stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
True - but he didn't ask us if we thought he could afford it 
The mod motor route is expensive, if nothing else.
The mod motor route is expensive, if nothing else.Hoping to go Modular
- Thread starter Garrettn
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
glad to see the mud motor trolls made it. 
Everything about the mud motor install is hard. Getting it to fit, getting a 3650/t45/t56 to fit, wiring up everything. And it is extremely expensive. At 18 (I'm not too far beyond that) I certainly didn't have the money to do all of that.
Mustangs Plus recently had an article called "Gas Wars" where they did a side-by-side comparison between a 4v 302/c-4/3.00 gear and a EFI GT-40 crate motor/t-5/3.50 and the carb car averaged right at 14.65 mpg and the EFI car averaged 20.89 MPG (mixed city and highway).
And the article right before that one is right up your alley. They showed step by step putting a stock 5.0 efi intake on a 289, which can be had for almost nothing.
Everything about the mud motor install is hard. Getting it to fit, getting a 3650/t45/t56 to fit, wiring up everything. And it is extremely expensive. At 18 (I'm not too far beyond that) I certainly didn't have the money to do all of that.
Mustangs Plus recently had an article called "Gas Wars" where they did a side-by-side comparison between a 4v 302/c-4/3.00 gear and a EFI GT-40 crate motor/t-5/3.50 and the carb car averaged right at 14.65 mpg and the EFI car averaged 20.89 MPG (mixed city and highway).
And the article right before that one is right up your alley. They showed step by step putting a stock 5.0 efi intake on a 289, which can be had for almost nothing.
57fairlane said:glad to see the mud motor trolls made it.
Completely uncalled for comment. Who's the real troll?
Lets get back on topic. The original poster asked for what was needed to swap a mod motor in, not 100 biased reasons not to.
Modular motor is only going to get you a WOW factor and cost thousands to do RIGHT.
I would swap in an EFI 302 or even a 331 if you want. A set of cheap edelbrock heads and EFI intake. Then strap an AOD or T5 on it. With proper tuning, you can be making 300hp and get 25+ mpg.
If you need an MII suspension setup - at least something very much like it, but better quality, let me know.
I would swap in an EFI 302 or even a 331 if you want. A set of cheap edelbrock heads and EFI intake. Then strap an AOD or T5 on it. With proper tuning, you can be making 300hp and get 25+ mpg.
If you need an MII suspension setup - at least something very much like it, but better quality, let me know.
alright lets look at a few things here;
weight, yes the aluminum block and heads reduce weight on a mod motor, but the end product still weighs in about the same as a dressed out 351w(remember the stock mod motor isnt a lightweight).
you might be able to fit a four cam mod motor in a 65-66 stang without using a mustang ll suspension covnersion, but if you ever have to service the engine beyond changing plugs, like to replace a leaking valve cover gasket you will need to remove the engine.
yes a mod motor, even the early 2v motors, can make more power than the 289/302, but how many people build more than 300-400hp for a daily driver? not many i can tell you that.
fuel economy? how about 19 city and 26 highway with a poor combination. i have already done that with my 66 coupe. wrong cam(too much duration and overlap), stock heads and intake with a 4100 autolite carb, small 4-1 headers and dual exhaust, 3spd manual trans and 2.80 gears. the car would still run high 14's in the 1/4 mile.
can it be done? yes, most anything can be done regarding engine swaps. can it be done cheap? NO, it cant. is it worth the effort? imo no it isnt, but that is something you will ahve to decide for yourself. by the time you get everything you need for the swap, spend the money to swap the front suspension, or even just modify the shock towers, build the engine mounts, build a new trans crossmember, new driveshaft, figure out the wiring harness, install everything, modify the trans tunnel to fit the trans, and do all the little things that need to be done in an engine swap, you will still need to do paint and body, and interior work. add all those costs up, and you can even be cheap about it, you could still build a fuel injected 351w, add a tremec 3550, and have a car that will do everything that the mod motored mustang will do, and have money left in your pocket to date that special college chick
weight, yes the aluminum block and heads reduce weight on a mod motor, but the end product still weighs in about the same as a dressed out 351w(remember the stock mod motor isnt a lightweight).
you might be able to fit a four cam mod motor in a 65-66 stang without using a mustang ll suspension covnersion, but if you ever have to service the engine beyond changing plugs, like to replace a leaking valve cover gasket you will need to remove the engine.
