My dad had a '67 Falcon with a 170 and a 3-speed manual he used as a work car from about 1981 - 1988. It was thrashed but kept on running no matter what we did to it. The floorboards were rusted through, and the floor mat was the only thing between your feet and the pavement. It was so simple to work on.
That was a waste. That 170 Ford inline 6 Engine would be perfect to be installed in a long wheel based Jeep, or in the International Scout 11 Terra or Traveler.."🎉🎉
I got out of the USMC in '69, bought a '67 Ford Falcon, 200 (I'm pretty sure), 3 on the tree, it had 28K miles on it, I drove it for 10 years as a daily driver. No A/C, power anything, but, it got me to and from work. Cost me $1200, I had it paid off in a year. Only ran out of gas with it, once. Over the past 27 years I've had 2 F150's, 2 Rangers, 1 Ridgeline, now I'm driving a 2024 Nissan Frontier SV, (400 miles on it) lots of bells and whistles, that I don't need, it's okay, but, I miss my 2014 F150 that I sold to my son for $3100. Wish I had it back. Bought a 2021 4Runner ( Jan '24) that came off lease, drove it from Jan. to May, just did not like it, it ran okay, and if I had to, I could still be driving it, traded that in for the Frontier, the dealer had it sold in a week.
Back in the 70s my girlfriend, now my wife drove a 1970 Maverick Grabber with a 200 ci engine. That was one sweet engine, never gave her problems and always gave her good gas mileage. It had an automatic transmission & high-back bucket seats. Cool Car. She drove it until we had our first child, then it became time for the family station wagon. 👍🏁😎
OMGs! That was the engine that was used in the 1st generation Ford Bronco! Also perfect to be installed in the Jeep Scrammber and the Scout 11 Terra...and ill keep that simple engine forever!..🎉🎉🎉🎉
My mother had one of those too. It was orange with the black stripes. The car ran great and saved my life. I rolled it on a improperly marked state highway going around a corner during the weekend my cousins got married in a double ceremony. My mother was pretty upset/shocked when the state patrol came to the wedding reception and told her what happened. Thank God the windows had a metal chrome strip around them, they held the doors shut while the chrome drip rails wrapped around them.
My bud had a 61 falcon wagon ! I know gas at the time in the 80's was around a $1 a gal but man we would drive around all night for a few dollars ! Pretty amazing
As a ford guy, I’m a fan of this engine series. My main memories of the 170 and 200 was that although they weren’t the most powerful or high revving engines, they were practically indestructible whether in the Falcon, Maverick, or any of the various Fox platforms. And they got decent fuel economy. You COULD destroy the 250 if you really, really tried. But it wasn’t easy. Even then I think most 250s that failed were ruined by a leaky accelerator pump/power valve in the Carter carburetor which washed the cylinder walls and diluted the oil. I also remember the 250 being pretty thirsty in the Granada/Monarch , especially the 1975 model. My sister had one that didn’t get much better economy than my parent’s 1974 Ltd on the highway although it did much better in city traffic. They improved the economy in the 77-80 years by changing the rear axle ratio . The very minor loss in acceleration was barely noticeable to me. I’m convinced that the majority of these cars ended their lives with Good engines. The body,suspension, or transmission was usually the reason they finally went to the salvage yard.
I enjoyed the episode. I'd choose the '66 Mustang Fastback and the '70 Ranchero. I loved the clip of Archie. I lost my dog in May and I really miss her.
I'm sorry about your dog Archie is either 4 or 5 I love him he can be an asshole but he's our asshole lol I didn't even want a dog but my wife wanted a King Charles I found a lady who was breeding them and we went over to see what she had and my heart melted when I saw him he was the only one that would come to us and he was so tiny.. if I knew he was going to get as big as he did (he only supposed to be 10-15 he is 25-30lbs ) I would have called him Moose lol Great choices
Drove a service van in the late 80's with a 250 man. trans. Put over 250k with zero eng or trans issues. Still had the original clutch. Oil changes every 3k. No timing chain to think about having to change. Mediocre gas mileage but great reliability. Didn't leak or burn oil.
Hi Jay, we got the same engines here in Australia starting in 1960 but in 1976 when we had a change of model the same engine was fitted with an cross-flow Iron head and in late 1979 when we had another change of model, the early batch of cars got fitted with the remaining Iron Heads until stock was depleted and the introduction of the Cross-flow Alloy Head saw that new model into 1980/81 continuing right through until mid 1988 where we then saw the next generation of inline 6 which was fitted to 6 models then the final generation of inline 6 known as the "Barra" was introduce in 2004 and cessing production in 2016 when Ford Australia was no more.
Thank you so much for sharing information on that engine if I can find enough information I will definitely come back and cover it. It seems like the Australian got the better versions I wonder if it exported any
Ford Australia kept on with this engine family until 2015. Vastly modified with aluminium head, OHC, fuel injection it became the legendary Barra 6. One of the finest sixes in the world and able to be modified up to over 600 bhp.
Hi Jay! Here's an engine I can talk about at least a little bit, as I have either driven or owned Fords with some of these fine little sixes! I personally had a 1967 Falcon coupe with a 200, and auto trans (c-4 I think). My Mom had two new Granadas with these engines. The first was a little 1977 2-door with the 200. This was the car I learned to drive a stick shift on. It had a 3-speed with overdrive. These had a floor shift. Later she traded the 1977 due to some problems with the car (not to do with the engine or trans) for a 1979 2-door. It had the 250 with the same transmission setup. Mom claimed that the 250 didn't get as good of gas mileage as the 200 equipped one. I drove that 250 one a LOT. I thought it had ok power for what it was. That car had a LOT of miles on it when we sold it and was on the roads locally for YEARS after that! WYR #1 Who could pass up a 1966 Mustang Fastback?? #2 Going 1961 Ranchero on that one, as the power to weight ratio might be a little better! The truck and 1970 Ranchero are COOL though!
200 and 250 were available in the Australian market Cortina. 221ci displacement was available in the XW falcon, probably my favourite, revved harder than the 250 and more torque than the 200
looks like you are showing an Australian Falcon with the 250 engine. That 250 shown is the 2V version with the removeable intake manifold and 2 barrel carb rated at 170 hp . As far as I know the 2V 250 was only made in Australia . The regular 250 still had the intake manifold cast into the head . The later Australian 250 and 200 engines had a different cross flow head from 1977 . From around 1980 Ford Australia fitted an alloy head designed by Yamaha . This motor lasted until 1988 when the brought out the over head 3.9 and 3.2 litre straight 6 which will eventually be developed into the legendary BARRA straight 6 .
Awesome thank you so much for sharing all that insight and information I thought the 250 had a bolt on intake manifold and wasn't cast I could be wrong tho
@@What.its.like. Nope. He's right. The 250 in the U.S. had the same integral cast intake like all the others of this family. I know this to be true because my uncle R.I.P. had a 1970 Torino with the 250 and three-on-the-tree manual.
As an Australian I can verify that the 250 pictured is the Australian 2V engine with the removable inlet manifold. Later the Aussie falcon 250 got an alloy cross flow head designed in part by Honda.
I owned a 1977 Maverick with the 250 and 3 speed automatic. Never had an engine problem, but the car did not have enough power to climb the hills in the PA Turnpike. It would downshift to second and the engine would be at high rpm climbing hills. It was me and the trucks in the right lane going 55.
Ford Australia did an upgrade on the 200 cid engine, and produced a 221 cid version, in 1968, before introducing the 250 cid engine into locally made Falcon’s in 1971.
My Aunt gave me a rusty 1966 Falcon Sport Coupe 200 when I was 15. Beat what was left out of it. Still sitting in field - floor all dented and tranny burnt out. 1975 Comet Sedan with 250. Good economic car. I took it deer hunting one season. 1973 Mustang, blue on blue with black stripes, 250 3 spd on floor. That car could plow 4 feet of snow - Buddy for giggles decided to put us into the ditch after leaving the dance hall in winter. I dropped to 2nd and floored it until we plowed out. My Brother totalled it after a party. I could go on for hours ...
My Dad LOVED those Ford straight sixes. He had a new 65 Mustang with the 200 & automatic, a couple of Falcons with the 170,couple of F-100 pickups & a Mercury Montigo. It was a 1967 model 2 door bought also brand new & was the family car. It was also frighteningly underpowered-so much so that my Mom demanded that Dad get rid of it after only a year of driving it. It was traded in on a 1968 Cougar with a 351.Needles to say-it had a bit better performance.
