CarForum.net - Car Forums, Automotive News and Community
Home Gallery Register Calendar Members List

Go Back   CarForum.net - Car Forums, Automotive News and Community > General Car Discussion > Car Clubs

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools
Unread 01-31-2012, 07:11 PM   #91
It's Simple
 
Raptor22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 2,555
Rep: 64 Raptor22 will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed_Demon View Post
My buddy and I beat on his F150 so often that I can recall the sound of a 300 being pushed hard at will. It has a very tractor-like cylinder pumping sound.

That reminds me of my Jeep's roaring when you get on it. Now that engine itself could scare pedestrians.
4L and 4.9L sound similar depending on the exhaust. I love that low revving industrial tractor sound. Its distinct, not a V8, and still sounds cool.

EFI isnt that difficult to work with at all on OBD1 Fords. There are a fixed number of sensors, and everything is easy to get to. The OBD codes generally tell you what sensors are malfunctioning and even if you cant, you can replace all of them for under $100. Stock EFI 300s make 170HP, the carbed versions make 130HP. There are still things you can do to make a carbed 300 powerful (see clifford performance), but it wont run as efficiently. Still, either option is an improvement from 8MPG.

Commercial with the differences between Gen8 and Gen9:

__________________
Its an MN-12 thing... you wouldnt understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin McRae
"Straight roads are for fast cars, turns are for fast drivers."
[1989 Ford Blunderbird / 1985 Ford Conestoga Ox-Cart 4x4 / 2004 Ford Fairmont GT]

Last edited by Raptor22; 01-31-2012 at 07:14 PM.

Raptor22 is offline Raptor22's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-01-2012, 05:20 PM   #92
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22 View Post
What did you think of my EFI 300 idea?
I'm not fond of it TBH.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tofunater View Post
But there are so many readily available upgrades for the cummins platform. And theres nothing wrong with wasting a little money

And they sound like delivery trucks. I'm one of those crazy SOBs that will take the screamin' Jimmy over the Cummins because the Jimmy sounds so much better.

Listen, 'specially around 1:20 where he revs the absolute hell out of it.



Also, diesel fuel is 4.15/gallon in my area. I don't want to waste a drop blowing pointless and annoying smoke everywhere. I'd even run a particulate filter to catch the black smoke all diesels naturally produce at high throttle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed_Demon View Post
Am I applicable with my Lincoln or is it only blue ovals? I have Ford logos stamped all around the darn thing.
Yeah, you're in. It's a Ford product. We'd even accept owners of B2300s but nobody on CFN owns one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by simfreak View Post
Thanks for the suggestions. I might consider a 300 now...And I like 6 cylinders, not as loud as the V8's so doing donuts in parking lots won't get you busted as quick


Not bad, I would love that kind of mileage. I'd be OK with losing torque and power for mileage, it's a good sacrifice IMO.
It's up to you. The 300's a good motor but it's about half the output of the 460 stock. You can get it up to 400/400 pretty easily but you're playing russian roulette with the economy, and they will happily slurp down a gallon of fuel in eight or nine miles if you want them to.


Quote:
If I do decide to keep the 460, I could probably sell my 4.10's in a heartbeat to someone and swap them out in a weekend or so, I do about 2500 RPM at 65-70 (speedo isn't 100% I think). I think low gears are incredibly pointless on a big block.
Agreed. You'd be getting 14 city 16 highway if you popped some 2.49s or 2.73s in there, even with the 460, and you've got enough torque where it won't matter.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22 View Post
With my EFI 300 idea you dont lose power, torque, or fuel economy.

Uhh, the reason the 300 stopped selling as well in '87 was because the EFI models got the same MPG the 302s did. Common sentiment was about 14MPG combined for the EFI models, whereas the 1bbl models got 17-19 combined.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lautinjr View Post
Your mileage would be fine with just a 3.53 gear you don't need to swap engines.
Agreed. I'd go even farther than that though. 3.10s at the most. 460s have more than enough torque to maintain passing power with such gearing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lautinjr
Personally they sound like a tractor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed_Demon View Post
It has a very tractor-like cylinder pumping sound.
That they do. Mine sounds exactly like an old tractor, and to be honest, I like it. It's not nice the same way an Alfa Romeo 3.0 or a Chevy LS9 sounds, I'll admit. Those sound awesome because..well, they're awesome. But I still like hearing my old 300 chug along just the same. It sounds to me like something reliable, something that will always be there when called upon. It sounds like it's constantly swearing at time itself, telling it to -beep- off because it's got stuff to do and places to be. It's...hard to explain really. Relaxing is probably best I could put it. It's relaxing the same way listening to an open header LS9 is exciting.


