Inliners International Forums General Discussion Engines Ford v Chevy big six

At first I thought this was strictly a Chevy site. But I see some Ford people (actually I'm neutral, sorta.) Anyway, I'm looking for a work truck to do a lot of pulling, horse trailers up to 7000# GVW, 1200# round bales etc and want a big 6 with lots of low end torque. Got my mind made up on a I6 but am looking for a good side to side comparison between the Ford 300 and the Chevy 292. You know, torque, HP, reliability, availability of parts etc. Any thoughts....

I'm sure there are other guys here that will give you a more detailed answer, but here is my experience with my first truck. I got a 292 and didn't realize how awesome it was until I started researching it and I found out it is a real torque monster in a nice low rpm range. I haul with my truck and it goes. Also, seems like used parts are very plentiful as is the aftermarket. Performance upgrades too if you are willing to spend some good $$$. I dunno much about the Ford, but for pulling, I think the 292 would do it fine.

I'm very much a Chevy man too. I have a 292 with some mild street mods and it's awesome and strong in my '66 stepside truck.

But I have to admit in a side by side comparison the Ford I6 would probably be best. There are just too many advantages.

1. The engine was available as a stock option in trucks through 1996.

2. It has a true 12 port head from the factory. The 292 has a 9 port head, with only 3 intake ports. And those intake ports have a head bolt boss smack dab in the middle. Removing it for maximum airflow while maintaining engine stability is hardly trivial.

3. Fuel injection is readily available cheap for the Ford 300. It is available for the 292, but far from inexpensive.

4. Hop up parts are more plentiful and cheaper for the Ford.

5. The Ford blocks are easier to find.

6. The Ford has a larger factory bore (4" vs 3.875 for the 292) and shorter stroke, yet yields 8 more CI than the Chevy.

7. Since the engine was made through the mid 90s power steering and air conditioning components are readily available and inexpensive. Try finding a factory power steering or A/C bracket for a 292 engine. :rolleyes: Trust me. It ain't easy. I've tried.

There is a 12 port head available for the 292 but it's FAR from inexpensive - available from Sissell's Automotive in Covina, CA. And I don't know how long it's been manufactured so I can't speak pro or con for it's long term durability. And, of course, the custom 12 port head will require a custom 12 port intake, etc.

With me listing all this you might wonder why I don't have a Ford vehicle with a 300 I-6. I guess I just prefer Chevrolet. Across the board it seems that old Chevy vehicles hold their value better and are just more stylist (matter of personal opinion). But I certainly won't rule out picking up a Ford vehicle (probably an old F100) at some point in the future and, yes, the 300 I6 will be the engine of choice.

-magic mike-

Hey Magic Mike, you made me wondering why I don't have one, lol. I remember seeing and old F100 from what looked like the mid 60s and it was 4x4 That is rare to me. I bought my chevy instead because the bowtie always over powers me. That is thing with 292, the "extras" are the hard to find parts and everything cool is so darn expensive. This should help nickle man decide

http://fordflaresides.clubfte.com/300.html

http://www.6066gmctrucks.org/Inline6.htm

Just take notice to what is net power and torque for what I believe is at the rear wheels. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Hope this helps a bit.

WOW! Have you see the twin 6 engine on the 6066 GMC site? I wonder if I can hulk that in my 41 Chevy ;-)
(wishfull thinking I know)

Frank

well, i personally am a chevy guy, but ford did have a stock fuel injection for the 300 plus manifolds and headers are more plentiful on ebay and usually cheaper due to more peopple having or wanting chevy. i wouldnt think that the power difference would be that different between the two if similar parts are used on each.

I wonder how much all the pollution control garbage on the 300 affects the torque and HP? I drove an early 90's 1/2 ton company truck with a 300 for a few years and wasn't impressed. Years ago, a light chevy pickup with a 230 seemed like a hotrod compared to the newer truck with Ford 300.

Sidehill,

With the Ford 300 you get a huge head start for hot rodding, versus the 292. In other words it doesn't take as much work to get the same results in terms of power numbers in the Ford as it does the Chevy. The biggest factor is the head design.

The Ford factory head (with its true twelve port design and unrestricted intake flow) will obviously hotrod up better without major mods than the Chevy. To get optimum power and flow from the Chevy head the intake boss in the siamezed factory intake MUST be removed and a (bolt in, brazed or epoxied) lump port must be created. The lump port head has been done and re-done many times successfully with excellent results, but the work is hardly a task for the occasional enthusiast (certainly not doable for a novice).

