Switching Engines

Eladio_C · 11-01-2001, 06:15 PM

I have a question, Don't know much about Engines though, I was wondering if its posible to take the motor off a 78 transAm (400) and put it in a 66-67 Mustang???

Gearhead999 · 11-01-2001, 08:08 PM

It is possible to put any engine in any car. It's just how much trouble do you want to go through.

I would say it isn't a good swap. You have to manufacture mounts, wiring, headers, linkage, radiator hook up and transmission.

It would be alot easier to install a Ford product, like a 351W. At least it will bolt in without major modifications.

73 Mustang Boy · 11-01-2001, 08:16 PM

A Pontiac motor will not physicaly fit in a mustang engine compartment it is way to wide. They also use rear sump oil pans that wont clear the front cross member in a mustang. Someone who realy wanted a pontiac motor in a mustang and realy knew what they were dooing might get it to work.

------------------
73 coupe, 351W, GT-40 heads, edlebrock 750, offenhauser intake, .488 lift cam, 2.5 exhaust, 2 chamber flowmasters, blah, blah, blah...

lessheppard · 11-02-2001, 02:19 PM

WHY??? the only way to put that in there is change the front clip to a pontiac clip or nova or camaro and why would you want to mess up the best looking mustang ever built with a pontiac motor when the 428 cobra jet came stock in it.(68-69) - and a 351 windsor the best powerplant anyone ever produced (nascar uses them today) is it just because you dont have a 351 windsor? I CAN HELP YOU THERE contact me I have 7 351 windsors, 2 390,s and 35 302 engines. sell your 400 and get a real engine.

shovelnose · 11-02-2001, 04:28 PM

Also Pontiac motors aren't the greatest power plants out there by design. Take a 454 chev, 455 olds, and a 455 pontiac motors do the same work and the pontiac would come out last.

I have beat my buddies T/A when he had a 400 auto 3.73, then 4.56, then a 455 auto 4.56, then 455 stick 3.73. His car is heavier but I only have a little 302.

I'm all for the ford motor, esp in a ford car. I will be doing a 429 soon and would love to play with a windsor sometime.

------------------
82 Mercury Capri 302, Comp. Cams, Tremec 3550, 3.73's, 12.8@106 N/A
Kevin's Capri
Kevin's Mustang

thunderbolt · 11-02-2001, 09:00 PM

Hey, gonna upset a few people but what the hay, if it floats your boat, do it. I was thinking 454 and 4L80e in my 72 for a while. That being said, seems like a whole lot of work for not much gain. Gonna take lots of fab work.
A 78 TA 400 (stock) probably feels pretty good but it is old technology that can easily be surpassed these days. If it were me I would look at built 351W engines or a 428 if you want to spend lots of money.

PKRWUD · 11-02-2001, 09:53 PM

1978 Trans Am's had both Pontiac 400's and Oldsmobile 403's. The 403's were much more common, and were signified by 6.6 liter tags on the shaker. The 400 shaker stickers said 6.5 liter. Anyway, the 400 would fit, but I doub't the 403 would.

Shovelnose-
My T/A 403 would have beaten you (521hp NOS injected). ;!)~

Take care,
-Chris

------------------
Retired Moderator
MustangNet

My site: Peckerwoods Pit Stop

My teams site: Jim Porter Racing

RACECAR spelled backwards is RACECAR

HEY !!! Are you ASE Certified ??? If you are, ask me about iATN.

Unit 5302 · 11-02-2001, 10:40 PM

I've never been all that riled up by the 6.6L. My 1977 302 powered Mustang II would run neck and neck with the ones around here. Well, till about 100mph anyway. That's terrible. heh.

shovelnose · 11-04-2001, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PKRWUD:

Shovelnose-
My T/A 403 would have beaten you (521hp NOS injected). ;!)~

Take care,
-Chris

Probably. I didn't say you can't make them go. It just seems for the money it's not the best option.

I knew someone would pipe up for the pontiac.

John Force would beat us all!

------------------
82 Mercury Capri 302, Comp. Cams, Tremec 3550, 3.73's, 12.8@106 N/A
Kevin's Capri
Kevin's Mustang

PKRWUD · 11-06-2001, 06:19 AM

OLDSMOBILE!!! The 403 is an OLDSMOBILE engine. Sorry. I get a little excited sometimes.

You're right, it was alot more money and work than a small block Ford would have been, but I had two of them, and wanted something different. Actually, you would have beat me in a race. I had the 403 in a '77 Buick full size (LeSabre) which weighed in at close to 4400 pounds. The best time I had was 13.9. But, IF (that's such a big word) I had dropped it back into a Firebird or an Omega, it would have been in the low 12's. Oh well. Kinda funny how the older I get, the faster my cars were.

Take care,
-Chris

------------------
Retired Moderator
MustangNet

My site: Peckerwoods Pit Stop

My teams site: Jim Porter Racing

RACECAR spelled backwards is RACECAR

HEY !!! Are you ASE Certified ??? If you are, ask me about iATN.

11-01-2001, 06:15 PM	#1
Eladio_C Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: chicago,IL Posts: 1	Switching Engines I have a question, Don't know much about Engines though, I was wondering if its posible to take the motor off a 78 transAm (400) and put it in a 66-67 Mustang???

