Don't I know it ... I've been a Ford parts guy for almost 20 years, run in to that all the time. One-piece rear main started in mid-1983 model year, so there should be some non-roller one-piecers out there too. cheers Ed N.
Yes all 302/5.0 blocks (from about 1986 as '85 GT blocks were new castings and only went into Mustangs) will accept and operate with OEM Roller lifters and cams with the instalation of the spider and "H" tie bars for the lifters, but ALL engines WERE NOT roller equipt from '85 and up. On my home PC I have a chart that lists every single rolller cam grind Ford ever put in a 302/5.0 and the car it went into. I will post it tonight if I can remember to do so. When it comes to late model 302/5.0 and Mustang specs and information, There is very little I don't know. In fact I often forget things until later and then have to edit things. If you want to argue late model Mustang engine facts with me, you're gonna need to be ready to back up your information.
That's only true for the H.O. motors. The SEFI 5.0's in the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis (non-H.O.) used 1-5-4-2-6-3-7-8. My '87 Grand Marquis used that firing order, and it's definitely a roller cam. So it is possible to have a non-H.O. roller motor.
Correct ... non-HO passenger, and the flat-tappet trucks (to 93 model year) used the old 289 / 302 firing order and injector sequence. Truck 302s got the 1-3-7-2 order when they went to roller cam and mass air flow with sequential EFI system in 1994 model year. cheers Ed N.
I think the one exception to this would be the 1985 model year throttle-body injected (CFI) HO engines used with the auto. trans in the Mustang, Capri, LTD LX, Marquis LTS, and Mark VII. Those were the 175 hp version (some literature says 165), and AFAIK, they were still flat tappet. cheers Ed N.
And I've seen more than a couple non-roller Crown's, Grand Marquis and trucks from after '87. This was a change over period and not everything got a roller cam. I never said non-H.O. roller's didn't exist.
Sorry, I should have said it's possible to have a roller 5.0 with the "289/302" (1-5-4-2-...) firing order. Your post implied that all roller cams used the 351W firing order, which isn't correct. I just tend to differentiate the H.O. and non-H.O. motors by their firing order.
Other than pistons ('85-'91 H.O. factory pistons were forged), the H.O. engine was identical to non-H.O. engines. Most H.O. engiens got the E7TE head, but not all did. There were small variations, but the biggie was the pistons and the better (smoother, less vibration causing) 351W firing order. So seeign them as H.O. or non-H.O. is how I see them too.
an `88 Grand Marquis SHOULD HAVE a roller camshaft.....therefore a steel distrubutor gear is required...a cast gear as used on non-roller cam motors will not survive!!! You need to get a distrubtor made for a 1985 Mustangt 5.0 V-8 with a manual transmission. You must specify 1985 5.0 and a manual tranny! The Automatic Mustangs in 1985 had a Throttle-Body injection system and the distributor is a bit different. You will also need the Durspark ignition box,and look for a wiring diagram online,just "google" it....
Only the HO motors used the 351w firing order,a standard non-HO roller cam 302 will have a standard 302 firing order!
Once again... I will say it... this is not true. This is a left over myth from the early days of the roller cam. You only need a steel distributor gear that fits the distributor you want to run.
You had better learn how to read. I said in the quote of me you used that the 302 H.O. used the same firing order as the 351W. Not once did I talk about non-H.O. roller cams. If you can't understadn what I wrote you had better go study elementary English again.
I'll add fuel to the fire: The 1988 Lincoln Town Car I had was not a true serp setup, (it did have 5-rib flat belts), but used two separate belts on the front of the engine, and had a standard rotation water pump. Apparently, so did my 1990 T/C, I bought a pump for it and never used it before selling it. I put it on my current engine, because NAPA part numbers said it's a standard rotation. I had a 1990 and an '88 Lincoln Town Car with the 5.0 F.I. engines that were not roller or reverse rotation engines. Also had an '88 Cougar XR-7 with a 5.0 F.I. that was not a roller engine. But I'm 99.9% sure that one WAS a serpintine setup (reverse flow) because of the size of the engine bay, (it was basically a Mustang). The rumor I heard, was that before Ford phased out the 5.0 in regular production (non-Mustang) cars before/around 1991, some leftovers towards the end of the line got the roller treatment. In 1991, Ford started using the 4.6 in Town Cars. By 1992 the Crown Vic and Grand Marquis followed suit with their redesigned bodies as well. The 302 was still found up until 2001 in Exploders. They were rollers. Not sure about the F-150 applications. I've got one of the last ones made in my Mercury now. It was destined for a Exploder, the numbers decode as a 2001, and it has the GT-40P heads, the 351W (302 HO) firing order, and is a roller- but went to Roush for "testing" and never was put into a car before mine. I had to get a different front cover to run a mechanical fuel pump, and find an eccentric for the cam, which meant I had to also go with a different timing set. Check it out here: http://landyachts.homestead.com/mercresto8.html The general rule of thumb I have gone by is that if it's a "corporate" 302 (i.e. non-Mustang or Lincoln Mark 7) it's NOT a roller. Be plesently surprised if you find out otherwise. Confused yet?
What was it originally out of? The 87 Marquis? Have you actually seen inside your engine? This is getting interesting! I'd heard a rumor about some Grand Marquis and Crown Vics floating around with roller engines, but never believed it...
Hi Well let me start by saying I had the donor Crown Vic. for numbers checking 1987 year with a '86 5.0 roller with double belted crank pulley and standard rotation water pump. and e6te heads .I have a '95 van engine beside it to check between the two as far as rotation [look at the back plate on water pump you will see the different shape and direction of the inlet outlet holes. Oh yeal! old time SBF firing order . Later Jimb.
You didn't start a fight. Ford just did so many different things that it gets confusing. Let's not even get started ont he SAE/Metric fasteners mixture during these years...... lol
Yes, it's from the '87 Marquis, and I have the intake manifold and one head removed right now. I believe it's the original engine, but I'm going to check anyway. It's definitely a roller. The "spider" and "dogbones" are there. The belt setup was just like you described, with two flat ribbed belts. One for the alternator, power steering, and water pump, and a second one for the air pump and a/c compressor. I believe the same setup was used in these cars until the switchover to the 4.6. Mustangs, Thunderbirds, and Cougars used a single belt.
I just did this swap and got all the info I needed right here: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/s...d.php?t=191450 Also, you can use either the 3 or 4 bolt crank pulley with this balancer (50 oz) from Speedway: http://www.speedwaymotors.com/p/1802...temNo=balancer By the way, if you're running a C4 tranny, you can use the flexplate (50 oz) for the AOD available from Ford Racing for cheap at Jegs or Summit.
How do I check that? I have an 89 302 HO and swapped on a Edelbrock Performer manifold and carb, and used one of those HEI type dizzys that someone posted earlier. I don't have the original dizzy for comparison
joe, don't they have chad's dad's 302 at the shop? ask kevin or chad if it still has the stock distributor.
M-6605-B302 is the Ford Racing oil pump shaft for 87-95 H.O. engines. Quote from Ford Racgin Catalog "1987-95 5.0L Fits EFI and Non-EFI" List price $16.95
The Jalopy Journal
