Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 45 of 45
  1. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vdubn View Post
    Ok, so I swapped in the new MAP/BP sensor and tested it. Same 2.54v on the MAP signal wire. Then I switched my DVOM to Hz and it shows 165 Hz frequency with no vacuum. Since our cars don't connect the vacuum to the sensor, I didn't see any need to apply vacuum and test the frequency.

    Finally, I disconnected the vacuum from the adjustable FPR, plugged the connection going to the engine, and set the fuel pressure to 32psi. Then I reconnected the vacuum hose and revved the engine. Stayed at 32psi, never came up from there. I thought it should jump a bit, and eventually hit 40psi. Maybe it's not an issue.
    Based on your test results, don't we conclude that the new one is a dud as well? The dud I replaced got 2.50v and 160hz with no vacuum...

    As others have indicated, yes, do your fuel pressure adjusting without vacuum.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  2. #27
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    Yep, it would seem, but 2 new sensors with the same results says either Napa had a really bad run, or the test isn't appropriate for MAF vehicles (which I wondered since the test states to check voltage with vacuum applied... Not a scenario our vehicles will ever run into).

    In reading some other threads on this issue, to test a BP sensor, frequency is what is necessary to test, voltage is not. So the Hz measurement is only necessary to be tested on the MAF vehicles, at Idle or with KOEO, since vacuum is never applied to the BP sensor.

    Maybe my logic is flawed...wouldn't be the first time.
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  3. #28

    Default

    Frequency at sea level should be around 153, and go down as altitude increases. 165 says you're about a quarter mile underground... ��
    Jim DeAngelis
    Cornucopia of Useless Knowledge
    Connoisseur of Dearborn Ferrous Oxide
    '83 GT hatch, currently under the knife
    '79 Capri 2.3L n/a, Medium Copper metallic, survivor
    (bought from MRausch82)

  4. #29
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    Look back in the frequency section, it says around 160 with no vacuum, and with vacuum applied, the value goes down. 5 Hz over their approximation is not a big deal. If it were 180 or 190, then it would be far under sea level.
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  5. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vdubn View Post
    Yep, it would seem, but 2 new sensors with the same results says either Napa had a really bad run, or the test isn't appropriate for MAF vehicles (which I wondered since the test states to check voltage with vacuum applied... Not a scenario our vehicles will ever run into).

    In reading some other threads on this issue, to test a BP sensor, frequency is what is necessary to test, voltage is not. So the Hz measurement is only necessary to be tested on the MAF vehicles, at Idle or with KOEO, since vacuum is never applied to the BP sensor.

    Maybe my logic is flawed...wouldn't be the first time.
    ... and without vacuum applied, AKA atmospheric pressure, barometric pressure. MAP/BP same diff. Why you figure MAF conversion just requires no vacuum hose connected? Same sensors, same output.

    The test results the OP at 300ft elevation should be getting are the test listed less than 1.66v and 158Hz*.

    BP at 300ft = 14.537psi*

    *Calculated from figures in table at: http://www.sensorsone.com/altitude-p...ts-conversion/

    Interpolation with the voltage test results chart suggests a long, LONG way below sea level.

    Dimensional analysis* & interpolation* using the same linked table above, of a 165Hz test result, equals greater than 1000ft below sea level.

    * 14.696psi / 160Hz = x / 165Hz
    x = 165Hz / ( 14.696psi / 160Hz )
    x = 15.437psi

    VREF was tested earlier at 5v... unless VREF has increased, where else does less resistance (greater output voltage, which is converted to frequency or vice versa) come from?...

    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  6. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FB71 View Post
    Frequency at sea level should be around 153, and go down as altitude increases. 165 says you're about a quarter mile underground... ��
    ^ Yep
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  7. #32
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walking-Tall View Post
    ^ Yep
    Looks like I remembered the measurement incorrectly... just retested and its 155.4 Hz... I just remembered wrong. Either way, the car is running well.

    I reset the fuel pressure to 40psi without the vacuum hose connected. When I bleep the throttle, it drops to about 36 psi.
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  8. #33

    Default

    even 40psi is a bit high at warm idle. KOEO should be 40, with KOER (warm idle) around 35.
    Jim DeAngelis
    Cornucopia of Useless Knowledge
    Connoisseur of Dearborn Ferrous Oxide
    '83 GT hatch, currently under the knife
    '79 Capri 2.3L n/a, Medium Copper metallic, survivor
    (bought from MRausch82)

  9. #34
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    With KOEO, I get no more than 25 psi from the short primer. I'm only checking fuel pressure with KOER
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  10. #35

    Default

    There are a few more items to be checked or considered here that have not been mentioned that could cause a rich idle.

    First, pull the IAT sensor off and check to see if it's coked up.
    Second, check the voltage output at idle of the coolant temp sensor for the ECM, there's a chart for that that will tell you what it should be for 190*-200*.
    Third, determine if the T-stat is opening to soon and the engine is not coming up to temp, I prefer a 192* T-stat for the best driveability. I tried a 180* and it just didn't like it and I could tell the difference immediately.

    Let us know. Good luck.

  11. #36

  12. #37
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    You said IAT, did you mean IAC? If so, mine is brand new.
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  13. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vdubn View Post
    You said IAT, did you mean IAC? If so, mine is brand new.
    IAT is the Intake Air Temp sensor, I believe it's located on the D/S lower intake about in the middle, also, it looks like the coolant temp sensor which is located at the front of the lower intake, so don't pull the wrong one out or you'll have a coolant mess.

