SD Computer Swap Question
Thread Starter
|
Trailering
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Aurora, MO
SD Computer Swap Question
I am wondering if it is possible to run a built 5.0 SD motor on a 5.8 SD computer. I've been looking at the increased air/fuel mixture from the 5.8 as a possible bypass for the limitations of the 5.0 SD setup. If anyone has any input it would be appreciated. I know that a MAF setup would give more power and flexibility, but i really want to see if this is a workable setup to help the old 5.0 get a little more ooomph without spending weeks rounding up the parts to do a MAF conversion. In the past I made an 86 Mustang with SD that dyno'ed at 325 rwhp. I am not wanting to go through all of that again in my truck. I just want to get around 250-300 hp to the wheels.
My truck is an 89 F150 with the 4.9l I6 currently. I am changing to the 5.0 motor and have all the components needed for the swap. The 4.9l has 277K miles on it and is beyond tired at this point. It has the 5 speed manual transmission that I can use the computer from the 89 donor F150 from because it had an AOD automatic transmission and thus did not have electronic transmission management.
My truck is an 89 F150 with the 4.9l I6 currently. I am changing to the 5.0 motor and have all the components needed for the swap. The 4.9l has 277K miles on it and is beyond tired at this point. It has the 5 speed manual transmission that I can use the computer from the 89 donor F150 from because it had an AOD automatic transmission and thus did not have electronic transmission management.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 5,081
Likes: 865
From: N.W. Alabama
the 19lb injectors come in both 302/351 will limit your hp(300 at crank) output along with the SD PCM, so the 250 at wheels, will be borderline, so the SD PCM can compensate, without a tune, long tube headers, GT40 heads, more cost friendly, then depending on rear gear, that would be better way to get more ooomph, 2wd/4wd
Hotshot
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 12,870
Likes: 2,443
As you probably already know the cam has to be SD compatible. Too radical and it won’t be happy. I’m not sure why it would take you weeks to round up parts for a mass air conversion. One way is to buy a Mustang harness, computer and install a second oxygen sensor. There are systems available online with one push of a button. Which one you get depends on how much you want to spend.
Thread Starter
|
Trailering
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Aurora, MO
The issue I have with more modern "updates" is the custom aspect. I want to keep it as "stock" as possible to keep it simple for maintenance sake. I'm not worried about making my truck a hot rod... I just want a daily driver that I can go to my parts store and purchase parts off the shelf without waiting for orders to come IF and WHEN they do and IF and WHEN they are the correct parts.
Thread Starter
|
Trailering
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Aurora, MO
The only thing I am looking to do different from your suggestions is taking the E7TE heads and having them reworked with bigger valves to make a street-able set roughly equal to a set of GT40/40P heads. My local machine shop owners son is the family specialist in Ford stuff. He swears he can make the "truck" heads flow at least as good as the GT40's. For $300, I am willing to give him a shot at it. Especially since E7TE's can be found for around $50 a set around here pretty easily. There is no way I can get a set of GT40s for $350 in my area that would be ready to bolt on and run.
Trending Topics
Former Vendor
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 279
Likes: 3
From: Shawnee KS
The issue I have with more modern "updates" is the custom aspect. I want to keep it as "stock" as possible to keep it simple for maintenance sake. I'm not worried about making my truck a hot rod... I just want a daily driver that I can go to my parts store and purchase parts off the shelf without waiting for orders to come IF and WHEN they do and IF and WHEN they are the correct parts.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 5,081
Likes: 865
From: N.W. Alabama
I dont think he has done anything, yet, looking for 250-300 at rear wheels, out of his 302.
Daniel, just to put new intake/exhaust valves (stock, not bigger) is going to take a lot of that $300 and you still need springs and new valve seals, not trying to dispute what your told, but I would get a talley, on that plus what he will charge you to flow the heads, that is a great price, if he can flow E7's that much for that price, with new bigger valves, and springs
Daniel, just to put new intake/exhaust valves (stock, not bigger) is going to take a lot of that $300 and you still need springs and new valve seals, not trying to dispute what your told, but I would get a talley, on that plus what he will charge you to flow the heads, that is a great price, if he can flow E7's that much for that price, with new bigger valves, and springs
Thread Starter
|
Trailering
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Aurora, MO
The plan is for a SD friendly cam, built E7TE heads, long tube headers (I already have shorties from my old Mustang build, but not suitable for this one), intake/gasket/lower intake matching, and a larger Throttle body.
