Good info, thanks!
Stupid automatic transmissions! I may end up with a 5 speed yet...who knows.
I'm definitely not looking for "super fast" or even really anything other than "more entertaining than it looks." Definitely looking for something with torque from idle. The stock roller HO longblock in my Mustang is sufficiently entertaining.
One thought I have had is to build up a little bit more of a hotrod motor for the mustang and then put the engine (stock roller longblock out of about a '93 mustang) that's in the mustang into the Wagon.
That's one thing I really hate about automatics -- worrying about what the converter is going to think of a cam.
Just remember when you start thinking about higher stall speed converters, factor in your gear and tire size. More slip at cruise speed means alot more heat.
pres589
PowerDork
11/3/17 2:51 p.m.
A set of 1.7 rockers and the stock Explorer cam isn't probably a bad idea anyway. If good roller rockers could be found for cheap, this is probably an acceptable method of waking the motor up a bit.
I'm curious what just a set of 1.7 RR's and a good set of headers would do to 1996 & later Explorer engine that's been tuned well. I've only read bad things about the manifolds that came stock on those engines. It would be even more interesting to see what a stock H.O. cam as previously mentioned would act like in that combination vs. the stock Explorer cam.
The h.o cam is actually pretty good.
I had a few explorer gt40p motors. One with a comp cam xe270hr cam, and one with a tfs1 cam.
The tfs1 seems to be the "go to" cam nowadays when running the gt40p heads. I would not run it in an aod car without a stall.
Back in the fall my random-momentum-generator pointed me to the donor car to see what all was left to do to get the engine out. Turns out all that was left to do was the engine mount bolts. It only took a few minutes to have it sitting on the ground.
And that's where it sat all winter until I moved it into the barn a few weeks ago.
As I tore it down it fought me. Any bolt going through aluminum (all of the intake bolts and the water pump bolts) were a real pain. Two intake manifolds bolts broke (one in each head). One I was able to heat up and turn out with vise grips. The other snapped AGAIN and I was able to (for the first time maybe) drill straight through it.
I think that hole will be salvageable (I should be able to file and pick the bolt threads out)...but now I think it's moot because I realized I have had a misconception all these years. I remember reading an article in a magazine (most likely before the internet) that E6 heads were terrible, but E5 heads are good and E7 heads are good. Fast forward 20-some years and I go digging for more info only to find that the E5 truck heads are pretty good and functionally-pretty-much-identical to the E7 heads. However, what came in the '85 Mustang were E5 car heads and have a significantly lower compression ratio when atop an otherwise identical engine. "Well Lord, Mr Ford, what have you done?!"
So...the '85 heads on this car are not very desirable. LOW compression. I don't want high compression, but E7 heads are a bit higher (and I KNOW they run well with 87 octane in my mustang) so I should at least use some of those. A customer/friend has a set of E7s I can have for $50 (and there's another set on Craigslist for the same price) so I won't spend any time/money on these E5 "car" heads.
The other troublesome bolt was one of the engine mount bolts. It snapped off with the impact (I didn't expect these to be stuck or I wouldn't have been using the impact). It took a few tries but I managed to weld a nut to it and turn it out.
It's too bad I don't work on my projects in a photo studio. That would be cool.
How the heck did you move that engine hoist (casters) in the dirt with the engine hanging?
If you do get the E7 castings a little bit of port work on the exhaust side goes a long way!
In reply to ClemSparks :
ooh. Looking closer, I see your secret.
Well played.
dropstep said:
If you do get the E7 castings a little bit of port work on the exhaust side goes a long way!
That might be worth a try. I don't look forward to doing the work, but always like having a new skill ;)
ClemSparks said:
dropstep said:
If you do get the E7 castings a little bit of port work on the exhaust side goes a long way!
That might be worth a try. I don't look forward to doing the work, but always like having a new skill ;)
Picked up 3/10ths in the quarter mile on my old Capri. Another thing if you swap it to stick, keep an eye on the firewall wear you mount the clutch quadrant. The automatic cars don't have the bracing there. There known to flex and tear if you don't brace them.
Project86fox said:
The h.o cam is actually pretty good.
I had a few explorer gt40p motors. One with a comp cam xe270hr cam, and one with a tfs1 cam.
The tfs1 seems to be the "go to" cam nowadays when running the gt40p heads. I would not run it in an aod car without a stall.
So it sounds like for my purposes, the H.O. cam might be a good choice...and I have a couple here so that's cool.
