Project "Autonomous" F-350
- Thread starter pappawheely
- Start date
Hillbilly Heaven
Explorer
Gives new meaning to long tube headers.
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
I thought long tubes were for top end? This thing won't see 4K rpm?!?
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
Here is the intake.
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
Game over. The headers hit the Clifford intake manifold and have to go back. It took a month for them to be made. Now I have to wait another month for a new set of clifford's. They are also twice as much. ARGH, I knew things were going too smoothly. 
Hillbilly Heaven
Explorer
May I ask who made them? They were probably made to fit stock intake.
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
Yes, they would fit the stock log style intake. Not sure about the long primary tubes with a stock intake. The headers were made by patriot and the quality is fine. No complaints there. I called them to let them know it did not fit with the clifford intake. They were grateful for the feedback and courteous; something that is rare today.
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
I was poking around on the interwebz and found this photo of the car headers on the 223. These will be a better fit with the 4x4 X-member on the F250. The guy at Clifford could not fit his head around this but I think it's the way to go. He has car headers in stock so he is sending a set right out.
The truck headers come straight down and would dump right on top of the X-member
Normally the trucks use a single front motor mount, and the two tabs on the bell housing. I am using the side mounts, (the block has provisions for both), because I am changing the bellhousing.
The truck headers come straight down and would dump right on top of the X-member
Normally the trucks use a single front motor mount, and the two tabs on the bell housing. I am using the side mounts, (the block has provisions for both), because I am changing the bellhousing.
Attachments
Mwilliamshs
Explorer
I know the 262 cu in I-6 from these years was used in industrial applications like forklifts and whatnot. What was the 223 put in besides automobiles? Who is making them today? Unless by "used to this day" you mean there are some of them still in operation, in which case Model T's are used to this day as tractors and sawmills.
The 223, 262, etc share designs with the Ford Y-blocks. They have several oil system problems that must be addressed for longevity. What solutions do you have for those?
I LOVE my Ford 300. Look forward to your progress.
Last edited:
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
I was browsing the web and found a company that supplies crate 223 engines; they supply the aviation industry. Apparently the motors are in a lot of the ground support vehicles at airports. I'm sure there are plenty of 300's in them too. I did find some info on the top end oiling problems. Most of it was due to improper bearing assembly, and/or the lack of detergents in the old oil. The oil passages in the head are small and they would get clogged with sludge. I will wait until the motor is all together and make sure that the oil is flowing properly through the rocker arm shaft. One thing that intrigues me is the posts I have found where people claim 17-20 miles per gallon on the highway. For someone with a couple 460 engines, that sounds AMAZING!
Mwilliamshs
Explorer
I was browsing the web and found a company that supplies crate 223 engines; they supply the aviation industry. Apparently the motors are in a lot of the ground support vehicles at airports. I'm sure there are plenty of 300's in them too. I did find some info on the top end oiling problems. Most of it was due to improper bearing assembly, and/or the lack of detergents in the old oil. The oil passages in the head are small and they would get clogged with sludge. I will wait until the motor is all together and make sure that the oil is flowing properly through the rocker arm shaft. One thing that intrigues me is the posts I have found where people claim 17-20 miles per gallon on the highway. For someone with a couple 460 engines, that sounds AMAZING!
What's the company's name?
17-20 mpg matches the EPA ratings for Ford Econoline vans in the 80s with the 4.9L (300) and the various overdrive manual transmissions offered. These engines made 145 net hp and 265 net lb-ft. I have 2 such vans, one 5 speed OD and one with the C6 auto. The 300 is renowned for its longevity and low-end power. With stock 29" tires, stock gearing, an automatic and at GVWR, it's adequate, nothing more. I mention that because your 223 was rated at a maximum of 145 gross hp and 206 gross lb-ft. in certain truck applications. Note that these ratings differ from those for the 300, in that they are gross, not net ratings. The 223 numbers come from a bare engine with no accessories, no mufflers, nothing. The 300 numbers are from a fully dressed engine with full belt drive, all emissions equipment, full exhaust, etc. Two totally different sets of numbers that almost defy comparison. Even so, I would not wish to lose even a single digit from my bigger, more modern, fuel-injected engine which is both more powerful and has less work to do than yours.
I really enjoy your thread and look forward to more I-6 goodness.
Last edited:
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
Way to rub it in! 
I have some ideas to explore for getting every bit of horsepower from the engine.
I don't recall the company name that had the crate engines, and can't seem to find it.
I have some ideas to explore for getting every bit of horsepower from the engine. I don't recall the company name that had the crate engines, and can't seem to find it.
Hillbilly Heaven
Explorer
There is only one other 6 cylinder engine that beats out the 300 on durability. The age old slant 6!
pappawheely
Autonomous4X4
I called in Damper Dudes to make me a custom balancer for the 223. This will allow me to run the accessories from the 89 F250 that are driven by a serpentine belt.