My old Mustang made 325 rwhp naturally aspirated with this basic setup (addition of a GT40 intake and heads with shorty headers).
The primary reason I am even considering the 5.8 computer is to "see" if it will be a workable situation. I don't think anyone has tried it with a modded 302. I have seen plenty of "smokers" 5.0 engines due to too much fuel when using a 5.8 computer. I am wanting to "see" if a higher demand for fuel and air from the 5.8 computer can be offset by the hardware of the motor. I like to "play" with ideas and see what works. That is how I got 325 rwhp out of a NA 'stang.
After all, you never know unless you try. IF you fail... it just means you learned one more thing that won't work. So try something different...
My old Mustang made 325 rwhp naturally aspirated with this basic setup (addition of a GT40 intake and heads with shorty headers).
The primary reason I am even considering the 5.8 computer is to "see" if it will be a workable situation. I don't think anyone has tried it with a modded 302. I have seen plenty of "smokers" 5.0 engines due to too much fuel when using a 5.8 computer. I am wanting to "see" if a higher demand for fuel and air from the 5.8 computer can be offset by the hardware of the motor. I like to "play" with ideas and see what works. That is how I got 325 rwhp out of a NA 'stang.
After all, you never know unless you try. IF you fail... it just means you learned one more thing that won't work. So try something different...
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
The plan is for a SD friendly cam, built E7TE heads, long tube headers (I already have shorties from my old Mustang build, but not suitable for this one), intake/gasket/lower intake matching, and a larger Throttle body.
My old Mustang made 325 rwhp naturally aspirated with this basic setup (addition of a GT40 intake and heads with shorty headers).
My old Mustang made 325 rwhp naturally aspirated with this basic setup (addition of a GT40 intake and heads with shorty headers).
E7 heads can me made to flow a lot better, the port work that Powerhead did/does(not sure if they are still around) got flow numbers slightly better than the Edelbrock Performer head which outperforms all the cast iron GT40 heads, that may have been with larger valves too.
The primary reason I am even considering the 5.8 computer is to "see" if it will be a workable situation. I don't think anyone has tried it with a modded 302. I have seen plenty of "smokers" 5.0 engines due to too much fuel when using a 5.8 computer. I am wanting to "see" if a higher demand for fuel and air from the 5.8 computer can be offset by the hardware of the motor. I like to "play" with ideas and see what works. That is how I got 325 rwhp out of a NA 'stang.
Thread Starter
|
Trailering
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Aurora, MO
You are absolutely correct about the E7TE's being able to flow better than GT40's and even some aftermarket heads. My local machinist showed me (today) a set of them with 2.00/1.60 valves. No shrouding issues, 5 angle valve cuts, slight bowl work and they flow amazingly. He also concurs that a truck SD motor can put out @300HP with his heads and a little work. I asked him about the Throttle Body and he said leave it alone. He says with the setup I am talking about I will not need the 5.8 computer, but it would be an interesting experiment to try out.
I will post my head flow numbers when he finishes with them. He has 39 years in business for himself and several more years than that in learning his trade. He is a true Ford Man through and through. Fords are his specialty.
I will post my head flow numbers when he finishes with them. He has 39 years in business for himself and several more years than that in learning his trade. He is a true Ford Man through and through. Fords are his specialty.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 5,081
Likes: 865
From: N.W. Alabama
the motor and 300hp isnt going to be your issue, the SD computer telling 19lb injectors to squirt enough gas in hopes of it not running lean will be, I would suggest an A/F gauge to keep eye on it
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
A wideband O2 is a good suggestion. 19lb injectors can produce more output.. just have to increase the fuel pressure behind them. The spec'd flow rating is at 43psi so even a mild boost to about 50psi with an adjustable FPR would supply some more headroom.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DManikowski
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
8
Dec 16, 2012 01:50 AM