Looking for 5.0 bird running or not

[KerryP]

Im looking for a cheep 5.0 bird so i can swap the motor into my sc. I dont care about the body as long as everything i need for the swap is in tact, ie the computer, harness, rad etc. im willing to pay up to $700 depending on the condition. One that was smashed but with low km's would be perfect.

Any info on this swap would be greatly appreciated.

[fturner]

To be honest with you, your better off sticking with the 3.8 with the SC cause the 5.0's that came in the LX's where very weak.... but of course thats your choice ;).

Frit

[Payton]

To be honest with you, your better off sticking with the 3.8 with the SC cause the 5.0's that came in the LX's where very weak.... but of course thats your choice ;).

Frit
I think you should talk to Samir, he used to have a 5.0 HO in his Cougar and he thought it was a fast car!!!....
till he got a SC;) :D

[sumzxr7]

I think you should talk to Samir, he used to have a 5.0 HO in his Cougar and he thought it was a fast car!!!....
till he got a SC;) :D

Yeah, Payton is right....hehehe..the 5.0L was well...not too fast..all show, no go type of car..but man did it ever sound nice..now the SC was semi-fast...but compared to my 2003 Honda Accord V6, the SC seems super slow ;-) but of course, my Accord is 10 years newer.

Still bleed Ford Blue, but man I love Hondas!

[KerryP]

whats the difference betwen the 5.0 in the lx bird and the stang, i want the 5.0 b/c my 3.8 is shot and i think it would be easer and cheeper to build a high perf 5.0 than to try and squeeze what i can out of my 3.8.

[mn12bird]

actually I thought the 5.0 in a bird was the same as the stang minus the restricting exhaust? same cam, same intake mainifold. I dunno bottom end or internals might be better on a stang? I would just get one out of a stang. easier to find too. There is no reason I can think why you would want to find one out of a bird. as for being slow. please. put a little money into it and it will be just as fast and way more reliable ;)

Jake

[fturner]

I don't know... I think your gonna be hard pressed to mod a 5.0 to launch the tbird like the sc'd 3.8 does, and for cheaper. You can go to the tech forums there and ask. Several folks have done it so you can get their impressions.

If it was such a popular mod to do with tons of power to gain easily and cheaply, then I would think ALOT more folks would be doing it.

Frit

[tbirdsc357]

If it was such a popular mod to do with tons of power to gain easily and cheaply, then I would think ALOT more folks would be doing it.

Frit


There is no question that you can mod a 5L for less than an SC and make more power. There is a much, much greater aftermarket for the Mustang crowd and as a result their HI-PO parts are a lot cheeper.

However, if you think you are going to drop a stock 5.0 in a heavy bird and expect it to be as fast as a Stang then guess again, however, that 5L will respond much more for less than it will to get the same power out of the 3.8.

If I had put the cash I did in my bird into a stang.....there is no doubt that I would easily have a low 12 sec car.

[sumzxr7]

actually I thought the 5.0 in a bird was the same as the stang minus the restricting exhaust? same cam, same intake mainifold. I dunno bottom end or internals might be better on a stang? I would just get one out of a stang. easier to find too. There is no reason I can think why you would want to find one out of a bird. as for being slow. please. put a little money into it and it will be just as fast and way more reliable ;)

Jake

Yeah, this is pretty much correct..the intake manifold on the 5.0L in the cougar and birds are smaller (shorter runners) and it has restricted exhaust...other then that its pretty much the same H.O 5.0L you find in the 87-95 stangs..keep in mind if you want to change the intake manifold to the one found in the stangs, you may have problems with clearance, as the hood will not close (hence the reason Ford redesigned it for the M-12s)

Cheers,
Samir

[91 5.0 sc]

I have a 5.0 in my car and it goes very well but i have 3 inch flowmaster exhaust and cold air intake and 373 gears :)

[SeanMatteson]

Before I ever did the cam swap, much less the engine replacement, I was running 255 RWHP and 367 ftlbs of TQ at the wheels. I really didn't have a lot of money tied up in engine mods at the time with the totally stock bottom end, 3.8L V6.

