Welcome to the next installment of the

Topic of the Week

The subject for the week is swapping in the Ford 5.0 engine. This is an awesome powerplant, with tons of possibilities. Arguably a better swap than a SBC. But we're not going to argue that here, we're going to talk about the ins and outs of dropping a 5.0 in your junk.

Some suggested points of discussion:
- Wiring
- Tranny choices (AOD/C4C6/NP435/??)
- Mounts
- Cooling
- Hop ups
- What about using a 351W block with Mustang heads & SEFI? :vader:

DON'T USE ADVANCE ADAPTER ENG MOUNTS!!!!!!!!!

AND YES I AM YELLING!! :D

Originally posted by high5
DON'T USE ADVANCE ADAPTER ENG MOUNTS!!!!!!!!!


why?

Cool, hopefully this TOTW will gimme some good info. When I get back from Africa in a few weeks, I'm gonna start my 5.0 swap. Trying to be smart & do all my homework before I start.

Speaking of hopups, I'm dropping in a mild Trickflow cam while the motor's out & of course, will run a K&N filter & Flowmasters to open up her breathing a bit. When the money's straight again, after the swap, I'd love a set of GT40 heads & intake.... :vader2:

I have heard that the old v8 explorers with the Firestone tires came with GT40 heads. Doesn't make much sense--is this true? If so, should be a fairly easy find in the junkyards. I too am considering this motor. I think the 4.6 would make a good swap too. Should be a lot lighter since they are all aluminum.

This is quite a ways down the road for me, since I am still working on axles. I'd still like to see what you guys think though.

The Explorer heads are GT-40P and require a slightly different header due to the angle on the plugs. MAC makes the header, Ford Motorsports as well. You can get a complete set of built heads with 1.94 intake/1.60 exhaust from Central Coast Mustang for about $650. I'm running them on my 'stang. Also the Explorer intake is very close to a Cobra intake in design and airflow.

I have heard some good things about the GT40P heads and if I could get some from a yard in good shape I'd be tempted to give them a shot. But for $650 for new ones I'd almost be willing to shell out the extra dough for a set of really trick heads like Edelbrock or Trick Flow:D

By the way I'm sure none of this is needed for crawling, it is just part of my freakish desire to get the most out of a 5.0:flipoff2:

Originally posted by Dan-H


why?

they are known to break the bolt that mount the mount to the block. i have heard of several people with this problem and when i used to run a 351w i had the same problem too. infact i ended up breaking one of the threaded bungs from the side of the blok as a result of them breaking so many times.

This is a MUST for anyone thinking of swapping in a Ford EFI 5.0L.
Buy the Probst pamphlet "Multiport EFI Engine Management Harness" by calling Ford's Tech 'Hot Line' 810-468-1356 for only $5.

Then buy or barrow from the lybrary the Probst book and read it, a lot! "Ford Fuel Injection & Electronic Engine Control : All Ford/Lincoln-Mercury Cars and Light Trucks 1988 to 1993" by Charles O. Probst. Only 28 dollars. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0837603013/qid=1011421351/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2_2/102-9229428-7720961

Edit -> Summitracing was kind enough to to ahve the Probst 26 page Pamphlet scanned into a .pdf Save this one, and start here --> http://static.summitracing.com/global/images/instructions/fms-m12071f302.pdf

Or a great second option and worth it's wieght in gold is the large and well documented Helms wire manual. $18.50 http://www.helminc.com/helm/Result.asp?Style=&Mfg=FMC&Make=FCT&Model=MUST&Year=&Category=3&Keyword=&mscsid=AE2ERK42JWGU9GVH77PFM7WQBB7G44DD

And Mitchell wiring manual, from local library or Auto store.
Do not use the Haynes and Chilton books.

Go to wiring page (http://77cj.littlekeylime.com/5_0l_wiring.html) for a key to the below picture.

All you need to hook up between engine and vehicle:

Green plug (B) wires hook to:
W/R not used
Gr/Y Run only
Pu A-C on switch
Dk G/Y Inertia switch (Then to Fuel pump positive)
Pk/O Speed sensor negative (Splice this joint to ground, not Needed)
G/Blk Speed sensor positive
Pk/G Check Engine Light (ground side, need power from other side of light)

Brown Plug (Q) wires hooked to: (Hint, get the Mustang side of the Brown plug and splice into those wires)
T/Y Tack
W/Pk to Crank only
R/G to Crank and Run
R/LB to Crank only
Pu/Pk to H2O temp gauge
G/Pu Not used for Auto (Neutral switch)
Pu/Y Not used for Auto (Neutral switch)

1992 Mustang wiring harness, very close to the 88-93 Mustang harness.
http://77cj.littlekeylime.com/img/Eng/92stang5.0lwireharness.gif
Edit -> Moved Picture, after trying to reduce size.

Edit:
Front Page
http://77cj.littlekeylime.com/mrnimages/Ford_5.0_engine_wires.gif

Running a C4 behind a 5.0L

You want a 70's C4 and a 5.0L FlexPlate. Then you'll need a torque converter with the bolt holes 11.4" apart. Do note early to mid 70's C4's had a Torque converter and flex plate with 10.4" bolt pattern.
It's that easy, just bolt it up. However don't be fooled and try to use a C5 bell-housing, it's ~1/2" longer and will not engage the torque converter.

It seems most people end up making custom motor mounts for the Ford 302/5.0L to fint in a CJ or YJ. There are alot of companys that make them, but none other than M.O.R.E. the get a thumbs up.

Here is my custom mounts: Bolts to the frame.
http://littlekeylime.com/MrN/mrnimages/engine_mount_homemade02_.jpg
Never mind the bad weld, it's the 2nd pass

The prevalent restriction point in the 5.0L engines are the heads.
Heads, Heads and Heads. If you want to make the largest improvement you can with one single move, replace the heads, or at least remove the heads and grind the air nipple off the stock heads.

Which donor vehicles have the C4 with the proper output shaft that an Atlas II will bolt up to? Early Bronco? Anything else? And are they 23 spline? I've got the 5.0, harness and all smog goodies in my garage. How about the length of the 5.0 vs a Jeep 4.0? Length of different trannys vs the TF999? Yeah, I know, I could use the "search" button for alot of this, but since the thread is here...

Originally posted by Mr.N
The prevalent restriction point in the 5.0L engines are the heads.
Heads, Heads and Heads. If you want to make the largest improvement you can with one single move, replace the heads, or at least remove the heads and grind the air nipple off the stock heads.
What about 351 heads? Are they an big improvementon a 302? Are there any negative aspects to the short ford 302 rods? Chevy rods seem a lot longer.

anyone use z and m conversions motor mounts? they specialize ford to jeep conversions www.zandm.com i have a cj project coming up that will get a 351w i have sitting around.

heres a pic of there yj mounts

and there cj mounts

96-mid 97 exploder motors came with the gt-40 heads thereafter it went to the gt 40p heads at the end of the heads there are some bars casted in somewhat perpendicular to the cylinder mating surface. 3 bars denote gt40 heads 4 for the p variety.

The p heads are slightly better particularily for off road, they have better exhaust flow despite a smaller valve, great port velocitys.

As mentioned before the exploder motor comes with a cobra type intake, but also comes with a 65mm Throttle body.

I am running a 98 explorer motor with TFS stage one cam in my 65 cobra replica and am using a 88 mustang computer and wiring harness, I had to swap the timing cover, oil pan and distributor to make it all work.

In addition I used an 88 helms manual and trimmed out all unnecesary circuits and tossed all emmission related stuff.

Has ANYONE used the crank triggered, coil on plug setup found on the explorers? Or is everyone using the more common eeciv computer and wiring? (like on an HO mustang.)

here is a pretty good link on a yj swap

http://www.bc4x4.com/chrisw/projects/powertrain/powertrain.asp

I have thought about swapping the whole running gear from an explorer in, 5.0 AOD and t-case. I will probably do so in the next year or two. I am thinking I should be able to do it for about the price of a good rebuilt 4.0. My cherokee is approaching the 200k mark and feel like if I rebuild the motor the tranny will need it shortly there after.

Anyone know of any write-ups for removing the entire smog system off of the 5.0?? I'd like to block or remove any lines I can (don't need) for simplicity.

Originally posted by Gary E
here is a pretty good link on a yj swap

http://www.bc4x4.com/chrisw/projects/powertrain/powertrain.asp

I have thought about swapping the whole running gear from an explorer in, 5.0 AOD and t-case. I will probably do so in the next year or two. I am thinking I should be able to do it for about the price of a good rebuilt 4.0. My cherokee is approaching the 200k mark and feel like if I rebuild the motor the tranny will need it shortly there after.

Don't the 5.0 explorers have a single speed t-case??

Some miscellaeous ramblings:

- Mustang 5.0-HO engines are arguably the best candidates for a swap. '89-'93 were MAF and had the highest HP numbers, AFAIK. The MAF system is dead easy to deal with in a swap - in fact the EFI HO engines must rank amongst the easiest EFI engines to swap into a non-EFI vehicle. Their electrical systems are almost completely self-contained, so you only have to hook up a few wires during the install.

- When mating a 'stang 5.0-HO with a 4-speed (NP435, T18, T19), use the later-model (post-'85?) 50-oz imbalance truck flywheel, clutch & fork, bellhousing, starter, and throwout bearing. You CANNOT use the Mustang parts - they won't work with those trannies. Small mercy: the pilot bearing is the same, at least.

- Mid-to-late '80s Ford trucks had a great hydraulic clutch setup with an external slave cylinder. The bellhousing for this setup can be bolted between most 5.0 blocks and most HD Ford 4-speeds.

- While the factory 'stang headers look cool, they interfere with the mid-'80s hydraulic clutch slave cylinder. Run the truck manifolds and save a few $, unless you're mud-dragging or something. You should get better low-end anyway.

- 'Stang 5.0s run 40psi in the fuel supply line, so get a pump that's good to at least that much pressure. And yes, you need a return line to the tank.

- Avoid Z&M - my experiences with them have all been negative, and IMHO their stuff is massively overpriced. I'd suggest using separate left- and right-side motor mounts (maybe with a removeable cross-brace) instead of their cradle-type mount. Sure, you should never need to remove your oilpan once the engine is installed, but if you ever do, you're SOL.

- For those of us who would rather walk hot coals than fork over the kind of money AA wants for an Atlas, Ford didn't provide many options for good t-cases. that bolt up to 5.0 powertrains. The EB D20 is okay, but you need a custom adapter to mate it to a 2wd NP435. The NP203 is a boat anchor, which really just leaves the NP205 (2:1 low range) and the NP208 (chain-driven), plus all the later-model NV cases.

There's a bunch of photos & stuff of my 5.0L & dual t-case install at my website, check it out if you haven't already, and feel free to email me with questions if I can help.

Hope that helps some of you,
Chris

Just a note on HO motors... you want a MAF not a speed density which leaves you with 89+ (or 88 cal emissions) then the HO motors came with Forged pistons up until 92 then they went to Cast Pistons... for a good head combo run 351W heads they are suppose to gain a lot of HP. I belive it's an 88 or 89 Autos have the best Computer they produce the best HP.

For transmissions NP435 to NP203 to NP205 yea you Definatly need a CJ7 for it but it gives you a 4:1 low range and a 6.69 1st Gear and a 10% lower second gear as opposed to other 3 and 4 speeds (3.3vs 3.0) plus an NP203 you can get Gear reduction for to make it like 3.6 its all gears with no chain BIG BONUS :):):):)

Hey Cwate, whats your feelings on the swap after you have it done, are you really happy with the 5.0 how much more power did you get, how is the gas mileage etc, your general impressions, would you suggest it to others?

harsanyj, you are right all the 5.0 explorers use a single speed case the 4.0 liters had both lever and button activated low range, the explorer guys also don't have much good to say about the auto tranny either. and talk about switchin to an AOD

Anyone one know what t-cases would be available with the AOD?

maybe a 88-93 mustang, t-bird, or crown vic with an AOD would be a better donor vehicle?

What about divorced t-cases? just not enough room?
I am running a XJ

Originally posted by yjtj
anyone use z and m conversions motor mounts? they specialize ford to jeep conversions www.zandm.com i have a cj project coming up that will get a 351w i have sitting around. I've never owned any A&M products, but did design motor mounts very close to your picture. I used thicker flate plate, did run them on a Jeep. Now go re-read my motor mount post.

Originally posted by YJ4LIFE

What about 351 heads? Are they an big improvementon a 302? Are there any negative aspects to the short ford 302 rods? Chevy rods seem a lot longer. Yes and no, there are so many Ford heads you'd need to talk to a very knowledgeable person to get it right. You need special studs to bolt 351 heads to a 302 block. A lot of peoepl make heads for the 302 / 5.0L now.

Originally posted by high5


they are known to break the bolt that mount the mount to the block. i have heard of several people with this problem and when i used to run a 351w i had the same problem too. infact i ended up breaking one of the threaded bungs from the side of the blok as a result of them breaking so many times.


I just got my mounts from AA and after looking at them, decided to pick up some grade 8 bolts to replace them (available at Lowes for about $2). AA makes quality, albeit pricey, stuff. Grade 8 is the way to go!

The first improvement you’ll make with your 302/5.0L is replacing the power steering pump. Yes you can replace it with a F250 pump, it’d bolt up and work better (So-I’ve read several times) However the solution you want is a Saginaw pump!
The donors for bracket are mid 80’s vans for the 5.0L (V-belt guys, NAPA has a kit). The smallest bracket I could find was on a 84 5.0L van. Took it home and everything bolts up great. However one problem, the Pulley is off ¼” Just press the pulley off and back on several times to fit.

I’ve been told the following: “trip to ford Dealer and I bought a P/S pulley for 35.00 part number E7UZ3A733C” and also a GM pulley will work for cheaper.
H8Monday posted "a pulley for an 89 Camaro with, with a 350. They are 6 rib serpentine, 6" diameter, and cost about $17."

Also welndmn wrote "High PSI line no fit"

You can see the 84 Saginaw pump and bracket with the AC pump missing
http://77cj.littlekeylime.com/images/FordSaginawpump.jpg

Edit -> You don't need a new pulley. Just press the pulley off and back on several times. It will seat far enough in to work. Updated linked pic.

Is every one just running manafolds? I would prefer to run headers and dual exaust between the frame rails. I know it can be done and as of right now I am thinking custom headers. I have a 72 cj5 also so that doesn't help my situation.

Another improvement you’ll make with your 5.0L is replacing the alternator

Links for the G3 upgrade:
http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2001/03/paperformance/index.shtml
http://www.corral.net/tech/maintenance/130a-tech.html
http://www.geocities.com/smithmonte/Auto/3G_130A_Alternator_Upgrade.htm
http://fullsizebronco.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55169
http://fordfuelinjection.com/?p=75


You have to replace the stock wiring! This is a must!
http://www.corral.net/images/alttop.jpg

Another Q I have is what is everyone doing about cooling? I moved my motor forward a couple of inches to gain more d shaft. Now my problem is that if I mount my Radatior in the stock location it is REALLLY close to the pullys. so what I am thinking is cutting the latch out of the grill and moving the radiator back against the grill slats and run an electric fan with just enough clearance. Does any one know if there is a Radiator that will fit between my head lights and still provide enough cooling? Once again I was thinking of haveing a radiator custom made from alum. but that will get pricy fast. I have heard that some people have used an early mustange radiator has anyone done this? Thanks for listening to me babble.

Originally posted by convertiyota
Anyone know of any write-ups for removing the entire smog system off of the 5.0?? I'd like to block or remove any lines I can (don't need) for simplicity.

Anyone?? :confused: :rasta:

Originally posted by convertiyota
removing the entire smog system Anyone?? :confused: :rasta:

Try http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/...ips/index.shtml

You need to remove the air pump and brackets. then you'll need a plug for the back of the heads. Forget the size, just take the air tubes that plugged into the back ot the heads in to NAPA and find an plug.

Not sure what to do about the cats and I'm not running them. Should be easy. Are you planning on not running the EGR? How about Tab and Tad?

Originally posted by Gary E

maybe a 88-93 mustang, t-bird, or crown vic with an AOD would be a better donor vehicle?

Crown Vic's have less HP than mustangs and have a different Fireing order than mustangs do. but you can obtain the motor and wireing harness for $500 pretty easily...... Best price i've found is $400 for the motor/wireing harnes/comp/PS/alt/(air compressor.

For a budget build up that is deffinantly the way to go......

Originally posted by dangerranger33
Crown Vic's have less HP than mustangs and have a different Fireing order than mustangs do. but you can obtain the motor and wireing harness for $500 pretty easily...... Best price i've found is $400 for the motor/wireing harnes/comp/PS/alt/(air compressor.

For a budget build up that is deffinantly the way to go...... $29.95
Here in Minnesota you can get everything you need down to the wiring harness to the complete engine & accessories for $29.95. That was not a misprint. The local U-pull has a ton of reg 5.0 in late 80's Ford cars.
The catch? You have to pull everything your self the carry all the pieces including the complete block and accessories 15 feet.
It's all one person can carry 15 feet for $29.95 on June 8th at the local U-pull. And yes this has been done!

no one wants to answer me :crybaby2:

69-70 351w heads are better and are popular hopups, the next best heads would be the E7 heads like on the HO. The best heads are the gt40s and gt40ps. There are the K code heads but they are hard to come by and all the old mustang people pay more than they are worth for originality.

Originally posted by Mr.N


Try http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/...ips/index.shtml

You need to remove the air pump and brackets. then you'll need a plug for the back of the heads. Forget the size, just take the air tubes that plugged into the back ot the heads in to NAPA and find an plug.

Not sure what to do about the cats and I'm not running them. Should be easy. Are you planning on not running the EGR? How about Tab and Tad?

Thanks for the link!! If I can get away without running the EGR I'd like to. What would the benifits/downsides be?? What are the Tab and Tad??

Mr. N will you post that link again?? That one doesn't work. Thanks a lot.......

Originally posted by convertiyota
Mr. N will you post that link again?? That one doesn't work. Thanks a lot.......
Sorry about that, looks like they pulled the info and changed the site :(

For EGR just attach the wiring harness to the EGR sensor, skip everything else. Tab and Tad are to little sensors, hook to vacuum and the wiring harness, it's easier to run them than not. When you order the Probst it comes with a modified vacuum diagram for how to run it all.

