Differnces in Crown Vic and Mustang block?

S

schoonover_88

New Member

Jan 1, 2004

189

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#1

• Jul 19, 2006

• #1

Say, I was wondering if there are any differences when comparing the crown vic's block to the mustang's? I know that they have differnt firing orders, but is this due to the internals?...I had the luck of recieving a crown vic motor from autozone when I changed mine out and was wondering if there was anything short of putting a different motor in that would make it the same. Thank you in advance.

 

BlownFiveLiter

have car, will race....wait, it doesn't run

15 Year Member

Nov 29, 1999

3,133

18

108

Chicagoland

Jul 19, 2006

#2

• Jul 19, 2006

• #2

It really just depends what year the Crown Vic engine is. I don't recall what year they went to 4.6's in the 'Vic, but it should be a roller block and essentially the same as the Mustang's. Being a reman engine, it's probably got hypereutectic pistons like your '94 would've had originally, with stock rods and crank, so the only true difference would be the cam if we're just talking shortblocks. The cam determines whether or not you have the 5.0 HO/351W firing order.

 

Pokageek

Active Member

Jun 10, 2005

2,767

0

46

MA, USA

Jul 19, 2006

#3

• Jul 19, 2006

• #3

Interesting thread. You know the awesome and distinctive "sound" that our 5.0's make..I heard that this was a result of the firing order. Does that mean a 5.0 out of a crown vic would not sound as cool? Also, if the only difference making the mustang 5.0 a HO is the cam then why is it that the lincoln 5.0's only output'd 165HP..or is that just the older ones?

 

divit250r

Member

Mar 31, 2005

314

0

16

Columbia City, IN

Jul 19, 2006

#4

• Jul 19, 2006

• #4

The LSC Mark VII's were rated at 225 horse after 86, it's the same engine as the Mustang, right down to the valve covers. I'm not sure about the exhaust sounding different, I had an 88 Cougar with the lo-po 5.0 and it sounded like a tamer version of a GT. I put on factory headers and h-pipe cause I got them dirt cheap (Total of $50) along with Dynomax super turbos. Sounded good to me anyhow. lol

Scott

 

S

schoonover_88

New Member

Jan 1, 2004

189

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#5

• Jul 19, 2006

• #5

Oh it still sounds pretty dang good to me, but I want I real Mustang engine. So you think I could just change the cam and it would be the same? Would I need to do anything to the distributer to do this?...What aftermarket would you suggest?...Could I go with the E303, as I have heard of idling problems for the SN-95? Thank you again.

 

gustang818

New Member

Mar 10, 2006

48

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#6

• Jul 19, 2006

• #6

If you have a roller cam engine you should be able to put in a Mustang roller cam. I'm not aware of any difference in cam journal size between the flat tappet and roller motor blocks. If you have the intake off, is your new engine set up for a roller cam? It has the lifter guide retainer held in by 2 bolts? Also the lifter bores are longer in the roller cam engines due to the increased length of the roller lifters. The roller cam engines use a steel gear on the distributor as opposed to a cast iron gear on the flat tappet engines. You could use your stock '94-'95 dizzy or get the apropriate MSD.

I don't know about the idling problems. I have an F cam and don't have any.

 

S

schoonover_88

New Member

Jan 1, 2004

189

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#7

• Jul 19, 2006

• #7

So if I have a roller cam engine I am good to go then?

 

gustang818

New Member

Mar 10, 2006

48

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#8

• Jul 19, 2006

• #8

If it's a roller cam motor you can just put in a Mustang roller cam and use the Mustang firing order. I don't know what other difference there is internally between the Crown Vic and the Mustang other than the cam. Heads, pistons maybe?