1986 Lincoln Town Car Cartier HO swap

[Tiggie]

You can run GT-40 or p heads, or twisted wedge, or anything else on the stock short block. You just have to watch the piston to valve clearance. With a stock HO cam, or other mild grind with lower valve lift, it will work. Most people don't need a beefy cam in a heavy box with a slush box, stock converter, and highway gears anyway.

Personally, I do not like the P heads because the headers that fit and play nice with the spark plugs angles are hard to find last I knew. But they do flow well for stockers so I hear.

[Kodachrome Wolf]

I've used Mark VII speed density ECUs on both swaps I've been involved with, one being my '87 (plain HO swap but with a 2500 RPM stall converter) and the other was a full 1996 Explorer 302 swap into TecNickal's '89. I recapped both the ECUs before installing them since I've seen some capacitors start leaking due to age. However, given your aspirations for more than stock horsepower, the Mustang MAF ECUs might be the ones to start looking for so you can attain your goals, especially if you run a hotter cam than stock.

I'll mention the Explorer setup does feel a bit quicker than my HO setup, but the Explorer configuration does breath a lot better and the camshaft is better suited for low to mid range torque, while the HO cam doesn't really pickup until about 2200-2500 RPM. However, either setup is up to preference, but both will make you feel good when you stab the accelerator and the car picks up speed with authority.

[DerekTheGreat]

I've used Mark VII speed density ECUs on both swaps I've been involved with, one being my '87 (plain HO swap but with a 2500 RPM stall converter) and the other was a full 1996 Explorer 302 swap into TecNickal's '89... ...I'll mention the Explorer setup does feel a bit quicker than my HO setup... ...However, either setup is up to preference, but both will make you feel good when you stab the accelerator and the car picks up speed with authority.

I think this is the first post I've read about someone who has used a Mark VII computer with an Explorer 5.0. How well does that combination work together and does it have any quirks?

[Arquemann]

I think this is the first post I've read about someone who has used a Mark VII computer with an Explorer 5.0. How well does that combination work together and does it have any quirks?

How on earth would a "full" exploder swap work with a Mark VII ecm? The 5.0 Explorers have a cam synchronizer and dual coils instead of a dizzy. So I'm guessing it's just the explorer long block and manifolds you swapped, and not the electrical bits?

[JJ10x10]

Okay, thank you all for your responses. From what I understand 1986-1988 Mustang 5.0, or a 1986-1987 Mark VII computer. I do not have many options to source one locally so I will need to use Ebay or something like that. Does it matter the specific P/N of the ECU? I see a LOT of different part numbers for ECU's. I'm guessing it just needs to be speed density from those model years I mentioned and it's plug and play?

[Arquemann]

https://www.diyautotune.com/support/technical-articles/fox-body-mustang-mass-air-flow-vs-speed-density-which-is-better/

RockAuto has new / refurbished factory ECMs for not too much money.

[DerekTheGreat]

How on earth would a "full" exploder swap work with a Mark VII ecm? The 5.0 Explorers have a cam synchronizer and dual coils instead of a dizzy. So I'm guessing it's just the explorer long block and manifolds you swapped, and not the electrical bits?

Oh, I didn't swap anything, K-wolf did. I wasn't aware of the synchronizer or I forgot about it. Maybe the early years used a traditional camshaft in which you could swap a TFI type dizzy in order to have it play nice with the Mark VII computer? Someone more knowledgeable than I will have to confirm that.

Okay, thank you all for your responses. From what I understand 1986-1988 Mustang 5.0, or a 1986-1987 Mark VII computer. I do not have many options to source one locally so I will need to use Ebay or something like that. Does it matter the specific P/N of the ECU? I see a LOT of different part numbers for ECU's. I'm guessing it just needs to be speed density from those model years I mentioned and it's plug and play?

Make it an '87 or '88. '86 would've been 200 HP, '87 and up was 225 That's if the car was HO equipped. Don't think HO's were standard in VII's until '88. Before that, only LSC's got 'em. I can look at my parts stash and see what the number is off the Mark VII computer I've got. There's also this website: All Computer Resources : Auto Computer Experts - Pretty handy and helped me figure out my '93 F-150 has the wrong ECM in it and why the one we bought didn't work "right."

EDIT: This information regarding Exploader engines could be useful to you:
1996-2001 Ford Explorer 5.0L V8 Specifications - The Ranger Station

Reminds me, I think I've got an early style upper & lower in my parts stash. Not sure WTF for, maybe I intended to swap it on my Townie? NFC.

[sly]

You swap the engine, not the electronics. Use the stock panther wiring, swap in the distributor in place of the cam position sensor, put the panther accessories and oil pan on and drill out/tap the boss on cylinder 5 for the air intake temp sensor. You basically just use the long block and intake manifold.

[Arquemann]

Oh, I didn't swap anything, K-wolf did. I wasn't aware of the synchronizer or I forgot about it. Maybe the early years used a traditional camshaft in which you could swap a TFI type dizzy in order to have it play nice with the Mark VII computer? Someone more knowledgeable than I will have to confirm that.

