What Engine?

what engine came stock in a 79 ford ltd?

Reply to
Bubba Goat
Loading thread data ...

was it the 302 or the 5.0? i was told my car had a 302 but the sticker on the valve cover says 5.0. i dont know what to believe

Reply to
Amber

Reply to
Claud Spinks

the 302 IS the 5.0 litre. The standard engine was I'm pretty sure a straight six, but someone here will know for sure. Maybe the 300 ci(I forget if it was 299, 300, or 301). It was a new body style for 79.

Reply to
-brad-

The 300 six was never installed in a passenger car by Ford. It's smaller 240 sibling was installed in earlier models but, I don't believe it made it into anything that late. I believe '79 was the first year of the 5.0L engine which is an update on the 302. The update was a change in the way the engine was balanced changing the crank balance factor from 28 oz to 50 oz thus the change in identification. Unless you try to intermix the involved parts, the engines are the same from an operational standpoint. The bottom line is that the engine are similar and related yet, definitely, very different.

Reply to
lugnut
302 cu. in..... 1 in = 2.54 cm, 1 cu in = 2.54 *3= 16.387 cu. cm

16.387 X 302 = 4948.89 cu cm

1 L = 1000 cu cm.......

302 cu in = 4.94889 L...................

Welcome to the Standard/Metric Confusion........

Reply to
Spark

My memory ain't what it used to be but I thought Ford offered the 300 inch six in passanger cars in the early 60's. I knew twin brothers, one had a 283 Chevy with 3 on the tree and his brother had a Ford Sunliner with a 2bbl six with 3 speed and OD. The six whipped the 283 just about every time. The 300 put out gobbs of torque.

Reply to
Fred Brown

Reply to
Thomas Moats

Reply to
Thomas Moats

Reply to
Thomas Moats

The 2.5 is a stroked version of the Tempo/Topaz 2.3 HSC/HSO engine ( push rod ) Of a similar design to the car I6. Not the OHC 2.3.

Reply to
Thomas Moats

That may be the way your remember things, but what I posted was factual. I'm sure it will make you happy so I'll give you the last word. I'll have no more comment on the subject.

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

Reply to
MikeHunt

Pintos for the

as the US. I

were related

longer produced

Reply to
Thomas Moats

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.