The Bronco transmission doesn't have a removeable bell. Should be an M5ODR2 5 speed. Pretty sure it used a 164 tooth bell where the Mav's should be a 157 tooth. If the Mav has a 164 bell then the 5.0 flywheel will work, but the Mav presure plate likely won't bolt up to it.
Yea I did a little checking into this and It should be a 164 tooth flywheel with the 50oz balance (which shouldn't matter if I'm keeping all the bronco stuff up front). Seems the comet one should be 157... this is starting to get a bit too confusing. Much searching for conversion parts... So really if I want to swap motors I'm gonna need a new transmission too it seems
The only thing really needed is a flywheel & that bracket, and likely the pressure plate to match the flywheel, all the Mav stuff will work, you will just need to positively locate the Mav's timing cover. Then you'll need gaskets to swap the intake, timing cover, waterpump and oil pan and pickup tube. Like I said, it's not hard, you just have to do the homework to know what needs to be done.
Yea, I just wanted to be able to get the bronco motor ready without having to take the motor out of my comet first. It's my DD so being down for a couple weeks isn't an option. I intend to do this during the summer so I can carpool with my wife if need be, but that's annoying as she goes to work 3 hours before I do normally. Not afraid of doing the work, and that's why I'm working it out a few months ahead of time. If I figure it all out now, I can get it done smoothly later.
The "up front" doesn't make any difference, it's the crankshafts that require different balance weights on the flywheel and harmonic balancer... You must retain both, what bolts to them doesn't make a difference... If there is a 157 tooth flywheel available for 50 oz balance, I'd think you could use you original bell and maybe clutch... Or you could go with a early 164 tooth bell for the Bronco flywheel... Those were common behind 70s 351, and AFAIK used 11" clutch, so your original isn't likely to be reused(guessing it's 10.5" or maybe a 10")... It's best to research one area at a time and take notes to be sure each issue is addressed before you dissemble anything(still be prepaired to find something different than expected)... If it's not a daily driver, tear it apart and start comparing...
I'm not expecting to be able to re-use much. I did find some bell-housings, but at $400 and up... changing the flywheel seems cheaper. I'm in no hurry this thread is giving me lots of stuff to look at and think about. I'm just feeling confused. The transmission is definitely the place to start I guess. It's entirely possible I'll stumble onto a different engine to use between now and then too.
Go hit the pick-a part and pull an early 80's 5.0 from a Crown Vic or Granada, you'll get the 2 bbl aluminum intake and the timing cover you can use with your current waterpump. You can swap this stuff to the Bronco motor, then when you pull the 302 out of the Mav, then you can swap the oilpan and pickup tube. The Bronco flywheel uses a diaphram pressure plate, your mav has a long style with three fingers the throwout bearing rides on, the bolt patterns for either are almost never the same, so any 50 oz flywheel you get needs to have the same bolt pattern as the one in your Mav, if you plan on reusing that part.
164 tooth Toploader bellhousings are like the proverbial "red headed step child", you shouldn't have to pay more than $50 for one. Just keep in mind before you do buy one, that the Bronco pressure plate may not work with the Mav's clutch linkage, the distance from the flywheel surface maybe different between the diaphram tyle P/P and your Long style P/P. That's something that needs to be checked before buying anything. I think it would be best to keep your 157 tooth bell (look under the car and see what the bell is made of, if it's aluminum, it should be a 157, iron, should be a 164) and get a 50 oz flywheel that has the Long style bolt pattern.
Thanks for the comments. I'm gonna start doing the hard research now that I know what to look into. Expect some further questions on this at a later date. With the amount of stuff that will need to be done and purchased... What's the real difference between a HO and a non HO 5.0 roller engine? I mean I was planning to either find a HO and start building on it or buy a crate... but maybe I should just tear down this block, there's nothing wrong with it.
Depends on which "non HO" motor you're comparing it to. All used the same block, crank, rods after 1986. Ford used 4 different hyd roller cams from 85-2001: The base roller, (which is yours), then the Cobra cam, the HO (there were actually three of these all with the same basic specs with minor differences in the ramp rates) then the F4TE truck cam. They were equiped with 4 different heads ( E6SE, E7TE, GT40 and GT40P) and a half dozen different intake setups (Cobra, HO, Crown Vic, Truck, Explorer and the SN95 setup (also used on the 89-93 T-Bird/Cougar) The 94-97 pickup/van 5.0 is very close in output to the HO, only difference being the cam and intake setup. The 93 T-Bird/Cougar used the 93 Cobra's roller cam. I can go on and on, but If you really want to study the differences, get this book: The Official Ford Mustang 5.0" by Al Kirschenbaum, published by Ford Racing. There's more info in it about the 5.0's made from 1979 to 2001 than in any other book.
