Torque and Fuel Efficiency--Possible?

[410bruce]

Hey guys! Just curious if this is a possibility or fantasy. I'd like to have a fun, torque-laden engine with excellent throttle response that also got "reasonable" fuel mileage.
You guys may recall this thread  http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=7463.msg81768#msg81768 
I sold my daily driver and this truck has become the DD.
Is there any possibility of getting a 410 to 15-16 MPGs without neutering the torque potential?

I'm right on the verge of building a 5.0 HO small block to drop in but if I can get the 410 to deliver the above figures, I'll bypass the 5.0.

As always, thanks for any advice/input.

[BattlestarGalactic]

The 302/aod would get you the needed 15 mpg.  My 89 F150 and '95 F150's get that without much effort with 302's/auto.  They actually like a 3.55 gear with the OD.  Too little gear and the OD is too much on the highway and seems to unlock the converter more on the truck with only 3.08 gears(the 95).

An FE and a C6 is likely not going to get you there easily.  It would be hard to get good highway mileage if you geared it for town driving.  If it was stick, I would give higher hopes of mileage.

My .02.

[410bruce]

The 302/aod would get you the needed 15 mpg.  My 89 F150 and '95 F150's get that without much effort with 302's/auto.  They actually like a 3.55 gear with the OD.  Too little gear and the OD is too much on the highway and seems to unlock the converter more on the truck with only 3.08 gears(the 95).

An FE and a C6 is likely not going to get you there easily.  It would be hard to get good highway mileage if you geared it for town driving.  If it was stick, I would give higher hopes of mileage.

My .02.

Thank you.
I do plan on a 5-speed install eventually. Kind of given up on the T-45 but more than likely will be going with a good ol' T-5.

[e philpott]

TKO600 is your best bet for fuel mileage with a 410 with manual , for automatic you would need 4R70 , E4OD/4R100 or GM 4L70E or 4L80 , Bell Housing and a 500.00  computer to control it

[410bruce]

TKO600 is your best bet for fuel mileage with a 410 with manual , for automatic you would need 4R70 , E4OD/4R100 or GM 4L70E or 4L80 , Bell Housing and a 500.00  computer to control it

A TKO is not in the budget.

Thanks.

[drdano]

I've hit those numbers and a bit higher with my old 390 in a '62 wagon, even saw 20mpg on a trip to Bonneville with a good tail wind.  I had 3.00 gears in it at the time and a 'wide-ratio' (E40D) kitted C6 and a 'towing' converter.  I can hit those numbers now (no 20mpg though) with 4.11 gears, taller tires and a TKO600 with the .64 overdrive behind my warm 428.  The car is slightly more aerodynamic than a truck. 

[410bruce]

I've hit those numbers and a bit higher with my old 390 in a '62 wagon, even saw 20mpg on a trip to Bonneville with a good tail wind.  I had 3.00 gears in it at the time and a 'wide-ratio' (E40D) kitted C6 and a 'towing' converter.  I can hit those numbers now (no 20mpg though) with 4.11 gears, taller tires and a TKO600 with the .64 overdrive behind my warm 428.  The car is slightly more aerodynamic than a truck.

Awesome! Then to me, it would seem entirely possible with a "warm" 410 backed up with a T-5 and 3.08 gears?

[frnkeore]

In '63, I had a '58 Edsel, with a 345 hp, 410 MEL engine and a 2.91 rear gear. Cursing at 65 mph I could get 18 mpg. It had a Cruise a Matic and didn't lock up, of course but, we had good gas in those days. Also, it was a 4000+ lb, boxy shaped car.

 I think a T-5 is to light duty, if you plan to romp on it very much. If you can, go with the 4R trans and a 3.89 or 3.74 rear.

[C6AE]

My father had a '67 Galaxy (new) with a 390
He was a salesman and put 270k on that car. It could average 19mpg when he drove it, about 10 mpg when I drove it.
(That car would light the rear tires up in smoke.)

[FrozenMerc]

I have a '62 Merc Monterey Wagon (4800+ lbs) with a 352 FE that peaked at 375 ft-lbs of torque on the dyno and makes over 300 ft-lbs from 2500 rpms on up, and knocks down a consistent 18 mpg on the highway at 70 mph.  It is backed by a Broader built AOD (non-lockup), with the original 3.6:1 9 inch rear.

Building a 410 to build 450+ ft-lbs and get 15 mpg should be no problem.  The right cam, carb, heads and headers along with a good overdrive and proper rear axle gear will go a long ways to hitting you mileage target. 

[410bruce]

Excellent input guys. I'm pretty stoked to hear it's probably doable.

I think for the time being I'll use a C-6 since that's what's behind the 300 currently and will save on changing a bunch of parts right off the bat. I'll have to build one as I don't think I have an FE one. Have several 460 and a couple small block C-6s kicking around, though.

I'll get a hold of Brent Lykins for a cam, since he was kind enough to chime in on my other thread. Also will need to choose some heads. I have a set of the short port standard size valve heads that came off the 410 or a nice tall port set that has been reworked with CJ valves ready to bolt on that I purchased from a forum member here.
Will also need to choose intake, compression ratio, headers.....etc...

[66FAIRLANE]

This is a little story about when I first bought my Fairlane. The 390 had a Crane Fireball 294, 750vac, standard converter, C6 & 2.75 gears (it would do 110MPH in 2nd). My daily (and I know most of you guys will not know what this is) was an XE Fairmont Ghia with a fuel injected 250ci 6cyl, 5 speed manual, bone stock. My Fairlane got better fuel economy. Of course then I narrowed the LSA, put a 3500 converter, 3.89 gears amongst other things in and it was all over! I never measured the economy but it was impressive.

[cammerfe]

In the Spring of '64 I put a 3.50 gear in the rear end of my '64 Custom 427. We drove it from Metro Detroit to Sebring Florida for the 12 Hour Race. I 75 was only completed in a few areas and a lot of the trip was on 2-lane roads. There were 3 of us to switch off driving and we agreed to get something to eat when we had to stop for gas.

We averaged 11.7 MPG for the round trip, but on one tankful, while running at over 100 most of the time, we got 16. The trick was to have a light foot on the go-pedal and keep right up against the point at which the linkage would bring in the second carburetor. In the middle of the night, there were very few cars on I 75. By the way, top speed with 8.20-15 rear tires was a bit over 150. And passing gear was accomplished by downshifting the top Loader to third. It would pull to about 125. A 100 MPH downshift to third would make the hot-dog in the chevrolay next to you think twice. corvettes were fun too.

KS

[The Real McCoy]

I have reasonable success with a TKO 600 and a 3.00 gear in my 63.5 Galaxie. Engine is a 428 stroker with 2 x 4’s (Quick Fuel carbs) and full length 427 iron headers. Over this summer it has averaged 16.0 MPG with a best of 19.7, this is based on about 2600 miles. 17-18 would be the norm at 65-70.  It runs at 1800 at 60 and 2000 at 80 in overdrive. It doesn’t like overdrive below 60 for sure. Also had one 40 mile stint of all city stop and go driving, got 9.7 so not that great in town. I think it capable of getting in the 5-6 range if you drive it right too. 

[410bruce]

Wow, guys, those are some impressive numbers--and stories.

[TJ]

I also think 15-16 mpg is within reach on the freeway with a 410, albeit barely in a pickup. It will be much harder to achieve if you have a heavy foot or sit much in traffic.   Probably need a stick in place of the C6 to get there.  Not sure if it was mentioned but probably can't take a C6 off a 300 I6 and bolt it to an FE. 

I get about 13mpg in an F250 with a "tame" 482, NP435 tranny, and gear vender overdrive.  Runs 2400ish rpms at 70mph.  I tow some otherwise I'd consider changing my 4.10 rear to a lower ratio.

If you don't have a cam yet, consider a roller.  Call me crazy but I believe my mpg went up about 0.5 mpg switching from Valvoline VR1 to motorcraft synthetic blend.  Having a roller cam let me make the switch.  I've done several thousand miles with each oil and that's all I can figure on the improvement in mpg.  Nothing against VR1 oil, btw; seems like good stuff and it's needed for a flat tappet.

