Can anyone give me the weight of a Ford F-150,a Big Bronco, and a Early Bronco. I have a 90 F-150 with a 302 in it. I love a small block ford and I have thought about buying a early bronco so I can wheel a small block. My buddy said why not just wheel the truck since you already got it. I told him that it was too big and heavy for a small block and needed a big block. Is this a true statement???
Bill

all depends on what wheeling your doing.

Lets put it this way I am a former Samurai owner I am a firm believer that light weight rigs are more capable but I love the sound of a small black ford. My friend has a BUILT EB and I was a capable as he was in my built Suzuki. I have always envied the sound that it made. And finesse that he used in climbing the same obsticals that I would climb foot to the floor. EB's are expensive and if I can make this ford as capable as his EB I will stick with it because the type of skin it has is not important to me.

I am currently building a 351ed EB with 38s. Everytime I go out with buddies that all run 460s etc, all I ever hear is damnit, ya woulda easily walked over this with your rig being lighter in weight and just equally as powered cube for cube to our rigs.

I am a firm believer in keeping it light if you can within reason.

An EB is about 4500# from the factory with all the stuff on it. A BB is about 1200# more, depending on what engine/tranny combo is in it and the F150 totally depends on the year/equipment. Heavier in 78/9 vintage, going lighter till the mid '90s, then getting heavier as safety equipment got more restrictive. Engine makes a big difference as well, the 300 is the heaviest engine in the half tons.

The ability of a vehicle to wheel is so much more than it's weight. Weight is a big part, but how the weight is suspended is huge. If we're talking totally stock suspension, why do you think so many Jeep Rubicons are sold?

Once you get past weight/suspension combos, then you have to look at the tires. Exceeding the traction threshold means it won't climb, but it also has to have enough weight to keep the tires in contact with the ground.

Sprung vs. unsprung weight also makes a big difference.
Joe

You are right!! I am just wondering if the F-150 is too heavy for a small block to effectively pull it like it does in my buddy's EB. I noticed on the full size bronco forum that a guy was being praised his bronco body for a truck cab. If that is a popular swap why?? Is the pick-up lighter or the bronco frame stronger?

You are right!! I am just wondering if the F-150 is too heavy for a small block to effectively pull it like it does in my buddy's EB. I noticed on the full size bronco forum that a guy was being praised his bronco body for a truck cab. If that is a popular swap why?? Is the pick-up lighter or the bronco frame stronger?
NO..its just they probaly decided to go truggy. I wheel my one fitty and it does well for what it is...i think i weigh in at about 4800lbs. Not that big of a difference from an EB.

My 302 FSB wheeled great, it's even better as a truggy. It ain't no full throttle mud machine/hill climber, though. The key to mine is gearing, about 122:1 right now.

You are right!! I am just wondering if the F-150 is too heavy for a small block to effectively pull it like it does in my buddy's EB. I noticed on the full size bronco forum that a guy was being praised his bronco body for a truck cab. If that is a popular swap why?? Is the pick-up lighter or the bronco frame stronger?

I'm probably the one you saw on the big Bronco site. I did the swap because heavy duty wheeling tears the FSB body apart after a while. The pickup cab has much better mounting points so flex doesn't tear it up. You can swap a cab on easily in a couple weekends, one if you're really ambitious. Other than the body, and F-150 and an FSB are essentially the same vehicle (but they do have different frames.) It's not a real popular swap, but more people seem to be thinking about it. Comparing apples to apples, I think you'll lose about 700 pounds losing the FSB body and putting on a cab.

my 78 f150 was 5,600 pounds stock, now its prolly in the high 4,900 cuz of mods i have done

I actually got my '71 EB down to about 3300#. No tailgate, no doors, no top, lexan for the windshield, etc... It wheels pretty well like that. The only issue I have is with the lack of weight on the front axle (101" WB, front moved 6" forward and ahead of the motor mounts) so it won't climb as well as I'd like when the front end has to dig.
Joe

Do you think that the small block would turn a set of 60's with 38's or would that put too much weight on. Do you think a 9" and 44 would hold up to a set of 38" tires and small block torque? They weigh less than 60's. I am trying to develop a strategy for building this thing. I wanna stay small block that is the only thing that is definate.

Build an all aluminum 460....best of both worlds:evil:

My kid's 78 Bronco is 5400# on 38's with basically stock running gear and body. Mine is 6350# on 38.5's with a 460, 1tons, a cage, and a winch. I just don't see the weight savings of a 302 doing much for either rig. Slam it into a ranger or something if you want a light rig.

Does anyone else find it ironic that this is a suzuki driver asking these questions?

You of all people should know that power has little to do with wheeling ability. Though--short of breaking parts--it's always nice.

My 81f150 weighs just over 6000 pounds with a 460 and a solid axel front and i love the weight i dont have any interest in going lighter it keeps my tires planted and i still have rock sliders and cage to go yet all though i do have a big block u have a small block and i have to tell ya that SORRY there is no replacement for displacement the 460 is the best modd i have ever done i have way more tourke in 4 hi than my 302 ever had in 4 low and i love it ..Also i di think all this weight would suck with a small block so at leist go with a 351 windsor But in the end the lower the gear the leighter u will seem

No replacement for displacement...maybe. But factory 460's never really had awesome horsepower or torque. A stroked raised compresson 351w would be a good comprimise though. And if you're climbing hills or rocks, weight almost always hurts you.

Absolutely, wieght hurts you once you exceed the traction threshold of the tires. Around here I see a bunch of fully locked, big block, yada yada machines fail to climb stuff simply because the tires won't stick enough to get that extra weight over a ledge or whatever, especially on slickrock in Moab. Like everything else, it's a compromise of best performance vs. cost vs. the wife opening the $$ source, etc...

Remember, a 351W is a smallblock and makes a lot of power where you want it for most wheeling situations.

"No replacement for displacement" was coined on the street, on the rocks that should be more like "power to weight ratio is king", in the mud and a lot of wet wheeling it's more like "overbuild and it might be enough".

Maybe you should give us an idea of the wheeling you do and what other duties the rig will be required to perform.
Joe

Does anyone else find it ironic that this is a suzuki driver asking these questions?

You of all people should know that power has little to do with wheeling ability. Though--short of breaking parts--it's always nice.
Exactly and I also know that a stock Suzuki 1.3L is not suitable for turning a set of Rockwells and a set of 49" Iroks but I know a guy. I have to agree with rjlougee. There is a fine line between weight,torque,and the traction threshold of your tires. The weight and size of a suzuki make it very capable compared to the amount of power it makes. I am ready to step up to a small V8 that is why I am asking the question. Can a F150 be capable under small block power or is it too heavy. Speaking of terrain I pretty well do it all.
Mud? Rocks? Hill Climbs? How about muddy rocks up a steep hill. I drove the truck on its side through a 4 ft ravine this weekend. It did real well I was happy unfortunately tha cab took a pretty good beating. I might as well wheel it now :shaking:

My buddies 83' bronco on 33's with a 302, and some tools weighted in at 4900 with driver.
My 89' F-150 with a straight axle, 351, and 35's weighted in at 5700 with a few hundred pounds of crap in the bed.. With the torquey 351 it wheeled pretty good, and spun the tires ok.
Now with a high winding 302 it doesn't wheel quite as good offroad(the doubler helps that though) However it seems to have plenty of power to the clean the tires in the mud.

For a EB, or any 1/2 ton rig, I'd certianly think you would be fine with a mild 351.

For a EB, or any 1/2 ton rig, I'd certianly think you would be fine with a mild 351.[/QUOTE]
As far as a 351 swap I know the intakes will not swap what about the rest of it. (Computer, injection,exhaust. I was always under the impression there was not a whole lot of diffrence between those blocks.

The few things that don't swap are (lower) intakes, distributors and some cam issues. Exhaust is iffy, mostly because the block is a little wider, so an existing custom exhaust may have fitment issues. EEC, wiring, etc... will work fine. There are some little things that have to be worked out, but are easy to make happen.

I posted info in another tread here recently, but I really like a 351W from a '94-97 with the F4TE block (roller cam). Add the FRPP (although it's getting harder to find a new FRPP wiring harness) wiring harness, A9x series EEC, some good injectors and the right intake parts and it makes some pretty good power. My 4500# EB with a 351W and ZF 5 speed, was about a 7 second 0-60 truck with 4.10 gears and 35" tires at 7,000' altitude.

Truck intakes are pretty tall, so GT-40 or similar intakes are required. Again, getting hard to find so the Edelbrock and TFS offerings are more attractive.

I love listening to some of my buddies raving over the LS-1. Sure, it's a nice engine, but they keep comparing it to TBI Chevy engines and flat tappet cams. The 351W has been SEFI and roller cam since '94 if done right (as in when done in a buggy).
Joe

I had a 302 for a while and they had no power also u lose power with a factory fulie over a carb so i would at liest go 351 w i love the 460 i never have to worrie about not enough power but i do everything overkill..

My EB has a loaded trail weight of 5200# and does great with a 302. Power is all relative. If you love the sound, have little foot control and like to break things bigger is better. I have friends that run fullsize rigs with 302's and 300 I-6's. They perform very well. I met a guy at the Hammers one day and he was running a little 3 cyl(his truck was a skeleton). His philosophy was he would rather have the engine stop then break stuff. I wouldn't follow him in most cases. He could climb walls. I think he had an auto backed up to a manual and then a t-case. Low-low.