In Australia, 1976 roughly, we switched to a locally engineered 250ci crossflow design 6. Believe it got a co developed with Honda alloy head in 81/82 and mpfi in I think 84. Made about 165Hp in its final iteration. Then we went to sohc I6 in 88” with many changes and variants untill the dohc I6 Barra on 02”. Thanks for the video👍🏼
I had a 65 Fairlane with a 200 six, and a 3 speed manual transmission, "3 on the tree." My dad bought it in 66, used, and we drove it as our family car till 69, when my dad got another car and gave me the Fairlane to drive when I started college. I kept it till 78. Drove it 30 mi one each day way when I commuted to college, and about 20 mi one way when I started working. It was a great car. Choices: 67 Comet, 60 Falcon Ranchero
I had a 1969 Ford Falcon Futura I bought in 1979 with 27000 original miles under dash Sears A/C that would freeze you out. Manual steering , brakes with 3 on the tree and that reliable 200 CI 6 ..
Awesome thank you so much for sharing your car with us What's up with that? I swear the older air-conditioning units were way better than the modern ones. I had a 2001 Honda Odyssey van that would frost the windows on the inside. We have a 2011 it won't do that even the 2006 that we have won't do that...
The 250 CID in your video with the bolt-on manifold is an Australian version (note the car it is in, which is right-hand drive) and was rated at 170 hp. Known as the 250 2V, it was equipped with a two-barrel carburettor and headers as standard. It was short lived as most opted for a 302 V8.
As an addition to my comment about Ford Australia's upgrade of the 200 to 221cid, they then took the 250 cid version of engine and further developed it, 1st fitting a cross flow cylinder head, and fuel injection, followed on by a twin overhead camshaft head. The latter engine , which Ford named " Barra," came in normally aspirated and turbo charged form.
back in 1975 or 1976 I saw a 65 Galaxy 500 with a straight six being towed from one of the Long Island tracks that had run eleven something seconds in the quarter mile. Hell Id have been happy with a V8 that could do that.
Another great engine episode Jay, thanks for bringing us this one. I’ve always had warped brain lobe dedicated to wicked I6 builds, dating back to an indestructible 170ci slant-6 in a 1963 Plymouth Valiant I owned in the early 70’s. My Frankenstein Ford Falcon dream has evolved into a stretched wheelbase, wide-bodied, dry-sump, 300ci I6, 5-speed manual, 1963 Sprint hardtop channeled over a modified Panther-platform chassis with a Lincoln MkVII independent rear suspension, power-tourer meets Pikes Peak race car sorta build. I did mention the warped brain lobe, didn’t I?😁🐿️🧠❤️
You could have added that the engine continued on in Australia, gaining a cross flow head in 1976, followed a few years later with an alloy cross flow head, then getting a Weber 2 barrel carby then fuel injection. In 1988 it went to a SOHC head and a 3.2 and 4 litre capacity, and finally a DOHC head 4 litre with or without a turbo- the Barra. There were other changes to the engine other than the head along the way, including the crankshaft. About the only thing the Barra shared with the original US engine are the bore spacings.
'71 Maverik, no question. The seven main bearing 200 was an awesome engine. Also known as the "big bellhousing six" it came with much better transmissions.
The ultra rare Vintage Inline's aluminum head really changes what this engine can be. All kinds of fuel delivery options, WAY better ports and combustion chambers, plus weight reduction & the ability to run higher compression with better heat transfer
66 Stang 60 Ranchero I remember my grandfather buying a falcon once. Before he bought it he had a really beautiful red and cream 59 Ford sedan that I just loved as a kid. He traded that in on a falcon station wagon. I'm not sure what year it was Because when you're a 9-year-old kid You don't pay attention to details like that only that Grandpa bought a new car. But he usually bought new cars every 2 to 3 years so that would mean probably a 61 or a 62. I remember him saying that he thought it was underpowered so that would lead me to believe it probably had the smallest six banger in it . Also, it could have been that he was used to the acceleration of his big Ford sedan with its V8 so to him the falcon seemed underpowered. Maybe a combination of both is closer to the truth. Also, he disliked it because it, as he stated, "puked oil from every orifice and never had a tight engine from the day he bought it". I know he kept that falcon for just shy of 2 years and I honestly cannot remember what he bought after that, but guaranteed it was another Ford product because he drove Ford's all of his life.
I got some of my first bootleg driving time in my granddad’s 62 Ranchero. I know it was a six in front of the Ford-o-matic transmission but don’t know which one. My parents had an 80 Fairmont wagon with the 200. That was a pretty indestructible motor. I suspect Ford likely discontinued the 250 when it’s increased deck height made it harder to fit in the upcoming Fox body platforms. I remember a high school class mate or two who had Mavericks with 250s but thought they were all with the intake cast into the head. From what I remember about parts swapping from the fuel crisis days of the late 70s and early 80s, the 200 was the way to go and maybe use a 170 head for better compression. Either way, some serious cutting and milling would have to be done to run more appropriate carbs. .
WYR: 1967 Comet and 1960 Ranchero (might take it over all the others to be honest). Song: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida by Iron Butterfly? Well done as always, and glad I made a premier again ~ Chuck. P. S. Your dog is adorable!
Awesome choices Dennis got the song it was let's hang on by The Four Seasons great song .. Happy to see you in the premier Archie is a hoot, I figured I just show you guys that something completely random
In 1959, Ford also introduced it's only 2-speed Ford-O-Matic automatic transmission. It was also Ford's 1st aluminum-cased automatic transmission.It was discontinued in the middle of 1964 and replaced by the Cruise-O- Matic, aluminum-cased C4 3-speed automatic.. It's main application was used behind the inline 6cyl. engines which are the subject of this video. It could be found in the Falcon, Fairlane, Comet, Edsel and even the 1964 1/2 first year Mustangs. It was even used behind V8's, usually all 260's and some 292's and even some 352's.
Thank you so much for adding that I have no idea why Ford named that transmission to Fordomatic because they essentially shot themselves in the foot making the chromatic the three speed unit but the original Ford automatic was a three speed unit. It's super confusing.
@@What.its.like. Hi Jay,! Well, you know that Ford had called itself 'the better idea' company and you probably never seen it in any of their current advertisements of the era, dating back to atleast the 1970's, but Ford would include an illustration of a lightbulb. Hey, here's an idea, in the realm of history, maybe you could put a video together about car advertisements of the past?
I had a 62 Econoline with the 144 engine and use to drag race cars on Main street but no one in the other cars knew i was racing. I lost most of the time !!!!
My 66 Mustang coupe had the 200. I decided it needed Clifford dual headers! We put the cheapest ass mufflers shooting out behind the doors. It sounded like no other car on the road.I got that thing to 32/33 mpg consistently.Don't ask about the 3 speed on the floor!
This was the easiest WYR for me I’ll take the 66 mustang with the 200 I-6 and then the 71 ranchero with the 250 I-6 . I had a 66 comet caleinte with the 200 and while not a hot rod it was smooth and dependable with decent mpg with the old 3 on the tree manual which I preferred over the floor mounted stick shift as it allowed my high school sweat heart to sit next to me on the comfy bench seat and I could haul her and 4 others to the concerts and parties. That comet was always the go to car for the comfort, economy and roominess it was a great car
The early 144 and 170 had upper end oiling issues, especially if you delayed oil changes. Many had rocker arm issues. How do I know? I worked on literally 100's of these engines. I had a commercial account (when I owned my service station) -Packard Bell - Teledyne, They used vans, pickups station wagons and sedans. So did Montgomery Ward. (also a commercial account), I saw many of these with external oiling kits added on. But the fix was much easier. Remove the last head bolt on the right side, grind about a 1/4 off under the shoulder, clean out the oil galley, problem solved. Then advise the customer to change the oil more often. Als valve guides and seals were an issue on many of these. With good care these held up well. That said memories are always better than what went on in real life.
