Best Year 5.0 for Speed Build

[OverkillYJ]

Hey guys! I already have a Wranger and a 302 Im dropping in from an explorer, so I dont care about wheeling this explorer. Thats what my Wrangler is for and one offroad vehicle is expensive enough.

I need another vehicle with more interior room just for car seats and stuff. I am only getting a 5.0 Explorer. Problem is, I am having a hard time figuring out the best year. The one I'm currently building to drop in my Jeep is a 2001 with the GT40p heads, but Im running it wil an A9L EEC from a Mustang GT, and reverting quite a few things like injectors to the older style. Basically, motor completely self contained separate from the rest of that vehicle.

I know in 97 they stopped using the normal injectors and went to those white lower lb injectors which use a different harness. They also changed the heads though to better heads with more compression.

My plan is to make this Explorer I buy just FAST. Thats really all I care about. AWD with a built V8 will be fun on the road. I need leather interior because I do a ton of mechanical work and build axles, so Im always greasy and dont want to stain a cloth interior.

Im mainly concerned about how much work is going to have to be done with each upgrade though. The older EEC's basically self adjust using their table regardless of what upgrades you do to it. With the Explorers I am not sure what will happen if I pulled the orange stock injectors off the motor and stuck in higher lb ones though. Also, if I do a cam upgrade, how will it react?

When it comes to taking these and making them produce a lot of HP instead of the torque their designed for, which computer will be the most friendly? Also, how does that high pressure fuel line with no return act when you start changing parts out?

A lot of what I have read googling this has people saying just get the newest 01 because the electrical kinks were worked out more. I can fix all that stuff though. I own a full service shop I use for whatever I feel like. Its my toy building place. Im more concerned with how big of a pain it will be to get the motor to accept the upgrades and run properly. I know it will need a tune no matter what I do. Im more worried about having to add a return fuel line for example if I have an 01 and want to upgrade the injectors.

Also, things like EGR delete I am sure are more complicated on different versions. (track use only of course). That is one thing I like about the gt40p heads I have is no EGR. I have a ton of 5.0 parts lying around. Piles of stuff literally because I sell a lot of stuff to mustang guys. I would still rather start with the most friendly version possible. Im guessing it may be the 97 I want. I believe that is the last year they used mustang style injectors, but am not 100% sure. I also was not sure what headaches having a fuel rail with no return on it may present further down the road. The high PSI has me curious if that will give me more to do also.

So if you were going to buy a low miles 5.0 AWD Explorer or Mountaineer to upgrade over 300HP, which one would be the best candidate?

Also, I am building a 393 since they are dierect bolt in and only weigh 50lbs more, but that will probably go in my Jeep one day. Not sure. Maybe into the Explorer. Depends on what I can squeeze out of it without upgrading to a Megasquirt system or something too expensive.

Thanks for the help

 

[Centaurus5.0]

Honesty man, id wait and buy someone else’s hotrod explorer when it came up for sale. Much cheaper and much less headaches. If you already have one project, you'll probably never drive or finish either one if you tore into the explorer thinking it will be a weekend deal.

Just put 4.56's and a shift kit and tune on a stock 5.0L and you'd be faster than most "fast" Explorers out there.

Don't be one of those guys who pay $5,000 for a new aluminum headed motor with a 6,500rpm cam, $3,500 for built trans and TC and keep the stock 3.73 gearing and wonder why you can't break a 14et

 

[OverkillYJ]

Regearing is great for larger tires, but unless you want the mileage to suck and revs to be crazy high on the highway, they don't do much good since those small yours don't cover enough ground per revolution to make gears that tall worth the time it takes to even put them in if I got them free. 373 would be about as high a I would go.

A cam change and set of headers cost about $500 around here in the circles I'm in and take about a day to properly do. Seems everyone is treating apart their mustangs anymore for part outs. I don't buy built vehicles because they are too beat, and half the tone people cut corners to save money. I also own a full service shop though. Not something that would be done in a driveway. I've also ripped apart a ton of these for parts. Takes me about an hour and a half to reach the cam at this point.

I just want to know what computer plays nicest without a bunch of crap. I don't feel like rewiring another motor. I just finished rewiring this A9L to this 01 302. That one is actually worth it though.

