Ford 302/351 swap info - Page 3

colsoncj · 11-30-2005, 04:57 PM

Also, on those applications (stang/f-series) are there any little things i should know about the ECU's? for instance does it need a speed input from the tranny to run other other stupid stuff like that...

Thanks guys and keep the discussion rolling!!!! This will be a great thread for searchers.

This ad is not displayed to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Yotatech!

JamesD · 11-30-2005, 05:38 PM

If you do any upgrades you need to go with a Mass air system since speed density doesnt have adequate fuel and spark tables for add on parts.

F series trucks and Mustang computers are totally different. So pay attention cause this is going to help you out majorly. Of first off the motor or shortblock you want to use:

302: 87-92 Mustang motors and 87-92 Lincoln Mark 7 LSC only for the HO motors. Some other years had them but these are the easiest. Why an HO motor over other standard non-HO's? Here is the list why:

HO motors/Mustangs-LSC's:
Roller cam block
Forged pistons
Dual roller timing chain
E7 Heads-Same heads on F series trucks from 88 and up with a 302
19 lb injectors
Sequential fuel injection
HO roller camshaft
Mass air: 89-93(better for aftermarket upgrades) 86-88 had speed density and ALL Lincoln LSC's had speed density
Upper intake on 87-93 Mustangs were HO and other cars, except the LSC, were non-HO even though they looked identical. They flow a little more.
Computers had better fuel and spark tables both Speed density and Mass air of that of the NON-HO cars/trucks

These are just some of the stuff. Can you use non-HO blocks? Sure can. The 302 trucks didnt see roller until 93 or 94 I really cant remember. The regualr cars had some as early as 89 or 90 and after that they all were rollers. The truck and the car blocks did not have forged pistons, just cast. The trucks had the roller timing chains. The cams in the trucks weren't the greatest but made some decent low end torque. After 4k rpms, it ran out of breath about the same as the non-HO cars. The cams in the non-HO cars sucked.

Now here is other important info as well, the accesory brackets. Pay attention to this. The non-HO cars except the Lincoln Mark 7 were all different. The Mustang had their own, the Lincolns had their own, non-HO cars had their own and the trucks had their own. Which is the best? Well the Mustang since every bracket wasnt all one casted aluminum piece meaning the Alternator bracket was the alternator bracket, the P/S was the P/S and so on. All others usually had two brackets molded into one which made it hard to move some things around. The cars had one serpentine belt except the Town Car, Grand Marquis/Crown Vic which had two. Truck application varied. Sometimes one or sometimes two. The Mustang and Mark 7 had only one.

So all in all what do I really need? Well here you go:

Any 302 block will work for the most part. All 83 and new 302 blocks came with a one piece rear main seal. All the older blocks had a 2 piece so its your choice.
The HO cam is a great cam since it makes a good idle, great low end torque, good high rpm HP 5k rpms and it is emission friendly but remember it is a roller cam!
Roller blocks is nice but not neccessary. You can convert all non-roller blocks to roller. Ford racing sells the kit for a reasonable price or you can convert it yourself from roller parts out of junk roller block.
Any HO computer will do but if you decide to add heads or a cam then you need to go to mass air.
Oil pan is going to be custom or Advance Adapter.
Timing chain is basically a preference. You dont have to have a roller chain but they stock both at Advance Auto parts. Roller is usually stronger and doesnt stretch as fast as a non-roller chain but I have seen both wear at the same rate.
Intakes: Carb or FI? Either way their is tons of aftermarket intake for the 302, so again, preference.
Distributor:Same idea as the intake but you can use junkyard ones if you want for the FI or carb and each is different from each other.
Headers:Same as intakes but may be custom or Advance Adpators
Heads: Did I mention intakes?

Timing cover: A little tricky. HO had reverse water pump rotation as do the trucks all others are standard rotation and different hub height on the water pump so stick with truck and HO for timing covers for FI but use only the Mustang water pump since the trucks are different hub height and the belt wont align. Carb timing covers are basically on Mustangs 85 and older and have the hole for the mechanical fuel pump. If you have a FI one and are going to run carb, run an electric pump, but if you decide to use carb timing cover, dont forget the eccentric that is bolted to the cam sprocket so you can use the mechanical pump!
Flywheels and flexplates: Tons of aftermarket or stock stuff. Two different teeth count, 164t and 157teeth.

