'99 ohv 4.0 cam build

Im new to the forum, wondering if anyone has any suggestions or advice. Goal is to cam it, head milling,porting and polishing, and a single 2.5inch exhaust with a good 87 octane tune. Motor has 153k on it. All stock car. Parts list so far:

Sealed Power ZH2244 roller lifters, $40 a piece
Comp 49-422-8 camshaft, $300

As you can tell I need some advice on rods, valve springs, rocker arms, and gaskets, or anything else

thanks

 

[jd4242]

Haha nice I actually just found them on Summit thanks to Don for sending me part#s while back. Thank goodness you said something. They are waayyyy cheaper on summit. Halfway affordable now. Now that I recall I think the gaskets I have are orange or red. I shall do the blue ones. Thanks

Lol no problem man, cant wait to see this thing run after tuning

 

[Dono]

Its been a month...Were all curious how you are making out.

 

[QueenCitySleeper]

Update

Hey ya'll been awhile. Sct took so long to get me the tuning software that it was too late and I needed to drive the Explorer for work. I ended up swapping it back to na in a weekend. I was frustrated with how much of a pain in the ass sct was to deal with. I never even got the software licensed. Things came up, personal stuff, final graduation projects, job and purchasing a home left no time for the Explorer. The Explorer then had trouble starting and left me stranded at work. I picked up a jeep cherokee 1998 two door five speed with 108k mi cause I always wanted one and needed something to drive and to be honest it sucks compared to the ex. Constant electronic problems, no abs and just cheap all around. It's easier to shift and drive pulling my boat than without.
The motor is currently out of the Explorer and on the stand. Plan is to restore it back to close to factory as possible. I'm ditching the turbo because I'm paranoid about that electric oil return pump and don't want to be tuning and breaking things constantly. Motor build will be mild. Higher compression with first gen pistons, upgraded hardware and legit tune. Goal is to drive it not work on it. I hope to move this along so I can unload the cherokee onto some jeep fanboy. I'll try to catch up with everyone's builds over the weekend. Oh and my oil leak looks to be due to installing the rear main seal wrong when I did the original cam swap lol

 

[Dono]

Nice to hear from you. Life does get in the way of our hobby sometimes.
Great to hear all's well.

 

[QueenCitySleeper]

Update*** Engine build is slow at the moment. I have some catching up to do with the threads, however, I am very happy to see the builds on here becoming more radical by the month.

Currently I am attempting to get first gen ohv pistons to work in a '99 bottom end(compression increase). I cannot find a single documented source where this has been done. All I knew before buying a set of first gen pistons was that they are "heavier" than the ones from the '99 year. Dimensions confirm they will work just fine, but they are exactly 100g heavier each. In order to avoid balancing problems, machine shop costs and the obvious disadvantage of a heavier rotating assembly I am lightening the pistons and small rod end package by yes, 100 f'ing grams. As of now I have about 20hrs in modifying these pistons. I am doing the heavy milling first then will finish them off by hand. I will get pics of progress up soon. As always with me, this is all about bang for the buck and custom garage made goodies so please don't tell me to pay up for $900 pistons

 

[Dono]

I'd love to see where you are coming up with 100 grams to remove on a piston. lol.
I love the ingenuity, and attention to detail. I think most guys would have slapped them in and ran with it. Your right though, slapping them in and running with it would not be a good thing.

Hopefully this summer you will have time to focus on your motor.

 

[jd4242]

Im confused. .there is not a difference in the crankshaft other than the front pulley key and amount of bolts for the flywheel..people use different pistons all the time without issues. .if you was that worried you could have used a first get 6 bolt crank..

