Bullnose Enthusiasts Forum

300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Classic

List

Threaded

97 messages Options

12345

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Yes, Jonathan shared a link to that with David and I recently. But, it is cool!

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Dad's: '81 F150 Ranger XLT 4x4: Down for restomod: Full-roller "stroked 351M" w/Trick Flow heads & intake, EEC-V SEFI/E4OD/3.50 gears w/Kevlar clutches
Blue: 2015 F150 Platinum 4x4 SuperCrew wearing Blue Jeans & sporting a 3.5L EB & Max Tow
Big Blue: 1985 F250HD 4x4: 460/ZF5/3.55's, D60 w/Ox locker & 10.25 Sterling/Trutrac, Blue Top & Borgeson, & EEC-V MAF/SEFI

grumpin

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

In reply to this post by Rembrant

Rembrant wrote

Since you guys are discussing the 300/6 here, have any of you seen this video recently?

https://www.facebook.com/157130251058147/videos/556472388114263/

Pretty interesting stuff as far as modifications go.

Wow! that is impressive!

Dane
1986 F250HD SC XLT Lariat 4x4 460 C6-Sold
1992 Bronco XLT 4x4 351W E4OD
1998 GMC Sierra SLE K1500 350 4L60E
Arizona

grumpin

Re: New Page - Calculators Input Requested

In reply to this post by 1986F150Six

1986F150Six wrote

Gary Lewis wrote

But, that's just my guess with no empirical data. Perhaps the Frenchtown Flyer knows?

I hope I am not misquoting him, but a number of years ago, he attributed the broad [desirable] torque curve to the poor intake and exhaust manifolds! I believe what he meant was that at any given RPM range [probably ~1200-2000 RPMs], a couple of the cylinders were at their peak, so as some "came on" and others "dropped off" in efficiency, the torque band was widened.

It's amazing how an engine will be built for a purpose, i.e. a truck engine. Without high performance design, even "poorly" designed, but suits the build. And it will become an absolute workhorse with torque, longevity and reliability.

Dane
1986 F250HD SC XLT Lariat 4x4 460 C6-Sold
1992 Bronco XLT 4x4 351W E4OD
1998 GMC Sierra SLE K1500 350 4L60E
Arizona

85lebaront2

Re: New Page - Calculators Input Requested

Administrator

In reply to this post by Ford F834

No, 1995 could also have SEFI. I sent Gary an updated EFI pinout spreadsheet with the EEC-V information added for the 1996 models. Any engine carried over in the F250HD and F350 in 1997 should be the same.

To clarify a bit, automatic transmission 5.0L received MAF/SEFI in 1994, 4.9L and 5.8L automatic transmission models in 1995, even in 1996, there were still EEC-IV models as only the under 8500 GVW trucks were required to be OBD-II compliant meaning EEC-V and most of the manual transmission models still received OBD-I systems. The strangest being some of the California spec HD models as CA set the break at 14000 lbs so there were bank fired EEC-V systems.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

"Getting old is inevitable, growing up is optional" Darth Vader 1986 F350 460 converted to MAF/SEFI, E4OD 12X3 1/2 rear brakes, traction loc 3:55 gear, 160 amp 3G alternator Wife's 2011 Flex Limited Daily Driver 2009 Flex Limited with factory tow package Project car 1986 Chrysler LeBaron convertible 2.2L Turbo II, modified A413

85lebaront2

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

In reply to this post by grumpin

Yes, I have seen that, damned interesting too.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Whisler

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

You guys are way over my head with all this, but wanted to add a thought I had years ago. The vehicle was a 2 door Mercury Monarch (Granada clone) with 4.2 L six and 4 speed trans (3 + OD). I always wanted to built a 3 carb side draft manifold and use 3 Harley carbs.The Harleys of that era were ~ 1300 cc, IIRC, and 3 Harleys would be about 3.9L. It seemed to be a perfect fit to my feeble brain. Of course the build was way beyond my skill level and so was just a dream.

God Bless
Whisler

Frankenstein: 1989 F250 4X4, C-6, Hurst Pro-Matic 2 shifter, carbed '84 351W, Edelbrock manifold, Edlbrock AVS, DS2 ignition, 3G alternator, JBA shorty headers, no cats, dual exhaust with H pipe.

