1994 mustang EFI

[Bronco73]

I found a 94 mustang with an auto trans in it at a local yeard today. I recall something about the 94 EFI systems not being the best to work with and are hard to have tuned.

I believe the engine brackets and such fit nicely into an EB but I'm more concerned with getting EFI related pieces for my furture swap. I have a complete 98 mountaineer engine.

Is there anything worth grabbing from the car for an EFI conversion like wiring, fuel rails or anything else. Is the mustang intake better than the explorer intake, fit wise?

 

[Bronco_69]

the explorer intake is better.

if you have a complete explorer setup then you are good to go.

the 94/95 computer and wiring are not all that great once the engine is modded. on a completly stock 94/95 mustang engine it runs fine.

 

[Broncobowsher]

The '94 has a few advantages and disadvantages.
The distributer has a remote TFI to help with heat related failures
The wiring connectors are more sealed where the body and engine harness meet.
The '94 MAF is larger and capable of flowing more air.

But the '94 is hated by drag racers as the timing is always calculated based on cylinder pressure instead of defaulting to a fixed timing table. So bracket racing sucks as the timing changes every pass and so do your ETs. But for normal driving it is fine.

If you happen to have the '94 then use it. As stated, not the most diserable but nothing to run from either. The computer and stuff should transfer over to the Explorer engine just fine. Issues you may encounter; fuel rail hitting the distributer cap adapter and the computer will throw codes if if you don't use the electronic AODE trans.

 

[Bronco73]

I will ask the yard want they want for all the EFI stuff from the car. I will pull everything from the lower intake up and the front engine brackets and all. If I can save money and run the 94 stuff then I am all for it. I'm not building a race machine and I am sure I can find a manual 94 computer cheaper than the A9L.

My guess is the yard will want more than it's worth to pull. It's just sitting in the yard with the hood wide open. Kind of sad.

One thing that scares me is I recall a buddy with a 94 mustang, he installed GT40 heads and an E303 cam and had idling troubles with the car. I wonder how well the EEC will work with the explorer cam.

 

[Bronco73]

Doing some searching and it appears to be an okay system to use. I would still like to hear from some one who has run this system. in their EB or other projects.

 

[RustyShackelfor]

I think thats what byson1 has. I know he has the intake.

 

[Bronco73]

I tried searching prior to me posting this subject and couldn't find anything.

 

[Dave]

I've been running one in a FSB for 6 years and have been very happy with it. I wrote a tech article that appeared in 3 parts in Bronco Driver issues 20 - 22.

I've also refered to it in several posts.

http://classicbroncos.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1575305&postcount=1

If your are interested you can you can search under posts by me "Dave" and 94 Mustang, ZF etc...

It is a great running engine and has been most reliable, smoothest running, best starting of any vehicle I have ever owned new or used. I chose it and the ZF before learning about this site and others where I'm sure that I would have been steered away from both back then. I did the conversion without the influence, help, and experience that is available today.

I picked this engine because it was some guys pride and joy convertable GT who's son took for a joy ride and rolled it. Only had about 60K on it and it ran after the wreck.

I bought another one to use in my 70 EB project and had it in the chassis before deciding to which gears when I found a very clean low milage 2000 explorer. So I sold the somewhat beat 94 and started over.

There are some pros and cons with this engine. Some have been mentioned earlier.

I would only use it if you are going to install the complete engine and emissions equipment twhich is not all that complicated. The airpump will not fit the EB without without clocking it up on the top mounting bolt and extending making a support arm. They you will have to cut out the fender well. I was going to replace the two vacuum solenoids for the airpump with relays and use and electric airpump. I can not verify it but I believe that the primary air injection (cylinder head) is required for correct fuel control as it is upstream from the O2 sensors. The cat air injection is not monitored and would only effect the emissions output and not performance or generate codes other from the solinoid valve not being in the circuit which can be bypassed with a resistor or 12 volt relay. One of the other reasons I went with the explorer was the AODE vs the 4R70W. On the first one I swapped the AODE for a ZF 5 speed and swapped the computer for a 94 Mustang manual tranny computer. So I can not vouch for the operation of the AODE behind that engine in a 4X4 application.

If you move the battery to the drivers side the Mustang airbox will fit great under the EB hood without a body lift or humped hood. The electrical will also fit up nicly if you use the Mustang harness. I cut mine apart and removed all the circuits that were not related to the engine operation. A big part of the engine compartment harness is the lights and ABS system that are not related to or interface the computer and engine.

