How to get performance out of a CFI 5.0L V8(HP & Torque).

[MattsLincoln]

Im looking to get more power out of my CFI 302. I know theres not much i can do to it. I don't want to switch the fuel system. As soon as this engine blows up(Which i am hoping for as it has 140,000 Miles on it) i am going to invest in a 351 4bbl Windsor/Cleveland or a HO 302 From a Fox Body Mustang or maybe the new 5.0 V8 thats getting carried away with.


So far i plan to do this in the next few years.

Ditch the fucking stock exhaust(got one bad cat and still drives fine). The other cats gonna go soon too i bet.

Replacing my exhuast system with a Walker Dual Exhaust System with H-Pipe and 2 Flowmaster Super 40's Mufflers.(I like how the Super 40's Sound.)



Any other stuff.

[85crownHPP]

There's not really anything you can do to the motor... I dont think you can even adjust the timing on those EEC-III ones...!
I'd just do the exhaust and maybe gears for now, those will still be there for your engine swap and will make it feel/sound peppier for now

[andymac0035]

You live in PA......I'd go see Scott if I were you......

[MattsLincoln]

would a new Mustang 5.0 engine and auto tranny work in my car or should i get a 351 4bbl.

[1990LTD]

you mean the 5.0 coyote? i can say almost certainly that it won't work without a LOT of work.

[91grandmarquis]

you mean the 5.0 coyote? i can say almost certainly that it won't work without a LOT of work.

No I think he means the HO 5.0 from an early model mustang. Not the new modular engine that ford is releasing. I do not know it would work without a bit of work. Youd have to switch to EFI right? Or is there a 5.0 from a earlier model mustang that was carbed? Im not to familiar with the earlier 5.0s and the CFI on these cars.

[andymac0035]

85' mustang 5.0 HO (5-speed only) were carbed and had no computer. (210 HP)

[johnunit]

would a new Mustang 5.0 engine and auto tranny work in my car or should i get a 351 4bbl.

A 87-93 Mustang motor and tranny can be a relatively easy swap, but building up a 351 4-barrel would probably be cheaper and simpler. You'll take a significant gas mileage hit though going from an EFI stockish 5.0 to a 4-barrel non-egr 351.

[MattsLincoln]

see i like the 302 Carbed 5.0 used in the fox body mustangs and the 351 Carbed to. Gas milelage is important and so is which one gets more power.

[gadget73]

If fuel economy is a concern, I'd probably go multiport EFI 5.0 out of an Explorer. That would give you the most power, good economy from the injection, and a better and more easily understood injection system that people can actually work on. If you're good with a carb, do the same motor and put a 4bbl on it, but if you don't know how to tune a carb, you probably won't be happy with it because if the carb is wrong, it runs bad and wastes fuel.

351s in general eat a fair bit more fuel than a 302. They're capable of making boatloads more power and with the right setup they can be good on fuel, but just plunking a 4bbl on a truck 351 isn't how to do it. There is a guy on lincolnsonline who did a Lightning 351 swap with a tune and a cam in a Mark VII and it makes about 100 hp more than stock while giving him 2-3 mpg better economy. It can be done, but parts selection gets important.

[MattsLincoln]

what is more powerful a fox body mustangs 302 V8 or a ford explorer V8. I dont mind getting low gas mileage as long as it not's down right horrible MPG's.

[pantera77]

what is more powerful a fox body mustangs 302 V8 or a ford explorer V8. I dont mind getting low gas mileage as long as it not's down right horrible MPG's.

Explorer.

[1990LTD]

as far as stock Ford EFI motors go, lopo (panthers) are at the bottom, then I think '86 Mustangs (with the bastard 55mm throttle body/intake/etc), 87-93 HO, and then Exploder is right at the top.

[MattsLincoln]

what year exploder motor.

[gadget73]

96-01. 96 has GT40 heads, 97+ has GT40P. The P heads make more power, but they need different exhaust manifolds or headers to work properly. P heads are less desirable for that reason, even though they are better from a performance standpoint.