Seeing as California is becoming a haven for high gas prices I've been looking into ways of making my truck more efficient. Right now it has a carbuerated 1979 302 with a C4. Not a lot of power, and not too good on gas mileage. Now I'm considering getting a 5.0 HO EFI motor from a fox chassis mustang, and wondering if anyone else has done this in their 53-56 effie. Can this motor bolt straight up to a C4 and use the same mounts as the current 302? Thanks
I know you need to use the late model flywheel. The later 302's (after approx 1982) use a different balance flywheel/flexplate. All you would have to do is replace the heads on the 79 and you would get lots of improvement. The original heads that year have very large combustion chambers which means low compression.
You should get a major improvement in MPG with the EFI, if you can keep the lead out of your right foot. I have seen EFI motors installed in 53-56 F100s in magazine articles. Also there is a tech article on the FTE web site on installing a 5.0 SEFI Mustang engine in 61-79 Ford pickups. Good description of hooking up the electronics that make it go.
I am putting a 5.0 and AOD in my 57. It came from a 90 Lincoln Town Car. The article on the tech page is great and I suggest following it to a "T". I pulled everything out of the Lincoln in great haste (wife wanting junker out of her yard!) and didn't lable all the connections. I also suggest not using the Lincoln. The harness is very complicated and so far the cheapest aftermarket engine and body harness is over $1k.
I am in the process now (started 2 days ago) of putting a 90 Mercury 5.0 EFI into my 56 F-100. I am taking out the 351 Windsor which I built in 1972, using a 69 Merc 351. That was the year with the good heads, It has always had lots of power but what a gas hog!. I am looking forward to getting decent milage. The 90 5.0 flex plate bolts directly to my c-6 torque converter, the ring gear teeth count is the same. I want to put the same alternator and power steering pump on the 90 5.0, but my 351 crankshaft pulley is too long (sticks out about 1" further). Does anyone now if I can use the harmonic balancer from the 69 351 on the 90 5.0? That would solve the problem if the balance is correct.
I'll keep you all tuned in on the wiring and fuel system work. Larry
Are you guys using non H.O. 5.0's? Because I was doing some research on the web about 5.0 conversions and read the Mustang 5.0's (H.O.) were better than Lincoln's (non H.O.) because they tried to blend performance and economy, instead of just economy like in the Lincolns. Also another useful bit of info, I've heard the secret to getting a lot of power in the 5.0s is using the next bigger size cam from stock, and using heads with the heartshaped combustion chambers, killer combo, but I'm not completely sure it's true. And for those of you dealing the wiring harness, Painless Wiring has put out a wiring harness for conversions that supposedly make the mess a lot easier to deal with.
Where's Painless Wiring located? Do they have a web site?
TIA
>Are you guys using non H.O. 5.0's? Because I was doing some
>research on the web about 5.0 conversions and read the
>Mustang 5.0's (H.O.) were better than Lincoln's (non H.O.)
>because they tried to blend performance and economy, instead
>of just economy like in the Lincolns. Also another useful
>bit of info, I've heard the secret to getting a lot of power
>in the 5.0s is using the next bigger size cam from stock,
>and using heads with the heartshaped combustion chambers,
>killer combo, but I'm not completely sure it's true. And for
>those of you dealing the wiring harness, Painless Wiring has
>put out a wiring harness for conversions that supposedly
>make the mess a lot easier to deal with.
>
>Craig
HI GUY"S : I have been playing the message boards about 5 mo and didn't know this subject was such hot toppic. MY unfinished project is a 53 w 351w and fmx.. Just aquired 89 MK 7 roll over to get driveline. This is same configuration as mustang 5.0 ho roller cam headers, and cable operated AOD. Tremendous amount of wire.I was already going to use wire pkg and panel. I hope to have certified Ford EEC 4 spec to help bring this together.I hope everybody luck because it's a bit more involved. I will keep following this post for any suggestion. I'm excited to try to be different. I hope to use standard fuel tank but haven't found elec fuel frame mounted that promise to yield hi pressure qiuck enough.
Next mod will be a good set of binder's
chuck caddy 53
After doing a websearch I ran across this site where someone has already done a lot of the leg work:
http://home.san.rr.com/slick/SEFI.html
Adios,
Brett
I would recommend to everyone that they try to use the HO 5.0 Mustang type engine. It uses SEFI, gets great torque and good gas mileage. I drive an 86 Mustang GT and on the highway it has gotten gas mileage in the mid 20s. Truly. On a trip I got 25mpg with the first tank (a leg of the trip that included a little cruising at 100+mph) followed by 26mpg second tank then a 24 mpg third tank!
Around town, it's in the upper teens.
It is my understanging that the non-HO engines don't get mileage like this! They don't have SEFI, they use batch EFI.
Also, there's lots of aftermarket parts for this engine.
The non-HO engines can be converted to HO but it would require swapping the cam, intake, throttle body, wiring harness and computer.
I posted about this a while back but didn't get a very clear answer so I wanted to try again. I've decided while I can't afford to put a whole new 5.0 engine in my truck yet, I'm going to put an 89 Mustang HO intake on my '79 302. Earlier in this discussion someone mentioned that I should change the heads off my current engine. So my question is, can I simply bolt on the heads from a Mustang HO engine and it will work, or will I have to change rockers and pushrods etc to match everything up? Thanks
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
5.0 HO conversion
