![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 61
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 392
|
FI in 66 EB
Want to go FI in my bronco. Found an '85 2wd F150 with a 5.0 and automatic tranny for sale with 170,000 miles. I would want to put my NP435 behind it. Is there anything wrong with this year FI, anything that would make me stay away from it? I have heard this will bolt right up to the np435, is that true?
__________________
brister101@hotmail.com |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Member # 3959
Location: ~Denver, Colorado
Posts: 555
|
you'll need a body lift or hood bubble to fit it under the hood - if I remember correctly. The truck intakes are a bit taller than the car intakes. It will also be speed ensity, but as long as you don't make changes to the engine you will be fine. 170k is getting up there for a 5.0 though....
__________________
-Ben '74 Bronco - some assembly required... one of these years I'll drive it again..... When did common sense become uncommon? Last edited by injectedEB; 09-10-2002 at 04:14 PM. |
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Member # 1481
Location: blue lake,CA. USA
Posts: 1,102
|
speed density is ok. just need to keep a cam grind that allows vacuum. loss of vacuum is what kills speed density. i thought ford went efi in 86??
up until 83 ford used the 435. if you have a 302, it will bolt to the 5.0(5.0=302=5.0) i believe only the upper plenum is taller on the truck. body lift or check around for a gt upper. corral.net is chock fulla parts!!!! shon
__________________
researching my next mistake.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6708
Location: Vallejo, CA
Posts: 1,327
|
FWIW; 1987 was the last year for the NP-435. My 1984 Bronco had the NP-435.
Eric
__________________
'There will be pork in the tree tops by morning!'-Lion in Winter. 'Dear,dear.....what ever shall we do with mother.'-Lion in Winter. "Mr. President, We must not allow, a mine shaft gap!"-Gen. 'Buck' Turgidson 'Do you expect me to talk Goldfinger?' 'No Mr. Bond, I expect you to Die!' |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Member # 1481
Location: blue lake,CA. USA
Posts: 1,102
|
ok. i was told f-150's were 83. this was picked up when i was locating my bell to retain the slave cylinder for my clutch. not alot of room for mechanical linkage.
after thinking a little it makes sense. alot of 435 208 combos for sale. shon
__________________
researching my next mistake.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 61
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 392
|
I thought 85 was a little early for FI too, but that is what the guy said, (kind of a hard one to get mixed up, but you never know)! I am worried about the mileage also, I might just wait for something a little more appealing. I don't have a body lift, and don't really want to cut a hole in the hood, another good reason to keep looking! Thanks for the input!
__________________
brister101@hotmail.com |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Member # 857
Location: Dickson TN
Posts: 1,154
|
A buddy of mine had a 85 F150 that was FI. Maybe it was a late year run or something. I was always told 86 until I seen his. His dad was the original owner and I know it wasn't swapped in or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) |
|
Rock God
Join Date: Mar 2001
Member # 3850
Location: El Dorado Hills, CA
Posts: 1,507
|
Get a 5.0 from a mustang 88-93. If you have 289,302 or 351 now with 435 the mustang will bolt up. Plus it will fit under the hood and have more power. I replaced my tired 351w with 93 cobra and everything bolted right up except clutch linkage and throttle deal. I think internal slave on clutch might work better. I kept mechanical linkage and had to tinker with it to make it all work.
__________________
69 Bronco, 72 Bronco, 66 vert mustang I hate Smog certificates |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|