1996 Explorer 5.0 upgrade

rjrobin2002 · Dec 3, 2010

What dou ya'll think would be required to get 250-275 hp out of a 96 Explorer 5.0 with out complete rebuild? What do you think headers/flowmasters exhaust, cam and K+N cone air filter would do?

RustyShackelfor · Dec 3, 2010

depends on how worn it is

HoosierDaddy · Dec 4, 2010

Brand new it was rated for 210. If it still a tight motor , you should hit 250 fairly easy , maybe 275 without too much trouble.

Keep the heads and intake , those are GT40's.
Keep the throttle body , larger than mustangs by a bit.

Headers with a decent exhaust.
A bit more cam
stock valve springs are not known to be not worth a damn , so pitch those for some that can keep the valve train in check.

TrickFlow claims 360hp with their top end kit ... just as a reference ....TF Top End Kit

DanWheeler · Dec 4, 2010

I started this thread over at sbftech.com asking how to get 50-100 HP out of my 96 Explorer 5.0

http://sbftech.com/index.php?topic=27373.0;topicseen

needabronco · Dec 4, 2010

Keep in mind those are drag racing guys over there. They want high end power, and we need all the low end power...

I have read (don't remember where) that the exploder 5.0 can make 260-280 hp at the flywheel, with a cam and exhaust change. The explorer exhaust is very restrictive, but I'm assuming you've already changed that?

Porting too much out of your intakes and heads can actually hurt your low end power. If you do just a little porting you will pick up a 'little' bit, but it's a fine line...

broncnaz · Dec 4, 2010

Exactly how is this explorer motor currently setup? ie stock computer, A9p, or carbed?
A stock mustang 5.0 cam can make over 300 hp the issue is to do it you need heads, TB, mass air flow meter and a good exhuast probably some computer tuning as well. The biggest issue when upping the HP you also up the RPM range that the HP is made at so swapping out to a bigger cam may hurt driveability.
Since the explorer cam is fairly similar to the mustang cam I cant see why it wouldnt support 250-275 hp. I'd probably just do a good exhuast go from there. You go with to big of a cam and your lose lowend and hurt mileage as well.

HoosierDaddy · Dec 4, 2010

broncnaz said:
Since the explorer cam is fairly similar to the mustang cam I cant see why it wouldnt support 250-275 hp. I'd probably just do a good exhuast go from there. You go with to big of a cam and your lose lowend and hurt mileage as well.

I agree , I just happen to think that there are better cams out there in the aftermarket that will boost the crap out of the low end and mid-range and still post the HP numbers he requested.

Most importantly , how does he intend to drive it ?
Why does he want 250 to 275 HP ?
What does he want out of the motor , what does he want it to do?

DanWheeler · Dec 4, 2010

Not sure about the OP but my hope was to get a little more HP throughout the RPM range.

Mine is A9P w/ stock Explorer MAF w/ 2.5" 2-into-1 exhaust.

I was asking about more power because I'm in the process of going to 1-ton axles and 41s and I'm not sure how the 5.0 is going to do with all that. I'm geared low enough that I dont have to worry about it on the trail but I thought it might become a problem at the dunes since wheel speed and HP is so important.

Viperwolf1 · Dec 4, 2010

Keep in mind a 302 is a small V8. It isn't going to build a lot of low end torque. Bigger cam will shift the torque band higher up the rpm scale where it translates into more horsepower. It's a trade-off. You can have good low-end torque or you can have lots of horsepower. If you want lots of torque and HP you need to think bigger.

HoosierDaddy · Dec 4, 2010

needabronco said:
Keep in mind those are drag racing guys over there. They want high end power, and we need all the low end power...

Porting too much out of your intakes and heads can actually hurt your low end power. If you do just a little porting you will pick up a 'little' bit, but it's a fine line...

Both very true statements. The box upper is waay off the mark for our needs.

