exhaust on 5.0?

[fordtrucknut77]

hey guys, im in the middle of swappin my 5.0 into my ranger 4x4 if it matters, i wound up using a 70s style truck engine mount. I tried the mustang conv mounts and honestly just didnt like the fit.
Everything seems to fit better with the mount i have now but i dont know if i can buy a header to fit since im not using the *correct* conversion mounts. anybody have any ideas?

I dont even really need a header i would be happy with a manifold if i could find some that fit!

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

What didn't you like about the Stang mounts?

Dunno if you have found this, but it mentions that 70's manifolds are supposed to fit well.

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/V8Conversions.html

 

[bearsrngr]

Late 60s early 70s car mannifolds fit well. They hug the head so they clear the frame and steering with room to spare, plus with a little die grinder work they actualy flow pretty good. Still not as good as aftermarket headers but better than those junk factory ones. If I could get Photobucket to work I'd post picks but my internet out here in the sticks is to slow I havn't personaly used them but have heard Headman 88400s work well as they fit the same vehicles as the mannifolds mentioned above. Hope this helps

 

[fordtrucknut77]

What didn't you like about the Stang mounts?

Dunno if you have found this, but it mentions that 70's manifolds are supposed to fit well.

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/V8Conversions.html

i honestly didnt like ANYTHING about them lol. they just seemed like a weak flimsy design to me. besides that the motor sat up to high for my liking.
with the mount i used the engine sits down 3 to 4 inches farther in the frame and gives TONS more room around the firewall. I think I have most of this stuff figured out and would probly be starting this sucker soon if it wasnt for the exhaust issue

 

[5.0]

hmmm, I used the stang mounts, and if mine sat down another 3 or 4 inches, my crankshaft would be hitting the crossmember. And they work in Mustangs with a lot more power than my stock motor had, so I figured they'd be ok. Also, with a little modification, I was able to use the 89500 headers that so few people have been able to use. It's crazy the differences from one swap to another.

 

[fordtrucknut77]

hmmm, I used the stang mounts, and if mine sat down another 3 or 4 inches, my crankshaft would be hitting the crossmember. And they work in Mustangs with a lot more power than my stock motor had, so I figured they'd be ok. Also, with a little modification, I was able to use the 89500 headers that so few people have been able to use. It's crazy the differences from one swap to another.

yea thats pretty much what i thought to... my truck has a 2 inch body lift and with the convertible mounts the entire engine was hitting the firewall and there was no way on this planet i was gonna get a bell housing on it and a radiator at the same time...
I changed the mounts to the ones i am using and it sits right down in there. i will admit the water pump is kinda low in the rad support but again i have a body lift.

 

[bubbafinch07]

my 90 ranger has a 2" body lift and my 302 sits nice and low with stang mounts. but soon enough those block are gonna be gone. i hate that look.

 

[fordtrucknut77]

mmmm well who knows. as mentioned above its strange how 2 different people can do the same thing to the same truck with different results. are you guys using convertible mounts or regular 5.0 mounts?
Believe it or not they are different...this still baffles my mind. but my guy at advance said he cant even get the standard 5.0 mounts

 

[Teddyzee]

mmmm well who knows. as mentioned above its strange how 2 different people can do the same thing to the same truck with different results. are you guys using convertible mounts or regular 5.0 mounts?
Believe it or not they are different...this still baffles my mind. but my guy at advance said he cant even get the standard 5.0 mounts

Convertible mounts (same as sn95 coupe, Lincoln Mark VII, and others) are a captured design. They position the motor slightly lower, approx 3/4". Just a safer design.

Fox coupe:

"Vert" mount:

Keep in mind the pin (bolt) is offset on the mounts, so swapping them side to side can alter the engine position. My "vert" mounts came from a Lincoln (all the same part number) and were stamped correctly, the right one is on the passenger side.

Left mount, notice the position of the bolt:

And the other one, see the "R". Get rid of the locating rivet. (notice the hole and the grinder marks):

 

[fordtrucknut77]

ok thanks, i found some manifolds today that will do the trick but out of curiousity what are those tri y headers designed to fit?

 

[Teddyzee]

The Tri-Ys are for a '65-'70 Mustang.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

ok thanks, i found some manifolds today that will do the trick but out of curiousity what are those tri y headers designed to fit?

No workie with 4wd though...

To simplify things I just ordered SN-95 mounts, rather than trying to get fox convertable mounts.

 

[Teddyzee]

To simplify things I just ordered SN-95 mounts, rather than trying to get fox convertable mounts.

Same part number

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Same part number

Yup, but simpler for the parts guy.

I had a issue with one store that couldn't find a 302 listed for a foxbody Mustang, just a 2.3 or 5.0... after that I kind of question them and try to streamline things as much as possible.