DOHC 4.6L V8 build

[jd4242]

That's correct. The crank is cast. The pistons and rods are forged.



My 2003 Aviator engine heads (right P/N 2C5Z-6049-AG, left P/N 2C5Z-6049-DA) are the ones with only 4 spark plug threads and the coolant flow issues. The 2005 Aviator heads have 9 spark plug threads and the coolant flow issues have been corrected.

So do you have the 2005 as well?? Casting ending in ""DC""??is the crank the 6 or 8 bolt?

Some of thats correct. .some of 2003 heads ending in "DB" had 9 spark plug threads and the coolant issues were corrected but still suffer from loose exhaust seats and bad guides. .

In late 2004 they came out with the ""DC"" heads which had the 9 spark plug threads,coolant fix,exhaust seats and guides fixed.these were also what ford sold as the FRRP heads..

http://www.terminator-cobra.com/castings.htm

Good read but it doesn't mention the problems with the seats or guides in the ""DB"" heads which was released as a TSB from ford..

I purchased my 2003 aviator based on it having the good ""DB"" heads to only find out it had bad exhaust seats and the guides were shot..

 

[jd4242]

Also may want to consider the summit underdrive crank pulley..the Aviators alreafy have a smaller water pump and alternator pulley so all you need is the crank pulley out of the kit..i haven't had any issues with charging or AC with it thats noticeable. .it uses a 3" shorter belt(5060970)
://m.summitracing.com/parts/sum-c2511

 

[2000StreetRod]

So do you have the 2005 as well?? Casting ending in ""DC""??is the crank the 6 or 8 bolt?..

I only purchased the 2003 Aviator long block from an auto repair shop that had replaced it with a rebuilt long block for a customer. The cast crank is 6 bolt while a forged crank is 8 bolt. That way I can bolt it up to my 2003 stock Explorer 5R55S. The rotating assembly should handle up to 500 rwhp.

Thanks for posting the photo of your 2003 Aviator! Now I know where the accessories go. I still haven't figured out the kluge Aviator cooling system and how to integrate it with my Explorer.

 

[2000StreetRod]

I posted a link in your thread already with the rear ones and a picture of them installed. .might of missed it

I saw the photo but overlooked the link. I assumed that the adapters you showed were part of a kit. I realize now that the adapters are from the same manufacturer (ICT Billet) but one pair is for the rear (yours) and one pair is for the front (Luke's). The rear passenger side adapter has two side ports and the driver side has one side port. The ports are for straight NPT to hose barb adapters. The front passenger and driver adapters appear to be identical - each with one port. The port is axial requiring a 90 degree NPT to hose barb adapter when used in the rear. I'm concerned that the flow thru the driver side head may be reduced if it has to go thru the passenger side adapter before returning to the water pump inlet in the block valley. I wonder if I could eliminate the heater supply hose/pipe from the front of the engine to the heater control valve (shown below) by routing the outlets of the head to the heater control valve. I would have to replace the on/off heater control valve with an on/off bypass valve. I wonder if flow thru the heater core is restrictive when the valve is open. Coolant in the heads is probably hotter than coolant in the block so the heater should work better.

 

[jd4242]

I saw the photo but overlooked the link. I assumed that the adapters you showed were part of a kit. I realize now that the adapters are from the same manufacturer (ICT Billet) but one pair is for the rear (yours) and one pair is for the front (Luke's). The rear passenger side adapter has two side ports and the driver side has one side port. The ports are for straight NPT to hose barb adapters. The front passenger and driver adapters appear to be identical - each with one port. The port is axial requiring a 90 degree NPT to hose barb adapter when used in the rear. I'm concerned that the flow thru the driver side head may be reduced if it has to go thru the passenger side adapter before returning to the water pump inlet in the block valley. I wonder if I could eliminate the heater supply hose/pipe from the front of the engine to the heater control valve (shown below) by routing the outlets of the head to the heater control valve. I would have to replace the on/off heater control valve with an on/off bypass valve. I wonder if flow thru the heater core is restrictive when the valve is open. Coolant in the heads is probably hotter than coolant in the block so the heater should work better.
View attachment 92236

The stock cobras has a water port on the passengers head from the factory. .you add just one to the driverside in those applications..the Aviators have no water ports on the rear.that kit is to make it like the cobras basically. .

What your saying seems like it would work but sounds like more trouble than its worth,least in the case of most vehicles. The way the kit is setup its pretty easy and simple.it "T"s right next to the rear head so unless you knew what you was looking at you would never notice it..i can post a picture of how the rear hose runs over and how it "T"s if you want..

I saw no real effects on the cooling system. .showed a steady even temp almost the whole time once it was warmed up

 

[2000StreetRod]

The stock cobras has a water port on the passengers head from the factory. .you add just one to the driverside in those applications..the Aviators have no water ports on the rear.that kit is to make it like the cobras basically. .

What your saying seems like it would work but sounds like more trouble than its worth,least in the case of most vehicles. The way the kit is setup its pretty easy and simple.it "T"s right next to the rear head so unless you knew what you was looking at you would never notice it..i can post a picture of how the rear hose runs over and how it "T"s if you want..

I saw no real effects on the cooling system. .showed a steady even temp almost the whole time once it was warmed up

The photo of your Aviator doesn't show the top of the alternator. Is the bracket curved like the one on a Mach 1 shown below or flat?

 

[jd4242]

The photo of your Aviator doesn't show the top of the alternator. Is the bracket curved like the one on a Mach 1 shown below or flat?

View attachment 92569

Its curved

 

[2000StreetRod]

Its curved

Thanks! That means my Mach 1 intake should be compatible with the Aviator bypass tube which I can purchase new for about $65. A used Mach 1 bypass tube is at least twice as expensive.

 

[jd4242]

I personally would have stuck with the aviator intake..the mustang guys go out of their way to make them work..pretty sure they make more power across the board. .also fyi a 4.6 2v TB works on it..so you can go to a larger TB and from what i read a round intake will flow more than a oval..

The MAP sensor is also built into the egr on the aviator intake

 

[2000StreetRod]

I personally would have stuck with the aviator intake..the mustang guys go out of their way to make them work..pretty sure they make more power across the board. .also fyi a 4.6 2v TB works on it..so you can go to a larger TB and from what i read a round intake will flow more than a oval..

The MAP sensor is also built into the egr on the aviator intake

I've heard that the actuator can fail and that the part is fairly expensive. I think the intake manifold must be removed to replace the actuator. See the dark photo below I found on eBay that shows the actuator. I suspect that the Aviator intake system has better low end torque than the Mach 1.

I've been looking at the available Aviator bypass coolant tubes. It looks like the original is an all metal unit while the Motorcraft replacement is a combination of composite material and metal mounting tabs as shown below. I've seen metal Cobra units on eBay that had pinholes caused by corrosion and repaired with welds. The composite material would not corrode but may not be as strong as metal and could eventually crack due to fatigue and hot/cold cycles. Is yours metal? Any opinions on which would be better?

 

[jd4242]

I've heard that the actuator can fail and that the part is fairly expensive. I think the intake manifold must be removed to replace the actuator. See the dark photo below I found on eBay that shows the actuator. I suspect that the Aviator intake system has better low end torque than the Mach 1.

I've been looking at the available Aviator bypass coolant tubes. It looks like the original is an all metal unit while the Motorcraft replacement is a combination of composite material and metal mounting tabs as shown below. I've seen metal Cobra units on eBay that had pinholes caused by corrosion and repaired with welds. The composite material would not corrode but may not be as strong as metal and could eventually crack due to fatigue and hot/cold cycles. Is yours metal? Any opinions on which would be better?

View attachment 92669

View attachment 92670

Yes the intake would have to come off,it is very very easy to come off and as a whole unit though. I haven't heard of them failing but i haven't done alot of research on that.just know they make more power.they are much taller so the mustang guys make a custom upper manifold and use the lower only..

I did do some research as im wanting a larger tb also

My crossover is corroding so i can see how thats a issue. .id like to replace mine personally. .

 

[2000StreetRod]

This afternoon I transported my block, rotating assembly, main bearing caps and bolts to the machine shop. The block will be cleaned, bored and decked. The rotating assembly will be balanced. The cost for that will be $525. I like to deal with local shops but they vary greatly in time to turn around a project. The estimated delivery is 2 to 4 weeks. They offered to assemble the engine for another $275 but I declined. I want to do everything I can myself to learn thru experience and save the money for something else to purchase. It is likely I will have some questions and hope I can get answers from the Forum experts.

 

[2000StreetRod]

It appears that the connecting rods are symmetrical front to rear and side to side (no offsets). If that's true then it shouldn't matter which cylinder they go in and which way they face. Also, the four valve reliefs on the piston top appear to be symmetrical so it may not matter which way they face. The first time I rebuilt an engine was in 1973. It was a 1960 Volvo 4 cylinder with offset rods that I didn't notice. After torqueing the rod cap bolts I tried rotating the engine with a breaker bar and socket mounted on the harmonic balancer retaining bolt. It wouldn't budge. The first thing I thought of was high friction due to the honed cylinder walls and new rings. But then I decided it must be due to something else. I reviewed the shop manual more carefully and realized I had overlooked the rod offset notice. Fortunately I had not yet installed the head. Since then I have taken my time paying attention to details when performing automotive tinkering.

