Stroker motor talk!-Threads merged

[AussieRod]

you need a lot of TORQUE to move a Bronco through sand. Changing gearing and tyre sizes can have an effect on this. Using 4.88's and 35's on a 5.0 will help a lot, as the lower gearing gives better torque miltiplication and therefore more mechanical advantage going to the wheels. The 5.8 could use 4.56's or 4'88's, given you have OD in your auto. Without OD, 4.11's and 35's are what I would aim for. The 5.8 has more torque than a 5.0, but uses the same straw exhaust and cat as the 5.0, which seriously limits power. Personally, I would be using an efficient off-road pipe in between smog checks and reaping the benefit of more HP and torque, plus the few extra MPGs you stand to gain. Believe it or not, carrying too many spare parts and assorted other stuff you dont really need can seriously weigh down your steed, start thinking about what you DONT need to carry around, as this just costs gas to move along. I'm gonna have a play with different rear gears until I find a ratio that suits my purpose, then re-gear the front to match. Currently, I have 3.50, 4.11 and 4.56 to choose from, with 33" tyres to start with. Having the AOD, 4.56 is a good start, as around town or towing I wont use OD, until I'm on the highway at at least 65 mph and its convertor is locked in 3rd and OD anyway. I'm almost kicking myself I didnt just get a Coyote and be done with it, a BRAND NEW 5.0 with 400+ HP, 7500 safe rev limit and full Euro5 emmisions already, with the FRPP kit, it would be in and running already.

[hobbyturnedobsession]

They arent cheap and lookin into it they are having tuning issues

[BDKW1]

What you need in sand is floatation. The Barge was useless in low range in the sand. With the 3.73's and 35's it was pegged in 3rd all the time. High range was much more fun. Just aired down to 12 in the front and 10 in the back. Mind your speed in the corners and it will go anywhere.

[AussieRod]

What you need in sand is floatation. The Barge was useless in low range in the sand. With the 3.73's and 35's it was pegged in 3rd all the time. High range was much more fun. Just aired down to 12 in the front and 10 in the back. Mind your speed in the corners and it will go anywhere.

Agreed, Floatation is very important.

[PaulW]

Seems like the dimensions of a mod motor like the Coyote would not fit in my Bronco. After the suspension is done on any gofast Bronco the spring towers will severely restrict the install. Then when you squeeze the thing in there serviceing would be a pain. My take is stay with one of the Ford offerings using the Boss 351 as the starting place. Or just a DIY 351 stroker. More power and torque anyway and at lower revs compaered to any 5.0 base motor.
Yes, I know there are mod motors installed in early Broncos. The pics of those installs demonstrate what has to happen to squeeze them in. The front suspension has to be completely redone.
Bottom line is mod motors are for street rods and Mustangs - not GFBs
Choose what you want.
PW

[PaulW]

What you need in sand is floatation. The Barge was useless in low range in the sand. With the 3.73's and 35's it was pegged in 3rd all the time. High range was much more fun. Just aired down to 12 in the front and 10 in the back. Mind your speed in the corners and it will go anywhere.

==
Yup I just put 5.13s in the wifes Jeep with 12.5x35s For soft stuff I run 12-14psi on 8" no beadlock rims. The transfer has a 4:1 low so it goes ok. Still darn slow in the highway even with 30psi.
PW

[Agui-E7TE]

I aired down to 11 psi with 315/75R16 IROK ND tires and had to stick to low range in Glamis. For some reason Pismo isn't as hard on the truck as Glamis but I'd venture to say the steepness and softness of the sand has a lot to do with it.

I have stock gearing (3.55) so it does have a big effect on off road performance but the fuel economy was awesome. I ended up averaging just over 12 mpg for the entire weekend. I put 500 miles on the Bronco and did it with $145 total (91 octane) so I know I was getting between 13-14 mpg on the highway with the stock gearing and the bigger tires. I had plenty of power on the highway thanks to the fact that I didn't catch any hills.

Any way we spin it, for sand.. we need a whole heck of a lot more power than the Broncos have stock to keep you safe in the sand. It's not a great feeling when you try to carve a bowl and start bogging down and have to turn down really quick to keep it from going over.

[Dust]

The coyote seems like it would be an awesome engine to run in a Bronco. 418 HP and it revs to 7500 rpms, what's not to like?!

After running my Bronco through Glamis over the weekend it was very clear that the stock 351 just wont cut it and anyone who says it's at least better than a 5.0 really needs to think about how much power they're not putting out. On the flip side, I could in theory swap in the built 5.0L off my Mustang which is already putting out well over 400 HP (best guess from the seat of the pants dyno and the new 5.0 coyote Mustangs it's smoked as well as SS Camaros). I can run it reliably on pump gas 91 octane and its super reliable even as a daily driver.

I honestly think 400 HP is the minimum a Bronco should have just because of it's weight. A high revving engine is also perfect (or maybe just plain cool) and the coyote V8 would definitely be the ticket to better performance off road.

In every configuration (available in the truck line) the 5.8L made more torque then the 5.0L and more HP too if one believes the internet; when you modify either one, the same way, the advantage remains with the larger displacement and it takes fewer modification to get there with the larger engine because it starts out closer to the power target. In a light weight rig like a Ranger a high winding V8 could be fun for a short period of time after that and certainly with anything as heavy as a Bronco I'd want more torque, lower RPMS, easier to drive (more forgiving), longer engine life, and the list goes on... In a road race sedan... different story and I would still want the larger engine .

I agree, to play in sand you had 1/2 (or much less then that) the power you needed.

Dust

Dust

[Agui-E7TE]

In every configuration (available in the truck line) the 5.8L made more torque then the 5.0L and more HP too if one believes the internet; when you modify either one, the same way, the advantage remains with the larger displacement and it takes fewer modification to get there with the larger engine because it starts out closer to the power target. In a light weight rig like a Ranger a high winding V8 could be fun for a short period of time after that and certainly with anything as heavy as a Bronco I'd want more torque, lower RPMS, easier to drive (more forgiving), longer engine life, and the list goes on... In a road race sedan... different story and I would still want the larger engine .

I agree, to play in sand you had 1/2 (or much less then that) the power you needed.

Dust

Dust

The Mustang 5.0L HO made 225 HP and 300 foot pounds of torque. The Bronco/F150 5.8L made 210 HP and 315 foot pounds of torque while the 5.0L made 185 HP and 270 foot pounds of torque.

All I'm saying is that the truck engines are not built for performance compared to the Mustang engines that were built to go fast. 87-92 5.0 HO motors also have forged pistons as an added bonus. The 5.0L HO shares the same heads but that's about all they share with the truck engines. The aftermarket support for the Mustang motors is incredible and it's easy to build a reliable 400 plus horsepower daily driver engine. The truck engine's limit's are internals not holding up as well as emissions limitations that keep most of us from going wild with the mods on them.

That being said, it's more reasonable to build up the 351 if it's already in the truck but if you start with a 5.0L Bronco, I wouldn't hesitate to upgrade to a Mustang motor since they are already a step up from the factory Bronco motor and with a little work will deliver some great performance benefits.

[TurboJoe]

I agree that the mass air 5.8 does not have forged pistons but the 5.8 mass air truck and the 5.0 HO has the same cam and heads so I would think a intake cam and head swap would net similar gains favoring the 5.8 in low end torque...

Just my 2 cents
Joe

[Seabass]

One of the "budget" strokers is the 393. It uses 302 pistons an offset ground crank and I can't remember what con rod at the moment but if you don't mind recycling a few parts theres alot of used stuff for sale on the mustang sites. If you insist on new stuff there right next to the cost of a 408.

In my opinion the "budget" idea gets hard when you need to get heads that can keep up with the bigger cubes and extra r's. Entry level aluminum heads
are around a grand. There are "better" cast junkyard heads like the gt40 and gt40p heads but they probaly won't be enough.

