Can I swap a 200 cid for a 250 cid in a 61' Ford econoline with out swapping transmission or differential...
Not trying to avoid your question (cause I don't know), but a ton of info if you search "econoline madness" here on the Hamb.
No. The 250 shares the same bell housing as the small block built after '66. The 200 uses a completely different bolt pattern form '66 to about '79 or '80 or so when it got yet another bolt pattern similar to the small block but with a diffent spacing... Aint Ford stuff fun?
It stillwouldn't go into the same bell and trans setup as the O/P asked. But yes, I do have to agree with you, the 300 would be awsome in an Econoline.
'61 came with 144 or 170. The 240 was intro'd in 1963, the 300 in 1965. Both the 240 and 300 are a lot longer, so those would be some fancy bolts. Cosmo
These trucks are not "all the same" throughout their run, LOTS of small differences between early and late ones, as well as auto or standard equipped models. Important stuff, like engine mounts, transmission mounts, crossmember locations, doghouse shape/size, etc... just went through putting a 200/auto out of a '66 in a 170/std truck. Big pain in the ass...
What kind if problenms dud u run into I thought the 200 swap was supose to be easy Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
no 300 in an early econoline . Stop beating yourselfs up working on these Econolines . JOIN the groups . There is someone close to you that has info and will help with the trouble your having . Damn people do it right the first time .
Thunderbird . Why was it a pain . Get a trans crossmember from Vic on the groups . Make a driveshaft . Cable gas cable with pedal from Vic . Bolt everything in .
My first car was a '64 Econoline with a 170cid. After throwing a rod on my first trip, I replaced the 170 with a 200cid 7 main bearing engine. Everything fit perfectly, if I remember correctly. The only problem was that the radiator was inadequate and the temp would climb quickly with 8 kids in the back going over the mountain to the beach... There was not enough room in there for a 240, I don't think, although that became the stock engine by the mid '60's. Does anyone know if the engine compartment grew to accommodate the larger engine? Dave
engine compartment did not grow just the engines . 1961 62 63 had 144 . '64 had 170 . '65 and had 170 and 240 . Very rare was a factory 200 . no 300 in an econoline . Some ( 5 ) were built with V8's and went to Viet Nam .
Econolines were divided into two groups. 61 to 64 had 144's and 170's only. They were mounted on thin sheet metal arms that were flimsy. The dog house was small without a trans hump. Econolines from 65 to 67 came with a 170 or a 240 mounted on a tube crossmember. Each was crossmember had different mounting pads depending on which engine it has. In 65 the doghouse was about an inch taller and got a trans hump in the rear for bell housing clearance. A 250 is and odd bird. It needs the big six/small block bell housing and is about an inch wider in the pan rails. Takes a lot of mods to fit it in an Econoline. Especially a 61-64. The 200 is the biggest that will bolt in a 61-64 as long as it has the dual pattern bell housing mount. Some late 200's had the large pattern only. The large pattern on a 200 is not the same as the 240-SB bolt pattern. The small pattern is the same as the 144-170. Some early 200's had the small pattern only but that's ok as it will bolt in. The 200 really could use a stronger mount than the sheet metal arms used in the 61-64's. It will benefit greatly from a 65-67 tube style mount. Mounting pads on the frame are in the wrong place for a tube crossmember and will need to be moved but it's worth the effort. Actually the 61-64 only has the mounts on the outside of the frame and crossmember needs the mounts on both the inside and outside frame rails. You can cut them off the same Econoline that donated it's tube crossmember. Hope this helps. Duane in Tennessee
The Jalopy Journal