 

[jd4242]

Make sure you check the rings to see if they should be installed dry..most will say that now,you shouldnt oil the rings or the piston ring grooves. .also after you clean the cylinders with clean oil they should be basically wiped perfectly clean/dry with a lint free cloth..

Also double check on how they require you to break the rings in.mine require WOT to 60mph reaching 5,000 rpms multiple times and letting off letting the motor coast back down to 10 mph,then back to 60 reaching 5,000 rpms...the rings need the pressure to push them out to break in and seat properly. .the natural spring pressure isnt enough to break them in.

I messed up and oiled my ring grooves but not rings and left the cylinders oily..also i didnt do any WOT pulls right off the bat..i did add a zinc additive to my oil though

 

[2000StreetRod]

Make sure you check the rings to see if they should be installed dry..most will say that now,you shouldnt oil the rings or the piston ring grooves. .also after you clean the cylinders with clean oil they should be basically wiped perfectly clean/dry with a lint free cloth..

Also double check on how they require you to break the rings in.mine require WOT to 60mph reaching 5,000 rpms multiple times and letting off letting the motor coast back down to 10 mph,then back to 60 reaching 5,000 rpms...the rings need the pressure to push them out to break in and seat properly. .the natural spring pressure isnt enough to break them in.

I messed up and oiled my ring grooves but not rings and left the cylinders oily..also i didnt do any WOT pulls right off the bat..i did add a zinc additive to my oil though

Thanks for the advice! Hopefully, in about a month I'll be assembling the short block. However, it will be many more months before I'm able to start engine break in. I'm concerned about the formation of rust on the cylinder walls during that period. I'm thinking about using a pre-luber to pressurize the oil system and manually rotating the crankshaft every few days to reduce rust while kluging together a functional power plant.

 

[jd4242]

Just dont use WD40 on anything, it will actually cause rust.like you said just good oil or prelube everything

 

[2000StreetRod]

The Mach 1 windage tray I purchased only covers the rear half of the crankshaft where the oil pan is deep.

I've read that the 4 valve heads retain a lot of oil at sustained high engine speeds which is why many Mach 1 owners purchase a larger capacity oil pan. I suspect a windage tray may reduce the shortage of oil in the pan where the pickup is located. Unfortunately, mounting the tray requires modifying the pickup tube fins and 4 special main cap bolts. So far the only set I've found is from ARP for $250.

Also, almost all of my sockets are 6 point and I would need a deep well 12 point socket for the windage tray stud cap nuts. Canton makes a windage tray that mounts with oil pan bolts but some owners experience oil leaks unless two pan gaskets are installed.

 

[jd4242]

My aviator didnt have any tray on the bottom end..

 

[2000StreetRod]

I stopped by the machine shop today. So far they've only cleaned the block and placed it in line for the machine work. No catastrophic surprises were found. I asked about the balancing process and learned that the rod weights will be compared to each other as will the piston weights. I was told that from their experience with my purchased parts the variation should be less than 1 gram. If that is exceeded they will be brought into tolerance. Then comparable weights for each cylinder position will be somehow attached to the corresponding position on the crank. Then the crank will be rotated to determine the out-of-balance weights and locations and the crankshaft counterweights will be drilled to compensate. The process is estimated to start late next week so I should be able to pick everything up the following week. I decided I'm going to mount the used stock Mach 1 windage tray I purchased so today I ordered the previously mentioned ARP Main Stud Kit P/N 256-5701. The best price I could find was $240 with free shipping. Because the Centennial is longer than the Sport I won't be able to keep my small stand on end utility trailer in the garage and have enough room for assembling one engine on a stand and the crane pulling the stock engine. I think I can get the utility trailer thru my crawl space doorway after transporting several loads of bark mulch for the yard.

 

[2000StreetRod]

The ARP Main Stud Kit arrived today.

The 4 studs leaning against the box lid are for mounting the windage tray. I need to purchase some 12 point sockets. Then when I get my parts back from the machine shop next week or the following week I should have everything needed to assemble the rotating assembly in the block with the windage tray. Then I can start determining the modifications required to the oil pickup tube. I need to start selecting and ordering gaskets. The only ones I've purchased are the head gaskets because they were on sale at Rock Auto last winter. At the same time I purchased head bolts that were also on sale. I didn't purchase head studs because I didn't know if I would be able to remove the heads without pulling the engine.