question about GT-40P 1.7 rockers and valve covers

[JoshT]

I have the Explorer 5.0 going into a '99 Ranger. When I Got engine it was going into an older truck and was goingto have to go custom on intake tube and filter stuff. Now with it going into the '99 I want a mostly stock appearing install and have all the parts to pull it off thanks to another donor.

Engine currently has 1.7 RR paired with the stock camshaft, but it might get changed to a mild street cam. Even with the stock cam the 1.7s wouldn't clear the valve covers witch necessitated a set of Mustang aluminum valve covers and a 1" intake plenum spacer. I think the plenum spacer will be ok, but IMO the aluminum valve covers won't look right for a stock install and the oil fill will be under the intake duct. Some black paint on the aluminum VC and I could probably live with it, but I don't want ot be having to remove the intake tube to change oil.

Way I see is I have two options to achieve what I want.

• Go back to Explorer valve covers and run a spacer that will allow clearance with the 1.7 rockers and a mild street cam down the road.
• Paint Mustang VCs black to blend and modify fill tube to clear intake duct. Still might not clear when go to aftermarket cam with engine rebuild.

So the questions are:

1. Does anyone know what size valve cover spacers would be needed for the stock valve covers to clear the stock came with 1.7 RR? Or a 1.6/1.7 RRs with a mild street cam?
2. If you have run mustang VCs did you modify the oil fill tube to clear inteke duct? If so, how?

I could probably just get 1" spacers for the Explorer VCs since I have the plenum spacer, but they more expensive as they get thicker. Seems like double the thickness equals double the price and they aren't cheap to begin with

 

[410Fortune]

1/2” should do it to clear scorpion 1.7 roller for the pedestal Mount heads

The baffles inside the stock explorer stamped covers are the issue I’m thinking a 1/2” spacer would clear easily.
My problem was always keeping the rr centered on the valve stem with the pedestal
Mount… that was many years ago

 

[JoshT]

1/2” should do it to clear scorpion 1.7 roller for the pedestal Mount heads

The baffles inside the stock explorer stamped covers are the issue I’m thinking a 1/2” spacer would clear easily.
My problem was always keeping the rr centered on the valve stem with the pedestal
Mount… that was many years ago

Dam man, you on top of all these 5.0 questions. Makes sense since you've probably been hands on with more Explorer 5.0s than anyone else here.

Thanks for the help on all my questions.

No offense, but anyone else got input. I think 410 is right about the 1/2" spacer probably being good to clear the Explorer valve covers. Anyone got thoughts on the fillerneck if I stick with the Mustang Aluminum VCs?

 

[410Fortune]

I’m just here to get the conversation started and then poke poke at the participants after that lol there is plenty of knowledge on this site but yes I’ve been living and breathing 302 ranger based trucks since 2005 when I went v8

I can bolt stuff together but not without the help of people who went before me!

I put a e303 cam and headers and 1.6 rr on my old 96 many years ago… then o battled the valvetrain for a couple of years before I went back to stock stamped rockers then years later I would learn about the crappy stock springs and how to properly at fix pedestal mount rollers and measure for new pushrods all because of the people on this and other forums



Knowledge is power
I’m also here to learn!
No offense taken we need as much input as we can get!

 

[Turdle]

For valve covers, this is possible

Searching for usable Tall Valve Covers 5.0

Is it tight there next to the left header to cover, such that most covers might interfere? They made so many VC's, I found some recommended by a New Zealand member who swapped a 351W into his Land Rover. He picked a FMS cover that was used on the 347 crate engine they made many years back. I...

www.explorerforum.com

 

[JoshT]

For valve covers, this is possible

Searching for usable Tall Valve Covers 5.0

Is it tight there next to the left header to cover, such that most covers might interfere? They made so many VC's, I found some recommended by a New Zealand member who swapped a 351W into his Land Rover. He picked a FMS cover that was used on the 347 crate engine they made many years back. I...

www.explorerforum.com

Thank you for the link. I saw those when searching, but it would move the oil fill to the other head and relocate the PCV if I'm not mistaken.

All stuff that could be fixed with a welder since they are steel. The biggest holdup there is that I don't have those valve covers. I have got the mustang covers and two sets of explorer covers, one set decent the other pretty rusty I think. I'd rather modify the Mustang with a different filler or get spacers for the Explorer VCs, than buy another set. Especially another set that would take additional work to pull off what I'm after.

I did look at the 94-95 Cobra VCs since they had GT-40 heads and 1.7 TRS (IIRC). They look like they would fit the bill without much alteration, but they are even more expensive than the overpriced spacers for a similar outcome. I think I was seeing those sets for $2-300.

 

[Turdle]

Thank you for the link. I saw those when searching, but it would move the oil fill to the other head and relocate the PCV if I'm not mistaken.

All stuff that could be fixed with a welder since they are steel. The biggest holdup there is that I don't have those valve covers. I have got the mustang covers and two sets of explorer covers, one set decent the other pretty rusty I think. I'd rather modify the Mustang with a different filler or get spacers for the Explorer VCs, than buy another set. Especially another set that would take additional work to pull off what I'm after.

I did look at the 94-95 Cobra VCs since they had GT-40 heads and 1.7 TRS (IIRC). They look like they would fit the bill without much alteration, but they are even more expensive than the overpriced spacers for a similar outcome. I think I was seeing those sets for $2-300.

That work was to retain stock oil fill location. EFI truck valve covers , important that they are truck valve covers, will have proper hole locations. The driver side rear hole can be plugged. This retains front passenger side fill tube.

 

[JoshT]

That work was to retain stock oil fill location. EFI truck valve covers , important that they are truck valve covers, will have proper hole locations. The driver side rear hole can be plugged. This retains front passenger side fill tube.

I get what was done I think. Adding the oil tube to make it accessible and the coating in that nice silver vein (?) finish. Those pictures look to me like the oil fill would be on the front of the DS head Maybe I'm looking at it all wrong.

Again, thanks for the link. I don't think that is the solution I'm looking for, but it might have given me a bad idea.

I did say that I have two sets of steel Explorer valve covers. I also have access to a welder and a grinder. Assuming that the one set is just surface rust, there's nothing saying that I can't section them and make a taller set of Explorer VCs. I could build them about as tall as I could need them.

Not something I'm going to attempt right now, but I could keep the Mustang ones on there for now and try that later. Not really out anything since I have them and they wouldn't fit with the 1.7 RRs and might not fit with 1.6 RRs on a large cam.

 

[410Fortune]

I have used the tall chrome valve covers I have also used the alumina num mustang Ho covers
The only thing you need to be concerned with is the oil fill. The explorer has the nice rubber boot metal extension on the oil fill so that helps. Our pcv valve is in the lower intake manifold not the valve cover
The only hole in our valve cover is the oil fill and you can put it on either side with some cut/chop/ weld on any metal covers the aluminum a little more tricky… to clear roller rockers expect some trimming of baffles unless you use enough spacer

On the 96-07 trucks the oil fill spout also has a breather that plugs into the intake tube I do not think the 98-01 5.0 used that
Ford did some strange things especially on mercurys

 

[JoshT]

I have used the tall chrome valve covers I have also used the alumina num mustang Ho covers
The only thing you need to be concerned with is the oil fill. The explorer has the nice rubber boot metal extension on the oil fill so that helps. Our pcv valve is in the lower intake manifold not the valve cover
The only hole in our valve cover is the oil fill and you can put it on either side with some cut/chop/ weld on any metal covers the aluminum a little more tricky… to clear roller rockers expect some trimming of baffles unless you use enough spacer

On the 96-07 trucks the oil fill spout also has a breather that plugs into the intake tube I do not think the 98-01 5.0 used that
Ford did some strange things especially on mercurys

Oil fill is one of the main things I'm thinking about. I've got the Mustang aluminum covers now. For now I'm thinking about cutting the top filler cap part off the fill tube on the Mustang VCs and attaching the Explorer fill tube, I've got two of those too. I'd swap the whole fill tube between the two, but I'm not sure that it is removable.

I know that the baffle clears with the stock cam and 1.7 rockers when spinning over by hand. I can't recall if I needed to do any trimming on the oil baffle support, but I am running the stock Explorer cam for now. Will be able to find out soon. If I'm keeping the Mustang VCs I'll be pulling and painting before the swap, fortunately they are installed with FelPro silicon gaskets that have never been run.

Now that you mention it neither set of VCs has a port for the PCV. I'm sure I've noticed it in the past, but I didn't even think about where it was located.

IIRC on both sets of Explorer VCs I have there is a small tube coming off the side of the oil fill tube/spout. I assume that would go to the intake for a filtered air source. One set was off a 98 Explorer, the other set is on the 2000 Explorer donor.

 

[Blown]

1.6 vs 1.7 Josh how much is gained?

HP gained vs $ and time spent = not worth it.

 

[JoshT]

1.6 vs 1.7 Josh how much is gained?

HP gained vs $ and time spent = not worth it.

I don't think I asked about gains, if I should do it, or if it was worth it. I'm pretty sure that the thread was posted about making valve covers clear said rockers without going aftermarket. If I worried about if something was worth it, I wouldn't do anything. Not every build or mod has to be about getting max gains, or optimizing gains/dollar.

The idea for 1.7 rockers with the Explorer was not mine. I found the idea here, on other forums, and various articles around the net. I bought and installed a set, but engine hasn't run since. To find out gains you would need to ask people that have run and tested it with repeatable results either on a track or Dyno. I am not that guy.

