Attempting a swap on 92' Super Cab

[bobbywalter]

i recommend a stroker and heads..


or a late model gm truck engine

 

[Teddyzee]

i recommend a stroker and heads..


or a late model gm truck engine

Seems to go along with the rest of this discussion.

 

[The_Dealer]

what tranny are u gonna use?

 

[fastford03]

i got an aod i'm gonna put behind it.

 

[bobbywalter]

Seems to go along with the rest of this discussion.

really it does.

whats the goal....the point of a v8 swap?


if someone gave you a brand new crown vic motor its still a wheezer.

I've got a 92' Ranger Super Cab with a 2.9L V6 & an A4LD automatic trans. What I have to go in it is an AOD auto. trans. and an early 90's 5.0L HO, told it came out of a Lincoln. It has GT40 heads, already has a duel sump pan, I think the manifolds should clear, it already has a serpentine setup, but it's fuel injected and I want carbureted. I already have an Edelbrock Performer intake for it to accept a carb, but I have a few questions.

1. Will it be hard to go from fuel injected to carbureted? What parts will I need?

2. What are the perks/cons of GT40 heads?

3. What carb will be best for my engine? I was thinking of a Holley 650cfm, but I'd like some expert input.

Thanks for all your help.

this guy is totally fawked and a long way from gt40 heads...


he certainly is in great hands here, baddad will line him out with a cost effective maximization with what he is starting with.

i love my sbf's....and i really love the AOD....been building them for many many years.

unfortunately, i also know exactly what it takes to get 250 ish whp and an aod that will handle that. its anything but cheap, IF.. your looking at what is actually out there available to us all....and look at those options objectively.


just making mention before money starts leaving the guys hand.

 

[Teddyzee]

Well, that makes more sense. (no sarcasm this time)

I wouldn't start with the Crown Vic motor, based on my original goal, would not even consider it.

(Goal was dead reliable Mustang performance in my Ranger).

My 4.0 was as strong or stronger (and a whole lot easier...) than a standard 302.

But now I understand your post. If the plan is heads and other extras, a fine starting point that block would make.

 

[bobbywalter]

Well, that makes more sense. (no sarcasm this time)

I wouldn't start with the Crown Vic motor, based on my original goal, would not even consider it.

(Goal was dead reliable Mustang performance in my Ranger).

My 4.0 was as strong or stronger (and a whole lot easier...) than a standard 302.

But now I understand your post. If the plan is heads and other extras, a fine starting point that block would make.

locally to me theres several young guys wanting v8 power.

the look on their face when i suggest 4.0 swap is priceless.

i for one cant stand the sound of a v6 or four whizzer...but it is just my personal preference. for offroad abuse a 4.0 has it all over an eighties carbed stockish 302. and these kids just dont understand that





(at one point in my trucks life) i too wanted dead reliable mustang power...and went to the cobra and it was all of that and then some.

but once i crossed the 35 inch tire line, the 351 is what i needed. or a stroker 302.

theres a reason i like to know intended use. too many guys crying regret over issues with cooling etc forced some lessons on me.

 

[Teddyzee]

Yes, I already had the 4.0, it worked very well.

Mine is a street truck, so our rides are like comparing apples and apples, lol....

 

[The_Dealer]

when i go 5.0 is strictly for reliability and ease of install. i know my 2.8 isnt going to last much long and i might as well go to v8 and pick up a few ponies as well...ill be happy with 200, plus i can build on it later. because when i do e7 heads arent gonna do me any good, they are gonna get tossed. i have access to a 347 but its a straight drag motor and isnt practical for a dd/offroad rig. plus with the crown vic motor like i wanna use i wont be making gobs of power and i can use my 4.0 explorer 2core radiator

 

[fastford03]

Well, I know I'm a long way from what I was orginally told that I had, but I'm at a good starting point. Engine is completely torn down. Sending it to the machine shop. Found "REAL" GT-40 heads on craigslist $200.00. Thinking bout getting them. New intake, carb, distributor on the way. Purchased headers from Ebay. Going with duel magnaflow exaust. I'm sure the ranger, performance wise, will be a step up from the boring 2.9 with the a4ld. As far as the aod goes, i build it myself, been building them for years, it's my specialty. It is built to last. it has alto red eagle clutches and kolene steels. hi-perf band, deep pan, transgo reprogramming kit, and i resleeved the case. it should be fine.

 

[huntin_muddin_91]

not tryin to start no arguments or nuttin, im runnin 88 crown vic engine w/ a few more than extra miles on her round 120,000 with yes points setup(didn do my home work i know but went to parts house lookin for cheap to get started) but i got 38' swampers on a locked rear w/ 5.13 ratio, only cause i got sick of changing 4.0's, do the leg work once the engines will change just as easy.... an the block was free im no more than a back yard mechanic and am learning. more into deeper the better mud, but on dry pavement at stop just as soon as clutch compleately lets go i step on it and the truck breaks loose 2nd treats me like wise for a moment im happy w/ that just gettin into v8 would love lotttts more but will do for now, just my practice engine another awaits aint touched it yet waitin but costs money for pleasure. Granted im runnin rubber meant for rocks but in mud wide open all three are roostin (front aint locked yet lol) no loss of power till like baddad says round 5000 range (due to my intake setup) starts cuttin out. other wise i think the man is headin the right direction he wants to take... like my buddy tells me its always easier spendin someone elses money on the way to the parts store. my 4.0's would do roughly the same just hardly chirp second maybe tune up maybe miles i dont know but i slightly believe you can pick a lil up in ratios long as it all holds tough(knock on wood)

 

[RangerSVT]

You have a lincoln motor, as the intake plenum (upper) intake is on the driver side the motor, not the passenger like the mustangs...You can tell by the rear of the motor's lower intake water ports, on the rear of the intake there are two water ports, one is plugged and the other goes to the throttle body, depending on which side the inlet for the intake is on will depend on which port it used...and as stated, you have a roller motor, but the non HO style, also noticeable is the 14 lb injectors (grey top), instead of the 19 lb injectors the HO motors use...
SVT

 

[Teddyzee]

Well, that makes more sense. (no sarcasm this time)

I wouldn't start with the Crown Vic motor, based on my original goal, would not even consider it.

(Goal was dead reliable Mustang performance in my Ranger).

My 4.0 was as strong or stronger (and a whole lot easier...) than a standard 302.

But now I understand your post. If the plan is heads and other extras, a fine starting point that block would make.

In case it came across the wrong way, those few posts were just me figuring out BobW. I wasn't intentionally commenting on the original engine in thread. All of these engines are fun starting points, or fine as they are.


SVT, I think the Crown Vic/Gran Marquis also had the intake flipped, but the same/similar engine.

 

[RangerSVT]

Yeah, I realized I made that reply before there were two more pages of this thread and the crown vic was mentioned Either way, the block is a great starting point for a build, especially if rebuilding...Very few changes were made on the roller blocks, what made the difference between the engines and applications were after the short block...
SVT

 

[bobbywalter]

lincoln/crown vic/aero t bird is the same to me....theres vic or ho when dealing with sefi engines thats read wheezer or almost tolerable power levels in other terms.


the truck/cobra(gt40) pretty much the same as ho in my eyes as well. the gt40 is easy to get 300 hp though comparatively.

years ago i think like 02-03 or maybe 04 i swapped a 6.0 gm from a van to a jeep. it was a fuggin trainwreck to do with no help from other swappers at the time as it wasnt really being done. took some time to get right but was unreal compared to my sbf that was 300 ish hp. made my sbf look like a joke...compared fuel economy was a real kick in the nuts.

today most guys can do this type of ls based engine swap cheap compared to an equivalent sbf build. certainly the sbf would be fresh out of the machine shop because low mile usable ones are difficult to find but its hard to make an emmissions legal swap into a 06 ranger with a 01 explorer 302.....let alone find a low mile anything ford to swap into a ranger easily and cost effectively with 340 hp. but who wants affordable daily driver 340 hp right?????

of course this is not the case here, its just a good ol boy cruiser that started off with misinformation that likely would never had made the startoff point at all if this guy had been properly informed from jump.



huntin_muddin_91.... when it comes to setup for future upgrades i am really keen to that...and build with that in mind.

it all comes down to actual use. what you need, and what you want are really really critical when working with a budget. running 38 in tires requires 300 hp and more torque and d 60's in my assessment for trail use....of course mudd racing a d44 can get by.

you sure as fawk wont be competitive with a 8.5-9 to 1 scr 302 with stockish heads regardless of cam and induction choice unless you have turbos or a blower in the equation.

hard to belive a cv engine blows 38's off. with 456 gears and twice the power i had a hard time rippin good at 35's to shreds without the brakes being involved....but boggers spun like they were on ice.


i am not baggin on anybody, baddad is definitely the master here for the setup suggested.