Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

96 explorer cam different than mustang cam?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    96 explorer cam different than mustang cam?

    description says

    A 1996 Ford Explorer 5.0 Hydraulic Roller Camshaft. This is the same camshaft as in the Ford Racing Shortblock M-6009-B50. High torque profile. This will fit 1985 and newer hydraulic roller equipped 302's and 351W's

    it the same as 5.0ho cam?

    #2
    It is the same as the 351W truck cam and the other 302 trucks from 1994+.



    GM/CV/92-93 Truck Cam: Lift .237/.244 Duration 244/256
    HO Cam: Lift .278/.278 Duration 266/276
    94+ Truck/Explorer/Van: Lift .264/.280 Duration256/266
    302 & 351W

    Comment


      #3
      Its slightly different than an HO, profile is more low-end torque oriented. I keep thinking I want to swap my HO cam for one, as I'm disappointed with the under-3k torque on my engine, and I'll have the intake and valve covers off at some point to change them. It would probably also be a good idea to have a bit more low end grunt since I end up towing with this car from time to time.

      Since we're on the topic, anyone think a Mark VII SD ECM would have any major issues if I installed one of these on an otherwise stock engine?
      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 grandpa spec white and cranberry

      1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

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

      Comment


        #4
        It'll be fine with a exploder cam. I have 2 sitting around-brand new!
        Builder/Owner of Badass Panther Wagons

        Busy maintaining a fleet of Fords

        Comment


          #5
          ok im still thinking i should get a cam before its too late,

          is the 94-95 f150 cams the same as the explorer cams?

          or should i get the 4x4 cam justin has?



          remeber my setup will be

          88 stang 302 bored 20
          hypereutectic pistons with 2 valve reliefs part no H273CP20
          gasket matched e7s, 3angle, new springs and retainers, bowl grind.
          1.72 crane rr's
          mac equal length shortie
          ported explorer gt40 lower and upper
          intake spacer needed to clear rails for towncar application.
          65mm tb
          cam crank polish new bearings
          bosch injectors
          mark 7 LSC trans w high stall
          msd coil
          all new pumps and accessories.

          Comment


            #6
            The 4X4 cam justin has is a flat tappet cam.
            1983 Grand Marquis 2Dr Sedan "Mercules"
            Tremec TKO conversion, hydraulic clutch, HURST equipped!

            Comment


              #7
              ah i overlooked that

              Comment


                #8
                how about this one?

                Comment


                  #9
                  ah fuckit ill just keep the stock HO cam

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Ok I have been debating this one in my head. I mean I rode in a friends 5.0 explorer and I was not impressed. I mean I know it is in an explorer and not a stang or a panther but would I be disappointed in it as opposed to a HO cam. My wagon is a huge bitch so it might need more low end torque as opposed to a sedan or such.

                    As to give you guys a idea what I want from my wagon is just to be a great cruiser that is better then the Lopo in it right now and I want to be able to do a nasty burnout everytime I want to instead of the 50/50 change I can if I attempt it now.lol I have the heads, 19# injectors and HO computer for it sitting waiting to be slapped on. I will get more exotic with the engine when I am done bagging it and all the fun stuff.

                    So if I decide on a explorer cam, would I need a different computer or injectors??

                    I also know I am thread digging but I didnt want to start a new one.

                    Thanks.
                    2000 Mustang GT "Blondie", 2000 CVPI "Sargent Crusty"

                    Comment


                      #11
                      The stock Explorer exhaust is horrible. The engines actually will make a lot more power than a stock HO motor with those heads. The cam makes pretty darn close to the same power and has a little more low end torque. I did some desktop dyno testing (i know, I know) and it shows very little difference over about 3,000 rpm, but under 3k, the Explorer cam is definitely more stout.

                      Explorer cam or HO cam both work fine with the Mark VII ECM and 19# injectors.
                      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 grandpa spec white and cranberry

                      1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

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

                      Comment


                        #12
                        The explorers are damn stout, but the exhaust kills about 50hp or better. Go google explorer exhaust manifolds. The explorer cam is going to be better than the HO. I really didn't like the HO cam that much. The explorer cam will work fine with the HO ECM and 19lbers.
                        Builder/Owner of Badass Panther Wagons

                        Busy maintaining a fleet of Fords

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Alrighty I think I just may go with one of those instead. Gadget you threw one in your new HO didnt you? How do you like it compaired to the HO camshaft?

                          Also Mike you have any explorer cams sitting around, I saw in the post above you had 2 sitting around. Granted that was 2 years ago. If you do are you willing to part with one? If now I have found some on ebay.
                          2000 Mustang GT "Blondie", 2000 CVPI "Sargent Crusty"

                          Comment


                            #14
                            I don't have them anymore. I sold one and I don't remember what I did with the other... Might see what Scott has sitting around.
                            Builder/Owner of Badass Panther Wagons

                            Busy maintaining a fleet of Fords

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Feels more responsive off the bottom end, over about 3,000 rpm no difference really. It runs pretty good all in all.
                              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 grandpa spec white and cranberry

                              1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

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

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X