a couple of pics of "the sport..."

[ebgb]

This is the current atate of my poject...
302 w/ E303 cam, 1.6 rr FRP headers, 3:73 rear gear
4 wheel disc brakes, '96 Mustang GT interior,
Mustang Bullit wheel, lowered 2"...

 

[cm8809]

Cool project, nice choice of cam. Tell us more about the motor, what did it come out of? Is any of it stock?

Also, put a 10" speaker infront of your shifter man I know that's what I'd do if I had that room in my truck.. Beat factory

 

[ebgb]

...the motor began as a '97 Explorer 302. I you recall, it had GT40 heads and a similar intake to a GT 40 as well.
The motor started out as stock but I discovered that I had bought a "flood motor" from a shop here in the Tampa area called "Blue Oval Corrall"...and did I ever get corralled. I ended up with a new short block that everything was moved to. It was at that time that I added the cam, rr, etc.
It has been fun but I not sure that my finance committee is going to tolerate much more dicretionary expenditures...each has to be carefully negotiated.
I currently have trouble with it starting hard...maybe new starter. The brakes are discs at all corners and seem to have some minor operational issues.
It r8des like a buckboard so the suspension(shocks) need some attention. I've talke to Rancho and the local daler says he can work it out for me. The problem with lowrering the 1st gen is that the stock shovks want to bottom out...

 

[Erki]

very sweet ride. nice work.

 

[DeRocha]

Nice project.. Can't wait to see and read more about it as time goes on..

 

[Spdrcer34]

...I would have picked a different cam...

There are MUCH better cams out there, giving more torque and better mileage....and most of them were actually designed in the 21st century!

But other than that....what motor mounts did you use?

The problem with lowrering the 1st gen is that the stock shovks want to bottom out...

It all depends on how you drop it...

I have drop I-beams, and Lowering Blocks...it maintains the suspension geometry 100%....I would ONLY recommend the Bilstein or Edelbrock Shocks.....

Ryan

 

[BrianDye]

Looks great man, cant wait to see more progress!

 

[bats]

The black leather is hot and I love the clear headlights. Where'd you find them?

 

[deamon3]

Get body kits for it! The side skirts and rear kits for a seconded gen will fit a first gen , and there's a front bumper for a first gen s10 that will fit on the front.

 

[FIND]

that looks horrid

OP, good luck with the project, if you ever do want to change up the look of the front bumper, before you even think about a body kit, a limited bumper would probably be a good change.

 

[XLT]

Get body kits for it! The side skirts and rear kits for a seconded gen will fit a first gen , and there's a front bumper for a first gen s10 that will fit on the front.

The body kit makes the explorer look like a extended scion. Yuck

Sweet project you got going on ebgb. I have always wanted to put a v8 in my sport as well.

 

[ebgb]

...I would have picked a different cam...

There are MUCH better cams out there, giving more torque and better mileage....and most of them were actually designed in the 21st century!

But other than that....what motor mounts did you use?



It all depends on how you drop it...

I have drop I-beams, and Lowering Blocks...it maintains the suspension geometry 100%....I would ONLY recommend the Bilstein or Edelbrock Shocks.....

Ryan

 

[Spdrcer34]

??????

Ryan

 

[ebgb]

Ryan...sorry 'bout that! I tried to put together a response with quotes and that was what came out...I'll try again!

Which cam would you have used? I presume that you would use one that would generate "more torque and better mileage"...yes?

I think the mounts are from a V8 explorer. Too be honest, I don't know. I'm not much of a wrench turner...I'm better at telling somebody what I want.

I looked at the airbagit web site. Unfortunately I didn't know 'bout them...remember, I'm an old guy AND I live out here in ther colonies...!
I did speak to them today and they can help with the shorter shocks that I need. The front has an extra 328# due to the 302...so, I need to get stiffer up front!
They asked that I send them the "at rest" dimensions(center of ring to top at the frame????) I'm not sure what they mean but I'll give it a try! I don't think the 2" drop that have has messed with the geometry too much!!!
I'm not ready for aniother 5 bucks in the suspension. Am I correct that the dropped beam gives you more than 2" drop?

Now XLT...about the body kit!!! It kinda looks like the "Lady GaGa" of explorers. I've obtained the body molding from a '94 Limited. It includes rocker panel, wheel openings and front valance with fog lights.

The black leather is courtesy of a '96 Mustang GT and I found the clear front corners on ebay. I had clear back corners until some biatch deputy wrote me up for 'em! I know now why she likes carrying a gun...it was a substitute for...never mind that's another story.

Next part of "the sport" project is insulation inside. The 302 creates a lot of ambient heat...I will also make the hood scoop operational...engine comp. ventilation.

