Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40,
mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry
rzcrisis, DoctorC, jamyers, Motorboy, fastpat, Silverback280, chad


<<< New Site Update >>>

Not a fan of the 300

Moderator: Mod Squad

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Not a fan of the 300

Post #1 by tj300 » Sat May 16, 2009 3:45 pm

I did the vaccum check on my 300. A steady 18 hg. I also tuned it with the gauge. No change in performance. I stand by my original assessment of the 300. It's a sluggish performer. The performance is made worse with an auto tranny and 2.75 gears. I would gladly swap it for a V8.

I know you guys have valid reasons to be fans of the 300, it's just not my preference. It's a boring performer, (only my opinion), it starts, it goes.

My 300 has the Offy dp intake, Edlebrock 500 cfm 4bbl., Headman hedders, dual exhaust, and MSD ignition.

Any takers on a swap for a V8 of equal condition, (preferably a 351 windsor) ?

I'm not intending to be contentious, it's only my opinion. I respect your favorable opinions of the 300.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

rikard
Registered User
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:53 pm
Location: North Reading Mass

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #2 by rikard » Sat May 16, 2009 7:04 pm

I would change out those gears to 3.55s if your looking for any kind of performance. I liked them with both my 302 and 300. My 92 work truck with the 300 auto is much slower than my 95 with the 5 speed. Both have the same lame 3.08s.
regards
rikard
"If women don't find you handsome they should find you handy" Red Green
Now-95 Black F150 XLT SC 300 5 Speed " Nelly Belle"
Past I6s
250 Chrysler Spitfire, 194, 250 Chevy, 223 Ford, 242,258 AMC, 225 Slant 6, 330 REO GC

mutt
VIP Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 1:51 pm
Location: Santa Barbara, Ca.
Contact:

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #3 by mutt » Sat May 16, 2009 7:38 pm

im more than ready to dump my 3.08 rear. i couldnt imagine how sluggish it would be w/ a 2.75.
Your compression up to snuff? i was runnin a offy, 2bbl, and FI ex. When I opened the head up, it was noticeable, the power increase.
But, no, its not one of them bent 8 thingies....

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #4 by Craigwell » Sat May 16, 2009 10:28 pm

i dont think your going to like any stock v8 engine with 2.75 gears, maybe a 460.
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #5 by tj300 » Sun May 17, 2009 8:04 am

I do need a rear pinion seal. There's a place not far from me, " Babbit's Bearings " that will install 3.50 gears for just under $ 600. The pinion seal has to be done , and seems a good price for the gear install.

In answer to mutt, the engine is solid, has low miles, and runs good. It's just that the 300 will never match the performance of a V8 without $$$$$$. And that"s only matching the output of what some V8's make stock. You have to invest a lot of dollars just to see 250 hp from the 300, and there's V6's that even make that much stock. I.E., the new Suzuki,(yuk), V6, in the pick up they now offer, makes 260 hp.

With a V8 you can make more power with less $$$ and they sound a lot better when you put your foot into it, ( not that buzzy sound ). But, you do get more positive feed back when you raise the hood to show off the intake, 4bbl. carb. , and headers on the 300.

You have to be a dedicated follower of this engine to really appreciate it and to invest the $$$ it takes to reach your goals for it.
My preference only, I'd rather have a V8. I appreciate everyone being patient through my rants.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Harte3
VIP Member
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #6 by Harte3 » Sun May 17, 2009 9:04 am

Those of us who prefer the I6 take what we can get with what we have to work with. It does not have the potential of the sbc which is probably the most popular engine out there with a wide range of parts available. If your 300 is not meeting your expectations and/or goals it could certainly be productive to consider other options.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #7 by tj300 » Sun May 17, 2009 10:13 am

Harte3 wrote:
Those of us who prefer the I6 take what we can get with what we have to work with. It does not have the potential of the sbc which is probably the most popular engine out there with a wide range of parts available. If your 300 is not meeting your expectations and/or goals it could certainly be productive to consider other options.


I certainly respect the appreciation and the dedication you guys have for this engine. It's just not for me. I do prefer a 351w over the 300 if any one's interested in a swap. The sbf also has a pretty decent range of parts available, although not like the sbc, or as cheap, but they are pretty easily found.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
JackFish
VIP Member
Posts: 2787
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #8 by JackFish » Sun May 17, 2009 10:14 am

Well if you think you'd be happier, stick a V8 in it and be done with it.
The people on this board really like the aspects of an inline engine and that's why we're here.
We've already decided we'd rather put our $$$$ into getting what we can out of these engines.
They suit our purposes.
1978 Ford Fairmont station wagon
1978 Ford Fairmont station wagon
Yup, I bought another one.
1996 Chevy Caprice 9C1 (3)
1999 Dodge Ram 2500

User avatar
StrangeRanger
VIP Member
Posts: 5789
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: Copley, OH

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #9 by StrangeRanger » Sun May 17, 2009 10:27 am

When you do stuff the V8 into it you will discover that V8s need more RPM to get into their power band than 300s do. That means that with your 2.75 gears you will have little more and quite possibly less performance than you do now. Peak horsepower is a more or less meaningless number used to sell vehicles; what actually matters is the shape and the RPM range of the torque curve. You will find the V8 does not offer as much as you think when backed by those gears
1996 F-150 (tow missile)
1993 Mustang 5.0 (hot rod and auto-x monster)
1982 Tiga Formula Ford (SCCA racecar)
2013 Hyundai Elantra Coupe (daily driver)

Lazy JW
FSP Moderator
Posts: 5560
Joined: Fri May 16, 2003 10:25 pm
Location: Careywood, Idaho

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #10 by Lazy JW » Sun May 17, 2009 11:38 am

tj300 wrote:..... It's a boring performer, (only my opinion), it starts, it goes.....

.....My 300 has the Offy dp intake, Edlebrock 500 cfm 4bbl., Headman hedders, dual exhaust, and MSD ignition.
......


Yikes! :shock:

That thing should run like a scalded rabbit! Something is definitely amiss. Oh well, probably nothing wrong that a nicely built 460 won't cure :D

Seriously, the 300 does have limits, and in the immortal words of Inspector Harry Callahan, "A man's got to know his limitations". Sounds like you have found yours.
Joe
"The White OX" 1974 F-350 300-6, Stock single exhaust, Carter YF, T-18A, Dana70 w/4.11, Flatbed dually w/dump bed. "Where no oxen are, the crib is clean, but much increase is by the strength of the ox" (Proverbs 14:4)
Image

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #11 by Craigwell » Sun May 17, 2009 10:13 pm

Well, I'm certainly not going to beg you to "keep the faith" either, but here's some stuff to think about:

Have you ever put a vacuum gauge on that engine? Set timing and idle mixture with it?
What jets and power valve are you running in your carb?
Have you checked the timing curve of your distributor?
Have you considered that your mods might affect your top end, which you'd hardly ever see with 2.75 gears?
Have you dyno'd the engine and compared notes here to see if your getting what you should out of the engine?
What diameter is your dual exhaust?
What size tires are you running?

I wouldn't want you to get rid of something that might be fine with some adjustment.

V8:

Heavier - affects handling
Harder to work on (accessibility)

You'd need a built up, moderate sized V8 to gain on what you have with your six. 351W's aren't all that impressive of an engine in stock form. You'd need to do more than bolt on a 4 barrel and headers to a 351W to get big power there. For all the work, why don't you see things through with your six.

Work on the aspects of tuning you can control, and then you have raised compression and cylinder head porting as final stops on the road to a screamer six.

Just my two cents.
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

American Thunder
Registered User
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Upstate, NY

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #12 by American Thunder » Sun May 17, 2009 10:52 pm

If you drop in a 5.9 Cummins, I don't think 2.75 gears will be an issue anymore, plus you'd still have an inline 6. :D

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #13 by tj300 » Mon May 18, 2009 9:00 am

StrangeRanger wrote:
When you do stuff the V8 into it you will discover that V8s need more RPM to get into their power band than 300s do. That means that with your 2.75 gears you will have little more and quite possibly less performance than you do now. Peak horsepower is a more or less meaningless number used to sell vehicles; what actually matters is the shape and the RPM range of the torque curve. You will find the V8 does not offer as much as you think when backed by those gears


Actually, I will be changing the gearing very shortly to 3.50. I need a rear pinion seal, and a place not far from me is doing everything for just under $600. The gearing will be changed.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #14 by tj300 » Mon May 18, 2009 9:05 am

Lazy JW wrote:
tj300 wrote:..... It's a boring performer, (only my opinion), it starts, it goes.....

.....My 300 has the Offy dp intake, Edlebrock 500 cfm 4bbl., Headman hedders, dual exhaust, and MSD ignition.
......


Yikes! :shock:

That thing should run like a scalded rabbit! Something is definitely amiss. Oh well, probably nothing wrong that a nicely built 460 won't cure :D


Seriously, the 300 does have limits, and in the immortal words of Inspector Harry Callahan, "A man's got to know his limitations". Sounds like you have found yours.
Joe

Isn't it FTF who's building a monster 460? Think he'd be willing to trade it for my 300? I'll be holding my breath waiting for his reply!
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #15 by tj300 » Mon May 18, 2009 10:13 am

Craigwell wrote:Well, I'm certainly not going to beg you to "keep the faith" either, but here's some stuff to think about:

Have you ever put a vacuum gauge on that engine? Set timing and idle mixture with it?


