Whither the 5.8 VV after 1985?

[P72Ford]

Don't the P heads have 4 casting ridges on the front surface of the head, whereas a regular GT40 has 3?

[87LongroofCP]

Don't the P heads have 4 casting ridges on the front surface of the head, whereas a regular GT40 has 3?

Yes, GT40 is 3

[Mercracer]

The GT and GTP are often easier to see if all of the accessories are still bolted on the engine. Plus, people do not have to remember which is 3 and which is 4 ridges.....

[Brown_Muscle]

I'd be looking for an E7 head instead of the E5. Slightly smaller combustion chamber so you get a little more compression. Fairly similar otherwise. Still not sure how much you'd get out of just those heads and nothing else tho. I have a suspicion you'll be dissapointed with the results for the money spent. Cam and intake would probably yield better results for your money.

Pretty much any used set of heads I'd figure on a rebuild. Definitely need valve seals, possibly guides, and at a bare minimum the valves ought to be lapped. If there is any burning on the valve face (typical), the valves need to be refaced or replaced, and probably the seats will need a little work as well. I've actually done a whole head rebuild with the assistance of someone who owned a valve cutting machine and had the proper seat cutting stones. Its not hard, but the equipment isn't super cheap either. As for warping, they're iron so its probably not a problem. A straight edge laid across the head from a few different angles will tell you if there is anything to be concerned about.

I think I'm going to give the guy a call and check them out, it seems like a good deal and i could always paint them and resell them....

As far as all this work that is involved, what of that can I do myself, I dont know anyone with any of these machines or tools that I know of... I'd like to try to keep the cost to a bare minimum. I'll only get the heads if they are GT40...not gt40P i dont wanna fool around with exhaust or plug wires yet, I'd like to bolt it on and then move on to the intake system when I find a good deal.

[86VickyLX]

I think I'm going to give the guy a call and check them out, it seems like a good deal and i could always paint them and resell them....

As far as all this work that is involved, what of that can I do myself, I dont know anyone with any of these machines or tools that I know of... I'd like to try to keep the cost to a bare minimum. I'll only get the heads if they are GT40...not gt40P i dont wanna fool around with exhaust or plug wires yet, I'd like to bolt it on and then move on to the intake system when I find a good deal.

So what you're saying is is that you're gonna throw GT40 heads under a VV?

[Brown_Muscle]

Until I find a good deal on an edelbrock intake yes. Then I'll move on from there. I may not install them until I have the newer intake and carb anyway.

I've been looking up how to replace the valve seals but they only tell me how to do it while still on the car...

John, do you have any of the tools needed to do head work?

ok this looks like a decent write up for both the seals and valve lapping... http://www.v6z24.com/howto/valvelapping

I'd like to buy Fel-Pro seals, Are there special ones for the GT-40 heads or can i buy any seals for the 302...

[Brown_Muscle]

Oh and one more question....sorry guys for all the questions, just want to make sure

The cast iron exhaust manifolds- they will bolt right up to the regular GT40 heads with no problems correct?

Thanks haha

[1987cp]

Affirmative on that, though you'll obviously get lots more benefit from the heads if you install something made from actual tubes.

[Brown_Muscle]

OK I picked up the heads! they're from a 97 explorer. I'm gunna move questions and stuff to readers ride thread, because theyre about several things, ill include pix! Prolly wont be till later cause i wanna clean these heads up a bit

[Brown_Muscle]

Just an interesting fact I found in my chiltons book... in 1979 the 351 with the VV was rated at 138HP at 3200 RPM and 260 Ft/lb's of torque at 2200 RPM...they also have the ratings for the 2BBL 351...and the power figures are 142/286.... higher interestingly. However its says these power figures are rated at the end of the tranny, arent they measures at the flywheel nowadays...i know the tranny can rob a good amount of HP

[P72Crazy]

Reading some of these old threads is really cool. Lots of mechanics and gearhead comments which are very interesting (mostly spot on). The 5.8 vs 5.0 question still is being debated many years after many agencies have moved on and forgotten about these cars. Don't discount bidding politics and a bid spec that would not favor one company over the other. The CV was slated for a power plant upgrade (yes). Many agencies were looking at Mustangs and Camaros for high speed pursuit interceptors (yes). But the simple economics of the situation dictated that a large "cruiser" was required and the platform was already "dated". Couple that with a estimated purchase price (low bidder wins!) of 10K per unit, and you get the left overs, old technology, and anything else Ford could afford to make their bids attractive. The carb cars were more dependable power plants for agencies that may be parked on the highway for extended periods (hours of time) and not as finicky about 88 octane fuel with their lower compression engine.
As for problems with the VV carb, mostly they worked great for the life expectancy of the car (60K to 80K). Yes there was an occasional choke pull-off diaphragm that needed to be replaced, and an occasional stepper motor. Remember these cars got monthly maintenance and parts cost were not really the object. The real weaknesses of this power plant (very few actually) were not fully known until agencies pushed them beyond the 100K mark. The major engine problem (visible in the records) was intake gasket failures. These were numerous on the 5.8 as the aluminum intake sitting on the cast iron heads was real problem and prone to blow out on the DS rear corner and PS front corner. This was well documented!

[marquisman]

Holy old thread batman! lol. I honestly think that for knew the box body would go under the knife and both Windsor engines would disappear from the panther in a few years. That being said, I don't think ford wanted to invest in a SEFI set up, just for use on the panther line up. Instead, they were probably focusing on their new modular 4.6L.

[P72Crazy]

Yes I like history. And yes, Ford already had SEFI on the truck 5.0 engines 85 up IIRC. Also on the 5.8 truck 88 up IIRC. I was also curious about what "visitors" to this site were reading so I used the "who's on" . Interestingly enough, there were two folks viewing this thread so I read it too. It is a good thread and I stand by my opinions about Ford b/c I was very close to the action at the time. I have a 4.6 in an 03 Mach 1 package Mustang, but I was not impressed by the engine and it's early problems. The Windsor engines have an entirely different set of attributes and issues all the mechanics and gearheads can attest. There's something special about the styling and lines on the old boxes. And you can repair and rebuild a Windsor engine without spending 4 or 5 grand on an engine. Bottom line, the old power plant and chassis was still a desirable product but a huge truck demand and new fuel economy standards strained Ford. A large "fleet market" kept these cars around until 2011.

[marquisman]

Yes ford had SEFI for the 5.8L truck platform but, not one for car applications. even though both share similar operation, both are very different. Just like the SEFI 5L.

[P72Crazy]

You are right (of course). I had an 88 F-150 5 liter 5-speed Lariat. The intake system and throttle body looked much different than the Panther application. I also had a 89 F-150 w/5.8 EFI and C6 trans. The 5.8 EFI would have made a great police interceptor. Of course the physical attributes of the induction system would have had to have been quite different. In 90, my demo unit got mis-built and had the 5.8, E40D, and 3.08 gears....needless to say it wouldn't fall out of a tree performance wise. I had ordered with a 3.55 but it got coded on the order as a standard (3.08:1). Didn't accept delivery so we retailed it in only 48 hours of receiving it. If Ford would let engineers run the sales and marketing, all us car jocks would have been much happier.