Close



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38
  1. #1

    Default Big Block Mustang for 2020

    Ford Says Its New 7.3-Liter gas V8 Can Fit In The F-150, Mustang
    Ed

  2. #2

    Default

    That will be a real tire fryer for sure. All that displacement and stroke driven low end torque should be a handful to put to the ground.

  3. #3
    FEP Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Santa Maria Ca
    Posts
    718

    Default

    The real question is, will it swap into classic mustangs and foxbodies. If not for the portly dimensions and small displacements of the modular series, we’d not be seeing ls based motors swapped into everything.
    85 Saleen Mustang(s)

  4. #4
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BaconB8 View Post
    The real question is, will it swap into classic mustangs and foxbodies. If not for the portly dimensions and small displacements of the modular series, we’d not be seeing ls based motors swapped into everything.
    I understand from blueovalforums dot com that the SOHC 6.2 Boss deck height of 9.410" has been increased futher to 10.170. The 6.2" rod is not carried over, so with its 4.13 bore, 4.14" stoke, and 6.76" rods and stock, modern 1.34" compression deck pistons are likely.

    Even so, it should let it sit low enough, and its really just a NASCAR FR9 in bore spacing and way less than a 351M/ 400 Ford with with the deck. 10.32 for a 351m/400, which was taller than a 385 series 429/460, which is 10.220".

    Its tall, but not real tall. A good Capri style hood might become common.

    Like mustangxtreme's 1981 Black Magic 400 c6.....

  5. #5
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,127

    Default

    7point5inafox with his 10.22" tall 4.90" bore spacing 460 Mustang, and mustangxtreme's 10.322" deck , 4.375" block swap are your benchmarks to "Triple 4" 444 Godzilla Goodness.

    Back in the late 70's, the Fox conversions to fit the 351W, 335 (351C/351M/400) and Lima 385 (370/429/460) to the 79 Mustang style serp drive were all done by the same team, so everything is modular, and interchanges. Kaufmann's #8945 kit was a fit everything, it was what everyone was copying, and you'll be able to use the stock serp stuff the 7.3 has already.

    Ford made Kaufmann the go to guy and its was all pretty simple.

    Sump and K member should be easy.

    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...rnator-on-351C

  6. #6

    Default

    After all the work and money that just went into the GT350 and GT500, I'll believe a factory Godzilla Mustang when I see it. As for the F-150, Ford REALLY wants you to believe in the EcoBoost, so again, I'll believe it when I see it. Even in the Raptor. Although, I don't see why the 7.3 couldn't go into the Cobra Jet.

    As for swaps, I'll say it again. They need to sell the 7.3 for CHEAPER than the Coyote. Then they'll sell like hotcakes.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  7. #7

    Default

    Frankly you can make more power cheaper with aftermarket Windsor based blocks.

    When you take a 9.5 deck and punch it out 4.185 or even 4.2 with the latest from Dart it’s guaranteed to be a real workhorse. And a power plant that requires minimal vehicle re-engineering

    468 cubic inches of Windsor goodness!

    Those who haven’t read up on how much a larger bore helps with air flow on the intake valve need to!!

    For me, I don’t see a real reason to build anything else. Maybe the conversation aspect?

    My 85 Saleen clone will look factory but pack a 353 cid punch with rev capacity past 7000.

    Opinions vary for sure but the latest Dart has to offer is more than good enough for me.

  8. #8
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,127

    Default

    The real power increases are in in the right variable valve timing (VVT) cam. Since we live in a FMV emission and Tier 4 world, specfic power, ie hp per cube has been dialed back from what you should be able to get unlimited.

    With the right VVT, The whole torque curve can be much more like a proper big block, with a good specific power rating underload. Under part throttle, eveything is pulled back. Chryslers V10 Viper varicam was getting pretty good. Dual-independent variable valve actuation (VVA) on a single camshaft

    If done right, you can dial up well over 1.4 lb-ft per cube for a 444. That is 620 lb-ft. The best long stroke 4V Mod 5.4's with long stroke 4.25" crank and siamesed 3.7" or greater block are punching out 6 liters and making 600 lb-ft from 366 cubes.

    Until the cam gets intake and exhaust lobe seperation advance and retard, and not just at the vernier advance and retard at the cam sproket, two valve per cylinder engines, even the best of the Windsor, 335 and R452's are going to be less streetable than a nice 7.3 with VVT.

