Close



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1

    Default Ford 255 V8 Identification???

    I'm wondering if anyone can tell me about the older Ford 255 V8 and how to identify one? I'm referring to the short lived 'fake' 302 that Ford brought out in the late seventies. Are there any visual cues that readily show it as being different from the 302?

    Also, I was under the impression that the 255 was a 'de-stroked' 302 but I've read that it was actually small bore 302. Can someone set me straight on this? What are the obvious differences between the 255 and the 302???
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  2. #2
    FEP Super Member mustangxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Snohomish, Wa
    Posts
    4,021

    Default

    The only externally visible cue was the use of an open runner intake manifold with a stamped steel lifter valley cover attached to its underside
    Bore is 3.68"

    This info is from Wikipedia so I don't know how accurate it really is.
    Dave

    If common sense was common wouldn't it just be sense?

    1983 Capri L T top 5.0 efi aod
    1983 Capri RS Turbo
    1981 Black Magic 400 c6
    93 F-250 351 5sp 4x4

  3. #3
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    13,871

    Default

    This is the information I have, but I am not 100% of this as I have never seen a 255 in person.

    "The only externally visible cue was the use of an open runner intake manifold with a stamped steel lifter valley cover attached to its underside, giving the appearance of previous generation engines, such as the Y-Block and the MEL."

    If the intake is off "Cylinder heads used smaller combustion chambers and smaller valves and the intake ports were ovals whereas the others were rectangular."

    Bottom line is unless you want to be different or you are doing an original restoration, you are better off to ditch the 255 and use a 302 instead as you will have better parts availability and more power.

    Best of Luck!

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  4. #4
    FEP Super Member Travis T's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    China Grove, North Carolina
    Posts
    5,267

    Default

    Blainer just did a rebuild thread on his 82 GT 255 not long ago, it had some good information.
    1984 Mustang GT owned since 1991 (first car). Mercury Mountaineer GT-40P engine, some suspension mods, currently undergoing a five lug SN95 brake upgrade and more suspension mods. Some minor body and interior mods have been done as well.

    2004 GT convertible, 2001 Taurus LX, 1994 F150, 1950 F-1 Ford Pickup

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    "The only externally visible cue was the use of an open runner intake manifold with a stamped steel lifter valley cover attached to its underside, giving the appearance of previous generation engines, such as the Y-Block and the MEL."
    Indeed. That's what I'm looking at here. I've been dumping a bunch time, money and effort into a car that I 'thought' had a 302. The engine seemed to be down on power but I figured that it was maybe just carburation. If the 302 never had the open-runner type intake then what I've got is a 255.

    This does not exactly make my day...
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  6. #6

    Default

    The 255 that is in wagon I bought for parts has a intake that looks unlike any 302 factory intake I've seems. Can get you pictures if that helps.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whyidontknow View Post
    The 255 that is in wagon I bought for parts has a intake that looks unlike any 302 factory intake I've seems. Can get you pictures if that helps.
    Here are some pics. It is as wraithracing described in post #3. I called it a 'skeletonized' intake. When I first acquired the car, I figured that it was just a 'weird' 302 intake. I had never seen a 255 before so I didn't know what to look for anyway.

    This all came to light when I bought a new fuel pump for an 1982 302 thinking that that's what I had. When the pump came in, I realized that it was different than the fuel pump currently installed on my engine. My parts jobber dug a little deeper into his computer and discovered that the fuel pump on my engine was for an 1982 255.

    So it now seems that what I actually have is a 255...

    Name:  001.jpg
Views: 3573
Size:  124.0 KB

    Name:  002.jpg
Views: 3572
Size:  120.9 KB

    Name:  003.jpg
Views: 3543
Size:  151.4 KB
    Last edited by Autolite; 04-12-2015 at 05:16 PM.
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    Bottom line is unless you want to be different or you are doing an original restoration, you are better off to ditch the 255 and use a 302 instead as you will have better parts availability and more power.
    The 255 seems to be running okay for now so I'm just going to leave it in. This isn't a restoration, I just want a daily driver that runs reliably. I have about 90% of the parts I need to cobble together a really nice 302 but I just don't have the time nor the initiative for it, at least not this year.

    I'm trying to look on the bright side of things right now. With the 255 V8 I'll never have to worry about tearing up a clutch, a transmission or a differential and I certainly won't have to be concerned about anybody trying to steal the engine...
    Last edited by Autolite; 04-12-2015 at 05:33 PM.
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  9. #9
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    Everything about the anatomy of the 4.2 liter.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...50-255ci-Heads

    For about 1000 dollars in used parts, your time and labor, you can out do the hassles of fitting a used 215 hp roller cammed Explorer GT40P Mountainer engine.


    You can EASILY get a 35% power boost to 160 hp, and up to 132 mph out of a 255 if you follow the recipe of an ex Ford moto company employee turned journalist.


    1.#8005 4160 Holley 4-bbl with proper Ford TV cable linkage,
    2.Edelbrock SP-2P #3355 4-bbl intake (modified to suit the heads), or a later 5.0 83-85 5.0 4-bbl intake (modified to suit the heads),
    3. A source for a similar to Fords 1982 4-bbl Marine Cam (270/290 split duration cam with 278/283 thou lobe lift).
    4. An early 1982-1984 3.8 AOD with the stock 2350 stall converter (stock 1650 is too tight for a little V,
    5. 3.45:1 Gears and Limited Slip center, old Junked efi turbo 2.3 liter T bird
    6. Proper dual exhaust with headers.


    The full list is on this page,

    http://www.ascmclarencoupe.com/Liter...Oct81_2_04.jpg

    but you only need the bare minmum of 12 or 13 detail items to make it fly.

    We found that actually, the stock 255 heads are a little more spicey than some of the early early 195 to 225 hp 289 HP heads, so although they aint world beaters, with the cam, 4-bbl and gearing, your little 255 will truely get up and bark with another 41 hp.

  10. #10

    Default

    @xctasy

    Thanks, that's encouraging to know that! Still, I think the car will eventually get a 302. I've got a set of 10:1 performance pistons, a long duration cam, a couple of spare blocks, a spare crank shaft and about three spare pairs of heads and two sets of 'short' headers all for a 302. I should really put them to some use some day. If I can just remember where I put everything...
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Travis T View Post
    Blainer just did a rebuild thread on his 82 GT 255 not long ago, it had some good information.
    Can anyone tell me what the Ford factory exhaust system is on an 1982 4.2 litre (255 CI) Mustang? I was on the 'Walker Exhaust' website and they don't even list a system for that model/year. I'm guessing it might be cast iron manifolds with single exhaust but I really have no idea.

    Considering that a factory stock 255 would not breath very well by design anyway, I figure putting a dual 5.0 exhaust system on a 255 V8 would just be a waste of money and effort...
    Current Fox Fleet
    '82 Zephyr GS Two Door 3.3
    '80 Zephyr Sedan 3.3
    '80 Fairmont Sedan 3.3
    '81 Fairmont Sedan 5.0
    '86 Mustang LX 4.2

  12. #12

    Default

    I think you could benefit from dual exhaust - 2-1/2" may be too much but 2" should flow better than the single 2-1/4". If I understand Xctasy right, the 255 heads flow better than the dog excrement DE heads Ford used up to '84.

    A note about 255s, I've found a couple of 255's with the non-holey intake manifold. Same goofy intake port design but looked solid like the 302 intake.
    Proud owner of the one and only Friggin' Futura

  13. #13
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    It's okay to over anaylse and engine you may never touch. Point is, the quarter mile times of an auto AOD 4.2 outscore a 5.0 2-bbl HO 82 engine. Its a 36% Stage I nominal power boost. And a really low restrictiong quad outlet exhaust factored in that, with a special cam. Considering what is said about the AOD on little engines, the above Capri 130 mph road burner tune is a standout example of what the right modifications can do to a boat anchor 255.

    In compartive terms, getting 278 hp, then 309, or 345/352 hp with the common stock 5.0 HO roller, then E or B-303, and then the even smarter, hotter aftermarket cams on a formerly 210 hp 1985 engine in one Car Craft article show that a 36% boost for Stage I is not hard to get on a 5.0 HO engine. But it does require, carb, cam lift improvements, and some exhaust work, so you can't opt out of that if the grocery list requires it. See http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/...d-your-engine/

    Dean_T noted something, that perhaps there were a lot of little changes on the 255. First, the carbs (2150 287 cfm, then the 2700 Variable Venturi, then the MCU computer versions). The single or dual exhast option, the 49 states or Cali spec, and the intake manifold scramble which seams to have mistakes from all the suppliers. Some manifolds for the 255 look like 5.0 2-bbl ones....I thought it was a mistake, but maybee it wasn't.

    Early info that I read from 80's-90's HotRod magazine Tech Pages said there were 255 water gallery changes verses the 302, but I see no evidence of this from the visual comparisons.


    Head flow figures I've used are based on % idealized hp drop for engines with the smaller 2150 carb that was used on the 255 and the non HO 302.

    The Power drop was about 22 average units from the 140 hp 1979. The 115-122 hp rating is a like nominal 18% loss in head flow, from an 18% loss in capacity. That pegs it back to 145 cfm from the normal D8 to E2 V8 head figures from the Stan Weiss site. That's not too bad considering the stupid 244 at lash duration cam. The cam was a real tractor.


    Exhaust work is never a waste on smaller engines, you can't over scavange a 255. Overscavanging is when you go to split duration cams with more exhaust duration, but it sometimes workes negatively on a dyno compared to a mirror image cam. Sometimes, if the exhaust port is already good, and the header and dual pipes are low headloss, exhasut gas flow speed stalls and the 5th stroke of exhaust flow gets negatively screwed up.

    The finger print of over scavanging is when the exhaust gas temparatures go up, and you don't get as good brake specific fuel consumption. Dyno tuners can see this kind of stuff. Since the Cobra Jet and Super Cobra jet engine cam tune (an engine spec on small and big blocks that included split pattern cams with more exhasut overlap than intake) really do work well on those restrictive exhaust engines as all unibody SBF Windsors, 335's and big block FE and 385's were. The 255 exhaust is still hard pressed to get much above 65 % of the intake port flow, so a low loss tail pipe (twin or quad tail pipes and headers) will make a difference.

    On the 255, the whole engine is pretty tame, so exhaust improvements rate as a solid gold improvement in power and torque without lossing out at points in the rev range.

    The 255 is just a basic engine like a Buick Olds Pontiac 215/Rover 3.9/4.2/4.6/Leyland 268...comparitively backward, bad breathing heads with too small pistons but a short stroke with reasonable rod ratio. So you can thrash it without braking anything, or using too much fuel. And they aren't noisey or rough or rumbly like some of the hotter HO 5.0 B or E cam engines.


    Everybody likes the idea of 4.00 to 4.125" bores on Chevy or A3 SVO blocks to unshroud the valves, to little 3.68" bore 255 lookes like un underbored retard like the 3.736"Chev 305, 3.67" 267, or Ford 3.5" 221 and 3.8" 260, but those engines really could take a huge pounding with the right parts. In Class B to Sub C for cars in 250 to 275 cubes sizes, they do pretty good for cost and power. But the 302 versions with 4" and 3"stroke were TRANSAM winners.

  14. #14

    Default

    The 255s also jumped around, in terms of engine balance as well. They started off at 50 ounce, and went to 28 ounce about the same time that the 302 was making the opposite switch, or something hokey like that.

    I'm unaware of any USDM 255s with dual exhaust.
    Last edited by grabbergreen84; 04-15-2015 at 05:03 AM.
    '88 Mustang GT convertible, T5, 3.08:1 gears. 5.0 Explobra Jet: A9L Mass Air conversion, Fenderwell Mac cold air intake, 70mm MAF meter = 4.6 T-Bird/Cougar housing + '95 Mustang F2VF-12B579-A1A sensor, aftermarket 70mm throttle body and spacer, Explorer intakes, GT40P heads with Alex's Parts springs and drilled for thermactor, Crane F3ZE-6529-AB 1.7 "Cobra" roller rockers, Ford Racing P50 headers, Mac H-pipe, Magnaflow catback, Walbro 190 LPH fuel pump, UPR firewall adjuster and quadrant with Ford OEM cable, 3G conversion ('95 Mustang V6), Taurus fan, rolled on Rustoleum gloss white paint...
    Past Four Eyes: Red well optioned '82 GT 5.0, Black T-top '81 Capri Black Magic 3.3L 4 speed, Black T-top '84 Capri RS 5.0 5 speed.Over 200,000 miles driven in Four Eyes, and over 350,000 in Fox Body cars.

  15. #15
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    I seriously doubt there was any extra hp for the Dual outlet tip, as per the last part of the 1982 5.0 GT engine or the Pace Car, they were certainly options on the options list, I think, but not the full true 1986 onwards type. The 79-80 Turbo 4 and 79-Pc and Cobra 80 V8 cars had the same tips...angled down compared to the '82-84GT tips. When the 1982 RS or GT was specified with an automatic transmission V8, the RS or GT got downgraded to the 2.73 or 3.08 axle 4.2 with dual tip exhaust.

    Name:  Ford-Mustang-1980-wallpaper.jpg
Views: 3698
Size:  61.5 KB

    Quote Originally Posted by Boss 429 View Post
    When I bought a oem Exaust system (Cat back) for my 1980 V8 Cobra (same exaust as the 1979 Pace car) in 1982, My dealer had to order it and when it did come in,It was one unit from the Cat to the tips, including muffler, (No heat Sheilds on muffler were included) and the worst part was The DUAL TIPS were NOT CHROME! I called the dealer and They said "No longer available in chrome tips!, This was in late 1982! I did cut off the tips back towards the muffer where they were one pipe, and had them chrome plated, They are on the car to this day, but getting rather tired, I have been looking for a nos 1980 V8 Mustang exaust system for 20 years now.

  16. #16
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    The D code rating differences might have been exhaust related, but since the exhausts were never full duals, it would have been some other aspect. Same with the 81- Boceds (91 or 92 hp, depending on what publication), 82-B codes, just 87 hp, 1 hp less than the 2.3. Nothing to have a 6% difference.

  17. #17

    Default

    The 1980 255's had the valley pan under the Open type manifold, In April of 1981 Ford Changed the 255's to the more traditional "closed" manifold, ( which regular 255 small port intake gaskets) for the rest of the 255's life (1982)

  18. #18
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boss 429 View Post
    The 1980 255's had the valley pan under the Open type manifold, In April of 1981 Ford Changed the 255's to the more traditional "closed" manifold, ( which regular 255 small port intake gaskets) for the rest of the 255's life (1982)
    Your knowledge is very impresive. Thankyou Gregg M. For a man born in a 1951 Crosley, you are a real hotshot...



    Autolite,

    I've head what you've said about exhaust mods, but consider a 100% Jim Croquet special...(badder than old King Kong, Meaner than a Junkyard Dog) a source of only used junk parts by doing a deal with someonein the scap industry. Just asking for old cats is fine, and it may allow you to run a cool as quad system like this for just junk value...