Probably more stuff, but I think that is good for now. Hope that helps!

James

JamesD · 11-30-2005, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colsoncj

Also, on those applications (stang/f-series) are there any little things i should know about the ECU's? for instance does it need a speed input from the tranny to run other other stupid stuff like that...

Thanks guys and keep the discussion rolling!!!! This will be a great thread for searchers.

To answer you question, Speed density definetly does but Mass you can get away with it since it uses the Mass sensor for a good chunk of mapping the fuel. The trucks werent mass air until 94 or 95 so all the other were speed density.

James

JamesD · 11-30-2005, 05:43 PM

Oh and one more thing, if you want anymore info on the 94-95 Mustang HO and the Explorer crate engines, let me know.

James

DudeBud · 11-30-2005, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SRV1

If you do any upgrades you need to go with a Mass air system since speed density doesnt have adequate fuel and spark tables for add on parts.

F series trucks and Mustang computers are totally different. So pay attention cause this is going to help you out majorly. Of first off the motor or shortblock you want to use:

302: 87-92 Mustang motors and 87-92 Lincoln Mark 7 LSC only for the HO motors. Some other years had them but these are the easiest. Why an HO motor over other standard non-HO's? Here is the list why:

HO motors/Mustangs-LSC's:
Roller cam block
Forged pistons
Dual roller timing chain
E7 Heads-Same heads on F series trucks from 88 and up with a 302
19 lb injectors
Sequential fuel injection
HO roller camshaft
Mass air: 89-93(better for aftermarket upgrades) 86-88 had speed density and ALL Lincoln LSC's had speed density
Upper intake on 87-93 Mustangs were HO and other cars, except the LSC, were non-HO even though they looked identical. They flow a little more.
Computers had better fuel and spark tables both Speed density and Mass air of that of the NON-HO cars/trucks

These are just some of the stuff. Can you use non-HO blocks? Sure can. The 302 trucks didnt see roller until 93 or 94 I really cant remember. The regualr cars had some as early as 89 or 90 and after that they all were rollers. The truck and the car blocks did not have forged pistons, just cast. The trucks had the roller timing chains. The cams in the trucks weren't the greatest but made some decent low end torque. After 4k rpms, it ran out of breath about the same as the non-HO cars. The cams in the non-HO cars sucked.

Now here is other important info as well, the accesory brackets. Pay attention to this. The non-HO cars except the Lincoln Mark 7 were all different. The Mustang had their own, the Lincolns had their own, non-HO cars had their own and the trucks had their own. Which is the best? Well the Mustang since every bracket wasnt all one casted aluminum piece meaning the Alternator bracket was the alternator bracket, the P/S was the P/S and so on. All others usually had two brackets molded into one which made it hard to move some things around. The cars had one serpentine belt except the Town Car, Grand Marquis/Crown Vic which had two. Truck application varied. Sometimes one or sometimes two. The Mustang and Mark 7 had only one.

So all in all what do I really need? Well here you go:

Any 302 block will work for the most part. All 83 and new 302 blocks came with a one piece rear main seal. All the older blocks had a 2 piece so its your choice.
The HO cam is a great cam since it makes a good idle, great low end torque, good high rpm HP 5k rpms and it is emission friendly but remember it is a roller cam!
Roller blocks is nice but not neccessary. You can convert all non-roller blocks to roller. Ford racing sells the kit for a reasonable price or you can convert it yourself from roller parts out of junk roller block.
Any HO computer will do but if you decide to add heads or a cam then you need to go to mass air.
Oil pan is going to be custom or Advance Adapter.
Timing chain is basically a preference. You dont have to have a roller chain but they stock both at Advance Auto parts. Roller is usually stronger and doesnt stretch as fast as a non-roller chain but I have seen both wear at the same rate.
Intakes: Carb or FI? Either way their is tons of aftermarket intake for the 302, so again, preference.
Distributor:Same idea as the intake but you can use junkyard ones if you want for the FI or carb and each is different from each other.
Headers:Same as intakes but may be custom or Advance Adpators
Heads: Did I mention intakes?

Timing cover: A little tricky. HO had reverse water pump rotation as do the trucks all others are standard rotation and different hub height on the water pump so stick with truck and HO for timing covers for FI but use only the Mustang water pump since the trucks are different hub height and the belt wont align. Carb timing covers are basically on Mustangs 85 and older and have the hole for the mechanical fuel pump. If you have a FI one and are going to run carb, run an electric pump, but if you decide to use carb timing cover, dont forget the eccentric that is bolted to the cam sprocket so you can use the mechanical pump!
Flywheels and flexplates: Tons of aftermarket or stock stuff. Two different teeth count, 164t and 157teeth.

Probably more stuff, but I think that is good for now. Hope that helps!

James

great info but i like to add that oil pan from a van or bronco should work and maybe even one from a fox body stang? also go with a 157 tooth flywheel if you deside to go with a manual trans because you can use a smaller bellhousing. headers block huggers should work depends on what you do with motor mounts.

colsoncj · 12-01-2005, 12:00 AM

Great info guys! If you know any more, lemme know. We should get a mod to change the title to something like "Ford 302/351 engine swap selection info" for future searchers!

JamesD · 12-01-2005, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DudeBud

great info but i like to add that oil pan from a van or bronco should work and maybe even one from a fox body stang? also go with a 157 tooth flywheel if you deside to go with a manual trans because you can use a smaller bellhousing. headers block huggers should work depends on what you do with motor mounts.

Double humps came in all the cars but not the trucks. For a solid axle, you could probably use any car one and maybe a truck. For IFS I think you have to have a custom pan. The Mustang double hump pans are a little different than the rest of the cars. I think the Mark 7, TBird/Cougar 84-88 has the same pans as the Mustangs but all others are not as dimpled in the middle of the pan. The fox body cars had the K-member and the rack and pinion in the front. These cars had the double hump with the most amount of clearence due to the motor basically sitting on top of them so the dimple is pushed up towards the motor more.

James

DudeBud · 12-02-2005, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SRV1

Double humps came in all the cars but not the trucks. For a solid axle, you could probably use any car one and maybe a truck. For IFS I think you have to have a custom pan. The Mustang double hump pans are a little different than the rest of the cars. I think the Mark 7, TBird/Cougar 84-88 has the same pans as the Mustangs but all others are not as dimpled in the middle of the pan. The fox body cars had the K-member and the rack and pinion in the front. These cars had the double hump with the most amount of clearence due to the motor basically sitting on top of them so the dimple is pushed up towards the motor more.

James

yeah but he has a 4" lift so the pan should work right . this is one of the nicest swaps that i have seen and i think that he is on yotatech http://members.ozemail.com.au/~jonhel5/Engine.htm

colsoncj · 12-02-2005, 10:45 AM

when i go ford, im goin SFA.... thinkin about D60s fr and rr

also lookin at rear steer.... anyone know of an application with a real wide front d60 that has minimal offset?

RLJ3RD · 12-05-2005, 09:19 AM

[quote=kyle_22r]i was gonna post the cardomain site about the guy who booty fabbed a 390 into his toyota. then again, at least he had the cajones to give it a shot. i never would've imagined a big block would ever fit in a toy bay...QUOTE]

How about a Ford 460? OK it is a bored and stroked small block but it is 460 cubic inches, something to think about or at least dream about ...
460 Small Block

big jim · 12-05-2005, 04:18 PM

I'm pretty sure ford motorsports sells a wiring harness for a set up like this to use with a mustang ecu and it is much cheaper than a painless. I f you realy want a 351 i would sugest getting any roller 351 and use a cumputer/harnsess,intake etc for a 93 cobra as they had 351's. as for ford axles. 80-96 f-150 front ttb d44, rear 80-82 ford 9'' 83-present ford 8.8''
80-98 f-250 ttb d44 or ttb d50 on f-250 hd 99-01 solid d50 02-present d60
F-350 front 80-85 ttb d50 86-present solid d60 there might have been a few solid 50's in 99-01
most f250/350 rears have been sterling 10.25's since 1980 with a rare d70 or semi floating 60. i hope some of this helps someone

colsoncj · 12-05-2005, 04:20 PM

thanks for more info!

JamesD · 12-05-2005, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by big jim

I f you realy want a 351 i would sugest getting any roller 351 and use a cumputer/harnsess,intake etc for a 93 cobra as they had 351's.

Jim if I'am reading that correctly then you are incorrect. The 93 Cobra did not come with a 351, no fox bady did(79-04) except the 95 Cobra R that came from Ford with a 351 and those are rare. One other exception is the Saleen Mustangs, in the mid 90's put the 351 in there.

Kind of hard to find a roller 351. Is is easier to get a non-roller 351 and use Crane Cams conversion rollers what I forgot to mention earlier. Here is the link: 351w Roller lifters

James

big jim · 12-06-2005, 02:55 PM

Ok here is one thing that would work for you. 351w roller or not, trickflow or lightning intake manifold, ford motorsports harness(or foctory 5.0 mustang harnes if you're decent with electrical) and a stock 5.0 mustang ecu. All mass air stuff. then when you get it running depending on what other mods you do to the engine you may or may not have to have a chip burned for it. but i know a mass air 5.0 ecu from a mustang will work with a 351. or 331 or 347 stroker for that mater. I would probably go as some one else already said with a stock 5.0. it would be cheaper, my buddy just picked one up complete with harness and ecu for 500 bucks.) and if thats not enough go from there. stroker, blower etc.

Churnd · 12-06-2005, 03:12 PM

If I wanted to make more power, I'd do some thinking in terms of power to weight ratios. You can get a much smaller engine that might make slightly less power at the crank, but overall more at the wheels with some mods than a 351. Plus with gas prices as high as they are and 351's getting less than 10 mpg average, I can't imagine having one these days.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it happen.

colsoncj · 12-06-2005, 09:16 PM

I hear that... the more and more thought i put into this, the more and more sense a FI 302 makes....

Chris, can we change the title of this to reflect something more fitting like 302/351 swap info? for the purpose of helping future searchers, cause theres a lot of good info in this thread!

kyle_22r · 12-06-2005, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RLJ3RD

How about a Ford 460? OK it is a bored and stroked small block but it is 460 cubic inches, something to think about or at least dream about ...
460 Small Block

that'd be absolutely insane. i wonder how drag slicks would handle off-road?

DudeBud · 12-07-2005, 12:20 AM

i wonder what the extra bolt holes on thoes world blocks are for i haven't seen any heads that match up with them

Churnd · 12-07-2005, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colsoncj

I hear that... the more and more thought i put into this, the more and more sense a FI 302 makes....

Chris, can we change the title of this to reflect something more fitting like 302/351 swap info? for the purpose of helping future searchers, cause theres a lot of good info in this thread!

Done. Is that how you wanted it?

colsoncj · 12-07-2005, 09:36 AM

looks good! thanks! I just figured it would help those searching in the future with all this info in one spot!

Cargun · 12-07-2005, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Churnd

If I wanted to make more power, I'd do some thinking in terms of power to weight ratios. You can get a much smaller engine that might make slightly less power at the crank, but overall more at the wheels with some mods than a 351. Plus with gas prices as high as they are and 351's getting less than 10 mpg average, I can't imagine having one these days.

If the 302 and 351 are nearly identical they should weigh the same? Maybe I'm reading what you're saying wrong... but if a 302 makes less at the crank than a 351 but more at the wheels that isn't an engine issue, that's a drivetrain issue. Through the same drivetrain a 302 will have the same parasitic loss as a 351.

I don't know about fuel economy between similar 351's and 302's... but for most big/small V8 pairs (305/350, 318/360, 4.8/5.3, 4.6/5.4) the smaller, less powerful engines don't get noticeably better fuel economy than their bigger brothers. Maybe 1-2 MPG at most. I'm assuming the 302/351 are the same way? Getting under 10mpg with a 351 sounds like a 3/4 or 1 ton truck... which wouldn't be available for comparison with a 302. A 1/2 ton truck will have a lighter duty drivetrain which is more efficient, leading to better fuel economy. I've never heard of stockish small block getting under 10 empty in a 1/2 ton unless something was seriously wrong with it.

So I vote for more cubes... unless there some big differences between the 302 and 351 that make the 302 a better platform (seems like roller cam availability in stock form is one of them).