yes a mod motor, even the early 2v motors, can make more power than the 289/302, but how many people build more than 300-400hp for a daily driver? not many i can tell you that.
fuel economy? how about 19 city and 26 highway with a poor combination. i have already done that with my 66 coupe. wrong cam(too much duration and overlap), stock heads and intake with a 4100 autolite carb, small 4-1 headers and dual exhaust, 3spd manual trans and 2.80 gears. the car would still run high 14's in the 1/4 mile.
can it be done? yes, most anything can be done regarding engine swaps. can it be done cheap? NO, it cant. is it worth the effort? imo no it isnt, but that is something you will ahve to decide for yourself. by the time you get everything you need for the swap, spend the money to swap the front suspension, or even just modify the shock towers, build the engine mounts, build a new trans crossmember, new driveshaft, figure out the wiring harness, install everything, modify the trans tunnel to fit the trans, and do all the little things that need to be done in an engine swap, you will still need to do paint and body, and interior work. add all those costs up, and you can even be cheap about it, you could still build a fuel injected 351w, add a tremec 3550, and have a car that will do everything that the mod motored mustang will do, and have money left in your pocket to date that special college chick
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
I've got a link for you guys. Start drooling now, because this 4.6 w/griggs suspension looks like it's supposed to be there. Yes, some cutting required and it's NOT cheap. I would say that it gets a little more than a wow factor though - as it will likely out-perform any old-school 302/shelby drop setup.
http://www.jktaylor.org/gallery/70-03
http://www.jktaylor.org/gallery/70-03
DukeGnarley
Member
i don't think anybody is doubting the effectivness of the griggs suspension, but last i checked it was near $10,000 for the whole setup, not even getting to the engine. One thing to point out about the aluminum block 4.6, is it's still heavier than an aluminum block 302 or 351. Not many people are looking to make over 450 - 500 horses in these cars, and for the money spent, the 302 or 351 will get you there much cheaper, and will weigh less for better handeling.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but i think the Griggs front suspension setup looks like a cobbled up mess. It may handle better but it sure doesn't look too pretty. I know looks aren't everything, but if i'm throwing $10k into a front suspension i'd want it to look somewhat presentable.
I might add that the mod motors tend to react better to mods than a carb'd motor, especially with the use of forced induction. If it were me, i'd definitely eliminate the shock towers or get rid of them as much as possible just to ease spark plug changes and possible use of headers in the future. I'll leave the cost up to him, but if that's what he wants the perks to him! You'll also have to modify the firewall and the trans tunnel to get that monster in there. IIRC, the motor is longer than your normal 302 and you have to sit it back a bit, thus the need for firewall mods. Can't use the stock heater motor either, cause there is a huge head in the way. Dave at DVS restorations can also assist in getting the SN95 front suspension under the car also. I'm not a fan of wiring and sensors, and the mod motors are full of them so i'll stick with my carb motors lol.
I might add that the mod motors tend to react better to mods than a carb'd motor, especially with the use of forced induction. If it were me, i'd definitely eliminate the shock towers or get rid of them as much as possible just to ease spark plug changes and possible use of headers in the future. I'll leave the cost up to him, but if that's what he wants the perks to him! You'll also have to modify the firewall and the trans tunnel to get that monster in there. IIRC, the motor is longer than your normal 302 and you have to sit it back a bit, thus the need for firewall mods. Can't use the stock heater motor either, cause there is a huge head in the way. Dave at DVS restorations can also assist in getting the SN95 front suspension under the car also. I'm not a fan of wiring and sensors, and the mod motors are full of them so i'll stick with my carb motors lol.
jbuening said:
Theres no reason to eliminate the shock towers. If you want to change the spark plugs, SOHC's are on the top and DOHC's are centered on the heads.
Mod motors don't react any better to mods, especially FI.
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
DukeGnarley said:
An aluminum 302 or 351? Who has one of those for a daily driver? Im just comparing factory options.
Again, he didn't ask us if we thought he could afford it.
I am after 600+ to the wheels in my car - I have an idea what it will take.
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
jbuening said:
Griggs is a mess? Man - to me, it looks like a mean, lean, racing, double a-arm, coil-over monster - with front stear, sealed hub spindles..pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun! It might not be what you usually see under there, but it's certainly not ugly - heh.
