2011 4.6 liter, six speed conversion.

[67 Camper Special]

Hi. I am new here but certianly not new to old trucks. Its been a hobby my whole life from when I was 14 in 1969 and bought my first truck, a 1947 Willys. I currently have a 1947 Dodge, and just bought this 67 Camper Special from California.

This truck is going to be a tool as much as a toy, pulling a trailor occasionally and hauling lumber for my business in the summer. I recently bought a 2011 Ranger for every day work[contractor] to cut down on fuel costs, and it is working out so well I sold my diesel truck and bought this old Ford for the few occasions where I need more muscle.

so.... Now I have the first Ranger and the last Ranger, ironic. The first one gets 9-10 MPG with its 460/C6, and the new one gets 28-31 with its 2.3/5 speed. I would like to bring these two numbers closer together, and that is the reason for my post.

Has anyone put a 4.6 Liter in a heavy truck? The weight of the truck is actually just 200#s more than the Mustang that the motor came out of. The 4.6 has more HP, but I am sure less torque. I am sure it has enough torque though that it would be just fine, but my question is what can I actually expect for a mileage gain? Its a lot of work and as I have not seen a conversion kit [?] a lot of fabrication.

An automatic is not out of the question.

If anyone has done this conversion, I would love to hear about it.

Just to save someone some typing, I hate the 5.4 Triton. Would not use that motor for anything.

67

[1972hiboy]

The 4.6 is the same as the 5.4 just little brother engine. mainly seen in half ton pickup and crown vics. UNless this is a different newer ford engine that is 4.6l in displacement thats not a modular motor?

[67 Camper Special]

Never drove anything with a 5.4 that impresses me. They just don't seem to like to run, nor do they deliver the mileage of the 4.6. My mother has a Lincoln Continental on the other hand with a 4.6 that runs like a raped ape, and has for 140K now, and gets mileage in the mid twenties.

The motor in question is a 2010, I was mistaken on the year, out of a new Mustang with zero miles. I think it is in the neighborhood of 380 hp if I remember what he said, and is complete with 6 speed and computor.


Obviously the bore and stroke combination in the 4.6 is a better setup. There are many motors that work good in one configuration but not in another. I have a Mazda 3 with a 2 liter because I like it better than the 2.3. Just runs better.

The new 5.0 is interesting but too new to get a deal on. The nice thing about mustangs is that the aftermarket is huge! A supercharger is not out of the question.

Anyway, I am just toying with the idea at this point but would love to hear from someone that has tried this combination. I could drive the truck a lot more if it did not cost so much to use it.

67

[averagef250]

You can't disassociate the 4.6 and 5.4. They're essentially the same engine. Saying one is complete crap and the other walks on water is a little hard to follow.

The new Mustang 6 speed is a Chinese built German supplied Getrag. Not the finest thing Ford's put out by a mile.

Really look into what it's going to take to put that combo in something other than what it came from and get it running. The newest powertrains are very integrated with the vehicle. The level of communication between all the separate vehicle modules is hard to believe.

It works pretty good when it's all hooked up, but try using a piece of the puzzle by itself (the engine) and it won't be so easy.

[67 Camper Special]

I did not say the 5.4 was complete crap, I said I do not like it. I did not say the 4.6 walks on water, I said I like it. I did not want a 4.6/5.4 debate, because I have absolutely no intention of using a 5.4. I'd rather put in the new non-turbo v6, my second choice.

My question was has anyone put a 4.6 in a heavy hauler. For the most part the truck will just be used to drive around, and a few times a year will be asked to haul a load short distances. I do not see gas prices going down, so if I can significantly increase the mileage I will use the truck more.

So.... I am curious about driveability and mileage if it has been done by someone else.

67

[DuckRyder]

Can we try to focus on the question at hand - Which is who has put a 4.6 into a bump. 2010 would be a 3 valve no?

OP how open to other modifications are you (IE Crown Vic front end).

I think my first step would be figuring out how I was going to work the injection (IE mega squirt, or will the OEM ECU work without the other stuff on the Mustang).

[Ranchero50]

Yep, kinda need to know if the truck is a F100 or F250/350 before considering the Crown Vic front suspension swap and if lowering the truck is feasible for it's intended use.

Personally I don't see any real hurdles getting an early 4.6 to run in a stand alone configuration and I don't think there is a huge difference between the late model and early except for the coil on plug setup and the integration with the other modules in the car. I'd chose a '90's 4.6 out of a MkVIII with your choice of trannies and be done with it. Other than a return fuel system and making your own motor mounts I don't see any huge issues.

