Heres another inline everyone will hate!

[85_Ranger4x4]

there are some places that don't have body cancer.

Everybody has wrecks and storms though, the average lifespan of a car in the US is 7 years and most people are not junking their 2002 (and newer) cars because it blew an engine, it is because something else happened.

 

[Captain Ledd]

Henry,

You say you have a 223? I always thought that was an Argentinian only displacement, and the Americans got only the 200 and 250 I6. It's a good engine but at best you're only going to be making abot 80hp, if it's in good running order like it's claimed to be. I've currently got a 250 I6 slated for DEATHTRAP once the 302 dies.

Have you heard about a site called ClassicInlines.com? They have tons of stuff for those engines, including a aluminum cylinder head which makes some serious power. One guy has one for a 200 I6 in his mustang, made about 200 HP with some other mods (no forced induction) and a stupid flat torque curve.

They're cool little engines, and once warmed up a little would be surprisingly well suited for a Ranger.

http://www.classicinlines.com/
Dyno link <clicky
Chart <clicky as well

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The 223 was before the 200/250 I6.

later,
Dustin

 

[Will]

The 223 was built for full-size cars and trucks until 1964. Then the big six (in fullsize cars) was the 240 and the 300, both offered in trucks and only the 240 in cars. After '72 no six was offered in fullsize cars. They were too powerful and would snap the cars in half.

The 144-170-200-250 was for small and mid-sized cars. We aren't talking about those so I won't expand on it.

 

[AllanD]

the 302 comes with the e4od as well, and the 300 had plenty of aod's behind em too.

No actually most 5.0 powered full sizes came with the AOD
or 4R77W trans, where 4.9 and 5.8's invariably came with
C6 or E4ODs over the years.

MUCH earlier the 302 shared the C4 trans in some trucks (shoebox bronco) and vans equipped with either the 302 or the 200/250"small block" inline 6.


The 4.9 makes enough torque to break things that the 302/5.0 will NEVER break.

AD

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The 4.9 makes enough torque to break things that the 302/5.0 will NEVER break.

AD

Maybe it'll carry some meaning comeing from you...

later,
Dustin

 

[fastpakr]

Dustin, don't forget that part of the issue comes from the fact that a six cylinder of a given displacement creates larger power 'pulses' than an equivalent engine with a greater cylinder count. For the same reason, a 4 cylinder is MUCH harder on transmissions than a six cylinder pushing the exact same output numbers.

 

[Ozwynn]

all 302/automatic Broncos from 1990 - 1996 were E4OD. all 6 cyl and 351 powered full size broncos with the auto were either C6 or E4OD equipped. No 5spd for them either, only the 302 came equipped with a M5ODr2. No ZF available in the FS Bronco and possibly none in the F150. As far as I can find all the 88+ 351 equipped F150s had either an auto or a 4spd....... there was however a 5spd behind the 6cyl in the 88+ F150 but that also had to be a M5ODr2.

 

[Will]

Dustin, don't forget that part of the issue comes from the fact that a six cylinder of a given displacement creates larger power 'pulses' than an equivalent engine with a greater cylinder count. For the same reason, a 4 cylinder is MUCH harder on transmissions than a six cylinder pushing the exact same output numbers.

Exactly.

224 ft# is not a lot of torque. For the carb version.

265ft# is not a lot of torque. For the EFI.

Put a brake disc on the flywheel and a caliper mounted to a bathroom scale. Start the engine and push the throttle wide open. Then apply the brake while looking at the needle on the scale. Then engine will slow as the brake drags it down, and the needle will climb. At some point the engine will be showing it's greatest force on the scale. Write it down and then write down the tachometer reading. The 300-6 doesn't show up well--just 265ft# at it's maximum. Less than the 302. 50# less than the 351.

What it's good at is the very low rpm numbers because of the airspeed. A Dodge slant 6 has even longer paths for the piston to travel and also feels like a 300-6 with a good electric motor like buzz. And it's weak too. It runs really well at low rpms, that's the great thing about it. It can do a job, slowly, outside its size because its running faster at the same rpm than a 302. But once you are out of the barnyard, that doesn't matter anymore. And it's not a better low speed runner than any other long stroke motor. The 5.4 for instance.

 

[AllanD]

The thing to consider is that not only are there fewer power pulses
per cycle from the 4.9 because of the six cylinder Vs the 8cylinder
thing, but the real telling thing is that the 4.9 is making what torque
it does make at considerably LOWER rpm. they are much heavier blows.

So if the 5.0 is making four power pulses to make it's 300ft/lb of torque
at 3000rpm the 4.9 is making three power pulses per rpm at 1900rpm...
AND it has a greater rotating inertia....

So it's not only fewer pulses but heavier pulses.

the 4.9 would simply beat delicate things inside that AOD apart
the way you normally run them....
There are things inside the AOD that won't take that pounding.

Yeah an AOD holds up in a 3000# mustang even with a built 351,
because there is something else a mustang doesn't have... MASS.

Try that in a 6200# truck, even with 4.10 gears you will break things.

A bigger truck is like using a heavier anvil on a much more
sturdy bench to do your beating on.

On the M5OD-R2 which was DESIGNED for the 4.9 this isn't an issue
with the C4 based AOD that wasn't....

What was fascinating is seeing a factory built 4.9 powered F250 with
a ZF transmission...

It was really suprising to see just how comfortable a drive it was
with a 4.9 F250 loaded with 3000# of "stuff" in the bed AND towing
my Ranger behind it...
And that allows for the fact that I had to "drive around" the horrendus
racket that the thing made at some rpm and throttle combinations
because the exhaust literally fell the phuck off before I even got
out of Pennsylvania.... and I was heading for Wyoming!

the 4.9 is "only" 165hp, but that's a lot more than it takes to actually get the job done

Funny thing is I was making that run in "convoy" with a an F450 with a 7.5 and a ZF.
I could usually run away from him up hills and I was actually pulling more weight.
(but less sail area)

AD

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Low RPM drivetrain beating magnified...

2 cylinder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQdAhXvnKyM

4 cylinder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Nireeix5U

6 cylinder (never seen that wet of at track...)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDC3LGB3t-c&feature=related

Note how they keep getting smoother under a load? As you can imagine that is easier for the drivetrain.

 

[86bigred]

my 86 f250 has over 300,000 k's on her.that 460 has tons of torque,she will take off in 4th gear.with the miles on it,i'll trust her to go from one end of the country to the other,just can't afford the gas.all my fords being 4 cylinder,six cylinder,8 cylinder,big block small block,have all lasted me over 300,000k.just look after them,and they will look after you.

 

[SixFoFalcon]

You say you have a 223? I always thought that was an Argentinian only displacement

You're thinking of the 221, which was indeed an Argentine variant of the 144/170/200/250 line.