1996 Explorer Gt40 With Very Clean 250,000 Miles – Rebuild On Shoe String Budget

[waid302]

New guy here. I am rebuilding my 5.0 with GT40 heads out of 1996 Ford Explorer with 250,000 miles. What inspired me was the article in September, 2008 issue of Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords.

Ford Mustang Short-Block Engine Rebuild - Recession Special Part 1

http://www.musclemustangfastfords.c...ustang_engine_block_build_part_1/viewall.html

I figure I post there since there is wealth of knowledge of 5.0. This is going in my 1964 Falcon and it had to be GT40 and not the GT40P due to very tight clearance. I was looking the 1996 for a long time and just about gave up on it. Couple of weeks ago I was at a Pic-a-part and found one and almost walked away. I thought since, I was there, I might as well take the intake off and the valve covers off and take a peek. What a surprise. I could not believe how clean it was. I took a chance and bought it and slowly I began the tear down process and all is good.

About the only thing I am planning to do is to hone the block, install new rings, cam bearings, rod bearings, main bearings, a new timing gear set and new valve stem seals. Not sure about valve springs yet.

I would like some feedback.

Waid

 

[waid302]

Pictures of cranks and bearing.

 

[waid302]

Pics of rockers and pushrod.

 

[waid302]

Pics of roller lifter, piston, combustion chamber, cam and piston bore.

 

[waid302]

The roller lifter is perfect and has no play in it. The pistons & combustion chambers do have carbon build up on and planning to clean them up with Formula 88. I could not do a compression test at pic-a-part but did turn over the motor and felt very tight. I don’t have a transmission yet so I removed all of the spark plugs, and reinstalled a plug one at a time to check compression by hand on each cylinder. Few felt low but I think it was due to carbon build up on the valves and chamber and not closing as shown in the pics.

This is what I am worried about. After having bead blast the valves, the intake valve looks fine but the exhaust valve does show some wear on it. I know I can buy new set of exhaust valves for about $50, but I think that would require re-machining of the valve seats.

I will be installing new valve seals. The springs looks fine too. It lasted this long and may try to use again! By the way, I will be using a carb with no EGR, cat or any pollution control stuff and keeping the original truck cam.

Since the wear pattern on the exhaust valves matches the valve seat, can I get away with just lapping the valves?

Waid

Thanks

 

[NIKwoaC]

Sounds like a fun project. My suggestion would be to have the block and crank looked at by a machinist. You may want to have the crank polished, and ask the machinist if he thinks you can get away with just a hone on the cylinders. The crosshatch in the pic you posted looks good, but high mileage blocks tend to develop a ridge at the top of the cylinder that could give you grief down the road. I think you can get away with a little, I did the same thing with my block, and I had a little bit of ridge on a couple cylinders.

 

[Noobz347]

Not sure what your plans are in their etirety but the heads should be freshened up. Valve seats should ALL be replaced... springs, keepers, and rockers as well. Let your machinist make the final call.

I wouldn't be reusing some 250,000 mile lifters either, regardless of how they look.

You can rebuild it on a budget, no doubt. That budget goes out the window when you have to pull the motor to fix a cut corner though.

 

[TOOLOW91]

even if you don't plan a cam
right now I believe some may agree, have the heads freshened and go for better springs with some 1.6 RR this way you have the opportunity to change to a mild cam later on .. just a suggestion

 

[waid302]

I might get these GT40 springs from Alexparts:

http://www.alexsparts.com/sb-ford-gt40-drop-in-valve-spring-kit-hyd-roller/

 

[waid302]

Since I am going to re-hone the piston bore, what type of rings should I use. Cast? Moly? etc...

I was thinking about the cast rings which I believe were used from the factory.

I am planning to re-use the truck cam. The Explorer exhaust manifold got to be the most restrictive ever made! Even with those crazy manifolds, it still made 210hp. I will be using new shortly headers, no cat, no EGR, free flowing exhaust and a Holley 600 cfm carb which should possibly put me around 300hp ?

Thanks

 

[Noobz347]

Since I am going to re-hone the piston bore, what type of rings should I use. Cast? Moly? etc...

I was thinking about the cast rings which I believe were used from the factory.

I am planning to re-use the truck cam. The Explorer exhaust manifold got to be the most restrictive ever made! Even with those crazy manifolds, it still made 210hp. I will be using new shortly headers, no cat, no EGR, free flowing exhaust and a Holley 600 cfm carb which should possibly put me around 300hp ?

Thanks

Probably not. The cam is going to kill you.

 

[gearheadboy]

That bore is probably egg shaped as heck. I would hate to build a smoker. And I wouldn't polish the crank either with 250k, I'd turn it. And if you blasted the valves they need ground. I'd bet the guides have play as well. Budget is one thing, wasting gaskets, rings, and bearings on a grenade...ehh.. I'd never be lucky enough for it to last.

 

[waid302]

gearheadboy, would I still see the cross hatch mark, which I see on all 8 bores, if the bores are egg shaped?

Why would bead blasted valves would require regrind?

I did check the side-to-side play on the valves and there is no play at all.

Thanks

Waid

 

[88LX5.Oh]

Since I am going to re-hone the piston bore, what type of rings should I use. Cast? Moly? etc...

I was thinking about the cast rings which I believe were used from the factory.

I am planning to re-use the truck cam. The Explorer exhaust manifold got to be the most restrictive ever made! Even with those crazy manifolds, it still made 210hp. I will be using new shortly headers, no cat, no EGR, free flowing exhaust and a Holley 600 cfm carb which should possibly put me around 300hp ?

Thanks

There's guys that struggle to get that number with aftermarket EFI intakes and better cams.
Anyways the Explorer/Mountaineer cam is designed for torque. If I remember correctly, factory they had 270 ft lbs (I think that might be for the newer P headed Exploder engines, though) so it'll be a fun, slightly torquey car. But, you'll be lucky to hit 250 crank HP and that's really stretching it...

 

[waid302]

I found a HO cam on craigslist for $10 !

 

[gearheadboy]

If you have cross hatch and no ridge on all 8 bores with that mileage, on a standard bore block, have at it. If the guides are tight, ok. And the valves require a regrind because you blasted the sealing surface off of them.

 

[waid302]

Would these springs works ok with HO cam?

http://www.alexsparts.com/sb-ford-gt40-drop-in-valve-spring-kit-hyd-roller/

Just for your information, I will not be taking the Falcon at the track or racing or anything like that. It will be just a weekend cruiser with good sound! This is why I am not interested in full rebuild. Not yet.

Man, Purple Power really works. It is same as Formual 88, which I could not find, which has Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether. I going to get more and soak the heads too since 5 gallon is $25.

Before and after over night soak.

 

[RsStanG1987]

Why not just buy the tfs spring kit

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Would these springs works ok with HO cam?

http://www.alexsparts.com/sb-ford-gt40-drop-in-valve-spring-kit-hyd-roller/

Yes, those will be cats meow.

Why not just buy the tfs spring kit

With a stock HO cam....it's kind of a waste of money. The spring kit he quoted above will work fine and for half the price.

 

[RsStanG1987]

It will but if he decides to upgrade later he will be ahead of the game