Customs Please tell me about ford's inline 300 six?

While working as a line mechanic in a Ford dealership I had the pleasure of swapping out the recalled pistons on many of the 300 ford equipped pickup trucks. It paid a whopping 6 hours flat rate to pull the head and pan pull the pistons.
Then press the pistons off and press the new ones on and reuse the old rings and bearings. They did spring for a new head and pan gasket. Had to be super careful you did not break a ring taking them off or the shop foreman bitched about it costing the dealership money. Hell what about the mechanic losing his ass on the labor.
It was something about they rattled when they were cold.
I drove a 69 F100 with a manual overdrive for years. Gas mileage sort of sucked ,but most of the time it had a stock car trailer behind it so it was to be expected. Couldn't use 4 th gear with the trailer so just left it in 3 rd. Finally swapped it for a 68 Chevy p.u. with a 455 Pontiac and it drug the shit out of a trailer. Gm sure missed the boat on that combo. Worked way than most 454 GM trucks.

 

What year was the problem with the pistons? I have a 85 300 in my 56 and it seems fine, though it does sound like it's full of loose marbles if you rev it from a first start before oil pressure builds.. I remember some old trucks that were really noisy that way back in the day... Thanks Greg.

 

If I remember Ford did change the piston pin size from small V8 size to FE size around 1970.

 

Here ya go:
https://cliffordperformance.net/store/ols/categories/ford-240300

 

Ford used cast pistons with steel internal struts to control expansion up through 1986. The failure mode was that the piston skirt would crack where the expansion strut joined the skirt. It is not uncommon when I disassemble a high mileage 240 / 300 engine to find one or more pistons with cracked or missing skirts. Amazingly, this rarely causes engine failure - they just keep running, albeit with maybe a little more piston slap. In 1987 the engine was upgraded with hypereutectic cast strutless pistons which are far stronger and have less thermal expansion, allowing them to be run tighter in the bore, eliminating piston cold slap.

Aftermarket suppliers offer hypereutectic replacement pistons for rebuilds.

[EDIT: Previously I recommended the website www.fordsix.com. It seems to be down this week. It has happened in the past and it may be they have upgrades/maintenance to do. Keep trying. Worth it.]

 

Thanks for the info.

 

The 'Rocket Scientist' at Horsepower Engineering in Pasadena built a set of headers for one. He may have created the jigs and details to do more. Call him up and ask him. I'm sure he'd be more than willing to build more. What he doesn't know about 'go-fast' inline motors is not worth knowing. He even built his own flow bench when he and his partners were racing the GMC motor that pushed their little five window deuce into the 'Two' and change Club.

 

I worked for a pulp & paper company in the '70s & 80's. The company had a large fleet of 1/2 ton Ford trucks used in support of their logging division and around the mill. The trucks all had 300 straight sixes. I asked why as I thought a V8 would be better. I was told the trucks had more than enough power, less likely to be abused and were better on gas than the 8's. The trucks were auctioned off to mill employees as the mill retired them. The trucks looked beat but they were still strong runners that guys bought & ran for a long time afterwards. When I worked on the forest fire crews the trucks all were Chevs with 292's that were worked hard. The big straight sixes were not sexy but were good strong engines in their day.

 

I had an OT ford 4x4 short box with a 300 in it.
Offy intake edelbrock 600 carb( needed a 500)
Efi head ported and plugged for carb intake.
Stock duracrap distributor
Flowtech tri y style header
Mandrel bent 2.5" exhaust with a 40 flowmaster
Good pistons
Bigger cam(unknown specs) steel timing gear
Center force clutch

It would absolutely insult 5.0 mustangs light to light and eat hemi dodge pick ups for lunch. Like twist the frame and bugger off! 3.50 gears, limited slip and 10lbs in the passenger air shock. It got about 15 mpg if I drove it nice. About 6 if I was on the throttle, I used to pull the secondary linkage on long trips with the camper on.

 

That has been my experience with my '33 Willys coupe, similarly equipped and with a C6 / 3.50 posi and a weight of 2350# with me in it.

 

I keep checking in here to see if there were any actually installed in rods! Pictures, people, we need pictures!

 

Well, not a rod but here's a pic of mine- just a work truck....

 

Take a look at this
It looks like the engine really responds to more carburetion.

 

As was alluded to in previous posts any five liter engine saddled with a small 1V carb will be restricted in terms of performance. Likewise, the ports are small for an engine with cylinders of such size, so anything done to improve the head flow will greatly enhance its output.

 

My 5.0 bronco was a little more powerful than my 83 single barreled stock 300 4.9. the 5.0 got me around 13mpg. The 4.9 was 19 mpg. The 5.0 didn't not like being loaded too heavy. The 4.9 was the same amount of slow no matter the weight.

I sold the 5.0 truck