Yes sir... I'm going to hop Up The Fabulous Hudson OHV six. Maybe it was going to be the new OHV Hornet Twin H for the 1957 Super Hornet or "Terraplane Terror". It was not to be. Unfortunately Hudson merged into oblivion and the Hudson OHV 6 became an orphan that soon found it's way to Ford and ultimately the Ford F Series in 1965. What resulted is what many consider one of the toughest, maybe even the best massed produced 4 cycle automotive engine of all time. Since it was an inline six, it was a base engine. Ford always kept these on a tight leash. You do not want your base engine out performing the up optioned flagship V8s. When EFI come about, Ford had to "de-tune" the 4.9 even more as it would out perform the 5.0. What I'm getting at is this engine has always been undercarbureted and responds incredibly well to intake and carburetor upgrades. This is going to be really detailed. Instead of ....I slapped some of this on, some of that. I'm going to go in depth show what I had to do. I have already learned that things are not quite as simple as you would think. They never are. Here's what I'm starting with... D5 engine in a '65 F100. A 75 or 1976 300 engine replaced the original 240 that had more than 275K. There's no telling the mileage of this current engine. I do believe the PO got this engine from the junkyard and put another 100K on it. It's got good compression. It ran well with the stock Motorcraft 1V. Intake... Offenhouser C Series. I picked one up used. Some people call the C Series, single plane intakes. That really does not translate to inline 6s. I guess you could say all six cylinder intakes both stock and aftermarket are single plane. Offy offers another, the Dual Port. Again the Dual Port is not really a dual plane it's dual port. For the Dual Port to work right the carburetor has to be mounted sideways. The DP has the primary and secondary split, thus dual port. The C series does not care how the carburetor is mounted. If you want a new Offy intake, order now because Offenhouser only does short casting runs. Sometimes they are available, sometimes it takes months. Clifford offers some really swell intakes but, Clifford had been unreliable in recent years. Carburetor... Edelbrock 1405 600 manual choke I had it on the shelf. I'm going to build it. I really wanted a Holley 1850. I guess it's the whole Ford thing. I do have a 1850 on the F1 but I did not want to swap 'em. My second consideration was a Autolite 2100. It had a heat choke which I was going to convert to manual. The linkage was funky. The hollow base..spacer and all that..... In the end I chose the Edelbrock (Carter AFB design). mainly because it suits my needs, the linkage will be a snap and ...I had it. I know it's the 350 of carburetors but it's a great unit and as far as that goes the "350 " (SBC) is a hell of an engine. Although I prefer Autolites and Holleys, I'm not 12 years old so I can use an Edlebrock. Exhaust... New Oreilly replacement Dorman EFI manifolds.(China) There's really three main choices of exhausts for these. Stock log. That's what I would have considered especially with a 2100. The stock logs on both my sixes were cracked. One at the exhaust flange the other under the carb base heat valve. Stock logs were out. My second choice and really my favorite....The 300 HD Manifold This seems to be a great choice. There are caveats however. The main one is this.... Even though the 3 bolt heavy duty manifold will "fit" the stock intake log and Offy intakes, it may have a 3/8 gap needing a plate. I don't know this for sure but I did not want to fool with all that. Secondly since there is no exhaust valve, would you cook the carburetor? Lastly is there enough room for the 3" exhaust making that 90 on a 1965 F100? Apparently this is a problem on some later OT F100s and F150s. The one guy in Texas that imports these gets pissed if you ask about F100s. He says it's only for big trucks. So with all those gray areas I chose EFIs. After market tube headers..... Tube headers suck. That and it cooks the stock starter. Back when I ran Chevys I had to make sheet metal shrouds....I did not want to do that. Ahhh EFI splits. Easy Peasy It seems that Offys, Stock Logs and EFIs Sometimes Crack and break at the flanges. Why? Secondly EFI manifolds have some extra mounting holes. EFI heads had reinforced