Yes, a steady 18hg. I did set the timing and idle mixture with the gauge. Everything returned to the original settings.
What jets and power valve are you running in your carb?

I don't know. It's the Edelbrock 500cfm 4bbl., " Performer"
Have you checked the timing curve of your distributor?

[/quote ]No. I haven't done that. Other than the carb., intake , headers , dual exhaust, MSD ingnition , it's still pretty much stock.
Have you considered that your mods might affect your top end, which you'd hardly ever see with 2.75 gears?

Actually, the top end is where I noticed some gain. Intown street performance sucks! No real noticable gain. But, in the very near future I'm swapping out the 2.75 for 3.50.
Have you dyno'd the engine and compared notes here to see if your getting what you should out of the engine?

I haven't done that.
What diameter is your dual exhaust?

2"
What size tires are you running?

I'll have to look again. They're the original size car tire to that year, (1980 F100 short bed ).

I wouldn't want you to get rid of something that might be fine with some adjustment.

V8:

Heavier - affects handling
Harder to work on (accessibility)

You'd need a built up, moderate sized V8 to gain on what you have with your six. 351W's aren't all that impressive of an engine in stock form. You'd need to do more than bolt on a 4 barrel and headers to a 351W to get big power there. For all the work, why don't you see things through with your six.

Work on the aspects of tuning you can control, and then you have raised compression and cylinder head porting as final stops on the road to a screamer six.

Just my two cents.

Your two cents is always appreciated
[/quote]
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Harte3
VIP Member
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #16 by Harte3 » Mon May 18, 2009 12:06 pm

I suspect the tall gearing is not allowing for enough rpm to get decent A/F flow through the carb and thus it suffers on the bottom end. I plug mine around town at low speeds and it will run 30 mph all day long at 1000 rpm with no problem with 1500 rpm upshifts. When I mash the gas I have to make 2000-2500 rpm before it really takes hold. IIRC I'm geared at 3.08 though. I don't think I would care for gears any taller than that.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.

User avatar
THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER
VIP Member
Posts: 6084
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 9:25 pm
Location: FRENCHTOWN

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #17 by THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER » Mon May 18, 2009 2:30 pm

tj300 wrote:Isn't it FTF who's building a monster 460? Think he'd be willing to trade it for my 300? I'll be holding my breath waiting for his reply!


Image

I do not want to trade but if you want to give me the 300 I would be happy to add it to my collection. I'll find a use for it.
FORD 300 INLINE SIX - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN DRAG RACING

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #18 by tj300 » Mon May 18, 2009 4:49 pm

THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER wrote:
tj300 wrote:Isn't it FTF who's building a monster 460? Think he'd be willing to trade it for my 300? I'll be holding my breath waiting for his reply!


Image

I do not want to trade but if you want to give me the 300 I would be happy to add it to my collection. I'll find a use for it.

Awesome 460! That ain't even right!
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #19 by tj300 » Mon May 18, 2009 5:05 pm

Harte3 wrote:
I suspect the tall gearing is not allowing for enough rpm to get decent A/F flow through the carb and thus it suffers on the bottom end.
I plug mine around town at low speeds and it will run 30 mph all day long at 1000 rpm with no problem with 1500 rpm upshifts. When I mash the gas I have to make 2000-2500 rpm before it really takes hold. IIRC I'm geared at 3.08 though. I don't think I would care for gears any taller than that.

Aside from the 2.75 I also have a C6 auto tranny to boot. Not a good combo for the 300. Whether or not someone takes me up on a swap I'm still switching the out the 2.75 for the 3.50 very shortly. There's really not much difference between 2.75 and 3.08 is there? I was even considering going as low as 3.73. What would be your thoughts? Maybe too low?
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #20 by Luckyman » Mon May 18, 2009 5:46 pm

3.50 is a good compromise if you do both "in-town" and highway driving. If its more town go 3.73. if its mostly highway go 3.25. just my opinion.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

Harte3
VIP Member
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #21 by Harte3 » Mon May 18, 2009 6:52 pm

The 3.50 should be a fair compromise. I've had my truck since '87 and I'm used to the gearing and the 4speed transmission. Hauled hay, firewood, pulled 4 horse stock trailer, etc., but it does little actual work these days other than an occasional trip to the dump and a load of manure for the garden so the highway gears suit me just fine.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #22 by Craigwell » Mon May 18, 2009 9:46 pm

That's what I mean. Your top end is affected - it's making it's power there, and your gearing is to high to take advantage of it.

I like the 3.50 gearing choice. My 85 has the 3.08, and it wouldn't be a good gearset for a top end power making engine.

