what are the big differences between mustang 5.0 and explorer 5.0

[85mustangman]

i dont plan on going to crazy with the engine in it. If i build anything im just going to do a mild 408 windsor

 

[Scrambler82]

Good idea to start slow and work to what you want it to be.

If you go with a new cam thing about a short duration high lift type cam, Comp Cams has a great one.

Of course you need to determine what you want and how you wan the engine to perform then call one of the Cam Companies and talk to one of their techs.

The cam that is in my truck is short duration (don’t ask I do not have the spec sheet with me) and has a .520 lift / .050. This type of cam will give you more low end power and more power on the high end of the cam’s rpm range by allowing more gas in than a cam of the same duration and less lift so you will end up with the extra power but not the higher rpms.

This is just a suggestion within our talking not something that I am saying is a must do.

 

[baddad457]

The cam that is in my truck is short duration (don’t ask I do not have the spec sheet with me) and has a .520 lift / .050. .

You're confusing specs here. .520 lift @ .050 ? Nope. .520 is the total lift. Durations are expressed in two measurements, "Advertised" duration is the duration at .005 lift. Then there's the duration at .050, which is a lesser amount than advertised, but gives you a more accurate figure in terms of effective duration.

 

[Scrambler82]

You're confusing specs here. .520 lift @ .050 ? Nope. .520 is the total lift. Durations are expressed in two measurements, "Advertised" duration is the duration at .005 lift. Then there's the duration at .050, which is a lesser amount than advertised, but gives you a more accurate figure in terms of effective duration.

I may have expressed it incorrectly but at .050 at the lifter the valve,is opened .520.

Lift is advertised at .050... Fifty thousandths, not .005 five thousandths...

That's all folks !

 

[Teddyzee]

Except, no.
At .050 lift at the lifter, your valve is open .080" with 1.6:1 rockers, .085" with 1.7 rockers.

And lift is advertised both at the cam, and at the valve with a common lifter ratio, at it's maximum value.

You are a little confused.

 

[baddad457]

I may have expressed it incorrectly but at .050 at the lifter the valve,is opened .520.

Lift is advertised at .050... Fifty thousandths, not .005 five thousandths...

That's all folks !

OK, whatever. You do however have an appropriate screen name here.

 

[PetesPonies]

There is some inaccurate info in this thread. First, maybe someone straightened it up, but the Cobra cam is different than the GT cam. 1.7 rockers weren't just to avoid using a different cam, jeesh. You can run 1.72 rockers with any cam, as long as you make sure the results are what you want. I've built too many engines with 1.72s to let this info be posted as gospel. I'll tell you a helluva combo . . . . done a couple engines with this. Run a "B" cam with 1.72s. Terrific engine combo. One of mine ran 12.8 ET in total street trim, total, with this cam rocker combo.

 

[shane96ranger]

There is some inaccurate info in this thread. First, maybe someone straightened it up, but the Cobra cam is different than the GT cam. 1.7 rockers weren't just to avoid using a different cam, jeesh. You can run 1.72 rockers with any cam, as long as you make sure the results are what you want. I've built too many engines with 1.72s to let this info be posted as gospel. I'll tell you a helluva combo . . . . done a couple engines with this. Run a "B" cam with 1.72s. Terrific engine combo. One of mine ran 12.8 ET in total street trim, total, with this cam rocker combo.

I don't see where it was said that you can't run them with specific cams.

 

[PetesPonies]

Sure was eluded to:

If you are going with a new cam, stay with the 1.6 Rocker, less rocker arm angle to deal with. The idea of changing over to a 1.7 ratio is to save overall work in changing the cam/lifters, etc.

The Cobra has a 1.7 because Ford didn’ want to chg the HO cam, just added the extra lift via the rockers

just want to keep the info accurate

 

[baddad457]

I'll tell you a helluva combo . . . . done a couple engines with this. Run a "B" cam with 1.72s. Terrific engine combo. One of mine ran 12.8 ET in total street trim, total, with this cam rocker combo.

Don't go round saying this too loud. I've gotten in more than my share of internet fights with this combo. I used it with two builds. One was with ported E7 heads, RPM dual plane and 650 Holley in my 89 Ranger. Then I swapped heads to Canfields, changed the intake to a Vic Jr. The power band changed from 1000-6000 to 3000-7500. The internet "experts" refuse to believe a B cam can make power to 7500.

 

[PetesPonies]

I've done it with GT40s and 351W heads ( basically the same ). One had a FI setup the other carbed. It does make a nice engine, plenty of grunt but it loved to climb in the rpms. I was at a Ford day one time and had one of these with me in a Mustang. I have multiple people come up and want to know what was done to the engine because it sounded so good There were hundreds of Mustangs there they picked me. One guy told me it was the best sounding 5.0 engine he had ever heard lol But the ET backs it up and that was with a dual plane intake !! yep! I guess I'll keep it quiet, sshhhh

 

[shane96ranger]

With what bottom end were you guys able to run a B303 and 1.72 rockers? I've got the factory 89 bottom end (never been touched) and GT40P heads. I'm worried about PTV clearance with a B303, so I think I'm going to do an E303.

Or did you guys have success with a similar setup?

 

[baddad457]

With what bottom end were you guys able to run a B303 and 1.72 rockers? I've got the factory 89 bottom end (never been touched) and GT40P heads. I'm worried about PTV clearance with a B303, so I think I'm going to do an E303.

Or did you guys have success with a similar setup?

Believe it or not, I built this motor around a City Motor Supply (Dallas Tx) reman roller 5.0. Bored .040, Silvolite flat tops (I don't recall which flat tops though as they make more than one) all I did to the short block was change the rod bolts (one by one with the engine assembled on a stand) to ARP's, plus changed the cam to the B cam and a double row, roller chain timing set. I never had any piston to valve contact with either the E7's or the Canfields (these were even milled .060 and had 1.94/1.60 valves) The short block cost me all of $350 at the local NAPA store, plus the cost of the ARP's, B cam and timing set. I figured at that price if I blew it up, it was no big loss. That motor lasted 1-1/2 years with daily floggings to 6500, then another 2 months with floggings to 7500 before cracking the #4 cylinder wall (midway in the bore, about a half inch crack) It was still running when I pulled it, just had a milkshake in the oilpan. I sold the rods and pistons to someone else, kept the crank, just installed in into another 5.0. You'll be fine with GT40P's and a B cam with 1.7 rockers. These change the lift to .510 from .480.

 

[baddad457]

I went and looked, I'm pretty sure that motor had the 1177 pistons in it, which were far from the ideal with 1.585 pin heights, the comp ratio was less than 9 to 1 with both heads. That's why I now preach to the uninformed to pay attention to pistons for these motors, the pin heights vary from 1.585 to 1.620, that's a wole .035 difference that equates to volume (9ccs)equal to an extra head gasket on the motor. That's a full point in the ratio of a 302.

 

[Teddyzee]

With what bottom end were you guys able to run a B303 and 1.72 rockers? I've got the factory 89 bottom end (never been touched) and GT40P heads. I'm worried about PTV clearance with a B303, so I think I'm going to do an E303.

Or did you guys have success with a similar setup?

That's almost what mine is.

'92 Mustang short block, GT40 heads, 1.7rr, B303...