Convert my 65 back to a 6 cylinder - which one is best ?

ClanCassidy · Post by **ClanCassidy** » January 7, 2007, 8:26 pm

My 65 came with a 302 and the stock 3 spd manual, shift on the column. The 302 is kinda beat and I'll need to rebuild or replace pretty soon I think. One of the options I'm thinking about is putting it back to stock with a in-line 6. Not worrying so much about "correct stock" which is your favorite 6 for slicks and why ?

Also, where would I go to buy a good quality rebuilt 6 cylinder ?

Thanks,

John.

jakdad · Post by **jakdad** » January 7, 2007, 8:35 pm

If correct doesn't matter, I'd rebuild the 302, Truck will handle better with the 302.

Uncle Skip · Post by **Uncle Skip** » January 7, 2007, 8:57 pm

Personally, I'd go back with the 302. Why mess with perfection?
But if you just have to make a change, get a late model 300-6 with EFI and a 5-speed manual O.D.
U@ss

MadMaxetc · Post by **MadMaxetc** » January 7, 2007, 9:20 pm

The 300 with a head from a 250 and an RV cam with headers and a offy intake with a 500 cfm would be sweet!...ohh wait...THATS WHAT I HAVE! :lol:

Realy, a 300 would be easy. But it will cost about as much, if not more, to rebuild the 302. You could buy a short block and do it in an afternoon and a case of beer!

ME: I would rebuild the 302 and start hording parts for an awsome 300. Then replace the 302 and sell it off, then install the 300. :2cents:

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » January 7, 2007, 10:46 pm

Max means a head from a 240, which is slightly different than a 300 head and will bump the compression a touch. The 240/300 are arguabley the final pinnacle of perfection when it comes to inline six engines (chevy and dodge produced some good inlines too, but in terms of FORD inlines, the 240/300 were the end of the road and the best that there are).

The 240 and 300 are the same engine, just the 240 has a shorter stroke. That means it runs a tad smoother, perhaps a negligable bit more durable (though the 300 is a durability champ). The 240 engines pretty routinely outlast the vehicle they are in. But its no power monster.

The 300 is the torquiest engine with 300 cubes that you will ever drive. Driving it compared to a 302 is like night and day. The 300 feels like a diesel in some ways. It is MADE for the sort of things that working trucks did in the 60s and true working trucks still do today.

But if you like to run up the RPM and burn the tires, then fix the 302, or go larger still. And a I6 just will never quite sound like a bent8.

I have the 240. If it would quit, I already have a 300 waiting. The engine is close to orginal, almost 40 years old. Runs like a champ.

Do as you like.

Oh -- I have contemplated an EFI 4.9 as well (300 in metric terms). The problem with that swap is that the computer and wiring harness will take quite a lot of effort to get working nicely in a 65. Possible, of course, and several people have done it over at fordsix.com But not a "drop-in" install (though the actual motor mounts would be identical to the original 240/300).

Have fun......

FORDBOYpete · Post by **FORDBOYpete** » January 8, 2007, 9:18 am

If I was gonna go for a 6 cyl, after having had most of the ones "Henry" has built over the years, I'd go with a 4.0L V6-EFI with a earlier 90s style AOD ( before the nightmare E4AOD or A40DE) or whatever in the 96s.

I have an AWD/ 4X4 Aerostar with 1/4M miles on it with a 4.0L like that and all I have done is service and tune it for over 240K Miles with absolutely zero problems in the Power Train. . . . I'm a skeptic but that engine has my attention. . . .

FBp

Slick Fan · Post by **Slick Fan** » January 8, 2007, 12:46 pm

FORDBOYpete wrote:If I was gonna go for a 6 cyl, after having had most of the ones "Henry" has built over the years, I'd go with a 4.0L V6-EFI with a earlier 90s style AOD ( before the nightmare E4AOD or A40DE) or whatever in the 96s.

I have an AWD/ 4X4 Aerostar with 1/4M miles on it with a 4.0L like that and all I have done is service and tune it for over 240K Miles with absolutely zero problems in the Power Train. . . . I'm a skeptic but that engine has my attention. . . .

FBp

I've got a 91 Exploder with over 230K miles on it's original engine (& I think tranny too), still runs strong. I'm surprised, really.

61ford · Post by **61ford** » January 8, 2007, 2:26 pm

i didnt know the aod worked on the 4.0?so does the 4.0 share the samebellhousing as a small block or was it an aod desigined to work behind the 4.0?My a4ld behind my 4.0 has always been junk and ive been trying to find ways forever to find a new trans to go behind it.Persionally i wouldnt use a 4.0 in an old truck like that but yea great engine mine has got 178,000 on it bought it with 120,000 on it and only thing done to engine was a thermostat mainly tranny problems is only thing wrong with it

Jonas · Post by **Jonas** » January 8, 2007, 3:00 pm

FORDBOYpete wrote:If I was gonna go for a 6 cyl, after having had most of the ones "Henry" has built over the years, I'd go with a 4.0L V6-EFI with a earlier 90s style AOD ( before the nightmare E4AOD or A40DE) or whatever in the 96s.

I have an AWD/ 4X4 Aerostar with 1/4M miles on it with a 4.0L like that and all I have done is service and tune it for over 240K Miles with absolutely zero problems in the Power Train. . . . I'm a skeptic but that engine has my attention. . . .

FBp

I have had two seprate Aerostar Company Vans with 4.0. Both had close to 300,000 when I traded them in. My last van was a Mercury Villager(200,00Plus) it was also good. Traded it for my current Dodge Magnum SE. It will be interested to see how the Magnum does. I have 80,000 on it so far with no real problems.

I recently got a 1992 Mazada Navajo with the 4.0 and 5speed manual. It has some power and runs great. A coworker gave it to me. It will be my 14 year old son's first vehicle. Could not beat it for free

flareside64 · Post by **flareside64** » January 8, 2007, 6:03 pm

I vote for the six cylinder, 240 or 300, carbureted. Simple and easy to work on and very durable.. the 302 is a good engine, but the 300 is more durable and more for a truck.

MadMaxetc · Post by **MadMaxetc** » January 8, 2007, 6:34 pm

Yes I ment the 240 head. It has a smaller combustion chamber so it bumps up the compression a little.

I would like to find a 240 head to put on mine...I would traid the 352 FE for it!! :lol:

NO JOKE!

cdherman · Post by **cdherman** » January 8, 2007, 9:26 pm

Dan, I'll start keeping an eye out for a 240 head in Kansas land. I need to do some junkyarding for a rim, and I have a couple of likely yards in mind that would be withing striking distance for you too.....

I agree that if you are going to the trouble of rebuilding a 300 why not slap a 240 head on it while you are at it. Assuming you can like with E10 or premium gas. Which for my few thousand miles a year is no biggie.....