255 4.2L v-8?.
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
From: montana of course!
255 4.2L v-8?.
I have a 1982 255 4.2L v-8 that coming out of a 1982 cougar XR7 with only 90k miles. i know that they where only made from 1980 to 1982, so i don't want just junked or other words it rare find. it has the same casting numbers as the early 80's stang.
I HAD A BLONDE idea
that maybe putting the 255 in to some thing else. i have mid 60's ranchero or maybe a fairmoint wagon or maybe getting a small pick up like a ranger. with gas being $4.20 a gallon. i was thinking it should get better gas mileage than the bigger V8'S. it the same stroke as 5.0 ,just smaller cylinder bore. so what ever rig it would be going it, it would get the norm stuff (i like these parts,so i install them when ever i get a chance) like shorty headers/1.72 rocker swap/ 2 1/2 mendrual bent pipes/ 5speed tranny/ small 41004V carb or holley pro injection/ 3.55 gears.
my question is:
1- has anyone played with 255 v-8? if so what was your results?
2- i remember reading something about these back in the mig 80's. do any one have any thing about those mags?
3- is worth my time putting it in something or just save it for some one restoring there 80 to 81 mustang?\
i know some will trash the truth about 255 but i was just wondering?
I HAD A BLONDE idea
that maybe putting the 255 in to some thing else. i have mid 60's ranchero or maybe a fairmoint wagon or maybe getting a small pick up like a ranger. with gas being $4.20 a gallon. i was thinking it should get better gas mileage than the bigger V8'S. it the same stroke as 5.0 ,just smaller cylinder bore. so what ever rig it would be going it, it would get the norm stuff (i like these parts,so i install them when ever i get a chance) like shorty headers/1.72 rocker swap/ 2 1/2 mendrual bent pipes/ 5speed tranny/ small 41004V carb or holley pro injection/ 3.55 gears. my question is:
1- has anyone played with 255 v-8? if so what was your results?
2- i remember reading something about these back in the mig 80's. do any one have any thing about those mags?
3- is worth my time putting it in something or just save it for some one restoring there 80 to 81 mustang?\
i know some will trash the truth about 255 but i was just wondering?
Last edited by rancheronut; Jul 29, 2008 at 01:46 AM. Reason: spell check
Postmaster
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 6
From: Earth
"Poorly received thanks to its dismal performance and mediocre fuel economy, it was dropped after the 1982 model year, and is considered one of the worst modern Ford engines."
Ford Windsor engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of course, you take Wiki with a grain of salt...
Ford Windsor engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of course, you take Wiki with a grain of salt...
Cargo Master
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,071
Likes: 36
From: British Columbia
Well it was specifically engineered for fuel economy after the 1979 gasoline shortages. A friend had one in a 1982 T-Bird which we swapped out because it had a spun bearing, damaging the crank journal beyond regrinding.
It was an okay motor I recall, attached to an AOD got pretty good mileage. It uses a unique (aluminum) 2V intake manifold with a separate valley cover IIRC, and uses small oval intake ports. Thus you are pretty well limited to this stock intake.
The exhaust pattern is the same as the 302 so headers and such will fit. I don't think it has the threaded boss for clutch equalizer bar linkage for early applications.
It should be a good candidate for a better mileage engine in a Fairmont or such, but for the 60s Ranchero I might use a 260. It would be interesting to do scientific tests between these two motors to compare power and mileage.
Maybe it's time this Forum added 255 to its title.
It was an okay motor I recall, attached to an AOD got pretty good mileage. It uses a unique (aluminum) 2V intake manifold with a separate valley cover IIRC, and uses small oval intake ports. Thus you are pretty well limited to this stock intake.
The exhaust pattern is the same as the 302 so headers and such will fit. I don't think it has the threaded boss for clutch equalizer bar linkage for early applications.
It should be a good candidate for a better mileage engine in a Fairmont or such, but for the 60s Ranchero I might use a 260. It would be interesting to do scientific tests between these two motors to compare power and mileage.
Maybe it's time this Forum added 255 to its title.
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 146
Likes: 2
From: Wichita Falls TX
Actually to use a four barrel 302 intake, get some 260/early 289 heads
to bolt on. Then you can use 302 parts. The 260 heads are the same
combustion chamber volume and same size valves as the 255's heads.
So are early 289 heads.
to bolt on. Then you can use 302 parts. The 260 heads are the same
combustion chamber volume and same size valves as the 255's heads.
So are early 289 heads.
Cargo Master
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,071
Likes: 36
From: British Columbia
Keep in mind that the 260 and early 289 heads have one generator mounting bracket bolt about a sixteenth inch off from the later heads. I had to make an offset stud to account for this when swapping parts before. I think the change might have been in 1965.
Also they don't have hardened exhaust valve seats.
Also they don't have hardened exhaust valve seats.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 34,494
Likes: 2,809
Check the heads and valves to see if they will fit in the 3.68 bore, smaller than the 3.8 260 bore.
Trending Topics
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 146
Likes: 2
From: Wichita Falls TX
Well I know that the 260 will clear the bore. You might be right about
the 289 though. Although, they both list the same combustion chamber
size.
the 289 though. Although, they both list the same combustion chamber
size.
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
Postmaster
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 6
From: Earth
Just how big is the boat you're planning to anchor? I'd think just the block would be plenty for anything under 50 feet...
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 146
Likes: 2
From: Wichita Falls TX
I actually don't have any prejudice towards any Ford motor, I like
'em all!! Of course I'm not a performance minded person. 0-60 and
quarter mile times mean nothing to me. As long as the car or truck
looks nice and can go at least 75-80 mph, I'm satisfied.
'em all!! Of course I'm not a performance minded person. 0-60 and
quarter mile times mean nothing to me. As long as the car or truck
looks nice and can go at least 75-80 mph, I'm satisfied.
