Taking the 302 plunge, any help appreciated!

[Teddyzee]

Here's the ECU I mentioned. I cannot vouch for the seller, the part, or anything like that, just passing it on:
http://www.rangerpowersports.com/fo...engine-computer-pats-removed-$150-271356.html

After spending untold hours and cubic dollars on my truck, I'd love to have PATS! I like having it on my Mustang.

 

[bobbywalter]

Here's the ECU I mentioned. I cannot vouch for the seller, the part, or anything like that, just passing it on:
http://www.rangerpowersports.com/fo...engine-computer-pats-removed-$150-271356.html

After spending untold hours and cubic dollars on my truck, I'd love to have PATS! I like having it on my Mustang.

after dealing with all too numerous pats related failures since its use started...and the gm systems long before it, i prefer a personal approach to theft deterance.

i dont use keys for any of my vehicles save for the wifes. and the average person isnt jumping into my shit and driving it away even with it running and the doors wide open.

 

[jaxwithanx]

Here's the ECU I mentioned. I cannot vouch for the seller, the part, or anything like that, just passing it on:
http://www.rangerpowersports.com/fo...engine-computer-pats-removed-$150-271356.html

After spending untold hours and cubic dollars on my truck, I'd love to have PATS! I like having it on my Mustang.

I do not mind the idea of the PATS but seeing as how it looks like I need the steering column, this isn't an option. Thanks for the link, thats probably what I will be going with.

after dealing with all too numerous pats related failures since its use started...and the gm systems long before it, i prefer a personal approach to theft deterance.

i dont use keys for any of my vehicles save for the wifes. and the average person isnt jumping into my shit and driving it away even with it running and the doors wide open.

do explain....?

 

[jaxwithanx]

Just found out the engine doesn't have a wire harness either. Any good ideas other than trying to source another v8 explorer at a junkyard?

 

[gwaii]

i dont use keys for any of my vehicles save for the wifes. and the average person isnt jumping into my shit and driving it away even with it running and the doors wide open.

you too,huh

 

[bobbywalter]

I do not mind the idea of the PATS but seeing as how it looks like I need the steering column, this isn't an option. Thanks for the link, thats probably what I will be going with.



do explain....?

you would ask that if you had to drive my truck. the shifter isnt hooked up at all in that...the key is always in the ignition so the ignition steering lock still functions, but you can manually do that too if desired.


kill switch starting, shift lockout etc.

things you can do EASILY.... but more importantly...YOU CAN UNDO OR MECHANICALLY SOLVE INSTEAD OF FREEZING TO DEATH IN A NO CELL RECEPTION ZONE. you lose your keys hunting...or car show gawking or whatever 600 miles from home after dark on a saturday and your fawked.

i have been on too many vats and pats rescue missions for various reasons to ever consider such a thing on something i need to depend on.

its like congress....only thing it impedes is YOU. you dont see professional car thieves bitching about it, but you will find loads on the poor innocent bastards having to deal with it that didnt even know it existed

 

[Teddyzee]

Just found out the engine doesn't have a wire harness either. Any good ideas other than trying to source another v8 explorer at a junkyard?

I would buy the Explorer 5.0 if it appears decent, then buy an engine harness, injector harness and O2 harness from a 5.0 Mustang, 1987-1993, and use that. It's a very simple and affordable plan.
The three parts of the harness plus the ECU cost about $200, check www.corral.net or ebay.
Of course, you may find it all for $125, someone else may want $300... The Speed Density versions (1987, 1988) typically sell very cheaply.

 

[jaxwithanx]

I would buy the Explorer 5.0 if it appears decent, then buy an engine harness, injector harness and O2 harness from a 5.0 Mustang, 1987-1993, and use that. It's a very simple and affordable plan.
The three parts of the harness plus the ECU cost about $200, check www.corral.net or ebay.
Of course, you may find it all for $125, someone else may want $300... The Speed Density versions (1987, 1988) typically sell very cheaply.

Any reason to shoot for the speed density over MAF (I ask because I see all sorts of different opinions on this. I don't plan on many engine mods other than maybe a mild cam). And why not a 95-95 harness?

 

[bobbywalter]

Any reason to shoot for the speed density over MAF? And why not a 95-95 harness?

pretty much a matter of performance objectives.

stockish 5.0 power and i see no reason not to use it. it costs more time effort and money generally speaking to tune it to upgrades, but in the end for normal passenger vehicle type use i see it as worthy....there was a period of time i was snobby about it

but shit.....i have a 160 hp diesel powered 37 in tire daily driver ranger...and for some reason i get by fine with it.

but there are occasions i miss my gt 40 in hot tune mode....i cant deny that.

 

[Teddyzee]

Any reason to shoot for the speed density over MAF? And why not a 95-95 harness?

No reason at all. Most Mustangs changed to Mass Air in '89. California cars in 1988. My truck is currently Speed Density, but I have a new harness I'm making that is Mass Air. Simply so I can use a slightly lumpier cam with having it tuned. (speed density requires a vacuum signal to the MAP/BAP sensor that does not get along well with non stock cams. This is a generalization, and I'm not the person to give that particular tutorial!)