 

[Spdrcer34]

As for an on the shelf (OTS) cam, the CompCams 35-348-8 is a good cam.... http://www.summitracing.com/parts/CCA-35-349-8/

With Jay Allen not designing cams right now (Health Issues)....there are a few other guys out there that could design a custom cam for a few (literally, just a few dollars more than that cam at Summit, and it would be on a Billet Steel Core)

The V8 Explorer mounts are very unlikely in the 1st gen Explorer...it is more likely that they used L&L Mounts, or Mustang Convertible Mounts...

Aluminum Heads will take a little weight off the front of the Explorer and balance it out a little better.

The Drop I-Beams give a 3" drop. No short shocks needed, if you are using stock springs.

Ryan

 

[rhauf]

just wanted to put in my $0.02 on the cam shafts..

the E303 is the way to go!! it's RPM range is a bit high, but if you've got a 5 speed that's not a problem at all (2500 -6500 is where it performs best for me) i've run that cam in my mustang for the past 10 years. and that thing screams. plus it has a nice loapy idle. everybody talks **** about the E cam, but it's definitely my cam of choice for a 302.
mileage is descent too. don't let anybody tell you that you need a "torque cam" for an SUV because its heavy or something. you can always fix that problem with a deeper rear axle ratio. besides, an explorer sport isn't very heavy anyhow.

here's a couple videos of said mustang (302, 9:1CR, gt-40Y heads, E-303 cam, and t-5)

 

[Spdrcer34]

You absolutely CAN NOT compare a E-cam in a Mustang with the same cam in an Explorer.

It will be a dog off the line. And in the RPM range advertised, you will spend very little time 'in the zone'. The motor with that cam is less efficient at lower RPM's, and will result in decreased performance, and even lower mileage...ESPECIALLY if you spend any time on the highway.

That `68 Mustang is fairly lightweight. The lack of crash beams, full frame, power nothing, and no A/C....it still weighs a full 1,000 lbs less than the Explorer Sport...and closer to 1,700 lbs less than my 4 door...

I have driven a Explorer with an E-cam. It was fun in the upper RPM range....but the OEM tune has shift points set at 5k @ WOT, that can be tuned out....I know. But the reality is turning a motor at 6500 vs. 5000 just to make 11 more HP is stupid. Almost anybody in a Heavy SUV would rather choose a cam that had a lower RPM operating range, give up the 11 HP up top, and make 30-50 more ft lbs of torque before 4000 RPMs.

 

[rhauf]

You absolutely CAN NOT compare a E-cam in a Mustang with the same cam in an Explorer.

It will be a dog off the line. And in the RPM range advertised, you will spend very little time 'in the zone'. The motor with that cam is less efficient at lower RPM's, and will result in decreased performance, and even lower mileage...ESPECIALLY if you spend any time on the highway.

That `68 Mustang is fairly lightweight. The lack of crash beams, full frame, power nothing, and no A/C....it still weighs a full 1,000 lbs less than the Explorer Sport...and closer to 1,700 lbs less than my 4 door...

I have driven a Explorer with an E-cam. It was fun in the upper RPM range....but the OEM tune has shift points set at 5k @ WOT, that can be tuned out....I know. But the reality is turning a motor at 6500 vs. 5000 just to make 11 more HP is stupid. Almost anybody in a Heavy SUV would rather choose a cam that had a lower RPM operating range, give up the 11 HP up top, and make 30-50 more ft lbs of torque before 4000 RPMs.

If he's running a T-5, the gears will be close enough together that he will always be in the power band (a 6,000rpm shift would put him at about 4,000 in the next gear) so staying "in the power band" wouldn't be a problem here since power band starts at 2500. as for cruising, i don't see how it would be a problem cruising below the peak power point of the cam given that you don't need full output power to cruise. i'm sure it has plenty of torque at 2,000 rpm to cruise down the freeway in overdrive comfortably. as for "off the line" that problem can always be fixed with a lower axle ratio. if he has (for example) 4.56 gears, with the low first gear of a t-5 he's going to be in the power band immediately. it would surely spin the tires flooring it from an idle, without even dropping the clutch. yes the mustang is lighter, big deal. horsepower is horsepower, gear appropriately and it'll fly (btw it does have a/c).

i'm running a bigger cam than the E-cam in my bronco (crane 449601), and that huge heavy beast is a rocket off the line, even with 35's and an auto trans! it's all gearing (2400 stall, 5.13 gears) fwiw it was still fast with 3.50 gears before the swap (just spent more time in the stall).