I like that.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Last edited by Kenny McCormick; 02-01-2012 at 05:33 PM.

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-01-2012, 09:22 PM   #93
It's Simple
 
Raptor22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 2,555
Rep: 64 Raptor22 will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny McCormick View Post
Uhh, the reason the 300 stopped selling as well in '87 was because the EFI models got the same MPG the 302s did. Common sentiment was about 14MPG combined for the EFI models, whereas the 1bbl models got 17-19 combined.

Agreed. I'd go even farther than that though. 3.10s at the most. 460s have more than enough torque to maintain passing power with such gearing.

I like that.
Excuse me for saying this, but I'm calling BS.

Maybe with the C6 they only got 14MPG, but mine does 17 combined and cracks 20 highway no problem with 190 some-odd thousand miles, leaky injectors, and 3.55s. If someone with an EFI 300 is only getting 14 then they had better get their truck looked at.
__________________
Its an MN-12 thing... you wouldnt understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin McRae
"Straight roads are for fast cars, turns are for fast drivers."
[1989 Ford Blunderbird / 1985 Ford Conestoga Ox-Cart 4x4 / 2004 Ford Fairmont GT]

Raptor22 is offline Raptor22's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 10:19 AM   #94
Community Director
 
Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 7,603
Rep: 153 Mike has a spectacular aura aboutMike has a spectacular aura about
Default

Most people bought automatics.
__________________
"He shouted: 'You've won! Didn't you know?' I didn't, and it's about the nicest thing I've ever been told" -Bruce McLaren, 1968 Belgian Grand Prix
Read the rules! | DO NOT REPLY TO SPAM
2009 Pontiac G8 GT - 6.0L, 6AT - 95k miles | 1994 Chevy Blazer K5 - 350, 5MT - 140k miles | 2006 Mazda 3 S sedan - 2.3L, 5MT - 130k miles
Wife's Car: 2013 Chevy Volt - 70k miles
Bikes: 1979 Yamaha XS 750 | 1985 Honda Sabre 700

Mike is offline Mike's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 10:43 AM   #95
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22 View Post
Excuse me for saying this, but I'm calling BS.

Maybe with the C6 they only got 14MPG, but mine does 17 combined and cracks 20 highway no problem with 190 some-odd thousand miles, leaky injectors, and 3.55s. If someone with an EFI 300 is only getting 14 then they had better get their truck looked at.

Perouse the selection of Gen 8 and Gen 9 F-series with 300s. Note that the extreme vast majority of them have C4s, C5s and C6s in them, depending on tow/haul ratings. So equipped, they got 12 city 16 highway, and that was if you drove like KSimp. Drive like a normal person and 10 city 14 highway isn't out of the question. 302s weren't any better in this regard.


Even with the M5OD you're not doing any better than the 302s did, because again, the EFI 300 and EFI 302 use about the same amount of fuel. 302 + M5OD = 300 + M5OD. The only reasons you would order the 300 with the Gen 8/Gen 9 was because you wanted a straight six or simply couldn't afford the V8 option. Objectively they might as well be one engine. Neither was any more or less efficient, neither was any more or less powerful, neither was any more or less reliable, the only difference is the 302 cost a couple thousand more and made V8 noises.

My own crackpot theory as to why is 100% due to fuel distribution. With the 1bbl, the front and back cylinders got only the faintest whisps of fuel. Numbers 2 and 5 got about what they needed. Numbers 3 and 4 got more or less inundated, all they could eat buffet so to speak. This ended up benefiting the engine, economy wise, even if it did hurt power. With the EFI, all six got as much as they could drink. This is why the EFI 300s drink more. On top of that, when they went EFI the power and torque jumped up considerably, this is a result of more fuel getting in.

Hook up a real-time monitor to your truck and bury the throttle. I guarantee you'll see 6 or 7 to a gallon. If I did that to mine, somehow, I'd see closer to 12 or 13.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Last edited by Kenny McCormick; 02-02-2012 at 10:47 AM.

