Guest Anonymous Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 My plan: research>research>research>buy junkyard motor and FSM for it>research>(re)build in my garage>research>rob a bank>put in 240sx I'm figureing it'll take about a year start to finish mainly by myself. After a good bit of reading on here and other places, I think 5.0 is the way to go for me. But there are a LOT of 5.0 302 v8's out there. I found THIS website on mustang engines but I'm curious about non-mustang options as well. As far as pushrod vs dohc vs sohc or efi vs carb I just don't know enough about it yet. As much as I would hate to put carbs in a mid-90's car wireing really scares me. Physical size is ofcourse a big issue as I can't modify shocktowers or push back my firewall(other than a little hammering to fit the tranny)...thats just beyond the scope of my project. Weight is really my biggest concern, both lbs and it's CG. I don't mind making hump for my hood (or getting a whole new one, either way...) but I would like my weight to be as low as possible...w/out big clearance issues as the car is fairly low to begin with and will be lowered a little with aftermarket suspension in additon to the extra weight the car will be holding. Goal is something in the mid 300hp range N/A and at higher than stock rpm, but thats a different topic really. I'll research upgrades after I pick a motor. Any advice on which 5.0L v8 I should look into? Right now it looks like any 302 from 87-95 from a stang would work great. Here is a link to some info I already have about the swap http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB9&Number=335602&page=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Ignoring a few ignorant posts, it has some very useful information. Here is another link proving that it is possible in the same car as mine. http://www.limecreekmotorsports.com/project240SS.htm IIRC thats a bigger engine than I'm looking at also, extra good for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 Stick to pushrod for weight and size concerns, OHC is kind of a pain once you start modding the cam and heads too, they are heavy and large engines. Sounds like 88-93 are the 'best years' to pick from, which is going to of course be EFI and MAF but you can throw carbs on them if you want to buy the manifold/setup for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Thaks for the reply Mudge http://www.automotix.com/engines_by_size/ford-ford_v8-engines_t---FOR-302RHOLB-1.html What do you think of this one? I never realized it'd be so cheap @ $1300, probably another couple hundred for shipping. Whats HO though? One was HO the other said Not HO. It's far from complete but I could upgrade many of the missing parts and pull all the other parts from a couple hundred dollar junkyard motor...save me from having to rebuild. Then just pickup a junkyard tranny. This would allow me to focus on getting the thing in the car. Custom engine and tranny mounts, driveshaft and that part would be done. Then I'd just have wiring which should be the hardest part of the whole thing...wire to standalone engine management. Once in I can always swap with aluminum heads and do the other upgrades to get my desired HP and weight later. Hopefully I'm not seeing this as too simple or cheap but it looks like it could be done for around $5k...maybe not over 300hp but the mostly stock engine, running and in the car. What do you all think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLKMGK Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Okay - a tip from some friends who run a Mustang hop up shop... Buy an Explorer motor, get one with the GT-40P heads. Note that these require goofy headers on the Mustang so you'll need to make sure that street rod headers will work. Okay, you've got the engine, it was CHEAP huh? Now, replace the cam with a performance cam, use the Explorer "Cobra Style" intake, it will run great. A guy locally did this and with his Mustang ECU, MAF, etc. it made 300RWHP. Best of all it cost him MUCH less than a Mustang "HO" motor since the wrecking yards don't realize it's potential. It will also likely be newer, I think it will already have the rollers, spider, and other goods for a roller setup but a CRAPPY low lift cam - don't go nuts on the cam. The GT-40P heads are supposed to be as good or better than the SVO GT-40 heads They will be iron though but if you're on a budget they're decent. P.S. Someone double check me on the intake. I'm 99.9% sure on it but I've not been keeping up as much as I used to. Would be helpful to know the years for the Explorer 5.0 motors too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Sounds like a cheap alternative to mustang. Whats the difference between the Explorer and mustang 5.0 engines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Dave, HO = High Output, it probably means something like 20 more HP than the base, anyone know for certain? Back then in the late 80s the cars weren't all that potent so nowdays our average V8 is more than HO of the old days. Blk, do you know what year spread on those Exploder engines? Sounds like a good deal, the negative side to that is I'd still have to find a T5 seperately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Hrm...I can't find any explorers with 5.0's. I Only have data from 90-02 but they seem to all be 4.0L v6 Some Bronco models had a 5.0 from 90-96 though . Could that be what they meant to say? It puts out less hp and less torque than the mustang enigne though...but if they are the same basic engine and it's only a few changes to get them up to speed then it seems like it could be a cheaper way of going. 