Are all of the 4.6L Ford V-8's basically the same? Specifically,
could I swap out a blown 98 F-150 4.6L Triton V-8 with an engine out
of say a Lincoln or Mustang 4.6L? I know I would probably have to
swap out headers, intake, etc, but are all of the 4.6 engine/head
assemblies the same?

Well, the problem is, to start with, is there are 4 different 4.6L V-8
engines that might be in your truck. Granted, one is the CNG version which
is unlikely. Two plants, one plant made two versions of the gasoline V-8.

So, no, they are not all the same. If your engine is VIN code W, it was
made at the Romeo plant, not Windsor. Silly isn't it. VIN code 6 is the
Windsor engine. There are differences in the truck vs. car engines,
different emissions, power bands, etc., so you will need a 1997 or 1998
truck engine to replace the Romeo. For the Windsor, you will need to know
if the flywheel is bolted up with 6 or 8 bolts, but also will be a 1997 or
1998 truck engine only. There were changes to the 1999 & up, the engines
were unique almost every year in one way or another with calibrations,
PI(Product Iimprovement), and so forth. The Romeo survives after 2000.
Things get really crazy with truck engines in 2002 with 7 versions of the
5.4L, and a mid-year change to the Romeo 4.6L.

The Windsor/Cleveland/Boss engines and the 335 engines were so much easier
to keep track of...

Rob
*
*
*



"popof1010" <popof1010 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Thanks for the info. Mine is the VIN code W. I guess we will be
looking for a 4.6L out of a 97 or 98 truck specifically.



"Trainfan1" <LMSEARING (AT) usdatanet (DOT) net> wrote

The vin number is 1ftrx18lx2na09544. Does this give the proper engine?
When headers are installed what can a vechile increase in gas mileage?

I wouldn't be counting on much of an increase in mileage. Fuel mixtures are
closely controlled by the PCM by reading exhaust gas oxygen content.

What are you currently getting for fuel mileage.... and, please, try to keep
everything regarding this subject in one thread to avoid any possible
confusion.


"iola" <charzea (AT) peoplepc (DOT) com> wrote

"Jim Warman" <mechanic (AT) telusplanet (DOT) net> wrote:

Sounds to me like some kid wants to put headers on and needs an excuse.

Increase in HP is less than 5% on the up side... usually less. And that
only occurs in the higher rpm's.
Radical headers that will give low RPM gains cost a LOT, and often screw
up the fuel management system.
For 'seat of pants kick', paint the manifolds with high-temp and pretend
it's something that makes it run better... same result. You know.. like
when you wash and detail the truck.
Increase in economy is negligible. You'd do far better in looking for
fuels that have least ethanol in them,
Economic Payback, looking optimistically, would occur at just about the
time the truck is hauled off to the crusher.

Take a tip from a geezer that was THERE in the early sixties when Headers
first became something you could buy instead of make. Car manufacturers
used to just bolt on exhaust components that would physically fit without
much regard to how they actually performed. ( See 59 Pontiac Bonneville)

That has not been the case for years. Exhaust tuning is a good way for
manufacturers to get a fraction of a gallon in EPA mileage.. because it's
relatively CHEAP!

- - - -- - - - - -- - -
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

"Jim Warman" <mechanic (AT) telusplanet (DOT) net> wrote:

Headers going to Supernews

--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Starting to sound more like a used car lot.... one with a rather eclectic
selection of "cream puffs" (I've been itching to use that word in a sentence
for years...."eclectic" - has kind of a yuppy bastuhd ring to it, no?).

Once the fleet started "growing", I started wondering if "iola" wasn't
related to MustangGurrrlll.... Is there a full moon going on????