found a 5.0 block out of a 00 or 01 explorer and was wondering was there any advantages and disadvantages in this block compared to other 302 blocks or are they basically the same
2000 Explorer 5.0 block vs. other 5.0 blocks
- Thread starter ford_thoroughbred
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
TrophyHead
15 Year Member
txstang84
15 Year Member
Pretty sure you're corret...hypereucraptics...good for mild performance and tight bore clearance; that's about it.
Which is it? Traditional cast pistons are not the same as Hypereutectic. I'm leaning towards them being Hypereutectic as that's the direction most engines wen't by the early-90's, but I'm not 100% certain. They may also be dished as well....which would lower compression in comparison to the flat tops found in the Mustang.
txstang84
15 Year Member
To the best of my knowledge, the pistons in that block should be the same as the last gen Mustang 5.0s...they had the same CR, but better heads.
And you're correct about hypers being different than traditional cast pistons, but only by alloy and size...hyper pistons are still a cast piston any way you slice it, and they still will suffer the same fate if pushed too hard.
And you're correct about hypers being different than traditional cast pistons, but only by alloy and size...hyper pistons are still a cast piston any way you slice it, and they still will suffer the same fate if pushed too hard.
The pistons are hypers, and in a stock block it has absolutely no effect on how much power you can push through them.
For some reason they get a bad rap, but when is the last time you heard someone say they broke a piston in a stock 302?
If anything they last longer and burn less oil.
For some reason they get a bad rap, but when is the last time you heard someone say they broke a piston in a stock 302?
If anything they last longer and burn less oil.
txstang84
15 Year Member
Hypers get a bad rap because they're still castings and don't play that well with boost or spray. They will take more abuse than regular cast, yes, but still ain't great. And while it's irrelevant for use in a stock block, and they do consume less oil due to closer tolerance, I have seen them crack and burned before...broken no-but cracked or burned yes...
It all depends on your purposes...if you never plan to use a power adder, then sure-they're fine to use...they're lighter anyway. That being said, I think we might've wandered a bit from the OP's purpose in asking the question...
It has hypereutectic pistons like the 93-95 Mustangs and the remainder of the rotating assembly is identical. Swap in a new cam and oil pump pickup tube from a Mustang and you'd never know the difference between the two.
....until he started experiencing valve float after 4,500RPM because he forgot to upgrade the valve springs along with the camshaft.
txstang84
15 Year Member
....until he started experiencing valve float after 4,500RPM because he forgot to upgrade the valve springs along with the camshaft.
Something you've experienced before I take it...?
Indeed. The stock Mustang springs are barely adequate enough for the stock cam profile....and the Explorer valve springs are weaker still. I’ve floated the stockers as a stupid teenager on a 302 in more than one occasion in the past.
Add an aftermarket bump stick to the mix like one of the ones mentioned above that's got some additional lift/duration and accompanying RPM range over the stocker and you could end up seeing a lot of it. Not only will you not realize the full benefits said aftermarket camshaft has to offer, but miss a gear and bounce it off the rev limiter enough times and depending on the cam profile, you might even be one of the unlucky ones to make piston to valve contact.
There are area’s one could skimp if money were tight. I wouldn’t suggest valve springs as being one of them.
Similar threads
