I see all the sizes mentioned on this category, except the 332. 368 is a lincoln motor. Other than bore difference, does anyone have any info on the 332/368 Y-blocks? I have the chance to buy both motors. I'm thinking of stuffing one of them in my 60 F350.

 

They're also missing the 279 and 302. The 332 should have a steel crank which should be more durable. It looks like the 302, 332, and 368 share the same stroke. LINCOLN Y
I'll go out on a limb a say if I'm looking for a hot rod truck, I'd go with the 368 and if I'm going for a, um, truck truck, I'd go with the 332. I'd really probably just get both.

 

Pretty sure a late model 292/312 dist. and oil pump works on the lincs, but with the larger lincoln dist. gear. John Mummert once said the pushrod lengths for 215/223 I-6s were the same for Lincolns. However the I-6 could be the solid pushrod which is real weak.

 

I read somewhere that the 368 runs a 10:1 compression. I plan to pull my camper behind this truck. I just don't want to make it into a grenade by pulling to much weight. The 368 is in original condition and has an automatic behind it. Its been out of the car 40yrs and has 30,000 original miles on it.
The 332 I know about was run about 2yrs ago. Its still in the cutoff truck frame with the tranny still attached. I haven't seen it yet, but I understand it has the 4-barrell intake on it. I'm just trying to get a little more horse under the hood to pull my camper while keeping that vintage look. Right now I have a 292 with a t-98 tranny with a 5:13 rear.

 

Well, if either of the Lincolns are running motors, and installation into your truck is relatively easy, go for it. It looks like it might get you at least another 60ft/lbs.
If they have to be rebuilt and/or a lot of work is required to fit it into the truck, treat the 292 you have with some torque enhancing parts. I suspect your 292 with the 4spd and 5.13 gears will pull a camper just fine. How heavy is the camper?

Have a look at these Ford Y-block powered working trucks. The very first one pulling a parade float and then a camper is a 239!

working trucks

 

IIRC, the 56 Lincoln 368 has a 9:1 compression, and the 57 has a 10:1 compression. So, you may not have as much problem as you think, depending on what motor you have.

Secondly, the compression of the 368 may not make your choice so straightforward, as the compression of the 332 is probably in the low 8:1 range, and in this case, you'll be giving up some power, as something like 9:1 would probably be optimal, depending on the load you intend to pull.

Also consider your running costs. Back in "the day," premium gas was considered an expensive luxury. Now, with gas in the $2.50 per gallon range, the 10¢ or 15¢ difference is not a great percentage (e.g., a 10¢ difference at $2.50 a gallon is only 4% difference). High compression is not just a performance luxury, as it also will increase gas mileage. You may not find that the 4% difference (or whatever it is) actually costs you that much out of your pocket, when you consider even a slight increase in gas mileage.

Certainly, I doubt that it would be worthwhile to rebuild a motor to lower the compression. Given that these motors have a pretty efficient combustion chamber, you may well find that a little tweaking of the timing or going to a 160° thermostat could well solve your problem.

Also, I suspect (but again, this would need to be looked into) that the Lincoln car motor would have a bit more aggressive cam than the truck motor, so besides giving up some power in compression and cubic inches, you'd also be giving up some provided by the cam as well.

This whole business is something that only you can decide. You've made the point that you want your truck to have some "suds" and not be just a plow horse, so my remarks are addressed to that impression I've gotten from your post. However, if pulling is the big priority and your load is substantial, that is also something to consider.

The Lincoln automatic hauled a pretty heavy anchor in 1956 and 57, so if it is in good shape, the addition of an oil cooler may be all you would need. I cannot imagine that it would do you much worse in mileage than a T98, which is like having your own paddle boat sailing in a sea of 90W all the time, what with those big gears turning all the time. A fitting name for that grinder would be "Proud Mary."

But there again, your usage is important. If your trailer/load is substantial, the T98 is undoubtedly a heavier duty choice. Also, your intended destination is important. That granny gear in the T98 would be mighty handy in mountains or hilly terrain, like on hunting trips. But if you live in Nebraska and you want to do a fishing weekend on Lake McConaughy, and if you are only pulling occasionally and driving the truck solo on the street a lot, then an automatic might be a better choice.

As far as parts go, that's another thing that depends on your situation. If you are in an urban area, having access to the parts on that 332 cut-off truck could be very important, no matter which motor you go with. On the other hand, if you're in farming country or some other area where big trucks are used a lot and speculative scavengers haven't blighted the stashes in rural junk yards like a swarm of locusts, you should have an easy time getting what you need.

 

Thanks for that info. This truck started with a 223-6 new. Someone dropped in a 292 somewhere in its life. It originally had a 5:83 rear. I picked up a 5:13 pig for $20. I'm also going to install an auxiliary with 25% overdrive, double under. So in overdrive I'm at about a 4:25 rear. The camper I plan to pull is tall, and the weight tag on the frame says 7,200 pounds. I pull it with a powerstroke right now, and you definetly feel that brick back there. That's why I'm thinking about the bigger motor swap. I don't want to be running 45 on the highway pulling that

 

Did the 56 Lincoln have a transmission different from a Ford? The Ford transmission was still air cooled in 56 and wasn't much of a transmission to be pulling a load with. It would barely holding together pulling the little lightweight Ford passenger car around.