  9. #9
    FEP Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Santa Maria Ca
    Posts
    718

    Default

    I see Ford capitalizing on the stellar reputation of the International 7.3 as pure marketing. Everyone knows how good those are. Today’s buyers know 5.0 and 7.3 as good things, regardless of how there’s no actual association between the modern variants and the originals. I guarantee Ford will NEVER use the six liter displacement in any truck again, no matter how good it actually is. The six-oh is forever branded as garbage.

    The big bore thing seems to be the hot ticket with pushrod small blocks now. Darn shame you’re 2k over a regular rebuild with the aftermarket block. At least they don’t crack as easy with real power!
    85 Saleen Mustang(s)

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erratic50 View Post
    Maybe the conversation aspect?
    There's something to be said for that. That's a BIG reason my car is fuel injected.

    To me, when I look at something like picking an engine, another big consideration is, what was this engine designed to do stock? My ultimate build would have a Coyote. Right off the showroom floor, you have 460 horsepower! I mean, DAMN, no one dreamed of that when my Windsor 302 was built. And that's with A/C, sitting in traffic, day to day use! I do not understand why guys build race cars with Coyotes. Seems like a waste to me. Like you say, it's not that hard to get similar power from a Windsor, probably for less money, so why wouldn't you just do that? It may be rough around the edges compared to the Coyote, but who cares, it's made for 1/4 mile passes mostly, right? But for me, I don't want a race car. I want a car that's fun, but I can use it every day if I want. Can you do that with the 468 Windsor you're talking about? That engine was originally designed to have no more than 300 horsepower at the MOST from the factory.

    At this point in my life, I don't look for an engine i can build or modify. If you go much higher than modern engines do stock, you get into not being able to plant that power (ESPECIALLY in an older car without the electronic nannies), and fishtailing into crowds of people as there are SO many videos of Mustangs doing these days.

    This was a long way of saying, yes, I would swap a 7.3 into something. If I have my way, a '70-71 Cyclone. Drop it in, and you have all that power and torque without a thing to worry about durability-wise (except maybe with the car itself, ). I wouldn't mind the trucky-ness of it because that's a lot of car to be moving around. A Windsor would probably be cheaper, yes, but easier? No. I don't know much about building engines. My Zeph does have a Windsor (Coyotes are too expensive at this point for me), but it is one that has never run well (possibly just because it's old, I'm not sure), and the mods I've done to it haven't done a thing for me except cause more headaches. Making it run well has just gotten more complicated with each mod. Does it have more power than stock? Maybe. I'm not sure.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  11. #11

    Default

    VVT develops a ton of low end torque. This much is true. But how much of that ends the fun factor driving a car where you cannot put it to the ground.

    Its not hard at all to build a VERY streetable big inch Windsor. People do it all the time.

    Another thing you can play with is valve lift and duration changes via leak down lifters. They sure can mellow out an angry bumpstick down low and wake it up up high — depending upon the build.

    Anyway - I’ll try not to yuck anyone eles’s yum too much. I just hate it when I see a great car turned into an unreliable pile of parts that just doesn’t want to work.

    Imo if the car can’t do the being a car thing well then the modifications have missed the point. Sadly I see a TON of cars that are forever changed to other drive trains then sold off when the fun factor wasn’t where it should be. The reliability went out the window and there it sits

  12. #12

    Default

    Yeah, I was just trying to give a counterpoint to your point. You could be right about a 7.3 not making sense in a car application, at least in stock form. I'm certainly not married to the idea, and would be very happy with a 429.

    Not that this is what you were saying, but I certainly feel like my car is just a pile of parts that don't want to work well together. I'm not giving up though. These next few humps to get over might make all the difference.

    I have a bit of a prejudice against old school engines, especially carbed. My only experiences with them have been a nightmare of constant tweaking. My brother's BBC powered '79 Capri race car built in the '80s and '90s was just a mess. Overheated at the drop of a hat, uncomfortable (gutted interior, stupid rollcage to contort around to get in it every time), engine and trans never seemed happy, wouldn't idle, etc. All for an 11 second quarter mile. Then there was my highly modified 289 I bought from its builder I had in my '87 Mustang, and my junky '86 Bronco with a carbed 351. Those were okay, but the overall experience gave the impression they were just barely keeping it together. And so on. So, that's where I'm coming from.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  13. #13
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZephyrEFI View Post
    ..........

    I have a bit of a prejudice against old school engines, especially carbed. My only experiences with them have been a nightmare of constant tweaking. My brother's BBC powered '79 Capri race car built in the '80s and '90s was just a mess. Overheated at the drop of a hat, uncomfortable (gutted interior, stupid rollcage to contort around to get in it every time), engine and trans never seemed happy, wouldn't idle, etc. All for an 11 second quarter mile. Then there was my highly modified 289 I bought from its builder I had in my '87 Mustang, and my junky '86 Bronco with a carbed 351. Those were okay, but the overall experience gave the impression they were just barely keeping it together. And so on. So, that's where I'm coming from.

    Nice points.

    Your results are what most people find in 289's and especially the carb F150 5.8 trucks. The really lower than stock at the pump gas octane situation, and the later manner in which EGR influenced the basic 4180/4190 Holley tuning was a key issue.



    It takes some time, but Ford really does do it better. A mass produced engine is not really blue printed, so YRMV.

    Even small block 4bbl carb, or EFi 5.0 and 5.8's are generally very clean and smooth running if tuned the way Ford intended.

    EGR blockages, and a diet of bad lawnmwer 87 will always make it down on pep.


    A great EFI 5.0 Ford is always exceptional, Brad-onator! When you sift through the rest, you'll nail it!


    Of Fords factory GT40P headed 295 hp, 321 lb-ft Ford by Tickford EFI engine in Pages 45 to 47 in September 2001, Wheels Magazine said it best:-.




    https://www.whichcar.com.au/features...ommodore-vx-ss

    And the engine! What about the engine? Love it. This has got to be the dear old Windsor V8's finest hour....The new XR8, then, is the winner.It's a much more rewardingly responsive drive than the SS, and now deliviers simarly thrilling performance. Ford has ended the reign of the Gen III-engined SS as the king of affordable Australian V8- performance cars. Deny it if you like. But that's your problem, not mine.
    And the next year, they added a 342 5.6 liter stock bore 5.0 stroker with 335 hp and stock GT40P heads CNC machined and did the same thing....


    Even the GT40 non P for 1992 was designed to match the 351c from the old 1971-1974 Pantera 5.8 liter days.


    Initally in 1992, it was 305 hp, then downgraded to 248 hp for emissions, it took about 10 years of "GalŠpagos Island" development by Aston Martins Tickford to bring it back up to an above 1970-1974 351C 285, 295, 310, 330 net horsepower level found in the foreign export Panteras. From 1990 to 1996, the De Tomaso Pantrea Si basically matched the bigger 351C engine power ratings.



    Untill you've enjoyed a really good Big Block with a RRP Q jet, or the Panteras 4300D, all of Fords factory made non Holley 4bbl Big Block carbs were too small.

    As Motor in the Unitied Kingdom said in 1972, unlike other American V8 engines, the Pantera 5.8 doesn't loose power at high rpms. 6300 rpm, 330 hp net, and 6.4 second 20-40 mph accelerations in top gear, with a 138 to 165 mph top speed depending on gearing. Imperial 19.7 mpg at 84 mph average cruising speed, 14 second flat 1/4 miles.

    The carbs on all other 5.8's were too small, as well of the more common garden variety Cleveland and 335 carbs. Any factory 1969-1972 Holley option was generally too big.

    Its important to note that some of the 605 and 715 Autolites 4300D and some 4350 Motorcrafts, and the factory Qjet 429 SCJ replacement carbs were truly excellent, and in terms of carb area, CFM, and seamless power delivery, the best carbs ever.

    Spreabores with mechanical secondary operation Thermoquad and Q jet style was the total solution. (Overseas 302C/351C's got TQ 9600/9800'S).

    The issue was always a stiff, break prone mechanical secondary operation, and unless it was in a Pantera, fuel starvation in hard cornering. The 4180/4190 truck carbs were simply excellent, but simply too small for anything but a 5.0.

