My Commando wasn't a dog, it was a bone stock 273-4 auto with nothing added. 20 year garaged survivor. Could smoke the tires through an intersection and the power kept coming all the way to the miserable factory tachs 6000 rpm. I spun a rod bearing 3 months after I got it and it was faster for me to move everything over to a $100 68 318 short block from a wrecking yard than to get the crank turned (I didnt know what was wrong with it until I tore it down later). Put all the 4bbl stuff on that 318 (minus the intake I cracked so I put a Performer on it) and it made that still lower compression 318 way quicker than the 273-4 ever was. That got me looking at published numbers and lo and behold in 68, the 318-2 was rated at 230HP (how? because that year they measured it off the crank, no the rear wheels) , 5 shy of the 273-4 and ~25% more torque. WTH? When I see builds of 273-4's with new $$ Egge pistons, E-4 cams, Performer intakes...I gotta ask why and that was the basis for this great debate. There is nothing 4bbl left in these new builds except the stock intake and maybe the #s AFB. Both too small for the motor. For power, Ford guys dont build 260's, Chevy guys dont build 283's because both are simply so much better for 99% of applications in their larger bore higher torque cheaper to build forms. If your going to build a 273/318 for torque, build a 318. If your going to build one for 5 more published horsepower at another 1000 RPM but far less torque in street range, build a 273-4. I know what I will do. Heck, Im building almost a zero deck 273-2 right now because I have one on hand. Fact is a 318 would be better in this app again as it has lower compression for a turbo. Let it ride.....
