will it fit?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

purpleopal27 - 08 Feb 2006 03:10 GMT

i have a 1993 lx coupe w/ a 306 now under repairs i want to know if the 4.6
single overhead cam will fit in this model mustang

Reply to this Message

Backyard Mechanic - 08 Feb 2006 14:53 GMT

> i have a 1993 lx coupe w/ a 306 now under repairs i want to know if
> the 4.6 single overhead cam will fit in this model mustang

Not without MAJOR engine control wiring changes.

Signature

Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Reply to this Message

Blue Gator - 08 Feb 2006 18:50 GMT

>>i have a 1993 lx coupe w/ a 306 now under repairs i want to know if
>>the 4.6 single overhead cam will fit in this model mustang
>
> Not without MAJOR engine control wiring changes.

I think he meant dimensionally. I'm interested as well. I've thought
about dropping in a modular someday when my 5.0 finally dies. Does
anybody know if it will fit the engine bay?

Reply to this Message

purpleopal27 - 09 Feb 2006 00:31 GMT

i also have the wiring harness and computer from the original car. but i
don't knoww if it will fit size wise. if anybody knows or has actually
done this i sure would appreciate their input i'm holding off rebuilding
the 306 for now hoping that the 4.6 will fit

Reply to this Message

RSCamaro - 10 Feb 2006 00:11 GMT

>i also have the wiring harness and computer from the original car. but i
>don't knoww if it will fit size wise. if anybody knows or has actually
>done this i sure would appreciate their input i'm holding off rebuilding
>the 306 for now hoping that the 4.6 will fit

I'm sure that it will fit, the problem I see is where the motor mounts
land on the crossmember. If you have to move the motor and
transmission forward slightly there looks to be enough room. If the
motor has to be moved back then you are probably in trouble.

I was looking in my engine bay last summer and visualizing a V-10
under the hood. There looks to be plenty of room even if I had to
move the fans forward of the radiator. I don't think the suspension
could handle the extra weight though without sacrificing handling.

...Ron
--
68'RS Camaro
88'Formula
00'GT Mustang

Reply to this Message

purpleopal27 - 10 Feb 2006 12:34 GMT

thanks for the input, that would be sweet to see a v-10 under the hood.
could the suspension be upgraded to handle the extra weight? i hear of a
460 conversion and that engine really weighs a lot more than a small
block.

Reply to this Message

Ritz - 10 Feb 2006 12:49 GMT

> thanks for the input, that would be sweet to see a v-10 under the hood.
> could the suspension be upgraded to handle the extra weight? i hear of a
> 460 conversion and that engine really weighs a lot more than a small
> block.

Why would you want to subject yourself to that kind of hassle when it
would be a LOT easier to stick with a small block and use forced
induction to coax the power from it? A smaller/lighter engine would
also be a lot easier to manage from a suspension standpoint.

Cheers,

Reply to this Message

RSCamaro - 11 Feb 2006 05:01 GMT

>Why would you want to subject yourself to that kind of hassle when it
>would be a LOT easier to stick with a small block and use forced
>induction to coax the power from it? A smaller/lighter engine would
>also be a lot easier to manage from a suspension standpoint.
>
>Cheers,

The V-10 I had in mind was one from a E-350 van. 415 ci, 300+ hp, and
420 lb/ft. of torque. A junk yard engine and heavier springs would be
a fairly cheap way to pick up much more power. I think that I could
do it much cheaper than buying a supercharger or a Gale Banks kit.
Like I said in a previous post, I'd be sacrificing some handling for
the extra torque.

The transmission would have to be upgraded to a TKO or similar manual.

It's not like it's bound to happen, I was just day dreaming.

...Ron
--
68'RS Camaro
88'Formula
00'GT Mustang

Reply to this Message

Ritz - 11 Feb 2006 13:30 GMT

>> Why would you want to subject yourself to that kind of hassle when it
>> would be a LOT easier to stick with a small block and use forced
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Like I said in a previous post, I'd be sacrificing some handling for
> the extra torque.

You can get gobs of torque from a turbo or supercharged small engine
too. As a matter of fact, I am modifying the 2.7L engine
(lesseee....about 170 cubic inches) in my A6 with larger turbos and
associated software changes and that will bump it into the neighborhood
of 460hp and 455ft/lbs of torque on pump gas. With a flip of the
software switch, I'll be able to tank it up on 103 octane race gas and
do 525hp and 550ft/lbs. And this is in a daily driver porky German
highway cruiser. You really can turn a 6 or smaller 8 into a stump
puller without putting a boat anchor in the engine bay.

> The transmission would have to be upgraded to a TKO or similar manual.

Absolutely.

Cheers,

Reply to this Message

RSCamaro - 11 Feb 2006 15:29 GMT

>You can get gobs of torque from a turbo or supercharged small engine
>too. As a matter of fact, I am modifying the 2.7L engine
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>highway cruiser. You really can turn a 6 or smaller 8 into a stump
>puller without putting a boat anchor in the engine bay.

What's the cost per hp ratio? Since I'm in an area where I can find
and buy the V-10 and wiring harness out of a junk yard truck fairly
cheaply, I'm pretty sure that I could do the job for less. I wouldn't
have to buy the supercharger or turbo kit, or possibly a replacement
hood which would need to be painted, a laptop computer or the programs
necessary to change the engine parameters to work with the new parts.
According to one web site the 6.8L V-10 is only 140 lbs more than the
engine that currently is under the hood of my Mustang. I could live
with that.

http://www.sullivanperformance.com/YVS450/tech/tech1.htm

...Ron
--
68'RS Camaro
88'Formula
00'GT Mustang

Reply to this Message

Ritz - 11 Feb 2006 23:45 GMT

>> You can get gobs of torque from a turbo or supercharged small engine
>> too. As a matter of fact, I am modifying the 2.7L engine
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> engine that currently is under the hood of my Mustang. I could live
> with that.

The parts are going to cost me about $10k. Stock output for that engine
is 250hp. I like this particular application because it's still a very
cushy daily driver, handles like it's on rails, has AWD (important for
us northeasterners), still will get 20+mpg and won't require any
fabrication, pulling engines, or changing the outward appearance at all.
It will continue to be a baby/groceries hauler in addition to being
able to do low-12's in the 1/4. 8-)

Sure, I could probably achieve similar results if I spent a few grand on
a ratty fox Mustang and then 6-8K on mods. But then I'd still be
driving around a ratty fox Mustang. 8-) I've gotten used to a comfy,
quiet, AWD car. Maybe later this summer I'll reconsider getting a
supercharged GT or a Z06 'vette for warm/dry weather fun.

Cheers,

Reply to this Message

Big Al - 18 Feb 2006 06:36 GMT

> >> Why would you want to subject yourself to that kind of hassle when it
> >> would be a LOT easier to stick with a small block and use forced
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Cheers,

You forgot to mention how long it will live at 525 HP. My guess is about two
minutes:)

Al

Reply to this Message

Ritz - 20 Feb 2006 02:54 GMT

> You forgot to mention how long it will live at 525 HP. My guess is about two
> minutes:)

I'll be sure to let you know. People have been successfully
autocrossing these in S4's so it's probably not THAT fragile.

Cheers,

Reply to this Message