Explorer v8 accessory drive

[cee21]

Howdy guys, long time no typie, lol. Since I am basicly finally done building our house, I can go back to focusing on other things, like my 5.0 Bronco II. First off, I have had a vaccum leak for a while, and had an explorer intake sitting around, and a younger brother on winter break from college with nothing to do. So I had him help me swap the intakes since the leak need to be fixed anyway. Well, to put the upper intake on, we needed two more 6.5" long bolts, which nobody had even at fastenal. So I went to a scrap yard just looking for a 5.0 crown vic, to yang off its two bolts. I discovered a 96 v8 explorer with just the intake missing. Here are my choice since it is rather cold for this southerner:

• pull the whole motor since 75% of everything has bee removed already
• remove just the heads, accessories, and everything from the timing chain cover up.

So my question is, if I don't pull the motor, will the balancer on the explorer work with my 5.0 that was out of a mustang? My tranny is a stick, and I think it is a 50oz flywheel.

[cgrey8]

...if I don't pull the motor, will the balancer on the explorer work with my 5.0 that was out of a mustang? My tranny is a stick, and I think it is a 50oz flywheel.

Yes. Mustang HO 5.0Ls and Explorer 5.0Ls were both 50oz balanced on the rear (flywheel/flexplate) and 34oz balanced on the front (balancer). Prior to the "cheaper" 50oz balance setups, the balance was 28oz balanced on both front and rear. But I don't believe those have been around since very early 80s, possibly the 70s. I can't remember what the 351w balance is and if there's any history to them.

BTW, the 50oz balance is a crappier balance from what I understand. Ford went to the 34/50oz setup because 34/50oz cranks can be made with less metal thus making them cheaper to make. For stock/daily driven engines, it's not a big deal. But for frequently raced engines, the less external balance required, the easier the burden on the the main journal bearings at high RPMs hence why they make internally balanced aftermarket cranks. Most 331/347 strokers use the 28oz balance, but are generally available in 50oz and internally balanced. If you want to reuse stock 5.0L HO and Explorer flywheels/balancers with strokers, you have to either get the crank ordered for 34/50oz balance or have your stock flywheel/balancer modified by the machine shop to work with 28oz or internally balanced cranks. If you do opt for the 50oz balanced stroker crank, the machine shop will likely charge you more than they'd charge you to modify the balancer/flywheel due to the much higher difficulty in getting 50oz cranks to balance correctly.

[cee21]

Thanks for the info, and the extra info for future use. Depending on if I find me a better paying job (work for the state of Tennessee, and they pay engineers 1.5 to 2 times less), I may rebuild that explorer motor if I get it, and was thinking of stroking (it will have to be alot of extra pay). Torn between just boring 30 over, a 331, or 347. Since it won't be raced (only at random times my foot feels heavy while driving) I'm thinking of not doing 347. Any opinions on this?

[Teddyzee]

Tech tip: Use all-thread for intake bolts that are longer than 6", works like a charm!

And, just because you didn't actually say it, you do need the Ex balancer/pulley if you choose to run the Ex accessories.

[cgrey8]

That is true. If you plan to run the Explorer accessories, you WILL need the Explorer balancer since the pulley offset is different between Explorer and other 302 accessory setups.

As for 331 vs 347, I read over and over that 331 was better than 347. However if I ever build another stroker, it'll be a 347 now that I've done a 331. That's not to say one is better than the other. It's a difference of opinion and of use. And in hind-sight, I probably SHOULD have gone with the 347 instead of the 331 since 331 is really best for higher reving engines and I never had intentions of building a high-rev engine. From a "reving" standpoint, the difference between 331 and 347 is probably about the same as 289 & 302. But a 347's higher displacement probably would've been a better choice for a low RPM/high torque build like I was planning in the 1st place...added that the "problems" usually associated with 347s are not likely to be issues with a low RPM daily driver application.

[87sc302]

cee21
Still in Clinton?
Tried sending you private message but not sure it worked.Let me know if you got it.
Larry

[cee21]

Thanks guys, and yes I knew about the expy balancer, thats why I was wanting to make sure it worked with a 50oz flywheel.

I didn't get the PM 87, but I sent you one, I think. Me and my brother are thinking of going down to do some wrench turning on it tomorrow or saturday.

[cgrey8]

...yes I knew about the expy balancer, thats why I was wanting to make sure it worked with a 50oz flywheel...

I ran my 97 Explorer 302 for years with a Mustang 50oz flywheel. There never were manual transmission Explorers, so using a Mustang flywheel was my only option.

[cee21]

Thanks again for the info, now I just got to go out there, freeze my butt off, bust my knuckles, and believe this is a perfect world and everything will come off with ease, lol.

[cgrey8]

...now I just got to go out there...and believe this is a perfect world and everything will come off with ease, lol.

Yeah. Good luck with that.

[Dave]

I believe the actual length of the two bolts required is 5 7/8", too cold here to pull mine but I have the 1" manifold spacer with bolts, that's how I came up with measurement.
Chris - the balance for the 351 has always been 28 oz
Dave

[cee21]

Well, Friday was the big day, and thankfully, everything was still there. Once we got moving, the cold wasn't to bad, especially once the sun hit us. As far as turning nuts and bolts, there wasn't a problem that a little PVC cheater bar couldn't fix. And that is where the perfect world ended, time to get it out of there. First off, everyone who worked the yard, driving the fork lifts were all of the no hablo ingles. So I asked for the picker, a big still A frame with a geared chain puller, the send me midget number 1 with fork lift, which was fine. He yanked a couple of times and the trans would not separate. Well he left cause I guess his boss came over and told him to get the picker, idk. After further inspection, there was one that was still attaching engine and trans that I had broke lose, but did not finish removing, dumb ares. Well got the picker, and the trans still would not come off. So after several attempts, the trans cross-member was removed. And the last piece to remove was cutting the top part of the front clip off. Once the engine and trans was out, we finally got the trans off of there. So that is a 5.0 explorer with GT-40 heads and all the front dress on for $220.

From what I have found, I use a like 92 ranger power steering hose to hook up to this P/S pump? Can I use the A/C lines off the expy on my 84? And since this is R-134 compressor, should I get the drier off as well?

[cgrey8]

I forgot what I used for a PS hose, but I do remember having to modify the angle bent into the metal part of the hose to bend the right direction. The metal was soft and bent fairly easily in a vise. I'm sure I have the exact part in some old thread. I remember getting it from Oreillys because AutoZone nor Advance had it in stock, but they did.

As for the AC lines, I did a few things different. My truck was 89 and in 89, the condenser had both spring lock fittings on the PS. However in around 91, Ford redesigned the condenser so the inlet is on the DS where the compressor is and the outlet on the PS where the evaporator and accumulator are. But I never found a set of hoses that would work as-is to make a complete AC system. I had to get the compressor hose modified by a shop that does custom AC line work. They were able to modify the 97 Explorer's original line to work with the setup in my truck. I did have to bring them all my old V6 lines so they could salvage the spring-lock connectors off of the old hoses and use them on the modified hose since the Explorer connectors (both condenser and accumulator) are not compatible with Ranger AC components.

[cee21]

viewtopic.php?t=272

Here is your post. So the metal didn't kink on you?

[cgrey8]

I can't believe I never posted a pic of the modified line. I'll have to see if I can dig one up and get it posted to that thread. But no, it didn't bind on me. You can see the marks from the vise, but other than the visual marks from the vise, the metal is fine.