1990 eddie bauer bronco: Base Number of Cylinders: 8 Base Engine Size: 5 liters Base Engine Type: V8 Horsepower: 145 hp Max Horsepower: 3400 rpm Torque: 265 ft-lbs. 1996 eddie bauer bronco: Base Number of Cylinders: 8 Base Engine Size: 5 liters Base Engine Type: V8 Horsepower: 199 hp Max Horsepower: 4200 rpm Torque: 270 ft-lbs. Max Torque: 2400 rpm 1992 mustang gt: Base Number of Cylinders: 8 Base Engine Size: 5 liters Base Engine Type: V8 Horsepower: 225 hp Max Horsepower: 4200 rpm Torque: 300 ft-lbs. <--DAMN that looks like a fun place to START Max Torque: 3200 rpm Max rpm @ 4200 seems really low though. granted I hope to pick cams and aluminium heads that would bring it up to around 6k or 7k rpm but whats the gearing like on the t5? figured I'd tack another question on here... Can anybody point me in the direction of a good standalone engine management system? I found http://www.painlessperformance.com on this site for my wireing needs (will their stuff work with a 302?) but I need a computer to wire to and don't know much about them. Something like This or This seems like it would work. Any particular one you'd recommend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 96 is most likely going to be SOHC not pushrod though. The cams in trucks are usually torquey, i.e. "motorhome" cams, low lift and duration. So the cam is probably part of it, exaust perhaps another, and sometimes even just unflattering numbers for people who want to believe the muscle car is that much better. I dont know how Ford was about that though, but between the Camaro/Corvette the Camaro was always underrated. Thats not max RPM just means thats peak power output RPM, which is very low yes. Some of this is exaust some is camshaft and perhaps some is intake as well, an engine has to breath and if it can't breath them its going to run out of steam. This is where headers, and the intake come in, as well as a cam that doesn't die off. 5th gear on the T5 I think is .68? If you can find the #s you can plug them in here, the lower gears should probably be kind of close to the Nissan T5. http://www.geocities.com/z_design_studio/ T5 history stuff http://moderndriveline.tripod.com/moderndriveline/id14.html Maybe something of value here, not sure http://www.hybridz.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=13299 The T-5z is a 93 Cobra T-5 with 2.95 first gear set and .63 over drive. It has the best of everything. Hardened gears, short throw shifter, steel front bearing retainer, and tapered output shaft bearing. Best of all it has a torque rating of 330ft/lbs. This T-5 can handle up to 450 hp if not drag raced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 the diffrence between an ho and a non ho.. is that the ho has a roller cam the non ho has a flat tappet... the 87-90 had forged trw pistons.. the late 90- 95 had hyperutectic ... the elplorer motor is the same short block with gt40P heads...and a cross between a cobra and a gt40 intake.. the lower is the same.. the upper is slightly diffrent.... you can buy these on ebay... if you use a expy intake and a 87-90 short block add a small cam...(480-500) lift... and a set of alumnium heads...with a mas air computer you should hit 300 -325 hp.... ps the 87-90 short block... i have seen a BUNCH of them cross the 200,000 mile mark.... 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Hrm, sorry for my ignorance but whats the difference between a roller cam and flat tappet? "if you use a expy intake and a 87-90 short block add a small cam...(480-500) lift... and a set of alumnium heads...with a mas air computer you should hit 300 -325 hp" I like the sound of that! An explorer short block your saying? So the pre 1990 ones were 5.0? Unless I have incorrect information (edmunds.com) the 90+ were v6's and the bronco was the only one with a v8. Whats the difference between the MAF engines and the other one...air density or something as far as power output and things? The t5 sounds weak acording to that article. They say it is strong but the tq rating shown looks pretty low I'm going to a few junkyards tomorrow to make some measurements and just see what I can find, check prices, etc... Thanks for all the help so far guys! Long road ahead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLKMGK Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Yes, the Explorer had a 5.0 in it for a few years but as I said above I cannot detail the years without digging through a pile of Mustang mags - you've been reading up on those right? Roller cams have less friction and faster opening ramps - ie it's a desirable thing. Flat Tappet late model blocks accept the OEM roller stuff no problems. Oh, you don't need aluminum heads to hit 300RWHP with an Explorer motor, just a good cam and exhaust. 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 google rocks my world 8) http://www.mercurycapri.com/technical/trans/general/tgr.html I'm going to have to pick up some mustang mags tomorrow. Anybody have an idea of how much weight aluminium heads save over iron? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 google rocks my world 8) http://www.mercurycapri.com/technical/trans/general/tgr.html I'm going to have to pick up some mustang mags tomorrow. Anybody have an idea of how much weight aluminium heads save over iron? not sure on the tottal weight you loose but i know its alot.... and you just need a good 5 liter engin... dose not matter what year really i just would rather have the 87-90 because the forged pistons..... you need to go with mas air... because unless a speed density car is stock.. they have idle probs... a mas air car is just more practical for every day use... you can buy the expy intake and heads most any where... i have a lower in my shop floor... also you could find a used after market intake pretty easy like a tfs street heat or even a stock lower with the comp cams upper.... and maybe like a e-303 cam... steeda 18 or something along those lines.. find a set of roller rockers and a set of headers and you have your self at least 300 hp easy...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgkurz Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 The Ford Explorer had the 5.0L V8 from 96 to 01. Personally I tow my Z with my 2001 V8 Eddie Bauer Explorer. That low lift cam mentioned above has decent low end torque and gets me 21.5 MPG on the freeway. Not bad for a pushrod V8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 The Ford Explorer had the 5.0L V8 from 96 to 01. Personally I tow my Z with my 2001 V8 Eddie Bauer Explorer. That low lift cam mentioned above has decent low end torque and gets me 21.5 MPG on the freeway. Not bad for a pushrod V8. Your sure they stayed pushrod for that long? Was that to clear out old blocks or something? I am just curious because GM puts engines in trucks basically the year after the Camaro gets them, and the 5.0 Pushrod was last seen in the stang in 94? If the Ford flat tappet setups accept a roller setup that is great, because the GM blocks do NOT, they must be machined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 They say it is strong but the tq rating shown looks pretty low You rate a trans by torque, usually this denotes first gear strength. However, the lighter the car, the easier it is on the trans. If you dont drag race again, easier on the car, less shock force. But remember back then these cars didn't put out power, 225HP is a snooze these days. Look at a T56 and it weighs about 150 pounds, not 80ish like a T5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgkurz Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 I am positive that the Explorer had the 5.0L V8 from 96 - 01. I wish it was the 4.6 or 5.4. The 02 and newer Explorer's have the 4.6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 The 4.6 has a long rod it looks like, but all that friggin weight of the OHC and the size, and the difficulty of playing with OHC, forget it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 I found a nice 88 mustang 5.0 engine with manual tranny at the junkyard today. They wanted $1200 for it but I'm sure I can get it cheaper. Since I wasn't buying today, I didn't want to put out the effort of hagling and complaining about everything I didn't like about the motor. Also, I can get it cheaper if I pick it up w/out heads, intake manafold or cam, since they can sell things like that separate...and they do the work of taking it appart and giving me only what I want. I'd also save money if I didn't get the ac compresser or ps pump but I'm not sure if I can use my current ps pump or if I'll even keep ps or ac. I'm think I can get the engine and tranny for about $600-$900 depending on exactly what I get. Think that is reasonable? I BSed with the guy there for a while and ended up finding a # to get a aluminium or CF driveshaft made and the motormount adapters and tranny brace (I can't weld) so things are falling into place nicely so far. I picked up 5.0 magazine today and have been reading up over at stangnet.com...hopefully I'll be building the engine soon 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.