Why drive a truck with a big six cylinder?

LOL!  Yes, I have a problem.  But I don't want to "fix" it.  

Gary Lewis wrote

That's a good idea, David.  But maybe you should drive Blue.  Just swap trucks for the same drive and see what happens.

Yes, I could, but then we could not converse and catch up with what's happening. You can drive and try to exceed the former test results while carrying extra weight [my friend and me].

It's not a problem unless you admit it is.

ETA: who said 'fix'?
Most would agree there's no fixing you.
And why would anyone want to?

Sounds like a plan, Stan.

Now here's where a "rimshot" emoticon would come in handy.  Something like

ArdWrknTrk wrote

He says in the comments that the head is not really optimized.
That it was a Ford test piece for fuel efficiency.

One of the reasons Ford developed the crossflow head for the 4.9L was a warranty issue. The fuel injectors were exposed to heat soak, since located above the exhaust manifolds, when the engine was cut off. A temporary fix was a cooling fan blowing across the injectors and continuing to run after the engine was cut off.

There were other prototypes as well [variable displacement and turbo].

1986F150Six wrote

...a warranty issue. The fuel injectors were exposed to heat soak, since located above the exhaust manifolds, when the engine was cut off. A temporary fix was a cooling fan blowing across the injectors and continuing to run after the engine was cut off.

Are you saying the head was changed between '88.5 and '89?  Because the injectors are in the same location on my '95s, and they don't heat-soak or fail.  And of all the people to whom I've recommended deleting the '87-88.5 4.9L injector blower (which is probably in the low hundreds); none have mentioned any problems since.

Why, I really like the torque at the low end, it isn't like any other car/truck I've drove. Like Gary's said in another reply. You can tow almost anything with gears. My hay dealer use to use an 73' f350 300i6, 4speed to haul hay lots of it and take his cars to the demos. Was an 5th wheel 2 car trailer.

I didn't make the statement, FF did.

Carburetor manifolds actually need that heat in cold climates.
Individual injectors probably not so much.

I can see a YF bowl boiling, but the injector loop, under ~60 psi or so???

Injectors may have been improved [?]. But, according to a Ford Engine Development Engineer, injectors were being warranted too much. Much experimental work was done to better this engine, but the decision to redesign the truck with a shorter engine bay was one nail in the coffin. Others have mentioned emissions.

I was just pointing out that the measure of the poison is in the dose.

Any of the carbureted engines have air cleaner sensors to modulate the temperature.
The 300 has a chamber for the exhaust to heat the manifold floor, just like the V-8's crossover.

It sad if warranty issues killed this venerable engine.
Ford isn't about nostalgia at the expense of their bottom line.

Steve, check the injector rail pressure on the early vs late EFI 300. Ford raised the pressure much like GM did with the 454s to help with the heat soak issue. Chrysler did the same on their Turbo engines, the injectors on those were on the bottom of the intake from 1984-87 and ran at 55 psi static. GM used 60 on the 454.

I thought the 300's injectors went from 'in manifold' to 'in head' at some point.
I may well be wrong, as I'm no expert on these engines.

Bill's suggestion that the pressure was raised is intriguing.

You might think that Ford would have had the fuel pump continue to run for xxx (circulating cool fuel through the loop) rather than a clunky add-on fan.
Maybe this is down to a safety issue, like the HFH oil pressure shutoff in the 460?

Amazing performance upgrades can be done to the 300 six, and that’s great... but most of us who love the engine own a stock one and appreciate it just the way it is. It has a personality and demeanor that is quite unlike the V8’s. It is a gentle giant. It is a serious piece of equipment especially with low gearing. It does not roar to impress but it can move a house. It won’t win any races unless you count the lifetime engine longevity challenge.  There is something very relaxing about it’s low rpm torque that pulls strong without all of the noise and perceived stress of revving. It’s a cool cat, soft spoken but persuasive. I love mine and I am interested in ways to make it better... but at the same time I don’t think I want to change it’s character too much. I don’t want to loose sight of the personality that attracted me to it in the first place.

Again, where's the 'like' button?

Ford F834 wrote

Amazing performance upgrades can be done to the 300 six, and that’s great... but most of us who love the engine own a stock one and appreciate it just the way it is. It has a personality and demeanor that is quite unlike the V8’s. It is a gentle giant. It is a serious piece of equipment especially with low gearing. It does not roar to impress but it can move a house. It won’t win any races unless you count the lifetime engine longevity challenge.  There is something very relaxing about it’s low rpm torque that pulls strong without all of the noise and perceived stress of revving. It’s a cool cat, soft spoken but persuasive. I love mine and I am interested in ways to make it better... but at the same time I don’t think I want to change it’s character too much. I don’t want to loose sight of the personality that attracted me to it in the first place.

Hmmmm… this thread has just gone full circle [see 1st post]:

As I drove to work, this morning, I asked myself the question listed in the subject line, above. The answer is: it is so pleasing to feel the very flat torque characteristics, every time you go through the gears. Quiet and unobtrusive.

The answer to more power and not changing characteristics.....turbocharger.

Blower.

Turbos will always have lag unless they're small enough to be limiting, and are close enough to the ports that the volume is very small.

Blowers are always making power so there's no 'hit'

It effectively increases your displacement and compression ratio while not making the curve more peaky.

Who makes a blower for the 300? Or are you talking about a centrifical belt driven supercharger, like a vortech supercharger?

A roots style manifold mounted blower I have not seen for a 300.

Ray Cecil wrote

The answer to more power and not changing characteristics.....turbocharger.

In a general way I agree... but the stock 300 is already breathing through a 1bbl soda straw. Adding a turbo to that is a little self defeating. Porting the head and opening up the intake and exhaust is a fairly necessary step to allow the turbo to offer gains. You can certainly still size the wheel and housing to retain a similar low rpm power band, but for most people making the investment it is the doorway to much bigger power goals. As much as I admire 300 builds, I am having some misgivings about going down that road with my IDI which has pretty much the same personality as the straight six but on a bigger scale. I didn’t understand the compromises very well when I bought the parts that I bought and would choose differently now. Although I have not even built it yet, I am learning lessons about what I might choose for my 300 when it gets its turn.

You didn't say anything about a bolt on 'kit', and 20 years ago I would have said impossible.

But an Eaton M90 from an L67 is only about $200 used.
Those 3800's changed the game for Holden, Buick and Pontiac.

A little of the redneck engineering you seem so fond of would have you blown in a weekend.

Let the cries of blasphemy ring out!
(but you know I'm right)