At this point I would cost more to go back to 1.6 rockers than to make the VCs fit like I want. The original rockers and pushrods are long gone, to change back I'd need to buy both again and, if I'm buying, I couldn't go back with plain rockers.

 

[Turdle]

So, bringing back memories for me.

I taped the valve covers to engine, then cranked it over. ( Disable spark and fuel) If the tape pulls, there's an issue. It could be small enough a shave to the outer rockers cures it.
Or, silicone glue 2 silicone valve cover gaskets, make a sammich gasket.

 

[boominXplorer]

On my old ranger, I ran valve covers that put my fill on the back side behind the tb. Used the factory fill elbow on the aftermarket covers for easy fill too.

 

[Blown]

The idea for 1.7 rockers with the Explorer was not mine. I found the idea here, on other forums, and various articles around the net. I bought and installed a set, but engine hasn't run since. To find out gains you would need to ask people that have run and tested it with repeatable results either on a track or Dyno. I am not that guy.

At this point I would cost more to go back to 1.6 rockers than to make the VCs fit like I want. The original rockers and pushrods are long gone, to change back I'd need to buy both again and, if I'm buying, I couldn't go back with plain rockers.

I am knowledgeable. I researched this for my builds years ago. I can tell you there is little gain for all the headaches with a simple dyno simulation. Excuse me for being real. Make's me proud to be so and to point-out this so somebody doesn't follow flawed thinking for doing it in the first place. This Mod results in the mildest of gains, adds issues, cost, complications and perhaps less reliability.

Y'up, I beg to differ on price of going back vs going forward. I would get myself to the the wrecking yard and find everything I needed for a stock roller valve train and covers. The parts could be found there cheap. I have also found what I needed inexpensively on E-bay or forums classifieds. I would sell that stuff on a forum to defer costs and perhaps save the taller valve covers for more cam down the road. Those parts make sense to someone who is looking for every little additional gain on an already completely tweaked-out engine.

I took a bit more time with this response, sorry for being so Frank, short, abrupt with my prior post. I have been thankful and learned most over the years from others who have challenged what I was doing/proposing. I often came-out with more knowledge and a better alternative. That is what forums are about.

I don't understand engine mods that don't bring about better performance gains or better reliability. You may save some time/effort in the short run making what you got work, but will it have issues or future issue when you decide you want a cam? You could be changing it all again......................................

Good Luck!

 

[JoshT]

I get it, and we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

The mildest of gains, but the money is already spent and the work is already done. If it hadn't already been done, I wouldn't be doing it, but it has been. It's going in as is so far as the valve train is concerned. You don't have to agree with it, it ain't yours. You're welcome to throw out an I told you so if I come back with problem later, but I'm pretty certain that isn't going to happen.

To be clear this, internally this engine is in it's final form. I will be building another, better engine to replace it. Future cam will not be an issue, because I'll be running the Explorer cam until that engine goes in. That engine will probably be built with 1.6 RRs because the cam will be specd to my needs/wants at that ratio, but what I hear is that even then the stock VCs likely won't clear. The first question in the OP is trying to take that future engine into consideration.

Among the goals with this build and both engines is a stock appearance. Not being stock internally, but appearing that way externally. The cast aluminum Mustang valve covers that are installed now don't have the desired appearance. They fit and clear the 1.7s with the stock cam, but they don't look like stamped steel Explorer valve covers.

That is the purpose of this thread, regaining that stock appearance. No solution will pass close inspection, but there are a couple that can get close enough to make me happy. The simplest solution that probably comes closest to stock appearance is to install a set of black painted valve cover spacers under the black painted Explorer valve covers. I realized after posting thread that if all I wanted was to clear current engine I just needed to measure the difference between the two sets of VCs. If I'm spending the money on a set of spacers I only want to buy them once, and them work with the next engine as well.

I think that I have a course of action decided on. For now, I'm going to lay some black paint on the aluminum Mustang covers and modify them with an Explorer oil fill neck. With the next engine I'll do some measuring, cutting, and welding on stock steel VCs in order to get the appearance I'm after. Who knows, by then I might be very happy with the Mustang VCs, they do look good IMO, just not he style I'm after. Or that goal for the build may have changed, I will no longer care about the stock looking install, and I will slap a set of tall (and shiny) aftermarket VCs on fancy aluminum heads.

Also FWIW, regarding reliability. This vehicle is one of 4, possibly 5 by years end, that I am the sole owner and operator of. I have the 5th, but it currently doesn;t operate. Of the 4, it's already been the least reliable over the years, but it still fires up and goes every time. I don't have a wife or kids and I don't loan vehicles to friends. My parents and sister both have spare vehicles so the need for them to borrow one is very slim. If it does break and has to sit for an extended period it won't be the first time and won't really be a problem either.

