PotM GrandMarq.NET - Panther Headquarters Forum Index PotM
GMN Chat Room GMN's STORE!! GMN's Gallery Please!!
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: Explorer/GT40 parts vs HO conversion

  1. #21
    Fastest Box In South Jersey 86VickyLX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westmont, New Jersey
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffBoudah View Post
    Soooo. would a holley terminator be better? Mustang bro's want $300-500 for harnesses and A9P/A9L set ups, Then you have a $600 tuner (quarterhorse, tweecer, etc) or dyno tune time.... so $1300, seems like a wash and you can control a 4r70w with it... https://www.summitracing.com/parts/hly-550-943
    I control my 4r70w and 5.0 engine with the use of a tuned 94 towncar ecu. You're not really utilizing the mustangs harness. You are using your original with a few added pins. The going rate for an a9p computer is anywhere between 150-300 bucks. The quarterhorse is 250. The software license if you feel so inclined is 70 bucks. If you just want a tune written to a chip without capability of livestream datalogging, the chip is 60 bucks I think, need something to burn the chip. But it would still have to be initially tuned with a quarterhorse.

  2. #22
    I'm an air-conditioned gypsy gadget73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    39,275

    Default

    Don't need a Mustang harness, and really dont' want one anyway. They don't physically fit in a reasonable way. A Panther harness fits the car a lot better. its not all that involved to pop in a few more pins to connect a MAF. The MAF harness can be had for not a bunch, or it can be robbed from anything in the junkyard. I've since bought proper crimp tools and factory pins so messing with harnesses doesn't require a bunch of ugly splices and such.

    There are other ECMs besides the A9* ones, those just happen to be the easiest to adapt. Its like 3 wires. Any mass air ECM can be adapted if you're willing to shuffle the wiring around enough. SN95 Mustang and MN12 Tbird for example require a bunch of connections moved but it can be done. If you have any thoughts on a 4R70w or AODE, the later ECM with electronic transmissions make a lot more sense vs Fox ECM and something like a Bauman controller.

    86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
    5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

    91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC SE, triple black (Timewarp) - poly front bushings, KYB struts and shocks, Holley SystemMax1 lower intake, SilverFox AOD valve body,

    1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

    Quote Originally Posted by phayzer5 View Post
    I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Holland,MI
    Posts
    443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 86VickyLX View Post
    I control my 4r70w and 5.0 engine with the use of a tuned 94 towncar ecu. You're not really utilizing the mustangs harness. You are using your original with a few added pins. The going rate for an a9p computer is anywhere between 150-300 bucks. The quarterhorse is 250. The software license if you feel so inclined is 70 bucks. If you just want a tune written to a chip without capability of livestream datalogging, the chip is 60 bucks I think, need something to burn the chip. But it would still have to be initially tuned with a quarterhorse.
    Maybe i was exaggerating some costs a tad... and I'm all for doing things cheap, but really, I will pay more for simplicity and efficiency. After my buddy built a 6.0L turbo 2500HD 2WD and put this terminator system on it, and had it running and driving in about 7 minutes after getting the plugs connected... I'm sold. I hope to get one on a sbf someday when we're all working again. ha

  4. #24
    Beater gonna beat sly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lewisville, TX
    Posts
    21,616

    Default

    I too like the idea of the Holly and FiTech systems.

    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
    rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)
    Quote Originally Posted by gadget73
    ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.
    Quote Originally Posted by dmccaig
    Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

  5. #25
    I'm an air-conditioned gypsy gadget73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    39,275

    Default

    my real objection to non-OEM is serviceability. Thats why all the non-stock crap on my car is stock for something else. If some sensor barfs, I don't want to be stuck waiting on a part that has to come from Holley.

    86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
    5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

    91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC SE, triple black (Timewarp) - poly front bushings, KYB struts and shocks, Holley SystemMax1 lower intake, SilverFox AOD valve body,

    1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

    Quote Originally Posted by phayzer5 View Post
    I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Holland,MI
    Posts
    443

    Default

    Shit these cars are ancient now, I couldn't even find a Windsor water pump local and had to order one. I think the Holley uses a GM Map sensor, and a Bosh widband O2. So it's off the shelf stuff.