The next hurdle is the intake manifolds on the 351 truck motor. If you don't care about smog you can get junkyard intake manifolds off of explorers. OR for a little more coin used go fast mustang stuff. But either will require changing the intake plumbing making it instantly obvious something is off. (additionally the short runers are designed for high rpm stuff)


As far as the DIY thing you can have any decent machine shop assemeble it for you. Building one of these things isn't as daunting as some might fear. If your bronco is your hobby you should consider assembling a motor in your garage for fun. At the very least it'll give you a better understanding of whats going on underneath the loud pedal.

[robertcrav]

Junkyard explorer intake off a 5.0 Explorer will not fit a 5.8...

That being said I'm doubly screwed with my '96...seems like almost all the legal 5.8 parts stop at '95

I'd love to see what a 351based , AFR headed, lightning intaked 393/408 felt like...

And I'm curious, if anyone has access to any desktop dyno software, what just some 1.7 rockers do to a stock truck as discussed either in this thread or another performance thread

[TurboJoe]

I have a question... Is anyone certain that the truck upper and lower intake manifold is a poor flowing piece? At full throttle I'm not pulling a vacuum, it seems it keeps up with a stock 5.8 so it must be ok til a certain point? Not saying on a built motor but I wonder what it will support?

Joe

[RyanDS650X]

Junkyard explorer intake off a 5.0 Explorer will not fit a 5.8...

That being said I'm doubly screwed with my '96...seems like almost all the legal 5.8 parts stop at '95

I'd love to see what a 351based , AFR headed, lightning intaked 393/408 felt like...

And I'm curious, if anyone has access to any desktop dyno software, what just some 1.7 rockers do to a stock truck as discussed either in this thread or another performance thread

Edelbrock makes smog legal intakes i have the upper and lower on my '96 with 1.7 rockers. I really need to get it dynoed and see what its making...

[Seabass]

Robert your right I missed 302 w/351 hotrod stuff in my head.

I thought you where selling your bronco?

I share your 96 plight. Finding a y-pipe sucked.

[AussieRod]

Junkyard explorer intake off a 5.0 Explorer will not fit a 5.8...

That being said I'm doubly screwed with my '96...seems like almost all the legal 5.8 parts stop at '95

I'd love to see what a 351based , AFR headed, lightning intaked 393/408 felt like...

And I'm curious, if anyone has access to any desktop dyno software, what just some 1.7 rockers do to a stock truck as discussed either in this thread or another performance thread

Edelbrock makes smog legal intakes i have the upper and lower on my '96 with 1.7 rockers. I really need to get it dynoed and see what its making...

Actually, the FRPP 5.8 GT40 lower does fit with the Explorer upper. However, the Edelbrock intake is smog legal for 96 and will help performance, although most of the problem is the restrictive 'Y' cat in the exhaust. Get rid of that with a better flowing Y piece and you might be amazed at the difference. The problem is, for the 96 and smog testing, you must have the correct cat and Y piece for smog legality. If your testing is every two years, consider putting your cat pipe away and fitting an off-road Y pipe in between tests.

[hobbyturnedobsession]

Yeah but get caught without it in CA and suffer a 750 dollar fine. Ive been told either port match the intake or get a trick flow intake

[AussieRod]

Yeah but get caught without it in CA and suffer a 750 dollar fine. Ive been told either port match the intake or get a trick flow intake

Randy, you have a welder now. Carefully cut the cat pipe off and punch the inside out of both cats, then weld them back together. Looks legal, need a sniffer to tell the truth. I'd do that to a used pipe and keep your good one for the smog tester.
Use the Edelbrock intake with the stock TB and smog attachments, it will flow much better than a port matched stocker and TFS doesnt make a truck style intake, you'd have to modify your entire set-up for a car style intake to use TFS stuff. This way you will stay smog legal.

[hobbyturnedobsession]

Psh that exhaust ran me 750 from the headers back. The cat only takes up 1%. Mine is new. If its clogged itll rob hp.

[PaulW]

Yeah but get caught without it in CA and suffer a 750 dollar fine. Ive been told either port match the intake or get a trick flow intake

=
Or register you vehicle in a CA location that does not require smog or inspections.
Easy if you do your homework.
Or if it is NOT a daily driver register it in AZ wher the rules are almost non existant. Like Robby who has both Hummers registered there.
PW