new,more direct question
new,more direct question
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,613
Likes: 6
From: Coal country
I would disagree. (Sorry 4 Cammer! I seem to disagree a lot, please don't take it personal!)
The 4.6 Triton is a 281 CI, yes, BUT and a very BIG BUT it has all the latest cam and valve and piston designs, with computer controls and fuel injection features which make it able to get more efficient power out of those 281 cubes than a carbed 289.
It is the entire system that makes it possible, not the cubes.
In pre-computerized engine days, yes, greater displacement was the primary if not the ONLY solution to more power. Today, you can do more with less.
But, displacement isn't obsolete.
If you need more power than the Triton 4.6 can produce, I doubt you will get it by refining the engine any further. The improvements have about reached their limit of refinement. You will need to get that power by increasing the cubes.
The 4.6 Triton is a 281 CI, yes, BUT and a very BIG BUT it has all the latest cam and valve and piston designs, with computer controls and fuel injection features which make it able to get more efficient power out of those 281 cubes than a carbed 289.
It is the entire system that makes it possible, not the cubes.
In pre-computerized engine days, yes, greater displacement was the primary if not the ONLY solution to more power. Today, you can do more with less.
But, displacement isn't obsolete.
If you need more power than the Triton 4.6 can produce, I doubt you will get it by refining the engine any further. The improvements have about reached their limit of refinement. You will need to get that power by increasing the cubes.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
From: SOUTH CAROLINA
BANJO, i dont take much personal, i am just taking into consideration the weight difference between a 67 to 72 f series compared to a expedition or late model f series. you also need to consider gearing in the math of it. i dont see where a od trans could be a problem for everyday cruising.
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
Lots of guys in this forum have put AODs behind 302 with good success. I think the rear end ratio has to be matched so that you are not overdriving the little motor too much.
My 302/C4/3.25 will rev at about 2500 rpm at 60 mph. I would not expect that motor to be happy at anything under about 2200 rpm at 60 mph. The advantage of the AOD is that you can get a small reduction in highway rpms but you can also run a way lower rear end ratio for livelier acceleration.
My 302/C4/3.25 will rev at about 2500 rpm at 60 mph. I would not expect that motor to be happy at anything under about 2200 rpm at 60 mph. The advantage of the AOD is that you can get a small reduction in highway rpms but you can also run a way lower rear end ratio for livelier acceleration.
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,613
Likes: 6
From: Coal country
I think I was interpreting "...has the power to move...." a little differently. I was thinking "..power to move fast off the line" or "..go fast soon" kind of power. Also I was assuming he would be using a mid-60's 289, pretty much stock.
Yeah, the 302 w/AOD would be a decent combination, with a low enough gear ratio. I didn't really consider that. Windsors really prefer higher RPMs than FEs or 385s to work well.
Even so, in a truck it wouldn't be a real peppy or powerful combination, I would think, but you could work it to get good fuel mileage.
Thanks for qualifying the useable parameters.
Yeah, the 302 w/AOD would be a decent combination, with a low enough gear ratio. I didn't really consider that. Windsors really prefer higher RPMs than FEs or 385s to work well.
Even so, in a truck it wouldn't be a real peppy or powerful combination, I would think, but you could work it to get good fuel mileage.
Thanks for qualifying the useable parameters.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
thank you guys,im happy that i got answers i could actually use. the 289 is out of a 66 f-100,i think,money,well,recently i have acquered a job that pays quite well,w/ lots of hours,so money at this point is plentyful,and i can spen it when i like....so thanx once again yall.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
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
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
From: East TN.
my experience wasnt with an f-series but with a 63 1/2 galaxie. lets just say sometimes it was hard to get out of its own way. i'm sure with enough money though we could have helped that, but hey i was a broke teenager at the time! 
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
From: East TN.
what size rear tire are you running and what have you done to the motor. remember these trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick, and unless the steering and suspension is in great shape they arent very stable at high speeds.