Possible EFI donors???

[supermottl]

Hey all, <br>Just windering, In the future, I'd like to attempt an EFI conversion on an EB. Now, while I was wondering around my driveway the other day, I was looking under the hood of my moms '91 Cougar with the 5.0 HO motor. devils in my eyes!! LOL<br> Would this work?? And what other cars has everyone ripped EFi out of???? Cool, thanks

 

[Newt]

Once you get past the TBI's, just about any Ford V8 EFI will work. Your best is probably the 91-93 Mustang's or I think some of the MK VII Lincolns came with the HO engine.

 

[supermottl]

Derrrrrr, ?:? what's TBI's?<br>errrrr duuuuuuuuuuuuuhh

 

[rulebreaker]

[quote author=supermottl link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=0#91371 date=1039887383]<br>Derrrrrr, ?:? what's TBI's?<br>errrrr duuuuuuuuuuuuuhh<br>[/quote]Throttle Body Injection/Not very common,Any 86-93 5.0L will work for your porpose.Some like the 89-93 Mustang the best because its MAF but I personally like the SD systems because they get better fuel economy and I'm just cheap when it comes to gas.

 

[Waverous]

Throttle Body Injection/Not very common,Any 86-93 5.0L will work for your porpose.Some like the 89-93 Mustang the best because its MAF but I personally like the SD systems because they get better fuel economy and I'm just cheap when it comes to gas.

LOL Rulebreaker! You nut!
But seriously, I have been trying to find information regarding the 4v GM TBI for my 351W. Been told it would work - any ideas?

 

[mlogan24]

Rulebreaker-are you sure abou the SD being more effecient? I was under the impression that the MAF was because it was firing each injector individually vs. batch fire of 4 at a time. I pretty sure MAF is more effecient-or else why would all the OEM's use MAF systems now (especially with the tighter fuel consumption regs)?

 

[broncobsession]

Would your mom even notice if it was gone? You could switch hers to carburator...she'd never know ;D

 

[Newt]

In the June 1994 issue of Super Ford, they ran a series of test on a 351. The test started with an 88 engine, stock except for Thrush pre-cats & 2 1/2" mufflers. In this condition it pulled 323.6 ft lbs at 2500 rpm & 193.9 hp at 3750 rpm.<br><br>The second test was with GT-40 intake, 65mm throttle body, stock mustang headers & mufflers. The computer was changed to an 89 Mustang w/wiring harness. Result, 351.1 ft lbs at 3000 rpm & 243.3 hp at 4250 rpm.<br><br>The engine wound up in the August 1994 issue of Super Ford with a Vortech blower. Of course they made a series of changes along the way, heads, cam, headers etc. With an A-trim & 3.125" pulley at 6 psi it made 556.4 ft lbs at 4500 rpm & 513.5 hp at 5000 rpm. With a B-trim & 3.125" pulley at 6 psi it made 565.1 ft lbs at 4500 rpm & 525.2 hp at 5000 rpm. With a B-trim & 2.75" pulley at 8.7 psi it made 602.7 ft lbs at 4750 rpm & 566.7 hp at 5250 rpm. The Big boy R-trim, 2.5" pulley at 11.4 psi it made 619.6 ft lbs at 5000 rpm & 613.8 hp at 5250 rpm.

 

[rulebreaker]

[quote author=mlogan24 link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=0#91445 date=1039920448]<br>Rulebreaker-are you sure abou the SD being more effecient? I was under the impression that the MAF was because it was firing each injector individually vs. batch fire of 4 at a time. I pretty sure MAF is more effecient-or else why would all the OEM's use MAF systems now (especially with the tighter fuel consumption regs)?<br>[/quote]The crown vic's are not batch and they are SD and they get great fuel economy!I was getting 13 to 14 with 35" tires,I now have MAF and cant get 10.

 

[Waverous]

What about SD and 4 wheeling?

 

[howiebilt]

CROWNIES are the sh;t . and speed density shall rule the earth as we know it and there shall be a day when we will all come together and proclaim ourselves as the true pioneers of modern history , as we drive our trusty steeds over the tops of the mafses . <br>Speed Density . it's like a drug . Try it , you'll like it ! I am delirious please stop me ............................................................................................................ ;D Honestly , I will pit my crown vic fuel injection motor with SD against any ho out there as long as we are talking apples and apples

 

[Waverous]

[quote author=howiebilt link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=0#91526 date=1039965539]<br>CROWNIES are the sh;t . and speed density shall rule the earth as we know it and there shall be a day when we will all come together and proclaim ourselves as the true pioneers of modern history , as we drive our trusty steeds over the tops of the mafses . <br>Speed Density . it's like a drug . Try it , you'll like it ! I am delirious please stop me ............................................................................................................ ;D Honestly , I will pit my crown vic fuel injection motor with SD against any ho out there as long as we are talking apples and apples<br>[/quote]<br>Ok Howie, ALMOST got me convinced - but how does SD do with low speed, high RPM trail running?

 

[Explore74]

MAF, SD, it doesn't matter. You need to remember that usuallly you are comparing an engine that came from a passenger (gramma) car and a sports car. cars that are supposed to drive different. the certainly weigh different. I understand that you could get either system in the mustang, depending on year, and each will work equally as well. If you have lousy fuel milage, contact a chip programmer, and get a custom fuel map made up. Fuel milage can be dialed in to a certain extent just by toying with injector pulsewidth across the entire map. just remember that there are mustang computers, grand marquis computers, mark VIII computers(bad to the bone by the way), and even truck computers(ever see one of those get good fuel milage?) So the possibilities are endless (as long as your wallet is )

 

[mlogan24]

I guess I stand corrected then, I had forgot about those HO's. It still seems to me that MAF would be more effecient though (this comes from a guy running SD too). My gut feeling is that because MAF is so dynamic with how it provides fuel in accordance with volumetric needs, if properly setup it should be a little more effecient. One indisputable plus about MAF though-no real limit to how much you can modify you engine as opposed to SD which doesn't like much beyond a mild cam, etc. Anybody agree/disagree? Like I have to ask

 

[Explore74]

yes, you are exactly right about the MAF being more friendly to modification, because it calculates it's own needs constantly (within preset limits, which can screw you up), whereas the SD is indeed a set map and has a much smaller window of operation. good observation!

 

[howiebilt]

My crownie sd runs at high rpm's and slow speeds almost all the time . SD is not as tempermental as you might think and any cam that can be put into a 5.0 block that will not exceed the limits of movement ie. the push rods and rocker arms , will work if the grind is right . I got this information from the 5.0 tech site . The most computer friendly SD cams are made by Compu cams because of the way they grind their cams and I was told that you can run up to a 5.14 ? lift without problems. <br>Personally , I am running an Off road / RV cam in mine and I like it I was also informed that all of the late model chebbies are switching back to the speed density type because it is better ...maro's and such and that they currently are running a "batch fire system " already . <br> Some pointless bragging !!!<br>Like I said , I'll pit my stock SD with an RV cam against any other stock 5.0 MAF with the same cam ;D Witness reports of my front tires leaving the ground when I hit second gear and the hood unlatched to the safety catch

 

[Waverous]

[quote author=howiebilt link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=15#91544 date=1039970051]<br>I got this information from the 5.0 tech site .<br>[/quote]<br><br>What site is this Howie?

 

[rulebreaker]

Howie I run the Crown Vic setup for 2 years and if I hadnt switched to the 351 I would line up with ya! ;D ;D ;D ;D 8) 8)

 

[67halfcab]

Howie,

What cam are you running and where did you get it?

I have an 87' 302 from a Crown Vic "Country Squire" (19' woody ;D) sitting on an engine stand right now getting ready to make its new home under my 67' hood and theres no time like the present to spice it up a bit before I install it.

SD or MAF either way I personnally prefer EFI over a carb any day no matter which one, I just happen to be installing a SD because the deal was a steal.

BTW I was told that the Crown Vic was rated at 205hp from the factory in 87 and the Mustangs were 225hp. I don't know if this is true but it sounds reasonable. which to me means you really can't go wrong with either.

 

[howiebilt]

[quote author=Waverous link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=15#91559 date=1039975832]<br>[quote author=howiebilt link=board=5;threadid=12308;start=15#91544 date=1039970051]<br>I got this information from the 5.0 tech site .<br>[/quote]<br><br>What site is this Howie?<br>[/quote]<br><br>GO Here ! and log in ...then go to the forums and look under the windsor post and ask away . These folks are almost as nice as the classic site ...but they are usually influenced by adrenaline and can be testy at times ;D They have always been nice to me and I give them my respect .