4.0L V6 vs 200 6L

[gwaii]

The Ford "Small Block" inline 6 has one major problem... they are very prone to having the rocker arms chew the tips off the valve stems while at the same time the side loading this causes destroy the valve guides.

AD

back in the day(30 years ago)i was all about the old falcons....ran countless 144s,170s,and 200s into the ground.

i never saw or heard of this problem.not saying it didn't happen,but it never happened to me or my buddies running these engines.

 

[RustedRanger]

Another drawback to the straight 6 is weight distribution which is already bad in pickups.

 

[AllanD]

4 main bearing was on the early(60-63i think)144 and 170 engines.by the time the 200 came about they were all 7 main.

There were four-mail 200 engines but they stoipped making them ~'65 or '66

There WERE seven mail bearing 200's earlier but they were made specifically for the Econolines

BTW, while the bell patterns used on the seven main bearing engines is only "modifiable" to fit a
windsor bellhousing trans. the 250 IS a "windsor" bellhousing, In my very first engine swap I swapped
a 302 into a '69 Fairlane wagon that was originally a 250 without changing the
C4 trans.

but as I said above, unless heavily modified (at great expense) the 250, even with EFI and the Aussie crossflow head, does NOTHING that a stock 4.0 won't already do.

And the 4.0 is a "bolt-in" without fabricating a damned thing.

And bolts directly to a Ranger 4x4 trans.

And yeah a 4.0 will hold it's own (easily) against most 5.0's
on the street, particularly in a 4x4 and especially in a 4x4 offroad.

Unless a 5.0 is geared fairly short and running relatively small tires you simply can't get to the torque....

a 5.0 drives an awful lot like a 3.0 in it's RPM characteristics
and needs the same kind of gearing.

a 4.0 is so.... "right-f'ing-now"... on torque as soon as you roll into the throttle.

AD

 

[gwaii]

There were four-mail 200 engines but they stoipped making them ~'65 or '66

There WERE seven mail bearing 200's earlier but they were made specifically for the Econolines

AD

interesting....i didn't know there was a 4 main 200,or that the 4 main was around that late.

i remember the first time i saw a 4 main's insides.had a 62 falcon with the 144/3speed.it jammed into second gear when i was late for work,so i revved it high enough that the crank broke in two.when i pulled the engine and saw that it only had 4 mains i was shocked(i was 17 at the time)

it got a 200 after that.

but like allan said,it'll never match a 4.0.that's just a whole different world.

 

[grsjax]

If it wasn't so expensive to ship one I would be tempted to get a late model Aussie 250 with the aluminum cross flow head and EFI. Looks like the guys down in Oz took the L6 to the limit of its potential before dropping it in 2000. Here is a pic of the late model cross flow head.

http://image.mustangandfords.com/f/...harged_six_cylidner_mustang+cylinder_head.jpg

 

[strvger]

sure seems like either the 200 or 250 would be much easier to maintain as there would be no electronics associated with them. no sensors, no emissions, etc.
just a thought.

 

[AllanD]

sure seems like either the 200 or 250 would be much easier to maintain as there would be no electronics associated with them. no sensors, no emissions, etc.
just a thought.

But being carb'ed would run like shit at steep angles like my '67 200cid Shoebox bronco did.

that and the firewall was different on the really early ones that prevented retrofitting a V8 into it (I tried, believe me!)

I gave up on the V8 swap and put a 250 in to it and sold it

AD