351 swap to 300-6? [Archive] - FSB Forums

: 351 swap to 300-6?


Dawg Bones
02-09-2005, 12:14 AM
I saw a 300 6 cyl in a junkyard this weekend and could get it really cheap..plus it ran. It's out of a 86. I have a 79. Anybody done that? If so, any advice about do's and don'ts?

jopes
02-09-2005, 12:58 AM
stick with the M block they are better suited for the heavier broncos.

MikE2
02-09-2005, 01:04 AM
Different tranny too

kemicalburns
02-09-2005, 10:28 AM
your asking for a lot of work to swap to that motor.

85f150
02-09-2005, 02:38 PM
well if you want to swap the motor you need, a diff radiator, motor mount towers, different tranny if auto - if stick just a different bellhousing, i would also get rid of the feedback system on the 86 and swap it to duraspark.... Which you will already have on your existing 79 and would only need a dizzy and carb. Not a bad swap if you really want it or want something unique. Could install a turbo on it to have a little more fun :shrug

Agily00
02-09-2005, 06:18 PM
Why would you swap a 8 for a 6 anyway, thats backpedaling :twak

85f150
02-09-2005, 06:40 PM
six is alot better than a 302 and stock six has the same amount of torque as a 351w. There weak spot is in the head design as they can't flow above 3k. They are easy to wake up and are just like setting up a diesel, if i had more cash i would have the turbo on mine but right now i don't have the tools to modify my manifold the way i want and definately can't afford a custom one.....:beer

MikE2
02-09-2005, 09:06 PM
six is alot better than a 302 and stock six has the same amount of torque as a 351w.
A 300 never had the same ammount of torque as a 351. Usually the 302 even has 10 more ft lbs in stock form and a broader power band too

Optika1 illushun
02-10-2005, 12:02 AM
ur wrong there buddy, the 300 in the early to mid 80s had more torque and hp than a 302 and was knocking on the door of the 351. plus the 6 is bullet proof, can be easily modded and can definatly kick some bent-8s asses. ill take a 300 over a 302 and day and probaly a 351...

looks like we need to team up 85f150 against all the 6 haters =-D

MikE2
02-10-2005, 12:50 AM
Well let me dig the books out..........



1980
300 = 243 ft lbs @ 1200
302 = 239 ft lbs @ 1800
351M = 263 ft lbs @ 2000
351W = 266 ft lbs @ 1200

1981
300 = 255 ft lbs @ 1400
302 = 233 ft lbs @ 2000
351 = 268 ft lbs @ 1200

1982
300 = 253 ft lbs @ 1200
302 = 232 ft lbs @ 1800
351 = 269 ft lbs @ 1200

1983
300 = 250 ft lbs @ 1600
302 = 250 ft lbs @ 2000
351 = 278 ft lbs @ 1400

1984
300 = 250 ft lbs @ 1600
302 = 250 ft lbs @ 2200
351 2 bbl = 280 ft lbs @ 1800
351 4 bbl = 305 ft lbs @ 2800

1985
300 = 250 ft lbs @ 1600
302 = 250 ft lbs @ 2200
351 2 bbl = 280 ft lbs @ 1800
351 4 bbl = 305 ft lbs @ 2800

1986
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 295 ft lbs @ 2600

1987
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 295 ft lbs @ 2600

1988
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 315 ft lbs @ 2800

1989
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 315 ft lbs @ 2800

1990
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 315 ft lbs @ 2800

1991
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 315 ft lbs @ 2800

1992
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 310 ft lbs @ 2800

1993
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 310 ft lbs @ 2800

1994
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 270 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 310 ft lbs @ 2800

1995
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 275 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 325 ft lbs @ 2800


1996
300 = 260 ft lbs @ 2000
302 = 275 ft lbs @ 2400
351 = 325 ft lbs @ 2800

So according to my books, the 300 does make more torque than the 302 up untill 1983 where they make the same ammount untill 1985. Then from 1986 on the 302 makes 10 to 15 ft lbs more than the 300 does.
And it makes more torque at a higher RPM where the 300 cant even rev too.

So what I said before:
A 300 never had the same ammount of torque as a 351. Usually the 302 even has 10 more ft lbs in stock form and a broader power band too
Is right. The 300 never made as much torque as a 351, and the 302 usually makes 10 ft lbs more than the 300 (it did for 11 years)

Optika1 illushun
02-10-2005, 12:56 AM
ok so u proved my point...the 300 is a better engine than a 302 anyway u look at it. IMO and many others, its the best truck engine ford EVER made.

