[makemeknowit]

Just curious if the '84 block would accept all the '93 stuff. Cosidering rebuilding the '84 short block for when the '93 transplant going into our Bronco decides to give up the ghost.

 

[southrnpride69]

there is no hole to screw the knock senser into block and the water holes in the timing cover dont mate up to the newer water pump so you have to switch the timing cover other wise it is the same ...I just switched an 85 motoer into an 89 everything else was perfect

 

[makemeknowit]

there is no hole to screw the knock senser into block

Is this something a competent machine shop can drill and tap?

 

[southrnpride69]

probably could but i just left the knock sensor off made sure the connector is up out of the way and forgot about it. it doesnt give any codes so i am not worried about it

 

[makemeknowit]

probably could but i just left the knock sensor off made sure the connector is up out of the way and forgot about it. it doesnt give any codes so i am not worried about it

The code thing was my concern. Any of you EEC IV gurus want to chime in on the importance, or lack thereof, of the knock sensor?

 

[Gacknar]

there is no hole to screw the knock senser into block

Please forgive my ignorance if I am wrong but.

On my 86 Bronco 302 EFI, I think the knock sensor screws into the lower intake manifold.

I think thats wher it is becouse about 7 years ago I replaced it, and thaught it being on the lower intake was strange.

I also remember it being there from when I put the Mustang MAF sequintial EFI on it, becouse the Mustang computer and harness dont use a knock sensor, so ther is this sensor just plugging up a hole in my intake only the hole doest go anywhere, so I could remove it, but I didnt.

And I am verry sure there is not a whole for it in my block

Of cours my 86 may also just be an odball:shrug

Then again I may be crazzy:wacko

 

[81Bronk36]

the water holes in the timing cover dont mate up to the newer water pump so you have to switch the timing cover other wise it is the same ...I just switched an 85 motoer into an 89 everything else was perfect

as far as my experience (81 to a newest before they stopped making 302s) thats a negative

 

[jerry 1 a b]

The 85 and older 302's won't accept a roller cam without some machine work, and like someone else already said, the knock sensor setup is different. Whoever said that the knock sensor goes in the intake is not entirely correct. Apparently some were built that way, but not all. When I did my swap, the motor that was in the truck had the knock sensor on the block, and the motor I swapped in didn't have it. However, Fireguy told me, and I seem to remember my other bronco having the sensor in the lower intake. I guess it just depends.

 

[southrnpride69]

as far as my experience (81 to a newest before they stopped making 302s) thats a negative

Just did it last week on th 85 timing cover the holes did not mate up to the holes for a 89 water pump the hole made an L shape and my coolant poured out onto the ground I had to change the timing cover to get the holes to match up. all of the bolt holes were the same and it mated to the block the same but the pump didnt mate up the same. I still have an extra 85 pump and an 89 pump I can try to post pics later if you want.

 

[81Bronk36]

could it have something to do with the fact that I was using an 81 timing cover and an 81 wp???? I used my old one on there untill the second time I had the engine out, when I asked for a pump for an 81 Bronco again??? That seams like a reasonable explination

 

[EvilBronc]

Ok, I've gots a question for ya!

Will I have any probs with an 84 351W block going into my 90 bronco with the 302 crap from my motor?

 

[81Bronk36]

look in the tech section.... theres a bunch of stuff needed including a new oil pan and 28 oz balanced stuff.

 

[southrnpride69]

could it have something to do with the fact that I was using an 81 timing cover and an 81 wp???? I used my old one on there untill the second time I had the engine out, when I asked for a pump for an 81 Bronco again??? That seams like a reasonable explination

That would explain it