Gt40 vs Flotek heads

[19Walt93]

On most Ford engines, they never had valve adjustment. And I do not favor Ford or chevy, most people would not know the difference between a bare block 302 and a bare block 350 sitting side by side. I think most engineers went to the same school.

I am not sure why everyone thinks the lifter preload is for camshaft wear. It's to properly push the plunger down in the lifter the preset amount so the lifter works properly.

And when building a engine that is not factory, you sure do need to check this, and add or subtract somewhere to get the lifter preload correct. There are just extra steps on most Ford engines, and even chevy when to a non-adjustable valve train on their famous LS engines.

Without getting too technical, it's very easy to check. Just pretend you are adjusting a chevy Seriously, just turn the engine around to TDC of the cylinder of your choice, loosen the rocker bolts till you have play in the pushrod, slowly tighten till you have zero play, and then stare at the ratchet and count the turns as you tighten the bolt till it stops. If it took 1/2-3/4 turn, great. 1 turn would probably even work. Beyond that too much, or very much less than 1/2 turn, you are in the iffy zone.

I don't count turns on the bolt, I put a dial indicator on the rocker right over the pushrod and back off the bolt to measure lifter preload. Counting turns is probably at least close. A hydraulic lifter should habe .020" to .060" preload- I stay closer to .060. If memory serves, factory preload could be almost .100".

 

[Bigmatthew86]

That's the thing though. You said yourself. The SBF isn't going to be competitive, so why try. If you are looking to compete use a different motor.

That doesn't mean that the SBF isn't still a viable candidate for a V8 swap. The 99 Ranger 4.0L made what around 160 hp stock, by the 200k mile mark it's probably closer to the 150 figure. 300 hp might not be good numbers by today's standards, but it's still double what these trucks came with stock. Might be a plenty for someone like me just wanting to have fun with it and use it.

Different strokes for different folks. We don't all need high triple digit or quad digit horse power numbers. I think I could be very happy with 300 to 350 in a Ranger. I think even dropping in the stock 215 hp Explorer 5.0 will be a nice improvement.

Now realistically speaking, 300 is a number that can probably be hit pretty easily with bone stock iron heads and a cam change. Little mild clean up work can probably make them even better and is something that can be done on the work bench at home.

Just dropping an Explorer engine into a Ranger will be a huge difference. My truck is a 2wd regular cab. It did have a set of headers & full exhaust, paired with the 4w70w with shift kit & Explorer rear (3.73) it was a pretty quick little truck. Surely not a monster by any means but with the torquey little v8 it leaves stoplights pretty good.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Only thing my mind is made up about is that I'm putting a 5.0 in the Ranger, and that to begin with it's going to be a stock explorer 5.0L. I fully expect the plans for the engine and the overall build to change over time as I drive and use the truck.

One thing I want is to have is a build that looks like it could have come from the factory that way. Having aluminum heads and other speed parts under the hood will kind of break that illusion. Headers being the exception since im not going to run the explorer manifolds if I can avoid it. I'm not completely rejecting it, but not the preference. If I decide that aluminum is what I need, then aluminum it will get. If that happens, throw some paint on them and they won't be too noticable buried under everything else in the engine bay.

If it helps sway, 2001 V8 Explorer's had cast iron heads. 2002 V8 Explorer's had aluminum. If you painted everything I doubt anybody will hardly be able to tell if you are running factory style EFI anyway.

I kinda keep my "looks like it came that way build" +/- 5 years approximately. Otherwise the box you paint yourself in gets small very quick.

Torque Monster is the best but they are expensive and can take years to receive. Knock offs are the stereotypical sort of knock off and typically have bad welds and don't fit super well, @fastpakr has them on his. If it was me I would just use the stock Explorer manifolds. Even if you want TM ones go ahead and order them but it will be a great while before you see them... might as well run manifolds in the mean time.

It is mind blowing how much the use of my truck has changed in the 12 years since I swapped it.

 

[JoshT]

The copy obx are what I have & seem to be pretty decent quality.

Those would be one of the options. When I realized a year ago that this swap was a very real possibility I grabbed a set to stick on the shelf. They are Maximizer branded, but same company or conveyor belt as OBX.

