[raysmust]

I still don't understand why ford racing can't or won't do a controller kit for the earlier application since there are thousands upon thousands of 11-14 coyotes, truck and Mustangs, in salvage yards just waiting to be transplanted into other cars and all could use a harness kit. I don't understand why ford racing would turn their back on so many possible customers. That's not good business.

As to PBH, if they have a kit, it isn't shown on their website, if you have inside info please share it.

As to PA's controller, too pricey, plus I really don't want to have to have two pcm's to control the combo.

Call Power By The Hour directly and talk to Frank. He can tell all about the kit they have.

Ray

 

[Ltngdrvr]

Call Power By The Hour directly and talk to Frank. He can tell all about the kit they have.

Ray

I emailed them, thanks.

 

[loudnslow98gt]

I felt I had to chime in. I'm pretty deep into swapping one into my 99 Mustang that I race in American Iron. I had to modify the tunnel to get the MT82 to work. I agree with Jack that most people would not use this transmission. Since I have to detune the engine to be legal, I think I can get away with it. Other wise a TKO would be a better choice, AND you probably would not have to modify the trans tunnel. The control pack from Ford Performance should get everything running. Luckily the complete engine drop out I got from a salvage yard came with the engine side harness as I learned that the control pack doesn't come with the engine harness. Maximum Motorsports were awesome enough to work with me and I was able to get one of their K members without engine mounts, but I know they are workin on one. I'm sure they will have a much better solution that I came up with. Custom drive shaft, some other odds and ends and your done! Ok, theres more to it than that, but all the parts I believe are out there, and if you have some fabrication abilities, it can be done.

Heres the link to my build with more info.
http://forums.corral.net/forums/member-build-up-projects/2010561-aj-hartmans-99-mustang-american-iron-build-carbon-everything.html

 

[pkstang]

what's the power potential of these motors in stock trim and how high can you spin them?

what's the weak link?

 

[Jack Hidley]

The power limit is the size of the tiny turbos. The ECU has software to keep them from being over revved. To make much more power, the engine needs larger turbos. In a Mustang this is going to be very, very difficult to package given the location of the frame rails on each side. The turbo max rpm also limits the max engine rpm.

 

[pkstang]

for some reason i thought it was compact compared to the good old 302 but i guess i was wrong

 

[Jack Hidley]

It's short, but this version was designed for a truck, which has a wide engine bay. The turbos are mounted directly to the exhaust manifolds on the side of the engine. This makes the engine wider in the rear, right where the Mustang frame rails are closest together.

The SHO version is for transverse mounting so it has a different block, different turbos, etc.

 

[pkstang]

i'm guessing that most would be fabricating their own turbo headers so would that help?

 

[Jack Hidley]

Nope. The stock exhaust manifolds are tiny and super close to the heads. The turbo bolts right onto back of them. An aftermarket manifold won't make the engine any narrower. It would save some weight, but will hurt engine efficiency since it will leak heat out before the turbo.

 

[boostdcoupe]

The SHO version is for transverse mounting so it has a different block, different turbos, etc.

I guess the explorer sport version is the same, isnt it?

 

[B0jangles]

The SHO version is for transverse mounting so it has a different block, different turbos, etc.

I guess the explorer sport version is the same, isnt it?

If they're similar output, probably close. F150 coyote is different intake cam from the Mustang and not much else. But the main difference Hidley pointed out between f150 and taurus evoboost is transverse vs longitudinal. Ford had different packaging concerns.

There's clear torque differences, not sure if pistons or other major stuff is different. Where's our Ford techs and junkyard regulars?

Since wikipedia is such a reputable source:

 

[Goody_Seven]

Difference is turbos. Taurus and Explorer have GT15s and F150 has slightly smaller K03s

 

[pkstang]

also seems that the 4 banger might be worth considering in some applications over the 3.5

 

[B0jangles]

also seems that the 4 banger might be worth considering in some applications over the 3.5

+1

A guy who writes for road and track has been working on his own for a while now. His is a Focus ST ecoboost so its a little different, but a lot of Mazda parts bolt up. I'm not sure if the new turbo 4 shares that architecture. But MM is playing with a 4 cylinder ecoboost K member that's mocked up in his fox.

http://www.autoblog.com/tag/ugly+horse/

With the old SVO and Ford's IMSA work with 900hp four-bangers, a four cylinder fox with an angry force fed powerband is something I'd love to have and I'd love to see. 300hp is great in a balanced, 2800lb coupe

 

[P63]

OK, so let's say I stumble across a 2015 V6 ecoboost at the junkyard.

I'd get the control pack from LRS or Ford, and I think Sean Hyland has motor mounts that will shoehorn the motor onto my MM K-member (5.0 in a 95).

What bellhousing will interface the block to my stock T5?


(I'll have to drive sedately as it is my daily driver.)

 

[Jack Hidley]

I do not think any bell housing will bolt the 3.5l Ecoboost to a T5. Given that the Ecoboost will make nearly 500lbs-ft of torque with just dual exhaust, I think the T5 would last seconds in 3rd gear.

The RM-8086 bell housing bolts in to a TKO600 style transmission (TKO, 3550, etc). The RM-8087 works for a T56.

 

[P63]

Which MM K-member do I need for a 95?
Do you have any remote idea whether a STB would fit, or whether I need one? (Daily Driver)


Will an ecoboost V6 bolt in to a 98 4.6 k-member?

 

[Jack Hidley]

MMKM-2.1.

There are no engine mounts that I'm aware of that will even be close to working.

I would order the k-member without the engine mount structure on it, and without the diagonal brace tubes in the side windows. Purchase some of the aluminum engine mount brackets from a 2011-14 V6 Mustang. These will bolt directly onto the Ecoboost 3.5l V6. Then bolt any 2005-14 engine mounts (hyra, poly, solid, etc) onto the aluminum brackets. Position the engine in the car, then build support structure from the k-member to the engine mounts. This will be fairly simple since the mounts will end up just above the 1" x 2" FCA tab tubes on the k-member. I've modeled all of this and it fits quite well, but I don't think it is going to get built at this point.

 

[Nutzz]

Someone has to make this swap possible. This will be a huge success to ford period. Everybody wants to swap the Eco boost. When I first bought my 2011 F150 Eco, that was one of the first things my friends and I talked about. Future of drag racing could be lead with a 6 cyl turbo truck engine. Yes I know the GN had one, but FORDs is way better. My friend has worked a swap and turbo using the mustangs 6cyl. On computer it made great power. I hope to see someone racing one soon. Also for the LS swap.. it has taken over. It is not small...ever track has a stupid Chevy junk swap. The old 5.0 can not compete because if the weak block. And aftermarket 5.0 cost large amount of cash compared to a LS swap. These are not going away soon. I can not wait to see some normal guy get this swap done. good luck fellas

 

[P63]

Someone has to make this swap possible. This will be a huge success to ford period.

x2,
... and don't forget, ecoboost is far less harm to the environment than the coyote, and magnitudes better than our windsors, so to help save the planet, I plan on an ecoboost swap.

Strictly to save the planet, of course. :evil: