5.0 EFI on CR1

[Chicagowil]

After a lot of review of induction choices, I have decided to stay with my original choice of the Kenne Bell supercharger system I had acquired some time back with the original plan to install on my 67 Mustang. Decided it was too much for a 8" rear end in the Mustang. So I will want to use it on the CR1. The lower intake manifold has been extrude honed and I have TFS Twisted wedge heads with a stage II porting.

But I already have an issue with the original EFI on the 90 5.0 HO. The motor is sitting tilted left to right. I assume there is a problem with the motor mounts not correctly installed.

I have seen the string on the motor mount issues with the CR2s. I assume my CR1 has the earlier horizontal mount plate.

The CR1 is a early 90 kit. I did measure the mount plates on the frame (as best as I could with the motor in place). They look level. But the left side of the motor is about 2" higher than the right side. This causes a interference issue with the EFI intake and the hood already. The Kenne Bell is about 1" taller and the driving shaft is extending forward of course.

I have found no photos of CR1s with EFI. Anyone else have clearance issues with the 5.0 EFI?

Current EFI motor installed:


A mock up of the Kenne Belle system:

[C5GTO]

I do have a 5.0 EFI in a mid-90's CR1.



It's been there a long time so I'm working from old memory on what I did to make it work. I recall that I cut about 1" out of the motor mounts. I used an Edelbrock intake manifold instead of the Ford unit. I had about 1/2" milled off the bottom manifold mounting flange where the upper manifold attaches. I had to rotate the vacuum pipes on the throttle body to clear the hood.

I think that's all I did. The EFI manifold does clear the hood which has the narrow style hood scoop. With the engine sitting lower from motor mount chop, I have to be careful going over speed bumps. But with over 25 years and about 45K miles, it's all worked out fine.

[Chicagowil]

Thanks Joel! I will look at that motor mount option. I may have to choose between modifying the hood or once again reviewing the intake choice. I hope to pull the motor out this next week.


What did you end up doing on the exhaust? I see you replaced it on your photos.

Nice looking car! I see you are in Livermore. I grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from Clayton Valley High School. Had Aunt & Uncle that lived in Livermore for years!

[C5GTO]

Originally Posted by Chicagowil

What did you end up doing on the exhaust? I see you replaced it on your photos.

Chicagowil: here's the thread on side pipe replacement Question about rattle in CR sidepipe

While my address is Livermore, I live in the Mt. Diablo foothills in between Livermore and Clayton. So probably not all that far from your old stomping grounds :-)

[Chicagowil]

Somewhere off of Vasco Rd perhaps?

[studebaker53]

It may fit and look good from the top but what you dont see is how low the oil pan is below the frame rail. Might want to check that.... Been through that.

[C5GTO]

Originally Posted by Chicagowil

Somewhere off of Vasco Rd perhaps?

Morgan Territory Road. The morning side of Mt. Diablo as they say.

[C5GTO]

Originally Posted by studebaker53

It may fit and look good from the top but what you dont see is how low the oil pan is below the frame rail. Might want to check that.... Been through that.

You're right about the pan being below the frame. I believe that's the case even if you don't alter the motor mounts. But yes, the sump is certainly lower if you lower the engine. I think the superior driveability of EFI is worth it though.

My engine used to have a cast aluminum Cobra T sump pan with drain plug on bottom. I never knocked the drain plug off but certainly scraped it enough to make me nervous. I switched the pan to a Canton road race pan that's a bit shorter and has drain plug on rear of sump. I haven't scraped this one although I'm very careful on tall speed bumps. There are other road race pans out there that are even shorter if this is a big worry.

I also have the suspension set for a very low ride on my CR. I like the look better and it improves the handling. While this makes ground clearance even tighter, it's all just part of the Cobra experience in my book

[Chicagowil]

Used to "race" my MG Midget early in the mornings on Morgan Territory Road! That's when a lot of it did not even have utilities to the houses way back into the canyon.

I think I am going to end up with a combination of lower mounts, shorter pan and slightly modified hood. Looking at the hood- it is double skinned. Might be able to gain some clearance there by cutting away a bit of the inner liner layer.

Just don't want a scoop that ends up looking like the one on Shelby's personal 427 w/twin superchargers.

[Wisconsin_Snake]

Originally Posted by C5GTO

I do have a 5.0 EFI in a mid-90's CR1.

It's been there a long time so I'm working from old memory on what I did to make it work. I recall that I cut about 1" out of the motor mounts. I used an Edelbrock intake manifold instead of the Ford unit. I had about 1/2" milled off the bottom manifold mounting flange where the upper manifold attaches.