    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    See Car and Drivers October 1981 4.2 Windsor 160 HP Quad Exhast 4-bbl AOD Mercury Capri Exhaust

    Plenty of space if you use the factory hangers for even a quad exhast.




    http://www.ascmclarencoupe.com/Liter...Oct81_2_02.jpg
    http://www.ascmclarencoupe.com/Liter...Oct81_2_04.jpg
    It runs only the left E1AE 5E212-CA and right E1AE 5E214-CA catalyst from, a full size Ford Panther (Crown Victoria/Merucry Marquis) with dual exhaust, ie an HO 1981 351 4-BBL engine with FMX or AOD.

    E1=1981
    A= Full size Ford,
    E is Engine Engineering ( Powertrain and Chassis product Engineering )
    5E212-CA left catalyst
    5E214-CA right catalyst

    Any cataylst will have the CARB EO number FIRST, but then the year, then the 5E212-CA or 5E214-CA.

    I'd look for some used Panther frame Crown Victoria or Grand Marquis Police Interceptor or Ford GT 5.0 Mustang E6 cats, and do the same.

    Idealy, the EO numbers and third and forth digits should be Mustang ZE

    E6-ZE 5E212CA/ E6-ZE 5E214-CA with the same EO number would keep the exhaust nazis off your back, even with an early 81 4.2 engine...

  19. #19

    Default

    I have a 255 in my 1981 Mercury villager. Its a c4 car with a 2.26 geared rear end. It'll cruise 80mph all day long. So far I've gotten a best of about 23mpg out of a tank of fuel, all highway.
    I've got an open air cleaner and a set of shorty headers, off road h, flowmaster 3 chambers, all 2 1/2" out tailpipes. Sounds way stouter than it is. Slow as dirt but a fun car.
    Last edited by Jimbo302; 09-13-2015 at 02:24 PM.

  20. #20
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    Man, did Ford do some rapid scrambling with that engine!. It went through other changes on the Long wheelbase Fox luxo barges, and Panthers as well.

    In 1980, it was rated at 118 hp @ 3800 and 193 lb-ft @ 2200 with a higher 8.8:1 compression ratio and the 287 cfm 1.01 2150 2bbl carb
    For 1981, it lost 3 hp to 115 @ 3400, but gained 2 lb-ft to 195 @ 1600 with a 0.6 point lower 8.2:1 compression ratio and single plane intake.

    The induction on Fox Mustangs and Capris remained Motorcraft 2150 2bbl carb for 1982, but lost another 4 hp to 111 @ 3400, and 1 lb-ft to 194 @ 1600 , still with 8.2:1 compression.

    On long wheel base 82 Foxes, it came with MCU, Variable Venturi carb, and the AOD option, and it was given other power ratings. Highest overall top gear was the 2.26 axle in small Foxes, but the large Panthers and long wheel base Foxes got 3.08 axle gears and 0.67:1 top gears for a moon shoot 2.06:1 in over drive fourth.

    The 'D' vin code 4.2 intakes of each are swiss cheezed, and the engines are always later Ford blue, not early Ford blue, nor Ford gray as used on 1983 to 1992, nor plain metal unpainted as per the post 93 onwards Windsor ohv 5.0 engines.

    Lookes like the 4.2 engine engine above has been rattle can colored black.



    In the Panther and long wheelbase Fox Tbirds and Cougar XR7's, the 4.2 has the AOD trans too. The 4.2 is normally AOD is always equiped with the 164 teeth flexplate and 28 Oz flexplate, but the truck C4 and lockup clutch C5 was used as well.


    Sadly, the Tremec 140 5speed, SROD 4 speed, T4 Borg Warner and T5 weren't options.

  21. #21

    Default

    In the Capri/Mustang, the 4.2 came with a C4 in 1980 and 1981, and a C5 in 1982. I would have to check the database for other Foxes.
    Axle Tag Decoder
    Buck Tag Decoder
    Door Tag Decoder
    Owner Card Decoder
    Transmission Tag Decoder
    VIN Decoder

    FEP Registries: Black Magic & Crimson Cat / Cobra / Dominator / G.T.350 / LTD LX/Police & Marquis LTS / M81 / Pace Car / Predator / Saleen / Turbo GT & Turbo RS / Twister II

    Wanted (Dead or Alive): VINs, door tags, buck tags, build sheets, window stickers, owner cards, transmission tags, axle tags

  22. #22
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FoxChassis View Post
    In the Capri/Mustang, the 4.2 came with a C4 in 1980 and 1981, and a C5 in 1982. I would have to check the database for other Foxes.
    Howdy. I'm tacking down a block for a project.


    Still on the 255. I know a few 1980-1982 F-150 trucks got manual SROD 4.2 Liters in California.

    Since I'm from the Antipodean area of the Pacific (Australia/New Zealand)

    In Ford Parts Interchange Manual, 1959-1970, By Paul A. Herd, I have all the engine code numbers listed for our imported (US or Canadian Export) Windsor and Cleveland engines.

    For instance, the common 283 or 284 code 1968 model year J VIN e 302 4V engine is the Shelby engine he modified to become the 250 hp Shelby Mustang base model engine, and deTomaso Magusta engine, and the XT Ford Falcon GT 302 engine.

    The the 290 M VIN 351W 4V is the 208 code engine Ford Australia modified with Shelby over the counter cam and intake upgrades to produce the 300 hp GTHO Phase 1 engine, yet it still has a North American import CK 208 code on its rocker cover.

    For the in line sixes in Foxes, I've seen the 204 and 232 code B VIN engines pop up.

    On the 4.2 liter, I see the 854 code for the D VIN engine.

    Question is:

    For 1980 to 1985 Foxes, is any engine code Tag interchange in existence like in Paul A. Herd's interchange manual?

    I see all the 65-72s

    http://fordification.com/tech/engine...s_6572cars.htm

    All the 1973-1979 Ford Car

    All the Lincoln Mercury 73-79 sub codes

    F truck till 1979 codes,1973-1979 Ford Truck Engine Identification Tag Codes

    all the Big Block's
    http://429mustangcougarinfo.50megs.com/decoding.htm

    All the first Octave 65-73 Stangs,

    but Ford reuses the codes from 1980 onwards.

  23. #23

    Default

    I have a bunch of engine codes, for all engine sizes in the Foxes (mostly Capri/Mustang), from collecting engine calibration stickers and build sheets. It would take me a while to pull all of them together and what each code might mean.
    Axle Tag Decoder
    Buck Tag Decoder
    Door Tag Decoder
    Owner Card Decoder
    Transmission Tag Decoder
    VIN Decoder

    FEP Registries: Black Magic & Crimson Cat / Cobra / Dominator / G.T.350 / LTD LX/Police & Marquis LTS / M81 / Pace Car / Predator / Saleen / Turbo GT & Turbo RS / Twister II

    Wanted (Dead or Alive): VINs, door tags, buck tags, build sheets, window stickers, owner cards, transmission tags, axle tags

  24. #24
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,894

    Default

    Thanks Mick. Love your work.

    Down here we have a problem with people trying to pass off stuff. If I get an 81-82 Ford or Lincoln Mercury Fox, I want to know I can get low mount 3.3 engine or the right 255 4.2 liter engine parts. Everything 81 to 82 changed on the 3.3's and 4.2's.

    I am willing to help out $ wise as long as I can get true info.

    As we've seen with the 3.3 liter case 1352 Borg Warner T4,
    the 2.3 liter Tremec T140 5 speeds,
    and all the oddball Jap market and UK/Euro DSO exports,
    the locker 7.5 axles,
    the 2.47 ratio 8.8 axles,
    low and high mount 3.3 liter T, B and X codes,

    etc


    a lot of stuff is not really known.

    Engine tag codes ring fence off all that info, you are just missing a few extra little "snickets" of info to discern what transmissions , engines and carbs went with what engine.

