Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, that's a lot of cubes. Can't expect 20 mpg with a big 390 engine!
The hi-po 390s used in the Fairlanes got more like 10-12 mpg! Maybe 13 or so in a lighter car, like a '67 Mustang.
I once read somewhere that a Ford LTD (1969 I believe it was) with a 429ci 2 barrel got somewhere around 18mpg on the highway
I always thought the 390's were very good motors in the full size cars and the full size trucks but they're not my first choice when it comes to a muscle car or a pony car, for a muscle car I would rather have a 351 Cleveland over a 390.
Here my old mustang with a 351C, 4BL heads, huge solid roller cam. On the engine dyno it made 512HP. Very simple combo.
Hello guy,s since you seem to know your fords i have a question for you, im in the middle of a restoration on a 67 fairlane gta,it was sold to me without drivetrain,everything else is in there,my question is..what engine/tranny would you put in there.here is what im going for.easy install,easy to modify,the more power for money ratio.
i was thinking 5.0 carburator with 4 speed aut floor. what year is best ?
or 390,but these are costly here in canada.and a trick out 5.0 would be able to put out as much hp..i think ??
not fond about the 351 series..m-400 or w or c .high maintenance and costly ???
428,429,very costly.
427 middle oiler dont even go there,427 side oiler is a dream only,forget about it.
460 good, but a monster on gas.
So...what do you think ??
Well, that's a lot of cubes. Can't expect 20 mpg with a big 390 engine!
The hi-po 390s used in the Fairlanes got more like 10-12 mpg! Maybe 13 or so in a lighter car, like a '67 Mustang.
I knew someone who claimed to have gotten like 25mpg highway in his 1971 Mercury Marquis with the 429ci 2bbl V8.
I am not really sure if there is truly a horrible Ford V8. They might lack the power compared to certain Chevy and Chrysler engines throughout the years, but they all mostly ran good and didn't give too much trouble.
I had a 93 Town Car with the 4.6 that ran ultra smooth and never gave me problems besides for the leaky valve seals and some emission related stuff. I currently own a 78 Lincoln with the 400M that burns clean, also not very fast, but a smooth running engine otherwise, and it doesn't even leak any oil! So far so good in the Ford V8 department.
It's the other motors (power windows, seat motors, wiper) and electrical crap that Ford skimp out on for so many years to worry about.
i know that the normal thing is to claim the ford 255 is a rubbish motor because it didnt make any power, and call it a day. but the reality is that once you dump the stock heads and intake, and drop on a set of stock 302 heads and a decent intake, that little motor actually starts to wake up. add in a proper cam and a decent exhaust, and you can really start making power with the 255. if you want to call any ford V8 bad, the Y blocks are the ones that didnt make the power they should have, again because ford chose to use rubbish flowing cylinder heads on those motors. note that when ford put the supercharger on the 312, it really woke up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