JamesD · 12-07-2005, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cargun

If the 302 and 351 are nearly identical they should weigh the same? Maybe I'm reading what you're saying wrong... but if a 302 makes less at the crank than a 351 but more at the wheels that isn't an engine issue, that's a drivetrain issue. Through the same drivetrain a 302 will have the same parasitic loss as a 351.

I don't know about fuel economy between similar 351's and 302's... but for most big/small V8 pairs (305/350, 318/360, 4.8/5.3, 4.6/5.4) the smaller, less powerful engines don't get noticeably better fuel economy than their bigger brothers. Maybe 1-2 MPG at most. I'm assuming the 302/351 are the same way? Getting under 10mpg with a 351 sounds like a 3/4 or 1 ton truck... which wouldn't be available for comparison with a 302. A 1/2 ton truck will have a lighter duty drivetrain which is more efficient, leading to better fuel economy. I've never heard of stockish small block getting under 10 empty in a 1/2 ton unless something was seriously wrong with it.

So I vote for more cubes... unless there some big differences between the 302 and 351 that make the 302 a better platform (seems like roller cam availability in stock form is one of them).

The difference between the two is the 351 is taller and wider. Both share a 4" bore and cams. The 302 will probably get you better gas mileage than the 351. The 302 with FI will get you the same if not better gas mileage than the 3.0. Ask some people here with the Fords in them and they can tell you. I stay clear of the 351 due to fitment issues. The 351 has the same reliability as the 302 does anyway. Plus you can stroke the 302 in many ways like 331 or a 347 and still keep the 302 dimensions.

Like I said earlier, a STOCK 302 HO motor in a regeared Toy 4wd will be plenty to run your 35's down the road. Just add a mild cam and some other bolt ons for a little more power and you would be set if not leave it stock. If you need more power then you have many more ways to go about it. If a stock-mild 302 can move a 3400lb Mustang into the high 13's/low 14's in the 1/4 then you would have no problem turning some decent sized meats. If I do put a V8 in mine, it will be a 302 using mostly HO stuff.

James

DudeBud · 12-07-2005, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cargun

If the 302 and 351 are nearly identical they should weigh the same? Maybe I'm reading what you're saying wrong... but if a 302 makes less at the crank than a 351 but more at the wheels that isn't an engine issue, that's a drivetrain issue. Through the same drivetrain a 302 will have the same parasitic loss as a 351.

I don't know about fuel economy between similar 351's and 302's... but for most big/small V8 pairs (305/350, 318/360, 4.8/5.3, 4.6/5.4) the smaller, less powerful engines don't get noticeably better fuel economy than their bigger brothers. Maybe 1-2 MPG at most. I'm assuming the 302/351 are the same way? Getting under 10mpg with a 351 sounds like a 3/4 or 1 ton truck... which wouldn't be available for comparison with a 302. A 1/2 ton truck will have a lighter duty drivetrain which is more efficient, leading to better fuel economy. I've never heard of stockish small block getting under 10 empty in a 1/2 ton unless something was seriously wrong with it.

So I vote for more cubes... unless there some big differences between the 302 and 351 that make the 302 a better platform (seems like roller cam availability in stock form is one of them).

dont worry about milage with the right gearing and a good running motor there should be no reason to get decent milage.with a good tank of gas i run anywhere from 10-16 mpg,i'v recorded almost 300 miles to a tank on a long trip. i have a 17 gal tank and my motor is mildly built and running about 10.5 comp with a 625 demon carb. it's not that bad at all and really is better than the 22r with the weber that was in it before and makes almost 3 times the power

jposey66 · 12-12-2005, 08:52 AM

I run a EFI 5.0L with AOD in my 88 4Runner. I went with Total Chaos IFS up front. The extra width of the 351 would have interfered with the shock hoops/shock towers in this combination. I first tried using rubber Mustang motor mounts, but the motor was moving all over the place and the headers were banging against the shock towers. I'm in the process of swapping to either poly or solid motor mounts(undecided). The fuel mileage is great and comes in equal to or better than the 3.0 Toyota motor, that was in there previously. My 5.0 is speed density and has mild head porting. The compression has been lowered a little, so that I don't have to be picky about the quality of gas(I take it down into Mexico and you never know where your next tank of gas is going to come from or how good it is going to be down there). I can't imagine ever needing more power than this. I've had it up to 98 miles per hour on the pavement and somewhere in the 70's in the dirt. It could go faster in either situation. I you go with much more than that, you will have to replace everything. I can't imagine that the factory axles and t-case(W56) could handle much more than I am throwing at it. I also think that, if I were currently running a manual instead of automatic, those parts would all suffer a quick death.

