Contemplating 5.0L rebuild for mild performance boost | Ford Explorer - Ford Ranger Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free! This box and some ads will disappear once registered!

  • Holiday Special! - 2 for 1 Elite Explorer sale!

    Right now you can purchase an Elite Explorer membership for $20 and receive a two year membership! If you have an existing Elite membership contact me by PM and I will upgrade your account manually.

    Click Here to start your membership and get rid of the ads!

Contemplating 5.0L rebuild for mild performance boost

Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
I'm considering building a fresh 302 for my '00 Mountaineer and have some good hard parts on my shelf that I'm contemplating using. Not sure if it will be a good build however, mainly because of the heads.
  • '93 5.0 Mustang block, seasoned - was putting down close to 500 hp with a blower at one point. Glyptal in the valley.
  • Stock '93 5.0 crank
  • Stock '93 5.0 rods, but shotpeened and polished, as well as fitted with ARP Wave-loc rod bolts.
  • Federal Mogul forged flat top pistons - I think it was 9.5:1 with 60cc heads.
  • World Products Windsor Sr. cast iron heads, heavily ported, 2.02/1.60 valves, 1.6 ratio roller rockers and studs with guideplates.
  • Comp Cams Xtreme Energy 35-320-8 cam
  • Everything else, including exhaust and intake, bone stock.
Would the stock exhaust manifolds bolt up to the WP Windsor heads? That's a dual pattern head...
 


Holiday Special! Join the Elite Explorers $20 for 2 years! Gets rid of the ads!

Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links, can add their own profile photo, upload photo attachments in all forums, and Media Gallery, create and save more private conversations, and more. Join Today. Your support is greatly appreciated.




rabbit91

Well-Known Member
Joined
January 25, 2011
Messages
664
Reaction score
16
City, State
Surrey
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 LIMITED V8 SAS 35s
Subscribing
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
I spoke with my trusted and very experienced machinist... he says that the GT40P heads will offer better performance given the exhaust and intake restrictions I'm dealing with (stock).
 




Turdle

Lowrider
Staff member
Moderator
Elite Explorer
Joined
June 16, 2003
Messages
29,712
Reaction score
1,203
City, State
Humboldt, KS
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 Mounty
Something tells me "Maybe". I believe the header bolts on the p heads are slightly off center ( top to bottom) If you bolt the p manifolds to the WP heads there may be some protrusion, however you might be able to clearance the manifold material and get it out of the way.

Your heavy cast manifolds should flow pretty good. Once you take them off and get a look I think you'll see a lot of volume inside. They have much more room than the tubular style have.

Edit. We were typing at the same moment-lol

You will probably be better using the p heads.
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
I think I'm going to stick with the existing engine, but will stroke it. You can get a Scat 347 stroker kit with forged pistons for under $800. Complete with crank, H-beam rods, pistons, bearings, etc. Insane. Back in the day that stuff used to cost at least double that. The stock Explorer engine is outfitted with great heads and intake already, as well as ignition, that it's really pointless to even bother replacing them for only marginal gains in a daily driver application.

I have a question about oil pans and cams, though. Will an '89-93 5.0L Mustang oil pan fit the Explorer chassis or does it require its own special fitment? Also, what is a good cam that will pass emissions, but provide a measurable boost in torque and horsepower (off the shelf, of course)?
 








vroomzoomboom

Elite Canuck STOCK SUCKS!
Elite Explorer
Joined
January 22, 2007
Messages
9,802
Reaction score
1,073
City, State
selkirk, manitoba
Year, Model & Trim Level
98 supercharged 347 sport




Centaurus5.0

Explorer Addict
Joined
April 15, 2016
Messages
1,077
Reaction score
333
Year, Model & Trim Level
96'
There are many crazy deals out there right now. This one too...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/152328260542?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

There was another supercharged one in Cali that was going for $2,500 on CL that sold.

I'd just look for used go-fast parts and put something together along with what you already have Mesozoic. Start buying new performance parts and you'll soon have way too much into it.

With all the deals out there, you could build one of the fasted Ex's on the road for free just by buying deals and parting them out and keeping the good parts.

Just an idea.
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
Honestly, I'm not really into a supercharged engine in my Mounty. I have an '89 5.0L Mustang with a Kenne Bell 2.2L Blowzilla on it and it's a complete monster. However, I use my Mounty mainly for family trips and daily driving duty. One thing I've noticed with the supercharged engine is that the fuel consumption is much higher, even while cruising at part throttle. With a bit higher compression, around 10:1 for example, I bet the Mounty would get better cruising mileage in addition to a nice crisp throttle response and more torque. Just trying to refresh the engine with a bit more torque so I don't have to unlock the converter and/or downshift when climbing long grades and going through the mountains.
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
So does anyone know for sure whether stock '00 Mounty/Ex exhaust manifolds will work with a World Windsor Sr./Dart dual exhaust bolt pattern? Getting ready to refresh these heads and don't have a set of manifolds laying around to verify fit.
 




Turdle

Lowrider
Staff member
Moderator
Elite Explorer
Joined
June 16, 2003
Messages
29,712
Reaction score
1,203
City, State
Humboldt, KS
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 Mounty
I think the bolt location is the issue when comparing the 40-p heads to earlier patterns. One has the bolts centered on the sides of the ports, the other is moved up about 1/8". The result would be port protrusion ( header flange partially blocking the port)

The spark plug angles may cause issues also.
 




VR4

Well-Known Member
Joined
August 10, 2015
Messages
237
Reaction score
17
City, State
vancouver, wa
Year, Model & Trim Level
01 explorer
Manifold gaskets are the same on all 5.0 explorers. I'm pretty sure I've seen others run p headers on non p heads without much issue other than the known spark plug angle
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
Does anyone know if a Fox oil pan will fit a stock Explorer/Mountaineer? I've got a Canton 7 quart street pan I'd like to use on the rebuild, but not sure if it will clear everything.
 








roscoe 0202

Well-Known Member
Joined
February 3, 2014
Messages
340
Reaction score
76
City, State
salt lake city utah
Year, Model & Trim Level
1999 explorer sport
if those heads are drilled for straight across bolts or p head pattern they should bolt on
roscoe
 




Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
17
City, State
Tucson, AZ
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Mercury Mountaineer
This evening I checked a set of manifolds from a '99 5.0L Explorer against the World heads and it's a no go. The bolt patterns do not match at all.
 




MetricMuscle

Elite Explorer
Joined
July 8, 2018
Messages
73
Reaction score
8
City, State
Knoxville, TN
Year, Model & Trim Level
2001 Eddie Bauer AWD 5.0
Your heavy cast manifolds should flow pretty good.

Are the OE cast exhaust manifolds good for mild performance upgrades? Are they plenty for GT40P heads in like new OE condition?

What gains are folks seeing with Torque Monster headers on stock or slightly modified engines?
 




97-5.0

Active Member
Joined
July 6, 2012
Messages
98
Reaction score
8
City, State
Hamilton, Ontario
Year, Model & Trim Level
1997 5.0 AWD
I remember reading a member here ported the cast manifolds slightly, nothing crazy, and he noticed a slight improvement

Ill be port matching mine from top to bottom and opening the top and bottom of the manifold ports,
Can't grind the manifold bolt indents much without going thru the wall, so try making more room to go around the dents to improve flow

If your serious about wanting more then get torque monsters....I would but the Canadian dollar sucks so they would cost me over $1,300 cdn
 




MetricMuscle

Elite Explorer
Joined
July 8, 2018
Messages
73
Reaction score
8
City, State
Knoxville, TN
Year, Model & Trim Level
2001 Eddie Bauer AWD 5.0
I remember reading a member here ported the cast manifolds slightly, nothing crazy, and he noticed a slight improvement

Ill be port matching mine from top to bottom and opening the top and bottom of the manifold ports,
Can't grind the manifold bolt indents much without going thru the wall, so try making more room to go around the dents to improve flow

If your serious about wanting more then get torque monsters....I would but the Canadian dollar sucks so they would cost me over $1,300 cdn

Have you seen this about the GT40P exhaust port?

While exploring the exit with a threaded wand, I happened
to discover that the port exit did not like having the clear
plastic velocity tube moved to close to the roof of the port.
If I moved the tube any closer than about 1/8" to the top of
the port, the pressure sensor on the 'Flowbee' would rise,
indicating a reduction in flow. I will keep this in mind when
doing anything to the port roof.

Ex_thread1.jpg


While exploring the port exit with a velocity probe, I
discovered something that I really wasn't expecting. While
the upper left side of the exit has a very strong
velocity, the lower right hand corner has a very low
velocity. While this may not seem so unusual, what I
really didn't expect was to find that the lower right
corner was actually producing a slight vacuum at .1"
and .2" lift! When I applied a threaded wand to this
area, sure enough, the air was moving INTO the
lower right corner of the port exit. I tested a stock,
untouched, port and found the same results.

velocityprobe.jpg


Seems to me this is why Ford located the mounting holes where they did, so as to move the exhaust manifold up where the exhaust is flowing out of the port. The guy doing this research left the width of the exhaust port alone as well as the floor location. Might actually be ok if the manifold flange covered up a little bit of the bottom of the exhaust port.

Here is the website if you haven't read it before.
Porting GT40P Exhaust Port
 


Holiday Special! Join the Elite Explorers $20 for 2 years! Gets rid of the ads!

Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links, can add their own profile photo, upload photo attachments in all forums, and Media Gallery, create and save more private conversations, and more. Join Today. Your support is greatly appreciated.




palavine1951

Elite Explorer
Joined
July 21, 2018
Messages
63
Reaction score
9
City, State
Kansas City, Mo
Year, Model & Trim Level
2002 Ford Explorer Sport
I have mocked up Windsor jr heads with maximizer headers and the stock exhaust manifold and the stock manifolds may need alittle opening on the top and bottom but very little. The Maximizers have big enough ports to accommodate Windsor Jr heads. The bolt pattern is raised about a 1/4 to 3/8ths of an inch higher on the both exhausts manifolds but they still open up larger than the port.
 




Top