I also have a 5.0 FI engine... It fits under the hood without having to modify anything.. It will fit under the hood IF you use a 94-95 Mustang (upper and lower) intake manifolds.
The intake is much more "shorter" than the regular 5.0 intakes and was used on the 94~95 mustangs (also known as SN95 mustangs.).

You may be able to get away with using a the SN95 adapter elbow which was a aftermarket approach so that the regular intakes (which are less restrictive) could be used on the 1994~95 mustangs for a performance increase.
I would be interested to see if that would work.

Here is article detailing what was done to a SN95 mustang. It has pictures of the intakes.

https://www.allfordmustangs.com/Detailed/614.shtml

[rbgray1]

What Coolant overflow tank are you using? Im rebuilding my Cobra and want to include a good overflow tank in the process.

[Wisconsin_Snake]

Originally Posted by Chicagowil

Current EFI motor installed:

I want you to do this...
Take off the throttle body (leaving the intake on) and see of you hood then fits.

There is a elbow that is made the fits between the intake and the throttle body, that angles the TB down and forward. (Edlebrock makes one)
That would probably work as a better solution.

If you look in the link I provided earlier, there is a picture of one.

[CR67rep]

C5GTO, what hood prop are you using?

[C5GTO]

Originally Posted by CR67rep

C5GTO, what hood prop are you using?

Sourced the hood prop at a Pick N Pull salvage yard off a British car many years ago. I think it was an MG or maybe a Triumph of 70's or 80's vintage. I use the big metal rod hood prop that came with the CR kit as a poker for my fireplace. It works pretty good for that.

[Chicagowil]

Wi Snake- I will take a look at it. Got sidetracked this last weekend when I got back to WI. My well pump decided to give up the ghost! So 3 days later with the well folks working in 2 inches of ice- I have a working well!

I still have to figure out what the 1st owner of the kit did that made the motor sit cocked high on the passenger side.

[CR67rep]

Originally Posted by C5GTO

Sourced the hood prop at a Pick N Pull salvage yard off a British car many years ago. I think it was an MG or maybe a Triumph of 70's or 80's vintage. I use the big metal rod hood prop that came with the CR kit as a poker for my fireplace. It works pretty good for that.

I agree the original prop seems better suited to stoke a fire. I will browse the web checking props for British sports car props, thanks for the info! The original prop has bugged me since I got my CR in 2015.

[Horseracejudge]

Hi Chicagowil,

This is a 302 with 94-95 GT 40 option upper & lower intake with a 3/8 spacer. 65 MM throttle body with the bend. The clearance is close with hood. Couldn't use a thicker spacer. Pan clearance is ok. Using a Canton street double hump with a rear sump. Nick

Originally Posted by Chicagowil

After a lot of review of induction choices, I have decided to stay with my original choice of the Kenne Bell supercharger system I had acquired some time back with the original plan to install on my 67 Mustang. Decided it was too much for a 8" rear end in the Mustang. So I will want to use it on the CR1. The lower intake manifold has been extrude honed and I have TFS Twisted wedge heads with a stage II porting.

But I already have an issue with the original EFI on the 90 5.0 HO. The motor is sitting tilted left to right. I assume there is a problem with the motor mounts not correctly installed.

I have seen the string on the motor mount issues with the CR2s. I assume my CR1 has the earlier horizontal mount plate.

The CR1 is a early 90 kit. I did measure the mount plates on the frame (as best as I could with the motor in place). They look level. But the left side of the motor is about 2" higher than the right side. This causes a interference issue with the EFI intake and the hood already. The Kenne Bell is about 1" taller and the driving shaft is extending forward of course.

I have found no photos of CR1s with EFI. Anyone else have clearance issues with the 5.0 EFI?

Current EFI motor installed:


A mock up of the Kenne Belle system:

[Chicagowil]

Very clean look Horseracejudge!

[Roylerumble]

Originally Posted by Horseracejudge

Hi Chicagowil,

This is a 302 with 94-95 GT 40 option upper & lower intake with a 3/8 spacer. 65 MM throttle body with the bend. The clearance is close with hood. Couldn't use a thicker spacer. Pan clearance is ok. Using a Canton street double hump with a rear sump. Nick

older thread, but had issues with the motor mounts. Discovered that the part number for the mounts in the manual are discontinued. The shop found a set that worked, I believe they reversed them and had to redrill the pass side. they have the horizontal bolt through them. Anticipating hood clearance issues after reading posts.... @Horseracejudge, what motor mounts did you use?

[Lightingrod]

I like the GM EFI. :-)