datsunfreak Posted February 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 They are definitely light and compact though. I think compact is the ultimate goal. ^_^ Clearance on the right side is great. Clearance on the left side around the steering gearbox is tight. Very tight. Quote Link to comment
DRIVEN Posted February 12, 2013 Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 I know this might sound like an odd suggestion but, would it give you more room to run a passenger side header on the driver's side? That solved a steering clearance problem on my brother's truck. Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 12, 2013 Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 I think compact is the ultimate goal. ^_^ Clearance on the right side is great. Clearance on the left side around the steering gearbox is tight. Very tight. I hear ya, when Ford engineers decided to put the 302 in the Mustang II, they had to offset the engine to the right a couple of inches to clear the steering column and get the heat away from the master cylinder. Offsetting is OK as long as the engine/driveshaft/diff angles match. Are you leaving the stock cam in there, or go slightly hotter? I know that Explorer cam is a stump puller, especially with those stock heads. Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 12, 2013 Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 I know this might sound like an odd suggestion but, would it give you more room to run a passenger side header on the driver's side? That solved a steering clearance problem on my brother's truck. Nothing odd at all and very common when putting these engines in a 520 or 521. We would just swap them from side to side and they would exit out the front. When I swapped a 302 in a friends '60 Rambler American, I had to swap the manifolds side to side, and upside down to clear the tight compartment. I just made a U-bend on both sides, and the exhaust dumped down along side the engine. Just be careful, and let the engine cool down when working on it. Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 I know this might sound like an odd suggestion but, would it give you more room to run a passenger side header on the driver's side? Tim has mentioned this a few times. Assuming we have room to get the downpipes routed correctly, it's an option... I hear ya, when Ford engineers decided to put the 302 in the Mustang II, they had to offset the engine to the right a couple of inches to clear the steering column and get the heat away from the master cylinder. Offsetting is OK as long as the engine/driveshaft/diff angles match. Transmission clearance is already snug, so I don't think offsetting the engine would help enough to justify doing it. Are you leaving the stock cam in there, or go slightly hotter? I know that Explorer cam is a stump puller, especially with those stock heads. Leaving the engine as internally stock as possible. For now. B) Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 12, 2013 Report Share Posted February 12, 2013 Tim has mentioned this a few times. Assuming we have room to get the downpipes routed correctly, it's an option... Transmission clearance is already snug, so I don't think offsetting the engine would help enough to justify doing it. Leaving the engine as internally stock as possible. For now. B) I think that leaving the engine stock is a wise choice. A stock 5.0 engine in the little Datto lightweight, will push you down the pike in grand style. with the rearend ratio you have, the gas mileage should be good too. What a sleeper :thumbup: !!! Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 The Mustang Hypo 289 cast headers have OK flow, but would most likely hit the spark plugs. You could always find a set of used alloy heads, as they were made for the original design angled spark plug arrangement. I know that they are reproducing the Hypo manifolds in China? The earlier 351W had similiar castings to the Hypo version, and may be easier to obtain. The stock Lopo 289-302 manifolds would have the same problem (quite restrictive also). They are definitely light and compact though. Yes, it was the Moostank Hi-Po maniflods I was thinking of. I'm having trouble getting my head around this whole "straighter plug is going to foul the header when an angled plug won't" thing. Seems to me that the ANGLED plugs would be more likely to be the issue. Perhaps I'm missing something in the geometry here. Having said all of that, I LURVE them block hugger headers in D-Freak's picture! I want them! Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 Yes, it was the Moostank Hi-Po maniflods I was thinking of. I'm having trouble getting my head around this whole "straighter plug is going to foul the header when an angled plug won't" thing. Seems to me that the ANGLED plugs would be more likely to be the issue. Perhaps I'm missing something in the geometry here. Having said all of that, I LURVE them block hugger headers in D-Freak's picture! I want them! You can run a tighter header with the angled spark plugs, because they, (the plugs) sit closer to the head. The straighter spark plugs stick out more, causing the header pipe to have to curve further around it to clear it. Once you start fitting the various headers, you will see exactly what I am talking about. They also make shorty spark plugs that just Might help the interference problem. Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 I was thinking something in a "blog hugger" style might work? Here is a link from Speedway Motors for Ford smallblock block hugger headers that will clear the GT40P head's spark plug. The price is good at a buck and a half, but they are plain/uncoated/unplated. These would have to be ceramic coated to keep the heat down under the hood. http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Small-Block-Ford-Tight-Fit-Headers-Plain,3822.html Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 13, 2013 Report Share Posted February 13, 2013 Here is a link from Speedway Motors for Ford smallblock block hugger headers that will clear the GT40P head's spark plug. The price is good at a buck and a half, but they are plain/uncoated/unplated. These would have to be ceramic coated to keep the heat down under the hood.http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Small-Block-Ford-Tight-Fit-Headers-Plain,3822.html Sweet! I'm off to Speedway Motors! Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 I think compact is the ultimate goal. ^_^ Clearance on the right side is great. Clearance on the left side around the steering gearbox is tight. Very tight. How about your oil filter clearance, will you have to run a remote filter? Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 14, 2013 Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 How about your oil filter clearance, will you have to run a remote filter? I doubt it. Our clearance issues should be limited to the rear of the engine by the steering gearbox. 1 Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2013 How about your oil filter clearance, will you have to run a remote filter? Had we left the Explorer oil filter stand on, it wouldn't have cleared. We took it off and replaced it with the bits from the 289 to use a flush-to-the-block filter. And if we use the Explorer filter, it's surprisingly compact. :thumbup: 1 Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I got some work done yesterday but didn't take any oics. I'll have D-freak shoost some next weekend. Anyhoo, I built a framework to support and mount the fuel cell, I mounted the fuel pump, I up-fncked a hard line for the fuel (not too bad, it ought to still function but it is ugly), and I made a rear hatch support system thingy. Also, I grokked the engine some, specifically the zorst ports and now I see why GT-40P "straight plugs" might interfere. I was picturing the plugs going into the head... I don't know, like a NAPS-Z for instance. Apparently Nissan can make TWO spark plugs go into the sweet spot of the cylinder without having to be all catty-whompus but V-8 designers can't. 1 Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 17, 2013 Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I got some work done yesterday but didn't take any oics. I'll have D-freak shoost some next weekend. Anyhoo, I built a framework to support and mount the fuel cell, I mounted the fuel pump, I up-fncked a hard line for the fuel (not too bad, it ought to still function but it is ugly), and I made a rear hatch support system thingy. Also, I grokked the engine some, specifically the zorst ports and now I see why GT-40P "straight plugs" might interfere. I was picturing the plugs going into the head... I don't know, like a NAPS-Z for instance. Apparently Nissan can make TWO spark plugs go into the sweet spot of the cylinder without having to be all catty-whompus but V-8 designers can't. I am sure you remember that snake pool of headers that came with the 5.0 you are using, along with that bastardized oil pan just to fit in the Explorer/Mountaineer. Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2013 I am sure you remember that snake pool of headers that came with the 5.0 you are using Unfortunately, it came without any exhaust manifolds. :sleep: But yes, it's quite ugly and weird... Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 I got some work done yesterday but didn't take any oics. I'll have D-freak shoost some next weekend. Anyhoo, I built a framework to support and mount the fuel cell, I mounted the fuel pump, I up-fncked a hard line for the fuel (not too bad, it ought to still function but it is ugly), and I made a rear hatch support system thingy. How many gallons does your fuel cell hold? Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 CGS1948, I'm remembering it as being a ten gallon, but D-freak thinks it looks smaller than that. Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 If you recall the brand, we can find the dimensions online and find out? B) Quote Link to comment
CGS1948 Posted February 20, 2013 Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 If you recall the brand, we can find the dimensions online and find out? B) All you have to do, and it is the formula that I use for building gas tanks: Take the Length x Width x Height/231 and that will give you the approximate volume of fuel in gallons. Example 16" x 12" x 10"/231 = 8.31 Gallons Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2013 All you have to do, and it is the formula that I use for building gas tanks: Take the Length x Width x Height/231 and that will give you the approximate volume of fuel in gallons Thanks. :thumbup: Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 We'll do that Saturday. Lunch says it is ten-ish. Quote Link to comment
datsunfreak Posted February 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Well, "ish" covers a lot of ground... :rofl: Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 21, 2013 Report Share Posted February 21, 2013 Yeah, when the math comes out 9.875 or 10.023, I don't want you going, "In your face, Flanders!" Quote Link to comment
dimlight65 Posted February 23, 2013 Report Share Posted February 23, 2013 Soooo, what was that number we calculated again? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.