Try these (Some links taken from POR and I haven't looked into them)
http://www.bc4x4.com/chrisw/*
http://cjford.stormloader.com/
http://www.feepness.com*
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep*
http://www.v8-ranger.com/engine/engine.html**
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Falls/2032/conv.htm**
http://www.broncohq.com/rmte-5literhosefiswap.html Links to many pages!
http://earth.vol.com/~gboyd/Bronco.htm**
http://home.off-road.com/~bwiencek/projsr50/projsr50.html**
http://members.tripod.com/~grannys/listbyengine.html**
http://www.musclemotors.com/mustang/mustang.htm**
http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/powertrain/50hints.html**
http://trader.stangnet.com/**
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Canyon/1789/SEFI.html*
http://www.extreme-jeepin.com/swapinfo.htm**
http://www.rangerpowersports.com/tech/v8swaps/whatyouneed/computer.shtml**
http://www.windsor-fox.com/**
http://www.stangparts.com/**
http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2000/02/quicktips/index.shtml*
http://www.mustangwarehouse.com/contact.html good place for junkyard parts
http://www.truckworld.com/trail-trucks/00-81jeep-cj7/81-cj7jeep.html

is it ok to use an early 80's manuel bellhousing with the newer 50oz flywheel and starter? i don't see why it wont' work but just checking.



couple pointers..

1. most 351 heads have WAY to big of ports to ever hope of getting any low end torque when used on a 302

2. like DANGERRANGER33 said....................GET MASS AIR! the MAF uses a formula to run the motor so each change is accounted for by the computer.

3. get an automatic computer whether running automatic OR manuel. they are way more aggressive from the factory b/c of having to overcome the torque converter.

4. don't get a crown vic 302. i did......BIG MISTAKE!!!! it will take more $$$ to make it just as mean as a stock HO then it would take just buy a stock HO. here are my reasons:

1) tiny, tiny, tiny ports in the plenums. ie- they come stock
w/ 14 lb. injectors
2) NO MASS AIR until 91 unless in CA (i'm pretty sure about
that year)
3) flat tappet cam.....need i say more
4) NO CLEARANCE IN THE HEADS!!!! no joke, you can't run
any kind of cam w/o the risk of contact. plus, sissy fied
rocker arms that are prone to break w/ a new cam
5) stock cam is something like 194 degree duration
6) etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc!!!!!-russel

You can use an engine from a Lincoln Mark VII. They are the same engine as the Mustang.

How does a Mustang HO engine compare with a late model Explorer w/ the GT or GTP heads?

Do all 302's have the same bolt pattern to the flywheel?

Is the 302 the same as the I6 pattern? (When I pulled my NP435 I grabbed the bellhousing w/ the external slave cylinder and all the hydro-clutch shiat, it was in a 84 F-150 w/ the I6)

yes, the pattern is the same for all Ford small blocks after like 66 i think. that exlcudes the 4.6 and 351m which has the big block pattern. your bellhousing will work just fine. and yes, the auto's and manuels both use the same six bolt flywheel pattern.

-russel

The A9L is supposed to be the best performance computer for the 5.0. Also, I'd check whether using an auto computer on a swap with a manual trans is a good choice. You might get error codes thrown at you if it's not getting correct feedback the the AODE trans. Check Engine light = no pass smog.

Originally posted by Mr.N
[B]The first improvement you’ll make with your 302/5.0L is replacing the power steering pump. The solution you want is a Saginaw pump! The donors for bracket are mid 80’s vans for the 5.0L Took it home and everything bolts up great. However one problem, the Pulley is off ¼” So you’ll need a new pulley.

I’ve been told the following: “trip to ford Dealer and I bought a P/S pulley for 35.00 part number E7UZ3A733C” and also a GM pulley will work for cheaper.
H8Monday posted "a pulley for an 89 Camaro with, with a 350. They are 6 rib serpentine, 6" diameter, and cost about $17."Skip the new pulley stuff. Just hooked everything up. All I needed to do was buy some grade 5 washers (12), remove the bolts that hold the steering pump on to the bracket, insert the washer in-between the two and reassemble. This easy trick worked great, had to do it several times to get teh right width shims. Now everything lines up.
On to the York!

How bout cooling and fitment into a GPW????

Originally posted by withamc
The A9L is supposed to be the best performance computer for the 5.0. Also, I'd check whether using an auto computer on a swap with a manual trans is a good choice. You might get error codes thrown at you if it's not getting correct feedback the the AODE trans. Check Engine light = no pass smog.

94 up used aode so that is not an issue on the 93 older computer cause they used an aod which is not electronically controlled so the computer works with a manual. This is what I have in front of my t18.
The MORE mounts are awsome, and I used block huggers to clear the external slave cylinder. and a gear reduction starter to clear the block huggers.

i guess i can add a little pic to this topic too. i tossed it in a few weeks ago and i just need to run the gas lines and do the vaccume lines

http://bb.bc4x4.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=74025

http://bb.bc4x4.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=74029

AndrewH, that looks good, what year is motor?
What's the deal with the flywheel? Looks like you have holes drilled in it. I have a few wires left in mine to solder and then it is time to turn the key and see if it works. I haven't had any time in the last few weeks to work on it due to a new job, snow, moving, no garage, cold weather, etc... It is time to start looking to buy a garage, I mean a house with a garage, or at least that is what I tell my girlfriend.

it is a '90 stang motor.
- valve grind
- cylinders honed
- heads decked
- polished crank
- all spun and not tanked
- all new bearings/seals/gaskets and rings
- b303 ford racing cam
- msd off-road ignition
- accel 8.8 wires
- home made motor mounts...

thats about it so far

when i dropped the I6 flywheel off to get balanced it didn't have holes in it but when i picked it up it did have holes in it....

it was the same place that balanced cwate's I6 flywheel.

Originally posted by AndrewH
it is a '90 stang motor.

- b303 ford racing cam



I run the B303 cam in the 5.0 in my YJ. It is a very good cam for developing a strong low end power curve. I love it for rock crawling. It has plenty of mid range, and a half decent top end.

Originally posted by H8monday

I run the B303 cam in the 5.0 in my YJ.

and guess who made me go B303....cough, cough (you) ;)

Originally posted by AndrewH


and guess who made me go B303....cough, cough (you) ;)

Right Awn!
Finish the plumbing on that pony mill, so you can lemme know, how you like it. :D

If you wish to get rid of your emisions. All you have to do is get the plugs for the back of the heads. They are a stock item that they use in the front of the heads, they have threads in them to bolt your acc brackets to. Then you can pull off all your hoses.

There is no reason to get rid of your EGR valve. You will never notice any diffrence in proformance. However I also wouldn't make it a priority in hooking it up.

You can also get the HO 302 out of any Foxbody car. They don't say HO on them, but they are the same thing.

Like said before go for the MAF engine. However, don't pass up a good deal on a Speed Density Engine. Most likly you will be replacing a 2.5 or 4.0, so the SD engine will fell like a HO engine. Also you can build lots of power out of your SD engine with out changing to MAF. Which brings up another point about SD engines, you can get it, get it running, then for a few dollars you can swith it to MAF for around $600 using Ford Racing parts, or $400 using centech and NAPA, or around $100 from a junk yard.

As far as wiring one, they are fairly easy to do. Read what Mr. N has posted, get some background info on the plugs you need to use. Then hit your local Ford dealer, photo copy the wiring diagrams for the donor engine. Or buy a chilton book, it won't tell you why things happen, or give you a good way to replace things. But I have found the wiring diagrams are dead on. They are labled the same as the ones I got from Ford, and an "all data" computer.

Originally posted by emsoffroad

You can also get the HO 302 out of any Foxbody car. They don't say HO on them, but they are the same thing.




What excactly is a Foxbody car?

What excactly is a Foxbody car? [/B][/QUOTE]


its a mustang kinda like a f-body chevy (camaro)

Originally posted by H8monday



What excactly is a Foxbody car?

A general class of cars built by the Ford Motor Co. such as the Mercury Couger and a few others. The main diffrence is the name plate on the upper intake, and the fact that they will have cast exhaust manifolds, instead of the tube ones used on the stangs.

They all use the same front frame member, and rear setup, tranny, ect. There are a few diffrences, no kicker shocks, slightly smaller calipers, ect. As long as you get a 302 that has the 351w firing order, it's basicly an HO. There will be a few diffrences, but nothing to scare you away. I have seen quite a few XR-7s beat the crap out of stangs both on the street and on the track. If you bolt a part on a stang you can put it on any other 302. Or with the right parts a 351w, like I'm working on right now.

Edit: forgot to add, the books will rate the Mustang at a few more ponies, this can be atributied to a few things. A slightly stronger program in the ECU, smaller alt, ect. That and if you wan to sell your "performance car" it can't have the same engine as the family car.

They switched the firing order in order to keep the weaker 302 block from deforming, under the increased load of the higher output they were getting from the engine. The older 302s didn't have this problem since they have a higher nickle content in the block. But after 79 they made the castings cheaper, except the Mexican blocks.

Heard a lot of stuff on the engines guys, but I'd like to hear more on the transfer case and transmission decisions. I'm new to the board here and joined just because I saw this thread and tis been very imformative so far.

~Toast

Originally posted by emsoffroad


A general class of cars built by the Ford Motor Co. such as the Mercury Couger and a few others. The main diffrence is the name plate on the upper intake, and the fact that they will have cast exhaust manifolds, instead of the tube ones used on the stangs.

They all use the same front frame member, and rear setup, tranny, ect. There are a few diffrences, no kicker shocks, slightly smaller calipers, ect. As long as you get a 302 that has the 351w firing order, it's basicly an HO. There will be a few diffrences, but nothing to scare you away. I have seen quite a few XR-7s beat the crap out of stangs both on the street and on the track. If you bolt a part on a stang you can put it on any other 302. Or with the right parts a 351w, like I'm working on right now.

Edit: forgot to add, the books will rate the Mustang at a few more ponies, this can be atributied to a few things. A slightly stronger program in the ECU, smaller alt, ect. That and if you wan to sell your "performance car" it can't have the same engine as the family car.

They switched the firing order in order to keep the weaker 302 block from deforming, under the increased load of the higher output they were getting from the engine. The older 302s didn't have this problem since they have a higher nickle content in the block. But after 79 they made the castings cheaper, except the Mexican blocks.


Hmmm, if you say so.
According to a friend of mine at Ford Racing, the Fox Body, was the 79 - 93 Ford Mustangs. He says it was because, that was the code name for the floor pan they were built from. The 94 and newer are known as SN-95s or Fox-4s.
They also claim that no change in regaurds to inferior metalurgy was incorporated into the 79 and newer blocks. On the contrary, they said that improved metalurgy, enabled them to go to the newer thin walled castings in 79 to save weight. But that the newer castings were well able to reliably handle 400 HP. They still do produce the Boss 302 blocks along with the R302 racing block, the C302, or 356-T6 Aluminum block, they are built on the Boss design with thicker walls, increased webbing and 4 bolt mains at all 5 main bearings. They also say, that the nickle content BS is an old wives tail. The newer 351 firing order, is by their discription, a more efficient firing order and is easier on the bearings. They also said it is the firing order of choice even in the 1000 hp drag motors.
As for the differences in the HO and non HO versions, I have always thought that it was a differnt cam, computer, throttle body,lower compression ratio, and they did not have forged pistons, and they use an exhaust manifold instead of factory headers.
In any case Im not wanting to get into a gear head war with anyone, but there are obviously some discrepencies between your version and Fords.
I could actually care less, I already know that Mustangs and Lincoln Mark VIIs are the best source for swaps, in my opinion. And i already know excactly how I like mine set up, since it has been working great for me on the trail and in competitions for a couple of years now.

Originally posted by whitetoast11
Heard a lot of stuff on the engines guys, but I'd like to hear more on the transfer case and transmission decisions. I'm new to the board here and joined just because I saw this thread and tis been very imformative so far.

~Toast
Same here with the tranny/ X-case choices, Im currently building a YJ framed pile of parts & Im also using a 1993 5.0L stang motor I want to run a auto with an Atlas II but Im not sure what doner vechical to look for a tranny from. AOD or C-4/C-6 would be fine I don`t want a AODE because Im using the 1993 comp.
Thanks

I forgot about the cam.

I also do not wish to start a this is that is match.

The main reason of my post was just to mach sure if someone is looking for a EFI 302. Is to look for the MAF Stang engine, but if you find one from a Couger, T-bird, ect. And it has MAF, and your getting a good deal. There is no reason to pass it up. As long as the firing order is the same(so the computer fires the right injector at the right time), you can use the same parts, cam, puter, TB, injectors, ect.

I think we have a few diffrent opinions on things, but on the whole I believe that we both agree that the 302 is a good setup, and there are a few diffrent ways to get it the way you want it.

Originally posted by emsoffroad
They switched the firing order in order to keep the weaker 302 block from deforming, under the increased load of the higher output they were getting from the engine. The older 302s didn't have this problem since they have a higher nickle content in the block. But after 79 they made the castings cheaper, except the Mexican blocks. Could you expand on this? I'd like to learn more about this. Would it be possiable to use a 70's short block with a 84+ 5.0? (I know a little, but want facts)

Originally posted by Mr.N
Could you expand on this? I'd like to learn more about this. Would it be possiable to use a 70's short block with a 84+ 5.0? (I know a little, but want facts)

Mr.N you can use any year winsor block with late model heads & EFI set up. A frend of mine has a Earily Bronco with a 1978 351W block with a set of Trick flow heads, he is using a FMS GT-40 intake with Mustang 5.0L wireing & computer. im not sure which fuel rails he is using but I think 1993-1996 Ford Lighting fuel rails would work.
As far as mustangs go they didn`t have fuel injection until 1986 ( I drive one everyday). The 1986-1988 were Speed Density & the 1989-1993 are Mass Air(1988 in Cali.).

P.S. there was a "semi" fuel injected setup in 1985 called CFI its rare & it doesn`t work very well.

Just my 1.5 cents:flipoff2:
Harry

Originally posted by SledgeHammer


Mr.N you can use any year winsor block with late model heads & EFI set up. A frend of mine has a Earily Bronco with a 1978 351W block with a set of Trick flow heads, he is using a FMS GT-40 intake with Mustang 5.0L wireing & computer. im not sure which fuel rails he is using but I think 1993-1996 Ford Lighting fuel rails would work.
As far as mustangs go they didn`t have fuel injection until 1986 ( I drive one everyday). The 1986-1988 were Speed Density & the 1989-1993 are Mass Air(1988 in Cali.).

P.S. there was a "semi" fuel injected setup in 1985 called CFI its rare & it doesn`t work very well.

Just my 1.5 cents:flipoff2:
Harry
Yeah, 351 with 302 heads or the other way around you need special bolts. Using a older 302 block with a 5.0 top end you need to drill holes for the spider, to hold the roller rockers. I'm looking for more info. Why is this a good idea? After all there are a ton of reg 5.0 bolcks in the yard for pennys on the dollar.

Mr.N I`ll do a little more research on this & get back with you.
If I remember correctly any 5.0L non HO motor like in a lincoln ect... (1986 or newer) will already have holes in the block for the spider. The only difference between the HO & non HO motors were the Intake (even though they look the same non HO intakes have the throttle body on the driver side)Cam, Heads,Pistons. The blocks are the same.FWIF:D

On a 351w you don't need to get new fuel rails. All you need to do is make the hose that connects the two rails, longer. Someone told me that thier hoses were long enough to span the added width. The ones that I have laying here look like they would be close, but might end up a hair to short.

Originally posted by H8monday



Hmmm, if you say so.
According to a friend of mine at Ford Racing, the Fox Body, was the 79 - 93 Ford Mustangs. He says it was because, that was the code name for the floor pan they were built from. The 94 and newer are known as SN-95s or Fox-4s.
They also claim that no change in regaurds to inferior metalurgy was incorporated into the 79 and newer blocks. On the contrary, they said that improved metalurgy, enabled them to go to the newer thin walled castings in 79 to save weight. But that the newer castings were well able to reliably handle 400 HP. They still do produce the Boss 302 blocks along with the R302 racing block, the C302, or 356-T6 Aluminum block, they are built on the Boss design with thicker walls, increased webbing and 4 bolt mains at all 5 main bearings. They also say, that the nickle content BS is an old wives tail. The newer 351 firing order, is by their discription, a more efficient firing order and is easier on the bearings. They also said it is the firing order of choice even in the 1000 hp drag motors.
As for the differences in the HO and non HO versions, I have always thought that it was a differnt cam, computer, throttle body,lower compression ratio, and they did not have forged pistons, and they use an exhaust manifold instead of factory headers.
In any case Im not wanting to get into a gear head war with anyone, but there are obviously some discrepencies between your version and Fords.
I could actually care less, I already know that Mustangs and Lincoln Mark VIIs are the best source for swaps, in my opinion. And i already know excactly how I like mine set up, since it has been working great for me on the trail and in competitions for a couple of years now.

fox body: mustang, capri, and ltd(although slightly longer) still the same basic platform today for the mustangs

Originally posted by SledgeHammer
Mr.N I`ll do a little more research on this & get back with you.
If I remember correctly any 5.0L non HO motor like in a lincoln ect... (1986 or newer) will already have holes in the block for the spider. The only difference between the HO & non HO motors were the Intake (even though they look the same non HO intakes have the throttle body on the driver side)Cam, Heads,Pistons. The blocks are the same.FWIF:D

I think 87 1/2 and up Lincoln Mark VII's are HO, so there are some Lincoln's that are HO. And also I am working on an 87 Lincoln Mark VII (non-HO, early 87) and the intake has the throttle body on the pass side, so not all non-HO have the tb on the drivers side. Not that I am starting an arguement, but for somebody rolling through the yards doesn't say, "hey tb is on pass. side, must be an HO."

Originally posted by diiulio


I think 87 1/2 and up Lincoln Mark VII's are HO, so there are some Lincoln's that are HO. And also I am working on an 87 Lincoln Mark VII (non-HO, early 87) and the intake has the throttle body on the pass side, so not all non-HO have the tb on the drivers side.

Thats right but I wasn`t thinking about a mark VII :emb3:
I was thinking of the more comon found (in the junkyard that is)town car & contenial(sp?:confused:), ford crown vic, LTD, ect.

btt

OK did a little research on some things.

Foxbody cars started in 78 with the Zepher. In all there are 26 diffrent versions of the foxbody.

Mustangs and Mark VII have the HO. 91-93 Cougers and T-birds also have HO. Note here they are alittle diffrent, since the upper intake had to be shortend to fit under the hood. This caused a small lose in over all power (down about 20 HP peak). On the up side they gained low end.

Also from what I found if you are using a Mark VII, there are a host of diffrent sensors that go with it.?? Outside air temp, ect.??? This is from what I read. Those that have used a Mark VII engine is this true info? On the same note I read that you can use mustang sensors (and harness?) to convert it?

Only HO 302 use the 351w firing order.

Also found that you can easily do a HO swap onto your non-HO engine. However, you can only use a stock Stang HO cam. This is because the non-HO uses flat top pistons, and larger chamber heads. The upper non HO is a hair more restrictive, but with all the stang guys swapping to GT-40 and Cobra intakes, I've seen stock ones on Ebay go for around $25-50. You would also need to use HO computer. The computer fires the injectors in the right order for you, no need to change wires.

HOs have 60mm TB, non-HO 50mm.

Also HOs use the same head as the trucks. Cast #E7.

Non HOs will have 14-15# injectors. HO will have 19#. Fuel pumps are the same.

Rumor that no one could give me a positive answer on: '93 HOs changed pistons, and output was down a few ponies (-20 HP or so). If you know let me know. Since this is the year I aquired. But mine is from the change over time, 6/92 could be either.

i was talking with some mustang guys the other day and ive been in and out of a few engines in the last few weeks (gathering info for my swap) and im getting a lot of different info about the pistons. does anyone have more info then "in 92 they switched heads" because i had one guy hand me a piston he pulled from his motor that was an 88 and it wasnt a forged piston. he also builds mustang motors and says its always just hit or miss. can anyone confirm this? is it just an odd ball or where they man'd the engines?

Originally posted by Dust Puppy
he also builds mustang motors and says its always just hit or miss. can anyone confirm this? is it just an odd ball or where they man'd the engines?


He is wrong. It is not hit or miss. All 5.0 HO engines from 85 until 92 had forged pistons. Period....
In 93 Ford's bean counters won out and they went to cheaper hypereutectic pistons. However they claim that no HP was given up due to the weaker pistons, but the cast pistons can not withstand as much build up abuse such as when used with NOS.
There was a small change to the stock Camshaft in 1990 that was designed to eliminate a harmonics problem at high RPMs. Some Mustang gearheads claim that the newer cam gave up a couple of HP.

thanks h8 i guess when i tear down my 5.0 we'll find out if that is true or not. i NEED the forged pistons because like you said the others dont like NOS :D (im working with a 91 lincoln mark VII 5.0 HO)


another question

is it REALLY worth going Mass Air? for high hp yeah i understand and all the mustang guys i talk about dont know alot about building low end torq motors. what are your guys feelings?

DP

This is a full awn DAN question.

How do I tell between MAF and SD. I'm assuming the MAF has the sensor on the intake tube. I know nothing about EFI or engines as a whole for that matter, but I'm searching out a 5.0 for the buggy that I'll be building.

Also, did they make a c6 that has the small block bolt pattern? I've heard some talk about it, but nothing positive or where to find them.

Easy

I'm almost positive a c-6 will bolt up. Thats what I'm putting behind my 5.0. Hopefully someone can verify that. Also, all 89-93 mustang 5.0's are MAF. Some 88's with Cal. emissions are too I believe.
I know of a Loncoln Mark 5.0 up for sale for $500 obo if you interested. Its in maryland.
Josh

Thanks for the tip on the 5.0 but there are tons of them around here for cheap with the harness and comp. Anybody going to enlighten us on the C6 issue?

Easy

Originally posted by EasyXJ
Thanks for the tip on the 5.0 but there are tons of them around here for cheap with the harness and comp. Anybody going to enlighten us on the C6 issue?

Easy

The C6 came out in 1966, since then you can find the C6 in three diffrent bell paterns:
Smallblock-289,300,302,351w,351c,ect
FE block-360,390,391,427,428,ect
Bigblock-429,460,351m,400

I have 3 of the small block ones on the shelf right now. And a butt ton of the bigblock ones.

I got a 5.0 out of a 88 town car. The intakes will go on either way. So you can make it a drivers side or pass. side TB.

What is the plug in the harness that looks like a bunch of 110 outlets?

Toddy

So, who has the best motor mount? I don't think that was decided.:D

BTT, Great TOTW and great info. A TPI 302 ho upgrade has been made an option for me and with this info I think I may do it. Keep the great Tech coming!!!!

Originally posted by Bob/CA
So, who has the best motor mount? I don't think that was decided.:D
I have used the M.O.R.E motor mounts for a 350 conversion and they work great. FYI, We started with the AA mounts and threw them back in the box and orded M.O.R.E's stuff.

Originally posted by Bob/CA
So, who has the best motor mount? I don't think that was decided.:D

im using ones from MORE part# BA200, make them how you need them.
www.mountainoffroad.com/

Yeah, the BA200 is nice if you know where you want to place it and everything, but there is not a decent YJ mount for the SBF.

Z&M has a cradle style, but I am not a big fan of that. I had emailed MORE about doing SBF mounts for a YJ, and I got the "not worth our time" blah blah blah" talk. I was trying to get some tech from the guy on whether I could tweak the SBC ones (since the index the frame already) and just change the ends out, but he wasn't very helpful.

Anyone out there make a good mount built like a MORE mount for a SBF in a YJ? I would buy one. If not, anyone got some measurements and specs on their fabbed ones? Between the offset and the XYZ positioning that needs to take place, it is nice to not have to worry about mounts.

Originally posted by BAH
Yeah, the BA200 is nice if you know where you want to place it and everything, but there is not a decent YJ mount for the SBF.

Z&M has a cradle style, but I am not a big fan of that. I had emailed MORE about doing SBF mounts for a YJ, and I got the "not worth our time" blah blah blah" talk. I was trying to get some tech from the guy on whether I could tweak the SBC ones (since the index the frame already) and just change the ends out, but he wasn't very helpful.

Anyone out there make a good mount built like a MORE mount for a SBF in a YJ? I would buy one. If not, anyone got some measurements and specs on their fabbed ones? Between the offset and the XYZ positioning that needs to take place, it is nice to not have to worry about mounts.

Yeah, I modified the MORE CJ mounts for my YJ.
I used the passenger side, in its stock form, and lengthened the driver side mount by about 2".
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940920-motormountleft.JPG
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940929-motormountrt.JPG

I would just build my own from scratch if I were to do it again.

Also, when using the more style bushing mounts, a cross member at the mount area is a very good idea. The more style mounts alow the engine to pivot at the the mounts which causes a lot of flex at the frame (at/near the mount locations).

What kind of trannys are you guys running, i havae aquired a FI 302 + aod tranny out of a 1989 ford f-150. it is Speed density.

Right now i have the 258 + ax-15, is it possible to use the Ax-15 with its own components. In one post one guy said that he had his I6 flywheel balanced for the 302, does this mean that he is using the tranny he had behind the I6.

I am looking for opitions, help if you can , thanks

Brad

What about radiators? Are you able to use the stock radiator?

Originally posted by Bob/CA
What about radiators? Are you able to use the stock radiator?

I have a 1982 CJ-8 and am using the stock radiator.
. Just make sure it is in good condition before running it.
I took one of my 3 radiators (I have a radiator collection o.k.? ;) ) to a shop here called "AAA Radiator" for $28. they checked it out and made sure it was good to go. I pu it in, got some custom, flexible hoses from NAPA and haven't seen the temp go past 190º (180º therm) Granted I live in WA state and haven't been through the summer with my 5.0 yet but so far so good.
I am using the Pulley/Belt set up off an 80 something Ford Van including the fan, and fan clutch set up. It all cost me $20 here at a "Pull-A-Part" including the Saginaw steering pump and brackets. Find the right truck and pull everything off it. I went as far as pulling the Timing chain cover and all accssories (even the Air pump, just in case!)

I got a 5.0 out of a 88 town car. The intakes will go on either way. So you can make it a drivers side or pass. side TB.

You can flip the plenum to either side of the engine however you will also need to replace the fuel rails since the Fuel pressure regulator will be in the way (hits the bottom of the plenum) if you try to flip it around.
My 5.0 (SD) came out of an 86 Crown Vic and the air intake faces towards the driver side. It all packed in nicely, the air intake tube I got is for a Honda ($30 w/K&N style filter) after I cut it down to length it fits well.

In response to the post earlier in this thread regarding Crown Vic engines are not a good start, I would tend to agree BUT mine seems to be a good one, Roller cam, GT 40P heads, Auto Tranny Computer. It cost me $300. for the entire car (I drove it home) but by the time I installed it (AA engine mounts, AA Headers, CJ Hydro clutch Conversion, New Brake lines, mastercylinder, Frame reinforcement, Engine work-Blueprinted and balanced, heads worked over, 2 1/4" collectors into 3" exhaust) I have plenty of power and like the guy said It took as much $$ as buying a HO ($3000 after it was all installed and rolling) . I am pleased with the results, the only problem I still have are clogged injectors, I need to replace them outright but that will just have to wait till my SOA is done.

I have a Ford T-18 trans with AA T-case adaptor to my Dana 300.
Dana 44 front, Ford 9" rear. My Bronco is almost done (ha ha)

The power is incredible compared to that 258 I had. Torque and HP baby!
I can drive up a hill in 4th gear with my 36" TSLs that I had to take in 3rd, even 2nd (2 high) with my old 34" tires. It even accellerates! Now that makes all the trouble worthwhile.

The wiring harness wasn't to much trouble. After I removed all the stuff from the engine I didn't want/need (A/C, EGR etc) my freind came over and helped me cut down the harness.
Armed with a photocopy of the wiring diagram out of a Ford shop manual we eliminated all the junk in about one hour. The only thing I wish we had not cut off was the engine diagnostic connector. While you can check the sensors manually the Diagnostic connector makes it easier.

My fuel lines are basically the stock ones that came with the Jeep. The only upgrade I made was to replace the lines from my external Fuel pump (mounted to the front of the gas tank, on the tank itself) with High pressure rubber lines all the way to the fuel rails on the motor. I used the stock return lines and left the breather line hokked up to the tank. So far so good! no vapor lock or fuel starvation problems.
It is loud but the Fuel pump is worthy (BBS high pressure external pump, got it from Summit)

For the starter I am using a Powermaster high torque starter. Its small enough to clear the header and seems to hold up to the heat quite well. My alternator is a Powermaster as well and puts out 140 AMPs, way beter than that stock POS I had on the 258!

That about sums it all up. Feel free to post any questions you may have regarding what I have done. I know how it is trying to gather info for this type of swap. Without the various BBS boards I don't think I could have done this swap so quickly and completely.

Mark

Here is a pic of Saginaw bracket and pump that will bolt up to a Mustang 5.0. Might be off ~1/4 but can be made to fit. This is off a 85 van, some where around 86-88 they changed the bracket.
Save this pic, might be gone in 2 months.
http://77cj.littlekeylime.com/images/FordSaginawpump.jpg

Thanks guys, I now have an 87 5.0 ho out of a mustang with a complete harness and will be diving in head first once I find a bell housing and a fly wheel. :flipoff2: :D

I'll try to add pics of my swop to this thread as I go along.

Syko, if you have a problem finding a bellhousing and 11" flywheel, you can get one out of a van and have it re-balanced to your motor. The van bellhousings and flywheels are plentiful.


I want to put the efi on my early small block. What vehicle should I look for as a donor?

Originally posted by Bigburlynakedguy



I want to put the efi on my early small block. What vehicle should I look for as a donor?


Since your early small block will have the firing order of the NON HO 5.0, you will need to pull the parts and computer from any non HO Ford car or from a 5.0 truck. The HO versions use a 351 firing order, so you would need to change the cam.
The Non HO 5.0 came in Lincoln Town cars and Grand Marquise, among others.

Thanks H8, I could use the HO stuff if I re-cam?

Originally posted by Bigburlynakedguy
Thanks H8, I could use the HO stuff if I re-cam?


Yes but you would also need to change the rockers due to the HO's using a roller cam. There may also be issues with valve clearance, since the HOs use the E7TE truck heads, along with pistons that are dished and eyebrowed for higher valve lift.

Right on, what may be easier is to find a complete HO and ditch the early 289. Its a year old, runs very strong, but is carbed. I have a holley double pumper that runs great at angles with the jets/pumps/floats I have, but runs out of gas on the big dunes.

Ok I'm finally getting around to posting pics and I need to ask a few questions....

What we are starting with

I lied, the motor and the harness are out of an 86 Mustang

A big thanks goes out to M.O.R.E. for the motor mounts...We'll just say I'll be running their stickers this year in the legends class:evil:
They worked flawlessly......all I did was bolt them in

I have a jeep t-18a and a dana 20....
NOTE: the bolt pattern on a jeep T-18a is not the same as a ford. You will be able to use the top 2 hole but you will have to modify the bellhouse for the bottom 2. I ended up needing to weld a tab on one side of the bell housing. I also had to remove the 2 bolts that held the mount for the clutch fork and weld it to the inside. I then drilled and tapped 2 holes.

I also made a flat skid plate out of 3/8".. Yep, I said 3/8" I was tired of fawking up skid plates:evil:

Now for the questions:

I have found tons of info on the ford racing harness or a post 88 harness but mine is different. Can anyone point me to a writeup or help with this harness. I have a few wires/ plugs that I can't figure out were they go..

Is this the plug that goes to the O2 sensors? I still need to get the harness that goes to the O2

This one was destroyed, what the hell is it? Alternator ??

Can I just use the 1 wire jeep alternator and be done with it?

This is what I have at the fuse box side. I think I have most of them figured out but if someone could come up with a diagram that I could check what I have against it that would be awesome.

Last shot

Originally posted by syko
I also made a flat skid plate out of 3/8".. Yep, I said 3/8" I was tired of fawking up skid plates:evil:

Shawn - You still need to put some kind of reinforment on that 3/8 plate or it will still sag/get pushed up... When I made mine out of 1/4 plate, I took 1x2x1/8" tube, sliced in half (2x1/2 U shaped) and welded then across the plate, towards the front and the rear. It REALLY stiffens the skid plate.

http://www.tidesys.com/images/splate.jpg

Originally posted by rkcrawl


Shawn - You still need to put some kind of reinforment on that 3/8 plate or it will still sag/get pushed up... When I made mine out of 1/4 plate, I took 1x2x1/8" tube, sliced in half (2x1/2 U shaped) and welded then across the plate, towards the front and the rear. It REALLY stiffens the skid plate.

http://www.tidesys.com/images/splate.jpg

The bad part about it is it's tight now.... I don't know if I can fit an 1" tube under it. I know I can pick the jeep up on the skidplate now and I have the rest of a 4x8 sheet......... I'll take a look at it tonight and see if I can modify the trans mount....

Thanks

So i heard a rumor that the 302's bellhousing was the ford butterfly pattern and would bolt strait onto my 79 CJ's T-150 trans without any kind of adapter. If that is true, im thinking about a 302 much much more seriously than before. it would be more like replacing an engine - than the engineering project that i thought it was, getting new transmissions and moving the transfer case back and dealing with driveline angles.

Assuming the top part is true...
I've been thinking about asking my (friend) mechanic about finding a 5.0 explorer engine - as what i've gathered from this article it is the same exact thing with better heads/intake, and i think it would be cheaper b/c places here always overcharge for sports car shit. Any years i should aim for or steer clear?

Originally posted by syko
Now for the questions:

I have found tons of info on the ford racing harness or a post 88 harness but mine is different. Can anyone point me to a writeup or help with this harness. I have a few wires/ plugs that I can't figure out were they go..

Is this the plug that goes to the O2 sensors? I still need to get the harness that goes to the O2

that looks like the plug to the egr valve based on its location.

On edit, it looks like it might go to the MAP sensor if not the egr.

Originally posted by syko
This one was destroyed, what the hell is it? Alternator ??

Can I just use the 1 wire jeep alternator and be done with it?

Those are vaccume lines. Not really important if your not running smog stuff/egr. I would however say you should run the egr valve (have to remember which vacume hose color) because if you dont, you'll run in limp mode (read crappy timming).

Dude, if the wirering is kicking your butt, than go to your local public library :eek: In the referace section they (typically) have Mitchel Auto Repair manuals. Find the one for your engine donor and photo copy the pages containing the wiring diagrams, and find the one for your Jeep and photo copy those wiring diagrams as well. That's what I did. All the colors are listed with where they go, so with a small amount of head scratching you'll be done and playing at The Badlands again in no time!

The 86 5.0 HO Mustang engine is not the pick of the litter as far as 5.0's go, but its a decent , engine if you are not planning on hopping it up much.

Originally posted by H8monday
The 86 5.0 HO Mustang engine is not the pick of the litter as far as 5.0's go, but its a decent , engine if you are not planning on hopping it up much.

So ill ask again...
I've been thinking about asking my (friend) mechanic about finding a 5.0 explorer engine - as what i've gathered from this article it is the same exact thing with better heads/intake, and i think it would be cheaper b/c places here always overcharge for sports car shit. Any years i should aim for or steer clear?

syko
Go read my post on wiring, now spend the $18 and get a Helms, if I remember they do have 86.

Originally posted by 281 Quad Cam


So ill ask again...
I've been thinking about asking my (friend) mechanic about finding a 5.0 explorer engine - as what i've gathered from this article it is the same exact thing with better heads/intake, and i think it would be cheaper b/c places here always overcharge for sports car shit. Any years i should aim for or steer clear?

I haven't personally heard of things to watch out with years wise for the explorer engines. There are simple differences between the explorer and mustang engines, but not enough to affect anything major (besides headers). The OBDII stuff is harder to mod and setup right, but shouldn't be a problem if you get everything.

Originally posted by 281 Quad Cam


So ill ask again...
I've been thinking about asking my (friend) mechanic about finding a 5.0 explorer engine - as what i've gathered from this article it is the same exact thing with better heads/intake, and i think it would be cheaper b/c places here always overcharge for sports car shit. Any years i should aim for or steer clear?

The Explorer engines are good engines,..very good engines.
They have very good heads(the same as the stangs E7 heads), and one of the best torque intake plennums/manifold available(GT 40).
Probably the biggest downside of an Explorer engine as compared to the 87 - 92 Mustang engines is that they dont have forged pistons, and the cams and computers are slightly less performance oriented.

well... forged pistons are not a major factor i am considering. with the already "sorta cobra" intake and nice heads, a stock explorer motor in the jeep wouldnt run into trouble b/c of pistons. My mods should include exhaust and depending on airbox fitment, a ram air intake. i mean my 79's 258 is still kicking with cast pistons! lol

anyway my power bottleneck after the swap will be the T-150 transmission, stock AMC20, D30, and OE driveshafts. so i will probly snap my entire drivetrain before the pistons are harmed!

yeah, you prolly blow something apart, I did!

Re-doing the fuel lines.

Who makes those Ford fuel line at teh engine side adaptor to AN fittings?

Originally posted by Mr.N
Re-doing the fuel lines.

Who makes those Ford fuel line at teh engine side adaptor to AN fittings?


I looked everywhere and found no source for them.
I believe that 5/16 tube nuts and sleeves will work,...but,
I just had a welder (Welder boy since I live in the Sacto area), tig weld a piece of 3/8" stainless tubing to the ford pieces, then used AN6 Tube nuts and tube sleeves, to attatch to stainless flex lines and AN fittings.

