300 vs 302

[rusty ol ranger]

The EFI 300's actually dont do awful bad up high. The biggest thing working against the carbed 300's is the little lawn mower like 1bbl carb.

The 300 may no have as much as a 302 up high.....but once your rolling 35+MPH you dont need alot of torque....even to acclerate.

later,
Dustin

 

[bobbywalter]

Exactly.

Givin the same trans and rear end, lets say An E4OD and 3.55's, with lets say 8000lbs and a steep hill, the 300 is going to break the trailer moving, and you dont need nearly as much torque to keep it rolling as you do to get it rolling.

Thats what people dont seem to understand, you need your torque the most from a dead stop, and at a dead stop your not turning 3500RPM, your turning 800, 1200 or so when the TQ converter engages, thats where you want your torque.

If the torque converter engages at 1200rpm, and the 300 is making 235ftlbs, and the 302 is making 150, whos gonna grunt the bigger load? By the time the 302 hits 3500rpm sure the 300 is out of steam, but its already got the load rolling fast enough to where it can make due with less power.

later,
Dustin

where are you getting a tq converter that enages at 1200 rpm?

all mine are 16-2200....i would love to have a 1200 rpm unit though.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

Straight from the towing forum. Figured I would post it here too.

Torque is motionless. When you take torque the engine produces, and then multiply that by how many times the engine makes that torque you get horsepower. An extreme example would by a steam engine. A steam tractor can produce 5,000ft-lbs of torque. But it only spins at 100rpm. So, torque times rpm divided by 5252 would yield horsepower. (5,000 x 100)/5252 equals 95hp. A modern diesel tractor of similar size would produce 500lb-ft of torque. But this tractor turns out 2000 rpm. So, (500 x 2000)/5252 equals 190hp. You see, even though the modern tractor produces only 10% of the torque the old tractor does, it makes that torque many more times. Lets put this to the rear wheels. Both these tractors must maintain the same speed in the field. Lets say 20mph. Both tractors have the same height tires for easy comparison, lets say 6 feet tall. The circumference of a 6 foot tire is about 18.85 feet. There are 5280 feet in a mile, and 18.85 feet around the tire. 5280/18.85=280. This means that the axle must rotate 280 times for the tractor to move one mile.

Back to our tractors. We need to figure out what gear ratio would allow us to use each engine's powerband to the max while still maintaining 20mph. First, the steam engine. This guy spins at a max of 6000 revolutions per hour (100rpm x 60min) while producing a huge 5,000ft-lbs. And to maintain 20mph the axle must rotate 5600 revolutions per hour. So, 6000 engine rph/5600 axle rph = 1.07:1 gear ratio. If we multiply that huge 5,000ft-lbs by 1.07:1 we get 5350lb-ft at the axle.

Now, how much torque is the diesel putting to the axle? Well, spinning the diesel at 2000rpm for one hour would be equivalant to 120,000 revolutions per hour. The tires are the same size for comparison, so we know that the axle must turn 5600 times to travel 20 miles in one hour. So, 120,000/5600=21.43:1 gears. Now, lets take that 500lb-ft and multiply it by our gear reduction (21.43:1) to get 10,715lb-ft at the axle.

Do you see how torque doesn't mean much? It takes torque and rpm (which is HORSEPOWER) to do work. As you can see, the tremendous torque of the steam engine could only produce a maximum of 5350lb-ft at 20 mph. The diesel engine, which produced only 10% of the torque the steam engine puts out manages to turn the axle with 10,715lb-ft of torque.

Now do you see how the 300 would puke and the 302 still pull? Its not torque that pulls the load, its horsepower.

 

[Ozwynn]

Why would you pull a load at 12, 13, 14, 15, 1600RPM? Oh wait, thats where the 300 makes power. Beyond that and the 302 blows it away. So, yes, if you were pulling a load with 15 foot intervals where the engine was only allowed to reach 1600rpm then yes a 300 will work just fine. But highway merging and hill climbing and I'll just downshift that 302 so it doesn't have to be at 1600rpm.

uuuuuummmmmm I pull loads all day at 12,13,14,15,16 hundred RPMs, and I run down the road alot faster that 45 mph. the 300 is designed to run in diesel territory, and it does. and the 302 does not blow it away, it barely creeps away from the 300 until it hits a hill and when you are downshifting the 302 into second gear to keep your RPMs up the 300 is chugging right by you in 4th.

 

[tanbuddy]

It depends on how u tow.
If u want to go fast down the highway, u need more hp to keep up cause u can downshift and use gearing.
If u want to keep the rpm low in o.d and not downshift, the low rpm torque will me more improtant.

If u dont tow on the highway and only go 30 mph like me, the 300 is in 4th gear or 302 in 3rd gear. I prefer the 300.
With factory gearing, the 300 will get off the line better every time tho!

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Really though you have to look at what each engine was designed for.

The 300 is a desecedent of the 240 I6, which was designed to be a slow revving, run forever, torque monster for 1/2ton and up trucks. The 300 carries on that legacy only better due to its much larger bore and better cam. The 300 is designed to be a truck engine, made to grunt very heavy loads that would usually be unsafe to haul at 70+MPH. Mainly be used like a tractor.

The 302 on the other hand, is a desendent of the 289, which i think in itself is a desecdent of the 260?? Not sure on that one but anyways....

The 289 was designed to be a high revving speed machine for use in mustangs and other LIGHT vehicles.

The 302 was designed after these same specs. The only reason they made it into trucks was because ford needed a small V8 to compete with the likes of the 305.

The 300 was used in everything from F100's to F700 Grain trucks, school busses, boom trucks, etc etc. The 302 was used mainly in F100 and F150 trucks, and a few found there way into F250's with hellacious gearing to ge them todo what needs to be done.

Theres a reason Ford didnt use them in the big trucks....because they knew the 302 just didnt have what it took.

later,
Dustin

 

[Jason]

It appears that both engines were designed so people on the internet could argue about the merits of each.

 

[bobbywalter]

well thats the very topic here.....300-vs-302 merits. both engines in general have merits in mass. well stock to stock they are very deserving of praise for stock applications for the most part.



its also an rbv board.....which makes the 300 meritless...

 

[Gotta_gofast]

Bobby, nice ass!

 

[Ozwynn]

Dustin hit it. the 300 was designed to make a truck pull like a tractor. the 302 and the 305 are worthless hunks of crap in a truck. they can't pull like a tractor or tow like a big block...... leave them in the damn car or at the very least don't even try to play like it is an engine that can be useful in anything other than a car or a toy.

 

[bobbywalter]

Dustin hit it. the 300 was designed to make a truck pull like a tractor. the 302 and the 305 are worthless hunks of crap in a truck. they can't pull like a tractor or tow like a big block...... leave them in the damn car or at the very least don't even try to play like it is an engine that can be useful in anything other than a car or a toy.

lets get this right


if a 302 makes the same power as the 300 at 16-1800 rpm how is the 300 better?

granted most 302's and any factory unit does not do that, and there are reasons for that in oem form...but finding good running low milers isnt what it used to be either. generally these engines need freshening at this point in time. in a fullsize truck i would not use either engine....if i had too i would build the 302 to do the job at hand very cost effectivly and with alot more capacity and usable range. the 331/347 base stroker can be tuned with efi to some serios capacity for wonderfully cheap. at the same time the 300 can be built to some serious capacity as well. but dollar for dollar the 302 wins. its easier to make a 302 do what a 300 can then a 300 do what a 302 can....but a 300 can be a fire breathing monster as well.


in any case i dont PREFER either of these engines for real truck work. i would like the 300 if it had REAL TRUCK POWER at 11-12-13-14-1500 rpm....i dont think you have ver driven a stroked 302...it sure as hell makes a 300 look bad.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Stroke a 300 and see what you come up with.

Compareing a stroked 302 to a Stock 300 isnt even remotly fair.

We're compareing stock to stock. There is no doubt in anyones mind the aftermarket for the 300 sucks and buck for buck the 302 is better when modded. If you wanna compare a stroked 302 to something compare it to the 400M. Basically a V8 Version of the 300, same bore, same stroke, same cam profile, and ill lay odds that a decent running 400 would embarass a stroked 302 with a load. Because if im not mistaken, isnt a stroked 302 end up with roughly the same stroke as a stock 300?

