I am looking at buying a 74 Ford F250 Crew 2WD with manual trans. it has a 360 in it. I was told the 360 was a junk engine that it burns oil is this true? An if so how can I fix it? An if the 360 & 390 is the same then why did Ford come out with the 360 in the first place? An should I just put another engine in it or keep the 360 an if so what one should I go with. The truck will be a daily driver to replace my current 08 Chevy HHR SS which is junk. I have a lemon lawyer on the case an want back with Ford. Also this truck is from Cali so what emissions are on this truck that are not on other trucks? What can I do to improve MPG with this engine an what non computer engine gets the best MPG that would fit in this truck? This will be my first truck an first Ford in 13 years last Ford was a 84 Ford EXP best car ever owned. I have never did a project before how hard would it be to work on this truck? Any other info would be helpful.

 

360s don't burn oil at a rate any higher than any other engine.

The one in your truck might, but that's probably because it's worn out.

One theory of the 360 is that Ford wanted to simplify production, so instead of casting and machining the 352 with a 4 inch bore, and the 390 with a 4.05, the just went with the 390 block set up, and used the 352 cranks to make the 360. Thus, they had a "base" engine, and the 390 was an option. The problem with the 360 has to do with low compression and low piston height--power killers, and contributors to poor fuel economy.

You can overhaul the engine, and upgrade to a 390 crank and rods, or bigger. You can select pistons with a higher compression ratio for that set up. You will have extreme difficulty finding higher compression pistons for the 360.

Fuel economy? You can expect 8 to 12 mpg. You will be very happy to see 15. You will need an OD and a long, slow trip to see 20. Best economy will come with tall, skinny tires at their max psi, keeping the revs under 2000, and the speed under 55.

What trans is in it?

What is the overall condition?

Brakes?

Smog equipment might be the air pump and maybe a cat. '74 is now exempt in CA. A 3/4 over certain GVWR could have been exempt at that time also. Any stickers under the hood or on the valve covers?

How hard to work on? Sounds like it could be a real chore.

 

It has a manual trans . an over all condition of the truck is pretty good an the brakes are good. So off road tires an an 5 speed manual trans upgrade would not help much? I am planning to change everything over to a late 90's or newer frame that has 4WD an add fuel injection for non computer engines an maybe upgrade it to a 5 speed manual trans. I am planning to move to Colorado come spring. An with the rebuild books you can get for those engines how hard could it be?

 

A guy I know said he had a new 75 with a 360 an said it was real bad about blowback with the oil an those engines don't last long. He had problems out of the engine an he knew a lot of people who did as well.

 

Manual trans...3 speed, 4 speed, granny first...?

Off road tires = poorer mpgs.

5 speed manual: very limited. Ford issued 5 speeds won't bolt to the FE, that leaves an old Clark with a million miles on it, or an NV4500. You might bring it up to 15-17 mpg--you'll save some gas, but not much money.


Changing the frame, add FI, add 4WD, Moving to Colorado... You have many irons in the fire. You ever rebuild a vehicle like you're talking before?

As for Mr. Sour-on-the-360, there are many folks here with over 100,000 on a 360. There were always lemons, and it sounds like your buddy there got one. But overall, the 360 was very dependable, did not produce blowby right off the showroom floor and lasted as long as most engines of it's day.

If you choose to follow your friend, why buy this truck?

 

I'll drink to that. The 360 aint no 390 but it aint too shabby either.




John

 

It has a 4 on the floor an no I have never did a vehicle before this will be my first. I know some people who could help. An as far as the guy I know I was asking him what he thought about it since that is all he has had is Fords an he is about 50's so he would remember something about a truck like this. I am asking anybody who knows anything about these old trucks to see what problems I might run into. I don't know nothing about a 360 or 390 an never owned a truck or a V8 before I have just had small compact cars an the biggest car I owned was a 02 Camaro with a 3.8V6 in it. An I am wanting to change it over to a 390 since there are more parts available as far as MPG it can't be as bad as the HHR I am driving it gets 17-19 in winter an 20-22 the rest of the time it drinks the gas an it is only a 2.0 turbo an they say there is nothing wrong with it. My mom has a 3.4V6 in a Pontiac Aztek an gets 22 an her boyfriend has a Chevy Silverado ext.cab with a 4.3 an get about 22 both more than my car gets.

 

I have to disagree with your theory, because ALL 352/360/390/410/428 blocks were cast as 352's.

Only after the blocks were finished, could they be another size.

This why you cannot go by FE casting numbers to ID what the engine size is.

And...btw: The 390 was an option, but only with 2WD.

1968/76 F100/250 4WD: The only V8 available (and it was an option) was the 360 2V.

The 360/390's share the same block, same bore. Only the crank, rods and pistons are different 360 vs 390.

Kalve: I was a Ford back (shop) parts counterman for nearly 30 years.

There was never any problems associated with the 360 burning oil, cracking heads or overheating.

The 351M: Now that's another story. This terd of an engine was notorious for doing exactly this.

 

Gee, Bill, I am glad I'm not the only one who thinks the 351M was a POS. Big, heavy, poor fuel economy, burned oil, low powered. The only objection I ever had to the 360 was it really didn't deliver the power the 390 did and got worse gas mileage. Like most Interceptor (FE to you younger guys) engines, with reasonable care they would run forever.

 

Aren't they cast with bore-specific cores? Thus the inability to bore a 352 from 4 to 4.23, or the need for caution with overbores approaching .060? I know many of them have "352" on them.

 

A 390 can't be as bad as 17-19? 20-22? You are dreaming. Your turbo HHR gets OK mpg for a turbo. My Audi A4 1.8 turbo got 22.5 in mixed lead-footed driving, 24 when in grandfather mode. If you drive a PU with any FE with a lead foot, you will be getting 8 mpg tops. What rpm's are you turning when your HHR shifts? 5500?

Read some more of the threads here, the FAQ's at the top, and a book or two.

 

Who's a youngster? Were you born when FDR was Prez?

FE's were never called Interceptors when installed in trucks, and the name was dropped in cars after 1966, except for the Police Interceptor of 1967, and the name was gone for good after 1967.

Since most FE's have that 352 foundry marking, the FE blocks were cast as 352's...with the 4.00" bore.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lotsa luck getting any better than 8-12 MPG with any FE engine around town.

If you have stick and overdrive, 3.00-1 rear axle ratio...20 or a bit better MPG is obtainable on the hiway...if you drive 55...or less.

These trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick. Back then gas was cheap, and...no one...gave a damn about gas mileage.

Look at all the new piles, the gas mileage with more fuel efficent engines with all the electronic computerized crap, and EFI isn't much better that the old stuff got.

The best hiway MPG I got with my 2004 5.4L Lariat was 18. Around town, 10-12 MPG was the norm.

My 2008 Con-Fusion 4 banger w/5 speed A/T O/D: 20 MPG is about it combined. The wifes 2008 Edge gets around 18 MPG combined.

 

Yes your correct. The "352" is just a foundry indentifier used on the block. Also the reverse "105" blocks same thing. 352-360-390-410 were one set of cyl wall/water jacket cores. 406-428 were another. Some 406 and all 427's yet another. As the 406 was the test mule for the 427 many traits are common to both one of them was thicker cyl walls on some 406 blocks. There was also the reinforced or cloverleafed 427 wall cores. If you compare a few blocks together you'll see the cranksaddle areas of the HP and HD blocks are beefier than the std web blocks.

 

Yea in the winter time when it gets cold weather you have to run it at least 4,000 RPM or higher to keep it running it acts like it wants to die on you. An when you first start it on cold morning like freezing it acts like it don't want ot start an it turns over 4-5 times before it starts an starts missing an jerking an turbo kicks down an everything. dealership told me the direct injection on those cars are cold nature an the colder it gets the worse it runs. As far as the MPG on the truck I know I won't see 22MPG with it some tuning an some updates like fuel injection for non computer engines an things like that to increase MPG an easy running I might get it around 18MPG or so which would be fine. If I have to take a little hit on MPG an have a vehicle I can depend on so be it I know this Ford will do fine I had good luck with mine an have heard the same from others with Ford. Can't be no worse than Chevy this truck don't have computer emissions or sensors so no problems like that will ever pop up on this vehicle ever which would be a piece of mind. An no the HHR drinks the gas sometimes it will show right an sometimes it will show it went like 20 miles when you went 2 miles.

 

Well, I used to get 14 around town with a 390 4V in my 77 F150, 16-17 highway. This had a 3:25 rear. Bill, I know you remember FEs being Interceptors, I was adding it for the others. My 390 was a 76 camper special engine and I had the factory Holley and distributor. I had a real nice set of duals I designed to go down the right side to clear the tanks. Truck ran like a scalded dog, ask Archion.