    US Mass produced carbs were of exceptional quality, and GM aced it with the Rochester Q Jet. Ford were more worried about how it could pass emissions, so they did nothing at all to fix the 4300D and 4350. As a 4bbl, those carbs were exceptional, but unlike a good old Q jet or Vac Sec Holley 4160/4180/4190, it was very specific carb with 20 vital things that had toi be done just so. If Ford hadn't been forced to whang over to the VV2700/VV7200, Feedback 2150's and Motorcraft CFi's, the Mustang GT would have run a revamped 4350 Motorcraft.

    Fords 1980 to 1988 era higher GVW trucks with the 370 or 429 were downgrades, with the 2WD 460's a replacement for the 400 from 1983Ė86.

    The spread bore carbs don't top out till 470 hp, and that was proven during the Group A sedan racing class in Europe and Australia, where Holden topped 462 hp net at 6700 rpm with the 304 cubic inch V8 Larry Perkins used, a 725 cfm Q jet.


    The old Spreadbore Big Block four barrels were normally b-startized by people who didn't follow the factory linkage, EGR and ignition protocols. Ford was probably the worst. Even on Small block Fords, the breakage of the secondary throttle shaft in 605 cfm 4300D's used in the 1971-1976 300 hp 351C 4V was endemic down here. People just couldn't seam to follow FoMoCo's TSB's.


    I don't think a poorly set up 7.3 won't be any different. Even a problem with setting up a fuel pump from a Fox Mustang gas tank to feed a 450 hp engine can take out a great engines torque and power curve.

  14. #14

    Default

    Thank you! I sure hope so. I even avoided going to a stroker even though it wouldn't have cost that much more in the hopes that would make it easier for the computer to be tuned.

    I've always been jealous of the Falcon you guys got. I was p!$sed when I found out how close we came to getting it in 2005 only to have it not happen. I wonder how much it would cost to import one...
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  15. #15
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    12,637

    Default

    This is a bit off subject in regards to the new 7.3, but since Brad has gone down the carb/EFI route I will throw this into the mix.

    Nothing against a good ole' carburetor, I personally have had better luck in regards to Daily Driver and just basic drive-ability with the Edelbrock carbs and even the ole' Quadrajet when I had my Trans Ams. I have had my fair share of Holleys and they are fine too, but I just seemed to have better luck with the spreadbore setup.

    With that said, my plans for virtually all of my Four Eyes at this point is to run the Fitech throttle body setup in lieu of a carb or Ford's SEFI. I have a full SEFI on my 85 Road Racer with an old school 331 stroker and honestly I just can't get it to run the way it should. I am sure that is as much me as the setup, but it just seems I am chasing my tail with EFI issues. Doesn't want to idle right, surges, and some other issues. Unfortunately not being home much over the past year hasn't helped either.

    Anyway, long story short is because I don't really want to tinker with a carb most of the time and tired of all the added sensors, wiring, etc. of the Ford SEFI I am hoping to just run a nice Fitech setup and be able to just drive the dang cars instead of constantly fixing them. Besides, I am pretty sure I can get a Fitech to work on the new 7.3 once someone makes a carb intake for it!
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Ongoing RestoModification
    1984 SVO Awaiting Restoration
    1986 GT Wrecked by PO, but still want to save!

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Underway
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  16. #16
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,127

    Default

    I learned from JA Cook taht the same issue my service guy down here had with Nissan and Toyota EFi cars was a common Ford issue. Ford had more block connectors and less latent "nicenes"s in its wiring than any other EFi era cars. ToJo's changed when they found the block connectors were giving service guys grief. My old OBDII era Toyota's then went to virtually no block connectors, and very expensive , good quality vaccum lines, and that made them absolute nightmares to service, but perfectly reliable idles, and no issues with putting 87 octane in an 11:1 comprssion engine. Fords had issues because they had brought in subsystems, and that was both a solution and a problem.

    Block connector and wire continuity varies base voltages to about four parts of the ECM, and then need to follow the factory ignition and EGR systems and the total exhaust restrictions.

    My old CFi Toyota 1.8 with Automatic overdrive from 1982 was perfectly reliable car except for the ignition and fuel and EGR changes. For instance, if you used 95 octane, you could base up the timing.

    Go back to 87, and it was a knocking dowg. And without high test, the gearchanges labored.

    Most EFi cars are auto, and the same Continuity/Ign/EGR/Auto trans reponse thing applies. The continuity issues are base TPS/ Idle control resistor matters.

    And actual getting "unaerated" fuel delivered to the injectors by the fuel pump changes due to the fuel tank pickup and the eart wiring, and growing exhaust backpressure sometimes crucifes fuel supply, and the EECIV goes on a SPPD* mission.

    *Society for the Promotion of Petty Distractions...


    The earstwhile 2020 7.3 swap engine will have just the same issues in an engine swap, because if its a 197whatwever Spreadbore 429 Cobra Jet, or a 1983 460 4bbl or 1993 460 EFi, it'll be dealing with 1) voltages, 2) spark, 3) fuel delivery and quality 4) Emmisions package changes and 5) lower or higher than designed exhaust backpressure. Anything missing will send any EFi into a head spin, but the EECIV more than any other system due to the base voltage changes being so small. Port EFI is very unforgiving of those. And replacment parts in the TFI or TPS/MAP of the fusile link , or a non standard IAC diode or O2 sensors send only the FoMoCo into periodic fits.

  17. #17

    Default

    Out of curiosity, have either of you guys tried tuning an EEC-IV SEFI? Like getting a chip/interface thingy that will allow you to crack into the computer and make changes?
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  18. #18
    FEP Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sprague River, OR
    Posts
    578

    Default

    With all the SEFI issues, why not just replace the ECU with something like a plug-n-play Microsquirt box? It allows tuning easily, can adjust for boost if needed, and can use the stock harness. That's what I have considered if I stay with my 302 based engine with Ford EFI. The harness seems fine after I changed so much, but still doesn't allow for tuning.

  19. #19
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    12,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZephyrEFI View Post
    Out of curiosity, have either of you guys tried tuning an EEC-IV SEFI? Like getting a chip/interface thingy that will allow you to crack into the computer and make changes?

    I have considered the Megasquirt and/or Pimp by Stinger, but have not pulled the trigger on either one. Part of the reason is honestly I hate the way the Ford EFI looks in the engine bay. I know why it is how it is, and I know there are other manifold options out there, but personally I have never cared for the look myself. Most of that is because I am a bit anal when it comes to balance and symmetry, so I personally prefer intakes that have a center or top inlet to balance the engine bay out.

    Although again I don't care for the look of the EFI in the SVO either, I will most likely be going with a Stinger Pimp for mine just to maximize the power and driving experience and I will just have to get over the non symmetrical look. Truthfully I have always hated the offset turbo intercooler inlet.

    OH C#$P I have to run the SVO Mafia is after me now!

    Actually if you want to take a try at it and can get your hands on a computer that will interface with it . . . I actually have an old Speed Brain setup that was one of the early systems to allow you to tweak the Ford SEFI. Was supposed to be pretty good. I bought it for a project to work on, then ended up selling the project before I used it and haven't attempted since. Sitting in the box on a shelf in my garage.
    Last edited by wraithracing; 02-15-2019 at 02:43 PM.
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Ongoing RestoModification
    1984 SVO Awaiting Restoration
    1986 GT Wrecked by PO, but still want to save!

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Underway
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  20. #20
    FEP Member bkm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    House Springs MO
    Posts
    129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    I have considered the Megasquirt and/or Pimp by Stinger, but have not pulled the trigger on either one. Part of the reason is honestly I hate the way the Ford EFI looks in the engine bay. I know why it is how it is, and I know there are other manifold options out there, but personally I have never cared for the look myself. Most of that is because I am a bit anal when it comes to balance and symmetry, so I personally prefer intakes that have a center or top inlet to balance the engine bay out.

    Although again I don't care for the look of the EFI in the SVO either, I will most likely be going with a Stinger Pimp for mine just to maximize the power and driving experience and I will just have to get over the non symmetrical look. Truthfully I have always hated the offset turbo intercooler inlet.

    OH C#$P I have to run the SVO Mafia is after me now!

    Actually if you want to take a try at it and can get your hands on a computer that will interface with it . . . I actually have an old Speed Brain setup that was one of the early systems to allow you to tweak the Ford SEFI. Was supposed to be pretty good. I bought it for a project to work on, then ended up selling the project before I used it and haven't attempted since. Sitting in the box on a shelf in my garage.
    I haven't heard Speed Brain in almost 20 years. Blast from the past.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Basin Motorsports View Post
    With all the SEFI issues, why not just replace the ECU with something like a plug-n-play Microsquirt box? It allows tuning easily, can adjust for boost if needed, and can use the stock harness. That's what I have considered if I stay with my 302 based engine with Ford EFI. The harness seems fine after I changed so much, but still doesn't allow for tuning.
    Well, I was looking at something like a Moates thingy that cracks into your Ford ECU. I don't need to do a bunch of tuning going forward, I just want something that will compensate for my mods and set up my engine to run well on a dyno.

    Something like this.

    http://www.moates.net/f3-ford-memory....html?cPath=63

    I know very little about this sort of thing though, so I don't know if that's all I need to bring to the tuning shop, or if more stuff is needed. Regardless, I won't spend more than $250 on any one part number.

    Megasquirt, on the other hand, for one thing, I have a lot of trouble making heads or tails of what's even available. Their website is definitely information overload, and I don't know what half of it means. I THINK this is what I would want:

    https://www.diyautotune.com/product/...d-mustang-5-0/

    I see it uses a MAP sensor, and you can eliminate your MAF. Why is that good? Wasn't it a common thing for guys with speed density to convert their cars to MAF? It's kind of the same as Fitech and the other simplified TBI kits, they only use a few sensors. I just can't wrap my head around that being better than all the information the EEC-IV gets. And MS is $850 to START. They have things costing thousands of dollars on there! It just seems like a lot to spend.

    And it's funny you mention this Trey, the look of the Ford SEFI is one of my favorite things about it. I grew up with that. The '87-93 Mustang GT was THE car to have when I was just getting to be driving age. Round air cleaners were out of date, and... quite lame.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  22. #22

    Default

    Speed density EFI makes more power generally but is more sensitive to things such as the cam lsa and duration, etc.

    To get out of cam jail guys would go to MAF which tolerates a lot more cam .... but cross the line and you are still in tuning jail.

    A good portion of the problem is the tendency for older systems to do fuel maps rather than running injector pulse width and duration based upon A/F input.

    Moats Quarterhorse is a good J3 board for the EEC-IV. But nobody seems to know/remember how to tune a speed density binary these days.

    Binary Editor (BE) is good software for playing with tunes. It’s author owns a blown 86GT as a matter of fact— sweet ride .....

    There is a wideband logging option with BE that can then be used to make adjustments to the tune to help eliminate problem spots.

    The aftermarket just said screw this fuel map and mass air and other BS. Read the wideband and give the engine what it wants and let her eat. Most of the time you gain power and torque and remove drivability problems with an aftermarket ECU. Then there’s the added benefits of being able to run other race technology you might want in the car


    the least expensive option is Moats with BE last I looked. That’s what I bought for my 86GT and is likely what I’ll use in the long run once I’m done horsing around with things on a tortured worn out old mill that I love to beat on.

  23. #23
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    12,637

    Default

    Tuning can quickly and easily get out of hand with EFI if you don't know what you are doing. Not saying it's Rocket Science, but leaning an engine out can obviously cause major damage quickly. I would highly recommend at least having a decent working knowledge of how any EFI tuning system works before attempting major changes. Small tuning tweaks generally aren't a big deal, but wholesale changes to the whole fuel curve can easily get out of hand quickly. There are plenty of videos, training, and forums that can help someone get started and learn how the system works.

    I agree the Megasquirt website is confusing. I sorted my way thru it and finally got a handle on it, but I still get confused without hands on experience with type of stuff. From my understanding the Stinger Pimp system is a bit user friendly for the newby since they have set it up specifically for either the 5.0 and 2.3 Turbo. None of the stuff is cheap, but like so many things you get what you pay for.

    Many of the aftermarket systems use a MAP sensor over the MAF because in high HP applications the MAF becomes a flow restriction in the system. The other reason that so many of the aftermarket EFI use fewer sensors is that the ECU computing power today is much better and more efficient than the computers of the 80's/90's. Engineers have also a much better idea of how to make engines today make much better HP and TQ all while being more efficient. The EFI of the 80's/90's was impressive back in the day, but honestly by today's standards its pretty weak. Just think about today's laptop or phone compared to the desktops of the 80's/90's.

    In regards to price, if you compare what a Fitech or similar costs compared to converting a carb to EFI it is generally the cheaper and easier option. Yes if you have all the OEM parts from a donor and don't have much into it, you can be similar in price, but still for most of the Four Eyes the cost of going to a Fitech or similar setup will be less $$ and less work than swapping everything over to go to EFI. This is generally true since most of these vehicles already have compatible intake manifold, etc. and will only have to add a higher pressure fuel pump.
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Ongoing RestoModification
    1984 SVO Awaiting Restoration
    1986 GT Wrecked by PO, but still want to save!

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Underway
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  24. #24

    Default

    I should clarify. When I said "I'm not paying more than $250 on any one part number" I was referring to what Moates has available, not refusing to spend more than $250.

    I plan to have my car tuned by a performance shop with a dyno. I'll talk to the people there and see what they like to work on. I really don't want to have to mess with this engine ever again besides maintenance after this. No more mods. That is, unless I regularly have my ass handed to me by Toyota Siennas and Honda Pilots.

    Anyway, for that reason, it's probably best to have a system that can learn, eh? I don't really want to get into the ins and outs of tuning myself and have to fiddle with it. I'm happy to pay someone else be the expert on that.
    Brad

    '79 Mercury Zephyr ES 5.0L GT40 EFI, T-5
    '17 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
    '14 Ford Fusion SE Manual

  25. #25

    Default

    You pay a massive premium for the option to learn.

    The Quarterhorse lets you tweak things while the engine is running if you want ... not sure Iíll ever do that.

    If itís a do it once and forget it you need to know the difference between doing things the right way and getting by primarily


    All the stuff out there about ďcalibrated MAFĒ setups... complete bull****. The meter either returns the mass of the air delivered to the engine accurately or it is failing to do itís one and only job. Itís broken.

    People do those because they want to run a 24 lb or 30lb injector in a motor while the ECU thinks itís controlling a 19 lb/hr. Bs ó tell the computer what is there!

    Another problem area is displacement. You add more cubes and you donít tell the ECU it is now dealing with a bigger engine. 306, not a big deal as there is a margin of safety in the factory tunes. 327, 331, 347, 353, 363, 377 ...... problems. Tell the ECU whatís going on!

    Another spot where people get into trouble is on not understanding the way the MAF sensor and the housing work together. Obviously there are going to be differences in readings for a sensor in a 58MM housing vs a 70MM. There is generally a calibration detail that takes these differences into account. The MAF reading curve on a 70MM Cobra MAF housing is different than it is on a 58MM GT housing. Load the correct one into the MAF ECU or run the ECU that is matched to the MAF out of the box

    then there is mr stock motor with 255 lph fuel pump and stock fuel hanger. There are videos on YouTube about why this is horrible but the basic is the return line canít flow enough fuel to allow the regulator to regulate fuel pressure. Iím sure you see the problem! A 190 is plenty for well over 400 HP and is near the limits of the stock return line. no reason to go bigger unless the car is showing signs of fuel starvation.

    Then there is bad tuning compensation via fuel pressure and base timing. Watch it or you can get into trouble really quickly

    Im not saying Iíve never went off the reservation ó I have. My 86 GT has an A9L and a Cobra MAF and 13.5 degrees of base timing and runs like a bandit.. A clear mismatch. It went lean up top until I jacked up the fuel pressure for two reasons. One is the MAF curve of the cobra MAF. The other is because the motor combo is right at the limits of the 19ís. Jack up fuel pressure it runs like a top with my foot in it, but then it doesnít like to start because the initial prime practically floods it.

    Iíll fix it with a stock fuel regulator setting and 24ís and a cobra ECU before I waste any more time messing with it. But I know the cobra ECU is a softer tune which in the long run I wonít tolerate giving up the power but short term itís ok. when I know the car runs entirely right Iíll install my Quarterhorse in my A9L and build a tune that works properly with that too

    Anyway ..... Iíve mentioned the main things I get extremely annoyed by. There are other pet peeves too ó especially once you get into injection with boosted engines, etc, but those are the big ones.

    Its amazing how well things run when the guy making the decisions separates the facts from the BS and makes informed decisions about how they want their carís computer system to operate.

    Read 10x and buy parts once. Thatís my best advice. A lot of guys tuning are of the make it work mindset and wonít say crap if their mouth is full about all the things they donít like about what they see. It comes back to bite you ó hard
    Last edited by erratic50; 02-16-2019 at 10:36 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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