• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

2000 Explorer 5.0 block vs. other 5.0 blocks

  • Thread starter Thread starter ford_thoroughbred
  • Start date Start date Jan 29, 2012
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

ford_thoroughbred

New Member
Jan 27, 2012
9
0
1
Mooresville, nc & Lagrange, Ga
Jan 29, 2012
#1
  • Jan 29, 2012
  • #1
found a 5.0 block out of a 00 or 01 explorer and was wondering was there any advantages and disadvantages in this block compared to other 302 blocks or are they basically the same
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jan 29, 2012
#2
  • Jan 29, 2012
  • #2
The block is exactly the same.
 

Rick 91GT

Mustang Master
Nov 29, 1999
9,692
95
99
PA
Jan 30, 2012
#3
  • Jan 30, 2012
  • #3
yup...same, same, same, same
 

srtthis

the guy doing it does every local racers rear end
15 Year Member
Jul 3, 2009
5,129
1,666
204
Maryland
Jan 30, 2012
#4
  • Jan 30, 2012
  • #4
are you talking block itself or the short block?
 

TrophyHead

15 Year Member
Mar 18, 2003
1,195
11
49
PA
Jan 30, 2012
#5
  • Jan 30, 2012
  • #5
I heard the cam is different? Besides the obvious gt40 heads and intake.
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,226
17,911
224
Massachusetts
Jan 31, 2012
#6
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #6
Cam is different


Sent from my iPhone 4S using Tapatalk
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jan 31, 2012
#7
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #7
Cam is different but not performance oriented.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jan 31, 2012
#8
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #8
The pistons are not likely to be the same either?
 

srtthis

the guy doing it does every local racers rear end
15 Year Member
Jul 3, 2009
5,129
1,666
204
Maryland
Jan 31, 2012
#9
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #9
Gearbanger 101 said:
The pistons are not likely to be the same either?
Click to expand...
i believe they are a cast piston in the exploders
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,226
17,911
224
Massachusetts
Jan 31, 2012
#10
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #10
I think they are similar to the 93-95 pistons...if not the same
 

txstang84

15 Year Member
May 21, 2005
1,639
42
69
Tuscola, tx
Jan 31, 2012
#11
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #11
Mustang5L5 said:
I think they are similar to the 93-95 pistons...if not the same
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you're corret...hypereucraptics...good for mild performance and tight bore clearance; that's about it.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jan 31, 2012
#12
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #12
txstang84 said:
Pretty sure you're corret...hypereucraptics...good for mild performance and tight bore clearance; that's about it.
Click to expand...

Which is it? Traditional cast pistons are not the same as Hypereutectic. I'm leaning towards them being Hypereutectic as that's the direction most engines wen't by the early-90's, but I'm not 100% certain. They may also be dished as well....which would lower compression in comparison to the flat tops found in the Mustang.
 

txstang84

15 Year Member
May 21, 2005
1,639
42
69
Tuscola, tx
Jan 31, 2012
#13
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #13
To the best of my knowledge, the pistons in that block should be the same as the last gen Mustang 5.0s...they had the same CR, but better heads.

And you're correct about hypers being different than traditional cast pistons, but only by alloy and size...hyper pistons are still a cast piston any way you slice it, and they still will suffer the same fate if pushed too hard.
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,016
1,613
194
NJ
Jan 31, 2012
#14
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #14
The pistons are hypers, and in a stock block it has absolutely no effect on how much power you can push through them.
For some reason they get a bad rap, but when is the last time you heard someone say they broke a piston in a stock 302?
If anything they last longer and burn less oil.
 

txstang84

15 Year Member
May 21, 2005
1,639
42
69
Tuscola, tx
Jan 31, 2012
#15
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #15
2000xp8 said:
The pistons are hypers, and in a stock block it has absolutely no effect on how much power you can push through them.
For some reason they get a bad rap, but when is the last time you heard someone say they broke a piston in a stock 302?
If anything they last longer and burn less oil.
Click to expand...

Hypers get a bad rap because they're still castings and don't play that well with boost or spray. They will take more abuse than regular cast, yes, but still ain't great. And while it's irrelevant for use in a stock block, and they do consume less oil due to closer tolerance, I have seen them crack and burned before...broken no-but cracked or burned yes...

It all depends on your purposes...if you never plan to use a power adder, then sure-they're fine to use...they're lighter anyway. That being said, I think we might've wandered a bit from the OP's purpose in asking the question...
 

BlownFiveLiter

have car, will race....wait, it doesn't run
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
3,133
18
108
Chicagoland
Jan 31, 2012
#16
  • Jan 31, 2012
  • #16
ford_thoroughbred said:
found a 5.0 block out of a 00 or 01 explorer and was wondering was there any advantages and disadvantages in this block compared to other 302 blocks or are they basically the same
Click to expand...

It has hypereutectic pistons like the 93-95 Mustangs and the remainder of the rotating assembly is identical. Swap in a new cam and oil pump pickup tube from a Mustang and you'd never know the difference between the two.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Feb 1, 2012
#17
  • Feb 1, 2012
  • #17
StangGT1995 said:
It has hypereutectic pistons like the 93-95 Mustangs and the remainder of the rotating assembly is identical. Swap in a new cam and oil pump pickup tube from a Mustang and you'd never know the difference between the two.
Click to expand...
....until he started experiencing valve float after 4,500RPM because he forgot to upgrade the valve springs along with the camshaft.
 
Reactions: OonDeanisS

txstang84

15 Year Member
May 21, 2005
1,639
42
69
Tuscola, tx
Feb 1, 2012
#18
  • Feb 1, 2012
  • #18
Gearbanger 101 said:
....until he started experiencing valve float after 4,500RPM because he forgot to upgrade the valve springs along with the camshaft.
Click to expand...

Something you've experienced before I take it...?
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Feb 1, 2012
#19
  • Feb 1, 2012
  • #19
txstang84 said:
Something you've experienced before I take it...?
Click to expand...

Indeed. The stock Mustang springs are barely adequate enough for the stock cam profile....and the Explorer valve springs are weaker still. I’ve floated the stockers as a stupid teenager on a 302 in more than one occasion in the past.

Add an aftermarket bump stick to the mix like one of the ones mentioned above that's got some additional lift/duration and accompanying RPM range over the stocker and you could end up seeing a lot of it. Not only will you not realize the full benefits said aftermarket camshaft has to offer, but miss a gear and bounce it off the rev limiter enough times and depending on the cam profile, you might even be one of the unlucky ones to make piston to valve contact.

There are area’s one could skimp if money were tight. I wouldn’t suggest valve springs as being one of them.

 

ford_thoroughbred

New Member
Jan 27, 2012
9
0
1
Mooresville, nc & Lagrange, Ga
Feb 4, 2012
#20
  • Feb 4, 2012
  • #20
thanks for all the replies
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
781
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
M
Misfire
  • Mike3
  • May 30, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
78
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 30, 2026
Mike3
M
Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 95 GT/Saleen Supercharged 331 install
  • from6to8
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
24
Views
799
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
Z
Progress Thread zeth194 - New Guy on the Block
  • zeth194
  • Mar 19, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
518
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 26, 2026
LILCBRA
1
Engine Motor swap from a 2003 Explorer
  • 1996mustang new
  • Oct 9, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
554
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 16, 2025
squeak93
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?