Engine Swap comparison

[gadget73]

Block is the same. Heads and intake are really the only difference. I think it probably has hyperthingymabob pistons instead of the standard cast lopo pistons or the forged HO pistons tho. Thats about it really.

[Paul_]

I haven't read too much into the Explorer 5.0 swaps. How different is the block from, say our 5.0s? I know the heads are different, obviously.

[Blaze86Vic]

Much more powerfull. With shorty headers you are looking at roughly 100hp increase. And yes with little to no loss in mileage.

[88Vic]

An Explorer motor is much more powerful than a LOPO. And I could be wrong, but I don't think it gets as good fuel economy as a LOPO does.

[yucatec]

Dear Gurus,
Forgive me for asking a basic and probably stupid question. I have a 5.0 in my 89' wagon. I am not interested in racing/dragging nor getting popped for speeding. I am interested in passing quickly on the interstate, reliability and gas mileage.

I have seen many engine swaps suggested-Ford Explorer the commonest- on the site.

Please, what are their advantages and dis.
Donald McCaig

[88Vic]

True. I realize that it was a retarded idea that I thought up. But what else is new?

[Mercracer]

You are forgetting that the Taurus 3.4 only mates to the FWD transmission. You are forgetting that it does not use conventional motor mounts.
It would be less costly and many times more simple to bolt in a 4.6 4V Cobra motor to a CV/GM than it would a SHO motor.

[88Vic]

Also, the Taurus SHO takes Premium, so a Vic with a 3.4 would also need Premium. Another con for the 3.4L.

[88Vic]

The SHO motor, good gears, and performance parts could work well in a Panther, but you'd have to do some serious weight removal like: removing the back seats, taking out the front seats and putting in a racing seat, changing the hood, trunk door, and body panels to Carbon Fiber. But that would be expensive and stupid. But if you really wanted a Panther and that engine, that's what you'd have to do. I've got too much free time to be thinking up this stuff.

[Fordman75]

Yea but the SHO will have to work a hell of lot harder then the 4.9L would. The sho engine might be cool in a real light weight car but not a Panther. Way too much weight. That's like sticking a turbo 2.3L in a F250! You are just going to shorten the life of the engine for not much benefit.

And you can build a 300 to pull real hard from idle right thru 5500 rpm.

[N A]

The SHO motor and 4.56 gears would do the job.

[gadget73]

4.9 would actually be able to motivate the car out of it's own way with authority. It would be no high end screamer but you'd actually be able to get to the next stoplight before you got old.

[N A]

It'd look good, but it performes well at high RPMs. I'd much rather have a little less power, but have it at low-mid RPMs.

Mandatory 4.10:1 or 4.56:1 gearset. Think 32-valve DOHC modular Ford motor Mustang Cobra.

[Fordman75]

The 300 inline 6 (4.9L ) is one of, if not the toughest engine Ford ever built!! They are rock solid dependable and can take one hell of a beating!!

Plus they do have the ability to make some good HP when built right. I know a guy that runs one in his front engine dragster and he runs 8.90's in the 1/4. And that's with a 2.47 rear end gear!! And his motor is N/A. No blower, turbo or laughing gas. He runs 3 Holley 500cfm 2V carbs and is making right around 650 hp. But he used to work for Ford and he definately knows his way around a racing engine.

Oh yea and the 300 just looks sick with a multicarb setup!!

[88Vic]

The SHO motor would look wicked bad ass when you popped the hood. It's the more efficient motor of your two choices too.

It'd look good, but it performes well at high RPMs. I'd much rather have a little less power, but have it at low-mid RPMs.