An explorer isn't worth more than $1k max in upgrades to me. Once I drop in this other 302, a 351 is going on my stand for a build. I'm just looking for 350hp at most in an explorer. Nothing fancy. The intake will already support it. I have extra headers sitting around. Due to the fuel delivery system differences though, I'm almost tempted to go with a 97 fully loaded with around 100-125k on it. Every time i see white injectors they get ripped off and sold on eBay along with the fuel rail that had no return. Both are useless to me and my friends who mess with Ford stuff. I can't give them away.

 

[Highflow50]

Not saying it can't be done but it is a fair amount of work. And only obx or torque monster headers fit the v8 explorer. The 5.0 is really stuffed in. Engine removal is the best way to swap cams. And as for the transmission it's a 4r70w just to the "jmod". Best of luck man I have a ton of time and effort into my 5.0 and she is sitting at 275 at the crank.

 

[OverkillYJ]

Not saying it can't be done but it is a fair amount of work. And only obx or torque monster headers fit the v8 explorer. The 5.0 is really stuffed in. Engine removal is the best way to swap cams. And as for the transmission it's a 4r70w just to the "jmod". Best of luck man I have a ton of time and effort into my 5.0 and she is sitting at 275 at the crank.

Yeah, like I said, I have pulled apart more of these than I can count. Pulling the grill and radiator to do the cam is easier btw. I get the axles out of these in about 15 minutes from start to finish by myself. Intake and headers usually take me longer because of the tight space, but I still get the entire top end apart in under an hour. Only thing I do not like about these motors is the fact they didnt use forged pistons like the mustangs did. Now if I were to change those, then I would swap the motor. Pulling it to build takes too long when you can build another on a stand then just swap them in an afternoon with a buddy. Having a lift, full air, cherry picker, and overhead steel I beams is what I am used to working with though too so they go quick.

The stuff Im talking about ripping apart is in junkyards half the time though. I build the rears for Jeep guys and sell the intakes and heads to mustang guys.

Also, those are the most popular heads, but not the only ones that fit. There are more heads to choose from for the 302 then I can count. Really though, just a cam and spring upgrade along with proper headers makes these pull a lot of power.

Only downside with the Explorer cam is its a truck cam with a low RPM limit. With the right cam and upgraded springs these scream pretty good. The stock headers are just a complete joke though. I dont even resell the stock ones when they are in mint condition.

With these different options I just mentioned, I just wasnt sure how the EEC would act before getting tuned. Thats why I like the A9L.

The trans behind these V8's are great too for automatics. For going anywhere though, I use a NP435/NP205 combo. Pretty much indestructible even with a 393 dropped in. Also, that trans has a 6.8:1 1st gear. No overdrive, but that is easily fixed with numerically lower axle gears. Take out 373 gears for example and put in 354 and you have overdrive again with way more power in the low gears with a transmission you cant break even if you tried on purpose. They even have PTO ports on them. Ive heard they were used in dumptrucks, but I get mine out of regular pickups normally.

But back to performance, whats up with the EEC's from the Explorers and Mountaineers? I have about 3 or 4 on hand right now. I dont want to change parts and get a tune every single time. I would rather upgrade parts over the course of a month or two taking it off the road just one day at a time on the weekebnds here and there, then tune once everything is in I want. I just do not know what the new EEC's will do.

With the A9L it will just keep going. Actually they will run awesome, not as good as after the chip is retuned, but still they automatically adjust to whatever you put in very well with a cam cha nge, head change, MAF swap, whatever.

So besides the difference in the engines that are obvious between a 97 VS a 01, what are the differences in the computers? Im guessing the 97 would be much more friendly? I would rather an 01, but I dont want to have to change things like I said before like adding a fuel return line for example.

I ramble, but I need you guys to realize I have spent a ton of months working on Explorers and Mountaineers of all years. I just never got into the nitty gritty of the computers, or trying to upgrade anything with that returnless fuel system running 65psi.

 

[VR4]

I paid 6 for my TMs. Used.

J mod? There's no accurate write up. I used portions form the car 98+ write-up. Helps the 1-2 shift but I have yet to figure out the 3-4. I'll have to study the hydraulic charts to do something there. Everything they say to do for the 2-3 and 3-4 the holes in the explorer plate are already larger than recommended.


I don't know what my truck will run but based on other vehicles I've had encounters with it might touch the 14s. Barely. Probably not. It's hard to gauge tbh.

I've sat dead next to an ecoboost f150, pulled a 2j is300 auto, and walked a common rail 5.9 Cummins.

 

[Mesozoic]

These 5.0L engines are pretty well setup from the factory, so not sure why you'd really want to mess with it too much, but being a guy with several Mustangs that generate anywhere from double to triple the power the Ex 5.0L makes, I do understand the desire for more power and acceleration.

1999 and later model 5.0L engines have a few minor updates that makes them a bit more reliable and refined than the previous years. One of these things is the move from a Hall effect cam sync sensor to a variable reluctance type. The VR type sensor is passive and doesn't require power - is more reliable and longer lasting. The EEC-V computer, in my case REAC4 strategy, is leaps and bounds more refined than any EEC-IV as well. You can get fully broken out definitions from various people on the net. My understanding is that the later model 5.0L engines also came with better exhaust manifolds, if tubular headers aren't in your future.

Some of the differences between EEC-IV and EEC-V include things like integrated EDIS8 and transmission control, integrated MSD (so no need for the red MSD box anymore), faster processor, more refined programming, and better ability to cope with wild engine combinations. I've got a CDAN4 strategy EEC-V running a 351W stroker (408) generating around 500 hp with a very lumpy Comp Cams hydraulic roller cam. The spark feedback strategy in the EEC-V allows you to tame a radically idling engine, whereas it's a bit tougher in EEC-IV.

 

[Dono]

Yes, the computer will be fine. Depending on the cam, you may have idle issues. Going wot, anything generally over half throttle, you go open loop and there is no fuel trim learning happening, just default a/f being commanded. If the motor is moving more air, the effect will be the motor will run richer at wit.

I stuck with the factory fuel returnless system. I still have factory fuel rails. I did upgrade my fuel pump, high flow fuel filter, and an6 fuel lines though. So far, no fuel starvation issues at all. For the goals you are describing, id leave the factory fuel system alone.

I do hope you go forward for this. We could all learn from your experiences. Its not easy to make an ex go truly fast. If you make it to the 14's in the quarter, you have probably put a lot of energy in to your build. A 4700 pound brick doesn't exactly step out quickly very easily.

 

[Centaurus5.0]

A 4700 pound brick doesn't exactly step out quickly very easily indeed!

Hence, gears.

 

[OverkillYJ]

A 4700 pound brick doesn't exactly step out quickly very easily indeed!

Hence, gears.

Compared to my Wrangler this this is shaped like a Ferrari.

I build axles regularly for people and regear them. Unless I want my fuel to go under 10, nothing more than 373's belong in this with stock tire size.

Ratios and building axles are what I do for people more than anything. I'm not trying to break records, would just like it to respond when I step on it.

 

[Dono]

Well, have you thought about a cam with a higher stall torque converter?

If you stick with the lockup style torque converter, you wont loose street manners and will make better use of a bigger cam.

 

[OverkillYJ]

Well, have you thought about a cam with a higher stall torque converter?

If you stick with the lockup style torque converter, you wont loose street manners and will make better use of a bigger cam.

Basically, I just want it to be faster, or at leat as fast as my MKZ. I have an AWD Fully loaded MKZ that I beat a 97 Mustang GT with twice in a row. Kinda embarrassed the guy. Only beat him by half a car length the one time, full car length the second, but still. Thats just an Auto 6cyl up against his stick V8. Only reaoson is because that AWD with traction control distributes the power so well when I floor it completely its doesnt even chirp. Just sticks you back in your seat. If I could get an Explorer or mountaineer to keep up with my MKZ I would be happy. That I have also driven through about 18" of snow without a problem. My Jeep with lockers sucks in the snow for obvious reasons. I just havent gotten a selectable locker for the rear. Once I do that it will be much better.

Only reason I am getting this SUV is because I dont feel like springing for a 4x4 crew cab truck, and am getting rid of my king cab f150 for more interior room with another kid on the way. I have some time before I can buy one. More than anything I am hauling axles and large shop tools like welders, drill presses, etc.I know I can throw sheetrock and lumber on the roof without a problem when the rare occasion comes up. By no means am I trying to build some fancy superfast SUV. Just one that handles well and can keep up with my MKZ.

I love the diagnostics capability of the newer EEC's. But when it comes to reliability, the less bells and whistles the more reliable in my experience. Also, the A9L (stick) and A9P (Auto) EEC's are still highly sought after because of that reliability. Most people run the engine 100% stand alone from the vehicle and waterproof the EEC for creek crossings. The tables in them are easily modified, and you know exactly what will happen when you change something due to how they calculate the fuel to air ratio as well as other things. Its all stuff I can easliy reference. Ford Fuel Injection used to be a great site for that info before they got shut down. I actually have the entire site in PDF form because of how nice it was.

Thats what I have not been able to find out about these newer EEC's, and also things like deleting things I may remove so they do not trigger the CEL. IN PA if it is newer than 95 and the check engine light is not on your good to pass inspection unless your brakes are screaming.

If I found 97-01 explorers and mountaineers all with say 125k miles and the 5.0 AWD, same exact condition, which would be the best candidate to build up just a little bit? If I were to go over 400HP I would do that with a 393. Will that run off of one of these though if dropped in? I know it will bolt up and an old EEC would have no problem. Not sure about these new ones though.

I have gt40p tubular headers sitting on a shelf right now. I believe they are BBK's. Thats first on the list. Second on the list is a higher RPM cam with new springs so I get away from low end torque. Its great for my Jeep, but not going fast. Jeep is where gears come into play due to the tires. I think those changes to an Explorer or Mountaineer would put me where I want to be. If it doesnt, only then would I upgrade the heads. Even then unless I went large on the injectors, the intake should due fine. Wasnt sure about options with those new style injectors though. I know the stock orange 97 style are interchangeable with a ton of different ones all the way to the crazy high lb ford lightning. I can port the lower intake to get a few extra CFM out of it, but they are pretty damn good intakes for being stock.

When I blow the torque converter or trans I will upgrade it, just not before.

I know with a chipped older EEC I can have a few tunes to choose from. Even without a high stall converter I should be able to get some good shift points and performace options at the flip of a switch on the chip itself. I was not sure about these new ones though.

This will be fairly low though. Lower center of gravity. Panhard in the rear to tighten it up. Nothing crazy where I have to worry about speedbumps or snow, just low enough to make the handling better around corners.

Im gonna beat the living hell out of this thing. Honestly, I would prefer the 01 fully loaded Mountaineer. They are in line with the prices of the 97 Eddie Bauers around here anyway. Pretty much the same thing. Its just coming down to what I cannot see that has stopped me from going and buying one. I have a bunch of Explorer and Mountaineer EEC's like I said, and I know every one has a different code. If I remember the pin outs are not all the same either, so unless I rewire, I am stuck tuning what I buy. Im not going to drop a $1000 EEC in a vehicle that blue books under $2k. I will get a tune, but thats as far as I will go with the EEC.

So which one is best? Also, will any handle multiple programs so I can make it act "normal" for inspections time, get better mileage, then just change to the other tune when I want to so it redlines the shift points and screams a little more?

I should know this stuff, but sadly I do not. Thats why Im asking the question. Im focusing on 97's right now, or 01's in my searches until I get a real solid answer on why one is better. I figure it will be one extreme or the other with the years. I doubt anyone is going to come and tell me that a 99 or 2000 is the best one. LOL

Thanks for all your help guys. This site is much more friendly than offroad forums. Some of those are filled with douchebags. I never planned on offroading when I got my Jeep. It was just so much fun and addictive I ended up taking it to the extreme.

 

[Mesozoic]

Currently, all EEC-IV processors are in need of some service; the last one installed in a Ford was 1993. The PCBs were loaded with electrolytic capacitors, which have a very finite lifespan and pretty much everyone I know who still runs a Fox Mustang has had to redo their computer. Polymer e-cap technology exists today and can be used to retrofit the old EEC-IV computers, but the EEC-V stuff comes with them stock. It is far more reliable than an EEC-IV, when comparing circuits. The strategy is much more refined and has more levers for tuning. The diagnostic capabilities are simply a bonus, not the main feature, though.

 

[Highflow50]

I have a 01 mountaineer. Like I said I make 275ish at the crank never had it on a chassis dino. I did have the engine dinoed when I had it ported. The gt40p heads really open up to a cathedral style port kinda like the LS series small block. I have custom comp cam to keep it more like a truck I tow a snowmobile trailer into the mountains. The borg warner awd system robs whp big time. And I doubt it can handle the beating you want to show it. Not saying it can't be done but the clutch is nothe the strongest. As for headers again only 2 brands fit. Best of luck and keep me updated I love a hot rod 5.0.

 

[Dono]

Get the 2001

If its nicest, why not?

You don't need to worry about the returnless fuel system or rails. They will work perfectly for your goals.

The gt40p bbk headers you have will not clear the frame on the explorer.

Raising the power band with a hotter cam might be an issue getting off the line, but you would probably still enjoy it more. Make sure you upgrade springs at the same time.

Also, when cam shopping, try to stick with something with a resulting lca of no less than 112. Go less, and you are running more and more risk of needing tuning. I think factory is 115.

Buy the truck, pick up a cam and springs, and have at it.
If the awd xfer case pukes, go with a 4406 out of a f-150. You sound like you do not lack in mechanical ability.

 

[VR4]

Basically, I just want it to be faster, or at leat as fast as my MKZ. I have an AWD Fully loaded MKZ that I beat a 97 Mustang GT with twice in a row. Kinda embarrassed the guy. Only beat him by half a car length the one time, full car length the second, but still. Thats just an Auto 6cyl up against his stick V8. Only reaoson is because that AWD with traction control distributes the power so well when I floor it completely its doesnt even chirp. Just sticks you back in your seat. If I could get an Explorer or mountaineer to keep up with my MKZ I would be happy. That I have also driven through about 18" of snow without a problem. My Jeep with lockers sucks in the snow for obvious reasons. I just havent gotten a selectable locker for the rear. Once I do that it will be much better.

Only reason I am getting this SUV is because I dont feel like springing for a 4x4 crew cab truck, and am getting rid of my king cab f150 for more interior room with another kid on the way. I have some time before I can buy one. More than anything I am hauling axles and large shop tools like welders, drill presses, etc.I know I can throw sheetrock and lumber on the roof without a problem when the rare occasion comes up. By no means am I trying to build some fancy superfast SUV. Just one that handles well and can keep up with my MKZ.

I love the diagnostics capability of the newer EEC's. But when it comes to reliability, the less bells and whistles the more reliable in my experience. Also, the A9L (stick) and A9P (Auto) EEC's are still highly sought after because of that reliability. Most people run the engine 100% stand alone from the vehicle and waterproof the EEC for creek crossings. The tables in them are easily modified, and you know exactly what will happen when you change something due to how they calculate the fuel to air ratio as well as other things. Its all stuff I can easliy reference. Ford Fuel Injection used to be a great site for that info before they got shut down. I actually have the entire site in PDF form because of how nice it was.

Thats what I have not been able to find out about these newer EEC's, and also things like deleting things I may remove so they do not trigger the CEL. IN PA if it is newer than 95 and the check engine light is not on your good to pass inspection unless your brakes are screaming.

If I found 97-01 explorers and mountaineers all with say 125k miles and the 5.0 AWD, same exact condition, which would be the best candidate to build up just a little bit? If I were to go over 400HP I would do that with a 393. Will that run off of one of these though if dropped in? I know it will bolt up and an old EEC would have no problem. Not sure about these new ones though.

I have gt40p tubular headers sitting on a shelf right now. I believe they are BBK's. Thats first on the list. Second on the list is a higher RPM cam with new springs so I get away from low end torque. Its great for my Jeep, but not going fast. Jeep is where gears come into play due to the tires. I think those changes to an Explorer or Mountaineer would put me where I want to be. If it doesnt, only then would I upgrade the heads. Even then unless I went large on the injectors, the intake should due fine. Wasnt sure about options with those new style injectors though. I know the stock orange 97 style are interchangeable with a ton of different ones all the way to the crazy high lb ford lightning. I can port the lower intake to get a few extra CFM out of it, but they are pretty damn good intakes for being stock.

