• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

picked up a v8 exploder for $500

  • Thread starter Thread starter ashford
  • Start date Start date Jul 17, 2010

ashford

Member
Dec 19, 2003
485
0
16
fargo ND
Jul 17, 2010
#1
  • Jul 17, 2010
  • #1
i have been keeping my eye out for a v8 from an explorer for a few years to drop into my falcon. i can also use the front pulley system for when doing a/c and other various parts.

my falcon has a 5.0 and t5 from a 86 gt 100% stock. i bought a maf kit from summit years ago and used on it (stock computer and maf).

my question is how to go about the install. should i freshen up the exploder ingine and install(160k) or put the top end on the 86H.O.(20k on a freshen up no cylinder wear). the only thing i worry about is pv clearance(flat tops no valve relief .000 deck heighth) ive hears of people using e7te heads on the 86 engine no problem. will the gt40p work as well? also will spark plugs clear bbk shorties for a fox?
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Jul 17, 2010
#2
  • Jul 17, 2010
  • #2
The GT40P heads have slightly larger intake valves (1.84 vs 1.78) so that's really the only thing that's going decrease the piston to valve contact vs E7's. Be that as it may, the reason the 86 motor (along with the later Crown Vic/Towncar/Marquis 5.0's) didn't have valve reliefs was that the valves in the E6 heads are sunken deeper in the heads (by 1/8") vs all other SBF heads. So just doing a head swap moves the valves closer to the pistons by 1/8". Something to think about. As long as you don't do a cam change, or change the cam timing on the HO cam, you may be fine with the swap. One other thing is the rods in the Exploder motor, Ford chose to do a rod swap in the early 90's on the 302, dropping the tried and true C8OE rods for a newer forging. I've seen two mid 90's 5.0's break these rods, and not the bolts as with the C8's. The rod itself broke.
 
V

v8only

Active Member
Jul 3, 2003
2,378
22
49
Jul 20, 2010
#3
  • Jul 20, 2010
  • #3
don't waste your time trying to put that top end on the 86 motor.

I've had two friends both have ptv clearance issues while claying it up just trying e7's

160 miles isn't "too" bad for a 5.0. If your budget allows it, refresh it. If you're tight, trying running it as is (but with a better cam and valve springs)
 

ashford

Member
Dec 19, 2003
485
0
16
fargo ND
Jul 26, 2010
#4
  • Jul 26, 2010
  • #4
i took the heads off the motor and suprised the hell out of me it had crosshatch almost(within 1/4 of top of ring travel) the whole bore. yes i now plan on freshening up the engine(didn't wan't to waste a fresh ho if it i didn't hafto)

would the ho cam be the best option for me?
im looking for a daily driver engine that gets good econmy an i don't hafto work on for a long time after its in, the car is a real pita to change the motor. this was the best i could think of for an engine that will put a smile on my face when i drive it. if i wanta go really fast my other car runs an 11.8 in the quarter.
 
V

v8only

Active Member
Jul 3, 2003
2,378
22
49
Jul 26, 2010
#5
  • Jul 26, 2010
  • #5
the HO mustang cam is a very good choice....but you HAVE to swap the valve springs out to the HO stock springs at a minimum too
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Jul 27, 2010
#6
  • Jul 27, 2010
  • #6
ashford said:
i took the heads off the motor and suprised the hell out of me it had crosshatch almost(within 1/4 of top of ring travel) the whole bore. yes i now plan on freshening up the engine(didn't wan't to waste a fresh ho if it i didn't hafto)

would the ho cam be the best option for me?
im looking for a daily driver engine that gets good econmy an i don't hafto work on for a long time after its in, the car is a real pita to change the motor. this was the best i could think of for an engine that will put a smile on my face when i drive it. if i wanta go really fast my other car runs an 11.8 in the quarter.
Click to expand...

The Exploder cam has only slightly less lift and duration on the intake side vs the HO cam. (256/266 Expldr vs 276/266 HO) lift is .422/.445 for the Exploder cam vs .445/.445 for the HO. Both work great with a carb. Both could benefit from a set of 1.7 rockers (increasing the lift by .030 at the valve) I'm running a Exploder cam in a roller 5.0 in my 89 Ranger. It's a great combo for running around town with a 4 speed and 3.73 gears. Good mileage too at 16-18 mpg on the highway with no overdrive.
 

Decurion

Member
Sep 28, 2006
353
0
16
Livonia, MI
Jul 28, 2010
#7
  • Jul 28, 2010
  • #7
Do some research and see how many people are running that Explorer cam in the stock classes. Pretty sure that number will be zero. Ive read there are slight variations in the H.O. cams over the years, but I seem to remember the 86 (speed density) cams were the best. It wouldnt be hard to notch your flattops, but if youre freshening up the explorer engine then it doesnt really matter I guess. Since youve already got the heads off and apart, may as well do a little cleanup and port matching. Certainly cant hurt the exhaust side any. The gt40 heads are way ahead of any other production windsor style head produced before, but they still respond well to a little cleanup work. Add a set of good valve springs and 1.7 rockers, and you should have a fun combination.
What kind of exhaust are you planning to run with the P heads?
 

ashford

Member
Dec 19, 2003
485
0
16
fargo ND
Oct 3, 2010
#8
  • Oct 3, 2010
  • #8
finally got it togeather

here's what i did with the motor. new rings, bearings oil pump, timing chain. reground valves and the machinist put "Z28" springs in it #110 at seat.
i put the power rack back in the car and i took a gamble and used the explorer timing cover and accessories, it worked out very well. now i have enough room between the water pump and radiator an put the fan on the engine side of the radiator and put an ac condensor in front , whoo hoo i can have ac for next summer now. i used the headders i had. they are flowtec 1.5 shorties for a fox body and a set of chevy plug wires for the 90 degree boot. they all clear, the closest boot is about 3/16 away from the header. i reused the 58mm tb and egr from the 86ho, ill probable upgrade later since it runs out of steam around 4800rpm.

however the used HO cam i got isn't an ho cam it has the standard 302 firing order( ask me how pissed off i was when the car ran funny at first start up) by looks i know its not a car cam(it has a fat lobe, i know the car one when i see it iv'e thrown quite a few into scrap iron). the engine is a little lacking in low end torque compared to the 86 ho and "turns on" around 2000 rpm it also seems to have a slight lope at idle, but i am unsure if its an artifact of having the wrong firing order with sequential injection. the cam when i looked at it seems to be made by ford. it has an unreadable part number and has a line of punch marks around it by the dizzy gear. i would sure like to know what it is.

anyway a few pics for ya.

 

Attachments

  • 1003001834a.webp
    22.2 KB · Views: 206
  • 1003001834.webp
    26.4 KB · Views: 181

ashford

Member
Dec 19, 2003
485
0
16
fargo ND
Oct 3, 2010
#9
  • Oct 3, 2010
  • #9
and
 

Attachments

  • 1003001835.webp
    22.3 KB · Views: 185
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Oct 4, 2010
#10
  • Oct 4, 2010
  • #10
Ford only made one hyd roller with the std firing order. And it definately doesn't lope. Lift specs are right around .400 with an advertised duration of about 245-250. But it does look like any other roller cam with "fat lobes"
 
2

2+2GT

10 Year Member
Apr 25, 2009
3,333
10
79
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Oct 4, 2010
#11
  • Oct 4, 2010
  • #11
While your planning, bear in mind the P head spark plugs will only clear headers made for the P heads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

0
V6 to V8 Swap info
  • 02_2v_Curtis
  • Jan 11, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
748
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jan 11, 2026
02_2v_Curtis
0
D
Question about EGR valve, replacement, and a part on the valve.
  • DPP
  • May 9, 2026
  • SN95 V6 Mustang Tech
Replies
1
Views
136
SN95 V6 Mustang Tech May 23, 2026
DPP
D
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
919
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
Engine Random Misfire at idle.
  • Gulftown980x
  • Wednesday at 9:16 PM
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
11
Views
198
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Friday at 9:26 AM
squeak93
T
What's it Worth? 2002 GT conv/auto
  • tonydetesta
  • Jan 7, 2026
  • What is it Worth?!?!?
Replies
3
Views
649
What is it Worth?!?!? Jan 21, 2026
Mustang5L5
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang 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?