For the guys with the speed density harness here you go:



'87 Mustang 5.0 ECA Harness Wiring Details-speed density type
(wire colors typical of other '86-'88 Ford V-8 models, except '88 California Mustang)
Below is a list and ID info for the various connectors attached to the "Electronic Control Assembly" harness...
Connections and modifications required to adapt this stock harness to it's new home are noted below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AC Clutch Cycling Switch
(2) wires attached
Connector attached directly to the Ford switch, which was located at the top of the suction side of the Ford accumulator.
Ckt883 pink/lt blue
Ckt348 lt green/pink stripe
The Ford switch was closed above 46psi, open below 23psi
These wires can be connected to your original RX-7 pressure switch if needed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EEC PowerRelay
(4) terminal connector, (5) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the EEC power relay, located just above the ECA's main connector inside the passenger side kick panel.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt16 red/ly green
Ckt60 black/lt green
Ckt38 black/orange
Ckt361 red
Ckt68 orange/black (CKT361 and Ckt68 attached to same terminal)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGR Vacuum Regulator Solenoid
(2) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the EGR vacuum regulator solenoid, located on the top/rear of the passenger side strut tower in the Mustang.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt360 dk green
Ckt361 red
ECA grounds ckt360 to energize solenoid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor - MAP
(3) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the MAP sensor, formerly located on the driver's side of the Mustang's upper firewall.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt351 orange/white
Ckt358 lt green/black
Ckt359 black/white
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermactor Air Bypass Solenoid
(2) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the solenoid, formerly located in back of the Mustang's passenger side strut tower.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt100 white/red
Ckt361 red
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermactor Diverter Solenoid
(2) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the solenoid, formerly located in back of the Mustang's passenger side strut tower.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt99 lt green/black
Ckt361 red
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TFI Ignition Module
(6) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the module, mounted to the side of the Mustang's distributor.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt11 dk green/yellow
Ckt16 red/lt green
Ckt32 red/lt blue
Ckt259 black/orange
Ckt324 yellow/lt green
Ckt349 dk blue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/C WOT Cutout Relay
(4) wires attached.
Connector attaches directly to the relay, located on the left side of the Mustang engine.
No modifications required. (wire details shown for reference only)
Ckt73 orange/lt blue
Ckt347 black/yellow
Ckt361 red
Ckt883 pink/lt blue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-135 (black)
(8) terminals.
Located next to the ECA's main connector, in the Mustang's passenger side kick panel area.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt97 tan/lt green - connect to "-" side of the fuel pump relay coil.
Ckt359 black/white - connect to neutral safety switch (other side of neutral safety sw connects to connector C-201 Ckt199 ly blue/yellow)
Ckt361 red - connect to inertia switch. connect other side of inertia switch to "+" side of fuel pump relay coil.
Ckt687 grey/yellow - connect to IGN SW. "run".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-149 (black)
(1) terminal
Located next to the Mustang's battery.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt60 black/lt green - connect to chassis ground on fenderwell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-166 (black)
(4) terminals
Located at the rear side of the RH valve cover.
Connector plugs directly into the O2 sensor extension harness, so no modifications are required (wiring details shown for reference only)
Ckt60 black/lt green
Ckt90 dk blue/lite green
Ckt94 dk green/pink
Ckt687 grey/yellow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-190 (black)
(10) terminals
Located at the rear of the engine.
Connector plugs directly into the injector harness, so no modifications are required (wiring details shown for reference only)
Ckt264 white/lt blue
Ckt361 red - injector "+"
Ckt555 tan - Injector #1
Ckt556 tan/white - Injector #2
Ckt557 tan/yellow - Injector #3
Ckt558 tan/black - Injector #4
Ckt559 tan/ly blue - Injector #5
Ckt560 tan/lt green - Injector #6
Ckt561 tan/orange - Injector #7
Ckt562 tan/red - Injector #8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-191 (black)
(10) terminals
Located at the rear of the engine.
Connector plugs directly into the engine sensor harness, so modifications are not required.
Ckt31 white/red - (connects to oil pressure sender thru sensor harness)
Ckt39 red/white - (connects to coolant temp sender thru sensor harness)
Ckt89 orange
Ckt101 grey/yellow
Ckt351 orange/white
Ckt354 lt green/yellow
Ckt357 lt green/pink
Ckt359 black/white
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-201 (grey)
(8) terminals
Located in back of the Mustang's drivers side strut tower.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt11 dk green/yellow - connect to tach "signal".
Ckt16 red/lt green - connect to ign switched "start" and "run" thru a 20ga fusible link.
Ckt32 red/lt blue - Manual trans - connect to clutch safety switch, then to starter relay "S" terminal.
- Automatic trans - connect to starter relay "S" terminal.
Ckt33 white/pink - connect to ign switched "start".
Ckt199 lt blue/yellow - connect to neutral safety switch (connect other terminal of neutral safety switch to connector C-135 Ckt359).
Ckt348 lt green/pink - connect to AC/heater switched "compressor clutch control" leg of heater switch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-355 (black)
(2) terminals
No modifications required if connected to Ford compressor using the Ford compressor harness (wiring details shown for reference only).
Ckt57 black - connects to ground side of compressor clutch.
Ckt347 black/yellow - connects to "+" side of AC compressor clutch.
A diode is installed in the Ford compressor clutch harness that allows power to flow only from Ckt347 to Ckt57, but not in the reverse direction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-403 (grey)
(8) terminals
Located near the firewall on driver's side in back of strut tower near the self test connectors.
Connections and modifications required as noted below.
Ckt31 white/red - connect to oil pressure dash gauge.
Ckt39 red/white - connect to coolant temp dash gauge.
Ckt258 white/pink - 5.0 GT only
Ckt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-1984 (grey)
(6) terminals
Located near the firewall on driver's side in back of strut tower.
Connector plug is for diagnostic use only, so no modifications are required (wiring details shown for referance only)
Ckt97 tan/lt green - ground to test fuel pump.
Ckt359 black/white
Ckt382 yellow/black
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-1985 (grey)
(1) terminals
Located near the firewall on driver's side in back of strut tower.
Connector plug is for diagnostic use only, so no modifications are required (wiring details shown for reference only)
Ckt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector G-119 (lug)
(1) terminal
Located near the ECA connector in the passenger side kick panel area.
Connector should be attached to chassis ground.
Ckt48 - ignition shield ground
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1987 Mustang Alternator Wiring Guide
The back of the alternator has the following terminals, which should be connected to the car as follows...
Ckt38 "B+"
Ckt38 "B+" black/orange - connect both of these terminals to the battery side of the starter relay.
Ckt4 "S"
Ckt4 "S" white/black - connect these two terminals together with a short loop of wire.
Ckt904 "I" lt green/red - connect to ign switch "run" thru the "Alternator Warning Lite".
Ckt36 "A" yellow/white - connect to the battery side of the starter relay thru a 18ga fusible link.

This is all you should need to wire........

Connector C-135 (black)
(8) terminals.
Located next to the ECA's main connector, in the Mustang's passenger side kick panel area.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt97 tan/lt green - connect to "-" side of the fuel pump relay coil.
Ckt359 black/white - connect to neutral safety switch (other side of neutral safety sw connects to connector C-201 Ckt199 ly blue/yellow)
Ckt361 red - connect to inertia switch. connect other side of inertia switch to "+" side of fuel pump relay coil.
Ckt687 grey/yellow - connect to IGN SW. "run".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-149 (black)
(1) terminal
Located next to the Mustang's battery.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt60 black/lt green - connect to chassis ground on fenderwell.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-201 (grey)
(8) terminals
Located in back of the Mustang's drivers side strut tower.
Modifications required as noted below...
Ckt11 dk green/yellow - connect to tach "signal".
Ckt16 red/lt green - connect to ign switched "start" and "run" thru a 20ga fusible link.
Ckt32 red/lt blue - Manual trans - connect to clutch safety switch, then to starter relay "S" terminal.
- Automatic trans - connect to starter relay "S" terminal.
Ckt33 white/pink - connect to ign switched "start".
Ckt199 lt blue/yellow - connect to neutral safety switch (connect other terminal of neutral safety switch to connector C-135 Ckt359).
Ckt348 lt green/pink - connect to AC/heater switched "compressor clutch control" leg of heater switch.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector C-403 (grey)
(8) terminals
Located near the firewall on driver's side in back of strut tower near the self test connectors.
Connections and modifications required as noted below.
Ckt31 white/red - connect to oil pressure dash gauge.
Ckt39 red/white - connect to coolant temp dash gauge.
Ckt258 white/pink - 5.0 GT only
Ckt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector G-119 (lug)
(1) terminal
Located near the ECA connector in the passenger side kick panel area.
Connector should be attached to chassis ground.
Ckt48 - ignition shield ground
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1987 Mustang Alternator Wiring Guide
The back of the alternator has the following terminals, which should be connected to the car as follows...
Ckt38 "B+"
Ckt38 "B+" black/orange - connect both of these terminals to the battery side of the starter relay.
Ckt4 "S"
Ckt4 "S" white/black - connect these two terminals together with a short loop of wire.
Ckt904 "I" lt green/red - connect to ign switch "run" thru the "Alternator Warning Lite".
Ckt36 "A" yellow/white - connect to the battery side of the starter relay thru a 18ga fusible link.

what about a 5.0 swap retaining my original T-150/D20 setup? Novak says the ford bellhousing will bolt right up with no adapter - using the ford pressureplate and bellhousing, i can use the rest of the Jeep clutch - with a novak pilot bearing.

Has anyone actually done this or know anything about a 5.0/T-150? my 258 is actually dying and i need to go 5.0 as cost effectively as possible. My T-150 was recently rebuilt, and i think my driving habits can control how long before i destroy the tranny.

(i need a clue) :idea:

Found a link to these fittings on the ford Board

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/04fuel/fittings.htm

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/images/Chrome%20Fitting%20D.jpg

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/images/Chrome%20Fitting%20B.jpg

Syko where did u find that chart? I would love to have one for my 89 mass air. It is really kicking my ass. I have the books Mr N sugested but I am still at a loss. The chart u posted loks like it explains everything.

Originally posted by syko
Found a link to these fittings on the ford Board

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/04fuel/fittings.htm

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/images/Chrome%20Fitting%20D.jpg

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/images/Chrome%20Fitting%20B.jpg


You can get those at NAPA along with the Ford style plastic hose.
I thought he had asked for Ford Fittings to AN fittings, so that stainless braided or NASCAR style hose could be used.

syko, Thanks for taking the time to post, but not exactly what I was looking for. Would like the AN stuff, I've a lead and will post info it it turns out.
H8Monday, thanks for the tip I might end up going this route.

How the hell do you get the fuel line fittings to seperate??? Is there a special tool or what? I ended up cutting the plastic lines off and using EFI tubing to connect to my YJ lines, but it looks poopy and I'm not satisfied with how it looks.



Thanks!!

Originally posted by H8monday
You can get those at NAPA along with the Ford style plastic hose.
I thought he had asked for Ford Fittings to AN fittings, so that stainless braided or NASCAR style hose could be used.

I was unaware you could get those style ends at NAPA....Sorry:flipoff2::D

Look on down the page.......................
Run AN from the fuel rails and screw the Fawked up connectors

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/04fuel/9124.jpg

Originally posted by syko


I was unaware you could get those style ends at NAPA....Sorry:flipoff2::D

Look on down the page.......................
Run AN from the fuel rails and screw the Fawked up connectors

http://www.ronmorrisperformance.com/04fuel/9124.jpg


Thats the right stuff,....GOOD JOB!

Originally posted by H8monday
Thats the right stuff,....GOOD JOB!

Thanks:D They're Fawking $$$$$$ :eek:
Someone must make them cheaper

i didn't see any mounts for a cj2a on MORE's website. besides AA, who else makes em?

H8monday, have a pic of your set up? I take it the tube slid over the fuel rail.

Some fuel info:

The Line you want to run if you don't like the smell of gas: Teflon
http://www.martelbros.com/cgi-bin/store/ws400CS.cgi?store=AQP&category=aeroquip/19.htm&cart_id=

Originally posted by Mr.N
H8monday, have a pic of your set up? I take it the tube slid over the fuel rail.

Some fuel info:

The Line you want to run if you don't like the smell of gas: Teflon
http://www.martelbros.com/cgi-bin/store/ws400CS.cgi?store=AQP&category=aeroquip/19.htm&cart_id=


Yeah the "tube sleeve" just slide over the tubing then the "Tube nut" is tightened onto it and compresse the sleeve.
Summit Racing Part numbers are:
AN 6 Tube Nuts : AER-FCM3675 Price: (pack of 2) $2.95
AN 6 Tube Sleeves : AER FCM 3671 Price: (pack of 2) $3.25

To weld the 3/8 tube to the Ford rails.
I used a tube cutter and cut both ends.
Deburred the inside very well, and put a slight bevel around both ends. Smoothed both ends with emery cloth.
Then I handed it all to Welderboy and he worked his magic with the "Tig" welder.

If I had a digital cam I would be glad to take some pics, but saddly mine fell to its death at the Donner Rock crawling event last year, and I havent replaced it yet. :crybaby2:

Originally posted by H8monday
Yeah the "tube sleeve" just slide over the tubing then the "Tube nut" is tightened onto it and compresse the sleeve.
Summit Racing Part numbers are:
AN 6 Tube Nuts : AER-FCM3675 Price: (pack of 2) $2.95
AN 6 Tube Sleeves : AER FCM 3671 Price: (pack of 2) $3.25

To weld the 3/8 tube to the Ford rails.
I used a tube cutter and cut both ends.
Deburred the inside very well, and put a slight bevel around both ends. Smoothed both ends with emery cloth.
Then I handed it all to Welderboy and he worked his magic with the "Tig" welder.

If I had a digital cam I would be glad to take some pics, but saddly mine fell to its death at the Donner Rock crawling event last year, and I havent replaced it yet. :crybaby2: Thanks for the great info. Now I have to find someone to Tig...

OK, I'm back.......:D
I finally have everything wired, fuel lines run and ready to start it....So I crack on it.....nothing :$hit: I can spray starter fluid in the intake and it will fire.....

I have fuel at the fuel rail..I have spark.....but I'm not getting the injectors to flow....I used my volt meter and noticed that I have almost 11 volts on each wire that goes to the injectors....I looked at a running truck and it has a 12 volt in run on one side and a pulse in crank on the other.....

What could I have hooked up backwards/wrong....Aren't the injectors power feed from the ECA??? I'm sure this is something dumb......

Thanks for any help.:D

This was taken from FordMuscle Forum, by R Code. Just Too good not to share, and if that site is down this one should be up.

"I made the mistake of volunteering to do some editing on the content of the monster thread. Youch. Many, many hours of work later and the thing is still not done. Have a look at the current state and e-mail me with feedback, or I guess you could just post.
C4 MONSTER THREAD
This is a compilation of a monstrous thread from FordMuscle.com’s tech board on the subject of C4 modifications. Over 100 individual posts were made on the thread and thousands of views have been registered. Unfortunately, the thread wandered all over the subject matter making reading the thread a bit of a challenge. To facilitate better use of the captured information, and to more easily respond to quite a few requests, we are rearranging the info to create summaries and brief discussions organized by sub-topic. You will find that the posters are quite experienced builders who have learned their C4 tricks the hard way: they have tried them out. This is an international group with GregAust (GA) from Australia, Mario Van Wiechen (MVW) from Canada and 89Coupe (89C), Winsoreight (W and TimR (TR) all from the US. One of the posters pulled apart a Performance Automatics Super Stock C4 and reverse engineered it.
Clearly the C4 is a very stout unit that our panel has made live over hundreds of passes, behind ultra-high power BBFs and deep into the 8 second ET range. The information is more topline in most of the sections with some really in depth discussions farther down in the piece. So whether you want to skim or go deep, here is a mountain of info on the C4.

Introduction
Most of the builders describe their trannys as nothing too tricky. Several use stock H or R servos, many do no welding on the forward drum, some even use run of the mill clutches. Most seem to agree though that starting with the later, 26 spline factory unit, a good hard shift engagement, an extra clutch in each pack, careful attention to clutch pack clearances and use of the best parts available will result in a VERY stout little tranny. Many more details and opinions to come, but first, what have you got?

Identifying the tranny
Lots of confusion exists here, and the thread didn’t do a wonderful job of clearing things up. There is the early C4, with its 24 spline input shaft, which is inappropriate for all but the mild small block. The pan fill case, introduced in ’65 is considered a stronger unit. The later C4 introduced in ’70 with its 26 spline input shaft is considered the heavy duty unit and is the choice of the builders on this site. This basic HD C4 was again redesigned in 1982 with a convertor clutch and a number of other different internals and named the C5. All three versions can be either case-fill or pan fill.
Of course there are a couple bastard versions you may run across. The ‘65-’66 “green dot” shift pattern versions are in a ton of Mustangs. A good upgrade is to retrofit a ‘67-’69 valve body to those units. A rarer one is the ’70 26 spline version which was a one-year deal. Both ends of the input shaft have 26 splines which was changed to 26 on the converter end and 24 on the forward clutch housing end for all subsequent years.
So the various versions-
· C4 - 64-83
· Case fill 24x24 spline {C4 to C9}
· Case fill 26x26 spline {D0}
· Case fill 26x24 spline {D1 to D9, & E1SP)
· Pan fill 24x24 spline {C5 to C9}
· Pan fill 26x26 spline {D0}
· Pan fill 26x24 spline {D1 to D9}
· C5 - 82-86
· Case fill {E2AP only)
· Pan fill {E2TP only}

Build level suggestions
I have a 2500 lb car with a 250 HP carbureted motor. What would I want to do to a C4 to get it to propel my dedicated bracket car to the lowest E.T.s? 89C - 250HP in 2500# car only requires a good working V-8 C-4 which would work great stock or with a shift kit. No other mods needed. RC – If he is looking to squeeze some ET by modding his C4? 89C - A full manual valve body is going to bump up the line pressure considerably, which takes power from the engine to do. No need to spend a lot of money on a trans that will already hold up to 250HP. The governor assembly doesn't add significant weight to the reciprocating assembly and doesn't use any power. About the only way you will reduce parasitic drag in the C-4 is to completely convert it to a full roller, which is expensive for the small ET gain and not needed unless you plan on having 600+HP.
JJ - I'm wondering if all this stuff about adding clutches and roller bearings is really needed on a mild, say 350HP, or under application. Wouldn't a good rebuild using 5 Red Eagle or similar clutches in the forward pack and 4 in the high/reverse pack be OK? Nothing wrong with buiding up a C4 to stand up to high HP but is it really necessary in a mild application?
W8 - Yes. For a mild motor that would hold up fine.
89C - I called PA and said I have a little over 1200HP on the dyno, may add a shot of nitrous and need to know what I should upgrade while I was in my PA S/C C-4. He said, "it can handle that power".

Input shafts
Early transmissions used a 24-spline input shaft that is smaller and weaker than the 26. The early 24 spline input shafts have a diameter of .788" and the 26 spline shafts are .839". The shafts can't be interchanged without swapping the stator support and the hi/reverse and the forward drum. GA - It is said that the 26 spline input shaft will take up to 600 hp. TR - Use of an after market hardened input shaft is only needed for the very high powered cars and heavy trucks. Up to 450 HP is fine for the stock one, above that it would be good insurance. 89C - Very few factory C-4 input shafts are hardened and seems that only the original C-4s that had the "R" servos had them (all mine came from trucks with yoke that bolts on tail shaft and 4WD C-4s with transfer cases bolted on where tail shaft goes.) If you can scratch the input shaft, then it isn't hardened. I have 3 that you can take a razor blade to and try to dig in and sratch and they will not scratch. I have tweaked the splines and shafts of the non hardend inputs but not the hardened ones. (Once I found out they do exist from the factory.)