But in two factory stock trucks the 300 is the better worker.

The 300 would be absoultly no fun in a mustang, it would launch like helloff the line and run outta steam at 3500 and then youd shift and loaf along to 55. Thats what the 302 was designed for.

Hook 15K behind a F350 that by some weird miracle a 302 got put in and your going to be floored off the line and by the time you make it to where the 302 has an advatage over the 300 a similar truck with the 300 woulda already be gone.

later,
Dustin

 

[Gotta_gofast]

Well, the topic went pretty far off track. Strokin the engines, F350s that never came with these options...


Lets see, the '96 F150 for instance has a max towing capacity of 8,000lbs(?) when equipped with an auto and proper gears. I know this is a high figure, but lets move on. In stock form, the torque converter locks up around between 2200-2500rpm on the AOD-E and 4R70W transmissions. This is a little high for that 4.9L but its perfect for the 5.0L. Both engines are entirely capable of moving 8000lbs in first gear from a dead stop. As the speed of the vehicle increases to where the engine rpm starts to rise in first gear, the 302 will start to produce more torque. By the time both trucks reach their shift point, the 300 has been wheezing while the 302 is gladly revving in its midrange to get those 8000lbs moving in traffic. Once cruising, the 302 isn't going to be working at all. Remember, we don't tow a lot of weight in overdrive, so that 302 is sittin purdy in its torque curve while the 300 is probably running out of steam because its already peaked. Sure you can let it in OD, but will the trans wanna stay there? Down a hill maybe. But any kind of wind resistance along with that much weight and you can count on trans failure if you select OD.

Second point, most people don't purchase EITHER of these engines or F150s if its main duty is heavy hauling. If its your intention to pull this much weight all the time, then a big block or diesel sounds like your only options. So, for the occasional hauler/tower the 5.0L is going to yield the same estimated fuel economy as the 4.9L but the 5.0L equipped truck is going to prove usefull when it comes time to pass that slow guy in front of you. So, what am I saying? For the 1/2 ton pickups the 5.0L would hands down beat the 4.9L in every aspect. In a school bus, the 5.0L would have to maintain its torque peak all the time, which means it must rev all the way into its midrange. This is going to reduce the life of that guy. The 4.9L would have to run at its torque peak, which is substantially lower. But that means in order to maintain the same speed, it must use a numerically lower gear to keep in its peak. This is equally going to to be bad because you now have less torque multiplication. My point, don't use EITHER of these engines in hard duty cycles. There are diesels that produce tremendous torque without spinning fast to make up for the lower gears and to stay away from premature wear. There are big blocks that do a similar job. But for an F150 that hauls loads sometimes, I would have to vote 5.0L.

 

[Will]

I will never understand homerizm.

You click down a gear and the 302 screams by the 300 and the show is over--if the difference were that dramatic-which it isn't.

They both burn gas. They both kind of suck. A 300 is nothing like a diesel. It has no turbocharger pushing 50psi of boost. It's lays down and dies where the tractor engine is being pumped full of gobbs of O2.

I had a 300-6 in '91-92. I guess I didn't realize what a damn beast it was at the time. I suppose it was saddled by the manual transmission.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

I dont see why people say the 302 is that much faster in a smiliar truck then a 300 empty to empty. Both run about 13 seconds 0-60. The only time the 302 really has an advatage is from about 60-75.

I pulled 10,000lbs worth of skid steer and trailer behind my 300 6 F150. Equipped with the E4OD and 3.55's, It yanked it right down the road (in 3rd) at 60MPH and never hesitated in the least. It was slow to take off but it never felt like it wasnt going to go.

Thats the difference ive noticed between the two engines, the 302 (with a light load) doesnt seem to lose much accleration, the 300 does, but the heaiver the load, the more the 302 feels like it wants to give up, as to where the 300 just slows down more, but never feels like its going to tottally fail.


are you sure the torque converter engages that high?


Im just wondering because i watch my tach and empty my truck begins moving at 1200....maybe i dont fully understand tq converter lock???

All i know is Ive seen both engines work/run, and from what ive seen, and this is strictly personal experince, the 300 makes the better worker.

later,
Dustin