What Pickup?

I'm sure it's fine, but that looks like an awful lot of weight hanging out at the end of a long lever to me.....

On the Ford 300-I6. Yes, it's bulletproof and even pretty torquey. But I've driven a few of those trucks, and let's just say they aren't the quickest things around. They aren't "I'm afraid to pull out in traffic" slow, but they aren't that far off from it, IMO. At most, they had like 150hp if I recall right. In a full-size truck, that ain't a lot. Just something to keep in mind...

I never had an issue with it being slow when i was driving one

150hp, but 260 ft-lb of torque. much better for towing and hauling than the 4.2 v6 that replaced it.

Strizzo wrote: 150hp, but 260 ft-lb of torque. much better for towing and hauling than the 4.2 v6 that replaced it.

Yes, but the V8s all have over 300 ft-lb. I understand the advantages of the I-6, it's simple and durable, but it's not like a 302/351 is overly complicated or fragile, either. To each his own, just giving my impression from having driven trucks with both, I'd go for a V8. The fuel economy is very similar, as well.

I wouldn't touch that 4.2 with a 10-foot pole.

The ranger ford 2.3 turbo swap is bad ass but for stock the ford 300 i6 is a great motor i used to drive a delivery van with one and you couldn't kill the sonbich

Fit_Is_Slo wrote: The ranger ford 2.3 turbo swap is bad ass but for stock the ford 300 i6 is a great motor i used to drive a delivery van with one and you couldn't kill the sonbich

you also can't pass a gas station with the 300 6

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Strizzo wrote: 150hp, but 260 ft-lb of torque. much better for towing and hauling than the 4.2 v6 that replaced it.

Yes, but the V8s all have over 300 ft-lb. I understand the advantages of the I-6, it's simple and durable, but it's not like a 302/351 is overly complicated or fragile, either. To each his own, just giving my impression from having driven trucks with both, I'd go for a V8. The fuel economy is very similar, as well. I wouldn't touch that 4.2 with a 10-foot pole.

the 302's from the same year only put out 270 or 275 lb-ft, you would have to go all the way to the 5.8 to get more than 300 lb-ft stock. heck, from 81-85, the 4.9 only made 15hp less than the 302 (115 vs 130), and more tq (255 vs 243)

I loved my 300 I-6 had two of em over the years...Both of mine were 4 or 5 speeds and got 24+mpg mixed driving. (They were 2 wheel drive though) Dirt cheap, dead reliable

I would have to throw my hat in for a 150 with the I-6

V-8's are great but without proper service about 100k and they are pretty much ready for a rebuild (from my ford truck experience)

The 300's suck with an automatic.

With a 5-speed and proper, truck gears (3.9 in the tow package I have) they work great.

Mine hauls a camper or a loaded car hauler just fine.

Shawn

RossD wrote: Cherokee with the receiver hitch platform for loading bikes.

That's a short-box 4-door. I had a Honda Goldwing in the back of my extended cab truck.

The I6 is a great engine, but I wouldn't buy one. The 4.2 has 205hp and 255 torque giving it more hp and almost as much torque as the I6. The one in my 7000# work van went 298000 HARD miles before it pitched a rod. The replacement engine runs like a champ and just pulled a 20' trailer 200 miles with 3000# of doors on it. It even averages about 14mpg. I have seen as high as 18mph.

As far as trucks go, I would probably go full size. I'm a full size guy so I'm biased. I would also go 2WD unless you buy an old truck and get a solid front axle. IFS in a 4WD truck catch hell and most of the ones I have seen are worn slap out if the truck has seen much off road use. Just the thought of all that machinery running in a mud hole gives me the heebee geebees.