Case differences
GH - I run the C5 case. C5s are easy to identify because of the 1/4" NPT fittings for lines instead of the 1/8NPT fittings. Those cases have larger circuits through them and hence more volume. GA - There is no real problem with the early cases, it all depends on the final use. The early case has the bell housing retained by the same bolts that hold the front pump in where the later ones have a larger flange on the case to allow the bell housing to be fitted separately and this is considered to be stronger. JS - The bells that bolt to the case were a heavy duty version.
W8 - The C5 case is better because of its improvements but is as strong as the older cases, but I have never heard of any problems with the strength of the main case.

Valve bodies
GA - A good valve body helps the trans live. I have used the transgo stage 2 kits. There are some mods in the article posted that also work well. I use those mods. TR - I only use good manual valve bodies and transbrakes for my modified trans builds so there is no comparison of the shift quality of them and shift kit or stock builds etc. mine all shift hard and firm and no slip. MVW - Use valve body gaskets for better sealing, has helped several different trannies seal better. Use them even with full manual valve bodies. 89C – PA said they use gaskets in the valve body separator plate too for the full manual reverse pattern bodies but not in the trans brake valve bodies with billet transfer plate. (Deeper discussion on this subject below.)

Servo choices
There are a few different opinions on the subject, although there is a bit of convergence on the issue around stock R and H servos. GA – I like the R servos. MVW - I like the R servos but have used H's with good success. I spoke to Epping and they use stock servos with the letter machined off. They said the servo makes no difference in their trannies. GH – I use the H model servo because it gives very solid shifts. It is the largest factory unit, highly desirable and plentiful. Make sure you use a stout spring inside the servo (I use a std 351 cleveland valve spring). W8 - I use an H servo with the outer seal removed and 3 flats ground on the surface and I plug the hole in the case. 89C - I never modified any servos, never needed to. An "H" or "R" servo with a Kevlar rigid or flex band has always been more than enough for the 9 second big blocks and small blocks my trannies have been behind. The weakness isn't in the apply area. It's in the release area and until very recently where somebody here posted the apply and release areas of different letter servos, I saw why the "H" allowed a small flareup from 2-3 shift and the "R" didn't. The "R" has a smaller release area that fills quicker thus allowing fluid to pass to the direct clutches quicker to prevent the flareup. "R" servo has a smaller apply area but that is insignificant seeing that properly setup the 1-2 shift and 1st/2nd gears don't have problems. It's the 3rd gear shift that causes the wear on the direct clutches and making 3rd shift harder and quicker is what makes the C-4 live.

Planetaries
MV - I use the stock planetaries and they seem to hold up fine. GA - I rebuild the front planetaries using parts from the rear planets as per the article in the archives. 89C – My PS Super Comp has the 6 gear planetary set.

Teflon vs. cast sealing rings
One of the builders likes the teflon sealing rings, but that doesn't seem too universal. GA - I personally use the steel sealing rings but some guys do prefer the teflon
TR - I have used only cast seal rings like stock with very good luck, but feel that there is some merit to the Teflon ones and some day will try them myself. GH - I get the Teflon seals for forward and direct from H&R Transmissions in Indy.

Clutch manufacturers
89C - I like Kolene steels and Blue clutches for the harder shifts and less slippage.
GH - I run Alto race clutches and Kolene steels.
TR - There is some debate as to need for high dollar clutches and bands I have used new rebuilder kits for most of my builds with no problems mostly Raybestos, Borg-Warner and others.
89C - PA said the red Alto and Blue Raybestos clutches are just personal preferences and that's why they offer both but they both work as good as the other so you can pay more for the blue clutches or less for the red clutches and have the same performance either way.

Adding clutches
GA - I use 5 forward + 5 hi/rev clutches. W8 - I am now using 5 clutches in the hi/rev drum using the lower plate from a forward drum and the smooth red clutches. I use 6 clutches in the forward drum by having the snap ring groove widened higher. Performance also has a kit to do something similar. TR - I use as many as 11 clutches in my C4 transmissions and I do this by using thinned stock steels. I take large batches of them to a machine shop that can surface grind them with a magnetic chuck surface grinder and have them take them down to .061-.065 and then use smooth surface forward clutches that are .061 thick in both clutch packs, final clearance is set at .020-.025 in both packs and this is done by machining the stock pressure plate down to a thickness that gives this much clearance and don't worry about it being too thin as there are stock ones that are listed at only .141 thick. You can make them pretty thin without trouble. I usually don't need to take them down that far, usually about .160 or so, but be sure to check yours before you machine it unless you have lots of spares. Gregaust and others here have suggested that you can also machine just the edge of the pressure plate to create a lip for the snap ring to set in and I think this would work well. Just watch out for clearances of the assemblies when this is done. And a word of caution I do not believe it is a good idea to machine the snap ring land higher in the drum because you may raise the pressure plate out of the locate lands in the outer perimeter of the drum and this will allow it to turn in the drum and not drive the drum as it is supposed to along with the steels in the pack. GA - On the subject of the 6 clutch fwd hub you need to be careful with the inner hub length for the clutches to engage. I haven't actually measured but more than 5 plates with stock thickness steels would go close to running off the edge of the inner teeth for the clutches. Here is a link to a place here in Australia that has a long skirt hub to overcome this prob. http://www.drtaust.com.au/ 89C - I used to machine down some high/direct pistons (exactly the thickness of 1 friction and one steel removed from piston) to fit 1 extra clutch. I then used the curved pressure plate from forward clutch turned upside down (has thin outer edge which a snap ring barely fits into when used as top pressure plate) and used as a pressure plate to add 1 more clutch for 6 total with ease. I didn't use the deeper C-5 clutch drum for that would have let me fit 7 with no problem but 6 is enough using the regular waffle clutches and standard thickness steels. I also used that curved plate on the forward clutch pack as a pressure plate for 6 clutches there too. It all worked out very well with hard shifts but the #8 thrust washer would sheer the tangs off and spin. That was my problem. 89C - PA says if you use the thinner forward smooth clutches in high drum, it will slip more before lockup and will not shift as hard or quick. The grooves in the direct clutches are like tire tread and give the fluid a place to go when the clutches are applied. The smooth clutches work good in forward drum because they are applied from the start and thus don't need the quick fluid evacuating grooves. However, when 3rd is engaged, the clutches need to get rid of the fluid between the clutches as quick as possible and the grooved clutches are there for that reason. I have never used forward clutches in high drum for the same belief and now I'm glad I was right about that for the right reasons. RC - Maybe, maybe not TR has done this successfully and the Alto power pack uses 6 smooth Red Eagles. Additionally, all the Red Eagles are smooth irrespective of which drum they are for.
MVW - I never really thought about it, I just have some 5 clutch drums and I use them. I have one I bought from PA, I needed a drum and clutches so I bought a direct drum kit from them. Came with 5 blue clutches in it. When I rebuilt it I grabbed a stack of 5 Alto Red Eagle smooth clutches from a kit I had. I also grabbed 5 kolene steels and my pressure plate which is a thinner one than one I had in my spare parts box. (Possibly a .140” C5 pressure plate.) I put it together using the snap ring that had come out. Clearance was .05 with a .065 ring so I put an .080 ring in and I was done. I may have to do some measuring and get back to you with the thicknesses of everything.
Ford Papa - If you have an extra 4 clutch drum take the stepped pressure plate from the bottom of the forward clutch hub and use it as the top pressure plate in the direct clutch like Windsor Eight does since the step is only approx .125". It’s thinner so you can get 5 clutches in the standard 4 clutch drum. Other times I have used two steels together as a pressure plate to get clearance. It just depends on the frictions, steels and snap rings you have. It works and is easy. The five clutch drums are hard to find, but I do have one that came out of a c-4 with a yoke on the tranny, likely a truck application.
GA - I hadn't heard of a 5 clutch direct as original, just the c5 drum which has the snap ring groove slightly higher.
MVW - I always looked harder for panfill cores which tend to be out of heavier vehicles so maybe I take 5 clutch directs a bit for granted.
GA - We have lots of pan fill c4's here but they still only come with 4 direct clutches...Very interesting..You learn something new every day


Bands
GA – I use Kevlar bands. W8 - I use Kevlar bands. GH - Use Kevlar bands. JS - My thoughts on killing bands is the use of the "Flex-Band" not the servos or the servo mods mentioned above. I have never killed a band when using or re-using the rigid front bands. 89C - I have never had or seen a flex band break but I went with the rigid band for peace of mind. PA said they prefer the intermediate Kevlar lined flex band instead of the "rigid" intermediate Kevlar lined band because it can wrap around the drum easier therefore having better and more surface contact with drum. The rigid band needs time to seat in and wear to the contours of the drum before they become better than the flex band but most racers don't have extra time to wear the rigid bands in before the race so they aren't used. In a street car, they become better as they get more wear for increased contact surface

Oiling mods
GA - Remove the check ball from the stator support for increased cooler flow. MVW - More oil volume is good, deeper pan with filter extension of some kind.
89C - How are you modifying the C-4 cases? I haven't modified a C-4 case and haven't had any problems other than spinning the #8 thrust washer.
GH - My transmission runs about 215-217 psi line pressure. (MVW's C4 runs 200) I go in and put a small radius around the openings for feed from the oil pump as they are razor sharp from machining and this seems to help. DR - I have had several C4s that have spun the tangs off of the #9 thrust washer (the one behind the one way clutch that seats to the case) I noticed the C5 case has an extra lube hole in the thrust washer and of course a matching hole in the case. The return lube circuit from the cooler is the feed hole for this circuit and is larger. I have added this circuit to the C4 cases and have eliminated problems with knocking the tangs off the thrust washer. GA – To improve oiling to the #9 thrust washer, drill through the back of the case into the rear oil cooler return line passage to pick up direct lubrication for that thrust washer and drill the washer to match. Drill this passage to 3/16" to open it up slightly from 5/32". The hole in the case for the cooler fitting is quite a restriction so opening it up should improve flow slightly. GA - One of the C4's I rebuilt had this mod done already. I didn't realize that was the same as a c5. W8 - I prefer the heavy duty C4 case (bell to case-dipstick in pan). I believe that they are stronger overall. I have just been modifying my C4 cases for better flow. GA - I have noticed that some of the earlier 26 spline type front planetaries don’t have a lube hole in the planetary case that the later ones have. This is in the area of the front thrust washer drilled through to the center of the case. It would be easy to drill and may be worth drilling if it's not there already.

Drilling the drums
W8 - I drill holes in the outside of the hi/rev drum to stop too much fluid from building up.
GA – I drill both the hi/rev and low drum. The holes in the direct drum are evenly spaced, 4 holes at 5/16" in the outside circumfrence to help evacuate the fluid. Those holes are in the center of where the clutches ride. Measure down the inside of the drum to the approximate center of where the clutches run, then mark the outside. It works out pretty much the center.


Stator support bushing
JS - Since the early 80's, I have always used the C6 pump bushing in the C4/C5 pumps with no problems. 89C - I compared the C-6 pump to converter bearing to the C-4 bearing and the C-6 is nearly twice as wide and I guess I will use them from now on instead of the C-4 bushings. Better wear and stability.

Endplay
GH - Make sure you set the clutch clearances to factory clearances. MVW - Keep tranny endplay to a minimum, especially with iron sealing rings but helps all around. JS - I think a killer of the C4 and other transmissions is not paying attention to the clutch pack and endplay clearances. Most home builders don't take time to acquire a selection of selective snap rings and selective thrust washer combos since they might build one or two C4's before getting frustrated and buying one from a company. Get the selective thrust washers and snap rings at any transmission parts house. I use Recon or Transtar. I still have my old Peterson Publishing Auto Repair book that was released back in the 70's and reference it quite often for specs on endplay and clutch packs. W8 - Clearances are very important and that is where most people fail. I also found an H gauge to be a very handy tool for checking the end clearances. It will help keep you out of trouble. I build transmissions everyday but just for everyday vehicles. 89C - One of the most important things is to allow .005" clearance for each friction clutch for minimum piston movement and quicker engagement. 5 frictions should have .025" and 7 should have .035" like in my reverse/high packs which I have been calling "direct clutches" for obvious reasons. However PA told me .010" clearance per clutch in the drums will causes the least "drag" and will ET better but wear quicker and require more regular freshening. Said if running .005" clearance per clutch, you will lose a tenth or two depending on how many clutches are being used. MVW - The tight clearance on the direct clutch causes drag in first gear in particular. Remember that in first gear the clutches in the direct drum are spinning the opposite way that the steels are. Tighter clearances mean more friction and drag. Clearances become a guessing game between ET and clutch life.

Roller thrust bearing conversion
TimR has detail on the roller conversion eliminating the thrust washers. GA – The roller bearings will obviously free up a bit of power but a bigger advantage is there will be less contamination of the oil from the wearing of the stock thrusts. I build mine with roller thrusts as per TimR's info. The roller bearing mod also solves the problem that 89coupe mentioned a while ago. He was shearing the tangs from the stock thrust washers when on the gas.
TR - Interesting note in the current issue of Muscle Mustang and Fast Fords April 2002. There is an article about PA C4 build up and in it they show at least 2 more places to put bearings in the trans other than the places that I already do. I have seen bearings used in these places before in other companies transmission builds, but never had the sizes of the bearings so I had never put them there, but now I may try these places as well. They use the same Turbo 350 pump bearings there too, at least it looks to be the same ones in the pictures.
89C – The PA Super Comp has roller thrust bearings all over. Hell, even the front pump has a roller needle bearing set behind the front pump instead of a selective plastic thrust washer. My front pump has the roller thrust on #1 and therfore I have no way to control the endplay. I guess you're supposed to know exactly what the #1 thrust washer thickness is for optimum endplay before you have the front pump machined for the roller. That way you can get it dead on by just measuring #1 roller thrust thickness and cutting the receiver groove for the roller accordingly. Then endplay will not change and will always be right as long as the other regular thrust washers are not excessively wearing.
W8 – Hey, 89C you can shim the Torrington bearings. They make different thickness flat steel shims.
89C - But what holds the shim in place and keeps it from sneaking out? I have never seen a #1 plastic thrust washer worn or even slightly worn in any way. #1 isn't under stress and just takes up clearance for proper endplay and to keep the assembly from walking too much but under power everything is thrust rearward. I wonder why PA chose to use a roller there. I bought 2 TH350 front pump thrust roller bearings locally for $12.45 each and I think that is a bit high. I really would like to find those TH350 roller bearings cheaper.
TR - I am sure http://www.bulkparts.com has them (now they are also on the web site.) And if you need someone to machine your parts let me know I have done several sets for myself and had very good luck, I’d be willing to do some for folks who are interested for a modest fee. I may set up an exchange system - send me good cores and I’ll send you back machined parts ready to install. If there is interest I could even get the bearings and sell roller setups complete.
89C - Thanks guys. $5 each is a whole bunch cheaper than $12.45 each. I'll order 20 so I can totally make my other 2 race C-4s (already built and ready to race) fully rollerized in every position except for 2. I'll also make the rear planetary in my PA C-4 rollerized too while I'm at it since they have started doing that. By the way, I checked a place here in town and they didn't find any roller thrust bearing selective shims in their listings. I did ask so i could set the end play with the roller on #1 position..
GA - You could try a bearing place for a shim for #1 if you need it. Try Torrington, part# TRA-3446. This is a .030 steel shim that is the same diameters as the T350 bearing. I am able to buy here .020" + .030" shims to go behind the #1 plastic thrust to get correct clearances. You could use them if needed to. With careful machining hopefully you'd get by without any shims. Did you check out the link one of the guys posted above for the JPT C4? Noticed that they machine the back of the rear planet for the bearing instead of the ring gear.
89C - I checked my PA C4 and the ring gear is machined for the roller bearing instead of the backside of the rear planetary. It also has a roller bearing behind the ring gear against the reverse band drum. It's just missing the roller in front of the rear planetary but not for long. I am going have a machine shop machine the back of the case on the inside for a roller bearing but it will be a challenge because of how far back the machining will take place inside. Eliminating ALL thrust bearings with rollers is my goal now
GA - Check out the mighty mouse article and the light-o-matic article above for the rear #9 roller. It looks like the roller is machined into the inner race for the roller clutch. Machining the trans case may not be necessary. There's also the roller for behind the park gear. The bearing from a c6 fwd hub is the correct size for that one.
89C - I just checked out the possibility of machining the inner sprag race and it looks like it will not work. The little sheet metal cage that keeps the rollers and springs intact will be in the way. Without machining, the roller thrust does clear everything but having to machine .080" off the race for proper clearance will put the roller thrust into the metal cage and possibly even the rollers. There are tiny "nipples" that stick out along the cage and even with those sanded down there isn't enough clearance. Looks like machining the inside of the case is the only possible way to convert #9 to roller. What roller from the C-6 are you talking about? When did they start using rollers in C-6s forward hub? How much are those rollers or have you checked yet? It would be nice to find a roller that can be put in place of the smaller #3 forward clutch thrust bearing where the kidney holes are. A small roller for #2 reverse clutch thrust bearing at end of pump. Then a completely and totally rollerized C-4 can be built and should free up power a bit more(how much I don't know) but should definitely be better anyway. Any ideas?
GA - The roller bearing from a C6 is in the #3 position and sits in the backside of the fwd hub and the front planetaries run against. All c6's have them. It looks like it would fit the park gear to case and i just checked and it would be pretty close to the #3 spot over the jelly bean holes too. The bearing measures 2.105" x 1.365" x.140".
89C - I'll check into the C-6 roller for price and availability. I sure hope it fits #3 position too. That would be great. I found a machine shop here that will machine everything for the roller thrusts but they are checking into doing the inside rear of the case. They may not be able to machine that. Thanks for the info. This is really starting to look easy and affordable to do in all positions except #2 unless there is a small roller thrust that will fit there too. Maybe somebody already knows of a small bearing for the #2 at the end of the pump. I just got word from the machine shop that they can machine the back roller bearing register on inside of case for $70-$75 with CNC but if I bring them my 5 cases at once (3 will have to be disassembled) they said then can probably do them for around $35 each so I will do that. All other machining they can do too so now I will tear my other 2 race C-4s apart and 2 stock C-4s and have ALL machine work done at one time for rollers in every position. I have buckets of extra C-4 parts from years of accumulating which I will have machine also for spares. Damn, maybe i can sell some FULL roller C-4s around here and make some money. That would be nice but I won't count on it till it happens. I have yet to get that #3 C-6 roller thrust to see if it will work on #3 position over the jelly bean holes and between the park gear and the case.


Do you need to weld the forward drum jellybean holes?
Some do weld them up while others don’t. Clearly there is disagreement over whether this is necessary. W8 - I weld up the 3 peanut holes in the forward drum. GA- The weak link, as mentioned in another post here, is the fwd drum jelly bean holes. I weld them. TR- I think it is a good idea to weld or braze the kidney shaped holes in the forward clutch hub to prevent them from breaking out as this is a known weak spot. MVW – I’ve never welded my forward drums. I have never broken one but having said that it will let go on the first pass of the year. ( Note: the drum lasted fine after 140 passes.) 89C - I just disassembled my Performance Automatics (PA) Super Comp C-4 and the kidney holes in the forward drum are still there: no welding of any kind on the forward drum. PA says welding or brazing in the kidney shaped holes on the forward drum is only necessary if planning on making over 1000HP and I myself have never stripped out the splines or broken a forward drum even with 1.32 60ft times and I wasn't even close to making 1000HP. TR - I am surprised at the info you shared about PA saying that the kidney holes don't need to be welded I always thought that was a weak point. 89C - There are too many people running 8s with unwelded drums to think the drums are a weak link. A high mileage drum with a lot of wear in the spline area would cause a problem but not a closely inspected drum with nice tight fitting input shaft. I have seen worn out forward drums that I wouldn't use and I carefully inspect the ones I do use along with "feeling" the spline clearance using the input shaft. MVW – The last parts tranny I pulled apart had the drum broken though along with being the most burnt up C-4 I had ever seen. I wonder what kind of abuse it takes to so severely ruin a tranny. Lots of pedal to the metal in reverse then drop to 1st gear maybe.

Forward drum welding how-to
Some weld, while some of the builders braze the holes shut. Each seems to have advantages. The "King of the Cs" article in the Sept 88 Hot Rod says, "the C4 clutch drums tend to crack through their center jelly-bean holes, so they should be MIG welded shut. Welding heat also tends to reduce the i.d. of the center hole in the drum, yielding the added benefit of a tighter fitting and more positively retained input shaft." At least one of the builders, maybe Dynamic brazes theirs. W8-I mig weld them slowly, a little at a time cooling the drum down after every little bit so it doesn't get overheated. Just make sure you drill the lube hole through It is the hole in one of the peanut holes and you will cover it when you weld it up. Just drill it through the same size as the original hole or slightly larger. I also drill a corresponding hole in the thrust washer and chamfer it with a large drill bit. Alternatively, you can make a groove under the thrust washer to one of the holes already in the thrust washer. GA - I mig weld the jelly bean holes in the forward hub. Here's a little tip to help. Make sure to soak the hub in some solvent and get it nice and clean before welding. Soaking in a solvent removes all traces of oil, which is required for a good weld. On the oil hole, I like to redrill the hole then die grind a small groove under the thrust washer to link up with the original hole in the thrust washer.

Servo modification discussion
MVW – I do not like the servo mod where the small sealing ring is taken out. The only C-4's I see that take 2nd gear band out have this mod and I believe it is hard on high gear also. My thought is if the small sealing ring is removed on the servo piston and some oil transfer slots cut the pressures on both sides of the piston will be the same. The problem with that is if the valvebody does the same thing as a stock one when the tranny goes to high gear the apply pressure on the servo piston is not released. This means the only thing moving the piston up and disengaging the band is the spring. I have never seen this tech tip come with the advice to use a heavier spring. Using an H servo for an example there is a 4.4 square inch area difference between the two seal areas. If line pressure was 150 PSI, with both seals in use there is 660 lbs of force pushing the piston up the bore. The band disengages quickly and the pressure gets to the direct clutch quicker and with less lag. There is an 8 sec Fairmont running here that has the servo mod done and the band lasts about 10 runs. While I only run high 10's I have never killed a band. I believe Dynamic has a valve body that releases the 2nd gear pressure when high gear comes on. I spoke to them at Epping and they use stock servos with the letter machined off and he said the servo makes no difference in their trannies.
This is my theory and I am sticking to it. Poke enough holes in it and I will try the mod late in the year just to prove my point only with an A servo so I do not waste my good servos. W8 - I think it depends on the valve body too. I do the mod only on the C4's I build with manual valve bodies. I have been using TCI or ATI valve bodies and all of them want you to do this mod. I have not had a broken band yet. I Have a C4 in a friends 67 mustang with a 429 running 10's and in 4 seasons he has not broken a band. Same with the others I have done. I have seen some of the stock bands come apart though, with runaway line pressure. I am using Kevlar bands and they seem to hold up well. TR - I have used the servo mod on many of my builds with only one that ever gave me any trouble and I think that the cover is flexing on that one so I plan to build a girdle for it and see if that will help.

C4 websites

http://www.acerecon.com/catalog/automatics/illustration.asp?t=33 – exploded view

http://www.acerecon.com/catalog/automatics/series.asp?t=33 – comprehensive parts list

http://users.abilene.com/~dkelly/hotrod/trans.html – link to several nice pieces

http://users.abilene.com/~dkelly/hotrod/images/trans/c4exp.gif – excellent exploded view

http://www.hptransparts.com - Turbo 350 front pump bearings, C4/5 manual, parts

http://mmerlinn.tripod.com/trans/fdc4f/fd9c4bhd.htm C4/C5 bellhousing application chart

http://mmerlinn.tripod.com/trans/fdc4f/fbbfdc4f.htm#nom C4 numbers and nomenclature

http://community.webshots.com/album/33151626dMvona C4 build article JPT Trannys

http://www.geocities.com/parthos.geo/trans/tranny.html C4 Build page

[ This Message was edited by: R Code on 1/31/03 3:51am ]"

WOW HOO!!!!!!!! the fawker is running

It was something dumb.......I had the power grounds hooked to the + side of the battery.......I know, dumb ars....*looking at toes and kicking ground*......

Guess what, I know what a power ground is now.....lol

Note:BK/LG are power grounds and needs to be connected to a good ground....yes they carry voltage:D

Thanks to all that help with this....:beers: to all...

There has been a lot of discussions about car 5.0L, but what about the truck engines?
Are they all speed - density?

Is speed density vs MAF that big of a deal if you do not plan on a lot of modifications?

I am not too concerned about horsepower, and I can find complete, clean engines in trucks at the Pick N Pulls.
I would imagine the 5.0Ls in cars lived a hard life, being hot rodded around, whereas the trucks maybe not so much abusive hard driving.

My current plan is to get a clean PnP engine, check it over, new bearings and seals, get it in place and running, get the damned thing smogged:rolleyes: , then later on build a more durable engine platform.

Originally posted by syko
OK, I'm back.......:D
I finally have everything wired, fuel lines run and ready to start it....So I crack on it.....nothing :$hit: I can spray starter fluid in the intake and it will fire.....

I have fuel at the fuel rail..I have spark.....but I'm not getting the injectors to flow....I used my volt meter and noticed that I have almost 11 volts on each wire that goes to the injectors....I looked at a running truck and it has a 12 volt in run on one side and a pulse in crank on the other.....

What could I have hooked up backwards/wrong....Aren't the injectors power feed from the ECA??? I'm sure this is something dumb......

Thanks for any help.:D

I had the exact same problem. My injectors were hot, but they were hot all the time. A Ford tech told me that the injectors fire when they are grounded. I had the injectors so they were hot all the time, thus they wouldn't ground and fire. To fix it , I had to run the injectors off a hot in run and start (or just hot in run, i forget). That way, the comp sends a signal to the injectors to ground and fire.
Hope that helps
Josh

Heres som more info,
from the computer, pins 37 and 57 should be a red wire, they both have to he hot in start or run.
I think, (not completely positive) that pin 1 which should be a black orange wire, should be hot in start or run.
Theres a red/lightblue that should be hot in start only
a red light green that should be hot in run and start.
I'm still looking for the important diagram i have, just can't find it right now.
The wire that fires the injectors is the red one. THtas the one you wanna check.
Go to your local ford dealer and see if one of the techs can stop by your house sometime and throw a computer on to check everything. thats what i did and he answered all my questions.
HTH
Josh

I got my 302 this weekend.
1988 302 HO out of a 88 Lincoln Mark VII. Down side is it is speed density:(
I was surprised enough to find a HO at the Pick and Pull, on half off weekend. I got out the door with the engine complete from fan to flywheel, wire harness, and ECM for $150.
So what is involved with changing over to MAF? Swap out the ECM, wire harness, and install the MAF sensor. I have not looked up any wiring diagrams yet, but how is the speed density engine wire harness that much different than the MAF harness. Wiring into the Jeep should be about the same.

Originally posted by Robert
I got my 302 this weekend.
1988 302 HO out of a 88 Lincoln Mark VII. Down side is it is speed density:(
I was surprised enough to find a HO at the Pick and Pull, on half off weekend. I got out the door with the engine complete from fan to flywheel, wire harness, and ECM for $150.
So what is involved with changing over to MAF? Swap out the ECM, wire harness, and install the MAF sensor. I have not looked up any wiring diagrams yet, but how is the speed density engine wire harness that much different than the MAF harness. Wiring into the Jeep should be about the same. Nice Scoure.
Several companies sell kits to convert it. I say get it in a running, you can always change it over later. Plus only real reason to go MAF is for higher power, the SD is a fine motor and some say produce more power.

Originally posted by Mr.N
Nice Scoure.
Several companies sell kits to convert it. I say get it in a running, you can always change it over later. Plus only real reason to go MAF is for higher power, the SD is a fine motor and some say produce more power.

So the wiring into the Jeep will be the same? I have not got my books yet, they are in the mail:D
I couldn't sleep last night, too excited about getting this going:D

Originally posted by Robert


So the wiring into the Jeep will be the same? I have not got my books yet, they are in the mail:D
I couldn't sleep last night, too excited about getting this going:D The Probst phamphlet is all you "really" need. I think the rangerstation has a copy of it. CHeck the Ford section TOTW or TOTM on this for a link.
If your not swapping heads or other big power adder run it stock for now.

I just found a page with some good info, thought I'd share.
Mustang Engine, Fuel Injection, and EEC Information (http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/tech/engine/)

http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/tech/engine/images/88Stang5.0Vacuum.gif

After reading through this whole thread 3 or 4 times...

Is anyone actually running a 5.0 out of an Explorer.

Also - I would like an atlas but am leaning toward to 205 for $$. Is there a better option for the money. Will sandwich an auto between the 2 (AOE or C4/C6)

anyone running headers on there 5.0 with an np435? If so, which ones? Slave cylinder is in the way...pics would be appreciated. thanks.

Originally posted by TXYJ93
anyone running headers on there 5.0 with an np435? If so, which ones? Slave cylinder is in the way...pics would be appreciated. thanks.

Truck manifolds will work...

Or take some 'stang headers and have em modified...

Bad news on the Ford raceing stand alone wireing harness. From what I understand Ford has quit makeing them and summit shows them as not available. Thats going to make the explorer and Lincoln conversions a bit more difficult.

Originally posted by Rescue35
Bad news on the Ford raceing stand alone wireing harness. From what I understand Ford has quit makeing them and summit shows them as not available. Thats going to make the explorer and Lincoln conversions a bit more difficult.


Just buy a "5.0" magazine, there will be several companies that will step in and fill the void.
There are way to many folks swapping 5.0 engines into their track cars, for someone to not step up to the plate.
Intertech is the first company that comes to mind, they already manufacture several versions of mass air conversion kits, and other Ford EFI wiring accessories.

I was actually quite impressed with the painless wiring kit I got for mine. It took about 2 hours to set up and the worst of it was simply running the wires to where I wanted them. It fired up on the first try and it has run excellent since. I am sure if u pick up any 5.0 mag that there are plenty of other companies who do the same.

Yeah I just picked up the latest issue of 5.0. However modifying the stang harness dosent seem to tuff if you have it.

ok I read and reading and reading, here and google. Trying to help find my less internet literate BIL find some info not covered on a 5.0L swap. lots of good electrical info here though...

5.0L from a 91 GT
Ford T-18 tranny

Trying to find out what Bellhousing will bolt the T-18 up to the 5.0L. Will any Ford T-18 bell housing do this? Any issues with throwout bearing? Pilot bushing and figuring out clutch linkage shouldn't be an issue.

Thanks, read about people that have done this, but none of them really giving any details.

Originally posted by Travis Waldher

Trying to find out what Bellhousing will bolt the T-18 up to the 5.0L. Will any Ford T-18 bell housing do this? Any issues with throwout bearing? Pilot bushing and figuring out clutch linkage shouldn't be an issue.
Thanks, read about people that have done this, but none of them really giving any details.

A BH from a mid - 80's Ford pickup with a 5.0L will allow you to use the 50 oz. balanced, 164 tooth flywheel and 11" clutch. Don't get a flywheel from a 351/5.8L as they are 28 oz. balance. The Ford T-18 will bolt right up to the bell housing. You can get the pilot bushing from Advance Adapter, ~ $15. The TO bearing is a no-brainer, just get one for a truck that had the T-18.

Dean

Originally posted by Bgcj5
I am sure if u pick up any 5.0 mag that there are plenty of other companies who do the same.

While that is true, the nice part about the Ford wire harness to me was the price. It was only about $160, as compared to $400 for some of the aftermarket harnesses.
I would be checking around for dealerships with one in stock.
Just because Ford does not make them, doesn't mean you can't find one at a dealership somewhere.

Originally posted by Robert


While that is true, the nice part about the Ford wire harness to me was the price. It was only about $160, as compared to $400 for some of the aftermarket harnesses.
I would be checking around for dealerships with one in stock.
Just because Ford does not make them, doesn't mean you can't find one at a dealership somewhere.

You'd be paying around $400 for a complete new Ford Racing 5.0L harness. There are 3 sections to it, the engine harness, the O2 sensor harness, and the main harness. You'll need all three sections. I paid about $400 for mine from Summit 2 years ago.

Dean

:cool:

Good thread, a lot of good info.

I haven't read all of the posts and I am sure this has come up B4 but here it is again...

Has anyone used the early (60's) Mustang HiPo Exhaust Manifolds? It was the closest thing to a header you can find I guess it was called free flowing manifold, kind of looks like a shorty header ?
I have a set but have not tried them for fit; I will post just as soon as I try them on.

I have tried the Jet Shorty Header; it interferes with the hydraulic clutch and the body on the passenger side.
The passenger side header can be fixed by rotating the flange a little, but the Driver's side header and the clutch interference is another thing.
Anyone comes up with a good set of headers that fit, shorty or longer ones.

Added Note: The Ford 5.0L is lighter than an original Jeep six; so it should make for a better performaing vehicle.

Stock Mustang GT headers from an '89 ish car work nice...... At least they did on mine:flipoff2:

You can get Mustang shorty headers on Ebay for about $20 a set, too. That's what I'll be using. And, to get around the clutch linkage problem, run a C-6 behind the 5.0. With aftermarket shifter, there is nothing to interfere with the headers.

WIth a 5.0 and a c6, what for shifter are you guys running? I have a lokar, but it gets inthe wy of my dash and getting into park is a bitch.
I wanted to run a cheap cable one, but it would've hit the front driveshaft. Also, with the c6 and np205, I had to cut off the corner of the tranny pan to clear the front ds, thats how tight it is in there for me.
Josh

Now when swapping in a 5.0 into a 97 TJ, will I need to replace the radiator? I have an aftermarket 3 core radiator already in it, and then would be a huge benefit into doing a Ford swap.

KPJ, yer rad will be fine. I used a 3 core YJ replacment rad in mine, and it works fine.

Originally posted by Jeepin5.0
WIth a 5.0 and a c6, what for shifter are you guys running? I have a lokar, but it gets inthe wy of my dash and getting into park is a bitch.
I wanted to run a cheap cable one, but it would've hit the front driveshaft. Also, with the c6 and np205, I had to cut off the corner of the tranny pan to clear the front ds, thats how tight it is in there for me.
Josh

I am using the Art Carr gate shifter with a C6 and 5.0 and it fits great. It is a beotch to find a good place the mount the shifter base, but once it's in there, it works great.

If anyone is looking for some mustang Gt headers, I have a set in decent shpe. They have the typical surface rust, ect. They came from a '90 stang. I am running the FRP ceramic coated street rod headers. They are available from summit. Similar to a shorty header.

:cool:

As mentioned earlier in the thread Ford has a booklet that covers mod'g the original harness.

I used it and all there is a three wires to hook up and knowing where that wore are in the original harness and in the vehicle harness.

I think they are run/start, start, and run, again I think...(wood burning/smoke).

On the exhaust and the clutch linkage, there are some of us that still like manually shifted transmissions, good or bad but lets not get into that one.

I am using a Ron Francis - Wire Works harness, it requires running all of the wire indiviually, time, I hope it is on my side.

H8Monday, any chance of seeing close-ups of your OBA setup on the 5.0? That will be one of the first mods I do, once I get around to dropping the 5.0 in. :)

Nevermind, I saw some pics and info in another thread. :D

Originally posted by kpj
Nevermind, I saw some pics and info in another thread. :D

Well since you made me go look for the pics, your gonna get them anyway.:flipoff2:

http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/887743-Mvc-006s.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/887744-Mvc-005s.jpg

I used parts of the stock rotary compressor bracket, and some angle iron to make the bracket.
It was pretty simple.
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940882-Mvc-005sYork.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940887-Mvc-006sY.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940897-Mvc-005s.jpg

Thanks! :D

H8Monday,

Is that an air horn I see beside your brake booster?

Also, how far down did you mount your engine to be able to clear the top of the York? Or put another way, where in relation to your frame rails is the top of the block portion of the engine mount? (at the top of the frame rail, middle, bottom, etc.)

By the looks of that firewall/cowl, that's a CJ correct?

Anybody used the stock 5.0 ac compressor succesfully for on board air? If I put an oiler on the intake I think it should be fine. I like the fact that the AC clutch is already wired through the harness so all you have to do is hook up a switch to power:D

Originally posted by H8monday
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940897-Mvc-005s.jpg
Why Didn't you run it where the Air pump was?

Why would you want to?

H8Monday (or anyone who can answer), what is the PN for the Ford Racing wiring harness that would make it easier for a motor swap? Sorry about not doing the research myself, but I have dial up internet access when I am traveling on the road and it takes forever to do any research. :mad:

Thanks,

Ken

Originally posted by kpj
H8Monday (or anyone who can answer), what is the PN for the Ford Racing wiring harness that would make it easier for a motor swap? Sorry about not doing the research myself, but I have dial up internet access when I am traveling on the road and it takes forever to do any research. :mad:

Thanks,

Ken

The engine harness is no longer produced by Ford, however there are some aftermarket manufactures producing it. I think Painless is making one. Also check with some of the mustang mags, there are quite a few Ford Racing dealers and one is bound to have a left over harness on a shelf somewhere.

You can still get the Main harness from Summit. It's under p/n FMS-M-12071-C302

The main harness connects the computer to the engine harness.

Summit also still has the sensor kit: FMS-M-12071-K302

Hope that helps.

Rock

Originally posted by H8monday


Well since you made me go look for the pics, your gonna get them anyway.:flipoff2:

http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/887743-Mvc-006s.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/887744-Mvc-005s.jpg

I used parts of the stock rotary compressor bracket, and some angle iron to make the bracket.
It was pretty simple.
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940882-Mvc-005sYork.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940887-Mvc-006sY.jpg
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/940897-Mvc-005s.jpg

H8Monday, what application did you get the York from with the serpentine pulley?

Been looking for a compressor like that for a while..... so far, no luck.

Thanks

Originally posted by rock-rod


The engine harness is no longer produced by Ford, however there are some aftermarket manufactures producing it. I think Painless is making one. Also check with some of the mustang mags, there are quite a few Ford Racing dealers and one is bound to have a left over harness on a shelf somewhere.

You can still get the Main harness from Summit. It's under p/n FMS-M-12071-C302

The main harness connects the computer to the engine harness.

Summit also still has the sensor kit: FMS-M-12071-K302

Hope that helps.

Rock

Thanks for the info! It is much appreciated. :)

:cool:

H8monday, Sweet Job...

Godammit, had a c4 tranny built for my 5.0 right before this thread went up and the guy used a c5 case and bellhousing. Tried it today and sure enough it comes up a half inch short. Gotta go back tomarrow and get a c4 bellhousing for it.
~matt

has it been covered as to what fuel cell, gas tank, pumps must be used? id like to keep it junkyard or OEM (advance auto) parts if possible... i figure a new pump... can the CJ tank be retained? what pump goes in it?

Stock 5.0 needs 88 liters per hour at 40 psi. You will need a pump specifically designed for injected engines. summit sells nice mustang in tank pumps for under $100. Maybe you could make it work in a cj tank.
~matt

What is the stock TJ pumps rated for? If it is too small, could you get a "booster" pump to get it up to the required psi for the 5.0? I am trying to get everything squared away before I decide if I want to do this in the spring or wait until the TJ is parked next winter. I really want the HP now. :D Or, is there any way to adapt the Mustang pump into a TJ tank?

I'm running a stock YJ fuel tank, pump, and relay. I had a 4.0L before the swap and I've had zero problems since the swap. So, I'd say yer TJ junk will prolly work......... I'd say it would work, but you might be running a 2.5L and I have no first hand experiance with that fuel system.

Originally posted by kpj
What is the stock TJ pumps rated for? If it is too small, could you get a "booster" pump to get it up to the required psi for the 5.0? I am trying to get everything squared away before I decide if I want to do this in the spring or wait until the TJ is parked next winter. I really want the HP now. :D Or, is there any way to adapt the Mustang pump into a TJ tank?

It also might be possible to retrofit a pump from a V8 grand waggy.... just an idea.

Originally posted by rock-rod


It also might be possible to retrofit a pump from a V8 grand waggy.... just an idea.

you do know that all fullsize jeeps were carberated, right?

He prolly meant Grand Cherokee;)

If all goes well.. i could be turning over my 5.0 swap this weekend.. i'm going to try and use the stock fuel pump from my 93 YJ 2.5L, i'll let everyone know how it goes...

oh btw.. can anyone tell me real quick where to splice the 2.5L fuel pump POWER wire into the Stang harness... the wires going to the fuel pump relay don't match the diagrams i have.. so im in the dark... i know i can just go through with a multimeter.. i was just curious if there was a simple answer..

thanks

Well it should be a dark green/yellow wire on the green plug of the harness. It might look a little different.....mine was faded and looked avacadoe green;)

Originally posted by sodaboyYJ
I'm running a stock YJ fuel tank, pump, and relay. I had a 4.0L before the swap and I've had zero problems since the swap. So, I'd say yer TJ junk will prolly work......... I'd say it would work, but you might be running a 2.5L and I have no first hand experiance with that fuel system.

I am running a 2.5L right now, but I believe I still have a fuel pump from 4.0 somewhere. IF not, I will try and make one froma Grand Cherokee V8 work, so I will definetely not have issues. I think. :D

Originally posted by desertCJ
He prolly meant Grand Cherokee;)

duh and you would think i actually knew what i was talking about... yes I meant grand cherokee. sorry

Originally posted by RidiculousYJ
If all goes well.. i could be turning over my 5.0 swap this weekend.. i'm going to try and use the stock fuel pump from my 93 YJ 2.5L ...thanks

I am running my stock '95 YJ 2.5L fuel pump and tank with my 5.0 and it works well. I have had no problems with fuel starvation or anything else to speak of so far... and I have been driving the Jeep since late October, 2003. :flipoff2:

Well, I tried to install a stock style starter, and found that it WILL NOT FIT with the streetrod headers. I bought a Powermaster hi-torque starter and it fit with room to spare.

Just a side note, if anyone wants to try the Lokar C4/C6 dipstick tube to replace a missing or damaged factory Ford stick/tube..... DON'T. They suck and don't fit very well. I will be sending that back to Summit. It's a nice idea, but there is absolutely nothing to hold the bottom of the flexible tube into the case, other than a glob of silicon. Not my idea of a positive seal.

Well, I tried to install a stock style starter, and found that it WILL NOT FIT with the streetrod headers. I bought a Powermaster hi-torque starter and it fit with room to spare.

Or you can just use manifolds and stop trying to be cool like everyone else:flipoff2: That's what I'm doing...

Originally posted by desertCJ


Or you can just use manifolds and stop trying to be cool like everyone else:flipoff2: That's what I'm doing...

yea, yea.....I know. But the ceramic coating on the headers is so purty:flipoff2:

This is a good conversion I did it a couple of years ago but i ran my old Jeep tranny. At the moment i am installing a NP435 transmission and keeping my Dana 300
Heres a picture of my 5.0
http://myimages.fourvalve.com/cobra50jeep/Sik%20Jeep%20Pics/Jeep%20engine%202.jpg.JPG
If anyone lives in the Bay Are and wants to do ths conversion let me know and i will tell you where i got my COMPLETE 5.0 from.

http://img8.photobucket.com/albums/v26/buzziscrazy2/9939cddf.jpg

Buzz'z.........lol

Originally posted by BUZZISCRAZY2
http://img8.photobucket.com/albums/v26/buzziscrazy2/9939cddf.jpg

Buzz'z.........lol
how come you moved your radiator back a couple of inches?

hey Cobra5.0Jeep, how does the E303 cam work for you?
I know H8Monday had some poor performance characteristics from the E303 and went to the B303.
I am still up in the air between the two. I really need to retain smog legality. Several shops have told me I could sneak a B303 past the smog sniffer. Not sure if I want to push things though.
Getting a smog certificate will be tough enough.

E303 cam is badass for me. It does have negative sides. I seem to get a huge boost of HP after 3k rpm but i can lug it like no other down to 500rpm and it still crawls.
Nice lopey sound as well, i have no complaints

Originally posted by Cobra5.0Jeep
This is a good conversion I did it a couple of years ago but i ran my old Jeep tranny. At the moment i am installing a NP435 transmission and keeping my Dana 300
Heres a picture of my 5.0
http://myimages.fourvalve.com/cobra50jeep/Sik%20Jeep%20Pics/Jeep%20engine%202.jpg.JPG
If anyone lives in the Bay Are and wants to do ths conversion let me know and i will tell you where i got my COMPLETE 5.0 from.

Cobra5.0, where did you get that air filter from. I am looking for one just like that. Is it a K&N? I need it to attach directly to the stock MAF meter.

Thanks,

Rock

To make room for the tilt front end.........Very close

Rockrod, i too have the Lokar dipstick.......i made a little braket that attaches to a valvecover bolt hole and it works great.................the factory tube wouldn't fit with the headers:D

Originally posted by rock-rod


Cobra5.0, where did you get that air filter from. I am looking for one just like that. Is it a K&N? I need it to attach directly to the stock MAF meter.

Thanks,

Rock
I ordered it from a local auto parts store. It is a K&N and i think you can browse their filters online? I'm not sure but hopefully your local autoparts store has a K&N air filter catalog that you can look through.

92 stang 302 HO replacing 93 Jeep YJ's stock 2.5L

okay.. got the engine running. Now i have a driveshaft question... heres some background info:

Now, i have a C6/NP208 from an early 80's Bronco bolted up and mounted (used stock C6 trans mount and adapted stock YJ skid to accomodate) Im using the bolt-on Advance Adapters/Z&M motor mounts (bought from AA but came from Z&M with AA reciept in box???) so the engine is sitting on the stock 2.5L frame mounts. My rear end is a Currie Ford 9"..... wheelbase is pretty much stock.... so not much room back there i know..... the center of the 9" pinion is pointing below the center 208's output yoke.. which is a fixed yoke btw... distance between yokes is pretty small.. havnt measured yet, but a C6 is a lot longer then a fucking ax-5

heres my question... if im going to be using this as a DD, and considering the cluster-fuck back there, what driveshaft would you recommend? Ive been to Tom Woods site, HighAngle, driveshaftsuperstore, any others. What are you all running? What type of CV should I run.. all the companys have there own design like the Bad Boy from Driveshaft Superstore... which one would be best for my situation?

Originally posted by RidiculousYJ
92 stang 302 HO replacing 93 Jeep YJ's stock 2.5L

okay.. got the engine running. Now i have a driveshaft question... heres some background info:

Now, i have a C6/NP208 from an early 80's Bronco bolted up and mounted (used stock C6 trans mount and adapted stock YJ skid to accomodate) Im using the bolt-on Advance Adapters/Z&M motor mounts (bought from AA but came from Z&M with AA reciept in box???) so the engine is sitting on the stock 2.5L frame mounts. My rear end is a Currie Ford 9"..... wheelbase is pretty much stock.... so not much room back there i know..... the center of the 9" pinion is pointing below the center 208's output yoke.. which is a fixed yoke btw... distance between yokes is pretty small.. havnt measured yet, but a C6 is a lot longer then a fucking ax-5

heres my question... if im going to be using this as a DD, and considering the cluster-fuck back there, what driveshaft would you recommend? Ive been to Tom Woods site, HighAngle, driveshaftsuperstore, any others. What are you all running? What type of CV should I run.. all the companys have there own design like the Bad Boy from Driveshaft Superstore... which one would be best for my situation?

That's easy, Highangle is the best choice. I bought a shaft from Jesse and it works very well. Super duty strength!

Originally posted by Cobra5.0Jeep
E303 cam is badass for me. It does have negative sides. I seem to get a huge boost of HP after 3k rpm but i can lug it like no other down to 500rpm and it still crawls.
Nice lopey sound as well, i have no complaints

How does it idle. I have heard a lot of negative complaints on the mustang bb's with idle problems when using the alphabet cams.

Did you have to do anything special as far as tuning goes?

Thanks

I have the "e" also.........i love it !!

RidiculousYJ: Glad to hear u got it goin:beer:


BUZZISCRAZY2: I read that the E303 was for a blower or turbo application, and the B303 was for a normaly aspirated application, so WTF?:confused:

Dunno..........while i am lacking bottom end, i'm running 35" rubber and 4.11'S in a DD.......I need more gear, as far as the motor Purrrrrffffect:jeep:

If ya want a list of motor specs, lemme know..........Buzz

PS; Sodaboy......we'll have to hook up, i have a Great play area.......:D

BUZZISCRAZY2, If you wanna go this Saturday, we're wheelin' at McCaslin, trail ride leaves at 9am from the McCaslin Mountian campground. Looks like 2' of snow right now with more on the way!

Originally posted by rock-rod


How does it idle. I have heard a lot of negative complaints on the mustang bb's with idle problems when using the alphabet cams.

Did you have to do anything special as far as tuning goes?

Thanks


When I was running the E303 cam the only problem I had was in the lower mid range.
As was stated above, the engine was strong at 500 rpms and it was extremely strong above 3000 rpms. The problem I had was that between 1000 and 1800 rpms it wanted to rev to quickly under load. It made it hard to transition from a slow steep roll to a steady momentum climb, without breaking the tires loose.
On the street the E303 cam would fully get it.
The B303 cam gave up a noticeable amount of top end as compared to the E cam, but it is also noticeably stronger in the 400 to 700 rpms range. It also has a very strong and predictable power band from 700 - 2500 rpms.
Anyone who has watched me when competing knows that I can go from a heavy load 400rpm loping crawl to 3000 rpms in less than a second,..so it still does have plenty of punch,...its just a little more predictable.

As far as tricks to running the Ford racing cams,(other than just being properly tuned)
make sure your TPS is adjusted perfectly.(VERY IMPORTANT)
A strong fuel pump, 3/8 lines and a well flowing fuel filter.
A well adjusted fuel pressure regulator.
A computer that is capable of handeling 24lb injectors.
matched injectors
Strong ignition system

All of these help to get a smooth well rounded power curve.

Need a favor...
Could someone with a 5.0 in a YJ please post a pic or two showing how you attached the YJ throttle to the 5.0? Or if you made some sort of an adaptor bracket, a picture of that.
thanks

Originally posted by RidiculousYJ
Need a favor...
Could someone with a 5.0 in a YJ please post a pic or two showing how you attached the YJ throttle to the 5.0? Or if you made some sort of an adaptor bracket, a picture of that.
thanks


I just attached the 5.0 throttle cable to the YJ pedal.
All you have to do is fab a cup for the end of the 5.0 cable sheath, at the proper distance from the Yj pedal.
The whole thing took about 20 minutes to fab.
I posted pics of it a few years ago, after I did the swap.

Here is a pic of the bracket.
the throttle cable is continuing through the original cable opening(slightly enlarged) and click right into the stock YJ pedal, just like it was made for it.
http://tellico.off-road.com/wwwthreads_uploads/1253386-throttlebracket.jpg

thanks for the quick response. is it even possible to somehow attach the end of the original YJ throttle cable to the mustang throttle body?... or would it just be easier to find a Mustang cable and do what H8monday did...

Originally posted by rock-rod


How does it idle. I have heard a lot of negative complaints on the mustang bb's with idle problems when using the alphabet cams.

Did you have to do anything special as far as tuning goes?

Thanks
Mine idles badass, you can reset the default idle i read it somewhere and did it its idles at 900rpm now and its sik. I miss it i can't wait to get this tranny in!

E303 cam i don't believe is for blower applications if it is cool i wanna add a blower someday :D

Originally posted by Cobra5.0Jeep

Mine idles badass, you can reset the default idle i read it somewhere and did it its idles at 900rpm now and its sik. I miss it i can't wait to get this tranny in!

E303 cam i don't believe is for blower applications if it is cool i wanna add a blower someday :D

Cool thanks. I am going to start with the stock explorer cam, and see how she goes. I am trying to turn 42s, and my rig is pretty porky, so I figure I am going to need all the low end I can get. I used to run a 401, so I was accustomed to 480 ft/lbs of torque! I know it will be a little different, but I am confident I can get similar performance with the new motor. Plus, it has modern fuel injection! I am still considering the whole Trickflow package with cam, heads, and intake. It's tempting, but I want a baseline first. Ideally, I think the Trick Flow package on a 347 would be the ideal small block ford package.

Originally posted by Cobra5.0Jeep

Mine idles badass, you can reset the default idle i read it somewhere and did it its idles at 900rpm now and its sik. I miss it i can't wait to get this tranny in!

E303 cam i don't believe is for blower applications if it is cool i wanna add a blower someday :D


Personaly I dont want my engine ideling that high when trying to run very steep technical obstacles.
that was the main problem with the E303 Cam, the engine was always trying to get away from you. The result of the racey idle, and posessed mid range, leaves you mashing the brake pedal or slipping the clutch to keep the rig under slow control on transitions and down hills, rather than letting the back pressure and the computer controled idle to do it smoothly.
With the B303 Cam I run the idle at 600, and its as smooth as a baby's behind.
From my experience with both cams, I would run the E cam on a street engine or even on a rig set up for sand and wide open running, but for rock crawling the B cam is stronger and more predictable where you need it.

RidiculousYJ, this may be a dumb question, but how did you attach the motor mounts? I'm looking at putting a 302 in my '95 YJ, and I don't trust myself to measure and weld them in correctly...I've heard there are bolt-on adapters.

I'm watching this thread very closely, particularly with regard to putting 5.0 HO in a 2.5 Wrangler...I'd like to know every bolt needed and why you chose what tranny, etc (the reason I'm looking at this swap is because my car has 187k miles and the AX5 is about to boot 5th).

:cool:

Getting in on the Cam issue late but the stock cam is better than any of Fords performance cams for trail riding.

I would use a cam designed for teh EFI and has an rpm range of 1300 to 5500, w/ max torque at approx 2500 or so.

With a cam in this rpm range and torque designed to come in early you should be able crawl with no problem.

A buddy of mine bought the Ford crate 5.0 w/ 345 HP.
Not sure what cam it had but it had a performance cam in there.
Everytime he assaulted a rock or just a steep climb the engine would stumble.
He bought a cam (brand unknown) with an rpm range from 1800 to 6000 and he likes it better; says it doesn't stumble anymore.
I will tell when I ride with him again.

Luck on the cam choice but keep the rpm range low with a lot of lift.

Later,

Tremelune, ur one lucky sumbitch if u decide to do a 302 swap... if ur setup is as similar to mine as i suspect.. i would be able to help u out with most of the swap... I got caught on tons and tons of small little problems and inconsistencies with my references.. especially in the wiring... i gave up on the whole swap at least 5 times throughout the engine wiring process.. so feel free to ask me whatever...

your question,
I bought the bolt-on 302 mount from Advance Adaptors... they offer a nice cradle mount for the 302 that bolts right to the stock 2.5L mounts (you do have to cut off the tip of the driver side mount, but i did it with a dremel)... The weird thing about the mount was that its really a Z&M mount, but I ordered it through AA...

I've got a C-6 in there now... im worried about my rear driveshaft, i dont have one yet... ive heard C-4's are better b/c they are shorter in length.. i just got a good deal on a C-6 so im gonna give it a try...

Originally posted by NnF
:cool:

Getting in on the Cam issue late but the stock cam is better than any of Fords performance cams for trail riding.

I would use a cam designed for teh EFI and has an rpm range of 1300 to 5500, w/ max torque at approx 2500 or so.

With a cam in this rpm range and torque designed to come in early you should be able crawl with no problem.



My experience says that you are wrong.

The Ford racing B303 cam is a hydraulic roller rocker cam designed for the EFI 5.0 HO. When used in conjunction with an aggressive computer, larger injectors, MAM and throttle body, the result is extremely strong low end, a strong mid range and a very predictable and usable power curve.

The powerfull low end will also result in awsome fuel mileage on the trail, provided you stay out of the throttle.

I have ran the same engine and drivetrain, for over 4 years now, I have ran it with the stock cam, the E303 cam and the B303 cam. There is no question in my mind that if all things being equal and the engine is tuned properly, the B303 cam is the strongest trail cam of the three.

If you are planning on using the stock cam, they are not all exactly the same. Of the the Benchmark 5.0 HO years (89-92), the 89 has the strongest cam (according to the Ford Racing gurus). The 93 Cobra cam is also widely considered to be a very torquey cam,...which is also why the 93 Cobra computer is considered to be a good computer to build a torquey mill with.

What do you mean when you say that the 89 has the strongest cam?

My 5.0L is out of a 89 GT with an A9L computer, and I've been considering adjusting where most of my power is available, as well as making a couple of changes here and there to get more power out of it.

However, considering your statement, I'm now not sure if I have to adjust the useable powerband at all, because most of my driving is done on tight trails in forested areas with rocks, mud and snow depending on the time of year. Trails probably more like the ones in the northern part of California, or Washington State compared to those in Arizona or Nevada.

With that in mind, and your knowledge of the different cams strengths and weakness', what would you do for a cam?

Originally posted by Mark D
What do you mean when you say that the 89 has the strongest cam?

My 5.0L is out of a 89 GT with an A9L computer, and I've been considering adjusting where most of my power is available, as well as making a couple of changes here and there to get more power out of it.

However, considering your statement, I'm now not sure if I have to adjust the useable powerband at all, because most of my driving is done on tight trails in forested areas with rocks, mud and snow depending on the time of year. Trails probably more like the ones in the northern part of California, or Washington State compared to those in Arizona or Nevada.

With that in mind, and your knowledge of the different cams strengths and weakness', what would you do for a cam?


The 89 cam is only slightly peppier in its design. The Gurus at Ford have said that the 89 cam was redesigned to eliminate a harmonic vibration that was present with the 89 mills. The difference in power if I remember correctly was something in range of 3%. In articles found in magazines in regards to the cam, most tuners say that it is more of a seat of the pants difference.
Honestly I would stick with your A9L computer, and stock cam to start with. As was stated above it is a very strong engine in its stock configuration.
If your gonna get into cam swaps then you need to keep in mind that you will have to do much more to the engine in terms of bolt ons and some bench work to get real advantages, otherwise you can end up with an engine that has poor low end grunt, or just poor performance power curves in general.
The stock cam and computer are not a bad way to go.

H8,
Got a question for you.
When I finished my swap, I set the timing to what sounded like it idled the best. Drove around and performance was incradible. Smoking lcoked 37's off the line and such.
However, I went to my neighbors to set the timing. Once it was set correctly, if I mashed the peddle to the floor it would hesitate. I did not get nearly the responce I had when I set the timing just by listening to the idle.
On the trail it made a huge difference. During lunch on the one ride I changed from the "gun setting" to my setting and again was much more happier with the performance.
Any explanation for this? It idles better how I have it set too.
Also, My oil pressure when Hot and idle is around 8-10. Once on the throttle, it rises significantly, but still worried at idle. Possibly trying 20W 50.
Josh Althouse
91 5.0 HO, C-6, NP 205

I think where the information about running a stock roller cam in a 5.0 for trail use comes from the Ford tech line. I personally have a friend who did just that. He called the tech line, and the person he spoke to said "run a set a 'p' heads and the stock cam, along with a cobra intake and you will have an ideal motor for wheeling. Adding the 1.7 roller rockers is a good idea as well". My friend did just that, and I have to admit, that motor is very strong.

The alphabet cams have been around a long time, and from the information I have gleaned from sites such as Corral.net and Stang,net, there are better cams to run. Supposedly there is one individual who grinds custom cams, and I hear hsi work is unbeatable. Personally, I am going to try the stock explorer cam, knowing full well that it's intake duration is very mild. If it's not enough, I will switch to one of the aftermarket set-ups like Trick Flow or Crane.

One thing to remember, what works well for one rig may not be the best choice for another. throw in comps and the demands for such activities, and it's a whole 'nother ball game.:D

Originally posted by H8monday


If your gonna get into cam swaps then you need to keep in mind that you will have to do much more to the engine in terms of bolt ons and some bench work to get real advantages, otherwise you can end up with an engine that has poor low end grunt, or just poor performance power curves in general.


So with a B303, stock computer, you would recommend doing the 24 lb injectors, 65mm throttle body, and what else?

Originally posted by TJBob


So with a B303, stock computer, you would recommend doing the 24 lb injectors, 65mm throttle body, and what else?


*Port match the intake to the heads
*70mm Cobra or T-Bird SC mass air meter
*110lph fuel pump
*adjustable fuel pressure regulator
*MSD or equivelant ignition
*High flow air filter (BBK, K&N,...)

That should give you a very strong, and predictable engine with a good low range and midrange power band.

Originally posted by Jeepin5.0
H8,
Got a question for you.
When I finished my swap, I set the timing to what sounded like it idled the best. Drove around and performance was incradible. Smoking lcoked 37's off the line and such.
However, I went to my neighbors to set the timing. Once it was set correctly, if I mashed the peddle to the floor it would hesitate. I did not get nearly the responce I had when I set the timing just by listening to the idle.
On the trail it made a huge difference. During lunch on the one ride I changed from the "gun setting" to my setting and again was much more happier with the performance.
Any explanation for this? It idles better how I have it set too.
Also, My oil pressure when Hot and idle is around 8-10. Once on the throttle, it rises significantly, but still worried at idle. Possibly trying 20W 50.
Josh Althouse
91 5.0 HO, C-6, NP 205

I wont lie to you, I like my engine timed by performance better than the light also.
My harmonic ballancer and timing mark have hit my hydraulic ram enough times that i dont even trust it anylonger.
One thing you have to be sure of when setting your timming with the light, is to disconnect the jumper by the distributer cap. You also must have your TPS adjusted propperly.

:cool:

H8monday,
The problem with the figures that are handed out by Ford is that they are rated for on-road performance. Yes the Corbra cam is torquey for a street driven Mustang. If you look at the rpm range of the cam, it starts in the 1800 +, maybe 2200 range before it even make any torque and then lays flat after 3400 rpms. The only thing that make most 5.0L torquey or at least appear so is the EFI. EFI is noted for bring in the torque earlier and holds on flat until it dies.

Now, not to say that the B or E303 cam aren't right for you and the way you drive but it doesn't have the low end of a cam that is designed to start making HP and torque at 1300 rpm, there is no way man.
Not to say you might whip the other cams a$$ but the lower rpm cam with a good dose of lift will generate more torque and hold it longer than the stock Mustang/Corbra or the B303 cams by Ford.

Of course there is the idea that everyone has, that the cam they chose is the best.

I stated before that I road in one and watch the vehicle reactions and I honestly believe the the B303 isn't a cam for the trail, but everyone to their own opinions.

Keep it on all four,

I'm just going to run the stock cam that came in my '91 stang 5.0. Seems like there really isn't a point to swapping cams unless you're going to change a lot of other things with it....injectors, MAF, TB. I'm hoping that I'll be plenty happy with the stock setup and a A9L comp. I'm also deleting some of the smog stuff, No cats:D plugging the air tubes in the back of the heads and I'll get rid of some of the other vacume emissions stuff if I can. I used to have a Howell injected 258 so I think I'll be happy with my new engine.

Originally posted by desertCJ
I'm just going to run the stock cam that came in my '91 stang 5.0. Seems like there really isn't a point to swapping cams unless you're going to change a lot of other things with it....injectors, MAF, TB. I'm hoping that I'll be plenty happy with the stock setup and a A9L comp. I'm also deleting some of the smog stuff, No cats:D plugging the air tubes in the back of the heads and I'll get rid of some of the other vacume emissions stuff if I can. I used to have a Howell injected 258 so I think I'll be happy with my new engine.

You will be very happy with it, in its stock configuration.
They are very strong little engines straight from the factory.

Originally posted by H8monday



Personaly I dont want my engine ideling that high when trying to run very steep technical obstacles.
that was the main problem with the E303 Cam, the engine was always trying to get away from you. The result of the racey idle, and posessed mid range, leaves you mashing the brake pedal or slipping the clutch to keep the rig under slow control on transitions and down hills, rather than letting the back pressure and the computer controled idle to do it smoothly.
With the B303 Cam I run the idle at 600, and its as smooth as a baby's behind.
From my experience with both cams, I would run the E cam on a street engine or even on a rig set up for sand and wide open running, but for rock crawling the B cam is stronger and more predictable where you need it.
mine only idles at 900rpm when stationary i didn't mean while i am moving sorry.

hey guys, i was wondering what you guys thought about the trick flow street upper and lower intake. http://www.trickflow.com/product/manifoldsandspacers/homepg_5.0L.htm

i have a b-cam and MSD box but other than that the motor is stock.

OK guys, let's talk radiators, and let's talk about the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) hook-up.

What is everyone using. Brand, size, application (universal or made for specific vehicle) ect.

I originally had a Howe aluminum radiator with my old 401 which worked wonderfully, but with this motor, the lower outlet is in a bad spot and doesn't leave enough room for the hose to clear the power steering bracket.

I could either use some universal flexi-hose, or get a new radiator (old one is going on 7 years old).

In regards to the VSS, is it needed? I am using a Ford Racing street rod wiring harness to wire the computer up, and right now the wires are not hooked to anything. Should I just leave them? I have had no luck in locating a suitable VSS that will fit a Jeep t-case and work with the Ford EEC-IV system.

Thanks in advance!!

A 3 core radiator for a v8 Jeep works good. VSS...not needed as far as I know:confused:

Originally posted by rock-rod
OK guys, let's talk radiators, and let's talk about the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) hook-up.

What is everyone using. Brand, size, application (universal or made for specific vehicle) ect.

I originally had a Howe aluminum radiator with my old 401 which worked wonderfully, but with this motor, the lower outlet is in a bad spot and doesn't leave enough room for the hose to clear the power steering bracket.

I could either use some universal flexi-hose, or get a new radiator (old one is going on 7 years old).

In regards to the VSS, is it needed? I am using a Ford Racing street rod wiring harness to wire the computer up, and right now the wires are not hooked to anything. Should I just leave them? I have had no luck in locating a suitable VSS that will fit a Jeep t-case and work with the Ford EEC-IV system.

Thanks in advance!!

The VSS is not needed, there's no EEC output or input to or from the C6. Use an EEC for a manual tranny (A9L) and you'll be fine. Just tape the VSS plug and tie it up somwwhere out of the way.
As for the radiator, I'm using a C&R Racing aluminum radiator set up for a SBF. It measures, IIRC, 24"x19"x3". I had to trim the grill a bit and fab my own brackets, but at $229 for the rad. compared to almost $600 for the BeCool the extra work was worth it to me.

Dean

:cool:

Ok on the stock engine it should work fine, my Ranger/5.0 wasn't bad on the trail.


Luck,

Originally posted by deanz


The VSS is not needed, there's no EEC output or input to or from the C6. Use an EEC for a manual tranny (A9L) and you'll be fine. Dean

Actually you dont even need to use a manual computer.
The E shifting and lockup for the automatic, is a sub-routine in the programming so if the computer gets no in put from the VSS it automaticly assumes no auto tranny and defaults to manual operation.
There is however a slightly different power curve in the programming between the auto and manual computers.

Any decent 3 or 4 core (or wide 2 core) will work for the 5.0 HO. Its not a hard engine to keep cool.
Aluminums work great!
I have a very bling "Be Cool" radiator, because I had more dollars than sense when I did my build up. It works great, and is very tough, but any good aluminum radiator will work awsome for a 5.0.
If you have trouble keeping the 5.0 cool its usually due to poor circulation under the hood or through the radiator, or insufficient fan CFM.
I use the be Cool radiator, stock water pump, stock Mark VII fan and clutch, and 180 degree T stat, and I run right at 180 - 190 under any and all conditions.

I run an aluminum Be Cool as well, stock water pump, and a Taurus electric fan. I have not had a single cooling problem under any condition. I would agree with H8monday that just about any decent size radiator should do the trick. :D

BTW, I went with the Be Cool b/c I got it for $135 shipped to my door - brand new.

Thanks for the responses. I am not too concerned with keeping the motor cool, the radiator I currently have is probably overkill for such a small displacement motor.

The real problem lies in the space between the lower hose and the power steering pulley. There is about a butt-hair's space between the two. Looks like it's more 'engineering' time with the radiator.

On a side note, I have spent the last two hours looking for any information on a compatible speed sensor that will attach to a Dana 300 style speedo drive, and send the correct 4 pulses per turn to the computer. There is nothing. I even looked for information on F-150/Bronco applications with EFI and a BW t-case to see if they use a VSS that connects to the t-case, and then allows for a speedo cable to connect to it. Looks like a trip to the salvage yard may be in order to try and find one. I can find tons of stuff on google for GM applications, but I don't think they work with the EEC system. I guess I am not going to worry about it, and just leave the wires not connected. I had read somewhere that with the auto computer, it is set to provide a slightly higher idle speed to compensate for the converter load and prevent stalling. I am running an auto computer- actually it's the Ford Racing set-up in the catalog that is part of the stand alone system they sell. All brand new stuff straight from the FRP catalog.

Originally posted by rock-rod
OK guys, let's talk radiators, and let's talk about the VSS (vehicle speed sensor) hook-up.

What is everyone using. Brand, size, application (universal or made for specific vehicle) ect.

I originally had a Howe aluminum radiator with my old 401 which worked wonderfully, but with this motor, the lower outlet is in a bad spot and doesn't leave enough room for the hose to clear the power steering bracket.

I could either use some universal flexi-hose, or get a new radiator (old one is going on 7 years old).

In regards to the VSS, is it needed? I am using a Ford Racing street rod wiring harness to wire the computer up, and right now the wires are not hooked to anything. Should I just leave them? I have had no luck in locating a suitable VSS that will fit a Jeep t-case and work with the Ford EEC-IV system.

Thanks in advance!!

I am using a brand new Stock Radiator and it works perfect it might even keep my engine a little too cool.

Also for the VSS i made something so it would work, without it the engine ligth comes on i believe and i won't have been able to pass smog.

Originally posted by Cobra5.0Jeep



Also for the VSS i made something so it would work, without it the engine ligth comes on i believe and i won't have been able to pass smog.


From what the Ford racing Gurus have told me, the lack of a VSS should not make the Check Engine light go on. Since the automatic shifting is a sub-routine for the EECVI computer, it simply defaults to a non auto mode with no VSS signal available. However, a strange or faulty reading from the VSS can and will set off a Check Engine code.
By the letter of the law, if you are running a non Electric lock up automatic on an engine designed to run an electric auto, you are not smog compliant anyway,...so why bother hooking up a non E tranny like the C6 or C4 to a sensor that the engine does not want or need, unless its controlling E lock auto???

ALRIGHT! good news!

I finally got it to fire today! I ended up replacing all 8 injectors because only two of the original Explorer injectors would fire. I took H8's advise and bought a set of FRP 24 lb injectors and a Pro-M MAF set-up for the 24 lb injectors. Put it all on, and the motor immediately fired right off. I couldn't let it run long because I didn't have any coolant in the motor yet. But it ran! And ran well too. It settled into a smoot idle almost immediately.

On another side note....... has anyone had problems with the water pump not sealing to the timing cover. The reason I have no coolant in the motor because as I was dumping it in the radiator, cooland started to gush from someplace between the water pump and timing cover. I thought I was careful about making sure everything was sealed up, but apparently it's not. Any ideas why it wouldn't seal up???

Thanks for everyone's help! By the way, this thread has almost 11k hits on it and growing. Must be a pretty popular topic!

Originally posted by rock-rod
ALRIGHT! good news!

I finally got it to fire today! I ended up replacing all 8 injectors because only two of the original Explorer injectors would fire. I took H8's advise and bought a set of FRP 24 lb injectors and a Pro-M MAF set-up for the 24 lb injectors. Put it all on, and the motor immediately fired right off. I couldn't let it run long because I didn't have any coolant in the motor yet. But it ran! And ran well too. It settled into a smoot idle almost immediately.

On another side note....... has anyone had problems with the water pump not sealing to the timing cover. The reason I have no coolant in the motor because as I was dumping it in the radiator, cooland started to gush from someplace between the water pump and timing cover. I thought I was careful about making sure everything was sealed up, but apparently it's not. Any ideas why it wouldn't seal up???

Thanks for everyone's help! By the way, this thread has almost 11k hits on it and growing. Must be a pretty popular topic!
Hell take the garden hose and shove it up the intake, you'll be able to go a good 5-10 minutes! :D

Note: Make sure you are watching your oil pressure on start up, this is KEY. I installed a high volum oil pump and shut the engine off ASAP becasue of no oil pressure. THen I blead the line and bam 80 PSI. I turn it off as I've never seen it that high, called my brother and found out that is normal with the pump I got (FordMC).

Time cover. :flipoff2: I hate to let it out but the same thing happened to me, pissing from the timing cover. I went back to the gasket kit and did find an extra cover that looked like it would fit. Sure enough the Aluminum water pump has a piece of thin aluminum between the water pump and engine, so you need both gaskets. Mine was pissing as I re-use the gasket between the thin cover and water pump. I think I used 3 gallons of water and 3 gallons of Coolant before I had everything sealed. So double check you used both gaskets.

Originally posted by Mr.N

Hell take the garden hose and shove it up the intake, you'll be able to go a good 5-10 minutes! :D

Note: Make sure you are watching your oil pressure on start up, this is KEY. I installed a high volum oil pump and shut the engine off ASAP becasue of no oil pressure. THen I blead the line and bam 80 PSI. I turn it off as I've never seen it that high, called my brother and found out that is normal with the pump I got (FordMC).

Time cover. :flipoff2: I hate to let it out but the same thing happened to me, pissing from the timing cover. I went back to the gasket kit and did find an extra cover that looked like it would fit. Sure enough the Aluminum water pump has a piece of thin aluminum between the water pump and engine, so you need both gaskets. Mine was pissing as I re-use the gasket between the thin cover and water pump. I think I used 3 gallons of water and 3 gallons of Coolant before I had everything sealed. So double check you used both gaskets.

Yea, I thought about the garden hose trick.....

I installed a Hv oil pump and it definitely has lot's of oil pressure. It goes up to about 80psi. I primed the system before starting it up to ensure oil pressure.

I am going to pull the pump tomorrow and see just where I fawked up installing it. That little plate is there, but there where a couple of different gaskets that came with the pump, so maybe I used the wrong one.

Originally posted by H8monday
From what the Ford racing Gurus have told me, the lack of a VSS should not make the Check Engine light go on. Since the automatic shifting is a sub-routine for the EECVI computer, it simply defaults to a non auto mode with no VSS signal available. However, a strange or faulty reading from the VSS can and will set off a Check Engine code.
This is also what I've heard.
CWate from bc4x4 noted better gasmilage when he hooked up his, so if your on road a little it might be worth it.