Next project vehicle?

I want a mid-size 4 door SUV to drive when my 2000 Sport is being modified. I was planning to purchase a 2000 4 door Explorer with the SOHC V6 to take advantage of what I've learned, spare parts and my SCT PCM programming software package. However, I realized that at my age my next project vehicle will probably be my last. I've always been partial to DOHC engines since I purchased a 1958 Jaguar XK-150 in 1965. A recent thread: '02 limited 4.0 to 4.6 dohc swap has captured my interest. I didn't know that the Aviator came with a DOHC V8 engine and was based on the 3rd generation Explorer. Since I don't like the looks of the Aviator front or the 500 lb weight disadvantage I've become very interested in swapping an Aviator engine into an Explorer. My long term objective would be a fairly quiet rear wheel drive 3rd Gen with a DOHC 4.6L V8 stroked to 5.0/5.1L and possibly forced induction.

I'm aware that the 2002 Explorer is probably the most complained about Explorer ever. Most of the complaints are associated with transmission failures. I could use some help researching which 3rd generation Explorer would be the best project vehicle.

I think the 5R55W and the 5R55S were possible transmissions. Were both used with the 4.6L? If so, is one more robust than the other?

Which transmission was installed in the Aviator with the DOHC 4.6L?

I've started another thread about the planned engine: DOHC 4.6L V8 build

 

[2000StreetRod]

I purchased a small engine leveler from Harbor Freight to pull the engine.

It has brackets on the end of each chain that will bolt to the modular Ford lifting holes located in front of the driver side exhaust manifold and aft of the passenger side exhaust manifold.

Due to the position of the bolt holes the leveler has more effect on side to side tilt than front to rear tilt. I should have purchased the larger leveler for the 90 degree V8. The leveler takes the weight and the chains bolted to the alternator mount tabs raise the front to match the axis of the transmission input shaft. I installed lengths of pipe insulation on the leveler lower chains to prevent scratching the valve covers.

 

[CDW6212R]

I appreciate the ingenuity, it's often we have to create combinations of objects to complete a task. I have a good friend with a large collection of "junk" he accumulated over decades of working on cars, most from his father. At a glance a typical person thinks it's all junk, but he and I have done so much with random objects. I've learned a bunch from my friend, I've got a small amount of odd stuff for things like that. I try to to work with him a lot, because he has better junk than I do.

 

[2000StreetRod]

I couldn't find a 3/8 NPT to 5/8 hose barb 45 degree fitting for the firewall to engine heater water return so I settled for a straight one.

The part is Dorman #56152 which the package states is 1/2" NPT but the thread fits. I'll have to kluge something for hose connection to the firewall.

 

[2000StreetRod]

Today I began installing the DOHC engine.

The first problem I encountered is the distance between the motor mount brackets is about 1/2 inch less than the width of the oil pan mounting lip on the block. Tomorrow I'll raise the engine about 1 inch and then using the leveler tilt the block so the driver side is lower than the passenger side. Then I may be able to shift the block toward the passenger side and lower the driver side below the lip. Then shift the block toward the driver side and lower the passenger side.
The other issue is the lack of clearance between the passenger side valve cover and the A/C tube.

If I disconnect the tube mounting clamp I should be able to position the tube enough outward for it to clear the valve cover while lowering the block into position. It looks like the heater control valve assembly clearance will not be a problem.

 

[2000StreetRod]

There is adequate clearance after removing the A/C tube mounting bracket nut, lifting and pulling the assembly outboard, and then tying in place.

My idea of tilting the block lower on the driver side, lowering the engine, and then leveling the engine worked uneventfully. I had to adjust the turnbuckles to raise the front of the engine to get the flexplate parallel to the face of the transmission housing. During the tilting and lowering process I had to keep checking the exhaust manifold mounting studs to prevent from hanging up on the downpipe inlets. I forgot to remove the torque converter nuts inspection plug from the block so I had to do that while under the vehicle. I remembered to rotate the torque converter so one of the adapter mounting studs would be in the inspection opening but I forgot to rotate the crankshaft so one of the flexplate torque converter adapter mounting holes would be in the inspection opening. It may be difficult to rotate the flexplate using the harmonic balancer retaining nut with the engine hanging from the chains.

 

[CDW6212R]

You are putting that in alone, well, great job. It's all doable, but one person has to take it slower and more carefully due to the high weight and danger. I'm sure you've got it okay, but have a back up plan if you need another pair of hands, or have a phone on you all the time. Take it easy, it all looks very good.

 

[2000StreetRod]

That's good advice Don. I dislike working under the vehicle but when I do I always install 2 pairs of jack stands, have the hydraulic floor jack within arm's reach and my cell phone on me. I've tested my crane several times by suspending an engine overnight to check for any drop in height. The load leveler and the turnbuckles give me excellent control of front to back and side to side tilt. The engine is only about 1/2 inch above the motor mount brackets that will catch it if a chain breaks. It should be obvious that the time its taking me to do this job proves that I'm going slowly.