85lebaront2

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

The Jaguar E-type was a 3.8L or 4.2L (231 ci or 258 ci) and used 3 HD8 SU carbs these are 2" bore carbs and like many motorcycle carbs are "constant velocity", meaning they have a sliding venturii design that opens depending on air flow. Real simple carbs, float bowl, throttle plate and piston for the venturii. The main jet is raised or lowered to set the mixture and the piston has a needle that moves up with it to change the fuel quantity.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

I loved the simplicity of the constant-velocity carbs on motorcycles, so can imagine how well they did on the E-Type.

Anyway, from what I found today the 1980 - 82 300's had 8.9:1 compression and should be the best for MPG. That's of course if they aren't already worn out, and if rebuilt that the replacement pistons give the same CR. Slip an EFI intake and exhaust on, add EEC-V wiring and computer, maybe replace the cam, and you'd have the best of all worlds.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: New Page - Calculators Input Requested

Administrator

In reply to this post by 85lebaront2

85lebaront2 wrote

I sent Gary an updated EFI pinout spreadsheet with the EEC-V information added for the 1996 models.

And Gary has added it here: Fuel Systems/Carburetors, Chokes, & EFI/EFI and then the Pinout tab. Let me know how it works for y'all as I have things I can fine tune on it if need be.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Ford F834

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

In reply to this post by Gary Lewis

Gary, maybe I am just catching up to your thinking... but having looked at the master parts catalogue I find it lacking data.

First of all, if you ignore all the oversize pistons there seems to be only ONE part number for all HD and Canadian models from ‘80-‘86 although they appear in two places in the catalogue. (Yellow)

The light duty ‘80 pistons were replaced by the light duty ‘81-‘82 part so I think it’s safe to assume all three years’ pistons were comparable. (Green)

The ‘83-‘84 light duty pistons (Blue) show as being replaced by the 1987 EFI piston type... but there is no mention of light duty ‘85-‘86 pistons anywhere.

I also looked through the parts list and I can’t find any compression related component that says it is specifically for the 1983 fuel saver model to explain the 8.7 CR.

Since ‘85-‘86 has new heads, one for LD and one for HD it is at least possible that any compression ratio differences could be there rather than the pistons...

What still does not add up is how ‘83-‘84 HD’s had a CR of 8.4 with the same head and pistons as the ‘80-‘82 HD’s that yielded 8.0 and how did they raise the compression to 8.7 on the ‘83 fuel saver?

I did notice that starting in 1984 the facts book added the word “nominal” after compression ratio to 1. I don’t know what that means, if anything.

SHORT BED 4-DOOR DIESEL: 1986 F350 4x4 under construction-- 7.3 IDIT ZF5+GVOD

STRAIGHT SIX 4X4: 1981 F150 2wd to 4x4-- 300 I6 close ratio diesel T19, hydroboost brakes, Saginaw steering

BIG F: 1995 F-Superduty under construction— converting to 6.9L IDI diesel ZF5+DNE2

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Yes, the MPC is certainly lacking data. I don't see any way, given the information there, that the compression ratios shown could have been achieved. I'm not saying it wasn't, but that we just don't have enough info to know how it was done.

I wonder if a trip to the microfiche tower is needed?

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Well, score one for the microfiche tower! (You had to have been at the GTG last year, meaning in 2017, when Chris/ctubutis and Bill/Numberdummy brought me not one, but two microfiche viewers and a 1990 version of the Master Parts Catalog. It resides on top of the powder coating/paint booth, and is reached via an 8' ladder - hence "the microfiche tower".)

The 1990 version of the MPC shows pistons and heads that the 1994 version, which the rest of the world is working with, doesn't show. (But, we knew they had to be there!) I don't know that we've found all of them yet, as I still can't explain how they got the compression bump for the Fuel Saver Package. Nor have I gotten my head around what I've found. But, it is on the page at Engines/300 Six on the Compression Thoughts tab.

So, please take a look at let me know what y'all think.

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

85lebaront2

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Gary, just like the 460, the pistons on the 460 were the same from 1968-1987 which have a 0.240" depression in the piston top, but two things happened, one was in 1971 the deck height on the block was raised from 10.300 to 10.310 and in 1972 to 10.320, this lowered the compression slightly. The second thing was the change in combustion chamber volume, the later heads have much bigger combustion chambers. In 1988-1991 Ford went to a smaller depression, but even bigger combustion chamber to keep the compression where they wanted it, in 1992 the piston design was changed again by a deeper dish, still not as deep as the early one, but the compression height of the piston was raised.

I would go look at a good aftermarket piston catalog, like Mahle and see what the pistons actually look like.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Bill - You raise a good point. Perhaps the block changed along there somewhere. So, I took a look, and lo and behold there was and, at first blush, there were four. But, the 1980/83 one has a prefix of E7, so it is a replacement. And, that E7 is actually shown in three places.

But, using the breakdown on the left it looks like there were four: 1980 - 83; 1984 - 85; 1985 - 86 ex EFI; and 1987 on inc EFI. Right?

If so, we need to figure out what, if any, difference there was in deck height. Anyone know where to get that info?

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

85lebaront2

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Maybe from a machine shop. In the past I would have said Jack Clifford, he was to the 6 cyl world what Tim Meyer is to the 335 world. He built speed parts for everything from Hudson Hornets to modern in-lines.

Bill AKA "LOBO" Profile

Ford F834

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

In reply to this post by Gary Lewis

That’s great Gary... at least we got our answer about the 85/86 light duty truck pistons. It does support that the change in CR for the last two years was in the heads, but then again late 84 may have deviated from what the facts book says... I’m assuming the book was prepared based on what was happening at the beginning of the new model year.

I noticed the same thing about the blocks. It does seem to be a replacement which does not help us identify if earlier blocks contributed to the facts book numbers. Maybe I should write a thread over at the Ford Six forum and see if the Frenchtown Flyer chips in... he was a Ford engineer(?) if I remember right.

1986F150Six

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Ford F834 wrote

Maybe I should write a thread over at the Ford Six forum and see if the Frenchtown Flyer chips in... he was a Ford engineer(?) if I remember right.

He was a Ford engine development engineer. He worked extensively on the 302 engines [Mustang GT], but loves and races with the 300 engine. He has one of the few Ford experimental [prototype] cross flow heads.

1986F150Six

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

This post was updated on .

The Frenchtown Flyer was contacted and responded to my inquiry as follows:

I am a member of another forum: *Bullnose Enthusiasts Forum*; part of *Gary's Garagemahal*. This forum primarily helps those with 1980 - 1986 Ford trucks, vans and Broncos.

http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/

There (http://www.garysgaragemahal.com/There) is a current thread titled *300 six compression ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc*. Research has been done using Ford Dealer Facts Books and Ford microfisch [striving for accuracy].

Depending on the year as well as tonnage [1/2, 3/4, 1 and LD or HD], compression ratios are listed as 7.9, 8.0, 8.4, 8.5 & 8.9 to 1. There were different heads, pistons, valves and blocks [I think].

One rather interesting fact is that in 1983, the compression ratio was @ 8.4:1, except with the *"fuel saver"* package @ 8.7:1.

Would you please consider visiting [or joining?] the Bullnose Enthusiasts Forum [link above], or share your thoughts here and with your permission, I will quote you.

What we are seeking is the answer to what accounted for the varying compression ratios?

Thank you in advance, David
---End Quote---

Hi David,

I won't be joining any additional sites, but I'll give you the answer to your question as I see it.
All the carbed 300 heads chambers are the same with 76 cc chambers +/- 2. All the blocks are the same deck height wise. The pistons vary - industrial engines were a bit lower CR. Also, some HD engines had upgraded valves and it is possible that the dish size in the valves made a difference in the CR too.

Hope this helps.

Merry Christmas
Greg

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

That's a big help. Now we know that the CR change was all due to pistons, not blocks nor heads.

However, that begs several questions. For instance, where are the pistons used in the fuel saver package?

Looks like I'd better fire up the Microfiche Tower and check out the Feb 1982 version of the MPC I have............................................................

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

Gary Lewis

Re: 300 Six Compression Ratio, Intakes, Heads, etc

Administrator

Well, right about here the plot thickens. We now know that the blocks and heads didn't really change, so the difference in CR is in the piston. Heretofore I've looked at the 1994 version of the MPC and then corrected it with info from the 1990 version which I have on microfiche. Now I've looked at the Feb '82 version on microfiche and have found completely different #'s than before.

In fact, the information is so different that I'm not quite sure how to process it.

So I'll post it here and then puzzle with how to incorporate the info into the spreadsheet:

1980 on: D3TZ 6108-A for HD US trucks (E-F 250/350 over 8500) and all E-F100/350 Canada w/leaded fuel

1980/81 before 12/8/80: D7TZ 6108-A for LD trucks (E-F100/250 & U150 under 8500 w/unleaded fuel)

1981 from 12/8/80: E1TZ 6108-A for LD trucks (E-F100/250 & U150 under 8500 w/unleaded fuel)

Gary, AKA "Gary fellow": Profile

12345