Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Late V8 (1954+)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-24-2018, 10:16 PM   #21
Daves55Sedan
Senior Member
 
Daves55Sedan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Granite City, Illinois
Posts: 3,008
Default Re: 1960-1972 ford trucks- thoughts?

Quote:
Originally Posted by delco1946 View Post
I also have noticed that 67-72s are almost exclusively v8s , which for a potential daily driver is over kill. Whats their gas mileage? Ive been looking at older too, as 60-67s are more likely to be a v6

After the 223 I-block six cyl was discontinued (1964), there were a lot of Ford trucks that had the 240 straight six cyl. It would be best to select model years 1968-72 in which the distributor was equipped with mechanical advance. The earlier 240's used the same distributor as the old 223's which had vacuum only (Load-o-matic). Although, if you get a load-o-matic system working properly, they are okay.
I don't know of any Ford V-6 engines in the '60's or '70's. I think they were all straight 6's. Even in the 1980's a 300 straight 6 was a common truck engine.
Daves55Sedan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 08:17 AM   #22
Ford blue blood
Senior Member
 
Ford blue blood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 809
Default Re: 1960-1972 ford trucks- thoughts?

Only V-6s were in the small Ranger series. Have had a couple of trucks over the years. First was a 73/360/4spd/short bed. 13MPG no matter what speed or load. Took the 2bbl, put on a Galaxie tri-power and headers and mileage jumped to 14! Not worth it from a $ sense but worth it from the fun factor! Next was a 93/302/AOD, nice truck, 18/19MPG. Sold it for 2010, 4.6/6spd/3.55. 19/20 MPG, it went to a new home after 110K miles to make room for the 2016 5.0/6spd/3.55 that is so awesome I can't begin to say. Loves being out west in the 75MPH areas! 22MPG running 82 - 84, getting 18 - 19 around town.


I did buy a 61 Unibody out of CA, had it moved to my daughters place at Edwards AFB, flew out, made it road worthy and drove back to B-ham! Let me tell you, it is a long haul from Rosemont, CA to Birmingham, AL in a 61 F100! One of those bucket list items....
__________________
Bill, certified Ford nut.

2016 F-150
2016 Focus
08 Shelby GT500
57 Ford Ranchero
36 Chevy, 351C/FMX, 8", Mustang II
Ford blue blood is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 10-03-2018, 10:18 PM   #23
reman
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 72
Default Re: 1960-1972 ford trucks- thoughts?

I will just say, whatever you decide on AVOID a 351M engine, and a 360 unless you plan to convert it to a 390.
reman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2020, 02:57 PM   #24
greenpondmike
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: McCalla, Alabama
Posts: 32
Default Re: 1960-1972 ford trucks- thoughts?

I had a 77 with a 302 and it got 16-18 mpg soft peddling it on takeoff. The 16 is with 10-40 valvoline and driving it 70-90 on the highway with some mixed city driving. It got the 18 on valvoline 20-50 and doing 55 on a 2 lane state highway.
Pulling a tandom car hauling trailer with scrap vehicles on it the truck got 13 mpg. It was a swb truck and I always had enough power and even liked the powerband it had. No problem going up oak mountain with that trailer loaded.
Had a 79 with a 400m in it. I think it got around 12 mpg regardless. It seemed to have a lot of lower end torque, but I liked smooth steady build up of torque from the 302 better.
Had a 91 van with a fuel injected 300 six and wow that thing could pull. Coupled with the AOD trans and smaller tires than stock that thing would go head to head with any common vehicle on the highway. Great power band from 0 to wide open. Someone raced me one night on the highway and as they were passing me I saw it was Jefferson county in a suv chevy. I sheepishly waved a him and backed off. He just went on down the road with his V8 victory over my 6cyl van lol. I had other 300s, but the one in my van was the best one. The ones with carbs were almost worn out time I got them and were nothing to brag about. Not sure on mpg though, but it seemed my 302 got better although the 300 didn't seem to drop to 13mpg when pulling a loaded trailer. By now you probably already have gotten something, but I just wanted to throw in my $.02.
greenpondmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 PM.