The 302 in my 78 is trying to spin 2.75 gears. I'll get back to you in a couple weeks with how I feel about that pushing through a C5 (yes, a lock up tourque unit from the 80's) transmission.

I think you should check into what jet sizes and power valve are in that carb. I don't know anything about edelbrock carbs, but I assume these are adjustable. You could have a big issue right there. Some people here will tell you 500 CFM is too much for that engine with your mods. I think it could run alright, but it might need smaller jets.

As for your distributor. I wonder if there's a tag on it so that it can be referenced. Can you verify vacuum advance operation?? Care to take a crack seeing how's it mechanical timing is set up??

I think with your 3.50's, and a little fine tuning, you'll have one heck of an engine.
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

willowbilly3
Registered User
Posts: 454
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:28 am

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #23 by willowbilly3 » Tue May 19, 2009 8:25 am

While the 300 is one of the best engines Ford ever made for a light truck, it isn't the only engine for every need. I also feel you have a bad setup with the tall gear and auto trans. I'm not a big fan of automatics but respect those who are. There is a parasitic loss with most transmissions and the 300 can't afford to give away that power IMHO. I did have a new Econoline in 1980 with a 300 auto and it got down the road just fine. It had no problem getting 19+ but I suppose gas was better then too.
Great ideas have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds
Albert Einstien

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #24 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 9:55 am

Craigwell wrote:That's what I mean. Your top end is affected - it's making it's power there, and your gearing is to high to take advantage of it.

1). I like the 3.50 gearing choic.


My 85 has the 3.08, and it wouldn't be a good gearset for a top end power making engine.

The 302 in my 78 is trying to spin 2.75 gears. I'll get back to you in a couple weeks with how I feel about that pushing through a C5 (yes, a lock up tourque unit from the 80's) transmission.

2).I think you should check into what jet sizes and power valve are in that carb. I don't know anything about edelbrock carbs, but I assume these are adjustable. You could have a big issue right there. Some people here will tell you 500 CFM is too much for that engine with your mods. I think it could run alright, but it might need smaller jets.


3).As for your distributor. I wonder if there's a tag on it so that it can be referenced. Can you verify vacuum advance operation??
4). Care to take a crack seeing how's it mechanical timing is set up??


I think with your 3.50's, and a little fine tuning, you'll have one heck of an engine.

1). Luckyman made an interesting point about 3.73 for intown driving. Any thoughts? I'll be making the change real soon, because of the auto tranny I'm giving 3.73 another look.

2).I'm not sure of the jet or power valve sizes but they are adjustable.

3).I can check that.

4). If some one could walk me through it, I'll give it a shot.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #25 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 10:16 am

willowbilly3 wrote:While the 300 is one of the best engines Ford ever made for a light truck, it isn't the only engine for every need.
I also feel you have a bad setup with the tall gear and auto trans. I'm not a big fan of automatics but respect those who are. There is a parasitic loss with most transmissions and the 300 can't afford to give away that power IMHO.


I agree. The 300 can't afford to lose much through the drivetrain. I'm not a fan of automatics either, especially for a truck, but I'm stuck with it. That's why I'm giving the 3.73 , or 3.75 , another look. I have the 9" differential, so that would be the 3.75 which was original to that wouldn't it? Although , it wouldn't make much difference. Later , towards the Fall season, I'll put a shift kit in the auto. And , as was previously suggested, maybe I need some further tuning, I dunno.
It would sure be nice if I could talk FTF into a trade for that 460 . I'll even shine up the valve cover!



I did have a new Econoline in 1980 with a 300 auto and it got down the road just fine. It had no problem getting 19+ but I suppose gas was better then too.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #26 by Luckyman » Tue May 19, 2009 10:41 am

The 3.73 would be my choice if I didnt have to make any "road trips" or do lots of freeway driving. Anything up to 45-50 and the 3.73 would be just fine, (easy to keep in the torque "sweet spot") but at 70-75 on the freeway the screaming at 3500 rpm (approx, depending on tire size) would wear me out and suck some gas.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #27 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 11:07 am

Luckyman wrote:
The 3.73 would be my choice if I didnt have to make any "road trips" or do lots of freeway driving. Anything up to 45-50 and the 3.73 would be just fine, (easy to keep in the torque "sweet spot") but at 70-75 on the freeway the screaming at 3500 rpm (approx, depending on tire size) would wear me out and suck some gas.


I'm not making as many road trips as I used to , and the tires I have are the original size car tire to my truck , so , shouldn't be a problem there. It would still be interesting to find out how much more the 3.73 would jack up the rpm for highway driving and compare that to the 3.50. There's a post some where with that information.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #28 by Luckyman » Tue May 19, 2009 11:13 am

tj300 wrote:
Luckyman wrote:
The 3.73 would be my choice if I didnt have to make any "road trips" or do lots of freeway driving. Anything up to 45-50 and the 3.73 would be just fine, (easy to keep in the torque "sweet spot") but at 70-75 on the freeway the screaming at 3500 rpm (approx, depending on tire size) would wear me out and suck some gas.


