Printable View
Hey guys, has anyone run in to water pumper pulley aliment issues with the 5.0 fuel injected motor swap?? I need to find a 5.5" reverse rotation pump for my swap. The stock 5.0 pump is 5.75" and the old standard rotation pump is 5.5" but is "standard rotation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Steve:sawzall:
If you are using the 4 bolt balancer it should line up with the stock 5.0l pump. the early 28oz 3 bolt balancers use the shorter water pump. CRF racing and March make conversion pullies.
I have the CRF pulleys, my problem lies in that I am using an early timing chain cover with a dip stick in it. The early water pumps are standard rotation with a 5.5" base to flange measurement, and the later model reverse rotation pumps have a 5.75" base to flange measurement.
I have 2 choices I think.
1: space out the crank pulley .5" as well as the Alt. and P/S.
2: switch back to the late model timing cover and figure out a way to get a dipstick mounted.
The reason for the timing cover swap is the late model injected motor had a rear sump type pan with a block mount dip stick. Switching to the front sump pan rendered the block dip stick useless. I guess I could put the late model timing cover back on and go without a dipstick? I would just have to change the oil often to make sure it is full??
I think you'll find that the timing covers are the same thickness.Quote:
Originally Posted by doghows
Another thought is to find a timing cover and pump and all the pulleys from a V8 Explorer. They had a super low profile which would give you pleny of room for an electric fan.
Did the explorer have a dipstick in the cover? I have plenty of room for a fan I am just in the dilemma about dipstick access??
I found a conversion a guy did on a mustang and he drilled his late model cover for a dipstick.? I will look at mine and see if it have that same boss as his did. That would solve it all. (fingers crossed).
Thanks for the input guys, all information is good information.[thumb]
I've not seen a falcon with plenty of fan space.
The Explorer cover does not have a dipstick boss. Those engines had the dipstick in the rear sump. It could be drilled.
I don't think the cover thickness varies with or without the dipstick. They put the dipstick in the front if you had a front sump pan and in the block or pan if a rear sump (fox body car). The balancer always wants to tighten to the stop (the step) on the crank, the cover has no bearing on this. The thickness variations are all on the parts external.
It's good to know the Exploder had the shortest of them all. Will be worth scouting next time in the Pick-n-Pull.
Now if I could only figure out a serpentine system for a 200-6.
I think my problem lies with the pump. The later model reverse rotation ones are 5.75" and the early standard rotation are 5.5" Amazing what a 1/4 inch means??? (insert your own nasty comment here):)
There is a difference in pump length for the pre-68 and post-68 pumps. When Ford changed to the four bolt damper the pump length changed. I'm pretty sure that the reverse rotation pump is the same overall length as the post-68 pump (water inlet on drivers side).
If you have a four bolt damper and a reverse rotation pump, you should be set. You would just need the right pulleys. I would look at your pulleys if it's not lining up. You may need a spacer behind the crank pulley. Call the vendor that makes your pulley set to make sure you have the right stuff.
The Explorer setup was also used on the 94-95 5.0 Mustang. The pump sits inside the match timing cover. There is no pump backing plate. There is no fuel pump boss and the eccentric won't fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luva65wagon
That too is good to know.Quote:
Pbrown said: The Explorer setup was also used on the 94-95 5.0 Mustang. The pump sits inside the match timing cover. There is no pump backing plate. There is no fuel pump boss and the eccentric won't fit.
When I swapped the motor from a 79 LTD station wagon (actually the entire chassis) I retained the serpentine system which had the reverse pump. So I know it went way back to the 70's.
I don't know how many water pump heights there are - but I have to believe there are more than just one on the reverse pump.
Steve - just take a drive to your parts house and have him start pulling them off the shelf. See what height variations you see.
Ahhh. Yes, torture the counter staff. I love going in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luva65wagon
{STEVE} "Say there, I need a water pump"
{COUNTER GUY} "Sure... What year make and model?"
{STEVE} - Start singing a certain Johny Cash song.
:ROTFLMAO:
There was a time, I know, you could do this. I know, I'm still old fashioned that way. Back when we had ... BOOKS.
Also, I worked 3 years as a parts guy right out of high school. We could find ANYTHING you needed. And were happy to do so. Most guys today look at you and say, "it doesn't show anything on my computer screen."
I hear you. I had them pull several off the shelf and the old years are shorter and all the later ones were longer.
