Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: What effects can I expect from swapping a Mustang HO intake with the stock T-Bird.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Lansing, IL
    Posts
    41
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default What effects can I expect from swapping a Mustang HO intake with the stock T-Bird.

    I've been considering swapping out the 87 T-Bird 5.0L stock upper intake, throttle body and EGR with that from a 87 Mustang 5.0L HO. That will be going from 50mm opening to 65mm. Has any one ever tried this or have just upgraded to an aftermarket 65mm setup? If you have done this what effects/results were achieved?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Jenks, OK
    Posts
    2,335
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    Messing with a speed density system is like play Russian Roulette if you do not understand what you are doing. If this will result in more air getting in to the cylinders then you just hope that the EEC can compensate but my experience with SD has only been with race cars and tuned with a laptop.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    2,093
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    I can't remember what the EEC can adjust for until it pegs out the trim tables. 25%? I think the WOT fuel tables are also updated by the closed loop trim tables.

    Stay under ~25% increase in engine airflow and you're probably okay. Go beyond that and you'll begin to lean out at WOT and start to encounter a bunch of other issues that can't be 'learned' for.

    SD is great for reliability and cost for OEMs, but I think MAF systems are way easier to tune. You're directly given air flow, so you mainly have to make sure mods don't screw up timing tables.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    10,754
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)

    Default

    I did the HO upper/TB years ago along with factory HO headers and 2.25 dual exhaust. The factory SO speed density computer handled it fine with no issues.
    '88 Thunderbird LX: 306, Edelbrock Performer heads, Comp 266HR cam, Edelbrock Performer RPM intake, Edelbrock 70mm TB, 76mm C&L MAF, 30lb injectors, 2.5" exhaust, AOD with 2800 PI converter, 8.8 with 3.73 gears, 31 spline Traction-Lok, 31 spline Moser axles, 04 Cobra front arms, Maximum Motorsports extreme duty rear arms, subframes.
    '11 Focus, '12 Mustang 3.7, '17 Accord EX-L V6

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    193
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderjet302 View Post
    I did the HO upper/TB years ago along with factory HO headers and 2.25 dual exhaust. The factory SO speed density computer handled it fine with no issues.
    I did a similar upgrade but with headers also a few years ago and had no SD issues. If you're like the rest of us though, you probably won't be able to stop the mods at that point so you might want to brush up on the MAF conversion.
    '88 Bird 5.0, TW 170s, HO cam, Scorpion rockers, Explorer intake 70mm TB/EGR, MAF conversion, 24# injectors, 8.8 3.73 disc rear end swap, console swap, leather seats, 11" front discs, 15-1 rack, TC springs all around, x-pipe, BBK headers, welded sub-frame, unlocked digital speedo.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Utah.
    Posts
    9,257
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    Gotta start somewhere, right?

    It shouldnt bug the computer much. Check out the "mid h.o.conversion" on coolcats.
    Quote Originally Posted by jcassity
    I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
    Hooligans!
    1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
    1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
    1986 cougar.
    lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    East Coast Virginia
    Posts
    10,228
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    The SD system is fine with mods till you start messing with cams and big valve heads... Even then the Mustang system with 19Lb inj is OK with something like GT40 heads, still basically have to leave cam close to stock...






    My other rides (that actually do run & drive)

    1969 Fairlane Cobra 428CJ 4-Speed << New 49th Birthday Picture

    1972 Comet GT - 306 C4

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    1,843
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)

    Default

    As a direct response to OP, my answer is almost nothing. While the 50mm opening and small plenum volume of the SO intake are a limitation, they're not THE limitation. Your largest obstacles are going to be the single 2" exhaust (even with y-pipe in, y-pipe out duals, you still only can flow as much as can get through the single between the Y's, so it's still single exhaust), and after that the E6 heads, after that you run out of intake (with SO upper and TB), and shortly after that the cam is too small, and once you go to a larger cam, you'll immediately require higher capacity injectors.

    HO life is all or nothing.

    Heads, cam, intake, exhaust, EEC. Every upgrade you take from the Mustang 5.0 market will require that you're first converted to HO, if not HO and MAF.
    1988 Thunderbird 5.0
    GT40P, TFS-1, KB domes, 30#, MAF conversion, Explorer GT40 Upper/Lower, Smog delete, Wide Ratio AOD Mod, Unlocked Speedo, 3G Charging System Upgrade, Hi-Torque Mini Starter, 3.73 LSD, BBK 1 5/8 unequal headers, H-Pipe.

    88 Thunderbird/Cougar EVTM
    (Thanks to Trinom for hosting)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Utah.
    Posts
    9,257
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    I noticed a bigger difference from pulling out the silencer from the fender then the h.o. Intake on a stock s.o.
    Quote Originally Posted by jcassity
    I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
    Hooligans!
    1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
    1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
    1986 cougar.
    lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Olathe, Kansas
    Posts
    2,408
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default

    Stock SD setup, I added HO upper and TB, stock mustang headers, 2.5 H pipe, with dual exhaust. Noticed no running problems, not sure if I noticed much change performance. It was along time ago since I drove a stock one though.
    Mike

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •