200 to 250 power comparison

[kirkallen143]

Howdy everyone,

I am considering of an engine rebuild somewhere in the future, if this 200 ever gives up (doubtful). Is there any way you could make a 200 run as much as a 250? What I mean, even with the bigger cubes of the 250, is it possible to make the 200 run like it. Comparing HP and torque curves b/tw the two, or am comparing apples to oranges. This is considering the 250 is not a sleeper/dog engine and not mucho modified, either. The seven main bearing caps of the 200 really keep me in one direction (bullet proof). Just wondering.

Kirk ' 73 bronco

 

[67 Falcon]

Depens on what you want to use it for. For low end torque go with a 250, for high RPMs and racing go with the 200. Russell

 

[rbohm]

8) given equal carburation, valve timing, exhaust efficiency, ignition timing, compression, etc. the 250 will make about 10-15 more peak hp, not sure about torque, but the 250's curve will be wider and flatter than the 200's will because of the longer stroke.

 

[xctasy]

The actual percentage increase in power is off set by the additional 100 pounds of extra iron the 250 makes you carry over the 200. Trans is flanged for the bigger SBF V8 bellhousing, starter, longer front cover with bigger harmonic balancer.

An early 2450 pound Maverick 200 could weigh in at well over 2550 lb with a 250. The extra 10% power is really only 6% when you factor a 4% weight increase right over the nose.

On the plus side, the 25% increase in capacity gives a full 25% increase in torque. Allways, even with really awfull matching. This is why a 250 is so much rip snorting fun on the street, its meagre power increase is easily accessible

For peak power, the 250 is only a 10% increase in power, as the cam, carb, and bore to stroke ratio conspire against a 25% increase.


The 250 is heaps more responsive to the right gear than the 200. Tripple carbs, big lift cams, V8 5-speed gearboxes, and 2.5HSC pistons and rods would show a H-U-G-E gain in power for every dollar spent. Just don't expect it to handle like as handy as the 200, because that 1.66" taller six is much more unwieldy than the trim little 200.

 

[kirkallen143]

Why thank you gentlemen, you have answered my question. For the ' 73 bronco (as light as it is) stay with the 200. Like I said, I want it to stand on its own, but not drag race it from light to lightand the other thing is I don't have to go looking around in junk yards for bellhousings, harmonic balancers, etc... But they are out there, I have seen alot of ford Fairmonts, Granadas with them. Thanks Fellers.

Kirk ' 73 bronco

 

[rbohm]

8) xecute, 100lbs more? i think more like 50lbs more, as a small block ford weights a little over 100lbs more than a 200 does. but yes there is a weight penalty.

 

[xctasy]

Fact One:-The US 250 block is reported to be heavier than the Aussie log headed 250 block by Jack. It is 500 thou wider at the sump. A US 250 sump wont fit the Aussie 250 block because its too wide

Fact Two:- With all the jewlery, a 200 is 400 pounds ready to run.

Fact Three:-An Aussie 250 I6 with a log head is the same weight as a 302 at about 470 pounds. (Aussie cranks, transflanges, front covers are lighter than the US 250).

Fact Four:-In Australia, a stock alloy head 4.1 weighes in at 474 pounds. A cast rion headed 250 x-flow weighs 523 pounds! This is because the block is 7 inches wide, rather than 5.625" at the head.A 250 log headed six is a few pounds heavier than a 470 pound 302 2-bbl.

When you put the bigger SBF style trans on, there goes an extra 100 pounds all up. (More if its got power options like A/C, P/s, or the C4 pan fill auto).

But then, some people think a 10 inch tall 300 six is lighter than a 8.2" 302. Well, go figure...

 

[sefus]

how about a 200 block w/250 head. if most the extra weiht is in the 250 block (and i said if, cause i dont know) or if its fairly split then a 50lb increase for a short stroke (high revs) and good flowing power.