My 64 F100 has a replacement motor - Page 2 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks Discuss the Slick Sixties Ford Truck

My 64 F100 has a replacement motor

  #16  
Old 07-14-2009, 09:49 PM
warpedhead64
warpedhead64 is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9
warpedhead64 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Question

Originally Posted by garbz2 View Post
Right on.... I once had a Vertex mag and a fenton 6 one barrell intake and cast hedders for a 223 squirreled away for a model A roadster but some cash came along and spoke to me.. There is lots of stuff out there for 223s...The engine they were to go on lives in a uni in Ohio where the owner wanted to replace a 302 and go back to stock.

A buddy has a fresh 223 in his 63 Short bed uni along with a T5 out of a 6cyl fox mustang using one of mumerts 223 kits and pulls over 20 a gallon and drives it everywhere. People were looking at us funny as Fred wizzed by at 80 on the freeway in in Kansas City in an antique......

They run good with corrected top end oiling and have plenty of torque.

Garbz
top end oiling? If you say so--sure thing. But how do I do it?
Walt
 
  #17  
Old 07-14-2009, 10:12 PM
warpedhead64
warpedhead64 is offline
New User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9
warpedhead64 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Talking

Originally Posted by warpedhead64 View Post
I was 2nd owner of a 65 with a 300--back in the 70s and 80s--worst thing I ever did was sell it but my company went belly up and the kids and wife like groceries better than my truck, so--sell it I did. I drove it trouble free for over 150G and had to put a accelerator cable on and that was it!! I tried later to find another like it but in 85 bought a 100% restored 353 in a 65--wife nearly peed when I took her for her first ride in it--wound up having to sell it because teen son found out he had nice part time income sneaking it out at night to meet the cameros, etc. I honestly thought the 64 was like the 65 but had not done my research and found out the big change was in 65--oh, well, if I get the 223 spiffed it will be just what I need. I have lots of respect for the 292s abilities--was very sought after motor when I was just a pup.
Walt
It had 352 not 353--typo
walt
 
  #18  
Old 07-14-2009, 10:15 PM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 79,145
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
You have one hour to edit your posts, so you don't have to type new ones to make corrections or add info.

Look on the lower right for the editing button.
 
  #19  
Old 07-15-2009, 01:33 AM
garbz2's Avatar
garbz2
garbz2 is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 6,040
garbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to all
You can still find them on e bay. All they are is a fittings and some copper tubing to distribute additional oil to the rocker shaft or shafts.

Ford may have had a service kit for it and Bill can post the numbers. I had purchased one for a 292 and it was by western auto.

John, As far as i know Fred when he rebuilt the engine had the oiling kit all ready installed i never asked him but assume him being a crafty old timer he knew all the tricks, Heck he has a hydrogen cracker in his back yard...... Most engines that ran from that era to now had them. When you pull the cover there will be 1/4" copper tubing in there and a nipple on the valve cover tubing ran to a tee at the oil pressure gauge port..

Garbz
 
  #20  
Old 07-15-2009, 01:25 PM
Hakk
Hakk is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 194
Hakk is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
Originally Posted by warpedhead64 View Post
My question--if I do have to opt for another engine, what would be the easiest, quickest and most fuel efficient engine for a replacement--I retire from teaching next year and hope to have this truck as my everyday driver to pull my boat, firewood trailer, old tractor and transport many grandcritters to the lake fishing (6000 miles/year-avg).

I enjoy reading this forum and am excited at the possibility of having responses from some of the guys that really do a good job on this forum. Thanks lots. Walt
If you decide to go to a different engine, based on what you are looking for I would buy something with an overdrive transmission attached. Exactly what the engine is doesn't make nearly as much difference as your driving habits. An OD trans will make more difference in fuel economy than the engine displacement. If you keep the engine carbed and with points you will want to adjust and replace regularly to keep mileage decent. EFI is more work but would also help fuel economy significantly.

If easy and fuel mileage were my main concerns (with cost as the third), I would pick a 302. They are cheap and plentiful and overdrives are also easy to come by.
 
  #21  
Old 07-15-2009, 02:29 PM
Ringo Fonebone's Avatar
Ringo Fonebone
Ringo Fonebone is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 1,461
Ringo Fonebone is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Dave, I didn't remember seeing one on Fred's truck externally, figured you knew something (else) I didn't. I have seen them before on Y-blocks, they are kinda unsightly. Crafty ol Fred prolly found a way to conceal his. A hydrogen cracker eh,, the hell you say.
 
  #22  
Old 07-16-2009, 01:20 AM
garbz2's Avatar
garbz2
garbz2 is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glendale Arizona
Posts: 6,040
garbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to allgarbz2 is a name known to all
Yep, When Doc and I visited Fred in Globe he showed us it.... He is afraid to fire it on full and have it malfunction with 100,000 bricks and one large hole in Globe. Plus his airplane with no floor. and a few other gems........

There is a kit for 223s to tap the riser in the head and pipe and tap it in to the opposite end of the valve train. Those take a little more skill to install.

Garbz
 
  #23  
Old 07-17-2009, 11:14 PM
flipklos
flipklos is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Wahpeton ND
Posts: 2,085
flipklos is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Just what the world needs, another 302 where it didint start. Sorry I generate a lot of hatered saying this but the 302 is a crappy truck engine. Remember it was originaly a farlaine engine?
 
  #24  
Old 07-17-2009, 11:52 PM
Hakk
Hakk is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 194
Hakk is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
Originally Posted by flipklos View Post
Just what the world needs, another 302 where it didint start. Sorry I generate a lot of hatered saying this but the 302 is a crappy truck engine. Remember it was originaly a farlaine engine?
You have the right to your own opinion, even though it's wrong.

I have no special love for the 302, but they are cheap, plentiful and they work fine. I had a '90 F150 super cab with a 302 that I ran up to 214K miles before I sold it last year. Still worked great. The motor was never opened up. That engine also had a bad pan gasket leak at one time 8+ years ago and my ex ran it completely out of oil - twice! I count that as luck only that the engine wasn't damaged by that, but still it's a good motor IMO.

I would prefer the 351W to the 302 for a truck, but Ford never made any decent heads for them. The 352 FE in my '65 isn't bad, but it's expensive to convert to an OD trans or EFI and the heads aren't made to run unleaded. I like to use my vehicles a lot, but cost is also very important to me. Yeah the 302 isn't glamorous, but it's cheap and gets the job done.
 
  #25  
Old 07-18-2009, 12:28 AM
camperspecial65
camperspecial65 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: seattle
Posts: 4,374
camperspecial65 has a good reputation on FTE.camperspecial65 has a good reputation on FTE.camperspecial65 has a good reputation on FTE.
Not made to run unleaded...have you not heard of hardened valve seats or stainless steel valves...


- cs65
 
  #26  
Old 07-18-2009, 01:46 AM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 79,145
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by flipklos View Post
Just what the world needs, another 302 where it didint start. Sorry I generate a lot of hatred saying this but the 302 is a crappy truck engine. Remember it was originaly a farlaine engine?
The 302 was introduced in the spring of 1968 and was used in the following Ford passenger cars: LTD/Galaxie/Torino/Fairlane/Ranchero/Mustang/Falcon.

It was also used in 1968 Mercury Cougars, Montego's and Comets.

Econolines, Bronco's and F100's got it beginning in model year 1969.

What was the first year for unleaded gasoline? I don't recall any being sold here in LA LA Land prior to 1970.

The 351W was introduced in 1969, used in cars only thru 1974. Econolines got it in 1975, F150/350's and Bronco's in 1981.
 
  #27  
Old 07-18-2009, 12:45 PM
flipklos
flipklos is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Wahpeton ND
Posts: 2,085
flipklos is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Ford small block engines where originaly designed as an alternative to the massive FE engines in the early 60s.
The original displacments of 221 ,260, and 289 were used exclusivly in small and mid size cars that used a base six cylinder engine of small displacement and a massive 352 or 390 would be a grossly overpowerd mess.

The 302 is a great engine. I just think that if you tow or haul more than about 2000k the engine sucks. Hard to get a load started with the 302. No torque you see. They have poor acceleration with a heavy load. Sorry, my opinion.
The 351 Windsor and FE blocks will work as will the 460. 302 Is a car engine.
 
  #28  
Old 07-19-2009, 02:55 AM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 79,145
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
In 1963, Galaxie and Customs were available with the 289, which replaced the 292 used in 1962.

These cars and the (1965/68) LTD's used this engine thru 1968.

The 221 and 260 were introduced in 1962 Fairlanes and Mercury Meteors.

Falcon's and Comets used the 260 from midyear 1963 thru 1964.

1965 Mustangs manufactured before 8/23/64 were also available with the 260.
 
  #29  
Old 07-19-2009, 09:36 PM
ricky berry
ricky berry is offline
New User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas , Texas
Posts: 21
ricky berry is starting off with a positive reputation.
Rush Engine Tag

Sorry,Guys. I don't respond often but I do read the many posts. As for the 'Rush egine' tag. Ed Rush is still in business. I speak to his credit manager quite often as we are good buddies. Ed has been in business since the 1960's,as far back as I can remember when I was riding the bicycle. His business is located on Asher Ave in Little Rock,Arkansas. I hope this helps clear the air about the 'Rush' tag.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
64 f100 262
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
1
04-02-2015 08:42 AM
64 f100 262
New Member Introductions
4
04-02-2015 01:00 AM
64 f100 262
Ford Inline Six, 200, 250, 4.9L / 300
0
04-01-2015 11:49 PM
sean z
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
5
03-15-2015 10:35 AM
Dr4J
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
1
11-02-2004 05:48 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: My 64 F100 has a replacement motor


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.