4.0 OHV into 4.0 24v COSWORTH

As the topic. It's based upon a 93:ish 4.0 bottom end and the rest of the bits are from a 2.9i 24v BOB cosworth. Just missing a few bits to be able to put it all togehter. But here are a few old pics from how a few bits fit together.

 

[Devan]

Sounds like a cool project!

On a side note:
Holy crap Super Six is proud of their work! $2000 for heads!! The shortblock is $6000!! $500 for ARP head studs!! You could build a 347 stroker for all that!
Yeah I know the SOHC can be made to make power, but after you put all that money in it and try to beef up the transmission to hold it, is it really worth it??

I don't know if it's so much that they're proud of their work as much as they know that there really is no aftermarket performance for the 4.0 sohc so they know that if somebody really wants that **** they'll pay that price. and you're absolutely right all said and done it would be very expensive for a motor that can very easily cook or grenade itself. However those prices are for pre-built stuff of above-average quality. If I was to build a motor myself (which I will in the near future) and only bring it to a machinist when necessary I'd probably be looking at about 1/3 of expenses. Also like I said I have decided to keep this truck V6 because of how invested I've been in the V6 setup with the s/c, dual alternator etc. but I am going to get the previous Gen 2 door sport and swap in a 4.6 DOHC or SOHC either that or an 02 4 door in full black(not 03 cuz thats when they started using electronic throttle bodys on the 4.6 in the explorer. And 01 is the previous gen body) or maybe both. The 4.6 DOHC would require converting the brake booster to a hydroboost which I have absolutely no problem with because it's fairly easy to do and my Cobra has a hydroboost setup and I like it, and I would also have to redesign the blower/evaporator housing with fiberglass or watevs and a smaller evap core because I want to keep my AC lol and for clearance of course(Ford made a prototype svt lightning bolt which was a ranger with a lightning S/C 5.4 and they ended up putting some econoline blower box and evap core housing in place of the stock stuff to keep AC and to make it fit into the engine bay with the 5.4, google the lightning bolt, ive done extensive research on this and i even emailed the writers of a few diff articles where ive seen this lightning bolt ranger, to try to get more information about what they did with the climate control, but seems like the most relevant piece of info i was able to obtain was that it was some econoline blower box setup and the pictures) and then there is also designing custom headers, anything other than that is pretty easy i think. Also it's not really necessary to put every performance part under the Sun into the 4.0 sohc for it to handle decent power. I know a teacher over at UTI has an explorer 4.0 sohc with an eaton m122 on it. Probably one of the fastest v6 4.0 sohc explorers in the quarter mile, and I think all he had at the time was much better quality cylinder head bolts. But now I think he's trying to build new cylinder heads and he also did a balance shaft delete and a couple other things but the point is he has an m122 on top of an almost stock 4.0 sohc that can handle the power, although I think he did say that he had some head gasket issues at first. First he had an M90 then both variations of the m112 and now he's got an m122 on it. Oh actually my mistake I think he does have upgraded pistons and connecting rods to. He even told me that he would let me have the top plate for our banshee intake manifolds so that I can adapt an m112 to my motor, and he said that I can check out his builds to, that was a long time ago and then some things happened and then this Corona happened but I'm still looking forward to that day. I do have a cad design for an m112 top plate for my intake manifold but something about it doesn't look right to me so I'd rather have his top plate because I know it's been on a motor with an m112 before. I have a second m112 laying around from my cobra that I plan to use.
But if we could get more information on the Cosworth head swap that would be amazing.

 

[Devan]

Soooo can we get more info on the Cosworth Head swap?

 

[waren]

4.0L Cologne / 5R55 swap - Page 8 - The Merkur Club of America Forums

Fell down a bit of a rabbit hole stumbled upon this old thread. The link above has a number of photos that detail the differences between the 4.0 North America blocks and the euro 2.9

 

[CDW6212R]

This was an interesting idea and thread in 2007. Now the newer engines are all way better choices than anything which the 4.0 could be built into.

