93 5.8---96 5.8
#17
93 5.8---96 5.8
MY 1997 F350 5.8L is SPEED DENSITY. It was made in 11/96 though. There a lot of changes since my '90 5.8L. but still very similar to my '93 and '95 F250s. I have seen MAF 5.0s but no 5.8s. I'm not saying they weren't built just that I haven't seen them. All of my 5.8s have been SD.
The '96 engine will go into the '93 fine. Use your '93 heads and intake and you won't change much. If you would like to use the newer parts, I'm sure someone here can help. I only wish my 5.8s had MAF and roller cams. I've got 4 and owned a dozen or so. I have seen conversions for roller cams and MAF, both are pricey for me. I've had few problems with 5.8 engines at all. Good luck.
The '96 engine will go into the '93 fine. Use your '93 heads and intake and you won't change much. If you would like to use the newer parts, I'm sure someone here can help. I only wish my 5.8s had MAF and roller cams. I've got 4 and owned a dozen or so. I have seen conversions for roller cams and MAF, both are pricey for me. I've had few problems with 5.8 engines at all. Good luck.
#18
#19
93 5.8---96 5.8
Originally posted by Tim Ervin
MY 1997 F350 5.8L is SPEED DENSITY.
MY 1997 F350 5.8L is SPEED DENSITY.
#20
#22
93 5.8---96 5.8
We've been discussing a lot of things but we still don't know if his "96 engine is MAF/OBD II or speed density/EEC IV. If his problem is just the AIR tubes and other minor details it can be worked out without changing everything out. First of all he has to determine all the differences between his two engines.
I suggest looking at the air intake. Is the '96 a MAF engine? Then look at the distributer. Where is the TFI? If you just use the long block as Steve suggests, your computer will work. Now you might have a roller cam or other differences that can cause problems. If you're not sure, find a more compatible engine or change out the PCM/wiring harnass too.
I looked at going to MAF around '95. Back then it ran $800-$1500 depending on how much power you wanted, injector size, throttle body size, MAF sensor size etc. My prices were from Pro M manufacted by Professional Flow Technologies. You had to change harnass, PCM, add a MAF sensor etc. MPG is supposedly better because the MAF engine injects fuel only on half the stokes-combustion not exhaust, while the speed density injects fuel on every stroke. Also MAF allows more liberal cams, intake, heads, etc. The MAF sensor and PCM is specific to a certain injector size unless you are good at wiring. Roller cam kits was ~$200 then. I've had good service from speed density engines. I'd still like to save gas but no longer drive like a teenager. I have enough power as is and use my money on other things than modifying my truck. Also now I run several trucks in my business and don't want to modify them all. They all eventually go to work. If you are interested, you can search for Pro Flow with Google or I can give you a phone number or address. Since Ford put out MAF 5.8 (and I still haven't seen any, you can use stock parts and aftermarket could be considerably cheaper. Pro M had a really cheap version for non racers.
I suggest looking at the air intake. Is the '96 a MAF engine? Then look at the distributer. Where is the TFI? If you just use the long block as Steve suggests, your computer will work. Now you might have a roller cam or other differences that can cause problems. If you're not sure, find a more compatible engine or change out the PCM/wiring harnass too.
I looked at going to MAF around '95. Back then it ran $800-$1500 depending on how much power you wanted, injector size, throttle body size, MAF sensor size etc. My prices were from Pro M manufacted by Professional Flow Technologies. You had to change harnass, PCM, add a MAF sensor etc. MPG is supposedly better because the MAF engine injects fuel only on half the stokes-combustion not exhaust, while the speed density injects fuel on every stroke. Also MAF allows more liberal cams, intake, heads, etc. The MAF sensor and PCM is specific to a certain injector size unless you are good at wiring. Roller cam kits was ~$200 then. I've had good service from speed density engines. I'd still like to save gas but no longer drive like a teenager. I have enough power as is and use my money on other things than modifying my truck. Also now I run several trucks in my business and don't want to modify them all. They all eventually go to work. If you are interested, you can search for Pro Flow with Google or I can give you a phone number or address. Since Ford put out MAF 5.8 (and I still haven't seen any, you can use stock parts and aftermarket could be considerably cheaper. Pro M had a really cheap version for non racers.
#23
93 5.8---96 5.8
NO I wont have the truck. I have been looking around more and Ive found a few motors that were "air in the head" and it was out of a 95. i have no found a 96 with the air in the head, but it is an option when buying a motor from a few different companys. is the 95 a roller motor?
#27
93 5.8---96 5.8
so guys: what would you do? would you buy a reman motor for the year truck you have, or would you explore the option of buying a motor with a bit more technology? There is a company called greenleaf that buys cars-trucks and parts them out to the public, They have great deals on parts and great warranties: if you could get a complete motor used out of a 94-95-96-97 truck, w/ a lifetime parts and labor warranty for $1100, would it be worth it to make a few mods if need be?
#28
93 5.8---96 5.8
What are you trying to achieve? If it'd just stock or even a warm street motor you can get there easily with S/D. If the 5.0 Mustangs are any indication the S/D engine may actually make more power in stock form. If you're going to build it up to a near-race motor then MAF is inherently more flexible. But there is no simple way to convert your truck to OBD-II. You would end up re-wiring the entire chassis by the time you were done and you would then have to deal with the anti-tampering crap built inro OBD-II. Stick with the S/D. If you really need more powwer, build a Gen I Lightning clone. They were S/D and seemen to make enough power for most uses.
#30