Projects Worst Engine Ever. *update on why I dislike Fords*

just put a bit of marvel mystery oil in it.

 

I'm in the pull the head and see first crowd. If an engine sat in a humid place, the rocker assy would be one of the first things to succumb to moisture and subsequent rust. The rest of the engine might be ok... or it might not be. Give old iron a chance at least? Vacuum it out and just see...

 

Agree, I think all the debris came from something else sitting on the engine. If all that flake was from the engine itself the nuts would be completely round, they still have corner-ish shapes to them

 

I think the Triumph V8 is the worst engine ever. There are other contenders, but not the OP's one.

 

I would pull the rocker arms and see if any of the valves are stuck,a local old junkyard has a bunch of those old sixes and if it was mine and the engine is not stuck could have it running quickly.

 

In a word, No! A completely new OHV I-6 was offered for the 1952-53 F-series truck. It displaced 215 cu in (3.5 L) and produced 101 hp (75 kW). It was also used in the 1952-53 Ford full-sized cars.

 

To answer your question, no a 300 I-6 will not swap in. Your engine looks like a 223 which is from the Y-Block era. You can find a good running 223 for dirt cheap/free. They are good reliable engines but they won’t get you home very quickly. You could also swap in a Y-Block V8. That’s the most appropriate way to go IMO.

If you want a 300 I-6 or any other engine you’ll have to swap in the bellhousing & transmission that matches the new engine.

I have a 223 with dual carbs in my 59’ Ranchero. I mated it to a T-5 transmission by modifying a truck bell housing. I don’t plan on getting any speeding tickets but it should be fun when I get it back on the road. Good luck

 

My Dad had a 1956 Ford Pick up with that 223. In a strong head wind you would have to run it in second gear to reach any speed! We rebuilt a T-bird 312 Special and replaced the 223. That truck was then, a beast!






Bones

 

The first car I drove was a 52 Ford Mainline with that 215 that my dad bought from my aunt. It only had about 55,000 miles on it and ran like a new one. My dad put a Cherry Bomb on it and it was really fun. It was a 2 door sedan with a Fulton sunshield and a 3 speed stick. I wish I had it today!

 

Don't know crap about motors, but I'd put my money on saying that engine is toast haha.
Good to see another AMC guy, don't see many around.

 

toast . no butter

 

Damn, I had a complete good running 215 with stick tranny set up and a box of new ignition parts on "Pay it Forward" for a long time and nobody wanted it. Junked it for $27.00

 

timing is everything……

Ray

 

I dont know where your located since you didnt put it in your profile, but if you are near Virgina, i have a 223 and 3 speed i will give you. ran fine in the 54 F100 i took it out of. seriously, if you want it, or anyone for that matter come and get it.

 

If you are in NorCal, I can bring a shop vac and borescope.

We can find out the truth.

 

i would try to make it run just for the challenge of it. good, bad or ugly

 

Any AMC engine and transmission, or Chevrolet engine or transmission in that thing would be a huge improvement.

 

Little update... As said originally (I'm an AMC dude, especially the 6's easy design from 65 to 2004)! I was able to scoop an engine locally, turns out it's a 223.. Also turns out the mounting is completely different. I have different ideas floating around as to mounting.

Does anyone know if on the 54's with the 223 the engine mounts and brackets were moved backwards on the cross member or not? I am trying to see if in fact I can find 54 223 brackets and motor mounts and have them bolt in?

And, no-- it's a 63 223 so that means the head bolts are 1/2 and not 7/16, which renders a head swap useless. (*See why I dislike fords)

And yes, the head was seized on the old 215... Seized solid!

 

The 215 and 223 are the same engine family but there were changes over the years just like most engine families.There was another version used in trucks,I believe it was a 262.There are plenty of other examples of engines that that made changes that precluded direct swaps examples would be the original olds rocket a 64 394 will not directly swap in place of a 51 303 it can be done but is not a direct bolt in,the same can be said of a Pontiac v-8 a 64 389 will not directly replace a 55 287.Also I hd a 62 chevy 261 that had been sitting for 20+ years that looked pretty much the same under the valve cover I vacuumed all the stuff off of the head the head soaked everything in marvel and a mix of acetone and atf including down in the cylinders was eventually able to get it broke loose and get it running,it eventually ran great but smoked,I think if I had filled the cylinders with acetone and atf and let it soak some more I eventually would have gotten the rings to unstick too.

 

TR-8, great big gobs of grimy gopher guts! Someone still owes me some money for that heap!

 

All I can think of is...

 

Yes the 223 has more than one mounting location. The trucks have a crossmember way up front under the crank pulley. The cars crossmember is located behind the halfway point on the motor. It looks off balance with over half the engine sticking out forward but that’s the way Henry would have wanted it!

edit; and for the record, the AMC 4.0 I-6 is the best engine ever produced!!!

 

I would swap a in a 300 great engine but they are 36" long To those that say it can't be done I did a Sunbeam Alpine to Tiger clone.

 

Any engine that sits that long can end up like that,in my walks though a local old junkyard I see engines of all brands having valve covers that are rusted through and would hate to see what is under them.

 

Thanks for posting this, @F-ONE ! Brings back a lot of fond memories except mine had red interior and was 1 year older. Stayed in 2nd gear slinging gravel 90% of the time

Joe

 

Here's another video that shows the potential of the 223 Ford engine family – this one is the 223's big brother, the 262:


And a 6,000 RPM first to second speed shift:

 

Though not a "bolt-in" swap, if you could squeeze a 300 with a 5-speed in there, that would be the hot set up. There are a lot of "hop up parts" available for the 300 as well.
As for the rust bucket engine, don't waste your time. Return it to the boat anchor status that it looks like it's been used for a;ready!

 

Isn't that the Rover aluminum V8, i.e. the small Buick/Olds 215 cu in V8? First time I've heard these criticisms of that engine. I remember the turbocharged Olds Cutlass my older brother had when I was just a kid, it hauled ass, or so we thought back then.

 

I haven't the foggiest idea. Thinking back it far more than just the engine, it was the wiring and the fuel delivery too. Plus I didn't fit in it very well, and you couldn't make out in it and it got no respect on 82nd in Portland.

The engine I really liked and always thought I would "hot rod" someday was the V8 from the 928. Boy how times have changed.
"The child's grown, the dream has gone -
and I have become comfortable with a flathead."

 

No, totally different, their own invention. Basically a pair of their OHC 4 cylinder engines cobbled together. Alloy heads, iron block.