  7. #27

    Default

    Has anyone tried plonking a complete Explorer motor/2wd transmission/ECM and wiring into a 5.0 car and running it as an OBD2/Mass Air car? I haven't looked at how the hp/torque curves look comparatively but the Explorer seems more akin to the CV in weight and purpose than a Mustang or Mark HO motor swap?

  8. #28
    Fastest Box In South Jersey 86VickyLX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westmont, New Jersey
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bgreywolf View Post
    Has anyone tried plonking a complete Explorer motor/2wd transmission/ECM and wiring into a 5.0 car and running it as an OBD2/Mass Air car? I haven't looked at how the hp/torque curves look comparatively but the Explorer seems more akin to the CV in weight and purpose than a Mustang or Mark HO motor swap?
    I apologize in advance for the longwinded response. It's not to deter anyone from trying as I'm in the wiring phase of an OBD-II swap on one of my cars. But just putting the information out there because it's a lot of work. And it's probably not worth it for someone who just wants a turn key car.


    The 2wd 4r70w found in the explorer is 2 inches longer than the non Lincoln AOD. You will need to modify your trans crossmember to mount it and will definitely need a custom/shortened driveshaft to make it go. Explorers starting in 98/99 also utilized a rear differential speed sensor to get vehicle speed info. This communicated with the ABS unit to the PCM and ultimately to the electronic speedometer to display vehicle speed. Which means that there is a possibility that there is no drive gear for a conventional vss to be driven for cruise control operation and no speedometer operation. So it would have to be a 97 or earlier explorer trans, or a custom built unit with the necessary hardware on the tailshaft. Besides that, without tuning you're still gonna run into issues with the thing having issues with a check engine light an possible limp mode with missing sensors for the emissions crap. Rear O2s actually influence fuel trims (who knew?) Not to mention needing to run explorer accessories which have been done. At least twice (my car, and one of Scott's customers from way back). It really isn't worth it. Custom lines for the power steering pump, needing to swap the pressure relief valve and spring so the seals in the steering gear don't puke out. If you're keeping ac custom lines for that. Running the intake the other way would cause an issue with where the battery sits, I don't believe that the explorer air box would fit, so you'd have to figure out a different box/MAF assembly to use which will require a tune. The other alternative is keeping the stock accessory locations, fabbing up a mounting bracket for the crank sensor (which can't sit where it's supposed to be, so you'd have to clock the sensor lower than where it should be (this method also requires a special harmonic balancer to put the explorer tone ring on (I did this too, but the I had modified the ignition timing curve in the tune to allow for proper ignition timing advance). Or you could have an aftermarket trigger wheel fabbed and mounted to the crank pulley and make bracketry for the crank sensor as well. Regardless of that hurtle the wiring harness physically would be shorter as the ECM bolts directly above the engine on the explorers meanwhile the crown vic ones are tucked behind drivers wheel well. You could utilize a modified Crown Vic OBD-2 Harness. But you're still modifying it to make it work to the 5.0. So you're stuck with making a custom harness. 95-97 vic will yield you basically the same pinout as the early explorer. 98-02 will yield you COP ignition system which would be neat, but then you're making brackets to mount the coils. Regardless of what you do, you're still gonna have to fab something to make it work, and you will still need to tune the engine/computer to make it work. The fox Mustang ECU and whatnot is the most straightforward way to get the job done.

  9. #29
    Fastest Box In South Jersey 86VickyLX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westmont, New Jersey
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    Also forgot to mention the explorers have Pat's which disable the vehicles injector pulse. So you would either need to integrate that somehow, or disable it with a tune. Again, pain in the ass.

  10. #30

    Default

    Yeah, that does sound like a bunch of work.
    If I didn't have another project (or two...or three...) and if this wasn't my daily driver, I think it wouldn't be too awful. I like the thought of OBD2, EDIS and all of Ford's best engineering in one 5.0 that's designed for a vehicle as heavy as the Crown Vic with a trailer.
    But it definitely sounds like it would be the much much harder route.

  11. #31
    P31 Pursuit Car Brown_Muscle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gadget73 View Post
    my real objection to non-OEM is serviceability. Thats why all the non-stock crap on my car is stock for something else. If some sensor barfs, I don't want to be stuck waiting on a part that has to come from Holley.
    The holley Sniper EFI uses all its sensors/parts used on stock vehicles, so its not proprietary. Just as a note. Using stock computers and FI systems, and dealing with the nightmare of tuning them...no thanks, not ever again
    -Phil



    +1982 Ford LTD-S Police Car. 351w, GT40 Heads, Edelbrock 1906 Carb, Full exhaust headers to tails. 3.27 Trac-Lok Rear. Aluminum Police Driveshaft. Speedway Springs+Bilstein Shocks, Intermediate Brakes, Baumann Shift kit.

