Engine and Tranny compatibility

[broncodam]

Hey all!
I am new to the forums and looking to start my first V8 convertion project as something to keep me busy on nights and weekends... my first question is regarding a motor and tranny available locally. I am looking to do the swap in a 82-95 ranger and was originally thinking a mild cammed 302 with a high stall.C4 but a friend works at a shop selling a 351W and a C6 out of a running and driving 69 mustang and it has some edelbrock bolt ons and carb for $600. My question is will this motor fit in the ranger using the readily available.aftermarket motor mounts? Idc about a little bit of fabrication etc... also what would.be the pros and cons to this set up? C6. 351W? Any help would be.much appreciated!

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk 2

 

[shane96ranger]

The 351 will mount the same as a 302. Lots of guys use Fox Body motor mounts IIRC, and I am sure someone will chime in on that.

In my opinion, the 351 is more hassle than it is worth. Where it differs from the 302 is deck height, making it taller than the 302. This makes an even more difficult job with the headers. I think you will have even more issues with the heater box too.

The C6 is a great transmission. I would rather have an overdrive though.

Are you dead set on using a Carb?

Sent from the can

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The exhaust is more complicated but I think everything else is ok. The AC box will be badly butchered if it will work at all, the non-ac box can be heated and remolded.

If you want power the 351W trumps a 5.0 for potential, the later ones had crappy heads (pretty much the same ones that choke a 5.0 actually, guess how well they work with 49 more cubes) Like a 302 aftermarket heads really perk them up, not too sure about 60's stuff out of the box though.

Personally my C5 (glorified C4) is the last non overdrive transmission I will own in a vehicle unless by some mistake in fate I end up with a muscle car. Running 3k at 60mph a 302 will move a lot of fuel.

I don't think it would be too hard to rehome the C6, I don't think small block C6's are not all that common.

 

[adsm08]

Don't put a carb in an FI truck. Not only is it a huge step backwards in fuel delivery, it is actually MORE work.

I would hold out for a Mustang HO engine.

 

[shane96ranger]

The small case isn't that common, correct. They are getting harder to find around here.

Sent from the can

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I would hold out for a Mustang HO engine.

I would rather hold out for an Explorer if we are going that route, in addition to possibly being almost 10 years newer and not out of a sports car (beat on) the short FEAD is really nice and kinda pricy to piece together. They have a lot better heads and intake too.

 

[broncodam]

Thanks guys for the info! I was really thinking about going the FI route but am very timid of the wiring and computer end of the swap. The only reason i was shying away from an explorer 5.0 is they dont put out much power stock... i am going to do some more research and make a decision... i just want to have the best base platform to start with..

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk 2

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Thanks guys for the info! I was really thinking about going the FI route but am very timid of the wiring and computer end of the swap. The only reason i was shying away from an explorer 5.0 is they dont put out much power stock... i am going to do some more research and make a decision... i just want to have the best base platform to start with.

The list of stock 302's that put out more power than a stock Explorer is a pretty short one.

With a factory roller cam, GT-40 or GT-40P heads and the GT-40 intake there is quite a bit of potential there for power out of the box.

Make sure you don't confuse the gross (pre '72) and net (post '72) hp ratings. They don't line up very well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower#SAE_gross_power

 

[Mac]

Thanks guys for the info! I was really thinking about going the FI route but am very timid of the wiring and computer end of the swap. The only reason i was shying away from an explorer 5.0 is they dont put out much power stock... i am going to do some more research and make a decision... i just want to have the best base platform to start with..

Like said, think the later Explorer would be the best platform to start with. It got low HP ratings because of the truck cam and the computer, and crappy headers/manifolds. A nice cam sure helps. C-6's are strong but take a lot more hp than the C-4, think it's about 25 hp more.
Dave

 

[shane96ranger]

I hadn't thought about that, but Dave is correct. The C6 uses up more horsepower. As far as an overdrive transmission, the 4R70W is a very capable unit. It is derived from the AOD, but a much better transmission. Only problem is there, you need a controller to run it. Lots and lots of them have well over 200,000 on the factory build. Mine has 217,000 on it.

Sent from the can

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I As far as an overdrive transmission, the 4R70W is a very capable unit. It is derived from the AOD, but a much better transmission. Only problem is there, you need a controller to run it. Lots and lots of them have well over 200,000 on the factory build. Mine has 217,000 on it.

I think to a certain degree you can mix and match a 4R70W and AOD to come up with a mutant of sorts between the two.

I do wish they still made the 4R70W in a fullsize, I love the one I have my F-150. Now they are partnering with GM to concoct some sort of 9 or 10 speed.

 

[shane96ranger]

I do wish they still made the 4R70W in a fullsize, I love the one I have my F-150.

Same here. I also really liked the 4R70W in my Mountaineer.