The Chevy 292s stock piston design is a liability too. The .300 recessed deep dish head and resulting 8.0-to-1 compression ratio is hardly what you want for impressive power (except for certain forced air applications where a low CR is desirable). If the low CR isn't bad enough, the factory cast piston is also extremely heavy. The weight is actually probably a worse liability than the CR because the compression ratio can be raised through other means fairly easily (shaving head, etc.). Lightening the weight of the factory pistons while maintaining a balanced overall drivetrain is expert work.

But the biggest and most important advantage the Ford has is the factory head design. Hands down the Ford wins.

-magic mike-

put a turbo on either one....

Longer stroke on any cylinder engine equates to more torque....Torque is what moves you....I know more Ford enthusiasts that know the 292 has more potential than than the Ford 300 due to this and they have built both -for street and race.....Also, from info I have gathered, the Chevy modified head can flow more air than the Ford modified head....guess it depends on who you talk to and if they have built both engines and know the actual results-The Inline 6 Power Manual states how the Chevy head can outperform the Ford head-page 86......However, this does not take away from the awesome power the Ford 300 can make....

I checked out the web sites that John so thoughtfully provided:

Ford 300 Chevy 292

hp 150@3400rpm 153@3600rpm
torque 260@2000rpm 255@2000rpm
bore&stroke 4.00x3.98 3.85x4.125
compression 8.8:1 8.0:1

The Ford 300 numbers were for their 1994-96 EFI model. The nethp and torque for 1965-72 was 170@3800rpm & 283Lbs/ft@1600rpm; 1973-74 101hp@3000rpm & 223Lbs.@1600; 1978-86 120hp@3400rpm & 223Lb@1600rpm; 1978-86 101, 115, 117, 120hp@3000-3400rpm & 223Lbs. torque @1600; 1987-93(EFI) 145hp@3400 & 265Lbs.@2000. So you can see the numbers for the Ford vary quite a bit depending on the year whereas Chevy only listed one set of numbers at their web site. However, the numbers for the later models are quite competative with each other and I have to make my decision based on the other factors (availability of parts etc.) and what I usually go with - which shows up first at the best price.

The ford efi is kinda restrictive, unless you can get your hands on the mass air but even then...


Heres something to read, its three pages but it does provide details, pictures and dyno numbers. The most impressive aspect IMO is the mention of an off the shelf mellings torque cam, which was used to generate 300hp and 400tq.

http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307743

I'm not gonna try and sell you on the ford I-6, the 292 IMO is very capable as well.

All my life I've thought of myself as a Chevy guy but on this I have to say I am definately leaning toward the Ford 300. Mainly because of availability and, from what I have heard and read, it is easier to work on and find parts for. However they are so close that I'd be happy to go with the first good one to show up. But if I could find say a '53 Ford 3/4 ton and drop a '95 300 in it.......

I've always wondered about Ford vs Chevy as far as interchanging parts with their V-8 cousins.

I was under the impression you couldn't even bolt a Ford 6 to a V-8 bellhousing.
Chevy of course not a problem bolting the 194-292 to a V-8 bell.
(including late 4.8 and 5.3 engines? - dunno)

How's Ford on piston and valvetrain interchanging?

Of course cams, headers, and manifolds have to be sourced for each (except later Ford FI engine) and the factory stuff is nothing to get excited over on either Ford or Chevy.

The only Ford that really ever caught my eye was a 65 fastback with a six and a 4 speed.
Unique to be sure, but I was scared off by my lack of knowledge.

Ford 240/300 uses the same bell housing as the small block.

I have an '88 ford 150 with a 300 I6. It has over 350K miles on it, and it don't burn a drop of oil, and it starts on the coldest of days. It's not without it's problems, as it has several major oil leaks. It was my daily driver for many years and only twice I've had to walk home while it sat broke down on the side of the road. Once was a failed timing gear, the other a failed ignition module. I don't drive it much any more. It hasn't been registered in five years. I use it to haul junk to the dump once in a while, and to haul my boat to the lake, that is just 5 miles from my house. I have nothing but good things to say about the ford 300 6, although I have heard from some that rebuilding them is not for novices.

On another hand, I used to have a '63 Chevy 1/2 ton with a 292 in it, and it was an awesome motor. I drove it for 2 years with a cracked block. Sometimes if it got a little hot it would blow a little steam out the crack, but never any real coolant loss or coolant in the oil. I never took it apart, and it ran fine when I sold it (yes, I told the buyer all about the cracked block and he was ok with it) I have nothing but fond memories of that motor.

On one other hand, I had a '71 Toyota Land Cruiser that had a Chevy 292 in it. Funny thing was, this motor was built by Toyota, in Japan, with metric bolts, but everything else was identical to the Chev., plus the Chevy parts were cheaper and easier to get. Things like the water pump, which Toyota wanted a hundred bucks for, the Chevy one fit just fine, for $19.95. Even the points I used were for the Chev. And that motor was always ready to go. I drove that thing all over the west for several years with never a single problem from the motor.

