Swapping 1966 289 with a 1984 Bronco 302???

[gera_raider]

Hello Peeps,
I currently have 2 Bronco's. One a 1966 the other 1984. I want to take the 302 84' motor and tranny and transfer case and install it into the 66. Does anyone forsee any issues? Specially alignment issues with the 84 transfer case foing into the 66. Do you have any recommendations and good engine swaps?

Thanks in advance!!!

 

[jckkys]

The '84 should have a NP208 that may not fit inside the frame. Is there something wrong with the '66 D20?

 

[riggermortis]

I don't think that the transfer case will fit someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's too wide for between the frame rails and secondly I think the tranny transfer case is overall too long. As far as the '84 302, I think there's a lot of better options as far as power and popularity.

 

[Eoth]

I think there's a lot of better options as far as power and popularity.

There always seems to be a lot of used engines from Big Broncos out there. I know that the 351M isn't something people normally want but I figured that if you wanted to stay with a carburetor, then a 1984 302 would be the best (one piece main and roller). Sure there are better things related to the newer years (like GT40 heads and FI), but shouldn't it be one of the best options for the simplest swap?

 

[Timmy390]

Thought 85 was the first year for the roller cam in a 5.0 and that was for Mustangs only. Didn't think trucks got he rollers's till letter but I'm not expert on the topic.

Tim

 

[JAFO]

I put an 80's 302 in mine because I wanted to stay with a 302. Don't think that newer transfer case will fit though. Regarding power, the 302 seems fine to me. I have the old 3 on the tree and this past Sunday drove out to Harrisonburg via Rt33. Up over the mountain and never had to come out of third gear. Ran right up and over the mountain no problem.
Funny story....coworker had been in Harrisonburg and was coming home. He said he was coming down the mountain and all of a sudden from the back seat his 9 year old grand daughter started yelling "Grand dad, WHAT IS THAT TRUCK! I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT! THAT IS COOL!". He said he looks and says that has to me, nobody else has a Bronco that color! He said I went flying by on a turn and I never noticed him wave.

 

[Eoth]

Thought 85 was the first year for the roller cam in a 5.0 and that was for Mustangs only. Didn't think trucks got he rollers's till letter but I'm not expert on the topic.

Tim

Did a little digging.. Looks like you are correct (please don't tell my wife) ;D

 

[Broncobowsher]

Grew up with an '84 Econoline 302, I'm sure it is the same as the bronco version. This was the end of the dark days of auto engineering. The only good thing I can think of for this vintage would be the 1-piece rear main. I think this was the first vehicle my parents ever owned that didn't leak oil. The engine moved the van, but by no means was with any gusto.

You never stated transmission, usually automatics in those days. Probably a C6, maybe an early AOD. C6 is needlessly large and doesn't fit well. Early AODs have oiling issues that ear gear sets. They often still drive, but are not worth it for a rebuild. To use the AOD you need proper gearing, especially with that 302.

The transfer case is fat. I once posted pictures of one swapped in. Required building a bumpout on the frame to repair the notch cut in the frame to clear the case. The scabbed on repair was notched as well. So out of a 2" wide frame with a 2" brace on the outside only 1" of frame width actually existed after the brace was notched.

 

[riggermortis]

For 1965 the compression ratio of the base 289 was raised to 9.3:1, increasing power and torque to 200*hp (149*kW) at 4,400*rpm and 282*lb·ft (382*N·m) at 2,400*rpm. The four-barrel version was increased to 10.0:1 compression, and was rated at 225*hp (168*kW) at 4,800*rpm and 305*lb·ft (414*N·m) at 3,200*rpm. The HiPo engine specifications were not changed.
engine specifications were unchanged for 1966 and 1967. In 1968 the four-barrel 225*hp (168*kW) engine was dropped, leaving only the two-barrel — now reduced back to 195*hp (145*kW). The HiPo engine was also dropped, making room for the new for 1968 302 V8. 1968 was the last year of production for the 289 in the U.S

302 emission regulations*saw a progressive reduction in compression ratio for the 302 two-barrel, to 9.0:1 in 1972, reducing SAE gross horsepower to 210*hp (157*kW). In that year U.S. automakers began to quote horsepower in SAE net ratings; the 302 two-barrel carried a net rating of 140*hp (104*kW). By 1975 its power would drop as low as 122*hp (91*kW). Not until*fuel injection*began to appear in the 1980s would net power ratings rise above 210*hp (157*kW).

 

[riggermortis]

http://www.f150hub.com/specs/302.html

1981 thru 1984 302 was only rated at 135hp and 243ftlbs