| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Chevy & Ford I-6 / Mopar Slant https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11808 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | spconnor [ Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Chevy & Ford I-6 / Mopar Slant |
Yes I know this is /6 message board & I love it. But i am curious. Can the Mopar /6 hold its own againts say a Nova or a Mustang with their I-6's? What are their performance specs vs the slant. Does that 30~slant make any difference over a straight6 other than clearance? Are the other 6's in that 145hp range? Or is it that the /6 naturally destroys all. -curious mind |
|
| Author: | VG-265 [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have owned Slants and 170-200-250 Fords, the only Ford to keep with the slant is the Aussie 2V 250 or Alloy crossflow head 250. Cant comment on the Chevs. |
|
| Author: | slantzilla [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have done very well at the dragstrip against Chevy sixes, but I really can't say I have seen any Fords yet. I do very well against the small Bow Tie's and have even whacked a couple 292's. I think a 300 Ford would hand me my azz We have a guy at RT66 with an AMC Gremlin who runs very well. The closest I have gotten to him is about 4 tenths, but he kills me on weight. His is also a dedicated drag car. I really smoke him when I turn on the bottle though. 
|
|
| Author: | Matt Cramer [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Ford 300's can be insane. I once saw one spectacular example in a Mercury Comet at a dragstrip in Ohio. I knew something was up when I saw six upright velocity stacks poking about a foot above the hoodline. These fed a trio of Webers on a Clifford manifold. This monster was in the 12's. |
|
| Author: | sandy in BC [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 10:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I used to own a 61 Falcon coupe with a 300 Ford 6. I haven t owned a slant that could touch that combo. I think Charlie S used to have one as well. The 300 has a 7 main crank , square bore/stroke, 12 port head that flows better than a 5L V8. It has a gear drive cam, forged crank and rods. I used Chev v8 pistons for 10:1 compression. It is also available with port fuel injection and shares many parts with V8s. It shares a bellhousing with the small v8s. 300 Ford 6 valcves are used as an oversize in slant sixes. That being said I love my slant. It has personality. |
|
| Author: | Jon Dahlberg [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Chevy & Ford I-6 / Mopar Slant |
From the factory, the Pontiac Sprint 6 was probably one of the most powerful. I had a 65 Mustang with a 200, that thing was a dog..but it also had the most restrictive manifolds known to man on it. I don't know what engine would be better after modifications. You can get some pretty good power from the AMC 258. |
|
| Author: | Tim Keith [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 8:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I believe the 300 Ford was built for more years than any other inline six, I think the first version was a 240 cu in. The AMC sixes are pretty good motors in the 4 liter size, I believe some Wranglers still come with the 4.0L. The AMC six is the last pushrod inline six Detroit design, I think it first came in 1964 Ramblers. AMC motors are starting to get the respect they are due, expecially the 390/401 V8. The AMC pushrod sixes were the last, but benefitted from the analysis of the Big Three sixes. The slant six has a 12 port head, the Chevy six has siamezed intake ports that are a bad design but share a lot of basic dimensions with a small block, it's too bad a cross-flow Chevy six was never built. The integral log manifolds on the small Ford six is bad. The 5 liter Ford 300 is fundamentally a good design that can be bored and stroked, it is superior to the 292 Chevy. With its 4" bore it is kind of long for a Mustang, Maverick of Falcon. Another option is the 4.2 GM DOHC Vortec aluminum six. Chevy fans have practically ignored this recent design, it may yet have its day in the aftermarket. It is much lighter than the others, can make lots of power. The 4.2 is complicated, not many people have yet swapped a 4.2 |
|
| Author: | Jeb [ Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My cousin has a Mustang with a 200 and it sucks. Tops out at 80 and almost no torque. It is fairly reliable (even if poorly designed) but it aint s#@t compared to my slant. The Ford 300 on the other hand is a totally different story. This six knows it can do a burnout. |
|
| Author: | Rust collector [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
A friend of mine had a ford 300 in a 1ton van, and it ran waaaay better than their ltd with a 302. |
|
| Author: | Jon Dahlberg [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Chevy & Ford I-6 / Mopar Slant |
As bad as the 200 was in the 65 Mustang....it still had better acceleration than the 351M in the 77 Mercury Marquis I had.... |
|
| Author: | mnecaise [ Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Chevy I-6 has a poor cylinder head design. They have siamesed the intake and exhaust ports, which makes it nearly impossible to maintain any kind of decent port velocity and get good filling. You have to run them at high(er) rpm to make good power. It's common for those guys to do a lot of serious head mods, like brazing in spacers to isolate the intake runners or building a "lump port" head by filling in the runner to reduce the cross section. The off-the-shelf intakes typically have the same problems because they're made to fit the stock port. Despite all that, you can still build a respectible engine outa either the 235/261 or 230/250/292, if you're willing to put in the time. Supercharging or turbocharging helps, of course. been there. tried to do that. ran out of money... |
|
| Author: | Tim Keith [ Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Leo Santucci's "Chevrolet Inline Six-Cylinder Power Manual" is the book for building the 194-230-250-292. You have to be a wizard to build those "lump" port heads. I wonder why GM did not use a 12-port design in 1962? Seems kind of retro, the L-head Mopars have siamezed ports. OTOH, the GM motor has a decent seven bearing bottom end, but so does the AMC six. As popular as the SBC V8 is, the Chevy inline sixes don't have a lot of aftermarket support. An inline head pattered after the LS1 could retain most of the critical parameters - bore centers, valves etc. That pushrod head might give the twin cam 4.2 Vortec a run for the money with less weight, better for racing anyway, probably not better for SUVs. Most just swap the old sixes for a V8. GM engineers are said to be developing variable valve timing for pushrod motors. I've heard that the small Ford six lives on in Australia with OHC versions, I believe there may be a 24-valve head for the Ford motor Down Under. The Aussies did away with the integral log manifold head. |
|
| Author: | VG-265 [ Fri Feb 25, 2005 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The current Ford 6 in Australia is a 4 valve DOHC 4.0 inline. Power ranges from the propane fuel 156 KW, the standard range 182 KW, the Turbo 240 KW, and the F6 Typhoon and Tornado 270 KW. http://www.fpv.com.au/index.asp?link_id=2.455 
|
|
| Author: | Tim Keith [ Fri Feb 25, 2005 4:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
"All 550Nm on tap from just 2000 rpm and remaining constant all the way through to 4250 rpm. " VG-265, How does 550N compare to U.S. torque rating ? |
|
| Author: | Pierre [ Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gotta love google: 550 Newton meter = 405.659182 foot pound Google search bar acts as a unit conversion. For the above conversion for instance I typed in "550 newton meter to foot pound" and got that result. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|