I have a question about timing covers and water pumps... I know the Fox chassis vehicles used the reverse rotation pumps but what exactly is the difference in the cover from a CW rotation??? This chart only shows one reverse cover, but I have three covers that were used with reverse pumps and are OEM... My covers are two 302B that have the F/P mount but openings are closed, one came from a 5.0 HO LSC Lincoln, the other from a '87 T-Bird with std 5.0... A third is like 302D('89 5.0 Stang) and a forth is on a '68 289(looks like 302A)... In compairing them I can see no reason that even the '68 cover would not work with a CCW pump... I bring this up as there was some discussion on the Crown Vic Board about covers being different but in the end was agreed all the covers are basically same(excepting for the 351RF that no one had or seen) Thoughts???
Ford made probably a dozen different timing covers for the small block over it's 40 year lifespan. The reverse rotation covers introduced for the Mustang/Lincoln LSC in 1986 had the coolant ports reversed as opposed to the earlier covers. The covers used on the CrownVic/Towncar/Marquis 5.0 (til 91) are all std rotation covers. The reverse cover was also used on the pickup/van 5.0 til 97. None of these (rev. rot.) had fuel pump bosses as far as I know. The Vic covers did for awhile,(cast closed off) then it was dropped completely. All those shown above are std rotation covers, except for the 351RF.(this is the Mustang/pickup/van cover from 86-93 in the stang, til 97 in the pickup/van) Now, the 79-85 Mustang's used a reverse rotation waterpump, but it was bolted to a std rotation timing cover, this is why Ford came out with the true reverse cover in 86, the cooling was improved by 11%, simply by reversing the coolant port layout, notice how the ports are reversed on the 351RF cover as opposed to the rest in the pic. The Explorer's used the same cover introduced for the 89 T-Bird, but with a slightly different pump, the same cover was also used on the 94-95 Stang 5.0.Go back and compare your cover from that 89 Stang, you'll find it isn't the 302D but the 351RF, they are similar, but the ports are reversed.
Hey Dad before we go any farther, are you talking reverse rotation or reverse flow?? There is a difference... Reverse rotation as used on the Fox chassis Lincoln MK-VII, T-Bird/Coug & Stang are STANDARD FLOW and not reverse... Seems trucks such as first gen Lightnings and other similar year 351 used reverse flow and that is what the lower right picture is... Anyway I knew this wasn't going anywhere with out a pict so here are the covers I was asking about, both used in reverse rotation(not flow) applications... I haven't owned any late model 5.0 that used a std rotation since a '86 Grand Marquis and I never had that one apart... Lower cover is from the '86 5.0 HO LSC(F/P opening blocked) and a cover from '87 T-Bird is same... Upper cover is the '89 Stang...
Excellent information! I have argued with a few friends around here in the past about the different timing covers and ran across it again when I converted to the late model 5.0l, so it's nice to see the pics to prove it.
Reverse rotation. As for it being reverse flow, that could be true for a reverse rotation pump, but it would depend on how the impeller vanes are oriented. Ford revised the timing cover in 86 to improve the circulation of the reverse rotation pumps. You're mistaken in the identification of the 89 HO timing cover. That cover was used in the 79-85 Mustang 5.0's (with a reverse rotation pump). The 86-93 used the same timing cover as the pickups and vans.(lower right pic) And if you look at the flow in the pickup truck/van system (with the radiator cap off), you'll see that the coolant circulates just as all others, the coolant exits the block the same way as any std rotation pump. My 95 E150 van had an oil cooler plumbed between the lower radiator hose and pump, as did the 95 F150 I had last year. If the flow was reversed, then it would be pointless to locate the oil cooler in the lower hose if the hot coolant exited the block there, as the oil and the coolant would be nearly the same temperature. Or next time you look at any 86-97 pickup, feel the lower and top hoses while it's running. The top hose will always be hotter than the lower hose. If the coolant flowed the opposite direction, the upper hose would be cooler than the lower.