you had a bad experience with the E-cam. but you're application as different from the OP's. you had an improperly adjusted auto trans which shifted 1,500 rpm too soon, and i'm going to guess that you ran it with a stock stall and a fairly tall axle ratio as well. if any one of those 3 factors is true, i can see that the E cam would be a disappointment, if all of those 3 factors are true it must have run horrible.

as for "tuning it at 6500 instead of 5,000 to make 11 horsepower is stupid".. i think it's more like a 60 horsepower gain (over a stock/low rpm cam). if he's not afraid to wind his engine up a bit, it's going to perform great. if he's a ****** and shifts it at 4,000 rpm it's going to feel like a dog.

i don't know how you measure fast, but to me it's quarter-mile drag race. and in a drag, i'd put my money on the e-303 explorer over a stock/mind cammed explorer (given both had a 5 speed and a good driver) if you're talking about what feels more responsive when you try to accelerate at cruising rpm a little in town without downshifting, then yes.. the stock cam will appear more powerful.

 

[Spdrcer34]

How often do YOU shift an Explorer at 6000 on the street? ......nuff said....

...there is no way to get around the 1,800rpm climb you have to do from idle to get the START of the 2500 rpm range that the cam is advertised to be optimum at...and in that time you are trying to push a 4500 lb SUV off the line....the stall of the convertor will help, but keep in mind that that is lost energy (lost MPG's).

...and there IS something wrong with cruising down the highway in a 4500 lb SUV at 60mph, in OD at 1500 RPM with a manual transmission and a cam that has an advertised range of 2500-6500 RPMs....that cam will COST you more money in wasted gas in 6 months than if you would have spent a LITTLE more money on a custom cam that is RIGHT for the application.

...you are right...Horsepower is Horsepower....might I remind you that my comments on horsepower have been very limited, and I have focused on Low End Torque, and Efficiency. There is a reason that dyno queens and drag racers are different. Dyno Queens are only after 1 thing...MAX power. You can have 2 similarly weighted vehicles, with car #1 making 100 more peak HP than car #2, and Car #1 will still lose a drag race to the lesser PEAK powered car #2 due to the higher AVERAGE HP and Torque of car #2. It happens EVERY WEEKEND in drag strips across america.

...my comment of (paraphrasing here) "11 more hp for 1500 more RPM's" was comparing another NON-STOCK cam to the E-cam, such as the CompCams offering I posted earlier.

...As for the Explorer I drove, it had a 4R70W, 2400 stall Lock Up Convertor, Baumann Shift Kit, E-cam, RR's, AWD, TMH's, and Factory 3.73's, as delivered from the factory. In a 2,600 to 3,000 Fox, it is a solid high 12's low 13's package....In the Explorer though, it's hard to get it out of the 15's...

If you are going to open the engine up ANYWAY...spend the LITTLE extra money on a CUSTOM cam, designed FOR YOU. Not a box stock cam on the shelf at Summit. Spend the money, wait the 2-3 weeks, and do it right.....THEN dial the cam in....

Ryan

 

[ebgb]

canshaft and application...

I gotta say it's great to hear the various opinions regarding the choice of e303 as a cam for my application.
I agree that if I was more of a purest I would go with a custom cam. I only "race" from stop light to stop light.
Just a couple of things..."the sport" in question weighs in at approx. 4200#, the only mustang that comes close is the convertible...from what I understand. I didn't consider the weight issue until now...and that's more a suspension thing for me than HP...according to the last dyno run I get approx. 270HP at the rear wheels at 3500 rpm with 300# torque at 3500 rpm...that's enough for me.
I originally had an AOD in "the sport" and didn't like the performance or lack of it...depending on your mind set!
With a 3:73 rear gear, the T-5 sounded like the most cost effective trans to swap in...The E303 was in place and functioning just fine so I sasw no need to change.
I get to the speed limit faster that a lot of the kids "rice boxes" anyway!
I do stay in fourth gear most of ther time and the shifting in traffic does get to be a drag sometimes. "the sport" is real comfortable above 2200 rpm, but I gotta say..."the sport" will JUMP...not enough torque to spin the tires too much but i can get at least a "chirp" even ion to thrid gear. That's FFFFFUN!
I wish I could have benefitted from this discussion before...perhaps a different choice would have made...I do like the way it sounds to say "an E303 cam" however!
Probably won't get the track with it at all...that just doesn't float my boat. Hells bells, it sounds good, will burn "some" rubber off the line and chirp in three gears...the kids look at this "old fart" in a "sleeper" like mine and laugh...til I turn up the sound system with Country music and "BLAST" with that and then let the 2 in 2 out Flowmaster 50 series "SPEAK" Yeah baby...!
Honestly, the transmission guy DID say that it would be more comfortable and streetable with a 3:27 rear gear. It would better match the ratios in the T-5.
Oh well...maybe next time.