Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion September 26, 2008, 02:45:46 PM I just read the most interesting thing posted on another forum I frequent.Seems we're all wrong.....The 86 and 87 HO 5.0 did NOT have forged pistons according to one person who states that 88 was in fact the first year for forged slugs in a factory HO motor.....Discuss:D Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #1 – September 26, 2008, 05:30:06 PM I disagree.Mine are forged flat tops.Oh yes they are ('87 Mark VII H.O). Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #2 – September 26, 2008, 06:48:28 PM I dunno for sure but I "thought" the '85 HO used forged and was first year... Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #3 – September 26, 2008, 07:04:58 PM actually the "mustang performance handbook" by william mathis states that 85 was the first year for forged pistons. "1985 5.0 H.O.-Begining in 1985 the 5.0 block utilized a hydraulic roller tappet camshaft, forged 8.4:1 compression pistons and tubular exhaust manifolds." "1986 5.0 H.O.- A thicker deck and semi siamesed cylinders make this block considerably stronger than the previous 5.0 engines. Compression was increased to 9.2 by eliminating the dish and valve eyebrows in the pistons." "1987-1988 5.0 H.O. (Except 1988 Calif.)- Begining in 1987 Ford switched to the truck head (E7TE casting) with its larger ports and1.74/1.46 valves, 9.0compression forged pistons (with.030" dish and valve eyebrows), a larger runner intake and the now standerd 60mm T.B." Obviously you cant take this for gospel but at least its officially published in a book info. i ought to be carefull though. wouldnt want to offend anybody with my pen 15y, know it all, close minded attitude. i mean...there only statements based on facts you know. Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #4 – September 26, 2008, 08:05:41 PM The 85 piston carries a different part #.That's (the 85 pistons) not in dispute.....SEFI style engines are the topic (truck/passenger car SO/HO) He states he's pulled motors apart in both 86 and 87 Mustangs and came accross cast pistons....I gave all the info above stated to include part #'s from the Kirshenbaum book. He said these cast pistons did in fact have a Ford part #. He did not describe the style of the piston or state what the part # was. He's a year younger than me, so it's probable he's tearing into cars with long ago swapped short blocks.....He's hung up on the TRW thing.....My guess is he believes that only the pistons supplied by TRW were forged. It was to my understanding Keith Black supplied 5.0 pistons direct to FoMoCo for a period of time as well. Can anybody confirm this? I know in the early 80's at one point there were 3 different piston suppliers to Ford...... Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #5 – September 26, 2008, 08:53:32 PM QuoteCan anybody confirm this? I know in the early 80's at one point there were 3 different piston suppliers to Ford...... even if they were i would have thought that they would all be required to be in spec? would seem kind of i dunno, shoddy if otherwise. Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #6 – September 27, 2008, 01:07:45 AM hummtreading close to a sticky if we keep it up. I have nothing to add but wish i knew that level of detail on the 5.0 history. Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #7 – September 27, 2008, 01:32:31 AM If this guy is finding cast or hyper pistons in 86-87 Mustangs someone put them there. I've seen many 86-87 HO motors (ok many as in 15 :hick: ) and they all had forged pistons.Does he say if these *factory* pistons have .030 stamped in the top? Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #8 – September 27, 2008, 03:34:21 AM I'm pretty sure 85 HO 5.0s came with forged pistons. Maybe he's not looking in the right motors? Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #9 – September 27, 2008, 03:46:50 AM Quoteeven if they were i would have thought that they would all be required to be in spec? would seem kind of i dunno, shoddy if otherwise.Lowest bidder would be my guess I've yet to rip aprt a stock piston 86 or 87 HO and find cast pistons.....granted I've only ripped a few of those open.....Most Mark Vii's and one had valve reliefs so I'm guessing it was a rebuild or perhaps a late '87 car... Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #10 – September 27, 2008, 08:42:40 AM Try this linkhttp://phystutor.tripod.com/stang/engines/50.html Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #11 – September 27, 2008, 08:54:34 AM There's no changing some peoples' minds. Years ago I sold a set of stock Mustang shorties on eBay. Somewhere in the ad I mentioned that they were factory stainless steel headers. Some meatwad wrote me to tell me that they were not stainless. I emailed him back with several links stating otherwise. He basically told me that the whole internet and Ford marketing departments were all wrong, the headers were not stainless. His reasoning? That a magnet sticks to them. I then pointed him to a mettalurgy site that explained the several different types of stainless steel, some magnetic and some not. You guessed it: That site was wrong, too... Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #12 – September 27, 2008, 01:05:34 PM Lol...its only facts...facts dont mater when you have an opinion... Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #13 – September 28, 2008, 01:03:55 AM Quote from: Thunder Chicken;237453There's no changing some peoples' minds. Years ago I sold a set of stock Mustang shorties on eBay. Somewhere in the ad I mentioned that they were factory stainless steel headers. Some meatwad wrote me to tell me that they were not stainless. I emailed him back with several links stating otherwise. He basically told me that the whole internet and Ford marketing departments were all wrong, the headers were not stainless. His reasoning? That a magnet sticks to them. I then pointed him to a mettalurgy site that explained the several different types of stainless steel, some magnetic and some not. You guessed it: That site was wrong, too...yep,, in a way, he was right from a pure stainless perspective. Its not cost effective nor does it gain anything to use pure stainless on headers though. so for general conversation, they are stainless.I am having this very debate with a solar project im on now. Quote Selected
Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion Reply #14 – September 28, 2008, 11:15:12 AM Quote from: jcassity;237531yep,, in a way, he was right from a pure stainless perspective. Its not cost effective nor does it gain anything to use pure stainless on headers though. so for general conversation, they are stainless.I am having this very debate with a solar project im on now.Read the following link ->Is stainless steel magnetic? or Google "magnetic stainless". As a mechanical engineer somewhat familiar with metalurgy, the answer isn't as simple as "pure" or otherwise. Ford had to make the headers stainless so they would not rust-through during the warranty period - the corrosion resistance being the main desirable quality of "stainless steel" (and believe me, the different grades make a huge difference when looking for resistance to particular harsh environments and/or when looking for a particular strength or machinability requirement etc.) Quote Selected
Topic: Now I've heard it all......Piston discussion (Read 1907 times)
previous topic - next topic
