My turbocharged 2000 5.0 AWD....

I just wanted to show off my DIY remote build. The truck is an AWD 2000 5.0 Explorer. - I like to think of it as an AWD SUV Mustang This truck actually was lifted with tube bumpers, safari rack, and 32" ATs on 20" wheels just a few months ago- it has undergone a big transformation here lately. It is now lowered slightly in the front with the rear at stock height(with sagging springs). I kept the same wheels but put smaller tires on them and added 2" spacers. Now onto the turbo...

The Turbo is a T04E 57trim which turned out to be perfect for remote mounting. It is a little small if one wanted 10psi+, but I planned on 6psi max and fast spool. I am using the stock exhaust with muffler delete to the turbo, then a 3" mandrel bent tailpipe. In the tailpipe is my AEM wideband o2 sensor. For charge pipe, I bought a 2" mandrel bent intercooler kit along with some 2" pipe from my local muffler shop. For couplers, I am using cut pieces of 2" ID radiator hose. It can be bought from Advance Auto pretty cheaply- I got one piece that was a large 90 for $13 and had some left over. I just cut it into the desired length with a bandsaw. The charge pipe goes to a 2" to 2.5" steel adapter, then into a 2.5" to 3" silicone coupler from AutoZone. This coupler feeds into my 3" BOV adapter then into the 3" mandrel bend aluminum pipe leading into the engine bay. I brought the 3" down pretty far to try and eliminate turbulence in the MAF.

I am using an STS oil pump to return the oil back to the oil filler neck. I got the pump from an STS dealer who upgraded a customers car to their high volume pump. I am using the nipple that originally had the vent hose to the intake for the oil return fitting- I am using a vented push in oil cap to make up for it. It was alot easier this way than tapping the oil cap like STS does.

I haven't had it tuned yet but it will break the tires loose from a rolling start in 1st gear(remember, I am AWD), and I have full boost almost immediately. I already have a 6psi spring for the wastegate that will go in when I put on the 30lb injectors and Cobra fuel pump.


Here are the pictures and it you have any questions just ask.

 

[tmsoko]

The main concern with the stock short block is the block itself, not the rotating assembly (however, the pistons are iffy). The blocks tend to split in half when you get to the power levels you are speaking of. Even the FRPP sportsman blocks were failing below 500HP, leading to FRPP removing the HP rating from the advertisment.

As for block itself, the Man O War block is not the best choice for the explorer. I looked at getting one when Brian at ADPerformance had a special on them. problem is the 6 hole bolt pattern for head attachment. The exhaust side bolt hole boss will cause you a MAJOR head ache when trying to build custom headers for the engine in the explorer engine bay. When I made my long tubes, I had to pull the primaries VERY close to the block at the block/head interface, so the boss would have interfered if I went with one of those. Also, there are no (mainstream) heads that I know of that use the 6 bolt pattern, so no real benefit there either. Get a Dart and be done with it.

500+ RWHP (~600flywheel) through stock heads is increadible to the point of being in-creadible. Those numbers are normally seen with 185cc and up heads.

For my combo, I am shooting for ~550-600AWHP with a 351W, AFR205 heads, water to air intercooler and a 2.4L Kenne Bell. I know turbo's make better max HP on average over superchargers, but the 500+ listed above seems like a stretch on the stock part combos. I am building for durability however, which most of the mustang drag guys seem to overlook.

Now, get us the video - a little rain never hurt anybody...

 

[Jakee]

Can he come-a-long a chain around the engine to hold it together?

 

[tktrain]

Nah, he wants to get a billet titanium block...

 

[Turdle]

I don't WANT Justins engine to blow--

I just want to see it if it does--am I bad?

 

[Jakee]

I don't WANT Justins engine to blow--

I just want to see it if it does--am I bad?

No - What would be bad is if you we're egging him on to go for it when you know what would happen. It's human nature.

However, Justin seems to be a smart guy. He's shown dedication and I believe he'll do well.

Watch me blow my little puny 4.0 up trying to get over 210 to the wheels!! Don't think I won't ask james to keep leaning it out till I see the numbers I want to see!!

No really, I will not take that chance. It's not worth it. I would save my money until I get all the stuff I needed to do it right. That away you don't have to worry about anything going boom.