I have been told to space out the crank pulley and so forth but that puts me about 3/4" away from the radiator with the fan.
I will have to stare at it some more tonight.
The 4 bolt damper on the later engines sits out 1/4" farther to line up with the water pumps that use the drivers side outlet. on the early engines that have the 3 bolt damper they use a shorter water pump with the passenger outlet. You can mix and match but will need a conversion pulley that both CRF and March make. What set up are you trying to use? And the timing cover will not change this.
Steve, I have a 93 block with a early timing cover, front sump pan, and the pump is a summit# mil16330, and I cut about a inch out of the crank pully and welded it , also I will post a alum. 4 bolt pully when I find the number...jh:rocker:
I think this is the one I need [ and maybe you ] to replace the one I shortened..summit # zoops-60121....jh:shift:
3/4" radiator clearance sounds about right. That's what I had when I was running the Edelbrock water pump. I'm running a Ford Racing short pump on mine now. The photo shows the difference between the standard post-68 pump and the Ford Racing pump.
http://www.rainierfalcons.com/galler...Water_Pump.JPG
I have approximately 3/4" fan clearance using a stock water pump, stock fan and a 4-row radiator, but have doubts if that would be adequate if a flex-fan were used.
I was just looking through the Ford Racing catalog. They offer the 94-95 reverse rotation pump as a kit with timing cover. The part number is M-8501-A50. You would need to mod your pan for a dipstick or drill the timing cover.
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/FMS-M-8501-A50/
The standard rotation V-belt shorty pump like mine is part number M-8501-E351S. It fits a standard timing cover. It's not as cool as a serpentime setup but is provides good fan clearance.
http://www.summitracing.com/search/?...01-E351S&dds=1
OK problem solved. Here is what I found after searching the internet and all your help here.
The early timing chain cover IS thicker than the late model one. The early cover measures: 2.5" front to back and the late model one is 2.25" front to back. So what I found is that there are 2 different types of late model covers. One of them has the boss for a fuel pump and the dipstick but they were never drilled and or cut out. That is the one I had. So solution was to drill out the boss for the dip stick and tap in the stick from the early model cover. Viola problem solved and I can use the stock reverse rotation water pump.
I will take some pics when I blow everything apart and get it all ready to go back together so you can see the comparison. Needless to say I was very happy when I got home and found I had the cover I needed. I actually found the write up on this from a guys post on a 5.0 into a 65 mustang. Gotta love the internet!!
Thanks for all your help and input I am sure there are more people than me running into this issue. [thumb]:BEER:
How early is your timing cover? I have them in my shop from 1965-1974 and all measure the same. never heard of one that was 2.5" Very interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by doghows
Timing cover is from a 1965 289, that is the thicker one. The other that I will use is from a 1988 EFI 302.
The water pump for the 1965 motor is 2.5" and the pump for the 1988 EFI is 2.75".
So if I use the early cover and the late pump I am .25" out too far or is it .50"? I am going to try and pull it all apart tonight and lay it all out on the bench and measure it all and take a few pics.
Should be all back to the late model 1988 stuff. Just has a hole for the dip stick in the cover now.[thumb]
Here are the two covers. The silver one is the late model one and the blue is the early one.
Need to button up the pump and pulleys on the engine and I will put some pics of that when it is done. Also put pics of the covers with the pump on them to show difference in height.
Thanks for the pics, I would not have believed it without seeing it. I have 2 1965 covers and 1 1969 and 1 1974 cover and all measure 2 1/4". Does anybody else have a cover like that?
I have a 68 and it's 2.25, I also have a 64-289 and it's close to 2.5 ....jh:WHATTHE:
Go figure?? I am just glad my problem is solved. Now to finish putting the engine together and get it fired up. Then time to paint.... The light is getting brighter!!
Can't see from the pictures - but was the timing cover seal height also different heights too - or just the water pump portion? My guess is, as Patrick said, no fuel pump eccentric (or fuel pump mount) on the thinner one?
Learn sumpin' new every day.
If I remember they were the same. And the shorter cover has the fuel pump boss (not cut out) and the dip stick boss (not drilled out).
It is really stupid how it all works. There is about .5 inch difference in the cover height. And about a .25" difference in the pumps. Soo I used the shorter cover with the taller pump and it all lined up perfectly????
It was like I lost .5" with the cover and gained .25" with the pump thus moving it all back .25 to line it all up.:confused: