What is the latest and greatest EFI

[chuck1022]

It's still a good choice for high HP stuff as well. Obviously, it increases the cost and you have to tune it yourself which takes time. But I have consulted several people running north of 400 ponies and even a couple over 600 on the Explorer system.

That would be interesting to talk to those ppl and see how they got to 400hp on the explorer setup.

 

[EFI Guy]

That would be interesting to talk to those ppl and see how they got to 400hp on the explorer setup.

Big crate motors, 60 or 80 lb injectors and 4 inch slot MAFs on most of them. I takes quite a bit of tune scaling but still doable.

 

[Madgyver]

My one fear of EFI is it not running when I need it to. I like my camshaft choices. Is it true that it takes a lot more tuning to make the EFI work with radical cam profiles?
There are some EFI offerings out there that I would be willing to try but I just wanna drive and not be staring at my motor.

 

[bmc69]

t I just wanna drive and not be staring at my motor.

This from the guy that I see staring at a half torn down motor every month.

I hadda go there, Mad...

 

[Madgyver]

This from the guy that I see staring at a half torn down motor every month.

I hadda go there, Mad...

yes but I can fix it... lol
with EFI I would be scratching my head....

 

[EFI Guy]

My one fear of EFI is it not running when I need it to. I like my camshaft choices. Is it true that it takes a lot more tuning to make the EFI work with radical cam profiles?
There are some EFI offerings out there that I would be willing to try but I just wanna drive and not be staring at my motor.

Yes, the more valve overlap the harder idle is to tune. I tell most people in the build process to get their gains from higher lift rather than duration which increases valve overlap. When both valves are open at the same time the air coming in goes right back out the exhaust and is read by the o2 sensor as a false lean condition. The increased valve overlap is what causes the lumpy sound, this also causes "reversion" through the MAF sensor and makes the readings at idle erratic. It doesn't affect off-idle nearly as badly.

The OE computers usually handle up to 40 degrees of overlap well, at about 60 degrees you start bumping up idle speed to smooth things out, eventually, you end up forcing open loop at idle. Some people go as far as to remove the computer's ability for idle control altogether, I hate to go that far because I think you lose some drivability that way. But you can't expect something that is aggressively lumpy to have good street manners anyway. Unfortunately, overlap isn't a cam spec that is often published. So you usually have to calculate it yourself with Desktop Dyno or something similar. Generally the higher the LSA, the less overlap but that is not always true.

 

[73azbronco]

I like turtles. Yall stepped out of my sandbox of drooling.

 

[Madgyver]

Yes, the more valve overlap the harder idle is to tune. I tell most people in the build process to get their gains from higher lift rather than duration which increases valve overlap. When both valves are open at the same time the air coming in goes right back out the exhaust and is read by the o2 sensor as a false lean condition. The increased valve overlap is what causes the lumpy sound, this also causes "reversion" through the MAF sensor and makes the readings at idle erratic. It doesn't affect off-idle nearly as badly.

The OE computers usually handle up to 40 degrees of overlap well, at about 60 degrees you start bumping up idle speed to smooth things out, eventually, you end up forcing open loop at idle. Some people go as far as to remove the computer's ability for idle control altogether, I hate to go that far because I think you lose some drivability that way. But you can't expect something that is aggressively lumpy to have good street manners anyway. Unfortunately, overlap isn't a cam spec that is often published. So you usually have to calculate it yourself with Desktop Dyno or something similar. Generally the higher the LSA, the less overlap but that is not always true.

Thank you..
This coming from you, I'll stick with my QJet. No good local tuners here for support when you need them.

 

[chuck1022]

I'm feeling better about using my Explorers again. I'm not opposed to trying other systems....but I really like the Ford EFI.

The wiring harnesses and cpu's go to Garry...what else am I stripping off these donor vehicles?

Rear ends....

 

[chuck1022]

I have a 1996 and a 2000 explorer for donors.....the 1996 is more EGR friendly as far as fitment?.......

 

[fordguy]

I have a 1996 and a 2000 explorer for donors.....the 1996 is more EGR friendly as far as fitment?.......

Keep the rear end, especially disc brakes. Yes ther is info on early EGR on this forum as far as fitment. Watch the thread I posted about EGR and evap. I strip clamps, sensors, injectors, etc

 

[fordguy]

True trailblazers install fuel-injected 8BA flatheads in their EBs. Jus' sayin'...

“The cool kids”

 

[Boss Hugg]

Guess i'm gonna do some research on what it takes to flash my own PCMs. I've been running a Quarterhorse for several years which EFIGUY helped with to some degree and i suspect the battery will be going dead before long. I want to start building our dedicated crawler and I should have all the explorer stuff to build it. I just need a PCM that doesn't throw the light all the time. I'd like to know when there IS an issue outside of emissions stuff.

