96 THUNDERBIRD 3.8 ENGINE SWAP

Does anybody know if you can swap a 3.8 v-6 engine to 302 in a 96 thunderbird.Any help would be great.thanks!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BRIAN wrote:

Physically, it can be done. The problem is that the 5.0\302 was not available in that car. Being a 96 it will be OBD II. AFAIK there were no 5.0 OBD II equipped vehicles. It would not meet any form of emissions requirements. Also, you would need the complete engime management system, PCM, wiring harnesses, induction system and transmission for the 5.0. The exhaust would also have to be custom made along with engine mounts, etc. You would be much better off with a reman 3.8. It would be easier and cheaper. Another swap option is the 4.6 Litre. It would be nearly a bolt in swap, but again you would need exhaust, engine management parts, etc. along with possible front suspension parts. A wrecked donor vehicle would be useful in this case.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Adkins wrote:

1996-2001 Explorer/Mountaineer 5.0.
But as Tom says, it's really not an economical move. You are better off buying the car you really want or doing a direct 3.8 replacement.
Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
trainfan1 wrote:

Aha! It was in the back of my mind that there was 'something'. I just couldn't remember what.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Adkins wrote:

didnt the 94 mustangs also have a 5.0
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Picasso wrote:

Could be. I was referring to 1996 and newer vehicles with OBD II. The Tbird in question was originally OBD II, so an earlier EEC-IV 5.0 wouldn't be a viable replacement for the 3.8L.
It just ain't nohow cheap anymore. Just a few hours ago, my father called me. He was all excited about this really nice 96 Windstar he had found. Nice shape, loaded, and "only" $600. Bad 3.8 motor. (He's thinking $250 used motor and I do the work, like the old days). I had to tell him that it would be another $1000+ for a vehicle worth only about $1000. It took him a few minutes to comprehend that. Sadly, the days of low budget engine swaps are gone. Back in about 1980, I bought a really clean, low mileage 69 Pontiac Lemans with a bad motor for $150. $150 for a used Pontiac 350, another $50 for supplies, 1 weekend and I had a nice car for summer that I sold for $1100 in the fall. I did this quite a few times, but that was the best one for resale. I was able to drive some nice vehicles that way, back in the day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Piques my po' curiosity. Why did they continue with the (carburated?) 5.0 into 2001 with these SUV's?
I had thought that, by '96, the 4.6 was like an "official V8 workhorse" and would have been "a natural" ...
Thx, Puddin'
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Puddin' Man wrote:

some leaf springs in the front suspension would go well with that.
Did you want fries with that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Puddin' Man wrote:

A couple/few reasons...
1st, the last 5.0 carby was 1985(Mustang), they've been port injected since then.
The wide, & deep-skirted 4.6 cammer won't fit in the original Explorer platform, which is directly based on the Bronco II / Ranger. 2wd may have been remotely possible, 4wd no way.
The 4.6 was going into the new F-150 & Expedition in 1997, which put huge demands on the Romeo plant.
Tooling costs were very low - the 5.0 tooling was put into service in 1962.
Ford could still get away with emissions & CAFE numbers with the 5.0 in the hot selling Explorer.
Rob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pretty well covers it. Thanks.
Had nooooooooooo idea Explorer was genus (?) Bronco/Ranger, but I follow SUV etc stuff even less than passenger car developments.
Cheers, Puddin'
"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens!" -Friedrich Schiller
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BRIAN wrote:

why would you not consider a 4.6? i would think that would be an easier swap maybe?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.