Contemplating 5.0L rebuild for mild performance boost

[Josh P]

I never owned one of those, I was too broke and learned on my own, first my riding lawn mower($50), then my first car(R&R the C4, then the 4V engine swap), then the next car etc. The manuals I learned about at a few friend's places. I thought they were probably useful but I had done fine without them, so I never actually got one. I had a 1st gen Explorer manual given to me by a customer who had sold his truck. I didn't need it but it was a nice thought, and I gave it to a friend's dad who had a 92.

Nothing beats a factory manual, if you need one. The Chilton book was given to me with the truck. When I rebuilt the engine, I found it to be useless so it went in the trash and I got the factory one.

 

[CDW6212R]

I also have a friend with the factory manuals for a 1990 Mark VII, but not the huge shop manual. Those are large, one is for the electrical etc, they a take a lot of time to dig through, and you don't want to make them filthy near the car.

 

[Blown]

No, no you can't do that, all 6 tranny bolts is great! I have hated on those tranny bolts!!!

 

[Mesozoic]

Thanks for all the info about what it’ll take to extract. I think I’m going to plan to remove the transmission first because I need to deliver it by itself to my friend’s shop for rebuild and upgrades. It’s going to take a few days to accomplish all of that, for sure, so need to get it out in advance of basically doing anything else.

The engine is modified considerably, but the only issues I see include:

• Plumbing of the vacuum lines and PCV since the valve covers have been replaced with some aluminum parts that do not have any fittings installed to support crankcase breathing or even a fill hole.
• The water pump has been replaced with a Flowkooler unit, but it just looks like a GMB part with an anodized impeller from Flowkooler, hopefully no reliability issues with that.
• I’m expecting that the OEM 65mm throttle body and elbow will bolt on directly to the Performer RPM II intake without issue.
• OEM ‘P’ headers were already test fitted on the stand with the new heads, but not sure if the spark plugs angles will be a problem or not, yet.
• I’ve tuned the ECM using CalEdit and a Tweecer RT - Mike Glover has been very helpful in exposing PIDs in the tune that were not previously available. Things like the injector tuning and the overall VE estimate for the engine were updated among various other things, but it remains to be seen if the engine will even start with my tune!

My workspace with telescoping tranny jack visible:

 

[410Fortune]

Excellent!

If you are rebuilding the trans then yea drop that sob first
Removing the trans crossmember will make access to the transfer case Bolts much easier.

With the amount of work and mods you are planning I would just remove the front seats and center console (20 min) pull the carpet back and expose the floor access panel. This will give you direct access to the 02 sensor wiring on top of the trans as well as the top t case bolts

Have your trans guy open up the awd t case also and have a look

Have you considered a better transfer case upgrade? We run the 4406 often here which pretty much bolts up and gives you 2wd 4hi and 4 low it’s available in electric shift or manual shift

I have run tall aftermarket valve covers before, the pcv is a non issue with the gt40 explorer lower intake because the pcv is at the back of the intake. You will simply need to add an oil fill for your covers to work, no other holes needed

 

[Blown]

Nice work space, lift, etc.

My one rig is my daily driver and mild wheeler to get out. I am going to do the t-case swap and may lock the rear. However, if I had my old Bronc this rig would stay AWD for fun and winter highways. My opinion, so hey save me the swap and lend me your 400 cubic inch fuel injected, guessing - Tweecer tuned, 79 Bronc?

Good luck as always but looking at your stuff/history you got this and it's made easier here. It will be nice, following along.

 

[410Fortune]

Agreed!!

I just add, where awd is fun in the snow a true 50/50 4wd high range is better
Just sayin! I’ve driven both and grew up in the snow. The 70/30 split of the awd, once the rear end gets loose there is no bringing it back, with truck 4wd that doesn’t happen

 

[Blown]

That's true, but I thought breaking the rear end loose was half the fun! Yah, not at speed.

I want to come see you for a T-case swap and cam swap. I am sure it would go well with your help. I might need help picking-up pieces after cam swap and fixin' it back-up strongerer. Your knowledge/experience is great.

Let me whoop-out my knowledge - Skiing since I was 8, driving in it since was old enough and now I am 59. As a season passholder I drive blizzards and iced roads.
There are advantages/disadvantages to both. I have four wheel drifted, at slow speed with 4WD. It slipped when it bound-up. I have never had a break in traction from AWD binding around a corner. I like also like the dry traction feel of ripping/accelerating around a corner with AWD. It just sticks and goes!
I can also say I only got stuck in snow a few times with real 4WD (lockers front and rear), no way AWD would have pulled through some snow/ice I've wheeled! I want the advantages low range back for even light wheeling around here for engine braking and crawling. I also like the idea of 2 wheel high for burn-outs, err I mean towing my little camper and getting a bit more mileage. The selectable t-case will get more power to the ground VS AWD, if you can keep from spinning them tars. I hope this helps cover basic advantages/disadvantages??? We have determined about a 25% loss in power through AWD. What about the swap? Is 2High only about 15%-17% loss???

 

[Mesozoic]

I'm keeping the AWD, although I did look into swapping in the 4406. I use the truck for family roadtrips, including light offroad to reach campsites, but really a lot of highway and driving on snowy roads when we go skiing, etc. I'm not really after the maximum power, but I'm looking forward to having plenty of it when I need to maintain speed climbing mountain grades with the truck fully loaded with occupants and their gear.

 

[Blown]

I'm keeping the AWD, although I did look into swapping in the 4406. I use the truck for family roadtrips, including light offroad to reach campsites, but really a lot of highway and driving on snowy roads when we go skiing, etc. I'm not really after the maximum power, but I'm looking forward to having plenty of it when I need to maintain speed climbing mountain grades with the truck fully loaded with occupants and their gear.

So you want to keep the Bronc then? Ha, ha, love it, miss it and no longer have one. My 90 went pretty much wherever I pointed it.

The Rocky Mtns where formed during the Mesozoic. I do like getting at least 15 mpg and plenty of power to pull mountains at altitude.

 

[CDW6212R]

That's true, but I thought breaking the rear end loose was half the fun! Yah, not at speed.

I want to come see you for a T-case swap and cam swap. I am sure it would go well with your help. I might need help picking-up pieces after cam swap and fixin' it back-up strongerer. Your knowledge/experience is great.

Let me whoop-out my knowledge - Skiing since I was 8, driving in it since was old enough and now I am 59. As a season passholder I drive blizzards and iced roads.
There are advantages/disadvantages to both. I have four wheel drifted, at slow speed with 4WD. It slipped when it bound-up. I have never had a break in traction from AWD binding around a corner. I like also like the dry traction feel of ripping/accelerating around a corner with AWD. It just sticks and goes!
I can also say I only got stuck in snow a few times with real 4WD (lockers front and rear), no way AWD would have pulled through some snow/ice I've wheeled! I want the advantages low range back for even light wheeling around here for engine braking and crawling. I also like the idea of 2 wheel high for burn-outs, err I mean towing my little camper and getting a bit more mileage. The selectable t-case will get more power to the ground VS AWD, if you can keep from spinning them tars. I hope this helps cover basic advantages/disadvantages??? We have determined about a 25% loss in power through AWD. What about the swap? Is 2High only about 15%-17% loss???

The AWD is my choice too for the all street I need it for, and the power for rain traction etc.

BTW, there is an AWD with a low gear choice, I might look into that when I see if a NP149 can be altered to work. New Process made those for all the large GM SUV's of 2001-2006, and in similar years there was a two speed version that came out earlier in Grand Cherokee's maybe? I forgot the details, someone suggested it and I looked just briefly. It was a NP 247 and I don't yet know if it has a simple shift lever or what. If it was equally as strong and the same to build, I'd be interested. I have to be able to make a trans extension to mate those AWD's to a 6R80, plus change the input shaft to a 31 spline shaft.

 

[Josh P]

Keep the AWD but swap in a case that allows true 2wd.

 

[Mesozoic]

It would be nice to be able to disengage the front axle for dry street conditions.

My friend just handed me a factory AOD pan that apparently fits the 4R. He says it will come in handy when pulling the trans because it’s completely flat on the bottom, unlike the 4R.

 

[CDW6212R]

Keep the AWD but swap in a case that allows true 2wd.

That NP 247 I noted uses not a viscous clutch, but what they call a progressive coupling. That sealed device act like the VC, but it has clutches and a small pump inside. It's supposed to allow free wheeling 2WD, until it senses a difference in speeds, thus forcing the pump to push fluid into the clutches, engaging the front output shaft. That might work great, I hadn't found mention of strength yet, just operation and possible issues to watch for. Dirty fluid and 1/4" of difference between tires will kill those also, just like the VC AWD. Those progressive couplings are scarce right now too.

The NP 149 seems to have a right now available VC, and the good reputation for taking high power. I don't know enough about that NP 247 yet, the output shaft is much different also, I saw that before too.

 

[CDW6212R]

It would be nice to be able to disengage the front axle for dry street conditions.

My friend just handed me a factory AOD pan that apparently fits the 4R. He says it will come in handy when pulling the trans because it’s completely flat on the bottom, unlike the 4R.

The BW 4406 gets you true 2WD, but the various AWD or kind of(NP 247) would not.

I think the AOD pans are enough different they will leak on a 4R, and the filter is likely the wrong depth to. I know they made a flat AOD pan, I can't recall what they came on though, probably really early 80's model. Mine all had the small bump on the bottom, 1985-1992 models.

You should probably get a deep aftermarket 4R70W pan anyway, either the short one or the 2-3 quart version. I have both, one on my 98 truck now, and a short one I plan to use under my Mark VII. Prices have jumped, I got mine for just about $200 each, now most are $275 or more. Those are all strong AL models, flat of course, and hold a little more ATF.

 

[Josh P]

That NP 247 I noted uses not a viscous clutch, but what they call a progressive coupling. That sealed device act like the VC, but it has clutches and a small pump inside. It's supposed to allow free wheeling 2WD, until it senses a difference in speeds, thus forcing the pump to push fluid into the clutches, engaging the front output shaft. That might work great, I hadn't found mention of strength yet, just operation and possible issues to watch for. Dirty fluid and 1/4" of difference between tires will kill those also, just like the VC AWD. Those progressive couplings are scarce right now too.

The NP 149 seems to have a right now available VC, and the good reputation for taking high power. I don't know enough about that NP 247 yet, the output shaft is much different also, I saw that before too.

There is a NP249 which is a 2 range version of the NP149.

 

[CDW6212R]

There is a NP249 which is a 2 range version of the NP149.

Noted, I saw the NP247 and NP249 mentioned as cousins, most parts available looked like they fit both.

I only saw one service posting site about the functioning of the NP 247, those for a 1999-04 Grand Cherokee. I'd prefer if they had a VC I think, I'm not sure yet which would last longer. At $400-$550 it would matter which is prone to wearing out first, yet to decide.

 

[Mesozoic]

I think the AOD pans are enough different they will leak on a 4R, and the filter is likely the wrong depth to. I know they made a flat AOD pan, I can't recall what they came on though, probably really early 80's model. Mine all had the small bump on the bottom, 1985-1992 models.

You should probably get a deep aftermarket 4R70W pan anyway, either the short one or the 2-3 quart version. I have both, one on my 98 truck now, and a short one I plan to use under my Mark VII. Prices have jumped, I got mine for just about $200 each, now most are $275 or more. Those are all strong AL models, flat of course, and hold a little more ATF.

I already have a TCI deep finned aluminum pan on my 4R, along with a B&M shift kit. The intent of the steel AOD pan was to facilitate removal and reinstallation without damaging the aluminum pan.

 

[Blown]

New axles, seals, unit bearings, and locking hubs = expensive but I guess there is a conversion to manual locking hubs: How To: AVM Hub Conversion, 2006 Ranger I am not sure it is worth it.

 

[allmyEXes]

"Subscribing"