i have a 1994 f150 4.9 e4od and a 1996 explorer with a 5.0 aod i know my 4.9 is strong and will live forever but i want to rebuild this 5.0 and use it i have the entire suv so im wondering what will i need extra for the complete swap

 

Going to stick with e4od? From what I've gathered from this site yer going to need engine harness, and computer from pickup with 5.0 and e4od. Exhaust, engine mounts, I'm sure there's more. Someone more experienced will prolly give you more details.

 

the harness from the explorer wont work?

 

and im not separating the transmissions

 

That Explorer has a 4R70W, not an AOD. Two very different transmissions.

We covered most of that question in your previous thread: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...efi-302-a.html

 

Someone somewhere made a guide on how to use an Explorer powertrain and IIRC some Panther wiring stuff as a quick and easy swap into pretty much anything. The target audience was tube buggies, fully caged jeeps, etc. The point was that it was significantly cheaper than an LS drivetrain. Find it, read it, figure out how it applies to your situation.


Google is your friend.

 

ewwwww a 302 in off road app?

OP: careful what you wish for...besides the nice sound of a 302, you won't gain a whole hellofa lot stock vs stock with that swap.

 

Don't quote me. It wasn't my dumb idea

 

With an Explorer 5.0? All stock that motor makes 50HP more than the I6 and it'll easily make a lot more than that, the only thing the vehicle will need to best utilize the V8 is more gearing.

 

65HP more actually! It'd be a huge upgrade in power.

If you want to use the engine and 4R70W as, you're going to have to start cutting up wires, and interface the Explorer harness with your truck's harness. The easiest way to do it would be to find a computer and harness from a 1994-1995 F-150 5.0 4R70W MAF truck, and lay that over ontop of your engine.

 

Do some WOT runs up a hill or 0-60 or something with the 300 and repeat them with the stock 302. It'll be faster but it won't anywhere near 30% faster even though you'll gain more than 30% in peak horsepower by swapping to the 302.


The 300s peak torque is so close to idle that you're making a good chunk (60% or more) of your peak power for more than half (1800-3500)the engine's comfortable operating range (~1400-3500). This is what's meant by "area under the curve." Even with an Explorer cam the 302 is more "peaky" in its power band, i.e. the chunk of it's operating range where it's delivering a sizeable portion of it's peak power is smaller. Obviously you can monkey with rear gears, narrow ratio transmissions and the like to overcome this (all of the Ford autos have really narrow ratios and are a fine match for a 302) and at the end of the day the 302 does have more power but don't expect it to be tons faster even though there's a large gain in peak horsepower. It'll definitely feel faster since 302s all have a large peak in the power band at the top end (compared to a 300).


Feel free to sell me the 300 for cheap when you pull it

 

The truck 302 is anything but a "peaky" engine, and actually makes more torque than the 300 at every single point in its operating range. The 300 just feels torquey because it runs out of steam by 3000 RPM.

 

And because it's got a really heavy crank compared to the V8.. it was a tractor motor originally after all.

 

So you slept through high-school physics and don't know the history of the 300. Got it.

The 300 never went in tractors, the farm kind or the kind in front of a semi trailer, any that were put there weren't put there by Ford. Crank weight is has negligible impact on torque because all the mass is close to the center of rotation. Adding a few pounds around in the flywheel would have way more effect than the same few pounds in the crank and even that mostly matters to your butt dyno when you let the clutch out, not when you dyno it and actually measure torque.

The high torque for it's displacement mostly comes from piston/rod/crank geometry combined with cam specs that allow it to make good use of the available static compression while keeping the dynamic compression ratio at a sensible value.

 

Nope... and this is yet another example where basic theory doesn't quite tell the whole story, crank counterweight mass does have a profound effect on the character of an engine, a heavy mass crank will produce a slow revving and torquey feeling motor while a lower mass crank produces a quick revving motor.