The left shorty header is easy to modify to avoid the clutch by cutting the flange and rewelding with a little wedge to point it down for a cross over.

Good luck and keep us posted.

Dave...

 

[Bronco73]

That's what I was hoping to hear. Just hope the yard doesn't want a fortune for it all. Not holding my breath because I fear the yard will see mustang and see dollar signs. At that point it may be cheaper for me to just pursue the 87-93 EFI swap.

From what I've read the loss in HP in 94-95 was due to the smaller intake runners. Also the 94-95 EEC appears to be much faster than the 93 and earlier EEC's. Of course this doesn't make it any better for my application. It just seems like I keep reading that the 94-95 needs to be tuned more so than the 93 and ealrier EEC's.

 

[Dave]

That's what I was hoping to hear. Just hope the yard doesn't want a fortune for it all. Not holding my breath because I fear the yard will see mustang and see dollar signs. At that point it may be cheaper for me to just pursue the 87-93 EFI swap.

From what I've read the loss in HP in 94-95 was due to the smaller intake runners. Also the 94-95 EEC appears to be much faster than the 93 and earlier EEC's. Of course this doesn't make it any better for my application. It just seems like I keep reading that the 94-95 needs to be tuned more so than the 93 and ealrier EEC's.

Since its a 94-95 it will be "less desirable" for people doing swapps and probably cheaper. I've never had to "tune" mine using it in the stock configuration. Don't know about the runners but it is a more efficient running engine. Better MPG. I did push that big Bronco around quite smartly. Way more power and torque than the stock 302 and about 40% better economy. Also way cleaner. It easily passed colorado emmisions even using the new EPA standards that went into effect in about 94 which triggered Ford's changes to the 94-95. Never had any problems running around the Rocky Mountains at 12,000 feet. Main reason I got rid of the damn 2 barrel.

 

[Bronco73]

Dave, all great info and I'm getting excited about attempting this swap. I like the fact you are an electrical engineer so your input means alot to me and if I am able to go this route I hope you don't mind a few questions down the road. I think I have a CD some where with all the Ford electrical diagrams from many years/types of cars and trucks.

I agree the yard shouldn't be to bad seeing how like you said the 94-95 is less desirable but I always fear that when they think they have something you want they ask big money and wait for some sucker to buy it. I can always bargin with them on the price. I may not be able to make it back to the yard until next Saturday due to work and school.

Reading your one post about the mpg you got from the full size is awesome. I too will be running a ZF trans and I will go with a 205 case since it's paid for versus buying the D20 adapter.

When I was reading/researching the 94-95 EFI system last night is when I read about the shorter intake runners being the reason for the slight drop in HP.

The only thing I'm concerned about is having to adapt the emission system from the 94 into the EB. I need to get a price before I get a head of myself.

 

[Broncobowsher]

When I did the 5.0 stroker swap in the Ranger I actually sought out the 94/5 struff. Since it was getting a custom tune anyway the tuner liked the added capacity of the newer computers. We did get it to run right, biggest issue was trying to tune the trans. Engine tuned right in, trans fought us enough I finally had him switch the trans off and did a stand alone trans controller (we were playing around with a lot of shift points and I don't think the tuner completely understood the programming of that part. As long as we left the shift points stock, it was happy as could be).

I currently have another 94/5 engine, trans, harness, computer, etc sitting on casters wheeled into the corner of the garage waiting for another project. Not sure what I will be doing with it. Apparently the trans is bad. But I am saving the whole package anyway for the next Bronco, maybe the boat will need a new engine, the old water truck may need an engine someday, found a really clean '84 Chevy 2WD with a blown engine, maybe just use it to power a blender.

 

[Dave]

The only thing I'm concerned about is having to adapt the emission system from the 94 into the EB. I need to get a price before I get a head of myself.

The emissions are really pretty simple and straight forward. The vapor recovery system is a simple solinoid valve that purges the vapor canister periodically. No brainer. The engine emissions consist of 2 heated O2 sensors, a solinoid controled EGR, and air injection. 2 solinoid valves control the air injection. One for the cylinder head ports and one for the CAT. There is a cute little bracket mounted under the passenger side fender with a vacuum resivoir and three solinoid valves. You can see that mounted on the firewall on that road trip post. Like I mentioned earlier, I believe the air injection is necessary to really run correctly. It has no way of monitoring if the cat air injection so that would only be a feel green addition and could probably be omitted. The 94 has a sealed module called a CCM that contains solid state relays for the fuel pump, computer, fan, and AC clutch. Its a very clean way to control everything and plugs into the engine compartment harness. Another neater part of the 94 harness is the big block connector that cleanly connects the engine harness to the engine compartment harness. The computer diagnostics include Key on engine off and key on engine on tests. The complete test runs through a cycle and tests each cylinder along with all other engine functions. It identifies week cylinders and keeps track of misfires durring driving cycles. I've never dealt with the earlier OBDI systems so I don't know how they compare. I've also been told that O2 sensor positioning it is important and they should be located as close to the origional distance from the header flange as possible. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