Question: Did the 5.0 H.O. roller cam change at all between the 5.0 H.O. introduction in 1985 and, say...1993? I have the original cam from this engine and I have another one that I came up with a few years back that I think came from a later fox body.
I'll plan to use the original one from this engine if it's as HO as later HO cams were ;)
Edit: Oh, and are the Explorer cams the same as the Mustang H.O. cams or should I maybe be looking for an Eplorer Cam, specifically?
And the reason I'm coming back to ask the question above is because I picked up the block from the machine shop this week!
I specifically asked if it could be simply honed. he looked it over and said it was fine. So it was honed, cleaned, and he put the cam bearings in.
Now it's time to gather some bearings and rings and start putting it together!
In reply to ClemSparks :
Tfs stg 1 or 2 or even an e303.
The HO cam sucks and the exploder cam is worse.
Well...maybe the H.O. cam "sucks" but what does it suck at? I've got at least one contributor saying it's not too bad (taking my actual goals into consideration).
If we Consider that I'll be using:
- E7 heads (assume as-cast, stock)
- A stock aluminum intake (or possibly an Edelbrock RPM)
- An Automatic transmission. I'm not opposed to using a torque converter with slightly higher stall speed than stock...but I know they are expensive so that'll be an issue.
Then do these TFS and/or E303 cams still make sense?
I want to reiterate and be clear: I have other cars to be hot-rods (and these cars can have the cranky, hot-rod mannerisms that come with that territory).
This wagon MUST:
- Start easily every time (I know this is possible with a carbureted 5.0, I already have one)
- Drive comfortably (in 100 degree heat with the A/C running) in town and on the interstate.
- Be built on a budget.
Realistically, I know it is better to run too little cam than too much. So I admit I'm a bit skeptical about advice to install cams that advertise the need for "stall converters" and useable RPM ranges that start at 2,000 or more. However...I've never driven a cammed car and I barely know how to drive an automatic transmission. So I'll listen to BTDT experience.
Thanks!
Which HO cam do you have? I know of at least 4 variations of it.
Still got the I6 in there, and the k-member? Might be interested in them
Ranger50 said:
Which HO cam do you have? I know of at least 4 variations of it.
One of the specific questions I asked above is if the cam out of this engine (an '85 5.0/5 speed, carbureted, Roller cam car) is better, worse, or the same than/as a later model cams. I have a later cam, however, I don't know what year it is out of...so I realize that's not much help.
In doing a little poking around...it looks like the consensus might be that whoever made these for Ford was pretty inconsistent . But maybe in the neighborhood of 210 degrees duration at .050" lift and ~.444 lift at the valve with ~115 degree lobe separation.
Mr_Asa said:
Still got the I6 in there, and the k-member? Might be interested in them
It still has the stock engine/transmission in it. I have a 6 cylinder Futura 2 door as well. So I plan to hang onto this drivetrain (once removed) to potentially go into the Futura if something goes awry with the original engine (and/or transmission) in it. The K member I probably won't need but it's almost certainly easier to find one local to you than try to ship this around (Like...I'll help find one so I don't have to mess with this one ;)).
In reply to ClemSparks :
Check the date code on the block. Been a while since I looked it up, but E0BB or E1BB is supposed to be fairly rare and somewhat sought after by other I6 enthusiasts. Might be able to trade up or sell it for more than another 200 or 250 would cost
The k-member is more of a pipe dream than anything. It would be required for a car that is at least three cars away
Any of the "large log" 200s are the more desirable ones. Any of the foxbodys should have it. Slightly larger intake casting
In reply to dropstep :
Yup, the head flows better, but the block is what I'm talking about above. It is one drillable bolt hole away from a SBF bellhousing pattern, which opens up a decent amount of options that are otherwise a bear to have.
Not all the large log headed motors had that block.
Mr_Asa said:
In reply to dropstep :
Yup, the head flows better, but the block is what I'm talking about above. It is one drillable bolt hole away from a SBF bellhousing pattern, which opens up a decent amount of options that are otherwise a bear to have.
Not all the large log headed motors had that block.
That would be the low mount starter version of the 200. Unfortunately the large log combined with the low mount starter is very rare. My car is a high mount starter as is every other foxbody I've personally seen with the 200.
I recently ordered up some parts...Rings, Main Bearings, Rod Bearings, Core Plug set, Timing Set, Oil pump.
I have pistons soaking in diesel fuel and am slowly cleaning them up.
The block got paint over the last couple of days.
