A Switch to Windsor power . . .

S

Stonecoldtx

Registered
Hi, All--

I have a 408 stroker engine that I am going to adapt into my '97 Mark, and I have a couple of things that I need assistance with to make it work.

I already know the following:

1.) I need a different "K-Member", probably one from a MN12 car that came with a 302/5.0L
2.) I will need a different transmission, but I can still use a 4R70W that just has the correct bellhousing bolt pattern (a '98 V6 with a V8 High Gear clutch pack will work just fine), so that will work just as before if I use the MLPS from the current trans and "re-pin" the connector as needed
3.) I will most likely need a set of custom headers
4.) I will probably need to use the belt drive setup from a SN95 Mustang or an MN12/5.0L, as well as the distributor module, etc.
5.) I may need to re-route some of the wiring, and re-wire some of the connections to work on the new engine
6.) I'll most likely need to re-route the A/C hoses, and use the MN12/5.0L hoses instead of the current ones.

I realize that it's going to be a lot of work, but that's OK--I can make more power NA with this combination than most 4.6L 4V engines make with N2O or blowers/turbos, and probably pull down the same mileage--as long as I keep my foot out of it!

The main thing I *DON'T* know is what components are used with the Information Center computer, so I can make sure I get them correctly hooked up.

For example, I'll probably be using an EEC-V computer from a '94 or '95 SN95 automatic Mustang, so I can control the fan and shift points of the transmission, but what other components are reporting to the information center?

I won't be able to use the crank trigger or C.O.P. features of the current engine, so using the other computer will disable them; what effects will that have on the Information Center, using the other ECU?

If I disable the C.O.P and crank trigger, and that disables the reporting features of the Information Center, is there another Information Center that I could install in place of the existing one so everything would work (like from a Gen I car)?

If keep the existing ECU, can a chip be burned to make the ECU "think" the 4.6L is still installed (remember, I'll have to use a distributor!)?

I guess I could live without the Information Center, but I'd like to keep this as close to original in the interior, because I'm going for the ULTIMATE sleeper effect!

Anyway, any assistance with what feeds into the Information Center, and what ECU's that might be a better selection would be GREATLY appreciated!!

Thanks All!
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

You should be able to use your existing EEC somehow. You'll just have to make sure it's programmed right. You might be able to do this with the SCT software. That's what i'd look into first. I don't know if you'd be able to use the info center at all with a different EEC.

I'd head over to forums.modulardepot.com and post a question in the pre-order forum and see what they come up with.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Good luck with your project.It sounds like fun.
But I have to disagree with the statement of making more power N/A than a 4.6 with forced induction.
Realistically how much power do you think the 406 will make? You have to have big dollar heads that flow huge with a big nasty (hardly streetable) cam to make anywhere near the power of a 4.6 with ANY form of forced induction.And no way it will keep up with a turbo combo.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Oh yea, Mileage ????? good luck with that.

Sorry to be a party pooper.Just keeping it real.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

$$ for $$, you are going to get more power out of a pushrod motor. There are just more parts available. But these DOHC heads flow like hell, so with a power adder they do really well.

However, i do think it would be kind of cool to see a 408 stroker powered mark. But will it clear the hood...
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Take a stock 408 and a stock 4.6
Take 3 grand and put it into the the build up of an N/A 408
whats that get you, heads and a cam.Or maybe just heads depending on which heads you choose.
Now put that same money into a 4.6.I could either bolt a blower to it or I could put pistons and rods in it and a huge nitrous kit and either way it would kill the 408.And be completely civil on the street.

I'm not trying to dog this guys project.Again, I'm just keeping it real.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Hi, unstoppable--

With all due respect, I don't know why I'd have any problems producing that power level and maintaining that economy level with that combination.

I've been building engines for 28 years--I think I ought to know my way around them enough by now to accomplish those goals.

Here are some examples:

A stock 4.6L 4V with a blower makes what, 450HP? 500HP? You can't put more than 10-15lbs of boost on pump gas, so that's realistically the limit of of power you can make with a stocker with no octane boosters and only pump gas.

