300 six hp and torque possibilities - Page 2 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices

300 six hp and torque possibilities

  #16  
Old 01-21-2008, 10:51 AM
fomocoguy3
fomocoguy3 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 47
fomocoguy3 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Originally Posted by Col Flashman
I'm unable to answer your specific question & I do not know Why these v-8 Zombies keep coming here & stating garbage about I-6's.
As this is the I-6 Forum which Promotes the exchange of doing all sorts of interesting Perfomance builds to the I-6. So they should go some where else & Spout their Stuck in the v-8 Rut Bilge to those of a like mind as theirs!
Father used to build 300 I-6's by hand in his Garage for his 1/4 mile mates & would achieve 500-600hp out of them.

This is my build on my Inliner, I believe this should put this latest diatribe from the v-8 Zombies to rest. The majority of the parts came right off the parts house shelf.

Built '65 series 300c.i. (312c.i. now) I-6 w/ 300 H.P. @ 4600 rpm & 400 F.T.P. @ 3200 rpm w/ a 9.5-1 C.R.

Ross Pistons 4.060
Hastings Power Flex Rings .060
Federal Mogul Mains .020 Under
Clevite Performance Bearings Std.
Federal Mogul Cam Bearings Std.
Melling Torque Cam
Melling H.V. Oli Pump
Eagle H-beam Rods 6.300 2.100 Rod Journal
Crane Gold Race Roller rockers
ARP Main Stud Kit, Rocker Studs,
Fisher International Ballancer
Bore 4.060
Power Hone 4.060
Mild P&P Intake & Exhaust
Performance valve job
Performance Balance job on Steele Crank w/ in 7 grams
Grind Rod Journals to 2.100
Plumb Intake for Heat via Water Pump
Deck Block to Square
Align hone to Factory specs
Deck block for Zero Deck
Offenhauser C Intake
Holley 1850 600 CFM
S.S. Borla 2 into 2 Header
8' of 3" tubes attached to Flowmaster 40's
4 Core Desert Radiator mated w/ the Original Radiator Housing
2 1,200 CPU Electric Fans, on @ 180*, off @ 170* mounted diaginally
MSD 6A Eclectronics Package & Coil
Dura spark II Electronic Ignition
This sounds like a kick a$$ 300, but my problem is I just don't have the cash to build an engine like this, especially since I'm in the middle of restoring everything else on my truck. I don't think my current 302 will last long enough for me to build that engine! It's tapping and rattling and will need to go soon. I've been looking in the paper and can find a stout engine built by someone else for around a grand, so I figure if I'm smart about it I can let someone else lose their **** on the build and come out with a bad a$$ 302 or windsor. Maybe even a 460. I've been doing a lot of thinking over the last 24 hrs or so...
 
  #17  
Old 01-21-2008, 11:25 AM
mousetrap65
mousetrap65 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 66
mousetrap65 is starting off with a positive reputation.
build both then buy mustang put 302 in mustang put 300 in truck use truck to tow
mustang to shows cool ha
 
  #18  
Old 01-21-2008, 11:33 AM
IcemanV8
IcemanV8 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 499
IcemanV8 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Flashman, where do you people come from? You sit around and wait to be 'offended'... you TRY to be offended. No one said a single bad thing about the 300. No one.

No trash talking, nothing. What is a V8 zombie? Someone who knows that they can spend a lot less to get a lot more out of an engine? Then, I guess I am a V8 zombie...

Those are a LOT of mods to get 300 horsepower. And, no offense, but that definitely doesn't look like real dyno numbers. Unless you were just rounding... got a dyno chart? I'm curious on the torque curve.

I come to the 300 forum because I like all engines. I go into a lot of forums through here. But the OP doesn't know if he wants a 302 or a 300. Not everyone wants to sit back and let guys like you just completely leave out the 302. The 302 could be built better for less. That's the point. He didn't say he was set on building a 300. Then I wouldn't have said anything.

He said he was deciding between a 300 and 302, he won't be hauling much, but mainly, he wants something FUN to drive. Sounds like a 302 fits the bill perfectly.
 
  #19  
Old 01-21-2008, 02:59 PM
5.0Torx's Avatar
5.0Torx
5.0Torx is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 552
5.0Torx is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by Col Flashman
I'm unable to answer your specific question & I do not know Why these v-8 Zombies keep coming here & stating garbage about I-6's.
As this is the I-6 Forum which Promotes the exchange of doing all sorts of interesting Perfomance builds to the I-6. So they should go some where else & Spout their Stuck in the v-8 Rut Bilge to those of a like mind as theirs!
Father used to build 300 I-6's by hand in his Garage for his 1/4 mile mates & would achieve 500-600hp out of them.

This is my build on my Inliner, I believe this should put this latest diatribe from the v-8 Zombies to rest. The majority of the parts came right off the parts house shelf.