MikE2
02-10-2005, 01:00 AM
all the 6 haters =-D
So now I'm a 6 hater?
I always liked the 300. Its a very reliable and durable engine. but it doesn't make more torque than a 351

MikE2
02-10-2005, 01:01 AM
...the 300 is a better engine than a 302 anyway u look at it.
My 302 can beat up your 300 :goodfinge

MikE2
02-10-2005, 01:14 AM
the 300 in the early to mid 80s had more torque and hp than a 302
does that "hp" stand for hrsepower?
:histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica

the 300 never mad more horse power than the 302 :slap

Dont make me type all the horsepower specs in too

and don't hate me because I have V8s

The only 6 I drive is a Cummins

DirtyDeedz
02-10-2005, 05:45 AM
this is like NASCAR...

its slower and only makes left turns

Head
02-10-2005, 04:29 PM
IMHO you couldn't beat the 300 with a 4 speed. Had that combo in my 90. Blew the 302 I have now out of the water.

Optika1 illushun
02-10-2005, 04:32 PM
its all good, ill take my tractor like 300 over any bent 8.

and mike2, u can kiss meh ass! :-p

MikE2
02-10-2005, 10:28 PM
I'll put my stock 302 and $1000 up against your 300....but since your all the way across the country I dont think its possible

Optika1 illushun
02-10-2005, 10:30 PM
doing what? id be game for everything except a 1/4.

MikE2
02-10-2005, 10:50 PM
truck pullin...or sled pullin - whatever you call it back there


First one this year on my usual circuit is April 17

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-10-2005, 11:15 PM
haha ive got 3 302's that would prove you wrong anyday.......but none in a truck as of now anymore........lol i bet my 65 falcon could still pull a tractor faster than your truck could though

MikE2
02-11-2005, 12:20 AM
I got $1000 that says it cant

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 12:22 AM
:rolleyes: if we were closer id give it a try.

MikE2
02-11-2005, 12:24 AM
Yeah I know. That sucks

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-11-2005, 12:25 AM
lol your probably right not the falcon but the motor itself that ill put 1000$ on..... the falcon wouldnt go anywhere with the slicks plus i wouldnt put my 11.6 bracket car thru the abuse. eff that crap

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 12:25 AM
to bad, ur lucky because i wouldnt wanna embaress u :wacko

MikE2
02-11-2005, 12:26 AM
What engine you got?

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 12:27 AM
300 I6 with some work done :-D

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-11-2005, 12:27 AM
:histerica

MikE2
02-11-2005, 12:27 AM
No not you.
The Falcon engine

MikE2
02-11-2005, 12:28 AM
to bad, ur lucky because i wouldnt wanna embaress u :wacko
now thats funny there :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica :histerica

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 12:32 AM
:twak guess we'll never know :wacko

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-11-2005, 12:33 AM
ive actually been thinking about picking up a l6 an playing with it alittle. sounds like a good idea but whatever why get that if ive got 8 other motors. **** a straight 6 pick up you guys want different me an the boys got a 88 nissan 300 zx going to PA to get finished narrowed 9 inch 460 bored .40 plumbed for nitrous getting the cam made if the speed shop will ever get off theyre asses........ trying to hit mid 7's

that little falcons a beast :thumbup its little brother with the stock 302 an c6 could probably haul that tractor too of course i should stop talking before i actually get stupid an try it :twak

im just playing with you guys anyway heres the little brother im trying to sell
http://photos.fotango.com/p/eba00499785f00000028.jpg

MikE2
02-11-2005, 01:12 AM
sweet

RWard
02-11-2005, 10:32 AM
MikE2 wrote:

And it makes more torque at a higher RPM where the 300 cant even rev too.

Someone feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I have always been taught that the lower the RPM you can get your torque, the better off you are. Some of those early '80's peak numbers for the 300 were practically off-idle (1200rpm, for example). Aren't those the numbers you want to get the beast moving in the first place? I realize that you aren't likely to win any 0-60mph competition with one, but for going 4 wheeling, it seems ideal.

Also, out of curiosity, what are the mpg. comparisons? Particularly these days, as I am looking for a Bronco I wouldn't mind giving up a little bit of torque compared to the V8 if it would save me a few dollars in gas.

MikE2
02-11-2005, 03:53 PM
MikE2 wrote:



Someone feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I have always been taught that the lower the RPM you can get your torque, the better off you are. Some of those early '80's peak numbers for the 300 were practically off-idle (1200rpm, for example). Aren't those the numbers you want to get the beast moving in the first place? I realize that you aren't likely to win any 0-60mph competition with one, but for going 4 wheeling, it seems ideal.

.
Thats about right

They idle with a lot of torque but passing cars and other stuff at high RPM can take a while

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 05:08 PM
i beg to differ

MikE2
02-11-2005, 07:32 PM
i beg to differ
differ what?

If your comparing a stock 300 and a stock 302 the 300s have no power when you hit 4000 RPMs - there not made to be reved out

Optika1 illushun
02-11-2005, 11:53 PM
neither does the 302, stock cam signs off around 4200 and the heads flow like shit...so whats UR point? my dads truck and mine when it was stock could easily cruise at 65-75, get up n go without a problem and still get good gas milage. not only that but it'll out tow, out pull, out grunt and out last ur 302...

MikE2
02-12-2005, 12:58 AM
My point was what I just said. The 302 makes more power in the upper RPM range than a 300 does.

I don't care what you think your 300 can tow because if I wanted to tow something I wouldn't use a half ton truck to do it anyways. Thats what I have a F350 PSD for. And 300s, 302, 351 or any other engine a Bronco came with wasn't put in there like the designers were planning it to be a tow rig. Broncos make a crappy tow rig anyways with the light suspension and short wheelbase they have.


And about a 300 outliving any other engine, that all depends on how well its maintained, how its driven, in what type of environment...... even what gear ratio the axle has will add or subtract to the life of the engine. I have seen 300s that are running like shit with less than 100,000 miles on them and then again I have seen some with 300,000 on them and still running good. For example I have one at work with 335,000 on it and it runs good.
Same with the 302. Theres a lot of them around with 300,000 + on the odometer and runnin great and then theres a lot of them that are worn out with less than 100,000 on them
Same with any other engine.....all depends on how it was maintained.


And about 302 heads flowing like shit.... Have you ever seen a port on a 300 head? there the exact same size except the 300 intake runners are way longer. The difference is on a 302 there is only 38 cubic inches breathing through each port. On a 300 there is 50 cubes breathing through the same size port. Thats part of the reason they dont have a good upper RPM power band like the 302 does.


And so you can drive your 300 at 65 to 70 MPH. How many RPM's you at there? Prolly 2300 or so? Thats not even close to the upper RPM range I was talking about


I have driven them all
I dont think you have driven anything other a 300 straight 6

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-12-2005, 01:10 AM
My point was what I just said. The 302 makes more power in the upper RPM range than a 300 does.

I have driven them all
I dont think you have driven anything other a 300 straight 6

lol agreed but im not gonna agrue ill just watch you guys for entertainment :boxing

MikE2
02-12-2005, 01:20 AM
:boxing
No it aint that, I post everything with a smile


:D <-------------------see





I just like to have a friendly discussion every once in a while

montster
02-12-2005, 10:25 AM
300 to 302 is kinda like apples to oranges I've had both and it all depends how far up the skinny pedle you like to be. I like bush trails with lots of trees and muck my 302 and 300 both had np435-np208 the 300 is 83 stock carb and intake the 302 was 88 efi stock for what I like to do 300 is perfect. torque is right at the top of the peddle which is good when the trail means you cant get a very fast run at it, I can tug my buddy's yj out of the muck pretty much at idle (which I have to do all the time must be that JEEP thing that I dont understand) BUT stock for stock in open mudd ya the 302 could really throw the mud so ya on the road it does feel a bit more go but in my opinion the 300 is way more grunt so find the wheeling ya like and pick your parts

Optika1 illushun
02-13-2005, 02:22 AM
your all just jealous of the mighty mighty big block inline 6, awww yaaa :wacko

seriously, mike, ur pushing it with ur little novel u typed. while i agree any engine will last with proper maitnece (sp) why is it 300s were used in everything from f-100s to f-650s and even industrial equipment? or the fact even the most die hard bent 8 guys i know respect the 300 for its ability to take abuse that their v-8s couldnt think of?

also on the 300s head flowing poor, i agree. it does just like all fords truck engine heads but the 302s are really shitty. the cam sucks in them and they make marginaly more power then a 300 for being a v-8. mod for mod, a 300 will keep up with a 302, add a little nicer cam, port the head a little and upgrade the injectors and u got a bitchin 300 on ur hands which will embaress more then a few 302 and brand X v-8s.

oh and about driving at 65 turnin 2300 rpm, isnt that where i would want to be in OD? kinda irrelevant if u ask me. oh and i agree with monster, u need torque off the line to get these pigs (broncos and full sizes) movin and the 300s has it. so what i cant scream to 5 grand? (oh wait i can) i dont wanna be in that rpm range anyway.

and yes i drove several 302 effies and they seemed like slugs until u were moving. my 300 does what i ask of it when i want, where i want and how i want. plus it'll take abuse like non other and always get me home (besides the unforeseen things like running outta gas, bad iginition, the unpredicable shit, etc..). so u like ur 302, i like my 300 and thats all that matters. so unless u have anything that holds some kinda weight to add im done with the 300 V 302 pissing match.

MikE2
02-13-2005, 04:04 PM
or the fact even the most die hard bent 8 guys i know respect the 300
I like the 300 - when did I say I didn't? :slap



oh and i agree with monster, u need torque off the line to get these pigs (broncos and full sizes) movin and the 300s has it.
I agreed with that too - like I said earlier, the 300 has more power low down in the RPM range :slap



so what i cant scream to 5 grand? (oh wait i can) i dont wanna be in that rpm range anyway.
Thats right. You wouldn't want to be with a long rod 3.98" stroke engine. Thats what I was saying earlier - the 302 can make power where a 300 cant even rev too :slap


and yes i drove several 302 effies and they seemed like slugs until u were moving.
Thats all I was saying in the beginning - that the 302 has more high RPM power than a 300 does :slap


so unless u have anything that holds some kinda weight to add im done with the 300 V 302 pissing match.
Quitter :goodfinge

Optika1 illushun
02-13-2005, 04:11 PM
kiss meh ass dood! :wacko lol

MikE2
02-13-2005, 04:22 PM
shave it first

Optika1 illushun
02-13-2005, 04:23 PM
:histerica :toothless

ya so...how bout the weather :beer

4Wheelin Rust bucket
02-13-2005, 07:10 PM
:duel

85f150
02-13-2005, 10:06 PM
just to stir a little more...

i haven't been home for a couple days so i gots to catch up.....

I i love my six in the mud, it revs to 4-5 grand all the time since i have the NP435 when trying to back out of getting stuck..... Hell you can't beat its seven mains, my old one with over 300k on it sounded liek it was going to blow it it knocked so bad, but it lasted at least another 30k plus the trip to mexico the people i sold it to put on.

Optika1 illushun - where is FrenchtownFlyer when you need him to teach at lesson on some good ole v lovers :rockon

Optika1 illushun
02-13-2005, 10:13 PM
heh, lord only knows!

XLTbeast
02-13-2005, 10:29 PM
wow what an exciting argument. But sorry guys i would have to say if i were to choose between a 302 or a 300 i would go with a........300! That motor just plain rocks. and yes i know the 302 can make some good power built up and ya it rev's higher but its a truck not a f'n dragster and the 300 gets it done and saves a little gas. Oh ya and in my personal experience with pullin a FSB on a trailer the 300 definatly goes better than a stock 302.

But let me say my 400 will whoop both there asses.

Seriously tho some one make this a poll. I want to see what all the FSB people think cause i am curious now.

Optika1 illushun
02-13-2005, 10:54 PM
hell ya id take a 400...but dont forget...300 with 2 extra cylinder is a 400 =-D

MikE2
02-13-2005, 11:17 PM
hell ya id take a 400...but dont forget...300 with 2 extra cylinder is a 400 =-D
Well, your almost right
The 400 is actually a 402 cube engine
It has a 4.000" stroke vurses the 300's 3.980" stroke

MikE2
02-14-2005, 12:55 AM
Seriously tho some one make this a poll. I want to see what all the FSB people think cause i am curious now.
Well I done went and did it
http://fullsizebronco.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34162

Hoxviii
02-14-2005, 01:59 AM
The way I see Ford truck motors there are two- the 300 and the 460.

The 300 has off idle torque and no horsepower
The 302 has no off idle torque but has horsepower
The 351 has off idle torque, but not as much as the 300, and ALOT of horsepower
The 460 has off idle torque that'll put the 300 to shame and enough horepower to do anything you could ever ask it to.

In a truck I'll take a compromise motor (the 300) or the no compromise motor (460). Anything in between makes the compromise in the wrong direction (up the RPM band)

Justin

Clarko
02-14-2005, 03:12 AM
Well, your almost right
The 400 is actually a 402 cube engine
It has a 4.000" stroke vurses the 300's 3.980" stroke
And the 351 has 352 cubes.

MikE2
02-14-2005, 11:09 AM
Yeah thats another one - forgot about that.

When ford made the 351 they prolly didnt want anyone to confuse it with the old 352FE so they gave it a different name

Rancherlee
02-14-2005, 05:31 PM
Lets see, I've had both a 302-V8 with a 4bbl intake, cam, and headers and a 300-6 with 4bbl intake, cam (same pattern as I had in the 302), and headers................ 300-6 CLEANED HOUSE on the 302, on the hiway it wasn't too noticable (the 300-6 would get the jump off the line, and from a 20mph roll they were even) but OFF-ROAD where it counted the 300-6 was pure bliss, I could get let off the clutch @ 500rpm and be able to get the tires turing, I had to rev the 302 up to 2000rpm and slip the clutch to get moving and it had NO crawling power below 2000rpm. I can wait to get the turbo 300-6 going on my 2x4 truck so I can build another one for the bronco.

Other info about the 300-6
The STOCK rotating assemble can handle sustained runs at 5500rpm, IF BALANCE will handle sustained runs at 7000rpm. The Missing piece of the puzzle is Airflow. I know several guys that use to race 6 cylinder class dirt track. 300-6 ford and 292 Chevy were the engines use, many with stock balance rotating assemblys and a heavly ported head ran 5800-6200rpm as there target Engine speed for the dirt cars. If someone ever built a GOOD aluminum streetable head for a 300-6 it would be VERY hard for ANY 302-V8 to match the HP/TQ.

Mogley
02-14-2005, 06:04 PM
Well if you want to go off road, the lower rpm torque on the 300, is way better tha trying to get the 302 up to 3,000 rpms to get the same. Basically you could idle and creep anywhere with the 300, and with the 302 your gonna have to revv it up for the same effect, hence the 302 is better suited for the street and highway speeds, their it owns the I6, except for takeoffs and low speeds, or offroadm then the I6 is the way to go. But dont think that the I6 cant be setup for high rpm power though, just check out these sites http://www.fordsix.com/services.htm and http://www.cliffordperformance.com/Site04/Home.htm , now it costs more to build up the six, but they used to stomp the v8's at the drag strips, until they were put in a separate class than the v8's, casue the 8 guys were scared to race the 6's. But for the right money you can build a six for either insane low end power or toque, or high rpm power.

montster
02-14-2005, 08:09 PM
all I know after having both was it was harder to keep the 302 off the trees my 6 can crawl through stuff without reving so much that I cant get off it in time when my 38" ground hawgs hook up on the trails we run. when the 302 hooked up it was usually up in the pedel and often ment more body work. Ya I know its the driver but for me the 300 works! all I want to change is maybe a clifford intake with a motorcraft 2150 and a set of efi exhaust manifolds,

MikE2
02-14-2005, 10:06 PM
If someone ever built a GOOD aluminum streetable head for a 300-6 it would be VERY hard for ANY 302-V8 to match the HP/TQ.

A guy I work with has a 250 chevy I6 in his Nova. When he was in high school he bought 2 350 chevy aluminum heads and cut 1 cylinder off each and bolted them to the block. They were welded together at the deck and the coolant passages and everything were sealed.
I saw some pictures of it and it was one of the most intresting things I have ever seen.
With the ammount of work he put in that head set-up I asked him why didn't he just swap in a 350. He said everyone has 350s and he has to be different. I'm pretty much the same way.


So anyways, A head gasket lasted him about 100 miles. But it ran like hell when it was workin.

Optika1 illushun
02-14-2005, 10:15 PM
finally my backup arrived =-D

85f150
02-15-2005, 08:21 PM
A guy I work with has a 250 chevy I6 in his Nova. When he was in high school he bought 2 350 chevy aluminum heads and cut 1 cylinder off each and bolted them to the block. They were welded together at the deck and the coolant passages and everything were sealed.
I saw some pictures of it and it was one of the most intresting things I have ever seen.
With the ammount of work he put in that head set-up I asked him why didn't he just swap in a 350. He said everyone has 350s and he has to be different. I'm pretty much the same way.


So anyways, A head gasket lasted him about 100 miles. But it ran like hell when it was workin.

there is a guy over on fordsix that took the LS1 head and did the same thing, too bad he didn't make a few more though. He made one and ended up selling it on ford trucks for over a grand. I think i could give a left nut for one of those heads for my truck :brownbag

Andrew James
10-06-2010, 10:53 AM
This thread deserves a bump, it's an awesome, entertaining read. :D

AbandonedBronco
10-06-2010, 12:52 PM
Heh, even though it's 5 years old, I just had a lot of fun reading it.

I love my 300.
When I do my cam and head P&P, it should match or surpass the stock numbers of a 351 EFI, and at lower RPMs. Can't wait.
Currently, it sits around 165hp / 295tq. :rockon