bosses so these extra bolts help align this multiple piece design. Carb heads do not have this. The stock intake and exhaust log is one piece. Using EFI manifolds means this one piece assembly is now a three piece. It's four pieces if you count the gasket! Three pieces that may not fit together along with a gasket. Studs are a must have. There is no way you can juggle these three pieces and a gasket using bolts. Being in chassis makes this so much more difficult. I may have to pull this engine after all and do all this on a stand. Above I asked why the tabs break off of these on occasion. The photo below shows a Ford factory manifold bolt and my solution. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr I should have picked a better stock bolt for this photo. Anyway..... The factory bolt uses two special washers with a radius on each. A thin one and a thick one. Simply put this radius in the special washers allows two slightly uneven surfaces like the intake and exhaust pieces to clamp together. A standard flat washer may break off one tab when torqued. Since I'm using studs I decided to use special nuts and washers. The nut has a convex base. The washer has a convex top this should allow even clamping within a .027 correction. This is proving to be a really big pain in the ass. It's solvable...it's all part of working on a"hot rod" but it's still a pain. I kind of wish I would have went with headers or the HD manifold. I'm going to dry fit this stuff. I already know I'll have to modify the alternator bracket for clearance and likely some spots on the exhausts. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr Hopefully the Frenchtownflyer will chime in. More to come.....
I'm not an automotive history major so I don't understand your reference to the Hudson OHV Six. Enlighten me.
I had an early 80s F250 w the 300 engine. Rebuilt it w a ported head, clifford intake, holley 600 vac, cam from crane at the time, headers from clifford too i think. It had the true truck tranny in it, big ol heavy duty w granny low. 4.10 rear gear. That thing would haul ass....sounded like a mad hornet with the split dual exhaust. It pulled a 28ft camper up and down these Tn mountains like it wasnt there. Passed many a V8 truck. Good stout and bullet proof engine Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
There's actually some credible info in the HAMB annals and I do believe Hemmings that Hudson made a OHV prototype. When Hudson merged that project was abandoned. Eventually Ford hired that Hudson engine designer and used the prototype as the basis for the 240-300 six.
A) In stock carbureted form. Most have that damn heat riser tube from the exhaust manifold to the carb choke. It is always rusted out at the manifold. 2) Low oil pressure 99.9% of the time is worn cam bearings. d) If you find a fiber cam gear change it ASAP. Use a stock aluminum 300 gear from a later engine. 7) The heads before the mid 70s have soft valve seats. Make sure you have valve seats installed. Chances are they were done back in the day. q) The distributors love to corrode and lock themselves into the block. Use anti seize.
Just back from the garage.... I'm think my best bet is to pull the head. Check it out really well. Do the multiple piece assembly on the bench. Install intake, exhaust and then install it all in one piece with the aid of my crane. Or I may can hoss it on there. It can't be no worse than a stock FE intake. Heavier...but less bulky.
I used steel timing gears on mine. That was a good engine....my friend bugged me for several yrs till i finally sold it to him. I stepped up to my first diesel Ford
I had one of these in a 1970 Winnebago Class A motorhome and used it to pull my vintage race car. It was faster that most of the guys with motorhomes with big V8's and got better mileage. I rebuilt it and put in an Erson RV cam and it ran like gangbusters. I had an Offy 4 BBL manifold that I was going to use but never got around to it because I was afraind the gas mileage would suffer. The only problem with that vehicle was the brakes. Ot had a manual master cylinder mounted perpendicular to the vehicle centerline and was activated by a bellcrank, that was supposed to provide the same mechanical advantage. It didn't. I had to be very careful and plan far ahead if I ever got it into traffic.
