Use 89 F150 Flywheel With 164-teeth With A V6 T5 Bellhousing & V6 T5?

[waid302]

I know that the V6 T5 Bellhousing will bolt up to a 5.0 V8 but the V6 starter will not engage the V8's smaller flywheel with 157 teeth. The V6 used a larger 164 teeth flywheel but it will not bolt up to a V8.

Why not use a 164 teeth flywheel from an 1989 F150 Truck 5.0 V8?

A 1989 F150 with a 5.0L and a 5-spd manual transmission and used an 11-inch clutch. It is a 50-oz imbalance flywheel. Rock Auto has 164 teeth flywheel for 1989 F150 Truck 5.0 V8 for low as $42 !

I found a lot of information on Ford's flywheel here:
http://www.rowand.net/Shop/Tech/FordFlywheeslAndFlexplates.htm

Now the questions is do you redrill the F150 flywheel for V6 T5 Clutch or foxbody 10.5" clutch or simply use the larger 11" for 1989 F150 ?

Thanks

Waid


View attachment 75229 View attachment 75230 View attachment 75229 View attachment 75230

 

[ratio411]

First, check the balance.
I believe that 5.0 will still be 28oz imbalance due to it not being an HO 5.0.

 

[ratio411]

(I had more to tell you, but this thread is having a script error???)

If the balance checks out, then just use the 11" clutch. It will hold better. I have upsized my clutch before, and it worked fine as long as bellhousing and balance are in sync.

 

[waid302]

First, check the balance.
I believe that 5.0 will still be 28oz imbalance due to it not being an HO 5.0.

I believe this is not correct. Ford changed the imbalance on the 302 (otherwise known as the 5.0L) engines in 1981. Some sources list this change as 1980 in a confusing way, but all of the reliable data I found said 1981 was the first year of the new 50 oz imbalance motors. Thus, if a motor was built before 1981, then it's a 28oz imbalance motor. If it was build in 1981 or after, it's a 50oz imbalance motor regardless if it was HO or not. Here is more info:

http://www.rowand.net/Shop/Tech/FordFlywheeslAndFlexplates.htm


Waid

 

[Noobz347]

Wouldn't it be easier to swap out the starter? If tooth count is the only difference then use a 5oh starter.

 

[ratio411]

Wouldn't it be easier to swap out the starter? If tooth count is the only difference then use a 5oh starter.

The starters are the same.
The starter is positioned to the flywheel/flexplate size by the bellhousing.
Wrong bellhousing, and the starter is not going to line up.

 

[ratio411]

I believe this is not correct. Ford changed the imbalance on the 302 (otherwise known as the 5.0L) engines in 1981. Some sources list this change as 1980 in a confusing way, but all of the reliable data I found said 1981 was the first year of the new 50 oz imbalance motors. Thus, if a motor was built before 1981, then it's a 28oz imbalance motor. If it was build in 1981 or after, it's a 50oz imbalance motor regardless if it was HO or not. Here is more info:

http://www.rowand.net/Shop/Tech/FordFlywheeslAndFlexplates.htm


Waid

Yeah, I want to say my 90 F150 5.0 was 28 oz, but honestly I don't remember.
I know the 5.8 kept the 28 oz...
I also know for sure that the firing order stayed 289, instead of the HO's 351 order.

Just pointing out it is something that needs to be double checked.

 

[waid302]

Well, there it is. The 3.8 V6 clutch from a 1994-2004 will bolt up an 11" F150 Flywheel perfectly which cost only $55 at AutoZone!

Below are the pics of a 2000 3.8 V6 Mustang T5 11" clutch sitting on top of a 1989 F150 5.0L 11" Flywheel. All holes lines up! The V6 starter should work fine.

I am not sure how much performance will suffer on a Mustang 5.0 with little larger flywheel (less ramp up?) . I guess the larger flywheel works fine on the V6 Mustang!

Note: Around 82-83 Ford changed from 28-oz to 50-oz imbalance. All 5.0 roller are 50-oz imbalance.

