Rod/Main/Cam Bearings - Any Quality Differences?

[qdeezie]

While I'm asking questions about preferences and such, any preference on piston rings? I'm down to Perfect Circle and Hastings. I'm leaning more so towards Hastings, but in the past as I've mentioned as long as it's Moly that's all I'm looking for.

Thoughts?

 

[OVERKILL]

If the compression on the engine is good, I'd leave them alone. These engines aren't known for wearing the bores, you will probably have visible cross-hatching on the bores still.

 

[qdeezie]

I didn't have any sort of blow by or oil consumption, however, the cylinders do have a very glazed feel and shiny look to them compared to the normal feel/look of a cylinder that still shows cross hatching.

I have to attribute that to oil starvation in the engine's previous life before I purchased it.

 

[OVERKILL]

They are supposed to be shiny, that's what happens when the rings wear-in

As long as there is no scoring and the compression/leak-down was good, I'd be hesitant to bother with it.

The longest lasting 302's I've ever seen were always the ones that had stock rods/pistons in them. Mine have 338,000Km's and 348,000Km's on them respectively, both stock bottom-ends.

 

[qdeezie]

Lol, you sound almost like a buddy of mine that keeps telling me to take a day and install new rod and main bearings from the bottom with the engine still in it and be done with it.

In all seriousness, what you're saying is definitely something to consider.

 

[SteveSRT8]

In the case of the ole 302 there is too much choice involved.

This makes the experienced advise of a Ford man invaluable as you weed through the chaff to find the good stuff.

I would suggest a thorough tear down and send hi res photos to Overkill and use him as your consultant.

Of course this assumes his fee is reasonable!

 

[qdeezie]

You know, I'm sitting here looking at parts and I see that the older pistons have standard size rings and the pistons from about 86/87 up have metric rings.

Other than size, what's the difference? Does one control oil better?

It's my intention to clean and reuse the existing pistons I have, but I see all kinds of deal on pistons with the standard 5/64, 5/64, 3/16 ring pack.

What gives with mainly standard size rings pretty much being the only thing available in the aftermarket?

 

[OVERKILL]

The newer rings are also moly IIRC and seal better. That's about it.

 

[mechtech2]

Coated plain bearings are made, but I can't see why.
Bearings and journals should never touch.
Unless you have a good reason or two, the Clevite 77s are never far off.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Coated plain bearings are made, but I can't see why.
Bearings and journals should never touch.
Unless you have a good reason or two, the Clevite 77s are never far off.


Bearings and journals touch all the time. On startup, for example. Especially on startup after sitting for a long time (say a week), with thin oils. There is virtually zero oil on the bearings.

They also touch when oil pressure is lost momentarily. While not common, it does occasionally happen to autocrossers, racers, off road trucks in unusual attitudes and during exceptionally hard cornering.

You may not know this, but typical aerobatic Lycoming engines have a conventional oil sump AND an oil pickup at the top of the engine. That way, inverted flight is possible without loss of oil pressure. BUT, knife edge flight has no provisions for oil pickup and the engine starves for oil, while making full power. Bearing design is critical.

 

[mechtech2]

Bearings do NOT dry out every day for startup.
Even after a year or more, I have always seen oil on the bearings on a teardown.
If they touch, they are destroyed. They are soft.

 

[QuadDriver]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
This is for a 302? A few suggestions:

1. Get a Mustang HO camshaft, you should be able to get one for next to nothing.
2. Get a Mustang distributor from any Fox V8 car in the wreckers, this includes the T-Bird and Mark VII. That will solve that problem.
3. Use the Clevite 77's, that should have been what was in it stock.


Your engine is bank-fire, not SEFI, so the injector firing order isn't important. However, with the HO camshaft, you WILL have to change your plug firing order to 1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8. IIRC, the truck ECM can't just be swapped with an SD HO ECM, but I might be wrong. It's been a while since I did a similar swap. I ended up using a Lincoln harness and a Mark VII ECM.


The 1990 truck 5.0 has the exact same internal parts as the GT of the same year, heads ,cam crank, pistons whatever.

The truck is bank firing and has 6 mistimed injectors.

Switching to the 351/marine firing order will STILL have 6 mistimed injectors.

You can goto a SFI setup, it requires the injector overlay harness, or replace the engine harness with one from a GT - however, the intake on the GT/crown vic is positioned differently and you may have trouble reaching some of the plugs.

Any change to the engine interneals on the speed density setup will require reprogramming the ECU unless you switch to mass air.

There are many caveats in hereand ford has sold many parts to cover them.

If you rebuild the engine stock, then change nothing. IF you add better or worked heads, a letter roller camshaft or a performance cam, you are going to need the reprogram or mass air.

If you do not want the T50 or T51 truck setups from ford, then there are a select few mustang ECMs you can use. On the ford truck enthusiast website we detail the changes in many many threads

Do not, repeat do NOT use a mustang ECM without changing the injector harness or rewiring it, it is joined at the plug, you will screw fuel timning way up.

oooo, I just read your sig, you have the e40d, that adds another wrinkle, the mustang never had an e40d and the AODE or 4R70W are not compatible. so you will need to find a lightning ecm and convert the engine to 1-3 instead of 1-5 firing order and a lot more work. or piggy back 2 ecms, one for the engine, one for the transmission (insturctions for that are also on the FTE website)

 

[QuadDriver]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
I have a custom grind from Jay Allen. For your application, considering how stock the rest of the engine is, assuming stock heads and intake, the HO or Explorer cam are both better choices and the custom is a big waste of money.

BTW, the HO firing order is superior and makes more power. It also more evenly loads the crank.

I'm a big fan of the OEM Ford distributors with an updated TFI on them, but that's just me.


nah, the firing order has no bearing on the power made. But, there are more and better grinds for 1-3 vs 1-5 and the 1-3 grinds tended to get mass air which responds better to hard part changes. I do not recall any apples to apples comparo for either firing order. the only plausible difference ever given was perhaps 20-30 years ago crane claimed that on SP intakes fuel distribution would be better perhaps in the 5-15hp range at the extreme. You do not have this issue on your MFI motor

the 1-3 firing order does eliminate the 7-8 crossfire which is a known problem.

There is no 'good' TFI on a ford distributor. There is however, a better and 'best' solution for divorced TFI setups. The Black TFI module of course is incompatible with setups using the gray setup, but you can divorce the gray module and use a blown one to source PIP. Instructions for that are also on the FTE website and is a VERY recommended fix as all fo the TFIs available for purchase today are heat sensitive junk.

 

[QuadDriver]

Originally Posted By: qdeezie
While I'm asking questions about preferences and such, any preference on piston rings? I'm down to Perfect Circle and Hastings. I'm leaning more so towards Hastings, but in the past as I've mentioned as long as it's Moly that's all I'm looking for.

Thoughts?


are you stroking this? are you increasing the operating range with a 4.10 axle as well?

stock ring contructions will be fine - since the trucks run more RPM everyday than the cars, you want to guarde against breakaage AND you dont want the short stroke and associated thrust side angles eating up the bore. harder rings would be a bad idea.

I dunno if you got an answer, I have not seen the whole thread but you only change the dist gear if you goto a billet cam. do NOT change the dist gear if you run a tappet cam.

from reading it looks as if you are going for a non-stock rebuild. You are going to have to get a compatible mass air setup for an E4OD, or TWEEC(er) the ECM.

You should be asking this at the FTE website. NEarly everyone of us there has done this change and a lot of help is in member files.

 

[QuadDriver]

oh, to answer the OP.

