5.0 and trans swap 65 mustang

[Desertstrike86]

hey all new to the forum. I have a 65 mustang shell that I am restoring... I currently do not have a motor or trans in the car.... I recently acquired a 99 5.0 explorer for 360 bucks at a lien sale. I want to put that motor and trans with both of their harnesses into the mustang. I just found out that the trans will not shift without the rear diff vss from the explorer rear end.... could I technically put a manual valve body into the trans and not have the computer for the trans or it’s harness? Also what’s involved for removing all smog on the motor/computer? No smog in havasu so it’s not needed. Thanks guys!!!!

Adam

 

[Mbrooks420]

Could you swap in the 8.8 into the mustang?

To remove the emissions stuff you’ll need a custom tune, or it’ll constantly think the system is in fault.

 

[boominXplorer]

I'd be easier to swap in a tailshaft speed sensor and run a 96 or 97 computer, fuel rail and injectors. Then you don't have to deal with chip keys or a rear abs sensor. Emissions stuff you'll have to tune out but it will run without.

 

[Desertstrike86]

I could probably do both but what if I wanted the manual valve body? I like that control... do u think it would still work?

As far as pats is concerned I may just swap all that over I like the idea of the alarm... I’m a mechanic by trade but I don’t come across ford computers a lot

 

[410Fortune]

even with the manual valve body the 5.0 will not run right without the VSS signal
I was pretty sure some people here have found a way to replicate the VSS signal by using an aftermarket speed sensor setup that goes on the tailhousing?

You will need to convert the 65 to EFI, it will need to some sort of fuel pump setup to make the 99 5.0L fuel rail happy (65+ psi)

There are likely several ways to achieve the same goal
Lucky for you many others have gone down this road before you just need to find the right info

Wicked cool project!! Restomod!!!

 

[Desertstrike86]

I could always use the rear diff it’s just that without a nice jig cutting it short to fit can get tricky... if that axle tube is not straight I’ll eat bearings for breakfast

 

[CDW6212R]

I'm with boomin, get the needed parts to make it a late 1997 Explorer system. That 97.5 Explorer 302 computer is the best for non-Explorer swaps. The 98-01's require the 98-01 ABS module along with the rear VSS signal, it goes through the ABS before going to the 98-01 PCM(and speedometer).

Get the 96-98 injectors and rail, the 97.5 PCM, the older 4R70W output shaft and housing with VSS in it, and make the several wiring changes to the harness. The EGR is the only emission on these trucks, and it is very reliable. I'd use it instead of the hassle of doing away with it. It doesn't hurt power or economy. You only need the front cats, the rears can be ignored by a custom tune.

FYI, to put the Explorer 302 into the older Ford, remove and replace the block oil filter adapter(threads). Those are metric for the short FL820S, get the old thread adapter to use a big FL1A.

 

[imp]

hey all new to the forum. I have a 65 mustang shell that I am restoring... I currently do not have a motor or trans in the car.... I recently acquired a 99 5.0 explorer for 360 bucks at a lien sale. I want to put that motor and trans with both of their harnesses into the mustang. I just found out that the trans will not shift without the rear diff vss from the explorer rear end.... could I technically put a manual valve body into the trans and not have the computer for the trans or it’s harness? Also what’s involved for removing all smog on the motor/computer? No smog in havasu so it’s not needed. Thanks guys!!!!

Adam

@Desertstrike86
The simplest way to achieve 5.0L EFI in an early Mustang, regardless of the engine's origin, is IMO to drop the idea of working out the electronics for the transmission, forget about the ABS problems inherent with OBD-II EEC-V, go to the previous OBD-I EEC-IV using, say, 89-93 Mustang hardware and electronics. Install a fuel return line to the tank, forget about an in-tank pump, use an in-line F-150 pump easily plumbed in along with a filter, tucked in somewhere convenient. All the needed sensors are easily installed, only 2 HO2S sensors are needed, forget about cats altogether, it'll run beautifully without any. Use a Mustang PCM and install an AOD transmission, or a T-5 5-speed. If yer rear ain't a 9-inch (only "K" cars came with them), put one in, the smaller rear gears will not handle a 5.0HO EFI for very long.

This type of conversion I have done numerous times, with very satisfactory results. The EFI harness out of a wrecked Fox Body is less costly than buying a brand new harness. The latter was used in this '65 Galaxie:

 

[Desertstrike86]

Actually could I just use a stand alone cpu for the trans and a stand alone for the engine?

 

[Desertstrike86]

Actually shoot if all I need is to change the output shaft and housing with vss getting a hold of the older year wiring and pcm is no big deal.

 

[imp]

Actually could I just use a stand alone cpu for the trans and a stand alone for the engine?

@Desertstrike86
Maybe. But Ford began assigning great importance on ABS in late '90s, and I'm not familiar enough to know just how much. I can tell you that in my '04 when the ABS Module "bought it", the PCM commanded "Forced Engine Idle". That means just what it says: car started, idled, shifted into gears, but had absolutely NO throttle response. I don't think it was that bad yet with Gen 2s, but certainly CEL will be a permanent "ON" so long as that CAN Bus feeding the instrument panel is not being fed digital info. by a foreign PCM stand-alone, if one exists. The trans. function, PCM, and ABS are all tied together nowadays, a real pain in the ass to mess with. Hard to predict success or failure, whereas with OBD-I you can pass emissions, if need be, run like a Fox ran, while driving a Gen 1 Mustang.