The more I learn about these Ford EFI'd motors , the more interviews I read with the pros who actually use math and dynos to prove their point , the more I realize how bad most motorheads have the "bigger is better" mentality.

The GT40 intakes seem to be very, very capable manifolds. They offer pretty decent flow for the mid to upper rpms, plus they keep the velocity up , which is crucial to how most of us actually run these motors.
As he said above , they can be cleaned up or smoothed out a bit , balance the flow as needed , just don't HOG them out.

The GT40 heads are OK , they could use some work , the P's are a bit better match for the GT40 intakes.

The Trick Flow Twisted Wedge 170's (fast as cast) are a great match flow wise , for a well blended and balanced GT40 intake set up. They will both top out at 250 cfm at that point. You should get great velocity from that set up.

englewoodcowboy · Dec 4, 2010

Interesting thread. I know where he is coming from on power and yes it can be a fine line between horsepower and torque. I think you need to visit what you want to do with your ride. I too was saying I wanted around 300 to 350 at the crank knowing what I really want is a tight low end torque band in a reliable motor. I have figured with 33" tires, 4.27 gears and an AOD will put me at 2039 rpm at 70 MPH in OD and 3043 rpm in 3rd. I would have very similar results going to 35" tires and 4.56 gears. This tells me where I want my torque curve to be specified for cruising as my rig will be my DD. The advantage of staing with the stock AOD gears and a good low end torque is it should also perform well for the king of OR my rig will see.

Here is a link to the calculator I used to figure my ratios and RPM's:

http://www.csgnetwork.com/multirpmcalc.html

rjrobin2002 · Dec 4, 2010

I am planning on this motor for my daily driver with 35" tires, 4.56 gears and a 4r70w. Probably would want lower end power/torque. I am not set on a particular HP number, but was just thinking with those horrible restrictive headers replaced with some JBA shorty headers, K+N airfilter, and possible a RV cam what I could expect with stock MAF and A9P computer? I am just wanting the most out of the motor with a stock rotating assembly and heads by freeing up intake and exhaust with a cam swap. I am going to break the motor down and replace bearings, rings, possible cylinder work if needed, and heads rebuilt.

broncnaz · Dec 4, 2010

All really depends on what your axle gearing, tranny gearing, tire size and useage will be.
Most of us want good lowend and good hiway RPM's which all works out to a low RPM motor. The more HP you want out of a 302 the higher the RPM's will be that that HP is at 275 is not unattainable and may even still have decent low end. but as we've seen in many dyno tests people believed they were making way more HP than what they actually were.
My concept is to build the engine with torque in the range you want/need it. You'll be much happier dont worry about HP. HP is for drag racers. We want torque.
I'll have to go back over the old article I was reading the other day they had a stock 5.0 and were dynoing each upgrade I believe the final upgrade was a bigger cam it only netted about 16 more HP than the stock 5.0 cam.

ok I type slow and you answered already. I basically look at the explorer cam as a RV cam already. I'd say with your gearing, tire size ect your pretty close to what a stock explorer would have for overall gearing. So with that in mind I doubt a aftermarket cam will gain you much of anything unless you want the power higher or lower. The headers should be your biggest gain.But i would opt for some full lenghts to get the most power shorties just dont do it IMO. SBF's are not bad on the intake side its the exhuast side that needs all the help it can get. What injectors are you using? I might be wrong but arent the explorer injectors smaller than standard 5.0 injectors. you migh tsee a gain with larger injectors if thats the case.

HoosierDaddy · Dec 4, 2010

Sounds like you and I are going to be doing the same thing. Just checked out my Explorer 5.0 earlier today. Been sitting at least the three years I had it and I got it from a boneyard Explorer. 130K if I recall.
I can still turn the flywheel by hand , so at least it is not locked up.
Take it apart , check for damage , good cleaning , minimal mill work and reassemble with new parts and gaskets.

