Has anyone put an inline 6 in a Ranger?

[RacinNdrummin]

You 300/6 Humpers are crazy...

Its funny, the 300/6 is the most glorious engine ever built to those that have either A) Never owned a 300/6, and read forums or B)those that have only owned a 300/6 and never had a 302 truck with decent gearing (3.55+) or a 351 truck. The 302 will flat ass outlast a 300 2:1 in most cases, I have a 302 out of an 86 that had 308K on it when the speedo stopped working and who knows how many thousands of miles after, it has over a 1/4" of sludge in the valley, and still runs! Not to mention a properly geared 302, yes 302, will pull a 300 down the street backwards. Because it has better applcation of torque over RPM (HP).

Ive owned Ford trucks/vans with everything from a 4.9-5.8 and the 300 was always the least powerful, slowest of them all.

The 300 is a great engine (the best out of the 3) for lugging, Ill give you that, but who goes around lugging their truck???? I dont drive around below 1600 RPM, people that drive around in their trucks below 1600 RPM just piss people off for being too damn slow. Once you get above 1600 RPM, the 302/351 really starts to shine compared to a 300.

Ill give you 300 guys a test.... drive around and take a look at your tach, and really see just how much time you spend at 1600 RPM.....

Id take a 5.4 in any pre-97 truck over a 300 six anyday, and tow any one of your sorry 300 asses down the street backwards...

 

[dangerranger83]

Its not their truck they are lugging around, its there load they are towning. You need the torque to get off the line when you have a heavy load such as a trailer.

Not everybody is looking to fly around other cars or out race an import with there 300.

You can tow a 300 down the road going backwards but I'll be laughing my ass off when you finally have to turn and your front end whips arond smaking a light poll, then who towing who.

Point being its great for towing, not racing, prove what you want the 300 is still a winner in my book, theres a reason why they are still alive today after all these years of service to thier owners, they use it as a work engine, not a show off I can kick this Mustangs ass engine.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The 300 is a lugger, for sure. But thats what makes them such great workhorses.

Sure, the 302 makes like what...5 ftlbs more? At 1000-1500more RPM? Espically with an automatic your not going to taking off at 2500-3000RPM with a loaded truck, you going to be down around 1200, 1300, 1400RPM, where the 300 really shines.

Its not exactly fair to compare a 302 with like, 4.10's to a 300 with 3.08's. Give the 300 a set of 4.10s and that 302 wont know what hit it.

A testment to the 300's strength, they were used in F700 Trucks and busses. Because of there torque and durabilty. Something a 302 (or even a 351) could never do. Even in the late years the 300 was offered in F250 HDs and F350's, the 302 was not, becuase it simply couldnt produce the low end torque needed to handle extremly heavy loads with out hellacious gearing. So yeah, a 302 woulda worked in an F350, but the gearing needed to move a max payload with a 302 would pry be in the 5.13 range, and even with O/D youd be taching ridculous RPMS on the freeway.

The 302 has its place, in mustangs, leavce the hard work for the 300.

later,
Dustin

 

[59flatbedford]

well all i know is that three hundreds are damn near impossible to kill. we have one that we actually tried to blow and it just wouldnt do it, so then we entered it in the tough truck competition at the fair. then we took it home and started hauling iron with it. still runs fine, smokes like crazy but runs.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

I talked to a Ford Mechanic about the 300's they killed in cash for clunkers, even with no oil, wide open, with that sodium shit in them they ran like 8-10 minutes, block cherry red, head cherry red, etc, most engines lasted less then a minute.

later,
Dustin

 

[LittleHorse]

while I do think that the inline 6 is a superior design to the v6 in general, I don't think this is really the application.

IMO, the V6 was a bastardization of engine design that gave up serviceability, durability, and balance in exchange for being physically compact. It belongs in FWD economy and midsize family cars and that's about it. Sure it's smaller and lighter, but its at the expense of 3 main journals and a weaker structure.

