302?
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
It can, it's just not a torque producer with a 4" bore and a 3" stroke. Why build a small, stroke limited motor in a truck that can easily digest a 460(& bigger) sized engine under the hood? In a sort wheel base F100 or 150, a 302 is OK for short hop, around town running, but if you're going to put it in a bigger body (super cab, crew cab, F250 & up) it shows it's lack of pulling power. The 302 just was never intended to be a pickup truck motor when it was designed, it was adapted to many of it's applications later.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 34,503
Likes: 2,820
Originally Posted by MER
Why does'nt anybody like a 302 in a truck? I thought a 302 could be built very strong.
So what is the REAL reason people hate it in a truck? Some of it just what baddad457 says. But I think it's because most people on this site consider 3500rpm to stratospheric. They're stuck in this nightmare from their childhood when they or a country cousin floated the valves in the Farmall Cub at 1500 rpm when they fooled with the governer. So an engine like the 302 that has to rev to ---gasp---2800 rpm to make it's peak torque is just too peaky to be in a truck.
You can build a 302 very strong:
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/6...8-hot-rod.html
But 3600 rpm is just too much, and 7200 rpm is gas turbine territory, so I know a stock 300 six would get a massive hole shot on a motor like that Boss.
So if you have a 302, just hold it to the floor and slide your foot off the clutch, because it's just a dog until it spins up, you know.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
Originally Posted by 85e150six4mtod
the 302 actually makes more torque than the 300.
You should amend this it say that the 302 makes more PEAK torque than the 300 (but depends on the build you're talking about) The 300 has a broader torque band than probably all 302's. That's more useful in a truck application. 
The best stock 302 for a full size (short wheel base only) is the 94-97 truck/van 5.0. Even better with some port work on the E7's and 1.7 roller rockers added. This is what I'm running in my 89 Ranger and it's a great combo with a 4 speed Toploader & 3.73 rear for running around town. But when I hitch my car trailer to it loaded with just about anything, it shows it's lack of "*****" in pulling power. It WILL pull,(takes awhile to get this rolling with the 77 Comet on the trailer) just not like a bigger motor would. 
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
No, the 351's are fine. Even better when you've got a 94-97 model with the roller cam. The 1/2" longer stroke and nearly an inch longer rods work wonders. (302 rods are 5.095" long, the 351W's are 5.95")
Posting Guru
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 2
From: Wingo, Ky
OK...not trying to hyjack the thread but im a lil confused. I have a 302 in my 79 Ford pickup, it is the original 302. My dad rebuilt it a while back and it has a little less than 40,000miles on it now. it is now my daily driver and I am fixing it up. I've been tolded they are not good for pulling heavy loads. My 302 has only a slight build and it pulls a 16ft extra wide trailer and my 5,500 pound Antique John Deere tractor with no problem at all. My dad use to pull a 30ft camper with it.
edelbrock performer intake, 268 comp cam, no special pistons just flat top and .30 over, chrome moly rings, edelbrock 600 4bbl carb, stock heads. Trans is a C4 with a B&M shift kit. How much hp is my engine making? I know it cant be much, but I know it does pull loads good with no problems.
edelbrock performer intake, 268 comp cam, no special pistons just flat top and .30 over, chrome moly rings, edelbrock 600 4bbl carb, stock heads. Trans is a C4 with a B&M shift kit. How much hp is my engine making? I know it cant be much, but I know it does pull loads good with no problems.
Trending Topics
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
To you it may do OK, but pull that trailer and load with something with a bigger engine and you'll see the difference. And don't be surprised when that C-4 takes a dump pulling that tractor. 
And for future references, there are no such thing as "Chrome-Moly rings" Chrome rings ? Yes. Moly rings ? Yes. Just not the two combined.
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
Postmaster
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,656
Likes: 1
Nothing wrong with the c4 (don't worry)... great Trans... They put them behind big block all the time... and they use a lot less hp to turn them so more hp goes to the road.. Wish I had a c4 I would trade my c6 for one any day, I just couldn’t find the parts needed to make one a 4X4. Needed the output shaft and tail housing.. Older broncos used them so they are rare.
If you pull for a living get a diesel I maintain 10 F series at work from F250s to F650 no gas engines... they will out pull anything with gas all day long... but the little 302 will get better MPG as a daily driver. It’s all about what you can live with, if you not in a hurry than a 302 will be ok but if you have to pull hills at the posted speed limit get the longest stroke gas engine or a diesel.
If you pull for a living get a diesel I maintain 10 F series at work from F250s to F650 no gas engines... they will out pull anything with gas all day long... but the little 302 will get better MPG as a daily driver. It’s all about what you can live with, if you not in a hurry than a 302 will be ok but if you have to pull hills at the posted speed limit get the longest stroke gas engine or a diesel.
Postmaster
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,656
Likes: 1
There are no such thing as "Chrome-Moly rings" Chrome rings? Yes. Moly rings? Yes. Just not the two combined
Not trying to bash you buddy but I see references all the time for "Chrome-Moly piston rings" when ordering engine kits… what is the world missing here?
http://app.infopia.com/Shop/Control/...d/0/rid/125469
Not trying to bash you buddy but I see references all the time for "Chrome-Moly piston rings" when ordering engine kits… what is the world missing here?
http://app.infopia.com/Shop/Control/...d/0/rid/125469
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
And in reference to towing with a C-4-----------back in the 70's we had a 69 Ford E330 Club Wagon. 302 engine with the pan fill C-4. In the ten years we owned it, we had the transmission rebuilt 5 times. And we did very little towing. Damned thing weighted 6000 lbs by itself, ran the 1/4 mile in 21 seconds. Rearend was a Dana 60 with 3.73's. The C-4 just wasn't up to the job in that application.
Posting Guru
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,735
Likes: 2
From: Wingo, Ky
My dad has owned the truck for over 20yrs before he gave it to me to drive nothing catastrophic has ever happened to it, its never broke down on me, my dad said it never broke down on him. The c4 shifts like a dream. The engine has great compression with the "chrome-moly rings". It doesnt burn a drop of oil between oil changes, holds 50 pounds of oil pressure at idle. Runs 190 degrees with or without a load. My dad has a F-350 dually with the 7.3 in it that we usually use to pull the tractor around with, but the 302 has no problems. A freind of mine has a completely stock 302 in a 79 pickup and he pulls his pulling tractor around with it. The tractor plus all the weights comes in at about 7,500pounds and after all these years the ole 302 and c4 seem to be in fine condition. I know the 302 isnt the biggest engine in the world, but in my opinion it is one of the best engines ford ever built.
Senior User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
From: Mooresville, NC
I'm building a 5.0/302 EFI for my 94 2wd short bed. I considered going to the 5.8 (currently running 4.9) but I think the 5.0 will be plenty for this truck. No heavy hauling to speak of and no towing.