The other options are assorted fox body shorties that I picked up for another project that never happened.

 

[JoshT]

If it helps sway, 2001 V8 Explorer's had cast iron heads. 2002 V8 Explorer's had aluminum. If you painted everything I doubt anybody will hardly be able to tell if you are running factory style EFI anyway.

Torque Monster is the best but they are expensive and can take years to receive. Knock offs are the stereotypical sort of knock off and typically have bad welds and don't fit super well, @fastpakr has them on his.

I don't think that 2002 Explorers had a 5.0L, or that any production 5.0L came from the factory with aluminum heads. I know that Ford offered the GT-40X heads, but I think they were only offered separate and maybe in crate engines.

See above on the headers. I did consider them. I have no doubt that true TMs are better, but I can't support how Bob does business. I've heard from enough people about both the original sand the knockoffs that I'm willing to accept the tradeoffs.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I don't think that 2002 Explorers had a 5.0L, or that any production 5.0L came from the factory with aluminum heads. I know that Ford offered the GT-40X heads, but I think they were only offered separate and maybe in crate engines.

4.6... loophole lol

So it isn't like the technology didn't exist anyway...

See above on the headers. I did consider them. I have no doubt that true TMs are better, but I can't support how Bob does business. I've heard from enough people about both the original sand the knockoffs that I'm willing to accept the tradeoffs.

Same, except I would also have a hard time supporting the knockoff guys that can't simply copy a part correctly.

So for a mostly stock engine personally I would just keep the stock manifolds and cut out a lot of drama.

 

[Bigmatthew86]

If you have a set of the knockoff headers absolutely run them. The later versions of the knockoffs seem to be better than the earlier. Look them over & make sure the flange is flat. They will flow way better than the manifolds & you have them. The mustang shorties will take a lot of work to clear everything when mounted in the vehicle. I’m not giving anyone a 1000 bucks with no word when I might get what I paid for. A year to build a set of headers that you have the jig for & have done tons of is crazy. I’ll pass…

 

[JoshT]

If you have a set of the knockoff headers absolutely run them. The later versions of the knockoffs seem to be better than the earlier. Look them over & make sure the flange is flat. They will flow way better than the manifolds & you have them. The mustang shorties will take a lot of work to clear everything when mounted in the vehicle. I’m not giving anyone a 1000 bucks with no word when I might get what I paid for. A year to build a set of headers that you have the jig for & have done tons of is crazy. I’ll pass…

Yep. I'll check the flanges, have them trued up if necessary. Will also run better gaskets than the normal high temp card board variety that the parts store carries. Probably Remflex, had good results with them on an engine that is a lot harder to seal.

 

[bobbywalter]

That's the thing though. You said yourself. The SBF isn't going to be competitive, so why try. If you are looking to compete use a different motor.

That doesn't mean that the SBF isn't still a viable candidate for a V8 swap. The 99 Ranger 4.0L made what around 160 hp stock, by the 200k mile mark it's probably closer to the 150 figure. 300 hp might not be good numbers by today's standards, but it's still double what these trucks came with stock. Might be a plenty for someone like me just wanting to have fun with it and use it.

Different strokes for different folks. We don't all need high triple digit or quad digit horse power numbers. I think I could be very happy with 300 to 350 in a Ranger. I think even dropping in the stock 215 hp Explorer 5.0 will be a nice improvement.

Now realistically speaking, 300 is a number that can probably be hit pretty easily with bone stock iron heads and a cam change. Little mild clean up work can probably make them even better and is something that can be done on the work bench at home.

dont take that the wrong way.

with a sla ranger, the explorer swap is ideal as it is a bolt in...really hard to beat. yet it underperforms the earlier e7gt stock for stock...i have done that quite a bit..

for trucks though.. where it matters...it has a lower rpm bias and is really good.

i sure as hell wont evict a perfectly good running 4.0 for one though.

the cammer 4.0 runs right with the 5.0 explorers model for model when both explorers are unladen.




for the ttb rangers...not so much...

.i would just start with a 5.3 and 100 horse right from the rip. its all the same mods to install...and reworking truck manifolds is easy....


that is what i mean by they cant compete.

you will spend more tuning and modding an explorer engine to get to a modest 300 to 330 hp then just starting with a 5.3.

they are both great engines....i would say generally the 302 will take more heat and oil starvation abuse... but dollar for dollar parts sourcing and availability up here.... just what it is.

but these flotek heads are definitely pulling me to a 302. i had hoped edelbrock was going to put a 400 hp combo together when they moved most of the stuff out of cali...and spot us in at 25-2800. that so far isnt the case....but those flotek heads in the mild form and a good cam and a victor intake i bet would make a daily drive 350-400 hp combo easy peasy...

 

[JoshT]

dont take that the wrong way.

with a sla ranger, the explorer swap is ideal as it is a bolt in...really hard to beat. yet it underperforms the earlier e7gt stock for stock...i have done that quite a bit..

for trucks though.. where it matters...it has a lower rpm bias and is really good.

i sure as hell wont evict a perfectly good running 4.0 for one though.

the cammer 4.0 runs right with the 5.0 explorers model for model when both explorers are unladen.




for the ttb rangers...not so much...

.i would just start with a 5.3 and 100 horse right from the rip. its all the same mods to install...and reworking truck manifolds is easy....


that is what i mean by they cant compete.

you will spend more tuning and modding an explorer engine to get to a modest 300 to 330 hp then just starting with a 5.3.

they are both great engines....i would say generally the 302 will take more heat and oil starvation abuse... but dollar for dollar parts sourcing and availability up here.... just what it is.

but these flotek heads are definitely pulling me to a 302. i had hoped edelbrock was going to put a 400 hp combo together when they moved most of the stuff out of cali...and spot us in at 25-2800. that so far isnt the case....but those flotek heads in the mild form and a good cam and a victor intake i bet would make a daily drive 350-400 hp combo easy peasy...

Well I kind of hijacked the thread. The OP has a TIB and I mistakenly assumed that he already had a V8 and was looking to swap heads for either the GTs or Flowteks. My V8 swap candidate is a SLA, and Explorer based swap is the only one I'd consider. Not saying it's going to keep a stock Explorer 5.0L engine, but that's what will get it started.

If I had a 4.0 SOHC I probably wouldn't be looking to replace it. Dad has a '01 or 02 with the SOHC and it's a different animal.

I had way too many issues with the origonal 4.0 OHV in this truck over the years. If it had been yours I'm sure it would have been swapped long ago, but I was stubborn and kept trying to fix it. Finally a couple years ago I gave up on that engine and installed a different 4.0L OHV and all was good for a time, but the 5.0 swap idea has always been there. I decided after installing that replacement engine that if those problems happened again, I was done with the 4.0 OHV. Well around thanksgiving it started acting like it had those problems again. Turns out it was either a bad spark plug or plug wire, but the die was cast.

I don't and probably never will own a TTB Ranger, but like the OP I have and will own TIB Rangers. I prefer the first gen styling and have a few (in pieces), though so far only one of them has been a driver and and it was the 84 2.8L truck tyhat I totaled it. The "spare" drivetrain was originally intended to be swapped into one of those, but I don't think that is ever actually going to happen. While I prefer thye styling of the first gens, I've decided I'm more comfortable and fit better in my 99 Extended cab better. It's the bvetter candidate for a V8 swap and what I want to use it for. Not to say I'm getting out of first gen Rangers, but when/if I get back around to the 85 it's probably going 2.3 turbo or swapping in a newer Ford turbo 4 drivetrain. I envision it as an efficient daily to replace the Kia when it eventually kicks the bucket. Alternatively I've still got a good running 2.8L from the 84 I totaled. That wouldn't be efficient, but it was fun to drive. That's topic for a future discussion elsewhere though.

 

[Squarewheels287]

If you have the engine on a stand I’d do everything now. Timing set, water pump, gaskets, hoses, heads, cam. Do it all now, so much easier than in the car. While you can do most in the vehicle it’s so much easier out. I’d probably run the enforcers with the smaller valves so I didn’t have to worry about notching the pistons. They look like they flow pretty well out of the box & can be ported to preform very nicely if you wanted.

Oh ya, was planning on doing a full rebuild before I do the swap, more at the parts gathering stage at the moment while I fix the floor pans and cab corners.