 

[justin146]

The main concern with the stock short block is the block itself, not the rotating assembly (however, the pistons are iffy). The blocks tend to split in half when you get to the power levels you are speaking of. Even the FRPP sportsman blocks were failing below 500HP, leading to FRPP removing the HP rating from the advertisment.

As for block itself, the Man O War block is not the best choice for the explorer. I looked at getting one when Brian at ADPerformance had a special on them. problem is the 6 hole bolt pattern for head attachment. The exhaust side bolt hole boss will cause you a MAJOR head ache when trying to build custom headers for the engine in the explorer engine bay. When I made my long tubes, I had to pull the primaries VERY close to the block at the block/head interface, so the boss would have interfered if I went with one of those. Also, there are no (mainstream) heads that I know of that use the 6 bolt pattern, so no real benefit there either. Get a Dart and be done with it.

500+ RWHP (~600flywheel) through stock heads is increadible to the point of being in-creadible. Those numbers are normally seen with 185cc and up heads.

For my combo, I am shooting for ~550-600AWHP with a 351W, AFR205 heads, water to air intercooler and a 2.4L Kenne Bell. I know turbo's make better max HP on average over superchargers, but the 500+ listed above seems like a stretch on the stock part combos. I am building for durability however, which most of the mustang drag guys seem to overlook.

Now, get us the video - a little rain never hurt anybody...

Splitting the block isnt a major concern of mine, I am never going to rev mine to 6500RPM- so it will be less likely. I already have the Man O' War block and AFR heads, so I'll make do with the exhaust situation. These AFR's were on the engine when the block had a rotating assembly. I plan on building some log style manifolds in the near future, and I'll make them work on the new combo. Making long-tubes or even buying Torque Monsters will be pointless considering I have a turbo. I also have been looking at the Ford Racing headers that Summit has. They'll give extra flow capacity without alot of volume to fill. I am doing this when I move the turbo the front- which will be soon. It will probably be a low-mount, so I'll still have to use the oil return pump.

As far as 500whp with stock heads, there are numerous cars at turbomustangs.com making those numbers with stock heads at 15-20psi. I'll try to get some dyno charts after I get home from work. I dont want to make those numbers, I am shooting for 350-390ish. I'll be happy with 13's at the moment.


If and when I decide I want more I'll go with the new block. At the same time, I'll upgrade the fuel lines and go all out- but not just yet

 

[justin146]

Heck, sometimes even when no error has been made there are still kabooms that happen. Good luck man, forge it, fuel it, tranny it and boost it to all hell!

I know all too well about good parts going kaboom, that is the reason I have this Man O' War block in the first place. Its forged crank gave up under a big shot of nitrous, and the previous owner moved up to a 351. So I bought the heads first, then decided I better not let that block get away. The truck only gets driven about 1000miles a year, so if it sees a little down time its not a big deal. I recently got rid of my daily driver and looking for a replacement though

 

[justin146]

Ok, here's the first dyno sheet-
-stock explorer engine with holley intake
-MP T70 w/ .68 a/r exhaust housing
- 42 lb. injectors
- stock computer, no chip

 

[justin146]

here is the second... not quite 500, but with E7's

turbonetics 62-1 turbo @ 13 psi - stock 302 shortblock, stock e7 heads, stock ecu, stock t5, f303 cam, holley intake, 42# injectors, Granatelli 75mm mass air, BBK 75mm throttle body, msd, 255lph fuel pump, single 3.5" exhaust with a straight thru muffler and a dump...

hp @ 470, tq @ 463

here are videos taken during another pull, same car

exterior shot http://www.wendyzak.com/dyno/wendy4.wmv

gauge shot http://www.wendyzak.com/dyno/gauges1.wmv

 

[justin146]

here's my last one..

1993 LX 5.0 T5 Notch
DIY Twin T04B's
Stock shortblock, E7 heads, 30# injectors
MAC shortys, Vecco FMIC, GT40 intake, Comp cam

this guy put down 531whp at 16psi after he upgraded to 42lb injectors... note how lean the pull was with 30lb'ers.

Last 3 pulls are 17, 18, and 19 psi respectively, just out of fuel, no more power to be had with 30s

 

[Afboy143]

so ur expo is running 636 HP???