The late Ford engines make about 50% more power, stock, and can get 30mpg in most vehicles with decent gearing and weight etc. The packaging of the newer engines to swap into an older vehicle is the toughest part, you can't just assume any engine can fit in the old Explorers. The 302 is a very tight fit, and it costs people power and upgrade potential. The 4.0 SOHC is just a problem engine, along with the weak V6 trans.

The later 3.7 DOHC is my preference if it can fit, being NA and more basic, reliable, versus the twin turbo versions, which also take up more space.

The late six speed auto is very strong, should be very reliable in any application. A bone stock 3.7 and 6R80 might be a sweet upgrade for any old Explorer, ... if it will fit in the engine bay. I see those as a likely $5000 cost swap using a good mileage 2017+ pair, with the stock wiring, PCM, accessories, plus an AWD TC and new R&P gears with driveshafts. Costs would be based on what you find for parts, and what you can rebuild yourself, if needed.

I'd love a 2.3 ecoboost engine too, but it could be much harder to find the space, and it would be more complicated. Look around and see what you can find for measurements of sizes, and what is for sale at decent prices.

 

[waren]

This was an interesting idea and thread in 2007. Now the newer engines are all way better choices than anything which the 4.0 could be built into.

The late Ford engines make about 50% more power, stock, and can get 30mpg in most vehicles with decent gearing and weight etc. The packaging of the newer engines to swap into an older vehicle is the toughest part, you can't just assume any engine can fit in the old Explorers. The 302 is a very tight fit, and it costs people power and upgrade potential. The 4.0 SOHC is just a problem engine, along with the weak V6 trans.

The later 3.7 DOHC is my preference if it can fit, being NA and more basic, reliable, versus the twin turbo versions, which also take up more space.

The late six speed auto is very strong, should be very reliable in any application. A bone stock 3.7 and 6R80 might be a sweet upgrade for any old Explorer, ... if it will fit in the engine bay. I see those as a likely $5000 cost swap using a good mileage 2017+ pair, with the stock wiring, PCM, accessories, plus an AWD TC and new R&P gears with driveshafts. Costs would be based on what you find for parts, and what you can rebuild yourself, if needed.

I'd love a 2.3 ecoboost engine too, but it could be much harder to find the space, and it would be more complicated. Look around and see what you can find for measurements of sizes, and what is for sale at decent prices.

Totally agree!

It’s been about a year with the new to me 4l SOHC after 16 years with the 5L V8. I definitely notice a dramatic power difference despite equivalent ratings, I also notice 20-30% better fuel economy with the 4l.

I too am much more interested in more modern power trains such as an ecoboost 2.3, with some kind of vacuum solution that would prevent cutting the firewall.

that said I am a sucker for anything cosworth especially if it could be claimed to be derived from the famed DFV V8 ... also with good reason I suppose sbf tech has become a little stagnant

 

[CDW6212R]

I really like the Cosworth head idea too back in 2007. After a while I saw the rpm range of the 2.9 DOHC heads, and it was obvious that for a 4.0 engine, those heads would lack enough airflow, they wouldn't be very useful. I know a couple of people have put the 4.0 together with the DOHC 2.9 heads, but the low airflow would always limit the rpm and power. I'm sure that could be reliable and a relatively very fuel efficient engine, but I wouldn't go to that trouble to gain 10-20% in gas mileage.

The 2.3 might fit depending on the location of the turbos, versus the frame rails and nearby parts. That could be a good project. I would prefer to start with an engine that has no internal water pump, and DI with injectors in the intake also. The earliest of those is the F150 3.7 NA V6, I read that recently. It also comes with the same 6R trans which is the same as other V6 6R's from 2012 up. So the trans is easy to come by, while the engine is fairly new and many are $2000 or more. I could see any of the later Ford engines getting 25mpg on the highway in these 4500lbs Explorers.

This thread is old and not likely to be about the Cosworth heads any longer. I would suggest posting here about any potential upgrades to the 4.0 platform, such as later engines. I'd like to see actual dimensions of the 1991-2001 Explorer engine bays, the space available for an engine, plus dimensions of the later engines. I can see the AC box as an obstacle, as well as the frame and suspension, plus the steering shaft and cross member.