I'm not making as many road trips as I used to , and the tires I have are the original size car tire to my truck , so , shouldn't be a problem there. It would still be interesting to find out how much more the 3.73 would jack up the rpm for highway driving and compare that to the 3.50. There's a post some where with that information.


StrangeRanger can figure that stuff out in his head (without using fingers, toes, pencils, calculators :lol:) So hopefully he will be along soon to shed some light and get us closer to actual rpm figures.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

User avatar
80broncoman
Global Moderator
Posts: 3315
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2003 10:49 pm
Location: The Great state of Ohio!!

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #29 by 80broncoman » Tue May 19, 2009 11:22 am

I hope you are not trying to set ignition timing at stock specs. Stock specs are fine for stock engine trying to meet emissions. other wise run as much timing as possible with out it pinging.

just what engine/vehicle combo are you comparing the current
300/C-6/2.75 geared truck to?
OAPSE Union Member

Real men don't wear Bowties
When it come to engines If its .001 loose nobody knows, But if its .001 too tight EVERYBODY KNOWS!!
80 bronco FUV (farm utility vehicle)300 T-18 3.50s EFI head, offy C dual plenum, 500 edel carb, 1.7 roller rockers, Crane 260 cam EFI Exh

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #30 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 11:35 am

Luckyman wrote:
tj300 wrote:
Luckyman wrote:The 3.73 would be my choice if I didnt have to make any "road trips" or do lots of freeway driving. Anything up to 45-50 and the 3.73 would be just fine, (easy to keep in the torque "sweet spot") but at 70-75 on the freeway the screaming at 3500 rpm (approx, depending on tire size) would wear me out and suck some gas.

I'm not making as many road trips as I used to , and the tires I have are the original size car tire to my truck , so , shouldn't be a problem there. It would still be interesting to find out how much more the 3.73 would jack up the rpm for highway driving and compare that to the 3.50. There's a post some where with that information.


StrangeRanger can figure that stuff out in his head (without using fingers, toes, pencils, calculators :lol:) So hopefully he will be along soon to shed some light and get us closer to actual rpm figures.

Okay, I found the post with the info. You only get one guess as to who provided it.

Here's what StrangeRanger provided :
Based on my tire size, 235/75-15;
2.75= 2150 @ 65
3.00=2350 @ 65
3.25=2540 @ 65
3.50=2740 @ 65
3.75=2930 @ 65

I don't know. I like the 3.75 for intown driving , which I seem to be doing more of , but occasionally I do some highway driving. Where does the 300 peak out at? For intown driving would there be a sizable difference between the 2.75 and the 3.50?

I never had anything between a highway gear and a 4.10 . I don't know how anything between a 3.00 - 3.75 will respond.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #31 by Luckyman » Tue May 19, 2009 11:59 am

I have the 3.00 and 4spd in my 2wd "highway truck" (1976 150 300) and I like it for that. But it is a not much fun slug around town. I have a 3.50 4spd in my 4wd "hill car" (1976 150 300) and I dont like to go much past 65 on the highway but it is much better in town and in the hills. The "sweet spot" for power & mileage in my mostly stock trucks is 2000-2500 RPM.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #32 by Craigwell » Tue May 19, 2009 7:33 pm

The only way I like the 3.72 with the 300 is with an overdrive gear. I will be co-piloting a 1986 Econoline 150 with a stock 300, 3.50 gearing and a 3 speed with overdrive (no joke the van came stock this way) from Vancouver to Halifax ( or about 4500 miles) next week.

Based on my highway experience with this vehicle in the past, you sure are happy to have the .80 overdrive on the highway with the 3.50 gearing. I wouldn't want 3.73. If anything, I almost want taller in that van. (3.08 or a steeper overdrive, like .66)

This vehicle, and my 85 F150 with the 3.08 for that matter run just fine in the city. I almost think 3.08 is a perfect gear setup for a stock 300, or one built for tourque - in a 2wd light and quick runner. I really love how the 85 drives.

I do think 2.75 is too much for any truck, and I'll find out for certain with my 78 in the long run. (both with 302/automatic, and with the 300 with a 4 speed in the long term)

In short, my pick is 3.50.

Here are some links about ignition timing. If you wrap your head around this stuff, you'll be thankful you did someday, count on it.

http://www.carbdford.com/viewtopic.php?t=5543
http://www.carbdford.com/viewtopic.php?t=5392
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #33 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 7:54 pm

Craigwell, thanks. I like the links you provided. I'll be looking them over .