 

[justin146]

so ur expo is running 636 HP???

no, no, these aren't my dynos. I was just showing that the stock longblock/heads can flow enough to make 500+whp.

 

[Jakee]

The second sheet doesn't cross at the right RPM or am I in left field. Still, this does prove it can hold it but for how long?
However, do you know these guys?

 

[Turdle]

The second sheet doesn't cross at the right RPM or am I in left field. Still, this does prove it can hold it but for how long?
However, do you know these guys?

Good eye--I usually catch that.

 

[justin146]

The second sheet doesn't cross at the right RPM or am I in left field. Still, this does prove it can hold it but for how long?
However, do you know these guys?

he used different scaling for the torque, it only crosses at 5250 if you use default scaling.

 

[rocket 5979]

That's just wrong.....Wait a minute, It is cool to see things blow up when their not yours? However, I don't want to see Justins ride blow up...

I don't want his engine to blow up either which is why I posted my previous statements. But IF it does blow up then why not see the carnage as it happens?

Okay, So I guess the guy that told me that the 5.0 could handle 20 LBS of boost stock is a crack head. That's just great. Oh well, I barely know him.

Yeah, that guy had to have been a major dope fiend or something to say that.

The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is; A stock 4.0 can handle (Unsafely) as much as 12 LBS stock, OR is this more false information? This is NOT safe as I believe the engine finally went not to long ago. I know the 4.0 SOHC design is not as good as the 5.0. With that being said, I guess the difference is the push rods vs cams? I'm just trying to learn here...

Jakee, you cannot compare a 4.0 SOHC V6 to a 5.0 OHV V8... There are just too many differences to say, "design is not as good as the 5.0". Actually if you did have to make the comparison then the 4.0 SOHC V6 is better than the 5.0 in regards to engine design. Regardless it is still a small ci V6 which is why it lacks a little power when compared to the 5.0 OHV.

 

[Jakee]

Rocket - I think maybe you took the last statement wrong. When I compared the two (4.0 SOHC and the 5.0) I didn't mean to compare them for performance. I only meant design. (Head bolts locations, patterns, how many? ECT....) I think you can compare the two for design.

Hold on, let me put on my flame suit.....Okay.

If you really want to be truthful, I can think of a few V6 powered vehicles that can put a whooping on a lot of people in here.

Yes, if something is subject to blow up, why not see it happen.

 

[rocket 5979]

I know all too well about good parts going kaboom, that is the reason I have this Man O' War block in the first place. Its forged crank gave up under a big shot of nitrous, and the previous owner moved up to a 351. So I bought the heads first, then decided I better not let that block get away. The truck only gets driven about 1000miles a year, so if it sees a little down time its not a big deal. I recently got rid of my daily driver and looking for a replacement though

That is good that you have a block already. Good to see someone else who is proactive and not reactive.

I know that there are cars out there that can make that type of power through stock-ish heads but those are VERY few and far between. I can give examples of 99-04 Mustang GT's pulling 500rwhp through stock heads and a Kenne Bell 1.7L supercharger while doing dyno pulls in mineshaft air, doesn't mean anyone else is doing it. In general most will not get near those numbers with stock heads. And as for the stock bottom end? Well , we have already established what is likely to happen with that at 400 rwhp.

 

[rocket 5979]

Rocket - I think maybe you took the last statement wrong. When I compared the two (4.0 SOHC and the 5.0) I didn't mean to compare them for performance. I only meant design. (Head bolts locations, patterns, how many? ECT....) I think you can compare the two for design.

Hold on, let me put on my flame suit.....Okay.

If you really want to be truthful, I can think of a few V6 powered vehicles that can put a whooping on a lot of people in here.

Yes, if something is subject to blow up, why not see it happen.

I didn't take your statement wrong. I knew you were obviously comparing them from a design standpoint and not a performance one. Though it is hard to compare, if you do look at those engines from a purely design standpoint then the 4.0 V6 will win due to superior design. No flame suit needed man, I just think you didn't give your SOHC 4.0 V6 enough credit when looking at things from purely a design standpoint.

 

[justin146]

I got a little recording of the exhaust note today. I'd take some videos of it in motion, but I dont have anyone to run the camera for me.

Turn up the volume, and make sure the bass is up.....

http://www.explorerforum.com/files/5083/turboexhaust.wmv