I'm not familiar with the physical look of the '94/'95 harness, but it's also a viable option.

 

[jaxwithanx]

No reason at all. Most Mustangs changed to Mass Air in '89. California cars in 1988. My truck is currently Speed Density, but I have a new harness I'm making that is Mass Air. Simply so I can use a slightly lumpier cam with having it tuned. (speed density requires a vacuum signal to the MAP/BAP sensor that does not get along well with non stock cams. This is a generalization, and I'm not the person to give that particular tutorial!)

I'm not familiar with the physical look of the '94/'95 harness, but it's also a viable option.

Gotcha, that falls in line with my very loose understanding from what I read. You have a little more room for play with the MAF unless you happen to be able to reprogram your CPU and speed density setup.

I would need to source an AOD trans at that point and skip out on the AODE/4R70W trans correct, since the ECU from the Mustang would not be programmed to control the trans.

 

[bobbywalter]

Gotcha, that falls in line with my very loose understanding from what I read. You have a little more room for play with the MAF unless you happen to be able to reprogram your CPU and speed density setup.

I would need to source an AOD trans at that point and skip out on the AODE/4R70W trans correct, since the ECU from the Mustang would not be programmed to control the trans.

best bet is a stout aod for ease of use, and a eec4 maf setup.

this is with limited power and tuning potential being acceptable factors...330 hp was easy to do with the stock maf system. i broke a whole bunch of shit in that trim.


i have had limited success running piggy back processors in the past to operate both the e4od and the 4r70 units.

the 4r70w is pretty much a bad ass trans for this application nearly stock.

 

[jaxwithanx]

best bet is a stout aod for ease of use, and a eec4 maf setup.

this is with limited power and tuning potential being acceptable factors...330 hp was easy to do with the stock maf system. i broke a whole bunch of shit in that trim.


i have had limited success running piggy back processors in the past to operate both the e4od and the 4r70 units.

the 4r70w is pretty much a bad ass trans for this application nearly stock.

Yeah I was shooting for the Explorer swap because of the GT40 heads and 4R70W but I think my best bet (especially this being my first attempt at a swap) would be to go for MAF Mustang (hopefully 94-95 because of trimmer accessory drive). The only thing I'm hesitant about there is how complicated/much more different is the 94-95 harness from the earlier models. I guess I could always just source a 89-93 harness and use the 94/95 engine, correct?

 

[bobbywalter]

a complete explorer setup is really ideal.

and should be easy to round up in the end.

i have complete setups and need them or i would offer up. i have moved away from detroit so its not as easy to produce things anymore.

keep looking and you should be able to pull this off in a reasonable period of time with reasonable costs.

the stang stuff is definitely simpler, so it has a win that way, but its older and generally beat to hell. the tuners i deal with are getting away from them due to age related issues and harsh use in race applications...stuff starts to leak and corrode things internally on the processors etc causing issues difficult to track down.

this is why i would prefer a 2001 sploder setup over an 88 stang setup.

that and you can shitcan the dizzy and tuning and real time tuning capacity is easier with the later obd2 stuff.


it comes down to cost effective along with actual availability for me.

so my experiences and opines along with 50 cents still wont get you a cup of coffee, and can equally cause problems or solve them.

careful consideration of goals usually point the way to the best way to go.

lots of choices and lots of pros and cons.

start looking around and see what looks good.

 

[jaxwithanx]

a complete explorer setup is really ideal.

and should be easy to round up in the end.

i have complete setups and need them or i would offer up. i have moved away from detroit so its not as easy to produce things anymore.

keep looking and you should be able to pull this off in a reasonable period of time with reasonable costs.

the stang stuff is definitely simpler, so it has a win that way, but its older and generally beat to hell. the tuners i deal with are getting away from them due to age related issues and harsh use in race applications...stuff starts to leak and corrode things internally on the processors etc causing issues difficult to track down.

this is why i would prefer a 2001 sploder setup over an 88 stang setup.

that and you can shitcan the dizzy and tuning and real time tuning capacity is easier with the later obd2 stuff.


it comes down to cost effective along with actual availability for me.

so my experiences and opines along with 50 cents still wont get you a cup of coffee, and can equally cause problems or solve them.

careful consideration of goals usually point the way to the best way to go.

lots of choices and lots of pros and cons.

start looking around and see what looks good.

I would buy the Explorer 5.0 if it appears decent, then buy an engine harness, injector harness and O2 harness from a 5.0 Mustang, 1987-1993, and use that. It's a very simple and affordable plan.
The three parts of the harness plus the ECU cost about $200, check www.corral.net or ebay.
Of course, you may find it all for $125, someone else may want $300... The Speed Density versions (1987, 1988) typically sell very cheaply.

Yeah I really like idea of the Explorer engine and trans. I've got those sourced and I have an ECU sourced, it really just comes down to wire harness. I haven't come across any and if I wanted to use a Mustang harness I would also have to use a Mustang ECU, which means I'm back to not being able to go with the 4R70W. Right?

EDIT: Could I just use a 94-95 Mustang ECU and harness even though the engine is a 98 with PATS? The 94-95 ECU would be programmed to control the 4R70W already, right?