Mustang 5.0 HO motor in a 88 F250..?

[Darrin Tosh]

Well it looks like I burnt a valve in Droopy, my 1988 F250 4x4 Plow truck. It is still running and operable but I am looking into doing a motor swap.

I would like to put in a 5.0HO motor out of an Mustang GT that is rated at 225HP instead of the stock 150HP 5.0.

Does anyone know what will be invloved with this swap? Oil Pan? Front cover? Intake Manifold? Computer? Will the HO motor work with the Truck intake?

Just looking at my options and if I am doing a motor swap I may as well get a little more power out of it.

Thanks for any input,..

 

[Clydesdale]

as far as I know block was the same, it was intake heads and cam that made it the HO, roller rockers, etc.

They are getting cheap enough, it makes sense... Check the torq specs between the two, seemingly the truck ntake was designed for higher torq, and the car intake was designed for higher horse.

 

[MUDKICKR]

ok, things to reuse from the trk engine, use the oil pan, intake manifold, and exhaust manifolds, you can make the stock headers from the mustang work, if you want to do some work on the y-pipe. you will also have to do some rewiring, nothing to ******* the wiring the real differance is the fact that the 5.0HO has the firing order of 13726548 when the trk has the firing order of 15426378. you will just have to switch the wiring on the 4 fuel injectors, switch #5 and #3 and switch #4 and #7. other then that its a complete bolt in. few things i would suggest is replace the timing chain, and give it a good tune-up. other then that your good to go.

 

[MUDKICKR]

also the trk and mustang run the same heads and block, both are E7TE's, the only things that are different are the cam/intake and exhaust manifolds. the cam in the mustang is a roller cam, so you will want to use the mustang dist. (gear on dist is made from a different material)

 

[tractorman86]

that is about it, i would play with matching the truck intake top and bottom. it has longer, wider runners IIRC which to me seems like the way to go but i also think i remember that the truck intake has a lot of extra material to be smoothed out.

 

[BigRigTech]

I have a stock long block 94 roller 5.0 in my 63 Mercury, with minor mod's (LT headers, 1.7 roller rockers and mild exhaust port work) it made 208RWHP....That's about 265-270HP from an engine rated at 215HP from the factory....Very torquey too....Just switch the plug wires to the correct roller 5.0 firing order on the cap, everythig else will bolt in. Make sure to use the mustang dizzy gear to match the steel roller cam....I just junked a 90 F250 4x4, it had a roller 5.0 installed in it using the the truck intake.

 

[JLDickmon]

IIRC the only difference in the intake was the standard 5.0 was throttled on the left side, the HO on the right, so the only thing you should need to swap would be the plenumn and maybe throttle, cruise and TV cables...

 

[MUDKICKR]

the truck intake manifold is completely different then the mustang. the trk is designed for torque. the mustang is designed for hood clearance. now the trk lower intake will match aftermarket mustang upper intakes. but the mustang has ovel ports between the upper and lower and the trk has more square ports. the elebrock performer and performer rpm 87-93 upper intakes will match the trk lower intake. anyways how is this project coming along?

 

[fine6.9]

Truck intake is totally different. The lower intake on the truck has rectangular port entries and the mustang has round entries. I always wanted to do this, and I think as torquey as those motors are, I would try and use the stock mustang intake. Just my 2 cents!

 

[MUDKICKR]

hey, why dont you put a 351w in the trk? i think you would be happier with the 351w over the 302(even if it is out of a mustang) also i have a 93 ford lightning that i stripped. i dont have the long block, but i do have the intake, oil pan, all the frt drive assys, dipstick, pulleys, and the various other things to put it in a trk. i have just about everything to put the 351w into the trk. i also have the computer and the engine wiring harness, and i even have the dash and under hood wiring as well. if your interested just let me know.

 

[MUDKICKR]

oh almost forgot, i have a 393 stroker kit to put into a 351w block, it needs put together but i have a 69 351w block bored 30 over, the kit has the forged pistons. and i also have a aftermarket harmonic balancer (without the rubber, it has the weight). ill make you one heck of a deal.

 

[Darrin Tosh]

Thanks for the input guys, I have been looking for a motor and deciding what to do with the truck. What I need to do is just get it fixed as fast as I can, less down time, so I can continue to plow the lot with it.

So that eliminates swapping to a 351 that I have to assemble, or Rebuilding what is in it. That is why I am looking for a complete ready to bolt in 5.0 for a reasonable price

Mudkicker, Thanks for the offer on the 351, a Lightning motor would be sweet but the timing wont work out.

I did find a motor and will probably go pick it up tomorrow. It is a 5.0 from a 93 Mustang GT with 34K original miles on it. I have been looking for a couple of weeks, and this is the best all around deal that I have found, Low miles, unmolested, complete ready to drop in, and for $500.00 I can't rebuild mine for that.

I am still using Droopy, but only limited as it is low on power, and I want to milk it out till I am able to do the motor swap.

I think what happened is that the cat is plugged, Ill take care of that during the motor swap. Also the exhaust manifolds are just starting to crack so I will be replacing them with Shorty Headers.

Thanks again for the input,...I'll keep you alll posted,...

 

[tractorman86]

yea they are completely different asside from the flange that bolts to the head... i think you would want the torque of the truck manifold, new plugs, wires, and all the usual PM stuff

 

[MUDKICKR]

the mustang headers will fit the trk chassis, you just have to do a little exhaust work

 

[tractorman86]

i know the car manifolds will fit, but mustang headers will too?