colsoncj · 12-12-2005, 08:55 AM

Excellent post! On a side note, what is your compression lowered to? I've thought about driving my truck to Chile, and am curious about what should be done to make sure I wont have problems on such a long trek. (possibly carry some heavy duty octane booster?) I dont think i wanna lower the comp. ratio, this would be a one time only trip....

11-30-2005, 05:38 PM	#52 (permalink)
JamesD Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Binghamton, NY Posts: 1,829	Ford info If you do any upgrades you need to go with a Mass air system since speed density doesnt have adequate fuel and spark tables for add on parts. F series trucks and Mustang computers are totally different. So pay attention cause this is going to help you out majorly. Of first off the motor or shortblock you want to use: 302: 87-92 Mustang motors and 87-92 Lincoln Mark 7 LSC only for the HO motors. Some other years had them but these are the easiest. Why an HO motor over other standard non-HO's? Here is the list why: HO motors/Mustangs-LSC's: Roller cam block Forged pistons Dual roller timing chain E7 Heads-Same heads on F series trucks from 88 and up with a 302 19 lb injectors Sequential fuel injection HO roller camshaft Mass air: 89-93(better for aftermarket upgrades) 86-88 had speed density and ALL Lincoln LSC's had speed density Upper intake on 87-93 Mustangs were HO and other cars, except the LSC, were non-HO even though they looked identical. They flow a little more. Computers had better fuel and spark tables both Speed density and Mass air of that of the NON-HO cars/trucks These are just some of the stuff. Can you use non-HO blocks? Sure can. The 302 trucks didnt see roller until 93 or 94 I really cant remember. The regualr cars had some as early as 89 or 90 and after that they all were rollers. The truck and the car blocks did not have forged pistons, just cast. The trucks had the roller timing chains. The cams in the trucks weren't the greatest but made some decent low end torque. After 4k rpms, it ran out of breath about the same as the non-HO cars. The cams in the non-HO cars sucked. Now here is other important info as well, the accesory brackets. Pay attention to this. The non-HO cars except the Lincoln Mark 7 were all different. The Mustang had their own, the Lincolns had their own, non-HO cars had their own and the trucks had their own. Which is the best? Well the Mustang since every bracket wasnt all one casted aluminum piece meaning the Alternator bracket was the alternator bracket, the P/S was the P/S and so on. All others usually had two brackets molded into one which made it hard to move some things around. The cars had one serpentine belt except the Town Car, Grand Marquis/Crown Vic which had two. Truck application varied. Sometimes one or sometimes two. The Mustang and Mark 7 had only one. So all in all what do I really need? Well here you go: Any 302 block will work for the most part. All 83 and new 302 blocks came with a one piece rear main seal. All the older blocks had a 2 piece so its your choice. The HO cam is a great cam since it makes a good idle, great low end torque, good high rpm HP 5k rpms and it is emission friendly but remember it is a roller cam! Roller blocks is nice but not neccessary. You can convert all non-roller blocks to roller. Ford racing sells the kit for a reasonable price or you can convert it yourself from roller parts out of junk roller block. Any HO computer will do but if you decide to add heads or a cam then you need to go to mass air. Oil pan is going to be custom or Advance Adapter. Timing chain is basically a preference. You dont have to have a roller chain but they stock both at Advance Auto parts. Roller is usually stronger and doesnt stretch as fast as a non-roller chain but I have seen both wear at the same rate. Intakes: Carb or FI? Either way their is tons of aftermarket intake for the 302, so again, preference. Distributor:Same idea as the intake but you can use junkyard ones if you want for the FI or carb and each is different from each other. Headers:Same as intakes but may be custom or Advance Adpators Heads: Did I mention intakes? Timing cover: A little tricky. HO had reverse water pump rotation as do the trucks all others are standard rotation and different hub height on the water pump so stick with truck and HO for timing covers for FI but use only the Mustang water pump since the trucks are different hub height and the belt wont align. Carb timing covers are basically on Mustangs 85 and older and have the hole for the mechanical fuel pump. If you have a FI one and are going to run carb, run an electric pump, but if you decide to use carb timing cover, dont forget the eccentric that is bolted to the cam sprocket so you can use the mechanical pump! Flywheels and flexplates: Tons of aftermarket or stock stuff. Two different teeth count, 164t and 157teeth. Probably more stuff, but I think that is good for now. Hope that helps! James __________________ New Tacome V6 transfer case http://www.yotatech.com/f107/sale-br.../#post50755569 Various Toyota truck/4Runner switches for sale http://www.yotatech.com/f109/various...trucks-148139/

