I put about 40,000 on the 65 F100 before buying the Bronco, and never had one single problem with anything. Not even sitting in bumper to bumper traffic, stop and go for over 2 hours straight, in 90 plus degree heat. Sorry, but the 351C heads were not designed for good gas mileage, and have never been known as such. Even on the 2 barrel heads, the intake ports are huge, as are the valves. The 351 would be faster then my combo, but will never see the 20-25 highway mpg that I did.

 

Hello

A 302 is a great engine. Just out of curiosity what would the 289 be like with a C-4. Slightly under torqued. I just can't decied what engine to use. I found a great 410 FE. What would that be like. Power mmmmm. Fuel economy NOPE . What would I need for motor mounts, ECT to get a 351 windsor in there? I still like the idea of a 390 just can't justify it. Oh well.

 

A 410 FE would not be the perfect FE, but realy close. They are torque monsters because of the long stroke.