That said, how much towing torque do you really need on an RBV? This is a light truck, with light truck brakes...what's more important than getting your load going is being able to safely pull it and stop it, and I don't believe for a second that a 302 or even a 4.0 won't easily pull as much weight as the trucks chassis.

Take it as you might, but IMO it's a lot of effort for little return, and I pray for the safety of anybody sharing a road with a Ranger pulling 10,000 pounds.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

The 300 is a lugger, for sure. But thats what makes them such great workhorses.

It makes them Slower, and thats it.

Sure, the 302 makes like what...5 ftlbs more? At 1000-1500more RPM? Espically with an automatic your not going to taking off at 2500-3000RPM with a loaded truck, you going to be down around 1200, 1300, 1400RPM, where the 300 really shines.

Have you looked at your tach when taking off lately??? Tell me how much time you spend under 1500.

Its not exactly fair to compare a 302 with like, 4.10's to a 300 with 3.08's. Give the 300 a set of 4.10s and that 302 wont know what hit it.

No, it is completely fair, because of the relative torque curves. The 300 runs out of steam very early, where a 302 will wind up and still make great power through 5K. If your running 3.08's in any truck, your crazy, ford was crazy from the factory for putting the gears they did. Ive had a 300 with 2.75's and a 300 with 3.73's, both were slow, and the damn things could barely get out of their own way. A 300 with 4.10's wont touch a 302 with 4.10's, all you have to to do is look at take off RPM's to see that. Automatic- 302 wins hands down as stock stall is right in the 2k range, and the 302 is already making more torque than a 300. Give it more RPM (ie. pulling away) and the 302 is really going to out pull it. Manual- 302 wins hands down, you try and pull somthing letting the clutch out at 1500 and below... Stall city. Give both engines 3.08 gears, and you'll have similar results from either engine, both agonizingly slow, and neither noticably more powerful than the other. I know from personal expirience.

A testment to the 300's strength, they were used in F700 Trucks and busses. Because of there torque and durabilty. Something a 302 (or even a 351) could never do. Even in the late years the 300 was offered in F250 HDs and F350's, the 302 was not, becuase it simply couldnt produce the low end torque needed to handle extremly heavy loads with out hellacious gearing. So yeah, a 302 woulda worked in an F350, but the gearing needed to move a max payload with a 302 would pry be in the 5.13 range, and even with O/D youd be taching ridculous RPMS on the freeway.

The 300 was used as a base model engine in those trucks/buses/UPS vans/etc simply because it was cheaper to produce than a 302, less cost to tune up (6 plugs vs. 8 plugs, etc.), Not because it had any more torque. While yes they were put into those trucks, I havent ever seen one in person, and only know about the UPS van thing from hearsay, same thing with the later model HD trucks, I have never seen a 4.9 in one, nor heard of anybody that has had one. It seems to be one of those "options" that was never produced. And a 351 not having the torque of a 300??? LMAO.

The 302 has its place, in mustangs, leavce the hard work for the 300


later,
Dustin

Leave the slow, cant get it up work for the 300.....

 

[dangerranger83]

Its like why put such a huge engine in a lambo?? No reason to, not like it will ever be put to any good use, more engine then a car needs. Why it has such an engine, because they can, just like somebody that puts a 300 in a ranger or even bigger. Its because if you own such a thing you feel better about yourself. Its like why SAS a ranger, why do it, because it makes you feel better about your truck, its different and may allow you to do more then a stock one can.

 

[schmoo]

Would a pinto radiator be able to keep it cool? Might be able to with electric fans.

cars with 200's had a radiator like the pinto.
my 4cyl ranger has a pinto rad. i hate those
plastic and aluminum things. i have brass ones
over 50 years old that don't leak.

a 302 will get a heavy load moving, but a 300
will do it all day every day. running at full
rated horsepower hour after hour is about
duty cycle. a 302 is a great motor, but it
needs to cool off now and then.
and yes, you don't need a 300 in a ranger.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

It makes them Slower, and thats it.
Semis are slow, doesnt mean they cant pull.