I will tell you though the crank shaft and pistons are not balanced close at all in any of these motors,personally if you wanted it balanced i would have taken it somewhere to be professionally balanced on a machine..blindly removing weight may not be smart,the engineers obviously made them heavier and didnt change the crank for a reason..if you was talking about a gram or 2 making them all the same weight would be a different story..i have both 6 bolt and 8 bolts cranks in my shop, i used the 8 bolt and had it balanced for my motor as my flywheel and clutch is from a 06 mustang that uses the 8 bolts.that and the longer key way on front is only reason i went with it

 

[jd4242]

Ps fist gen pistons have less dish than 95+ also.thats how they increase your compression and also probably where the weight difference is..i have the dish specs if you need them..95+ heads have smaller combustion chambers than 90-94tm heads

I run 95tm heads and first gen pistons in my explorer fyi

 

[QueenCitySleeper]

Im confused. .there is not a difference in the crankshaft other than the front pulley key and amount of bolts for the flywheel..people use different pistons all the time without issues. .if you was that worried you could have used a first get 6 bolt crank..

I will tell you though the crank shaft and pistons are not balanced close at all in any of these motors,personally if you wanted it balanced i would have taken it somewhere to be professionally balanced on a machine..blindly removing weight may not be smart,the engineers obviously made them heavier and didnt change the crank for a reason..if you was talking about a gram or 2 making them all the same weight would be a different story..i have both 6 bolt and 8 bolts cranks in my shop, i used the 8 bolt and had it balanced for my motor as my flywheel and clutch is from a 06 mustang that uses the 8 bolts.that and the longer key way on front is only reason i went with it

Hi JD,

I'll try to address all your points. The motor is in fact balanced, or at least mine is very well. Largest variation is 5.8g. See my weight card below.

I don't want to use first gen crank because it would have to be heavier partially defeating the purpose of using first gen pistons. Plus machine costs. I'd have to get the block line honed etc etc and that means money and time. My engine is in excellent shape. The bearings are nearly perfect after 175k miles and numerous 6krpm+ pulls with zero oil pressure. I do not want to touch my crank or change any weights of the rotating assembly. With the pistons being weight matched to the '99 stuff that came out the crank won't know the difference.

I have 95tm heads as you advised me years ago. I also chose these pistons as you advised years ago. I knew they would be heavier, but 100g was a bit of a surprise. Blindly removing weight is not happening here. I am being highly selective taking many measurements. I can tell you that my '99 pistons have light years more technology in them than these first gens.

 

[QueenCitySleeper]

Rough milling of a couple pistons is complete. Oil holes also drilled to match the '99 units. Again, my goal is to replicate the dimensions of '99 pistons while adjusting for slightly different castings. The first gens should still be stronger when I'm through with them. I'll post my cut measurements after the motor successfully sees some abuse.

 

[jd4242]

Gotcha. Just didnt want you taking a grinder nocking weight off..

As far as the motor being balanced, i was referring to the counter weights of the crankshaft. .it would have to go in a machine with counter weights of piston/rods/etc and counter weights for the from balancer and flywheel to see if its balanced.

Just measuring all the pistons/etc to the same helps but does nothing as far as balancing the crankshaft which is pretty sloppy from factory..you would never know unless put on a machine...

The benifits of first gen is the smaller dish to up compression to 10:1,your be gaining some but what your doing im sure.im as shocked as you as far as how much difference in weight tho

 

[ts9409]

Below is copied from http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2001/04/rebuilding-the-ford-4-0l-pushrod-v6/

I think this helps explain the difference in weight from the gen 1 pistons and the gen 2 pistons. The cranks are the same in 99 and following years on both OHV and SOHC engines judging by what i read in this article

1999-2000

The XL2E-BA casting that was introduced in ’99 was used up through 2000 when the OHV engine was discontinued. This crank appears to be the same as the 97JM-AC, but there’s a noticeable difference in the bobweights. The 97JM had 880 grams on all the bobweights while the XL2E used 850 grams for cylinders 1, 2 and 3 and 842 grams for 4, 5, and 6, so there’s an overall difference of 4.3%. Installing the light crank in a ’97 engine with the heavy pistons will overbalance the assembly and add to the vertical imbalance that makes the steering wheel shake, so don’t use this light crank in an engine with heavy pistons.