 

[CDW6212R]

I know you well enough by countless posts that you are as careful as a person can be. That's key, nothing is perfect but we do what we can. Now if I saw pairs of cinder blocks under the front of the truck, I'd know something isn't right.

 

[2000StreetRod]

Docking the engine to the transmission was uneventful but tedious and time consuming. It was more difficult than for my 4.0L SOHC V6. The 4.6L access hole for the torque converter nuts is smaller than the 4.0L starter motor hole. Also, once the rear of the flexplate is aft of the face of the transmission housing the studs on the torque converter adapter are no longer visible. My torque converter was fully aft on the transmission shaft for the engine docking. The process would be easier if the torque converter adapter studs were forward of the face of the transmission housing to simplify aligning the studs with the flexplate holes. My process is as follows:

1. Rotate the crankshaft with the harmonic balancer retaining nut until one of the holes in the flexplate that mounts to the torque converter adapter stud is centered in the access hole in the block.
2. Rotate the torque converter adapter until one of the mounting studs will be centered in the access hole in the block.
3. Position the block in front of the transmission housing and adjust the forward to aft tilt so the face of the flexplate is parallel to the face of the transmission housing.
4. Position the block using the crane and leveler so the two block to transmission housing guide bushings are aligned with the transmission housing.
5. Align the transmission adapter stud with the flexplate hole. If the stud is above the flexplate hole place your finger thru the large hole above the small hole (red arrow in photo below) and push the stud downward.

If the stud is below the small hole, position something flat and thin between the flexplate face and the transmission housing face to push the stud upward. I used a small jeweler's screwdriver to keep the stud centered in the hole.
6. Alternately from side to side use transmission housing to block bolts to pull the guide bushings into the transmission housing. This should only require a few lb-ft of torque. More than that indicates something is binding. The studs may not be aligned correctly or the flexplate may not be parallel to the transmission housing. Continue tightening the bolts until the block face is seated against the transmission housing.
7. Start a nut on the torque converter adapter stud. I don't like the locknuts Ford uses. I prefer a thicker nut with less rounded outside face. So I purchased four M10-1.0 nuts from AutoZone. I will use medium strength thread lock when I torque the nuts to specification. Since the torque converter was fully recessed in the transmission housing and the flexplate is thicker than stock only one or two threads of the stud were exposed on the flexplate. I found that the threads on the nut were closer to the face on one side than the other. So I was able to start the nut with my hand and carefully tightened the nut pulling the adapter forward.
8. Rotate the crankshaft 90 degrees clockwise and start another nut. Repeat until all nuts are started.
9. Tighten a nut until snug and then rotate crankshaft 90 degrees clockwise while checking for any binding. Repeat until all nuts are snug.
10. Torque a nut to specification if using Ford locknuts or remove nut, add thread lock to nut and then torque to specification. Repeat until all nuts are torqued to specification.
11. Insert transmission to block bolt and torque to specification. Repeat until all bolts are torqued to specification.

 

[2000StreetRod]

The DOHC V8 is finally mounted in place.

I installed new bolts with larger hex heads in the engine mount to block brackets. With the upper intake manifold removed, I laid folded blankets to act as padding and then sat on top of the block to tighten the top two transmission to engine bolts. The motor mount upper and lower nuts and upper through bolt have been torqued to specification. I still need to torque the flexplate nuts.
I've sprayed the EGR tube compression fitting and pipe to exhaust manifold adapter fitting with P B Blaster every day for two weeks. I still haven't been able to loosen the two fittings using a medium depth 6 point 1/2 inch drive socket and a 15 inch adjustable wrench being struck with my 4 lb hand sledge hammer.

I guess the next thing to try is to heat the compression fitting. I can buy a new adapter fitting but the Aviator EGR tube is no longer sold by Ford. The salvage yards just cut them off because they are so much trouble to loosen.

 

[Rick]

Now there's some eye candy

 

[2000StreetRod]

I ran into problems when trying to install the Explorer starter. The housing around the starter teeth interferes with the flexplate. Below are photos of my Explorer type of starter.

The interference with the flexplate occurs at the 2 o'clock to 7 o'clock positions in the above photo. I'm confident that I didn't install the flexplate incorrectly unless the sticker on the flexplate stating "engine side" was on the wrong side. I suspect the problem is due to the thicker flexplate and a different offset. I did some cursory part number comparisons and learned that the Explorer and Aviator starters have the same part numbers. I also learned that the Mustang Mach 1 and GT have the same part numbers but different than the Explorer/Aviator. The photos below show the Mustang starter type.

Both starter types have 12 teeth and rotate clockwise but I need to do more research before buying one to try. I want to confirm the flexplate number of teeth on the Mustangs are the same as my flexplate.

 

[Rick]

Ahh, the joys of hotrodding and making the bits and pieces work together.

 

[jd4242]

I ran into problems when trying to install the Explorer starter. The housing around the starter teeth interferes with the flexplate. Below are photos of my Explorer type of starter.
View attachment 158362
View attachment 158363
The interference with the flexplate occurs at the 2 o'clock to 7 o'clock positions in the above photo. I'm confident that I didn't install the flexplate incorrectly unless the sticker on the flexplate stating "engine side" was on the wrong side. I suspect the problem is due to the thicker flexplate and a different offset. I did some cursory part number comparisons and learned that the Explorer and Aviator starters have the same part numbers. I also learned that the Mustang Mach 1 and GT have the same part numbers but different than the Explorer/Aviator. The photos below show the Mustang starter type.
View attachment 158364
View attachment 158365
Both starter types have 12 teeth and rotate clockwise but I need to do more research before buying one to try. I want to confirm the flexplate number of teeth on the Mustangs are the same as my flexplate.

Any updates ?

 

[2000StreetRod]

Edit: I confirmed that the Mach 1 ring gear has 164 teeth. The Explorer ring gear thickness is 0.375 inches while the Hays 12-071 flexplate ring gear is 0.395 inches thick. The difference is only 0.02 inches which is much less than the excess length of the starter housing. I suspect that the Mustang flexplates/flywheels have a different offset than the Explorer/Aviator.

For the Explorer the actual distance from the starter mounting facing to the aft face of the gear is 0.9195 inches. But the starter gear housing contacts the flexplate about 0.25 inches too soon. It may be due to one of the rib supports in the starter housing buy I don't see how. I'll try to find a Mustang starter in stock at one of the local auto parts places to make some measurements. I may have to fabricate a spacer plate even for a Mustang starter.

 

[boominXplorer]

Your going to get it! I'll check my starter pile to see if I can help. I've got crown vic, navigator, ford e series van and explorer 3 bolt starters to name a few. An 06+ starter from a 6r60 might do the trick

 

[2000StreetRod]

Working on my back under the vehicle can be confusing to me and I made some errors in my previously posted calculations. This morning I went to Advance Auto Parts and examined the Mustang GT/Mach 1/Cobra starters they had in stock. They had a rebuilt one (Carquest 3221S and a new one Carquest 3221SN) with the only difference being a new case and $28. I purchased the new one.

The length of the gear teeth is 0.60 inches but when retracted is recessed some in the housing mounting face. The throw (fully extended) is 0.47 inches 1.11 inches from the housing mounting face. The bolt pattern was identical to the Explorer starter. The diameter of the lip and the mounting face flange were identical to the Explorer. I test fit the starter. The cutout in the dirt plate was suitable and the starter seated fine. I temporarily installed the 2 easier bolts with no problem. I'm confident that there is adequate clearance between the ring gear teeth and the starter teeth when the gear is retracted. I'm a little concerned about an adequate depth of engagement of the starter teeth with the ring gear teeth when the gear is fully extended. I'm beginning to suspect that the Mustangs do not use a dirt plate which reduces the depth of engagement. The stock ring depth is 0.375 inches and the Hayes ring gear depth is 0.395 inches. The dirt plate is 0.078 inches thick or 21% of the stock ring gear depth. I've removed the Mustang starter to attempt to obtain more accurate measurements of the ring gear distance from the bellhousing. I want to accurately calculate the depth of starter gear engagement.

 

[jd4242]

Working on my back under the vehicle can be confusing to me and I made some errors in my previously posted calculations. This morning I went to Advance Auto Parts and examined the Mustang GT/Mach 1/Cobra starters they had in stock. They had a rebuilt one (Carquest 3221S and a new one Carquest 3221SN) with the only difference being a new case and $28. I purchased the new one.
View attachment 158604
The length of the gear teeth is 0.60 inches but when retracted is recessed some in the housing mounting face. The throw (fully extended) is 0.47 inches 1.11 inches from the housing mounting face. The bolt pattern was identical to the Explorer starter. The diameter of the lip and the mounting face flange were identical to the Explorer. I test fit the starter. The cutout in the dirt plate was suitable and the starter seated fine. I temporarily installed the 2 easier bolts with no problem. I'm confident that there is adequate clearance between the ring gear teeth and the starter teeth when the gear is retracted. I'm a little concerned about an adequate depth of engagement of the starter teeth with the ring gear teeth when the gear is fully extended. I'm beginning to suspect that the Mustangs do not use a dirt plate which reduces the depth of engagement. The stock ring depth is 0.375 inches and the Hayes ring gear depth is 0.395 inches. The dirt plate is 0.078 inches thick or 21% of the stock ring gear depth. I've removed the Mustang starter to attempt to obtain more accurate measurements of the ring gear distance from the bellhousing. I want to accurately calculate the depth of starter gear engagement.

Ill double check but dont think there was a dirt plate or anything between my motor and trans..the motor bolted directly to trans ""i think""..

Looking back at my pictures i definitely dont see one though

 

[2000StreetRod]

Its called the "spacer plate" in the engine section of my 2003 Explorer/Mountaineer Workshop Manual and the "Rear cover plate" in the engine section of my 2004 Aviator Workshop Manual. Based on what I learn, you may be better off not having one with our flexplate and starter configuration.

 

[jd4242]

Well i was wrong,i did have one..just wasnt visible in my pictures