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 11:54 AM   #96
It's Simple
 
Raptor22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 2,555
Rep: 64 Raptor22 will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike View Post
Most people bought automatics.
No they really didn't. The vast majority of trucks equpped with the 300 came with either the T18 4 speed or M5OD 5 speed. Most the reason people bought 300s in the first place is there were huge rebates for buying the 6cyl with a manual. Finding the 300 with an automatic is pretty rare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny McCormick View Post
Perouse the selection of Gen 8 and Gen 9 F-series with 300s. Note that the extreme vast majority of them have C4s, C5s and C6s in them, depending on tow/haul ratings. So equipped, they got 12 city 16 highway, and that was if you drove like KSimp. Drive like a normal person and 10 city 14 highway isn't out of the question. 302s weren't any better in this regard.


Even with the M5OD you're not doing any better than the 302s did, because again, the EFI 300 and EFI 302 use about the same amount of fuel. 302 + M5OD = 300 + M5OD. The only reasons you would order the 300 with the Gen 8/Gen 9 was because you wanted a straight six or simply couldn't afford the V8 option. Objectively they might as well be one engine. Neither was any more or less efficient, neither was any more or less powerful, neither was any more or less reliable, the only difference is the 302 cost a couple thousand more and made V8 noises.

My own crackpot theory as to why is 100% due to fuel distribution. With the 1bbl, the front and back cylinders got only the faintest whisps of fuel. Numbers 2 and 5 got about what they needed. Numbers 3 and 4 got more or less inundated, all they could eat buffet so to speak. This ended up benefiting the engine, economy wise, even if it did hurt power. With the EFI, all six got as much as they could drink. This is why the EFI 300s drink more. On top of that, when they went EFI the power and torque jumped up considerably, this is a result of more fuel getting in.

Hook up a real-time monitor to your truck and bury the throttle. I guarantee you'll see 6 or 7 to a gallon. If I did that to mine, somehow, I'd see closer to 12 or 13.
You have no idea what you are even talking about. Gen8 full size Ford trucks never came with C4s or C5s, and only came with a C6 as an option for two years. The trucks that came with automatics were AODs until 1989 and E4ODs after 1990, but there weren't many 300s sold with automatics.

The 300 has much more torque at a much lower RPM than the 302, the 302 doesnt get much better fuel economy than the 351. My 300 gets its rated 15/19 (17 combined), I don't care what you say...

__________________
Its an MN-12 thing... you wouldnt understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin McRae
"Straight roads are for fast cars, turns are for fast drivers."
[1989 Ford Blunderbird / 1985 Ford Conestoga Ox-Cart 4x4 / 2004 Ford Fairmont GT]

Raptor22 is offline Raptor22's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 09:19 PM   #97
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Big deal. Ford claimed mine got 30MPG highway on national television. You really gonna start bringing Ford's claims into this?
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 09:32 PM   #98
Veteran Member
 
simfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 721
Rep: 22 simfreak is on a distinguished road
Default

lolol you would need one hell of a tailwind to achieve 30 mpg out of one of these trucks.
__________________
"'Splody"
02 Ford Explorer
Eddie Bauer
| 4.6L V8 | 5R55W 5 speed auto | 214k miles

simfreak is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 10:17 PM   #99
It's Simple
 
Raptor22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chico, California
Posts: 2,555
Rep: 64 Raptor22 will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny McCormick View Post
Big deal. Ford claimed mine got 30MPG highway on national television. You really gonna start bringing Ford's claims into this?
I dont give a rats ass what Ford claimed, those are the EPA rating and those are what I get. The core issue is I get 17 combined, not 12 combined like you keep saying I do...
__________________
Its an MN-12 thing... you wouldnt understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin McRae
"Straight roads are for fast cars, turns are for fast drivers."
[1989 Ford Blunderbird / 1985 Ford Conestoga Ox-Cart 4x4 / 2004 Ford Fairmont GT]

Raptor22 is offline Raptor22's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2012, 10:50 PM   #100
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22 View Post
I dont give a rats ass what Ford claimed, those are the EPA rating and those are what I get. The core issue is I get 17 combined, not 12 combined like you keep saying I do...
Actually, I never said the M5OD models got 12. The normal models, the 90% of which that got automatics, do. They get 12-14.


Funnily enough, you're getting the same I'm getting. That alone should be telling.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 PM.

Shogun Interactive Development Copyright 2015 Shogun Interactive Development. All rights reserved.