Difference in 5.0's

I_AM_CANADIAN

Member

Mar 30, 2005

189

0

16

B.C.

Jul 4, 2005

#1

• Jul 4, 2005

• #1

I need to know if there are any internal differences between the lincoln/t-birds 5.0's and the mustangs. I don't care about H/C/I or computer, just internals (ie block, rods,pistons,crank etc.). Thanks.

EDIT: I am aware of the 86 having different pistons, as with the 93. I will be using an 87 - 92.

 

J

JB66

New Member

Aug 21, 2004

565

1

0

New York

Jul 4, 2005

#2

• Jul 4, 2005

• #2

yes

 

I_AM_CANADIAN

Member

Mar 30, 2005

189

0

16

B.C.

Jul 4, 2005

#3

• Jul 4, 2005

• #3

alrighty........... perhaps one might be able to elaborate a bit more.....

 

W

whitenblu89

Member

Jul 25, 2003

70

0

6

westland mi

Jul 4, 2005

#4

• Jul 4, 2005

• #4

i thought the only real difference was the cam.

 

larrendeuce

Member

Sep 13, 2003

649

1

19

Southern NJ

Jul 4, 2005

#5

• Jul 4, 2005

• #5

Thunderbirds and Cougars (1988 and earlier) used standard output engines with cast pistons, different firing order and cam with e6 heads, and more restrictive upper intake. all speed density. 1989 and later used hypereutectic(sp?) pistons and a high torque cam with the 351W firing order and e7 heads. 1987-92 Lincoln mark VII's used forged pistons and the HO cam. The 87 year had the e6 heads, not sure if it also had the restrictive upper.

I can go on if you need more info.

 

I_AM_CANADIAN

Member

Mar 30, 2005

189

0

16

B.C.

Jul 5, 2005

#6

• Jul 5, 2005

• #6

please do, My plan is to use a low mileage 5.0 that is identical to the mustangs (shortblock anyways), rebuild it, put on afr 165 heads, a weiand dual plane intake with a speed demon carb, and a custom cam. I just need as much info as to what vehicles had what engines. Thanks.

 

J

JB66

New Member

Aug 21, 2004

565

1

0

New York

Jul 5, 2005

#7

• Jul 5, 2005

• #7

Sorry about that, I AM CANADIAN, but I couldn't resist! There have been so many posts on this subject in this forum...
Unless you already have a block to start with, my suggestion would be to get yourself a rebuilt HO short block and start with zero miles. Especially if you don't have the history on the donor engine. I wound up going with an HO long block when my 5.0 failed, and I think it was worth every penny. If you're planning on keeping the car, that's my recommendation.

 

87MustangGT5.0

Member

Apr 16, 2003

153

0

17

Maryland

Jul 5, 2005

#8

• Jul 5, 2005

• #8

Was there any difference in the Mustangs piston wise from 87-92, or was it just in 1993?

 

larrendeuce

Member

Sep 13, 2003

649

1

19

Southern NJ

Jul 5, 2005

#9

• Jul 5, 2005

• #9

87MustangGT5.0 said:

Was there any difference in the Mustangs piston wise from 87-92, or was it just in 1993?

Click to expand...

87-92 had the same pistons. Factory wise the put grey oil pans with forged pistons and black oil pans with hypers. I'm not sure if it was on purpose or they just changed were they got the parts. The HO cam changed slightly around 8/10/1988.

 

9250stang

Founding Member

Jul 15, 2002

927

1

18

Kentucky

Jul 5, 2005

#10

• Jul 5, 2005

• #10

Some late build '92's had the hyperpoopy pistons.

 

87MustangGT5.0

Member

Apr 16, 2003

153

0

17

Maryland

Jul 5, 2005

#11

• Jul 5, 2005

• #11

Why did they switch the pistons? Also that means the cam changed for the 1990 cars.

 

larrendeuce

Member

Sep 13, 2003

649

1

19

Southern NJ

Jul 5, 2005

#12

• Jul 5, 2005

• #12

Probably cost, emissions, fuel economy, NVH, all of the above