Viperwolf1 said:
Keep in mind a 302 is a small V8. It isn't going to build a lot of low end torque. Bigger cam will shift the torque band higher up the rpm scale where it translates into more horsepower. It's a trade-off. You can have good low-end torque or you can have lots of horsepower. If you want lots of torque and HP you need to think bigger.

I just read a damn good article on how the intake manifold is what makes the 5.0's as good as they were. In theory the short stroke / big bore is a high winding horsepower maker , but when they decided to make the intake runners so very long on these things , the high speed air velocity turned them into torque machines.

Kind of the opposite of people putting a shade higher cam in a 351 relying on the ample torque they naturally have and using the hotter cam to boost top end.

For what it is worth , after insane amounts of research , I've decided to just stick with the GT40 heads , get the proper springs for the cam I have had an absolute hard-on now for awhile now , The Comp Cams XE258HR , 35-510-8. Linked.
If I ever get a 351 , I'll move to a GT lower , fully ported and TF TW170's , fast as cast , prolly the same cam.
If ever a 408 , maybe keep the same heads and intake and go up a cam or two.

HoosierDaddy · Dec 4, 2010

Explorers use 19lb/hr injectors.

The guys running the XE258 or its twin Crane 2020 , have so much low end that in low/low on a manual tranny , they cannot kill it at idle in gear with the brakes , it powers through the brakes at idle.
Another description , "very strong low end , brutal mid range" .... sound like what I'm looking for.
Cam card says valve float occurs around 5300 or 5500 rpm IIRC.

RustyShackelfor · Dec 5, 2010

Just need a 5.8

broncnaz · Dec 5, 2010

I'm sure the 2020 cam is ok but still its nothing exciting at least to me heres some rear wheel dyno numbers for that cam swap in a 93 gt. The car stock did a best RWHP of 138.57 and RWTQ of 185.10 ft/lbs.
After the swap the best RWHP was 139.85 and RWTQ of 206.62 ft/lbs.
The biggest gain was 35.37 TQ@2708 RPM and 19.54 HP@2845 RPM

overall it looks like it made more power at about 300 RPM's lower than the stock cam. Stacked up against a stock explorer cam I'm sure it would make even more power but probably at higher RPM's than the explorer cam. Here's explorer cam specs .422/.448 lift and 256/266 advertised duration not at .050 like others. Lobe sep is 116.
Still I guess a cam swap would be a good option to up the power a bit its just roller cams tend to cost quite a bit and you may not gain a whole lot for the money.
Also keep in mind you'll need new valve springs for theys cam swaps as stock springs usually cant handle lifts over .500
Just my .02 I'd have to experiance the explorer cam setup first then decide. I like the aftermarket cams choices as well.

HoosierDaddy · Dec 5, 2010

Just back up the the unkillable comment I made earlier .... and make a correction.
He used the 35-308-8 , very similiar grind.
http://www.norcalbroncos.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1152&page=3

Whatever cam I use will be used in a 5.8 later , just don't care to spend the $$ for the 5.8 right now. Too much other stuff needs done also.

The stock roller 351 cam is a very good cam also. Have the specs for it somewhere.

Viperwolf1 · Dec 5, 2010

HoosierDaddy said:
The stock roller 351 cam is a very good cam also. Have the specs for it somewhere.

I believe it's the same as the explorer cam mentioned above.

broncnaz · Dec 5, 2010

X2 the 351 roller is the same cam as the explorer roller.
As for that link to a post I could say its killable as I didnt see anyone comparing it to a explorer cam. not saying the cam is not good as it appears a lot of guys are happy with it compared to the bigger cams they were running. Common mistake IMO as many people tend to listen to all the mustang crowd has to say which doesnt always work ina bronco..

1996 Explorer 5.0 upgrade

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

electron whisperer

Bronco Guru

Lick Creek Restorations

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

Bronco Guru

electron whisperer

Bronco Guru

Similar threads