I have a 250 six from a 73 Maverick in mine.  Mine's stock but it's perky and very drivable.

If you want, these engines are hot roddable with a more aggressive cam, headers from Clifford Industries and aluminum heads from Classic Inlines.  They have the same bellhousing pattern as the small block V8's so will bolt up to any transmission you'd use with a V8.

Dare to be different!  :-)

I was trying to find a ecoboost conversion to read about … Mustangsteve was telling me he had seen a guy that sold the whole kit on a pallet had computer and all wiring.

All you will get from one of those unconventional conversions is a “wow look at that” when your hood is open.
For all the work and headaches you will get doing that’ll,  a SBF will get as good or better performance . . . in my opinion.

Yes, if cheap power is your goal then you are MUCH better off sticking to the same thing everyone else already has.  You definitely peg the WOW factor with an unconventional swap though, and if you can do a modern engine swap that doesn't require you to rework the entire car (new front suspension, steering, brake boost system, etc.) its a much easier way to do it.  That's why the 2.3 would be attractive.  With modern turbo technology power is not going to be an issue.

For cheap power a 5.0 based stroker is going to be the ticket.  I have like $6,500 in my 331 that will make 450HP.  I'd spend about the same to get 425HP from my 2.0 WRX 4 cylinder with stock heads, stock cams, and stock displacement.  Its hard to fight economies of scale.

I would like to try something like John Ha has, with a few mild upgrades.

A 250 in-line with a 2 bl or really small 4 bl carb.
Exhaust header, just to eliminate any exhaust manifold issues.
Eleectronic ignition
T-5 Trans
3.0 - 3.5 gear

I have a 65 with a 200 in-line at the house right now, and the boss (wife) and I went for a drive the other night, and all she could say is how much she enjoyed it over my 68 with the 331, and everything I've done to it to make it better ( or as the boss says, screwed it up).

The in-line is so easy to work on, access to great, it will idle indefinitely with the AC on and never move off 180-185 degrees.
The older I'm getting, the more I want to build things for how I drive them 90% of the time vs 10% of the time. 

I think the issues are with a modified engine vs. a stock one.  My gut tells me that if you mod the 6 its going to be as objectionable as the 331. 

That's also where the modern engines, though difficult to install, have a clear benefit.  They are smoother, better mileage, etc. while still making a ton of power.  New engines are just more efficient than the old ones.  You add a turbo into the mix and its crazy.  Case in point:  '87-'93 5.0 HO made 225HP, and my '02 WRX stock made 227 from 2.0 liters.  Now the 5.0 has more low end torque, but the WRX has AWD.  My '89 GT stock and my '02 WRX stock both ran a 14.50 in the 1/4.  Cost to drop that time to a 13.9 was about the same on both cars.  The difference?  The WRX still got 22MPG around town and 35MPG highway.  The 5.0 not so much. 

TKOPerformance wrote:

I think the issues are with a modified engine vs. a stock one.  My gut tells me that if you mod the 6 its going to be as objectionable as the 331. 

 
Just curious as to what was objectionable with the 68/331?

Rudi wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

I think the issues are with a modified engine vs. a stock one.  My gut tells me that if you mod the 6 its going to be as objectionable as the 331. 

 
Just curious as to what was objectionable with the 68/331?

It is the wife that finds it objectionable, but I would say it is my cam and exhaust choices that make it not to her liking, plus I drive a 331, 5-speed, 3.73 gear a lot different than someone else’s all stock car.

John Ha wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

That's also where the modern engines, though difficult to install, have a clear benefit.

There are ways to put an LS into an early Mustang.  I know it's been done.   I'm sure you could dress and paint it up so it would take a hard look to tell it's not a Ford engine.

  Just sayin'   :-)

I'd rather stack BBs than put a shivy in a Ford.

Yeah, Chevy in a Ford is sacrilege.  I think its still a hanging offense in Dearborn. 

There are small Diesels that could fit, but nothing built by Ford.  The go to for a swap like this would be a 4BT Cummins.  Pretty easy to package and can be upgraded to make absurd power.  Pretty cheap, by Diesel standards too, as its just a 6BT with 2 fewer cylinders.  It uses the Bosch P pump so injectors, delivery valves, etc. are cheap.  Heck, just take the fuel stop plate out of it and it'll gain 70HP.  It would be an interesting swap, but the amount of work involved is considerable. 

John Ha wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

Yeah, Chevy in a Ford is sacrilege.  I think its still a hanging offense in Dearborn. 

No, it's not.  You see it all the time in old Ford vehicles from Model T's to coupes, sedans and pickups up thorugh the 60's.  It's part of hot rodding - combining the best things from different sources together in a way that results in something unique. 

I've always thought that this forum is a hot rod site that's focused on a specific model (the Mustang).  I base this perception on the fact that most, if not all, of the people who are regular participants have altered their original vehicles with parts from, among others, Jaguars, Toyotas, GM (Saturn, etc.), and after-market suppliers, that never, ever came on a Ford from the factory.

Apologies to Billy Walton for diverting the relevant discussion of his legitimate question.

I see a lot of stuff every day that isn't right.  Volume doesn't make something correct. 

Guys using other brand parts in their Mustangs is different.  Who cares where the steering or brakes came from?  A lot of OEMs don't even built that stuff themselves.  What I see here is cars that may have other parts here and there, but with decidedly Ford drivetrains. 

Classic hot rodding is a different story.  Guys were swapping cheap, higher performance parts for outdated low performance parts.  The only Ford V8 at the time was the flathead, which, while a huge step forward, had serious limitations due to the way it breathed.  If you could get your hands on a Cadillac V8, Buick nailhead, or eventually a small block Chevy it was a major step up in power and the potential to make more power.  Ford had the Y block, but they were a lot harder to find.

Point being that the LS is a great engine, but I see no reason to go that route when traditional SBFs can make just as much power without egregious brand disloyalty.  Also, if you're looking to do something different the LS isn't that.  Its just an update of the SBC that ends up getting swapped into everything.  The first 100 maybe pinned the cool meter, but now it pins the vanilla meter. 

But hey, my word isn't law, never said it was.  I'm always a fan of the underdog, and I want to keep a vehicle's heart the same as its skin.  I didn't swap a Cummins into my F250 because I wanted more power, my Jeep won't get a SBC it'll get an AMC, and I use T5s in most everything. 

And I'll also apologize to Billy Walton for this tangent.