I never had anything between a highway gear and a 4.10.
I don't know how a 3.50 would feel in comparison to a 2.75 for intown driving. Should be a big difference shouldn't it?
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Harte3
VIP Member
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #34 by Harte3 » Tue May 19, 2009 8:23 pm

I would think there would be a noticeable difference. According to the chart I have a 3.00 with the 235's. I can idle off from a dead stop in 2nd with only a little cracking of the throttle and pick right up as wanted but that really doesn't say much about how it moves with an A/T.

I think the Edelbrock uses different springs to change the enrichment rather than a Holley type power valve. Different jets and metering rods are available. Might be worth a call or Email to the Edelbrock Techs and run it by them.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #35 by tj300 » Tue May 19, 2009 9:35 pm

Harte3 wrote:I would think there would be a noticeable difference. According to the chart I have a 3.00 with the 235's. I can idle off from a dead stop in 2nd with only a little cracking of the throttle and pick right up as wanted
but that really doesn't say much about how it moves with an A/T.


I think the Edelbrock uses different springs to change the enrichment rather than a Holley type power valve. Different jets and metering rods are available. Might be worth a call or Email to the Edelbrock Techs and run it by them.

The auto tranny is the reason I'm considering the 3.75 over the 3.50. But, the 3.50 is a big jump from the 2.75. It has to be noticeable. Everyone's probably right, maybe the 3.50 is the better choice. Even the place that'll be doing the work advised the same.

What would be some of the tell tale signs that my carb could be directly linked to my performance woes?
Is the 500cfm really too big for the 300? I know both the Holley 390cfm and the Edelbrock 500 cfm are used on the engine.
Also, I did nothing to the dizzy after adding my mods. I also noticed that my engine gives a little sputter when I shut it off.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #36 by Craigwell » Tue May 19, 2009 9:55 pm

yes. 3.50 works good in the city. 3.75 is almost too much of a good thing... again, in my opinion. if your engine has less power down low, and wants to rev with more top end power, then i see why the 3.75 might be good, but again. you want an overdrive if you have 3.75 or forget about decent highway use / mileage.
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #37 by Luckyman » Tue May 19, 2009 9:57 pm

The Ebrock 500 carb is made to work by a lot of 300 owners. However it flows more than can be used by an other wise internally stock engine. To take advantage of the higher airflow the head needs to be modified to flow better and a higher lift/duration cam installed to take advantage of it. That in turn moves the torque curve up the rpm scale and a trade off is made for more power higher up for a little bit less off idle "grunt".

The conventional wisdom is that a stock 300 only needs a maximum of about 350 cfm. One reason why the Holley 390 is a popular choice. The primaries flow approximately what the stock single barrel carter yf flows (180-200), but then at higher rpms (3000 & up) the secondaries can open up giving some more oomph at higher speeds. Same with the Ebrock 500 which will stay in the hunt longer after more modifications than the 390 will. Either one will help the 300 make more power up to 4500 rpm after the stock single barrel wheezes out at 3000-3500 rpm.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #38 by Craigwell » Tue May 19, 2009 10:16 pm

as far as your carb goes:

it may very well be fine, but due-diligence says you need to check into it. It's one thing to have fuel and air dumped into an engine, and then for spark plugs to ignite the mixture -- it's a whole other ball-game once you consider your distributor regulates timing in three different ways, and at different rates - ALL of which are adjustable. A Carburetor has several different systems as well, all of which are adjustable. You have your idle mixture, accelerator pump, power valve/system, main jets etc. Vacuum characteristics both influence your tuning in these areas, and also help you to understand what your getting.

You must take the time to consider the intricate relationship between all these variables, and consider how you would go about fine tuning.

Data is always your friend in these matters:

What is your initial timing (set with timing light)

what is your carbs internal settings/parts. this should be able to be determined by running all the parts/casting numbers on it by edelbrock.

is there still a tag on your distributor? perhaps we can run the numbers and find out it's mechanical advance setting.

Don't be daunted by this stuff, we are all in different stages of learning about our projects. I wish I understood what I do now about these vehicles, even 5 years ago. The subtleties make a huge difference, and it takes a long time to understand how.

Your on the right track with the gear swap. Be sure to only adjust one factor at a time, so that you can evaluate the results...see how it feels on the road. Get the gears changed out to 3.50, and find out as much as you can about the other components on your engine.
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

J.R.
Registered User
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2002 10:11 pm
Location: SoCal

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #39 by J.R. » Wed May 20, 2009 4:11 am

Another approach might be to install the performance 1st and 2nd gears into the C6 trans: 2.72 1st and 1.54 2nd, versus the standard 2.46 and 1.46. That's about 10.5% deeper 1st gear, ie. the 2.73 act like 3.01 rear gears, or the 3.08 gears feels about like 3.40 rear gears, and of course, the 3.50 gearset would feel like the 3.87 set.