[jayb]

Your original question was asking for a "torque-laden" engine.  That is not going to be a 302.  With over 100 more cubic inches, the 410 is going to slaughter the 302 in low end torque.  You might consider going with a mileage-specific intake, like an Edelbrock SP2P or an Offy Dual Port, with a small four barrel carb, a mileage cam, and headers.  You would get excellent throttle response and low end torque with a combination like that, and should be able to hit your mileage goals.  That combination would probably not provide a lot of power over 3500 RPM, but I think it would meet your objectives.

Edit:  Corrected manufacturer of the Dual Port intake.  Can't believe I did that LOL!

[GerryP]

...or a Weiand Dual Port, with a small four barrel carb, a mileage cam, and headers.  You would get excellent throttle response and low end torque with a combination like that, and should be able to hit your mileage goals.  That combination would probably not provide a lot of power over 3500 RPM, but I think it would meet your objectives.

Not to pick nits, but the dual port was an Offy.  I installed them from time to time in the early '70s even on some FEs and used one myself.  Your advice is really relevant to what was going on in the US in the early and mid '70s as drivers were trying to get every bit of efficiency out of what they had in their driveway.  Back then, it wasn't really a question of what gas cost.  It was a matter of whether you could even buy any gas.  Yes, the gas lines were real and in every part of the country.

Here, we are just discussing a different form of bench racing.  After all, if you have a fuel economy concern, you wouldn't wisely start with an old pickup with an FE or a '68 Mercury Monterrey.  That might have been what you had in your driveway the early '70s but they aren't typical daily drivers today.

But, as Jay points out, you want to use the hardware that was created to address fuel economy.  Even cylinder head improvements could be considered.  Most of your gains will be with an overdrive transmission.  This is where the biggest gains came from.

By going with a larger displacement engine, you are battling pumping losses and those can't really be tuned away.  So, have fun with creeping up the mileage chart but don't become one of those hyper-miler buttheads that just block traffic trying to satisfy a neurosis.

[410bruce]

Again, thanks guys.

GerryP--lol. No worries on the butthead blocking--no neurosis here.


I think what I'm going to do is, throw the 302 in there for now, since I have most of the stuff to put one together, and it will only take a set of small block motor mount perches to bolt it in. Then I can get it running with the EFI to carb swap. Then, I can take my time building the 410 how I want it and gather everything I'll need for the swap at my leisure. Hopefully swap in a 5-speed manual at the same time. Maybe even go with a Fitech EFI set-up or something similar as well.

[My427stang]

I'd say do not veer too far from Ford stock.

The way I'd do it is a zero deck 410 (or 416), C8AE-H heads with a good bowl port and cleanup, keeping port size small.    The key will be the right cam and as much compression as that cam can support.  Keep intake opening early, keep overlap to a minimum, and then add a nice dual plane, likely a Performer 390, but the stock T intake would work well.  Dial in a 600 cfm Holley, and curve the distributor, and headers and a nice dual exhaust with an H pipe I think you'd be amazed

Keeping the port fast, compression as high as it can, and minimizing overlap should clean it up nicely.

FWIW - I also see high "teens" with my 489 FE, TKO-600, 4.10s, but mine is EFI and I have a lot of timing control, certainly not mild but doesn't need much torque to pull it around either.  The problem is, it's tough to behave and once you drop the hammer, they all drink

[drdano]

In my post above I should have mentioned when I was hitting close to 20mpg with the old 390 I was running a SMI 750 Quadrajet and did spend time dialing in the APT so it would have a nice cruise mix at highway speed without need for the secondaries to be open at all.  Current 428 has a Dean Oliver race prepped 800 Quadrajet and I've done the same APT adjustments to get the cruise mix where the motor wants it barreling down the highway. 

[410bruce]

Okay, back to this deal.
I've pretty much decided to bypass the 5.0 and just do the 410 as I originally wanted. Picking up a World Class T5 tomorrow. Dug out an FE manual bell housing I knew I had but forgotten what I had done with it.

What would be a good budget piston to use in this engine? Cast is fine with me as it won't be a high RPM screamer.

And, I'm not going to be as concerned with fuel efficiency. Just want a good running, low RPM torque monster that's fun to drive on the street.

[My427stang]

Speedpro makes a 381NP cast piston, not a bad stocker style piston but for anything trying to be efficient,  the compression height is pretty low at 1.66 and they run super thick stock style rings.  If you cut the deck and heads with the right surface and used either a shim gasket or a Cometic it'd tighten up the quench, same if you cut the deck to 10.150 and ran a 1020 gasket.  I think the dishes are about 12cc but maybe someone esle knows exactly.  They are cheap though, which is a benefit for a budget build, 150 a set if you look around.

After that, it goes way up.  I like Racetec's Autotec line, flexibility in design and many better features, but the price goes up.  Not Diamond-level up, but still up from the Speedpros

[Barry_R]

sorry - I gave wrong data for a 410

[410bruce]

Thanks Ross.
Do you happen to know the factory compression height for the 410? I would assume it's the same for a 428 but I don't know what it is either.

I understand Ford used 410 pistons in '70s pick-ups to dump the compression so conversely, could one use 390 pistons to bump the compression up in the 410?

[My427stang]

I think 1.66

The issue is, even back then, Ford didn't worry much about quench.  (3.98/2) + 6.49 rod + 1.66 = 10.140, the deck height was 10.170, that puts them .030 in the hole before a gasket, and even if they were 1.67, they'd be .020 in the hole.

Personally, if you were in the .055 quench range, I likely wouldn't even think twice about it if the compression came in where you wanted it, just be careful on cam choice, mixture and timing, but to do that with a Felpro 1020 gasket at .041, you'd need to cut the deck to 10.151, and if you went with a Blue Felpro 8554, you'd have to cut to 10.142 or so, which is a pretty good cut.

The 1020 option isn't horrible, lots of FE decks at 10.150, but I tend to try to stay at 10.160 or 10.155 when I can, just because I hate to cut more than I need to

[410bruce]

I'd just as soon not have to cut on the block if I don't have to.

Guess I'll have to start saving my pennies for some good pistons.

[My427stang]

I'd just as soon not have to cut on the block if I don't have to.

Guess I'll have to start saving my pennies for some good pistons.

Don't rule out any cut, FEs are generally crooked and not always flat either.  If you are going as far as calculating quench and picking good parts, square deck it to a number to compare to, otherwise, it'll be all over the map

In the event you do go with good pistons, the best for the money IMHO are likely the Racetec Autotec line, you can pick what you want within reason, their shelf piston is a 1.67 which is a good starting point, and it comes with a much better metric ring set.  Brent can help you get a set, but if you go that route, blueprint the whole thing, chamber size, decks, cam choice, it'll be a beautiful engine if done completely

I know you are driving toward a 410, but another option is a L2291 forged piston with a 390 build.  Pretty cheap for forged, good pin height,and all they need is a light cut for a tight quench.  I have done a couple of them with a Edelbrock Performer Plus cam, combined with a vac secondary and a decent intake/headers they are sweethearts to drive, good on fuel, etc.  As crazy as it sounds, for the power per dollar, could be a very nice option.

[410bruce]

Are you speaking of Brent Lykins? I'm going to have him do a cam for me so might as well get pistons from him as well.

I'm already invested in the 410 so going to stay with it.

Thanks again for the information.

[My427stang]

Are you speaking of Brent Lykins? I'm going to have him do a cam for me so might as well get pistons from him as well.

I'm already invested in the 410 so going to stay with it.

Thanks again for the information.

Yes, he will steer you right

[410bruce]

Well, for better or worse, I just bought these.  https://www.ebay.com/itm/312766377214

[My427stang]

Well, for better or worse, I just bought these.  https://www.ebay.com/itm/312766377214

I think those are 1.674 compression height and I'd guess a 10 cc dish, maybe Barry knows.  I think that's a good piston at 1/2 the price of a custom

10cc with a 72cc chamber and a cut to 10.160 would be 10.11:1 and .047 quench with a 1020 Felpro
10cc with a 72cc chamber and a cut to 10.160 would be 9.85:1 and .059 quench with an 8554 Felpro

Either would work well with the Edelbrock 2106 I mentioned, with the 1020 Felpro or a little more cut on the block being better.  However, if you are going custom, just get your numbers to Brent, he'll fix you up and it'll likely be much better than the Edelbrock (although as old school as it is, I have always liked that cam in a mild FE)

[410bruce]

Well, for better or worse, I just bought these.  https://www.ebay.com/itm/312766377214

I think those are 1.674 compression height and I'd guess a 10 cc dish, maybe Barry knows.  I think that's a good piston at 1/2 the price of a custom

10cc with a 72cc chamber and a cut to 10.160 would be 10.11:1 and .047 quench with a 1020 Felpro
10cc with a 72cc chamber and a cut to 10.160 would be 9.85:1 and .059 quench with an 8554 Felpro

Either would work well with the Edelbrock 2106 I mentioned, with the 1020 Felpro or a little more cut on the block being better.  However, if you are going custom, just get your numbers to Brent, he'll fix you up and it'll likely be much better than the Edelbrock (although as old school as it is, I have always liked that cam in a mild FE)

Excellent! I'm happy you think it's a good piston. I often shoot myself in the foot being somewhat impatient and thinking I got a deal on something--when in reality I didn't. Glad this isn't one of those times. 

[410bruce]

Hey guys, I need your input here. I have a chance to pick up a complete 1995 351w -5.8 - roller cam engine from the same place I purchased the T5. When I say complete, I mean the complete engine plus all the front dress--brackets etc.
This would make a V-8 swap/5-speed swap much easier. I could save the 410 for something more appropriate and deserving of it later down the road.
It would be cheaper for me in the long run as there would be no fab work, which I would have to farm out, and would be pretty much a bolt-in swap.

I'm kinda leaning toward this....

What do you think?

[chris401]

Hey guys, I need your input here. I have a chance to pick up a complete 1995 351w (5. roller cam engine from the same place I purchased the T5. When I say complete, I mean the complete engine plus all the front dress--brackets etc.
This would make a V-8 swap/5-speed swap much easier. I could save the 410 for something more appropriate and deserving of it later down the road.
It would be cheaper for me in the long run as there would be no fab work, which I would have to farm out, and would be pretty much a bolt-in swap.

I'm kinda leaning toward this....

What do you think?

Mine stock with 2° advanced timing was typically a 15-16 mpg engine. (November 95)1996 F-250 351 5 speed 3.55:1 gears. It was no power house compared to my 7.3 but it was dead dependable. 116,XXX miles when I bought it in September 2000. 318,XXX in April 2012 when I sold it. Opened the engine once at 186,XXX miles to replace a broken exhaust valve spring. Still had 163 to 175 psi static compression when I sold it. Happened into the old truck at a wrecking yard 5 months after selling it.

[410bruce]

Hey guys, I need your input here. I have a chance to pick up a complete 1995 351w (5. roller cam engine from the same place I purchased the T5. When I say complete, I mean the complete engine plus all the front dress--brackets etc.
This would make a V-8 swap/5-speed swap much easier. I could save the 410 for something more appropriate and deserving of it later down the road.
It would be cheaper for me in the long run as there would be no fab work, which I would have to farm out, and would be pretty much a bolt-in swap.

I'm kinda leaning toward this....

What do you think?

Mine stock with 2° advanced timing was typically a 15-16 mpg engine. (November 95)1996 F-250 351 5 speed 3.55:1 gears. It was no power house compared to my 7.3 but it was dead dependable. 116,XXX miles when I bought it in September 2000. 318,XXX in April 2012 when I sold it. Opened the engine once at 186,XXX miles to replace a broken exhaust valve spring. Still had 163 to 175 psi static compression when I sold it. Happened into the old truck at a wrecking yard 5 months after selling it.

Thanks Chris.

[chris401]

Thanks Chris.
[/quote]Noticable difference in low end torque between the 390 and 410. I ran one for a couple of months in stock form.