 

[ratio411]

I am not sure how much performance will suffer on a Mustang 5.0 with little larger flywheel (less ramp up?).

More rotating mass on flywheel will cause the engine to respond slower as it must get more mass spinning.
On the positive side, and probably the reason they put it on the V6, it will enhance torque output.
Engine braking is also affected, but I can't remember if it is slower or faster...

All in all, it's a good swap if it all works together and gets you going.

 

[waid302]

After looking at multiple websites, the F150's flywheel is about 8 lbs. more heavier than the Mustang. I doubt it will be noticeable in every day driving.

It's a lot simple to use the 94-95 V8 bell housing but people want $200-$300 for it which is crazy. Hell, I paid $70 for 2002 V6 T5 from pic-a-part which included bell housing, clutch fork and cross member to boot.

If it works, this is a good alternative.

Waid

 

[ratio411]

8# is huge for rotating mass.
Not bagging on it or saying it is ill advised, but I just would mention that.

Like I said though, the torque enhancment from that much more weight being thrown around at thousands of rpm will be beneficial.

The larger clutch will hold better, and it will weigh more itself.
Personally I like the idea.
We are going to convert our AODE 94 to T5, and I'd like to go this way myself after hearing about it now...

Just run an aluminum driveshaft to counteract the added weight.
The driveshaft doesn't spin all the time, and it won't take away from the benefits of the heavier flywheel, at least in my mind.

 

[ratio411]

Can a Fox T5 bolt to the V6 bellhousing?
Does the V6 bellhousing have the clutch fork in the same place as the V8 SN95?
If not, is the positioned like the Fox V8, or is it different from either?
Gotta remember that clutch fork location will dictate which headers you can use.

Heck, now that I think about it, the larger bell might not allow the exhaust to pass at all.

 

[waid302]

The Fox T5 will bolt up to the V6 bellhousing but the input shaft will not reach the pilot bearing because its little short. The V6 bellhousing is about 3/4" longer compared to the foxbody.

Back in the day, the flywheel were about 30 lbs. I looked up a flywheel for a 1969 Ford Mustang with a 302. This is what I came up with on Valeo's webiste:

14.250 OD, 164 Teeth, 30Lbs

Fits
66 - 70 Ford Fairlane,
68 - 70 Ford Falcon,
68 - 73 Ford Mustang,
71 - 73 Ford Torino

If its good enough for Fairlane, Falcon, Mustang & Torino, its good enough for me. Since my block is on the bench right now upsidedown, I can play with the bellousing and check everyting out. Just need to make sure that the V6 starter will fully engage the F150 flywheel.

The whole motivation for V6 T5 is that it has same spec. as the foxbody V8 T5 and there are tons of them out there that are not abused and not beat to death with low miles for lower price!

Waid

 

[ratio411]

If its good enough for Fairlane, Falcon, Mustang & Torino, its good enough for me.

I'm with ya.
Every classic 302 I have ever had, I have upgraded to the 11" clutch/164t flywheel.
I was just saying that 8# spinning over such a large diameter, at thousands of rpms, is not a slight amount.

I do however have issues with your list of "302" cars with 11" clutches.
The 302 came in those cars with 10.5" clutches, which is the smaller flywheel and bell, with very few exceptions.
The 11" clutch/164t flywheel was reserved for Boss 302s, 351c/w, and truck 302s.
Cars didn't have the 11" and a base 302. On stuff like this, there is alot of misinformation out there.

 

[ratio411]

This is what I came up with on Valeo's webiste:

14.250 OD, 164 Teeth, 30Lbs

Fits
66 - 70 Ford Fairlane,
68 - 70 Ford Falcon,
68 - 73 Ford Mustang,
71 - 73 Ford Torino

Okay, I just realized what is going on here....
The key word is "FITS".
Yes, the larger bell, flywheel, and clutch kit will 'fit' those cars with a 302, but they didn't come from Ford that way.