Wow thats cool....ol six-banger makin it happen. I mentioned a cam in mine earlier, and it was a tow/mild performance cam also. But with that and the intake/header it would really get rolling. It loved to rev, and the 4.10 gear made it sing. Good power in the 2800-4000 range. With a load i wud pull it up to speed, shift at about 3800 and hold on. It was a 5 speed, but really a 4 spd because it had a granny gear low (1st)......shuda kept that truck dammit Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Ive got some 300 six ford engines & parts in the hoard. someone modified a stock intake into a 4 bbl. Also I have a set of hedders. a fresh bored block and new pistons for it. and a box of another set of new pistons a cyl head with a new valve job. a set of gaskets. Also a complete engine of unknown cond. and a C6 trans to fit a 300. I don't want or need it. been trying to sell everything for $500
Ok, I’m a Chevy guy, probably will be forever, BUT the Ford 300 is the greatest gasoline light truck engine ever built. I’ve had several, Dad has had several, and my 17 year old nephew can’t hurt his. Geared correctly, with a proper transmission, there isn’t anything they can’t do. My neighbor’s first grain truck was a slightly o/t 1967 F-600 with a 300. It had an New Process 435 with a two speed axle. It wasn’t fast, but pulled its 14 foot grain bed just fine. It was a sad day in Dearborn when the 300 was discontinued. I wouldn’t hesitate for a second to have another one. Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Running the carb sideways with a divider turns a inline 6 intake into a 180 degree V8 style every other cylinder feeds from one side of the carb with a 12 port head. Don't let the 240 head get away early heads ran bigger valves, adjustable rockers and a 240 had a smaller combustion chamber worth 1/2 point compression.
This may be worth a watch too: https://www.powernationtv.com/episode/HP2013-18/a-buildup-of-fords-classic-inline-six
When I was a kid, 6 cylinders were what most of the dirt track rules required of the "Hobby" class. The "Sportsman" class was mostly V-8's. There was one guy though, Frog Owens, that took a 300 Ford and made 'em live hard, even winning some races. The 302's, 327's and 318's didnt have nothing on him. When the 350 SBC and the 351 Cleveland came along, he was finally outclassed, but he was fun to watch for a while. There were still a couple of tracks around still running a Modified 6 cylinder class up until the late 80's. Tube chassis, all fabricated cars. They were running 292's and 300's, they were all running dual Predator carbs . I never had a Predator, so I dont know what was the reasoning behind that choice. Never saw one on a street car either, but seen a bunch on the track. Following your build, brings back a lot of memories.thanks for posting it up. Good Luck
When I started vintage dirt racing in the early ninties, I seem to remember some associations and tracks had a class specifically for the "Big Sixes" (292's and 300's).
Not going to argue this point, because I don't know, but I am from Missouri, the Show-Me State What I do know is that I bought a Ford van with the 300 CID 6 and 80xxx miles. It came with the Holley 1904 carb, which was pretty much too small. I bought the Offy 4-barrel intake, and installed it and a Carter 400 CFM AFB, which was plenty large for the otherwise stock 300. Not sure about that 600 you are planning to use, unless you modify the engine for MUCH higher RPM. This change did significantly increase power at higher (4000? RPM range), and almost doubled gas mileage. The Holley was very fickle. Every new gas station was its favorite gas station. That van was my shop vehicle. At 440xxx miles (thats right, more than 400 thousand), the body rusted out for the THIRD time due to MoDot's winter salt and cinder policy, and I gave up on it. At 440,000 miles, the engine was still strong, and the cylinder head had never been removed. Tough engine! EDIT: forgot that at the same time I installed the 4-barrel, I also changed the 3 on the tree to a truck 4-speed. Pulled an 18 foot trailer with John Deere and bush hog for a lot of miles. Ran great, and would easily stay up with traffic in the hills of central Missouri. Jon.
I'm going to pull the head because I don't want to rig up something like this to fit all these parts in that '65 F100 engine compartment. It will be much easier on the bench. The mind wonders.... That's always been my problem with these projects. My mental wondering zero. Too many choices I guess. Since I'm pulling the head. Do I use the 76 head or the 66 head? It's really a no brainer. The 66 head is better. What this means is retrieving the 66 engine out my Dad's Barn. This means a whole day and another engine in my shop which upsets the Space-Junk-Continuum. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr Ahh, the Barn. Before my Dad bought it, Model As were built in it. My brother and I worked on many many things in there.. Not much is left any more. A few pieces of creaky tin...a oil spotted concrete floor and Legend...Lots of Legends. Here's some of them.... 51 Chevy 3100...55 1st GMC ( that one had the look and the stance) 62 Galaxie...49 Ford....50 Ford Business Coupe...52 Chevy Business Coupe...70 Chevelles (our high school cars) My long black 72 Monte Carlo (the sexiest car I ever owned) The F1.....plus many more. It still smells the same inside. We grew up and moved away. My Grandparents moved next to it on my parents place when they got elderly. The barn yard became their yard and thus ending it's use other than storage. Even my Dad built a new Barn away from my grandparents to give them some privacy. The '66 240 patently waiting in the old barn.. Maybe it's a 300. I'll measure the stroke when I pull the head. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr Since the 240 was made until 1977 it's possible both of these engines may be 240s....no matter. It will be just a ...240 hop up. Getting back on track the next task is to pull the head and bench fit the parts regardless of which head I use.
I built this guy about 10 years ago for use in the shop truck. 0.030" over bore, Offenhauser Dual port, Holley 600, Hedman 3-into-2 Header, and Comp 270H cam. Backed with an AOD, it would knock down 19-20 mpg with the truck empty and still have plenty of grunt to pull a car hauler along at 70 mph. Biggest problem was keeping the tranny temps under control with a trailer behind it. Truck rusted out and I pulled the motor. It will likely go into my '51 F-1 within the next few years. Jon - I agree that a 600 cfm cab is a bit big for 300, but I have seen the argument put forward (perhaps by FrenchTownFlyer) that a 300 six is a big hole to fill (equivalent to a 400 ci - 8 cylinder), and as such needs a bit bigger carb then what normal rules of thumb would dictate. Something about larger pulses - more volume - different vacuum signature, etc, etc, etc. That said, the 600 worked well on mine, though I never ran a dyno comparison with a smaller carb to see if it was truly optimal. FYI - Putting a 300 on a $25 Harbor Junk engine stand is a "At Your Own Risk" moment.....
FrozenMerc - very nice looking engine! My comment about 600 CFM "Not sure about that 600 you are planning to use, unless you modify the engine for MUCH higher RPM." The OP did not mention (or if he did, I missed it) any camshaft mods, head porting, etc. to increase engine RPM. You did mention a different camshaft for your engine. Arguing CFM requirements for a 4-barrel can be a slippery slope for a street engine, as one would generally be interested in maximizing venturii airflow ON THE PRIMARY SIDE, rather than WOT CFM. Obviously, for a race engine, different criteria exist. For 60 years, I have used with great success the old CFM = (CID * RPM) / 3456 equation for street engines. The mathematicians and engineers that devised this equation stated that the equation was an approximation for a multi-cylinder 4-stroke engine of at LEAST 4 cylinders at 100 percent volumetric efficiency. Results needed to be adjusted for engines of 1, 2, or 3 cylinders. So if one uses 4000 RPM as a useful redline for a basically stock 300, then CFM = (300 * 4000) / 3456 = 347 CFM If we take this a step further, and say that cruise RPM is about 2500, then: CFM = (300 * 2500) / 3456 = 217 CFM on the primary side for cruise A 400 CFM Carter provides 200 CFM on the primary side, so we would maximize primary air velocity. I got 20~22 MPG at highway speeds with my van, but you got 20 MPG, so looks like the 600 worked well for you. Possibly the AOD transmission helped your mileage, whereas I was running 1:1 differential. I am assuming the Holley 600 is "square" providing 300 CFM on both primary and secondary. Just really believe that too many enthusiasts order to large a carburetor (for street use) with no idea how to tune it. Jon.