 

[Broncobowsher]

The Air injection is not needed. The air is blown into the heads only during warm up. Once warm the O2 sensors need pure exhaust (without air injected or leaked in) so it can moniter the burn. The basic operation is to squirt air into the heads during warm up to clean the exhaust and help light off the cats faster. One warm and the cats lite off no more air is injected into the heads. Air is then fed into the cat. The factory cat is a 3-way unit. The first part is there to break down NOx and works best without added air. The second part works on CO and HCs, that part works best if a little fresh air is added to the mix. So that is why the air line feeds into the middle of the cat.

Deleteing the air injections and/or the cats will not cause it to have issues. Throw a few codes that simply states the the stuff is not functioning. The Explorer V8 stuff doesn't even run air injection (computer got better at controlling the mix so it isn't needed). Actually the cats will never be missed, except for dumping a little more pollution into the air. The computer can't "see" them. Only after OBD0II did the computer start looking at the cats.

The EGR is a little different. Often it can be deleted, but if the computer expects to see it there can be a few issues with cruising and a lean mix/detonation issues. I won't say it will happen but I have read enough issues to realize that it does happen often enough. That is a sticky point about the '94/5 mustang system. The EGR is external with the supply coming off the #3 exhaust port. You can expect to need to delete this simply due to needing to change the exhaust. If you do early Explorer intake you can go back to the internal EGR supply and not have to deal with the supply pipe.

As I mentioned I used the '94/5 computer system on my Ranger project. It had not air injection and the EGR was deleted (didn't want to delete it but I didn't have room for it and A/C. A/C won hands down). I wanted the EGR as it offers a slight improvment in fuel economy when working correctly.

 

[Dave]

A buddy of mine is a powertrain calibration engineer at Ford. Gave a different answer on the need for air injection on the 94 which is why I included it on my conversion.

Here is a link to some more smog pump info: http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-forums/733696-smog-pump-function-cold.html

 

[904Bronco]

The Air injection is not needed. The air is blown into the heads only during warm up. Once warm the O2 sensors need pure exhaust (without air injected or leaked in) so it can moniter the burn. The basic operation is to squirt air into the heads during warm up to clean the exhaust and help light off the cats faster. One warm and the cats lite off no more air is injected into the heads. Air is then fed into the cat. The factory cat is a 3-way unit. The first part is there to break down NOx and works best without added air. The second part works on CO and HCs, that part works best if a little fresh air is added to the mix. So that is why the air line feeds into the middle of the cat.

Deleteing the air injections and/or the cats will not cause it to have issues. Throw a few codes that simply states the the stuff is not functioning. The Explorer V8 stuff doesn't even run air injection (computer got better at controlling the mix so it isn't needed). Actually the cats will never be missed, except for dumping a little more pollution into the air. The computer can't "see" them. Only after OBD0II did the computer start looking at the cats.

The EGR is a little different. Often it can be deleted, but if the computer expects to see it there can be a few issues with cruising and a lean mix/detonation issues. I won't say it will happen but I have read enough issues to realize that it does happen often enough. That is a sticky point about the '94/5 mustang system. The EGR is external with the supply coming off the #3 exhaust port. You can expect to need to delete this simply due to needing to change the exhaust. If you do early Explorer intake you can go back to the internal EGR supply and not have to deal with the supply pipe.

As I mentioned I used the '94/5 computer system on my Ranger project. It had not air injection and the EGR was deleted (didn't want to delete it but I didn't have room for it and A/C. A/C won hands down). I wanted the EGR as it offers a slight improvment in fuel economy when working correctly.

Finally, I have an answer my question... Even the Smog Referee here in CA could not answer this question when I questioned his requirement for 4 cats just like the 1989 Mustang donor motor had vs the two I had installed in my 77EB... It came down to a visual configuration and not whether the tailpipe was clean... you just gotta love CA...

 

[Bronco73]

I don't mind the EGR being kept. I just don't want to mess with any of the other emission stuff.

I'm not finding a whole lot of information on this swap on the net so any info I can gather here only helps fuel my desire to try this swap. If the price is right at the yard.