 

A few comments:

Goodness, I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one in the world who called a carrier/center section a "pig!" That's how I was raised, anyway.

From the sounds of it, you will be needing plenty of power, if you are trading out a Powerstroke as your tow vehicle. In this sense, you ARE going to put a real load on. From my own perspective, I'd still be thinking about getting all the inches I could. I'd also recognize that the motor might need to be spun a little faster than I'm used to, in order to get it down the road.

If you go with the 368 of whatever flavor, consider finding a truck distributor (279, 302, 317, or 332), which will have a less aggressive curve to it -- better suited for heavy loads. I'd recommend that you mess with your ignition curve, as that always seems to pay dividends in power, but you will need to be conservative with that load behind you.

One more thing -- I'd agree that the Lincoln automatic is not going to be suitable in your situation. One thing you might consider, rather than keeping the T98 and rigging up an auxiliary, with all the attendant drive shaft cutting and messing with two shift levers, would be to go to a big truck 5 speed. The 5 speed transmissions offered by Ford in trucks came in direct drive and overdrive configurations, and also in light, medium, and heavy duty ratings. Primarily here, I'm thinking of the light and medium duty boxes that were offered in the F500 series on up. These were made by Clark and New PRocess. Here's a comparison:

T98 ratios (available in the 100 to 700 ratings; 2nd, 3rd, and 4th synchronized):

1st: 6.40
2nd: 3.09
3rd: 1.69
4th: 1.00
Rev: 7.82

Light duty overdrive (available in the 500 to 700 ratings; 3rd, 4th, and 5th synchronized):

1st: 6.25
2nd: 3.64
3rd: 1.89
4th: 1.00
5th: 0.80
Rev: 6.17

Heavy duty (available in 700 to 900 series):

1st: 6.06
2nd: 3.50
3rd: 1.80
4th: 1.00
5th: 0.80
Rev: 6.00

My thinking on this is that even the lightest duty transmission would be sufficient for your needs. These boxes are quite large and heavy, but I would guess that the weight of your current T98 + auxiliary would be in the same ballpark, plus you eliminate extra turning gears and countershafts, extra shifters, extra driveshafts, and some fabrication of mounts.

Also, if you could find a suitable source of parts, you'd be able to use things like the factory floor inspection cover, which would have the proper cutout for the shifter and the emergency brake. (All of these transmissions will have a truck style parking brake with a drum on the end, and these require the parking brake lever that is next to the gear shift.)

This could make a very sano installation, done with factory parts (except for the driveshaft).

Anyway, I've often thought about this myself, but don't haul big loads. I'm just passing it on to you as a matter of interest.

 

I was looking up some info in Motor's and found this in the engine spec section:
1957 312 made 340 lbs.ft. torque @ 2600 rpm
1957 368 405 lbs. ft. @ 2600 rpm
1958 383 405 lbs. ft. @ 2900 (added for comparison)

 

That 312 is probably on par with the 332. Does it say which 312 it is?

I found some info on the 341 and it was 332ft/lbs. That's why I say, if the other motors need work or are difficult to fit, just stick with the Ford Y and use the money you'll spend anyway to upgrade it. The increased parts availability definitely makes it worth it in my opinion. You can easily get a Y between 350 and 400 ft/lbs.

In either case, after pulling with the Powerstroke, I'm sure it's just not going to feel as strong. Any way you go, you will be down at least 120ft/lbs.

Ooh, how about putting the Powerstroke in the F350? It won't be easy but the difference in power is much more significant.

 

The chart I was looking at listed the 312 as 255 HP. 341s and 368s were/are cool engines, but like I think has been mentioned parts support isnt great. At least Rams Horn exhausts can be had inexpensively.

 

No 368's in Merc's until 1957. 1956's used 312's, as did many 1957's.

1956 Lincoln 368: 9.01:1 compression / 285 gross HP @ 4600 RPM / 'Ford' 4V.

1956 Mark II 368: 10.01:1 compression / 300 gross HP @ 4800 RPM / Carter 4V.

1957 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser 368 (optional in Monterey/Montclair/Voyager/Commuter): 9.7:1 compression / 290 gross HP @ 4600 RPM / Holley 4V.

1957 Mercury Monterey M-335 optional 368: Dual 4V / 335 HP (only specs listed).

Info source: The Standard Catalog of American Cars 1946/1975 / krause.com / ISBN: 0-87349-461-X.

1950/55 Lincoln's used Hydra-Matic / 1956/60's used Turbo-Drive / What 1957/60 Merc's with 368/383/430's used, I dunno.

Cruise-O-Matic was introduced in 1958, used in Ford/Bird's with 332/352/390's thru 1967 / 1959/60 Bird's w/430's / 1961/67 Merc's with 390's.

I don't have a L/M parts catalog until 1965, so I don't know what trans' were used in Merc's w/368/383/430's thru 1960.

I know the Lincoln's A/T's, as I've owned a few Lincoln's over the years: 1936 Zephyr, 1940 Continental, 1955 Capri, 1956 Mark II.

 

The 312 was offered in Mercury cars up to and including 1960 models.

 

Yes, I'm aware of that. I was merely pointing out that there were no 368's in 1956 Merc's, optional in 1957's except Turnpike Cruiser's.