Have you looked at your tach when taking off lately??? Tell me how much time you spend under 1500.
Now that i dont have a 300, i cant, however, even at 55in O/D i was at 1600 or 1700. So quite often.

No, it is completely fair, because of the relative torque curves. The 300 runs out of steam very early, where a 302 will wind up and still make great power through 5K. If your running 3.08's in any truck, your crazy, ford was crazy from the factory for putting the gears they did. Ive had a 300 with 2.75's and a 300 with 3.73's, both were slow, and the damn things could barely get out of their own way. A 300 with 4.10's wont touch a 302 with 4.10's, all you have to to do is look at take off RPM's to see that. Automatic- 302 wins hands down as stock stall is right in the 2k range, and the 302 is already making more torque than a 300. Give it more RPM (ie. pulling away) and the 302 is really going to out pull it. Manual- 302 wins hands down, you try and pull somthing letting the clutch out at 1500 and below... Stall city. Give both engines 3.08 gears, and you'll have similar results from either engine, both agonizingly slow, and neither noticably more powerful than the other. I know from personal expirience.

So its fair for me and you to both try to break a rusted bolt loose, only giving you a 6 ft cheater bar and me just the ratchet? Thats the equivlent of giving the other the better gears. Lower gears mean more leverage, more torque mutiplication. Yes, a 300 with 3.55's would pull about the same as a 302 with 3.73's, just because the 300 makes alot more low end torque. How much torque is the 302 making at 14 or 1500 RPM?

You right, with a 302 you do have to rev the shit out of it take off, because its like a 3.0, its a frickin car engine.

The 300 was used as a base model engine in those trucks/buses/UPS vans/etc simply because it was cheaper to produce than a 302, less cost to tune up (6 plugs vs. 8 plugs, etc.), Not because it had any more torque. While yes they were put into those trucks, I havent ever seen one in person, and only know about the UPS van thing from hearsay, same thing with the later model HD trucks, I have never seen a 4.9 in one, nor heard of anybody that has had one. It seems to be one of those "options" that was never produced. And a 351 not having the torque of a 300??? LMAO.

I never said a 351 didnt have as much torque as a 300, a 351 is the better engine choice over the 302 or 300, but its not fair to compare because its got 51 more cubes ten a 300. Its like compareing a 351 to a 400, its not fair.

The 302 was not even OFFERED, In anything over a LD 3/4ton. Even then its rare to find one that wasnt saddled with 4.10's to give it some kind of work abilty.





Leave the slow, cant get it up work for the 300.....

Ok, so pulling 4 horse goosenecks and 10,000lbs worth of trailer and skid steer is slow cant get it up work? Both things me and my dad have done with 300's.

later,
Dustin

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Now I've got four points to make.

1) I have a 300 with 3.08s and a 4-spd granny and 235/75 tires and I think it's the PERFECT gearing for that truck. The granny 1st + 4.9L torque makes for effortless clutch engaging at about 1100 rpm, but the 3.08 gears keep the RPMs under control at about 2250 rpm at about 60 mph.

2) The only time I ever see better than 2000 RPM is cruising at highway speed. So yes, sub-2000 performance is very important.

3) Below is a load I just recently pulled with my F-150 (described above), had no trouble maintaining 60 mph up any hill on my route. I also did some pulling with my parents old 94 E-150 complete with the 5.0, 3.31 gears, and an E4OD. It wouldn't hold 60 with half as much trailer.

4) Any future full size truck I buy will have the 4.9L in it.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

Now I've got four points to make.

1) I have a 300 with 3.08s and a 4-spd granny and 235/75 tires and I think it's the PERFECT gearing for that truck. The granny 1st + 4.9L torque makes for effortless clutch engaging at about 1100 rpm, but the 3.08 gears keep the RPMs under control at about 2250 rpm at about 60 mph.

