Engine Swap Economy?

I need to refresh the 289 in my new 67 Ford Ranch Wagon and I'm curious if I'd be better served by a bigger engine. I could stroke the current block to 347ci, swap in a 390/410FE, 351W, or stroke the 351W to 393ci. I'm currently driving an 03 GMC Sierra extended cab with a 4.6 and its a dog to drive around in city traffic. Really got to punch it to get up to speed for our short interstate on-ramps or even trying to pass. When you do puch it, you can almost watch the gas needle drop!

I figure with bigger displacement/ longer stroke, a stump pulling TORQUE cam/ induction/ exhaust combo and propper gearing, I can navigate the urban jungle with ease and get decent mileage (18-21mpg). Need an Overdrive tranny for those interstate road trips too. Suggestions welcome.

What are yalls experiences with various engine swaps? How satisfied are you with the added power? What would you do different? How was your fuel economy effected?

 

I've had several near identical a-bodies with both 2.8 and 3.1 V6 engines. All had the 4 speed 440T4 automatic with 3.33 final drive. The only real difference between the engines is the stroke and the logo on the plenum. They even run off the same chip. In my Celebrity I also swapped the 2.8 for a similar mileage 3.1, using the existing chip, sensors, everything except the long block and manifolds.

The 3.1 has noticeably more low end torque, it pulls a lot harder and almost never has to downshift on hills. Also in every case, the 3.1 gets about 2 mpg better than the 2.8. And the sedans get about 1 mpg better than the wagons because they are lighter.

With normal driving, so basically without trying for economy, the same 150 mile downstate trips would give me the following just about every time.
1989 2.8 6000 wagon, 28 mpg
1990 3.1 6000 wagon, 30 mpg, no difference from 70k to 255k on the odometer
1989 2.8 Celebrity sedan before swap, 29 mpg
1989 3.1 Celebrity sedan after swap, 31 mpg
1988 2.8 Celebrity sedan, 29 mpg

My driving is mostly highway and I stay away from the city as much as possible. I think a larger engine would consume more fuel in the city since it'd be idling a lot and burning more fuel while it is going nowhere.

 

You certainly have a lot of ways to go.

One way would be to utilize a late model fuel-injected 5.0 with AOD trans. You would have to look for a conversion kit to adapt your '67 to the late-model fuel injection with computer controls and such. I'm sure they are out there.

Over the years, I've seen more 60's big Ford wagons with the 390 than with the 289. My bet is that your fuel mileage wouldn't suffer much, if any, switching to a big block.

Start looking around, you might fall into a great deal on something that will fit.

 

What are you getting for mileage now with that 67, 289?

 

My driving will be mostly around town with lots of short stoplights and really short on-ramps. Just want the power on demand. The wagon will actually be primarily my wife's car taking the kids to their appointments, store, etc. It's all mine to drive them to church, week end cruising, and Holiday roadtrips to Indianna and Florida. It won't rack up that many miles other than the occasional road trip

I'm leaning more towards either a 390FE or 289 based build. As far as the cars resale value is concerned, is the 390FE more desirable and would it matter that it isn't the factory engine? The 390FE's come up around here fairly often and really cheap too. The 410FE uses stock parts from what I understand. I'd like to avoid using an aftermarket stroker kit (roughly $1K). I'd rather put that cash towards a Gear Vendors unit basically turning the C4 into a 6 speed and adding overdrive.

 

Currently not running. The carb needs rebuilt, the engine needs new gaskets, bearings, and rings. Considering my options before I dive into the 289.

 

If you ask...

I would get the 289 going and then spend whatever money you desire to improve it if needed. I can't imagine changing my factory 289 for anything unless I was going to race, but even then a hopped 289 would do the trick.

Happy with a 289 in Texas

 

If it is your wife's primary daily driver I would follow KK's advice and look into the 5.0HO/AOD swap. Parts should be relatively cheap and easy to find. There are also plenty of 5.0HO hop up parts to be found new and used. That could be a great reliable combination capable of turning good mileage and giving good performance.

 

The 302 is the way to go. Tons of parts for them. The FE's were good engines, but performance wise left a lot to be desired. All the 390s I had were slugs. Had a 428 that was a little better, but sucked gas at a rate that made OPEC rejoice. You should even be able to get well over 200 HP out of the 289, and it is lighter. A big block will call for other mods to the vehicle like springs and maybe brakes.

 

Most of the time a smaller engine has to have steeper gears to match the performance and torque of a larger engine, so apples to apples, my experience is, in similar vehicles a big engine "can" have the same fuel economy as a smaller engine, and sometimes more depending on how it is operated.

Of course it goes with the old saying, "as long as you keep your foot out of it".

My question is this, what is your intention for your wagon? Daily driver? Vacation wagon? Project vehicle?

I ask because, the costs of swapping what needs to be swapped, and in the case of a larger motor beefing up what will need to be beefed up, that's money.

Money that could instead just buy A LOT of gas for your current setup. Now that's economy.

But if you are wanting to swap for more power, or to have something you don't currently have (big block, or modern EFI 5.0 and overdrive, etc.), then that is fine and good as well.

Stroking the 289 or other small block? Probably not going to pay off, but would be a "fun" performance modification. Swapping a 289 for an FE 360/390/428? I wouldn't.

For "economy" regarding mpg potential, my best recommendation is to agree with Krash Kadillak and do a 5.0 swap with either an AOD or five speed.

And if you have the inclination and motivation, put an intercooled turbo setup on that bad boy and you WILL have the best of both worlds, 20 plus miles per gallon and 300-500 horsepower on tap when you need it.

Myself, I am partial to stock, so if it was me, I'd refresh the 289 and get it back to factory spec and a good tune, and enjoy the heck out of it as is.

Keep us updated.

 

I would think torque would be more important than horsepower, and you get that from more cubic inches. You want overdrive then you'd want an AOD or 4R70W. And you'd probably want fuel injection for easier starting, better driveability, and better mileage.

I would seriously consider a 302 V8 and 4R70W from a late 90s Explorer. You can get the engine complete with harness and computer and the transmission from a junkyard as a dropout unit probably for well under 2K. Then it's just a matter of putting it in your wagon. The biggest issues you would have would be changing the length of the driveshaft an inch or three, hooking up the throttle linkage to your gas pedal, and hooking up the shift linkage to your shifter. Motor mounts will be the same, oh, and you'd have to change the yoke on your driveshaft up front there. In fact if you do it right, changing the yoke to a shorter one, you won't even have to change or cut your driveshaft, just swap yoke, balance, and go.

I'm pretty sure the 4R70W from the late 90s there still has a cable driven speedo. I know the one in a 98-00 Crown Vic will, since my '98 CVPI taxi had a 2000 model transmission and rear axle (3.55:1 gears and Trac-Loc, baby!) and we had to change the speedometer gear to make the speedometer and taximeter read correctly.

You could also use a 351W engine with the EFI intake from a 302, but that's getting complicated. The Explorer 302 in '96 had the GT40 heads. '97 and newer ones had the GT40P heads. Both are good for a 302 engine. You could put the on a 351W too but then you'd need to port them and probably put in bigger valves. Not worth the trouble IMO.

I know you drive a wagon, not a Mustang, but the 64-70 Mustangs and the forums pertaining to them will give you TONS of info on it. And every one of those people is swapping an Explorer 302 into their classic Ford. Definitely worth looking into and they'll have the same problems as you except they're all going floorshift.

Or you could do like I did with my Gran Torino, drop in an early 70s 351C with a 4-barrel intake and carb, and enjoy all the torque and 14mpg with an FMX and 2.75 gears. I bet an AOD with 3.25 gears would get me to 20mpg easy. I think a 302EFI/AOD swap will still be in this car's future. I wanted to do that originally but then the $400 10K-into-a-rebuild-got-a-cam-intake-carb-and-all-Cleveland fell into my lap and I had to do it.

 

I have a solid lead on a "Donor" wagon out of New Mexico. $700 67 Country Sedan with the 10 passenger option I was hunting for! SWEET! My Ranch Wagon will actually be the real donor, giving up all its glass, headlights, interior, and other misc bits. Sooo... the Country Sedan has a 390FE (needs complete overhaul) and the Ranch Wagon has the 289. Has any one used the 289 wagon for a tow vehicle??? I probably won't tow very often. A light weight trailer to haul camping gear mostly but occasionally I want to attent car shows with the family and tow my 71 Datsun 240Z behind.

 

Sounds like a plan....
Is it pretty flat between NM and Corpus Christi? If so, you can probably make it, but take it slow - and make sure you've got real good brakes.

 

If you really want mileage, especially on the highway, there is ONE way to go, and you will really knock people's socks off. You want to skip the fuel injected engines, as they do not get the mileage of the carburetor equipped ones. The compression is lower, and they have less torque. Also, stay away from the electronic transmissions. They have a bad habit of 'learning' your driving style, so when a gentle driver nails the gas they get confused. UGH.

My suggestion is first, stay small block. The handling will be better. Also, no permanent mods are required so you can return to original to maintain resale value. Start with a 351W from an 85 - 91 Crown Vic/Grand Marquis. It is a torque monster right off the factory floor. If the cam is good, don't even bother to change it. If it needs a new one, CompCams makes a SLIGHTLY higher torque cam for it. The factory AOD that came behind it is, especially with the Trailer Tow III package, about as durable a transmission as you will ever find. I know one that has almost ONE MILLION miles on it with nothing but maintenance. The factory rear end in them was a 2.73:1 with the tow package. They have LOTS of get up and go. Enough that they can be a handful in the wet unless you run REALLY good tires. Just change the intake and carb over to an Edelbrock Performer intake and square bore 1401 carb. Talk to tech support at Edelbrock and they will help you figure out the metering rod/jets to use for the way the car is driven. Done right, and set up properly, and you will be in the high 30s for gas mileage, and it is all bolt in, including the transmission. Oh, and the AOD that was originally behind a carbureted engine does in fact work with the Edelbrock Carb, you just may have to adjust the kick down rod differently.

 

Lokar makes a kickdown cable for AOD-equipped cars with aftermarket carbs. It's pricey but it works very well. I'm still running an FMX behind my 351C with an Edelbrock carb and when I swap to an AOD, if it didn't come out of a 351W Panther (which with 351W and AOD would have the right kickdown cable to use on the Edelbrock linkage) then I'll be getting the Lokar cable for it just to make things simpler.

I honestly think a 289 with a CompCams DEH255 cam, Performer intake and 1401 carb, AOD, 3.00 or 3.25 gears, and 26 or 27 inch tires would be perfect for towing. The Dual Energy cam gives you a reasonable amount of lift, a good 110 degree LSA, and 203/216 duration at .050" lift. Efficient and strong, perfect for towing.