I expect you could get a 5.0L HO into the same horsepower, even at the wheels, for the same or less money than I had into my setup at that time. However, I doubt you'll get 367 ftlbs of TQ out of it, at the wheels unless you switch to forced induction on the 5.0L HO. ...And if you want to run any of the 'good' intakes for the 5.0L, then you'll have to switch to a taller hood , or modify the way you mount the engine to have it sit lower (I think some people have modified the subframe that the engine and front suspension mounts to) in your T-Bird, or you'll have clearance issues.

I don't care what you do to a 3.8L V6, you'll never get the same sound as a HiPo 5.0L. It's just a matter of physics! ...You will never run the same frequencies with 6 cylinders as you do with 8 for a given RPM range. However, I strongly doubt you'll get anywhere near the same fuel economy with the heavily modded 5.0L HO that it would take to move the heavy T-Bird the same as a modded 3.8L V6, since typically a gear change is a must with the 5.0L cars. ...I'm still running 2.73's in mine at present.

...I'd really like to get my car strapped down for a tuning session with Dave Dalke to put a more aggressive tune on the car, and see what kind of numbers she's putting down now. Hopefully we can do just that in the next month or two. ...I really need to in advance of the Shootout, or I won't be competing.

Ultimately, it's a matter of personal choice. Personally, if you're gonna go V8, I still like what Wayne did with his old '92 SC.

Cheers,

Sean

[Payton]

Personally, if you're gonna go V8, I still like what Wayne did with his old '92 SC.
Cheers,
Sean
I'd like to know how much money did he sink in this project:rolleyes:

[tbirdsc357]

I'd like to know how much money did he sink in this project:rolleyes:

Wayne's project is very different from a simple V8 swap, his was a 351, it was fuel injected, turbo, and the biggest part from what I understand was trying to fit the intake under a stock hood....which he did.......that thing was so perfectly tight in there it was amazing, and he could still change the plugs 10 times faster than an SC.

If I'm not mistaken, that car made more HP and TQ than any other SC out there, I believe the closest was Chris Wise with a 100 shot of nitrous and a completly done engine??

[SeanMatteson]

Wayne's project is very different from a simple V8 swap, his was a 351, it was fuel injected, turbo, and the biggest part from what I understand was trying to fit the intake under a stock hood....which he did.......that thing was so perfectly tight in there it was amazing, and he could still change the plugs 10 times faster than an SC.

If I'm not mistaken, that car made more HP and TQ than any other SC out there, I believe the closest was Chris Wise with a 100 shot of nitrous and a completly done engine??

It was a very cool setup! Actually, I don't know that I ever actually heard or saw hard numbers from Wayne. I'd guess he was running quite easily between 500 and 600 RWHP, and I don't think that Chris Wise was running as much power on his heavily modded 3.8L V6, even with the nitrous.

...And yes, it really wasn't a cheap project for Wayne. If anyone is going to try to reproduce what Wayne had done, they better have deep pockets filled with loads of cash. ...Just go out and price an aftermarket engine management system like FAST or DFI for starters.

Cheers,

Sean

[charged92]

There is one here in London. I know the guy, it is a 91 LX with a 5L HO in it. It runs good could probrably get it for chaep. PM me if you are interested.

[barrieguy]

My brother has an '88 Mustang GT that he converted from 302 to 351 with twin turbo, he bought a used engine from a ford pickup (good for lower compression with high boost), then picked up some used turbos (he got both for under $200 for both), and had an exhaust shop fab up the necessary pieces to connect them, he also installed dual intercoolers (also from bone yard, got them both for $120). When it was all said and done he spent less than $1000 for everything, turn key. He is running 15lbs boost, and I would estimate he is running atleast 500 rwhp. I know the birds are a little different but I'm sure the same could be done under the hood of an MN12...

Just my two cents.

Trevor

[KerryP]

My brother has an '88 Mustang GT that he converted from 302 to 351 with twin turbo, he bought a used engine from a ford pickup (good for lower compression with high boost), then picked up some used turbos (he got both for under $200 for both), and had an exhaust shop fab up the necessary pieces to connect them, he also installed dual intercoolers (also from bone yard, got them both for $120). When it was all said and done he spent less than $1000 for everything, turn key. He is running 15lbs boost, and I would estimate he is running atleast 500 rwhp. I know the birds are a little different but I'm sure the same could be done under the hood of an MN12...

Just my two cents.

Trevor
Wow that thing sounds cool, good way to spend a grand.
thanks for the input but im not realy shooting for 500rwhp (for now), I just want to get it running strong and reliable. I would like to put a 351 in but it seams to be alot easer and cheeper to swap in a 302.

[barrieguy]

351's from pickups can be had for VERY little money, plus you get the extra displacement and the low compression (hint, hint maybe some boost)....

I had a '93 LX with the 5.0HO in it and I was very pleased with the power. It didn't quite have that same aura about without a supercharger but I would say the difference is marginal at best. The 302 HO comes with I believe 320 lb/ft of torque out of the box, not bad I'd say...

[SeanMatteson]

351's from pickups can be had for VERY little money, plus you get the extra displacement and the low compression (hint, hint maybe some boost)....

Trevor, these definitely won't fit under the hood of an MN12 without modifications to the hood, or the engine mounts. ...Especially if you wish to use that tall intake plenum found on the trucks.

I had a '93 LX with the 5.0HO in it and I was very pleased with the power. It didn't quite have that same aura about without a supercharger but I would say the difference is marginal at best. The 302 HO comes with I believe 320 lb/ft of torque out of the box, not bad I'd say...

For '93 T-Birds, the 5.0L HO of that vintage had the cam from the '93 Cobra, dropping the HP to 200 in exchange for some improved, bottom-end torque (275 lbft @ 3,000 RPM), as compared with the SC's 210 HP @ 4,000 RPM and 315 lbft @ 2,600 RPM. A standard Mustang GT with the 5.0L HO for '93 was rated at 205 HP at 4,200 RPM and 275 lbft at 3,000 RPM. The '93 Cobra was rated at 235 hp @ 4,600 RPM and 280 lbft @ 4,000 RPM.

Notice how much higher the torque numbers are for the supercharged V6's, and more importantly how much sooner you achieve the peak torque. The MN12's are a heavy car, and so this is very important.

If you're going to swap in a 302 or 351, you had better be ready to commit to going forced induction pretty early on, or I suspect you'll be disappointed with the performance of your MN12.

...Just my $0.02 worth.

Cheers,

Sean

[barrieguy]

The intake from the truck can be tossed as it is garbage. As far as the HP ratings on the 93 mustang, I believe that ford changed the way they rated HP in that year (they switched from a bare motor with no accessory's to a motor with full gear, this accounts for the low numbers. I believe a stock 302HO has about 320 lb/ft of torque which is just about the same as the SC V6 but without the reliability issues. I helped my brother with his project which was originally on the 302, it held up to over 15lbs of boost for 3 years of beating, you must understand that this was a tired high mileage 302. He has owned the car for 10 years and has beat it hard and even still it held up to those boost levels, completely stock long block....

You could drop a 302 in there very easily and cheaply, slap on a single or twin turbo system and walk all over the Supercoupes with no worries of HG's and the like.

Just my .02 cents...

[fturner]

The intake from the truck can be tossed as it is garbage. As far as the HP ratings on the 93 mustang, I believe that ford changed the way they rated HP in that year (they switched from a bare motor with no accessory's to a motor with full gear, this accounts for the low numbers. I believe a stock 302HO has about 320 lb/ft of torque which is just about the same as the SC V6 but without the reliability issues. I helped my brother with his project which was originally on the 302, it held up to over 15lbs of boost for 3 years of beating, you must understand that this was a tired high mileage 302. He has owned the car for 10 years and has beat it hard and even still it held up to those boost levels, completely stock long block....

You could drop a 302 in there very easily and cheaply, slap on a single or twin turbo system and walk all over the Supercoupes with no worries of HG's and the like.

Just my .02 cents...

But as mentioned, at what RPM are you getting that supposed 320 ft/lb at......... is it down low like the sc v6 or do you have to wind it out to 4000 RPM's or so to get it.......

I like the low rpm full torque cause I can launch the car real nice without having to wind the snot out of it to do so. If a stock 302 can do that at around 2400 RPM's then all the world to you, but if you have to wind out to 4000 RPM's to get it, then that 302 is going to start getting more expensive in a heart beat so you can get that torque down low.

Frit

[barrieguy]

300 ft/lbs @ 3200rpm....

[SeanMatteson]

300 ft/lbs @ 3200rpm....

...And the SC bone stock is 315 lbft at 2,600 RPM. ...Without putting a single mod on it.

I think I said it earlier, but I'll say it again... To each his own. I respect people who decide to be different and swap to a V8. I might question whether it will really end up giving you more performance for less money in the end, but I still love to see people put together exciting little projects.

If anyone is going to attempt this, I would strongly suggest you do some searching on these forums to see what other people have encountered before you. ...Might help you to side-step some landmines along the way.

Cheers,

Sean

[Radlers]

Well,

I have a 1993 5.0L Tbird and I love the engine. The transmission to me is the biggest failing of the car. The 1st gear is so tall, it's a slow start, but once it gets going, it's quite nice.

As mentioned, the ratings for the HP on the Mustangs was dropped... for insurance purposes... it's a little higher than 205 posted output.

I purchased the 5.0L over the 3.8SC engine because of reliability. The 3.8 stock (non-charged) has historically been an unreliable engine, and to pump extra power out of that block was a good idea if not for the design issues.

The SC coupe will be faster, not only in power ratings, but in weight.
However, the 5.0L engine does have a lot of mod options.

What about the 4.6L Lincoln Mark VIII engine? Is that easily dropped in? That's a sweet engine and you wouldn't have to do anything to it to get all that extra HP/Torque.

I've been trying to find out what the exact differences were between the Mustang 5.0LHO setup vs. my car so I can match it up and have it sound more like a 'stang and perform that way. I'll have to mosey over to the TCCOA forums to find this info out I suppose.

I'd still say the 4.6L sounds like the better block to muck with in a Tbird.
I love the 3.8LSC... don't get me wrong... I just don't want to be so finicky with a car to have it behave normally.

Rob

[mn12bird]

can't blame you for wanting RELIABLE (ouch sorry SC guys) power can we? The Mark8 and your SC are the same car. putting any 4.6 in there is a bolt in affair. hardest part is of course would be the wiring but thats no differant than anything else. now getting a stick shift in there is a whole other game. if you want automatic fine just take the 4R70W out of the Mark with the motor. but your SC manual won't bolt and the T45's or other Manuals are alot of work to get in there.

JAke

[XR7 Dave]

Here's one cheap. Linky (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1993-Ford-Thunderbird-LX-Parts-Car-Only_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6783QQihZ002QQitem Z120018632366QQrdZ1)

I did a couple 5.0 swaps into SC's. The AOD was a dog. Hated it. The 5spd was ok, I also did dual exhaust, aluminum flywheel and electric fan on it. But even that car wasn't near as fast as my SC with a late model blower on it. With just an S-Port my SC made about 250rwhp and ran 14.40's @ 100mph. You won't do that with a bolt on 5.0 spending 2x the money. Chris Lazzo's 347 never broke into the 13's without a power adder. He made 280rwhp after dyno tuning (heads, cam, intake, etc). I've tuned many "built" 5.0's in Mustangs and most made 275-300rwhp with heads, cam, intake, headers, exhaust, etc.

The 5.0 is smooth and reliable but it won't ever "light your fire" in an SC. To me it always seemed like it had great throttle response but then after that it was dead in the water. I think if a person didn't want to mess with an SC the thing to do would be to find a nice 4.6 LX and "SC" ize it. My buddy has a 97 Cougar and with a chip, UD's, exhaust, CAI, PI intake, gears, Cobra brakes, 17's, and other suspension upgrades, the car is fun and handles great. I don't know how fast it actually is, but it feels like it goes pretty good. It's probably around 210rwhp.

Sorry, I'm sure no one really wanted my opinion. :/ I mainly wanted to point out the great jugs in that ad. :D

[charged92]

can't blame you for wanting RELIABLE (ouch sorry SC guys)

JAke

I know I shouldn't say this out loud, because my SC will probrably explode for doing so, but I have had my SC for close to 10 years, and really never had any major problems with reliability. Maybe mine is the exception I don't know. Just thought I would add that in as there seems to be a lot of people questioning the reliability of an SC in this thread.

NOTE:
Andrew, if I don't make it to your place tomorrow, refer back to this post.:D

[phyxius]

reliabilaty on any vehicle is all in upkeep of your vehicle.you beat it and don't do proper upkeep and nothing will last.i have 2 sc's with 280k on them both with no major probs.I also had 3 3.8 na's with all well over 300k with not even so much as a HG prob just the bodies didnt last.i had 2 5L HO cougars and they were no where near my SC's power or mpg

[Radlers]

OK, I totally agree with the upkeep = reliability, but 5.0L's don't need gasket changes, etc. as part of regular maintenance to prevent major problems.

That's what I'm really getting at. Most folks aren't as diligent or nit-picky. Everyone in these forums would be. As to modifying any engine..... extra HP in an engine not designed for it = shorter life span if used regularily in that context. ;)

Ok Ok... I'm off the soapbox.

[fturner]

OK, I totally agree with the upkeep = reliability, but 5.0L's don't need gasket changes, etc. as part of regular maintenance to prevent major problems.

That's what I'm really getting at. Most folks aren't as diligent or nit-picky. Everyone in these forums would be. As to modifying any engine..... extra HP in an engine not designed for it = shorter life span if used regularily in that context. ;)

Ok Ok... I'm off the soapbox.

LOL They don't need gasket changes?... funny I know of quite a few 5.0's that needed gasket changes after 15 years of running. Also, last time I checked everything on my car the new HG's are doing just fine after almost 2 years of daily driving, but are you suggesting that for "regular" maintenance that I should change the HG's out every year?

Any engine that has been modded to produce more power is going to have a shorter life span as you put it... its just the nature of the beast. As for the SC3.8.... I think running for 200000km's over 14 years before the HG's went with it running naturally hot and under boost conditions is saying just how stout those motors really are. Set up a factory built HO 5.0 with 12 psi of boost and run it at the constant temps the 3.8 runs at and we'll see how long that motor will last.

AS for cost...... here's something to think about. My SC is pretty much stock, and a friend has a stang with a 5.0 HO thats been engineered, blue printed and balanced blah blah blah, and spent around $14000 just on the motor. We did side by side launch trials at an event out here and everytime, my SC stayed with him till about 40mph then he pulled away. He even admitted that the SC gave that kick in the pants he wanted but his stang wasn't doing it. He was going back to the drawing board to add a blower.

As for fuel mileage, you show me 1 5.0 that can get 26mpg on the highway at cruise speeds............ and still have the killer launch the SC does.

Its all relative, and some folks have had good experiences with the SC's and others have had bad. I find alot of folks are actually scared of working on the SC'd 3.8 because of its supposed complexity, but really its just a six cylinder motor with pistons etc, and has a blower on top. The knee jerk reaction to people not understanding something is to make it sound like the worst thing ever built etc.

And 1 more thing....... EVERYONE and their dog has that nice rumbly V8 sound out there so really no one really pays attention anymore, but how many folks out there have that really sweet sound of a blower winding up....

Thanks for the use of the soap box for a minute ;)

Frit

[tattoo]

I know I shouldn't say this out loud, because my SC will probrably explode for doing so, but I have had my SC for close to 10 years, and really never had any major problems with reliability. Maybe mine is the exception I don't know. Just thought I would add that in as there seems to be a lot of people questioning the reliability of an SC in this thread.




Well,you have gone and done it now.You should have just left the car gods alone.....Bad JooJoo man.