    I'm personally really interested in what a 3.3 liter Thunderbird or XR7 used in 1981. I've seen a low mount 3.3 liter block coded as EO, and those have been used for great performance engines.

    My intentions are to do an 81-82 Sterling or maybee a short wheel base Fox, but I'm not certain what to ask for for an 81-82. I'm specifically looking for a numbers match thing that I can possibly "blow up" but still get replacement parts for. For me, that means low mount 3.3 engines or early 255's. 1980 to 1983 stuff is particularly problematic.

    To race one down here, its got to be a common year of build thing. I can mix and match parts from any engine combo, like put a couple of TO3b turbo's on a 255, and use the same years Borg Warner T5 as a four speed T4 as the gearbox case is the same.


    Since the California 255 4.2 Liter truck ran a manual SROD on the F150, I can make a manual 255 work if I find the right balance 164 tooth flywheel.

    This is mainly an Ak Miller Propane turbo AOD thing, but I might try a T4 non over drive.

  25. #25

    Default

    Cougar/Thunderbird
    1980
    4.2L AJ882BD

    1983
    3.8L DJ520BA (Canada)

    1984
    3.8L EK506AA

    1986
    2.3T 6G976AD

    Fairmont/Zephyr
    1978
    3.3L JB214AA
    5.0L JJ316BB

    1980
    2.3L AG168BA

    Granada
    1981
    3.3L 1J204AA (CA emissions)

    1982
    2.3L CF151AA

    LTD/Marquis
    1983
    3.8L DJ532BA

    1984
    3.8L RF516AC (Canada)
    5.0L EK334AB

    1985
    3.8L 5K502AA
    3.8L LF516AA (Canada)
    3.8L LJ516AB (Canada)
    5.0L 5K334AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L 5K338AB (Police Package)

    Capri/Mustang
    1979
    2.3L KA188BB
    2.3T KF171AB
    2.3T KJ171AC
    2.3T XJ171BA (CA emissions)
    2.8L KK952AC (Canada)
    2.8L KK952AD (export)
    3.3L KA208AA
    5.0L KC326BB
    5.0L KF326BA (Canada)
    5.0L KF327AA
    5.0L KF327BA
    5.0L KF327BA (Canada)
    5.0L KJ304AB (CA emissions)
    5.0L KJ326AA
    5.0L KJ326BB
    5.0L KJ327BA
    5.0L XJ326AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L XJ326BA (CA emissions)

    1980
    2.3L AF187AA
    2.3L AG186BA
    2.3L AJ187AA
    2.3L SK184AA (CA emissions)
    2.3T AK170AD
    2.3T AK171BA
    3.3L AJ205AB
    4.2L AF852DD
    4.2L AF852BB (Canada)

    1981
    2.3L 1F199AA
    3.3L 1J202AA (CA emissions)
    3.3L MB202BA (Canada)
    4.2L BF852AB (Canada)
    4.2L TK852AA (CA emissions)

    1982
    2.3T NF175AA (Canada)
    3.3L CJ222AA
    4.2L CJ856AA (DSO unreadable -- unknown emissions)
    5.0L CF335AB
    5.0L CF335AC
    5.0L CF335AC (Canada)
    5.0L CJ335AB
    5.0L CJ335AC
    5.0L CJ335AC (SSP)
    5.0L UF335AA (CA emissions)

    1983
    2.3L DF156AB
    2.3L DF157BB
    2.3T 3G975BA
    2.3T 3G975BA (CA emissions)
    3.8L DF514AA (CA emissions)
    3.8L DJ524AA
    3.8L DJ514AA
    3.8L DJ514BA
    5.0L DK333AC
    5.0L DK333AC (Canada)
    5.0L DK333AC (CA emissions)
    5.0L DK333AD
    5.0L DK333AD (SSP, CA emissions)
    5.0L DK333CD
    5.0L DK335AB
    5.0L DK335CB
    5.0L WK333AB (CA emissions)
    5.0L WK335AB (CA emissions)