Best wishes on your project.


J.R.
So Cal

willowbilly3
Registered User
Posts: 454
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:28 am

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #40 by willowbilly3 » Wed May 20, 2009 6:30 am

I drove a 72 F250 for many years, one of my favorite trucks ever. It had a 300, T18 and a 3.73 gear. Tires were 31" tall. It was good gearing, the truck pulled well and could cruise effortlessly at 75. It averaged 16 1/2 on the highway and about 14 city. If I was feeling a little lazy I could roll it out in 3rd gear.
Great ideas have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds

Albert Einstien

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #41 by tj300 » Wed May 20, 2009 8:44 am

I guess I'm really not giving my 300 project a fair chance to get going. I want to take a closer look at the distributor to see if an upgrade is are needed there as well. I just thought since I wasn't too far from stock I didn't need it. Seems I'm probably wrong. Iam going to switch out the gear very shortly and see how the performance picks up for intown driving. From what you guys are saying I may need more tuning, and I want to get deeper into that as well. I went with the Edelbrock after I called Offenhauser and spoke with them. They tested both the 390 cfm and 500 cfm on the dp intake and they said there was no real noticable difference in performance, hence they suggested the Holley 390 cfm. But, I was able to get the Edelbrock 500 cfm for $100 cheaper. That's why I chose the Edelbrock. Offenhauser did tell me the 500 cfm would work. But, as some of you suggested that may not be entirely correct, and a little work may be needed there as well. I know both carbs are used on this engine . Are there any on the forum who have this carb?
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
Craigwell
Registered User
Posts: 666
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:37 pm
Location: Atlantica, Canada

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #42 by Craigwell » Wed May 20, 2009 8:33 pm

There's a good chance your distributor is fine, but you just want to be sure - if it's not, your performance takes a big hit.

The information in those links describes what characteristics your timing should have, depending on engine factors such as: Compression, octane of fuel used, etc.

The easiest things to do:

Get a timing light with advance feature
follow instructions in the link to remove the top parts of distributor to see what's stamped on the centrifugal advance mechanism
use your timing light to see what rate your mechanical advance is being applied.

This is all stuff you can revisit later. I'd do your gears first, see how it runs, and then look at those links again when your ready for fine tuning.

I have those links bookmarked, and have looked at them at least 4 or 5 times since I first seen them (on this site in the small six threads) about a year ago.

One day at a time sir! At least you have a map of things to look into before you possibly defect back to the V8 fold.

:D
1995 F150 4x4 4.9L E4OD Mule / Plow Truck
Gone but not forgotten: 1976 F250 4x4 300 six, NP435. Dana60/44HD 4.10 Traction Lok, EFI Exhaust, 240 Head

Harte3
VIP Member
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #43 by Harte3 » Wed May 20, 2009 8:49 pm

The Edelbrock should be fine especially since most driving is on the primary side. I suggest having the distributor recurved for your application and you might not even have to touch the carb.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #44 by tj300 » Wed May 20, 2009 10:08 pm

Thanks for the info and the encouragement guys.
First on my agenda in the very near future is swapping out that 2.75 gear. I'm still up in the air over the 3.50 and 3.75,( 3.75 was in the 9" wasn't it ?). Later in the fall will be the shift kit in my C6. I think the combo of high gearing and the auto tranny is mostly what's killing the intown performance. But I think I also want to take another look at the dizzy and address any issues for additional tuning. My 300 does give a little sputter when I shut it off. No Craigwell, I haven't defected yet. You guys kept me from falling off the wagon. Although I will trade my 300 for FTF's 460 , I even shined up the valve cover!
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

User avatar
Mustang_Geezer
RC Moderator
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:10 pm
Location: NorthEast Indiana

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #45 by Mustang_Geezer » Thu May 21, 2009 7:10 am

I'd say its your gears also....

Mines a fuel injected 92 w/ auto and it has more than enough power to suit me and it pulls my Mustang on a trailer in overdrive @ 65 mph once I get on the freeway so its no dog.... :wink:

Never checked the gear ratio on mine though?

Later,
1966 Mustang Coupe
206 ci Inline 6
Best ET 60' 1.84 1/8 mile 8.74 @ 79.09 mph 1/4 mile 13.67 @ 98.18 mph US 131 Motorsports Park. 4/6/13
2003 F-150 FX-4 Tow vehicle.

Ronbo
Registered User
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 8:56 am
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #46 by Ronbo » Thu May 21, 2009 7:28 am

You sure do have a strange combo there....I'd say the C6 was part of a towing package but no way with that rear gear. Is the axle code on the door jamb the same as the one on the rear end? Basically your all over it. The tranny is sucking the life out of it, the rear is putting the double suck to it. I took Bronco beast out for a jaunt after reading through this again and here are some observations. I know my truck can do more with some head work and a cam, that will lengthen the power band a bit and I would be able to move it up or down to where I want it. Have you ever ridden an old two stroke dirt bike? My truck with 3.55s and 32" tires drives just like it. It has a 1500rpm or so power band that is really strong, it builds up to it fair and falls straight on its face at the top of it. I wish you could take a ride in the thing because it is very obvious. Given the weight and dynamics of the vehicle I can honestly say when it is in that powerband its as good/better than any SBF. Outside of it you might as well be Fred Flintstone in the Flintstone mobile! On the bottom end you dont get the rush but it will pull tree stumps. Its a truck and that is what it was meant to do.
Your already on the road to fixing a big portion of your problem with the gear set if you want to change the characteristics of the engine its going to mean headwork and a cam. I wouldn't give up on her just yet 8) I too toy with the V8 idea on my Mustang but then I might as well just go buy a new Mustang and join the masses.
As far as gear choice, if I was planning on keeping the SROD I would go 3.73s so I could get more use out of the overdrive. I drive mostly in third and the 3.55s are good around town and on the highway.
And finally, for the record, I believe FTF has built more than a few honking 300s, do some research and see what you find ;) Good luck and don't bail just yet!!

Ron
2017 F-150 Lariat ECO Boost
2011 F-150 Lariat ECO Boost
68 Mustang, power drums/steering, AC, single outlet coated header, Holley 350, DS II w/Accel super coil
80 Goldwing (half the Mustang :))

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #47 by tj300 » Thu May 21, 2009 9:07 am

Actually, head work and a cam was going to be my next project. But, I didn't see the point until I took care of the gearing and had a shift kit installed in the C6. Maybe next year for additional engine mods. I'm just glad that since I'm stuck with an auto tranny, it's at least a C6. Any way, I will be taking care of the gearing very shortly. Still deciding between the 3.50 and 3.75.
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

greyf100
Registered User
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:24 am

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #48 by greyf100 » Thu May 21, 2009 9:26 am

man i feel your pain...

i have an '81 F100 with 300, c-6, 2.75...it absolutely loves cruising down the highway at 55-65 MPH, but hates getting up to that speed. I'm avg around 15MPG, i did take off all the smog with the exception of the cat and have replaced all the ignition stuff and rebuilt the carb. I'm thinking a 3.50 trac lok third is what i need, i dont do a lot of highway driving but i would still like to be able to. with that gear, c-6, and 225/75r15 tires i should be turning about 3k rpm @ 70 MPH. Do you know if the c-6 has a lock up torque converter?

Luckyman
VIP Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:42 pm
Location: Helena, MT. pop. enough

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #49 by Luckyman » Thu May 21, 2009 11:42 am

tj300 wrote:........ Still deciding between the 3.50 and 3.75.


If you know that you never want/need to go with a larger tire the 3.50 should be fine. If you ever do want a larger tire you might wish you had the 3.73-3.75 But if you get the 3.75 and never need/do the larger tires then just more revs, noise, gas. Just thinking out loud.
1 "76" F150 RC, LB, 2WD, 300, NP435, 9" open 3.00, special order 2-76/Delivered 4-76. Still "new".

1 "73-79" F150 RC/SS/SB/4WD, "84"-300, T18, NP205, 9" open 3.50, Dana 44 3.50 open, Offy DP, Holley 470, EFI + single 2.5" exhaust. Gathered from 15+ donor/parts trucks. "Fubar". Runs good, safe, still needs details/project continues.

User avatar
tj300
Registered User
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:40 pm
Location: Grove City,Ohio,near Columbus

Re: Not a fan of the 300

Post #50 by tj300 » Thu May 21, 2009 3:19 pm

greyf100 wrote:man i feel your pain...

i have an '81 F100 with 300, c-6, 2.75...it absolutely loves cruising down the highway at 55-65 MPH, but hates getting up to that speed. I'm avg around 15MPG, i did take off all the smog with the exception of the cat and have replaced all the ignition stuff and rebuilt the carb. I'm thinking a 3.50 trac lok third is what i need, i dont do a lot of highway driving but i would still like to be able to. with that gear, c-6, and 225/75r15 tires i should be turning about 3k rpm @ 70 MPH.
Do you know if the c-6 has a lock up torque converter?


I don't know. How would I tell?
America was founded by people who believe that God was their rock of safety.I recognize we must be cautious in claiming that God is on our side,but I think it's all right to keep asking if we're on His side;Ronald Reagan, 2nd inaugural

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: old28racer and 18 guests