I have a 78 Bronco that is in above average shape for the year in Michigan.It has the 351M C6, and NP205. I also have a 93 F 150 with a 302 and AODE (not sure if AODE or just AOD) with the electric shift Tcase (1356 or 1345 not sure which...haven't looked yet). I am thinking of putting this together for my son. He is twelve now so I have about four years to get it together. I am thinking about putting the 302, tranny, and tcase from the 93 in the Bronco because I think it would be a little more economical to drive with the 302 and OD trans.

Has anyone else done this? If so any feedback on the pros and cons or difficulties you had. Don't know how easy it will be to adapt the computer controlled stuff into the older chassis. I know it has been done, but would it be easier since I have everything together already. I will probably look for a manual shift tcase or see what it would take to adapt the AODE to the 205.

Just looking for feedback on this to see what others have to say and if anyone has other stuff for me to think about.

Steve

 

the 78 is heavy in comparison to your 93 and we know the 302 does ok in that rig so i imagine it would be a dog in the 78. wouldnt be economical due to the motor working harder to move the heavier rig. I like your idea though in general, i have also thought about this. Personally i would run an efi 351w in there, you can still use that same od tranny, the wiring harness from the 302 even the front acessories to. finding a complete efi 5.8 out of a bronco,f150,f250,f350 would be ideal and more of a drop in. same goes for finding the manual tcase those are pretty plentiful. if you have the donor rig the swap would be easier sure. you could probably even swap over the dash from the 93 that would make wiring up everything easier. we can go more indepth if your serious

 

That 79 is a heavy rig. I agree with Kem... a 302 is going to struggle mightily in that truck. It will be a dog, and get pretty bad mileage.

However, a 351m can really be woken up with some engine mods. You can also change it to a 400 pretty easily and with a reasonable budget be making some pretty good power with it. If it were my truck, that's the route that I would go.

 

Thanks for the input guys. I see where you are coming from with it being underpowered with the 302. The only EFI 351W I have is in my 95 F 350. It isn't any speed demon or gas sipper in that 6000lb truck. Gets about 12mpg all the time. The Bronco would probably be a little lighter though. I am trying to do this with stuff I already have if I can. Might be nice if I had an E4OD from a 460 to put behind the 351M. The expense may not be worth it though. That may be a very big factor with the whole project. I could probably put a lot of gas through the 351M/C6 combo for what it would cost to put a different powertrain in it. The Bronco has 3.50 gears with 33's, so the RPM's wouldn't be too bad anyway. About 2560 at 70. The 351M in the Bronco runs real good. C6 is a little iffy, but I was told the AODE in the 93 may not be too good either. I am sure it would be cheaper to rebuild the C6. I have a 400 in my 78 SWB F 150 4x4 with a Performer cam and intake, 750 Edelbrock, and headers and it runs pretty strong. I might have a 460 in it by the time I would need the Bronco for my son, so I could use the 400 or the parts from it for the 351M. Just thinking out loud here. I guess unless some better parts for the project I will probably just work with what it has in it. I do have a couple of good running 300's and an NP435 that will fit behind it. Hmmmm. Another thought. The possibilities are endless.

Steve

 

locate a zf 5speed that was bolted to a 460 in a f350 truck. it has a granny low and of course overdrive. sure its a manual but would require no electronics to make it work like the e40d would.

 

yeah, i would go with the zf 5 speed. in all my experiences, you don't want to touch the e4od witha 20 foot pole. it has a bad reputation for eating itself. i personally like the m-series engines better than the windsors. although they are carbed, they get decent gas mileage and if you have the 351m, you can run that, which has plenty of power. and if you decide you want more power, you can convert it to a 400. you'll get the same gas mileage and a lot more torque.

 

Hadn't thought about the ZF. Do you have any idea what they go for? I have not personally seen any for sale where I am. Although I haven't looked either. Would the ZF hook to the NP205 or would it be better to get the tcase with the ZF?

Steve

 

since there were overlap years where the new np208, bw1345, and bw1356 t-cases were introduced but the c6 still was used, the bolt pattern had to match. so the new trannys(like the zf) had to have the same pattern as the c6, so the np205 that your c6 is mounted to should bolt to the zf 5 speed. i'm not 100% sure, but i think you'll be ok with just the tranny. i know i would try to keep the np205 as it is gear driven and the newer ones are chain driven. the np205 is suppose to be one of the best ones ever built.

 

That sounds logical. I should keep my eyes out for a ZF I guess. That would be a good way to go. Another thought.....How is the clutch actuated on the ZF? Does it depend on the year of the trans? Need to know if I would need a clutch master and slave cylinder of if I need linkage.

Steve

 

i would go hydrolic with this setup. so when you get the tranny just get the peddle and everything associated

 

I have the pedals for the 78. I wonder if I could make them work with the clutch master? Do the ZF's have different setups for the clutch? I guess I need to know so I would know which type to look for or which years. BTW, what year trucks had the ZF in them?

Steve

 

i am not 100% on start year but anything during the 90's would be a good choice and have decent miles on it. the nice thing about a manual tranny is they dont wear out like an auto does ya know. I had an np435 with 300K+miles on it, had it gone thru just cuz and the tranny guy said he couldnt beleive how good of condition it was in. a few syncros were bad but the bearings, gears etc look new.