    1984
    2.3T(GT) 4G975AA
    2.3T(GT) 4G975AA (CA emissions)
    2.3T(SVO) 4G975AA
    2.3T(SVO) 4G975AA (CA emissions)
    2.3T(SVO) 4G975AA (high altitude emissions)
    2.3T(SVO) 4G977AA
    2.3T(SVO) 4G977AA (CA emissions)
    2.3T(SVO) 4G977AA (high altitude emissions)
    3.8L EK536BA
    3.8L XK536AA (CA emissions)
    3.8L XK536BA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 EK333AB
    5.0L/T5 EK333AB (SSP)
    5.0L/T5 EK333AC
    5.0L/T5 EK333AC (SSP)
    5.0L/T5 XK333AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 XK333AB (CA emissions)
    5.0L/AOD EK334AB
    5.0L/AOD EK334AB (Canada)
    5.0L/AOD XK334AB (CA emissions)

    1985
    2.3L 5K143AA
    2.3L 5K156AA
    2.3T 5G977AA
    2.3T 5G977BB
    5.0L/T5 FK331AA
    5.0L/T5 FK331BB
    5.0L/T5 FK331BB (SSP)
    5.0L/T5 FK335AA
    5.0L/T5 FK335BB
    5.0L/T5 FK335CB
    5.0L/T5 SK335AA (Canada)
    5.0L/T5 YK335BB (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 YK341AB (CA emissions)
    5.0L/AOD 5K340AA (DSO missing from build sheet -- unknown emissions)
    5.0L/AOD FK340BB
    5.0L/AOD FK340CB
    5.0L/AOD FK340CB (SSP)
    5.0L/AOD FK348BB
    5.0L/AOD YK340AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/AOD YK340BB (CA emissions)

    1986
    2.3L 6K143AC
    2.3L 6K156AB
    2.3T 6G977AA
    2.3T 6G977AA (CA emissions)
    3.8L 6K536AB
    5.0L/T5 6K331AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 6K331BA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 6K335AA
    5.0L/T5 6K335BA
    5.0L/T5 6K335BA (SSP)
    5.0L/T5 6K335CA
    5.0L/T5 6K335CA (Canada)
    5.0L/T5 6K335CA (SSP)
    5.0L/T5 6K337AA
    5.0L/T5 TK335AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 TK337AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/T5 ZK337AA
    5.0L/T5 ZK341AA
    5.0L/T5 ZK341BA
    5.0L/T5 ZK341CA
    5.0L/T5 ZK341BA (high altitude emissions)
    5.0L/AOD FK340BB
    5.0L/AOD 6K340AA
    5.0L/AOD 6K340AA (SSP)
    5.0L/AOD 6K340BA
    5.0L/AOD 6K340CA
    5.0L/AOD 6K344AA
    5.0L/AOD TK342AA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/AOD TK342BA
    5.0L/AOD TK342BA (CA emissions)
    5.0L/AOD ZK342BA
    5.0L/AOD ZK342CA

    1987
    5.0L/T5 7K335AA
    5.0L/T5 UK341AA (CA emissions)

    1989
    5.0L/T5 9K337AA

    1990
    5.0/T5 0K337AA

    1993
    5.0L/T5 3K337AA
    5.0L/T5 DK335AA (Cobra)
    Last edited by FoxChassis; 06-30-2020 at 08:06 AM.
    Axle Tag Decoder
    Buck Tag Decoder
    Door Tag Decoder
    Owner Card Decoder
    Transmission Tag Decoder
    VIN Decoder

    FEP Registries: Black Magic & Crimson Cat / Cobra / Dominator / G.T.350 / LTD LX/Police & Marquis LTS / M81 / Pace Car / Predator / Saleen / Turbo GT & Turbo RS / Twister II

    Wanted (Dead or Alive): VINs, door tags, buck tags, build sheets, window stickers, owner cards, transmission tags, axle tags

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •