Guest scca Posted December 6, 2000 Share Posted December 6, 2000 is there any years of the 5.0 that are better to use for a conversion? i would like to use the complete FI sysytem. is one easier to hook up or are they all thesame? MIke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 6, 2000 Share Posted December 6, 2000 Mike, I can't really answer regarding the FI questions. When I was considering a Ford for my conversion I wanted a carbed 302 so I never really checked into the FI. As far as blocks, etc...I would look for a 1984 and up, I believe, that are machined for the hydraulic roller cams. If you are going to make some serious power with a 302 block consider a main cap girdle, I have seen many pictures of 302s with ripped out main webs. I think a 302 Ford is an excellent choice for a swap as it is lighweight, compact and has the distributor on the front of the motor, plus, parts for the 302 are fairly inexpensive. If you are considering stroking the 302 to, say, a 347 I would look at the Coast High Performance kit. Their kit uses longer rods with an offset pin pistons that does not get the pin into the oil ring land. If you are set on using FI check out http://www.mustangbxr.com/ I have never seen any of their stuff or read about it being used but they make some pretty big claims about the benefits of using their manifolds. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumo Posted December 6, 2000 Share Posted December 6, 2000 I remember from some old 5.0 magazines that the 302 FI after 88 or 89 were better because they had the mass air FI system. The speed density stopped by 87 or 88. You might want to dig deeper though for more info on the FI system switch over. Hope it helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randy 77zt Posted December 7, 2000 Share Posted December 7, 2000 better blocks are 85 up for roller cam.best injection is 88 up mass air.there is a bigger maf and 30lb injector kit in ford motorsport catalog that i have heard works good on everything as far as cams and heads go .the newer blocks have one piece rearmains too.the oem t5 is usuable but needs world class t5 kit.the oem t5 has a low 1st to spin a 3.08 rear.oem t5 1st is 3.35 wc t5 is 2.95 with a .63 5th.if you spend the money to convert oem t5 to wc t5 you can almost buy new t5 from summit.do not machine flywheel too thin or springs on clutch disc will hit flywheel bolts.i wrench at a ford dealer so i have learned about these things.i think if you put aluminum heads on 5.0 and put battery in back it would be balenced better than a l28 motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
74_5.0L_Z Posted December 7, 2000 Share Posted December 7, 2000 The 1988 through 1990 5.0L are the most desirable. Pre 88 they were speed density, and less amenable to engine upgrades. After 1990(I think ford switched from forged pistons to hypereutectic cast pistons. I have a 1989 5.0L in mine. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLKMGK Posted December 7, 2000 Share Posted December 7, 2000 Okay, from memory - 85 was the first year for roller - cars were either carbed or CFI in the automatics. Pistons were forged. 87 and 88 had MAP sensed EFI except for the 88 Cali cars which were MAF. Pistons still forged and they had roller cams too. Converting MAP to MAF isn't hard - computer, sensor, a few wires. 89-95 all MAF sensed cars w/roller cams. 94-95 had screwed up computers with timing taken out to save warranty costs with the T5 - these cars were heavier. Mid to late 92 Ford switched to Hyper pistons. Somewhere between 88 and 93 they also switched cams and never told anyone, yes this is true. The magazines noticed in their dyno tests and replacement part #s changed too. It was done for NVH supposedly. The books will also say that 93 was the first year for hyper pistons, this is crap. A friend owns a shop specialing in Mustangs and he's SEEN hyper pistons in 92 cars (doh!). Interesting note - 93 cars have a 94 floorpan. If you lived closer I could help you get all the Ford parts you could ever want, my Ford mechanic does a booming business and is a pretty nice guy. He's gotten deep into modular motors now 93 Cobras have 24lb injectors, funky MAF meter, and a CRAPPY computer. They also have GT40 heads, a cast "Cobra" intake (ala GT40), and crappy cast "Crane" roller rockers. Many of these rockers failed - at a show once I spoke to a cluster of Cobra owners, 3 out of 5 had valvetrain issues with the rockers. So, if you've buying a complete car for this buy say a 91, I think it'll have trans upgrades in it too. Dump the pistons for new forged ones as the "low tension" oil rings will likely be shot or soon to be. The cam will be good but there are cheap upgrades available everywhere. Port a nice cast "Cobra" intake, put on some shorty headers, use some nice aftermarket aluminum heads, use a 65mm TB, and maybe get a slightly bigger MAF. Figure 300+HP is a cakewalk. You might need 24lb injectors, not 30s unless you run a blower. 