A '94 Cobra 5.0L makes 240HP (net, of course), and all it has is an upgraded intake and a little better heads (GT40 heads with larger valves--1.84" to be exact on the intake side, which is stock 351W sizes).

With a good set of aftermarket heads, like AFR 165's or TFS TW's, you can add another 50-75HP by just bolting them on, which puts it at 290-315HP and that's for an engine that still has a smooth idle and 106 fewer cubes than my 408.

If I can't make 500HP with a N/A EFI 408, something's wrong, and it can be done with a nice, smooth idling cam, too. All it really takes is somebody who knows what they're doing, and I do.

As to mileage, why wouldn't I get 22-24, or even more MPG on the highway with the same transmission and gears, especially when it's all computer controlled?

Considering I've revealed my age, then you should know I'm "Old School", and one of the things I learned a LOOOONG time ago is, "There is no substitute for cubic inches".
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

First off,I'm not doubting your engine building ability.

420-500 RWHP is getting common place with stock bottom ends lately.(how long will they last? I dont know)
Now for a 406 to make lets say 450 RWHP through a C4 it needs 540ish HP.How is 106 cubic inches going to get you another 225-250 HP with a smooth cam??????Thats going off of your 290-315 with good heads.

And show me a stock 5.0 that gets 22-24 MPG let alone one with the kind of cam need to get you to your goals.I personally have never seen a 5.0 get over mid teens in mileage.

The MAIN reason these 4.6s get such good mileage is because of the head design.The head is much more efficient, than the earlier 2 valve designs.

Again, I hope you are not taking this the wrong way.I like your idea.I just think some of your reasoning is flawed.You'll definatley beat the 4.6 in low end torque.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Hi, unstoppable--

First off, I think you're missing a couple of very important points:

1.) The idea that RWHP is a percentage of the HP made at the crank is flawed the because the drivetrain in a car does NOT start consuming more power when the engine MAKES more power; in other words, if I have a stock, 225HP 5.0 that puts 190HP to the rear wheels (like many of them do), then if I suddenly install an engine that makes a dyno-proven 500HP flywheel into the car, it's not going to only put 410HP to the rear wheels (figuring the same 18 percent as the original combination = a now NINETY HP absorbed)--it's going to put 465HP, because that's how much the drivetrain absorbs (225-190 = 35; 500 - 35 = 465). Again drivetrain power absorption does not increase as HP levels increase.

2.) The stock 4.6L engine is rated at 280HP-290HP, and many or most of the Mark VIII's put something like 230HP-245HP to the rear wheels, according to the reports of the members on this site.

Now, here are some examples; keep in mind, this will be a completely STREET-driven car, with occasional trips to the strip, so it must be COMPLETLY reliable and survive on pump gas.

When you add a KB blower, you're limited to 9lbs of boost with no intercooler, and so the MOST you can hope for is roughly a 165HP-175HP increase in HP (if you calculate 9lbs boost vs. atmospheric pressure of roughly 15 psi, and don't subtract for the increase in air temperature, then that's about 61% more air being pumped into the engine), which gives you 455HP at the crankshaft (but LOTS of torque throughout the RPM range), so you should see anywhere from 395HP-420HP at the rear wheels.

If you put a centrifugal blower on it, like a Vortech, you can increase the total amount of boost, and increase your HP level, but you would probably be limited as to how much total boost you can run on pump gas with the stock components to about 15lbs, and it will come at a LOT higher RPM level than the KB, which will add a lot more stress to the lower end of the engine (stress on the lower end increases inversely proportional to the RPM).

That combination should roughly double the HP level at the crankshaft (again, not taking into consideration the increase in air temperature), which would be 560HP at the flywheel and 500HP to 525HP at the rear wheels.

3.) Since we know that engines are only air pumps, let's take the figures for a good-running smallblock, putting out the 290HP-315HP levels mentioned in the previous post.

If you increase the amount of air INTO the engine (whether by increasing the displacement OR by adding a blower/turbo), the engine will produce more power.