I think it comes down to personal prefrence between brands for the most part. They are all very good motors.

the Ford. I too was a Chev & GMC 6 guy....till I got a 300. Three words: Seven main bearings.........

Three more words: Four Inch Bores.

292-stock stroke is 4.125...more available and 4" bore is also possible .........

Just an FYI, the 292 is a seven main bearing engine too. But the Ford does have the advantage in that it has more cubes PLUS a bigger bore and shorter stroke.

-magic mike-

I don't see the shorter stroke as an advantage unless you're racing, but if you want to PULL at low rpm's you gotta have stroke

another advantage to the ford six is the fact that the cam is gear driven which is much more positive and durable than a chain and sprocket.

Hmmmm...

Last I looked my lil Chevy 250 had gear to gear cam drive too...

:p

So does my little 292

-magic mike-

With a more oversquare engine - that is to say a larger bore and shorter stroke for (nearly) the same cubes you will ALWAYS have the potential for more horsepower than an engine with smaller bore and longer stroke. Not only does a short stroke / big bore engine breathe well because of BIGGER VALVES can be used, it also has slower piston speeds and less rod angularity (read less motoring horsepower consumed). That is why the trend throughout automotive history has been to evolve to shorter stroke engines. For instance, our beloved Offenhauser Indy engines of the '30's, '40's, and '50's were surpassed with the high winding Indy Ford V8's of the '60's. It would be very naieve to think that any torque advantage gained by a longer stroke could not be more than made up for by overall gearing increases in the final drivetrain.
"But wait," you may be saying now, "the newest automotive designs are moving back toward longer stroke engines." Not as oversquare as in years gone by. That is chiefly due to emissions constraints and the wish to minimize hydrocarbon formations and get a more concentrated, faster burning engine design. Emissions driven, and, yes, also because front wheel drive East / West applications try to reduce the length of the block assembly. I think engines destined for high performance applications will still have to maximize the bore area to take advantage of more breathing potential.

With a more oversquare engine - that is to say a larger bore and shorter stroke for (nearly) the same cubes you will ALWAYS have the potential for more horsepower than an engine with smaller bore and longer stroke. Not only does a short stroke / big bore engine breathe well because of BIGGER VALVES can be used, it also has slower piston speeds and less rod angularity (read less motoring horsepower consumed). That is why the trend throughout automotive history has been to evolve to shorter stroke engines. For instance, our beloved Offenhauser Indy engines of the '30's, '40's, and '50's were surpassed with the high winding Indy Ford V8's of the '60's. It would be very naieve to think that any torque advantage gained by a longer stroke could not be more than made up for by overall gearing increases in the final drivetrain.
"But wait," you may be saying now, "the newest automotive designs are moving back toward longer stroke engines." Not as oversquare as in years gone by. That is chiefly due to emissions constraints and the wish to minimize hydrocarbon formations and get a more concentrated, faster burning engine design. Emissions driven, and, yes, also because front wheel drive East / West applications try to reduce the length of the block assembly. I think engines destined for high performance applications will still have to maximize the bore area to take advantage of more breathing potential.

With a more oversquare engine - that is to say a larger bore and shorter stroke for (nearly) the same cubes you will ALWAYS have the potential for more horsepower than an engine with smaller bore and longer stroke. Not only does a short stroke / big bore engine breathe well because of BIGGER VALVES can be used, it also has slower piston speeds and less rod angularity (read less motoring horsepower consumed). That is why the trend throughout automotive history has been to evolve to shorter stroke engines. For instance, our beloved Offenhauser Indy engines of the '30's, '40's, and '50's were surpassed with the high winding Indy Ford V8's of the '60's. It would be very naieve to think that any torque advantage gained by a longer stroke could not be more than made up for by overall gearing increases in the final drivetrain.
"But wait," you may be saying now, "the newest automotive designs are moving back toward longer stroke engines." Not as oversquare as in years gone by. That is chiefly due to emissions constraints and the wish to minimize hydrocarbon formations and get a more concentrated, faster burning engine design. Emissions driven, and, yes, also because front wheel drive East / West applications try to reduce the length of the block assembly. I think engines destined for high performance applications will still have to maximize the bore area to take advantage of more breathing potential.

