I found a decent running 1963 Mercury 260 small block with 2-speed auto. I want to use this in my 1938 Ford COE. Any reason not to use this motor. The rear in the truck has 4.10 gears with 29.5" tall tires. Truck will have a 7' vintage Holmes wrecker bed, but without the boom.
Not looking to cruise at 80mph. But would hope to be able to drive around like any old car without overdrive.
That's a lot of truck for that little motor nowadays, but if you have patience.... It would probably be more motor than it had to start with.
260 is little but would be usable motor for a DD. I'd can the 2 speed fordo though , C4 is a better trans. Thinking that a 4.00 gear would be pretty short although it would help move that heavy wrecker moving.
If you end up thinking about swapping a different trans, keep in mind only an early C4 will have the same bolt pattern as the 260.
At one time I had a 63 Falcon Ranchero with the same 260/2 speed automatic. It had a Holley 2 barrel carburetor on it and dual exhaust; otherwise it was completely stock. That little engine was snappy, even with the 2 speed! The Falcon body was a typical, rusted out, POS, and I parted it out. I was going to drop the engine/trans into my 82 Chevette (my college car I bought new), but lost interest, sold the car, and sold the engine/trans to a local Falcon/Comet Restoration Group. Curb as much weight on the COE as possible, use some smaller diameter tires, and it should get the job done. Butch/56sedandelivery.
Is the 2-speed trans the biggest issue? Not looking for a fast truck, but not looking to build a pig either. I just like the idea of using a Mercury motor over the ever so common 302 or 5.0 Ford engine. My other choice would be a 289/C4 combo. Thanks everyone for the info.
Well Studebaker powered trucks, and Semi's, and House trailer toters with 259 and 289 V8's for years. With truck's it all about the gearing. Thnik about how the truck was originally powered. Probably a 95 HP 6 or a 110 HP Flathead. It would have had a 4 speed with a granny low gear. So the 260 will definitely put out more than that, and with the torque converter will out twist the original set up also. If you are not going to actually haul or tow things regularly, using what you have makes sense to me. I believe the ford o matic is actually a three speed, that starts in second in Drive, but low is there and use able. The 4.10's and tall tires will probably have it spinning at about 3000 at 60, but that doable. You can always power up later if you find it lacking.
You are going to be pulling a fair amount of weight,it is easy enough to make a 302/5.0 look like a 260-289 and the extra cubes = more torque, also if you use a later 5.0 and AOD (1988-93 AOD's are non-computer) you can highway cruise at about 2300 RPM @70 mph with your 4.10's. The AOD also has a lower 1st gear than the C4 to help you get moving,win,win all around.
Which Mercury.......full size or Meteor? If it's the latter and the original trans , it's likely a 2 speed Fordomatic.....the C4 didn't arrive until '64 as I recall. If full size Merc.........maybe the three speed that start's in second, as posted above.
It originally had a 221 CID 85 HP flathead V8 engine so a 260 OHV V8 would power it OK. The only problems you might encounter is the length issue with the small block Ford V8 and the early small blocks were more limited on what would bolt up to the bell. They changed the bolt pattern in 66 I believe. A warmed up 255 Merc flathead with the bell adapter and clutch would bolt right in that old truck if you still have the OEM radiator and running gear.
Okay, I took your advice. Picked up a 1973 Ford 302 with a C5 or C6 with 49k original miles and an extra AOD trans. Not sure what gears are in the AOD? I believe Ford made two versions? Close and wide ratio versions? Here is the donor vehicle, 1973 Econoline 300 motor home. And the odometer reading of 49,523 miles. I believe this maybe the actual miles being a motor home. Can anyone tell by the vin tag if the econoline has a C5 or C6 trans?