I had a 96 E150 with the 300. When I bought it new, I told the salesman I was concerned about driving it in the mountains in Mexico. He told me if I was not satisfied I could trade it for a V8(the dealer would absorb the costs---and yes I had bought many cars at that dealer). On the way to Mexico City from Michigan I thought surely I would be getting the hightop with a V8. The Inline 6 van loved 70-75mph, no more or it burned oil. But would you know it, that 3-speed van with that 300 went up and down the mountains without any problems!!!!!! Yes, I kept that van. Now the downside, the 300 is not a highway engine, my wife drives 40 miles each way to detroit and the ride was hard on that engine because of the speed.....The 96 300 was 150 hp and 240 foot pounds of torq. at a pretty low rpm. The 4.2 loves the highway more, and also has 202 hp and 240-260 torque at I think 3600 rpm. The 300 got 15mpg in every situation. My F150 2006 cannot make up its mind what mpg to get. A couple days ago it got 11.6, today it got almost 20 on the same road at the same rpms-----I'm easy keeping shifts at around 1600. Brian A, today is warm in the 40s, so the temp must be a factor in the mpg??????

 

The factory rating for the 4.9 was 145 or 150 Hp, depending upon tranny, and 265 lb. ft, not 240.

Highway speeds are not at all hard on the 300/4.9. As long as you keep it below 33-3500 rpm or so, beyond which the power curve falls off a cliff, you'll be fine. Maybe yours burned oil at that speed but trust me, most do not.

My 93 stickshift with 31 inch tires, 4.10 rear axle and overdrive turns around 2600 at 75. If you have the same size tires, 3.55's and NO overdrive you're turning around 2900. I've logged many, many highway miles at those rpm's using the 300 and it doesn't strain it one bit. That's still well within its powerband.

 

You are right, 145 hp, 265 to 270 pounds of torque at 2000 rpm, and the 4.2 is 202 hp, 260fpt at 3750rpm. Why would ford put an engine whose torque peaks so high in a truck?

 

Because it's what's available, and they use it in other vehicles like minivans, so it has multiple uses. Chevy put a comparable size V6 (the 4.3) in their trucks. There's nothing wrong with the 4.2 for most uses, but when the truck is loaded down it falls a bit short. The result with a heavy load is it spends a lot of its time at higher revs, since it has a higher rpm, peaked power curve that falls off sharply as the motor lugs down.

If this motor was in a midsized car you'd really like it. It works well in a van also.

FWIW, the Dodge Hemi has a higher torque peak rpm, and the Chevy's 5.3 is comparable to the rpm's of the 4.2's torque peak, but those motors have around 70-90 cubic inches more displacement to offset the higher torque peak. They also seem to have a broader powerband than the 4.2.

I think they pursued horsepower to the exclusion of all else with the 4.2, and the powerband shows it. You gotta rev it to go. The ironic thing is that if they increase the horsepower of the 4.2 in the future the torque peak will go even higher. If you don't mind the motor revving a lot, just live with it. The 4.2 I drive is a pretty tough motor, but I greatly prefer the 4.9 to it for truck work.

 

you wanna walk the dog? lets hook chains and see how big and bad your v6 is. im sure it'll bark real nice getting draged backwards down the street. the 300 will out work a 4.6 and a 5.4 easy, the 4.2 dosnt stand a chance. its a minivan engine at best.

 

Jimbo,
Thanks for joining in. I take it you like the 300 I6!
I didn't see him saying how "big and bad" his truck is. I DID see a guy who seemed happy with the 4.2 while acknowledging the strengths of the 300 I6 at the same time.
Most of us don't get involved in truck pull-offs, but I'll grant, the 300 would likely win.
For some of us, the 4.2 works quite nicely, performing fine within the range of use for which it is intended.
I spend a LOT of time on the interstate and the 4.2 shines there - at least for me. I can crusie at 80 mph all day long and the engine never breaks a sweat.
I need a truck also, and again, the 4.2 does me just fine.
It's a boat load less expensive than a V8 to buy (2005 XL brand new, about $15,000 out the door.), and it's a snap to maintain.
I have driven several 300s on the interstate.
Given my needs and wants, the 4.2 is better for me than the 300s I have driven.

 

Brian I agree with you on the 4.2 and in with my current needs I am very happy with the 4.2 (I just hope the mpg improves) The truck accelerates just fine and I'll probably never tow 5000 lbs. Hell, my ranger with the 4-banger towed a uhaul trailer around town just fine lolololo. I did get the 150 out on the highway in the last two days and it shined. I believe I read a post stating it can take many thousands of miles to break the engine in and get improved mpg. I realize I do drive a truck, and it will NEVER get the mpg like a car, but a 4.2 should get many more mpg that the 4.6 and 5.4!!!!!

 

I loved the old 300 for it's bulletproof reliability and ease of service. But ya gotta remember that pickup truck owners have changed too! Just a few years ago they were used for work only. Nowdays people who buy work trucks opt for a V-8, or go up a notch and get a V-10 or diesel. Most of these pickups are usually F250's or 350's for the extra load capacity anyway. Most people who buy the F150 are going to use it for hauling kids, groceries, going to the movies ect... That's why you see extended cab short bed trucks eveywhere. You really don't need a low lugging straight 6 or V-8. It's more of a family vehicle. Look at the so-called pickups today-lots with 4 door cabs with 4ft. beds. My 03 4.2 has more horsepower and torque than my 84 302 2bbl did. I'm happy with it since I drive 100 round trip miles to work. It does fine on the highway with my full sized truck camper in the back. It also plows snow great too. There will always be debate on which engine is best. Look at the Cummins 6 vs. Powerstroke 8 debates. GO USA!!!!!!!!! USE E85!!!!!