Built '65 series 300c.i. (312c.i. now) I-6 w/ 300 H.P. @ 4600 rpm & 400 F.T.P. @ 3200 rpm w/ a 9.5-1 C.R.
once again, you just took things personally and am putting words in my mouth. i said the 300 is a good engine and described whats its good at. Thats not smack talking.

I visit this board because i own an 83 F250 with a 300 and an NP435, thank you. And over the summer while working on construction sites i'd have trash and wood loaded up higher than the roofline, so i was even using it for it was designed to do! So dont tell me i should go somewhere else. For as long as i own this truck i will visit the 300 forum. For as long as i own a ford truck, i will visit this site.

I really am not surprised you said what you did because its happened before.
Its hard not to be offended by it, really, because you act like just because 300s CAN make 300 hp streetable, or 500-600 hp for dedicated quartermile machines, that ALL 300s are better than ANY V8. You have one of the, if not THE strongest 300 on this board. You are at the top of the pile, man, not the average. Stock, the 300 is an anemic old tractor motor giving you max torque for minimum dollar. Since you have pumped thousands into yours, you now dont have to sacrafice the lack of power or revvability. I'd just like to point out that i and MOST OF THE GUYS ON THIS BOARD dont have thousands and thousands of dollars sitting around to make a 300 hp 312 like you did. Most guys selected the 300 because THEYRE CHEAP - to buy initially and maintain. Some guys have <$1000 and will put do intake and full exhaust. Even fewer have the money, downtime, and willpower to start porting the head and such. By this stage youre a die-hard 300 fanatic anyway, which is fine. If 300s float your boat, get a 300, i wont stop you. I encourage you to buy the truck that makes you happy. Just dont be ignorant and bullheaded with me for stating facts. And dont take things so personally.
 
  #20  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:12 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 6,969
AbandonedBronco is a name known to allAbandonedBronco is a name known to allAbandonedBronco is a name known to allAbandonedBronco is a name known to allAbandonedBronco is a name known to allAbandonedBronco is a name known to all
5.0Torx, I'm going to have to agree with you on this. I have a 300 and ONLY a 300. I've never in my life driven or ridden in a vehicle that has a 302 or a 351. I absolutely love the 300. It's taken me lots of places, is great around town, does "well enough" on the freeway, and is very easy to maintain and lasts for ever. I completely love it and am sold on it. But like you said, it is great because of what it is. And as I stated before it can definitely be built to be an awesome and powerful engine in ALL regards, but it's not going to be as easy or inexpensive as a 302 or 351, which was what my original post said and which I think is good information for fomocoguy3 so that he knows what he's up against if he decides to go with the 300. It definitely is more cost effective to build a V8 than a I6 if you're economically and time minded and it's definitely something to keep in mind.

However, I think the main reason that people keep getting defensive over your (5.0Torx) and IcemanV8s posts is that it seems whenever anyone asks what a 300 is capable of, even if a 302 isn't even mentioned (in this case it was, but the original question was simply what a 300 could do), both of you come into a 300 message board and post all about the 302. It seems that it's almost every time. So when you actually have valid information, as you do right now, people are immediately still on the defensive of your two's posts. Just a heads up.
 

Last edited by AbandonedBronco; 01-21-2008 at 03:17 PM.
  #21  
Old 01-21-2008, 04:55 PM
5.0Torx's Avatar
5.0Torx
5.0Torx is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 552
5.0Torx is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
thats fair. i understand what youre saying and ill try to be better in the future, but 300 guys do the same. Im just sick of the same old argument. It seems like alot of the guys around here pull tree stumps for a living, which the 300 is great for, but they never seem to recognize that some guys want their trucks to do something other than pull an immense load at 2 mph.

The 302 hits the middle. Decent low end, big mid range, decent top end. Jack of all trades, master of none. The 300 has big low end, decent mid range, no top end. Master of pulling immense loads at 2 mph. Theyre both great motors, theyre just better at different things. for the OP, i think the 302 would be better and easier, especially given that he already has one and its in his truck.

I would love to know how much money was spent on col flashmans build, and to see a dyno graph. The BS would really stop there.
 
  #22  
Old 01-21-2008, 05:01 PM
6CylBill's Avatar
6CylBill
6CylBill is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Almost Heaven
Posts: 7,021
6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.
300 = Truck Motor.

302 = Hot Rod.



You sound like you want a hot rod (haven't read the other posts). I'd go with the 302 for speed.

I'm fond of the either motor, but I prefer the 300. Your choice.
 
  #23  
Old 01-21-2008, 05:02 PM
6CylBill's Avatar
6CylBill
6CylBill is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Almost Heaven
Posts: 7,021
6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by 5.0Torx
thats fair. i understand what youre saying and ill try to be better in the future, but 300 guys do the same. Im just sick of the same old argument. It seems like alot of the guys around here pull tree stumps for a living, which the 300 is great for, but they never seem to recognize that some guys want their trucks to do something other than pull an immense load at 2 mph.

The 302 hits the middle. Decent low end, big mid range, decent top end. Jack of all trades, master of none. The 300 has big low end, decent mid range, no top end. Master of pulling immense loads at 2 mph. Theyre both great motors, theyre just better at different things. for the OP, i think the 302 would be better and easier, especially given that he already has one and its in his truck.

I would love to know how much money was spent on col flashmans build, and to see a dyno graph. The BS would really stop there.
]


^ what he said. Either motor has different strengths / weaknesses.

Originally Posted by AbandonedBronco
5.0Torx, I'm going to have to agree with you on this. I have a 300 and ONLY a 300. I've never in my life driven or ridden in a vehicle that has a 302 or a 351. I absolutely love the 300. It's taken me lots of places, is great around town, does "well enough" on the freeway, and is very easy to maintain and lasts for ever. I completely love it and am sold on it. But like you said, it is great because of what it is. And as I stated before it can definitely be built to be an awesome and powerful engine in ALL regards, but it's not going to be as easy or inexpensive as a 302 or 351, which was what my original post said and which I think is good information for fomocoguy3 so that he knows what he's up against if he decides to go with the 300. It definitely is more cost effective to build a V8 than a I6 if you're economically and time minded and it's definitely something to keep in mind.

However, I think the main reason that people keep getting defensive over your (5.0Torx) and IcemanV8s posts is that it seems whenever anyone asks what a 300 is capable of, even if a 302 isn't even mentioned (in this case it was, but the original question was simply what a 300 could do), both of you come into a 300 message board and post all about the 302. It seems that it's almost every time. So when you actually have valid information, as you do right now, people are immediately still on the defensive of your two's posts. Just a heads up.
Oh and.. what ^ he said too. :P
 
  #24  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:05 PM
fomocoguy3
fomocoguy3 is offline
Freshman User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 47
fomocoguy3 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Wow. I didn't realize I was stirring up such an age old pot of engine comparison stew! Seriously though, I apprieciate everyones input. I need all the opinions I can get; really about all my options, not just the 302 or 300. I'd like to have it all figured out before spring is here, so I can go ahead and do the work when the weathers nice (my garage is too short for a cherry picker, and I don't like pulling engines in the cold!).

Honestly, for the money I know I'm better off with the 302, just because I have a nice carb and intake already, plus I have a set of 1968 4v heads with a 53.5cc chamber that would be a good starting point. The only thing nagging at me is I just like the idea of doing something different, hence the buildup of a 1972 (with a 69 grill) shortbed Ford.

Does anyone have a 1971 400M lying around? They had 9.5:1 compression in 71 only...
 
  #25  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:11 PM
6CylBill's Avatar
6CylBill
6CylBill is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Almost Heaven
Posts: 7,021
6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by fomocoguy3
Wow. I didn't realize I was stirring up such an age old pot of engine comparison stew! Seriously though, I apprieciate everyones input. I need all the opinions I can get; really about all my options, not just the 302 or 300. I'd like to have it all figured out before spring is here, so I can go ahead and do the work when the weathers nice (my garage is too short for a cherry picker, and I don't like pulling engines in the cold!).

Honestly, for the money I know I'm better off with the 302, just because I have a nice carb and intake already, plus I have a set of 1968 4v heads with a 53.5cc chamber that would be a good starting point. The only thing nagging at me is I just like the idea of doing something different, hence the buildup of a 1972 (with a 69 grill) shortbed Ford.

Does anyone have a 1971 400M lying around? They had 9.5:1 compression in 71 only...
Ah, you're doing things different. I can respect that a great deal. Look at this video; One of them on the site made it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=q6_a8RzNLKw

300 Inline six with 300 HP and 400 ft lbs. Beast? Yes.
 
  #26  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:52 PM
Col Flashman's Avatar
Col Flashman
Col Flashman is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: La Verne, California
Posts: 3,875
Col Flashman has a very good reputation on FTE.Col Flashman has a very good reputation on FTE.Col Flashman has a very good reputation on FTE.Col Flashman has a very good reputation on FTE.
Typical of Both your standard come backs & you are the ones being Ignorant & Bullheaded & I got those Numbers straight from the Dyno Read-out you v8 Zombies you.
AND just because you Did Not read &/or Comprehend part of my Statement, I'll Reiterate that Portion of it for you.
"ALL of These Parts Can Be Bought Right Off the Parts Shelf", meaning the Internal engine parts. Just pick up a Hollander's & have a field day, as all of the parts that'd give you a Mild to a Wild Street Rod Build are all right there in B&W.
I could have gotten more hp by going w/ a couple of different parts, but I didn't want the standard v8 Zombie engine Lope & I didn't want a Gas Guzzler.
And NOT for Thousands & Thousands of Dollars that you keep Ranting about & Yes you Both are ALWAYS Ranting that the Only thing a 300 is good for is a Slow Hauling truck engine & that's all it's good for.
Custom Classic Trucks magazine a few years ago Published an Article about how to Build the 300 I-6 into 500hp Street Rod & it didn't cost Thousands & Thousands of dollars. It was just a tick more (because they went to Clifford whos prices are exorbitant) than your typical Zombie v-8 302 build that is so boring & repetitively done by everyone & their dog.
And once again, all you have to do is make Any I-6 Breath & it will perform so much better. Just simply installing an Offenhauser "C" or "DP" Intake w/ a 390 4V, a Header will vastly improve Throttle response & kick in a 25% minimum of hp. Then to take it a step further a Minimal P&P w/ oversized valves w/ stronger springs & a 3-angle grind & if you so desire you can install a Comp Cam for that little extra Omph. You can even cheat a tick & find a 240 head & up the compression a tick as well as the previous mentioned performance tips.
This is comparabal, if not cheaper than doing the same to a 302.
Plus I've yet to have an Inliner Self-Destruct that I've had v8's do used under the same circumstance's, pulling, hauling, daily driver or racing.
You believe that an Inliner is Only good for one thing, that's fine for you, But don't you dare come here & attempt to dissuade others that wish to know what others here have been able to make an Inliner More than you believe they can be built to be.
That's why your are a Stuck in a Rut v8 Zombie. You have one mind set & one mind set only, Inliners are Only good for one thing & one thing only & v8's are better for everything else.
 

Last edited by Col Flashman; 01-21-2008 at 07:09 PM.
  #27  
Old 01-21-2008, 07:26 PM
5.0Torx's Avatar
5.0Torx
5.0Torx is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 552
5.0Torx is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
whatever flashman,

1)i never said the 300 couldnt do the things you say it can do, im just saying its easier to do it with a V8. 300 hp is not earth shattering, neither is 500. You can build a 302 to do that too. Sorry...There are new 06+ Honda civic Sis pushing 600. You can build any motor to do whatever you want. Its just easier to do certain things with certain motors.

2)quit calling me a zombie. youre not 10 years old anymore. and what makes you think im stuck in a rut? You think im sad to have a 302? do you REALLY think it is THAT MUCH WORSE than a 300? define ignorance...

3)your sarcasm is annoying. you are not glad that i own a 1983 F250. The point i was trying to make was that I HAVE BOTH a 302 and a 300, so i know both motors on a FIRST HAND BASIS (whens the last time you drove a 302 or 351 V8 WITH AN OPEN MIND, sir? yeah right...). To support your argument, you read that and understood "i own a 1983 F250 and therefor am entitled to tell the OP that all 300s are anemic pos tractor motors no matter what". Nope! Define stubborn....

4)enough BS. lets see a dyno graph and how much you spent on your 312!
 
  #28  
Old 01-21-2008, 07:34 PM
6CylBill's Avatar
6CylBill
6CylBill is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Almost Heaven
Posts: 7,021
6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.6CylBill has a great reputation on FTE.
Can we please stop arguing like a bunch of 13 year olds? How many times must it be said either motor is good?

After all, they're made by FORD.

A Chebbie guy was bragging the other day about his old truck. He was saying.. "Yeah, it's a 289 V8. Smallest V8 Chevie makes." or whatever c.i. motor.

I thought to myself, "Yeah, and Ford's Six is bigger than that and gets better mileage while working just as hard." I didn't say that but I didn't have to. I know what I have. :P

Both the 300 and 302 are stout motors. 'Nuff said.
 
  #29  
Old 01-21-2008, 07:40 PM
85e150six4mtod
85e150six4mtod is online now
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 21,054
85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation85e150six4mtod has a superb reputation
The other thing here is he already has a 302 in the truck. Despite the many merits of the 300, you really can't beat having a starting point of everything fits, links, pumps, cools, heats, exhausts already right where it is.

If he had a 300 and was thinking 302, he'd be better to beef the 300, imo.

Since he already has the 302, all the money needed to change to the 300 would be better spent on rebuilding extras (like all ARP fasteners, for example) on the 302.
 
  #30  
Old 01-21-2008, 07:42 PM
rswhitmore
rswhitmore is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 283
rswhitmore is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I posted early on this thread, to give an answer(or opinion)on the question ask. I am so tired of this bull **** bickering between the 4.9l & 302 camps that I am going to opt-out of this thread. If you guys have nothing better to do than argue about these two great engines, then I have better things to do with my time. Get a life! The stars after word bull were put in by the FTE Site. It's another word for Crap!
 

Last edited by rswhitmore; 01-21-2008 at 07:46 PM. Reason: error

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 300 six hp and torque possibilities


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.