(Yet another!) M5OD-R2 swap

[Mechrick]

Hi all! You may remember me from my V8-swapped Bronco II last year. If not, visit

Rick's 5.0/C6 swap 1985 BII

I've had my BII on the road for seven years now. It was originally put together with a 2.3L/Weber 32/36 and a TK4 speed. A good writeup is on FordSix, they were gracious enough to allow it in the Orphan Inlines section. https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863 Working from home...

www.therangerstation.com

to get up to speed. I've been driving it since the swap. Love the V8 power, hate the lack of overdrive.
-Other than a strange idle fuel mixture problem with the Summit carb (hot soak causes the carb to run extremely lean), it's been perfect. My original plan was to swap in a AOD or 4R70W to get overdrive. I ditched that plan because of the lack of space in the tunnel with the automatic. Between the trans lines, exhaust and trans, it gets pretty tight in there. Plus, I like rowing gears and actually miss the TK5. I prefer the way they work offroad too.

Found the preferred M5R2 out of a 1997 4.2 4x4.

Dimensions for Ford 4x4 transmissions (bellhousing to extension housing):

C6 is 25.75"
AOD is roughly 26.5"
4R70W is roughly 27.5"
M5ODR2 is 27.625"
E4OD is roughly 31.5"

For reference, TK5 is 26.5", a BW1350 is 14" thick vs the NP 208 I'm running is 17" thick.

-This means I'll have to shorten the rear driveshaft roughly 2" and lengthen the front the same amount.

<sigh>

Apparently the auto starter is different than the manual starter.

<sigh>

I'm getting ready to order clutch parts. I want to run the applications over guys who've done this swap. So far I have:

5.0L flywheel, manual starter, clutch and slave from a ~1996 F150

Clutch master from a ~1994-ish Ranger

-How about the clutch line? With my 2" body lift, should I run a line from a Ranger or F150? I would love to run an line, but the slave fitting will be a problem.

-Thank you

 

[Bird76Mojo]

I'm getting ready to order clutch parts. I want to run the applications over guys who've done this swap. So far I have:

5.0L flywheel, manual starter, clutch and slave from a ~1996 F150

Clutch master from a ~1994-ish Ranger

-How about the clutch line? With my 2" body lift, should I run a line from a Ranger or F150? I would love to run an line, but the slave fitting will be a problem.

-Thank you

Mcleod offers many adapter fittings to adapt the Ford slave to AN hose, but I believe you'll have to have the hose crimped on to their adapter. Or buy a super expensive pre-built hose with their adapter pre-installed.

Though the fitting size may be hard to figure out: https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mcl-139100-18?seid=srese1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwyN-DBhCDARIsAFOELTk7WOYse1rzwBEITBxT0zRp9vOWHtpuJvXmQ9EMyCYLIHi-hx34DFgaAiBWEALw_wcB

 

[Mechrick]

I see the pricey part. With these parts it's a $100 solution.

McLeod Racing 139204-36 McLeod Hydraulic Clutch Lines | Summit Racing

Free Shipping - McLeod Hydraulic Clutch Lines with qualifying orders of $109. Shop Hydraulic Clutch Lines and Hoses at Summit Racing.

www.summitracing.com

Russell Performance 641001 Russell Clutch Adapter Fittings | Summit Racing

Free Shipping - Russell Clutch Adapter Fittings with qualifying orders of $109. Shop Quick Disconnect Fittings at Summit Racing.

www.summitracing.com

It looks to be possible to knock the roll pin out of the slave and insert an an adapter. I have a Russell 640281 (an-3 to factory 'O' ring) so I compared the two.

I then compared the fitting to the slave cylinder (when did these things go plastic? Ugh).

Clearly I would have to clearance the hex of the fitting to make it work. -Or I could chop both and weld them together (or weld steel tubing in the middle) to extend the an connection to a more trail-friendly location.

In other news, I verified the bolt pattern by comparing it to a small block plate I had in the shed, and gave the trans a coat of paint. I like doing this to help pinpoint (and clean) oil leaks.

 

[don4331]

I imagined you painting it black. So, no oil leaks ever existed as they couldn't be seen.

My install was on 2WD '99, so I'm really not much help. So, I'll just sit back and watch.

 

[kunar]

I'm working on a 351w swap in an 87 right now. I used an m5r2 from a 99-04 f150 (puts the shifter further back) and i used the clutch and flywheel from my donor f350. the master, slave and line were for a 2nd gen ranger with an m5r1. It's all in the truck, bolted together, looks like it should work but... I don't have it running yet so i can't confirm that it'll all work as planned. If you need pics, measurements, whatever, just let me know.

 

[Mechrick]

I hadn't realized the slave cylinders were the same between Ranger/BII and full size. That makes things easier. I checked the an-3 to 'O' ring adapter in the factory BII master cylinder.

It fits.

The only issue I may have is master cylinder bore size. They change from year to year and by model.

1985 Bronco II- .750"
1994 Ranger 4.0L- .630"
1996 F150 5.0L- .709"

I will possibly have to change the master to get the pedal effort where I want it. The Mazda B2300 I used to have and the BII I have now had more pedal effort than the F150's with integral slave that I've owned, so I don't think it will be an issue.

I'll order another pack of Russell 640281 fittings and the correct length an -3 line once the trans is mounted and I know the length needed.

 

[kunar]

I hadn't realized the slave cylinders were the same between Ranger/BII and full size. That makes things easier.

They're not exactly the same, they come up as different part numbers depending on what you look up. They'll bolt into either the m5r1 and m5r2 though. There's a couple different connector styles (black or gold) and I'm assuming they could be different bore sizes or maybe even stroke length depending on the application. I took a shot in the dark and ordered a master and slave that I know are made to work together, but i haven't figured out if it'll actually work the clutch like it needs to. I'll be interested in what you come up with though, just in case i need to do things differently

 

[Mechrick]

Yep, it gets confusing because the integral slave doesn't have a listed bore size.

The external slave of the 1987-1888 F150's are listed at 1.000" (four speed trans). Those trucks use a master with a bore size of .880", and the same master is used with the integral slave M5ODR2 so I think I'll be fine.

There is .041" difference between the BII master and the F150 master. Should be negligible.

The bore size of the external slave used on 1984 TK4 transmissions is .880", so:

Pickup- 1.000" slave, .880" master, 113% pressure advantage

Bronco II .880" slave, .750" master, 117% pressure advantage

-If the fluid displacement of the pickup integral slave matches the external, then, theoretically:

Pickup 1.000" slave, Bronco II master .750", 133% pressure advantage.

 

[Mechrick]

Stock slave to an -3 adapter:

Whittled a mild steel bolt down to .400"

Drilled the center

Welded them together. The first time, I chucked the result in the lathe and was trying to turn the welds back down to .400", but the piece snapped. The second time around, I cranked up the heat a bit and wasn't overly concerned with looks over strength.

 

[Mechrick]

Changing of the guard...

The difference in width is evident. Unfortunately so is the difference in length.

I'm a bit concerned about the difference in output shaft stickout. I'll have to do some measuring.

Shifter placement:

It's easy to see how the M5ODR2 in late '80's and early '90's trucks would have a compromised shifter location. The 99-up shifter would be a bit better than this.

I'll have to cut the hole in the tunnel a bit bigger and patch the rear with sheet metal.

Haven't looked at the shifter for the transfer case yet.

Much better room under there.

It's got two bolts in it right now, flywheel but no clutch. I'm going to install the starter and run the engine long enough to prove that the flywheel is balanced correctly, then install the clutch and bolt it in for good.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

A little late to the party but I just used all Ranger hydraulics on my R2. I think 1991 flavor, it works fine.

 

[Mechrick]

It's amazing when you start modifying vehicles how niggling issues crop up, like ripples in a pond...

I've never liked the clearance of the front driveshaft to the front cross member. Several things I've done to the vehicle had reduced it. Adding shims to the front springs, changing to the Dana 35, changing transfer cases and moving it further rearward have all conspired to reduce front driveshaft clearance. To boot, the bigger bellhousing of the V8 makes it difficult to get a trans through the hole created by the cross member and the body. I took an afternoon to address this issue.

Aluminum flat stock is 1/2" thick, stacks to give me 1" between the frame rail and the bracket.

-This will add a bit of caster to the front end, but at some point I'll add beam pivot drop brackets and longer springs, which will take it away.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

What do you have for manifolds/headers?

My problem with my D35/M5ODR2 swap was the exhaust clearance, my headers kick the exhaust back more though.

I think the pinion sits higher on a D35, with my D28 I was fine... and the D28 driveshaft doesn't telescope. I still need to address it, 98.2% of the time I just leave the driveshaft out of it. Great example of stupid crap you have no way of knowing about until you get there on your little "3 hour tour"

 

[Mechrick]

I have stock cast-iron Explorer 5.0L manifolds with a homebuilt Y pipe.

My biggest issue is the NP208 is *much* wider than the BW1350 placing the driveshaft very close to the radius arm nut/washer.

If I can get the gas mileage where I want it (hello, EFI?), I'll make long tubes one of these days. If not, hello diesel.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I snagged a 208, did some measuring in the real world and then tracked down a 205, it is about the same size as the stock 1350.