Jamie

[1972hiboy]

Yep, kinda need to know if the truck is a F100 or F250/350 before considering the Crown Vic front suspension swap and if lowering the truck is feasible for it's intended use.

Personally I don't see any real hurdles getting an early 4.6 to run in a stand alone configuration and I don't think there is a huge difference between the late model and early except for the coil on plug setup and the integration with the other modules in the car. I'd chose a '90's 4.6 out of a MkVIII with your choice of trannies and be done with it. Other than a return fuel system and making your own motor mounts I don't see any huge issues.

Jamie

I wouldnt get a modular motor made before 2003. the early ones are known for blowing spark plugs out of the heads as well as the drivers side head having coolant cavitaion issues resulting in blowing out the aluminum at the front of the head.

[67 Camper Special]

I got a call from the fellow that had the 4.6/six speed. He sold it. So I have more time to make a decision.

I like the regular v6 in the current F150, makes probably more HP than my 460. Thats a thought as well.

An earlier 4.6 would be fine but putting in a late model would not be a problem. I'm good at fabricating, my brother and I raced off road for years, I was the fitter and he was the welder. Heres a video of my brother this past labor day weekend. As you will see, our fabrication gets tested. He is still in a body cast. The cage held but it was such a bad hit that the harness broke his back. Hans device probably saved him from being paralized. He was only going to race two more years to get his house paid off but looks like that is not in the cards. Monster Energy said they will build him a new truck, but I hope he calls it quits. He's 50, doesn't heal so fast any more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dry_xBCTakc

A standalone computer is not out of the question, but there are ways ways to fool a stock computer. Painless wiring makes harnesses for a lot of the more common motors and my brother is good at that kind of thing. Auto repair is what he does besides racing.

I thought about a Crown Vic front end but this is a 3/4 ton and as I understand it it does not fit. Twin I beam is not so bad, but I do want disks some day. It stops much better than my 47 though.....

67

[fbomb100]

I thought about a Crown Vic front end but this is a 3/4 ton and as I understand it it does not fit.

67

it does fit

[67 Camper Special]

I have been thinking about where I want to go with this truck, and I still need to be able to use it to haul heavy loads on occasion. I like the idea of the Vic front, but I better leave it alone.

I am going to take a bit of spring out of the back. Can you say buckboard? I had about 2500-3000 pounds on it the other day and it was just starting to ride nice. Any suggestions on this would be appreciated. I would like to take out just enough spring that they start to work empty. Now, if I am empty bumps in a corner are bad, tail bounces out. Plus it is beating the truck to death. I don't mind if springs bend a little bit.

67

[Ranchero50]

For your rear suspension, I would swap out a flex-o-matic setup from a '71 or so F250. Surprisingly this setup really made my F250 ride like a F100 and still handle the F250 load. #7 in the pic in the link

http://www.fordification.com/library/ma ... temId=2447

For the front I'd just go mid '70's F250 dent with disc brakes and power steering. It all bolts in and works wonders vs. drums and Armstrong Inc. steering.

Jamie

[basshound71]

Fast and Loud put a 4.6 in a bump. Looks like it ran pretty good. I too would like to do the same thing.

[67 Camper Special]

Jamie

Thanks for the rear suggestion. Problem is up here any truck that old is either restored or crushed because of rust. I'll have to find that setup in a southern junkyard. My truck is from the Oregon Desert or it would be long gone already.

Mine does have factory power steering, but the truck is not original so who knows. Brakes are power, but they still take some leg to stop.

By the way, my wife wants a Ranchero like you have. I have a nice little 289 just waiting for it. Of course I have a 327/365hp steel crank just in case I find a ElCamino first. And a 340 Mopar just in case........

Thanks, Larry

[67 Camper Special]

I should have bought that new 4.6/6 speed! I did not realize what they are going for. I could have had that for $1500. I'm out of the loop I guess, I am seeing crazy prices for low mile late model engine/trans. I am not paying $4-5k. Its a $2800 truck.

I have been reading a lot of stuff on this forum, and one conversion that has me curious is 6bt Cummins conversions. I have had a couple Dodge/Cummins pickups and they treated me well. I would love to see a pic or two of one in a bump to see how they fit but have not run across one yet. I kind of thought it would be a tight fit lengthways.