300 six hp and torque possibilities - Page 4 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices

300 six hp and torque possibilities

 
  #46  
Old 01-24-2008, 03:28 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.
Thanks for all the information, SS. I'm taking it all in. One more question; what is the literage of a 305? I know the 300 is 4.9L.
 
  #47  
Old 01-24-2008, 03:33 PM
Silver Streak
Silver Streak is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Posts: 3,241
Silver Streak is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
5.0 just like a 302. The liter to ci conversion isn't taken literally when they publish those numbers.
 
  #48  
Old 01-24-2008, 04:05 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,060
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
The cubic inches are more accurate than liters.
For instance, the 300 (300.08ci) is a 4.916L whereas the 302 (301.59) is 4.942L.
So in all actuality, the 302 is ACTUALLY a 4.9L, just like the 300. They just couldn't call them the same thing.

The 305 though, is 4.998, which is pretty much a 5.0L.

The one that's interesting is the 351, it's actually a 351.858, which easily is a 352, they just didn't want to confuse it with their older 352. Just goes to show that companies can change the number on the engine to fit their needs (like the 302 becoming the 5.0 when it is really a 4.9.)
 
  #49  
Old 01-24-2008, 04:20 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.
How do you guys know all this? I'm really impressed. Where do you get all this information?
 
  #50  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:00 PM
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 Silver Streak
I find it hard to believe that the Camaro went away because of the 305. They built them for a decade after the last 305 was installed in an f-body and the Camaro laid waste to the Mustang for that entire decade. Even the 305 powered cars could run with a stock 5.0 with an auto.
Let me clarify. The 305 TUNED PORT Camaros would run with a stock 5.0 auto. The TBI 305 camaros were totally worthless in a performance application. I tromped one in my moms Saturn once when I was a kid. And it wasn't a spur of the moment stoplight thing; I knew him and we planned the race. The throttle body injection cars are one of the most gutless V-8's I've ever had the mispleasure of experiancing.

And I'm not just guessing; I've owned both a 1986 5.0 auto and a 1988 Camaro with a TBI 305 (which I promptly ripped out and built a 350 for).
 
  #51  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:42 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,060
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
Originally Posted by 6CylBill
How do you guys know all this? I'm really impressed. Where do you get all this information?
Trust me, I don't have it memorized.

1 Liter = 61.02374ci (have it written down)

The only thing I had memorized was the bores, strokes, and the displacement formula.

300 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.98
302 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.00
351 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.50
305 = Bore: 3.74 Stroke = 3.48

The formula is just (cylinders) * (pi) * (stroke) * ((Bore / 2) ^ 2)

And I forgot to go back to the formula with the 305, it's actually a 305.85. (5.011L) Wonder why they didn't call it a 306? Does Chevy already have a 306?

To get liters, I just divided by 61.02374.

That's all the math behind it, but to make things even faster, I just have a program on my computer that I made that just does it within seconds.
 
  #52  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:45 PM
Silver Streak
Silver Streak is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Posts: 3,241
Silver Streak is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by AbandonedBronco
And I forgot to go back to the formula with the 305, it's actually a 305.85. (5.011L) Wonder why they didn't call it a 306? Does Chevy already have a 306?
Probably because if you want to get really technical the bore of the 305 is 3.736, not 3.74. I rounded it up because I didn't know we were going to break out the slide rules.
 
  #53  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:57 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 AbandonedBronco
Trust me, I don't have it memorized.

1 Liter = 61.02374ci (have it written down)

The only thing I had memorized was the bores, strokes, and the displacement formula.

300 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.98
302 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.00
351 = Bore: 4.00 Stroke = 3.50
305 = Bore: 3.74 Stroke = 3.48

The formula is just (cylinders) * (pi) * (stroke) * ((Bore / 2) ^ 2)

And I forgot to go back to the formula with the 305, it's actually a 305.85. (5.011L) Wonder why they didn't call it a 306? Does Chevy already have a 306?

To get liters, I just divided by 61.02374.

That's all the math behind it, but to make things even faster, I just have a program on my computer that I made that just does it within seconds.
I'm going to save this in my e-mail for future use. I think it's interesting the 300 has a longer stroke than a 351. Shouldn't this mean that the 300 actualls puts out more TQ in the low end than the 351? I know it's about the same down low but I thought the 351 would have a longer stroke?
 
  #54  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:35 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,060
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
Originally Posted by Silver Streak
Probably because if you want to get really technical the bore of the 305 is 3.736, not 3.74. I rounded it up because I didn't know we were going to break out the slide rules.
Hehe, was just pointing out some fun facts to answer a question the long way around. And you're right, at 3.736, it makes it a 305.19, which is a 305



6CylBill

Fords truck engines all have almost "perfect" bores and strokes, the sixes are the only one that breaks the formula (if only by a little bit.) The five most common engines all have an exact 4" bore.

240 I6 Bore = 4.00 Stroke = 2.98
302 V8 Bore = 4.00 Stroke = 3.00
351 V8 Bore = 4.00 Stroke = 3.50
300 I6 Bore = 4.00 Stroke = 3.98
400 V8 Bore = 4.00 Stroke = 3.98


They basically just added 1/2" every time. Not sure why with the I6s they went with 2.98 and 3.98 instead of 3 and 4, but *shrugs*.


The longer stroke of the I6 is what gives it a lot of it's torque, when the piston moves that far, it's got a lot of momentum behind it. That's also why they have their great lugging ability. When something moves that far back and forth, it takes a lot to stop it. Basically why the 400 has a lot of torque and lugging ability. It's, in a way, just a V8 300.
 

Last edited by AbandonedBronco; 01-24-2008 at 06:39 PM.
  #55  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:38 PM
IcemanV8
IcemanV8 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 499
IcemanV8 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I'd say that mainly depends on the cam specs. Lift and duration ultimately define your torque curve. But, you got to remember, the 351w has two more cyldiners. Would you say a 4 cylinder engine with a 4in. bore x 4in. stroke (201ci) should tow 'just as good' as a 300-6? This kind of comes into play with any V8, as there are 2 more cylinders there doing the pushing.
 
  #56  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:41 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.
The 300 and 400 have the same bore and stroke? ha ha.. What are the HP and Tq numbers on a 400? Seems like the more I learn about the 300, the more I like it. (O_o A V8 isn't touching my baby.

I now have a folder I keep all of this information in just for future referance. It's nice to know what my motor's specs are in comparison to a V8 or another rival's motor. As long as you keep spitting out the info, I'll keep saving it. Ha
 
  #57  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:50 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 IcemanV8
I'd say that mainly depends on the cam specs. Lift and duration ultimately define your torque curve. But, you got to remember, the 351w has two more cyldiners. Would you say a 4 cylinder engine with a 4in. bore x 4in. stroke (201ci) should tow 'just as good' as a 300-6? This kind of comes into play with any V8, as there are 2 more cylinders there doing the pushing.
Makes sense. And something can be said for displacement too. That's why the 400 is more powerful than a 300 - Two extra cylinders and more room to kick all that power around. You lose gas mileage though.
 
  #58  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:57 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,060
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
The number of cylinders doesn't always mean everything. It also has to do with displacement, the bore, and stroke. Such as a 300 and a 302, they have almost the same amount of displacement and should therefore be pushing the same amount of fuel and air. When you get to this point, the number of cylinders only has an improvement over smoothness. The I6 actually doesn't have to work as hard because there's less parts. And when they were both carbureted, they had almost the same horsepower and torque, they just made it at different RPMs, which is where the cam comes in.

In 1981
302 135hp @ 3400 RPM 243 TQ @ 2300 RPM
300 122hp @ 3000 RPM 255 TQ @ 1400 RPM
351 132hp @ 3600 RPM 263 TQ @ 1800 RPM

Oh, and to answer your question, in 1979:

400 149hp @ 3200RPM 300 TQ @ 1400 RPM
(notice almost the same RPM ranges as the 300 )

The 351 & 400 simply made more because they had more displacement. (Also, when the 351 went to a 4bbl carb, it was making 200hp/300TQ.)

It's when you start adding on cylinders and keep the bores and strokes the same that the V8 wins. The 300 to a 400 is a great example because they're near identical, just two more cylinders for the 400. There's just more cylinders of the same size to deliver the power.

Now, as for the 4cyl you pointed out, it would make less simply because it's smaller. But I drove a delivery truck for a while that was a 4.9 I4. I don't remember the exact bore and stroke, but they were basically like coffee cans. It was fuel injected, but it put out right around where you would think, 145 HP, and 300 TQ.
 

Last edited by AbandonedBronco; 01-24-2008 at 07:00 PM.
  #59  
Old 01-24-2008, 10:11 PM
Silver Streak
Silver Streak is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Posts: 3,241
Silver Streak is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
The fact that Ford didn't want the 351 confused with the 352 is a little ironic considering how many different versions of the 351 they ended up using. You've got the 351, 351M, 351C, 351CJ, 351 Boss, and probably one or two others.

Ford doesn't really make a habit of using round numbers in their bores and strokes. The 360, 370, 390, and 460 all have oddball bores and strokes.

I believe the stroke of the 240 is closer to 3.2".
 
  #60  
Old 01-24-2008, 11:02 PM
AbandonedBronco's Avatar
AbandonedBronco
AbandonedBronco is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 7,060
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
You're absolutely right, it's not 2.98", it's 3.18" I just remembered that the V8s kept increasing by half an inch so I got it stuck in my head that the 240 was exactly a one inch shorter stroke than the 300. Oops.
 

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


Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 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.