V8 swap dual sump oil pan question

sitewerx · Jul 27, 2014

Hello all! My first post. I did a v-8 swap about 28 years ago, and now I am helping my son with one now. He has a 94 2wheel drive ext. cab splash that had the 4.0 v6 with the 5 speed. For a donor, we picked up a 94 F150 pickup with the efi 5.0 liter with the AOD transmission. Have ordered headers, engine mounts, oil filter relocation from Advance Adapters and radiator, and have a quick oil pan question. I am looking at this dual-sump pan on ebay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/83-93-Ford-Mustang-Chrome-Oil-Pan-Dual-Sump-Stock-Style-5-0-302-Small-Block-/111418651922?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item19f111b512&vxp=mtr

Will this oil pan work on my engine? I felt that it should, but figured I better get someone else's opinion before purchasing. The existing pan on the F-150 truck looks like a front sump pan that I am pretty sure won't work. I look forward to a response from someone who knows much more about this than I do! I am going to have other questions and I will post them as they come up. We are documenting the process from start to finish with pics and will post the complete project when finished.

Thanks guys for the help! :icon_thumby:

RonD · Jul 27, 2014

I wouldn't think it would fit correctly, you would need one that includes the '94 302/5.0l

Ford changes the front(timing cover) and rear main oil pan mating surfaces from time to time, the sides are usually the same but the ends won't always seal well if pan AND gasket are not for that specific year.
The gaskets have to be matched as well, double check the parts store part number, "looks right" can mean a small oil leak down the road.

dangerranger83 · Jul 27, 2014

Also without a decent body lift, the f150 intake won't fit because it's too tall. Putting a gt40 intake on it should do the trick.

sitewerx · Jul 28, 2014

Thanks for the Reply, created new question!

Thanks for the reply, now you created a new question. You said the F-150 intake would not fit under the hood. Not real happy to hear that, I had been told the F-150 was a good choice because everything would work. Would a Cowl hood provide enough additional clearance to meke it work? About the same money as a lift and wouldn't have to deal with changing anything else. This is my son's project and he is on a limiited budget, trying to keep things as low cost as possible without cutting corners...

l0sts0ul · Aug 5, 2014

On a quick side note. I can tell you chrome oil panel have a hell of a time sealing very well at all. Because of the surface on the pan, gaskets don't seat right.

That looks like a stock fox body pan, it should fit the body, as for the engine I have no idea.

85_Ranger4x4 · Aug 5, 2014

Wire wheel the chrome off the sealing lip and it is the same steel that is in any other pan underneath. The only getcha would be if it is of the thin flimsy type metal that they usually make chrome valve covers out of.

They changed rear crankshaft seals in '80/81. The seal that seals the crankshaft itself. Oil pans don't care though, you can pretty much mix and match them to your little hearts content. It is common to run a '79 pan on earlier engines to get a dual sump with a usable dipstick, very common to run a generic foxbody pan on just about anything with a block mounted dipstick to put in a Ranger.

I have a foxbody pan of unknown year (that came on a 1978 302 the guy had in a '83 Mustang) on a '87 Crown Vic engine with an Explorer timing cover... dry as a bone. I don't remember what I told them for the application but I got the blue rubber one piece Fel-Pro pan gasket. I started out with a CV cover too.

Scott B. · Aug 19, 2014

The pan should work, but don't forget to change the oil pickup.

You need a pickup designed for whichever pan you use.

85_Ranger4x4 · Aug 19, 2014

Scott B. said:
The pan should work, but don't forget to change the oil pickup.

You need a pickup designed for whichever pan you use.

And you will need the one main cap stud to support said pickup.

RangerSVT · Aug 22, 2014

dangerranger83 said:
Also without a decent body lift, the f150 intake won't fit because it's too tall. Putting a gt40 intake on it should do the trick.

The F150 intake won't fit in a ranger, even with a 3" body lift. Also, the f150 block is both a non ho motor and batch fire, meaning the 160 hp 4.0 that was in it makes more power than the 150 hp 5.0 in the early to mid 90's f series trucks.
I'd sell that motor and find one from a 96-97 explorer, get the engine wiring harness and ecu, throttle cable and cruise module from the donor. You will reuse the 4.0 power steering line, but you will need to straighten the hardline section. You will have to modify the heater box, but its easy to do. Mustang foxbody oil pan AND pickup screen. Use the stock 4.0 motor moints and use the plate method over the mustang motor mounts. If your radiator is the dual row, you can use that. You'll need an oil filter relocation kit, with the 90* block adapter, transdapt part number 1413. Explorer 5.0 upper radiator hose, foxbody lower trimmed on both ends. You'll need to remove the engine oil cooler if your engine has one, and change the oil filter block fitting from the female threads to the male thread. You can get this from any ford engine in the junkyard that uses the FL1A/PH8A oil filter, or get one from summitracing.com...

SVT

85_Ranger4x4 · Aug 30, 2014

HP is only part of the story though. The F-150 5.0 will tear a 4.0 apart for low end torque though. There is a reason they each ended up in their respective vehicles.

I had one of the "wussy" CV engines in mine to start out with. Torque off idle was hideous. I think it was rated around 280lb-ft at roughly 2k rpm, my PI 5.4 in my F-150 is 350lb-ft at 2500rpm so IMO a 302 close to 300 that low is doing pretty darn good. You could smack unsuspecting passengers heads off the rear window all day long.

Everybody said they are gutless compared to an HO... so I put E7 heads and an HO cam in it. Aside from the cam I didn't touch the shortblock and used the same headers/intake/carb. Nowhere near the bottom end power. About 4-5k where the non-ho was starting to give up it comes alive now. I have no use for that kind of a powerband so I end up with a net loss for power for where I normally run it (4k tops if I am feeling spirited)... it doesn't have near the bottom end it used to and since it is a basically a sporty car engine in its fullest sense it makes sense in retrospect.

If it wasn't such a PITA I would switch it back in a heartbeat. Still have the E6 heads and std cam in storage in case I am presented with another reason to go that deep. From rumblings on the internet I am probably the only to do so but I really liked the "before" better than the "after". F-150's used a similar cam with E7 heads so it would be slightly different than mine too.

Never been around the Ex 5.0 though, maybe it is the best of both worlds. If I ever stumble into a dead or dying stang it is where I would shop. The HO cam and cast Cobra intake are big bonuses for them.

V8 swap dual sump oil pan question

sitewerx

New Member

RonD

Official TRS AI

dangerranger83

5.0 HO under the hood!!!

sitewerx

New Member

l0sts0ul

New Member

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member

Scott B.

Member

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member

RangerSVT

Oct 09 OTOTM

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Members online

Member & Vendor Upgrades

Latest posts

Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Follow TRS On Instagram

Latest Album Photos

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad

Amazon Deals