Anything will move effortlessly with a ~5:1 granny gear. Put the same tranny behind a 302, then make the comparison...

I had an 81 F-150 that originally had a 300/SROD/2.75:1 setup. I pulled the six and dropped in an 86 pickup 302 (the one with 300+K on it) with a motorcraft 2bbl, dead stock in front of the same exact tranny and Rear. The thing definately had more get up and go, but was still deathly slow. Later on I dropped a stock (sans 4bbl, intake, and headers) 69 302 in the same truck and it moved even better. Then I put a 3.50:1 rear in it, and the thing came alive. Still cruised on the highway right around the 2K mark. The 300 that was in it would have never touched it.

2) The only time I ever see better than 2000 RPM is cruising at highway speed. So yes, sub-2000 performance is very important.

I call BS here, unless you drive slower than a grandpa everywhere,your truck definately has to see more than 2K going through the gears.

3) Below is a load I just recently pulled with my F-150 (described above), had no trouble maintaining 60 mph up any hill on my route. I also did some pulling with my parents old 94 E-150 complete with the 5.0, 3.31 gears, and an E4OD. It wouldn't hold 60 with half as much trailer.

Again, I call BS on the effortless 60mph uphill with that load, Im sure you downshifted and im sure you were not doing 60mph. My 4.9 in my E250 with 3.73's/C6 would not go uphill without downshifting, and sure as hell would not have kept 60 pulling a load like that, it would barely keep 60 unloaded at all.

This is the typical "talking up" of the story that usually happens with 300's...

4) Any future full size truck I buy will have the 4.9L in it.

Excellent, thats your choice.

 

[dangerranger83]

Only reason why they put V-8's in trucks and cars now a days is to save space, lighten stuff up and everybody is so hell driven on the thought of a V-8.

Like people may ask why did you buy a ranger with a 3.0? Why not get 4.0? Or why not 4wd? Because it was your choice.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Anything will move effortlessly with a ~5:1 granny gear. Put the same tranny behind a 302, then make the comparison...

I had an 81 F-150 that originally had a 300/SROD/2.75:1 setup. I pulled the six and dropped in an 86 pickup 302 (the one with 300+K on it) with a motorcraft 2bbl, dead stock in front of the same exact tranny and Rear. The thing definately had more get up and go, but was still deathly slow. Later on I dropped a stock (sans 4bbl, intake, and headers) 69 302 in the same truck and it moved even better. Then I put a 3.50:1 rear in it, and the thing came alive. Still cruised on the highway right around the 2K mark. The 300 that was in it would have never touched it.



I call BS here, unless you drive slower than a grandpa everywhere,your truck definately has to see more than 2K going through the gears.



Again, I call BS on the effortless 60mph uphill with that load, Im sure you downshifted and im sure you were not doing 60mph. My 4.9 in my E250 with 3.73's/C6 would not go uphill without downshifting, and sure as hell would not have kept 60 pulling a load like that, it would barely keep 60 unloaded at all.

This is the typical "talking up" of the story that usually happens with 300's...



Excellent, thats your choice.

1) Actually it's a 6.72:1 granny gear It's only useful when pulling trailers.

2) I agree whole heartedly with you about the carb'd 300 with a SROD and 2.75 gears. I drove one of those too, only it was an 86 I think. Holy crap was that thing slow!! I'll be the first to point out that the carb'd 300s suck. The 4.9L FI is a different matter altogether.

3) No BS. I shift at 2000, what's wrong with that? It feels comfortable and keeps up with traffic around here.

4) No BS again, and I'm certainly not a fan of talking things up on the internet. It really did pull that load up the hills in 4th gear (1:1), no downshifting, and kept the speedo needle above the 60 mph mark. The worst hill took about 75% throttle. Now granted the "hills" we have here in flat old Illinois are probably quite a bit different than your definition of "hill" being from WA. I'll be the first to admit that I wouldn't want to try to pull that load through the mountains with that truck - or any other half-ton for that matter.

