Ford Mustang Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey Guys,

I noticed on ebay that when looking for a 2000 4.6L engine they list 2001-2004 as incompatible with the 2000 4.6 for the mustang. They both should have PI heads so I'm not sure why it's different. Anyone know the difference between an 00 and 01+?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Hey Guys,

I noticed on ebay that when looking for a 2000 4.6L engine they list 2001-2004 as incompatible with the 2000 4.6 for the mustang. They both should have PI heads so I'm not sure why it's different. Anyone know the difference between an 00 and 01+?
I don't know of any differences! It may only be sensors and placement of but the only other unimportant thing is the construction of the crossover on the front of the intake that is prone to cracking on the pre2001 models. Has nothing to do with whether it will work in your 2000 or not! Should be plug and play...maybe better informed members could chime in!

 

· Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Valve cover bolt pattern is different, water pump is different, flywheel is 8 bolt instead of 6 bolt. The 2000 motor is made at the Windsor plant while the 2001 is made at the Romeo plant. Those are the main differences u will encounter with the motor. The engine would be a direct bolt in for any 2001-2004 mustang. It is essentially the same motor with just a few key differences. The transmission was also changed from a T45 in 2000 to a TR 3650 in 2001.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
But they are all slow that never changed!!
Sounds like you've really got a chip on your shoulder for the 4.6 now. Stock they may be slow sure, but not any slower than other cars from the time. The Cobras and Machs were never slow that's for sure

Plus you'd be hard pressed to find a stock GT at the strip, people usually bring out the big guns
 

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Valve cover bolt pattern is different, water pump is different, flywheel is 8 bolt instead of 6 bolt. The 2000 motor is made at the Windsor plant while the 2001 is made at the Romeo plant. Those are the main differences u will encounter with the motor. The engine would be a direct bolt in for any 2001-2004 mustang. It is essentially the same motor with just a few key differences. The transmission was also changed from a T45 in 2000 to a TR 3650 in 2001.
Great reply, thank you. I knew there was a difference between the romeo and windsor engines but for some reason I thought that mid 99 and up mustangs had the romeo.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Sounds like you've really got a chip on your shoulder for the 4.6 now. Stock they may be slow sure, but not any slower than other cars from the time. The Cobras and Machs were never slow that's for sure

Plus you'd be hard pressed to find a stock GT at the strip, people usually bring out the big guns
I was turned off by the 4.6 at first but found this link and realized for about $2500 and your own labor you can bolt on some nice power. I wanted to go carbureted and saw a cool combination in this article from hot rod magazine about two thirds down the page.

Here it is: The Ford 4.6L Modular Engine
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,038 Posts
Lol they were slow for there time to. Plenty of four door cars were pushing 260hp. Now they are making over 300. The 93 lt1 had 285! Ls1s at 320 in 98. Lol they suck stock but can bolt on power like said above

Sent from my DROID RAZR using AutoGuide.Com Free App
 

· Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
The MAF sensor is different to. The earlier cars had the iat in the intake tube and later models had it in the maf sensor. Look at the maf sensor plug, earlier have 4 pins and later have 6 pins.

Quan Cheese is correct, the new edge where slow cars when they came out at that time. Stock for stock the lt1 cars made more power on paper then the mustang. You had some v-6 making 260hp or more. Now the ls1 is just a beast and they came out in the late 90's. Now with money anything can be made fast.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Sounds like you've really got a chip on your shoulder for the 4.6 now. Stock they may be slow sure, but not any slower than other cars from the time. The Cobras and Machs were never slow that's for sure

Plus you'd be hard pressed to find a stock GT at the strip, people usually bring out the big guns
I was starting to think the same thing. Kinda funny how people are eh?

All cars are slow stock :) that's where we come in
 

· Banned
Joined
·
12,365 Posts
slow? Well that was then, this is now...apples to oranges, my 5.0 94Gt was "fast" in 94, slow now
People on the street think my 96 Cobra is the "slow" one...until it Whistles the "Kenne Bell Beat Down"...giddyup
 

· Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
In twenty years you'll be saying how you can't believe the 5.0 Coyote "only" came with 420hp, we're talking about a nearly 18 year old engine.

I'm not directly addressing anyone here but if you can't make a Mustang fast when high school kids are slappin' turbos into 17 second Civics then there are serious motivational issues that need to be dealt with.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top