    +1975 Maverick- Fuel injected 302, Trickflow 170 heads, XE270 cam, explorer intakes, 24# injectors, custom tune. T5 transmission, 3.55 Yukon Trac-Lok rear.

  12. #32

    Default

    Well, il give you my setup since it seems to fall in this category.things that are currently installed on my 88 town car. Ported upper and lower explorer intakes, 65mm explorer tb. a9p computer. Mass air conversion. 3.55 trac lock. Mustang headers into duals. 19lb injectors. Stock cam. stock heads. Recent trans rebuild. It seems to get hot quick. oil light comes on especially at stop lights. Goes thru batteries. Needs a 3g alternator i think.

  13. #33
    I'm an air-conditioned gypsy gadget73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    39,275

    Default

    does that actually perform better than stock? The heads and the cam are a huge bottleneck. Your fuel trim would also be screwy since the injector firing order does not match the engine firing order. Half the cylinders would have the fuel puddling on the back of the intake valve rather than firing when the valve opens. An Explorer cam would be a much better fit there.

    86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
    5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

    91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC SE, triple black (Timewarp) - poly front bushings, KYB struts and shocks, Holley SystemMax1 lower intake, SilverFox AOD valve body,

    1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

    Quote Originally Posted by phayzer5 View Post
    I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

  14. #34

    Default

    It does oddly. Not great but much better than it did. It needs an oil pressure sending unit. That comp xe 258 should be fine right? Tho that would call for the change in heads huh. Should i do that and the gt-40 heads at one time? Im still looking into how to set up the heads. Behive springs different pushrods 1.6 rockers right?

  15. #35
    I'm an air-conditioned gypsy gadget73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    39,275

    Default

    Should be OK, its what I run on mine. I'd definitely do the heads with the cam. The intake has to come off for both, no point in doing it twice. Pushrods are a maybe, measure to confirm. I needed longer ones but some people have gotten by without. I had no preload with stock pushrods. Stock are 6.25, mine are 6.3. I'm running 1.7 rockers but I had them. 1.6 are probably the right ones to use. No idea what springs to use, my E7's dont have stock ones but I honestly have no clue whats on them.

    86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
    5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

    91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC SE, triple black (Timewarp) - poly front bushings, KYB struts and shocks, Holley SystemMax1 lower intake, SilverFox AOD valve body,

    1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

    Quote Originally Posted by phayzer5 View Post
    I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

  16. #36
    GMN Regular Giraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Cabot, AR
    Posts
    876

    Default

    I managed to get my hands on a set of standard GT40 heads and cam from a '94 Cobra. My plan is to get a V6 Mustang 4R70W and go with a Megasquirt computer along with a transmission controller. It'll take a while to get to that point, but I think it's a better option than rolling the dice on speed density.
    óJohn

    1990 Mercury Grand Marquis LS (POTM March 2017 & May 2019)
    1995 Mustang SVT Cobra coupe (cream puff)
    1966 Mustang coupe (restoration in-progress)

  17. #37
    "The finder of unobtainium and other magical items" zoomie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eustis florida
    Posts
    3,059

    Default

    here are a few things i was planning to do a long time ago, and probably will be doing with my new rig. I personally never saw a reason to mess with mass air, so my solution to the explorer top end swap recipe i had put together included a mustang da1 ecu, i also found a tuner in rochester ny who tunes them, adam marrer from pops racing. If you have the right stuff he can even do a remote tune.
    heres my list.
    explorer intake, 65mm tb
    lightning egr spacer, or custom made( im working on doing a casting at some point)
    19 lb 4 hole injectors to start, but 24 after tune.
    comp camp x258
    alexs parts hardened push rods
    alexs parts drop in springs for gt40 heads
    pushrod checker is cheap*
    Mustang da1- not sure but pretty sure the mark vii d9s is the same , but diff tuning for tourqe.
    but yeah based on research should run dandy on speed density just fine.
    89 townie, mild exhuast up grades, soon to have loud ass stereo....

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
GMN Approved Links!


www.rockauto.com www.adtr.net