302 coupe
Founding Member
hey guys, I want to swap in an engine with miniscule displacement, but incredible external size, thats really heavy, expensive, complicated, and maxes out at about 350 flywheel horses n/a. Whats the best way to go about this? Oh...and I'm on a budget.
stangonline said:
yep a cobbled up mess. look at the quality of the welds on a griggs setup. will it do the job? probably, but for how long? but if i'm paying that much money i'd better damn well get quality looking welds!!!! i have also heard a lot of bad stuff about using griggs stuff on the street as of late namely because of the welds, you see those crappy looking welds also have a tendancy to break. this is just stuff that i've heard no personal experience. any way you look at it, i'm not trusting my life to crappy welding, period.....hell the welds on my POS shop dolly look better than most of the welds i've seen on griggs products.
i have to wonder if the welds are that sloppy on something they sell to the public what is the engineering like? another thing is that if i wanted what is basically a fox body mustang front suspension i'd go out and buy a fox body for a hell of a lot cheaper than a classic mustang shell much less adding the cost of the griggs suspenion to it. so it's got upper a-arms added so what? it's still basically a fox body suspension setup with the same basic geometry of a fox body fairmont or ltd. yeah like want a fairmont suspension in my classic mustang. no thanks
I guess I missed the memo where everyone started building show cars and looks is a priority of function.
302 coupe said:
That was pretty good.
NasaGT said:
Hmm, if there is 102 people on this board and he got 100 people telling him it probably wasn't a good idea, what would you think?
So if I start a thread about how I am 18 and going to college and I want to back-half my mustang because "I want it to hook up better", what do you think I would get as a response?
Answer:
1. You probably don't need it.
(AND)
2. If you did it, would you even know how to set it up?
How did this answer my question? No one told me how to back-half the car.
You see we are giving "advice". Does anyone need a mud motor in a classic? No. Is it worth swapping? Arguable. If he really is set on swapping to a mud motor, all he has to do is ask. But if has any doubt, and is goals can be achieved easier/cheaper/less headache, why would he not want to know that beforehand.
I would 100% of the time rather answer these kinds of questions than a "Help! I started a project that I underfunded, underplanned for, and don't neccesarily need" thread.
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
302 coupe said:
Read:
Hey guys, I know its the year 2006, but my mind is stuck in 60's technology, and I'm afraid to try something new, just because I already know about the 60's era parts. Oh...and if I can't find it in my garage, I cant afford it.
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
I agree, I've done a doubletake or two when looking at griggs welds, but the fact is, you don't hear of many failures - and these get track duty. If you have any doubt of the performance, check corner-carvers.net, they are super nice and will answer any new-comers questions. 
However, the fact that you think it's a fox body suspension tells me that you need to look again... We can continue this dibate in another thread, once you've taken a few more looks at the pretty pictures..
Jeff
However, the fact that you think it's a fox body suspension tells me that you need to look again... We can continue this dibate in another thread, once you've taken a few more looks at the pretty pictures..
Jeff
bnickel said:
stangonline
Member
- Feb 22, 2003
- 318
- 0
- 16
The single biggest issue with mod motor vs. 302/351w motors is cost when you are looking for 400-450hp. I can't argue that one. However, when you get above the 500hp mark, the gap isn't quite as wide. You will spend a lot building a strong 302 based motor - and even then, it will be super strong and probably not destroy itself from just the HP - BUT IMO "IMO", the longevity of such a motor will not match a mod motor of equal horsepower.
stangonline said:I agree, I've done a doubletake or two when looking at griggs welds, but the fact is, you don't hear of many failures - and these get track duty. If you have any doubt of the performance, check corner-carvers.net, they are super nice and will answer any new-comers questions.
However, the fact that you think it's a fox body suspension tells me that you need to look again... We can continue this dibate in another thread, once you've taken a few more looks at the pretty pictures..
Jeff
ummm yeah, i'm already a member at CC and yes the griggs front setup is based on the fox suspension, yeah it's all custom parts and has upper a-arms added but that doesn't change the fact that is still BASED on the fox suspension, which is still based on the 78 fairmont platform, period. i'm not saying the classic mustang suspension is any better but for 10 grand i want more than something based on a 78 fairmont. the point is that there is a lot that can be done to the classic mustang suspesnion system and get almost the same results as with the griggs for a lot less money. will it be the equal of the griggs? probably not but it can get damn close.