Some engines breathe better than others. Im running a 625 carb with a adapter on a stock220 HP 283 . and it runs like a Raped Ape no bog no stumble only mod is hedders. Of course ive fiddled with the jets and metering rods ect. the engine is in the wagon in my avatar.
FWIW, the 300 I've got under my shelf came out of a running truck with the Offy Intake, dual tube headers, and was apparently "cammed" if that gives any insight. I ended up changing directions so I never ran it but I was told I had a later block with the early head. It had an aluminum bell (which was cracked when I got it) and a NPT425 transmission bolted to it.
I pulled the head and started fitting parts. There is no way I could have done this in chassis leaning over the fender trying to align all this up. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr You can see here the exhaust is in contact with the intake. I'm going to grind the exhaust for clearance. Untitled by Travis Brown, on Flickr It will fit. It's one of those deals you have to adjust back and forth...shake it.....hold your mouth right. One thing that does concern me, is the manifolds are held by clamping pressure only. Due to design if the nuts (with studs) or bolts are loose, it can fall off. The intake is retained by a dowel and a bolt hole. I found it essential to mount the intake first, then work the exhausts in there. I may use some larger washers to spread the clamping force to get a more secure grip on this assembly. The Frenchtown Flyer recommends some Special washers or angled shims that hold the bottom of the manifolds. I dont know if this is really necessary since I'm doing this on the bench. I can see how that would be essential if working in chassis. I also think it would help support these manifolds when pipes are added. My studs and special nuts and washers were not essential. I could have done this with the Ford bolts since I chose to do this on the bench. Working off the side of the engine against gravity....they may be of some benefit there. I've some grinding and more fitting to do to get this perfected. Well, at least to my satisfaction. I'm having fun....It's been a long time since I've been in one.
I have a Fabbed 4 barrel intake you can have for shipping It didn't like cold weather no carb heat. Used AFB carb EFI exhaust manifolds Pocket ported 240 head and a Crane cam 204 intake 214 exhaust @.050 Idled like a stoker and was flat stout
I just discovered this thread. How's the buildup going? I did work at Ford Engineering in Dearborn for 31 years, much of the time in the Engine Performance Development Group. While I have built many 300 Ford sixes over the decades I have never talked to any Ford personnel who discussed a connection to Hudson in its development. Not sayin' it is not true, just that all the engineers who worked on it never mentioned Hudson. I did hear that its original design was one of those "back-of-the-napkin-quick-n-dirty-lunchtime-discussion" events that led to fast-tracking its birth. I thought the Hudson was a small bore / long stroke engine - something like 3.81 x 4.50, quite unlike the Ford's 4.00 x 3.98. For a couple of my current builds check out my Attic Anglia and champ car (crossflow) threads below.
The Hudson / Ford story is internet hogwash without names and a timeline to substantiate it. Engineers, especially engine design engineers, change companies all the time. I personally know engineers who have worked at GM , Ford, Cummins, Oman, Navistar, Cat , and Others, all moved from one company to others during their career. Thin wall casting wasn’t really in Hudson’s technology handbag and they didn’t have the resources to develop it in their final years. That alone pretty much debunks the Hudson -Ford myth.
I built a '79 300" + .030 for my 71 Torino in 1985 . 3.50 gear and 2.78 4spd..Cliford 4v [600/1850 holley] intake and home built shorty exhaust with 2.5 flange..Cam was a Clifford 290° and head was gone over port wise, even swirl polished the valves. Balanced..2-1/4 v8 dual exhaust from 351C v8..Didn't sound like a 6L nor a v8 but "different". Cold weather was a bitch as no manifold heat; I did incorporate a carb spacer with water heat but wasn't enough..It run strong but gas milage was not a virtue, maybe 14/15 in the warm weather months..
seb fontana - I did a similar conversion on an OT Ford van (79), but used an Offy intake and Carter AFB. No engine issues in the cold, but heater in the van didn't do the job Highway mileage about 22~23. Jon.
The Jalopy Journal
