I am replacing the AC system on my 88 E150 with a 302 engine and am having trouble locating a particular hose.
I found this one on EBAY" for $50 and ordered it.
FORD MANIFOLD & TUBE F0UZ-19D850-C / F0UZ19D850C / YF-1667 NEW SURPLUS ? Sun Parts

Here you can see better where it goes
HOSE | Genuine Ford | FOUZ19D850C

You can see that the two hoses connect onto the manifold block and mount to the compressor..

The one I ordered is supposed to be specifically for a van with a 351w in it and there is a separate part number for the one that fits a 302.. What might be the difference in the two?
I checked part numbers for the condenser, accumulator, and compressor, and those parts are all the same wither the van has a 302 or a 351. Both vans have the compressor mounted on the left upper side of the engine... Only that particular line has a different part number..

Thanks

 

The 351 motor is a little taller and wider so it's possible the hose for that motor is shaped a little differently or is slightly longer.

 

I think this is the reason. Here's a quick spec on the engines, graphic on page 2.

http://www.fordracingparts.com/downl...Dimensions.pdf
jim

 

Thanks guys..
I sure would love to have that nice new pretty engine on the bottom right in a 351!

So the 351 is 3" taller, and 2-1/4 wider then the 302, the length is the same.
That is interesting because I have the new hose now and compared it to the old hose and the main difference I can see, is where the hose connects to the condenser and then the manifold, and position of the muffler..
Ah wait,, there is a slight difference in the angle of the suction line where it is welded into the manifold block. On the new 351 hose, the suction hose is at a slightly lower angle then the 302 hose, but only about an 1'5" lower. Perhaps that has to do with clearance as the 351 is 3 inches taller. I don't see that suction line angle being a problem at all. Of course I have not attempted to install it yet.

Here are some pics.



In the next two pics you can see the difference in the location of the muffler and that the vertical tube is about 2.5" longer on the new line. That line connects into the condenser. The E150 or E250 with a 351 or 302, use the same condenser. I assume the condenser would be mounted at the same heights in either van with either engine?
On my van with a 302, that old line comes out of the condenser and drops down almost to the inner fender well. I would guess that the highth from the condenser to the fender well should also be the same regardless of which van or motor? But that is where i see there might be a problem, the length of that tube. If so, then perhaps I can bend a slight 30 to 40 degree angle in it to clear the fender well, if need be.





There is a difference at the manifold connection. The new hose has a much more heavy block to attach to the compressor. They both use the same compressor so the holes are the same other then the heavier block will require a longer bolts even though the block has a recess for the bolts.



Here in this drawing you can see how the liquid line in question comes out of the condenser, drops down to the inner fender well, under the master cylinder, and over to the compressor. This drawing is showing the old hose with the muffler in the vertical part of the line and the part just before the line goes under the master cylinder is just a foam piece to protect the hose from rubbing on the inner fender well.


There are a couple of reasons I wanted to try to make this hose work... first it was only $50 while the other hose is close to $300 with shipping and tax.. I thought about taking the old hose and having new rubber hoses put on it but then there is the muffler which is a part they recommend not attempting to clean because it has baffles in it and would be almost impossible to clean and dry out. Also the hoses on the van are 28 years old. While the new line could possibly be 26 years old (the part number is a 1990 number) it has not been sunder the hood, in use, and subjected to high temps.

I will be taking one hose to the old radiator shop that cleaned my radiator. They also restore old cars and build their own hoses. perhaps they can cut and shorten that longer vertical metal tube if need be.
I would have just taken the line in question to them and let them replace the two rubber hoses but that would have cost $65 each hose, more then double what I paid for the new hose, that I believe I can make work!

Ok well that's the long story and any suggestions are welcome!

I believe if that vertical tube was shortened to the length of the old line with the muffler on it, it would work fine.. Everything will be brand new and all but 2 parts will be Motorcraft (evaporator and accumulator). Hopefully it will outlast the van without any problems..

Thanks

 

I do not see any show stoppers in this, annaleigh. In the olden days, we had AC hose, clamps, and barbed fittings to make hoses. Those were the days when GM systems could generate 700 PSI head pressures on a hot, summer day while sitting at the stop light in Texas. The hose was rated to 1,000+ PSI.

Cutting a section from the metal line is probably not doable, another solution would be better that would allow repositioning the line. jim

 

Well so far it appears like it will work as is. The van was not here yesterday when the part came in and so today when I got it home, I checked the line for fitment. It will lock onto the condenser and the muffler at the bottom should be about a 1/4 to 1/2 off the inner fender well. now the compressor is not mounted but the manifold end of the hose will defiantly fit as there is plenty of play to move it around..

I have a tendency to overthink things and am curious as to why they would engineer 2 different parts If the 351 part fits the 302.. As in the earlier post, there is a difference in the angle of the suction tube that comes off of the manifold, the 351 hose has a lower angle. That is probably as you stated, because the 351 is taller and it might need the clearance.. But then that would not be an issue on the 302, so only part would work for both. Perhaps the issue still has something to do with the longer vertical pipe. i would think it would have to be a clearance issue as the size of the motor should have no effect on the operation of the AC system itself.
Oh well we will see once i get it all back together..

I have to replace the evaporator next. It appears to me that the evaporator and heater core are two jobs. the evaporator comes out by removing the outside box with the fan, while the heater core, you have to remove it from inside the van?

 

I don't have an answer, but I have a couple of guesses that I'd probably put money on if I had to.

First, the 302 got EFI in 86, the 351W didn't get it until 88. Belts changed from v to serpentine at the same time as the EFI change. More likely than not, the guy who was tasked with the AC hose design for the EFI 302 wasn't thinking at all about fit on the 351W two years down the road. Odds are good that if you throw the early 302 design hose on the 351W in the same van, something clashes, probably body or frame related (the engines are about 1.25" from identical, and many of the drivers side serpentine brackets fit both with alternate water pump holes).

When they swapped the 351W to EFI, someone probably said, "Crap, this hose doesn't fit," and the hose was probably redesigned. Maybe to intentionally fit both applications, maybe not, since "Serpentine 351W with FS-6 AC compressor" is a one year only thing.

In 89 Ford went from the FS-6 compressor to the FS-10, and the hoses probably changed again for both. I'd probably bet ten cents that from about 89 on, the 302 and 351W use the same hose with the FS-10 compressor. The brackets generally interchange in those years too, so at least someone was thinking ahead by then.

 

Wow it is 3 months later and I just got the AC working...
I learned that the manifold hose for the 351W with the lower angle on the suction hose will hit the distributor on the 302 and will not bolt down onto the compressor because of this. I had already installed the dryer and wanted to get the vacuum pump going so after giving it some thought on what options I had, I took the new hose to the shop and put it in the vice and tweaked the metal tubing till i had about a 1" of clearance above the distributor on the 302. It actually bent pretty easy and did not twist the tubing up at all.
I also had to change out the bolts that that go through the manifold block on the hose set as you can see from the pics that the block is much thicker on the 351W hose. I used socket head cap bolts as i could not find the bolts with a small enough head to allow me to get a socket on then once down in the manifold block.