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

  • Register Today It's free!

Contemplating 5.0L rebuild for mild performance boost

Mesozoic

Well-Known Member
Joined
October 3, 2015
Messages
382
Reaction score
149
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.

EDIT: This combination rips! The heads are definitely not any detriment at all, the engine produces a ton of torque everywhere.

EDIT: Final assembly details below:
  • '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, polished
    • Block decked, line honed, honed w/brushes - did not require overbore
    • ARP main studs 154-5401
    • New cam bearings (Durabond F-18)
    • Clevite rod bearings, CB634P
    • Clevite main bearings, MS-590P
    • 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 - compression ratio is 9.2:1 with 65cc heads.
    • Childs piston ring set 10472HG-5
  • World Products Windsor Sr. cast iron heads, ported, polished chambers, bowls blended, port-matched to Felpro 1262 gaskets
    • Comp Cams Ultra Pro Magnum steel 1.6 ratio roller rockers, 1631-16
    • ARP rocker 3/8" studs (134-7101) and guideplates
    • New SI Premier series valves (2.02" PRV-2022/1.60" - PRV-2023), new cast iron valve guides, seals
    • New valve seats, SB1671E-1N
    • Heads flowed 300/200 cfm intake/exhaust @ 0.600" lift
    • ARP head studs w/7/16" nut kit and washers (200-8333 and 200-8532)
  • Summit Racing E303+ cam, pn 8900
  • Ford Racing 6500-R302H hydraulic roller lifters (hope they don't fail)
  • EPW billet timing chain set 08-2023T9R
  • Comp 776-16 pushrods
  • Edelbrock Performer RPM II intake manifold
    • Lower is fully ported, port matched to Felpro 1262
    • Upper is CNC ported
    • Stock 65mm elbow and throttle body
    • 90mm LMAF
    • Ford LU24A injectors
    • Holley (Walbro) 190 lph pump upgrade
  • TorqueMonster headers
  • Stock downpipe w/cats into Magnaflow dual inlet muffler
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





Subscribing
 






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).
 






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.
 






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)?
 


















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.
 






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.
 






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.
 






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.
 






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
 






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.
 






it wont. the pan will either hit the cross member, or the power steering rack
 






if those heads are drilled for straight across bolts or p head pattern they should bolt on
roscoe
 






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.
 






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?
 






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
 






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
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





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.
 






Back
Top