Gary's '66 conv.
New Member
Am now looking at installing a 1990 5.0 with EFI in my 1966 conv. Anybody had any experience doing this and will it fit under the stock hood?
-
Hello there guest and Welcome to The #1 Classic Mustang forum!
To gain full access you must Register. Registration is free and it takes only a few moments to complete.
Already a member? Login here then!
Gary's '66 conv.
- Thread starter Gary's '66 conv.
- Start date
should fit no problem with a stock intake. I'm doing the same in my 70 vert right now.
Several guys on here have done it. Talk to Ken(kb3) he has one in his sons car.
Here's a good link to info
http://www.midnightdsigns.com/Mustang/Engine.htm
Several guys on here have done it. Talk to Ken(kb3) he has one in his sons car.
Here's a good link to info
http://www.midnightdsigns.com/Mustang/Engine.htm
kb3
Well-Known Member
We put a 1993 style cobra EFI set up in our 65. It cleared the stock hood by 1/4" in the tightest spot. That being said, I do not have the shock towers or standard engine mounts as we went with a TCI front end. I do know many others were able to make it fit with the standard setup. Most likely you will not be able to use the spacer between the upper and lower manifolds, such as is common with the 5.0 crowd. I can send some pictures if you would like.
Ken
Ken
Ponyman66
Yak, yak, yak
I am in the process of swapping in a '92 5.0 from a Mustang LX donor car. The basic drop in itself is no more difficult than an original 289. The engine in stock form fits with no clearance issues. You will need the '66 style motor mounts, a front sump oil pan (such as a '66 289), an oil pump pick up for a front sump pan and you'll need to add a hole in the front right corner of the '92 timing cover and install an oil dipstick tube there. You'll also need to plug the old dipstick tube hole in the side of the block. Many people have advocated using a piece of wooden dowel to do it. Personally, I thought that was a hokie deal. You can pick up the appropriate sized metal plug (it's just like a freeze plug only much smaller), from NAPA. It's 3/8" and is NAPA p/n 3812185. They cost about 0.75$.
Keep in mind the 5.0 uses a reverse rotation water pump. As such the radiator hose outlet on the water pump is on the opposite side for the lower radiator hose. You also won't be able to use the 5.0 headers, they hit on the frame rails. You can either use stock 289 manifolds, 289 HiPo manifolds or aftermarket headers. If you stick with the original EFI system, the heater core hoses are different and the stock 5.0 hoses won't work work the '66 heater core. IIRC, James White's article covers this. There is some wiring you'll need to do as well as adding O2 sensors into your exhaust.
What transmission will you be using?
Keep in mind the 5.0 uses a reverse rotation water pump. As such the radiator hose outlet on the water pump is on the opposite side for the lower radiator hose. You also won't be able to use the 5.0 headers, they hit on the frame rails. You can either use stock 289 manifolds, 289 HiPo manifolds or aftermarket headers. If you stick with the original EFI system, the heater core hoses are different and the stock 5.0 hoses won't work work the '66 heater core. IIRC, James White's article covers this. There is some wiring you'll need to do as well as adding O2 sensors into your exhaust.
What transmission will you be using?
Gary's '66 conv.
New Member
I am also using a TCI front suspension which reqiures a rear sump oil pan. And going to use the AOD tranny thats hooked to the motor. Planning on putting a Vintage air front runner system on it also.
kb3
Well-Known Member
Depending on the upper intake manifold you use, it may be close. The throttle body had a vacuum port that just missed a brace in the hood, that and the TPS sensor were awful close. An inch or so inboard and it wouldn't have cleared. Don't mind the ugly power steering reservoir....I am currently looking for something nicer. I could not get the Mustang 5.0 accessory system on it and fit a nice fat radiator and electric fan so I went with a different method. The radiator and fan were a good choice as there have been zero heating problems.
Gary's '66 conv.
New Member
Ken when you say the 5.0 accessory kit wouldn't fit what are you talking about? Did any of you guys do anything to the engine to boost the horsepower to around 300?
kb3
Well-Known Member
The stock Mustang 5.0 accessories hung out to far forward to fit the radiator and electric fan. I originally ran a 4 row, aluminum radiator with the electric fan. The new 2 row is nearly as deep. I ended up using the front accessories off a 5.0 Explorer, it moves it all back about 2".
As for the motor, I have not had it on the dyno, but it probably pushes just over 400hp at the crank. Ford rates the stock crate motor at 340 and then I had a computer re-tune (they claimed it was good for lots of Hp) plus I sized up the injectors, throttle body and mass air....I know it is putting more than 300 hp to the wheels.
kb3
Well-Known Member
Based on the equipment installed and the info supplied by the tuner, the engine should be in the 400hp range, assuming a very generous 25% drive line loss.....300hp seems like a very safe number to bet on. Now most will call out a 15% drive line loss...but again, being the generous, giving guy I am....I pushed it to 25%.
my ass-o-meter is actually out of calibration, I need to send it in for the latest software revision.
Ponyman66
Yak, yak, yak
I've kept mine bone stock, primarily due to it's intended use. With that said, even in stock form the 5.0 will provide a good kick when dropping it into a '66. The power to weight ratio is better due to a '66 weighing a little over 700lbs LESS than a '92!
Gary's '66 conv.
New Member
Ken, did you use stock spindles or the 2 inch dropped spindles? Also what size tires did you go with?
kb3
Well-Known Member
I believe the kit came with the 2" drop spindles as standard equipment. We stuffed a 235/45-17 tire in all four corners of the car. I ended up rolling all of the fender lips and actually had to raise the car 2" to clear the tires. That being said, the car still sits lower than most Mustangs and the tires do not rub what so ever. Below are a couple of pics, but they don't do the car justice. I can take a couple more pics tonight if needed.
