300 Straight Six

[cody93]

probly EFI, the carbed one suffer from fuel starvation on CYL 1 and 6, altho it can be remidied with triple carbs

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The biggest thing working against the 300 is the fact it cant breathe. If you have a carbed one (which im assuming you do), youre better off running an EFI Head with a small 4bbl carb, and dual exhaust manifolds from an EFI engine. Its been 3 years since i had a 300, and even longer then that since i had a carbed one, but i cant tell you there tough, and when compared to a 302, alot better in a trail rig. If your planning on mud running then gear it high (lower numerically), the 300 has enough grunt to twist and with the higher gears it will be able to keep the wheel speed up, in a trail only rig gear it low (numercally higher) for serious crawlabilty.

In a dual purpose street/trail rig pick a midline gear (like 3.55's) and youll be happy.

How much you enjoy your 300 is directly related to how its geared. You gotta pick the gears to take advatage of its torque curve.

later,
Dustin

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I have a 302 in my Ranger, feels pretty perky down low to me

I forget the exact specs, but by no means are they terrible.

The darn thing about fell in there too.

 

[Hahnsb2]

Sure it can be done, but reward vs the effort just doesn't add up.

 

[birddog321]

If all it takes is a body lift and some BFH massaging, I don't think it will be that bad. I just have to see if a transfer case will work with the tranny I have.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

Was it carbed or FI?

Mine is FI

 

[nb11]

Looks like you need to borrow this guy's....

 

[AllanD]

If you are dispassionate about it and actually look at the numbers there isn't a whole
lot of difference (and even less significant difference) between a 4.9 and a 4.0.

If download torque is important to you, the 4.0 V6 is actually making >200ft/lb
by 1300rpm and it peaks at 225ft/lb.

I can understand the "I want to use what I've got" but back around '82 I tried to put
a 300 inline 6(That I already had) into a 1968 "Shoebox" Bronco and after having the
engine hanging from the hoist in the engine bay for a wheek while I just stared at it
I pulled it back out and bought a 250cid inline six out of an early 70's Maveric and
that bolted up to the original mounts and trans (C4) where the original 200 had been.

What I would have had to do to complete that conversion was just too
ugly to comptemplate.

The length of the engine was the least of my worries (but still a problem) my main
problem were actually the bellhousing pattern and the oil pan


Frankly if an engineless 66-69 Shoebox Bronco with a 6cyl firewall
(yeah the firewall had to be changed to allow a V8) appeared in my driveway today
I'd put a 4.0/M5OD-R1 and a 13-54 in it with about as much hesitation
deciding to take a sip of my morning coffee.

a V8? ahhhh.... No. the problem with a V8 is that everyone uses
is a 302/5.0 which aside from a 289 is probably the worst choice for a truck.


The comments regarding "V8 power" or "V8 torque" are hilarious to me because I
actually know the torque and power curve of both the 5.0 and the 4.0 engine

And frankly below 2000rpm there is nothing that any 5.0/302 ever made
does better than a 4.0 V6 and they are about equal from 2000-2500rpm
it is only above there that the 5.0 starts working.

IF you ever hear I'm actually building a V8 ranger you can bet anything you like that
I'm using a 5.8. a 5.8 can actually make power down low.... the torque curve of a
5.8 is rather like that of a 4.0.

The torque curve of a 5.0 is quite like that of a 3.0.... ponder that for a while...

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

If you are dispassionate about it and actually look at the numbers there isn't a whole
lot of difference (and even less significant difference) between a 4.9 and a 4.0.

If download torque is important to you, the 4.0 V6 is actually making >200ft/lb
by 1300rpm and it peaks at 225ft/lb.

I can understand the "I want to use what I've got" but back around '82 I tried to put
a 300 inline 6(That I already had) into a 1968 "Shoebox" Bronco and after having the
engine hanging from the hoist in the engine bay for a wheek while I just stared at it
I pulled it back out and bought a 250cid inline six out of an early 70's Maveric and
that bolted up to the original mounts and trans (C4) where the original 200 had been.

What I would have had to do to complete that conversion was just too
ugly to comptemplate.

The length of the engine was the least of my worries (but still a problem) my main
problem were actually the bellhousing pattern and the oil pan


Frankly if an engineless 66-69 Shoebox Bronco with a 6cyl firewall
(yeah the firewall had to be changed to allow a V8) appeared in my driveway today
I'd put a 4.0/M5OD-R1 and a 13-54 in it with about as much hesitation
deciding to take a sip of my morning coffee.

a V8? ahhhh.... No. the problem with a V8 is that everyone uses
is a 302/5.0 which aside from a 289 is probably the worst choice for a truck.


The comments regarding "V8 power" or "V8 torque" are hilarious to me because I
actually know the torque and power curve of both the 5.0 and the 4.0 engine

And frankly below 2000rpm there is nothing that any 5.0/302 ever made
does better than a 4.0 V6 and they are about equal from 2000-2500rpm
it is only above there that the 5.0 starts working.

IF you ever hear I'm actually building a V8 ranger you can bet anything you like that
I'm using a 5.8. a 5.8 can actually make power down low.... the torque curve of a
5.8 is rather like that of a 4.0.

The torque curve of a 5.0 is quite like that of a 3.0.... ponder that for a while...

My '87 302 is rated 270 lb ft at 2000. Mine is modified from that (4bbl, shorty headers and dual exhaust compared to SEFI and whatever plush exhaust a CV had) I have been around 4.0's and was never really all that impressed.

 

[RatDog8o8]

Not sure if any of the Ford info on here would help, but they list some dimensions for the 300.

http://www.kabamus.com/garage/motorswap/swapchart.pdf

 

[gwaii]

i've been told i shouldn't/couldn't do damn near everything i've ever done by someone at some point.

had i listened i never would have done anything,and even the things that didn't work out gave me valuable real world experience.

my opinion?get out your tape measure and bfh and post about the results.
then,the next guy that wants to know if it can be done will be referred to your thread.

 

[birddog321]

Not sure if any of the Ford info on here would help, but they list some dimensions for the 300.

http://www.kabamus.com/garage/motorswap/swapchart.pdf

I tried that link but nothing comes up

 

[RatDog8o8]

I tried that link but nothing comes up

Just tried it, it opens up an Adobe .pdf file page with the charts on it.

 

[koda6966]

Props to you if you do it. I love that engine and I've considered putting one in my Ranger. I'm going to stick with a V8 though, because any 300 I come across is going in the '79 Highboy.

 

[Il Brutto]

i've been told i shouldn't/couldn't do damn near everything i've ever done by someone at some point.

had i listened i never would have done anything,and even the things that didn't work out gave me valuable real world experience.

my opinion?get out your tape measure and bfh and post about the results.
then,the next guy that wants to know if it can be done will be referred to your thread.

HELL YEAH!!!

If you want to do it, start doing it! A few posts here say it has been done, so it CAN be done...DO IT!