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Who sells rebuilt engines?	UglyFast88	Windsor Power	7	02-13-2003 03:52 PM
'87 mustang engines?	gizmo83	Windsor Power	5	07-25-2002 01:14 PM
Stupid Question?	SilverGT02	Modular Madness	4	07-06-2002 11:01 AM
anyone heard of les shepperd who sells engines from beech grove IN.	stalker95	Windsor Power	0	11-12-2001 10:56 PM
Alternative engines	PGkelly	Blue Oval Lounge	15	03-16-2001 01:11 AM

11-01-2001, 08:08 PM	#2
Gearhead999 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 1998 Location: Oviedo, FL Posts: 992	It is possible to put any engine in any car. It's just how much trouble do you want to go through. I would say it isn't a good swap. You have to manufacture mounts, wiring, headers, linkage, radiator hook up and transmission. It would be alot easier to install a Ford product, like a 351W. At least it will bolt in without major modifications.

11-01-2001, 08:16 PM	#3
73 Mustang Boy Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Georgia Posts: 84	A Pontiac motor will not physicaly fit in a mustang engine compartment it is way to wide. They also use rear sump oil pans that wont clear the front cross member in a mustang. Someone who realy wanted a pontiac motor in a mustang and realy knew what they were dooing might get it to work. ------------------ 73 coupe, 351W, GT-40 heads, edlebrock 750, offenhauser intake, .488 lift cam, 2.5 exhaust, 2 chamber flowmasters, blah, blah, blah...

11-02-2001, 02:19 PM	#4
lessheppard Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: beech grove ind usa Posts: 5	WHY??? the only way to put that in there is change the front clip to a pontiac clip or nova or camaro and why would you want to mess up the best looking mustang ever built with a pontiac motor when the 428 cobra jet came stock in it.(68-69) - and a 351 windsor the best powerplant anyone ever produced (nascar uses them today) is it just because you dont have a 351 windsor? I CAN HELP YOU THERE contact me I have 7 351 windsors, 2 390,s and 35 302 engines. sell your 400 and get a real engine.

11-02-2001, 04:28 PM	#5
shovelnose Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 234	Also Pontiac motors aren't the greatest power plants out there by design. Take a 454 chev, 455 olds, and a 455 pontiac motors do the same work and the pontiac would come out last. I have beat my buddies T/A when he had a 400 auto 3.73, then 4.56, then a 455 auto 4.56, then 455 stick 3.73. His car is heavier but I only have a little 302. I'm all for the ford motor, esp in a ford car. I will be doing a 429 soon and would love to play with a windsor sometime. ------------------ 82 Mercury Capri 302, Comp. Cams, Tremec 3550, 3.73's, 12.8@106 N/A Kevin's Capri Kevin's Mustang

11-02-2001, 09:00 PM	#6
thunderbolt Registered Member Join Date: Oct 1998 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 380	Hey, gonna upset a few people but what the hay, if it floats your boat, do it. I was thinking 454 and 4L80e in my 72 for a while. That being said, seems like a whole lot of work for not much gain. Gonna take lots of fab work. A 78 TA 400 (stock) probably feels pretty good but it is old technology that can easily be surpassed these days. If it were me I would look at built 351W engines or a 428 if you want to spend lots of money.

11-02-2001, 09:53 PM	#7
PKRWUD Junior Member Join Date: Mar 1999 Location: Ventura, California Posts: 8,981	1978 Trans Am's had both Pontiac 400's and Oldsmobile 403's. The 403's were much more common, and were signified by 6.6 liter tags on the shaker. The 400 shaker stickers said 6.5 liter. Anyway, the 400 would fit, but I doub't the 403 would. Shovelnose- My T/A 403 would have beaten you (521hp NOS injected). ;!)~ Take care, -Chris ------------------ Retired Moderator MustangNet My site: Peckerwoods Pit Stop My teams site: Jim Porter Racing RACECAR spelled backwards is RACECAR HEY !!! Are you ASE Certified ??? If you are, ask me about iATN.

11-02-2001, 10:40 PM	#8
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	I've never been all that riled up by the 6.6L. My 1977 302 powered Mustang II would run neck and neck with the ones around here. Well, till about 100mph anyway. That's terrible. heh.

11-06-2001, 06:19 AM	#10
PKRWUD Junior Member Join Date: Mar 1999 Location: Ventura, California Posts: 8,981	OLDSMOBILE!!! The 403 is an OLDSMOBILE engine. Sorry. I get a little excited sometimes. You're right, it was alot more money and work than a small block Ford would have been, but I had two of them, and wanted something different. Actually, you would have beat me in a race. I had the 403 in a '77 Buick full size (LeSabre) which weighed in at close to 4400 pounds. The best time I had was 13.9. But, IF (that's such a big word) I had dropped it back into a Firebird or an Omega, it would have been in the low 12's. Oh well. Kinda funny how the older I get, the faster my cars were. Take care, -Chris ------------------ Retired Moderator MustangNet My site: Peckerwoods Pit Stop My teams site: Jim Porter Racing RACECAR spelled backwards is RACECAR HEY !!! Are you ASE Certified ??? If you are, ask me about iATN.