I stock clevites and FMs in std and .001 for ford and chevies.

without the use of purpose build cranks with perhaps filleted journals, either is fine and service well.

just how abused was this 302 before you got it? have you checked the cylinder taper yet to make sure the 5.0 block is even servicable? if not, find any "XXX" casting (it literally has 3 X's on it), it will be exact fit and be roller compatible.

 

[qdeezie]

I will be pulling the engine and breaking it down this upcoming weekend. At this point, I'll be able to report back the condition.

If everything checks out to be in reusable condition, it will be a stock re-ring job with the lone exception of upgrading to a roller cam with the 1-5 firing order.

The roller cam I'm using has the same specs and firing order as the stock flat tappet cam. It's a base 5.0 Non-HO roller cam. My reason for this is I don't have any desire to change electrical components that are working fine.

As far as the condition of the engine, honestly I am expecting the absolute worst. The engine ran very smooth (to the point people complimented it out of the blue) and didn't consume any oil, but the previous owner never changed the oil and the engine had gallons of hard, caked sludge. I took the oil pan, valve covers, intake and timing cover off after purchasing it and removed the sludge and restore my oil pressure to the point to where it was reliable.

I'll be letting the machine shop inspect the block and I'm 99.9999% sure at the bare mininum the crank will need to be reground to .010.

I'm wishfully thinking and seriously hoping that the cylinder walls are not scored.

My emphasis on this rebuild is spotlessly clean surfaces and correct tolerances, which in turn will give me consistent oil pressure and no further "what ifs" in the back of my mind every time I drive it.

I did some research on the difference between the 1-3 and 1-5 firing order and it seems as if it points to a reduced load on the #1 main bearing in performance applications and also when the 351W was designed, Ford couldn't get it to run right with the 1-5 firing order, so the 1-3 firing order was developed. Also Ford used the 351W cam in the 302 marine engines and transferred it to the Mustang.

So, in a nutshell the difference in firing order seems to be cost savings and reducing #1 main bearing load in performance applications.

 

[qdeezie]

Also, I don't know if I mentioned it earlier, but I read that if an HO firing order crankshaft is employed, the wiring order on the injectors can be changed to eliminate the need to change the ECM. It makes sense, but whether or not that is true, I don't know.

 

[QuadDriver]

Originally Posted By: qdeezie
Also, I don't know if I mentioned it earlier, but I read that if an HO firing order crankshaft is employed, the wiring order on the injectors can be changed to eliminate the need to change the ECM. It makes sense, but whether or not that is true, I don't know.


if you had a SFI engine that would be true. the problem with the bank firing wiring is that 4 cylinders worth of injector wiring are bundled at the plug on the firewall.

you can get around this with a soldering iron (there are instructions on the website as well) or a SFI kit will contain what they call and 'overlay harness' - which is what I use.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: QuadDriver

The 1990 truck 5.0 has the exact same internal parts as the GT of the same year, heads ,cam crank, pistons whatever.


What exactly is a "GT"? Are you making reference to the 302HO? If so, it was put in a heck of a lot more vehicles than the Mustang GT including but not limited to the Mustang LX, Lincoln Mark VII, and Thunderbird.

Oh, and no, it didn't. It had the same block, crank, rods and heads.

The pistons were different, the camshaft was different, as was the oil pan, pick-up....etc.

I actually documented the swap of an '88 302HO into a 1990 F-150 4x4 on this site a few years ago. I've done it.

I also put a 302HO into an '88 F-250 that originally had the 300 I6.

Quote:

The truck is bank firing and has 6 mistimed injectors.

Switching to the 351/marine firing order will STILL have 6 mistimed injectors.


Yes, I think the OP is aware of the caveats of bank-fire injection.

Quote:
You can goto a SFI setup, it requires the injector overlay harness, or replace the engine harness with one from a GT - however, the intake on the GT/crown vic is positioned differently and you may have trouble reaching some of the plugs.


