I hear from quite a few guys that their 300 made it to 500,000 miles... but that seems like a lot to me. Mine, I drove it across Washington state in second gear at 4,000rpm and daily drove it for a couple years after that. Before I'd bought it, it had been sitting 16 years. No issues.

 

I HATE to say anything good aboug a GM Product but the Corvair engine was WAY ahead of it's time. All Aluminum (fully synchronized tranny too GM's first). So far ahead of it's time that they didn't have the materials to permanently seal the pushrod tubes. They had some kind of asbestos stuff that can NOW be replaced with new stuff that keeps this from happening. Keep in mind that these things run with a manifold temperature as high as 450 to even 500 degrees. They're simple and they work, even 50+ years old with about the same maintenance as you average lawn mower or motorcycle. As far as size, they're 102 cubic inches or 110 cubic inches with 2 carbs on the earlies and 140 cubic inches with 2 or 4 cabs on the 65 and later models. They even offered them with turbo charging from 1962 to 1966 or 67..



I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread by saying the 300 I6, 350 SBC, 3.8 Series III (GM FWD Especially the SuperCharged ones) and the good ol' Flat Head V8. Without Henry trying to one-up Chevy's StoveBolt 6, we may never had had hotrodding.

 

Rob, as a former Corvair owner, I will agree with you. We had a 140hp 1965 Corsa that was .030 over with an Otto OT20 cam. This made it between a stage 2 and stage 3 Yenko engine. Fun car!

 

my personall thought are as follows:
best deisal 12 valve common rail cummins.. solid reliable, easy to mod, last for ever
worst deisal-gm 5.7 put in any gm.. cheap, weak, lousy etc etc
best v8s-426 hemi with 6 pack or the 69 429 boss with one off heads... (they were a hemi style) the 427 side oiler runnin close behind
worst v8 chebby 305, gutless poor design lousy milage need i say more..
best v6- the ford ohv 4.0 good power, cheap, reliable not overly complicated
worst v6- the chrysler 3.3 really do i need to say anything
best i-6- the ford300.. cannot be killed by mere mortals...
worst i6- the chevy 230.. good design poor execution wasnt till the 250/292s that it got better
not even gonna bring up for cylinders or foriegn builds.. they dont exist at my home nor will the..

my vehicals should illistrate my current personal choices:
99 superduty 7.3l auto w/263k miles and no mods..
1993 mustang 306ci v8, aod with full race suspension, complete fuel injection overhaul and 2001 gt cobra brakes, rebuilt 3.23 8.8 disc rear..
1986 4X4 ranger.. complte 92 explorer drive train, motor, trans, axles, dash, seats, limited slips frnt & back, rollbar, winch,4" lift, 31x10.5r15 wranglers
1979 bronco.. 406ci heavy modified, built c6, 205, dana 44 front 8 lug outers, 10 1/4 rear, both w/4.10s and true tracs.. 6" lift, lightbar, rollbar, roof rack, tire/jack rack, pushbar w/ winch, 36x12.5r16.5 goodyear mtrs..
1978 ford f250.. 466ci moddied, buit c6, 205, dana 44 front, 10 1/4 rear, 4.56 gears w/ truetracs, 8" suspension and 3" bod lift, rollbar w/tire mount, aromuor bumpers w/winch ffront, 43/13.5R16.5 swampers..
78 frod f250 supercab 4X4, 460ci with intake swap, rebuilt 4spd & 205, new drivelines, 3 1/2" lift, camper special rear susp, dan60 rear 44 front 3.54 gears open, full rear bench, bed side toolbox, cross rail toolbox, dual exhaust, 265x75R16 geolanders. soon to be up for sale.. too many projects
1983 mustang hatch,, currenly stripped for race car.. gonna be 557ci, c4, 8.8 4.56 gear w/ mini spool, 12 point cage etc..
1994 explorer limited 4x4, 4.0, e40d, elec tcase, 235x75X15s, brush gaurd, taillight gaurd, selling soon.. too many rigs..
78 bayliner saratoga 26' with custom 351w..omc out drive, cuddy cabin, rigged to be ski boat..
68 glaspar 18' fish boat.. 2.5 iron duke inline 4, mercruiser out drive..


also workd on, swapped out, moddifed, or tweaked dozens of other motors..probably owned 35 cars since learnin to drive..

 

That's a heck of a list, you must be the richest guy in Sweethome. I know the town it's a little

 

not rich.. the wife and i both work hard, shop bargains alot and currently have no children.. toys will probably get sold off when we do have kids... some of my rigs ive owned for 20 years so ive had time to work them over.. i live in sweethome for the peice and quite.. the neighbors dont complain about my projects.. could use a house with more property and a bigger shop though.. paying storage sucks..sorry

 

I dont know about the chrysler 3.3 V6. All of the ones i have experience with have been rock solid reliable. Now the Chryslers 2.7 was a piece of junk IMO.

 

How could you say the 4.0 SOHC V6 was a "best engine"?

Cam chain tensioners are weak in early models, leading to failure as early as 50k. Three cam chains, and one on each end of the engine to boot make it a "hateful" engine to work on. It requires pulling the engine to service the passenger side cam chain. They are thirsty, and power is modest for an OHC 4 liter motor.

 

I'd have to say the earlier 4.0 is a best motor. Not the SOHC motor, but the earlier one. Like in '94.

We've got a '94 ranger with that engine, it has 160,000 HARD miles. Never had any problems with the engine itself. The A4LD trans behind it is durable to say the least.

My grandpa has a '93, same exact truck as our '94. And gets treated the same way, Hard. It has over 300,000 on it and it's running better than ever. They just won't quit.

 

Just don't overheat them.

I had an Explorer with 192k on the original A4LD. Great truck.

Sent from my Telegraph using IB AutoGroup

 

Well, not that I like to admit it, but it got HOT a couple of times. Engine and tranny.

I tell this story about this truck as a testament to the Built Ford Tough model. It is 100% true...

Years ago, before we bought our super duty, the only pickup we had was the little ranger. It did all the work we had to do. Sometimes it was overloaded, asked to things a full size 4x4 would have trouble with, but it always got us through.

One time, we had to haul a load of railroad ties up to our mountain property. It's 100 miles away, on a highway with some decent grades. Some a few miles long. We had our trailer stacked. I don't remember how tall it was, (I was still a little guy) but they were probably stacked as high as two men could load them. I do remember that the gross estimated weight was about 14,000lbs, Give or take a ton.

This trailer is an all steel industrial style flatbed with 5,000lb axles and 8lug hubs, brakes on both axles. So it was probably overloaded, But it's a tough piece.

We it hooked up to the ranger, and left home at around midnight to avoid traffic and hope that the cool night time air would help the truck. The first 45 miles of the trip is all pretty flat ground, just gradually picking up elevation out of town. The truck was doing ok. we were just going easy at 55 mph in drive. Then came the hills....

We would give it hell about a mile before every hill. Trying to gain as much momentum as possible. We would hit about 70 and start climbing. On the shorter hills it wasn't so bad, we would make the top at a reasonable speed. But there is one long hill. Longer than the others.

Again, we started out as fast as we could, about 60 because of a turn at the base. Then just opened the throttle. It dropped to 2nd gear, speedometer coming down, then first gear, now at WOT. Speedometer still coming down. It stopped falling at about 30mph. It held that speed, wide open in first gear, for the next couple miles. Temperature gauge starting to climb.

We made it to the top and pulled over to let it cool off before starting down the other side. Being how it was still a relatively new truck, 6 or 7 years old, it cooled down fast and was ready to go.

Going down was just the opposite. Start off just barely rolling, in manual 1st gear, but that heavy trailer just pushed the little ranger out of the way. Using the gears and the brakes to their full extent, it was just enough to keep everything under control to the bottom.

Fast forward a few more hills, same story. We were now on the last climb up to our place. Everything on the truck was hot, so hot it wasn't acting normal. We made the final pull up our driveway and parked it. Opened up the hood and pointed it into the breeze.
The engine was hot. Very hot. 240 or more.

The transmission was puking fluid from everywhere. The bottom of the truck was covered in tranny fluid from the top vent spewing it out. And I kid you not, on the dark mountain with no lights, you could see the transmission darkly glowing. We thought we had done it in this time, we just ruined that truck.

It took a few hours, but after everything cooled down, we started it back up and poured about 2qts of tranny fluid in it. It still moved!!! Not only did it move, it shifted! Up, down, it was working.

We drove it back home, easily, not knowing if it was gonna hold up or not. But it did. No problems. Changed the filter and flushed it, it has worked ever since. That was 70,000 miles ago, still going. Working fine.


If that ain't a testament to ford and how well they built the rangers, I don't know what is....

 

The 4.0 is def a good engine, but i have have experienced quite a few with loud ticking valvetrains, didnt seem to really effect them though.

 

Ford 300..hands down most reliable engine. I also love the 302, 351W, and the 460. the 2.9L v6 in my 88 ranger has also been good.

Engine i dislike the most, the chevy 350...yes it is a good engine.. but I am so sick of seeing them in old classic Fords..every time you see a nice hotrod, it's got a darn 350 in it.. I mean, come on...be original..
I also dislike the chevy 454.. had one of those in an RV...Ford 460 beats that engine hands down in an RV..460 had more low-end grunt, and didn't have to scream climbing uphill like the 454.. and the 460 climbed the hill FASTER!

and the chevy 305.. I can't say anything bad about that engine.. I have one in my boat(Mercruiser 898)..runs all day at 4,000 RPM and doesn't complain..when it finally goes..*sigh*...it will be replaced with a 350...

 

mebe2k, the friend who is building my new engine (.030 over 460 with probably roller cam and rockers and 9.2-9.5:1 CR) has a bunch of early 460 parts from building marine engines. He told me the reason you don't see many 460s in marine use, too much torque. He said he has seen one actually explode the upper box on a stern drive used with them and 454s.

Back when my late wife and I took our 5th wheel up to the Pennsylvania Good Sam Samboree I had a fellow come over when we were checking in. He had an almost identical rig to ours, except a Chevy dually with a 454 and 4:10 gear. He wanted yo know what kind of speed I had climbing seven mountains grade. When I told him 37mph in 2nd with the C6 he damn near dropped his teeth. His was 22mph WOT in 1st. The rig, loaded with no water in the tanks and the truck needing filling was 16100 lbs on the truck scale at Millersville MC.

 

I'm not clear. Was that 16,100 lbs his weight or your's?

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: this worship of Chevy engines really bugs me. With only ONE exception, the 454 has the absolute worst rod length to stroke ratio (1.53 to 1) of ANY V8 EVER made. Only one engine is worse: the SBC 400 (1.48 to 1). I've been researching the 8.1 BBC and it apparently also has a 1.53 ratio despite having longer rods, because it's longer stroke offsets the effect of it's longer rods.