auto to manual

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

May 21, 2008 | 01:39 PM

#16

86Stepside

Senior User

Joined: Jul 2005

Posts: 493

Likes: 1

From: Minneapolis, MN

The mazda trans is usually reffered to as the m5od. F250's can have 300's too, the one I found my zf in was one, 300, 302, 351 all have the same bellhousings.

May 21, 2008 | 02:02 PM

#17

85e150

Super Moderator

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 34,526

Likes: 2,830

Pics of the trans. You'll see it when you find one or the other:

Domestic Truck Tranny Guide

I'm more with Raider50 on this one. Brakes alone are reason enough to upgrade if heavy loads are in the future.

As for a 300 out pulling a 351, go find a hp/torque chart for the 351 and explain how that would be possible.

Good luck with your project.

May 21, 2008 | 02:03 PM

#18

tjthegreat

Elder User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Ft Wayne IN

usually m5OD

May 21, 2008 | 05:38 PM

#19

tjthegreat

Elder User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Ft Wayne IN

it is possible because the 300 has more low end grunt than the 351 does,the 351 tops out at a higher rpm

May 21, 2008 | 10:04 PM

#20

Raider50

More Turbo

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 707

Likes: 1

From: Buffalo, Wyoming

Oh alright i was thinking you were talking about numerous tons here. I was thinking when they put a ton and a half of coal in the bed of my 3/4 ton it squatted down fairly low, i was going to be thinking that if you were going to be packing around ton's of weight you might want to think about getting a suspension upgrade also.

May 22, 2008 | 02:18 PM

#21

ssidney

Senior User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 440

Likes: 0

From: pg b.c

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjthegreat

it is possible because the 300 has more low end grunt than the 351 does,the 351 tops out at a higher rpm

the 300 does NOT have more low end. I have one of each and it's not even comparable, yes the one in my sig. has 4.10 gears but previous to that I had an '87 f-150 3.55 with the 351 as well and it could out-pull the 300....the only reason I have the L6 is because of the fuel mileage.

May 22, 2008 | 03:37 PM

#22

jas88

Lead Driver

Joined: Feb 2002

Posts: 7,970

Likes: 595

From: Greater Austin, Texas

From my 1990 Ford F-Series brochure:

300 Six = 150 HP @ 3400 RPM, 260 LB/FT @ 2000 RPM
351 V8 = 210 HP @ 3800 RPM, 315 LB/FT @ 2800 RPM

From the torque curve published therein, it looks like the 351 makes about 300 LB/FT @ 2000 RPM so I don't see how you could say the Six has more "grunt" than the 351.

May 22, 2008 | 04:41 PM

#23

Raider50

More Turbo

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 707

Likes: 1

From: Buffalo, Wyoming

or you could just get a 460 and be able to tow anything you can hook onto

FTE Stories

Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts

10 Ways Ford is LOSING to the Competition

Joe Kucinski

Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now

Brett Foote

This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level

Verdad Gallardo

Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals

Joe Kucinski

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

May 22, 2008 | 06:16 PM

#24

tjthegreat

Elder User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 721

Likes: 0

From: Ft Wayne IN

hmm thats interesting ive heard all over this site that the inline six has more torque till about 2400 rpm while the 351 kepps going,hell look at a cummins compared to the pws,you may be right if any of you kno any dyno websites with these engines can u let me kno,sidney i bet a big reason ur 351 pulled ur 6 is because it is a 250

May 22, 2008 | 07:00 PM

#25

icrman

More Turbo

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 578

Likes: 12

So how come my owner manual says the truck can pull more with an automatic than the manual transmission? I would hate to have to start out on a hill with a 14k trailer with a manual trans.

May 22, 2008 | 08:12 PM

#26

ssidney

Senior User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 440

Likes: 0

From: pg b.c

the 351 in my 250 came out of my '87 150 (thats why it's no longer in my sig)....the difference is not small either...like comparing an arab to a clydesdale

May 22, 2008 | 08:13 PM

#27

ssidney

Senior User

Joined: Jan 2008

Posts: 440

Likes: 0

From: pg b.c

Quote:

Originally Posted by icrman

So how come my owner manual says the truck can pull more with an automatic than the manual transmission? I would hate to have to start out on a hill with a 14k trailer with a manual trans.

the automatic gives you tq multi in the tq converter

May 23, 2008 | 08:50 AM

#28

alxsnmr

Fleet Mechanic

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 1,603

Likes: 1

From: St Louis

Honestly, numbers do not lie but people will get rather passionate about objects. What engine you use to do the work with is up to the individual but if someone is satisfied with the ablity of a particular engine why encourage them to upgrade? If they are unsatisfied and seeking more power for the work then I can see encouraging upgrading the engine/drivetrain/truck. I am certainly happy with my 351 in my bronco, and would be much happier of my 78 pickup had a running engine.