Yeah, the Mustang harness does not fit correctly, I know, because I've done this swap, lol

It needs a lot of work to fit correctly, which is why I ended up using one from a Lincoln Town Car, as it had enough wire length to fit the engine bay whilst retaining the stock ECM mounting location. The Mustang ECM is in the passenger-side kick-panel, while the Truck and Panther ones are to the side of the dash on the drivers side.

Quote:
Any change to the engine interneals on the speed density setup will require reprogramming the ECU unless you switch to mass air.


Wrong.

Any changes that change the VACUUM that the MAP sensor reads (IE, changing to a more aggressive camshaft that Ford didn't use) will cause driveability issues with the SD ECM. However, you can use the HO camshaft without issues with the truck ECM.

Quote:
There are many caveats in hereand ford has sold many parts to cover them.

If you rebuild the engine stock, then change nothing. IF you add better or worked heads, a letter roller camshaft or a performance cam, you are going to need the reprogram or mass air.


The letter camshafts are junk. There are much better grinds from any of the majors that have vastly superior modern split pattern profiles, will retain better driveability and fuel economy and make a LOT more sense for a TRUCK. However, the HO camshaft is usually next to free and is a decent upgrade over the truck bumpstick, while working fine with all the factory components.

There ARE other "SD Friendly" roller grinds from manufacturers like Crower (I can dig up the part # if the OP is interested) that will work with what he has, but using a cam like that with stock heads/intake is simply a waste of money.

Quote:
If you do not want the T50 or T51 truck setups from ford, then there are a select few mustang ECMs you can use. On the ford truck enthusiast website we detail the changes in many many threads

Do not, repeat do NOT use a mustang ECM without changing the injector harness or rewiring it, it is joined at the plug, you will screw fuel timning way up.

oooo, I just read your sig, you have the e40d, that adds another wrinkle, the mustang never had an e40d and the AODE or 4R70W are not compatible. so you will need to find a lightning ecm and convert the engine to 1-3 instead of 1-5 firing order and a lot more work. or piggy back 2 ecms, one for the engine, one for the transmission (insturctions for that are also on the FTE website)


Or just retain his current ECM, deal with the batch fire,use an SD friendly camshaft and save himself a pile of work......

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: QuadDriver
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
I have a custom grind from Jay Allen. For your application, considering how stock the rest of the engine is, assuming stock heads and intake, the HO or Explorer cam are both better choices and the custom is a big waste of money.

BTW, the HO firing order is superior and makes more power. It also more evenly loads the crank.

I'm a big fan of the OEM Ford distributors with an updated TFI on them, but that's just me.


nah, the firing order has no bearing on the power made. But, there are more and better grinds for 1-3 vs 1-5 and the 1-3 grinds tended to get mass air which responds better to hard part changes. I do not recall any apples to apples comparo for either firing order. the only plausible difference ever given was perhaps 20-30 years ago crane claimed that on SP intakes fuel distribution would be better perhaps in the 5-15hp range at the extreme. You do not have this issue on your MFI motor

the 1-3 firing order does eliminate the 7-8 crossfire which is a known problem.

There is no 'good' TFI on a ford distributor. There is however, a better and 'best' solution for divorced TFI setups. The Black TFI module of course is incompatible with setups using the gray setup, but you can divorce the gray module and use a blown one to source PIP. Instructions for that are also on the FTE website and is a VERY recommended fix as all fo the TFIs available for purchase today are heat sensitive junk.


Ford has numerous part # revisions for the TFI. Using something like Arctic Silver heatsink compound, we've found good TFI life with the OEM Ford modules.

HOWEVER, a lot of the guys like to go to the remote TFI mount (which requires a bit of re-wiring) like was on the 94/95 SN95 cars.

As far as the firing order switch making more power, remember, the "old" 302 firing order is the same cylinder firing order as the SBC. I'm sure you remember the SBC camshafts that swapped two of the cylinders in the firing order and claimed a power increase (I honestly don't remember what they were... not a big SBC guy...). IIRC, this made the firing order much closer to what became the HO firing order.