11-30-2005, 05:43 PM	#54 (permalink)
JamesD Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Binghamton, NY Posts: 1,829	Oh and one more thing, if you want anymore info on the 94-95 Mustang HO and the Explorer crate engines, let me know. James __________________ New Tacome V6 transfer case http://www.yotatech.com/f107/sale-br.../#post50755569 Various Toyota truck/4Runner switches for sale http://www.yotatech.com/f109/various...trucks-148139/

12-01-2005, 12:00 AM	#56 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	Great info guys! If you know any more, lemme know. We should get a mod to change the title to something like "Ford 302/351 engine swap selection info" for future searchers! __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done. Last edited by colsoncj; 12-01-2005 at 12:01 AM.

12-02-2005, 10:45 AM	#59 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	when i go ford, im goin SFA.... thinkin about D60s fr and rr also lookin at rear steer.... anyone know of an application with a real wide front d60 that has minimal offset? __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done.

12-05-2005, 09:19 AM	#60 (permalink)
RLJ3RD Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: RIDGECREST, CA Posts: 146	[quote=kyle_22r]i was gonna post the cardomain site about the guy who booty fabbed a 390 into his toyota. then again, at least he had the cajones to give it a shot. i never would've imagined a big block would ever fit in a toy bay...QUOTE] How about a Ford 460? OK it is a bored and stroked small block but it is 460 cubic inches, something to think about or at least dream about ... 460 Small Block __________________ Helping put warheads on foreheads since 1981 "Those whom the gods would destroy they first make proud" - Sophocles 1994 4Runner - RB 2" Body Lift / 15x8 Eagle Alloys (powder coated black) / 33x10.5 BFG M/T's / RB 1" Diff Drop / Sdori BJ Spacers / LC Rear Coils / ProComp Panhard Bracket / Explorer ProComp Steering Stabilizer / AISIN Manual Hubs

12-05-2005, 04:18 PM	#61 (permalink)
big jim Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Ridgecrest Ca. Posts: 70	I'm pretty sure ford motorsports sells a wiring harness for a set up like this to use with a mustang ecu and it is much cheaper than a painless. I f you realy want a 351 i would sugest getting any roller 351 and use a cumputer/harnsess,intake etc for a 93 cobra as they had 351's. as for ford axles. 80-96 f-150 front ttb d44, rear 80-82 ford 9'' 83-present ford 8.8'' 80-98 f-250 ttb d44 or ttb d50 on f-250 hd 99-01 solid d50 02-present d60 F-350 front 80-85 ttb d50 86-present solid d60 there might have been a few solid 50's in 99-01 most f250/350 rears have been sterling 10.25's since 1980 with a rare d70 or semi floating 60. i hope some of this helps someone __________________ 88 4runner, 3.0, auto, SAS 5'' lift,5.29's ARB's, 30 spline longs, 35''BFG mt's. coming in the future, bumpers with swing away. f/i 302/AOD swap

12-05-2005, 04:20 PM	#62 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	thanks for more info! __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done.

12-06-2005, 02:55 PM	#64 (permalink)
big jim Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Ridgecrest Ca. Posts: 70	Ok here is one thing that would work for you. 351w roller or not, trickflow or lightning intake manifold, ford motorsports harness(or foctory 5.0 mustang harnes if you're decent with electrical) and a stock 5.0 mustang ecu. All mass air stuff. then when you get it running depending on what other mods you do to the engine you may or may not have to have a chip burned for it. but i know a mass air 5.0 ecu from a mustang will work with a 351. or 331 or 347 stroker for that mater. I would probably go as some one else already said with a stock 5.0. it would be cheaper, my buddy just picked one up complete with harness and ecu for 500 bucks.) and if thats not enough go from there. stroker, blower etc. __________________ 88 4runner, 3.0, auto, SAS 5'' lift,5.29's ARB's, 30 spline longs, 35''BFG mt's. coming in the future, bumpers with swing away. f/i 302/AOD swap

12-06-2005, 03:12 PM	#65 (permalink)
Churnd Registered User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Hattiesburg, MS Posts: 4,093	If I wanted to make more power, I'd do some thinking in terms of power to weight ratios. You can get a much smaller engine that might make slightly less power at the crank, but overall more at the wheels with some mods than a 351. Plus with gas prices as high as they are and 351's getting less than 10 mpg average, I can't imagine having one these days. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it happen. __________________ -Chris If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Click here to search! My Website

12-06-2005, 09:16 PM	#66 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	I hear that... the more and more thought i put into this, the more and more sense a FI 302 makes.... Chris, can we change the title of this to reflect something more fitting like 302/351 swap info? for the purpose of helping future searchers, cause theres a lot of good info in this thread! __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done.

12-07-2005, 12:20 AM	#68 (permalink)
DudeBud Contributing Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: WA ,monroe Posts: 1,886	i wonder what the extra bolt holes on thoes world blocks are for i haven't seen any heads that match up with them __________________ Dan 95 4runner 3vze A/T 84 4runner sr5 Ford 302 T-18 4spd yota t-case yota front and rear both open 37X13.00 boggers 88 4runner 22re 5spd

12-07-2005, 09:36 AM	#70 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	looks good! thanks! I just figured it would help those searching in the future with all this info in one spot! __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done.

12-12-2005, 08:52 AM	#74 (permalink)
jposey66 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Madison, Alabama Posts: 78	I run a EFI 5.0L with AOD in my 88 4Runner. I went with Total Chaos IFS up front. The extra width of the 351 would have interfered with the shock hoops/shock towers in this combination. I first tried using rubber Mustang motor mounts, but the motor was moving all over the place and the headers were banging against the shock towers. I'm in the process of swapping to either poly or solid motor mounts(undecided). The fuel mileage is great and comes in equal to or better than the 3.0 Toyota motor, that was in there previously. My 5.0 is speed density and has mild head porting. The compression has been lowered a little, so that I don't have to be picky about the quality of gas(I take it down into Mexico and you never know where your next tank of gas is going to come from or how good it is going to be down there). I can't imagine ever needing more power than this. I've had it up to 98 miles per hour on the pavement and somewhere in the 70's in the dirt. It could go faster in either situation. I you go with much more than that, you will have to replace everything. I can't imagine that the factory axles and t-case(W56) could handle much more than I am throwing at it. I also think that, if I were currently running a manual instead of automatic, those parts would all suffer a quick death.

12-12-2005, 08:55 AM	#75 (permalink)
colsoncj Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monett, MO (Springfield) Posts: 2,533	Excellent post! On a side note, what is your compression lowered to? I've thought about driving my truck to Chile, and am curious about what should be done to make sure I wont have problems on such a long trek. (possibly carry some heavy duty octane booster?) I dont think i wanna lower the comp. ratio, this would be a one time only trip.... __________________ Cory Eastern OK, Western/Northern AR, Southeastern KS, or Southern MO area: OZARKS 4ROC Click Here 04 Dodge 2500 Cummins - DD/Tow Rig 02 Z06 Corvette - Weekender 94 FZJ80 - Wheelin Rig. Build in progress: http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129727 72 Buick GS - i.e. the project that will never get done.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1990 pickup ford 302	Cienega4x4	The Classifieds GraveYard	2	02-12-2007 10:31 PM
NWOR 302 Ford to R150 bellhousing	JamesD	The Fab Shop	16	01-08-2007 05:03 AM
Ford 302 Engine i 4runner swap transmission+transfer case problems	travisdahl	95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners	7	02-11-2005 01:43 PM
89 4runner will 302 ford fit ?	duanedeidre	95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners	4	11-08-2003 03:32 PM
Ford 302 Tacoma?!?!	Detcord	95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners	21	10-06-2003 12:02 AM