30lb injectors aren't needed on a stockish 302. I used them on my turbo 302 and it was perfect - 450hp with room to spare. I didn't use a rising rate fuel regulator like Vortech and others use - that's crap. I've got 42s on my blown 351W now and I think I went too big (sigh). I've talked to guys running higher fuel pressure making over 500HP on 30s, I think I should've gone with 36s. Do NOT go too big - you will regret it. Also note that changing injectors in a Ford by going with a recalibrated MAF is a bad way to do it. It changes the load maps in the computer and screws up timing. A chip is the best way to go for this. ProM won't mention this little fact and most Ford guys don't realize it. The EECIV is an awesome computer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scca Posted December 7, 2000 Share Posted December 7, 2000 ok.. my car doesnt have a roof - or a rollbar for that matter "anymore". (it used too- its still in the shop- but i like the clean look with the top down) i think a well breathing 5.0 should be more than enough for "street use" i have the race car for no chance of tickets.. i used to have a 93 stang with chip, underdrive pulleys, bigger TB, 3.55's?- i cant remember it all - bought it that way. but it was plenty quick in that car and my Z HAS to be lighter so that would be fast enough to scare myself on the street i'd like a easy swap and low maintenance . hence FI. the only upgrade i would consider is alum heads for the weight savings. or other small ones the cars already got enough brakes for a freight train so all i need is more power. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 8, 2000 Share Posted December 8, 2000 Mike, I don't have an answer but I do have another question. I live in Merritt which as you know has colder weather than Vancouver. You stated that you feel the EFI system is more reliable. I have also decided to to a 5.0 swap into my 240 but I don't know whether to go with the EFI or a carb. Seems to me a carb setup would be easier and cheaper to modify;as a trade-off gas mileage and reliability might suffer. My thinking is that if I wanted around 300 hp a tweaked efi system might be best but if I wanted more like 400 hp (which I do) then non-efi might be a lot cheaper to build up and according to some people I've talked to a carbed car can be made quite streetable at these horsepower levels. I'm not so sure in my climate, though. Comments? BTW, the swap seems like such a natural thing to do - c.f. the l28 the Ford has less weight, more cubes, and power to match the turboed l28's with less "fussiness". (what about a turboed 302???). Better than a sbc wrt weight/hp, too. Dan in Florida seems to have made his fit quite well. Any problems yet, Dan? As for the "low exhaust ports", an earlier posting here states an FRPP street rod block hugger header fits great for $220 U.S.. I'm pumped. I'm pretty busy with work but hope to have the thing running by spring. I hope the swap site Pete and alansil have been discussing goes ahead. Right now I'm just gathering as much info as possible to prevent screwups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scca Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 i think FI is the best...... most of us fear it as a unknown but a well setup FI car will outlast and outperform a carb'd one. IMO.... on similar levels. with colder weather a FI would be even better ..... hmm what starts better a 73 mustang or a 91? yes initially building a huge HP car is easier with a carb but if your looking for longevity and consistency then FI has to be the way to go. having a big carb'd 400hp would be like having a BOss302 or a 69z 28 to drive, nice cars but not something to drive routinely. 