Mopar 6 vs Ford V8

[sorensen_dk]

Well, got carried away on youtube and watched some Ford flathead V8s for a couple of hours.

Now, what struck me was how.....clumsy they look compared to the Mopar flathead 6. The generator on top of the engine, two waterpumps, the whole manifold deal. The 6 looks really sleek and compact and, viewing some specs, even seem to have better torque.

I haven't driven an old Ford V8, but someone on the forum must have checked them out and it would be interesting to know if they were actually superior to the 6s.

Tom

[james curl]

I believe if you check the specs for both the flathead Ford V8 and its flathead I/6 sister you will be surprised at what you find. V8 Ford, 1949 239.4 cu in 100 hp@ 3600, 180 lbs ft torque @ 2000. 1949 I/6 Ford, 226.0 cu in 95 hp @ 3300 rpm, 180 lb ft torque @ 1200 rpm. Plymouth, 1949 I/6 217.8 cu in 97 hp @ 3600 rpm, 175 lb ft torque @ 1200 rpm.

The flat head Ford only had three main bearings and when modified to produce much higher horse power the center web was its Achilles's heal.

Edited August 24, 2012 by james curl
addition

[Plymouthy Adams]

I believe the Ford early flathead has a few factors in its favor..cool looking and thus the eye candy of the time and..it was a smooth runner and only later had a good following of hop up parts....in stock from it was not a big performer..

[blucarsdn]

I hate to bust all of Mopar 6 cylinder lovers bubble, but do so I will.

Through out the life of the 6 cyln engines, regardless of what make, the only exception being the GMC 270's/303's, the 6's could not hold a candle to a Ford V8 for speed and longevity..

True the six has more bottom end torque that the V8, but for sustained high speed driving the six will not stand up to the V8..

I base my opinion on first hand experiences... The first five cars I owned were Chevy's.. A '40-41-38-38 (w/270 GMC) and a '42.. The '40 was only ten years old and the '42 was eight years old. Following the '42 Chevy I switched to a '41 Ford then a '36 Ford in 1952.

I had several friends that had Plyms/Dodges, my Chevy's would run off and hide from them. The D/P's did not want to start in subzero weather, The Chevy's would start right up.

The Chevy's were much more stable on the road, however, with the exception of my Chevy/GMC, the Ford would out run the Chevy's in races longer than a 1/4 mile.

I use to know a man that owned a '39 Plym conv. cpe for almost 60 years... He once told me that in 1940 he tried to catch a Greyhound bus that was headed south to Salt Lake.. The engine in his Plym blew up in 50 miles. The car was taken to a Plymouth dealer for repairs.. Upon receiving the repaired car, the Service Manager told him.... Mr Cutler, "I do not want you to drive this car over 45 MPH again".. Mr Cutler told me that during the time he owned the car he never drove it over 45 MPH again....

I know that my comments about the two types of engines in question is like preaching to the choir, having been there done that has given me some insight into the real world of the two engines....Bill

[james curl]

Well, I am glad to know that they will only run 45 mph on the highway. In ignorance I drove my P15 from Texas to Reno , Then on to Grass Valley Ca, then to Bonneville Ut for speed week then back to Texas, the return trip all on interstate highways at the speed limit except in west Texas where it is 80 mph, I only ran it 75 mph as that is close to 3600 rpm, in all 4800 miles and I am still driving it.

[maineSSS]

If you really want to torture-test an engine, try tractor-pulling- it's maximum rpm against increasing load til you stall out or lose traction. What the audience is hoping to see are spectacular explosions- oil pans blown off, rods thru the block, flames and smoke, and all this WILL happen with a weak engine build.

I've never heard of the V8 Ford flathead used in this type of competition, but the 230 Dodge stood up to 2 years of vintage tractor pulling by Mark Hudson, and after teardown showed no unusual wear. He did cross-drill the crank between #5 & #4 and #2 and #3 main bearings to provide a complete oil passage to allow 6000 rpm operation.

Edited August 24, 2012 by maineSSS

[Tim Keith]

An advantage to the Ford 8 is when its stroked it'll have larger displacement. The stock Mopar 230 six is already about as large as they can be built. The Chrysler 265 with 1/8-inch overbore is 283 inches, but that's about the limit. Its not uncommon for those with bucks to build a Ford that is greater than 300 inches. Doesn't really matter to me as I'm not going to be racing anybody.

[Plymouthy Adams]

one word answer to the flathead 8....CULT

[Don Coatney]

but the 230 Dodge stood up to 2 years of vintage tractor pulling by Mark Hudson, and after teardown showed no unusual wear. He did cross-drill the crank between #5 & #4 and #2 and #3 main bearings to provide a complete oil passage to allow 6000 rpm operation.

That would be this tractor.

[scottyv47]

I hate to bust all of Mopar 6 cylinder lovers bubble, but do so I will.

Through out the life of the 6 cyln engines, regardless of what make, the only exception being the GMC 270's/303's, the 6's could not hold a candle to a Ford V8 for speed and longevity..

True the six has more bottom end torque that the V8, but for sustained high speed driving the six will not stand up to the V8..

I base my opinion on first hand experiences... The first five cars I owned were Chevy's.. A '40-41-38-38 (w/270 GMC) and a '42.. The '40 was only ten years old and the '42 was eight years old. Following the '42 Chevy I switched to a '41 Ford then a '36 Ford in 1952.

I had several friends that had Plyms/Dodges, my Chevy's would run off and hide from them. The D/P's did not want to start in subzero weather, The Chevy's would start right up.

The Chevy's were much more stable on the road, however, with the exception of my Chevy/GMC, the Ford would out run the Chevy's in races longer than a 1/4 mile.

I use to know a man that owned a '39 Plym conv. cpe for almost 60 years... He once told me that in 1940 he tried to catch a Greyhound bus that was headed south to Salt Lake.. The engine in his Plym blew up in 50 miles. The car was taken to a Plymouth dealer for repairs.. Upon receiving the repaired car, the Service Manager told him.... Mr Cutler, "I do not want you to drive this car over 45 MPH again".. Mr Cutler told me that during the time he owned the car he never drove it over 45 MPH again....

I know that my comments about the two types of engines in question is like preaching to the choir, having been there done that has given me some insight into the real world of the two engines....Bill

kind of funny to me to, my flathead is bone stock, has a beat carb that leaks all over, and i drive my car at 65-70 mph up hill every day of the week, don't know where you got the info, but its definatly wrong

[scottyv47]

one word answer to the flathead 8....CULT

tim, you spelled cult wrong, the word you meant to spell was "JUNK"

[Plymouthy Adams]

no..I say cult for that is basically the full value of the engine..as these engines were so available at every trun when the popular traditional rods were first being built, surpassed by the very powerful and dependable OHV enignes..the kids were able to grab these engines out of clapped out cars for a few trade in soda bottles and hubcap or two maybe..they remain popular through today as a cult folowing..it would be a waste of time money and effort to think that yu are getting bang for the buck with these engines outside of nostalgia value only..kinda like another taboo cult of today..the flathead ford is as much a performance endurance machine as the typical harley...given the typical rider buys a new bike for +side of 20K..spends yet another 5000.00 +/- on engine mods, chrome and leather.. just to be blown off the road by the typical 3500.00 j-bike at 1/3 the CC's in a curve at 6 times the speed a typical harley can do the same corner.. and if the average biker would even try to drive and handle a harley in said manner 70% fewer bikers within the week and the few survivors you could easily hoist a beer to at the tavern identified by the piston and rod still sticking out of their butt..reminder of the engine that handgrenaded beneath them

now for the harley owners here...not that I am apologizing in any manner to my opinion but I feel even you know that when compared to a j-bike it is altogether apples and opranges and the majority know not to drive these bikes in like manner nor expect them to perform to the j-bike standard they are not the same species.. so why asuume the flattie V8 is also above this cult following..beyond me..a famous car buyilder once said that if you give 250,000.00, the asking price of this exotic car..I willl blow him away with a 4 door sedan..well..something along them lines...lol

[Captain Neon]

Well, I am glad to know that they will only run 45 mph on the highway. In ignorance I drove my P15 from Texas to Reno , Then on to Grass Valley Ca, then to Bonneville Ut for speed week then back to Texas, the return trip all on interstate highways at the speed limit except in west Texas where it is 80 mph, I only ran it 75 mph as that is close to 3600 rpm, in all 4800 miles and I am still driving it.

James, would care to share which rear end and tranny you have in your P15? A little info on your P15's engine rebuild and set-up?

I run my bonestock P15 more door about 50 mph. I would never even consider running 75 mph with a stock tranny, stock rear end, stock manifolds, and single B&B carb.

[Plymouthy Adams]

I run my 54 230 stock Plymouth at 75 and its is not screaming rpm...it is screaming give me more...75 is a smooth lope for this beast..heck it don't shift into high till 53 when just holding the pedal down.,.our modern highways are free of the average 8-15 inch deep rut and our interstates have leveled the hills..the day of the 3.9 and 4.1 is just not needed ...we have 300 lb cars out tjhere runing 105 cubes and about 90 ponies that run circles around the old car..gearing is the best approach to bringing trhese cars into the right cnetury of operation..

[scottyv47]

I run my 54 230 stock Plymouth at 75 and its is not screaming rpm...it is screaming give me more...75 is a smooth lope for this beast..heck it don't shift into high till 53 when just holding the pedal down.,.our modern highways are free of the average 8-15 inch deep rut and our interstates have leveled the hills..the day of the 3.9 and 4.1 is just not needed ...we have 300 lb cars out tjhere runing 105 cubes and about 90 ponies that run circles around the old car..gearing is the best approach to bringing trhese cars into the right cnetury of operation..

same here, i run 65-70 in my 51 on the highway not screaming with a good amount of pedal to go, and i know the speed is correct because my speedo cable is broken, so i use my gps as a speedo, and its dead on

[james curl]

I run a 90 Dakota 3.55 rear end with the stock 3 speed transmission with P 205 75 R 15 tires and am tacking 3180 RPM at 70 mph by my GPS and by my speedometer. I have been told no to exceed 80 percent of rated horse power RPM for sustained time which would be 2880 RPM by Tom Langdon. Now my engine is anything but stock and should produce a shade more horsepower than the stock engine. I have between $3000.00 and $3500.00 in parts and machine work in the engine. I replaced the water pump, fuel pump, oil pump with new parts, had the cam reground for more torque but not more RPM, .040 on the bore, head milled .100 which takes some machine work in the valve area, stainless steel valves of 1.50 and 1.60 dia for the exhaust and intake, rebuilt harmonic balancer, mains line bored, con rods re- manufactured, all mating surfaces planed for straightness, flywheel surfaced, new clutch and pressure plate with pilot bearing. The crank was polished and the oil holes have a sweep added for lack of a better description at each oil hole, this is a relief area out from each oil hole about 5/8" to increase the oil flow. I had asked the machinist to cross drill the crank and he said that I would not need that for a street car. The man is a Flathead Ford V8 specialist since the 50's and has a complete machine shop in his back yard and has been building flat motors for close to 60 years. I also have dual Carter YF carburetors and a split manifold with dual exhaust.

Edited August 24, 2012 by james curl
addition

[TodFitch]

James, would care to share which rear end and tranny you have in your P15? A little info on your P15's engine rebuild and set-up?

I run my bonestock P15 more door about 50 mph. I would never even consider running 75 mph with a stock tranny, stock rear end, stock manifolds, and single B&B carb.

According to my GPS, I've touched 70 MPH in my "bonestock" '33 with its original 190 cu.in. engine (rebuilt 20K miles ago) and stock 4.375 rear end. Pretty scary with the skinny tires, lever arm shocks, etc. even though I was on a smooth freeway posted at 70.

same here, i run 65-70 in my 51 on the highway not screaming with a good amount of pedal to go, and i know the speed is correct because my speedo cable is broken, so i use my gps as a speedo, and its dead on

With my stock size tires and 4.375 rear I cruise at around 60, sometimes as high as 65. Given a 4.11, or better, a 3.9 something rear end 65 to 70 would be very easy for that 79 year old engine. However the suspension, steering, brakes, etc. would need some work to feel comfortable. Seems like the '40s and '50s cars running descendants of my engine should have no problems.

With respect to the Ford V8 and the Chevrolet 6, I think it depends on the year. If I have my information correct, in '33 Plymouth had the smallest displacement engine of the three but fell midway between the Chevy (65 BHP) and the Ford (75 BHP) on the power scale. At that time the Chevy had 3 main bearings with the rods lubricated by splash and used cast iron pistons. Ford and Plymouth had full pressure lubrication. Not sure about the Ford, but Plymouth had cam ground aluminum pistons.

My take is that if you had one '33 car of each manufacture, stock with no modifications in good condition, and set out across the country at 55 or 60 MPH that Chevy would die on the first long grade with the front rod bearings having issues. The Ford would die when it hit the desert with its odd early water pump design and fuel pump in the hottest part of the engine compartment. The Plymouth would have a reasonable chance of getting to the other coast. Other year versions might get different results (Ford changed their cooling system fairly early on, Chevy eventually changed to full pressure lubrication, etc.). But I am unlikely to test this opinion as it would take three car owners like Bamford's Garage to do it. And that would be only one test so the statistics wouldn't be valid.

[greg g]

How come a test of cars for police work in the late fortys had the Plyouth beating both the ford and chevy except right at the end of the 1/4 mile when the Ford caught and beat by about 3 tenths of second??? Stopped shorter and went faster through the handling course. I have seen this reprint from Machanix Illustrated about 4 or 5 times. and the plymouth is faster 0 to 30, 0 to 50, 0 to 60 than both the ford or chevy.

[Plymouthy Adams]

Greg...most folks are with you 100%..you got to remember the difference between stock off the showroom and anything added to enhance reliability and performance after the fact...your test data is fully skewed after the first stock item is played with..I don't racall any stories of the Hudson trembling before a stock flat head 8 of the same era..

[james curl]

In 56 I had a 40 ford coupe with a 51 flathead Ford engine with dual exhaust and a 39 ford floor shift transmission. I had 820 15 tires in the back. I got involved in a drag race with a 41 Chevy pick up, we ran even to about 70 mph then I begin to pull away at a very slow pace. The moral of the story a stock Ford flathead was not all that fast. We ran a fully modified 48 Ford flathead engine in a 32 5 window coupe that was chopped and channeled, we ran c gas coupe and sedan class on gas with four 97s on it. An A stock 56 Chevy could blow our doors off. We went to a tube chassis with a 35 Austin Bantam coupe with the same engine, the driver sat behind the banjo rearend. the engine and transmission fastened to the rearend with a coupling. Ran AA modified coupe and sedan, got beat the last time by an almost identical car with a jimmy I/6 running fuel. We sold the car and went Go Kart racing until 73 then we gave it all up, I got into old Plymouths and he got into Chargers and Challengers.

[scottyv47]

According to my GPS, I've touched 70 MPH in my "bonestock" '33 with its original 190 cu.in. engine (rebuilt 20K miles ago) and stock 4.375 rear end. Pretty scary with the skinny tires, lever arm shocks, etc. even though I was on a smooth freeway posted at 70.

With my stock size tires and 4.375 rear I cruise at around 60, sometimes as high as 65. Given a 4.11, or better, a 3.9 something rear end 65 to 70 would be very easy for that 79 year old engine. However the suspension, steering, brakes, etc. would need some work to feel comfortable. Seems like the '40s and '50s cars running descendants of my engine should have no problems.

With respect to the Ford V8 and the Chevrolet 6, I think it depends on the year. If I have my information correct, in '33 Plymouth had the smallest displacement engine of the three but fell midway between the Chevy (65 BHP) and the Ford (75 BHP) on the power scale. At that time the Chevy had 3 main bearings with the rods lubricated by splash and used cast iron pistons. Ford and Plymouth had full pressure lubrication. Not sure about the Ford, but Plymouth had cam ground aluminum pistons.

My take is that if you had one '33 car of each manufacture, stock with no modifications in good condition, and set out across the country at 55 or 60 MPH that Chevy would die on the first long grade with the front rod bearings having issues. The Ford would die when it hit the desert with its odd early water pump design and fuel pump in the hottest part of the engine compartment. The Plymouth would have a reasonable chance of getting to the other coast. Other year versions might get different results (Ford changed their cooling system fairly early on, Chevy eventually changed to full pressure lubrication, etc.). But I am unlikely to test this opinion as it would take three car owners like Bamford's Garage to do it. And that would be only one test so the statistics wouldn't be valid.

i forgot, i have one modification to my car, i took off the oil bath and run open carb, so i get a little more air than stock

[Don Coatney]

i forgot, i have one modification to my car, i took off the oil bath and run open carb, so i get a little more air than stock

That is a really bad idea.

[Tim Keith]

Tom McCahill road tested a new '49 Suburban, driving it at 80 MPH cross country. At that speed the oil consumption was 1 quart per 300 miles.

http://www.autos.ca/motoring-memories/motoring-memories-1949-plymouth-suburban/

[Niel Hoback]

Compare the procedure for a valve adjustment on a Mopar and flathead ford. Then you will know why Chrysler is known for engineering.

[scottyv47]

That is a really bad idea.

honestly don, i've been doing it for 30 years now, and people tell me all the time that road dirt, and other stuff will get in my motor and ruin it, and i can honestly say i've never blown a motor in my life, i've blown head gaskets, and trans's, and other stuff, but they were mostly age related, maybe i've just been lucky, but its worked for me so far, but then again i've alway owned mopars, which have hands down the toughest motors ever made, anyone of you can argue till your blue in the face but it doesn't change the facts mopar has always had the toughest longest lasting motors ever made, and at the top of the list in this order are the slant 6, the 4.0 jeep motor, and the 318, the 4.0 and the 318 will outlast any honda, toyota, or any other american motor, and you can't kill a slant 6 no matter what you do to it, i've driven a couple of them with no oil for over a week and they just keep going