5.0 vs 5.8
Freshman User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
I also have a 1993 F150 ext cab with the 5.0 and WISH it was a 351. If it was, I wouldn;t have had to put a ton of money into it making it as fast as a stock 351....that alone should tell you. Actually it is faster than a stock 351, but doesn't have the towing torque of one.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,358
Likes: 3
From: Nebraska
Originally Posted by phoneman91
The 302 in a truck responds well when it has truck gears--ie 4.10s. I test drove 5.0/5 sp with 3.55s and my 4.10 302/5 sp and the 4.10s woke that 302 up!!!
The 4.9 seems to run well with 3.08s--but the 302 needs the lower gears!!
The 4.9 seems to run well with 3.08s--but the 302 needs the lower gears!!
I used to have an 86 I6 with 3.08's and a 4 speed and it never felt down on power.
Freshman User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by brown 4x4
I'll agree with that. My automatic had 3.31's with stock tires; my stick has 3.55's with 31" tires. Close to the same effective ratio. The automatic has a much higher overdrive gear and on the highway is when it felt the most gutless compared to my 5 speed. I'm sure 4.10's would be even more in the power band, but mileage would probably go down.
I used to have an 86 I6 with 3.08's and a 4 speed and it never felt down on power.
I used to have an 86 I6 with 3.08's and a 4 speed and it never felt down on power.
6th Gear
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
1992 f250 5.8 and 1990 5.0
1992 F250 4x4 LB 5.8l throttle body 5sp 150k+
10in wide wheels slightly oversize 31s or 32s all terrains
It's a dog over 2200 rpm and not much before 1500 rpm
slow loud and is lucky to get 9 mpg anywhere
1990 F250 LB 5.0 (long runner mustang looking efi) auto 88k
stock rims stock tires
power from idle up. Quieter even with the religious exhaust. Much better throttle response. 15 mpg all day long.
10in wide wheels slightly oversize 31s or 32s all terrains
It's a dog over 2200 rpm and not much before 1500 rpm
slow loud and is lucky to get 9 mpg anywhere
1990 F250 LB 5.0 (long runner mustang looking efi) auto 88k
stock rims stock tires
power from idle up. Quieter even with the religious exhaust. Much better throttle response. 15 mpg all day long.
Last edited by CorvusCorax; Sep 12, 2021 at 05:50 PM.
Cargo Master
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,190
Likes: 620
The 302 is a fine motor in a 1/2 ton or even light 3/4 ton, if geared properly. Ford had a *terrible* damn policy of putting 2.73s, 3.08's, and 3.31's in the 1/2 tons, which just frankly aren't worth a tinkers damn for a truck that you actually want to do anything useful with. I had an 89 F250, with a 302/M5OD and 4.11's, and it was a fine truck, even for towing light loads. It got around 17mpg empty (driving 60-65mph).
It's all about expectations, and how you drive. I continually see guys buying these OBS trucks and saying they're "Down on Power" or something similar.
Well, yes, in stock form, compared to a Newer F150/Silverado 1500/Ram 1500, they *are* down on power. It was a different time, and the *newest* of these trucks is now roughly 25 years old.
I don't think the EFI Truck 302 was ever rated over 200HP, the 351W, I think was advertised at 215HP, I think the 460 might have been advertised at something like 220HP. They are what they are. Adjust your expectations.
It's all about expectations, and how you drive. I continually see guys buying these OBS trucks and saying they're "Down on Power" or something similar.
Well, yes, in stock form, compared to a Newer F150/Silverado 1500/Ram 1500, they *are* down on power. It was a different time, and the *newest* of these trucks is now roughly 25 years old.
I don't think the EFI Truck 302 was ever rated over 200HP, the 351W, I think was advertised at 215HP, I think the 460 might have been advertised at something like 220HP. They are what they are. Adjust your expectations.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 5,075
Likes: 864
From: N.W. Alabama
Had 4.9's, and 302's, in everything, mustangs same as trucks, gear it and your good, I finally got a 351w in the one I own now, drove it, came back, bought it 7yrs ago, it will roast the 31's off it, if needed, just for fun.
Cross-Country
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 66
Likes: 20
From: Garden City, MI
My 5.0 feels plenty spunky. Of course, it's a regular cab short bed with few options and plenty of rust to reduce the weight. It's 3.08s, too.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
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
Logistics Pro
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 583
From: Chillicothe
Cargo Master
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,190
Likes: 620
I couldn't recall the exact numbers, but I knew they were around 200HP rated from the factory. I mean, seat of the pants dyno? you can't feel 10HP in something the size of an F150.
Logistics Pro
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 583
From: Chillicothe
You are right, not too noticeable. But odd that the "less accurate " speed density made more power
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
I suspect there is no significant difference in the actual power made at the motor, MAF usually runs a little richer than SD so not likely SD makes more power. But a manual trans consumes less power than an auto so it's not that the manual truck makes more power it's just that less of it is lost in the powertrain... and the marketing Dept works that backwords and comes to the wrong conclusion.
Cargo Master
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,190
Likes: 620
Meh, I'm constantly annoyed by the constant yammering of people that MAF is the be-all and end-all of fuel injection management technologies. There's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with a speed density setup. The issue with the EEC-IV Speed Density, is the simple fact that the ECU is very very limited in what it's able to do, in stock form. It's got nothing to do with the fact that it's an SD system. It's the ECU it's plugged into.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 5,075
Likes: 864
From: N.W. Alabama
and one, damn near all are geared towards the 3000+ rpm range, an dont help our trucks on take off, nor do we spend very much time past 3000 rpm