400HP in a winter car???? what size tires does it have and brakes.. sub frame connectors etc... doyou think you can actually get that power to the ground in a Z. i mean the difference from 300hp to 400hp. just wondering aloud......and i'm thinking unflared cars.... ------------------ Mike mike@fonebooth.com http://www.fonebooth.com/brakes.html raceparts and brake upgrades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 quote: Originally posted by scca: i think FI is the best...... most of us fear it as a unknown but a well setup FI car will outlast and outperform a carb'd one. Everything I've read agree's 100% with that. FI motors tend to last MUCH longer due to precise amounts of fuel being injected and not having excess fuel wasted, washing by rings and diluting the lubrication. Some of the auto makers are claiming nearly double the lifespan on the engine. That may be a bit optimistic, but not totally without merit. Lone ------------------ "No matter where you go, there you are.." Buckaroo Banzai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLKMGK Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Yeah, go fuelie if you can. Ford even sells a harness for "streetrod" use that would make the swap easier. Oh, for headers you can use stock style Ford shorty type headers depending upon how you mount the motor. A friend has a 302 mounted in his 240 but never finished the swap (sigh) - shorty headers worked well and the T5 lined right up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
74_5.0L_Z Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 In my installation, the shorty headers did not work well. They turn out and back. The exhaust would have to make a sharp turn to clear the frame and fire wall. I used the dynomax block-hugger headers. They work well, but the quality is questionable. When these headers die, I'll try the Ford Motorsport block-huggers. I've seen them and the quality is good, and they look like they'll fit. The other option is to make my own long tubes. There is plenty of room but no premade set. For anyone using pre-91 engine, you'll need to convert to the later 91-93 starter. The early starter was big and heavy and interfered with the headers. The later starter is a factory mini-starter. Good Luck, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 12, 2000 Share Posted December 12, 2000 Depending how wild you go with the motor/cam setup I'd direct you towards: http://www.eec-tuner.com This group has a piggyback board that lets you alter most everything you'd want to in the EFI map: map a new transfer curve for the MAF, change injector sizes, tweak timing curve with some pretty fine granularity, etc.. Eric Goehl is supposed to have a pretty good reputation for customer service and everyone I've talked to has been quite happy with his product & service. The main drawback I've read is that it's all text based so entering data is rather difficult so check out www.sn95.com's Eec-tuner section. There's another guy that's doing a GUI front end for the eec-tuner, but I forget his URL. BTW, Blkmgk, what's up with those 42s? Are they lucas injectors or the Bosch types off a '99+ Lightning? I'm just curious because I've heard good things about the Bosch 42s WRT idle quality, smoggability, etc.. HTH, Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firebern Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 The bxr intake sounds pretty efficient. It's limited production which is fun for somebody who wants something different. One thing though is when they are comparing the edelbrock against it, they don't even have the same engine setup. What do U think? I'd like to try it, but it's a little too expensive for an intake, no? I wonder if this would be as efficient on a stock 302 engine from an 88 GT? How did you get the ford engine mounts to fit on the datsun?(this would make great topic, different people with diff. ideas) Thanks, Fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLKMGK Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 Heh, now that's a new one on me - EEC-Tuner?! For a moment I thought that perhaps Mike Wesley's stuff had finally made it out the door but I'm not so sure from the descriptions. I'll have to read into the SN95 forum to get a better idea. BXR intake? Hrm, if memory serves that's the REALLY wild ram tuned intake that someone made? There was even one that had dual runners and a valve to switch between them. BIG bucks if that's the one you mean and honestly I think ram tuning will only get you so far - start modifying other things on the engine and you throw off the design specs for the intake. (sigh) If memory serves this one ever required a distributor that was run off of a belt (ouch). Duh, there's a link up there - yeah that's the one! Damned nice but very pricey. Heh, I run Street Heat TFS heads too My 42s are Lucas, sorry. Bosch is big bux usually, didn't realize they came stock on the Lightnings - same style of injector? I'm betting not since the other mod motor injectors are really funky looking. I believe once I get off my butt, set the timing, and get the programming sorted that my 42s ought to idle okay. I've talked to guys who have run 83s (?!) on the street and they claim it worked okay. Talk about a quick pulse for idle! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.