Great choices I think we're going to do an engine manufacturer next week might do one on Cummins .. not entirely sure Thank you Archie is pretty cool and I totally agree not really growing up. She's getting more mature faster. She's about the same size as she always was maybe a couple inches taller. It really bothers her because she's the oldest of three little girls and she's the smallest. Just to be clear I don't have three little girls my brother has a girl and my wife's sister has a girl. Lol
My first car, a '64 Galaxie had the 200 6 with an auto transmission. Slooooooooow. But it also ha 200K miles on it when I got it. It leaked everything, smoked more than my Grampa, but wouldn't die. It met it's demise in my first demolition derby. WYR: 1) Maverick 2) '61 pickup.
My first car was a 66 Mustang with a 200 six. Didn't go very fast, but I could go along way on a tank of gas. Looed cool just couldn't race with it. I paid 250 dollars for it in 1975.
That's awesome thank you so much for sharing your car with us. I had a 67 Mustang when I was 21 at a 351 Windsor though. Everyone wanted to race... lol
Had one of these in a Maverick, Which I bought cheap for work car in about 1984. . Noticed the transmission kickdown link had been disconnected. I reconnected it, and when I kicked it down for passing, every con rod in it was just loudly hammering. No oil light on, so I drove it daily for 2 years. Pretty tough. Also these would often crack the exhaust manifold in two .
The early 144 engines seemed to have major piston ring problems. I used to see clouds of blow-by smoke from them when sitting at a stop light. Later ones were much better. That log manifold wasn't designed for performance, but there was a company called Man-A-Fre that sold a kit to install 3 one barrel carbs on those. I think they literally epoxied the two other carb mounts on after drilling the manifold for the extra carbs. The 200 and 250 were major improvements over the early engines. Great video, Jay, but *quit torturing your poor doggie!* Your daughter and doggie are really cute! WYR= either of the Rancheros! BTW, that 66 Mustang shown has the 271hp 289, a rarity, and I'd take that one over all the others!
Thank you so much for sharing that insight and information I'm happy you dig that at the end I figured I'd do something completely random. I like doing some random things from time to time lol Great choices
I never experienced the 144. But I heard it was slow. And I believe it given that it had similar horsepower as the 2.3 acyl “ Pinto” engine in what I assume was a heavier vehicle, ESPECIALLY when equipped with the 2 speed automatic . Actually it likely had LESS hp since the 144 was GROSS vs the Net rating in the “pinto” engine. My brother and uncle described the experience of driving an old, high mileage Falcon in the mountains of upstate New York. Their only word was SLOW. 😅. However, I did have the opportunity to drive several 66 and later Falcons with the 170 and the c4 automatic. And they had decent acceleration given the fact that I started driving (legally) in 1980. And the 1970s era cars I often drove weren’t known for speed either.
As many would probably know by now that Ford Australia’s Ford Falcons that were manufactured here and its derivatives including Fairmonts and Fairlanes in their base models had versions of these six cylinder engines even our base Aussie version of our F-100’s had the 250 ci Falcon six in them, but we had all these engines and they were manufactured in Australia, the 144 ,170, 200 and 250’s but we also had other displacement capacities that the US never had and these were the 188 ci, the 221 ci and also a performance version of the 250 ci that had a detachable inlet manifold with a two barrel stromberg, mild cam and headers etc that put out 170 hp in the day and a four speed manual in an XY Falcon was about as quick as a 302 Windsor with an auto in the same model but in Australia this basic Ford engine had a big evolution right into around 2016 with our final Ford Falcon and derivatives ended a long and prosperous production here from 1960 to this time around 56 years of continuous production, this engine went thru many design changes in that time, from the old pushrod originals to cast iron and alloy head crossflows to single overhead cam variants in carburettor to throttle body and multipoint fuel injection with other cubic inch displacement sizes to Ford Australia’s masterpiece the 4.0 litre “Barra” with double overhead cam with variable valve timing to Turbo charged variants in an array of high horsepower outputs in a range of Ford Australia vehicles to FPV (Ford Performance Vecles) that really are an LS beater in our GM Holdens, the mighty Ford Falcon FG series was the end of this fantastic six and they were all an evolution of that tiny little 144 six back here in the 1960 XK Falcon!
Thank you so much for sharing all that information I couldn't find any information pertaining, the Australian one it was like it just didn't exist.. here which I've found search results are different based on location in the world weird right?
I had a 67 falcon with the 170 ci engine. It was worn out when I bought it. It used oil, fouled plugs and was a very basic piece of crap but it was reliable😂
Geez that picture of the 250 ci engine at 5.19 looks like it’s one of our Australian XY Falcons from 71,72 as it has the detachable inlet manifold with 2 barrell stromberg and factory extractors (headers) and you would find that the air cleaner would have a sticker saying “250-2V” which meant 2 Venturi’s even the colour of the car looks like an Australian Ford colour named “Wild Violet” as I am pretty sure the US did not have this engine the only ones you got were imported from here in Australia privately
It might be I honestly didn't know there was a difference until reading the comments in the comment section. That's why I love this channel because it's a community there's so much information out there that's just false and it's really cool when people come together and correct =)
Since I nearly died in a 1967 Comet, I'd stay away from that one. I'd take the Mustang. I drove a Ford Fairmont with the 250 six and automatic. It was a total dog. But that whole era was devoid of horsepower.
@@ColtonRMagby My nephew owned a CAR that had the 144 CI engine, The Registration said 1959 Frontenac. According to history the Falcon and Frontenac were first built in 1960. i thought that engine was bad, then I owned a 200 CI engine in a 1982 Mustang. The 200 engine made the 144 look like a jewel ! The 144 had a 1904 series Holley carb that worked, the 200 had a Motor craft pollution carb that didn't.
I would rather not have an inline six cylinder engine. My favorite Ford engine from the sixties is the 289 V8. However, in the scenarios, I would pick the Comet and Falcon Ranchero. Mustang was not meant to be a fancy economy car. It was a muscle car. I would never put a six in it. Only a V8. My dad had a 60 Falcon with a 144, I had a 63 Falcon with a 170, my dad had a 66 Comet with a 200, and I had an 82 Granada with 200. Of all of the 6 cylinder engines in the Cars my family had all of those Fords and the one Chevrolet my mom had, none of the were as good as my sister's slant six in her 71 Plymouth Barracuda. I was not a fan of the inline six except for that slant six. I preferred the V8 engines, of which I had a 289 and a 351 Cleveland. Then came the V6, but that is a comment for another Video.😊
Side note: the 2.3 HSC Tempo engine and the 2.5 engine in the base Taurus were largely based on this engine series. I think they simply removed 2 cylinders as the main modification. Those engines were rock solid too. Not fast. But very durable if my memory serves me correctly.
Thank you so much for adding all of that information greatly appreciate it. I totally forgot to mention that. I spent a lot of time, looking for literature and visuals on this engine, which was really hard to do for whatever reason sometimes the pictures explaining information is harder than finding the information itself
@@What.its.like. You do a great job giving the information. It’s very understandable that it’s challenging to find pictures and illustrations since most were produced long before you could simply ask google to show an image. Funny thing. I asked Siri to show me a 170 cubic inch Ford engine. And it showed several correct examples. I asked for it to show me a picture of a 250 cubic inch ford engine. It showed engines from an F250. Asked it to show me images of a ford 292 engine. I must have confused it because it simply showed random ford engines. NONE was a 292. 😂. Im especially impressed and amazed when you find ANY pictures of the 30’s, and 40’s era engines , especially those that were somewhat uncommon to begin with.
@@What.its.like. By the way, it’s 100% understandable that you can’t include every related piece of trivia in one video. You have to walk the delicate balance between including enough relevant information vs making it so long that people (like myself) won’t say . “Interesting topic. But I don’t have time to sit through a video that long. I need to go to bed. “ 😂😂 keep doing what you do.
I have a 29,995 mile 1962 falcon deluxe sedan with the 170….not a powerful engine at all…especially with the 2 speed fordomatic. But it gets looks everywhere I go.
The 200ci and smaller engines are as mundane as an engine can get because of the 'log' intake head. Breathing was so restricted that you couldn't overstress anything while driving, so they gained a reputation for robustness. The bigger ones did live long lives; over time they just get weaker and burn oil till they won't hardly move the car anymore. Fuel mileage was also bad when compared to the competition's near-equal sized engines, especially the sluggish pollution-controlled ones. The 144 is a wimp, even for those who sought fuel economy over power. The Australians, long-time fans of the inline six, did the engines justice but we never got those up here. Ford's 240 and 300/ 4.9L were a different engine and a different game altogether, but most of those went in pickups and vans. WYR I had a base Maverick with the 170 and wouldn't want another so I'll take the Comet. Round 2 I love the '60 Ranchero but the Econoline pickup is scarcely seen anymore so I'll go with it instead. All would be much better with any V-8 (n/a in the 1st gen Econolines).
Yeah I don't know why ford did that cast integrated head intake it's like they can never do anything 100% correct they always have to have some sort of drawback..
Ford Australia Cast the Six Head in 250 2V without the log intake , they used a alloy bolt on intake and a 2 barrel carbie, and twin outlet cast iron exhaust manifolds. In 1979 Ford Australia redesigned the 200 and 250 ci six head to be cross flow , Cleveland V8 cantered valve heads, they use all Cleveland valves, springs, retainers etc , in 1980s it got cast in alloy and got multi point fuel injection ! All these heads bolt to any 144,170,188,200,221 and 250 ci early engines , ( the short deck six's you might need short pushrods ! ) in 1988 Ford Australia put a single over head cam and Hemi chambers on the 3.2litre and 3.9/4.0 litre six ( they went to metric sizes and down sized the engine size even though they were the same bore and stroke as 200 and 250 ) that lasted for a few years then they dropped the small motor and only used the 4.0 six but added 24 valves, Double Over Head Cams and variable valve timing and lift. Then a bit later a Garrett Turbo, the Barra Six was born. But it still shares the 144 six bore spacing , bellhousing , starter, engine mounting locations, water pump . The Australian 4.0 Turbo Barra Six is the evolution of the 144 ci six. Anywhere a 144 was under a hood a Barra 4.0 will bolt ! Some Barras in Australian Taxis have done 1 million kilometres and still running !
@@mylanmiller9656Ford Australia kept the engine basic design till 2017 , the 144 evolved into the Barra 4.0 Turbo 24 valve DOHC six . As stated same bore spacing, engine mounts, bell housing , water pump, and other parts .
@@JosephCowen-fz8vj Yeah but trying to get those heads in US is about impossible and really expensive. I thought you had to do some machining to get a Australian cross flow head to bolt to a US made Ford 6 ? Maybe that was the later ones ? Vintage Inline made some crossflow heads for it as well but not many were made so they are super rare to find. They were suppose to make some more but last I heard they were having problems getting them cast so looks like any more coming out is likely dead in the water. I dont know why someone like Elderbrock never came out with a replacement head for them. There are many out there and the bottom ends stock are solid as can be and can take a ton more HP . Seems like they would make a profit but maybe not. Most go for the 300 inline six for building a Hot Rod Ford six but they are at least a 100 lbs heavier. I have always been a straight 6 fan and have built a few over the years. I always wanted a nice 250 Ford 6 ( wanted to put one in a Mercury Comet I used to own) with tri power or 6 1lb carbs but the lack of head options has always put me off of trying. It was cheaper and easier just to drop a 302 V8 in the Comet. Right know I have a old Cherokee with 4.0 six with a mild build for daily driving.
Sweet choices I sort of want to get a 66 Mustang fastback with a six cylinder, put triple Webber side, draft carburetors on it and a big cam in my opinion, there is nothing sexier when you open the hood..
4th generation the 240 and 300 will be in a different episode I never said that this engine used the 223 block. I said it replaced it in chronological order is all I meant.
Is this AI voice? When you are speaking real time while pointing out features on a feature car vid, your grammar is natural sounding, with no odd pauses or weird vocal cues or edits. On these history videos, the narration is wholly unnatural and off-putting. Can you make the narration more natural and human sounding on these history vids? Think about it, nobody has conversations that sound like you talk here. That would be absolutely creepy to listen to. Thanks for the effort.
Ford Australia also built a188ci and a 221ci version for the 1968 , 1969 and 1970 Australian built Falcons .
And the 250 2V as well
And the 3.3 and 4.1 litre versions got crossflow heads in 1976. Then an alloy head in 1980. Then a weber dual throat carby in 1983.
My dad had a '67 Falcon with a 170 and a 3-speed manual he used as a work car from about 1981 - 1988. It was thrashed but kept on running no matter what we did to it. The floorboards were rusted through, and the floor mat was the only thing between your feet and the pavement. It was so simple to work on.
That's crazy thank you so much for sharing that memory =)
That was a waste. That 170 Ford inline 6 Engine would be perfect to be installed in a long wheel based Jeep, or in the International Scout 11 Terra or Traveler.."🎉🎉
@@levyoliver5363 ?
I got out of the USMC in '69, bought a '67 Ford Falcon, 200 (I'm pretty sure), 3 on the tree, it had 28K miles on it, I drove it for 10 years as a daily driver. No A/C, power anything, but, it got me to and from work. Cost me $1200, I had it paid off in a year. Only ran out of gas with it, once. Over the past 27 years I've had 2 F150's, 2 Rangers, 1 Ridgeline, now I'm driving a 2024 Nissan Frontier SV, (400 miles on it) lots of bells and whistles, that I don't need, it's okay, but, I miss my 2014 F150 that I sold to my son for $3100. Wish I had it back. Bought a 2021 4Runner ( Jan '24) that came off lease, drove it from Jan. to May, just did not like it, it ran okay, and if I had to, I could still be driving it, traded that in for the Frontier, the dealer had it sold in a week.
Back in the 70s my girlfriend, now my wife drove a 1970 Maverick Grabber with a 200 ci engine. That was one sweet engine, never gave her problems and always gave her good gas mileage. It had an automatic transmission & high-back bucket seats. Cool Car. She drove it until we had our first child, then it became time for the family station wagon. 👍🏁😎
Thank you so much for sharing those memories =) isn't it amazing, seeing different cars and music will just take you back
OMGs! That was the engine that was used in the 1st generation Ford Bronco! Also perfect to be installed in the Jeep Scrammber and the Scout 11 Terra...and ill keep that simple engine forever!..🎉🎉🎉🎉
My mother had one of those too. It was orange with the black stripes. The car ran great and saved my life. I rolled it on a improperly marked state highway going around a corner during the weekend my cousins got married in a double ceremony. My mother was pretty upset/shocked when the state patrol came to the wedding reception and told her what happened. Thank God the windows had a metal chrome strip around them, they held the doors shut while the chrome drip rails wrapped around them.
If by "sweet", you mean smooth, reliable, and economical. But certainly not PEPPY.
The biggest detraction from the 140-200 sixes was the integral intake-exhaust manifold making muliple carbs impossible without machining .
My bud had a 61 falcon wagon ! I know gas at the time in the 80's was around a $1 a gal but man we would drive around all night for a few dollars ! Pretty amazing
Thank you for sharing those memories
As a ford guy, I’m a fan of this engine series. My main memories of the 170 and 200 was that although they weren’t the most powerful or high revving engines, they were practically indestructible whether in the Falcon, Maverick, or any of the various Fox platforms. And they got decent fuel economy. You COULD destroy the 250 if you really, really tried. But it wasn’t easy. Even then I think most 250s that failed were ruined by a leaky accelerator pump/power valve in the Carter carburetor which washed the cylinder walls and diluted the oil. I also remember the 250 being pretty thirsty in the Granada/Monarch , especially the 1975 model. My sister had one that didn’t get much better economy than my parent’s 1974 Ltd on the highway although it did much better in city traffic. They improved the economy in the 77-80 years by changing the rear axle ratio . The very minor loss in acceleration was barely noticeable to me. I’m convinced that the majority of these cars ended their lives with Good engines. The body,suspension, or transmission was usually the reason they finally went to the salvage yard.
I enjoyed the episode. I'd choose the '66 Mustang Fastback and the '70 Ranchero. I loved the clip of Archie. I lost my dog in May and I really miss her.
I'm sorry about your dog Archie is either 4 or 5 I love him he can be an asshole but he's our asshole lol I didn't even want a dog but my wife wanted a King Charles I found a lady who was breeding them and we went over to see what she had and my heart melted when I saw him he was the only one that would come to us and he was so tiny.. if I knew he was going to get as big as he did (he only supposed to be 10-15 he is 25-30lbs ) I would have called him Moose lol
Great choices
Drove a service van in the late 80's with a 250 man. trans. Put over 250k with zero eng or trans issues. Still had the original clutch. Oil changes every 3k. No timing chain to think about having to change. Mediocre gas mileage but great reliability. Didn't leak or burn oil.
Awesome thank you so much for sharing your experience
I had the Ford Torino but in Argentina it was renamed to Ford Fairlane since here was already the Renault Torino... Bulletproof engine
Hi Jay, we got the same engines here in Australia starting in 1960 but in 1976 when we had a change of model the same engine was fitted with an cross-flow Iron head and in late 1979 when we had another change of model, the early batch of cars got fitted with the remaining Iron Heads until stock was depleted and the introduction of the Cross-flow Alloy Head saw that new model into 1980/81 continuing right through until mid 1988 where we then saw the next generation of inline 6 which was fitted to 6 models then the final generation of inline 6 known as the "Barra" was introduce in 2004 and cessing production in 2016 when Ford Australia was no more.
Thank you so much for sharing information on that engine if I can find enough information I will definitely come back and cover it. It seems like the Australian got the better versions I wonder if it exported any
@@What.its.like.Brazil used the crossflow iron head on Thier Falcon
Ford Australia kept on with this engine family until 2015.
Vastly modified with aluminium head, OHC, fuel injection it became the legendary Barra 6.
One of the finest sixes in the world and able to be modified up to over 600 bhp.
That’s crazy
Hi Jay! Here's an engine I can talk about at least a little bit, as I have either driven or owned Fords with some of these fine little sixes! I personally had a 1967 Falcon coupe with a 200, and auto trans (c-4 I think). My Mom had two new Granadas with these engines. The first was a little 1977 2-door with the 200. This was the car I learned to drive a stick shift on. It had a 3-speed with overdrive. These had a floor shift. Later she traded the 1977 due to some problems with the car (not to do with the engine or trans) for a 1979 2-door. It had the 250 with the same transmission setup. Mom claimed that the 250 didn't get as good of gas mileage as the 200 equipped one. I drove that 250 one a LOT. I thought it had ok power for what it was. That car had a LOT of miles on it when we sold it and was on the roads locally for YEARS after that! WYR #1 Who could pass up a 1966 Mustang Fastback?? #2 Going 1961 Ranchero on that one, as the power to weight ratio might be a little better! The truck and 1970 Ranchero are COOL though!
Awesome choices. Thank you so much for taking the time to share all of that information and insight greatly appreciate it.
200 and 250 were available in the Australian market Cortina.
221ci displacement was available in the XW falcon, probably my favourite, revved harder than the 250 and more torque than the 200
looks like you are showing an Australian Falcon with the 250 engine. That 250 shown is the 2V version with the removeable intake manifold and 2 barrel carb rated at 170 hp . As far as I know the 2V 250 was only made in Australia . The regular 250 still had the intake manifold cast into the head . The later Australian 250 and 200 engines had a different cross flow head from 1977 . From around 1980 Ford Australia fitted an alloy head designed by Yamaha . This motor lasted until 1988 when the brought out the over head 3.9 and 3.2 litre straight 6 which will eventually be developed into the legendary BARRA straight 6 .
Awesome thank you so much for sharing all that insight and information I thought the 250 had a bolt on intake manifold and wasn't cast I could be wrong tho
@@What.its.like. Nope. He's right. The 250 in the U.S. had the same integral cast intake like all the others of this family. I know this to be true because my uncle R.I.P. had a 1970 Torino with the 250 and three-on-the-tree manual.
Had the 221 variant in a 69 XW falcon. Don't know if you guys in the States got that either.
Nope it doesn't seem like we get the good stuff here.. there's a lot of Japanese engines that we don't get here
As an Australian I can verify that the 250 pictured is the Australian 2V engine with the removable inlet manifold. Later the Aussie falcon 250 got an alloy cross flow head designed in part by Honda.
I owned a 1977 Maverick with the 250 and 3 speed automatic. Never had an engine problem, but the car did not have enough power to climb the hills in the PA Turnpike. It would downshift to second and the engine would be at high rpm climbing hills. It was me and the trucks in the right lane going 55.
Ford Australia did an upgrade on the 200 cid engine, and produced a 221 cid version, in 1968, before introducing the 250 cid engine into locally made Falcon’s in 1971.
My Aunt gave me a rusty 1966 Falcon Sport Coupe 200 when I was 15. Beat what was left out of it. Still sitting in field - floor all dented and tranny burnt out.
1975 Comet Sedan with 250. Good economic car. I took it deer hunting one season.
1973 Mustang, blue on blue with black stripes, 250 3 spd on floor. That car could plow 4 feet of snow - Buddy for giggles decided to put us into the ditch after leaving the dance hall in winter. I dropped to 2nd and floored it until we plowed out. My Brother totalled it after a party.
I could go on for hours ...
Thank you so much for sharing those stories. What great memories.
1975 comet???
@@fastinradfordable Canadian car. Mercury car. Same as Maverick.
My Dad LOVED those Ford straight sixes. He had a new 65 Mustang with the 200 & automatic, a couple of Falcons with the 170,couple of F-100 pickups & a Mercury Montigo. It was a 1967 model 2 door bought also brand new & was the family car. It was also frighteningly underpowered-so much so that my Mom demanded that Dad get rid of it after only a year of driving it. It was traded in on a 1968 Cougar with a 351.Needles to say-it had a bit better performance.
In Australia, 1976 roughly, we switched to a locally engineered 250ci crossflow design 6. Believe it got a co developed with Honda alloy head in 81/82 and mpfi in I think 84. Made about 165Hp in its final iteration. Then we went to sohc I6 in 88” with many changes and variants untill the dohc I6 Barra on 02”. Thanks for the video👍🏼
Thank you so much for all the insight and information as well as watching, im glad you dig this episode
I had a 65 Fairlane with a 200 six, and a 3 speed manual transmission, "3 on the tree." My dad bought it in 66, used, and we drove it as our family car till 69, when my dad got another car and gave me the Fairlane to drive when I started college. I kept it till 78. Drove it 30 mi one each day way when I commuted to college, and about 20 mi one way when I started working. It was a great car.
Choices: 67 Comet, 60 Falcon Ranchero
Sweet choices thank you for sharing your experience =)
I had a 1969 Ford Falcon Futura I bought in 1979 with 27000 original miles under dash Sears A/C that would freeze you out. Manual steering , brakes with 3 on the tree and that reliable 200 CI 6 ..
Awesome thank you so much for sharing your car with us
What's up with that? I swear the older air-conditioning units were way better than the modern ones.
I had a 2001 Honda Odyssey van that would frost the windows on the inside. We have a 2011 it won't do that even the 2006 that we have won't do that...
Love the 250 it could be made to go real well in the right car,the 200 was rubbish,170 was ok mileage was only fair on any of these motors
Had a '71 Maverick. Must have been the 200. Great motor, simple, strong.
Had a 170 in my Ford Econoline van great van no powerhouse but reliable great video Jay thank you so much!!!
Thank you so much for watching happy you dig this one and thank you for sharing your ford econoline van
The 250 CID in your video with the bolt-on manifold is an Australian version (note the car it is in, which is right-hand drive) and was rated at 170 hp. Known as the 250 2V, it was equipped with a two-barrel carburettor and headers as standard. It was short lived as most opted for a 302 V8.
As an addition to my comment about Ford Australia's upgrade of the 200 to 221cid, they then took the 250 cid version of engine and further developed it, 1st fitting a cross flow cylinder head, and fuel injection, followed on by a twin overhead camshaft head. The latter engine , which Ford named " Barra," came in normally aspirated and turbo charged form.
Thank you so much for sharing all of that information. It seems like the Aussie, took a dog, and made it into a wolf =)
back in 1975 or 1976 I saw a 65 Galaxy 500 with a straight six being towed from one of the Long Island tracks that had run eleven something seconds in the quarter mile. Hell Id have been happy with a V8 that could do that.
The best part was you enjoying time with your daughter and dog. Glad you take time out to do that.Time goes by real fast.
I’m finding that out she’s growing up so fast, time is also the most expensive thing in the world
Another great engine episode Jay, thanks for bringing us this one. I’ve always had warped brain lobe dedicated to wicked I6 builds, dating back to an indestructible 170ci slant-6 in a 1963 Plymouth Valiant I owned in the early 70’s. My Frankenstein Ford Falcon dream has evolved into a stretched wheelbase, wide-bodied, dry-sump, 300ci I6, 5-speed manual, 1963 Sprint hardtop channeled over a modified Panther-platform chassis with a Lincoln MkVII independent rear suspension, power-tourer meets Pikes Peak race car sorta build. I did mention the warped brain lobe, didn’t I?😁🐿️🧠❤️
My understanding is that the Tempo four cylinder was a derivative of the Falcon six.
You could have added that the engine continued on in Australia, gaining a cross flow head in 1976, followed a few years later with an alloy cross flow head, then getting a Weber 2 barrel carby then fuel injection. In 1988 it went to a SOHC head and a 3.2 and 4 litre capacity, and finally a DOHC head 4 litre with or without a turbo- the Barra. There were other changes to the engine other than the head along the way, including the crankshaft. About the only thing the Barra shared with the original US engine are the bore spacings.
I had a 200 sick cylinder in a Maverick. It couldn't get out of it's own way. I was happy tossing it into the scrap iron pile.
The Barra was the perfect version of this motor. Ford Australia did it right from the late 70s on with crossflow etc.
'71 Maverik, no question. The seven main bearing 200 was an awesome engine. Also known as the "big bellhousing six" it came with much better transmissions.
The ultra rare Vintage Inline's aluminum head really changes what this engine can be. All kinds of fuel delivery options, WAY better ports and combustion chambers, plus weight reduction & the ability to run higher compression with better heat transfer
I remember the 221 made in Argentina, which was still fitted to the Bricknose in Brazil and Argentina with EFI
66 Stang
60 Ranchero
I remember my grandfather buying a falcon once. Before he bought it he had a really beautiful red and cream 59 Ford sedan that I just loved as a kid. He traded that in on a falcon station wagon. I'm not sure what year it was Because when you're a 9-year-old kid You don't pay attention to details like that only that Grandpa bought a new car. But he usually bought new cars every 2 to 3 years so that would mean probably a 61 or a 62.
I remember him saying that he thought it was underpowered so that would lead me to believe it probably had the smallest six banger in it . Also, it could have been that he was used to the acceleration of his big Ford sedan with its V8 so to him the falcon seemed underpowered. Maybe a combination of both is closer to the truth.
Also, he disliked it because it, as he stated, "puked oil from every orifice and never had a tight engine from the day he bought it".
I know he kept that falcon for just shy of 2 years and I honestly cannot remember what he bought after that, but guaranteed it was another Ford product because he drove Ford's all of his life.
Great choices. Thank you so much for sharing all that information and insight as well as experiences.
I got some of my first bootleg driving time in my granddad’s 62 Ranchero. I know it was a six in front of the Ford-o-matic transmission but don’t know which one. My parents had an 80 Fairmont wagon with the 200. That was a pretty indestructible motor. I suspect Ford likely discontinued the 250 when it’s increased deck height made it harder to fit in the upcoming Fox body platforms. I remember a high school class mate or two who had Mavericks with 250s but thought they were all with the intake cast into the head. From what I remember about parts swapping from the fuel crisis days of the late 70s and early 80s, the 200 was the way to go and maybe use a 170 head for better compression. Either way, some serious cutting and milling would have to be done to run more appropriate carbs. .
WYR: 1967 Comet and 1960 Ranchero (might take it over all the others to be honest). Song: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida by Iron Butterfly? Well done as always, and glad I made a premier again ~ Chuck. P. S. Your dog is adorable!
Awesome choices
Dennis got the song it was let's hang on by The Four Seasons great song ..
Happy to see you in the premier
Archie is a hoot, I figured I just show you guys that something completely random
@@What.its.like. watching him, your daughter, and you interact was a definite bright spot in my day!
She likes wearing long sleeves with shorts new fad, that I find different lol
@@What.its.like. She’s rocking her style!
In 1959, Ford also introduced it's only 2-speed Ford-O-Matic automatic transmission. It was also Ford's 1st aluminum-cased automatic transmission.It was discontinued in the middle of 1964 and replaced by the Cruise-O- Matic, aluminum-cased C4 3-speed automatic.. It's main application was used behind the inline 6cyl. engines which are the subject of this video. It could be found in the Falcon, Fairlane, Comet, Edsel and even the 1964 1/2 first year Mustangs. It was even used behind V8's, usually all 260's and some 292's and even some 352's.
Thank you so much for adding that I have no idea why Ford named that transmission to Fordomatic because they essentially shot themselves in the foot making the chromatic the three speed unit but the original Ford automatic was a three speed unit. It's super confusing.
@@What.its.like. Hi Jay,!
Well, you know that Ford had called itself 'the better idea' company and you probably never seen it in any of their current advertisements of the era, dating back to atleast the 1970's, but Ford would include an illustration of a lightbulb.
Hey, here's an idea, in the realm of history, maybe you could put a video together about car advertisements of the past?
I love the mundane older smaller sixes, reminds me of my old maverick.
=) I love the original mavericks the trucks aren't bad either
My first car was a 1962 Falcon van with a 144 cu in engine.
I had a 62 Econoline with the 144 engine and use to drag race cars on Main street but no one in the other cars knew i was racing. I lost most of the time !!!!
My 66 Mustang coupe had the 200. I decided it needed Clifford dual headers! We put the cheapest ass mufflers shooting out behind the doors. It sounded like no other car on the road.I got that thing to 32/33 mpg consistently.Don't ask about the 3 speed on the floor!
This was the easiest WYR for me I’ll take the 66 mustang with the 200 I-6 and then the 71 ranchero with the 250 I-6 . I had a 66 comet caleinte with the 200 and while not a hot rod it was smooth and dependable with decent mpg with the old 3 on the tree manual which I preferred over the floor mounted stick shift as it allowed my high school sweat heart to sit next to me on the comfy bench seat and I could haul her and 4 others to the concerts and parties. That comet was always the go to car for the comfort, economy and roominess it was a great car
My Dad's 1971 Torino 500 wagon had the 250 the intake manifold was cast on not bolted.
Ok thank you for that correct must have gotten some bad information it happens a lot thank you so much
That's a cool wagon your dad had
That was so you could bolt on triple side draught Webbers.
That's what I would do nothing sexier on an actual ngoni than triple Weber's on a six
Another great episode, Jay. I'll take the '71 Comet and the Falcon Ranchero.
Awesome choices
The early 144 and 170 had upper end oiling issues, especially if you delayed oil changes. Many had rocker arm issues. How do I know? I worked on literally 100's of these engines. I had a commercial account (when I owned my service station) -Packard Bell - Teledyne, They used vans, pickups station wagons and sedans. So did Montgomery Ward. (also a commercial account), I saw many of these with external oiling kits added on. But the fix was much easier. Remove the last head bolt on the right side, grind about a 1/4 off under the shoulder, clean out the oil galley, problem solved. Then advise the customer to change the oil more often. Als valve guides and seals were an issue on many of these. With good care these held up well. That said memories are always better than what went on in real life.
Awesome thank you so much for sharing your experience with these engines =)
For WYR, first pick is the ‘71 Maverick. The second is the ‘61 Econoline.
I always enjoy these Ford episodes. Especially the ones I can remember.
Archie is a very cute dog BTW. And your daughter seems to be growing up pretty quickly.
Great choices
I think we're going to do an engine manufacturer next week might do one on Cummins .. not entirely sure
Thank you Archie is pretty cool and I totally agree not really growing up. She's getting more mature faster. She's about the same size as she always was maybe a couple inches taller. It really bothers her because she's the oldest of three little girls and she's the smallest. Just to be clear I don't have three little girls my brother has a girl and my wife's sister has a girl. Lol
@@What.its.like. Yeah, you’re right. She is more mature than she was when you first started the channel.
I had a 64 Falcon with the 170 and also 68 with the 170. 64 was a 3 on the tree and the 68 had a Hurst floor shifter.
Sweet =)
I had a 1960 falcon with the 144, it got 33 MPG. In 1961 and the 170 Ford detund the 144 and the 170 had the same hp as the 1960 144.
Awesome =)
My first car, a '64 Galaxie had the 200 6 with an auto transmission. Slooooooooow. But it also ha 200K miles on it when I got it. It leaked everything, smoked more than my Grampa, but wouldn't die. It met it's demise in my first demolition derby. WYR: 1) Maverick 2) '61 pickup.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience with your car. Your first car. Awesome choices.
My first car was a 66 Mustang with a 200 six. Didn't go very fast, but I could go along way on a tank of gas. Looed cool just couldn't race with it. I paid 250 dollars for it in 1975.
That's awesome thank you so much for sharing your car with us. I had a 67 Mustang when I was 21 at a 351 Windsor though. Everyone wanted to race... lol
If they released this with high compression and port fuel injection.
It just may save ford
Had one of these in a Maverick, Which I bought cheap for work car in about 1984. . Noticed the transmission kickdown link had been disconnected. I reconnected it, and when I kicked it down for passing, every con rod in it was just loudly hammering. No oil light on, so I drove it daily for 2 years. Pretty tough. Also these would often crack the exhaust manifold in two .
Thank you so much for sharing those memories =)
I think all the WYR's are cool, I'd go with the Comet and the '70 Ranchero.😎
Sweet choices and totally agree this one was hard
The early 144 engines seemed to have major piston ring problems. I used to see clouds of blow-by smoke from them when sitting at a stop light. Later ones were much better. That log manifold wasn't designed for performance, but there was a company called Man-A-Fre that sold a kit to install 3 one barrel carbs on those. I think they literally epoxied the two other carb mounts on after drilling the manifold for the extra carbs. The 200 and 250 were major improvements over the early engines. Great video, Jay, but *quit torturing your poor doggie!* Your daughter and doggie are really cute! WYR= either of the Rancheros! BTW, that 66 Mustang shown has the 271hp 289, a rarity, and I'd take that one over all the others!
Man-A-Fre made the intake on Milner's yellow Deuce Coupe in American Graffiti. Didn't know they made one for this six.
Thank you so much for sharing that insight and information
I'm happy you dig that at the end I figured I'd do something completely random. I like doing some random things from time to time lol
Great choices
I never experienced the 144. But I heard it was slow. And I believe it given that it had similar horsepower as the 2.3 acyl “ Pinto” engine in what I assume was a heavier vehicle, ESPECIALLY when equipped with the 2 speed automatic . Actually it likely had LESS hp since the 144 was GROSS vs the Net rating in the “pinto” engine. My brother and uncle described the experience of driving an old, high mileage Falcon in the mountains of upstate New York. Their only word was SLOW. 😅. However, I did have the opportunity to drive several 66 and later Falcons with the 170 and the c4 automatic. And they had decent acceleration given the fact that I started driving (legally) in 1980. And the 1970s era cars I often drove weren’t known for speed either.
@@P_RO_ LOL. And I didn't know that they made Milner's intake!
@@61rampy65 Yep. If you check out his carbs he had ~1025 CFM on tap which is more than any streetable SBC can make use of. Looks cool as heck anyway!
As many would probably know by now that Ford Australia’s Ford Falcons that were manufactured here and its derivatives including Fairmonts and Fairlanes in their base models had versions of these six cylinder engines even our base Aussie version of our F-100’s had the 250 ci Falcon six in them, but we had all these engines and they were manufactured in Australia, the 144 ,170, 200 and 250’s but we also had other displacement capacities that the US never had and these were the 188 ci, the 221 ci and also a performance version of the 250 ci that had a detachable inlet manifold with a two barrel stromberg, mild cam and headers etc that put out 170 hp in the day and a four speed manual in an XY Falcon was about as quick as a 302 Windsor with an auto in the same model but in Australia this basic Ford engine had a big evolution right into around 2016 with our final Ford Falcon and derivatives ended a long and prosperous production here from 1960 to this time around 56 years of continuous production, this engine went thru many design changes in that time, from the old pushrod originals to cast iron and alloy head crossflows to single overhead cam variants in carburettor to throttle body and multipoint fuel injection with other cubic inch displacement sizes to Ford Australia’s masterpiece the 4.0 litre “Barra” with double overhead cam with variable valve timing to Turbo charged variants in an array of high horsepower outputs in a range of Ford Australia vehicles to FPV (Ford Performance Vecles) that really are an LS beater in our GM Holdens, the mighty Ford Falcon FG series was the end of this fantastic six and they were all an evolution of that tiny little 144 six back here in the 1960 XK Falcon!
Thank you so much for sharing all that information I couldn't find any information pertaining, the Australian one it was like it just didn't exist.. here which I've found search results are different based on location in the world weird right?
Longest lasting production engine in Australia.
BARRA is based off this original engine 👍🏻👍🏻
What a cute dog
Hahaha yes cool random moment
Would You Rather: (1) Maverick (2) bigger, newer Ranchero. That being said, I have a 61 Falcon 4 door with the 144 and 2 speed automatic.
Great choices how do you like your falcon
@What.its.like. I haven't got it running yet. Was sitting for some time before I got it. One of several projects. It's cute, though.
Yeah, I take all three good video
Awesome choices =) with all of them
I had a 67 falcon with the 170 ci engine. It was worn out when I bought it. It used oil, fouled plugs and was a very basic piece of crap but it was reliable😂
That's what I've heard. I've heard they were absolute dogs, but was reliable, just like man's best friend
Geez that picture of the 250 ci engine at 5.19 looks like it’s one of our Australian XY Falcons from 71,72 as it has the detachable inlet manifold with 2 barrell stromberg and factory extractors (headers) and you would find that the air cleaner would have a sticker saying “250-2V” which meant 2 Venturi’s even the colour of the car looks like an Australian Ford colour named “Wild Violet” as I am pretty sure the US did not have this engine the only ones you got were imported from here in Australia privately
It might be I honestly didn't know there was a difference until reading the comments in the comment section. That's why I love this channel because it's a community there's so much information out there that's just false and it's really cool when people come together and correct =)
Since I nearly died in a 1967 Comet, I'd stay away from that one. I'd take the Mustang. I drove a Ford Fairmont with the 250 six and automatic. It was a total dog. But that whole era was devoid of horsepower.
What happened in the comet ? Happy your ok
WYR: All of them.
With minimal modifications, these engines can be used in boats.
Awesome =)
I saw they were used in generators forgot to add that
@@What.its.like. If it can have the rotating magnets driven off of it, it'll work as a generator.
@@ColtonRMagby My nephew owned a CAR that had the 144 CI engine, The Registration said 1959 Frontenac. According to history the Falcon and Frontenac were first built in 1960. i thought that engine was bad, then I owned a 200 CI engine in a 1982 Mustang.
The 200 engine made the 144 look like a jewel ! The 144 had a 1904 series Holley carb that worked, the 200 had a Motor craft pollution carb that didn't.
@@mylanmiller9656 Nice.
I would like a maverick, and the e-truck.
I would rather not have an inline six cylinder engine. My favorite Ford engine from the sixties is the 289 V8. However, in the scenarios, I would pick the Comet and Falcon Ranchero. Mustang was not meant to be a fancy economy car. It was a muscle car. I would never put a six in it. Only a V8. My dad had a 60 Falcon with a 144, I had a 63 Falcon with a 170, my dad had a 66 Comet with a 200, and I had an 82 Granada with 200. Of all of the 6 cylinder engines in the Cars my family had all of those Fords and the one Chevrolet my mom had, none of the were as good as my sister's slant six in her 71 Plymouth Barracuda. I was not a fan of the inline six except for that slant six. I preferred the V8 engines, of which I had a 289 and a 351 Cleveland. Then came the V6, but that is a comment for another Video.😊
Ha ha ha ha ha I love your comment. Thank you so much for sharing your experience with these engines. Greatly appreciate it.
First pick the 67 Comet, second 61 Econoline 5 window pickup.
Sweet choices that first on is tough for me I like all those =)
1971 Ford Maverick, 1961 Ford Econoline truck. Those were my easiest choices lol.
Awesome choices
The 200 in some cars through out the world had a 3 speed manual floor shift ,it was horrendous
I think you forgot the First generation Ford Bronco.."😅 they also used that inline 6 Power Thrift engine!
Yes, totally forgot. Thank you so much for adding that.
@@What.its.like. No problem. You're Welcome. 😊
Side note: the 2.3 HSC Tempo engine and the 2.5 engine in the base Taurus were largely based on this engine series. I think they simply removed 2 cylinders as the main modification. Those engines were rock solid too. Not fast. But very durable if my memory serves me correctly.
Thank you so much for adding all of that information greatly appreciate it. I totally forgot to mention that.
I spent a lot of time, looking for literature and visuals on this engine, which was really hard to do for whatever reason sometimes the pictures explaining information is harder than finding the information itself
@@What.its.like. You do a great job giving the information. It’s very understandable that it’s challenging to find pictures and illustrations since most were produced long before you could simply ask google to show an image. Funny thing. I asked Siri to show me a 170 cubic inch Ford engine. And it showed several correct examples. I asked for it to show me a picture of a 250 cubic inch ford engine. It showed engines from an F250. Asked it to show me images of a ford 292 engine. I must have confused it because it simply showed random ford engines. NONE was a 292. 😂. Im especially impressed and amazed when you find ANY pictures of the 30’s, and 40’s era engines , especially those that were somewhat uncommon to begin with.
@@What.its.like. By the way, it’s 100% understandable that you can’t include every related piece of trivia in one video. You have to walk the delicate balance between including enough relevant information vs making it so long that people (like myself) won’t say . “Interesting topic. But I don’t have time to sit through a video that long. I need to go to bed. “ 😂😂 keep doing what you do.
I have a 29,995 mile 1962 falcon deluxe sedan with the 170….not a powerful engine at all…especially with the 2 speed fordomatic. But it gets looks everywhere I go.
My 250 6 in my Torino 500 wagon did not have a bolt on intake manifold.
Would I rather 1: Maverick 2: Ranchero.
Sweet choices
The 200ci and smaller engines are as mundane as an engine can get because of the 'log' intake head. Breathing was so restricted that you couldn't overstress anything while driving, so they gained a reputation for robustness. The bigger ones did live long lives; over time they just get weaker and burn oil till they won't hardly move the car anymore. Fuel mileage was also bad when compared to the competition's near-equal sized engines, especially the sluggish pollution-controlled ones. The 144 is a wimp, even for those who sought fuel economy over power. The Australians, long-time fans of the inline six, did the engines justice but we never got those up here. Ford's 240 and 300/ 4.9L were a different engine and a different game altogether, but most of those went in pickups and vans.
WYR I had a base Maverick with the 170 and wouldn't want another so I'll take the Comet. Round 2 I love the '60 Ranchero but the Econoline pickup is scarcely seen anymore so I'll go with it instead. All would be much better with any V-8 (n/a in the 1st gen Econolines).
Awesome choices. Thank you so much for sharing all of that information and insight as always. I always greatly appreciate reading your comments =)
The bottom end of those engines are bulletproof but that log intake and head are terrible.
Yeah I don't know why ford did that cast integrated head intake it's like they can never do anything 100% correct they always have to have some sort of drawback..
@@What.its.like. The worst part of that was ford kept the engine from 1960 to 1984.
Ford Australia Cast the Six Head in 250 2V without the log intake , they used a alloy bolt on intake and a 2 barrel carbie, and twin outlet cast iron exhaust manifolds. In 1979 Ford Australia redesigned the 200 and 250 ci six head to be cross flow , Cleveland V8 cantered valve heads, they use all Cleveland valves, springs, retainers etc , in 1980s it got cast in alloy and got multi point fuel injection ! All these heads bolt to any 144,170,188,200,221 and 250 ci early engines , ( the short deck six's you might need short pushrods ! ) in 1988 Ford Australia put a single over head cam and Hemi chambers on the 3.2litre and 3.9/4.0 litre six ( they went to metric sizes and down sized the engine size even though they were the same bore and stroke as 200 and 250 ) that lasted for a few years then they dropped the small motor and only used the 4.0 six but added 24 valves, Double Over Head Cams and variable valve timing and lift. Then a bit later a Garrett Turbo, the Barra Six was born. But it still shares the 144 six bore spacing , bellhousing , starter, engine mounting locations, water pump . The Australian 4.0 Turbo Barra Six is the evolution of the 144 ci six. Anywhere a 144 was under a hood a Barra 4.0 will bolt ! Some Barras in Australian Taxis have done 1 million kilometres and still running !
@@mylanmiller9656Ford Australia kept the engine basic design till 2017 , the 144 evolved into the Barra 4.0 Turbo 24 valve DOHC six . As stated same bore spacing, engine mounts, bell housing , water pump, and other parts .
@@JosephCowen-fz8vj Yeah but trying to get those heads in US is about impossible and really expensive. I thought you had to do some machining to get a Australian cross flow head to bolt to a US made Ford 6 ? Maybe that was the later ones ?
Vintage Inline made some crossflow heads for it as well but not many were made so they are super rare to find. They were suppose to make some more but last I heard they were having problems getting them cast so looks like any more coming out is likely dead in the water.
I dont know why someone like Elderbrock never came out with a replacement head for them. There are many out there and the bottom ends stock are solid as can be and can take a ton more HP . Seems like they would make a profit but maybe not.
Most go for the 300 inline six for building a Hot Rod Ford six but they are at least a 100 lbs heavier.
I have always been a straight 6 fan and have built a few over the years. I always wanted a nice 250 Ford 6 ( wanted to put one in a Mercury Comet I used to own) with tri power or 6 1lb carbs but the lack of head options has always put me off of trying. It was cheaper and easier just to drop a 302 V8 in the Comet.
Right know I have a old Cherokee with 4.0 six with a mild build for daily driving.
I’ll take the Maverick and the Econoline. The Mustang needs a V8 as does the Comet. 👍
Sweet choices
I sort of want to get a 66 Mustang fastback with a six cylinder, put triple Webber side, draft carburetors on it and a big cam in my opinion, there is nothing sexier when you open the hood..
1967 Comet
1970-71 Ranchero
Awesome choices
WYR: 1966 Mustang 2+2, and 1970 Ranchero.
Not all 250s had a bolt on intake at least in the states,the Aussies had a better head for those engines.
Something is wrong here. at 5:29 you show the stroke at 3.91 in / 79.4 mm. 3.91 inches converts to 99.3 mm!
I took the specs listed on another site at face value, and did not convert myself.. happens a lot thank you fir the correction
Check your sources, please. Is the 240 I-6 an enlarged 223 from the late 1950s, or is it the basis of the 300 I-6 truck engine? I can't remenber.
I always thought the 240/300 were clean sheet designs. They have nothing in common with the older Ford sixes or the 144-250 sixes.
4th generation the 240 and 300 will be in a different episode
I never said that this engine used the 223 block. I said it replaced it in chronological order is all I meant.
223 is totally different from 240
You know, I might just go with the Comet or the E Truck. The other choices are more obvious.
here in the usa no bolt on intakes for 250
Thank you for that correction
Not THAT Ranchero!
Which ranchero would you prefer
Nope, nope, nope - 250 used the same head as the 200, with an integral intake manifold. The Aussie (and maybe Argentine) 250 had bolton manifolds
Thank you for that correction got some bad information it happens all the time
The engines were good but the gearboxes were terrible, especially the linkages,
What about the alloy cross flow version?
I think that's an Australian engine might come back and do an Australian version. It's hard to find information on those here it's weird.
These were put in small pick ups?
I thought so but the f series used 240/300 when that engine came out
How about the 300 cid ?
Forth gen it's either the 240 different engine family
Mercury - Ranchero
@@bobmccurdy8881 sweet choices
Wood chippers had 300/6 industrial engines
The 240/600 will be the next Ford in line 6 engine featured not entirely sure when that will be
83 pounds for the block. Really? I bet the head weighs that much.
Maybe all in the engine weighted around 350lbs
🥝✔️✊♥️👈
Id rather 67 comet
🐕
Now y'all need to get a female spaniel, and name her "Edith". 🙂
Archie is a king Charles we were thinking about getting a female and maybe breeding but evidently there’s complications with that
Is this AI voice? When you are speaking real time while pointing out features on a feature car vid, your grammar is natural sounding, with no odd pauses or weird vocal cues or edits. On these history videos, the narration is wholly unnatural and off-putting. Can you make the narration more natural and human sounding on these history vids? Think about it, nobody has conversations that sound like you talk here. That would be absolutely creepy to listen to. Thanks for the effort.
Not Al it's the same I found it's impossible to please everyone I use in shot and I think it happens during compression