 

[JoshT]

@Blown, looks like you might be a winner. Not sure what you won, but a winner. Can't say that told ya so yet, but I might be turning in your direction.

I don;t know if I really said it above, but I've decided to stick with the Mustang valve covers for the time being. They are a Ford part so kindof sticks with the project goal, and they won't be that noticable buried in the engine bay anyway. In the future I'll decide of I want to keep that, or come up with something else.

So project creep snuck in and bit me in the ass. Was getting some things ready to the project this weekend. A few pieces needed to come off the engine to make it easier to lift. Pulled the upper plenum. While the plenum is off I figured I'd pull those VCs to clean and paint. One thing led to another. Now I've got the lower intake removed and a broken intake bolt in the front of the driver side head.

For this swap I was never supposed to have the lifters exposed. Now they are, which kink of blows away the argument of not going deeper. Still not sure that I'm going to touch it, but now a cam is looking a bit more inviting.

My main hesitation is the potential for introducing a failure point that prevents it from running right after the swap. I'll have enough potential issues without adding one more. The bottom end is high miles, but it is in good shape so there is no real reason that I should NEED to replace it any time soon if I maintain it. If I go ahead and do a cam upgrade now it will probably be a long time before I need to touch the bottom end again.

My heads are already set up with aftermarket springs from Alex's Parts. I don't have any more springs specs since the kit is no longer listed on the site, but they were inteneded for the GT-40P heads with "Low & Mid Lift Cams" and good for "up to .540" Lift." I see where in my email correspondence with the company that I was interested in this set because it would allow for a future cam upgrade to an E303 or TFS1. There are likely different or better options now.

If this happens I will be changing back to stock rockers, or 1.6 RRs. Since posting this thread a new Pull-N-Pay yard opened in town and it has an intact 5.0L Explorer that I've already thought about going back and getting the seats from (high back power with adjustable lumbar). I'd almost rather go ahead with RRs whether I need them or not, but it'll be a budget set again like the first time around. Cost of the parts from the salvage yard will be about half way to the cost of budget RRs.

I guess I'm looking for a cam that will see some gains and play well with the stock ECU tuning, but also respond well to being tuned. Also needs to play well with the stock torque converter. I will investigate upgrading converter in the future, likely when it needs transmission work, but for now it's staying stock.

It needs to be a "budget" off the shelf cam. I'm already spending too much on this swap and this adds another unplanned expense of a few hundred at least. I will eventually build an engine for this truck, but there's no point in rushing it. When that day comes I'll spring for a custom grind, for now I just want off the shelf simple. If it will work with stock pushrods that's even better since the ones in it are still like new. Help to not spend a little more money and I really don't want to spend the time measuring, ordering, and waiting for custom length pushrods.

Edit: Also, I plan to buy new and off the shelf, timeframe doesn't work to wait for the right cam to come up used. That said, I will consider used if it is VERY common and readily available used, meaning I can buy one tonight/tomorrow and have it first part of next week. I prefer to be able to go buy in stock and in person at Summit (a couple hours round trip) or through Amazon with their fast shipping.

 

[410Fortune]

I have been in this boat many times myself

 

[FletcherHubbards]

I have the Explorer 5.0 going into a '99 Ranger. When I Got engine it was going into an older truck and was goingto have to go custom on intake tube and filter stuff. Now with it going into the '99 I want a mostly stock appearing install and have all the parts to pull it off thanks to another donor.

Engine currently has 1.7 RR paired with the stock camshaft, but it might get changed to a mild street cam. Even with the stock cam the 1.7s wouldn't clear the valve covers witch necessitated a set of Mustang aluminum valve covers and a 1" intake plenum spacer. I think the plenum spacer will be ok, but IMO the aluminum valve covers won't look right for a stock install and the oil fill will be under the intake duct. Some black paint on the aluminum VC and I could probably live with it, but I don't want ot be having to remove the intake tube to change oil.

Way I see is I have two options to achieve what I want.

• Go back to Explorer valve covers and run a spacer that will allow clearance with the 1.7 rockers and a mild street cam down the road.
• Paint Mustang VCs black to blend and modify fill tube to clear intake duct. Still might not clear when go to aftermarket cam with engine rebuild.

So the questions are:

Nox Vidmate VLC

1. Does anyone know what size valve cover spacers would be needed for the stock valve covers to clear the stock came with 1.7 RR? Or a 1.6/1.7 RRs with a mild street cam?
2. If you have run mustang VCs did you modify the oil fill tube to clear inteke duct? If so, how?

I could probably just get 1" spacers for the Explorer VCs since I have the plenum spacer, but they more expensive as they get thicker. Seems like double the thickness equals double the price and they aren't cheap to begin with

The baffles inside the stock explorer stamped covers are the issue I’m thinking a 1/2” spacer would clear easily.