When I blow the torque converter or trans I will upgrade it, just not before.

I know with a chipped older EEC I can have a few tunes to choose from. Even without a high stall converter I should be able to get some good shift points and performace options at the flip of a switch on the chip itself. I was not sure about these new ones though.

This will be fairly low though. Lower center of gravity. Panhard in the rear to tighten it up. Nothing crazy where I have to worry about speedbumps or snow, just low enough to make the handling better around corners.

Im gonna beat the living hell out of this thing. Honestly, I would prefer the 01 fully loaded Mountaineer. They are in line with the prices of the 97 Eddie Bauers around here anyway. Pretty much the same thing. Its just coming down to what I cannot see that has stopped me from going and buying one. I have a bunch of Explorer and Mountaineer EEC's like I said, and I know every one has a different code. If I remember the pin outs are not all the same either, so unless I rewire, I am stuck tuning what I buy. Im not going to drop a $1000 EEC in a vehicle that blue books under $2k. I will get a tune, but thats as far as I will go with the EEC.

So which one is best? Also, will any handle multiple programs so I can make it act "normal" for inspections time, get better mileage, then just change to the other tune when I want to so it redlines the shift points and screams a little more?

I should know this stuff, but sadly I do not. Thats why Im asking the question. Im focusing on 97's right now, or 01's in my searches until I get a real solid answer on why one is better. I figure it will be one extreme or the other with the years. I doubt anyone is going to come and tell me that a 99 or 2000 is the best one. LOL

Thanks for all your help guys. This site is much more friendly than offroad forums. Some of those are filled with douchebags. I never planned on offroading when I got my Jeep. It was just so much fun and addictive I ended up taking it to the extreme.

I can't comment directly but based on other vehicles I've run I would love to try an sn95. Could be close

 

[Mesozoic]

All EEC-V pinouts are 104 pin, should all be the same. Ford mass produced these vehicles and having custom pinouts would be an expensive change. Sensor hardware definitely changed from vehicle to vehicle, but the calibration generally accomodates for that. For example, my '00 Mounty does not have e-fans. EEC-V support dual independent electric fan control, however. So the low and high speed e-fan outputs have been switched off in the OEM calibration. With the right definition, you can turn them on, adjust the setpoint temperatures, and control dual independent e-fans, though. Another example would be where the cam sync sensor on the '98 and earlier Ex/Mounty were Hall effect type (3-wire). The later model stuff was 2-wire VR sensing. Another switch in the calibration handles that.

Not sure where you're getting $1000 for an EEC, but perhaps the dealer would charge that! I've ordered stuff off of eBay and find they're usually in the $80-120 range. Good luck.

 

[OverkillYJ]

All EEC-V pinouts are 104 pin, should all be the same. Ford mass produced these vehicles and having custom pinouts would be an expensive change. Sensor hardware definitely changed from vehicle to vehicle, but the calibration generally accomodates for that. For example, my '00 Mounty does not have e-fans. EEC-V support dual independent electric fan control, however. So the low and high speed e-fan outputs have been switched off in the OEM calibration. With the right definition, you can turn them on, adjust the setpoint temperatures, and control dual independent e-fans, though. Another example would be where the cam sync sensor on the '98 and earlier Ex/Mounty were Hall effect type (3-wire). The later model stuff was 2-wire VR sensing. Another switch in the calibration handles that.

Not sure where you're getting $1000 for an EEC, but perhaps the dealer would charge that! I've ordered stuff off of eBay and find they're usually in the $80-120 range. Good luck.

Look up Megasquirt. They are just one of many in the $1k range for a custom tuneable EEC. When it comes to custom tuning, thats the best way to go. As for the stock EEC's, they are so undesirable by builders for these motors I have them for about $35 and they dont sell. If I remember correctly they changed the pinout after 97. All Ford EEC-IV have the same pinouts, all EEC-V have the same, etc. Thats as far as my understanding anyway. I havent seen anything to the contrary from the same manufacturer.

