302 for a ranger?
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
302 for a ranger?
I am considering buying an 86 ranger that has a 302 in it. The engine that it has is knocking and needs a rebuild at least. I have another 302 from an 82 f-150 that I could rebuild for it. The 302 in the truck was from a mustang so i am wondering if i would get more power out of the mustang 302 or the f-150? also I want decent amount of power. I can't afford a crazy build up. I have to stay in the 400 to 500 dollar range. I want the best bang for the buck. I found rebuild kits from northerautoparts.com and i think they are as cheap as i can find. Anybody have any idea what to use to create a nice sleeper truck? also were do I look for id numbers on the block to tell me what year it is and what it was taken out of so i have a better idea what i am working with.
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
The mustang 302 should be the better motor... though it will depend upon the year. The block will have a casting number on the oil pan gasket surface, either front or back corner, and the heads will have a number cast into the rocker surface. These numbers will tell you what castings you have, but not what year the motor it is, but the casting number is the important part anyway. If the mustang motor is post 85 it should have a roller cam, and it'll be a better cam than you'll find in a truck 5.0. But if the cam or lifters is causing the knocking and needs replacing you could blow your whole budget right there.
What parts do you need besides a rebuild kit? A decent carb and intake on the truck 5.0 with a 260-270 duration flat tappet cam should perform well in the little ranger.
What parts do you need besides a rebuild kit? A decent carb and intake on the truck 5.0 with a 260-270 duration flat tappet cam should perform well in the little ranger.
Last edited by Conanski; Sep 28, 2006 at 01:57 PM.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
Everything will depend on what's in your Ranger now. The 82 F150 302 ain't no prize. No cam to speak of, huge chambered heads. You could strip it down to the basic short block, swap the cam and heads and get 300hp out of it, but I doubt you'll spend less than you've budgeted. One easy, cheap route is to buy a factory reman roller 5.0, swap the cam & timing set with something like a Ford B303 roller and a double row,roller timing set, replace the rod bolts (one at a time while the engine's assembled) with ARP's, take a set of E7TE heads, and do some work on them with a die grinder (remove the Thermactor bumps from the exhausts and open the roof and sides some) put the old Shelby type Tri-Y headers on it, and a good high rise aluminum 4 bbl intake and 600 cfm carb. This will get you a reliable, lively engine for a Ranger and run you about a grand, give or take, depending on how good you are at wheelin and dealin.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
new factor in price
I am in college for automotive repair and have all the tools and equipment to do the work my self. Try refactoring that in to your price instead of paying a head and valve shop to do it for me. also i want to try and stick with the heads i have. The mustang motor i believe is out of an 80 something model i believe. I don't know if there was a big difference in the heads for a truck verses a car.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
I didn't add anything for labor. I built just such a 5.0 for my Ranger a few years ago. It would help to know what heads the Stang motor has now. Look for a large "T" cast next to the valve cover in one corner. This "T" is present on the E7TE heads which were used on all Stang 5.0 (87-95), F & E series pickups and vans(5.0 & 5.8-87 to 97), and the Lincoln Mark series HO 5.0's from about 87 to 91. The 82 truck heads had huge 70 cc combustion chambers, verses the E7TE's 64 cc heads. Plus the E7's ports flow better.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
it will be a while
It maybe be a few weeks before i get a chance to check th ranger. The next time i am there to see the ranger i am going to check the rear axle to see if it is an 8.8 or a 7.5 and the trans to see if its a aod or a c4 and now i shall check the heads to see if i can figure out what they are. Any idea if the T will be on both cylinger heads on opposite corners?
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
what will happen?
If i switch to the ho heads will i also have to buy a cam shaft for the ho? or do i buy a cam for the engine block which isn't an ho.
Trending Topics
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
The "T" will be on the passenger side head, on the lower front corner, immediately below the valve cover. I wouldn't worry about what rear is in it. The 7.5 will hold a good bit, depending on how sticky the tires are, if it's got a posi unit, and what transmission it's got.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
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
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
ok
Well the trans is either an aod or a c4 the rear tires are 295 wide so they will get pretty good traction for a ranger. I think it has a posi trac in the rear because i did look at the rear tires and they are worn evenly. I just hope the trans isn't an aod.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
Cam selection will depend on the block type (roller or flat tappet) As for transmissions, me personally? I'd rather an AOD, every C-4 I've ever had, left me sitting on the road side at some point. Sure, they're cheaper to rebuild, but they ain't strong. 295's huh? got to be 295/50/15's. I've got a Toploader 4 speed in mine with 275/60/15's in the back.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: Chrisney Indiana
on the cam shaft
I would like a cam that will give me good power and a noticable lop when its idling. I already know that a give sloppy cam profile will give me no power at an idle and no extra power if the heads aren't redone. I just want a cam that will work well with heads that might have had some light porting and polishing with stock valves and springs. Agian though i want a nice sound as well.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
One more important factor in cam selection , especially in a 302, is the compression ratio. Too big an overlap in a cam and that's what kills the bottom end, especially in a 302. And overlap is what gives a cam the lopey idle. Find out that part first before choosing a cam.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
If you want enough overlap for a lope but with less duration, then you want a narrower lobe seperation angle. Lobe seperation angle is an important spec.
Usually the narrower the lobe seperation, the racer the cam. With slightly less duration along with less lobe seperation angle, you can get the tourqe to come in stronger at lower rpms, but the cam will still rev to high rpm without running out of steam. For example, a cam with say 282* duration and a LSA of 110*, could have 62* of overlap. Another cam with say 286* duration and a LSA of 114*, will still have ~62* of overlap, despite the greater duration, because the intake and exaust lobes on the cam are farther apart.
The extra duration of the 286* wide LSA cam, is usually manifested by the valves opening a few degrees sooner. The smaller 282* duration tight LSA cam will still close the intake valve to .050" lift at about the same point on the compression stroke, but it will close the intake valve completely, sooner. This equals more low end tourqe with the tighter LSA. The great potential overlap of the narrow LSA cam may also help it rev .
The only problem is that LSA's of 110* and less don't idle very well with EFI systems. Therefore, wider LSA's are usually used with EFI, and that requires more duration to get the same top end breathing of a narrower LSA cam.
Usually the narrower the lobe seperation, the racer the cam. With slightly less duration along with less lobe seperation angle, you can get the tourqe to come in stronger at lower rpms, but the cam will still rev to high rpm without running out of steam. For example, a cam with say 282* duration and a LSA of 110*, could have 62* of overlap. Another cam with say 286* duration and a LSA of 114*, will still have ~62* of overlap, despite the greater duration, because the intake and exaust lobes on the cam are farther apart.
The extra duration of the 286* wide LSA cam, is usually manifested by the valves opening a few degrees sooner. The smaller 282* duration tight LSA cam will still close the intake valve to .050" lift at about the same point on the compression stroke, but it will close the intake valve completely, sooner. This equals more low end tourqe with the tighter LSA. The great potential overlap of the narrow LSA cam may also help it rev .
The only problem is that LSA's of 110* and less don't idle very well with EFI systems. Therefore, wider LSA's are usually used with EFI, and that requires more duration to get the same top end breathing of a narrower LSA cam.
Last edited by P51D Mustang; Sep 29, 2006 at 10:48 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JPontius
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
5
May 10, 2005 07:52 PM
mohomustard
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
8
Sep 2, 2003 11:02 PM
Bogaski
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
3
Dec 8, 2001 09:14 AM