300hp + Manual Tranny

[baddad457]

The truck/van HP numbers you'll find are misleading. There was a cam change from 91 to 92 (flat tappet to roller) then another in 94, this was to the F4TE roller which specs out at only slightly less lift on the intake (.020) and 10-20 degrees less duration (intake only) Both (94-95 HO and truck/van 5.0) shared the same internals otherwise with different intake setups. Add 1.7 Cobra rockers to a 94-97 truck/van 5.0 and you're above the ratings for the HO. Do some port work and headers and you way above the HO. (if the HO's left in stock form) In otherwords, if you cannot easily find an 5.0. HO there are thousands of 94-97 truck/van 5.0's to choose from.

 

[HOT_ROD_CAR]

300hp + a Manual, that's my goal for my swap. What would be the best way to go? 5.0 HO makes around 300 doesn't it? Or would a 351 be better? I was told engines from teh F series trucks have big intakes that wouldn't fit under the Ranger hood. Is it the same with the E-series vans? I was offered a 351 from an Econoline van, and I am not sure how well it would fit.
Also, what would be the best option for a tranny? Will a T-5 hold up? The T-45s seem a bit more rare. And has anyone put a M5OD from a Bronco/F-series in?

Thanks

I had a 5.0 H.O. in a 1992 Ranger and it was a really fun ride!

I now have a 351 Cleveland in a 1994 Ranger and I love it!

The hood was a tight fit, but I used a low profile Edlebrock air filter, and it fits just fine. Either way, you will enjoy the huge difference in how it drives!!

 

[desertrunner]

personally ive never driven a ranger with a 5.0 in it but i cant see where you could go wrong. ive owned quite a few fox bodys and i absoultely love them.

ive had a few stock mustangs then my 14.02 car had 177k miles on the long block, i ran 1.7 crane rockers, 24lb injectors, a 70mm throttle body, 73mm c&l maf, and some nitrous and the car was fast, had 3.73's in it

then i built an automatic car for my wiff. 180k bottom end, 351 heads with decent valves, 1.7 rockers, edelbrock performer intake, 24lb injectors, 70mm throttle body, 73mm c&l maf, and some nitrous. this car was an automatic car and ran a 13.7 on the rev limiter before the end of the track with 4.10's and 26 inch street et's

then i ripped apart the automatic car and converted it to a 5 speed, built a 399 cubic inch stroker for it. its pretty bad, nothing over the top but i put an f cam in it, has kieth black pistons keeping the compression around 9.5-9.8, windsor jr world products heads, 1.72 scorpion rockers, edelbrock intake, 30lb injectors, 75mm throttle body, 76mm c&l maf. ive also got nitrous on it but i havnt ran it yet. i just got it together in jan and ive been sidetracked with my ranger project, but its stupid fast on just the motor, im running 4.10's which is a overkill on a 5 speed, 1st gear is pretty much pointless. its awesome having alot of power but theres no use in having that power unless you can put it to the ground. im expecting this set up to put the car in the low 12's, would be awesome if i could dip into the 11's but i dont think its gonna happen until i get better flowing heads.

unless you are just wanting to show off and burn tires i wouldnt go over 3.73's with a 5 speed, especially if you get the t5 with the 3.35 first gear, you can always adjust tire size to fine tune it though. dont even consider a speed density setup, mass air flow is the only way to go, thats the efi setup that mikepotts stated earlier that is constantly adjusting itself for the perfect tune, mass air flow actually has the ability to learn. ford put the adaptive learning feature in those computers to compensate for wearing engines but they can also compensate for mod's to a certain extent. some people say they have a 15% learning curve, some people say its 25%. im running a completely stock A9L computer in my stroker mustang and it runs fine. will it run better if i got a dyno tune and had the computer tuned to the engine...absoultely, but will it run fine without...yes and ive got 97 more cubic inchs then the computer was designed for.

im gonna throw a stock mass air 306 in my ranger to start with, only because i really dont know what kind of power its gonna have in a ranger platform compared to the mustang, then i will just mod it from there with bolt on's, im planning on eventually getting afr heads for my stroker so then ill throw the world products heads on the ranger and everything else that i change will go to the ranger as well. the main thing you need to worry about is having the bottom end that you know you will be happy with so you dont have to pull the engine again and you can just mod it from there with the engine still in the truck.

 

[IRKillroy]

T-5 Tranny gear ratios

this should help you know what ratios you have to better pick something that will give you what you want.

the 90-91 mustangs look to have a great 5th gear ratio for highway speeds.


Also you can bolt on some long block mods such as Edlebrock heads and intakes (they have a 50 state legal truck EFI intake) that should give you upwards of 320 hp when you're all done.

 

[xcrchar]

Try Air Flow Reasearch 165cc heads my be a bit pricey (1800 dressed) but 400hp with weiand stealth intake, road demon jr 625cfm carb on a 5.0ho with stock cam and 1.7 ratio rockers with stock pistons

 

[Ozwynn]

now I feel dumb in asking this but what is the point of putting 351 windsor heads on a roller cammed 302? somebody told me this would make the engine a boss 302 but isn't the boss a 302/289 block with 351 cleavland heads? And if you did put 351W heads on a 302, which intake do you use? ...... I know this must be common because because I have seen head bolts for the very swap because the 351 windsor head uses a thicker bolt.

 

[v-8power]

now I feel dumb in asking this but what is the point of putting 351 windsor heads on a roller cammed 302? somebody told me this would make the engine a boss 302 but isn't the boss a 302/289 block with 351 cleavland heads? And if you did put 351W heads on a 302, which intake do you use? ...... I know this must be common because because I have seen head bolts for the very swap because the 351 windsor head uses a thicker bolt.

The older 351W heads were better for putting on 302's. The newer ones are the same except the bolts like you mentioned.
A boss does have the cleavland heads. As far as intake you would use the standard 302 intake with the 351W heads.

 

[Ozwynn]

thanks for the clarification. so just to see if I get this ...... there is no point to putting 351 heads on the roller cammed 302 in my Bronco........




wouldn't 351w head lower the compression on an older 302? I thought the 351 had thee same bore as a 302 but with a longer stroke so the 351 had bigger combustion chamber to keep the compression the same?

 

[Mac]

Twenty years ago at least, using the late 60's 351 heads was the hot set-up. Car magazines don't even use them in the head comparisons anymore because there are so many stock or aftermarket heads that are better. You would have to use the head bolts from the 302 with the special bushings. Even the GT-40P heads flow better.
Dave