Bronco Forum - Full Size Ford Bronco Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I had a 96GT that I parted mostly out and have had the complete dash, heater box assembly, steering wheel/column, vehicle wiring harnesses, ECU, radiator, electric fan, and other parts laying around my garage taking up space. Anyways, I was thinking maybe this could all be swapped into my 84 full size with a 5.4L modular engine and a manual trans from a mod pickup. The engine mounts and trans mounts would be the hardest part. just need some fab work. The dash would just need a few mounting brackets fab'd up. I wouldn't think it would be all that hard, just take some time. Anybody know of anybody that has put the 94+ mustang dash into a bronco? How bout a 4.6 or 5.4L modular motor? pics, links, etc???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Steve83 said:
Someone posted either a link or pics of a '78 Bronco with an '05 F150 dash & 5.4L, but I can't find it.

I don't think you're gonna get a Mustang dash to look, fit, or work right in a Bronco.

GO for it, but take LOTS of pics. :thumbup
Yea, it was just an idea. I haven't looked at anything yet. At the least I would like to get the complete wire harness set from a EFI bronco and covert mine over to EFI
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
The 5.4, if I'm not mistaken, should be about the same width, height, and weight as a 460, but shorter lengthwise. That's going on the assumption that the 5.4 is only a couple of inches wider than the 4.6 SOHC, so I could be wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,896 Posts
holy chit.. that is a sick setup.. Damn.. Talk about taking your time and doing it right...

Mad props....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,616 Posts
Engine sizes (taken from FRPP catalog, 2004):

302
Width: 18.75"
Length: 27.5"
Height: 20.75"

351
Width: 21"
Length: 27.5"
Height: 23.75"

460
Width: 26"
Length: 32"
Height: 26"

4.6 SOHC
Width: 25.625"
Length: 28"
Height: 26"

4.6 DOHC
Width: 30"
Length: 28"
Height: 29.875"
 

·
Satyr of the Midwest
Joined
·
17,738 Posts
Spectre said:
holy chit.. that is a sick setup.. Damn.. Talk about taking your time and doing it right...

Mad props....
I second the mad props. I perused the site a bit, and found that the guy that did this has a BS in manufacturing engineering. Got a lot of help from an electrical engineer (hey, that's what I'm studying! :chili: ), but still, if you look at the time and quality put into the vehicle alone, it's amazing. Better yet is that he didn't 'rig' everything to just barely work, he did it RIGHT, if there ever was such a way.

This has me thinking... My dad has his 2000 F-250 Super Duty sitting in his yard right now. It has a V-10. If a 5.4L was that much fun....:uhoh3

Got-dang, now I have motivation to graduate!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
Project Lazarus said:
Engine sizes (taken from FRPP catalog, 2004):

302
Width: 18.75"
Length: 27.5"
Height: 50.75"...
That should be a 20.75" for height if I recall, but yep, good info.

I got into an entertaining friendly discussion the other day with a 4.6SOHC owner who thought his Mod was smaller and lighter than a 5.0L powerplant That one was pretty entertaining, he'd never actually looked at or messed around at all with a 302. Kids these days. ;) Not only is the 4.6L huge, it also outweighs the 5.0L by about 80-100lb depending on whose scales you use. They may be incredibly strong and well engineered blocks (deep skirt, four bolt main, with no head bolt stress in the cylinder walls), but they're sure portly! :histerica
 

·
USAF C-17 Maintenance
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
Not sure on the weights, but these mod motors are wide sob's. When under the hood of the '97, it doesn't even look proportional.

Adrianspeeder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
Chuck said:
The 5.4, if I'm not mistaken, should be about the same width, height, and weight as a 460, but shorter lengthwise. That's going on the assumption that the 5.4 is only a couple of inches wider than the 4.6 SOHC, so I could be wrong.

seems to me a 460 belongs in there rather than a 5.4L.

:shrug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
Steve83 said:
Are you talking about long blocks only, or complete engines??? Having swapped & hauled both as complete assemblies, but weighed neither, my impression is that the 4.6L installed is lighter than a 5.0L installed.

.
I'm talking complete assembly, but I haven't personally verified these numbers either. I had the 5.0L with the Mustang manifolds in mind, which is lighter by a few pounds than the truck version, though not by much. I'm trying to scare up a hoist scale at a reasonable cost somewhere, since I've pretty much got at least one of all of these powertrains around the house. :histerica I'd actually be willing to take the hour to pull the 5.0L back out of the Bronco when the cab is back off just to weigh it, and we're getting ready (possibly this summer, hopefully sooner) to dismantle a 92 Vic with an F1AE Windsor-bellhousing pattern block that I can weigh as an assembly if I can just get a scale.

I've seen numbers for these things that range all over the place, so it's a hard call on what to trust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Now I am not a complete expert by any means, but i did this same search on google and yahoo. i came up with alot of stuff for mustangs and for what ever reason they were still leaning towards the 351. But even knowing this i think it is a great idea. especially with the 3 valve one, or if possible import a DOHC from Australia or something. If you have the money to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,616 Posts
Not the one that adrianspeeder posted, but still a good pic to throw up here. Provided by one of the guys on the TRS forums.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I'm not sure about pre 2004, but if you try to install an '04 or later modular engine in a non-standard vehicle you have a few challenges in your future. The stock computer is networked with several modules throughout the vehicle. The ABS computer, gauge cluster, PATS anti-theft module, just to name a few. For example, if I disconnect my ABS sensors the bronco will run just great, right up to 41 mph. When you get to 42 it triggers a P2106 DTC and decides to run like crap until you restart the engine. If you get both front sensors working but forget the back you'll go as fast as you want, but the DTC will hit you randomly instead. This is great fun on a road trip, especially if you have your wife along. If you don't include the steering column or at least the antenna built into it, the thing won't even turn over because it needs to get a signal from a key programmed for that computer. Forget about hot-wiring it. All the spark plug wires and injector wires come straight out of the ECU. The gauge cluster also uses a vehicle speed signal which it converts and sends to the other modules for things like cruise control and I can't remember what else. I almost forgot the transmission! The transmission is covered with sensors that the computer uses to coordinate with the electronic throttle to maximize shift quality. Unplug one of those things and you're getting codes like crazy. This means you're not going to use a non-standard transmission very easily. You might get away with it if you used the guts from a 5.4L with a manual trans, but I suspect you'd need to replicate some speed signals somehow. The VSS input also no longer comes from the rear axle. It gets computed from the output shaft speed of your transmission through a little sensor mounted in the casting. There's still a sensor on the axle, but it's only used for ABS.

I'm not trying to discourage anyone, just lay out what you've got ahead of you assuming you can make everything fit dimensionally. Even in my full size bronco I still had to notch the frame to make the 5.4L fit. If you really want to put a new modular engine in your rig (again I can't speak for pre-2004) I'd look for an aftermarket computer that's made specifically for it (if one exists). That way you wouldn't need all these modules I listed above. I had one guy tell me he thought a tweecer could do the same thing, but I haven't even explored verifying that. My impression is a tweecer can modify settings, not tell your ECU to disregard an integral part of its programming.

Lovin' those positive comments about my project.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top