 

[chuck1022]

Guess i'm gonna do some research on what it takes to flash my own PCMs. I've been running a Quarterhorse for several years which EFIGUY helped with to some degree and i suspect the battery will be going dead before long. I want to start building our dedicated crawler and I should have all the explorer stuff to build it. I just need a PCM that doesn't throw the light all the time. I'd like to know when there IS an issue outside of emissions stuff.

Let us know what you find out!!!!!

 

[Boss Hugg]

Of course, i am not finding anything that talks about changing the programming. I probably need a megasquirt, but I also have the 4R70W to control...

 

[lars]

Guess i'm gonna do some research on what it takes to flash my own PCMs. I've been running a Quarterhorse for several years which EFIGUY helped with to some degree and i suspect the battery will be going dead before long. I want to start building our dedicated crawler and I should have all the explorer stuff to build it. I just need a PCM that doesn't throw the light all the time. I'd like to know when there IS an issue outside of emissions stuff.

Cue Garry's post #35. He will still do the PATS delete and other minor adjustments.

You can do all of the Explorer PCM tuning yourself including tuning some fairly wild engines but the learning curve is way steep. You need a dedicated cable if you want to tune by reflashing (as opposed to using the Quarterhorse) and you will need tuning software. None of which is cheap. A local guy near me has a 67 Mustang with an FE motor running an Explorer PCM. I don't know the horsepower number but I'm guessing far side of 500. And until recently it was controlling the 4R70W as well.

 

[OK75Bronco]

So how about the aftermarket standalone trans controllers? The quick 4 is the one I was looking at. I had planned on Proflo 4 and 4R70W out of an explorer. Anyone have any experience with those controllers? I think that the MSD atomic EFI had a controller for transmissions too if I’m not mistaken. Not sure if that is even still available. I actually installed a Proflo system on an old (rebuilt) Mopar 440 for a customer once and it was super smooth to set up and the engine busted right off an ran with no issues. I have been going back and forth between Proflo and the Holley systems. Sniper would be all I would need as far as tune ability goes. I have my doubts though because of all the negative press the sniper gets due to heat soak and RFI. I do like the multiport aspect of the Proflo as well. I do realize as stated earlier in this thread there’s not any performance difference between the TB style injection and the port style. However engine masters did point out that one advantage of the multiport setup is better cylinder to cylinder distribution. Not that it’s going to make much difference at my power level. I had considered going explorer as well. I even emailed back and forth with EFI guy a while back to hash out what it would take. I have a doner explorer even. I just think for what I’m trying to do the simplicity of the proflo system is probably the way to go. Anyone have experience with the standalone controllers? I only know of one shop in my area that has used one and that was controlling a 5R110 behind a 12v Cummins. Truth be told I don’t know what controller it was but I do know it took them some head scratching to get it to work right because of how low the Cummins makes torque.

 

[lars]

So how about the aftermarket standalone trans controllers? The quick 4 is the one I was looking at. I had planned on Proflo 4 and 4R70W out of an explorer. Anyone have any experience with those controllers? I think that the MSD atomic EFI had a controller for transmissions too if I’m not mistaken. Not sure if that is even still available. I actually installed a Proflo system on an old (rebuilt) Mopar 440 for a customer once and it was super smooth to set up and the engine busted right off an ran with no issues. I have been going back and forth between Proflo and the Holley systems. Sniper would be all I would need as far as tune ability goes. I have my doubts though because of all the negative press the sniper gets due to heat soak and RFI. I do like the multiport aspect of the Proflo as well. I do realize as stated earlier in this thread there’s not any performance difference between the TB style injection and the port style. However engine masters did point out that one advantage of the multiport setup is better cylinder to cylinder distribution. Not that it’s going to make much difference at my power level. I had considered going explorer as well. I even emailed back and forth with EFI guy a while back to hash out what it would take. I have a doner explorer even. I just think for what I’m trying to do the simplicity of the proflo system is probably the way to go. Anyone have experience with the standalone controllers? I only know of one shop in my area that has used one and that was controlling a 5R110 behind a 12v Cummins. Truth be told I don’t know what controller it was but I do know it took them some head scratching to get it to work right because of how low the Cummins makes torque.

Plenty of people on this forum running Quick 4 etc controllers from USShift and Baumann before that. The USShift controller will also run a 6R80 transmission as I understand it.

 

[ba123]

Of course, i am not finding anything that talks about changing the programming. I probably need a megasquirt, but I also have the 4R70W to control...

PiMPxshift Standalone Engine Management + Transmission Control (Sequential or Batch EFI)

PiMPxshift Standalone Engine Management + Trans Control

www.stinger-performance.com

I think it's technically two megasquirts built into one package. One for engine and one for trans.

 

[chuck1022]

http://[URL]https://www.stinger-performance.com/store/pimpxshift-powertrain-management?search=shift

[/URL]

I think it's technically two megasquirts built into one package. One for engine and one for trans.

So simplify this for me. You have an Explorer motor trans and wiring harness. The ford ecu is bypassed and is controlled by the megasquirt?