5) Everyone has their own experience and opinions and that's fine. I respect yours. I'm just stating what mine have been.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

It makes them Slower, and thats it.
Semis are slow, doesnt mean they cant pull.
Yes, but if semi's could do it faster, they would....


Have you looked at your tach when taking off lately??? Tell me how much time you spend under 1500.
Now that i dont have a 300, i cant, however, even at 55in O/D i was at 1600 or 1700. So quite often.
I really doubt you drive around at 55, even at 60-65(~2k), a 302 is making more torque than a 4.9.


No, it is completely fair, because of the relative torque curves. The 300 runs out of steam very early, where a 302 will wind up and still make great power through 5K. If your running 3.08's in any truck, your crazy, ford was crazy from the factory for putting the gears they did. Ive had a 300 with 2.75's and a 300 with 3.73's, both were slow, and the damn things could barely get out of their own way. A 300 with 4.10's wont touch a 302 with 4.10's, all you have to to do is look at take off RPM's to see that. Automatic- 302 wins hands down as stock stall is right in the 2k range, and the 302 is already making more torque than a 300. Give it more RPM (ie. pulling away) and the 302 is really going to out pull it. Manual- 302 wins hands down, you try and pull somthing letting the clutch out at 1500 and below with any engine... Stall city. Give both engines 3.08 gears, and you'll have similar results from either engine, both agonizingly slow, and neither noticably more powerful than the other. I know from personal expirience.

So its fair for me and you to both try to break a rusted bolt loose, only giving you a 6 ft cheater bar and me just the ratchet? Thats the equivlent of giving the other the better gears. Lower gears mean more leverage, more torque mutiplication. Yes, a 300 with 3.55's would pull about the same as a 302 with 3.73's, just because the 300 makes alot more low end torque. How much torque is the 302 making at 14 or 1500 RPM?

You right, with a 302 you do have to rev the shit out of it take off, because its like a 3.0, its a frickin car engine.

Thats a pretty crappy analogy dude, you never state the amount of force or the speed at which the force is applied, both are relevent fo that analogy to mean anything...

A 300 with 3.55's will run out of steam REAL quick, while a 302 with 3.73's will be happy for a long time, they are no where near the same. The 300 does not make A LOT more lowend torque, were talking in the 5-10 lb/ft range sub 1500. Thats the difference of a lawn mower dude....

Last time I checked, revving above 1500 was not revving the shit out of it... and my 3.0 does pretty damn good in my ranger, I have no complaints.

The 300 was used as a base model engine in those trucks/buses/UPS vans/etc simply because it was cheaper to produce than a 302, less cost to tune up (6 plugs vs. 8 plugs, etc.), Not because it had any more torque. While yes they were put into those trucks, I havent ever seen one in person, and only know about the UPS van thing from hearsay, same thing with the later model HD trucks, I have never seen a 4.9 in one, nor heard of anybody that has had one. It seems to be one of those "options" that was never produced. And a 351 not having the torque of a 300??? LMAO.

I never said a 351 didnt have as much torque as a 300, a 351 is the better engine choice over the 302 or 300, but its not fair to compare because its got 51 more cubes ten a 300. Its like compareing a 351 to a 400, its not fair.

The 302 was not even OFFERED, In anything over a LD 3/4ton. Even then its rare to find one that wasnt saddled with 4.10's to give it some kind of work abilty.

Well how come they never offered a 351 in the F700, but offered the 300??? Simple, it was cheap for fleet purposes. How many of them were produced???? Good question... same with the heavy duty trucks....





Leave the slow, cant get it up work for the 300.....

Ok, so pulling 4 horse goosenecks and 10,000lbs worth of trailer and skid steer is slow cant get it up work? Both things me and my dad have done with 300's

Im sure you didnt do it fast.....

Justin