With a more oversquare engine - that is to say a larger bore and shorter stroke for (nearly) the same cubes you will ALWAYS have the potential for more horsepower than an engine with smaller bore and longer stroke. Not only does a short stroke / big bore engine breathe well because of BIGGER VALVES can be used, it also has slower piston speeds and less rod angularity (read less motoring horsepower consumed). That is why the trend throughout automotive history has been to evolve to shorter stroke engines. For instance, our beloved Offenhauser Indy engines of the '30's, '40's, and '50's were surpassed with the high winding Indy Ford V8's of the '60's. It would be very naieve to think that any torque advantage gained by a longer stroke could not be more than made up for by overall gearing increases in the final drivetrain.
"But wait," you may be saying now, "the newest automotive designs are moving back toward longer stroke engines." Not as oversquare as in years gone by. That is chiefly due to emissions constraints and the wish to minimize hydrocarbon formations and get a more concentrated, faster burning engine design. Emissions driven, and, yes, also because front wheel drive East / West applications try to reduce the length of the block assembly. I think engines destined for high performance applications will still have to maximize the bore area to take advantage of more breathing potential.

Frankly this whole debate over whose inline six is "better" has become a bit tiresome and a little bit worrisome to me. It is this type of Orwellian thinking that can turn devisive in an organization that welcomes all inliners, pitting our differences against us rather than celebrating our common love of inline design engines. I'm opting out of this and further debates on the subject.

FF,

If you're going to opt of these type discussions then why did you make your previous post four (4) times...???

Just kidding. Couldn't resist. Forgive me!

-magic mike-

Frenchtown, the trend in modern street engines is to longer stroke engines,less piston area,4 valve heads and modern combustion chamber designs take care of breathing problems.many high reving Japanese 2 liter engines have 3-1/2 strokes,the new generation Chevy V-8's have longer strokes than the old 350 small block.Longer rods lessen angularity and give more torque through leverage.

nickle man, youve struck a conversation jackpot askin that question but ill tell you this also. I would go with a ford 300. Im 18 and am rebuilding a '87 300 for an '85 pickup and ripped off the fuel injection and ill tell ya what if you go with the 300. STICK WUTH THE FUEL INJECTION ITS AWESOME. It is more economical and it works and runs sooooooooooo smoothe its a great thing.

I think the big Ford six was built for more years than any other Detroit production motor. It was never designed for high performance, it won't fit into most Ford passenger car models because it's so long. Other than EFI I do not know how Ford might have improved this venerable series over the years.

The only complaint I've heard about the 300 is the fuel economy is often not better than a small block V8. Its a classic work horse motor.

Probably a more important choice for the parameters of the original question would be transmission choices with regard to towing/hauling and the vehicles that come with both the Ford and Chevy engines. BOTH the 300 adn 292 are on par whereas issues of reliability will likely be found in the weaker areas of the drivetrain like the tranny.

Well I got the Ford 300. Just about what I was looking for, 90 model, 300 6, 5spd, manual. I don't know whar rear end it has but it is TALL, truck goes 15mph in 1st. Not what I want in a pullin' truck. I'm going to put an air lock rear end in this summer; the question is - do I need to change the whole rear end assembly to get a lower ratio or can I get away with just changing the gears in the rear end at the same time that I put in the lockers? Geeze the problems that just cme to my head. I'll probably (probably?) have to specify the rear end when I order the locker so I'll need to have that taken care of already and would the locker kit fit a hybrid or made do diff. Ouch.

Personally, howzabowta International Black Diamond 6, either 450 or 501, with twin carbs and dual pipes?

They changed the head design for efi models. The 300 will fit in a falcon engine bay, it could make its way into other passenger cars.


2wd efi 5 speed 3.55:1 rear = 17 mpg no matter how I treat it.


No doubt you drive a 4.9 efi equipped truck you will think man is this a dog, put it under a load, then it become apparent why ford used the 300 for 30 years.


I will suggest this, even thought the ford 4.9 has efi, the speed density version sucks and not easily reprogramed unless you like to spend money on dyno time, even then finding a chip company that wants to work with you is not easily done. The mass air which was used in 94-95 california models and all 96 is more desirable and has more support, alot easier to work with.


With all that said, IMO its a toss up as to which is better.

I think you mean the International Red Diamond; available in 372, 406,450, and 501. I understand they had factory 4 bbl and dual exhaust for the bigger models.

Red Diamond, of course. Don't know my cornbinders as well as I'd like. A recent issue of the ATHS magazine (Wheels of Time) had an article about an RD450 with a twin carb manifold and efi.

IMO, wot's best is wot you gots.

Jason and Sundog, you have brought up a topic I've been interested in for some time. When I was a kid my Dad had a bus with a Red Diamond 450 in it and man that was a puller, would not stall. I have since learned that before the diesel engine got big it was the backbone of trucking industry because of its pulling power and reliability. Haven't heard anybody mention it in over 30 years though and thought it was forgotten. I would love to find one or even just see one restored and working.