Vintage Mustang Forums banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part MAY's Ride of the Month Challenge!

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ok I have a 97 f150 with a low mileage 4.6 and tranny. Are there any write ups or anyone that has used that combo in a 65? Or anywhere I can find info on this swap?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,532 Posts
You will need an IFS that replaces the shock towers. By time you have gone that far it makes far more sense to upgrade to the 5.0 coyote.

For a how to just search for “coyote swap” on this forum, it will be the same process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,346 Posts
A 97 4.6L is going to be a 2valve engine...I think I saw one years ago they got away with a huge shock tower notch, but as ajzride said, the more common approach for those who have swapped 2v 4.6L engines is to go with a Mustang II type front suspension(In my profile pic I have the 4v 4.6L sitting in a 66 coupe...it required removing the shock towers...a 2v 4.6L is marginally narrower...but not by much...its also not worth the effort, it doesn't make enough HP to be any better than a 289/302...even a 4v is only 300HP(or the newer 3v) and you can get that out of cammed 302 with a few other bolt-ons easily enough. If you are removing the shock towers, you shouldnt even consider swapping in an engine with less than 400HP these days. Lets put it this way: I am putting in a 3.7L v6(300HP) from a 2012 mustang in this 66....that makes more power, more torque, and is 200lbs lighter than than a 2v...all while fitting between the factory shock towers, for that matter...a stock 289/302 is going to make just as much power as a 2v without any modifications at all needed. Its great you have an extra engine and transmission...but the swap makes no sense unless you just love the 2v sound or something
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,346 Posts
This requires a suspension that removes the UCA, might as well get an IFS if you are changing the suspension out.



Set of turbos from a 3.5EB should bolt right up.
The turbos do bolt up(I think...I think its the Duratec 3.0 with the different exhaust flange bolt pattern) but that doesnt help...because they are mounted on the side of the engine...and the 3.7L has the same dimensions as a 351w width and height wise....meaning its already a super tight fit with conventional manifolds, the ecoboost turbos push it out an additional 2 inches per side. Besides that...those turbos are already on the small side for a 3.5L,add the extra displacement of the 3.7 and you will choke out the top end. That being said...if I were to turbocharge the 3.7, the best choice of turbos would be Aerochargers(Aerochargers have a self-contained oil supply and are VNT, making them the perfect remote mount turbo) installed in place of the mufflers in a remote-mount setup...that would give far better weight distribution and still have low turbo lag...would also take a lot of heat out of the engine bay. Maybe some day I will think about turbocharging the 3.7L...but 300HP is just about right for a daily driver in a 2500lb car
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
That's going to be an awesome project, I can't wait to see updates. I'm really curious how well it'll handle, too as that'll have nice weight distribution.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top