By increasing the amount of cubic inches by roughly 1/3 (106c.i. is rougly 1/3 of 302), with NO OTHER CHANGES from the combination mentioned, a 408 *should* produce at least 33% more HP.

Having said that, if the 302 makes 290HP-315HP, then the same combination on the 408 should make 385HP to 420HP.

Of course, more displacement "tames" camshafts, and requires bigger port/valves and more overall flow, so a 408 with correspondingly larger valves/ports and camshaft, again *should* make upwards of 500HP, without causing the idle to be rough (due to the "taming" effect a larger displacement has on camshaft profiles).

4.) Comparing 4.6L to 408 HP levels as detailed above, we have about the same power produced by either one, but as you pointed out, the 408 will have a LOT more low end torque--especially in the RPM ranges normally encountered on the street, and that's what makes vehicles move--torque.

5.) I've completely analyzed the parts costs between the two engines, and the 408 is BY FAR less expensive to produce these HP levels and still be reliable.

I have a total of about $6500 in this engine, and that INCLUDES all electronics and special intake & headers for it, where building up a 4.6L from scratch to '03 Cobra levels and adding a KB blower (which would get me to the RELIABLE 500HP level) would cost about $10,200 (all new parts in BOTH combinations).

I would even venture to say that I could use a 2000RPM stall speed T/C and 3.27:1 or maybe even 3.08:1 gears, and be able to run this combination as quick as a blown/turbo'd 4.6L with 4.10-4.30 gears (figure the amount of torque multiplication taking place between the two combinations, and you'll see what I mean), and the higher gears are where the improved mileage would come from.

The slower the engine turns, the less fuel is used--because fewer combustion cycles take place. That's why the manufacturers started going with OD transmissions and high gears in the rearends--for fewer combustion cycles; this not only translates into better fuel economy, but also reduced emissions (again, fewer combustion cycles, so fewer exhaust cycles and fewer emissions per mile as a result).

You don't have to agree with me, but you can't argue with the numbers and the physics behind them posted above.

Yes, I realize that the head design on the 4.6L engines flow very well, but I've got a set of very well-flowing heads going on my 408, too--and, the best part is that they're ALSO very efficient according to the flow numbers, and THAT, my friend, is what will make the power in this engine.

Besides, if I ever feel like I need more power, I can always add juice or a blower!

NOW--if we can just get back to the ORIGINAL questions I had . . .

I LIKE the idea of the SCT; I'm not sure it would work in this case, but it MIGHT be the best option for what I'm trying to achieve. I'm going to investigate that option and see if that might work for me . . .
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .


1.) The idea that RWHP is a percentage of the HP made at the crank is flawed the because the drivetrain in a car does NOT start consuming more power when the engine MAKES more power; in other words, if I have a stock, 225HP 5.0 that puts 190HP to the rear wheels (like many of them do), then if I suddenly install an engine that makes a dyno-proven 500HP flywheel into the car, it's not going to only put 410HP to the rear wheels (figuring the same 18 percent as the original combination = a now NINETY HP absorbed)--it's going to put 465HP, because that's how much the drivetrain absorbs (225-190 = 35; 500 - 35 = 465). Again drivetrain power absorption does not increase as HP levels increase.

...When you add a KB blower, you're limited to 9lbs of boost with no intercooler, and so the MOST you can hope for is roughly a 165HP-175HP increase in HP (if you calculate 9lbs boost vs. atmospheric pressure of roughly 15 psi, and don't subtract for the increase in air temperature, then that's about 61% more air being pumped into the engine), which gives you 455HP at the crankshaft (but LOTS of torque throughout the RPM range), so you should see anywhere from 395HP-420HP at the rear wheels.

If you put a centrifugal blower on it, like a Vortech, you can increase the total amount of boost, and increase your HP level, but you would probably be limited as to how much total boost you can run on pump gas with the stock components to about 15lbs, and it will come at a LOT higher RPM level than the KB, which will add a lot more stress to the lower end of the engine (stress on the lower end increases inversely proportional to the RPM).

...By increasing the amount of cubic inches by roughly 1/3 (106c.i. is rougly 1/3 of 302), with NO OTHER CHANGES from the combination mentioned, a 408 *should* produce at least 33% more HP.

Having said that, if the 302 makes 290HP-315HP, then the same combination on the 408 should make 385HP to 420HP.

Of course, more displacement "tames" camshafts, and requires bigger port/valves and more overall flow, so a 408 with correspondingly larger valves/ports and camshaft, again *should* make upwards of 500HP, without causing the idle to be rough (due to the "taming" effect a larger displacement has on camshaft profiles).
[/quote]

Your logic about how much power the drivetrain sucks out is flawed. While it is not a set percentage, it is not a set amount of HP either. It's somewhere in between, and actual performance is highly dependant on the rotational inertia of the drivetrain components and how fast you are trying to accelerate them. If you try to accelerate your drivetrain faster, which you will with more hp, less hp is going to make it to the ground.

For a given amount of boost, it puts more stress on the components at lower RPM, since the cylinders have more time to fill. Granted, high RPM puts its own stresses on the engine internals, but if you're getting 9 lbs of boost at 1500-2000 RPM, you're going to be making a lot of torque, and probable bending some rods. At higher RPM, the motor will be more likely to take it, because the engine isn't going to be making as much torque. That said, 9 lbs out of a KB or 15 lbs out of a vortech is still way too much for a stock bottom end in a 4.6 (except the 03 Cobra). It'll probably take it for a little while, but it'll be a time bomb. You're looking at 6-8 lbs out of either if you want your motor to last.

Your logic about the increasing cubic inches is a bit flawed too. With the same heads/cams/valves, a 33% larger motor isn't going to make 33% more power. With the correspondingly larger valves and whatnot it will. I'm not seeing how you're getting 500 hp. It's certainly doable, but it'll take a little more than just "correspondingly larger" on those parts.

The 408 will be cheaper though, esp. if you're looking for NA power and torque.

Investigate the SCT stuff, i think they'll be able to make it work for you. The only problem i'm seeing is the ignition, your EEC runs with COP ignition, and i'm not sure how easy it is to switch to coil packs and wires for the EEC or adapt COP to the 408.

Good luck, this sounds like a cool project, definitely something different. Keep us updated, this is something i want to see.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

I am going ot have to jump on the "that engine will not make that much hp and still retain 20+mpg" bandwaggon. I have ran a couple of small block fords and a lot of big Fe's. The Fe's can make the torque and decent hp, but could never come clsoe to 15mpg, even in my 3200lb mustang. 22mpg and that kind of hp is not going to happen.
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Hi, Ponyfreak--

Your FE Mustang doesn't, and never did have EFI . . .

NOW--once again, can we PLEASE get back to the questions I asked?
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

I am going to make this brief , having done a few fuel injection swaps , the wiring harness is going to be your downfall, nothing is going to match up , you are talking distributer vs coil pack, crank sensor vs pickup , and the changing of connectors you make so lite of, just doesn't work that way.. You will have to know the fuel injection system of both cars inside out and backwards and how every system in them both works , because one system works one way ,and on the other motor it does the same thing but in a different way...then you will have to know where every wire from the ECM in the Mark goes and its function so you can eliminate it or modify it , or add one that isn't there..you have differences in the EEC 4 and EEC 5 system to contend with ... Or you could swap the entire fuel injection wire harness for dash and engine compartment from old car into the Mark and then try to separate everything that is not part of the fuel injection , in the Mark...
I think you will get much more enjoyment and use out of your car if you spend your time and money on modifying the 4.6 , believe me you wont be disappointed..
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Hi, John/Topcat--

Thanks for the response and the input!

You said, "I think you will get much more enjoyment and use out of your car if you spend your time and money on modifying the 4.6 , believe me you wont be disappointed..

Yeah, I'm sure you're right--I'm sure I WOULD get plenty of enjoyment out of the same combination that everybody else is running . . .

BUT . . .

This is what Hot Rodding is all about!!

