Explorer 5.0

68Jcode · Jan 30, 2008

I'm looking for a late model 5.0 to drop into my '68. I know the 89 - 93 5.0 HO are a good choice, but a little hard to come by, especially with low mileage. I've also heard some newer Explorers had equal or more powerful 5.0 liters. Maybe early 90's T-birds and Cougars as well? Can someone give me lowdown on the late model options available to me?

Thanks,

Andrew

PUNISHER RACING · Jan 30, 2008

explorer motor FTW

Helmantel · Jan 31, 2008

The later (1998 and up?) 215 hp explorer engines have the GT40P heads and a good intake manifold, which flows only slightly less than the Cobra and GT40 intakes, but have a very mild cam:

5.0L Truck, Explorer F4TE-6250-BA
Hydraulic Roller
256° I (adv)
266° E (adv)
Duration (adv.) (Exhaust): 266 Deg
Duration (adv.) (Intake): 256 Deg
Cam Lift (Exhaust): .279''
Cam Lift (Intake): .263''
Duration at .050'' Lobe Lift (Exhaust): 197 Deg
Duration at .050'' Lobe Lift (Intake): 176 Deg
Lobe Centerline (Exhaust): 113 Deg
Lobe Centerline (Intake): 118 Deg
Valve Lift (Exhaust): .447''
Valve Lift (Intake): .421''

I've no experience with these engines, but with a cam swap (even a stock 5.0 HO cam), it should perform pretty good.

Rusty67 · Jan 31, 2008

I would not get one that has GT40P heads. It is going to make for a headache when installing the headers. Try and find a motor with E7TE heads or if you are lucky a set of regular GT40 heads. If you just want to get a block and you are going to play with it a little, the Explorer motors are great. Yank the heads/cam and swap something else in and now you have a great setup to play with.

Shakin66 · Jan 31, 2008

I bought an explorer long block on ebay and then sold the heads trashed the cam and bought a 347 kit so I dont have the answers to the stock parts questions but I can say that mine was a low mileage engine that was a fresh base to build from.

Gearbanger 101 · Jan 31, 2008

Keep in mind, the later ('93-up) 5.0L HO's are going to use hypereutectic pistons in place of the forged slugs found in the earlier HO's. Not a big deal unless you plan on running a high strung power adder.

noblesteed · Jan 31, 2008

Hi 68jcode I'll be doing a complete explorer v8 install into a 67 coupe later this year eec v and electronic auto tranny too if you want to ease your install look for a 1996 to ealry 1997 explorer v8 they have gt 40 heads (not the p heads) if you find the p head explorer sanderson headers may work check them out in this forum.I drive v8 explorers everyday they have great torque and super gas mileage for a v8 awd suv I love em
they also idle super smooth with the distributor less ignition I'm looking forward to installing this whole set up )minus the awd of course) into the 67 coupe project waiting for me I've also heard that using 1:7 rocker arms help overcome short comings of stock camshaft I'll be trying that out too with the eec v obdII in place could be fun hope this helps

D.Hearne · Jan 31, 2008

Helmantel said:
The later (1998 and up?) 215 hp explorer engines have the GT40P heads and a good intake manifold, which flows only slightly less than the Cobra and GT40 intakes, but have a very mild cam:

5.0L Truck, Explorer F4TE-6250-BA
Hydraulic Roller
256° I (adv)
266° E (adv)
Duration (adv.) (Exhaust): 266 Deg
Duration (adv.) (Intake): 256 Deg
Cam Lift (Exhaust): .279''
Cam Lift (Intake): .263''
Duration at .050'' Lobe Lift (Exhaust): 197 Deg
Duration at .050'' Lobe Lift (Intake): 176 Deg
Lobe Centerline (Exhaust): 113 Deg
Lobe Centerline (Intake): 118 Deg
Valve Lift (Exhaust): .447''
Valve Lift (Intake): .421''

I've no experience with these engines, but with a cam swap (even a stock 5.0 HO cam), it should perform pretty good.

The F4TE cam is a great street/daily driver cam if you run it with 1.7 rockers. This is the setup I have in my 89 Ranger. Stock short block with flat tops, F4TE cam, Ported E7 heads, Cobra roller rockers, Ford A321 intake, topped with a 570 Street Avenger carb. Good mileage, great torque, pulls from idle to 6500 rpms. Best cam I've ever used with a carb. Works great with the Toploader 4 speed and 3.73 rear. I'd never swap it for the GT/HO cam, there isn't that much difference in the specs. The LSA is 116* not 115*. Lift with 1.7 rockers equals the GT/HO cam .445/.473 with 1.7's.

Decurion · Feb 2, 2008

The explorer engines are, in my opinion, the best regular production 302/5.0L ford has made. Sure the standard H.O. had forged pistons, but it had wheezy heads and intake. And there was the Boss 302, but that was pretty rare.

D.Hearne · Feb 2, 2008

The 93 Cobra 5.0 had a different cam grind. It wasn't the HO grind with 1.7 rockers.

Decurion · Feb 2, 2008

D.Hearne said:
The 93 Cobra 5.0 had a different cam grind. It wasn't the HO grind with 1.7 rockers.

But it did use the 1.7 rockers, right? How much different was the cam?

Gearbanger 101 · Feb 2, 2008

Decurion said:
But it did use the 1.7 rockers, right? How much different was the cam?

It was ground to provide a little more low end torque than the standard HO bump stick. In reality though, they probably would have been better off sticking with the HO grind. This same cam (the one used in the '93-'95 Cobras) was also found in the '93 Thunderbird 5.0L as well.

D.Hearne · Feb 2, 2008

Cobra cam specs : .479/.479 lift (1.7 rockers) Advertised duration was 270/270. 118.25 LSA. The HO cam's advertised duration is a little cloudy. The Ford 5.0 book lists it at 276/266 (int/exh), the Ford Racing catalog lists it at 266/266. Some listed it as 276/276. In any case, Ford said the HO was a bit hotter than the Cobra cam, so I suspect the HO cam was 276/276. The LSA was 115* on the first HO grind, the later ones were slightly different at 115.5*

Rusty67 · Feb 2, 2008

Decurion said:
The explorer engines are, in my opinion, the best regular production 302/5.0L ford has made. Sure the standard H.O. had forged pistons, but it had wheezy heads and intake. And there was the Boss 302, but that was pretty rare.

The thing I don't like about the explorer motors is that they didn't stick with the C8 rods. I can't remember what year they switched but the newer connecting rods are not as stout as the originals.

RMODEL65 · Feb 2, 2008

i just picked up a 96 exploder motor the dash said approx 60k on it got it for 200$

D.Hearne · Feb 2, 2008

Rusty67 said:
The thing I don't like about the explorer motors is that they didn't stick with the C8 rods. I can't remember what year they switched but the newer connecting rods are not as stout as the originals.

The rod switch was done in 91. Seen two 5.0's with F1TE rods with each one having a broken rod. And it was the rod broke, not the bolts like the C8 rods did.

Rusty67 · Feb 3, 2008

The C8 rod bolt problem is easy to fix... put ARP rod bolts in and it is over with. A broken rod is bad new bears.

Do the C8 and F1 rods interchange ? The deck high on the blocks are different aren't they ?

D.Hearne · Feb 3, 2008

No, should be the same dimensions for both. Except for the mid 70's 302 blocks with the extra .020 on top. Never weighed the two rods either, maybe something I'll do if given the chance.

PUNISHER RACING · Feb 3, 2008

H.O. ) .278/.278adv.- 210/210@.050- .444/.444 1.6- .473/.473 1.7- 115
Cobra) .282/.282adv.- 209/209@.050- .451/.451 1.6- .479/.476 1.7- 118

68Jcode · Feb 5, 2008

Thanks for all th great info guys!

Explorer 5.0

68Jcode

PUNISHER RACING

Active Member

Helmantel

New Member

Rusty67

Shakin66

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash

noblesteed

New Member

D.Hearne

New Member

Decurion

Member

D.Hearne

New Member

Decurion

Member

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash

D.Hearne

New Member

Rusty67

RMODEL65

Member

D.Hearne

New Member

Rusty67

D.Hearne

New Member

PUNISHER RACING

Active Member

68Jcode

Similar threads

Explorer 5.0

Active Member

New Member

Straight Outta Locash

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

Straight Outta Locash

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency