• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Mustang 5.0 vs Explorer 5.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikefsanti
  • Start date Start date Dec 27, 2004
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
M

mikefsanti

New Member
Dec 25, 2004
4
0
0
Dec 27, 2004
#1
  • Dec 27, 2004
  • #1
As far as I know the mayor differences between a mustang block and an explorer block is, crankshaft and heads. Does any body have more info on this, for example which one is inclined to have more torque and which one is inclined to have more HP? forgive me if I sound dum but I am new to all this. I would really appreciate any more comparison info.

Thanks
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Dec 27, 2004
#2
  • Dec 27, 2004
  • #2
not the crank, the camshaft, and there is also a gt40 intake there. do a search under explorer there is a guy with the screen name greenmustanggt or something like that in this 94-95 section. he has just in the last few months swaped in a explorer motor.
 
M

mikeflys1

Founding Member
Aug 27, 2002
217
1
0
CT
Dec 28, 2004
#3
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #3
Also i think all the 96+ ones are distributorless.
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Dec 28, 2004
#4
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #4
mikeflys1 said:
Also i think all the 96+ ones are distributorless.
Click to expand...

And a 4.6 modular motor - totally different from a 5.0 motor.
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Dec 28, 2004
#5
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #5
I thinks he's referring to the 96+explorers..
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Dec 28, 2004
#6
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #6
OOOOOPS - senior moment. Yes they are distributor less, but it's a drop in for the stock Mustang distributor.
 

DFG 5OH

Active Member
Aug 28, 2004
1,341
0
36
Louisville, KY
Dec 28, 2004
#7
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #7
I know that the explorer transmissions are geared different, and the motors are probably not tuned to be in a mustang. Correct me if i'm wrong but if someone would just drop a complete Explorer motor with a T-5, what kind of power would you get, without any modifications, and what would you have to do to make the motor push its "potential" power in a mustang.
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Dec 28, 2004
#8
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #8
well the 5.0 explorer/Merc. mount. were AWD so they had a bit of drive train drag on them too. The cam is for a truck so that might want to get tossed.

I think greenmustanggt has a explorer motor and is a 5spd.? He may have some insight as to power "feel" and whatnot.
 

DFG 5OH

Active Member
Aug 28, 2004
1,341
0
36
Louisville, KY
Dec 28, 2004
#9
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #9
blksn955.o said:
well the 5.0 explorer/Merc. mount. were AWD so they had a bit of drive train drag on them too. The cam is for a truck so that might want to get tossed.

I think greenmustanggt has a explorer motor and is a 5spd.? He may have some insight as to power "feel" and whatnot.
Click to expand...


thanks, does anyone have some dyno numbers for an explorer 5.0?
 
H

hrspwrjunkie

Member
Dec 15, 2004
165
0
18
Dec 28, 2004
#10
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #10
People here have given good advice.

The great thing about the later Explorer engines with the GT-40P heads is the greater air flow through the heads while not losing any velocity. And while the swap is a good idea, here are some good ideas to make a great combination that will really run well together and take full advantage of the better heads:

A GT-40, Cobra, Explorer, Edelbrock Performer or Trick Flow Street Heat intake. While I think there is a chance the new BBK SSI series intake will out perform any of the ones I've mentioned in this application, it won't fit under the stock hood and will require the Cobra R cowl. While many people choose to put a larger throttle body on their motors, the fact is, when tested, the factory 60mm performs well enough on a 5.0 that it can match a 65mm up to 330 horses and give you better throttle response and easier throttle modulation while driving. The stock MAF can also flow fine for this application so long as the injector combination is tuned in with a chip or aftermarket computer. But grab a K&N air filter. Many people have their favorite versions of aftermarket MAFs if that is a way you would like to go Two of the more popular brands are Pro-M and C&L. 24lb injectors are a good idea as well.

A Crane 2031 cam, a Ford Racing E303, Comp XE264HR or Comp XE266HR are all excellent choices with matching valve springs.

MAC 1 5/8" shorty headers for GT-40P heads in a '94-'95 Mustang will do the job well and as far as I know are the only ones available for the application.

Your choice of 2.5" H or X-pipe and catback. It's hard to go wrong where performance is concerned. Noise levels and tones will be different with different systems.

A different set of gears. 3.27:1 will allow you to trap the quarter mile perfectly in third gear, 4.30:1 will be perfect for 4th, but many people like street driving with 3.55:1 or 3.73:1 gear sets.

Also, make sure you have the combo tuned by a dyno tuner that can perform the whole gamut of driving functionality from idle, part throttle to full power. This is really where great strides in power, driveability and functionality can be found. But this in no way is an exhaustive explanation of what would be needed to make the combination work.

mikefsanti said:
As far as I know the mayor differences between a mustang block and an explorer block is, crankshaft and heads. Does any body have more info on this, for example which one is inclined to have more torque and which one is inclined to have more HP? forgive me if I sound dum but I am new to all this. I would really appreciate any more comparison info.

Thanks
Click to expand...
 

DFG 5OH

Active Member
Aug 28, 2004
1,341
0
36
Louisville, KY
Dec 28, 2004
#11
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #11
what kinda numbers could be put down with a direct explorer 5.0 swap?

would it be that much better than the stang 5.0? That is including a better cam in the explorer motor.
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Dec 28, 2004
#12
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #12
hrspwrjunkie said:
People here have given good advice.

here are some good ideas to make a great combination that will really run well together and take full advantage of the better heads:

A GT-40, Cobra, Explorer, Edelbrock Performer or Trick Flow Street Heat intake. 24lb injectors are a good idea as well.
Click to expand...

well the explorer intake is already a gt40 intake, the and injectors are already 24# ones (I think anyway but like 99% sure on the inj.) that have a diff. and better spray setup.

Now as far as cams go I have done alot of reading on gt40 heads and what they like. The heads seem to like close to .500 lift (around .490 is prob. best) and a split patt. that fav. the exh. side by .008-.012 lift and 4-8* in dur. I am not a authority on the subject just "read up" on the things.
 

DFG 5OH

Active Member
Aug 28, 2004
1,341
0
36
Louisville, KY
Dec 28, 2004
#13
  • Dec 28, 2004
  • #13
i want one bad!
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Dec 29, 2004
#14
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #14
Anderson Ford Motorsports did a dyno comparison of the GT40, Cobra and Explorer intakes on the same dyno mule - they all made within a couple HP of each other all the way through 6,600 rpm.
 

scarless

Member
Aug 9, 2004
175
0
16
Dec 29, 2004
#15
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #15
tmoss, any info on the dyno mule specs?
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Dec 29, 2004
#16
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #16
I'll see if I can find the mule data.
 

loud 95

New Member
May 29, 2003
562
0
0
Milwaukie, OR
Dec 29, 2004
#17
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #17
I have recently installed a set of '96 explorer (GT-40P) heads on my 95GT shortblock. I matched them with a stage 1 TFS cam, and a typhoon intake with a 65mm throttle body. The idea was to go as cheap as I could on this engine, as it will soon be pulled out of my mustang and transplanted into my Bronco II. With an untuned ECU, stock MAF and 19lb./hr injectors, it made great power with surprisingly good driveability. Currently, it has 24lb. injectors and a 76mm C&L. I have just had a chip burned, and the car will be dyno tested in a week. In addition, I am running a short belt. As such, I will make more power than a stock 5.0 explorer engine. Even so, my dyno numbers (when I get them) should give you an idea of what an explorer engine with a slightly hotter cam, roller rockers, better valve springs, pulleys, better MAF and a tune should put down. I'll post my numbers as soon as I get them. Oh yeah, I am running the same Mac long-tubes I ran with my stock heads. The only problem that occurs is that one spark plug wire needs a 90 degree boot attached to clear the header primary. I simply used the long distributor wire included in the FRPP wire set.
 

lager94GT

Founding Member
Feb 9, 2001
119
0
16
LI, NY
Dec 29, 2004
#18
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #18
In addition to my mustang, I have a 96 Explorer with the 5.0. My '96 has the gt40 heads, not the gt40p's. The 'P's came in late 96 or 97. The Explorer 5.0 also has the "explorer" intake which uses the gt40/cobra lower. I believe the explorer 5.0 is rated at 215hp. I have the AWD so there is more drivetrain friction loss than is a rear-wheel drive Mustang.

In my opinion, if you were to drop the 5.0 from my 96 explorer (cam and all) directly into a Mustang you'd likely have 225-235 hp, similar to but slightly less than the 94-95 cobra ratings. The explorer headers are extremely constricted. Thousands of times worse than some $159 shorty mustang headers. I think they had to fit the explorer 5.0 with gt40 heads and cobra-type intake instead of E7 heads to compensate for the poor exhaust manifolds.

The explorer also has 18 lb injectors, not 19 like stock Mustangs
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Dec 29, 2004
#19
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #19
P heads did not find their way onto Explorers until 97. The Explorers came with Bosch Gen III 19# injectors - they are orange just like the stock Bosch Gen II 19# Mustang injectors but their body is smaller and the whole body is ortange plastic. Ford also made Lime Green Bosch Gen III 19# injectors but the connectors are not the same as ours.

Edit: Click on the "My Garage" link below my avatar for a visual guide to the Gen III injectors that can be used in Mustangs.
 
A

Allmotor95

New Member
Oct 28, 2004
29
0
0
Dec 29, 2004
#20
  • Dec 29, 2004
  • #20
Well let's see!!

My p-head E-cam combo was on a 2001 Explorer engine.

My current combo is a 98 Explorer engine.

You need to change at least the cam and is a Cobra engine.
Don't forget to check out my signature.This is a VERT!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW FRPP shorties(new style) are perfect fit for P-Heads with no issues!!!
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Engine PATS off pcm for 1999 Explorer 5.0 swap
  • GOvert
  • Dec 23, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
16
Views
785
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jun 14, 2026
GOvert
G
1
Engine Motor swap from a 2003 Explorer
  • 1996mustang new
  • Oct 9, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
571
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 16, 2025
squeak93
S
1965 Mustang with 80s 5.0 engine in it Power Steering hose or connection ID?
  • spearce
  • May 19, 2026
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
88
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 8, 2026
AeroCoupe
J
MEED HELP!! 86 mustang
  • Jacob0121
  • Jan 23, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
327
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 25, 2026
CAMTWO1070
S
5.0 Rebuild
  • smittys7up
  • Nov 29, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
545
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 20, 2025
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific 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?