Back in the early days of Hot Rodding, there was no such thing as an "off the shelf part", people had to MAKE what they needed in order to improve their performance.

( ;-{D}

Granted, it will take a LOT of work to make this run properly with the current system in place, but I think I can do it.

I've been leaning more toward using the EEC-V stuff and adapting it to this engine.

If you sit down and think about it, there is only one or two major area that needs to be resolved in order to make this Windsor work with the existing EEC-V system, and one of them is ignition.

Another one is the Knock Sensor, but that's easily overcome by adding a sensor to the engine near the same location as the original one.

The other facets (the entire fuel delivery system, including the injectors and the MAF, the emission controls, all the transmission controls, fan control, etc.), can be taken care of with a custom-burned chip.

So, now I'm researching what crank trigger ignition systems are available, and how to make them work with the EEC-V system. Once I get over that hurdle, I think it's pretty much downhill after that!

I might even try to adapt the system in use on one of the 4.6 engines to the Windsor . . . right now though, it's research time!

Again, THANKS for your response and your input! Even though your post discourages the swap, due to the depth of work that would be involved, it's helpful because it helps illustrate more things to be considered!
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

How late did the explorers use 5.0s? Were there any EEC V 5.0 exploders? Might want to check that out.

Yea, there's just a few (or many) sensors that need to be taken care of. Otherwise, a v8 is a v8, either engine is going to need fuel and spark. It looks like if you have it tuned by the right people (i'd get it reflashed rather than adding a chip) they can take care of any tuning issues, it's just up to you to make sure the computer has all the proper inputs.

Good luck!
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Stone-cold
I to, come from those early years, and I salute your desire to be different...but a project that remains a project for too long gets to be a real drag , and no fun at all...I think when you actually get to the mechanics of the wire harness you will see what I am talking about...having said that , If I can help don't hesitate to ask , I have some experience in fuel injection , and doing ,what you want to do...Winter is a very busy time for me and I am not around much , but you can catch me from time to time. However in the summer I have more free time ,and will be working on my car also...
Right now I have 32 valve 4.6 ... Chip , headers , exhaust , and some transmods... projected this summer, intake , port work , cams and some reprogramming..
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Hi, John/Topcat--

Thanks for the offer of assistance--I might take you up on that!

In my previous post in this thread, I indicated that the major issue that I need to resolve is simply the way the ignition system is handled.

If I can figure out a way to integrate an ignition system that is controlled by the EEC-V, then all the other stuff is easy by comparison.

Re-wiring a harness for the EFI wouldn't be needed, as I would try to use the same components already in place, and at most, I think I would only need to "re-pin" a few connectors.

Of course, since I haven't compared the two systems, I don't know exactly what will be involved yet, but the first step is to research and then the next step is to have a logical plan that can be followed.

I have a visual picture in my mind of what needs to be done, but before I actually get started, I'll put it all down on paper, just so I won't miss any components or steps along the way.

Sleeper had a good point--the Exploders had 5.0's way up until around 2000, and it's very possible I could adapt existing components from one of those EFI systems to the 408, and have it completely controlled by the EEC-V system.

They're very similar, and so I should be able to use all the EFI system electronic components from one of those engines, as well as the ignition components and get them to work with the EEC-V, just by burning a chip that would correspond with the difference in displacement and the change in ignition components (I doubt it's a crank trigger-type ignition system, but that will be part of my research).

Anyway, here's a little story about a previous buildup I did--back in the early '80's, I had a '74 Malibu with a bone-stock, 235HP net 454 and 2.73:1 gears in the rearend.

It would CONSISTENTLY do 0-60 in 7.1 seconds with my girlfriend onboard, and the car had an empty weight of 4100lbs!!

I figured that engine, with a little "tweaking" and in a lighter car would be AWESOME!!

A couple of years later, I picked up a '78 Malibu for something like $400, built up a nicely warmed-over .030 over 454 (460 c.i., with a small cam, square-port valves in oval-port heads) and put it into the car using ALL factory components except for the transmission crossmember (including a stock air cleaner for the "stealth" effect).

I had a 12-bolt out of a '64 Chevelle I used for the rearend with a 3.08:1 posi, and I built up a Turbo 400 with a "Variable-Pitch" torque converter (it had two stall speeds, activated by a solenoid in the front pump).

With a stock, cast iron intake and Quadrajet, stock exhaust manifolds, 2-1/2 exhaust with Turbo mufflers and the rest of the combination mentioned above (using the LOW stall speed on the converter), it would do low 13's on street tires, and that thing would HOOK!!

I think I had a total of about $7500 in that car, including purchase price, but I learned a LOT about some of the other important things in a car project, like having adequate brakes, and having them proportioned properly! It was scary at times to drive it, because the brakes in the front were too small, and the ones in the rear were too big!!

Now, everybody and their dog is building this combination . . .

So, adapting a 408 into my Mark VIII isn't a project that worries or scares me, because I've build unusual combinations before. Heck, I might even check into an aluminum block instead of using the '95 truck block I now have--just to save some weight!

( ;-{D}
 
RE: A Switch to Windsor power . . .

Well, I posted this question on the TCCoA website, under the "5.0-5.8" engine section, and several people posted with some good information about this swap, or more specifically, the EEC-V component information I've been looking for.

It seems that the Exploders up until 2001 came with 5.0's, and of course used the EEC-V ECU and system. In those engines, there is a module that is used by the computer, and only a couple of sensors to make it work. There is an article on a website where they have already modified these parts to work on a 351-based stroker.

It appears all that is needed to swap over to EDIS (Electronic Distributorless Ignition System) are the following parts:

1.) The Cam position sensor; this takes the place of the distributor, and indicates where TDC on cylinder #1 is located. Since there is a deck-height difference between these engines, this will need to be modified to extend the length; this also will be what drives the oil pump, so the shaft and gear from a 351 will need to be used.

2.) The Crank sensor; this mounts onto the timing cover, and receives it's signal from an "exciter ring" cast into the stock dampener.

3.) The exciter ring--since this is integrated into the dampener on the Exploder 302's, one can be made from scratch that can fit onto whatever dampener is used. I guess someone could modify the stock dampener to the 28-oz. imbalance, but it's much better to use an SFI-approved dampener with the correct imbalance already, so I think I'll have a machinist create one of these rings that I can attach to the dampener I already have.

4.) The edis module itself; as mentioned above, this part has already been used on a 351-based stroker with a Vortech (actually, it was a 392), and spun to 6300RPM with 19lbs of boost without any problems, but it was used with a Speed Pro computer, and they didn't use the camshaft sensor.

I think if I just use these parts and implement the camshaft sensor (that the other guys didn't use), that I should be able to integrate these components into the existing EEC-V system in the Mark VIII, and make it work properly. According to the article mentioned, it states that this is pretty much a stand-alone system, and can be adapted to just about any computer system.

Once the ignition system and timing are controlled by the computer, it then knows when to fire each plug and when to fire each injector.

Then, if I'm not mistaken, the sensors for the rest of the fuel system take over to determine how much fuel to deliver; i.e.: the temperature sensor measures the ambient air temperature, the TPS measures the throttle opening, the MAF measures the amount of airflow, the MAP sensor measures the barometric pressure to determine the density of the air, the ignition system tells the computer how fast the engine is running and the O2 sensors measure the amount of oxygen in the exhaust. Once all these work parameters are gathered, they work together to determine the pulse width of the injector.

Since the engine is larger, the fuel requirements are higher, so I'll be using 36lb injectors, a larger MAF than what is currently installed, and will definitely use a larger throttle body, so at that point, about the only thing I can think of that I'll need to do is have a chip burned to make adjustments for the timing and possibly the fuel mixture through the RPM ranges.

Now I need to start gathering parts, so I can modify or create them!

I am open to additional information about how to integrate this system, such as "gotchas" and additional considerations, but I think this is a good foundation for making this engine work with the EEC-V system, which will allow me to retain the functions of the Information Computer in the dash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top