  14. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gt pony View Post
    IAT is the Intake Air Temp sensor, I believe it's located on the D/S lower intake about in the middle, also, it looks like the coolant temp sensor which is located at the front of the lower intake, so don't pull the wrong one out or you'll have a coolant mess.
    Otherwise widely (and universally) known as ACT (air charge temperature... sensor).
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  15. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gt pony View Post
    There are a few more items to be checked or considered here that have not been mentioned that could cause a rich idle.

    First, pull the IAT sensor off and check to see if it's coked up.
    Second, check the voltage output at idle of the coolant temp sensor for the ECM, there's a chart for that that will tell you what it should be for 190*-200*.
    Third, determine if the T-stat is opening to soon and the engine is not coming up to temp, I prefer a 192* T-stat for the best driveability. I tried a 180* and it just didn't like it and I could tell the difference immediately.

    Let us know. Good luck.
    There are charts alright...





    The calibration and sensors within EEC-IV makes a 180-degree thermostat PERFECT, most especially for performance, which is EXACTLY what EVERY Mustang enthusiast is ALL about...
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  16. #41
    FEP Member vdubn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Posts
    455

    Default

    Well, I currently have a 165 thermostat in the car... I also have a 190 degree, tomorrow I will see if I can get a 180 degree thermostat. Car runs at 180 solid, with the 165 degree thermostat, and comes up to temperature as expected (not too slow, not too fast).

    Mike, I really appreciate the test procedures. I will let the car warm up and will back probe both sensors, and then on the ACT sensor, I should see 5v reference at the LG/P wire, then across the two pins see what the voltage is based upon the chart, correct? On the ECT, should get 5v on the LG/Y wire, then .8 volts across the 2 wires when my temp gauge shows about 175 degrees.

    Any good way to tell the temp of the ambient air in the manifold, so I can verify what value to look for?
    85 GT Hatchback, T-Tops. 2012 Coyote 5.0L Swap, T56 Magnum, GT550 Dept of Boost kit, with Eaton M122 SC, RAM 11" Powergrip clutch, BBK Long Tubes/OR X-Pipe, Flowmaster Axle Back, Stifflers DS Loop, and Rear X-member, AJE Tube Crossmember with AJE-Mod Mounts, 3.73 Posi 8.8, 5 lug Cobra 13" fr and 12.6" rear disc swap, 2004 Hydroboost Swap, MM SubFrame Connectors, MM Panhard Bar, MM front A-Arms, MM rear control arms, MM CC Plates, MM Coilovers w/Koni dampeners, MM Torque Arm (soon to be installed).

  17. #42

    Default

    Voltage or resistance (I'd check both. I'm weird like that) for ACT/ECT sensors, yes.

    Too many variables for ACT after running. Unless you're able to somehow measure the air temperature inside in the area of the sensor tip, like removing it and measuring the temperature in the hole... you should be safe assuming the temperature outside (hopefully 50+ Fahrenheit, as per the chart above) or wherever the car is, is what temperature the air inside the intake will be... and take note of the last sentence in paragraph four up there for ACT too, regarding corrosion/extra resistance (and/or viewed as dead nuts continuity between sensor and brain box) of connections/circuit and what happens with air:fuel mixture...
    Last edited by Walking-Tall; 02-13-2018 at 09:40 PM.
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  18. #43
    FEP Super Member erratic50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    4,575

    Default

    My car is a gas sucking pig when running a 160 or a 180. Good performance but loses 6-7 MPG highway. I run a 195 exclusively after those experiments

  19. #44

    Default

    I've never done any big hp mods, but I've found the 195 t stat to bee good as well.

    A 180 stat didn't seem to hurt mileage on long trips, but in winter time it took forever to warm up and the heater sucked. Usually took about 25 miles of driving to get it up to temp on a cold summer morning.

    With the 195 stat I didnt over heat on a 110° day sitting in traffic after a 45 minute freeway drive. This was on a 86 cougar with 300+k miles on it.

    My old tbird I even had working a.c. and same thing, never an issue. I drove that car 7 days a week for a year and a half and put around 80k miles on it with multiple 1500 mile trips everywhere from Montana in winter (started good at -25°f with no block heater) and down to southern utah with 115° temps.

    I've bought a few cars the previous owner put a 180 t-stat in and it kills mileage.
    2 1986 cougars (both 4 eyed and 5.0)
    1 1987 cougar

  20. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haystack View Post
    I've never done any big hp mods, but I've found the 195 t stat to bee good as well.

    A 180 stat didn't seem to hurt mileage on long trips, but in winter time it took forever to warm up and the heater sucked. Usually took about 25 miles of driving to get it up to temp on a cold summer morning.

    With the 195 stat I didnt over heat on a 110° day sitting in traffic after a 45 minute freeway drive. This was on a 86 cougar with 300+k miles on it.

    My old tbird I even had working a.c. and same thing, never an issue. I drove that car 7 days a week for a year and a half and put around 80k miles on it with multiple 1500 mile trips everywhere from Montana in winter (started good at -25°f with no block heater) and down to southern utah with 115° temps.

    I've bought a few cars the previous owner put a 180 t-stat in and it kills mileage.
    Thanks for your input. There's a big difference between a 180* stat in a carbureted car and in a fuel-injected car. I'm speaking from 55 yrs. of experience here. Go with the 192-195* T-Stat.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •