Motive power

[John Hofstetter <hofs@domain.elided>]

>Tom and John H, I'm not so sure about the 5.0--
>  My 89 5.0 in my convertible Mustang is rated 225 HP (NET) and
>300 ft-lb torque, though I'm not sure how flat the actual curves are. My
>CT-402 Specs book shows a 304 to have about 170 HP (NET),
>and 260 ft-lb torque (NET).  I would maintain that the 5.0
>would be an acceptable Scout motor.  Note that it is multi-port
>injected, computer controlled to make those numbers.  Some
>minor mods will get more.  I believe this powerplant would get
>some nice MPG figures also.  I think we are talking about something
>Tom posted--new technology is making higher HP/Torque from 
>the same or less cubes.  But, the engines are also working harder to
>do so.  I doubt a 5.0 would last as long in a Scout as it does in a
>Mustang.
>
>Allan Weidenheimer
>72 1210 Pickup

Allan, 
I wasn't impugning the ability of the engine. Rather I was thinking of 
idling up Jail Canyon in the Panamint Valley at about 800 rpms. My son 
keeps wanting to put a 360 Chrysler engine in my Scout, says that just 
getting the weight of the boat anchor 345 out of there would make a major 
difference, but I love the way that old IH V8 can just walk along on 
back-country trails. You'll have seen an earlier post of mine on my 5.2 
engine that has similar characteristics to your 5.0 and you'll see that 
basically I said the same thing that you just said. Although, I didn't 
offer to let anyone put mine in his/her Scout.
John H.