Off track a bit now, but we did start with an Explorer 5.0 engine.......A few other unknowns, for me anyway, did 5.0 Exs use the 5.0L HO firing order? What about injector size and fuel pressure? To use OBD-II, Explorer, level of the "art" in that Mustang, a stand-alone trans. controller, for example, would have to be able to handle all that data normally fed to the Ex. Gen 3 PCM. To my knowledge, such "sport" is like watching mosquito "wigglers". imp

 

[410Fortune]

I for one think going to the OBD1 computer is cutting yourself short, why go back to the distributor ignition and EEC-IV computer?
Using the explorer OBD2 stuff is not THAT hard.........the benefits of the OBD2 system, DIS ignition and explorer EFI make it worthwhile to sort out the VSS and PATS issues.
I love OBD2, using the 96-97.5 PCM is a good way to work around the VSS issues

 

[MAS Tequila]

Here is one stand alone trans controller, there are others.

It's the same with the FI, no need to use the full harness.

US Shift Stand-Alone Transmission Controllers

 

[Desertstrike86]

Aight so if I use the 96to 97.5 cpu will that solve my VSS issue? I take it that cpu doesn’t account for the vss in order to run right? I def want to stay obd2 and keep the harness etc..

 

[imp]

I for one think going to the OBD1 computer is cutting yourself short, why go back to the distributor ignition and EEC-IV computer?
Using the explorer OBD2 stuff is not THAT hard.........the benefits of the OBD2 system, DIS ignition and explorer EFI make it worthwhile to sort out the VSS and PATS issues.
I love OBD2, using the 96-97.5 PCM is a good way to work around the VSS issues

@410Fortune
Well, you are right in that OBD-II offers more bells and whistles. I see it as muddying the waters and not needed. EEC-IV still used a distributor, that's quite right....but to use DIS requires use of EEC-V PCM, which introduces headaches the average guy may not get through without a lot of misery, or paid help. There's a whole lot of info presented on-line, a lot of which proves erroneous when the "prospective" tries to use it. Look at any discussion on PATS: Forscan worked for one guy, failed for the next, etc., etc. PATS can be a real PITA, IOW. It didn't exist in the earlier system. The VSS meant nothing at all with those Mustangs having a snake spinning their speedometers. A non-issue. imp

 

[imp]

For example, check this thread out:
1998 5.0 XLT Electrical Gremlins. PATs and horn problem.

The guy has gotten 90 replies, and is just about there.......maybe. imp

 

[imp]

@410Fortune
It really isn't fair to denounce the old 5.0 because it had a Distributor. After all, it was an Electronic Distributor, not a dinosaur like it's predecessors. The designers and car makers do not build to make it "nice" for owners, they build to make money.

Don't get me wrong, I love distributorless ignition, but, that distributor was an expensive part to make, much more so than a simple sensor to provide crankshaft position information. That distributor did that, but ALSO provided the needed info regarding let's say, piston #1; yeah, the Crankshaft Position Sensor gives Top Dead Center all right, but was it on Compression, or Intake stroke? So, to get rid of the distributor, they had to ADD a much cheaper part: the Camshaft Position Sensor, CMP. The way the distributor did double-duty was very clever, using 8 slots, one of which was wider: Cylinder #1. Thus, you got pulses for each cylinder AND #1 on Compression, AND engine speed.

I've read of the CMP providing many headaches, but so far my 4.0 has not given me that kind, yet.
imp

 

[Mbrooks420]

The camshaft position sensor, and sync drives are usually good for over 100k.

I’ve never had an issue with PATS, and that would be avoided using a 97.5 computer.

I wouldn’t be afraid of either.

 

[Mbrooks420]

Aight so if I use the 96to 97.5 cpu will that solve my VSS issue? I take it that cpu doesn’t account for the vss in order to run right? I def want to stay obd2 and keep the harness etc..

I think you’d still need to swap the tail shaft housing IF there isn’t a place to install the VSS in later models ( I don’t think there is)

 

[CDW6212R]

If the donor vehicle didn't have the entire set of OBDII components, wiring etc, I'd agree the EECIV is just as easy to acquire and set up. But given he's getting a whole set of 99-01 parts(those are all the same), it's easier to get the late 97 PCM and fuel rail etc, and make it work. The Explorer front dress is wonderful, the old pre-96 style is not at all.

Stick with the late 97 computer, the 96 and early 97 requires an analog trans range sensor. The late 97 and up us e digital range sensor(DTRS), and the donor trans has that and the matching internal wiring, solenoids etc. Re-pinning the trans connector is required to use the 97.5 PCM, the wires are there but moved around after 97.

The 98-01 Explorer systems are the crazy ABS systems, the rear ABS signal runs to the ABS module, which conditions the signal into a VSS signal. That system should be avoided for everything except another 98-01 Explorer(which has the required ABS module, and g-force sensor on the frame rail). That's not needed prior to 1998.