Some vehicles you have to physically change the EEC to do what you want. Pull it out, open it, change or disable physical components, then reinstall. Its the reason I avoid any with the factory seal broken.

Here is a good example of why the older ones are so nice. 4 tunes to choose from at the flick of a switch, and they plug right into the EEC. You have to remember the newer you get, the more anti tampering exists due to federal regulations. http://www.ebay.com/itm/88-95-Musta...ash=item5199605079:g:LtUAAOSwuTxV~SPu&vxp=mtr

As for fans, I stick with mechanical and usually change them out for my own vehicle. Had too many electric fans die. No big deal if you live in the boonies, but in the city you cannot always keep it at speed to get home. Mechanical fans have never let me down. Ive heard the argument of "freeing up power" with electric fans. Thats about the most horrible misinformation I have read. Alternator works harder, no free lunch there. Its about as true as perpetual motion. On the highway they turn off, but at the same time on the highway with a mechanical fan the wind helps turn it and lighten the load (which is negligible) anyway. As for custom controlling them, I used little control units based on the incoming coolant temp to turn the fan off and one as needed. They are like $20 and work prefect as long as you waterproof them with some epoxy. Reason being when I liked electrical was for deep water crossings. Wired a fan kill switch in my dash so when I crossed water the fan didn't act like a propeller, or get fried for having power while getting submerged. After years of messing with them, I reverted to mechanical and have not had a problem overheated since. Mechnical going through deep water does tear up water pumps when done repeatedly, but at least I can get it home topping off fluids along the way.

So anyone on here actually own a tuner and regularly tune their own EEC? Find any problems or differences between the model years?

 

[Mesozoic]

I tune all of my own vehicles. I have an EEC-IV based '79 Bronco, EEC-V based '71 Mustang, EEC-IV based '89 5.0L Mustang, an EEC-V based Mountaineer, an '07 Mazda 3, and an '08 Buell XB12Ss motorcycle tuned with TunerPro. Megasquirt is overpriced junk. I'm also a professional embedded systems engineer, my friend runs a company that has licensed Megasquirt to retrofit into UAVs - the code is junk, poorly written, very amateur. He does run a modded MS to power his '64 Falcon with a turbo 302, but it's not nearly as plug and play as the stock Ford ECU stuff. With the EECs you just get a Quarterhorse, potentially pay $25 for a complete definition, and off to the races. Many folks choose to run aftermarket ECUs in Fords, but I think it's for lack of understanding how the Ford EEC works. In my experience, it is far better engineered than any aftermarket ECU and supports a wide range of platforms, as Ford has been designing and evolving EECs via their software department since the 1970s.

 

[OverkillYJ]

Well brand specific units are opinions. I know some guys swear by megasquirt for the track. I also know MSD makes some proprietary ones that I believe only work with their hardware and go over $3k for the complete systems. Those are the other top choice of a lot of people.

Bottom line though. You're obviously familiar with the EEC-IV A9L and probably running at least one of those or an A9P from the amount you just listed. The A9L and A9P have the most aggressive tables ever put out by ford to my knowledge from the factory. I know there are a couple others with the same tables in them with different codes on the outside, but the two I just mentioned are by far the most well known. All the chip does is change that information for what exactly you're running.

So how does the explorer or mountaineer EEC-V compare? Any additional problems, limitations, etc I should know about? Biggest thing for me is NOT having a check engine light on because of modifications. I have never personally run into that problem, but I know a lot of people have. I could just kill the light, but I do like it for diagnostic reasons. Saves me time on repairs.

The thing with the later model that made me create this thread in the first place is the damn emissions regulations being the biggest reason Ford made changes to the 5.0 in these SUV's over the life of them. In my experience, changes for emission reasons are never good for performance.

Also, if you build that much, you know exactly what I am talking about. Last I heard they were working on exemptions for track cars because of even tougher laws effecting them as well.

I like the 01 the most for the body and options, as long as I can do whatever I want to its engine. The 97's I like because of the older style components under the hood I can get my hands on more easily and cheaper. Also, they interchange with more vehicles.

If youre telling me that I can build HP and torque with a 01 as easily and cheaply as I can with a 97, then that is a simple decision.

Currently Im just trying to find one under 125k miles.