390 specs
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
Originally Posted by krewat
Not going to get into a peeing contest, but I can say that my 11:1 390 in the '74 highboy could pull about the same loads as my V10. And the truck itself is about 1500lbs heavier.
And the V10 doesn't try to kill me by carbon monoxide poisoning idling 20 feet away from the garage door ...
And my last highway trip, my V10 got better than 16MPGs, almost 17. Actually, I broke 17, but I'm skeptical of my own calculations...
And the V10 doesn't try to kill me by carbon monoxide poisoning idling 20 feet away from the garage door ...
And my last highway trip, my V10 got better than 16MPGs, almost 17. Actually, I broke 17, but I'm skeptical of my own calculations...
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
From: Paragould Ar
Originally Posted by baddad457
I added that little jab after perusing thru the V10 forums. The V10 (2 valve) has 20 more cubes, power output almost identically with a 40 year old 390, gets about the same mileage. I just don't see where anything's improved, they should have just put EFI on the 390.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
Where did I say the mileage would improve ? My point was, between the 40 year old 390 and a 2 valve V10, there's no difference in performance and mileage. Emissions I'm sure are better (from the smaller bore and longer stroke) on the V10, but that's about it.
Senior User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, WI
I like the info that's been put in this thread. Thanks to everyone who's contributed, first of all. Secondly, to adam.. depending on your gearing, you might get as high as 18? Almost the same mileage as the new trucks, better power and durability, and better looking. Heh. Let everyone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm basing off what I've seen here on the forums.
Elder User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 574
Likes: 0
From: Paragould Ar
Originally Posted by baddad457
Where did I say the mileage would improve ? My point was, between the 40 year old 390 and a 2 valve V10, there's no difference in performance and mileage. Emissions I'm sure are better (from the smaller bore and longer stroke) on the V10, but that's about it.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
Originally Posted by baddad457
I added that little jab after perusing thru the V10 forums. The V10 (2 valve) has 20 more cubes, power output almost identically with a 40 year old 390, gets about the same mileage. I just don't see where anything's improved, they should have just put EFI on the 390.
I had both a hopped-up 390, and now the V10. No comparison ... when used as a truck motor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
76Ford kid
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
7
Jul 12, 2014 04:18 PM
daflentge
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
19
Oct 13, 2006 04:02 PM
donsboy
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
19
Apr 19, 2006 12:19 PM
bluepartsman
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
7
Mar 18, 2005 10:34 PM
76 F150 Ranger XLT
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
9
Aug 27, 2004 08:36 PM