Yes, I know it was KW & Nick, but I was mostly expanding on the "full" exploder swap, because you did mention pulling the whole shit & kaboodle from an explorer on the previous page.
Explorers have a stubby little thing that's basically the bottom half of a dizzy and a small position sensor on top. You can just plonk in a normal dizzy in their place, roller cam, steel gear. I've got an explorer cam in my MGM.

[Kodachrome Wolf]

I think this is the first post I've read about someone who has used a Mark VII computer with an Explorer 5.0. How well does that combination work together and does it have any quirks?

That wagon has driven great since that swap was done. I know Nick drove it to Canada and back and the only issue he had was a faulty ECU (or maybe it was the fuel pump) relay at one of his stops.

How on earth would a "full" exploder swap work with a Mark VII ecm? The 5.0 Explorers have a cam synchronizer and dual coils instead of a dizzy. So I'm guessing it's just the explorer long block and manifolds you swapped, and not the electrical bits?

By full, I mean Explorer long block with Panther distributor ignition, timing cover, accessory drive, and oil pan. The Explorer intake, TB, and 19 lbs injectors were also utilized.

[DerekTheGreat]

You swap the engine, not the electronics. Use the stock panther wiring, swap in the distributor in place of the cam position sensor, put the panther accessories and oil pan on and drill out/tap the boss on cylinder 5 for the air intake temp sensor. You basically just use the long block and intake manifold.

BAM! Thanks for that, just what I was hoping to see and written much more succinctly than I would've.

That wagon has driven great since that swap was done. I know Nick drove it to Canada and back and the only issue he had was a faulty ECU (or maybe it was the fuel pump) relay at one of his stops.

By full, I mean Explorer long block with Panther distributor ignition, timing cover, accessory drive, and oil pan. The Explorer intake, TB, and 19 lbs injectors were also utilized.

That's great to hear. What kind of MPG did it net?

Yes, I know it was KW & Nick, but I was mostly expanding on the "full" exploder swap, because you did mention pulling the whole shit & kaboodle from an explorer on the previous page.
Explorers have a stubby little thing that's basically the bottom half of a dizzy and a small position sensor on top. You can just plonk in a normal dizzy in their place, roller cam, steel gear. I've got an explorer cam in my MGM.

Oh, I read your post as if you implied I swapped. Nope, haven't swapped an engine in over twenty years. Great to see confirmation that you can swap the cam position sensor out and plop a Panther dizzy in. But yeah, if a fella was so inclined they could pull all the wiring and gain OBD-II greatness. That's a lot more work than how K-Wolf/Nick did it. I'm positive that I'd do it just as done with that '89. Great intentions, but lazy.

[gadget73]

possibly a controversial tidbit, but valve lift has very little to do with piston to valve clearance. Its at max lift when the piston is way down in the bore. Its duration you have to worry about. So long as the valve is shut by the time the piston gets up top, it doesn't matter how far it opens. Its when the valve closes right at the top of the stroke you may have problems. Those sort of cams are completely shit for making torque in a small motor for a heavy car though, so unless you just pick a really dumb cam its not a big deal.

The HO cam, IMO, is not an ideal fit for these. The torque under about 2800 is lousy and unless you have much spicier rear gears and/or a looser torque converter its going to suck until things get going. An HO in a 2 ton box with a 3.08 rear and a stock torque converter is slower than the stock engine with the same parts off the line. The Towncar being heavier than a Vic sucks just that much worse.3.55 or a 3.73 make a huge improvement.


Working EGR is good for about 1 mpg and costs no horsepower. The EGR valve shuts at full throttle, its only doing something at part-throttle cruise. The EGR spacer is needed to give you something for the throttle cable bracket to attach to. It cannot be reliably bored beyond stock HO throttle body size though, so keep that in mind. It *might* be possible to make it work if you completely pack the spacer with something like JB weld, let it set up, then bore that out but I wouldn't guarantee it. EGR won't work if you do this of course, but it might function to allow air to get through it and give you somewhere to hang the cables. The stock spacer just doesn't have enough sealing surface if you bore it beyond about 60mm for the gasket to have any hope of sealing on the back side. Thats where the fill part comes in. Somewhere I think I posted pics of what it looks like stock, what it looks like at 60mm, and marked to show what is left if bored to 65. I can't find it right now but someone with more patience for the search feature might be able to dig up the post.

Engine controls are another problem. Mark VII stuff works for basically stock engines. Much of anything beyond ported stock heads and you're looking for trouble. It might be possible to tune one, I don't honestly know, but few tuners seem willing to even fool with the speed density stuff. Finding Mustang mass air bits is getting too stupid price-wise. I've given some thought to a "what if" scenario if I were to try and duplicate my car now and I think I'd be looking at maybe Megasquirt thats designed to just plug in to the stock harness. That would get a new ECM instead of 30+ year old hardware, and the ability to tune it without add-on bits, some of which are out of production now.

[Kodachrome Wolf]

That's great to hear. What kind of MPG did it net?

When he messaged me on that trip, he'd noted 22.5 MPG without the A/C on going up. That wagon has a 3.55L axle too.